Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-02-09 - AGENDA REPORTS - METRO WATER DISTRICT (2)NEW BUSINESS DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: BACKGROUND AGENDA REPORT City Manager Item to be l3resented by: February 9, 1993 Metropolitan Water District West Valley Project City Manager Michael P. Murphy The Metropolitan Water District (MWD) is currently considering the construction of additional pipeline facilities to serve growing communities located in southern Ventura County and western Los Angeles County. One of the proposed general alignments could have significant impact in Santa Clarita. During November, 1992, MWD conducted three scoping meetings for purposes of identifying issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report. On December 2, 1992, the City Council's Castaic Lake Water Agency Liaison Committee met with City staff and provided direction for Santa Clarita's response to the Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report. The City's formal comments were submitted by mail on December 7, 1992. On December 18, 1992; MWD representatives met with City staff to outline the scope of the project and discuss issues raised in the City's comment letter. MWD also offered to make a presentation regarding the West Valley Project to the City Council in early 1993.. RECOMMENDATION Receive presentation from Metropolitan Water District representatives regarding the proposed West Valley Project and provide direction to City staff regarding future actions. attachment Agenda Item: City Of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 300 City of Santa Clarita California 91355 December 7, 1992 Phone (805) 259-2489 Fax (805) 259-8125 Ms. Kathleen M. Kunysz Manager, Environmental Affairs Jill Klalic Metropolitan Water District Mayor P.O. BOX 54153, 304N Jan Heidt Los.Angeles, Ca 90054 Mayor Pro -Tem Rya= West Valley Project Carl Boyer Response.to the Notice of Preparation for an Councilmember Environmental Impact Report JoAnne ilmmbDarcy Dear Ms. Kunysz: Councilmsmbsr George Pederson - Thank you for this opportunity to respond to the Notice of councilmember Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Metropolitan Water District's (MWD) proposed West Valley Project., Our response to the NOP is predicated on the City of Santa Clarita's role as a responsible agency pursuant to Section 15381 of the California Environmental Act (CEQU) Guidelines. We have read the information and environmental materials forwarded with the NOP on October 29, 1992. In addition, City staff attended two (Simi Valley, 11/18/92; Fillmore, 11/23/92) of the three information meetings hosted by the MWD and the Calleguas District. Despite this, however, we are concerned that we do not, at present, have a clear understanding of the project or its potential impacts. For this reason, we request additional information so as to make our participation in this process as useful and effective as possible. We would especially appreciate a description'and location map of the various alternate routes proposed for the project in the Santa Clarita Valley. Our preference -would be that these routes be identified individually on the - appropriate U.S.G.S. Quadrange Map(s) for the area, and as recommended in the CEQA Guidelines. .We also request an information meeting between MWD and City staff so that we may better understand the project, the process, and our mutual' roles. We would.be available for such a meeting at your earliest convenience. Ms. Kathleen M: Kunysz December 7, 1992 Page 2 of 4 We request that the project.DEIR specifically address the following issues and concerns which are of interest to the City of Santa Clarita: 1. While we generally agree with'the Initial Study prepared for the project, we request additional consideration on the following.areas of Section II, Environmental Impacts: A. Issue Area lg - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Maybe and studied; B. Issue Area 2j - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Yes and studied; C. Issue Area 4a -_ We believe this should be identified as a Significant Impact/Maybe and studied; D. Issue Areas 5b, d - We believe these should be identified Potential Impact/Maybe and studied; E. Issue Area 7a - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Maybe:and studied; P. Issue Area 8b - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Maybe and studied; G. Issue Area 14a - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Yes and studied in depth; H. Issue Areas 17d, e, f - We believe these should be identified as a Potential Impact/Maybe and studied; and I. Issue Area 18a - We believe this should be identified as a Potential Impact/Yes and Significant Impact/Maybe and studied. The MWD may also wish to reconsider its "No Potential Impact" finding on Issue Area 22; we believe this project could have such significance. Ms. Kathleen M. Kunysz December 7, 1992 Page 3 of 4 While recognizing that a substantial portion of the project lies outside of the Santa Clarita valley (SCV), we request that equal weight be given to the study of impact within the SCV area. 2. Provide identification of the facilities and location of facilities planned in the City and the SCV. 3. Provide identification of both short-term (construction related) and long-term project impacts to the City and the SCV. 4. Provide identification of the local (City/SCV) beneficiaries of the'project,.if any. 5: Provide in-depth determination of any potential adverse impact, direct or indirect, on City/SCV water supplies. 