HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-30-2001sp SPECIAL MEETING
AUBURN CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
April 30, 2001
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 4:05 p.m. for the purpose of discussing a request from
the City of Pacific for nested water storage. Those in attendance were Mayor Booth,
Committee Chairman Rich Wagner, Council/Committee member Pete Lewis, and
Council/Committee member Sue Singer. Staff in attendance were Public Works Director
Christine Engler, City Engineer Dennis Dowdy, Assistant City Engineer Dennis Selle,
Project Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Assistant Project Engineer Laura Philpot, Assistant
Development Engineer Walt Wojcik, Construction Manager Larry Dahl, Administrative
Services Supervisor Pam Miller.
Guests in attendance were Mayor Howard Erickson, Community Development Director
Edward F. Davis, Public Works Director John Walsh, Water Rights Attorney Joe Mentor,
City of Pacific; Public Works Director Ray Pullar, City of Algona; Doug Berschauer, Mark
Cornett, Parametrix; Larry Bradbury, Water District No. 111; Judy Nelson, Duane Huskey,
Covington Water District; John Bowman, Lakehaven Utility District; Don Wright, South King
County Regional Water Association; Bill Peloza; Heidi Wood; Greg O'Farrell, Terrace View;
Consulting Engineer Dwight Holobaugh.
II. PRESENTATION BY CITY OF PACIFIC
Copies of Pacific's presentation to Auburn City Council on April 16, 2001, were distributed
to Committee members. City of Pacific Community Development Director Davis re-stated
their request for sharing water storage facilities. He emphasized that Pacific is not asking
for a new supply of water, but is asking to share the use of existing Auburn facilities for
emergency water storage, also called "nesting." Davis stated that their request for nesting
could be accommodated in an interlocal agreement, and that when they have their own
reservoir, Auburn could share nesting with Pacific in that facility, delaying the need to build
additional reservoirs. He stated that their request has nothing to do with a Joint Operating
Agreement, which addresses supply, or new supply requirements for water.
Chair Wagner asked for a definition of emergency storage, and an explanation of how
Department of Health (DOH) regulations would impact the ability to proceed on a shared
storage concept. Davis stated that, to his knowledge, no two cities have done this before
under DOH rules and regulations, but that Auburn's Comprehensive Water Plan mentions
nesting. He stated that Pacific's nesting proposal is for an emergency such as a fire or
when a pump is inoperable, which is the same as in the current emergency intertie
agreement between Pacific and Auburn. Council/Committee member Singer asked if
Pacific was proposing essentially the same type of agreement as has been in place
between Auburn and Pacific since 1984. Davis responded in the affirmative, but restated
that they are asking for storage, not water. He further stated that in previous meetings with
Auburn Public Works Director Engler, she had stated that Auburn would be more than
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 2 of 7
happy to share storage in Auburn's reservoir to the east of Pacific for a possible price of
approximately $1 per gallon. Meanwhile, the City of Pacific plans to construct a reservoir
on the west side of Pacific, and he feels both sites are complementary to nesting.
Council/Committee member Lewis asked if there is any difference in volume in the amount
of water to be used between the current and the proposed agreements. Davis responded
that it would depend on whether or not they had a fire or other emergency. Lewis
commented that Pacific's proposal asks for up to a million gallons. Davis stated that Pacific
would be willing to entertain a charge, but hopes that when their reservoir is built, the
storage would be reciprocal. As to the one million gallon figure, Davis referred the question
to Mark Cornett of Parametrix. Cornett stated that the figure is based on projected standby
and fire protection based on City of Pacific design criteria. The fire protection is based on a
high flow rate, for a major fire, and requires storage of about 300,000 gallons, while the
standby component requires storage of about 700,000 gallons and is based on two times
their average daily demand. He stated he did not believe Pacific would need to draw 2,500
gallons per minute (gpm) for an 8-hour period. He felt Pacific's demands, based on
emergency use, would more likely be 2,500gpm for two hours or, in the case of pump
failure, 1,000gpm for 12 hours. Cornett conjectured that to use the total I million gallons
stored would likely only happen in the event of a fire on top of a pump failure on a very high
demand day.
