Commentary: Overstating water supplies won’t make it rain, people

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 14, 2010 at 6:08 am

From the Santa Clarita Signal, this commentary by Lynne Plambeck:

“State legislators have long seen an urgent need to provide adequate water supply information to planners. It was obvious to everyone that increased population in California would escalate pressure on the state’s water resources.

So about seven years ago the state passed landmark legislation – the “show me the water” laws – requiring thorough disclosure of water supplies in the form of water supply assessments for all large development projects. They also updated requirements for disclosure in urban water management plans.

Even so, it took many years of insisting by local environmental groups that polluted water not be counted to force disclosure by local water agencies.

Groups demanded that treatment facilities to clean wells polluted with perchlorate should be actually functioning before additional development was approved based on those water supplies. … “

January 14, 2010 · Filed Under Southern California, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Tuesday’s top of the scroll: Luxury development’s dubious Delta water supply

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 5, 2010 at 8:25 am

From the Contra Costa Times:

“A luxury housing development 250 miles south of its Delta water source is moving forward, even though its water supply relies on a 15-year-old deal that has never passed environmental muster.

Critics say the Tejon Mountain Village project is the first of a number of planned subdivisions that would use provisions in the water deal to harden the demand for Delta water at a time when environmental regulations are reducing the amount of water that can be taken from Northern California.

At issue is whether Delta water resources, which already appear oversubscribed, will become even more so under the “Monterey Agreement,” which is not yet final because of difficulties in analyzing and justifying its environmental effects. What happens, for example, if thousands of houses are built in Southern California and a court rules again that the agreement they rely on for water does not meet the requirements of environmental laws? … “

Continue reading at the Contra Costa Times website by clicking here.

Picture of Tejon Ranch by flickr photographer cellar8.

January 5, 2010 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water package holds high importance to builders

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 10, 2009 at 8:14 am

From the California Building Industry Association, this position paper on the recent water legislation package (hat tip to the LPALand twitter feed):

“The comprehensive water package passed recently signed into law by Gov. Schwarzenegger should be viewed for what it is: A major achievement by a Legislature that has been widely criticized for doing little to address many of the pressing social and economic problems confronting California today.

After years of talking — and little else – about the state’s chronic lack of investment in its water supply infrastructure and the dire implications of standing by as the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta engaged a decades-long “March of the Penguins” toward decline, the Legislature and the Governor should be applauded for getting it right.

Now the question is: Will California voters get it right when they go to the polls on Nov. 2, 2010? If you are a California homebuilder or are employed by a California homebuilder or rely in one way or another on the substantial economic benefits of new housing, then you should hope they do.

The importance of the $11.1 billion comprehensive water package to California’s homebuilding industry is considerable. Water is the lifeblood of everything we do; without it there is no prosperity, there is no building. In California there has always been a link between land use and water supply. Within the last decade though, there has been an increased emphasis on demonstrating water supply security for new development. … “

December 10, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

State exploring detailed strategy for growth

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 8, 2009 at 6:39 am

From the San Francisco Chronicle, this column by John King:

“With little fanfare and a modest budget, work has begun that could lead to something California has never had – an explicit government vision for how and where the state should grow.

The official action is modest, a $2.5 million contract to devise a set of detailed growth scenarios for California, from classic suburban sprawl to compact development focused on older cities. The goal is to produce a single “preferred scenario” – one that conceivably could be used to prod local governments to accept or reject new construction.

This sort of top-down planning would alter politics in California, where cities and counties for decades have deflected any initiatives that might crimp their autonomy. The difference now: legislative efforts to reduce the state’s carbon emission levels, and voter support of a high-speed rail system that could put now-distant portions of the Central Valley within commuting distance of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Proponents say there’s no way to make wise long-term decisions without data to gauge the impact of different patterns of growth when it comes to matters such as energy or water use.

“When you’re building infrastructure, you have to take into account all the different statewide goals,” said Cynthia Bryant, director of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. “We haven’t done scenario planning at a statewide level, and it’s something we need.” …”

Read more from the San Francisco Chronicle by clicking here.

November 8, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water overreach: The Rancho California Water District should find a less drastic way to address tight water supplies than just shutting off the tap for growth, says editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 11, 2009 at 10:10 pm

From the Riverside Press-Enterprise, this editorial:

“The Rancho California Water District should find a less drastic way to address tight water supplies than just shutting off the tap for growth. A moratorium on water service to new development is too blunt a tool to use for a task that requires more delicacy.

The water district’s Board of Directors plans to consider temporarily blocking new water hookups and withholding water guarantees for new development — although the board last week did not set a date for weighing the issue.

The district faces a water squeeze because of drought and court-ordered cutbacks in water exports from Northern California. The district imports 65 percent of its water, and that imported supply serves all new growth. But the agency’s water supplier, Metropolitan Water District, slashed deliveries by 10 percent in July. …”

Read more from the Riverside Press-Enterprise by clicking here.

October 11, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Columnnist: Atlanta needs a water/growth intervention

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 20, 2009 at 7:30 am

From the Savannah (Georgia) Morning News, this editorial:

“If some Georgia officials could inhale as hard as they blow when it comes to Atlanta’s water woes, the Atlantic Ocean would be lapping at Decatur.

Talk about wind power. If some Georgia officials could inhale as hard as they blow when it comes to metro Atlanta’s water woes, the Atlantic Ocean would be lapping at Decatur.

Gov. Sonny Perdue and other Georgia officials expended a considerable amount of energy this week, suggesting there might be a national solution to Atlanta’s water shortage problem – a nationwide policy that allows municipalities to stick their straws into all federally managed reservoirs and drink to their heart’s content.

“There are some things Congress must address and some things that the state must address,” the governor told reporters Monday at the Governor’s Mansion after meeting with Georgia’s two U.S. senators and eight of the state’s 13 congressmen.

To which any reasonable lawmaker in Washington should respond, “You first.” …”

Read more of this commentary from the Savannah Morning News by clicking here.

Hat tip to Water Wired, who contrasts Atlanta with Las Vegas:

Atlanta seems to have assumed the mantle of the ‘800 pound gorilla’ of Southeastern water, just as Las Vegas has that well-deserved reputation in the Southwest. The big difference is that metro Las Vegas has options and the money to pursue them, whereas metro Atlanta seems to me to be a bumbling giant.

They could use Pat Mulroy.

You can read Water Wired’s post by clicking here.

August 20, 2009 · Filed Under National water news, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

2009 legal and political impacts of California water supply on development: “those in the development industry need to become actively involved with the policies and actions taken by local water districts and community services districts,” advises commentary

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 14, 2009 at 11:29 pm

From GlobeSt.com, a real estate news website, this commentary by Sean Sherlock:

“Water supply continues to be a critical issue for development in Southern California, and at present there is no reason to believe things will get better anytime soon. To avoid or minimize these potential consequences, those in the development industry need to become actively involved with the policies and actions taken by local water districts and community services districts.

