Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br /> <br />tr~at~'d water systems. the greater the percentage increase in pea" ~ummcr usage over usage in other <br />periods oftht,' YC;H,lhc grl'lllCr the potcnlial hcnclits of secondary supply S)'stClllS lor lllunkipalitics. A <br />three to one difference. Of mOTe. bct\\cen stllnlTIcr and olher seasonal uses is dl'ilrly an open invltaliolllO <br />the advantages to municipalities of !>l'cond:JT} water supply s.ystcms.ll <br /> <br />Meanwhile. many <br />municipalities appear to have fev.cr <br />problems with the cosl of treating <br />water than with mCding the <br />lransmissi()f1 and infrastructure <br />capacity needs 10 ddivcr this waler. <br />Studies sho\\ thai waler treatment <br />usually makes up only a small <br />fraclion of municipal water costs,ll <br />It is Ihe storage and transmission <br />facilities and infrastructure that are <br />costly for municipalities. <br />Eliminating the nced tode1iver <br />treated water for outdoor use .....ould <br />free up infra<.tructure capacity for <br />future munidpal growth. In shon. <br />although dual systems do not create <br />more water for use. dual systems <br />may be shown to achievc hellcr cconomies and cllidcndes in the all{l(atiol1 of water .....ithin a given <br />area.l.I These arc sOllle of the key themes addn:ssed in this repon. <br /> <br />C<lIIcems About Secunda!"'; S~'ste!llS <br /> <br />Fi~ure 7. North ofO~den. Utah. Pine View Willer Usc~ <br />.'\<'sOI;ialion Sl'r\'icc Area <br /> <br />Alllhl'\II:".,undcTl'rC\'U1l/c<l,cl"ndaJ),ul'l'l) <br /> <br />. <br />- <br /> <br />,- <br />.' <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />....,,::1.- <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Although dual systcms arc beliewd tll be bl'ncllcial in several \\ays.llulIlcrous issllCs an: hcing <br />raised in the region about the design and operation of sccollda!) supply sysll'ms. These include the clTcct <br />ofpollrl)' dcsigned, installcd and supervised secunda!} systems un .....ater supplh.:rs, homeowner:-o. and <br />local jurisdictions. MUllicipalities and Title J~ districts (rural domestic \\ater distril,ts) want a..surance. if <br />not guarantees. that a scconda!)' syslem is notlikdy to fail ifcanal wmpanies and irrigalion districts, or <br />ewn homeowners' associations. provide the Sl..'Condary service. POlcntialliahilit)' concerns ahoul waler <br />quality and accid{.'ntal. or purposeful. cross conn<:ction.. with potal:lle .....ater systcms arc high onthl.' list a.. <br />well. <br /> <br />^ I.C)' goal of the study was 10 assess these various concerns and the ovcrall ecollomic tx.nclit.. <br />and costs of pr<:ssuri/cd seconda!)' syslems to a variety of stakeholdcrs. These e/,:ollomic CtltK{.'ms <br />include long range projl.'ctions of how pressuri/_l.'d seconda!)' supply might affecllncal water rates ({Ir <br />treated \\ater, hO\\ these s)'st<:rT1S might he c\pected to afli:clland values and hind use, hO\\ they could <br />affcct the futur<: capital needs of treated \\aler suppliers. hO\\ Ihe)' could affeCI gnl\\1h patterns in <br />unincorporated areas. and ultimatel) 11{1\\ they might affect the regional watcr marl.et. For inst:mc<:, <br />examples from Utah suggest Ihat thl.' provision of preSSUrill.'d sl.'c(lllda!)' supply increases r{.'sidenlial <br />property values substantially. H Information from inlerviews \\ ilh se\eral scconda!)' watl'r suppliers in <br />Utah and Idaho. 110th municipal and agricullUral. arc discllsscd laler in the rer<m and will he u...ed to <br />answer somc ofthcse questions. <br /> <br />7 <br />