HomeMy WebLinkAbout27_AppF_GenentechFinalWSA_web
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................1
1.0INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1
1.1.Project Description................................................................................................................1
1.2.Climate..................................................................................................................................3
1.3.Water Supply Planning..........................................................................................................3
1.3.1.SB 610 Water Supply Assessment...................................................................................3
1.4.Local Groundwater Geology.................................................................................................7
1.4.1.Westside Basin Geology...................................................................................................7
1.4.2.Groundwater Supplies and Recharge...............................................................................8
1.5.?Are There Sufficient Supplies to Serve the Project Over the Next 20 Years??...................8
2.0WATER SUPPLY....................................................................................................................10
2.1.Water Supply Entitlements, Water Rights and Contracts...................................................10
2.2.Water Supplies....................................................................................................................10
2.3.Water Contracts and Agreements.......................................................................................12
3.0WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS...............................................................................................16
3.1.Proposed Project Water Demand.......................................................................................16
3.2.Historical System Demand..................................................................................................17
3.3.System Demand Forecasts.................................................................................................18
3.4.Comparison of Available Water Supplies versus Demand.................................................20
3.5.Annual Supply and Demand...............................................................................................20
4.0CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................................24
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Water Supply Reliability Letter, June 1, 2005
APPENDIX B Supply Assurance Allocation (Except for SFPUC UWMP, 2005)
APPENDIX C California Water Service Company Individual Supply Contract 1984
APPENDIX D BAWSCA Supply Assurance Letter 1994
APPENDIX E ABAG Projected Growth by City
APPENDIX F East of 101 Existing and Cumulative Building Square Feet, Employment, and Water
Demand
i
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLE
TABLE 2-1 2005 SFPUC Water Supply..............................................................................................10
TABLE 2-2 California Water Service Company Water supply............................................................11
TABLE 2-3 SFPUC and CWSC Contracts and Agreements...............................................................13
TABLE 2-4 SFPUC Allocations for CWSV 2005-2030 in Normal, Dry, and Multiple Dry Years.........15
TABLE 3-1 Water Demand Factors.....................................................................................................16
TABLE 3-2 Project Demand by Building Use (mgd)............................................................................16
TABLE 3-3 South San Francisco District Historical Water Use by Customer Sector.........................17
TABLE 3-4 Employment and Population Current and Projected........................................................18
TABLE 3-5 South San Francisco District Project Water Demands.....................................................19
TABLE 3-6 2005 to 2030 California Water Service Company Total Bay Area Demand....................20
TABLE 3-7 CWSC Supply and Demand Comparison for Normal, Dry, and Multiple Dry Years........22
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1. Project Location..............................................................................................................2
FIGURE 1-2. Service Area....................................................................................................................6
FIGURE 2-1. Regional Water Supply System....................................................................................11
ii
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
BAWSCA Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CWSC California Water Service Company
EIR Environmental Impact Report
GMP Groundwater Management Plan
gpm gallons per minute
IWSAP Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan
mgd million gallons per day
MSA Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities
SSA Supply Assurance Allocation
SSFD South San Francisco District
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
WSA Water Supply Assessment
WSIP Water System Improvement Program
iii
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of South San Francisco is preparing a Master Environmental Impact Report (Master EIR)
for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion and implementation of the
2006 Genentech Facilities Master Plan.
The proposed project, as defined by the Master EIR, outlines a potential expansion that would allow
the existing overlay district to expand by 36 acres and include approximately 6 million square feet.
The increase in building square feet will be met from both the redevelopment of existing Genentech
buildings and by expansion of property that Genentech has recently or may in the future acquire.
This water supply assessment (WSA) will provide information for use in the CEQA analysis for this
project. The requirements for such a WSA are described in the sections of the California Water
Code (Water Code) amended by the enactment of Senate Bill 610 (SB 610) and Senate Bill
(SB 221) in 2002
According to the requirements of Water Code Section 10910(c)(3), the water supply assessment
shall include a discussion of ?whether the public water system?s total projected water supplies
available ? will meet the projected water demand associated with proposed project, in addition to
the public water system?s existing and planned future uses.? According to the requirements of Water
Code Section 10911(a), if the results of the assessment conclude that the water supplies are, or will
be, insufficient, the water supply assessment shall include plans for acquiring additional water
supplies. Those plans may include, but are not limited to, information on costs, financing, permits,
and timeframes.
California Water Service Company (CWSC) is the water supplier for the proposed project. CWSC
2030 goal of a total reduction of 2.36 million gallons per day (mgd) beyond anticipated reduction for
plumbing retrofits will allow for average demands to be met, but significant shortfalls will still occur
1
during multiple dry years, such as occurred during 1988 through 1992. If such a drought should
occur in 2030 the resulting shortfall will be over 8 mgd or more than 19% of the average year
demand.
The proposed project will result in a 0.29 mgd net increase in average day demand or 0.7 percent of
the projected CWSC average day demand in 2010. While the individual project does not contribute
significantly the CWSC system wide demand, any increase in demand within the system will result in
increased dry year reductions and methods of reducing demand should be evaluated.
Local supplies including the Westside groundwater basin are key to meeting the future demands.
CWSC and the City of South San Francisco should participate in the increasing their understanding
of these supplies and gather new data through a multi-stakeholder Groundwater Management Plan
1 Personal Communication with Nicole Sandkulla, BAWSCA Water Resource Analyst, Monday, March 6, 2006.
ES-1
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of South San Francisco (City) is conducting an environmental review under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed project. This
water supply assessment (WSA) will provide information for use in the CEQA analysis for this
project. The environmental review for the proposed project includes the need for an assessment of
the available water supply to serve the project. The requirements for such a WSA are described in
the sections of the California Water Code (Water Code) amended by the enactment of Senate Bill
610 (SB 610) and Senate Bill (SB 221) in 2002.
SB 610 and SB 221 provide a nexus between the regional land use planning process and the
environmental review process. These laws also reflect the growing awareness of the need to
incorporate water supply and demand analysis at the earliest possible stage in the land use planning
process. The core of these laws is an assessment of whether available water supplies are sufficient
to serve the demand generated by a project, as well as the reasonably foreseeable cumulative
demand in the region over the next 20 years under a range of hydrologic conditions.
This WSA provides information on the available water supply to serve the proposed project, based
on the sections of the Water Code amended by SB 610. In addition, this information can be used as
part of the written verification of water supplies, as required under SB 221.
This document is divided into 4 sections: Introduction, Water Supply, Demand Analysis, and
Conclusion. The Introduction describes the project and water supply planning under SB 610 and
SB 221.
1.1. Project Description
The City of South San Francisco intends to prepare a Master Environmental Impact Report (Master
EIR) for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion. Associated with
this project is an update of the 1995 Master Plan. The1995 Master Plan focuses on the Central
Campus within the Research and Development Overlay, including the Lower, Upper, Mid, and West
campus neighborhoods. The current Genentech Central Campus consists of 3.57 million square
feet, of building area, of which roughly 2.87 million square feet are occupied by Genentech. The
remaining properties have tenants with varying lease terms. In addition to the Master Plan area,
Genentech currently has leased space at the Gateway Business Park and Britannia East Grand
Development, which is currently under construction. Genentech also owns properties in Bay West
Cove. Properties outside the proposed overlay district are not included in this analysis.
The proposed project, as defined by the Master EIR, outlines a potential expansion that would allow
the existing overlay district to expand by 36 acres and include approximately 6 million square feet.
The increase in building square feet will be met from both the redevelopment of existing Genentech
buildings and the expansion of property that Genentech has recently or may in the future acquire.
The proposed project is to occur in an expanded Research and Development Overlay District,
approximately 167 acres. The Project is located along the San Francisco Bay shoreline in the City
of South San Francisco. The proposed MEIR study area is included in FIGURE 1-1.
1
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
Project
Location
MarinaBlvd
GrandAve
SwiftAve
MitchellAve
UtahAve
NorthAccessRd
01,0002,000
°
Feet
ExistingGenentechResearch
andDevelopmentOverlay
1inchequals2,000feet
ProposedOverlayExpansion
GenentechFacilities
Source:MapMart,Aerials,May,2004;MasterplanOverlay
andEIPAssociates,March20,2006.
SouthSanFrancisco,CA
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
1.2. Climate
Winter temperatures on the San Francisco peninsula are quite temperate, with highs between 55F
and 60F and lows in the 45F to 50F range (Null, 1978). The main source of wintertime fog in San
Francisco is formed in the moist regions of the Sacramento River Delta and is moved through the
Suisun and San Pablo Bays and into San Francisco Bay on cool easterly winds. Over 80 percent of
the peninsula?s seasonal rain falls between November and March, occurring over about 10 days per
month and yearly averages range between 17 and 22 inches. Rainfall from May through September
is relatively rare. Off- season rains do occur and are usually the result of weak early or late season
storms, or surges of subtropical moisture from the south that result in brief showers or
thundershowers. While most storms during these periods produce light precipitation, the occasional
coupling of polar and subtropical air masses can produce heavy rainfall events.