California is in its third year of drought, with annual precipitation running about 60% to 70% of normal over each of the last three years. As a result, reservoir levels are steadily declining. At the same time, a series of court and regulatory actions focused on protecting the Delta Smelt have curtailed water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Continuing litigation by the federal government and environmental groups in NRDC v. Kempthorne, as well as the recent federal biological opinion for salmon, steelhead and other migratory species in the Bay Delta, will keep pressure on water exports from the Bay Delta.

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California expects the restrictions resulting from these actions to reduce deliveries from the Bay Delta by as much as 40%. The impact of these reductions will be felt hardest in districts that lack significant groundwater supplies and are heavily dependent on imported water. More concerning, however, is that MWD now predicts that restrictions on Bay Delta water exports will hinder its ability to replenish water supplies during wet years. The state legislature, occupied with budget problems, has devoted little time or attention to a meaningful long-term solution. …”

Read more from GlobeSt.com by clicking here.

August 14, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

1 Comment

Drought cause: Poor planning, over-development

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 25, 2009 at 4:08 pm

From City Watch, this commentary by David Coffin, a candidate for the 51st Assembly Seat:

“Drought has many forms but Mother Nature is only a bit player in today’s water crisis. Our drought is caused primarily by poor planning and over-development. State Senate bill SB610 was supposed to protect water supply but it contains a huge loophole that allows planners and developers to use outdated water management plans that promise sufficient water supplies for growth but never deliver.

The problem is compounded when over-development creates environmental fiasco’s like those that occurred in the Owens Valley, the Mono Basin and the Sacramento Delta thus forcing legal remedies to protect those areas. Those remedies include shutting down State Water Project pumps and redirecting half of the L.A. Aqueducts water back Owens and Mono.

Poor planning and water assessments have had an equally devastating effect on farmers who now have to stop growing crops and layoff employees.

In the end, we end up paying with higher prices and lower allocations and a lower quality of life.”

Read more of this commentary by clicking here.

July 25, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Los Angeles: Residents, community boards see no allowance for drought in plans for high density residential and commercial projects

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 9, 2009 at 6:32 am

From The Argonaut:

Water may be in short supply, but there seems to be no shortage of development projects in the planning stages throughout Los Angeles. Several large-scale initiatives, including the second phase of Playa Vista, the Howard Hughes Center in Westchester and proposed multi-story developments in Del Rey and Venice are being considered, to the consternation of various neighborhood councils and residents.

They say that because the city government has moved to Phase III of the municipal water ordinance that includes mandatory conservation measures, high-density projects should be reexamined, scaled back or have water agencies and planners include the effects and consequences of the drought.

Westchester resident David Coffin thinks that city leaders have not taken the water shortage into account regarding large scale development, and he disagrees with those who suggest that state laws that direct cities and counties to request that developers obtain a water assessment prior to approval are sufficient. “They are relying on water management plans that are four years old,” Coffin, who is a member of the Neighborhood Council of Westchester-Playa, asserted.

Read more from The Argonaut by clicking here.

July 9, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

PPIC releases new reports on water, climate change, and planning

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 8, 2009 at 7:44 am

From the Public Policy Institute, three new reports this morning, beginning with California Water:

California faces growing water management challenges—including growth in demand, climate change, and instability in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Potential solutions will involve difficult and sometimes costly tradeoffs.

This publication is part of a briefing kit that highlights our state’s most pressing long-term policy challenges in eight key areas:

* budget
* climate change
* economy
* education
* population
* transportation
* water
* workforce

Click here to download this 6-page pdf file.

The second report is on climate change:

California is charting new territory with its plans to reduce emissions. But the state also needs to prepare for the effects of climate change that’s already coming.

This publication is part of a briefing kit that highlights our state’s most pressing long-term policy challenges in eight key areas:

* budget
* climate change
* economy
* education
* population
* transportation
* water
* workforce

Click here to download this 6-page pdf file.

The third report deals with planning issues:

California’s current economic and fiscal realities make nonpartisan, objective information on the state’s future challenges all the more critical. Understandably, the search is on for immediate solutions to the unprecedented crises we face today. But if the present crises make policymakers shelve long-term planning, the result may be an even more uncertain future for our state.

This briefing kit highlights California’s most pressing long-term policy challenges in eight key areas:

* budget
* climate change
* economy
* education
* population
* transportation
* water
* workforce

Click here to download the 6-page pdf file.

July 8, 2009 · Filed Under Climate change & water supply, General Water Issues, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Commentary on AB1408: Californians, imagine new homes that need no new water

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 30, 2009 at 8:34 am

From AlterNet, this commentary by Doug Linney, president of the Board of Directors of the East Bay Municipal Utility District, a board member of the Planning and Conservation League, and a board member of the California League of Conservation Voters:

In February, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a drought emergency in California, citing two successive years of below-average rainfall and dangerously low runoff from the Sierra Nevada snowpack.

Since then, the water-supply crisis has only deepened, and now it coincides with a recession that has severely damaged the state economy. Few sectors of the economy have been as hard hit as the home builders and construction companies.

Enter Assembly Bill 1408, authored by Democratic Assemblyman Paul Krekorian. This unique bill would offer significant dual benefits for improving our water supply and alleviating the housing slump. Imagine new homes that require no additional water supplies but have the same, or better, amenities than the current housing stock. Imagine builders being able to construct these new homes in areas where, without AB 1408, the lack of water would preclude new development.

Now imagine that the building industry wants this bill killed. It is hard to believe but true — the California Building Industry Association continues to lean on legislators to vote against this bill in the coming days. But why?

Read more of Doug’s commentary by AlterNet by clicking here.

May 30, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Development could dry up wetlands, environmentalists say

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 30, 2009 at 7:13 am

From the O. C. Register:

Environmentalists are warning that wetlands could go dry and some Surf City homes might sink if the city moves forward with the proposed 111-home Shea Parkside Estates development.

With the City Council set to vote Monday on whether to approve a revised development plan for the property, Bolsa Chica Land Trust officials have released a 250-page report about what they say are significant changes to the property and are asking the council to postpone the vote.

They say water levels have dropped at least partly due to emergency repairs of the nearby Wintersburg Channel, and that the levels could plummet more if the developer proceeds with plans to further reinforce the levee and drain certain areas before building homes on top of it. Environmentalists and neighbors say the draining process may change the water table, causing the preserved wetland habitat on the property to dry up and adjacent homes in the Kenilworth Drive area of Surf City to sink.

The documents are the latest twist in a more than a decade-long battle between environmentalists and Shea Homes, which wants to build on 50 acres near the Bolsa Chica wetlands.

