Brighton_WaterAudit_50%PR

• Water Efficiency Grant Type: Water Conservation Implementation Grant
• Contract/PO #: OE PDA 10-77
• Applicant: City of Brighton
• Project Name: Commercial Water Audit & Fixture Replacement Program
• Title: 50% Progress Report
• Date: 7/6/2010
• County: Adams
• Water Efficiency - Doc Type: Interim Reports

• Retrofits —We have completed the following installation of those fixtures:
Summary of Planned and Installed Retrofit Fixtures
Fixture Type
Location
Planned in Grant
Actual
Installed
Toilet
City Hall
16
14
Senior Center
5
5
Inglenook
30
36
Urinals
City Hall
3
0
Senior Center
1
0
Recreation Center
6
0
Police Station
5
0
Sink Faucet Aerators
City Hall
9
13
Senior Center
3
3
Recreation Center
14
13
Police Station
16
15
Inglenook*
118
57
Showerheads
Recreation Center
14
14
Police Station
3
2
Inglenook*
112
12
Showertimers
Recreation Center
4
3
*Installation hampered by limited access to rooms; provided 15 showerheads and 30 aerators to facility manager
at Inglenook for additional replacement efforts.
• Reporting — No reporting has been initiated to date; however some water use data has been
acquired to characterize water savings.
Obstacles
Two key obstacles have been encountered during execution of the project as designed. The first relates
to not having enough residential and HOA customers being open to having the free audits conducted at
their homes and /or businesses. The original scope had a total of 35 audits (15 residential and 10 each
for commercial and HOA customers). To date we have completed (or collected data for) 25 audits (20
commercial, 1 residential and 4 HOAs). We will continue to use television and other methods to create
interest in the City's various residential and commercial customers.
The other obstacle relates to installation challenges for the fixture retrofits. They are as follows:
• At City Hall, two toilets were not replaced given that the existing toilets are connected directly
to lateral metal pipes, creating plumbing challenges that were cost prohibitive to remedy during
the retrofit process. The surplus toilets were moved to Inglenook.
• At all the facilities, the waterless urinals were found to be cost prohibitive to install due to the
location of the existing drain pipe (which was typically too low to be accommodated by the new