HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-1998
0
aemr~r
1 I 1
i
anrro+
r'
City Council Agenda Packet
September 22, 1998
~ ! 1 it
i
~ 2 o hdC f i, !
32 X
o
a
Agenda Nc)._
AGENDA Agenda Ieir~
CITY OF DEN70N CITY COUNCIL n
September 22, 1998
After determining that a quorum is present and convening in an open meeting, the City Council
will convene in a closed meeting of the City ~f Denton City Council on Tuesday, September 22,
1998 at 5:15 p.m, in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 115 E. McKinney, Denton,
Texas at which the following items %ill be considered:
1. Closed Meeting:
A. Conference with Employees - Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Sec. 551.075. The
Council may receive information from employees during a staff conference or
briefing, but may not deliberate during the conference.
ANY SINAI. ACTION. DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A
CLOSED MFIAING OR ON INFORN1ATWN RECEIVED IN A CONFERENCE WITH
EMPLOYEES WILL ONLY BE' TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING TI{AT IS HELD IN
COMPLIANCE. 41;.,1 TEX. GOVT. CODE Cll. 551. THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES i
TEIF. RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A CLOSED MEETING OR EXEC'UI1VE SESSiOil AS
AU I I IORILED BY TEX. GOVT. CODE SEC. 551.001, ET SEQ. (TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS
ACT) ON ANY IILNI ON ITS OPEN NIELIING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A
C'ONIINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON IIIE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS
NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE 4V1111 TIIE: TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT,
INC'LUDINU, 41ITIEOU4 LIMI"CATION SEC"FIONS $51.011.551,085 OF THE OPEN
MEETINGS AC I.
Special Called Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on'Euesday, September 22, 1798 at
6:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City hall. 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at
which the following items will be considered.
I. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, approving the 1998 tax
rolls, and providing an effective date.
Following the completion ofthe Special Called Mecling, the Council will convene in!o a Work
Session to consider the following:
NO'I17„ A Work Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City Council
• Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction into whether or not such
matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting of the Council for citizen input,
City Council deliberation and formal City action. At a Work Session, the City Council generally
receives informal and preliminary reports and information from City staff, officials, members of
City committees, and the individual or organization proposing council action, if invited by City
Council or City Manager to participate in the session. Participation by individuals and members
• of organizations im ited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the session is being closed to 0 •
public input. Although Work Sessions are public meetings, and citizens have a legal right to
attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to participate in the session
unless invited to do so by the Ndayor. Any citizen may supply to the City Council, prior to the
beginning of the session, a written report regarding the citizen's opinion on the matter being
explored. Should the Council direct the mallet be placed on a regular meeting agenda, the staff
will generally prepare a final report defining the proposed action, which will be made available
0
City of Denton City Council Agenda
September 22, 1998
Page 2
to all citizens prior to the regular meeting at which citizen input is sought. The purpose of this
procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting the opportunity to hear the views of
their fellow citizens without having to attend two meetings.
I. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding an update on the Year 2000 project.
2. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction concerning the continued
participation in the Lake Chapman Water Supply Project with the Upper Trinity Regional
Water District,
3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding zoning notification
procedures.
4. Receive a report and hold a discussion concerning the business and development
activities, Texas Department of Transportation grant projects, and future growth and
development of the Denton Municipal Airport.
CERTIFICATE
1 certify that the above notice of meeting was postea on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the
City of Denton, Texas, on the day of , 1998 at o'clock
CITY SECRETARY
NOTE: IHE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS
ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.
IIiE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOA THE HEARING
IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED
MEETING, PLEASE CALL TIES CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349.8309 OR USE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING I.801'-
Rh'LAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED
I ti t:UL1GIl THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
. 7
❑ 32X
• •
a
1
Agenda No ___7_l'L_t1~2
Agenda ltem._.S~S~
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: September 22, 1998 {
DEPARTMENT: Finance Administration
ACM: Kathy DuBose, 349.8218
IBSL JECT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE 1998
TAX ROLLS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BACKGROUND
The approval of the tax role is an winual process required by the Texas Property Tax
Code. The tax roll is calculated by taking the 1998 certified appraisal roll (excluding
property under protest) and applying the 1998 adopted tax rate. The total tax levy on the
certified roll will be available on Tuesday, September 22, 1998. The anticipated
collection rate is 100%r
PRIOR ACTIONIREVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions)
Not applicable,
1 FISCAL INFORMATION
" y The approval of the tax roll will enable the City to mail tax bills in early October.
,
Respectfully submitted:
Director of Fiscal Operations
1
10 32X
}
O
I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING THE 1998 TAX
ROLLS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
TI IE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council hereby approves the 1998 tax rolls of the City of
Denton, Texas in the amount of S based on the Certified Appraisal Roll
as approved by the Appraisal Review Board of the Denton Central Appraisal District.
S .TI N Il. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .1998.
JACK MILLER, MAYOR
AT'1 EST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY
nt
r;
• f.hharddrpPLGb0 -bocumc m, Udimnen'r9E'' NO rotl doe •r •
i
75 K a 32 X lo
,
!tea •
O i
I
IRMA"
Agenda No
Agenda ltem
bate ~2t12=Z.r!
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: September 22, 1998 Questions concerning this item
may be directed to Alex Pettit at
DEPARTMENT: Finance - Information Semites 349.8595.
ACM; Kathy Du Bose, 349-8228
,r
SUDJECT:
Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding an update on the Year 2000 project.
BACKGROUND:
The objective of the Denton 2000 initiative is to ensure that the City's systems and service
deliveries Aill function beyond the millennium change. Success means that computer systems /
will accurately process, store and report data up to, during, and beyond the year 2000; and that
day-to-day business practices will continue as usual through the change of the century.
This is a review of progress to date on thi,a project
PRIOR ACTIONIREVIEW: I
NIA
W,-AL INFO INIATION:
NIA
EXHIBIT
I. Tower Point Presentation
2, Public Information Brochure
i I
t Respectfully submitted:
y i Alex Petty
Dhector of Information Services
i
s
'k" r+. 25 x 10 32 X I❑
I.
%
a
u
4
h
►r~r•~~~*'~e~1mal•rx OF DENTON
• Equipment MeiMenence Inyamelior System-DONE CITY
• To% -DONE Y2K CHALLENGE
• Pdiu Ind Fee Computer Aided System -DONE
• local Govl mrtwM FinanciM Syalerra-9H2/96
• Payroll Sys'em-1011/96
• Door Seeurty System - 100196
• W ilies Customer Infarmatlar system - 1231416
• Municipal Court System- 1231416
• Budpelinq Worksheets and Admin Services - 1231416
• Airport - 1211196
Electric Wlrty, - 123196
• Wid Wn1e - 123196 h
• feel Services- 1211416
Er;'-ee•inp -123196
• fec0n_-.. MsreWmenl - 1211196
• libn7 - "13196
• Prss6Fe-1211416
• Police 6 Fue - 12/3196
• Audit d Y2K Compliance -,V30199
• Communications -610'99
1, :ft
ry ry
Y2K Program Summary
.
