HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-023-03/01/2016-APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN UPDATED WATER EFFICIENCY PLAN RESOLUTION 2016-023
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS)
APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN UPDATED WATER EFFICIENCY PLAN
WHEREAS, the City owns and operates Fort Collins Utilities,'which includes a water
utility that, among other things, provides water at retail to domestic, commercial, industrial, or
public facility customers that have a-total annual demand of 2,000 acre-feet or more; and
WHEREAS, the City has a long-running commitment to the efficient use of the City's
water resources, dating back to 1977 and continuing through the present day; and
WHEREAS, Section 37-60-126 of the Colorado Revised Statutes concerns certain
requirements for the City's development, adoption, and implementation of a water efficiency
plan approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board ("CWCB"); and
WHEREAS, in 2010, the CWCB approved the City's current water efficiency plan,
known as the Water Conservation Plan, dated February 12, 2069; and
WHEREAS, Section 37-60-126 of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires that the City
review and update its water efficiency plan no less frequently than.every seven years; and
WHEREAS, Fort Collins Utilities has reviewed and updated the Water Conservation
V Plan and has proposed for Council approval and adoption an updated plan, known as the 2015
Water Efficiency Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit"A" ("Updated Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Updated Plan is consistent with the City's goals and objectives,with the
benefits to the City including the following: lower per capita water use; delaying or avoiding
significant capital costs for Fort Collins Utilities; otherwise lower water bills for customers of
Fort Collins Utilities; further development of a conservation ethic; ' demonstration of a
commitment to sustainability; support of economic health; enhanced resilience during drought .
periods; preparation for and adaptation to potential effects of climate change; and potential
provision of water for other beneficial purposes such as agriculture, ecosystem services,
recreation, and aesthetics; and
WHEREAS, the Updated Plan meets the requirements of Section 37-60-126 of the
Colorado Revised Statutes and is ready to be submitted to the CWCB for its review and
approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
J
Section 2. That the Updated Plan is hereby approved and adopted.
4-
Section 3. That the City Manager is hereby directed to submit the Updated Plan to
the CWCB pursuant to all legal requirements.
Passed and adopted on at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this
1st day of March, A.D. 2016.
T r, o
ho,:• .,cy ;ayor
ATTEST: �
eEL
•cOLORP�
City Clerk
}
-2-
EXHIBIT
2015
Water
Eff iciency
Plan
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Listof Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Listof Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v
AcronymList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ExecutiveSummary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 .0 Profile of Existing Water Supply System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . 1 Overview of Existing Water Supply System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1 . 2 Water Supply Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1 . 3 Supply-side Limitations and Future Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.0 Profile of Water Demand and Historical Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 . 1 Demographics and Key Characteristics of the Service Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 . 2 Historical Water Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 . 3 Past and Current Demand Management Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 . 4 Demand Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3 .0 Integrated Water Supply and Demand Management Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3 . 1 Water Efficiency and Water Supply Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3 . 2 Water Efficiency Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4 .0 Selection of Water Efficiency Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4 . 1 Summary of Selection Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5 .0 Implementation and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5 . 1 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5 . 2 Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
GI ossa ry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Appendix A: Materials related to Chapter 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Appendix B : Materials related to Chapter 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Appendix C: Materials related to Chapter 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 . 1 Raw Water Yield in 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 1 . 2 Water Supply Limitations and Future Need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Table 2 . 1 Treated Water Use by Customer Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Table 2 . 2 System Water Loss Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 2 . 3 List of Current Water Conservation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table4 . 1 Areas of Opportunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 . 1 : Water Service Area and surrounding Water District boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 1 . 2 City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply System Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 2 . 1 Treated water use and population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Figure 2 . 2 Average daily treated water demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Figure 2 . 3 Water use by customer category, 2010-2014 average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 2 .4 Water use in gallons per capita per day and weather data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 2 . 5 Estimated indoor and outdoor use, 2010-2014 average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 2 . 6 Treated water demand, historic planning levels, and population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Error ! Bookmark not defined .
Figure 3 . 1 Water efficiency goals, demand and population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Figure 3 . 2 Historic GPCD and New Conservation Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
v
ACRONYM LIST
AF Acre Foot ( equals 325, 851 gallons )
AMFC Advanced Meter Fort Collins
BFO Budgeting for Outcomes
BMP Best management practice ( s)
C- BT Colorado- Big Thompson
CAP Climate Action Plan
CWCB Colorado Water Conservation Board
ELCO East Larimer County Water District
FCLWD Fort Collins - Loveland Water District
GMA Growth management area
GPCD gallons per capita per day
LCU Large commercial users
MG Million gallons
MGD Million gallons per day
NCWCD Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District or " Northern Water"
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPIC North Poudre Irrigation Company
PRPA Platte River Power Authority
RWR Raw water requirement; requirement to provide water for any new development that
occurs within the Utilities water service area
SWSI Colorado Water Conservation Board' s Statewide Water Supply Initiative
TAZ Traffic analysis zone
WEP TAG Water efficiency plan technical advisory group
WSDMP Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, 2012
WSSC Water Supply and Storage Company
WTF Water Treatment facility
WFCWD West Fort Collins Water District
WQA Winter quarterly average ( Dec, Jan and Feb use )
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Fort Collins Utilities has a strong commitment to ensure the efficient use of its natural
resources . The Utilities' Water Conservation Program is nearly 40 years in the making and has resulted in
lower per capita water use, even as population has grown significantly. These programs have benefited
the Utilities by delaying or avoiding significant capital costs and have benefited customers through
reduced water bills . The additional benefits to the City and the community include development of a
conservation ethic, demonstration of a commitment to sustainability, support of economic health,
enhanced resilience during drought periods, preparation for potential effects of climate change, and
provision of water for other beneficial purposes such as agriculture, ecosystem services, recreation , and
aesthetics .
This Water Efficiency Plan (WEP ) is an update to the Water Conservation Plan approved by the Colorado
Water Conservation Board in 2010 . "Water efficiency is doing more with less — not doing without" — the
term "efficiency" has replaced "conservation" because efficiency includes conservation and is a more
appropriate term for the range of tactics needed in Colorado . ' The 2010 Plan set a goal of 140 gallon per
capita per day ( GPCD ) by the year 2020 . This updated Plan proposes a new goal of 130 GPCD by 2030 .
The GPCD in 2014, normalized to account for weather, was 143 (without weather- normalization , GPCD
was 139 ) ; for reference, the normalized GPCD in 2001 was 198 .
Efficiency and Conservation activities
Fort Collins Utilities has a robust water conservation program with activities that touch on many
different uses and affect the entire community . The Water Conservation team will continue to build on
existing programs and develop new approaches to conservation . Programs will be evaluated for
effectiveness in water efficiency, customer service, and technical excellence . The overall mission is to
cultivate a water efficient, adaptive, and knowledgeable customer base through education and cost-
effective water efficiency programs while supporting the City' s Strategic Plan and its social,
environmental , and economic health .
The Water Conservation team has identified five key areas of opportunity for greater water efficiency :
• Leverage Advanced Meter Fort Collins data and capabilities
• Promote and support greater outdoor water efficiency
• Encourage greater integration of water efficiency into land use planning and building codes
• Expand commercial and industrial strategies
• Increase community water literacy
Actions will be guided by the following implementation principles :
• Employ sophisticated data -driven processes and decision- making
• Coordinate and support symbiotic efforts within Utilities and across the City
• Cultivate new and bolster existing community and statewide partnerships
1 http ://cwcb . state .co . us/water-management/waterEfficiency/Pages/main . aspx
Draft : February 17, 2016
Plan Development Process
The content and organization of this plan was developed using the Colorado Water Conservation
Board ' s municipal water efficiency plan guidance document, as it is a state requirement to submit an
updated Plan every 7 years . This plan was developed with input from the community and a technical
advisory group : Water Efficiency Plan Technical Advisory Group ( WEP TAG ) . The WEP TAG included
Utilities and City staff as well as Water Board members . A draft of this WEP was presented to City
Council at the October 13, 2015 work session and received positive feedback. Following this
presentation , Water Conservation staff held a public comment period and performed additional
outreach activities . The next steps include a return to City Council for resolution and ultimately
submittal to the CWCB .
Note : this document includes several technical terms and abbreviations . An acronym list is provided
after the table of contents for reference and a glossary is included at the end of the document to
provide additional technical detail .
PROFILE1 . 0 SUPPLY
The City of Fort Collins is located 65 miles north of Denver in Larimer County, nestled between the Rocky
Mountains foothills and the Eastern Plains of Colorado . Horsetooth Reservoir borders Fort Collins to the
west and the Cache la Poudre River winds its way through north Fort Collins before reaching the South
Platte River to the east of Greeley, CO .
The Fort Collins Utilities service area boundaries for water do not perfectly match the Fort Collins city
limits . Z Fort Collins- Loveland Water District ( FCLWD ) and East Larimer County Water District ( ELCO )
provide water to some areas within the city limits and will most likely serve additional city residents in
the future . 3 Furthermore, Fort Collins Utilities provide water service to some customers beyond the city
limits; this is primarily northwest of Fort Collins, including providing wholesale water to West Fort Collins
Water District (WFCWD ) . Figure 1 . 1 shows the Utilities service area and the neighboring water district
services areas with respect to the Fort Collins Growth Management Area ( GMA) and the official city
limits . Fort Collins Utilities currently serves about 75% of Fort Collins' residents and businesses .
Note that this Chapter contains an abbreviated set of information on the Water Supply System ; for a
more detailed account, see the City of Fort Collins' Water Supply and Demand Management ( Policy)
Report ( dated April 2014) 4. The updated Policy, which was approved by City Council in late 2012, serves
as a guide for the Fort Collins Utilities to a sustainable and integrated approach to 1 ) ensuring an
adequate, safe, and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community, and
2 ) managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource consistent with
the preferences of customers and in recognition of the region' s semi-arid climate .
z Fort Collins Utilities is an enterprise and does not receive funds from the City of Fort Collins general fund . Water
Conservation is entirely funded by the Water Fund .
3 The Fort Collins Utilities service area is landlocked by neighboring water districts . There will be little new
development and mostly re-development of existing properties within the service area boundaries. Most land
available in Fort Collins for new development is outside of the water service area . This Plan only applies to the
Utilities' water service area except where noted, such as collaboration with neighboring water districts .
4 http ://www.fcgov. com/utilities/what-we-do/water/water-supply-demand/
2
Fort Collins Area Water Districts
NN
W + E
G yJ
S
. 090 yGs1 y% D 54
-_ - AD 52
r.
2 _ _ r J. ,
90 din .
NcvLN Y 1
a.
w
V✓ LAI !RE I 5T
z • ~
.`d 1N( I' o� CT ;:: D E P Elk_- DL
o
r�
W D RD E DRAKE I? u
LJ
r' , c r r.
_ -
-I n w ` . J ; - - YROAD .
J
2 •",
t.. �• %S1 1 0
rr I I r T
R:LBV RG 1 . I
OOV
\ w I I '_Jr . C RPENTER RD .n
V
i E COUNTY ROAD 30
o�
Water Districts
East Larimer County Water District
Fort Collins Loveland Water District — — City Limits
Fort Collins Utilities (Water) r7 GMA
Sunset Water District Major Streets
West Fort Collins Water District Railroads
Fc of
lllns
Miles
0 05 1 2 3 4 5 F,gure Updated 9,113 '
Figure 1 . 1 : Water Service Area and surrounding Water District boundaries
3
1 . 1 OVERVIEW OF EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
The Fort Collins Utilities' water sources are surface supplies . The Utilities water supplies come from two
major systems : the Cache la Poudre River ( Poudre River) Basin and the Colorado- Big Thompson ( C- BT)
Project, often referred to as " Horsetooth Water" . ' The City' s water supply and treatment system
consists of several key facilities, which are illustrated in Figure 1 . 2 and include the Poudre River
diversion structure and pipelines, Joe Wright Reservoir, Michigan Ditch, Horsetooth Reservoir, the
Water Treatment Facility, the Mulberry Reclamation Facility, and the Drake Reclamation Facility . ' Figure
1 . 2 includes Halligan Reservoir, which is currently owned by Fort Collins Utilities but operated by the
North Poudre Irrigation Company ( NPIC) . A discussion of the Halligan Water Supply Storage Project is
located in the "Storage" portion of the System Reliability section below . The City's Water system
contains approximately 540 miles of pipeline and 34, 298 connections . In addition to treated water, the
City diverts about 3, 000 to 4, 000 acre-feet of raw water to irrigate City parks, golf courses, a cemetery,
greenbelt areas, some school grounds, and for the purposes of meeting some contractual raw water
delivery obligations . In 2014, the City of Fort Collins Utilities supplied 7 . 4 billion gallons of water to
approximately 130, 200 people . '
From the beginning of the City of Fort Collins Water Utility in the 1880s up to the early 1960s, the City
depended primarily on direct flow rights to the Cache la Poudre River ( Poudre River) to satisfy its water
demands . Direct flow rights are water rights that can be taken for direct use, as opposed to storage
rights that can be taken for later use . The first water right was obtained in 1889 and four other senior
direct flow rights were obtained in the early 1900s; these currently allow the Utilities to divert an
average of 11, 300 acre-feet of raw water annually. In the late 1950s, the Utilities acquired its first 6, 000
units of Colorado- Big Thompson ( C- BT) Project water. To date, the Utilities owns about 18,855 units of
CB-T water . In addition to these two major sources of water, the Utilities began to acquire shares of
several local irrigation company stocks starting in the 1960s, in part to expand the Utilities' water supply
portfolio and in part as developers turned over the water rights from lands they were building over in
order to satisfy the raw water requirements for new development . $
5 Horsetooth Reservoir borders the City of Fort Collins and is an East Slope terminal reservoir in the C- BT system .
For more information on the Colorado- Big Thompson Project, which is operated and maintained by Northern
Water and the U .S . Bureau of Reclamation, please see : http ://www. northernwater. org/WaterProjects/C-
BTProject. aspx
' The Water Treatment Facility chemically treats up to 87 MGD ( million gallons per day) . The Mulberry Water
Reclamation Facility employs physical, biological, and chemical processes to treat up to 6 MGD . The Drake Water
Reclamation Facility employs similar processes and treats up to 23 MGD of wastewater.
