Colorado River Commission & 7-States Meeting Inside Info: Arizona

Home Browse Search

,r r,• a-: Photos by Mark Henle/The Arizona Republi Ducks swim in a lake at Payson's Green Valley Park. The lake holds reclaimed wastewater from a treatment plant until the wastewater is needed to irrigate the town's parks and golf courses. Two towns struggle to cope Payson: Limiting growth, water use while grabbing nearby supplies By Shaun McKinnon The Arizona Republic PAYSON — On a sunny spring afternoon, the lakes at Green Valley Park offer a tranquil set- ting for joggers, a few people walking dogs and a youngster struggling with a kite. But the water isn't there just to look pretty. Like every other drop in this high- country town, it's fully accounted for and serving a purpose. In this case, the lakes are kept full with efflu- ,nt from a waste - treatment plant. The lakes store it until it's needed to irrigate parks or golf ;curses. What's left seeps into the ground to help recharge an aquifer. With limited groundwater, Payson has worked to make itself a model town for efficient water ase and conservation, slowing growth and im- posing strict rules on everyone from the home ;ardener to Wal -Mart. As a result, Payson residents consume as little as 86 gallons of water per capita each day, well oelow the 150 gallons or more that the average Phoenix resident uses, and the town lives within its water means. Buzz Walker, the town's utilities chief, credits an elected council willing to say no to any pro- posed residential or commercial development that lacks an identifiable supply of water. The town can do this because it operates its own wa- ter system. "We've tried to make rational connections be- tween growth and our long -term water supply," Walker said. "We put the brakes on growth until we could secure a supply." Payson's population has nearly doubled to more than 15,000 since 1990. The town estimates its existing water sources could support a maxi- mum of 18,300 people. Over time, Payson enacted policies and regu- .ations aimed at preserving its fragile ground- water supply: ■ New commercial projects are limited to 150,000 gallons of water per month. When a pro- Chris Benjamin is a member of the Diamond Star Water Coalition in Star Valley. A 10,000 -gal- Ion water storage tank serves Sky Run Resort, his 25 -unit getaway. posed Home Depot estimated it would need 200,000 gallons, the town refused to budge. So the company retooled its design and installed air - conditioners instead of evaporative coolers. Wal -Mart also agreed to change its plans. ■ The town more than doubled the water -de- velopment impact fee for homes and began charging tiered water rates to encourage con- servation. A typical house pays about $45 a month for 7,500 gallons of water; if the home- owner adds grass and other landscaping, the bill climbs to $300 or more. The result is few resi- dents grow grass. Lawns are banned on new lots. ■ Although tourism helps drive Payson's economy, the town limits new motels to 44 rooms and prohibits new swimming pools, spas, flush urinals and misters. ■ New residential subdivisions are limited to 20 lots. Builders must provide their own sources of water and build the pipelines or other infra- structure needed to deliver it to residents. The growth - control measures don't impress some high-country residents who live outside the town limits. A group of homeowners in nearby Star Valley is accusing Payson of threatening its water supply by encouraging a developer to drill wells just beyond the Payson boundary. "The town of Payson has not listened to any of our input," said Gary Hatch, fire chief of Stai Valley and other rural communities in the area "Our wells are at risk." Chris Benjamin, whose resort park sits next t( land purchased by the developer, said test well: affected water levels in wells that supply home: and businesses in the area. Of greater concern he said, is an abandoned dump that resident: fear will contaminate their water if the nev wells draw too deeply. The unlined dump was used for years to dis pose of everything from old cars and refrigera tors to dead animals, Benjamin said. Resident: approached the federal Environmental Protec tion Agency, "but they said there's nothing the3 can do until there's contamination," Benjamir said. "Then it's too late. What are we going to d( for water then ?" Walker, Payson's utilities chief, said neither the town nor the developer is doing anything ille gal. The town's Water Department is exploring the possibility of drilling wells outside the town including several on national forest land to thc east. The town is also considering a plan to deeper existing wells. A typical well produced water a 500 feet five years ago but now is dry as deep a: 750 feet. Finding new groundwater will become lesa critical now that