1 August 31, 1998
CITY OF DENTON INFORMATION SERVICES
Alax L Patdt
ctor }
Dire3494595
www,dtiofdenbn.conWk •
nleu, wt1WItyofdenlon.cw
3 10
o
' o
d':NLIT111
Program Objective The Program le guided by a year 20r) Program Ofhce, which resides In the
Inf or matbn Sarvkes Department
The oblecbva of the Oanlon 2000 Initiative is to ensure that the City's systems and
service deliveries will luhebon beyorl IM mdlennlum change Success means that The Program Office responsibilities include
Computer eyslems Wit ecctrrafey process, slots and report data up to, during, and
beyond the year M,, and that day-to-day business pradrees vest continue as usual a The davelopm+nf and implemddstion olprotect slandards
I wough the change of the century a Cdy-wide program oversight.
G Project consultalion (riesling departments to develop, stall and ev acute plans)
While City Departmenis can ensure that pit of thew tachnkal and non-lechnical a Program quality assn ante
systems are year 2000 compfi i nl, there is a nsk that they may not be able W continue a Program /thus leporting to Cdy Managemenl bndDwKlore
bui nese sa usual t companies and organizations they depend on are not compkerd. a Represerding the CRY at the Slate d Teas Year 2000 Vvirhing Group
Therelora the City Program will make every reasonable alos possibim to assua that a PUIIk Infwmatkn on project /thus
verka s used by the Cdy and organlyilons supported by the City DONS, their own liter
2000 issues This may even Include cancellation of contracts with suppliers that Wdhin each depaM1ment, a 2KC (Year 2000 Coordrnatoll diecis and facilitates all
carinur provMe adequate assurance against failure related to gar 2000 This indsl N is the key Wr% between depari pogo and
The Iergol date for compiance is Dedelrlbar 11, 1091 city program The 2KC's respanslloWiites wiclude
a Developing and revising tnr strategy and plan b implementing the business
Otfrnldnn of compliance decisiors that include time, cost and resource roquwemenis, event/dectsion
sequencing ark monaoring, specific ac,;oumabifey across the project team and
Facn hwil,rare, a,h"nv and firmware product will be able to accurately process depertntai and mechaniens to track and resolve issues
dote Baia (inr.ludrng but not limned to, cciculsbng, comparing, and sequencing) From, a Department protect management
inlu and between me Iwentieth and hvenly-firol tenures, including kap year a Tracking and disposing d Issues and action Items
air, niurrars. when used in accordance with the product documenabon a Requalwg and backwg vendor campllan e
Pru auo a Orderhg departmental yoflwsre casAkatrons
1act P• a Reposing project statue to program coorchnsor
ANaogh Ile Initiative I primary lucus is on appicebort computer systems, the Cdy Otadllne
alto arcs rrrany oilier hardwera devices, software appikebons and factaiel that may
- - -
m ed lu be e.ii io accommiodam the year 2000 Emergency medical
nRCeeVwprnent H'JAC burdugsecurelysysems andbaneprvtatlonerrs The City fvs lid a desdins of D•cernbr 1991 For total compkance This deadline
r.Pnp~~und , ,
p.of a hw of me deco a,al nay need to be sManced to operala sli the year 2000 micros for the lasting d changes 10 occur dulling 1990 In eddltcri. a year's worth of
normal processing with anhanced syslents In 1999 Ymt ftreae the success during
S Proguni Ueslgn 2000 and beyond.
1 he Ot"A,ao 2rr70 P,Qgr em is a Irv, phase Initiative Cokilil nlry Planning and Testing i
In parallel with testing remedied appkmlms during 1999 business conlingency plane
roll bas reviewed and tested
Assess Test Rsmadlele htpierfwrrf Vallds
gees ! 0
i I
a~ ~f_7 32/111
0
' o
Y
»a
}i
{
.yy
'y •
~~,.~n 4 Y~l~I
I ~
Alex PCt~dt
# ,e', 5
,r
,
~OCIOR OE ~~W! SarvlCea ,r ,'a w,
Phone: w-8,593
A
t
fi~;wp, K C 32X~~
o
1n,A ~ ` ~ r A 3 i ~ v "A • ~ F 5 ~ ~ +~1 T
'S:y.'
t
ssry0 ,Jana 1 1 °
Your . y . x, rb pr qj #J,
. '4^} X18 coactur~sm7rrdr♦U
{ ~ L h I F ~I' ~ fi 7 V f,4ipA.l~, ~ ~Y ]
,~5; ( ~ •,~~~~,F~ ~~~Y,~r~p~~ ~y ~'~',.11 ~l~n'SSy~qI ~«'b,`4 "Y!V~~R!jL i.~~~p 1y~~,f.r„ ti'.A
~5
T ~y ~{«TO eraa~y~ur ~ ~ ~ M
nn Y\k4 ~ ~r~• a ~!~F l~St4 i
t' ` t 1 S. f "~a F.•A e:u~ ~~,~kr%srnt' t w Y i' l>', ~ i,:. t'
F~I.AF l i 5 ,i].
p ~ 2;. i*`~}) '~T4<'~G bt ~w ,~':k ~"S ,~i,• 'a"hX'li" *a c r
r,.e~ y~nq, rSS'j+~t, ~ ~~rr!.. t~ 7~F .i ~4~YY"4..i! c 1. i~~
-;4 1.1" mom
.4:~. Y~ 4'~,,i.hr . '_':~:~.IIF'ykLr ''K. , ~v
r
n
l.,yi..` ! a . J~ ~ lJ 32 X l ll
8
~M
ound
:.What We I
'City or"Denton Applications and Systierns Identified
Y ~
Fax sv"Icill DON I
Y.
t
14:
I ICS
A
Y
s
0
~ o •
.3 2 X,
o
o
r
.,...'Year- 2000 Still Loomma
Is I
r
r
10 Not doing Lm% Ili*
r
City of Dcn toll
1
O
O
32x
~Y
4
p
Boa' .
a'
10%
30
100
90
20
F
7:'1
x
.ae~Mr
m 50
141/0 at 50'!/o Conipllifllc~
9'.
140
f."