III. UPDATE FROM PACIFIC AND LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT CONCERNING
AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY SUPPLY
Davis stated that the Lakehaven Utility District (LUD) has granted Pacific an intertie on the
west hill and is currently reviewing Pacific's drawings. Pacific currently has a 12" waterline
that extends to the top of the west hill in the Jovita Heights area, which is provided water by
LUD. John Bowman, LUD Water Manager, said that an agreement for an emergency
intertie with Pacific is currently being reviewed by LUD attorneys. LUD estimates that they
can provide approximately 1,000gpm for the intertie. In response to a question from Chair
Wagner, Bowman responded that they are not using the nesting concept, and that the
agreement is for interruptible supply. Even in the event of an emergency, if the emergency
impacted pressures or flows in LUD, the intertie could be shut off. In response to another
question from Wagner, Bowman stated that water through the intertie is not counted as
standby and is not calculated as a portion of LUD's storage. He further stated that they
have not yet defined emergency.
IV. AUBURN WATER UTILITY- POINTS OF CONSIDERATION CONCERNING CITY OF
PACIFIC'S REQUEST
Auburn Public Works Director Engler stated that she intended to step through the key
points of Pacific's request with regard to Auburn's Water Comprehensive Plan (Comp
Plan). She said that Pacific's request for 1.2 million gallons of storage nested within
Auburn's system appears to be hydraulically feasible. Auburn could deliver a maximum of
2,500gpm, which would last for 8 hours at that flow rate. Engler pointed out, however, that
Auburn's approved reliability criteria preclude Auburn from making nested water
continuously available to Pacific (as requested) without compromising Auburn's ability to
have sufficient storage or sources of supply to last the City two days if Auburn's largest
source is out of service. If that were to happen, Auburn would have to have water available
from additional sources or storage to meet Auburn's need.
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 3 of 7
Engler reviewed recent Auburn system emergency events, and stated that the Comp Plan
includes a number of storage and supply projects, all planned in order to maintain approved
reliability criteria from the 1995 and 2000 Comp Plans. In response to a question from
Chair Wagner, Engler responded that the planned Lakeland reservoir would have a
capacity of about 2.5 million gallons. She stated that Auburn has an agreement with the
City of AIgona (IA3) that provides for the transfer of water rights from AIgona's well, and
Algona would cost share at about $1.25/gallon in the storage project, which would be
Lakeland Hills Reservoir B. Based on a pro-rata share, storage of 1.2 million gallons for
Pacific or to maintain Auburn's reliability criteria could cost $1.5 million. Another option
would be to amend the Comp Plan to lower the reliability criteria.
Engler stated that the City of Pacific has requested that Auburn supply nested storage in
return for a franchise agreement that would enable Auburn to place a water line along the
East Valley Highway. Thus, the total cost to obtain the franchise from Pacific, to supply
Pacific with 1.2 million gallons of storage, to complete the 16" water main along East Valley
Highway, and to construct the pump station in Terrace View is approximately $3.4 million.
She reviewed two alternatives to the franchise, pipeline, and pump station, stating that
neither of the alternatives account for costs already incurred to develop the current
alternative or to provide service to the valley zone south of Pacific, adjacent to Terrace
View. Engler then reviewed key questions that need to be addressed in order for
considerations to be fully developed. She also expressed concern regarding the potential
impact such an agreement could have on relationships Auburn already has in place with
the Covington Water District, Water District No. 111, and the City of AIgona.
V. AUBURN WATER UTILITY - EXISTING AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER PURVEYORS
AND SOUTH KING COUNTY REGIONAL WATER ASSOCIATION JOINT OPERATING
AGREEMENT
Auburn City Engineer Dowdy displayed a map showing Auburn's water service area, and
adjacent water pureyors' service areas. He reviewed existing connections that Auburn has
with LUD and the City of Pacific. He stated that the three interties with Pacific are normally
in the closed position, and past practice has been that when Pacific needs water, they
notify Auburn, open up the valve, and use the water at their discretion. Auburn then reads
the meters and bills them for the water. He discussed an interlocal agreement (IA1) with
Water District No. 111, which established an intertie that could pump up to 1 mgd.