The developer contends the report is the latest tactic by the Bolsa Chica Land Trust to stall a project that has already been scaled back by the California Coastal Commission. The development, which the city originally approved in 2002 with 170 housing units and 3.7 acres of conservation area, is now planned with 111 homes and 23.1 acres of preserved areas.

“These people are not engineers. They’re not licensed,” said Shea Parkside Estates spokesman Laer Pearce. “They are very smart … but they don’t know how soil works…You can’t call for a new (environmental impact report) when a project has less impact than it had when it was originally approved.”

Read more from the O. C. Register by clicking here.

May 30, 2009 · Filed Under Southern California, Water & Development, Water & the Environment

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

State ag board, environmentalists share goodwill; Board president sees conservation opportunities as development wanes

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 8, 2009 at 8:04 am

From the Capital Press:

Agricultural and environmental leaders are assuring one another they can find common ground while California faces escalating water-supply challenges.

In a hearing on April 29, members of the State Board of Food and Agriculture praised environmental leaders while expressing cautious optimism for working together on water policy. “We find that the conservation-environmental side, there’s a lot of reasonable people there, and I think you’ll find on the redneck-agriculture side there are some reasonable people there too,” said board President Al Montna.

Montna, a rice grower, described opportunities for agreement on water policy while development interests have quieted. “It’s a great opportunity now because the developer is not knocking at the door,” he said. “And we’d be remiss to allow that window to (close) again without getting some real good programs and agreements in place.”

Read more from the Capital Press by clicking here.

May 8, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

New fee for water capacity approved; Critics say added cost to hurt building industry

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 20, 2009 at 5:56 am

From the San Diego Union Tribune:

Helix Water District officials say a fee they will begin imposing on new homes and businesses will pay for the cost of adding customers to the system, but critics say the fee will harm the already-struggling building industry.

The Helix Water District board voted 4-1 Wednesday to start charging a capacity fee for new construction. The fee will add $10,072 to the cost of a new house and $53,715 for a typical small commercial business. Developers of larger structures would pay a fee between $100,716 and $537,151, depending on the size of the water meter.

The board voted 4-1, with board member Chuck Muse opposed, to start collecting the fee beginning July 1, rejecting requests from developers and Lemon Grove Mayor Mary Sessom for a delay until next year. “The ratepayers are looking for us to move ahead with this and be firm,” board President Richard K. Smith said.

The fee is part of a package of rate increases the district is seeking in light of a 19.7 percent boost in the cost of water from the Metropolitan Water District set to take effect in September, and a projected 21.5 percent increase in 2011. Helix gets most of its water supply from Metropolitan through the San Diego County Water Authority.

Read more from the San Diego Union Tribune by clicking here.

April 20, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Crisis on Tap: It’s a delicate balance between water, growth; some builders are working to save water, build smarter

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 22, 2009 at 8:01 am

More from the Press-Enterprise’s special coverage of water issues, Crisis on Tap, this article:

When the economy recovers from the current financial crisis, developers are expected to cast their sights on the Inland area once again. But even if there’s enough capital to build, the question remains: Will there be adequate water supplies to sustain continued growth?

The answer depends on whom you ask.

Many residents and environmentalists say not enough is being done to curb growth in the face of a statewide drought and rationing. “Developers are free to build while the rest of us suffer,” said Mike Snider, a Riverside County resident who maintains more than an acre near Lake Mathews. “We don’t have enough water for us.”

On the other hand, economists and homebuilders say an increase in water rates would effectively end any water shortage, because people would no longer waste so much of the precious commodity.

“Conservation pricing” is what researcher Ellen Hanak calls it. In her 2005 report for the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonpartisan research group, Hanak said stringent rate structures that discourage excessive water use will help allow the state to continue growing when paired with conservation, increased storage and “thoughtful planning of new developments.”

More on this story from the Press-Enterprise by clicking here.

A related story highlights the efforts of home builders to incorporate water conservation and savings into their new developments:

Weather-sensitive sprinklers controlled by satellites. Instant water heaters near every faucet. Low-flow toilets with pressurized flushing. And a WaterSense seal of approval from the federal government. Welcome to the home of the future.

While most builders retreat to their offices to wait out an economy gone awry, those still seeking building permits are discovering that projects can live or die based on the availability of water.

Several builders already have been forced to change plans: one showerhead instead of several, less grass and more drought-tolerant plants. Next on the horizon: using recycled water to irrigate landscaping of new homes.

More on this story from the Press-Enterprise by clicking here.

The Press-Enterprise has comprehensive coverage of California water issues on their special report webpage Crisis on Tap. Besides about a dozen articles on various issues, there are videos, photo galleries and interactives. It’s well worth the click-through! Check it out by clicking here.

March 22, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Our state needs a growth cap, says commentary

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 15, 2009 at 8:12 am

From the Daily News, this commentary by Norma Jeanne Strobel, a retired professor at Santa Ana College and Ralph E. Shaffer, a professor emeritus at Cal Poly Pomona:

“The sky is falling.” Actually, according to our governmental alarmists, the problem is that the sky is not falling. We’re in a drought!

Our governor has declared a “drought emergency.” The Metropolitan Water District will soon reduce allotments to water agencies in Southern California. In West Covina, the water cops ticketed an elderly, visually-impaired woman who dared to water her flowers before dark. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is threatening to ration water, while the mayor calls on Angelenos to conserve.

Hogwash! There is no drought. This year’s slightly below normal rainfall is simply a vagary of our cyclical weather.

Sure, Southern California has a water problem, it’s just not caused by drought, says this commentary:

We have taxed our rivers to their limit. Not only is there no more water to send South, but we are in danger of losing access to what we had been allotted.

Conservation is not the solution. Let’s face reality. Southern California has reached the point where available water can no longer support unlimited growth. The California dream is still a single-family residence, with a yard and flowers. To keep our standard of living and our dream of individual home ownership, we need to cap our growth instead of rationing our water.

Read the full text of this commentary in the Daily News by clicking here.

March 15, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Why some cities are getting drier as skyscrapers rise: Not only are cities impacted by their regional climate, they also shape it

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on February 19, 2009 at 2:07 pm

From AlterNet:

It might seem like a cruel irony: While the growth of cities worldwide requires more water resources, urban growth itself may be a factor in creating a drier, or different, regional climate.

Take China’s Pearl River Delta region, which in recent years has gone from being a regional backwater to being the center of the global manufacturing universe. Three decades ago, this area at the southern tip of Guangdong province, where the river spills into the South China Sea, was a relatively quiet spot, where farmers waved off mosquitoes buzzing in capacious rice paddies. Today the region, strategically situated just north of Hong Kong, is the industrial hub of the world’s most prolific manufacturing nation — home to some 50 million people and thousands of factories churning out toothbrushes, toys, computer parts and just about everything else that can be packed in shrink-wrap and shipped around the world. The region’s new soundtrack is a constant whir of factory machinery, loading dock whistles and construction crews building ever more roads and apartment blocks on the outskirts of town.