20/0 at 40%) Collipl;alicc' E30
10/0 at 30% COmplid lice o
mill
Y;
3% at 201/0 ('oil ipI I alice
a
10%
ILL
0
Q , Q Q
1
I
s t~ } ]
32 x
1
I 0~14r •
• O
l
Yea"r 2000 Impacts
yr
i
w
j~
„/„pryryp
iyy
9~
10 32XIO
OKI
o
Year 2000 Impacts
v
s
30% Will NOTconipICIC ill tillic
DOD -10 1
DOT 2010
t
x
"s*
Problem
i
Cilvol'Dellion
A
r•J~Yw e
0
o '
~wo
Y •
1AF
~r Y
L'
7
Year 2000 Impacts
US $440 Million
R
r
Hoyds of' l'ondoll estimates Y2 K. litigation costs to
i
CxCCCd $1 Trillion.
i
j
ti
s
2 .2X❑
4
0
Business Continuity
54% 1;
Of Thesc:
74./,q) Say I'llell, 1)1,111 colls,idcl -S all 111ISSI-oll cl \i.C,,Il proccSses
9
y
S
y
I
1
data Cad Within 6 montlis
1
Cily of' 1) 11011
•
j
F~
32 x C
o
• o
• 4
i
Hrst Steps
r
01 rr,
-y-"M'ss'on Cr*fical City Function
4
a•
t
1 i
3'.
each Dcpartnicni
i
1, I
i
(OlLvolAkiltoll
1
1
A 1
~1 '
32 x El
e
o ° M1
ject ow
Y2K I
Assessment
Assess Teet Ramadiata Impkmant tda
RcillailatiOll
r
a
r
k
f'
a
i
i
1
i
I
•
J~4
3210
:,w 7
F
Pbase I Assess'Metit
A-* Ob~jccfive - TO Lill djastand the current systems
r
t
3
Approcich -Should be viewed Ili three stages:
and Tc 1111oN)gy lilt'
Assess the risks ind Impact to 1111C (1cpal-1111clit alld collillitiIIIIN
illt
Build I risk matrix IdiciiIII'Viing high, nicil and 1(m Y-'1K risk
7
to City ol)cl*,Cltl()IIS
I
City of Den loll
i
I
I
i
El :32 x
r
Q
I.
r e
Y ~
I
I
Assessment Checkfist
I -V
Airport
City Maliag'O
•4
r.
L. I
PI
A
`f
I
7~ Cily of Demon
w
s
• ~ o e
y
I
o ,
o
4
;Aw
• •
P-1 tase 2
•
obuva Call
w
ConllmNd ~w
OE~UvN ❑ 1k
Approaeh~;;A Jsillg active and FA
passive testing tools Mid
11
Testing.
Y2K tcchnical key Controls
1
1
32 x
e
AWN.
' o
n
Test Plan
T, sfing - Develop.,
Appropriate I esting Tools
{
e•
V
its
i
'11 Tool's
i
4
J\I~
10 3210
o
xit
i'
J1
1
'Vtil nerab elety
P
erform
` i
Testilla
I
Test User Accc(-,-s Controls
r
Tcst Data and Dcv*cc Controls
4
w
0
2.5 0 ;2 x
o
0
• e r
d
A
i
NOW ed
0 11
• r
future*s(alc \'.IsI011 to address
VaNdatad
pro+aal0eala r
and ObJactHaa
t~
Remediation
~ c
AI)I)roach - With tile
-cd
Phases I 2, Ricnill'Y mid
or upgrades to non- fit
ysticills
e I
I
e ~ o •
~ra✓ ,
3210
' s
I
I now$
0 ,
a
',9 V
y
Solution Development
'I'lic Future V, ~"ol, Should be defillcd after
j'.
i
y
1
J
People 1-nahler",
i
j.
i
1
♦mwtw ~y h 32 x I O
o
a
I
Solution Development
C
y
I
f•
b
vl
T~c Plan Identifics ()I).Icctlvcs, kcy issumptions,
191
CI ()I I)COINH)
e
~i Ica 32 x#Q
- - - - - -
ILK
II«
hase, 4 1 mplementation
i
and integratc solutions
r;
R;
Sci-vices will assist \vIIII:
mid
archliccitire
F
~y •sy~r MrY' i ! Cam.! 32 /x I II
i
0
r
t Y + •
Phase i
,or many of'our systclils. third party i-cvlcxNl would he
illappf-ppriatc to validalc our work
g '
i
I
i
i
I
• 0 •
0432 x d
K
ALT
0
1
1
. I
I
w
I
:y
tam El 32XIII
o
•
d 1
I
I I P A
•
E L E C T
Energizing tomorl"Ov) 9s community toc ayl
' a
i
i
I
TM
'32 X
e
o
F
SUbst (at *1011
t
4;
I
I ~ o
6
I
w i
I
)TPQ
Possible Noit-Compliant Equipment:
r.
Continuous 11,111ISSIolls Monitoring Systcili
t
,parry I 32 JQ
s
o
Compliant Equipment:
Boller Controls
Turbine Supervisory Systems
.
M
0 Chillatc Control Systems
f1
i
0 14,1111cl-gency Diesel Generators
MISCcilancotis Cooldig Water Charts
I ~y
• 0
!
o
i
J E
i
l `
r
tl
I~j{T"r ~ ~ ~r a PPP4 k~
1 1 .i ~ I1 ~1 K n
`'~~S M1 it 1 ~ 1
~Lu, ~ po lyey p yy
Mr kjf i li
I
i
i
1
i
3 2 X I o
,
4
0
K"74CJ871 '
Q
r
r
r
I
y
K. r
4 .
l
1
i
1
3 2 x
o
y
f
i
Possible Non-Compliant 1 'fir
SUIVI'Visory o
r r r w l f) x 32 X I II
• o ,
Compliant Equipment:
14.
Switchgear and Protective Rclaying
Vchlclcs with Computers
i
1
32XIII
0
I
u
1
11 Aff
[f 1 4
7- IF Iw WIF
Y Yr.. r~s 1,r~~y e ' YP Py! I.t"'
Y}I
I~ i i ~ ~ ♦#4 rG I aC.f s .rG4l,ri
~a. ~ k 1 r. i
gonad
ty3 q~'. 1.4 r 1
w "Y~ ~7' 9~,1 ~t~yrj .,GHQ' 'il ~M~+• ~r I o•~~ r,~'~h f 1
44 1:-y3 c Ii,~ r
•r 1 1, 4 !
r ~rA.~. y.1~ 1 i
I
s
lip' 32 x
o ,
Na"
o
i
E
1
r.
1
r
I
~JX
l
T
P~r 2S ~Cl 32 }:~fl
0
o
s
;
r
1
ies,
1 % .
Powernictrix i
orporatioll
i
Landis & Gyr Utilities Services
SICIIICIIS
i
S
y
32 x
o
I
Possible Non-Compliant
Telephone Interconnect to 8800 MHz
System
Tclephone System (Voice Mall)
I
s ,
r
u
I
i
gas SLII)I)Iiei-s
All i
* In 32x
o
l
t i t 1
s.
t 1 V y 1, 4 iyr Y 5
r i
i ,
,
{
i
I
e
e ~ o e
k, i4e
32 .x'
Y ,
9
o
i
3 ~iUr » r lV
ilk.