Snow is extremely rare on the San Francisco peninsula, with only 10 documented instances of
measurable snow at the official observing site in the past 143 seasons. Snow has fallen on a
number of other occasions, but usually only in trace amounts or at the higher elevations. Spring and
fall are transition periods for the San Francisco Bay area. These seasons usually produce the most
cloud-free days between the overcast days of summertime stratus and the rain laden clouds of
winter. The hottest days are typically during the spring and fall when high pressure builds and dry
offshore winds replace the Pacific sea breeze.
1.3. Water Supply Planning
Senate Bill 610 and SB 221 were passed into law on January 1, 2002. These laws reflect the need
to incorporate water supply and demand analysis at the earliest possible stage in the planning
process. SB 610 amended portions of the Water Code, including Section 10631, which contains the
Urban Water Management Planning Act, as well as adding Sections 10910, 10911, 10912, 10913,
and 10915, which describe the required elements of a WSA. SB 221 amended Section 65867.5 and
added Sections 66455.3 and 66473.7 to the Government Code. Upon signing these bills, Governor
Gray Davis stated, ?Most notably, these bills will coordinate local water supply and land use
decisions to help provide California?s cities, farms and rural communities with adequate water
supplies. Additionally, these bills increase requirements and incentives for urban water suppliers to
2
prepare and adopt comprehensive management plans on a timely basis.?
Senate Bill 610 is designed to build on the information that is typically contained in an Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP). The amendments to Water Code Section 10631 were designed to
make water supply assessments and UWMPs consistent. A key difference between the WSAs and
UWMPs is that UWMPs are required to be revised every five years, in years ending with either zero
or five, while WSAs are required as part of the environmental review process for each individually
qualifying project. As a result, the 20-year planning horizons for each type of document may cover
slightly different planning periods than other WSAs or the current UWMP. Additionally, not all water
providers who must prepare a WSA under SB 610 are required to prepare an UWMP.
1.3.1. SB 610 Water Supply Assessment
The SB 610 water supply assessment process involves answering the following questions:
Is the project subject to CEQA?
Is it a project under SB 610?
2 Department of Water Resources, Guidebook for Implementation of SB 610 and SB 221 of 2001, 2003.
3
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
Is there a public water system?
Is there a current UWMP that accounts for the project demand?
Is groundwater a component of the supplies for the project?
Are there sufficient supplies available to serve the project over the next 20 years?
1.3.1.1.?Is the Project Subject to CEQA??
The first step in the SB 610 process is determining whether the project is subject to CEQA. SB 610
amended Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 to read: ?Whenever a City or county determines
that a project, as defined in Section 10912 of the Water Code, is subject to this division [i.e., CEQA],
it shall comply with part 2.10 (commencing with Section 10910) of Division 6 of the Water Code.?
The City of South San Francisco has determined that the Genentech Research and Development
Overlay District Expansion is a project subject to CEQA. The information contained in this
assessment will be used to inform and support the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
Genentech Master Plan, and will be appended thereto.
1.3.1.2.?Is It a Project Under SB 610??
The second step in the SB 610 process is to determine if a project meets the definition of a ?Project?
under Water Code Section 10912 (a). Under this section, a ?Project? is defined as meeting any of
the following criteria:
1. A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units;
2. A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or
2
having more than 500,000 square feet (ft) of floor space;
2
3. A commercial building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 ft of
floor space;
4. A hotel or motel with more than 500 rooms;
5. A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park, planned to house
more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000
2
ft of floor area;
6. A mixed-use project that includes one or more of these elements; or
7. A project creating the equivalent demand of 500 residential units.
Alternately, if a public water system has less than 5,000 service connections, the definition of a
?Project? also includes any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial
development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of service
connections for the public water system. Because the proposed project would be composed of a
2
mix of office and industrial and would add more than 650,000 ft of floor area to the existing campus
facilities, it meets the requirements as a ?Project? under the Water Code.
1.3.1.3.?Is There a Public Water System??
The third step in the SB 610 process is determining if there is a ?public water system? to serve the
project. Section 10912 (c) of the California Water Code (Water Code) states: ?[A] public water
4
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
system means a system for the provision of piped water to the public for human consumption that
has 3,000 or more service connections.?
South San Francisco District (SSFD) is one of three water service areas that is owned and operated
by the California Water Service Company (CWSC). SSFD is a public water system and serves the
City of South San Francisco including the proposed project, the City of Colma, a portion of Daly City
and Broadmoor, and an unincorporated area of San Mateo County, as shown in FIGURE 1-2. The
District is approximately 11.2 square miles and bounded on the north by San Bruno Mountain, by the
City of Daly City on the northwest, in the south by City of San Bruno and San Francisco Bay to the
east. These boundaries range in elevation from sea level to over 500 feet; due to unique topography
of the service area, the District must use 15 separate pressure zones to maintain effective
operations and reliability. SSFD served an annual average of 16,137 connections in 2004, of that
single family residences account for 85.4 percent of the customers, 11.7 percent are commercial
customers and the remaining 2.9 percent accounts for all other land uses.
3
1.3.1.4.?Is There a Current UWMP That Accounts for the Project Demand??
Step four in the SB 610 process involves determining if there is a current UWMP that considers the
projected water demand for the project area. The Water Code requires that all public water systems
providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers, or supplying more than 3,000
acre-ft/year, must prepare an UWMP, and the plan must be updated at least every five years on or
before December 31, in years ending in five and zero.
Water Code Section 10910 (c)(2) states: ?If the projected water demand associated with the
proposed project was accounted for in the most recently adopted urban water management plan, the
public water system may incorporate the requested information from the urban water management
plan in preparing the elements of the assessment required to comply with subdivisions (d), (e), (f),
and (g) [i.e., the WSA].? The 2005 SSFD UWMP is currently available as a draft report and a final
version of the UWMP should be released soon.
The projected demand at buildout of the proposed project is higher than the existing demand at the
project sites. The District, along with all BAWSCA members and SFPUC used a series of recent
technical reports to forecast water demands and growth within their service areas and this data is
included in the 2005 UWMP; however, the increased demand from the proposed project appears to
exceed anticipated growth rates and it is assumed the proposed project has not been included in the
UWMP.
1.3.1.5.?Is Groundwater a Component of the Supplies for the Project??
This section addresses the requirements of Water Code Section 10910 (f), paragraphs 1 through 5,
which apply if groundwater is a source of supply for a proposed project. SSFD supplements their
purchased water supplies with groundwater from seven operational wells on the peninsula. The
wells were designed to have a combined pumping capacity of 1,370 gallons per minute (gpm) and if
operated continually this system can supply 1.97 million gallons per day (mgd) and produce up to
2,210 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/year).
CWSC and SFPUC agreed to a short-term (3-year) in-lieu conjunctive use plan to evaluate the
groundwater recharge. During the study the SFPUC would supplement water needed by SSFD
customers that is normally supplied by groundwater sources. This in-lieu agreement ended in 2005
and CWSC is again pumping groundwater to supplement their supplies.
3 WSC SSFD 2005 UWMP, p 40
5
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
°
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
A Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) prepared for the City of Daly City determined some
uncertainties in the amount of recharge occurring in the Colma Creek Basin, the local geologic water
bearing unit; consequently, CWSC has reduced pumping to roughly 500 million gallons per year or
1,530 acre-ft/year. CWSC included this rate of groundwater pumping as a reliable supplementary
source through the 2030 planning period. However, concerns regarding the allocation and reliability
of groundwater on the San Francisco peninsula are growing. No formal agreements or judicial
decisions currently regulate pumping rates and quantities. Citizen groups, who are mainly
concerned with the decline of water levels in Lake Merced as it relates to groundwater pumping in
the basin during the drought of 1988-1992 have voiced their opinions. Specifically, ?California Trout
filed a formal complaint with the SWRCB claiming that SSFD and other providers pumping
groundwater for the Westside Basin in an unregulated manner resulting in impairment to Lake
Merced.? Consequently, CWSC, the cities of San Bruno, Daly City and San Francisco are in the
4
process of preparing a GMP to meet these two objectives: (1) maintain water quality and (2) ensure
water supply reliability. The City of South San Francisco and CWSC are not currently participating in
the GMP effort.