However, before that intertie could be completed, a new agreement (IA2) was entered into
between Auburn and Water District No. 111 and Covington Water District. IA2 superceded
IA1, and increased the amount of water to 5mgd, to be split between WD111 and
Covington. Both agreements were negotiated under the South King County Regional
Water Association (SKCRWA) Joint Operating Agreement (JOA). Just prior to IA2, another
agreement, IA3, was negotiated under the JOA with the City of Algona.
Dowdy stated that he has been analyzing Pacific's request to determine if it is a request for
storage only, or for supply, or for supply and storage. He stated his belief that it involves a
little bit of both, as the water has to be continuously available for a period of 20 years. If
the request involves supply, it must be negotiated under the JOA. Dowdy distributed
copies of pages 1-6 of the JOA.
Chair Wagner posed questions about the Bonney Lake intertie. Dowdy stated that Auburn
has been working with the City of Bonney Lake and has a formal agreement for a limited
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 4 of 7
connection that serves a small development in Auburn's proposed annexation area near
Kersey Way. He said that Auburn is also working with Bonney Lake to establish an
emergency intertie on Lakeland Hills Way, or possibly the Loop Road. Engler clarified that
Auburn currently has another agreement with Bonney Lake wherein Auburn supplies fire
flow to three multi-family complexes on the Bonney Lake side of the service area. The
intertie is in the closed position, and is opened upon agreement of the two cities. The new
emergency intertie agreement would provide water at retail rates. The amount of water
would be limited to what is physically deliverable, as determined by the donating City.
Dowdy referred to page 2 of a letter from Parametrix to Davis dated April 2, 2001, which
states that the emergency storage should be available at all times through an automatic
valve assembly, and that manual valves are not desirable. Dowdy contended that the
language likens the proposed agreement to the existing agreement between Auburn and
Algona, and constitutes more than a storage request. Requesting a guarantee that the
water will be there is more like a firm water request. He directed attention to the third
recital of the JOA, which addresses projects that provide for the coordinated and
cooperative use of supply and storage. Dowdy stated that a new agreement would most
likely have to be negotiated under the JOA, and any agreement negotiated cannot require
signatory members to give up any of their water rights. If the agreement with Pacific is for
supply or a partial firm supply, Auburn must notify the signatories of the JOA. In response
to a question from Chair Wagner, Dowdy stated that the City of Pacific is not a signatory to
the JOA.
Davis stated that their request should not be compared with agreements Auburn has with
other cities because Pacific is only requesting storage capacity. They are not requesting
supply or giving up water rights to Auburn. He reviewed Pacific's interties with Auburn,
LUD, and Sumner (through the Webster Water District), and pointed out that Pacific is a
signatory to the 2000 JOA. He also stated that Pacific is not asking for long-term supply,
just storage credit.
Joe Mentor, Water Rights Attorney for the City of Pacific, stated that "continuously
available" refers to the storage facility being available, not water in the facility being
available. He stated that DOH requires cities to have storage to meet four needs - peaking
capacity, equalizing storage, fire suppression, and emergency standby. Pacific has its own
water rights sufficient in terms of liability and capacity for long-term needs, and is asking
Auburn to allow them to share fire suppression and standby storage to allow Pacific to meet
the DOH requirements. He stated that Auburn is not obligated to provide the water and
keep the facility full, and disagreed with Dowdy's contention that Pacific's request is
comparable to Algona, because Algona and Auburn have exchanged water rights, whereas
Pacific is merely asking for a facility sharing arrangement and will rely on their own water
rights.
Discussion was held regarding the term "continuously available" and the possibility that
DOH has a different view of the nested storage concept. Council/Committee member
Lewis asked Mentor to confirm that Pacific is buying space in a tank, and if the tank was
empty, that would be acceptable. Mentor responded in the affirmative. Chair Wagner
expressed the need for a potential agreement to address a hierarchy of need, while
Council/Committee member Lewis expressed a need for limitations to address a potential
long-term emergency need on the part of Pacific.
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 5 of 7
Council/Committee member Singer asked if Pacific would supply Auburn up front or replace
water that is used. Mentor stated that issue has not been discussed.