VIP
~ry~ryy~~W~ 1 4 Y}y r'~~ ~ ~ ~ .~,:'A
S 1
~lt~~ ) r Y
1 y a ~,rt ° 3' , r I
r r ;w' l+~~a¢lytw~l?!~;4~ w ~yf~rg.~'~,,q-,
m~ .3 Y ~ S 44 r
1 f~ t t I
v4~h y~q~~: f"~;Y,t~yy~' ~~rr rig:. 4n~{Htr 1) P
~Yf'kt~Y~Y~'~,~~44lj
`~-°~e X1'•Ytpa~, ~~t~ •r'y~. p+t`1 Ili E.
yp~y ~'~y ¢J r
i
now
• 0 4
-44
n
r
7
32 x
t.1`.l tip'
1
MM%
1
I
In
I
t
'S\ r
CM E COT
RI +f.Gv F-w4( CND
I ~ f
T r....
r•
1'-
e '
e ~ o e
4~
%32 x
6
ARAN" 0
y .
t
I
~I
f ~
r
biscussion
a
• ~ 0 f
+ 4,4 32 X
e
Aganda 130.~1._>L
Agenda Ite~j~
Date__7_`
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DAfE: September. 21, 1998
DEPARISIENT': UtilityAaministration
AC%I: Howard Sla.lin. 349-8232
S tDJF.CT
Receive a report, hold a discussion and gi%c staB'direction concerning the continued
participaion in the Lake Chapman Water Supply Project with the Upper Trinity Reeional
Water District.
BACKGROUND
The Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRIA'D) purchased 11.7 S1GD of water
from the City of Commerce in Lake Chapman. Denton has p;+icipated in this project
and purchased a 2 h1GD share of the UI RWD's 11.7 MOD supply. Denton's
participation in this ~ltoject was formalized under a contract between the I''fk%"D and
Dalton dated June 10, 1991. 1'he terms of this contract allowed Denton to participate in
the project at a relatil cly low financial cost (the cost of the raw water debt pa)ment).
until more detailed cost information was available concerning transportation
arrangements and infrastructure expenses. The contract allows each of the participants an
opportus ty to withdraw from the project prior to the issuance of bonds for financing the i
transportation infrastructure, the City of Denton was provided with a notification from
the U I RWD (Exhibit 17 of their intent to proceed forward with the project If the City of
Denton elects to withdraw from the project, the UTRAT) has requested that this decision
be mode within 45 days from the date of the writter notice, This deadline has been
extended to Septer^,f+er A 1998.
T
Intng has negotiated a contract with Montgomuy Watson Inc„ to sere as Program
Slanager for the Lake Chapman water supply project. UTRA'D is nejtotiating an
Agreement -.sith the City of Irving to transport UI RWD Lake Chapman Water supplies
to I.a.ke I,ewlsl ille A draft copy of this agreement has been provided to Denton's staff
but specific terms and conditions have not been finalized at this time. The basic
principles of this agreement are as follows:
a T he City of Irving has participated -.ith the North Texas Municipal Watet District for
the joint ownership and operation of d transmission system to convey their water from C
Lake Chapman to Lake Lavon. ( Phase I Facilities)
a the City of Ining will finance, own and operate the transmission system from Lake
Lavon to f ake Lewisville. (Phase 11 FariliJes)
i
i
32 x~~
s
au~ ,
to
t
• 1 he City of Irving will finance the Phase 11 portion of the project with mostly cash
reserves and possibly supplemental funding from bond sales.
• The City of Irving Hill enter into a long term contract {in the form of an Interlocal
Agreement under Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code) to convey UTRWD's
Chapman water through the Phase I and Phase 11 transmission system from Lake
Chapman to Lake I ewisville.
The contract trill be structured as a " sen ice-al-cost' agreement.
• The operating protocol for the day to day operation of the transmission system will be
developed by the City of Irving and the UTRWD after the contract agreement has
been signed but within six months of startup operation of the system.
Tom Gooch with Freese and Nichols helped the City of Denton in the analysis of the
Lake Lewisville pass through agreement and was retained to assist staff with this
particular phase of the project. Mr, Gooch has evaluated Denton's water supply needs
through the year 2050 and analyzed the economic and strategic merits of Denton's
continued participation the UTRWD Lake Chapman water supply project. His report
(Exhibit 11) will be presented to the Denton City Council on September 22, 1998.
Exhibit III lists other k^y factors that need to be considered in making the decision about
participation in the UTRW'D Lake Chapman project. Pending the outcome of a meeting
with Dallas Water Utilities to be held on September 18, staff is recommending to
withdraw from the UTRWD Lake Chapman project and to actively pursue alternative
water supplies to meet the long term needs for the City of Denton, f
ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT
The current schedule for the pipeline project is as follows:
Planning Phase 1998.1999
Design Phase 1999.2000
Construction Phase 2000-2001
PRIOR ACTIUN/RFYJE1 Council. Boards. Commissions)
Public Utilities Board briefed on Chapman Lake (Cooper) Project on February 16, 1998.
Public Utilities Board updated on the Chapman Lake (Cooper Lakc) water supply project
A on April 6, 1998
Public Utilities Board received a presentation from Tom Gooch of Freese and Nichols
concerning Chapman (Cooper) Water Issues and the proposed contract between the
Upper Trinity Regional Water District and the City of Denton on April 20, 1998.
Council w as briefed on the pass-through agreement April 28, 1498.
Public Utilities Board received a presentation from tom Gooch of Freese and Nichols
0 concerning Chapman (Cooper) Water Issues on Slay 4, 19,11 ' 0 ,
C
i
t
32 X IO
s
a
c
a
i
v
Public Utilities Board to consider approval of pass-through agreement on June 1, 1996.
Public Utilities Board approved the pass through agreement on July 6, 1998.
Public Uhilities Board briefed on Chapman Lake (Cooper) Project on September 21,
1998.
r
FISCAL INFORMATION
Denton's cost to transport its sure of the Lake Chapman water is unknown at this time.
Preliminary estimates of the transportation expenses for Denton's 2 MGD share of the
Lake Chapman Water Supply project are included in Freese and Nichols report and are
summarized below:
Raw Water Cost 48,240/year $0.066/1000 gallons
capital Recovery Cost 361,000/year $0.495/1000 gal ons
I
Operating Cost 123,4I01year 0.16911000 gallons
Total Cost 532,650 )car 50. 30/1000 gallons
Note: Year 2004 annual and unit costs
Projected Revenues from UTRWD for the Pass-Through Agreement:
50.02/1000 gallons for UTRWD's share of 11.1 SIGD supply
Estimated Annual Revenue - 510.810
Additional revenues and water supplies could be available by obtaining a re-use permit
from the TNRCC. Pass through fees of 50.02!1000 gallons apply for Lake Chapman
Water Supply if passed through Lake Lewisville prier .n re-use. These two revenue
sources will accrue to Denton whether or not the City remains in the UTRWD Lake
Chapman project.