' One acre-foot of water is equivalent to 325, 851 gallons of water. 7 .4 billion gallons of water is approximately
equal to 22, 710 acre-feet of water.
8 The use of "City" vs . " Utilities" may be confusing in this section . Nearly all water rights are in the name of the City
of Fort Collins; however, the majority of the water rights are utilized and administered by Fort Collins Utilities. The
Parks Department and the Natural Areas Department also use some of the water rights and are responsible for
them . The districts ( ELCO and FCLWD) serve some residents and businesses within the Fort Collins GMA, however,
they each have their own water rights.
4
t � ♦ \ L . �� �� t
. II f� � � ,, ♦ Y"t ,
/ice :3 \� A• ; 1 �;` _
p 1
rg
AL
OAJP
CD
x a �
_kNIN
j2.$3,t �
a§
: 9 i. _
ftftm
w.
�g 3
Figure 1 . 2 City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply System Map
5
Table 1 . 1 shows the average annual yield of the Utilities' various water sources . For more detailed
information on each supply source, see Appendix A. The Utilities' average annual raw water yield as of
2014 is approximately 75, 245 acre-feet, but the actual treatable average annual yield is closer to 55, 000
acre-feet per year. The treatable water right yield is lower due to legal constraints, such as agricultural
rights that have not been converted for municipal use, ditch losses, water right volumetric limitations
and return flow obligations . The Utilities' modeling has shown that the current firm yield of its system is
approximately 31,000 acre-feet per year. 9 During the summer months, however, much of the Utilities'
water rights yield more water than the demands of the service area customers . Both the raw water yield
and treatable yield are reduced in dry years, requiring more storage water to meet demands .
Table 1 . 1 Raw Water Yield in 2014
Source acre-feet
Poudre River Direct Flow 111300
Joe Wright- Michigan Ditch 51500
Northern Water ( CBT) 141330
North Poudre Irrigation Company10 191850
Pleasant Valley & Lake Canal Company 71760
PRPA Reuse Plan 21310
Southside Ditches11 101760
Water Supply and Storage Company 21240
Miscellaneous12 11195
Average Raw Yield Total 75,245
Note : Yields are the approximate average annual yields and are
not representative of a dry year conditions and do not reflect
other constraints of the system .
9 This assumes a 1-in-50 year drought; Firm yield is commonly determined by calculating the maximum constant
annual demand (quantity of water) that can be met with the available supply during a specified multi-year
hydrologic period .
10 These sources are only partially available for municipal use .
11 The Southside ditches refer to Arthur, Larimer No . 2, New Mercer, and Warren Lake irrigation companies.
12 These are relatively small contributors to the overall raw yield and include shares in Chaffee Ditch, Boxelder
Irrigation Ditch Company, Lake Canal Company, Louden Irrigating Canal and Reservoir Company.
6
Reusable Supplies :
An important part of the City' s water supplies are sources that are reusable . Typically, this is water that
is imported from another basin or comes from specific in - basin sources that may be totally consumed
through succession of identified uses . For Fort Collins, this includes much of the Michigan Ditch and Joe
Wright Reservoir water and portions of the Southside Ditches water that has been converted from
agricultural use to municipal use .
A sizeable portion of the Utilities treated water supplies are reusable . 13 Much of this is used as part of a
Reuse Plan which involves the City, Water Supply and Storage Company (WSSC) and Platte River Power
Authority ( PRPA) 14. Reusable sources owned by the City and WSSC are used Utilities' customers and the
reusable effluent is used by PRPA at their Rawhide Power Plant facility . In turn , PRPA provides Windy
Gap water to the City .
Raw Water Requirements :
Developers are required to provide water for any new development that occurs within the Utilities
water service area . The amount is determined by the Utilities; the developer is assessed a raw water
requirement ( RWR ) for any new development that occurs within the service area . This practice originally
began in the 1960s when two acre-feet per acre of land developed was required . Because water use
varied considerably depending on the type of use for any given area , a study was done in 1983 -84 to
develop the existing method of assessing the RWRs, which attempts to more closely assess the
requirements based on actual use .
The formula for residential development considers the density, and an estimate of indoor and outdoor
use . The RWR is calculated by multiplying the water use estimate by a "water supply factor" that is used
to reflect the variability in supply and demand from year to year as well as other unaccounted for water
use . 15 Non - residential requirements are based on tap size . Water use is analyzed for all non - residential
customers for a given tap size and the requirements are based on those results . Since there is a lot of
variability within each tap size, a raw water surcharge is assessed for any annual use exceeding an
annual allotment . 16
Developers and builders may satisfy the RWR by either turning over water rights acceptable to the City
or paying cash in - lieu -of the water rights . The City uses in - lieu payments to purchase additional water
rights or implement other means of increasing the firm yield of the Utilities' water supply, such as
developing storage capacity. The in - lieu fee is evaluated and, if needed, revised to reflect the costs
associated with developing the required water supplies ( e . g. , market price of water rights) .
13 This refers to the total amount of water used, not to the total amount of water feasibly available in a given year.
14 2012 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy ( 2014 Report ) .
15 The current water supply factor is 1 .92 . This equation is used to determine the residential RWR is as follows :
RWR = 1 . 92 x [ ( . 18 x Number of Dwelling Units ) + ( 1 . 2 x Net Acres )]
16 Requirements vary from . 90 acre-feet for a 3/4 inch meter to 9 . 60 acre-feet for a 2-inch meter. For larger
meters, the RWR is based on an estimate of water use .
7
1 . 2 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY
Fort Collins Utilities is responsible for providing an adequate and reliable supply of water to its
customers . The planning criteria describe the water demand that can be reliably served under specified
drought conditions and the margin of safety the Utilities should have in place to address unforeseen
circumstances . 17 The three main planning criteria used to develop the City' s water supply system are 1 )
the drought criterion , 2 ) the storage reserve factor and, 3 ) the planning demand level . These criteria
determine the amount of water supplies and facilities the Utilities' needs ( e . g ., the amount of storage
required ) and should be conservative to account for inherent uncertainties in water supply planning.
Drought Criterion
The drought criterion states that in a 1 -in -50 year drought the Utilities should be able to meet the
planning demand level . This is an important criterion because not only will demands often be higher in
drought periods due to less precipitation , water supply systems generally will also yield less water . The
Utilities has used a 1- in -50 year drought criterion since the original 1988 Water Supply Policy.
Storage Reserve Factor
A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through the
drought criterion ( 1- in -50 year drought) . This storage reserve provides a short-term supply to address
emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have occurred during drought
conditions) . The Policy calls for a 20 percent storage reserve factor, which equates to about 3 . 5 months
of winter supplies or about 1 . 5 months of summer supplies .
Planning Demand Level
The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to
meet . Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to
determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired . The planning demand level is measured
in gallons per capita per day ( GPCD ) and is used along with projected population and projected large
contractual use ( LCU ) needs to determine future demand levels; population projections will be discussed
in detail in Section 2 .4 . The planning demand level is set higher than current use and current water
conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the Utilities'
water supply yield . The current Water Supply and Demand Management Policy set 150 GPCD as the
planning demand level, which is the average of 2006-2011 water use .
Impacts of Climate Change
Climate change could significantly impact the reliability of the Utilities' supplies and/or the amount of
water required to maintain existing landscapes . These changes may include reduced snow pack, earlier
runoff, hotter and drier summers, and an increased recurrence of drought . A great deal of uncertainty
exists related to current climate change projections along the Colorado Front Range and its impact on
municipal water supply and demands . Current research indicates that changes in precipitation in this
area are uncertain but that temperatures will increase and therefore it is likely that runoff will come
17 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Report ( dated April 2014; approved by City Council in later
2012 ) .
8
earlier and in a shorter amount of time, precipitation may come more often as rain rather than snow,
and higher temperatures will increase outdoor demands and change growing seasons for existing
landscapes . For additional information refer to the CWCB 2014 report "Climate Change in Colorado : A
Synthesis to Support Water Resources Management and Adaptation " . 18
The Utilities' water supply planning criteria and assumptions are conservative in part to account for
climate change based on the information to date . The City will continue to monitor climate change
information and, if necessary, will revise its water supply planning criteria and assumptions to ensure
future water supply reliability.
1 . 3 SUPPLY - SIDE LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE NEEDS
Table 1 . 2 lists the future water supply needs and challenges . The full use of the Utilities' water rights in a
given year can be reduced by several physical and legal constraints . Legal challenges are related to
Colorado water laws and the administration of water rights . Some of the agricultural water rights owned
by the Utilities are not available for use because the shares need to be changed in Water Court to
municipal use .
The Colorado Water Conservation Board ' s Statewide Supply Initiative ( SWSI ) predicts a significant gap
between water supplies and water demands along Colorado' s Front Range, starting in 2040 for the
Northern region of the South Platter River Basin . 19 Fort Collins is a forward -thinking community and the
Utilities has identified water supply needed through 2065 . Two key solutions to ensuring a reliable
supply system moving forward include storage development and water efficiency programs . Water that
is conserved may only be used for other beneficial purposes or at other times of the year if storage is
available for that unused water.
Table 1 . 2 Water Supply Limitations and Future Need
Future Need/Challenge Yes No
System is in a designated critical water supply shortage X
area
System experiences frequent water supply shortages X
and/or supply emergencies
System has substantial real or apparent water losses X
Experiencing high rates of population and demand X
growth
Planning substantial improvements or additions X
Increases to wastewater system capacity anticipated X
Need additional drought reserves X
Drinking water quality issues X
18 http ://cwcb . state . co . us/environment/climate-change/Pages/main . aspx
19 Camp Dresser & McKee Inc . 2011 . Colorado' s Water Supply Future : Colorado Water Conservation Board 2010.
9
Storage Constraints
A primary physical constraint is the lack of storage capacity to manage and regulate the water rights
owned by the City . Additional water storage capacity is critically needed to increase the yield and
reliability of its water supply system . Operational storage is needed to meet return flow obligations
inherent with converted irrigation shares and provide other operational flexibility, which has recently
been met through the acquisition of Rigden Reservoir. Carryover storage is needed to capture water
during wetter years for use during drier years and also provide a storage reserve for unexpected
emergencies ( e . g. a pipeline failure ) . Both types of storage are needed to increase the reliability and
redundancy desired to meet the water needs of our customers .
While the Utilities do have some year-to-year "carryover" storage capacity, much of this is already
allocated to meet return flow obligations and other contractual agreements . Northern Water does
include some carryover storage in the CB-T system ; however, it is also almost entirely allocated to
meeting contractual obligations . 20 While the City owns shares of several ditch companies that do have
storage, we do not have access to the storage systems. Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin that meets
the storage reserve would help diversify the City' s water supply system , which is currently highly reliant
on C- BT storage .
Planned Storage Improvements
In 2003 the City acquired Halligan Reservoir, located on the North Fork of the Poudre River
approximately 25 miles northwest of Fort Collins, for carryover and vulnerability storage . With plans for
its expansion, the City is currently going through the National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA)
permitting process, including an analysis of potential environmental impacts, other storage options, and
costs and benefits . In 2013, the City acquired an existing gravel pit storage facility located below the
Drake Water Reclamation Facility . The gravel pit, now Rigden Reservoir, has been enlarged to 1, 900
acre feet and is being used for operational storage . The reservoir began operation in 2015 and will
increase the system' s firm yield .
20 Note that CB-T water is particularly valuable to the water supply portfolio because it can be stored within the C-
BT reservoir system for use any time within a given water year.
10
PROFILE2 . 0 OF DEMAND AND HISTORICAL
The City of Fort Collins city limits do not perfectly coincide with the Utilities water service area . The
information in Section 2 . 1 below describes the City of Fort Collins, rather than the service area, as the
city limits are how this type of information is collected by the City Planning Department, the U . S . Census,
and the American Community Survey. Information in Sections 2 . 2-2 .4, however, will pertain to the
Utilities' water service area .