The early scoping sessions of the GMP identified the fact that little knowledge is available about the
geology and characteristics of the basin. As such, useable data and Information necessary to make
intelligent long-term planning decisions did not exist, and gathering this data became the focus of the
GMP. The GMP established both long-term and short-term tasks and will specifically address the
following five items:
1. Groundwater Storage and Quality Management
2. Saline Water Intrusion
3. Conjunctive Use
4. Recycled Water Use
5. Source Water and Wellhead Protection
In an effort to expedite the data gathering process the participants are conducting groundwater
monitoring investigations while other components of the plan are being worked out.
1.4. Local Groundwater Geology
The SSFD is the Visitacion Valley Basin (Basin 2-32) as defined by the Department of Water
Resources Bulletin 118. The two sub-basins within the Visitacion Valley Basin underlie the SSFD
service area: the Colma Creek and Westside Basins. The groundwater wells the supply the project
are from the Westside Basin.
1.4.1. Westside Basin Geology
The Westside Basin is the largest groundwater basin in the upper San Francisco Peninsula. The
basin?s northern boundaries are defined by a bedrock ridge through the Lobos Basin in Golden Gate
Park (Phillips and others 1993). The eastern boundary is formed by the San Bruno Mountains. The
San Andreas Fault and Pacific Ocean form the western boundary and its southern boundary is set
by bedrock that separates it from the San Mateo Plain Groundwater Basin (South Bay Groundwater
Committee Report 2001). The basin opens to the Pacific Ocean on the northwest and San
Francisco Bay on the southeast (Phillips and others 1993), as shown in FIGURE 1-2.
4 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, p 31.
7
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
The basin is geologically comprised of two groups, bedrock and large water bearing unconsolidated
materials (Phillips and others 1993). The unconsolidated materials are layed above the bedrock.
Aquifer storage coefficients indicate unconfined conditions at depths less than 100 feet and confined
conditions at depths in excess of 100 feet (Phillips and others 1993). These three geologic water
bearing units consist of dune sands; the Colma formation; and the Merced Formation (Phillips and
others 1993). Dune sands consist of fine grained to medium-grained sand and overly the Colma
formation in most of the basin north of Lake Merced. The dune sands range in thickness from 0 to
150 feet (Phillips and others 1993). The Colma Formation overlies the Merced Formation consisting
of fine-grained sand, silty sand, and inter-fingered clay layers, to 5 feet thick (Phillips and others
1993). The Merced Formation is composed of sand and thin interbedded silt and clay layers of
shallow marine deposits (Phillips and others 1993).
5
1.4.2. Groundwater Supplies and Recharge
Sources of recharge include infiltration of precipitation, infiltration of landscape irrigation water, and
leakage from local conveyance systems. Aquifer recharge is dependent upon climatic conditions,
landscape irrigation, local hydrology and leaking conveyance systems.
As of 2003, Data were insufficient to provide either an estimate of the Westside Basin?s groundwater
budget or sustainable groundwater extraction (pumping) rates from the basin. This is based upon
the facts that no estimate of stored groundwater exists or even groundwater storage capacity could
be estimated. Although, average groundwater recharge in the basin for water years 1987 ? 1988
was estimated to be 4,850 acre-ft/year or an average annual pumping rate of 4.33 mgd (Phillips and
others 1993); current data from the City of Daly City Groundwater Management Plan would suggest
that these recharge estimates are exaggerated and new data from the multi-stakeholder
Groundwater Management Plan should be used to correctly evaluate the basin?s groundwater
potential.
1.5. Are There Sufficient Supplies to Serve the Project Over the Next 20 Years??
In the early winter months of each year, SFPUC can begin to estimate water supply conditions for
the next year using known and anticipated precipitation and snowpack conditions. These factors are
used by SFPUC to determine whether the regional supply system will be capable of SFPUC
customer demands. Consequently, if the supply system appears incapable of meeting system-wide
demand due to drought (dry year conditions), the SFPUC is expected to declare a water shortage by
6
March 31 of that dry year.
Prior to engaging in the assessment process, it is important to recognize the supply situation as it
exists today. SFPUC forecasted water reliability with 83 years of historical climatological data, for
example, in 2010, CWSC has a 10.8 percent probability of at least a 10.2 percent shortage and a 4.8
7
percent probability of a 21.8 percent shortage, given the modeling circumstances and assumptions
(APPENDIX A). The modeling showed five years of consecutive supply short falls based on the
1988-1992 drought. In 2030 these supply shortfalls stretched to six years based on anticipated
demand. As total water demands on the regional water system grow, water shortages will increase
both in frequency and in magnitude. Another SFPUC study projects that total demands on SFPUC
8
supplies will increase by 19% by 2030.
5 DWR Bulletin 118, Update 2003 Westside Groundwater Basin
6 Reference SFPUC, 2005, UWMP (Appendix C).
7 SFPUC, 2005, Water Supply Reliability letter, June 1, 2005 (Appendix A).
8 SFPUC, 2004, Wholesale Customer Demand Projection Technical Report (URS), p 5-2.
8
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District INTRODUCTION
Water Code Section 10910 (c)(4) states: ?If the City or county is required to comply with this part
pursuant to subdivision (b), the water assessment for the project shall include a discussion with
regard to whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the City or county
for the project during normal, single dry and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection, will
meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to existing and
planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.?
As required, the next step in the SB 610 process is to prepare the actual assessment of the available
water supplies, including the availability of these supplies in all water-year conditions over a 20-year
planning horizon, and an assessment of how these supplies relate to project-specific and cumulative
demands over that same 20-year period. In this case, the period is 25 years and covers the years
2005 to 2030.
There are three primary areas addressed in a water supply assessment:
1. relevant water supply entitlements, water rights, and water contracts;
2. a description of the available water supplies; and
3. analysis of the demand placed on those supplies, both by the project and on a cumulative
basis.
Water entitlements and contracts are addressed in Section 2 and demand analysis is discussed in
Section 3. Section 4 contains results and conclusions.
9
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
2.0 WATER SUPPLY
This section reviews the South San Francisco?s water supply entitlements, water rights and
contracts.
2.1. Water Supply Entitlements, Water Rights and Contracts
Water Code Section 10910 (d)(1) states: ?The assessment required by this section shall include an
identification of any existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts
relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project, and a description of the quantities of
water received in prior years by the public water system, or the City or county if either is required to
comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), under the existing water supply entitlements, water
rights or water service contracts.?
2.2. Water Supplies
In 1934, San Francisco combined the Hetch Hetchy system and Spring Valley system to create the
SFPUC system. The rights to local diversions were originally held by the Spring Valley Water
Company, which was formed in 1862. The SFPUC is owned and operated by the City and County of
San Francisco. At present, the SFPUC System consists of three regional water supply and
conveyance systems: the Hetch Hetchy, the Alameda, and the Peninsula system, which are all
connected. The Peninsula system includes water facilities that connect CWSC to the San Francisco
distribution system and Bay Division pipelines. Approximately 85 percent of the SFPUC water supply
is served through deliveries from the Hetch Hetchy system. The balance of the SFPUC water supply
comes from diversions on a variety of streams and stored in local reservoirs as summarized in
TABLE 2-1. The SFPUC provides approximately 90 percent of the CWSC supply during normal
years, as shown in TABLE 2-2. An additional ten percent of the supply comes from reservoirs and a
groundwater system operated by CWSC.
TABLE 2-1
2005 SFPUC Water Supply
Normal Year Supply
Sources Origin/System
mgd Percent of Total
a
Local Source AlamedaSystem
39.75 15%
b
Peninsula System
c
Imported Source Hetch Hetchy System225.25 85%
Total 265.00 100%
Notes:
a. Calaveras Reservoir, San Antonio Reservoir.
b. Crystal Springs Reservoirs, San Andreas Reservoir, Pilarcitos Reservoir.
c. Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, Lake Lloyd, Lake Eleanor, New Don Pedro Reservoir, Tuolumne River System.
Source: 2005 SFPUC UWMP, pg. 11; Draft SSFD UWMP.
10
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER SUPPLY
TABLE 2-2
California Water Service Company Water supply
Normal Year Supply
Source
mgdPercent of Total
a
SFPUC Supply Assurance Allocation 35.50 93%
Local Supplies 2.72 7.0%
b
Bear Gulch Reservoir 1.37 3.5%
c
Westside Groundwater Basin 1.36 3.5%
Total CWSC Supplies 38.23 100%
Notes:
a. Sum of total purchases for four services areas (Mid-Pennisula; SSFD; Los Trancos: and Bear Gulch). Total of all districts
were included because contract allows for allocations to be transferred between service areas.
b Personal Communication with Darren Duncan of California Water Service Company, Bear Gulch District; March 20,
2006 ? Bear Gulch Reservoir has an average water production goal of 500 million gallons per year. Production occurs
from January to July each year.
c. Westside Basin ? equivalent to 1,534 acre-ft/year groundwater yield based upon current CWSC SSFD UWMP, page 24.