In response to a question from Council/Committee member Lewis, Director Engler stated
that DOH regulations regarding the potential to use another system's storage are explicit
and require that the source must be continuously available, not just the facilities. This
would require that 1.2 million gallons of water be available and on line. Discussion was
held on DOH criteria and ways Pacific could replace water used. DOH would have to see a
specific design to determine whether or not it meets DOH regulations. In response to a
question from Chair Wagner, Davis responded that Pacific has not begun design, because
they were waiting to see if Auburn is agreeable to the nesting concept. Mentor suggested
that something could be conceptually worked out to aid Auburn in making a decision.
Council/Committee member Lewis asked if Auburn has additional storage capacity to take
on an additional 1.2 million gallons of water. Director Engler responded that Auburn has
the capacity to meet Pacific's storage needs for the next one to two years, but roughly in
about 2003, Auburn will need to bring new storage on line to meet its own needs. Mentor
stated that the storage the City of Auburn relies on for fire suppression and emergency
standby could be relied on by Pacific, as well. This raised questions as to who would get
water if both cities had an emergency at the same time. Mentor thought that Auburn would
have priority since it's their facility. Discussion was held on the source for supplying the
reservoir and interpretation of the DOH regulations in regard to this issue. City Engineer
Dowdy stated that these are some of the same issues faced in the situation with Algona,
and reiterated that a similar agreement would be the best way to address Pacific's needs, if
Pacific is willing to cost share. Chair Wagner asked if 20 years is the actual length of time
required by Pacific. Davis responded that Pacific hopes to have a reservoir on line in the
next year or two, and that they are not talking about 20 years. Doug Berschauer,
Parametrix, stated that it would depend on what they build. If Pacific could share storage
with Auburn for a long-term commitment, Pacific would not need to build fire suppression
and standby storage, just equalizing storage for long-term needs. If Auburn is not able or
willing to share storage long term, than Pacific would need to build a bigger reservoir.
Reciprocity and the possibility of Auburn nesting water in the Pacific system was discussed.
Council/Committee member Singer commented that there might be a possibility for Pacific
to nest water with Auburn for 2 to 3 years, and then when Auburn has need for short-term
storage, they could nest with Pacific. In response to a request for clarification, Engler
stated that Auburn's storage reservoirs do not contain an "empty" space that could contain
an additional 1.2 million gallons.
Chair Wagner asked Don Wright, SKCRWA, about the 2000 JOA and Auburn's status.
Wright clarified that while Pacific may have authorized signature of the 2000 JOA, it has
never been executed and distributed to other members. As of December 2000, the
SKCRWA made revisions to the JOA and, in January 2001, distributed revised agreements
to all members for consideration of re-signing. At this time, only Kent, Soos Creek, and
Water District No. 111 have signed the new agreement. Dennis Dowdy stated that Auburn
is still a signatory to the 1996 agreement and has not yet signed the new agreement. The
City's Legal Department is currently reviewing the method for Auburn to withdraw or resign
from the 1996 agreement.
Judy Nelson, General Manager for Covington Water District, stated that she understands
that utilities are seeking reliable supply, but in this instance, she wants to be assured that
no harm will be suffered by Covington or Water District No. 111 due to any changes
necessitated by the proposed agreement. Since she had not seen the proposal to evaluate
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 6 of 7
impacts, she was unable to comment; however, if there were adverse impacts, she would
like an opportunity to sit down with all parties and seek a solution so that none are
disadvantaged. Larry Bradbury, Water District No. 111, stated that they would be against
any set aside that would take priority over their agreement. Chair Wagner asked for
comments from Mayor Booth, who stated that it is essential that Auburn honor, to the letter,
the agreement with Covington and Water District No. 111, and that he has sympathy and
support for Pacific, but not to the extent that it would jeopardize Auburn's system.
VI. PUBLIC WORKS COMMI'I'rEE DISCUSSION
Chair Wagner commented that he had talked to the Auburn Fire Chief about mutual aid,
which involves a very clear hierarchy, and that while Auburn hasn't done this with water, it
seems to be a direction in which we're headed. He expressed a need for a better
understanding of "interruptible" and suggested that Auburn might be amenable to an
agreement for a term of two or three years. Council/Committee member Singer clarified
that when discussing reciprocity, she was not referring to long-term, just the possibility of
delaying Pacific's needs for a couple of years, and then Auburn's needs for a couple of
years. Chair Wagner stated that it is important to consider interties as an opportunity as
well as a problem. Council/Committee member Lewis stated not only are we looking at two
perspectives, and it may be possible to come together in an agreement, but we need to
understand what DOH will say. Singer stated that the #1 criteria is that Auburn's citizens
and customers are not harmed, while Lewis asked for a required ranking as to who is first
in the event of emergencies or accommodation therein. Also mentioned were time limits,
getting to an agreement that could be presented to DOH to see if it would satisfy the
"continuously available" definition, and avoiding money changing hands in light of a
possible reciprocal agreement in the future.
