Agenda Item # Page #

TO:

39 CHAIR AND MEMBERS

ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

FROM: PATRICK MCNALLY, P. ENG. DIRECTOR - WATER, ENVIRONMENT AND CUSTOMER RELATIONS

SUBJECT: WATER MASTER PLAN UPDATE FINAL REPORT

MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 27,2004 I

PREVIOUS REPORTS PERTINENT TO THIS MATTER &

RECOMMENDATION

That on the recommendation of the Director - Water, Environment and Customer Relations, the following report BE RECEIVED for information.

A previous report entitled “Position Paper Respecting fhe Water Component of Development Charges”was presented to the ETC on February 9, 2004 by EESD. Using the City’s website, the report can be found under ETC Agendas, 2004-02-09, Item 15. The ETC resolution can be found under ETC Reports, 2004-02-09, Clause #8. The Council direction can be found under Council Minutes, 2004-02-1 6, Item #69.

Thereafter, a report entitled “Water Component of Development Charges” was presented to the ETC on June 7,2004 by EESD. it, too, can be found on the City’s website under ETC Agendas, 2004-06-07, Item 20; ETC resolution: ETC Reports, 2004-06-07, Clause #5; Council Minutes, 2004-06-1 4, Item #216.

BACKGROUND

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise Committee and Council that the Water Master Plan Update 2003 Study has been completed. Receipt of the final report will allow for formal public release of the document.

Context :

The City retained Earth Tech Canada Inc. to undertake an engineering study relating to the City of London’s Water Master Plan. The project commenced in 2003, undertaken specifically to support the City’s Development Charges review process, as the required background analysis for the water distribution system component. Council considered the 2004 Development Charges at their meeting of June 28, 2004.

Discussion:

An engineering analysis of the water component of the 2004 Development Charges review process was commissioned by EESD which included significant consultation and liaison with interested parties through continual involvement in the Development Charges 2004 By-law Technical Consultation and S fe ering Comrnifte e. F u n d a menta I d e s i g n pa ra met e r s , pop u 1 at i o n projections, and other pertinent criterion were established early in the process through this forum, and shared with the Steering Committee members through distributed information, formal presentations, and discussions.

The study initially provided preliminary findings, draft recommendations, and approximate costs associated with water distribution system improvements that will be required to support continued growth City-wide.

Agenda Item # Page #

This information was presented to the Steering Committee and City staff in December 2003. Comments on the draft report were provided to Earth Tech Canada Inc., and they subsequently delivered the final report to the City on August 4, 2004.

The Water Master Plan Update report provides supporting documentation for required system needs to Yr.-2024 (ie. 20-Year growth) and those required to full build-out of the City (to population 675,000). Further, it provides the following information for system planning:

Guidance for capital expenditure requirements that will be considered annually in preparing Water Capital Budgets for approval by Council, including the upcoming 2005 budget review process. Timing of required works is commensurate on growth activity, and has been projected in 5-year increments from 2004 to 2024.

Analysis, in appropriate level of detail, to generate costing of works. Included are specific projects that may be linked with other growth-related infrastructure requirements due to sanitary, storm/stormwater management, and/or transportation needs over a similar timeframe and in similar format. Identification of these common project locations ensured that duplicative costing did not occur.

Supports development cost charge implications relating to non-growth and growth components of the system for residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional sectors. All work was performed in conformance with Development Charge Act req u i rem en ts.

Update to the City‘s hydraulic master model, reflecting anticipated growth demands on the system and system improvement requirements as recommended in the report.

A strategic framework for bringing on-line major capital improvements on the low-level and high-level pressure zones that ensures water delivery to current customers and future growth areas occurs in the most economical, logical manner.

The Water Master Plan Update also reviewed the effects of the City’s planned distribution system improvements (major transmission lines; pumping stations; water storage reservoirs) and growth demands on its two supply systems, those being the Lake Huron Water Supply System (LHWSS) and the Elgin Area Water Supply System (EAWSS). It reviewed the impacts and overall system benefits associated with the establishment of the proposed Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir and lays out a framework to systematically adjust service areas within the City to balance water demands from either system in order to delay/defer large-scale capital improvements on those systems to the extent possible. A future report later this year to the Environment & Transportation Committee regarding the Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir has been requested by the Committee, and will be provided nearer the completion of the engineering detailed design currently in progress.