Additional revenues could be available from interim sale of Denton's 2 MGD share orthe ;
project to the U1 RWD at the current Dallas wholesale price for untreated water supplies
(cta*emly $0.4155 per 1000 gallons).
I
r
.
I
i
a
{_n k
Ei
25~ 10 32xl❑
Ir
I'
.
. T\.>n.. .e icSWOa/ alln nnY ~u wY•....., rn~.. ~
1 r
I
Denton•s need for additional water supplies is not until the year 2012 based upon Freese i
and Nichols current projections,
Respectfully submitted:
Tim Fisher
Assistant Director of Water Utilities
1[F. II
Exhibit t: Jul) 8, 1998 Letter from UTR WD on Notice of Intent to Implement the Cooper Lake
Project
~r
Exhibit 11, September 16, 1998 Freese and Nichols Review of City of Denton participation in Lake
Chapman Water Del N ery w ith UT R W D
Exhibit III: Key Factors
I
Exhibit IV: Location Map
i
I
I
I
h` I
~ II
i ~
I
a 1
t., Sr 1:
,~~~10 32/,10
10-
rh 1
~ ctr,r~~e JUL I SW
396 1V Van -I , 2
'GIONAL MAHN DISTRICT
9'2121912:9 • F,v 972!ii' 1395
July 8, 1998
f
Mr. Howard Martin
Assistant City Manager of Utilities
City of Denton
215 E. McKinney St.
Denton TX 78000
Re:. Notice of Intent to Implement the Cooper I,.aks Project
Dear Mr. ~4w
In accordance with Section 3.03 of your contract with UTRWD, the District is required to conduct `
an engineering feasibility study and sarrid the report to Participating Members for approval.
Enclosed is a report dated June 3, 1998 from Don Rouschuber, P.E, based on the latest proposed
concept for the project. The Rouschuber Report updates and expands upon previous reports by
Carter 6 Burgess dated March 31, 1997 and prior. The Rauschuber Report cocifimis ate feasibility
of the proposed project and the Board of Directors has officially determined the project to be
feasible.
Further, the original participants in the project have the right to approve issuance of District bonds
to finance the project. The current proposal is for Irving to issue the bonds and to contact with the
District for transportation of UTRWD's share of the water. Even though the District does not plan to
issue fronds, the District's position is that the original participants have a similar right to stinprovs
allemobve funding for the project. The District Is offering the original participants wi oF -ortunity to [
approve funding, whether bonds are issued by Distdcl or by Irving - sines either strategy wig fesuM If
in project implementation. if tiny original participant fails to approve ft proposed funding, the
District has the option to purchase or to convey that participants interest in the project f
This letter fulfills the District's obligation to provide a feasibility repM and notke of intended k
funding, Within 45 days of the date of this letter, please advise me of your approval for the District `
to proceed with the project generally in accordance with the Rauschuber Report and this letter. To
discuss the project and to answer your questions, a meeting has been scheduled for 9 00 A.M. on
July 15 in the District office.
.r
0 rely,
T mas E Taylor
Exmfive Direnor
End Rauschuber Report dated June 3, 1998
Copy of Resolution SW - 23 adopted by ft 8o3rd of Directors on July 2, 1998
C! Dave Rybum, Water Ublities DireMor, City of Irving
r~ ! Don Rauschuber, DORA, Inc. t
f1
EXHIBIT !
f - - - aT. ~ rv~ I , a • ~ s .
25 x I❑ 32 X I O
oil, -
.
0
l
i
ME11IORANDUM " Df' RA tyr
TO: Thomas Taylor, A.E., Upper Trinity Regional Water District i
{
FROM: Don Rauschuber, RE, DGRA, Inc.
DATE: June 3, 1998
SUBJECT; Delivery of UTRWD's Lake Chapman Water to Lake Lewisville
The purpose of this memorandum is to present preliminary capital and unit cost projections associated
with the delivery of UTRWD's Lake Chapman water to Lake Lewisville via the City of (wing's Lake
Chapman Phase I and Phase 0 Water Transmission Facilities and evaluate water delivery scenarios,
Based on all indications, the City of Irving Is wilting to negotiate a water transportation contract with
the UTRWD for the purpose of transporting the District's Lake Chapman water to Lake Lewisville.
The evaluations presented below are based on DGRA's understanding of the probable cost of ,
improvements and "most likely" operation scenarios regarding the aawntission of Lake Chapman water
to lake Lewisville.
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 PHASE 1 FACILITIES
{ In 1996, the City of Irving and the North Texas Municipal Water District completed the construction
of the Phase 1 Lake Chapman to Lake Lavon Terminus Pump &j ion and Pipeline. This facility,
costing approximately $55,138,314', involves the following principle components:
A. Raw water intake tower, connecting conduit and wet well (i.e., pump station substructure)
located in lake Chapman - Ttxse facilities components have an estimated production capacity
of 440 mgd;
I
B. Lake Chapman pumpstation--Thisfacility has an installed pumping capacityofIIOmgd(i.e.,
2 • 55 mgd pumps each powered by 5,000 horsepower motor). This pump station has an
estimated pumping capacity for Irving and N IMWD of 220 mgd, provided additional pumps
b t
' At the ume of preparation of tints memo, the Phase I Project between N[MWD ml Irving was not
closed-out due to unresolved easements that are being adjudicated in the courts arsS due to other
project matters. In addition, Irvings 5094 share of the 1155,150,714 (it.. $21,519.157) does not
include any other costs (e 1. planning, water quality studies, legal, and financing) which lrnn0 has
incurred, therefore, the final Phase I Project costs may increase.