In Shenzhen, one of its busiest port regions, nearly everyone is from somewhere else — from other cities in China, from foreign companies and, especially, from the countryside. More than 95 percent of the workers on the assembly line are estimated to have flocked from nearby villages, a familiar pattern across China, where millions of people each year move to the nation’s fast-growing cities. As they settle into factory dormitories and new high-rises, then turn on the faucet for cooking, showering and laundry, demand for water rises. Yet in precisely the same years that skyscrapers have soared and the sky has thickened with smog, rainfall in the region has declined. Why?

To untangle the connection, a team of interdisciplinary researchers compiled readings from 16 meteorological stations in the region, which they compared with maps charting urban growth, derived from NASA satellite data. Their study, published last year in the Journal of Climate, found that between 1988 and 1996, urban land cover in the Pearl River Delta increased 300 percent — the equivalent of paving an area the size of Rhode Island in less than a decade. Meanwhile, during the dry winter months (the subtropical region’s summer is influenced by the Asian monsoon cycle), rainfall declined. The team created a statistical model linking urban growth with winter rainfall; they found that each percentage point in growth correlated with a decrease of 2.44 milli-meters in rainfall.

Read more from AlterNet by clicking here.

February 19, 2009 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

County officials to rededicate water to new developments

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 23, 2008 at 6:47 am

From the Antelope Valley Press:

Los Angeles County officials confirmed this week they would be willing to rededicate water left unused by canceled development projects to new ones.

Palmdale’s governing officials raised the question during a Thursday breakfast meeting with 5th District Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich and other county representatives.

Palmdale is in the process of tallying the new home and business projects for which water has been promised by local providers, including county Waterworks District 40. At issue is whether some of those projects should be granted discretionary extensions of their construction deadlines.

Because of a slow development market, the state Legislature in July adopted an urgency bill that automatically extended for one year the life of all approved projects in California.

The city’s Planning Commission holds discretionary authority to deny any additional time extensions, which could eliminate the development of many homes and save the water those homes would use. “We have a lot of paper projects that are out there right now that have ‘will-serve’ letters” from water providers, Councilman Steve Hofbauer said.

Read more from the Antelope Valley Press by clicking here.

November 23, 2008 · Filed Under Antelope Valley, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

In water fight, Antelope Valley home builders seek solutions

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 18, 2008 at 6:29 am

From the Antelope Valley Press:

Can the dream of homeownership – at least in the form of a new Antelope Valley tract home – still be a reality despite the Valley’s water woes? Home builders say “yes,” and insist they are part of the solution by helping build new water supply infrastructure and in bringing in water-saving technology and less-thirsty landscaping for new homes.

But developers caution that turning off the spigot to new building also will turn off new jobs, shopping opportunities and other commercial and recreational amenities.

“I have great concerns that next year I could go to brush my teeth or turn on the shower and not have any water come out of the tap. And so I understand when a homeowner says, ‘Well you know, I need to protect mine right now and I don’t think we should allow any new homes to go in,’ ” said Tom DiPrima, North Division President for KB Home, which has developed subdivisions for thousands of homes in the Antelope Valley over the last 20 years. “Unfortunately those are the same homeowners saying, ‘Why are we not getting any more new retail and why are we not getting any new employers?’

“If we get to a point where we have a moratorium on growth, that moratorium will be very broad based. It won’t just be new homes. It will be on retail, it will be on commercial and valuable jobs we need,” he said.

Executives of companies considering opening new stores or plants in the Valley examine population growth projections, DiPrima added. “Those companies that look to invest in communities, and open a new store, they look at new rooftops. They don’t look at existing rooftops,” he said.

Read more from the Antelope Valley Press by clicking here.

August 18, 2008 · Filed Under Antelope Valley, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Is growth over? California’s continuing water crisis may mean the end of the state as we have known it, says commentary

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 20, 2008 at 7:27 am

From the Los Angeles Times, this commentary, written by Cary Lowe, a land-use lawyer and urban planning consultant:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s recent executive order certifying that California is in a drought and directing state agencies to start thinking about what to do about it is only the latest sign that a way of life built on cheap and readily available water is coming to a close. For much of the state, June was the driest month on record, according to the National Climatic Data Center. The continuing water crisis raises the question of whether we are approaching the limits of growth in California.

For the last century, it seemed there was no limit. More than any other state, California’s economy and population exploded, a growth spurt fueled in large part by abundant water supplies. Now we may be at a turning point, especially in Southern California.

The most obvious indicators certainly point in that direction. Snowmelt in the Sierras, which historically has filled the state’s major reservoirs and aqueducts, has been shrinking steadily. California’s rights to Colorado River water have been gradually scaled back by regional agreements and mounting claims by other states. Court orders in response to environmental lawsuits aimed at protecting endangered fish species have slashed water deliveries from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta. And reduced rainfall throughout the region has made it increasingly difficult to replenish groundwater basins.

Initially, the public agencies responsible for ensuring water supplies were cautious in their response to the signs of a growing water crisis, perhaps fearing a political backlash from Californians who expect to be able to open a tap and let it flow, without limits, any time, anywhere, for any purpose. Adding a reservoir, drilling a few more wells or cutting deals with farmers to transfer some of their water to nearby cities helped soften, if not avoid, the effects of the state’s growing water shortage. Now, however, the situation is becoming sufficiently dire that the water agencies are beginning to give the public a taste of what lies ahead.

Earlier this year, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the largest water agency in the region and the principal supplier to the cities of Los Angeles, San Diego and numerous others in between, announced a 30% reduction in deliveries to agricultural customers, which means that farmers will have less water for their crops and to give to cities. And things could get worse. The agency also adopted a contingency plan that could result in similar cutbacks to urban consumers and rate hikes of up to 20%. Local water agencies, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, followed suit, beginning with voluntary conservation programs but warning of mandatory ones to come.

Such steps alone will probably not make enough of a difference to avert a water-supply crisis. There is a finite amount of water available in Southern California, and it has not increased since 1990. The MWD annually imports 2.1 million gallons of water to the region. Without a plan of action by state and local governments, coupled with across-the-board changes in how we consume, major sectors of the state’s economy such as agriculture and real estate development will soon face previously unimagined restrictions.

Read the rest of Cary Lowe’s commentary in the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.

July 20, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water: Is it drying up? Antelope Valley water boards say supply not enough for development

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 13, 2008 at 11:48 am

From the Antelope Valley Press:

Antelope Valley is the last frontier for large-scale population growth in Los Angeles County with undeveloped land open for future residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural development. But can current and future water supplies sustain a region that is projected to house 1.2 million people by 2045?