Also in keeping with directives from Council, the costs associated with supply system improvements on the Lake Huron and Elgin Area Water Supply Systems were kept separate from City distribution system requirements. The City’s 2004 Development Charges has exempted the water-supply component, with instruction to Civic Administration to continue to liase with stakeholders and bring foward subsequent reports to Council to consider changes to the adopted development charge rates and policies. At the time of conducting the City’s Master Plan Update, both supply systems were concurrently undertaking a master plan review of their system needs. The City’s report contains discussions, calculations, and information pertaining to the Joint Board of Management’s activities based on preliminary information provided to Earth Tech Canada Inc. as of July 2003. The preliminary draft reports for the LHWSS and EAWSS have been released for discussion and consultation purposes, and are subject to another report on this agenda.

Summary:

The Water Master Plan Update 2003 (final report July 2004) provides a solid foundation for establishing capital expenditure requirements and forecasting of needed water system works commensurate with City-wide growth. This information will be reflected in the proposed 2005 Water Capital Budget to be delivered later this year, and budget development in following years. The study has provided City staff an update of the City’s hydraulic model. This working tool will be used to review development applications to monitor growth demands in order to ensure accurate forecasting and construction of works to support growth.

Agenda Item # Page #

PREPARED BY:

The study has also provided supportive information necessary for rate setting of the water distribution system component in the 2004 Development Charges review.

RECOMMENDED BY:

Public release of this report will provide information in a comprehensive and complete format to stakeholders in order to provide ongoing discussions on master planning of the City’s long-term needs relating to water distribution.

Acknowledgements:

This report has been prepared with the assistance of John Simon, Environmental Services Engineer, of the Water Engineering Division.

R’6BERT fly & Q *# E. ,I COOPER, c& M. E

DIVISION MANAGER W

WATER ENGINEERING Y:\Shared\PubServ\PMcNally\Reports\ETC -Water Master Plan Update - Final Report

September 15, 2004 REC/ JAS/cw/l t

Attach: City of London Water Master Plan Update 2003 - Executive Summary

cc: Peter Steblin Ron Standish Earth Tech Canada Inc.

4 Attacken t

Page 1 Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summary

c-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Earth Tech Canada h c . was retained to undertake the London Water Master Plan Update 2003 for the City’s Water distribution system and facilities. Not included are the City’s water supply systems firom Lake’s Huron and Erie. Separate Master Plans are being completed for these systems. Preliminary output information fkorn these systems is identified herein to complete the work required.

The City of London last completed a Water Master Plan Update in 1999, in support of the Development Charges implemented that year. Given the requirements to update Development Charges on a 5-year basis, the City of London initiated this Water Master Plan Update 2003 to support a Development Charge By-law implementation by August 2004. The intent was to identify growth-related components for the City’s water distribution and supply systems on a 5-year incremental basis over a 20-year period (2004 to 2024), to support Development Charges for Mure residential, institutional, commercial and industrial development.

Update Objectives

The objectives of the project were as follows: ?.

Update the City’s Water Master Plan to identify growth related requirements on a 5-year incremental basis for 20 years. (City Lo.w/High pressure water distributions, pumping and- storage systems, and Lake Huron Water Supply and Elgin Area Water Supply System (LHWSSEAWSS) information from separate Master Plans for each).

Confim service levels based on past work, more recent regulatory and fku-e anticipated regulatory requirements, and historical demand patterns for residential, institutional, commercial and industrial users in the City of London.

Confirm the service zone and pressure area for the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station. -

Confirm costs for required growth works, groenon-growth components, and appropriate residential, institutional, commercial and industrial allocations for. both the City’s water distribution system and facilities, and those components of the water supply systems from Lakes Huron and Erie respectively. .

Take into consideration ultimate build-out requirements to ensure appropriate distribution system components and facilities are identified.