2 . 1 DEMOGRAPHICS AND KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SERVICE AREA
The City of Fort Collins is home to approximately 158, 600 residents and 30,000 students as of 2015 . 21
The average household size is 2 . 37 people, the median age is about 29 years old , and about 27% of
households have at least one person under the age of 18 . The average household income is about
$ 72, 000 . As of the 2010 U . S . Census, about 55 % of homes were owner-occupied , 57% of homes were
single-family detached residences, and the median home value was $ 247, 800 . About 11% of the housing
stock is estimated to be built prior to1960 and about 40% were built prior to 1980 . 22
The City of Fort Collins is home to two major public higher education institutions : Colorado State
University and Front Range Community College . Fort Collins was once home to a wide swath of
agricultural activity; however, much of this is now limited to the outskirts of the City or has moved
outside of the City entirely . Several high -tech industries call Fort Collins home, including Hewlett
Packard, Intel, Woodward Inc . , and AMD, among others . In addition to the other major employers like
the City Government and the colleges, there has been an increase in the areas of clean energy,
bioscience, and agri -tech businesses . The City also enjoys a strong microbrewery industry alongside an
Anheuser- Busch Brewery . z3
2 . 2 HISTORICAL WATER DEMANDS
Up until the early 2000s, the Utilities' service area population growth was largely matched by an
increase in total water demands . Like many other Colorado communities, the 2002 -03 drought spurred
the City of Fort Collins to rethink its water use . While the population continues to grow, water demands
have exhibited a downward trend, as illustrated in Figure 2 . 1 . From 2001 to 2014, the service area
population increased by about 7% while the total treated water demand decreased by about 25% . Such
reductions are a combined result of Utilities' customers being fully metered and adopting
tiered/seasonal rate structures by 2003, as well as the robust water conservation program and the
water conservation efforts by customers .
21 As of 2014, the Utilities' service area provided treated water to about 130, 200 residents .
22 This paragraph contains information about the City of Fort Collins from three sources : the City Planning
Department, the 2010 U . S . Census, and the 2013 American Community Survey.
23 The Fort Collins AB Brewery is home to the world -famous Budweiser Clydesdales West Coast Team .
11
Treated water use and population , 1960 - 2014
Fort Collins Utilities
12000 140
10000 120
c
° 100
8000
0 80
0
6000 c
- 60
a� C
D 4000 - °
40
co a
2000 20 a
MM IM
0 - — 0
o Ln o Ln o Ln o Ln o Ln o
co co r� r�_ 00 00 rn rn o 0
(3) rn rn rn rn 6) M M O O 0
�- N N N
Year
Treated Use ( MG ) — Population ( 1 , 000' s )
Figure 2 . 1 Treated water use and population
Daily water demand varies considerably throughout the year . Water use is fairly consistent throughout
the winter months, then more than doubles in the summer months as customers increase use for
landscapes and other seasonal purposes ( e . g . pools) . Figure 2 . 2 illustrates a five-year average of the
daily treated water delivered from 2010-2014 along with details on the peak day for each year, which
highlights how variable water demands can be in any given year .
12
2010-2014 Average Daily Treated Water Demand
Fort Collins Utilities
40
2010 Peak Day: July 26, 40.8 MG
35 2011 Peak Day: August 30, 39.8 MG
2012 Peak Day: Jun 22, 46.8 MG
2013 Peak Day: June 26, 42.95 MG
ro 30 2014 Peak Day: July 9, 37.22 MG
m
25
E
c. 20
E
g
15
d
10
f°
5 —
0 } {
c a L >, c on a > u
Figure 2 .2 Average daily treated water demand
Fort Collins Utilities monitors treated water use by eight categories, as shown in Table 2 . 1 . This table
reports the annual use, number of accounts, average monthly use and water use by account, as of 2014 .
The majority of accounts are single-family residential accounts, however on a per account basis
commercial customers use the most water. Recall that since the Utilities' water service area is different
than the City limits; Outside City Customers refer to customers outside of the city limits but who are
Utilities' customers . West Fort Collins Water District receives wholesale treated water from the Utilities,
which is why they appear as one singular customer .
13
Table 2. 1 Treated Water Use by Customer Category
2014
Annual Water Number of Average Monthly Average
Customer Category Use ( MG ) * Accounts Use ( MG ) * Annual Use per
Account (gal ) *
Single- Family 21142 261930 178 . 5 791536
Duplex 120 11226 10 97, 750
Multi - Family 970 21240 80 . 8 4321934
Commercial 21972 21222 247 . 7 1/ 337/ 765
City Government 107 225 8 . 9 4751830
West Fort Collins WD 140 1 11 . 7 14010001000
Outside City Customers 280 11454 23 . 3 1921751
Total 61731 341298 560 . 9 1961251
* Note : These numbers are rounded and are not exact . MG = million gallons.
As shown in Figure 2 . 3, residential categories collectively use the most water each year: about 47% on
average, with about 32% attributable to single-family homes . The City government buildings and
facilities only use about 1% of the treated water each year, outside City customer use about 4% and the
Utilities delivers about 2% of the treated water to West Fort Collins Water District . System loss is
discussed in greater detail below .
Commercial customers use about 39% of treated water, on average . Beyond the small, mid and large
commercial customers, the City has identified a number of Key Accounts, who are businesses that are
typically the largest water and energy users . The Utilities' Customer Accounts representatives work
together with the Key Account customers to connect them to the appropriate experts, programs and
services they need from the City of Fort Collins . These partnerships help customers achieve their
sustainability goals as well as the goals set by the Energy Policy, Water Efficiency Plan and Climate
Action Plan . The Customer Accounts team offers a customized and targeted approach to assist in
accomplishing the goals set by these policies . Given the uniqueness of how each business utilizes water,
the largest users can also apply for a custom water conservation rebate, up to $ 5,000, in addition to
being encouraged to participate in our other rebate programs .
14
Fort Collins Utilities Water use by Customer Category
2010-2014 average
■ Multi -Family
13%
■ Duple ■ Commercial
2% 39%
■ City Government
■ Single-Family
1 /o a
32%
— — — _ ■ West Fort Collins
WD
■ Outside City 2%
—■ System Losses Customers
7% 4%
Figure 2 .3 Water use by customer category, 2010-2014 average
2 . 2 . 1 GPCD : GALLONS CONSUMED PER PERSON PER DAY
Water consumption is often characterized by daily per person use, measured in gallons per capita per
day ( GPCD ) . This is calculated as total treated water use (total treated water that leaves the water
treatment facility; includes all uses ) divided by service area population and 365 days :
total treated demand — LCU
GPCD =
service area population * 365 days
These calculations exclude large contractual customers ( LCU ) and other sales or exchange arrangements
to produce a value that is somewhat more comparable to other municipalities . 14
Fort Collins Utilities also estimates a weather- normalized GPCD metric in order to control for the
fluctuations associated with varying weather patterns . This normalized GPCD is approximately the GPCD
24 While the use of GPCD for comparisons has long been an industry standard practice, there is evidence that it is a
difficult indicator for individual water-users to relate their behaviors to, and the system-wide GPCD is a function of
far more than a utility's water conservation and efficiency activities . More on this topic and recommended changes
can be found in in Chapter 3 .
15
that would have occurred if the weather conditions had been the average weather conditions for the
region . This means that the actual GPCD is generally higher than the normalized GPCD when we have a
relatively dry year and lower in a relatively wet year .
Demand levels have declined significantly over the last few decades, from around 230 GPCD in the early
1990s to about 200 GPCD before the drought year of 2002 . Figure 2 .4 shows actual GPCD and
normalized GPCD from 2001 through 2014 . To help illustrate the role that weather plays in our actual
GPCD, the graph also includes annual precipitation and evapotranspiration for grass, both in inches . ZS In
years where our region received less precipitation and the evapotranspiration rate was higher, actual
per capita water use is higher. The average normalized use over 2002 to 2009 is 158 GPCD,
approximately a 21% reduction in per capita water use from before 2002 . The average normalized use
from 2010 to 2014 is 146 GPCD, which is about a 27% reduction in per capita use from pre-2002 . Since
the 2002 -03 drought, several factors have helped to reduce water use including, universal metering,
conservation -oriented rate structures, more efficient plumbing standards, and our robust water
efficiency and education programs .
Water use in gallons per capita per day, actual and weather- normalized
Fort Collins Utilities
250 - 60
v
t
50 c
_ 200 110111a —_
>
ra O
v 40
Q Q
@ 150 G
Y_ (U
Q Q
ru
u 30 -o
>_ c
v �
100
c O
_0 20
o a
ao �,
v �
50 r��°
10 O
�= C
>
}� w
0 - 0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
= Actual Use ( GPCD) ! Normalized Average Use (GPCD)
mommAnnual Precipitation ( inches ) I ET for grass ( inches)
Evapotranspiration (the amount of water needed for plant health) data comes for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District's Fort Collins East station, with the exception of the
2007 value, which comes from the Fort Collins Central station. The reference crop for this data is grass. Precipitation data comes from Fort Collins Utilities Water Resources Division
and is annual data (not just growing season).
Figure 2 .4 Water use in gallons per capita per day and weather data
25 Evapotranspiration is often defined as the combination of the water lost ( evaporate) to the atmosphere from
the ground surface, evaporation from the capillary fringe of the groundwater table, along with the plant
transpiration, which is evaporation of water from plant leaves . Evapotranspiration is affected by temperature,
relative humidity, wind and air movement, soil moisture availability, and the type of plant . For more information
see : http ://water . usgs . gov/edu /watercVcleevapotranspiration . html
16
Weather patterns mostly affect outdoor use of water . Figure 2 . 5illustrates an estimate of the portion of
water demand that is utilized outdoors . A common method for estimating indoor versus outdoor use is
to take the average of the demands in December through February and set this to be the estimate of
average indoor demands and assume that no outdoor use occurs in those months . Then for months
March through October, attribute any use above and beyond this average indoor use to be the
estimated outdoor use portion . As shown in Figure 2 . 5, water use in the summer months can be up to
almost two-thirds of total water demands .
Estimated Indoor and Outdoor Use
2010- 2014 average, Fort Collins Utilities
1200
c 58% 58%
0
1000 54%
tw 49%
800 41%
E
-a 600 17% 22%
E 4% ■ 2%
--
v 400 — —
v
3
M
0
a, Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Im-
Estimated Indoor Use ■ Estimated Outdoor Use
Note: Indoor use from March to October is estimated to be the average of the winter months (Winter Quarterly Average), December through
February.
Figure 2 . 5 Estimated indoor and outdoor use, 2010-2014 average
Fort Collins Utilities participated in a single-family end use study in 2012 . 26 This study helped shed some
light on how families are using water, through a small 88- household survey and analysis . In terms of
outdoor use, many of the participating homes were estimated to be under-watering, relative to what
was water needs estimated based on landscape area and weather information . However a minority of
homes were over-watering and this excess was large enough to offset any under-watering by the other
participating households . This highlights our need to provide improved programs and education to help
our customers use the optimal amount of water for their landscape .
Since indoor use is less visible to the Utilities, how people allocate and use water indoors is more of a
mystery. This 2012 study illustrated that there are still a significant number of low efficiency toilets and
26 Study was conducted by Aquacraft Water Engineering and Management, Inc.
17
clothes washers in the housing stock, however the majority of participating homes had a high efficiency
shower heads . The study also estimated that a significant amount of water is lost to leaks, which often
go unnoticed by the residents . This highlights the need to utilize data available through the Advanced
Meter Fort Collins (AMFC) program to help identify leaks and let our customers know so that they can
address the problem and stop paying for lost water; we are piloting a Continuous Consumption program
to meet this need, discussed further in Section 2 . 3 .
As noted in Section 1 . 1, in addition to treated water the Utilities diverts about 3 ,000 to 4, 000 acre-feet
of raw water to irrigate City parks, golf courses, a cemetery, greenbelt areas, some school grounds, and
for the purposes of meeting some contractual raw water delivery obligations .
2 . 2 . 2 SYSTEM WATER LOSS
Water losses in the Fort Collins Utilities' water system can occur in several locations :
• Between the points of diversion and the water treatment facility ( e . g. , from conveyance losses
within the pipelines carrying water to the treatment facility)
• Within the water treatment facility ( e . g . , during filter backwash processes )
• Within the water distribution system between the water treatment facility and the meters of
end users ( e .g . , from conveyance losses in the distribution pipe network)
Losses within the conveyance system that brings water to the treatment plant and within the water
treatment plant itself are not fully quantified, but estimated at 3 % of the annual diverted volume, when
estimated from source to outlet of the treatment plant . Losses within the distribution system are
estimated based on the difference between the amount of water treated at the treatment plant and the
cumulative amount of water metered at end users . A summary of losses is provided in Table 2 . 2 below.
These numbers represent estimates only and may reflect a number of factors . Fort Collins Utilities is
currently exploring integration of the American Water Works Association ' s M36 methodology into its
water loss management and tracking.
Table 2 . 2 System Water Loss Estimates
Loss Estimate ( in Million Gallons ) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Treatment and Diversion to
242 . 2 235 . 7 270 . 8 233 . 8 230 . 0
Treatment Conveyance Losses
Distribution Losses 426 . 5 462 . 1 695 . 1 534 . 9 705 . 7
Total 668 . 7 697 . 8 965 . 9 768 . 8 935 . 7
Distribution loss as percentage of 5 . 4% 6 . 1 % 7 . 9% 7 . 1% 9 . 5%
total treated water
18
2 . 3 PAST AND CURRENT DEMAND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Faced with a drought in 1977, the Utilities created a part-time water conservation position . In 1989 the
position expanded to a full -time position . The first Water Demand Management Policy in 1992 lead to
an expansion of conservation projects and increased educational and outreach efforts . The 1992 Policy
set a conservation goal of 195 GPCD by the year 2020 .