On the San Francisco Peninsula, SFPUC utilizes Crystal Springs Reservoirs, San Andreas
Reservoir, and Pilarcitos Reservoir to capture local watershed runoff. In the Alameda Creek
watershed, the SFPUC constructed the Calaveras Reservoir and San Antonio Reservoir. In addition
to using these facilities to capture runoff, they also provide storage for Hetch Hetchy diversions, and
serve as an emergency water supply in the event of an interruption to Hetch Hetchy diversions.
FIGURE 2-1 shows the SFPUC distribution system.
FIGURE 2-1. Regional Water Supply System
CWSC?s SSFD uses local groundwater supplies to meet customer demands and this makes up
approximately 11 percent of their available daily supplies.
11
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER SUPPLY
2.3. Water Contracts and Agreements
In 1984, the SFPUC executed the Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract (MSA)
with the 29 member agencies of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA).
The BAWSCA members purchase approximately two-thirds of the water delivered by the SFPUC
system and the balance is delivered to the City of San Francisco and its retail customers. The MSA
primarily addresses the rate-making methodology used by SFPUC in setting wholesale water rates
for its wholesale customers, in addition to addressing water supply and water shortages within the
regional water system. The MSA provides 184 mgd as an annual average of ?Supply Assurance? to
all BAWSCA wholesale customers but is subject to reductions in the event of droughts, water
9
shortage, earthquake, other acts of God or system maintenance and rehabilitation. Each member
holds an individual water supply contract and the MSA governs the contract (Appendix C: CSWC
Contract). The current twenty-five year contract ends in 2009, and it is reasonable to expect that the
contract will be extended or renewed.
Additional agreements and plans have been developed since the 1984 MSA and are summarized in
TABLE 2-2. In the early 1990?s, for planning and reliability purposes, BAWSCA negotiated, and then
formally adopted in 1993, the Supply Assurance Allocation (SAA) that quantifies SFPUC?s contract
obligation to supply water to each of the members. The MSA does not guarantee that SFPUC will
meet peak or hourly demands if the individual wholesaler?s annual usage exceeds the SAA. The
SAA helps the wholesaler plan for future demands and growth within their service area; for that
reason, the SAA transcends the MSA expiration and continues indefinitely. CWSC?s SAA for the
four districts is 35.5 mgd based on an annual average basis. According to SFPUC staff, the SSFD?s
purchase estimate for 2010 secures roughly 7.2 mgd based on average annual deliveries.
10
In terms of water supply reliability, the SFPUC UWMP defines system ?firm delivery capability?:
(System supply reliability is expressed)?in terms of the system?s ability to deliver water during
11
historically experienced droughts.? The 1987 to 1992 drought is the basis for this plan. The
SFPUC plans its water deliveries assuming that the worst drought experience is likely to re-occur
and then adds an additional period of limited water availability. The revised 6.5 year drought
scenario is referred to as the ?design drought? and is the basis for water resource planning and
modeling.
The water supply master plan identifies a 239 mgd annual average delivery over a hydrologic period
12
equivalent to that experienced from 1921 to 1999 with no deficiencies. Under existing operations
and procedures based on reduced reservoir capacity, the SFPUC system has a firm delivery
capability of 223 mgd.
According to the SFPUC UWMP, there is sufficient water to meet all expected future demand in
normal and wet hydrologic periods; however, the MSA allows the SFPUC to curtail deliveries during
13
droughts, emergencies and scheduled maintenance activities. SFPUC system operations are
designed to allow sufficient water remaining in SFPUC reservoirs after six years of drought to
14
provide some ability to continue delivering water, although at significantly reduced levels. SFPUC
is currently delivering approximately 265 mgd, about 43 mgd above firm delivery capabilities. A
15
10 percent system-wide reduction would be mandated, if SFPUC declares a shortage. At current
9 Approved SFPUC, 2005, UWMP and SAA language (Appendix B).
10 SSFD Purchase Request Estimates: Year 2015 (7.2 mgd); Year 2020 (7.5 mgd); Year 2025 (7.7 mgd); Year
2030 (8.0 mgd).
11 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, , April 2000, p 20.
Water Supply Master Plan
12 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, , April 2000, p 22.
Water Supply Master Plan
13 Approved San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2005, UWMP Language.
14 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, , April 2000, p 20.
Water Supply Master Plan
15 Nicole Sandkulla, BAWSCA Water Resource Analyst, Personal Communication, February 3, 2006.
12
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER SUPPLY
TABLE 2-3
SFPUC and CWSC Contracts and Agreements
Contract
Source/AgreeWholesalers ? Year Supply
Contract Type ment Expiration Terms of Plan/Contract/Agreement
Providers EstablishedQuantity
Settlement BAWSCA All members 1984 184 mgd 2009 Rate making methodology, wholesale
Agreement & (annual rates for wholesale customers; addresses
Master Sales average)water supply and water shortages; doesn?t
Contract (MSA or guarantee SFPUC will peak daily or
Master Contract) hourly demands when customer usage
exceeds the SAA (See ? Section Supply
Reliability)
Individual Water California California 1984 35.5 mgd 2009 See Appendix C
Supply Contract Water Service Water Service
Company Company
Supply Assurance BAWSCA All members 1994 184 mgd N/A SAA - quantified SFPUC's obligation to
Allocation (SAA) (annual supply water to its individual wholesale
average)customers (all members adopted the
SAA; each wholesale customer has a
specified quantity) (See - Section Supply
Reliability) Appendix B
California 1994 Annual N/A SFPUC can meet the demands of
Water Service Purchase customers in years of average and above-
Company Request - average precipitation
35.5 mgd
Water Supply SFPUC BAWSCA 2000 239 mgd N/A Planning/guiding document ? identified
Master Plan WSIP, CIP ? cooperative effort b/w
SFPUC and BAWSCA
Interim Water BAWSCA All members 2000 20% 2009 Two Tier Plan, 1) Allocates and distributes
Shortage System-Water b/w SFPUC and BAWSCA - based
Allocation Plan Wide on level of supply shortage. 2) allocates
(IWSAP) Reduction the collective wholesale customer share
among 28 wholesalers allocation is based
on SAA (mgd), purchases previous 3
years, rolling averages in last 3 years
Water Supply SFPUC Regional Water 2000 goal 10 mgdcurrent SFPUC program to "firm-up" supplies and
Improvement System ensure supply reliability for planned
Program (WSIP) growth and increased demands
Source: Menlo Park 2005 UWMP, SFPUC 2005 UWMP, developed by EIP Associates January 2006.
delivery levels, the regional water system can be expected to experience up to a 25 percent
16
shortage 15 to 20 percent of the time, during multiple-year drought sequences.
The SFPUC and the wholesale members developed a long-term strategy to accommodate or rectify
17
the potential of future water shortages throughout its wholesale and retail operations. The
methodology for determining water supply reliability during drought years is the Interim Water
Shortage Allocation Plan (IWSAP). In 2000, the SFPUC and BAWSCA members agreed upon and
adopted the IWSAP. Under this plan, the SFPUC will determine the available water supply in
drought years for shortages up to 20 percent on an average, system-wide basis. The IWSAP will
18
remain in effect through June 2009. The IWSAP was necessary because the MSA?s default
formula discouraged the wholesale customers from reducing purchases during normal or wet years
by applying demand management (conservation) programs or perusing alternative supplies such as
groundwater, water recycling or transfers.
16 The reliability will increase to 4.8% chance of a 24.2% reduction after 2012 following reservoir improvements.
17 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP p 22.
18 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, (see Appendix B)
13
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER SUPPLY
The IWSAP has two components. The Tier One component of the IWSAP allocates water between
San Francisco and the wholesale customer agencies collectively. The Tier Two component of the
IWSAP allocates the collective wholesale customer share among each of the 28 wholesale
customers. This allocation is based on a formula that considers three factors, the first two of which
are fixed: (1) each agency?s Supply Assurance from SFPUC, with certain exceptions, and (2) each
agency?s purchases from SFPUC during the three years preceding adoption of the Plan. The third
factor is the agency?s rolling average of purchases of water from SFPUC during the three years
19
immediately preceding the onset of shortage.
CWSC?s total Supply Assurance is 35.5 mgd based on average annual purchase; this is their share
of the 184 mgd allocated for the BAWSCA members, these supplies are then distributed to their four
service areas. According to the Draft 2005 SSFD UWMP, the District buys approximately 89 percent
of its water from the SFPUC, the balance is met with local groundwater.