Confirm cost effective capital and long-term operating solutions are identified.

Co-ordinate master planning with the Sanitary Sewerage Servicing and Transportation Master Plan work completed at the same time, and related Urban Work Reserve Fund (UWRF) plans for S tormwater ManagementYServicing and Minor Roadworks.

Consultation with the City of London’s Environmental and Engineering Services Department, Finance Department and the Development Charges Monitoring Committee at key stages of the project to reduce potential cost and time implications, and obtain “buy in” with respect to outputs.

Being a master planning exercise the study was to match works to needs for the 20-year growth period used, and remove restoration redundancies where applicable amongst various water, sanitary, storm File Lacation: P:PROJECTS\6519 ZEXECUTIVE SUMMARYExecutive Summary-Revised August 3‘04.doc

Water Master Plan .Update 2003 Executive Summary Page 2

and/or road related works. For work detennination purposes, major facilities, and watennains greater than or equal to 400 m in diameter (16 in), were included as per past Development Charges and design policy. The intent was to ensure fmdmg for future growth related work, andlor portions thereof, was provided for both the City’s distribution supply components. The latter has historically been paid for via water rates.

Current Conditions (2002)

With the crisis in Walkerton, Ontario in 2000, the water industry has been undergoing tremendous change over the past 3 yeas. New regulations to protect and enforce drinking water standards (Regulation 459 and the new Safe Drinking Water Act); to ensure proper planning and financial recovery for watedwastewater inf?astructure (Bill 175 Sustainable Water and Sewage System Act); arid a renewed emphasis on watershed protection (Nutrient Removal Protection Measures Act, etc.), have all been introduced. As a result, all of the water systems in Ontario have been intensely reviewed, with upgrades needed in most instances to meet these new requirements. As such, the City of London’s water distribution and supply systems, along with other systems, have been undergoing upgrades over the past 2 years that impacts day-to-day water provision and emergency supply requirements.

The City of London receives water Erom the LHWSS, via the John Gillies ( h a ) Pumping Station, and from the EAWSS, via the Elgin-Middlesex Booster Station. The LHWSS provides 85% of the City’s water supply. This supply system has a current rated capacity of 340 MLD, of whch 119 MLD (2002), is ~

used on an average day (winter) basis, and 255 MLD is used on a Maximum Day basis. Water is provided from the treatment facility at Grand Bend via partially k e d transmission mains 1200 mrn in diameter. At the mid point, transmission pressure is boosted and some storage is provided at the Ausable Booster Station. London’s storage is provided via reservoirs (4 cells) in Arva (109 h4L capacity).

From this point, most of the City’s low pressure system is fed by the Arva Pumping Station (Maximum day capacity 3680 Us). System pressures are maintained from this point to the City’s low level system, to fill the Springbank reservoirs (3, total rated capacity 209 ML), and feed the City’s high pressure systems (Uplands, Hyde Park, Springbank, Westtnount, and Pond Mills Booster Pumping Stations (BPS’s). The Pond Mills BPS will be decommissioned upon implementation of the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station).

From the south, water is provided by the EAWSS, which has a rated capacity of 91 MLD. (Limited to 80 MLD due to transmission main capacity from Lake Erie to St. Thomas). The current average day demand for London is 24 MLD (winter 2002). Maximum day capacity is capped at 27 MLD. This is being done to delay future expansion of the EAWSS, with the Maximum day capacity from the EAWSS that would normally be used for London (currently provided by the LHWSS), being utilized by Elgln Area users to serve growth in their service area. The current water demand, for these users is 24 MLD (2002 Avg. winter day), 47 MLD under maximum day conditions.1

The EAWSS consists of a treatment facility just east of Port Stanley at Lake Erie, and a 750 mm dia. transmission main to St. Thomas, which constrains capacity to 80 MLD.. At this point distribution pumping and storage is provided for the St. Thomas and Aylmer Secondary Systems, and to London via the Elgin-Middlesex Pumping Station. The reservoir facility has a storage capacity of 27 ML for London, 27 ML for the St. Thomas and Aylmer secondary users. From this point a 1050 mm dia. transmission main continues north and enters the City of London water distribution system directly in the Highbury

Elgin Area Water Supply System Master Plan Update Draft dated July 30,2003.