Prompted by the drought of 2002-03, Utilities made several efforts in 2003 to increase accountability
and encourage the efficient use of water including fully metering every customer by, implementing a
conservation-oriented rate structure — a tiered rate structure — with a seasonal component, initiating
several new outreach and educational programs, and also developing the Utilities' first Water Supply
Shortage Response Plan as guidance during drought and other emergency condition S . 27 The first joint
Water Supply and Demand Management Policy was developed in 2003 and set a conservation goal of
185 GPCD by 2010 .
The Utilities' Water Conservation program expanded again in 2010 with the development of a formal
Water Conservation Plan . This plan set the current conservation goal of 140 GPCD by 2020 . City Council
approved the budget for additional programs and staff outlined in the plan starting with the 2010-2011
budgets . The plan was approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board in early 2010 . Note that
conservation goals are purposely set lower than the Planning Demand Level discussed in Section 1 . 2,
which is used for supply reliability planning .
2 . 3 . 1 CURRENT DEMAND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Table 2 . 3 is a list of the current demand management activities along with the initial year of
implementation, if known . Note that many of our activities, programs, and regulations have
substantially evolved over the years . For a description of each activity, see Appendix B, which also
contains a table with participation levels from 2010 to 2014 for most of our current activities . This table
does not contain participation counts for events .
Z' The Water Supply Shortage Response Plan contains certain restrictions on the use of City-treated water and
other actions to be taken during a specified drought or water supply conditions .
19
Table 2. 3 List of Current Water Conservation Activities
Foundational Activities Educational Activities
Conservation -oriented rate structures ( 2003 ) Business education programs ( 2004 )
Continuous consumption program ( 2015 ) Community education programs ( 1977 )
Metering ( 2003 ) Conservation kit giveaways ( 1990 )
Monitor My Use ( 2014 ) Conservation public information efforts ( 1977)
Online water use calculator ( 2012 ) Home water reports ( 2014)
Seasonal rate structures ( 2003 ) Hotel and restaurant conservation materials ( 2003 )
Utility water loss program ( 1993 ) K- 12 education programs ( 1997 )
Target Technical Assistance and Incentives Watershed tours ( 2012 )
Clothes washer rebates ( 2003 ) Xeriscape Demonstration Garden ( 1986 )
Commercial facility assessments ( 2004) Ordinances and Regulations
Custom commercial rebates ( 2011 ) Green building codes ( 2011 )
Dishwasher rebates ( 2007 ) Landscape and irrigation standards ( 1994 )
Home efficiency audits ( 2009 ) Parkway landscaping regulations ( 2013 )
Home efficiency loans/ZILCH/on- bill financing
Plumbing standards ( 1978 )
( 2010)
Irrigation equipment rebates Restrictive covenants ordinance ( 2003 )
Low income retrofit program ( 2007, w/ LCCC) Soil amendment ordinance ( 2003 )
Restaurant pre- rinse spray valve distribution
Wasting water ordinance ( 1917 )
( 2011 )
Showerhead rebates ( 2011 ) Water efficiency upgrades at City buildings ( 2010 )
Sprinkler system audits ( 1999 ) Water supply and shortage response plan ( 2003 )
Toilet/ Urinal rebates ( 2010 ) Other Activities
Xeriscape design/incentive program ( 2010 )
Raw water for City irrigation , large customer reuse
project ( 1985 ), backwash water recycling ( 2003 )
2 . 4 DEMAND FORECASTS
Acquiring water supplies takes many years . In order to ensure a reliable water supply for customers in
the future, the Utilities plan for future growth and water needs . The City' s future municipal water
demands are largely dependent on population growth and the rate of commercial and industrial
development . The rate and pattern of population growth are also influenced by the future economy,
land use policies, and development incentives, among other factors . As such , the Water Supply and
Demand Management Policy Report ( dated April 2014) takes the long view and identifies projected
demands through 2050 .
20
2 . 4 . 1 PLANNING HORIZON
The current Water Conservation Plan , developed in 2009, identified a 10-year planning horizon with a
goal to update the plan in five years . This Water Efficiency Plan, to be submitted to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board in 2017, takes the middle road and uses a 2030 planning horizon, with incremental
goals leading up to the 2030 goal , as well as a goal to develop an updated plan no later than 2024 (seven
years after this Plan' s required submission year) .
2 . 4 . 2 DEMAND PROJECTIONS
The Utilities estimates future water demands for a given year by first multiplying the projected
population by the planning demand level ( 150 gallons per capita per day) multiplied by the number of
calendar days, then projected large contractual use ( LCU ) is added to get the total projected water
demand, as shown in the equation below . The Demand Planning Level is currently set at 150 gallons per
capita per day, and is purposely set higher than conservation goals to provide a greater level of system
reliability28 .
Total Demand = Projected Population x 150 gpcd x 365 days + Projected LCU
2 . 4 . 3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Given the differences between the Fort Collins Utilities water service area , the Fort Collins city limits,
and the Fort Collins Growth Management Area, population projections were estimated using
information from a Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) study developed for the City of Fort Collins and Larimer
County . The TAZ information is based on City and County zoning designations, which dictate the type of
development and thus population densities . The TAZ study makes population estimates based on
projected new development and redevelopment in each zone . The population projections for this Plan
were estimated by using the zones within the water service area . Note that, based on the TAZ study, it is
anticipated that the Fort Collins Utilities' water service area will reach build-out near 2040, meaning that
all vacant buildable land will be developed . After build -out, it is assumed that the water service area
population will only grow via redevelopment, and therefore population growth in the service area is
expected to eventually slow down . However, the Utilities currently has agreements to supply water to
surrounding water districts. With these agreements in place and the potential for more in the future,
the Utilities considers these possibilities in estimating future demand projections . Thus, the population
projections used in this plan includes some of West Fort Collins Water District. 29
28 For more information on the Planning Demand Level , see Section 1 . 2 .
29 The estimates do not include some Fort Collins- Loveland Water District areas currently served by the Utility
because these areas are served only in the sense that a ) FCLWD purchases some excess capacity in our Water
Treatment Facility, and b ) there is an now terminated agreement whereby certain areas of development could
meet raw water requirements either through the Utilities or the districts . If any of these areas are annexed by the
City, then they would still have the option to make use of this option .
21
2 . 4 . 4 LARGE CONTRACTUAL USE
In addition to population- based water demands, the Utilities also has contractual obligations to provide
water for the current and future demands of several large industrial water users . Large contractual use
( LCU ) is estimated separately from population - based water demand projections and is not included in
the GPCD metric . The LCU projections are added to the overall projected demands, which are based on
population projections and the water demand planning level set in the Water Supply and Demand
Management Policy Report ( dated April 2014) . LCU is currently about 3, 900 acre-feet per year of treated
water . Additional raw water is provided to LCUs . Because of certain applications, a portion of the water
supplied to LCUs must be sourced from reusable water rights . The future LCU is estimated to be about
8, 000 acre-feet per year by 2050 . This will require a mix of single use and reusable water sources .
Figure 2 . 6 illustrates the projected population for the water service area . This figure also illustrates the
project water demands based on the historic Planning Demand Level and the current Planning Demand
Level . 30 It is clear that conservation and efficiency activities, among other factors, have helped to reduce
total water use as well as per capita water use; these reductions have lowered the planning demand
level and helped to increase the reliability of the water supply system .
Treated Water Demand and Historical Planning levels
Fort Collins Utilities
16000 160
o 14000 - - 140
tin
0 12000 120
- . 185 GPCD
N
O
10000 - 100 0
150 GPCD
v 8000 80
L �
4-1
6000 60 0
v 4000 2003 planning demand level - - 2012 planning demand level 40
v — Historical demand — Historical population
~ 2000 - - - - Projected Population 20
0 0
N 4:T LID 00 O CV II l0 00 O N ICT lD 00 O N II ID 00 O
Ql al M Ql O O O O O r-I r-I r-I r-I ri N N N N N M
Ql 01 Ql Ql O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Figure 2 . 6 Treated water demand, historical planning levels, and population
30 These estimates also incorporates an estimated 8% system water loss level .
22
3 . 0 INTEGRATED WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLANNING
There are four main documents that provide direction and/or complement the Utilities' water efficiency
efforts, listed below . Along with the most recent Water Conservation Plan of 2010, these documents
helped to develop this updated Water Efficiency Plan and will also guide our ultimate implementation
moving forward .
■ The City of Fort Collins Strategic Plan ( 2015- 16 ) 31 : this document is a result of a planning process
incorporating input from citizens, businesses, City Council, and City staff. It identifies the City' s seven
key outcome areas as well as several strategic objectives in each area ; these are to guide the work in
all City service areas . Water efficiency aligns very strongly with Objectives 4 . 8, 4 . 7 and 4. 6, it also
touches on several other objectives detailed in Appendix C.
■ The Water Supply and Demand Management Policy ( 2012 ) 32 : this is the guiding document for water
supply and demand management activities . The objective is to provide a sustainable and integrated
approach to 1 ) ensuring an adequate, safe, and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by
customers and the community, and 2 ) managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a
scarce and valuable resource consistent with the preference of Water Utility customers and in
recognition of the region ' s semi -arid climate . The original water supply-focused policy was
developed and approved in 1988; it was updated in 2003 and again in 2012, with the most up-to-
date report published in 2014 . This Policy defers to the latest Water Efficiency Plan to set the
efficiency goals .
■ 2015 Climate Action Plan Framework : The CAP provides a high level framework to set Fort Collins on
the path to achieve carbon emissions reduction objectives as requested by Council , but will not
determine future implementation details . Implementation details will be developed as strategies
and tactics are considered on a case- by-case basis, and will be brought forward to Council for
approval prior to implementation . The two main strategic initiatives that involve water are : 1 ) Water
and Land Use, and 2 ) Preparation, Adaptation, and Resilience .
■ The Water Supply Shortage Response Plan ( 2014) 33 : this document identifies the restrictions and
requirements intended to achieve progressively higher levels of water savings under various
projected water shortage conditions . The original plan was approved by City Council in 2003 and an
update was approved in 2014 .
31 The City's Strategic Plan can be found at : http : //www. fcgov. com /citymanager/pdf/strategic- plan -2015 . pdf
32 Though a more extensive report was developed and dated April 2014. See the City's Water Supply and Demand
page : http ://www. fcgov. com/utilities/what-we-do/water/water-supply-demand
33
http ://www . fcgov. com/utilities/img/site specific/uploads/ORDINANCE NUMBER 088 July 2014 Water Supply
Shortage Response Plan . pdf
23
3 . 1 WATER EFFICIENCY AND WATER SUPPLY PLANNING
In planning for a reliable, secure, and sustainable water future, the Utilities employs an integrated
resource planning strategy that utilizes a portfolio - based approach to meeting future demands and is
guided by the documents described in Section 3 .0 above . In most years, the City of Fort Collins Utilities
has the benefit of having a plentiful level of water supplies that ensure sufficient supplies above the
reliability criteria discussed in Section 1 . 2 . The Utilities' water supplies are expected to support
projected changes to demand under a combined strategy of a ) increased long-term storage and, b )
continued water efficiency efforts . This diversified approach will reduce water demand, improve system
reliability, and enhance community resilience to drought and climate change . These two strategies need
to be undertaken collectively; either on their own will be significantly less effective without the other .
Expanded water efficiency measures are cost-effective means to water supplies that can be utilized for
several beneficial purposes. Conserved water can be stored for periods of drought, leased for
agriculture, and used for beneficial environmental enhancement efforts such as in -stream flow
programs . Increased storage provides a physical location for conserved water and enables Fort Collins to
take full advantage of savings achieved by customers . See Section 1 . 3 for more information on the role
of storage in our supply and demand management planning .
3 . 1 . 1 BENEFITS OF WATER EFFICIENCY
In addition to being a key part of the integrated resource management process, water efficiency
programs also :
Foster a conservation ethic and reduce waste : the success of this Plan depends on the cooperation and
support of the Water Utility customers and the City of Fort Collins community . Instilling a conservation
ethic is an important foundation to changing habits and attitudes toward water use . The power of the
individual in conservation makes a big difference in protecting quality of life, including our environment
today and for generations to come . Our average use, calculated as gallons per capita per day ( GPCD ),
has declined significantly. For example, in 2001 the GPCD was 198, whereas in 2014 it was 143 . Several
conservation - based efforts took place on the heels of the 2002-03 drought which have helped to
support a sustained reduction in use; these include full metering, conservation -oriented rate structures,
seasonal rate structures, expanded targeted industry outreach , the restrictive covenants ordinance,
conservation kit giveaways, clothes washer rebates, and more .