The 2005 CWSC purchase request was 38.25 mgd. This supply is subject to reductions in critical
20
dry years or over multiple dry years. As seen in TABLE 2-4, if 2005 was a critical dry year,
mandatory reductions would have been necessary and supplies would be reduced to 31.33 mgd;
over a multiple dry years, the supply would be further reduced to 27.23 mgd. Because dry year
conditions are, a result of weather patterns that affect groundwater recharge this assessment
assumed that local groundwater supplies would be reduced during multiple dry year events.
Additionally, this assumption is consistent with the Draft SSFD UWMP stating, ?groundwater is at
risk from climatic issues, such as lack of rainfall to recharge the basin or from overall drought
conditions?, therefore, CWSC local supplies could be reduced by 10 percent in a single dry year.
21
SFPUC 2004 Wholesale Customer Water Demand Projections study (Demand Study) analyzed
water demands associated with each customer sector and then forecasted demands over a twenty-
five year planning horizon. TABLE 2-4 shows CWSC purchase requests from SFPUC based on the
findings presented in the Demand Study. As illustrated in the table, supply amounts increase every
five years; this is based upon the assumption that supply contracts will be renewed and SFPUC is
able to ?firm up? local sources, expand recycled water programs, improve conjunctive groundwater
22
uses or increase diversions from the Tuolumne River.
19 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, (see Appendix B)
20 Water Supply Reliability Letter (Appendix A)
21 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, p 31
22 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, p 22-29.
14
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER SUPPLY
TABLE 2-4
SFPUC Allocations for CWSV 2005-2030 in Normal, Dry, and Multiple Dry Years
Normal Year One Critical Multiple Dry Year Event
Purchase Request Dry Year
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
2005
mgd %mgd %mgd %mgd %mgd %
a
BAWSCA Allocation177.9 100% 157.4 88.5% 157.4 88.5% 136.8 76.9% 136.8 76.9%
a
CWSC Allocation38.25 100% 31.33 81.9% 31.33 81.9% 27.23 71.2% 27.23 71.2%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
2010
a
BAWSCA Allocation188.9 100% 167.2 88.5% 167.2 88.5% 145.6 77.1% 145.6 77.1%
a
CWSC Allocation35.78 100% 32.13 89.8% 32.13 89.8% 27.97 78.2% 27.97 78.2%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
2015
a
BAWSCA Allocation191.6 100% 169.7 88.6% 169.7 88.6% 147.8 77.1% 147.8 77.1%
a
CWSC Allocation35.47 100% 32.59 91.9% 32.59 91.9% 28.39 80.0% 28.39 80.0%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
2020
a
BAWSCA Allocation197.5 100% 175.0 88.6% 175 88.6% 152.5 77.2% 152.5 77.2%
a
CWSC Allocation36.01 100% 33.61 93.3% 33.61 93.3% 29.29 81.3% 29.29 81.3%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
2025
a
BAWSCA Allocation203.6 100% 180.5 88.7% 180.5 88.7% 157.4 77.3% 157.4 77.3%
a
CWSC Allocation36.32 100% 34.66 95.4% 34.66 95.4% 30.22 83.2% 30.22 83.2%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
2030
a
BAWSCA Allocation209.4 100% 185.7 88.7% 185.7 88.7% 161.9 77.3% 161.9 77.3%
a
CWSC Allocation36.96 100% 35.66 96.5% 35.66 96.5% 31.1 84.1% 31.1 84.1%
b
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
Notes:
a. Based on letter dated June 1, 2005 from SFPUC to CWSC (Table 3 in Appendix A).
b. Local Supplies from Bear Gulch Reservoir (1.37 mgd) and Westside Basin groundwater (1.36 mgd) from TABLE 2-2.
15
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
3.2. Historical System Demand
TABLE 3-3 presents the water uses in the District?s service area from 1980, 1985, and 1999 ? 2004
and shows the annual average change over the five year period. The top section shows the number
of accounts served annually, the middle section presents the total water usage by account per day,
and the bottom section shows average number of gallons used per account. The Draft SSFD
UWMP states, ?with the conclusion of the long-term drought conditions, the district has experienced
a continual increase in demand toward pre-drought levels. It was expected that demand would
remain below pre-drought levels, as a result of implementing physical conservation mechanisms;
23
however, demand per service for the last three years shows a return to pre-drought use patterns.?
TABLE 3-3
South San Francisco District Historical Water Use by Customer Sector
Average
Annual
percent
Number of Accounts 198019851999200020012002200320041999-2004
Single Family Residential 12,039 12,201 13,227 13,450 13,456 13,534 13,532 13,787 0.83%
Multi-Family Residential 140 143 151 151 151 151 150 151 0.00%
Commercial 1,410 1,503 1,791 1,815 1,837 1,858 1,864 1,885 1.03%
Industrial 140 115 75 74 74 72 71 68 -1.94%
Institutional/Government 144 186 215 218 219 218 219 220 0.46%
Other 11 17 37 62 69 59 26 26 -6.81%
Total 13,884 14,165 15,496 15,770 15,806 15,892 15,862 16,137 0.81%
Use per Account (gpd)
Single Family Residential 236 250 239 244 240 239 235 236 -0.25%
Multi-Family Residential 1,969 2,334 2,759 2,808 2,732 2,560 2,524 2,444 -2.40%
Commercial 1,059 1,444 1,584 1,857 1,889 1,813 1,762 1,834 2.97%
Industrial 15,331 11,296 10,894 11,218 8,350 8,616 9,062 10,368 -0.98%
Institutional/Government 2,278 2,310 2,004 2,031 2,341 2,005 1,869 2,007 0.03%
Other 885 1,119 1,419 690 665 1,070 371 622 -15.21%
Use by Account Type (mgd)
Single Family Residential 2.84 3.04 3.16 3.28 3.24 3.24 3.19 3.25 0.56%
Multi-Family Residential 0.28 0.33 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.39 0.38 0.37 -2.50%
Commercial 1.49 2.17 3.12 3.37 3.47 3.37 3.28 3.46 2.09%
Industrial 2.15 1.30 0.82 0.83 0.62 0.62 0.64 0.71 -2.84%
Institutional/Government 0.33 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.51 0.44 0.41 0.44 0.46%
Other 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.01 0.02 -16.74%
a
Losses/Unaccounted0.32 0.43 0.39 0.30 0.28 0.49 1.06 1.04 21.67%
Total 7.42 7.72 8.39 8.69 8.58 8.60 8.98 9.28 2.04%
Notes:
a: Daily losses/accounted water based on total annual losses
Source: Draft 2005 South San Francisco District UWMP, Appendix C ? Worksheet pages 1,3,4.
As shown, single family residential accounts have had annual average growth of 0.83 percent per
year between 1999 and 2004, the long-term average annual growth rate (10 year) was calculated at
0.7 percent and represents historically accurate growth in the SSFD service area. Multiple Family
Residential accounts have remained unchanged but use per account has dropped by 11 percent
from 2,760 gpd to 2,440 gpd, and it is safe to assume that this reduction is the result of passive
23 CWSC SSFD 2005 UWMP, p 41.
17
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
24
conservation. The commercial sector shows a 5 percent increase in accounts and a 15.7 increase
in water use in between 1999 and 2004; in contrast, the industrial accounts have shown a negative
growth in the number and total water use over the same period. Water use in the commercial sector
has fluctuated but could be on the rise as seen between 2003 and 2004. The most significant
observation from historical use is the magnitude of unaccounted for water in 2003 and 2004;
however, this was an anomaly and was a result of a mainline flushing program the District was
implementing.
25
3.3. System Demand Forecasts
The 2002 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projected annual population growth
between 2000 and 2030 at 0.56 percent and annual job growth at 0.77 percent in the City of South
San Francisco. An annual growth of 0.77 percent results in a 21 percent increase in jobs over
25 years (Appendix E). The SSFD UWMP population projections mirrors those of the ABAG, except
ABAG projection assume a higher 2005 population, but the projections are nearly equal by 2025.
TABLE 3-4 shows the projected population from the SSFD UWMP and projected employment from
ABAG.
TABLE 3-4
Employment and Population Current and Projected
ab
PopulationEmployment
2005 56,820 42,130
2010 58,490 45,080
2015 60,210 48,410
2020 62,000 51,160
2025 63,850 54,020
2030 65,760 56,810
Average annual increase 2005 to 2030 0.58% 1.2%
Total percent
Increase 2005 to 2030 15.7% 34.8%
Source: Draft 2005 SSFD UWMP and EIP Associates adapted 2006.
a. Draft 2005 UWMP , page 16 (service area population is 85% of City of South San Francisco, 100% of City of Colma and
100% Broadmoor district)
b. 2002 ABAG, Appendix G. 2000 to 2030 growth is only 25.9% or an annual average growth of 0.77% due to significant
decrease in employment projected for 2005, which did not occur as forecasted.