6. The City of Santa Clarita requests that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15131, socio-economic impacts relating to or arising from the proposed project be identified and studied in the DEIR. Socio-economic factors specifically to be addressed include: A. What financial arrangements (if any) are in existence, or are proposed as a part of this project, between the MWD and the Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA), or other concerned parties? What is the timing and/or proposed length of time for any such agreements? B. In line with the abovewhat types of water i rights agreements are n existence, or are proposed, as a part of this project? What is the proposed length of time for such agreements? C. Does the implementation of this project, either directly or indirectly, create a potential avenue of access to the MWD (or others) to the ground water supply available to the SCV? How can this be ascertained and, if necessary, how can local supplies be accounted for? Ms. Kathleen M. Kunysz December 7, 1992 Page 4'of 4 D. What is the the proposed development , corridor may construction discuss this ;rowth-inducing impact, to the SCV, of project? It is our concern that urban &long the Santa Clara River/Route 126 be encouraged and facilitated by the of this project. The DEIR should issue in significant detail. E. Is the capacity of the CLWA'9 Rio Vista Water . Treatment facility being increased to serve the proposed project? If so, are local funds/revenues/taxes being used to pay for this expansion? What the socio-economic/fiscal impact of the project on the MWD? Calleguas District? CLWA? Citizens of the SCV? Thank you for this opportunity to respond to the project NOP, and to participate in the environmental process. Once again, we would like to meet with MWD staff soon to gain a better understanding of the project and its implications for the SCV. If you have any .questions or -concerns regarding this response, please call me at (805) 255-4330. Sincerely, LYNN M. HARRIS DEPUTY CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Donald M. Williams Senior Planner LMH:ldd:975 DJOTRICT V THE PROJECT In Brief The West Valley Project will increase vital imported water delivery reliability for local communities. Approximately 90 percent of the water used in southern Ventura and western Los Angeles counties is imported. What's Inside: • Project Brief • Need for Project • San Fernando Valley Route • Santa Clara River Route • ComnIption DntP nnei Cnct The current water system in the West Valley service area is reaching its limits. It will soon be insufficient to meet local needs as the population here is expected to grow from 1.3 million people to about 2.2 million by the year 2030. Additional conveyance facilities are needed by the year 2000. To assure a reliable, sufficient supply of water for West Valley communities in future years, the Metropolitan Water District and the Calleguas Municipal Water District are proposing to construct new water lines and tunnels. The project would also provide new groundwater storage facilities to increase the local underground supplies. The West Valley service area, shown in Figure 1, encompasses about 850 square miles in Ventura and Los Angeles counties. Member agencies served by Metropolitan here include Calleguas, the City of Los Angeles, Las Virgenes Municipal Water District, and West Basin Municipal Water District. Figure 1 V WHY BUILD THE WEST VALLEY PROJECT? The West Valley Project will help enhance the The West Valley Project would help meet the area's water delivery system in several ways: water needs of local communities through the year 2030 by increasing pipeline capacity in the V 1. Increase Reliability of the area and developing groundwater storage in the Water System North Las Posas Basin (shown on Figure 2). A portion of the West Valley service area, served by Calleguas and Las Virgenes water districts, receives almost all of its water supply through a single pipeline in Metropolitan's distribution system. A second pipeline serving this area would make this system more reliable and more flexible, by allowing water to flow through one of the pipelines if the other pipeline is out of service for maintenance or emergency repairs. V 2. Meet the Water Supply Needs of the Community The West Valley area's population will grow to approximately 2.2 million by the year 2030, according to forecasts by the Southern California Association of Governments. Over the same period, water demand is expected to increase from 300,000 to 500,000 acre-feet per year* Metropolitan may be required to supply up to 55 percent of this projected demand, depending on other available sources which include exist- ing groundwater, reclaimed water, and the City of Los Angeles Aqueduct supplies. 