File Location: P:WROJECTS\65 191\EXECUTNE SUMMARYExecutive Summary-Revised August 3‘04.doc

I

Page 3 Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summay-

AvenueDingman Drive area. Pressure Reducing Volume (PRV’s), are positioned in three locations (Castleton, Wilton and Jackson), to create a small pressure zone fed by the Elgin-Middlesex Pump Station. Additional supply can be provided to the City’s east side in response to maximum day and peak hour use, and to balance system pressures along the east side of the City via the JacksodCommissioners Road PRV. See Figure EX. 1 for London’s existing water supply and distribution system.

In addition to the City’s day-to-day water-supply and distribution system components, the City also has an emergency .well system and some small reservoirs with a current available capacity of 42 MLD. A number of these emergency facilities are being taken off-line from the City’s water distribution system and are in the process of being decommissioned as a result of the recent regulatory requirements referenced previously .

The Water Supply Reliability Assessment Final Report dated April 2002 reviewed various emergency scenarios to identify how the City’s supply and water distribution systems, and storage- facilities, could address different emergency situations with varying degrees of risk of occurrence. Those of most concern were:

1. Lake Huron water supply system off line for one maximum day and one average day;

2. ’Same as above with a water demand 1.3 times average day, plus two average days.

Based on these scenarios, the City’s current one day storage deficit (2001), is 43 ML, assuming the Citv’s standbv wells and reservoirs are.stil1 utilized. If all of these are removed as expected, the one day deficit moves to 60 ML. Ths current deficit will have to be overcome by the provision of additional storage capacity, which is intended to be provided by the proposed Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station. Scenario 1 translates to a 115 ML storage deficit over 2 days. Scenario 2 translates to a 130 ML storage deficit over 3 days. The City’s current total reservoir capacity (2001), is 288 ML. Additional storage is also required to accommodate new growth in the future.

Future Growth

The City of London themselves developed fbture population growth information for the period from 2004 to 2024 in 5-year increments (2009, 2014, 2019). An additional 5 years was added to 2029 to address potential oversizing needs, and f’uf-ther information was provided to 2031 to compare directly to Institutional, Commercial and Industrial (IC0 employment growth information provided by Clayton Research for IC1 purposes. (Draft Report dated March 2003). Clayton’s work also verified the City’s population growth information, with related amendments for net and gross populations included in the digital infomation provided by the City to Earth Tech in June 2003.. Th~s information, plus later updates ‘and/or amendments, formed the basis for the planning work completed for all services.

Table EX.1 shows the water demand forecasts developed from the population and IC1 information provided by the City, using the design criteria summarized at the bottom of the table. The table shows calculated demands for Average Day Demand winter (ADDw); Maximum Day Demand (MDD); and Peak Hour Demand (PHD), for each land use type by year (2001, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2019, 2024,2029, 2031), and ultimately for a 675,000 population, along with total growth and water system demands for average day, maximum day and peak hour use. In addition, an industrial demand add-in equivalent to 10.4 MLD (2.3 MIGD), over the 20-year growth period, primarily in the City’s core area, was added as prwided by the City of London through the Sanitary Sewerage Servicing Plan Update. No other allowances were put in place, although pipe sizing for industrial growth areas in the City, primarily in the southeast portion of the City, were assessed based on the use of design industrial flows, versus the planning flow figures shown in Table EX. 1. Although some increased pipe sizing was warranted, it was

File Location: P:PROJECTS\6519 1EXECUT.lVE SuMMARy\Executive Summary-Revised August 3’04.doc

42

w

Y

I I I

Y Y Y Y S S 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N

8 5 U 0

f , i 8

W 8"

I , I 1

Page 4 Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summary

left as per the needs driven by the planning infirmation and criteria outlined, with added pipe reinforcement provided as part of the Build-Out scenario to accommodate if needed.