Demonstrate a commitment to sustainability : The City aims to be leaders in this effort . The City
approved the Climate Action Plan Framework in 2015 and previously approved an Action Plan for
Sustainability in 2004, and an Environmental Policy in 2009 that outline the ways the City itself will
reduce its environmental impact (this includes a commitment to identifying and implementing effective
ways to conserve natural resources) . To bring the global concept of sustainability to action at the local
level, sustainability advocates use the triple bottom line in decision - making . Essentially, that means
projects are evaluated based on their social, economic and environmental impacts . Rather than make
decisions on the basis of profit or the economic bottom line, three bottom lines ( social , economic, and
environmental ) are considered . For the City, it means creating an optimal mix of resource efficiency,
cost effectiveness and employee well - being in daily City operations . One example of a goal is to reduce
municipal operations water irrigation and increase efficiency per acre, as well as to reduce indoor use by
24
20% by 2020 . 34 City buildings are required to achieve LEED "Gold" certification . Also, several areas of
City grounds have been renovated with low water using landscape materials and some weather sensors
have been added to the irrigation systems . The City Parks system is regularly audited ; the majority of the
Parks irrigation systems uses 95% or less of the water needed, based on the turf and plant
requirements .
Provide water for multiple beneficial purposes : Conservation efforts can help to provide more water for
beneficial uses beyond normal municipal purposes . For example, the area around Fort Collins continues
to be a productive agricultural area , which in addition to representing economic activity, also provide
significant open space outside of Fort Collins that is desired by many residents . When possible, making
some of the City' s surplus water available for these purposes provides supplemental revenue for the
Utility and its customers . The potential environmental benefits of conserved water are also important .
These include providing additional flow for the local stream systems, in -stream flow programs,
improvements in water quality, improvements in aquatic and riparian ecosystems, enhanced
recreational opportunities, and aesthetics, among other benefits .
Enhance resilience during drought periods : Conservation and efficiency efforts can help to develop a
community and landscape that is more resilient to drought conditions . Through support of drought
planning and implementation of proactive mitigation efforts, the actions proposed in this Plan can help
to reduce vulnerability, protect economic health , and ease the effect of drought on individuals,
businesses, and landscapes.
Prepare for climate change : Climate change may have significant impacts on both water demands and
water supplies in the time frame of this plan . It is anticipated that climate change in the Mountain West
will likely include the following changes : Increased evapotranspiration rates, increasing the water
required to maintain the landscaping; more frequent dry spells and a longer growing season ; increased
variability in seasonal snow pack; earlier spring snowmelt and runoff; changes in the distribution of
precipitation throughout a given year. These changes are expected to accelerate over the decades
ahead and impacts may depend largely on factors such as population growth , economic growth and
technological changes . Utilities will likely face significant challenges in the years ahead managing both
water demands and water supplies . With many uncertainties regarding both water supply and demand ,
it is prudent to prepare for a wide range of conditions in the future . One example of the importance of
efficiency efforts is that without conservation and/or significant changes in landscaping choices, outdoor
water use will likely increase over the coming decades as customers strive to maintain their landscapes
in a hotter and longer growing season . Furthermore, an approach that also includes planning for
adequate reservoir capacity to help balance the swing in supplies available between wet and dry periods
34 http ://www.fcgov. com/sustainability/goals. php
25
Reduce costs :
■ Direct utility costs : Efficiency programs decrease water and wastewater treatment costs as it
reduces the amount of chemicals and energy used to produce, deliver, and heat water.
■ Customer costs : water bill , but also the cost of energy to heat water, and landscape related
costs including the cost to maintain , like labor costs, fertilizer and other landscape - related
product costs . 35
■ Long-term costs : decisions about water supplies, treatment/distribution capacity needs, storage
facilities are all made in consideration of projected water demand and peak capacity.
In addition to these savings, Fort Collins Utilities has benefited financially from conservation in two
notable ways :
■ Halligan Water Supply Storage project size : The original Halligan Reservoir enlargement planned
allotment for Fort Collins was 12, 000 acre-feet, which was in part based on the 2003 planning
demand level of 185 GPCD . Among other factors considered in the permitting process, the role
of conservation and the downward trend in GPCD (current planning demand level = 150 GPCD )
resulted in revising the enlargement downward to only 8, 125 acre-feet, which is approximately
a 68% reduction and represents a $ 6 . 1M savings in project costs .
■ Extra Water Treatment Facility capacity : A Water Treatment Facility (WTF ) is designed for peak
demand . The Fort Collins WTF was last expanded in 1999, prior to the significant increase in
conservation efforts prompted by the 2002-03 drought . The total WTF treatment capacity of 87
MGD is estimated to be at least 23% larger than the expected build out in 2035 peak demand (�
20 MGD ) . In 2013, the City of Fort Collins Utilities entered into an agreement with Fort Collins-
Loveland Water District to sell FCLWD up to 5 million gallons per day ( MGD ) in excess water
treatment capacity . The financial benefits of this agreement include the associated plant
investment fee of $ 12 . 6M and a treatment charge of about $ 2 per thousand gallons . 36
■ Delay of capital expansion protects : Decreased wastewater flows have delayed the expansions
of the Drake Water Reclamation Facility treatment capacity from 2010 to 2028 .
35 These costs may also represent larger environmental costs as run -off from landscapes can affect water quality
and ecosystem health .
36 In addition to the benefits to the City of Fort Collins Utilities, Fort Collins- Loveland Water District will be able to
defer expansion of their current treatment facility and/or construction of a new water treatment facility.
Additional information on this agreement can be found in the City of Fort Collins City Council agenda and materials
from the October 15T, 2013 regular City Council meeting.
26
3 . 2 WATER EFFICIENCY GOALS
The WEP' s overarching goal, which tracks from previous goals, is to reduce water demand to 130 GPCD
by 2030 . During the development of this updated Plan, however, it became clear that a single, system -
wide metric of water use doesn't resonate with and isn't meaningful for customers . During the public
comment period Water Conservation staff often saw that the GPCD metric was confusing . For example,
it was unclear which water uses ( residential, commercial , the Utilities' largest users, etc . ) were involved
in its calculation . The exact definition/equation of a utility' s GPCD is a common issue for other entities
and therefore can complicate and limit the ability to compare across utilities . Furthermore, a system -
wide GPCD isn't a direct measure of the progress and effectiveness of the Water Conservation team' s
activities .
It was also unclear how an individual' s water use ( as seen on their bill ) related to a GPCD goal . For most
residential customers, on average, their individual GPCD or even GPHD (gallons per household her day)
are much lower than the system -wide GPCD; however, during the summer irrigation months, it may be
significantly higher. For customers in multi -family or multi - business units that are not sub- metered ,
there is no way to connect to the single system -wide goal . The community' s feedback raised the
question of the appropriateness of a GPCD goal, as well as the question of the best way to structure
goals to motivate lasting change and communicate water efficiency progress .
Amy Vickers & Associates, Mary Wyatt Tiger and Shadi Eskaf confirm these broad issues : " . . . estimates of
[GPCD] are not comparable to each other when the types of data used to compute GPCD differ. While
average single-family water use metrics reflect a relatively small number of types of indoor and outdoor
end uses of water that are common to most single-family homes, an average water use metric for an
entire city reflects thousands of different types of water- using activities [ . . . ] Furthermore, a system -wide
average neglects the nuances of individual customer behavior and is not specific enough to detect some
significant changes in water use behavior." in the 2013 American Water Works Association report : A
Guide to Customer Water-Use Indicators for Conservation and Financial Planning .
For this WEP, a long-term goal of 130 gpcd by 2030 will remain . GPCD is still an industry standard and
still a means to compare progress over time for the Fort Collins Utilities system overall . In the coming
years, staff will work to evolve the metrics and indicators by which we judge water
conservation/efficiency progress . The ultimate version of the goal definitions and structure will be
subject to analysis and research and will be reflected in the next update of the Utilities' Water Efficiency
Plan . Currently, staff recommends moving toward measurement and tracking of:
• Volume of water saved . This will be evaluated based on tracking conservation and efficiency
programs . This is being added in part because City and Utility leadership have asked for clearer
metrics related to Water Conservation programs . This metric provides good clarity and is a more
direct measurement of the impact of Water Conservation programs .
• Program participation . This will be tracked by programs and events . This will give a measure of
how many customers we' re reaching .
• Residential water use indicators defined using measures of the amount of water delivered to
residential customers and the service area population . This will likely be further broken down by
type of residence ( single-family, duplex, multi-family) .
• Commercial sector indicators . These indicators will be based on industry-specific standards and
set in partnership with the local commercial sector.
27
An updated Water Efficiency Plan will be developed no later than 2024 ( 7 years from the anticipated
CWCB 2017 submission date ) . Figure 3 . 1 illustrates the projected water demand level if the 130 GPCD by
2030 goal is met, the current 140 GPCD by 2020 goal in the 2010 Water Conservation Plan , and the
current 150 GPCD Planning Demand Level used in water supply reliability planning, along with historical
and projected population . Figure 3 . 2 is a graph of GPCD levels, rather than total volume . This figure
shows the historical GPCD levels along with our goal level and the projected trend in use that will
achieve that goal . Chapter 4 describes the strategies for achieving this goal .
Projected Treated Water Demand and Population
Fort Collins Utilities
16000 160
14000 140
r
12000 120
C
O
10000 CD
- 100 0
o - -
8000 - " 80 0
6000 60 o
E
a) — Projected demand with efficiency goal of 130 GPCD by 2030
a
4000 Projected demand @ 140 GPCD, previous conservation goal 40
- - Planning demand level of 150 GPCD
— Historical Demand
2000 — Historical Population 20
0 0
N "I lD 00 O rV � lD 00 O N � LD 00 O N ICT lD 00 O
Ql Ql Ql a) O O O O O r--{ r--{ r--+ r--1 .--1 rV N rV rV rV rv1
Ql Ql Ql Ql O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
.- A .--1 .--1 .--1 N nl t V N N N r%4 N N N t V r%4 . . . .
Figure 3 . 1 Water efficiency goal , demand and population
28
Water Efficiency Goal
Weather - normalized Water Demand ( GPCD )
Fort Collins Utilities
225
200
175
L
150
4-1
. Q
mu
125
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a� 2015 Goal :
Q 100 130 GPCD by 2030
c
0
75
0
u 50
0.
— Projected demand toward new efficiency goal
25
— Historical weather- normalized demand
0
rV � l0 00 O fV � lD 00 O N � lD 00 O N qzt l0 00 O
M Ql 61 Ql O O O O O ri ri r-I ri r-I N N N N N m
Q1 Ql Ql Ql O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
r I ri ri ri N N N N rV N N N N N N N N N N N
Figure 3 . 2 Historical GPCD and New Efficiency Goal
29
4 . 0
SELECTION OF WATER EFFICIENCY ACTIVITIES
The Utilities Water Conservation Team uses its mission and three overarching objectives to select the
programs, projects, and approaches used in our daily efforts . These will ultimately guide our path to
achieving our water efficiency goal of 130 GPCD by 2030 and align our work and efforts with those of
the Utilities, the City and the State .
Water Conservation Team Mission : Cultivate a water efficient, adaptive, and knowledgeable customer
base through education and cost-effective water efficiency programs while supporting the City' s
strategic plan and its social, environmental, and economic health .
Water Conservation Team Obiectives :
■ Water Efficiency and Conservation — provide water for beneficial purposes while reducing
unnecessary use and waste .
■ Customer Service — provide exceptional service for an exceptional community
■ Technical Support — provide technical expertise to customers and City staff
4 . 1 SUMMARY OF SELECTION PROCESS
4 . 1 . 1 SELECTION PROCESS AND CRITERIA
Fort Collins has a robust water conservation approach with a number of conservation activities that
have been implemented for years . We intend to continue the water efficiency activities, in some form ,
within our current portfolio of programs . These programs are likely to evolve over the years and the
exact specifics of each are subject to change as a result of changing legislation, regulations, technology,
customer preferences, appliance/fixture saturation rate, and Utilities/City plans . For example, the state
of Colorado has passed legislation ( Senate Bill 14- 103 ) that mandates that any plumbing figure sold in
the state must meet WaterSense standards by September 2016; this includes lavatory faucets, toilets,
urinals, and showerheads . This change will likely affect our current approach to incentivizing customers
to swap out old efficient fixtures for new, efficient ones .
In addition to a review of our existing activities, new and innovative activities were researched . Potential
activities were identified from a number of sources including the Colorado Water Conservation Board ' s
technical resources, the Colorado WaterWise Guidebook of Best Practices for Municipal Water
Conservation in Colorado 37, a broad literature review, exploration of other utility case studies, and input
from Utility staff, the City of Fort Collins Water Board, the community, the Water Conservation staff, and
a Water Efficiency Plan Technical Advisory Group, consisting of several City departments as well as
community members . This process not only identified activities, but also processes and tools that have
the potential to help improve all activities .
The activities identified in this plan represent the best choices at the time . Technology, regulations,
efficiency standards, market saturation , customer preferences and other factors are likely to change
before this plan is updated and are sure to change during the course of the planning horizon ( 2030) . We
will continue to monitor the effectiveness and appropriateness of current activities while also exploring
37 http ://cwcb .state . co . us/technical-resources/best-management-practices/Pages/main . aspx
30
new programs . The City of Fort Collins utilizes a two -year budgeting cycle called Budgeting for
Outcomes, which determines funding for Water Efficiency activities by, in part, evaluating the proposed
activities against the City' s strategic outcomes . We are therefore potentially constrained in terms of the
activities we can undertake; the funding must be available and approved by City Council .