The consensus of the Committee was that they were willing to entertain a concept and then
take it to the DOH and see what they think. Director Engler interjected technical comments
regarding reciprocity, stating that the storage required by Auburn needs to be built in other
service areas, not in the valley, and that Pacific's planned reservoir in Jovita would have its
pressure controlled to serve Pacific's customers. Auburn would not be able to look at
short- or long-term benefits without getting into significant engineering and costs. Chair
Wagner suggested that new supply criteria puts more dependence on interties, and we
need to look at that concept and any others that are beneficial. Engler clarified that she
was speaking specifically to storage reciprocity, and that while all emergency interties are
beneficial, at this point, it's difficult to see how storage in Pacific's system would be useful
for Auburn's system.
Chair Wagner asked that Pacific take the lead in drafting an agreement for review by
Auburn staff, and stated that the draft should address Auburn's need for a short time frame
of three to four years, DOH interpretation of continuous availability, interruptibility with flow
limitation (2,500gpm for 2 hours or 1,000gpm for 12 hours), and a hierarchy of emergency
uses so Auburn's reliability criteria would not be compromised. He then asked if the draft
could be prepared within the next week and how this timeframe would fit in with the East
Valley Highway project.
Terrace View Developer Greg O'Farrell stated that they are basically at the mercy of what
happens as a result of the meeting, and that they planned to construct the sewer force
main this summer or early fall.
Public Works Committee April 30, 2001
Page 7 of 7
Davis stated that Pacific was using the franchise agreement to get Auburn's attention, and
that once they get direction from the majority of Auburn City Councilmembers that Auburn
wants to get an agreement on storage with Pacific, then the agreement and franchise will
be on two separate tracks. Council/Committee member Lewis stated that Pacific certainly
got Auburn's attention, but that, regardless of effort, it will take time to develop an
agreement and get approval from DOH. Lewis asked that if the two issues are on separate
tracks, then is the other moving forward at this time? Davis responded that if they hear
Auburn's Council say they will move forward on the storage issue, then the franchise issue
will move forward. Lewis asked if the franchise issue will move forward if Auburn is saying
here that they will make a best effort. Davis responded that the Committee does not
represent the majority of the Council. Chair Wagner stated that Auburn won't have that
answer for about a month, and there is a need to move forward with the franchise to
combine the sewer and water project. Wagner emphasized that while Auburn is committed
to moving forward, a full Council decision may not be known until a month from now, and in
the meantime, Auburn is running up against time for two projects.
Davis asked about the possibility of a special Council meeting to review their request, much
like the special Public Works Committee meeting. Mayor Booth asked what would happen
if we go through the process and at the end, find out nesting can't be done. Davis
responded that would be out of their arena, but Pacific will put as much energy and
resources as possible to communicate with the DOH. Chair Wagner stated the Committee
would support an agreement that includes the elements previously stated, so it would seem
the outcome rests with DOH. Davis stated that Pacific shares Auburn's concerns and does
not want to see East Valley Highway torn up and traffic stopped twice. Chair Wagner
directed that Pacific's request be placed on the agenda for the May 7, 2001, Auburn City
Council meeting. Davis asked for a copy of the minutes from this meeting so that they can
be sure to address the criteria requested by the Committee.
Pacific Councilmember Clint Steiger assured Auburn that if Auburn expedites Pacific's
wishes, he would do everything in his power to expedite the franchise. He stated that
Pacific is not trying to hold the franchise hostage, just encourage cooperation. In response
to a question from Chair Wagner, he responded that if the franchise is ready to go, and the
storage issue is still being worked on, the franchise would move forward.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
Submitted by Pam Miller, Administrative Services Supervisor.
Approved by the Public Works Committee on//~/Z///~,?~(:;;2/
PM/bd
File: 17 (17.2)