' V 1
t,
` a w~ti1
~5 !Q 32x❑
e
Ideal"
c
9mom
r
are installed and an intem,ediate booster pump station is constructed approximately one-half
of the way between the Lake Chapman Pump Station and Lake Laven Terminus. The Lake
Chapman Pump Station is be.ng used by the City of Sulphur Springs to divers up to 22 mgd
from the facility; and 1
C. Lake Chapman raw water transmission pipeline (Phase 1 Facilities) This transmission main
(approximately 39.3-miles of 84-inch diameter pipe) extends from the Lake Chapman Pump
Station to the Lake Lavoa Terminus. This pipeline has a projected maximum water delivery
r%te of approximately 130 to 133 mgd, if additional pumps are installed. f
I
I
1.2 PHASE Q FACILITIES j
Irving is planning on constructing the Phase 0 We Lavon Terminus to Lake Lewisville raw water
transmission systrm (i.e., Phze 11 Facilities). This facility, scheduled for operation bylune 2003, has
the following major components that will be use and useful to both Irving and UTWRVr
A. An additional 80-mgd variable speed pumps, with appurtenances, will be installed in the Lake
Chapman Pump Station. This pump will allow Irving more flexibility in the transtrilmion of
their and UTRWD's water from Lake Chapman to 0, Lake ravon Terminus Pump Station,
B. Lake L Avon Terminus Pump Station will be constructed having the following planned
improvements
i
a. Flow control valve located in the existing 84-inch diameter Phase I pipeline to dives
water to the Lake Lavon Terminus Pump Station':
b. Raw water metering station to measure water diversions from the 84-inch diameter
Phase I pipeline to the Lake Lavon Termjrrus Pump Station';
C. 20-million gallon raw water balancing reservoir; 1
d. Raw water high service pump station with two (2) 80-mgd variable speed pumps,
building, controls. valves, electrical, and appurtenances;
there ate other Phase It project components which are only useful to Irving no Iiswd in this section
i ' In lieu of me (1) 80-mgd variable speed pump. Irving may elect to install two (2)10-m8d veritable
speed pumps.
11he cost of this project component my be shard with NrM" since it will be use and useful to
both tJ1bfWD and Irvin{.
2
j
f
k
5 CJ 32 x C+
s
0
C. Approximately 30-miles of 66-inch diameter concrete steel-cylinder or steel pipe
extending from the Lake Lavon Terminus Pump Station to Panther Creek, a We
Lewisville tributary';
f. Channel improvements to approximately 7-miles of Panther Creek; and
8 Chlorination facilities located either at Lake Chapman Pump Station or at Cake [Avon
Terminus Pump Station (optimum site to be determined by Irving) and de-chlorination
facilities located at the Lake Lewisville Terminus'.
On April 23, 1498, Wing retained Montgomery - Watson, Dallas, Texas, as the project design and
construction manager firm for the Phase 0 Labe Lavon Terminus to Lake Lewisville Pump Station and
Pipeline. In April 1998, Montgomery - Watson estimated that the Phase it Facilities components
conunon to both Irving and UTRWD will have a capital cost of approxim ,tely $74 million (1998
dollars), as shown in Table I
In addition to the capital cost of about $74 million, capital interest during construction may be added
by Irving. To estimate interest during construction, it is assumed that Irving will finance the entire
Phase 17 capital cost by the issuance of revenue bonds in accordance with the schedule presented in
Table 2. Based on the assumptons and calculations presented in Table 2, it is estimated that interest
during construction will be approximately 54.26 rnWion. This results in a total Phase Il project cost
of about $783 million (574,041,140 + 54,260,000)•
2.0 UTWR 'S "8A .LINE" CAPITA AND LINIT WATER COST PRO EC7TONS
In orkr to project UTRWD's cost basis in contracting with Irving for the transport of the District's
Lake Chapman water to We Lewisville, the following assumptions are made;
A. UTRWDand Irving will enter into awater transmissionscMcescontract for utilizationof both
Phase 1 and Phase 0 facilities;
B. Irving and NTMWD will be the sole owner's of Phase 1 facthties. NTMWD will not object or
charge any addidonal user fee to UTRWD for use of Phase I Facilities other than any Increase
Currenuy, it is planned to discharge water from the Phase D Facilities Into Panther Creek, Them
water would flow approximately 7-stiles to Lake Lewisviik. M put o(& final project design,
Irving will performed an opamiution study to determine the most feasible discharge route to Lake
Lewuville
' N
TMWD may cost participate in the chlorination facilities if located at We Chapman Pump
Station.
3
2 .5 32X
o
in operation and maintenance cost that may be attributable to pumping UTRWD's Lake
Chapman water,
{ C. Irving will be the sole owner of Phase 11 facilities and will "oversize" these improvements (and
any needed Phase I improvements), as necessary, to transport UTRWD's Lake Chapman water
to Lake Lewisville;
D. UTR WD's capital cost base for use of Phase I (see Table 3) and Phase a Facilities (see Table
Nos.4 and S) will be basedon each pany's (i.e., Irving's and UTRWD's) firm annual yield shut
(Irving - 39.3 mgd and UTRWD • 1 l.7 mgd) in Lake Chapman or 77.06 percent (39.3 mgd
divided by 51,0 mgd total) for frying and 22.94 percent (11.7 mgd divided by 31.0 mBd total)
for UTR
WD for ,
all transportation components that are use and useful to both parues. Capital
4 cost will be amortized at 6.0 percent over a 20-year bond term;
E. Wuer transponation losses from Lake Chapman to We Lewisville via the Phase I and Phase
H Facilides (including Panther Creek) are assumed to be S percent; and r°
f
R Operation and maimenance cost will be proportioned based on the analyses presented in Table
Nos. 6 and 71.
Based on the assumptions and information listed above, the projected capital and annual cost shares
associated with Lake Chapman water are presented below:
UrR%VD COMPONENT APITA ons ~ t & it
j
{ I.= MERIA'i'ION LMM COST SOURCE
I. Phase I Facilities
$ 6,326,639 From table 3 l'
2. Phase II Fuilides S 19.329.812' From Table 3
3. Subtotal: Capital Cost S 25,836,471
!
fu -
lnctudes interest during eonsmx0on j
fff
y;
32x10
•
UTRWD ANNUAL COSTS FOR PHASE I AND PHASE 11
j EM DESCRUMON UTRWD COST SOU
I • Lake Chapman Initial SOURCE 1
Storage Annual Debt
Service S 65,820 March 31, 1997, C&B Memo' '
2. Lake Chapman COE
0&M S 16,485 March 31, 1997, C&B Memo
3. Lake Chapman Future
Storage Annual Debt
Set vice S 197,185 March 31, 1997, C&B Memo
4. Phase I and Phase a
0&M Cost S 689.29 From Table 7
5. Subtotal: A.-, uai Cost S 968,786
The projected UT-dWD unit water cost related to the delivery of Lake Chapman water to Lake
Lewisville is presented below;
UTRWD UNIT WATER COST ASSOCIATED HITH PI ASFS t h n FACfi rT*F c
UH DESCR211QN
1. UTRWD Avenge Annual Lake Chapman Withdrawal (1,000 gpd) 12,942'
2. Total Allocated Phase I and Phase II Capital Cost $25,856,471
3. Annual Debt Service (UTRWD's Portion Only) $ 2,l 17,74110
4. Annual Cost (UTRWD's 0&M Portion Only) S 968,786
5. Total Annual Cost of Water (fine 3 plus line 4) S 3,086,527
6. Water bosses (5%, 1,000 gpd) 647 f
7. Net Water Delivered (line 2 minus Line 8, 1,000 gpd) 12,295
8. TOTAL COST OF WATER PER 1,000 GALLONS $ 0.688
3,0 MOSTMQ$T PROBABLE WATER DFL.IVEgy SC YAKS
The Phase I Facilities were designed as "average day" water delivery facilities that would be used in
conjr ~onwitbterminal rawwAter storage facibdes. NTMWDwipuUlize[Ake lsvon&sitsterminal
facility for its Lake Chapman water. frying, under a contract with the City of Dallas, will utilize
! conservation storage space in Lake Lewisville for terminal storage. As such, it is env cloned that both
' Carter & Burgess Much 31, 1997, Memorandum to UnWD
' 12,942 mgd represenu 904 of VMWDy TNRCC annual authoriWon for the diversion of Lake
Chapman wvter.