Data outlined in a newly adopted regional water management plan for the Valley shows demand outstripping the supply. “We’re basically going to run out in 2008,” said Adam Ariki, assistant division chief for Los Angeles County Waterworks.

That doesn’t mean residents will turn on empty taps any time soon. But it does mean County Waterworks District 40, which serves much of Lancaster and west Palmdale, has stopped telling developers that water is available for new projects. Ariki said it would be irresponsible to promise water to new homes and businesses without first finding a new water supply. It’s a decision some Antelope Valley leaders find harsh.

“The moment word gets out that we’re somehow shut down for business, we’re in huge trouble and have got to fix that issue,” Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris said. “We’re going to respond with all of the resources we can muster,” said Parris, who is looking to Palmdale, sometimes an adversary, as a potential ally. “There are two major areas that the city of Palmdale and the city of Lancaster had better get married on, and that is crime and water,” Parris said. “And if we would do that, if we would come together and aggressively work together, because we are certainly going to die of thirst together, we could solve this tomorrow.”

Palmdale Mayor Jim Ledford said a regional water plan adopted by 11 agencies earlier this year will serve as “a launching pad where we can now work collectively and without stepping on each other’s toes, recognizing the fact that we all share in this responsibility.”

Already, Antelope Valley and Southern California rely heavily on water that comes from Northern California through the California Aqueduct. But global warming and environmental problems are making imported water increasingly unreliable, which is changing the face of water supply and delivery. The changes mean that wheeling and dealing between water buyers and sellers is increasing outside traditional practices. Recycled water has become the “new” water, and water users may have to adjust to higher costs for a commodity that has been historically cheap.

Developers, who are hunting for their own sources of water, may have to resort to trade-offs such as retrofitting older homes with low flush toilets and low-flow shower heads to free up water for their proposed developments. New residents may have to give up their attachments to lush green lawns in favor of drought-tolerant landscaping and cut back on outdoor water usage. Existing residents may find developers willing to pay for their lawns to be ripped out and replaced with xeriscaping. And all residents will be asked to step up conservation efforts.

“The public needs to understand we have a significant challenge in managing our water resources,” Ledford said. “We don’t want them to panic, because that’s not necessary. But we do need them to help us by changing some of their behaviors and be partners in bringing solutions to this crisis.”

While this year has been tough, next year is a big concern:

Los Angeles County supervisors announced this month that if the drought continues into next year, Antelope Valley and other parts of the county may have to start rationing water. The Public Works Department says Waterworks District 40, which serves the Antelope Valley, would be one of the hardest hit water agencies if the State Water Project continues to cut supplies. The aqueduct supplies 80% of the water used by waterworks district customers.

Local water suppliers believe they can get through this year, but are worried about 2009.

The Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency, which supplies aqueduct water to smaller water districts, will fall short of meeting its customers’ demands this year, but “the really, really serious situation is ‘09,” AVEK General Manager Russ Fuller said. He expects the state Department of Water Resources to allocate only 5% to 15% of normal State Water Project supplies next year, due to a very dry spring this year. And what happens elsewhere in the state directly affects how much imported water will be available in Antelope Valley.

Read more on this story from the Antelope Valley Press by clicking here.

July 13, 2008 · Filed Under Antelope Valley, Water & Development

1 Comment

Watering the West: growth stops when the water runs out

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 18, 2008 at 6:15 am

From AlterNet.org:

A recent issue of National Geographic featured a compelling story on the double-barreled threat facing western states: rapid population growth and climate change. “The American West was won by water management,” proclaims the article. “What happens when there’s no water left to manage?”

This question vexes more than water managers. It may seem absurd to approve development without reliable water supplies, but that is exactly what has happened in many communities — leaving homeowners and other taxpayers holding the bill when extravagant measures become necessary to gain access to water.

Just as homeowners demand, and building codes require, safe wiring and solid foundations for their dwellings, they also deserve to know that their drinking water taps will deliver clean, reliable water for decades to come. Moreover, states are currently reckoning with the question of what happens when there is little water left to manage — two weeks ago, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought.

Historically, land-use decisions and water planning have been treated as entirely separate issues. Water is allocated by state agencies, and land-use planning falls under the authority of local officials. Water resource managers juggle many competing demands within a watershed, and they tend to focus on facilitating economic development. In turn, local land-use authorities have safely assumed that water would be available to satisfy continued growth.

Increasingly, however, local land-use decisions run headlong into water supply concerns. Planning for growth is important in all communities, and planning for sustainable water supplies to support that growth should be an integral part of that planning process. Although water itself seldom provides a hard barrier to growth, the failure to connect land-use and water planning may have far-reaching and increasingly unacceptable consequences.

Read more from AlterNet.org by clicking here.

June 18, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Lois Henry column: Unchecked growth a strain on water

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 14, 2008 at 6:09 am

From the Bakersfield Californian, this column by Lois Henry, who begins by pointing out that amid all the talk and focus on water issues, the one word you never hear is “building moratorium”:

We absolutely must stop or drastically slow development in this state so we can get a handle on our true water supplies, how to make the most of them and how to develop more, if possible. Otherwise, we’re going to race to the end of our finite water string and then what? Armed conflict? Hey, thirsty people are angry people.

I’ve been told that no, no, no, we don’t have a supply problem, we have a regulatory and distribution problem. Maybe so. But that still adds up to a supply problem.

In fact, our surface water has been quantified by the state board that oversees California’s water permits and it is not good. The State Water Resources Control Board found that “current permitted water appropriations, amount to about five times California’s average annual surface water supply,” according to its strategic plan released in January. That means we are beyond maxed out.

So far, the only options being batted around the Legislature, including the Governor’s latest attempt to get a bond ($11 billion this time) onto the November ballot, have looked at some conservation methods, new dams and the politically radioactive peripheral canal, which would skirt water around the ailing San Joaquin/Sacramento delta.

Some believe the governor’s official drought announcement recently and his emergency water declaration for nine valley counties, including Kern, are ploys to boost support for his bond measure. Probably. But I’m more interested in what his, and others’, list of solutions leave out. What about development?

Apparently, that’s even more politically radioactive than the ol’ p-canal.

Read the rest of this column by Lois Henry in the Bakersfield Californian by clicking here.

June 14, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

How serious is our water shortage? Enough to suspend new water connections?

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 12, 2008 at 7:46 am

From the North County Times, this commentary by Gerald Watson, president of Bonsall Area for a Rural Community, which starts out by recapping recent events: Governor declares shortage and Metropolitan urges conservation. Then:

Why conserve? What are the pieces of the water puzzle?