Works Determination

The City’s H20NET Water Model (Version 3.1) was used for works determination purposes. Tiunk system watermains 300 mm (12’3 in diameter or greater were added to the model (Pumping Stations, reservoirs and waterrnains 400 mm in diameter or greater were in the model previously), to service growth areas of the City, and the water demands to be met over the next 20 years and beyond as per Table EX. 1. Both low and high level water system conditions were modeled separately and collectively using H20NET. Given the smaller area serviced by the City’s High Level water systems, peaking factors of 2.5

’ max day and 5.0 peak hour were used as per the High level Master Planning Study, 1999. The following conditions were modeled for works determination purposes:

AverageDay

Maximum Day (EPS)

PeakHour

Average Day Extended Period Simulation (EPS)

Maximum Day plus Fire Flow

Peak hour demands are generally the critical flow used for trunk watermain design. However, once pipe - sizes were determined, the water system was checked using a 24 hour EPS run for average and Maximum

Day Demand to examine distribution characteristics at every time step for facility and operational optimization purposes. Input and output information for each model run was provided to the City of London in digital form, along with the latest H2ONET, Version 3-1 model inputs and outputs, under separate cover. Modeling was completed for the following growth scenarios:

- - - - -. -

2001,2004,2014,2024 and 2031; Full build-out of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (later modified via the removal of industrial land area). Ultimate build-out for a future population of 675,000 people.

Based on the model results, new mains were added to either upsize (or twin) existing watermains, to provide looping, to add or upgrade facilities, or to service new growth areas. System analysis was completed for each of the above scenarios as follows.

An analysis was initially completed for the year 203 1 water demands. Required works were then identified to satisfy design constraints, and for input to the model; and

Assessed works were then staged for the years 2024,2014 and 2004 by assessing the scenarios in this order and defining the timing of each required work item. Works. in 5 year increments were then interpolated fi-om this.

With this infomation in place, the analysis was completed for both the Year 2024 and Ultimate Build- Out demand scenarios on a phased basis. Growth and non-growth related demand infomation, complete with related Residential and IC1 allocations are available fiom the model on this basis. Oversizing needs for the next 20 years and beyond were also dete&ned in this manner.

File Location: P:WROJBCTS\65 19 1 \EXECUTIVE SUMMARYExecutive Sumniaty-Revised August 3‘04.doc

I * I

i A g ~ b t ~ ~ z i n , ~-~ r q e I P , Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summary -.--_--.**” Page 5

Reguired Watermain Works

- Based on the modeling analyses outlined above, the following pipe related works were identified for existing deficiency rectification andor h t w e growth purposes to 2024, and for Build-Out (675,000 population). Details are shown by Figures EX.2 and EX.3.

Tables EX.2 and EX.3 identify the future low and high level watermains required respectively for fbture 2024 and Build-Out conditions. Each table includes: location (Growth area, component ID, street and frondto), information; diameter (mm); length (m); and estimated cost (pipe, construction, road restoration, engineering and contingency), information. Also shown are project implementations in 5-year increments, with City project numbers shown where provided. All works are identified by timing based on either Year 2024 or Build-Out demand conditions, with Residential and IC1 growth, and non-growth components, identified to 2024, and only growth/non-growth to Build-Out.

Watermain costs are based on updated pipe and constsuction tendered costs over the last 4 years to 2002. Road restoration costs are those used for the London Sanitary Sewerage Servicing Study Update for one lane replacement in urban and/or rural environments to 2002. Redundancies with other transportation, storm drainage or sanitary sewer works were removed where applicable. To these costs, engineering at 13% and contingency at lo%, and indexing from 2002 to 2003 at 2.0% were added.

ReQuired Facility Works .. -- - - .

In addition to the watermain related works, facility related works are also required for the City’s water distribution system, and for the EAWS/EMW and LHWS Systems. Table EX.4 A/B identifies the facility related works required for the City, Elgin and Lake Huron water systems. Identified is the facility by name; approximate implementation year; existing rated capacity and current flows (2002); fbture flow requirements to 2024; and new/expansion capacity information; and estimated costs from study, other report or City budget sources. Costs were updated to 2003 to which engineering at 13% and contingency at 10% were added. City project numbers are identified as provided. Also shown are the non-growth and growth components applicable to City of London and/or to Elgin Area/Lake Huron water system users. Residential and IC1 allocations are also shown.