• " Rom Table Not. 7 ud S
s k
i
i
i
4
0
Phase I and Phase Il Facilities will be operated as an average day delivery facility for both NTMWD
and Irving. These two entities each have a TNRCC annual water appropriation of 54,000acre-feet per I
year which is believed to b: in excess of each entity's firm annual yield share in Lake Chapman, Tex
two (2) 55-mgd pumps installed in the fake Chapman Pump Station wii l divert & total of approximately
108,000 acre-feet of water (i.e., 34,000 acre-feet per year each for Irving and NTMWD) from Lake
Chapman under the current "time-of-day" Texas Utilities (TU) Electric Service Contract between '
NTMWDandTU. The time-cf-day limitation prohibiu st"ng orrunning the large 5,000 horsepower
rotors that drive the 55-mid pumps between the hours of 12:00 noon to 8:00 P.M. during the period
of June I through September 30".
Assuming that living observes the time-of-day limitation set forth it the TU/NTMWD Electric Service
Contract, the typical Lake Chapman pumping schedule shown in Figure I will be followed, based on
current installed pumping capacity. However, it is anticipated that living will install additional pumping
capacity at the Lake Chapman Pump Station and at the Lake Lavon Terminus Pump Station to transfer
UfRWD's Lake Chapman water and to allow for kil I
gher pumping rates by [ruing, At Lake Chipman, I
Irving plans to install an 80 mgd variable speed pump (or two 40 mgd variable speed pumps) that when i
operated in conjunction with an existing 53 mgd pump will allow for up to 133 mgd (maximum flow
capacity of the 84-inch diameter Lake Chapman to Lake Lavon Terminus Pipeline) to be diverted frot3
Lake Chapman. Of the 133 mild diversion rate, 55 mgd will be utilized by NTMWD, leaving a
potential of up to 78 mgd (133 mgd minur. 55 mgd) pumping reserve at Lake Chapman Pump Sutton.
On an annualized basis, pumping 11.7 mgd (UTRWD's Lake Chapman firm annual share) for UTRWD
would leave Irving with a reserve pumping capacity of up to 66.3 mgd (78 mgd minus 11.7 mgd).
Irvine's average annual Lake Chapman required pumping rate could vary from 39.3 mgd (i.e., hying's
firm annual yield supply of 44,016 acre-feet per yeu) to an annual average of 48.2 mgd (i.e., [wing's
maximumTNRCCannual authorized divenlon-54,000acre-feet per) ;:rdiviC:dby 1,120acre-feet
per I mgd), Oven the time-0f-day limitation to the TU Electric Service Contract, Irving would need
a maximum pumping rue ranging from 44.2 mgd (during the months of January through April and
October through December) to deliver it's firm annual yield supply of 44,016 acre-feet to 55 mgd
(during the months of January through April and Oct6erduroughDecember) to deliver it's maximum
J
annual authorized diversion of 54,000 acre-feet per year. With the installation of an 80 mgd I
variable speed pump, Ni leaves Irving with a reserve pumping capacity that could be dedcated to
UTRWD of between 33.8 mgd (78 mgd minus 44.2 mgd) and 23 mgd (78 mgd minus 55 mgd).
" If me of bah 5.000 horsepower motors we operated i1 the restricted time-of-day period, the
minimumelectne bill chuged by 1V subspvttlally increases. However, once Irving, UTRWDsnd
NTMWD diverts water from l.alce Chapman on a cononcous•363 day~a.yesr basis, TU energy
charges will exceed mi umum bill chugts. making the time-ofday rrunimum bill penalty a mule
• point
j ~ •
l 6
,
4
K I 32 X10
o ,
t.
a
NNW"
UTRWD will require a maximum pumping rate of 13.2 mgd (during the months of January through
April and October through December) to deliver ifs firm annual yield share (I J, 126 acre-feet peryear
or 11.72 mgd on an average basis). During the months of June through September. LrMWD's pumping i
rate would be 8,8 mgd (66.67% of 13,2 mgd) to complete the delivery of its firm annual share. The
typical water delivery rate for UTRW D Lake Chapman firm annual yield share to Late Lewisville (as
diverted at t..*.e I ake Chapman Pump Station without losses) is shown in Figure Nes. 2 and 3. '
To deliver UTR WD's TNRCC maximum authorized annual diversion rate of 16,106 acre-feet per year 1
would require an average pumping rate from Lake Chapman of 14.4 mgd. This resLAits, wi$t the TU
time-of-day limitation, in a maximum diversion rate of 16.2 mgd (during the months of January through
April and October through December). During the months of June through September, UTRWD's
Lake Chapman diversion rate would be 10.8 mgd. Figure Nos. 4 and S graphically present water
delivery rates to We Lewisville (without conveyance losses) for this water supply scenario,
4.0 LAKE L.EWISVILLE PASS-THROUGH CONCEPT
UTRWD proposes to pass its We Chapman water (discharged from Phase Q Facilities) through
take Lewisville without the benefit of storage in Lake Lewisville. The lake "pass-through" concept
is valid and can function properly, if UTRWD coordinates its Lake Chapman discharges to and
withdrawals from We Lewisville on a reasonable basis. To accomplish this, UTRWD and/or its
member cities must have sufficient or reserve treatment capacity to instantaneously treat up to the
maximum tJTWRD's We Chapman inflow rate, currentas estimated at 16 2 mgd (see Section 3.0).
This can tx accomplished since IJTRWD (with 20 mgd treatment capacity), City of Denton (a t
member city with 30 mgd treatment capacity), and City of Lewisville (a member city with lS mgd
treatmctt capacity) have a combined treatment capacity of approximately 65 mgd.