4 . 1 . 2 PRIORITIZATION PROCESS
Each of the potential activities will be prioritized using the following qualitative screening criteria .
■ Program Effectiveness : This combines the estimated water savings with the estimated program
costs : How effective is the activities in terms of gallons of water saved per program dollar spent?
■ Staff Resources : How labor- and time-intensive is the program ? Do we have the staff resources
to properly support, monitor and evaluate the program ?
■ Customer Preferences : Does this activity meet the needs and wants of the Utility water service
area customers ? Does this activity support the social and economic health of our customers ?
■ Participation Level and Reach : How many customers could be impacted by this program ? What
types of customers does it reach ? Is it engaging previously unengaged customers ?
■ Alignment with other Utility and City objectives : Does this program support activities in other
areas of the Utility and the City ? Does it help achieve Utility and City strategic objectives ?
4 . 1 . 3 POTENTIAL NEW DEMAND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
In addition to continuing the existing set of water conservation and efficiency activities listed in Section
2 . 3 and described in greater detail in Appendix B, we identified five areas of opportunity for developing
new programs and approaches . Each highlights an area with great potential to expand and increase
water efficiency and great potential to better meet the needs of our customers . Each of these areas also
supports specific strategic outcomes and objectives in the City' s Strategic Plan; these are listed in
Appendix C . In this process we also identified three implementation principles that will guide the
development of any new programs and strategies; these are detailed in Section 5 . 1 .
Areas of Opportunity
• Leverage Advanced Meter Fort Collins data and capabilities
• Promote and support greater outdoor water efficiency
• Encourage greater integration of water efficiency into land use planning and building codes
• Expand commercial and industrial sector strategies
• Increase community water literacy
Table 4. 1 highlights a few benefits of each identified area , a few potential activities that fall into each
area, as well as a brief description of an existing practice within the area .
31
Table 4. 1 Areas of Opportunity
Leverage Advanced Meter Fort Collins data and capabilities
Aligns with City Plan Strategic Objectives : 3 . 9, 4 . 6, 4 . 7, 4 . 8, 7 . 9, 7 . 10
Benefits Potential Activities Example : The
• Increased customer 0 Monitor My Use & High continuous consumption
understanding of water use Bill/Use Alerts uses AM data to detect
• Greater connectivity to 0 Improved leak detection likely leaks; we alert
customers 0 Near real -time identification homeowners so that
• Increased customer of savings and inefficiencies they can fix the leak and
benefits through web portal 0 Craft easy-to- understand, avoid damage and high
information and tools targeted water-savings bills . In 2015 we reached
• Less confusion and fewer actions based on data and use out to 980 customers .
bill surprises patterns
Promote and support greater outdoor water efficiency
Aligns with City Plan Strategic Objectives : 1 . 11 , 4 . 6, 4 . 7, 4. 8, 7 . 5
Benefits Potential Activities Example : In 2014 we
• Reduced peak season and 0 Residential and Commercial provided over 400
peak day demands, which sprinkler audit programs sprinkler system audits,
impact system capacity 0 Xeriscape Incentive Program with an estimated
needs and long-term 0 Customer and Contractor potential savings of
planning training series 30MG . The cost-
Customer benefits through s Interactive demonstrations effectiveness of this
lower bills, increased a Educational Water budget program is about $ 1 . 20
aesthetics and home value tool per 1,000 gallons saved .
• Fewer wasting water
issues/complaints
Encourage greater integration of water efficiency into land use planning and building codes
Aligns with City Plan Strategic Objectives : 1 . 3, 1 . 11, 3 . 7, 4. 7, 4 . 8
Benefits Example Activities Example : Beginning in
• Increased efficiency of 0 Landscape requirements and 2012, the City' s Green
development incentives for new Building Code mandates
• New development will lead development WaterSense toilets and
by example 0 Contractor education and other fixtures in
• Less waste from pursuing trainings residential and
retrofits of new 0 New and re-development commercial facilities;
development plan review requirements this is estimated to save
• Reduced impact of a Require WaterSense between 20-25 %
population growth appliances and fixtures annually.
32
Expand commercial and industrial sector strategies
Aligns with City Plan Strategic Objectives : 3 . 5, 3 . 6, 4 . 7, 4 . 8, 5 . 10
Benefits Example Activities Example : In 2013 the
• Increased water savings 0 Custom commercial rebate custom commercial
due to scale of projects program program helped replace
• Enhanced business 0 Benchmarking two pools filters, which
partnerships 0 Targeted industry-specific are estimated to have
• Support ClimateWise campaigns and outreach nearly 800, 000 gallons
program a Address tenant/owner per year.
• Enable greater economic incentive misalignment
health
Increase community water literacy
Aligns with City Plan Strategic Objectives : 4 . 6, 4 . 7, 4 . 8, 7 .4
Benefits Example Activities Example : In 2014 we
• Customer has greater Improved and expanded began providing Home
understanding of role in the messaging strategies Water Report to select
water system Identify new approaches to customers; these display
• Increased customer education and outreach usage information,
understanding and support Develop innovative methods comparisions to similar
of Utilities' actions and to strengthen K- 12 water homes, and provide
decisions literacy curriculum efficiency tips .
• Increased cooperation Households receiving
during difficult conditions the reports reduced
their use by 2% .
We also highlight a few other promising areas, in addition to our current program and the types of
activities identified in the Strategic Objectives sections, that we plan to explore in the coming years .
Many of these overlap with several of the Areas of Opportunity or warranted some additional
explanation, and thus are discussed in greater detail below .
■ Rate Structures : Prices send a value signal to customers and help customers determine how
they value using water . Rate structures are also designed to cover the cost of providing
service . 38 Therefore it is important to balance both sides . Along with the Finance team, we
intend to explore new means of incentivizing the efficient use of water while supporting
revenue requirements .
■ New and Re- Development Incentives & Requirements : There are a variety of decisions made
throughout the development and re-development process . We aim to further explore and
support ordinances or regulations like low water use landscape requirements, tap fees and
incentive programs that are more aligned to encouraged efficiency from the start, irrigation
taps/requirements, greywater ordinances and systems, and more .
38 This includes operational costs ( like treatment costs), maintenance costs, and capital costs .
33
■ M36 Audit & Other Leak Monitoring Initiatives : A significant way to reduce water loss, reduce
bills and repair expenses, is a robust portfolio of leak detection, monitoring, and notification
initiatives, including those that address leaks within our distribution system, private property
leaks that occur prior to the meter and result in non- revenue waste, and continue to expand and
enhance our beyond -the- meter Continuous Consumption Program . The Utilities is also in the
process of incorporating the American Water Works Association' s M36 Audit process to ensure
"the accountable and efficient management of water supplies" by the Utilities . 39
■ Rebate and Incentive Programs : We aim to ensure that the rebate level is based upon data -
driven estimates of the water savings that results from the appliance, fixture, or technology
change . This process will also include an approach to phase out or adjust program specifications
once Colorado becomes a WaterSense state in September 2016 . We also want to expand the
reach of our programs to help more customers, either through community partnerships or new
approaches to outreach and marketing . We will explore how to reach more low- income or
otherwise disadvantaged/at- risk households, rental units, and multi-family units . 40
39 The M36 represents a National standardized approach to water supply system audits that accounts for all water.
http ://www. awwa . org/portals/O/files/publications/documents/toc/m36ed3 . pdf
http ://oawwa .org/SDWA%20Presentations/2013/Water%2OAudit%2OPresentation ,/`2ONovember%204, /`202013 .
pdf
40 While this is titled "Rebates and Incentive programs", efforts to reach underserved populations may also include
expansion of direct-install programs like our current partnership with the Larimer County Conservation Corps
( LCCC) .
34
5 . 0 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
5 . 1 IMPLEMENTATION
The following principles serve as guidance to implementing existing and new activities . We believe these
principles will help to improve effectiveness of our programs, help to achieve our water efficiency goals,
and keep our actions in alignment with our overall mission . These principles are also in alignment with
several Strategic Objectives in the City Plan , including 3 . 9, 7 . 4, 7 . 5, 7 . 10, and 7 . 11 . These are further
described in Appendix C.
Employ sophisticated data -driven processes and decision - making
Benefits Example Actions
• Decisions supported by data 0 Targeted and tailored programs
• Improved accuracy of water savings a Marketing and Communications
estimates 0 Streamlined, consistent program
• Increased overall portfolio tracking and reporting
effectiveness 0 Develop and monitor targeted
• Increased program savings and reach metrics to support targeted goals
through use of behavioral science
principles
Cultivate new and bolster existing community and statewide partnerships
Benefits Example Actions
• Greater trust in the Utilities 0 Expand conservation support for nearby water
• Expanded capacity and reach districts
through project partners 0 Expand work with higher education institutions
• Support economic health a Increase public- private projects, like an
• Stronger network of conservation industry-specific water efficiency conference
partners 0 Participate in and contribute to statewide
conservation efforts, ( e .g . Colorado
WaterWise, Colorado Foundation for Water
Education )
Coordinate and support symbiotic efforts within Utilities and across the City
Benefits Example Actions
• Improved consistency and Resource Conservation unification in Utilities
reduced redundancy across City Collaborate with efforts of Environmental
efforts Services, Planning, Natural Areas, Community
• Simplified processes for Engagement, Nature in the City, Housing and
customers Development, Parks, among others
• Greater synergies in the water- Partnerships with the neighboring water
energy nexus space districts .
35
5 . 1 . 1 EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Each year existing activities will be evaluated and adjusted to ensure that they are performing well —
both internally and externally — and that they are meeting our goals and objectives . Any new programs
will be subject to a holistic vetting process, by bringing in internal stakeholders from other areas of the
Utilities and the City to ensure consideration of multiple viewpoints and create organization -wide
awareness and support for the new program .
Part of the support for existing new program development will stem from the Utilities' new Program
Management Office, which is tasked with launching Utilities activities in a way that is well planned, well -
resourced and sustainable . New programs will be developed through a process that includes several key
stages . New programs will need clearly stated goals and objectives . Models will be developed to test the
viability of the proposed program in meeting water savings and other goals . These models will likely lay
the groundwork for metrics that will measure the effectiveness of the programs . Once a proposed
process starts to become clear, risk assessment and a business case will be developed to strengthen and
validate the proposed conservation program or activity . Proposed processes will be mapped and
documented and roles of staff will be assigned . Internal and external stakeholders will be engaged to
ensure consideration of multiple viewpoints, create organization -wise awareness and support for the
new program , and to make sure the program is supported by our customers .
The programs that ultimately are implemented will be a function of the budgeting process . The City of
Fort Collins uses a Budgeting for Outcomes ( BFO ) approach , which is based on the premise of prioritizing
funding for results, rather than focusing on funding inputs and costs . This method shifts the focus from
paying for costs to buying results, and emphasizes accountability, innovation , and partnerships . This is a
two-year cycle, with the next preparation phase starting in 2016 for the 2017- 18 budget cycle . In order
to fund new water efficiency programs, we will need to show that the program can deliver results . These
results most importantly include improved water efficiency and sustained water savings .
5 . 2 MONITORING
We cannot monitor or improve what we do not measure . The benefits of monitoring include :
■ Feedback as to whether or not conservation activities are affecting change .
■ Identification of programs that might not be cost-effective relative to other programs or to
developing new supply .
■ Clarity of alignment with goals and if a given program warrants expansion, modification or
termination .
■ Improvement of modeling of supply needs .
■ Illustration of savings by various customer segments
■ Tracking of participation based on customer class and other factors to help verify programs are
accessible to all types of customers
■ Prioritization of program development funding and expansion
While the main goal of this plan is identified in terms of GPCD ( a common metric used throughout the
water industry that captures community water use changes at a high level ) we intend to also focus on
more specific and targeted measures . This is further discussed in Chapter 3 .
36
In addition to what is discussed in Chapter 3, tracking measures may include but are not limited to :
■ Water savings estimates with breakdowns by seasonal vs . baseline, consumptive vs . non -
consumptive, treated vs . raw
■ Direct and indirect energy savings associated with water saved
■ Landscape changes, including the amount of irrigated landscape; annual amount of audited
landscape
■ Total participation in programs and events, number of new participants, types of participants —
including type of customer based on customer class, sociodemographic categories, geographic
location , etc .