First, agriculture users represent only 6 percent of Metropolitan’s demand. Interim Agriculture Water Program users represent only about 30 percent of that 6 percent demand. They represent less than 2 percent of Metropolitan’s demand, proving its demand is overwhelmingly due to residential consumption.

Water agencies are asking the public to save 20 gallons a day, per person. Since the average home uses about 748 gallons a day, this represents a savings of 7 percent. However, compliance will probably not exceed 50 percent, resulting in a savings of less than 3.5 percent.

Since housing development has been growing at around 1.5 percent per year since 1995, this represents an increased water demand —- and where is all this “new water” coming from to support new developments?

Consequently, your conservation savings are going to support new development.

Clearly, residential users will never voluntarily reduce their water usage when they see that these savings are being passed on to developers. They will only conserve water when they perceive that these savings are beneficial to them.

How can Metropolitan and the County Water Authority justify new water connections for new developments in a “water emergency” when they are imposing water restrictions on existing users? They need to assert their “emergency authority” and mandate that new-water connections be suspended during water emergencies.

We either have adequate water and there is no need to conserve, or we have a “water emergency” and we need to conserve, which requires suspending new-water connections.

Read more from the North County Times by clicking here.

June 12, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water-Starved California slows development

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 7, 2008 at 10:30 am

From the New York Times:

As California faces one of its worst droughts in two decades, building projects are being curtailed for the first time under state law by the inability of developers to find long-term water supplies.

Water authorities and other government agencies scattered throughout the state, including here in sprawling Riverside County, east of Los Angeles, have begun denying, delaying or challenging authorization for dozens of housing tracts and other developments under a state law that requires a 20-year water supply as a condition for building. California officials suggested that the actions were only the beginning, and they worry about the impact on a state that has grown into an economic powerhouse over the last several decades.

The state law was enacted in 2001, but until statewide water shortages, it had not been invoked to hold up projects. While previous droughts and supply problems have led to severe water cutbacks and rationing, water officials said the outright refusal to sign off on projects over water scarcity had until now been virtually unheard of on a statewide scale.

“Businesses are telling us that they can’t get things done because of water,” Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said in a telephone interview.

On Wednesday, Mr. Schwarzenegger declared an official statewide drought, the first such designation since 1991. As the governor was making his drought announcement, the Eastern Municipal Water District in Riverside County — one of the fastest-growing counties in the state in recent years — gave a provisional nod to nine projects that it had held up for months because of water concerns. The approval came with the caveat that the water district could revisit its decision, and only after adjustments had been made to the plans to reduce water demand. “The statement that we’re making is that this isn’t business as usual,” said Randy A. Record, a water district board member, at the meeting here in Perris.

Development has been put on hold in Riverside & San Luis Obispo counties due to water concerns, and in Kern County, three developers scrapped plans over water worries.

“The water in our state is not sufficient to add more demand,” said Lester Snow, the director of the California Department of Water Resources. “And that now means that some large development can’t go forward. If we don’t make changes with water, we are going to have a major economic problem in this state.”

Read the full text of this article from the New York Times by clicking here.

David over at Westchester Parents says that before Los Angeles city officials keep approving development projects, the need to ask themselves some tough questions:

Can the projects currently envisioned by the city today be assured of an adequate and reliable water supply for the next 20 years as required by state law?

Have developers been able to assure the city that they have an adequate 20 year supply?

Can the city assure them that they have reliable 20 year supply?

Clearly the answer is they cannot. They cannot assure it and they need to come to grips with this new reality. I know this puts the city in the uncomfortable position of having to say No to these grand housing plans and thousands more like them, but the members of our city council and the mayor cannot continue to stick their collective heads in the sand and ignore today’s reality. To do so imperils the very existence of LA’s struggling yet vibrant population.

Read the full text of this post from Westchester Parents by clicking here.

June 7, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Moratorium urged; Official urges building be halted for drought

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 6, 2008 at 7:17 am

From San Bernardino Sun (hat tip to David over at Westchester Parents for the link):

The impending water shortage facing California this summer has prompted one elected official to suggest a moratorium on development.

R.M. “Cook” Barela, president of the Jurupa Community Services District board in Mira Loma, has suggested a halt on development in the Jurupa Valley while the water shortage exists. “We ought to put all development on halt until we have a plan,” he said.

The board will discuss the issue on Tuesday at its water committee meeting, said Eldon Horst, general manger of the district, which provides water, sewer and street-light service in 48 square miles of unincorporated west Riverside County.

Barela says he would like to see a 2-year hold on issuing letters of water availability, but not all agree:

“I really don’t think we need to be at the moratorium point of decision. If people are responsive to the governor’s call, if people conserve, we won’t need to be at that point,” said Celeste Cantu, general manager of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, which oversees the Santa Ana River watershed.

Other avenues can be taken other than stopping development altogether, said Richard Atwater, general manager of the Inland Empire Utilities Agency. “We need new development, new jobs,” Atwater said. “Let’s make sure it mitigates the water supplies.”

Read the full text of this article from the San Bernardino Sun by clicking here.

June 6, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Eastern Municipal Water District gives go-ahead to 9 industrial & residential projects

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 5, 2008 at 1:43 pm

From today’s Riverside Press-Enterprise:

An Inland water agency said it could serve nine major industrial and residential projects in the southwest Riverside County area, the first assessments it has approved since determining that conservation measures and other resources would provide enough water for the long-term future.

The Eastern Municipal Water District board of directors decided Wednesday to issue water supply assessments for the nine projects, confirming that it believes the district can provide water to the developments for at least 20 years based on current conditions.

The district temporarily stopped certifying new projects in October, because of concerns over long-term water supplies, including the ongoing drought and a court-ordered reduction in water deliveries from the Sacramento River Delta to protect a fish species threatened with extinction.

Read the full text of this article from Riverside’s Press-Enterprise by clicking here.

June 5, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Tainted water still counts for land developers; Amendment to count only clean water struck down in Sacramento

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on June 4, 2008 at 6:33 am

From the Santa Clarita Signal:

Local water activists are saddened today now that a proposed law promising to slow development through tougher conditions set on groundwater assessment has been struck down in Sacramento.

Assembly Bill AB2046 requires water suppliers such as the Castaic Lake Water Agency to submit to the state the quantity and quality of groundwater being assessed in relation to supplying that water ultimately to an identified group, such as a 500-unit housing development. If a water supply is contaminated, the suppliers are required to detail for their local governments how they would treat the contamination. Once those conditions are met, the supplier can count the water in its plans. Proposed amendments to the bill would have precluded water suppliers from relying on groundwater in calculating their water supplies.

Specifically, the amended AB2046 would have precluded the supplier from relying on groundwater as a supply earmarked for any proposed development project (such as a 500-unit housing development) if the groundwater did not meet applicable state standards – such as the standard set for safe drinking water – on the date the water supply assessment is prepared.

