View
231
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Past, Present and Future Water Supply Planning and Needs
By Bill HagenBurger, P.E.Plant Engineer
Presentation Outline
• Creation of Beaver Lake
• Formation of Beaver Water District
• Evolution of Beaver Water District
• Beaver Water District Now
• Future Transmission Line Plans
• Future Water Demand Projections
What’s Happening in NWA Circa 1950
• 1950 – Sam Walton purchased a store in Bentonville and opened Walton’s 5 & 10
• 1952 – Don Tyson Graduates From the University of Arkansas
• Late 1950’s – Meatpackers begin to base operations in NWA
• 1958 – Tyson’s Randall Road Plant Opens• Joe Steele looking to expand his canning company
Let’s Look at Historical Population Growth
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970
Po
pu
lati
on
Year
Washington & Benton County Populations 1840 to 1960
Washington County
Benton County
What’s Holding Us Back?
• “By the 1950s, the springs that had always watered the area could not produce enough water to supply the area’s growth” Quote about Springdale from the Encyclopedia of Arkansas History & Culture
NWA Water Sources
Water Supply Sources
◦ Fayetteville: West Fork/Clear Creek/Lake Fayetteville/Lake Sequoyah
◦ Springdale: Spring Creek Springs/Shiloh Springs/Fulbright Springs/Little Osage Creek
◦ Rogers: Frisco Spring/Diamond Spring/Deep well/Lake Atalanta
◦ Bentonville: Unnamed spring/Ford Spring
What are we going to do DAM IT!• 1927: Flooding results in
almost 100 deaths and 1 million in damages
• 1929: COE begins study of White River basin
• 1938: FDR signs Flood Control Act
• Flood Control Act authorized civil engineering projects such as dams, levees, dikes, and other flood control measures through the United States Army Corps of Engineers
The Birth of Beaver Lake
• 1940’s a group of NWA businessman push for the construction of a dam near Eureka Springs
• Beaver Dam Association Formed after WWII
• 1954: Congress adds Beaver Reservoir to the Flood Control Act for the purpose of:
– Flood Control
– Power Generation
Ok we are all set BUT HOLD ON!
• COE performs Cost Benefit analysis based on– Flood Control– Power generation
• Cost GREATER Than Benefits• 1958 Congress passes the Water Supply Act • Water Supply Act allows COE to include Municipal
Water Supply in Cost Benefit analysis• Benefits GREATER Than Cost• CAVEAT
The Birth of Beaver Water District• Federal Water Supply Act requires a local sponsor to
pay for the water supply portion of the lake• Arkansas Legislature passes Act 114 of 1957
– Creating Regional Water Distribution Districts
• August 27, 1959 Beaver Water District is Born!– Includes Benton & Washington Counties– Sells water to cities of Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers &
Bentonville– Governed by a Six member publicly elected Board of
Directors
Beaver Dam
• 1960 Construction Begins• By 1966 Dam is
complete and Beaver lake is filling with Water
Beaver Water District South Intake
• Constructed before the lake was filled
• Capacity of 80 MGD
• BWD’s only intake till 2006
Beaver Water District Treatment Plant
• Completed 1966
• Capacity of 10 MGD
• Serves City of Springdale only
Beaver Water District Treatment Plant
• Newspaper article about the new WTP going online“The following article, by NEWS staff writer
Mike Snipes, describes the complicated and expensive procedures required to provide Northwest Arkansas with its biggest asset … the key to industrial and
agricultural development – pure water.”
Treatment Plant 1978
• Capacity of 50 MGD
• 1971 Rogers & Bentonville start receiving water
• 1972 Fayetteville starts to receive water
• Joe M. Steele WTP
Treatment Plant 1993
• Total Capacity of 80 MGD
• Hardy Croxton WTP added 40 MGD
North Intake
• Pumping Capacity of 70 MGD
• Online 2006
• Hydraulic Capacity of 140 MGD
• BWD Intakes Total Capacity of 220 MGD
Treatment Plant Today
• Solids Handling Facility• Capacity of 140 MGD
• Renovated Joe M. Steele WTP
• Six Mega Watts of Emergency Power
• Administration Center with Visitors Center and Education Center
Let’s Look at Historical Population Growth Again
010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,00090,000
100,000110,000120,000130,000140,000150,000160,000170,000180,000190,000200,000210,000220,000230,000240,000
1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Po
pu
lati
on
Year
Washington & Benton County Populations 1840 to 2010
Washington County
Benton County
Beaver Water District’s Future
• Western Corridor pipeline project• Construction for additional Emergency Power• Continue to be proactive about drinking water
regulations• Be involved with local and national drinking
water associations
• Continue with our Watershed Protection Program
Regional Growth Study
• Completed in January 2006
• Develop population forecasts and water demand projections through 2055
• Investigate the need for a new transmission line to serve existing & future customers
Population Density
0 2 4 6 Mi les
2010 Pop Density0 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 300300 - 500500 - 700700 - 10001000 - 15001500 - 20002000 - 25002500 - 35003500 - 45004500 - 65006500 - 1050010500+
N
2010 Benton and Washington County Population Density(per square mile)
20100 2 4 6 Mi les
2055 Pop Density0 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 300300 - 500500 - 700700 - 10001000 - 15001500 - 20002000 - 25002500 - 35003500 - 45004500 - 65006500 - 1050010500+
N
2055 Benton and Washington County Population Density(per square mile)
2055
Benton & Washington County Population Density (per square mile)
0 2 4 6 Mi les
Water Demands0.00 - 0.010.01 - 0.020.02 - 0.040.04 - 0.060.06 - 0.100.10 - 0.200.20 - 0.300.30 - 0.500.50 - 0.750.75 - 1.001.00 - 1.501.50 - 2.002.00 - 3.003.00 - 4.004+
N
Benton and Washington County 2055 Maximum Day Water Demands (MGD per square mile)
0 2 4 6 Mi les
Water Demands0.00 - 0.010.01 - 0.020.02 - 0.040.04 - 0.060.06 - 0.100.10 - 0.200.20 - 0.300.30 - 0.500.50 - 0.750.75 - 1.001.00 - 1.501.50 - 2.002.00 - 3.003.00 - 4.004+
N
Benton and Washington County 2010 Maximum Day Water Demands (MGD per square mile)
Water Demand Density
2010 2055
Benton & Washington County Water Demands (MGD per square mile)
Key Findings
• Growth will create water demands that will exceed BWD’s deliverable capacity
• Development Could “Box-in” BWD
• Rapid growth (residential congestion)
• Future water demands will occur West of current service area
• Increasing easement costs
Western Corridor Pipeline Project• Currently obtaining easements
for two future 60” dia. pipelines
• Cross I-49 then parallel future 412 Bypass to east of Hwy. 112
• Construct Pump Station near Willis Shaw Elementary School
• Customer Cities Future Pipelines will go the new PS
2015 Master Plan
• Population Projections
• Water Demand Projections
• Regulatory Review
• Capital Improvement Program
• Facility Review and Evaluation
Population Projections - NWARPCTable 2-1. Service Area Historic Population
City/Regional Area 19801 1990 2000 2010
Bentonville 8,756 11,257 19,730 35,301
Bella Vista (85%)2 2,201 7,721 14,095 22,492
Cave Springs 429 465 1,103 1,729
Bentonville Regional Subtotal 11,386 19,443 34,928 59,522
Rogers 17,429 24,682 38,829 55,964
Lowell (5%)2 54 61 251 366
Rogers Regional Subtotal 17,483 24,743 39,080 56,330
Springdale 23,458 29,945 45,798 69,797
Lowell (95%)2 1,024 1,163 4,762 6,961
Bethel Heights 296 281 714 2,372
Elm Springs 781 898 1,044 1,532
Tontitown 615 450 942 2,460
Johnson (50%)2 260 300 1,160 1,677
Springdale Regional Subtotal 26,434 33,036 54,420 84,799
Fayetteville 36,608 42,247 58,047 73,580
Johnson (50%)2 260 300 1,160 1,677
Farmington 1,283 1,322 3,605 5,974
West Fork 1,526 1,628 2,042 2,317
Greenland 622 757 907 1,259
Elkins 579 692 1,251 2,648
Goshen - 589 752 1,071
Fayetteville Regional Subtotal 40,878 47,535 67,764 88,526
Total – Four Primary Cities 86,251 108,131 162,404 234,642
Total – Service Area 96,180 124,757 196,191 289,177
1. All data sourced from available U.S. Census Bureau. 2. Number in parentheses represents percentage of the wholesale
customer serviced by the primary customer city.
Table 2-2. Service Area Population Projections
City/Regional Area 20201 2030 2040 Growth %
Bentonville 47,323 59,345 71,367 3.4%
Bella Vista (85%)2 29,878 37,263 44,649 3.3%
Cave Springs 2,361 2,993 3,625 3.7%
Bentonville Regional Subtotal 79,562 99,601 119,641 3.4%
Rogers 71,600 87,236 102,872 2.8%
Lowell (5%)2 519 672 824 4.2%
Rogers Regional Subtotal 72,119 87,908 103,696 2.8%
Springdale 89,725 109,653 129,581 2.9%
Lowell (95%)2 9,860 12,759 15,658 4.2%
Bethel Heights 3,418 4,463 5,509 4.4%
Elm Springs 1,856 2,177 2,499 2.1%
Tontitown 3,460 4,460 5,460 4.1%
Johnson (50%)2 2,366 3,055 3,743 4.1%
Springdale Regional Subtotal 110,685 136,566 162,450 3.1%
Fayetteville 89,321 105,061 120,801 2.1%
Johnson (50%)2 2,366 3,055 3,743 4.1%
Farmington 8,300 10,626 12,952 3.9%
West Fork 2,672 3,027 3,383 1.5%
Greenland 1,510 1,761 2,013 2.0%
Elkins 3,626 4,604 5,582 3.7%
Goshen 1,312 1,553 1,795 2.3%
Fayetteville Regional Subtotal 109,107 129,687 150,268 2.3%
Total – Four Primary Cities 297,969 361,295 424,621 2.7%
Total – Service Area 371,473 453,761 536,056 2.8%
1. All data sourced from available U.S. Census Bureau. 2. Number in parentheses represents percentage of the wholesale customer serviced by the primary customer city.
Population Projections - NWARPC
City Per Capita Demands
City Per Capita Demands
Water Demand Projections
Table 2-14. Average Day Projections
Year Average Day (mgd)
Bentonville Rogers Springdale Fayetteville BWD Sales BWD Production
2015 8.93 9.32 16.06 14.79 49.10 50.57
2020 10.22 10.47 18.18 16.33 55.19 56.85
2025 11.51 11.61 20.31 17.87 61.29 63.13
2030 12.79 12.76 22.44 19.41 67.39 69.41
2035 14.08 13.90 24.56 20.94 73.49 75.69
2040 15.37 15.05 26.69 22.48 79.59 81.98
Table 2-17. Max Day Projections
Year Max Day Capacity (mgd)
Bentonville Rogers Springdale Fayetteville BWD Sales BWD Production
2015 16.98 19.09 29.92 30.02 96.01 98.89
2020 19.43 21.43 33.88 33.15 107.89 111.13
2025 21.88 23.78 37.84 36.28 119.78 123.37
2030 24.33 26.13 41.80 39.40 131.66 135.61
2035 26.77 28.47 45.76 42.53 143.54 147.85
2040 29.22 30.82 49.72 45.66 155.42 160.09
Water Demand Projections
Closing Thoughts
• Beaver Lake is needed to meet the future drinking water demands of the region
• Beaver Lake has been a tremendous investment for the region
• Beaver Lake is a very important asset for the region and it needs to be treated as such
Questions?
????????
Recommended