The City water system includes implementation of the Wickerson BPS and the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station. A BPS is required to service the proposed Wickerson development area currently approachng construction implementation, and in the future the southern portion of the RiverBend planning area. The f&re Wickerson BPS is to be located on Wickerson Road, approximately 250 m south of the Wickerson Roamase Line Road (Byron) intersection. The pumping station will provide a Max. day capacity of 142 L/s, initially serving the Wickerson area to the south, and later working in concert with the Springbank Pumping Station to service areas north of Southdale Road, west of Boler Road. Future watermain connections to the north would allow the southern portion of the RiverBend =ea to be serviced. This facility is 100% growth driven.

Implementation of the Southeast Pumping Station and Reservoir was fist recommended as part of the Water Supply Study ESR completed in 1992. This was confirmed as part of the initial Water Master Plan completed by Dillon in 1994, by the Waterworks for Growth Study completed by Earth Tech in 1999 and by the Water Demand Forecasting Report in 2000. Implementation was again confumed as part of the work completed for t h s project to provide required water flows and system pressures to southeast London initially, and later south and southwest London, and provide the reservoir capacity needed to accommodate growth and address the current storage deficit identified by the Water Reliability Study completed by.Di1lon in 2002. This is further needed because of the decommissioning of a number of the City’s emergency supply wells to meet SDWA and Certificate of Approval requirements.

File Location: P:\PROJECTS\6519l\EXECUTIVE SUMMARYExecutive Summary-Revised August 3’04.doc

cd a E E 0 0 m

8 0 hl I

R .- 0 0 0

5 Q) t

8 f! v)

U m 2

0 - .- 3 m

v) .bl C Q) t 0 a E 0

0) C

v)

.- 0 .- 3

)r + .- 0

2 "I I

---.- ...-

% A

-- -.--

x Q 4.d C a, t 0 Q

5 0

t- 3 0

'A n

X

d:

W

I

I

I

I

? . .

,

1 . I

--- .. -.

. _ , .. .

w

Page 6 Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summary

7 I

The latest Preliminary Design Report for the project was completed in 2003. It identifies the provision of 113 ML of storage capacity and a maximum day pumping capacity of 1794 l/s. The estimated cost of the project is $42 M as currently budgeted by the City of London. This is based on inflated costs fiom the previous Pre-Design Report completed by Dillon in 1997, and includes engineering, contingencies, and the need to separate portions of the City’s low and hgh level systems in order to establish a third pressure zone served exclusively by the Southeast Pumping Station. The proposed service zone is shown on each of the previously referenced figures, and is based on the Build-Out population of 675,000 confimed through modeling.

Based on the planning and modeling work being completed for the m o r t Road South Study area, the Southeast PS will also be needed early on to ensure adequate water supply and pressure is provided for this proposed industrial development. The intent is to initially service southeast London and provide interconnection to the City’s low level system to balqce flows and pressures along the east side of the City. Later, the Southeast PS will service those areas currently serviced by the City’s low level system in south London to free-up growth servicing capacity for the LHWSS to north London.. This would include decommissioning of the Pond Mills BPS fi-om the City’s high level system. Generally, those areas south of Southdale Road and west of Wellington Road would redefine the boundary of the City’s high level system serviced by the Springbank and Westmount pumping stations. Servicing would eventually be provided hrther to the west of Wellington Road (existing areas), and west of White Oak Road (new growth areas), as needed bringing these areas off the City’s low and/or high pressure systems as warranted. Implementation of the Southeast Reservoir and PS also delays the need for the EAWSS expansion by 5 years.

Added watermain capacity from the proposed pumping station and reservoir site‘into the City’s water distribution.gnd will also be needed to establish the service area. This includes the required 900 mm dia. watermain upsizing or twinning on Highbury Avenue, north to Dingman Drive in 10 to 15 years.

Of the $42 M cost for the project, $22.32 M is applicable to the PS component and site works, with the remaining $19.68 M applicable to the reservoir component.