On Thursday, members of the Assembly’s Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee voted five to two in favor of amending two sections of the state Water Code, thereby removing the proposal to stop counting untreated groundwater.

Read the rest of this story from the Santa Clarita Signal by clicking here.

June 4, 2008 · Filed Under Drinking Water, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Krekorian’s AB 2153 legislation would require developers to prove their projects have no net gain water use or pay water impact fees

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 28, 2008 at 6:15 am

From the San Diego Union-Tribune:

The Assembly plans to take up legislation that would force developers to pay to offset increased water use at new projects, much like school impact fees.

The legislation, believed to be unprecedented nationally, comes as water supplies are shrinking, Californians are questioning potential rationing while new homes continue to spring up and lawmakers are in gridlock over building more reservoirs. “The idea is to create a framework by which California can continue to accommodate the need for growth while staying within the inherent limits of our water supply,” said Assemblyman Paul Krekorian, D-Burbank, who is carrying the measure.

An intense lobbying campaign is under way leading up to the floor vote, with builders and business interests marshalling forces to block the bill and environmentalists mounting an aggressive campaign to push the measure along to the Senate. Water agencies are divided. “It’s going to be tough – very tough,” Krekorian said.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position on the bill.

It would definitely signal a shift in the way we think about water, but not everyone is on board:

Krekorian’s measure would require developers to prove their projects have no net gain in water use or pay into a fund to finance conservation projects elsewhere, such as fixing leaky pipes, cleaning up groundwater and recycling. The fee would be capped at 1 percent of the cost of a house, roughly $3,000 on a $300,000 home, or less than $10 a month over the life of a 30-year mortgage, supporters counter.

To Krekorian, that’s a small price to guarantee water for homes. Without the bill, he said, projects could be blocked under existing law that allows water agencies to declare that there is not enough supply to meet the increase in demand. Or ratepayers and taxpayers would continue to subsidize growth, he said.

Builders say that more fees would be another drag on their slumping industry. The California Chamber of Commerce is pitching in to help kill the legislation. “AB 2153 further exacerbates a suffering economy and dismal housing market by imposing an untold tax on new home buyers,” opponents wrote. Business interests argue that new homes and buildings are water-efficient.

Read more from the San Diego Union-Tribune by clicking here.

May 28, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Builders facing water pressure; new developments urged, or required, to offset impact

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 22, 2008 at 6:32 am

From the San Diego Union-Tribune:

California officials have long assumed that there always will be enough water to serve the state’s growing population, which is now more than 38 million people. But that’s no longer a safe bet because of drought, environmental rules restricting water supplies, greater demand from nearby states and the escalating cost of the increasingly precious commodity.

In response, water agencies across California are starting to make a dramatic shift in how they review applications for new developments. Some are demanding that future housing tracts and shopping centers will have little or no impact on a region’s water supply. Builders are being asked or forced to prove that they can offset their impact to existing users by using reclaimed wastewater, conserving water or creating new sources of it.

In San Diego County, water officials are scrutinizing a proposal for enlarging the Westfield UTC mall in La Jolla, analyzing plans to construct a community of more than 700 houses near Escondido and considering whether to make developers pay a fee to fund water service for their projects.

“Our traditional water supply concepts are being challenged and the future water supply is uncertain. . . . We better make sure that we have water to meet the growth plans” and existing demand, said Mitch Dion, general manager of the Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District in Escondido.

The article discusses at length development & the need for water, and how attitudes are changing. “We can’t just say if you build it, there will be water,” said Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica. And new legislation might be on the way:

One of the most closely watched water bills in Sacramento is AB 2153, which would require developers to prove no net gain in water use. Mitigation could include investments in recycling and fixing leaky pipes within the water district’s service area. It’s unclear how such demands would mesh with growth plans prepared by cities and counties.

“This is probably the issue of the day – whether you can limit growth by shutting off water supply or making it more difficult to build a home,” said Tim Coyle, a top official at the California Building Industry Association. Coyle said that there’s only so much lawmakers can force developers to do as they try to meet housing demands. He said the state will continue to attract newcomers, “all with straws in their mouth.”

Get the full story from the San Diego Union-Tribune by clicking here.

May 22, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

If you want to build in San Diego, save some water

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on May 20, 2008 at 7:37 am

From Voice of San Diego:

For the first time, the city of San Diego is requiring a developer of a large project to offset its water demand, a step designed to address concerns that new development will exacerbate the city’s strained water supply.

The city’s Water Department is requiring Westfield, the developers of the $900 million University Towne Center mall expansion, to keep the project’s water demand neutral, a step that will require the developer to save between 21 million and 43 million gallons of water annually.

In the UTC project, new stores and residences will use more water, which the developers will offset by using reclaimed water — non-drinkable treated sewage — for irrigation. The company will also pay for other existing developments to do the same, enabling those using drinking water for irrigation to switch to reclaimed, non-potable water. That would boost the amount of drinking water in the city’s system, neutralizing the expansion’s increased demand.

For now, the policy is informal, hasn’t received City Council support and has no violation penalty. “This is all relatively new stuff, and it’s clearly being driven by an increased awareness of what the water supply conditions for Southern California are,” said Jim Barrett, the city’s director of public utilities. “I think we’re taking a much more proactive approach than we have in the past.”

Barrett said he looks to offsets as a way to address a state law requiring an assessment of large developments’ water supplies. The 6-year-old law, designed to ensure that supplies keep pace with growth, mandates that cities provide what is termed a “water supply assessment” for large developments: Subdivisions with more than 500 homes, hotels with more than 500 rooms, offices serving 1,000 or more people or shopping centers with more than a half-million square feet. The assessment must verify the city has a sufficient supply planned to accommodate the growth.

Most projects in the city would not rise to that level. Few are large enough to trigger the assessment. A Westfield spokeswoman declined comment.

Read the full text of this report from the Voice of San Diego by clicking here.

May 20, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Join the fight against MWD tyranny – drought is not the problem, says commentary; the problem is unemcumbered growth

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 28, 2008 at 6:34 am

From the San Gabriel Valley Tribune, this commentary:

As California’s centuries-old water war threatens to once-again engulf the entire state, op-ed writers are already rolling out that old saw usually attributed to Mark Twain: “In the West, whiskey is for drinkin’, water is for fightin’.” Not only does the current water fightin’ pit North against South, but communities in Southern California are now engaged in a civil war.

The problem is not drought. The culprit is unencumbered growth.

One need only consult the rainfall chart published annually in the local newspaper to see that we still enjoy a humid climate in the Los Angeles basin. Since the 1870s rainfall has fluctuated cyclically but the average has hardly changed. What has changed is the proliferating and unquenchable demand we have placed on that finite amount of liquid.