The SSFD UWMP plan contains water demand forecast to 2030 based on the ten year historical
growth rate of 0.70 percent per year for each account type and a 10 percent reduction through
conservation. SSFD UWMP calculated a 2030 average annual demand of 8.77 mgd. The SFPUC
26
performed an analysis of the wholesale customer conservation potential and projected future
27
demand for all users based on a 10 percent unaccounted for water use, which is significantly greater
than the historic 5.65 percent historical average in the SSFD. The SFPUC demand projections
28
also included passive conservation from plumbing retrofits to low flow devices. The SFPUC study
resulted in a 2030 average annual demand of 9.90 mgd.
24 Passive conservation is the on-going replacement of out-dated plumbing equipment with new low-flow
fixtures and appliances.
25 CWSC, 2005 SSFD UWMP, p 43.
26 CWSC, 2005 SSFD UWMP, Scenario 2, Table 5.4-1, p 47.
27 URS Corporation. 2004. SFPUC Wholesale Customer Water Conservation Potential. November.
28 CWSC, 2005 SSFD UWMP, p. 69
18
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
For this analysis a revised projection was calculated using CWCS growth by account type and an
historical average of unaccounted for water combined with the passive conservation determined in
the SFPUC demand projections. The revised approach resulted in a 2030 average annual demand
in the SSFD of 9.02 mgd and is included in TABLE 3-5.
TABLE 3-5
South San Francisco District Project Water Demands
Average
Annual
percent
Number of Accounts 2005201020152020202520302005-2030
Single Family Residential 13,840 14,323 14,824 15,341 15,877 16,432 0.69%
Multi-Family Residential 2,505 2,593 2,683 2,777 2,874 2,974 0.69%
Commercial 1,896 1,971 2,050 2,132 2,217 2,306 0.79%
Industrial 71 67 63 59 56 53 -1.16%
Institutional/Government 223 228 233 238 243 248 0.43%
Other 71 73 76 79 82 84 0.67%
18,606 19,255 19,929 20,626 21,349 22,097 0.69%
Total
Use per Account (gpd)
Single Family Residential 239 231 223 216 208 201 -0.68%
Multi-Family Residential 158 152 146 140 135 130 -0.78%
Commercial 1831 1799 1768 1737 1707 1677 -0.35%
Industrial 9523 9357 9193 9033 8876 8721 -0.35%
Institutional/Government 2050 2015 1980 1945 1911 1878 -0.35%
Other 683 672 660 648 637 626 -0.35%
Use by Account Type (mgd)
Single Family Residential 3.31 3.31 3.31 3.31 3.31 3.31 0.00%
Multi-Family Residential 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 -0.09%
Commercial 3.47 3.55 3.62 3.70 3.78 3.87 0.43%
Industrial 0.68 0.63 0.58 0.53 0.50 0.46 -1.51%
Institutional/Government 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.07%
Other 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.32%
a
Losses/Unaccounted0.47 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.09%
Total 8.83 8.86 8.89 8.93 8.97 9.02 0.09%
Notes:
a: losses/accounted water is 5.65 percent, SSFD UWMP p. 69, average for past 10 years not including flushing program
Proposed projects for the east of Highway 101 area are presented in Appendix F, FIGURE F-2. This
list was developed from consultation with City of South San Francisco Staff. Assuming the proposed
project list for the east of Highway 101 area would be completed by 2015, the total building square
feet would increase at a rate of 3.4 percent per year over the next 10 years. The water demand
would increase at a 5.4 percent per year over the same period (Appendix F-7). While conversion of
industrial areas to high density office and mixed use space is accounted for in the growth projections
and resulting water demand in CWSC UWMP and the SFPUC UWMP, the calculated growth east of
Highway 101 (Appendix F) exceeds that of the other demand studies; therefore, the proposed
project demand will be added to projected growth in TABLE 3-5. TABLE 3-6 includes the projected
demand for the all the bay area CWCS services districts and the proposed project demand.
19
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
TABLE 3-6
2005 to 2030 California Water Service Company Total Bay Area Demand
Percent Increase
Number of Accounts 2005201020152020202520302005-2030
a
Bear Gulch 13.5 13.6 13.6 13.7 13.7 13.9 3.0%
a
Mid Peninsula 17.5 17.7 17.7 17.8 18.0 18.1 3.4%
b
SSFD 8.83 8.86 8.89 8.93 8.97 9.02 2.2%
Project 0.0 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 -
c
39.8 40.5 40.5 40.7 41.0 41.3 3.7%
Total
Notes:
a. URS Corporation. 2004. SFPUC Wholesale Customer Water Conservation Potential. November. p 5-2.
b. see TABLE 3-5.
c. see TABLE 3-2, assumes buildout in 5 years.
3.4. Comparison of Available Water Supplies versus Demand
Section 10910 (c)(3) of the Water Code states, ?the water supply assessment for the project shall
include a discussion with regard to whether the public water system?s total projected water supplies
available for normal, dry and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection will meet the
projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to the public water
system?s existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.?
3.5. Annual Supply and Demand
The MSA allows the SFPUC to reduce water deliveries to wholesale customers during periods of
water shortage. Under the MSA, reductions to wholesale customers are to be based on each
agency?s proportional purchases of water from the SFPUC during the years immediately preceding
the onset of shortage, unless this formula is superseded by a water conservation plan agreed to by
29
all parties.
The SFPUC used the historical hydrologic record from 1920 to 2002 to compare water supplies and
demands into the future. This methodology assumes that climatic history will repeat itself and similar
hydrologic conditions will be experienced. Under the current storage limitations throughout the
SFPUC system, all BAWSCA members have a significant risk of water shortage relying on potable
water supplies delivered through the regional water supply system. The SFPUC Water Supply
Reliability Letter (Appendix A) estimates that in 2010 CWSC has a 10.8% probability of at least a
10.2% shortage (3.65 mgd) and a 4.8% probability of a 21.8% (7.8 mgd) shortage, given the
modeling circumstances and assumptions. As total water demands on the regional water system
30
grow, water shortages will increase both in frequency and in magnitude. As such, the CWSC
SSFD 2005 Draft UWMP contains a Water Shortage Contingency plan in the event of these potential
system-wide supply reductions.
The IWSAP formula encourages the BAWSCA members towards constant conservation in normal
and wet years, thereby, under dry year conditions, the wholesalers are not penalized by further
reductions in quantities. The IWSAP states that if the previous years? usage exceeded the
wholesaler?s SAA, in this case 35.5 mgd, the SFPUC can further reduce supply quantities to the
wholesaler during dry years. This strategy is advantageous for both parties because it encourages
adherence to Best Management Practices and Demand Management Measures and allows the
regional system to store surplus water in normal or wet years. CWSC has exceeded their SAA
29 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP. p 81.
30 Draft City of Menlo Park UWMP, 2005, p 1.
20
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
every since 2000. The five year average was 36.9 mgd, although two years of excessive use was
attributed to the 2003 ? 2004 in-lieu groundwater recharge program. Interestingly, if groundwater
pumping had occurred 2004 purchases from SFPUC still would have exceeded CWSC?s SAA.
31
TABLE 3-7 demonstrates the supply reliability and projected future demands by varying hydrologic
conditions over the twenty-five year planning horizon through 2030 as required by SB 610. The
analysis of supply and demand shows that CWSC does not have sufficient water supplied to meet
normal year demands after 2010 which is contrary to the SFPUC reliability statement in the SFPUC
UWMP. The comparison of supply and demand in this WSA finds that under the current supply
32
situation, CWSC can not meet the areas demand with secure purchase allotments from SFPUC
even during normal years. With this understanding, it will be necessary for CWSC to further develop
improved demand management measures that will increase conservation beyond the passive
conservation mechanisms that are currently in place. CWSC has committed to reducing demand in
all service areas in 2030 by 2.36 mgd, which allow CWSC to meet average year demands, but not
33
single dry demands (10.2% probability) or multiple dry year demands (4.8% probability). The CWSC
demand reduction goal of 2.36 mgd is 5.9 percent of the total 2005 demand for all three of the
CWSC districts.
The SSFD UWMP lists the following conservation programs and Best Management Practices that
are currently in effect to eliminate or curb demand in the event of supply cut-backs, including:
water meters at all connections both new and existing
System Pressure Control Program
leak reductions through constant maintenance, system repair audits, leak detection, and
repair
home retrofit of plumbing fixtures, including Ultra Low Flush Toilets
school education programs, and public outreach, includes water efficient landscaping
water survey programs for single family and multiple family residential connections
high-efficiency washing machine rebates
conservation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional customers
reclaimed water use
water waste prohibition
water shortage contingency plan
Water System Improvement Plan.