Master ‘planning for the LHM’SEAWS systems was completed concurrent with this work. Draft results dated July 2003 were provided as an input to this study update. These details are subject to review and confirmation by the Joint Board of Management for each water system and the general public through consultation.

Once capacity for the EAWSS is exceeded due to Elgin users growth, or LHWSS capacity is exceeded due to London’s growth, expansion of the EAWSS is needed. to meet fbture 2024 demand requirements for both City of London & Elgm Area users. An approximate 10 MLD transfer of flows over the 2004 to 2024 period from the LHWSS to the EAWSS is needed to prevent the need for further expansion of the LHWSS during this time period. TIUS means that over the time period to 2024, the EAWSS begins to compensate somewhat for London’s growth needs, as currently is the case for Elgin Area user needs. This is the most efficient alternative for the provision of water to both users. Beyond 2024 this could

’ continue for some time to further delay expansion needs relative to the LHWSS. Details of the sharing of growth capacity should be confirmed between the City of London and Elgin Area water users approaching and beyond 2024.

The next major expansion for the supply of water to the City of London is to come from the EAWSS via the Elgin-Middlesex Water System ( E M W S ) , as outlined in the Water Supply Study ESR (1992), and previous master planning work in 1994 and 1999.

4

These studies recommended the capacity of the Elgin Water Treatment Facility be doubled and the related raw water supply and potable transmission main components be increased to accommodate. This

FileLocation: P:WROJECTS\65 1 9 I W C U T N E SUMMARYExecutive Summary-Revised August 304.doc

. I . ~ L U & I 1io.n R W P r I i-$"--J bl Page 7 I -* - -*,-

i Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Summary

expansion would bring the maximum capacity from 91 ML/d (20 MIGD) to 182 ML/d (40 MIGD). The expansion is required in years 10 to 15, (assuming the Southeast Reservoir and PS is implemented), as confinned by the draft Master Plan information provided for the EAWS/LKWS systems.

Of the 91 ML/d (20 MIGD) expansion, 131 MLD (29 MIGD), will be needed to 2024 to service both Elgin Area and City of London water users (63 MLDI14 MIGD for London and 68 MLDI15 MIGD for Elgin area users). Ths represents a 48% share for the City of London and a 52% share for Elgin Area water users. TJxs would apply to the 40 MLD added to the existing 91 MLD capacity to meet 2024 requirements. The remainder would be oversizing shared on the same percentage basis. Based on work completed as part of the 1999 Waterworks for Growth Study, approximately 20 to 25% of the expansion cost could be staged to reduce cost and oversbing impacts. This should be confirmed once the final Master Plan update report is provided for the EAWSS. Oversizing has been shown on h s basis for now based on the percentage of 2024 flow requirements versus the rated capacity provided.

The work to be completed as part of the expansion required are identified in Table EX.4B. These are based on preliminary draft outputs from the Master Plan update. Timing is also consistent with that driven by current and hture flow requirements and needs for EAWSS users. Some components are specifically part of the future expansion (Le., the low lift pumping station, raw water transmission main, and water treatment plant works). Other components such as the Residual Management facility, existing transmission main upgrades, the new transmission main and the provision of standby power are works required to upgrade the existing facilities and/or service future growth. Expansion of the Elgin-Middlesex Pumping Station was identified as a requirement as part of the Waterworks for Growth Report and the earlier Master Plan. Thrs will now however not be needed in the next 20 years with the Southeast Reservoir and Pumping Station in place.

Although no capacity expansion works are identified' for the LHWSS over the 20 year planning period to 2024, this is predicated on:

the transfer of demand fiom the Lake Huron system (1 0 MLD Max Day), being' accommodated by the EAWSS over the last 5 years of the planning period;

0 no changes arising from the Draft Master Plan outputs for the Lake Huron and/or Elgm Area Water Supply Systems; and

no works at the Arva Pumping Station other than operational changes.