■ Customer use of the Monitor My Use web portal, mobile, and other online tools and alerts
■ How effectively events, educational and informational strategies lead customers to participate
in a program ; if participation in one program leads to participation in other programs
37
1- in -50 Year Drought Criterion - criterion adopted in the current Water Supply and Demand
Management Policy that defines the level of risk for the City' s water supply system ; a drought is a period
of below average runoff that can last one or more years and is often measured by its duration , average
annual shortage and cumulative deficit below the average; a 1 -in-50 drought corresponds to a dry
period that is likely to occur, on average, once every 50 years; although the Poudre River Basin has
several drought periods in its recorded history, it is difficult to assess whether any of these droughts
were equal in magnitude to a 1 -in-50 drought; the 1985 Drought Study developed the 1 -in -50 drought
used in assessing the Utilities water supply system ; this drought period is six years long and has a
cumulative deficit of 550, 000 acre-feet, which represents annual river volumes that are about 70% of
the long-term average for the Poudre River; see also "Statistically Based Drought Analysis"
Acre- Foot or Acre- Feet ( AF ) - volume of water equal to about 326,000 gallons; one acre-foot can supply
around three to four single family homes in Fort Collins per year; for storage comparison the maximum
volume of Horsetooth Reservoir is about 157, 000 acre-feet
Active Capacity - the usable capacity of a reservoir for storage and regulation of inflows and releases
that does not include any capacity below the reservoir' s lowest outlet (which is known as dead capacity)
Carryover - used in reference to storage; it is the ability to save water in storage for use at a later time,
most notably in following years
Colorado- Big Thompson ( CBT) Protect - a Bureau of Reclamation project that brings water from the
Colorado River basin to the east side of the continental divide via a tunnel and the Big Thompson River
to several locations including Horsetooth Reservoir; operated by the Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District ( or Northern Water); Fort Collins Utilities currently owns 18, 855 units of the
310, 000 total units in the CBT project
Direct Flow Rights - water rights that can be taken for direct use, as opposed to storage rights that can
be taken for later use; see also "Senior Water Rights"
Drought Criterion - The drought criterion states that in a 1 - in - 50 year drought the Utilities should be able
to meet the planning demand level . This is an important criterion because not only will demands often
be higher in drought periods due to less precipitation, water supply systems generally will also yield less
water . The Utilities has used a 1 -in -50 year drought criterion since the original 1988 Water Supply Policy .
ELCO - short for East Larimer County Water District
Evapotranspiration - the combination of the water lost ( evaporate ) to the atmosphere from the ground
surface, evaporation from the capillary fringe of the groundwater table, along with the plant
transpiration, which is evaporation of water from plant leaves . Evapotranspiration is affected by
temperature, relative humidity, wind and air movement, soil moisture availability, and the type of plant .
For more information see : http ://water. usgs . gov/edu/watercycleevapotranspiration . html
38
FCLWD - short for Fort Collins- Loveland Water District
Firm Yield - a measure of the ability of a water supply system to meet water demands through a series
of drought years; for the Fort Collins Utilities, this means being able to meet the planning demand level
and storage reserve factor through the 1 -in -50 year drought criterion; see also " 1-in -50 Year Drought
Criterion", " planning demand level" and "storage reserve factor"
GMA — short for Growth Management Area , which is the planned boundary of the City of Fort Collins'
future City limits
GPCD - short for gallons per capita per day; a measurement of municipal water use; for the Fort Collins
Utilities, GPCD is calculated based on the total annual treated water produced at the Water Treatment
Facility for use by all Water Utility customers ( minus large contractual customers and other sales or
exchange agreements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility' s service area and 365
days
Legal Return Flows or Return Flow Obligations - refers to legal requirements when changing water rights
from agricultural to municipal use; this process requires obtaining a decree from Colorado Water Court
that involves detailed analysis of the historic agricultural water use, including the water diversions,
amount used by the crops, and the return flow patterns of the water not used by the crops; terms in the
decree to prevent municipalities from taking more water than was historically taken and replacing
return flows in the right amount, location and time to prevent injury to other water rights
LiDar: This is a remote sensing technology that can be used in large-scale landscape analysis .
Northern Water or NCWCD - short for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District ( NCWCD ) ;
Northern Water operates the Colorado- Big Thompson ( CBT) Project and is involved in several other
regional water projects on behalf of their participants; see also "Colorado- Big Thompson ( CBT) Project"
NPIC - short for North Poudre Irrigation Company; an irrigation company that supplies water to farmers
north of Fort Collins and is the owner of all water currently stored in Halligan Reservoir
Planning Demand Level - level of water use ( demand ) in GPCD used for water supply planning purposes
that is a factor in determining the amount of water supplies and/or facilities needed ; see also "GPCD"
RWR — short for Raw Water Requirements, which requires new development to turn in water rights or
cash - in - lieu of water rights to support the water needs of that development; cash is used to increase the
firm yield and long-term reliability of the Utilities' supply system ( e . g. , purchase additional storage
capacity)
Senior Water Rights - refers to Colorado water law' s use of the " prior appropriation" or priority system ,
which dictates that in times of short supply, earlier water rights decrees (senior rights ) will get their
water before others (junior rights ) can begin to use water, often described as "first in time, first in right"
39
Storage Reserve Factor - refers to a commonly used engineering principle in designing water supply
systems to address short-term supply interruptions; as defined in the Water Supply and Demand
Management Policy, the storage reserve factor incorporates having 20 percent of annual demands in
storage through the 1 - in -50 drought which equates to about 3 . 5 months of winter ( indoor) demands or
1 . 5 month of summer demands
Water Rights Portfolio - the mix of water rights owned by a water supplier; typically includes water for
direct use, as well as for storage for later use; for the Fort Collins Utilities, includes City owned water
rights, owned and/or converted shares in agricultural rights, storage rights at Joe Wright Reservoir, and
ownership in the CBT project
WSDMP - short for Water Supply & Demand Management Policy, which provides Fort Collins Utilities
guidance in balancing water supplies and demands
Yield or Water Rights Yield - refers to the amount of water that is produced from a water right; the yield
of water rights vary from year to year depending on the amount of water available ( i . e . , low or high river
runoff) and the priority of the water right; see also " Firm Yield" and "Senior Water Rights" .
40
APPENDIX As MATERIALS RELATED TO CHAPTER 1
The following are descriptions of the various water supplies currently in the Utilities water supply
portfolio :
Poudre River Basin Water Rights :
■ Senior Direct Flow Decrees : The City has five very senior direct flow decrees on the Poudre River
that are available to the City most of the time . Only in very severe dry periods are the diversions
limited .
■ Junior Direct Flow Decrees : These junior rights are only in priority during the peak runoff period
when most of the other rights on the Poudre River have been satisfied . In dry years, the City
may not be able to divert anything under these rights .
■ Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Shares : The City owns a substantial portion of the shares in this
mutual irrigation company. The amount of water the City is entitled to divert to meet treated
water demands depends on the number of shares the City designates for such use and which
priorities owned by the irrigation company are in priority during the season .
■ Southside Ditches : The City owns shares of stock in the Arthur, Larimer No . 2, New Mercer and
Warren Lake irrigation companies, often referred to as the Southside Ditches . With 13 separate
priorities, yields vary considerably from year to year. Much of the yield comes from a couple of
large junior rights and normally only yields during the high runoff months of May and June .
■ Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir System : This system consists of a ditch that diverts
water from the Michigan River drainage across the divide into the Poudre River Basin , Joe
Wright Reservoir and storage capacity in Meadow Creek Reservoir. Joe Wright Reservoir
includes about 6, 500 acre-feet of active storage and is the only storage facility owned and
operated by the City. There are usually periods during the peak runoff season in which the
reservoir is full and Michigan Ditch water is available if it can be taken directly to meet demands .
Joe Wright Reservoir is used primarily to regulate the annual Michigan Ditch flows and has
limited carryover capacity to provide drought protection for the City. The City also has storage
capacity in Meadow Creek Reservoir, which is used to release water to downstream senior rights
on the Michigan River .
■ Water Supply and Storage Company Shares : The City owns about 27 shares in this irrigation
company . Since the City-owned shares are not presently decreed for municipal use, this water is
usually rented back for agricultural use .
Colorado- Big Thompson Water System :
■ Horsetooth Reservoir : Water from Horsetooth Reservoir, a part of the C- BT Project, can be
delivered to the City' s water treatment facility or to the Poudre River. The following sources are
available for use from Horsetooth Reservoir .
■ Windy Gap Water: The City receives Windy Gap water from Platte River Power Authority ( PRPA)
as payment for 4, 200 acre-feet of reusable effluent made available to PRPA by the City . The
reusable effluent is the result of a Reuse Plan that involves the City, PRPA, and the Water Supply
and Storage Company (WSSC) . The 4, 200 acre-feet of Windy Gap water is dedicated for large
contractual use that requires reusable water. As part of the Reuse Plan, the City is required to
deliver 1,890 acre-feet of single use water to the WSSC .
■ North Poudre Irrigation Company ( NPIC) Shares : The City currently owns about 3, 564 shares of
NPIC . Each share consists of native water supply (which is primarily decreed for agricultural use )
41
and 4 units of C- BT water . Unless the agricultural portion of each share is changed for municipal
purposes, the City can only use the C- BT portion of the shares to meet treated water demands .
■ West Fort Collins Water District (WFCWD ) Water : Through an agreement with the WFCWD, the
City provides treated water to their customers and in return, gets reimbursed with an equivalent
amount of C- BT water . In recent years, the amount transferred to the City has been about 500
acre-feet each year .
42
APPENDIX
• • , MATERIALS
1 RELATED
, CHAPTER
Table : Collected Service Area Trends, 2001-2014
Service Average Normalized Actual Peak 1 in 50 Annual ETos
Year Area Annual Water Day Use Actual Use Average Use Peak Day Day Use Normalized Precipitation Grass Tot
Population Use ( MG ) ( MGD) (GPCD) (GPCD) Use ( MGD) (GPCD) Peak Day Use ( inches) ( in )
2001 121, 300 91978 27.3 198 198 55.8 428 503 12 .3 45
2002 123,700 91599 26.2 183 189 51 .4 378 411 9 .3 47
2003 125,500 81280 22 .6 154 157 46 . 9 346 383 18 .2 49
2004 125,800 71984 21 .8 146 150 42 . 3 307 327 18 . 1 44
2005 126,900 81497 23 . 3 155 155 50 . 1 365 363 16 . 2 49
2006 127, 800 91268 25 .4 172 156 48 . 9 353 350 11 . 2 51
2007 128,400 81860 24. 2 162 156 47 . 5 342 356 13 . 7 44
2008 128, 700 81352 22 .8 153 153 44. 3 321 333 13 .8 50
2009 128,900 71391 20. 2 135 147 37. 1 265 304 21 .9 46
2010 1291000 71830 21 .4 146 144 40 . 8 295 323 14. 1 48
2011 1291100 71621 20.8 141 144 39 . 7 285 289 17 . 8 49
2012 1291200 81757 23 .9 165 152 46 . 8 342 315 10 . 8 54
2013 129, 300 71560 20.7 141 147 43 312 303 18 . 8 47
2014 130, 200 71437 20.4 139 143 37 . 2 269 288 16 . 7 47
Draft : February 17, 2016
The following are descriptions of the Current Water Conservation Program Activities, along with the first
year of full implementation .
Foundational Activities
■ Conservation -oriented rate structures ( 2003 ) — Tiered rates ( increasing block rate structure ) .
There are currently three tiers for residential single-family and duplex customers, one tier for
multi -family units, and two tiers and commercial customers . 41
■ Continuous Consumption program ( 2015 ) : this program developed a data query that checks the
meter data for meter readings that have continuously remained above zero for 72 hours .
Customers with the highest continuous flow rates are contacted to make them aware of the
continuous consumption and the likely leak . Staff troubleshoots with the customer to try to find
the source of continuous use .
■ Metering ( 2003 ) : Commercial and multi-family units have been metered for decades; the
Utilities fully metered residential customers by 2003 . The Utilities transitioned to advanced
metering infrastructure (AMI ) in 2014, known as Advanced Meter Fort Collins (AMFC) The data
resolution is hourly intervals for water and 15 -minute intervals for electric .
■ Monitor My Use ( 2014 ) : this web- based portal was developed to provide customers near- real
time access to their historical and current electric and water usage and costs . The portal also
provides comparisons to the previous bill period, and illustrates which tier you are currently in .
There are alert- based features that a customer can use to provide automatic notifications when
they reach a certain usage level or cost level . 42 A mobile version was launched in December
2014 .
■ Online water use calculator ( 2012 ) : Customers can use an online calculator with their household
parameters and historic water consumption to identify ways to improve efficiency and reduce
43
use .
■ Seasonal rate structures ( 2003 ) : Multi -family and commercial customers face higher rates from
May through October.
■ Utility water loss program ( 1993 ) : Sonar equipment is used to listen for leaks in the water mains
and pinpoint their locations . Crews monitor water leaks on an ongoing basis, with a two -year
cycle to survey all water mains . Catching leaks before they have surfaced saves water and costs
of excavation and repairs, and supports the wasting water ordinance .
41 For the most current residential rates see : http ://www.fcgov. com/utilities/residential /rates/water. Multi -family
units are often not sub-metered and instead have a base charge which varies by the number of dwelling units .
Commercial customers' rates are based on the size of the meter; this includes the base charge, the volumetric
charge, and the volume above which customers face the second -tier rates. See
http ://www.fcgov. com/utilities/business/manage-your-account/rates/water for the most current rates .
42 This tool is only available for residential customers . Commercial customers currently have access to a different
tool called MV Web and the Utilities is exploring new methods and systems to address commercial customers'
needs.
43 Currently, the Utilities' website provides a link to the following website developed by the Alliance for Water
Efficiency: http ://www. home-water-works. org/
Draft : February 17, 2016
Targeted Technical Assistance and Incentives
■ Commercial custom rebates ( 2011 ) : offered for any technology ( e .g . cooling tower conductivity
control , leak detection and repair, fixture replacement, etc . ) that has a documented water
savings from the current equipment .