31 CWSC, 2005 SSFD UWMP, p 52.
32 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP. p 81
33 Personal Communication with Nicole Sandkulla, BAWSCA Water Resource Analyst , Monday, March 6,
2006.
21
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
TABLE 3-7
CWSC Supply and Demand Comparison for Normal, Dry, and Multiple Dry Years
Multiple Dry Year Event
Normal Year One Critical
Purchase Request Dry Year
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
2005
mgd %mgd %mgd %mgd %mgd %
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation38.25 100% 31.33 81.9% 31.33 81.9% 27.23 71.2% 27.23 71.2%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 40.98 100% 33.79 82.4% 33.79 82.4% 29.41 71.8% 29.41 71.8%
b
CWSC Demand39.83 39.83 39.83 39.83 39.83
Difference 1.15 2.9% -6.04 -15.2% -6.04 -15.2% -10.42 -26.2% -10.42 -26.2%
2010
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation35.78 100% 32.13 89.8% 32.13 89.8% 27.97 78.2% 27.97 78.2%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 38.51 100% 34.59 89.8% 34.59 89.8% 30.15 78.3% 30.15 78.3%
b
CWSC Demand40.45 40.45 40.45 40.45 40.45
Difference -1.94 -4.8% -5.87 -14.5% -5.87 -14.5% -10.30 -25.5% -10.30 -25.5%
2015
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation35.47 100% 32.59 91.9% 32.59 91.9% 28.39 80.0% 28.39 80.0%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 38.2 100% 35.05 91.7% 35.05 91.7% 30.57 80.0% 30.57 80.0%
b
CWSC Demand40.48 40.48 40.48 40.48 40.48
Difference -2.28 -5.6% -5.44 -13.4% -5.44 -13.4% -9.91 -24.5% -9.91 -24.5%
2020
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation36.01 100% 33.61 93.3% 33.61 93.3% 29.29 81.3% 29.29 81.3%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 38.74 100% 36.07 93.1% 36.07 93.1% 31.47 81.2% 31.47 81.2%
b
CWSC Demand40.72 40.72 40.72 40.72 40.72
Difference -1.98 -4.9% -4.66 -11.4% -4.66 -11.4% -9.25 -22.7% -9.25 -22.7%
2025
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation36.32 100% 34.66 95.4% 34.66 95.4% 30.22 83.2% 30.22 83.2%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 39.05 100% 37.12 95.0% 37.12 95.0% 32.40 83.0% 32.40 83.0%
b
CWSC Demand40.96 40.96 40.96 40.96 40.96
Difference -1.91 -4.7% -3.85 -9.4% -3.85 -9.4% -8.56 -20.9% -8.56 -20.9%
2030
a
CWSC SFPUC Allocation36.96 100% 35.66 96.5% 35.66 96.5% 31.10 84.1% 31.10 84.1%
a
Local CWSC Supplies2.73 100% 2.46 90.0% 2.46 90.0% 2.18 80.0% 2.18 80.0%
TOTAL CWSC Supplies 39.69 100% 38.12 96.0% 38.12 96.0% 33.28 83.9% 33.28 83.9%
b
CWSC Demand41.31 41.31 41.31 41.31 41.31
Difference -1.62 -3.9% -3.20 -7.7% -3.20 -7.7% -8.03 -19.4% -8.03 -19.4%
Notes:
a. see TABLE 2-4
b. see TABLE 3-6.
22
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
City of South San Francisco Water Supply Assessment
Genentech R&D Overlay District WATER DEMAND ANALYSIS
The current understanding is that regional water system supplies are less than dry year demands
and future demand increases are anticipated in most areas throughout the region. SFPUC and all
customers must accept the challenge of an increasing gap between supplies and demands and look
for ways to lessen the disparity. In order to enhance the ability of the SFPUC water supply system
to meet service goals for delivery reliability and stabilize water supplies, the SFPUC and wholesale
customers are implementing the Water System Improvement Program (WSIP). The WSIP is a
multiple year, system-wide capital improvements program aimed at firming up the SFPUC?s ability to
meet its water service goals. Many aspects of the WSIP are rooted in the 2000 ?Water Supply
Master Plan? and various water system vulnerability studies. A Program Environmental Impact
Report is being prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and each
qualifying water supply project will be subject to specific environmental review and would result in
preparation of a CEQA environmental document. Each project will also be reviewed for compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act and any necessary local, State and federal permitting
requirements. The water supply improvement options being investigated are:
1. SFPUC RWS Conjunctive Use Program: Westside Groundwater Basin
2. SFPUC RWS Water Transfers from the Tuolumne River Districts
3. SFPUC RWS Recovery of Storage: Restoration of Calaveras and Crystal Springs reservoirs
The WSIP is investigating the potential options of developing local water resources such as water
recycling, groundwater, desalination and improved conservation to meet SFPUC purchase requests
or demands. These resources are potential opportunities that exist throughout the regional water
34
system and could be used to meet customer demands over the next twenty-five years.
34 SFPUC, 2005 UWMP, p 22.
23
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
4.0 CONCLUSION
According to the requirements of Water Code Section 10910(c)(3), the water supply assessment
shall include a discussion of ?whether the public water system?s total projected water supplies
available ? will meet the projected water demand associated with proposed project, in addition to
the public water system?s existing and planned future uses.? According to the requirements of Water
Code Section 10911(a), if the results of the assessment conclude that the water supplies are, or will
be, insufficient, the water supply assessment shall include plans for acquiring additional water
supplies. Those plans may include, but are not limited to, information on costs, financing, permits,
and timeframes.
CWSC 2030 goal of a total reduction of 2.36 mgd beyond anticipated reduction for plumbing
retrofits will allow for average demands to be met, but significant shortfalls will still occur during
35
multiple dry years, such as occurred during 1988 through 1992. If such a drought should occur in
2030, TABLE 3-7 shows a shortfall of over 8 mgd or more than 19% of the average year demand.
The proposed project will result in a 0.29 mgd net increase in average day demand or 0.7 percent of
the projected CWSC average day demand in 2010.
This WSA concludes that there is a sufficient water supply to serve the project and anticipated
growth in years with normal rainfall, but dry years with a probability greater than 10 percent may
cause mandatory reductions greater than 7 percent and dry years with a 4.8 percent probability may
cause mandatory reduction greater than 19 percent.
Local supplies including the Westside groundwater basin are key to meeting the future demands.
CWSC and the City of South San Francisco should participate in increasing their understanding of
these supplies and gather new data through a multi-stakeholder Groundwater Management Plan.
While the individual project does not contribute significantly the CWSC system wide demand, any
increase in demand within the system will result in increased dry year reductions and methods of
reducing demand should be evaluated.
35 Personal Communication with Nicole Sandkulla, BAWSCA Water Resource Analyst, Monday, March 6, 2006.
24
FINAL
August 18, 2006
P:\Projects - WP Only\21117.00 Genentech\Final\Genentech_FINAL-WSA.doc
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Water Supply Reliability Letter; June 1, 2005
Appendix B
Supply Assurance Allocation (Excerpt from SFPUD UWMP, 2005)
1)Explanation Of Water Master Contract & Implications For Long Term
Supply
The business relationship between San Francisco and its wholesale customers is
largely defined by the ?Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract
(Master Contract)? executed in 1984. The Master Contract primarily addresses the
rate-making methodology used by the City in setting wholesale water rates for its
wholesale customers in addition to addressing water supply and water shortages
for the regional water system. The contract expires on June 30, 2009.
In terms of water supply, the Master Contract provides for a 184 million gallon
per day (mgd, expressed on an annual average basis) "Supply Assurance" to the
SFPUC's wholesale customers subject to reduction in the event of drought, water
shortage, earthquake, other acts of God, or rehabilitation and maintenance of the
system. The Master Contract does not guarantee that San Francisco will meet
peak daily or hourly customer demands when their annual usage exceeds the
Supply Assurance. The SFPUC's wholesale customers have agreed to the
allocation of the 184 mgd Supply Assurance among themselves, with each entity's
share of the Supply Assurance set forth on a schedule adopted in 1993. This
Supply Assurance survives the termination of the Master Contract in 2009.
The SFPUC can meet the water demands of its retail and wholesale customers in
wet and normal years. The Master Contract allows the SFPUC to reduce water
deliveries during droughts, emergencies, and for scheduled maintenance
activities. The Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan (IWSAP) between the
SFPUC and its wholesale customers adopted in 2000 provides that the SFPUC
determines the available water supply in drought years for shortages of up to 20%
on an average, system-wide basis.
2)Supply Assurance
[Name of Agency] receives water from the City and County of San Francisco?s
regional system, operated by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
(SFPUC). This supply is predominantly from the Sierra Nevada, delivered
through the Hetch Hetchy aqueducts, but also includes treated water produced by
the SFPUC from its local facilities in Alameda and San Mateo Counties.