'One acre-foot of water equals 326,000 gallons, an average amount used by two households in one year. ♦ 3. Optimize Water Supplies Groundwater storage allows water to be stored when itis available and used later when supplies are limited and demand is greatest. Figure 2 .OXNARD SANTA PAULA 0 V WHERE WILL THE NEW WEST VALLEY PIPELINES BE LOCATED? Studies have identified two general routes for the pipeline's alignment: the San Fernando Valley route and the Santa Clara River route (see Figure 2). Current studies will identify more precise routes. V San Fernando Valley Route This alternative would connect to Metropolitan's existing Sepulveda Feeder, following approxi- mately nine miles of San Fernando Valley roads to a point near the East Portal of the Santa Susana Tunnel in Chatsworth. The new pipeline would roughly parallel Metropolitan's existing West Valley feeders. It would require construc- tion of an additional tunnel, next to the existing one, through the Santa Susana Mountains. From • FILLMORE Rr h dway F v hrr • ,ow • M LAS POSAS BASIN MOORP• K . CAMARILLO END IING PIPELINE 'OSED PIPELINE PIHIUU U NAPPY CAMP CYN TUNNEL THOUSAND OAKS NTA CLARA FEEDER . SEPULVEDA FEEDER , the western end of the tunnel, the water would continue its journey through a new 15 -mile -long pipeline leading to a groundwater well field. The majority of the pipeline for this route would be laid underneath existing roadways. V Santa Clara River Route For this alternative an underground pipeline would be constructed from Santa Clarita in a westerly direction for about 20 miles along the Santa Clara River. It would then turn southward at Calumet Canyon and travel via tunnel for two miles under the Oak Ridge Mountains. At the tunnel's southern portal in Happy Camp Canyon, new pipelines would transport the water to distribute it and store it underground. SANTA CLARITARIO VISTA M / WTP WEST VALLEY FEEDERAI �yEgT SIMI VALLEY FEEDER SIMI j SAN�FERNANDO VALLEY r-� VALLEY FEEDER I SANTA SUSANA TUNNEL WEST JENSEN VALLEY FILTRATION / PLANT PROJECT ALIGNMENTS 310 V WHEN WILL THE PROJECT & COMPLETED AND HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? The project will be implemented by Metropolitan as lead agency and Calleguas as responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act. The proposed timeline is shown in Figure 3. A draft Environmental Impact Report will be completed in 1993. Construction is projected to begin in the mid to late 1990's with expected operation by the year 2000. WEST VALLEY PROJECT SCHEDULE The West Valley Project is a component of both Metropolitan's multi -billion dollar capital construction program and Calleguas's Capital Improvement Program. Project costs, estimated at approximately $300 million, will be shared by both agencies. The funding would provide for required tunnels, pipelines, interconnections, and groundwater storage facilities. Exact project costs would depend on the alternatives selected for pipeline alignment and treatment facilities. _[e�� AslRluTr STUDIESP1 DESIGN PUSUC COMMENT P[R100 ISO DAYS) • PUSUC COMMENT PERRM (4S DAYS) CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES V ABOUT THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT AND CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Figure 3 The Metropolitan Water District is a wholesale public water agency that provides, through its 27 member public agencies, almost 60 percent of the water used by more than 15 million Southern Californians in Los Angeles, Ventura, San Diego, San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange counties. Calleguas Municipal Water District supplies supplemental water to the southern Ventura County. Service area communities include Oxnard, Camarillo, Thousand Oaks, Moorpark, Simi Valley, with an approximate population of 500,000. V HOW CAN YOU COMMENT ON THE WEST VALLEY PROJECT? Public comment is an important aspect of the environmental review process. Metropolitan invites you to participate in this process and take advantage of the opportunities as indicated in the project's timeline above. For more information, contact William Fong, Environmental Specialist, at (213) 250-6899, or write to: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 1111 Sunset Boulevard, Box 54153, Room 304 N, w Los Angeles, CA 90054-0153. Printed on recycled paper. i41 /4