Payson has secured a long- tern supply of surface water. The town will have ac cess to as much as 5,000 acre -feet of water per year from Blue Ridge Reservoir, which sits or the edge of the Mogollon Rim just above Payson That will more than triple the town's water sup ply. A pipeline to move the water to town will cosl $15 million or more and take five to 10 years tc build. lb pay for it, Payson will probably looser its growth restrictions to help increase the tai base. Even then, the reservoir water will makc Payson one of the few rural towns to claim an as sured 100 -year supply of water. Prescott: Proof that one size of urban- regulation doesn't fit all By Shaun McKinnon The Arizona Republic PRESCOTT — With a developer poised to build more than 10,000 Zomes and groundwater supplies dis- appearing, the City Council here gam - )led on a $200 million solution: Buy a ranch 50 miles up the road, take over Is water rights and build a pipeline to mport water from a healthy aquifer. It sounds like an expensive way to :(eep up with the demand for more wa- :er, but the law and the geography left the city with little choice. Prescott and more than 400 square miles of Yavapai County were desig- :iated an "active management area" )y Arizona's 1980 Groundwater Man- agement Act, which was meant to pro- tect groundwater reserves and pre- vent growth from outstripping the available water supply. But 25 years later, Prescott faced a rural -style water crisis in the making because it lacked what the other man- agement areas had: water. Specifical- ly, renewable sources from rivers or streams. Maricopa, Pinal and Pima counties can tap the Central Arizona Project Canal, which delivers Colo- rado River water. But the canal runs too far south for Yavapai County. Without a significant source of sur- face water, communities in the area must rely almost solely on groundwa- ter and, as a result, aquifer levels are falling rapidly. That's why Prescott and its partner in the deal, Prescott Valley, had to buy a "water ranch" just to keep up with development. It's the sort of situation the water laws were meant to avert and proof to many ru- ral officials that urban-style regula- tions don't always work. The Prescott management area was created because groundwater re- serves were being depleted rapidly. Anticipated growth and Prescott's proximity to Phoenix contributed to the decision. "We've been stretching to make it (the 1980 law) fit some areas," admits Herb Guenther, director of the Ari- zona Department of Water Resources. "One size does not fit all" Prescott Valley Zbwn Manager Larry Tarkowski isn't as diplomatic. Including Yavapai County in the 1980 act was, he said, "patent unfairness. When it was created, it was done with the full knowledge that there were di- verse water sources in Phoenix and Tucson, but only groundwater here." Lawmakers recognized the Pres- cott area's disadvantage, and unlike other management areas, allowed communities there to import limited groundwater from places outside the district, like Chino Valley. Mwkowski said the ranch will bene- fit his town and Prescott, but as the biggest -ever public works project for either community, "it's a hardship on our economic development" Without the imported water, the Prescott management area would drift further away from the goal set by the 1980 law of someday pumping no more water from aquifers than could be put back with recharge projects. Prescott's water deficit, the differ- ence between the water taken out and what's returned, is growing rapidly, despite efforts to recharge with treated effluent in several locations. Even without the ranch, Prescott alone can't erase the management area's deficit, partly because of the spread of unmonitored private wells. Critics of the water ranch, includ- ing local citizens groups and environ- mentalists, say rather than strain to expand their water supplies to match population growth, Prescott and Pres- cott Valley should limit development. "We have the (Prescott) City Coun cil telling people there is no water problem in Prescott, and we have by drologists telling us we're in over draft," said Muriel Haverland, presi dent of the Citizens Water Advocac3 Group. "It's going to get to a poini where our homes lose their value." Her group and others say Prescor should use the water from the Chin( Valley ranch to expand aquifer -re charge projects rather than supp13 new subdivisions, tipping the area back toward sustainability. Jim Holt, who manages the ranct for Prescott, said the water is far to( expensive to do that, but he believe: the city can achieve the balance be tween water taken out and returned. Officials in other communities sa) the Prescott area's experience ha: proved that urban-style regulatior will not avert a rural water crisis anc that any solution must fit the problem