In 1984 [Name of Agency], along with 29 other Bay Area water suppliers signed a
Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract (Master Contract) with
San Francisco, supplemented by an individual Water Supply Contract. These
contracts, which expire in June 2009, provide for a 184 million gallon a day (mgd,
expressed on an annual average basis) Supply Assurance to the SFPUC?s
wholesale customers collectively. [Name of Agency]?s individual Supply
Assurance is _____ mgd (or approximately ______ acre feet per year). Although
the Master Contract and accompanying Water Supply Contract expire in 2009, the
Supply Assurance (which quantified San Francisco?s obligation to supply water to
its individual wholesale customers) survives their expiration and continues
indefinitely, as noted above in Section 3.
The SFPUC can meet the demands of its retail and wholesale customers in years
of average and above average precipitation. The Master Contract allows the
SFPUC to reduce water deliveries during droughts, emergencies and for
scheduled maintenance activities. The SFPUC and all wholesale customers
adopted an Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan in 2000 to address the
allocation of water between San Francisco and wholesale customers in aggregate
and among individual wholesale customers during water shortages of up to 20%
of system-wide use. This plan, which also expires in June 2009, is described in
more detail in Section ______.
3)Shortage Allocation Plan
The SFPUC can meet the demands of its retail and wholesale customers in years
of average and above-average precipitation. The Master Contract allows the
SFPUC to reduce water deliveries to wholesale customers during periods of water
shortage. Under the Master Contract, reductions to wholesale customers are to be
based on each agency?s proportional purchases of water from the SFPUC during
the year immediately preceding the onset of shortage, unless this formula is
supplanted by a water conservation plan agreed to by all parties.
The Master Contract?s default formula discouraged SFPUC?s wholesale
customers from reducing purchases from SFPUC during periods of normal water
supply through demand management programs or development of alternative
supplies. To overcome this problem, SFPUC and its wholesale customers
adopted an Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan (IWSAP) in calendar 2000.
This IWSAP applies to water shortages up to 20% on a system-wide basis and
will remain in effect through June 2009.
The IWSAP has two components. The Tier One component of the IWSAP
allocates water between San Francisco and the wholesale customer agencies
collectively. The IWSAP distributes water between two customer classes based
on the level of shortage:
Level of System Wide Share of Available Water
Reduction in Water Use
SFPUC Share Suburban Purchasers
Required
Share
5% or less 35.5%64.5%
6% through 10% 36.0%64.0%
11% through 15% 37.0%63.0%
16% through 20% 37.5%62.5%
The Tier Two component of the IWSAP allocates the collective wholesale
customer share among each of the 28 wholesale customers. This allocation is
based on a formula that takes three factors into account, the first two of which are
fixed: (1) each agency?s Supply Assurance from SFPUC, with certain exceptions,
and (2) each agency?s purchases from SFPUC during the three years preceding
adoption of the Plan. The third factor is the agency?s rolling average of purchases
of water from SFPUC during the three years immediately preceding the onset of
shortage.
The IWSAP allows for voluntary transfers of shortage allocations between
SFPUC and any wholesale customer and between wholesale customer agencies.
Also, water ?banked? by a wholesale customer, through reductions in usage
greater than required, may also be transferred.
The IWSAP will expire in June 2009 unless extended by San Francisco and the
wholesale customers. The projected amount of water which [Name of Agency]
expects to receive from SFPUC during dry years after 2010 [shown in Table __]
has been calculated by SFPUC on the assumption that the Plan will in fact be
extended.
Appendix C
California Water Service Company Individual Supply Contract 1984
Appendix D
BAWSCA Supply Assurance Letter 1994
Appendix E
Association of Bay Area Governments Projected Growth by City
Appendix F
East of 101 Existing and Cumulative Building Square Feet,
Employment and Water Demand
AppendixF-1
Eastof101StudyAreaAcreage
1
TAZAcres
BayWestCove47
Gateway106
LowerCampusA20
LowerCampusAoutsideOverlay28
LowerCampusB25
LowerCampusC10
MidCampus25
MidCampusoutsideOverlay2
N27
Opus/SierraPoint19
OysterPoint124
P30
R26
S77
SouthCampus26
T24
TerraBay24
U66
UpperCampusA11
UpperCampusB18
UpperCampusC23
UpperCampusoutsideOverlay13
W59
WestCampusA14
WestCampusB15
WestCampusC8
X48
Y225
Z39
TOTAL1,177
ProposedGenentechResearchand
DevelopmentOverlay
167
1.seeFigureF-1forboundariesofGenentechCampusNeighborhoodsandTAZ(TrafficAnalysisZones)
Eastof101BuildingAreaSummary
WithinProposed
Eastof101GenentechR&D
outsideoverlayOverlayTotal
2005Existing(msf)14.43.618.0
2015(msf)19.16.025.1
2005?2015Increase(msf)4.62.47.1
2005-2015APR 2.8%5.3%3.4%
2030(msf)28.96.034.9
2015-2030Increase(msf)9.90.09.9
2005-2030APR
2.8%0.0%2.2%
1.seeFigureF-1forboundariesofGenetechProposedR&DOverlayandEastof101StudyArea
F-1
-1
P:\Projects-AllEmployees\21117.00Genentech_WSA\Calcs\Eastof101demands-change.xls-1.Acres
AppendixF-6DemandFactors
WaterDemandFactorsEmployeeFactors
22
gpm/1000ftft/employee
Commercial0.011a400c
22
gpm/1000ftft/employee
Office0.041a375c
22
gpm/1000ftft/employee
R&D0.155a450c
22
gpm/1000ftft/employee
Manufacturing0.061a955c
22
gpm/1000ftft/employee
Other0.044a420c
2
ft/employee
Hotel130gallonsperroomb420
2
ft/person
Residential280gallonsperdwellingunite468d
2
gpm/1000ft
Office/RD0.079
aTableAUtilityMasterPlan
bSeattlePublicUtilitiesResourceConservationSection,HotelWaterConservation,
ASeattleDemonstration,July2002,preparedbyONeill&SiegelbaumandTheRICEGroup
cDyett&Bhatia,2000,ProjectedLanduses.MemorandumfromSueExlinetoMikeLappen
note:office/R&Disassumedtobe2/3R&Dand1/3office
dBasedonMandalayTerrace,average1045sf/DUand296unts
e2000censusdata=2.23peopleperDU,averageindooruse=63gal/day
=useperDU=63x2.23x2.0forlandscaping
Wat
er
Usa
ge
Average
200
Demand
4Water
per1000
(ccf)Usage2004Peakedgpm
2
BldgTypeSQFT***(GPM)(3.0)ft
1MFG153,674###50.2150.60.327
2R&D97,768###22.667.90.231
3MFG193,281###204.1612.31.056
4Office139,749###6.920.80.050
5MFG182,164###11.233.60.061
6,8,9MFG432,804###100.1300.30.231
7MFG290,845###33.399.80.114
20,21R&D117,250###10.531.60.090
24Other101,415###4.012.10.040
25Other67,154###3.510.40.052
26Office113,642###2.57.40.022
Office127,516###5.717.00.044
36Office25,253###1.64.70.062
FRCIR&D275,846###50.0150.00.181
FRCIR&D278,277###36.1108.20.130
*FactorsareGeneratedfromWaterbillinghistoryreceivedfromGenentechfor2004
**BuildingsquarefootageprovidedbyGenentechWebEnergyrecords
F-6
P:\Projects-AllEmployees\21117.00Genentech_WSA\Calcs\Eastof101demands-change.xls-6.Factors-12
Opus/
SierraPoint
TerraBay
R
OysterPoint
BayWestCove
MarinaBlvd
S
I
Ä
LowerCampusA
T
Lower
P
CampusC
LowerCampusB
Upper
Gateway
Lower
CampusB
BayWestCove
CampusA
Upper
Gateway
CampusA
LowerCampusA
West
GrandAve
U
CampusA
LowerCampusB
MidCampus
Upper
CampusC
MidCampus
West
West
W
CampusB
CampusC
N
Opus/SierraPoint
OysterPoint
SouthCampus
SwiftAve
P
Y
MitchellAve
R
Z
S
SouthCampus
UtahAve
X
T
TerraBay
U
UpperCampus
N
W
WestCampus
X
Y
Z
LowerCampus
NorthAccessRd
MidCampus
UpperCampus
S.Airport
WestCampus
07501,500
°
Feet
OverlayDistrict
GenentechFacilities
Source:MapMart,Aerials,May,2004;
MasterplanOverlay
andEIPAssociates,March20,2006.
SouthSanFrancisco,CA
EastGrandAve
UtahAve
°
EastGrandAve
UtahAve
°