■ Commercial facility assessments ( 2004) : facility audits are performed to assess water and
energy use and make recommendations for improved efficiency . During these assessments, low-
flow aerators are installed at no cost to the business .
■ Home efficiency audits ( 2009 ) : residential customers are offered an energy and water audit of
their home to identify equipment and actions that can improve efficiency for a small fee . Faucet
aerators and showerheads are installed at the time of the audit .
■ Home efficiency loans/on -bill financing ( 2010) : this program offers a low cost, no- money-down
financing option for up to 20 years . Loans are conveniently repaid by the customer through their
monthly utility bill .
■ Indoor Appliance and Fixture Rebates ( residential and commercial ) :
■ Clothes Washer ( 2003 ) : Available for eligible EnergyStar labeled clothes washers .
■ Dishwasher (started 2007 ) : Available for eligible EnergyStar labeled dishwashers .
■ Toilet ( 2010 ) : Available for eligible WaterSense labeled toilets and urinals . 44
■ Showerhead ( 2011 ) : Available for eligible WaterSense labeled showerheads .
■ Outdoor Equipment Rebates ( residential and commercial ) :
■ Sensors ( rain , soil moisture ), high -efficiency nozzles, pressure- reducing heads, pressure
regulators, and smart irrigation controllers
■ Low income retrofit program ( 2007) : provides low income single- and multi-family households
with toilet, showerhead and faucet aerator retrofits . This work is often done in partnership with
Larimer County Conservation Corps .
■ Restaurant pre- rinse spray valve distribution ( started 2011 ) : low flow pre- rinse spray valves (to
rinse trays of dishes prior to washing them ) are installed at no charge for restaurants and other
food service operations .
■ Sprinkler system audits ( 1999 ) : audits are offered to homeowners and homeowner associations
to help them improve sprinkler system efficiency.
■ Xeriscape design/incentive program ( 2010) : provides homeowners a one-on -one consultation
with a landscape design professional for a small fee .
44 The toilet rebate program also includes a mandatory toilet recycling component . The porcelain from recycled
toilets is used by the Streets Department as a road base .
http ://www.fcgov. com/utilities/residential/conserve/water-efficiency/toi let- rebates/toilet-recycling
45
Educational Activities
■ Business education programs ( 2004) : Programs are offered to commercial customers on a
variety of environmental topics, including water conservation . Staff provides newsletters,
mailings, meetings and seminars on topics of interest to specific businesses, such as restaurants,
hotels, car washes, landscapers, and key accounts .
■ Community education programs ( 1977 ) 45 : These programs include the Educators' workshops,
contractor trainings, and partnerships to put on other events like the Residential Environmental
Program Series . The Utilities also conducts educational programs about Xeriscape landscaping,
watering techniques and practices and general water conservation . A daily Lawn Watering Guide
is published in the Fort Collins Coloradoan and on the City's website during the watering season .
■ Conservation kit giveaways ( 1990 ) : Free conservation kits with indoor and/or outdoor water-
saving devices and information are offered periodically to customers during events .
■ Conservation public information efforts ( 1977 ) : Information is disseminated via bill inserts, bus
benches, billboards, events, newspaper articles, TV and radio announcements, Utilities website
information, social media , and more . The team also serves as technical experts to help
commercial customers with water use or billing questions . Displays are set up at several
community events including the Sustainable Living Fair, Harvest Festival , Business Innovation
Fair and many others .
■ Home Water Reports ( 2014) : These reports are delivered to a portion of customers on a bi -
monthly basis . The reports provide households with information on their current water use and
comparisons to historical use as well as similar households' use . 46
■ Hotel and restaurant conservation material distribution ( 2003 ) : A three-card set is available for
hotels and other lodging establishments to inform guests about importance of water
conservation to our area and to encourage the reuse of towels and linens . Tent cards are
available for restaurants telling customers that "water is served upon request ."
■ K- 12 education programs ( 1977 ) : Presentations and hands-on activities are provided to school
classes on water topics, including the history of water in Fort Collins, water use and
conservation, water chemistry and watersheds . Fort Collins Utilities is a co-sponsor of the
annual Children' s Water Festival .
■ Watershed tours ( 2012 ) : Educational bus tours of the Utilities' Cache la Poudre watershed ;
involves information about drinking water, protection of water resources, water quality, and
managing urban watersheds .
■ Xeriscape Demonstration Garden ( 1986 ) : Staff oversees maintenance of the City ' s Xeriscape
Demonstration Garden and provides tours at organized events and upon request . We are also
partnering to support various demonstration gardens and other events at the Gardens on Spring
Creek. 47
45 http ://www.fcgov. com/utilities/community-education
46 The Utilities implements a similar program ( Home Energy Reports) for electric customers .
47 http ://www.fcgov. com/gardens/
46
Ordinances and Regulations
■ Green building codes ( 2011 ) 48 : Existing building codes include many elements that support
green building; the code green amendments represent the next steps along the path of
integrating green building practices into mainstream construction . These codes include a
requirement for bathroom and kitchen faucet aerators, showerheads and toilets to not exceed
the flow rates of WaterSense labeled fixtures .
■ Landscape and irrigation standards ( 1994) - New development landscape and irrigation plans are
reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code ' s water conservation standards . As part of
these standards, a rain shut-off device and a post- installation audit are required for commercial
sprinkler systems .
■ Parkway landscaping regulations ( 2013 ) 49 — The City updated the Streetscape Standards to
include more flexibility to xeriscape the parkway, the strip of land between a residential street
and the sidewalk.
■ Plumbing standards ( 1978 ) : All construction within the City of Fort Collins shall comply with the
most recent International Plumbing Code, among other codes and standards . so
■ Restrictive covenants ordinance ( 2003 ) — City Code prohibits homeowner association covenants
from banning the use of Xeriscape or requiring a percentage of landscape area to be planted
with turf, if the homeowner owns the property and pays for the water that irrigations the
landscape .
■ Soil amendment ordinance ( 2003 ) : requires builders to amend the soil for new landscapes .
■ Wasting water ordinance ( 1917 ) — staff enforces the section of the City Code that prohibits
wasting water. Wasting water complaints are investigated . Complaints are used as an education
tool , but enforcement by ticketing is also an options "
■ Water efficiency upgrades at City buildings ( 2010) : The City is committed to building new City
buildings to the LEED standards; including water efficiency upgrades . Audits are conducted at
existing City facilities and upgraded water-efficient indoor fixtures and sprinkler system
equipment are installed . The City has a sustainability goal to reduce municipal building water
use ( normalized to account for weather conditions), by 20% by 2020 . 12
■ Water Supply Shortage Response Plan ( 2003 ) : This plan has a series of measures to be enacted,
including water restrictions, for various levels of water shortage . 53
48 http ://www.fcgov. com/enviro/green -building. php
49 http ://www.fcgov. com/planning/streetscapedesign . php
so http ://www.fcgov. com/building/codes . php
51 City Ordinance No . 089, last updated in 2014.
52 http ://www.fcgov. com/sustainability/goals . php
53 City Ordinance No . 088, last updated in 2014.
47
Other Activities
■ Backwash water recycling ( 2003 ) : Backwash water recycling equipment at the water treatment
facility treats backwash water and recycles it to the beginning of the treatment process .
■ Large customer reuse ( 1985 ) — Treated wastewater from the Drake Water Reclamation Facility is
pumped to Rawhide Power Plant for landscaping and cooling water.
■ Raw water for City irrigation : Raw water is used to irrigate the majority of the City' s parks,
cemeteries, and golf courses . 14
Program Participation 2010-2014 ( does not include event attendance )
Program 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Clothes Washers 1249 1366 993 971 1058
Commercial Clothes Washer -- -- 0 1 0
Commercial Dishwasher -- -- 0 1 0
Commercial Facility Water 81 77 93 268 281
Assessments
Commercial Kitchen Info Program -- -- 32 nozzles, 72 16 rebates, 79
aerators items
Commercial Restroom -- 1 4 rebates; 16 rebates; 79 27 rebates;
443 items items 249 items
Commercial Sprinkler Audits 2 1 0 0 0
Commercial Sprinkler Equipment -- 15 56 rebates; 35 rebates; 12 rebates;
964 items 2266 items 165 items
Custom Commercial Rebate -- 2 1 3 rebates; 14 0
items
Dishwasher 780 880 635 648 787
ELCO Audits -- -- 42 48 68
FCLWD Audits 112 82 67 94 97
Garden-in -a- box -- 68 63 74 --
HOA Sprinkler Audits 5 12 14 13 11
Home Efficiency Audits 466 519 592 683 662
Home efficiency loans/On - bill 13 6 5 0 7
Financing
Home Water Reports -- -- -- -- 10,000
Irrigation Plan Review 11 42 44 49 69
Irrigation Site Inspection 21 24 28 34 52
Landscape Plan Reviews 29 49 54 73 59
Low Income Retrofit Program -- 250 homes 275 homes 275 homes 482 homes
Residential Sprinkler Audits 449 331 232 394 232
Residential Sprinkler Equipment 164 118 137 rebates; 108 rebates; 97 rebates;
170 items 880 items 135 items
Residential Toilet 479 573 912 651 1004
Showerhead -- 21 27 25 73
Xeriscape Design Clinic/Assistance 55 50 37 -- 46
54 Many of these properties have only ever been irrigated with raw water, thus the "start" date varies .
48
Below is a graph of the total number of projects and measures by year from 2010 to 2014 .
Total Number of Projects and Measures by Year
Water Conservation Programs
6,000
5,000
41000 ■ No . of
Projects
3,000
■ No . of
21000 Measures
1,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
A project may include multiple measures .
Total do not include participation in events, Xeriscape programs, or the Home Water Reports .
Below is a graph of the estimated new annual water savings in million gallons . These totals do not reflect
savings from Xeriscape programs, Home Water Reports, or events .
Water Conservation Programs
New Water Savings by Year
■ Annual Savings (million gallons)
24.2 25 .0
20. 1
14 .8
13.3
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
49
See below for a graph of projected participation ( where participation here means total number of
measures) and annual new water savings in thousand gallons, where the savings includes customer
water use reductions as well as savings from treated less water and avoiding losses throughout the
distribution system .
Projected Participation ( measures )
and New Annual Water Savings (Tgal )
50000
45000
40000 -
0
c7 35000
c
30000
3
O
t
` 25000
v
3 20000
M
a,
E 15000
46
0
z 10000
5000
0
o M qrr Ln W N W M O . I N M TT Ln W r\ W M O
.—I c-I c-I a I . I r-I r-I c-I c-I a--I N N N N N N N N N N M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
+ Participation Measures tAnnual Total Water Savings (Tgal )
Estimates use 2014 numbers as the base, and assume a linear growth of measures of 4% each year
Estimates do not include Home Water Reports, xeriscape programs, or events.
The jump in water savings from 2011 to 2012 reflects several new rebate offerings launched in 2012 .
50
APPENDIX C : MATERIALS RELATED TO CHAPTER 3 �]
Water Efficiency and Conservation Activities and related actions support the following Strategic
Objectives from the City' s 2015 - 16 Strategic Plan , ss
City of Fort Collins Strategic Objectives most relevant to Water Conservation Activities
Key Strategic Outcome : Environmental Health
4. 1 : Improve and protect wildlife habitat and the ecosystems of the Poudre River and other
urban streams .
4. 2 : Achieve environmental goals using the Sustainability Assessment framework.
4. 6 Engage citizens in ways to educate and change behavior toward more sustainable living
practices .
4. 7 : Increase the community's resiliency and preparedness for changes in climate, weather and
resource availability.
4.8 : Protect and monitor water quality, and implement appropriate conservation efforts and
long-term water storage capability.
Key Strategic Outcome : Economic Health
3 . 5 : Sustain high water quality to support the community and water-dependent businesses .
3 . 6 : Maintain utility systems and services; infrastructure integrity; and stable, competitive
rates .
3 . 7 : Support sustainable infill and redevelopment to meet climate action strategies .
3 . 9 : Provide transparent, predictable and efficient processes for citizens and businesses
interacting with the City.
Key Strategic Outcome : Community and Neighborhood Livability
1 . 3 : Direct and guide growth in the community through appropriate planning, annexation, land
use and development review processes .
1 . 11 : Maintain and enhance attractive neighborhoods through City services, innovative
enforcement techniques, and voluntary compliance with City codes and regulations .
Key Strategic Outcome : Safe Community
F510 : Provide ahigh -quality, sustainable water supply that meets or exceeds all public health
ards and supports a healthy and safe community.
Key Strategic Outcome : High Performing Government
7 .4 Strengthen methods of public engagement and reach all segments of the community.
7 . 6 : Enhance the use of performance metrics to assess results .
7 . 9 : Improve productivity, efficiency, effectiveness, customer service and citizen satisfaction in
all areas of the municipal organization .
7 . 10 : Implement leading-edge and innovative practices that drive performance excellence and
quality improvements across all Service Areas.
7 . 11 : Proactively influence policy at other levels of government regulation .
ss http ://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/pdf/strategic-plan-2015 . pdf
51