There are however, some works required to meet regulatory requirements, wbch to some extent address certain growth requirements. This includes the implementation of a Residual Management facility and the provision of standby power. In addition, the Joint Board for the LHWSS is currently reviewing the potential benefits that would be obtained by completing twinning of the transmission main between Grand Bend to London. This is currently identified in the DraR Master Plan as an emergency response and security of supply issue. What available supply can be provided should be confiimed to prevent the need to transfer the 10 MLD Max Day demand to the Elgin Area Water Supply System over the last 5 years of the planning period, or to further extend into the future the need to upgrade the LIFWSS, This work need and timing is therefore subject to verification.

Development CharEe Implications

The impetus for completing the Water Master Plan Update 2003 was the need to identify those works required to satisfy future water demands driven by growth over a 20 year period &om 2004 to 2024, and confirm these works met t h s need and were sized appropriately to address fbture requirements based on the growth lnfomation provided by the City. GrowthNon-Growth determination and Res/ICI allocations

File Location: P:WROJECTS\65 191EXECUlWE SUMMARYExecutive Summary-Revised August 3'04.doc

t

Page 8 Water Master Plan Update 2003 Executive Sumrnary

were shown in Tables EX.2, EX.3 and EX.4A/l3 previously. Table EX.5 summasizes the total costs; non- growth costs; 2024 growth costs complete with Res/ICI allocations; and the build-out growth costs complete with ResACI allocations for the City's water distribution system (Low level watermains, High level watermains, High level pumping stations, Southeast Reservoir and Pump Station), and Water Supply System ( E A W S S L W S S ) .

Key policy considerations include:

All- watermains required to service development in the future less than 400 m r i ~ (16 inches) in diameter are considered local services to be provided by development proponents.

Oversizing aspects beyond 2024 were identified on a case-by-case basis for pipe sizes 750 mm in diameter or greater only. Pipe size differential represents the only significant added cost since installation and restoration would be the same regardless of size.

For facility related components, the water demand information to 2024 was used to determine future work requirements.

Water demand information was used to detehnine work needs to 2024, and oversizing aspects beyond that would have to be financed initially, with recovery during the 2004 to 2024 planning period, and debt being carried beyond.

With respect to works completed in 2004 (i.e., the Hyde Park, Springbank and Uplands BPS's), it is current. City policy that those projects previously financed cannot be included in Development Charges unless expressly identified as such by City Council resolution. As a result, works relative to each, and the watermain components serviced by the Hyde Park, Springbank and Uplands BPS's, were also removed if completed in 2004.

Non-Growth for the Southeast Pumping Station compopent was based on the current 24.1 MLD (5.0 MIGD), provided by the EMWS since the remaining existing area currently serviced by the LHWSS, to be serviced by Southeast in the future, frees-up capacity within the Lake Huron system to service growth .in the north end of the City. The 473 Us (752 Vs for the flows currently fed from theArva Pumping Station minus the 279 ' U s currently serviced), is the capacity fteed-up. The resulting Growth/Non-Growth splits are 16% and 84% respectively. Res/ICI water demand allocations kom the model relative to the 473 Ws capacity made available as a result of the LHWSS switch were: 65% residential; 22% industrial; 5% commercial; and 8% institutional. The remainder of the proposed Southeast PS service zone is: 29% residential; 61% industrial; 7% commercial; and 3% institutional.

'

For the Southeast Reservoir, water demands for the City as a whole were utilized based on Res/ICI demand requirements given the reservoir services the entire City. These are: 56% residential; 32% industrial; 5% commercial; and 7% institutional.

For facility related works, the water demands to be met to 2024 w i b the Urban Growth boundary by a gwen facility, segregated by residential and IC1 demands in each service area Erom modeled outputs, were identified. This applied to the Springbank PS and service area watermains; the Wickerson Road PS and service area watermains; the Uplands PS and service area watermains; the Southeast Pumping Station and service area watermains; and the Hyde Park service area watermains.

The dormation outlined in this report provides the basis for water development charge determination for 2004. The policy considerations outlined above arehhould be addressed as part of this.

File Location: P:\PROJECTS\65 191EXECUTNE SuMMMY'Executive Summary-Revised August 3'04.doc

3 N

0 .5

,

8

. I .