To keep up with our seemingly insatiable and ever-growing thirst, we first drained the artesian supply that once abounded on the plain. We built an aqueduct, than a second, to the Eastern Sierra. We diverted the Colorado River. Finally, we tapped the water of Northern California.

But even that wasn’t enough. And now concern for the Delta Smelt has temporarily curtailed a significant portion of that supply.

So now we are about to fight among ourselves for what remains. This fight pits Lynwood against Beverly Hills, Covina against San Diego, in fact all the smaller and in many cases less affluent communities against the big, powerful and expanding ones. And the little guys aren’t about to quit.

Read the rest of this commentary from the San Gabriel Valley Tribune by clicking here.

April 28, 2008 · Filed Under Metropolitan Water District, Water & Development, Water Agency News (all)

1 Comment

The other side of “No water, no development”

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 13, 2008 at 11:08 pm

Laer over at the Cheat Seeking Missiles Blog has a lengthy reply to the editorial, “No water, no development”, by the LA Times last week. Laer discloses that “my business handles public affairs assignments for land developers and water districts”, and so accordingly, he takes a different view.

For instance, the LA Times editorial says, “It is time for development in California to follow the water”, to which Laer replies:

“Follow the water” is an utterly ridiculous concept also because we have the capacity and infrastructure to move water. Any development that is near existing water infrastructure — say the city of LA in its semi-arid desert environment — is as well situated, if not better situated, than one along a natural water source.

Calling for an end to suburban development to fix our water problems is no more a solution than would be a call to have the clouds drop more rain. Neither is realistic.

The LAT then goes through a three-paragraph exercise in diminishing the consequence of environmental and anti-growth laws it lobbied hard for itself. Thanks in part to the LAT’s support, we now have laws in CA that require new development to prove that there is a 20-year supply of water sufficient to meet the community’s dry weather demand.

Laer also disputes the insinuation that developers are able to buy influence:

If developers are so powerful, how come the homebuilding industry is the most heavily regulated in the country? When I speak on the subject, I usually start with the line, “Did you know it’s easier in California to get permission to cut open someone’s chest and stick a new heart in there than it is to get permission to build a house?”

Builders’ whims are summarily crushed by the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the environmental quality acts of the federal government and various state governments, and regulations that require no runoff to leave construction sites, no grading during bird nesting season, no construction noise near nesting birds, strict building limits in fire zones, and that they fund roads, parks and schools.

Clearly, the idea that developers buy influence has plenty of proof against it and precious little for it.

Much more from the Cheat Seeking Missiles Blog by clicking here.

April 13, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

1 Comment

Antelope Valley construction halted by water concerns

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 13, 2008 at 8:25 am

From the San Fernando Business Journal:

Construction has been halted in some parts of the Antelope Valley over the inability to provide new homes, and industrial and commercial developments with an adequate supply of water.

Since November, the Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40 has refused to issue “will serve” letters guaranteeing water service. The district serves much of the Valley, including the city of Lancaster and parts of the City of Palmdale. That refusal stalled the construction of 1,000 new single-family homes in two projects in Lancaster and has developers thinking twice about starting new projects.

While not at a crisis stage yet, the water shortage is a priority of the cities, developers and agencies responsible for the water supply. “There are currently a number of groups working together or individual agencies looking for additional sources of water whether it’s here in Southern California, through Northern California acquisition or even potentially outside the state if there is water on the market,” said Gretchen Gutierrez, executive director of the Building Industry Association chapter for the Antelope Valley.

Water finds its way to the valley from melting snow in the Sierra Nevada Mountains transported south through the Los Angeles aqueduct. Lower snowfalls have produced less water in years past. Additionally, a December court order restricts water flow by slowing pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to protect the endangered delta smelt, an indigenous species of fish.

As that order affects water delivery to all areas south of Stockton, the Antelope Valley has found itself in competition for other sources. Since the waterworks district and individual developers cannot negotiate for water on their own, it is up to the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency and two other state water project contractors serving the area to do that.

Read the rest of this story from the San Fernando Business Journal by clicking here.

April 13, 2008 · Filed Under Antelope Valley, Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Population growth: how can California accomodate it’s growing population and assure adequate water supplies? Snow and McIntyre debate …

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 10, 2008 at 7:47 am

From the Los Angeles Times, the latest installment of the debate between Lester Snow, head of the Department of Water Resources, and Mandy McIntyre of the Planning & Conservation League:

Can California continue to grow given its endangered water resources? Should we be trying harder to limit or control growth, and if so, how? Lester Snow and Mindy McIntyre debate.

Lester Snow goes first (excerpt):

The decisions we are making now — how efficiently we use water and where we build our new communities — dictate how much flexibility we will have in the future and what the quality of life will be for the next generation of Californians.

Most land- and water-use decisions in California are made at the local and regional levels, though rarely is such decision-making integrated. For example, land-use planning that encourages low-density development greatly increases per-capita water demand. Such development patterns also inevitably lead to more dependence on automobiles, which are the largest source of climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions in California. The resulting climate changes will make it more difficult to maintain reliable water supplies.

Low-density development imposes other costs as well — it is generally more costly and difficult to provide flood protection for sprawling suburbs, and this growth reduces the availability of agricultural land. In all, such land uses threaten our water-supply reliability and are costly in many other ways. Land use and water planning must be better integrated to ensure that we make informed resource management decisions.

The bottom line: Good land-use planning and water management can help secure our future.

Mandy McIntyre responds:

Californians recently experienced the fallout of placing too much demand on limited energy resources. Our water supplies are affected in the same way. More demand on the system can mean less water-supply reliability. As with energy, when water supplies are over-tapped, disadvantaged communities that have the oldest and least efficient infrastructure are the hardest hit when rates go up and shortages occur. Water efficiency and new technologies, including water recycling and groundwater remediation, can restore reliability if they are implemented when growth occurs.

The good news is that pending legislation, AB 2153 by Assemblyman Paul Krekorian (D-Burbank), would keep the economy going while protecting water reliability. It would accomplish this by tapping into the enormous potential of water efficiency and other locally based supplies. AB 2153 would require developers to incorporate all feasible water efficiencies into their projects. Developers would then have to fully mitigate whatever remaining demand their projects create.

Mitigation would be accomplished through implementation of efficiencies in existing housing or by producing proven and highly reliable local water supplies. AB 2153, endorsed by the Planning and Conservation League and the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, would ensure that disadvantaged communities are not left behind, directing a portion of the mitigation to upgrades and replacement of leaky pipes in such communities.

Read the full text of this article from the Los Angeles Times by clicking here.

“Water seam” photo by flickr photographer Bukutgirl.

April 10, 2008 · Filed Under Water & Development

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment