Water Distribution Water Distribution

Peaking Factor

1

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD)

p y

Reservoir Elevations as of December 28, 2014

S l R i C ti C t El ti DSupply Reservoir ConservationPool Elevation

Current Elevation (msl)

Down

Lavon Lake 492.00’ 479.09’ -12.91’

Jim Chapman Lake 440.00’ 427.45’ -12.55’

Lake Tawakoni 437.50’ 425.49’ -12.01’

Lake Texoma 617.00’ 611.42’ -5.58’

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

Peaking Factor: Calculation based on the comparison of the

p y

amount of water used on a maximum day versus an averageday. The 2011 CIP Update showed the peaking factordeclining to 2.5 by 2044 (Buildout).g y ( )

Historical: 2008(3.6), 2009(3.3), 2010(3.4), 2011(2.1),2012(2.0), 2013(1.9)( ) ( ) ( )

How to reduce the Peaking Factor: Water ConservationBenefits to a reduction in the Peaking Factor:1. Delay timing of CIP Infrastructure and decrease in size

of ultimate Town facilities.2. Prevent future extreme “take or pay” limit on waterp y

contract with provide.

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

Other Municipalities Peaking Factors:

p y

• City of Frisco = 2.5 for residential, 2.0 for non-residential• Little Elm = 2.2

Denton and Princeton = 2 0• Denton and Princeton = 2.0• McKinney – doesn’t use average day demand in planning

but based on their calculations their peaking factor is p garound 2.4 – 2.5

* Town’s recently amended contact with NTMWD included a lower Town s recently amended contact with NTMWD included a lower peaking factor from the previous contract.

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

1. Delay timing of CIP Infrastructure and ultimate size of Town facilities:

p y

Town facilities: (example: decreasing peaking factor from 2.5 to 2.0)

• Ground Storage• Ultimately you would need 15 MG of ground storage instead of 18 MG shown in the • Ultimately you would need 15 MG of ground storage instead of 18 MG shown in the

2011 CIP Update. With the recently constructed 5 MG GST, additional ground storage isn’t needed to be in service until 2030 compared to 2024 in the 2011 CIP Update. ($1,250,000)

• Pumping• Pumping• Ultimately need 25 MGD of firm pumping capacity to UPP instead of 30 MGD shown

in the 2011 CIP Update. ($250,000)• Ultimately need 35 MGD of firm pumping capacity to LPP instead of 40 MGD shown

in the 2011 CIP Update ($250 000)in the 2011 CIP Update. ($250,000)• Elevated Storage

• Ultimately need 3 MG of elevated storage in the UPP instead of 4 MG shown in the 2011 CIP Update. Prosper Trail EST is recommended to be in service in 2018 instead

f 2015 h i th 2011 CIP U d t ($1 000 000)of 2015 as shown in the 2011 CIP Update. ($1,000,000)• Ultimately need 5 MG of elevated storage in the LPP (same as 2011 CIP Update).

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

2. Prevent extreme “take or pay” limit on water contract:• City of Plano

p y

y• Contract = 73.2 MGD• 2001 Usage = 73 MGD• 2013 Usage = 53 MGD• Difference of 7.373 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $13.8 M

(M b Ci R i l $1 87/1 000 ll )• (Member City Rate is currently $1.87/1,000 gallons water)• City of Richardson

• Contract = 30.2 MGD• 2000 Usage = 29.4 MGD

2013 U 21 8 MGD• 2013 Usage = 21.8 MGD• Difference of 3.066 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $5.7 M

• City of Mesquite• Contract = 22.7 MGD

2000 U 21 1 MGD• 2000 Usage = 21.1 MGD• 2013 Usage = 15.5 MGD• Difference of 2.628 Billion Gallons/Year paid for but not used. = $4.9 M

* City of Allen is great example of a municipality nearing buildout that is taking Water y g p p y g gConservation seriously to prevent this from happening.

Town of Prosper“a place where everyone matters”

Staff comments:

p y

• Water Conservation is needed to not only protect the water sources but to encourage proper use of the water resources.

• Once a week watering is adequate if done correctly.

• Cost savings are immediate and long term.

P d Pl f A iProposed Plan of Action:• Continue to encourage Water Conservation in summer 2015 and monitor

through technology.through technology.

• Update the Impact Fee and CIP in 2016 with a recommendation on a suitablepeaking factor and impact it will have on the Town’s infrastructure.

• Implement an updated policy of education and enforcement to controlpeaking factor with 2016 Impact Fee and CIP Update.