In order to pass water through LAke Lewisville, an aaounting system must the developed to
properl / account for Lake Chapman inflows and diversions from We Lewisville. Technical issues j
associmed with passing water thresgh take Lewisville may include, proper measuring or metering
cf Lake Chapman inflows and diversions, quantifying channel conveyance and/or reservoir
I
evaporation losses, discharging Lake Chapman water into Lake Lewisville when it is in flood pool
operations, and water quality/environmental considerations,
Passink water through Lake Lewisville possibly will require the following issues to be addressed:
• I. An agreement between UTRWD and City of Irving to transfer UTRWD's water from We
i
Chapman to Wee Lewisville; f
2. An agreement(s) among or between UTRWD and the City of Denton (or the Cityof Dallas)
for use of We Lewisville as a water pass-through facility;
5 is 32XIO
o
3. An agreement among or between UTRWD, City of Denton and/or City of Lewisville to
utilize eaca entities' water treatment plants for treating UTRWD's Lake Chapman water
being discharged into Lake Lewisv.!le;
4. An authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for Irving and U"l*RWD to
discharge water into Lake Lewisville;
S. A bed and banks permit or authorization Aim the TNRCC for hind and UTRWD to use
We Lewisville and, possibly, one of its tributaries as a water conveyan:e channel; and
6. Development of a protocol for a water accounting system among the parties.
8,0 CONCLUSIONS
Bused on the asseasmenu presented above, I offer the following conclusions concerning the `
trpmsmission of UTRWD's Lake Chc.pman water to We Lewisville:
1. The pumping capacity of lrving's Phase I Lake Chapman Facilities can be increased to
transfer rrving's and VTR WD's We Chapman water, as long as, the combined pumping
rate of both entities does not exceed 75 to 78 mgd;
2. Wing's Phase 11 We Chapman Facilities can be designed and constructed to transfer both
Irving's and IJTRWD's Lake Chapman water;
3. Capital cost associated with UTRWD's Phue B Facilities components (including Phase I
Facilities improvements) is projected at $26 million (1998 dollars);
4. UTRWD's initial-annual operation kA maintenance expenses associated solely with Phase I
and Phase H Facilities (excluding M%"'s Lake Chapman, Lake Lewisville and other
costs) should be approximately $700,000 (1998 dollars);
S, UTRWD's unit cost (including Phase 1 and Phase U Facilities and We Chapman costs) for
We Chapman water delivered to We Lewisville should be approximately $0.70 per 1,000
gallons (1598 dollar;), based en the assumptions presented in this memorandum;
0 6. Under a "rypi^al" c;eratlon,cerMo, UTRWD's Lake Cbapman water inflow rate to Lake
Lewisville v ill range between 8.8 mgd to 16.2 mgd depending on time of year and
requested lelivery quantity; ant
t
pill ~ z Y
t, r
10
10 32 X
o,
0 I
.
1
i ,
.
j
7. Pasung UTRWD's Lake Chapman water through Lake Lewisville is feasible recognizing the
entities (VMWD, City of Denton, and City of Lewisville) who will withdraw Lake
Chapman from Lake Lewisville have in excess 60 mgd treatment capacity, if all necessuy
approvals and agreements are secured.
U you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Don Rauschuber, P.E.
President, iMIRA, Inc.
i
r,
Z
i
1 ,
9
' cr
v
t I
2 5
0
wool
d
"9']47:1Ielt
TABI fi 1
PRELIMINARY COST PROJECTIONS PON PRASE 11 FACILITRS USE AND USEFUL TO UT11W A AND IRVING • 1991 COST
(SOURCE: MONTGOMERY •WATSON.DALLAS,TE1US APRIL19911
A R C
fleet Nr Dtacni b1 Mw 9 Rtrbld Flllmau
Qviskaoilly UNN UnIl [We Total "a
I Improrememl Y lase ❑ulpman Pumping Sutso,n
a iO mid Val Speed Pump 1 each {1,150,000 $1,150,00(1
b Silt W1nnJ and Appusenonaa I a $130,000 SI SOXII
1 1.arun Tersrunul Bunur Pump+ng Sutwa
I 1 10 mid pumps, budding, piping. cunuols, rift , t ute rink I It $9,000,M) KOK'
b stwsSc Tan►and CUnuuls la nul g0( 11,500,000
e Meunng Suuon I 16 $750,00(1 {750,000
d ufrwd Space In Pumpni Sutwn Building L200 sq h 1130 5160,010
1 66' Piprltne and Appanene4ces 159,69$ 1f $710 511,117,650
4 rerminalPacddks 1 each $50,000 550,001
1 to It mevy and Pemoot Conti ul I I s 5500,n00 5500,001
n Channel Improvements (u Pi l Clock (11,0001 f l I 4 {I.00OX0 11,000,000
7 Chbninwon and De [hNNlMlwn Fki1111ea 1 I t $500, $500.000
4 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION 55 697 ASO
9 ENemeMe Ind RIIN of Way n5 wife $3.000 $1,173.000
10 Land AcqulslUon S aorta {10,000 550,000
II Legal Cools AswclYedwith LilAcqunmmn I II $150,000 $450,000
12 Permits I l a 150,0W IJQ,QQy
11 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION w/ LAND COSTS A PERMITS $60,41100
14 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCVIM) HMUO
IS SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION wlLAND COSTS A CONTINGENCY 461913
16 NNw Engineerlmg 3JAIS,600 51,615,600
S 17 l and 0. L qutsrtwn and Right of Way 5440.= 5440,000
11 Ik nin Spftnl Sen kea lSuhei, Oeoiethnic d, 8nruovnrnnl,rkl 1a95,J00 S1196J00
19 'unstructwliManlgement $941,100 $941,100 I
20 Cunswwon Spin tal Senkes(Mnaials Telling. Conval Surrey, tic l $110,000 1J10,000 i
11 soul Up vA Openlsaru Suppon S169,10C gFQp,Zpy
r16 SUBTOTAL ENGINEERING taOO Ohio,
ENGINEERING CONTINGENCYSURTOTAL ALL ENGINEERING WITH CONTINGENCY Legal and Financing Cow
PRO ECTE9TOTALESTIMATE CAPITA%STS {0041110
ut~ NMI I. T*II 1 PnkNla prellml May CON prOOMM of pno COmp0lNnu NN Yt uN and useful k 6016 WD Yd hind
1 Ptudecl components ihN pfoskk unly beluTNS to liming lie ON grounded in till tahk
fie table 10(s
i
5
I` t
TABLE 2
PROJECTED INTEREST DLIMG CONSTRUMON FOR PHASE 0 WPR01'Eb>ENTS 4
NOTES I Annual debt service 14 based on UnMjjn11 construction coil ae an auumed f
6 0 perom iourot rre fa 2Gyean Further, it is usumdd that re•snvestmettt of bondwed bond
funds will resutt to an eKatre'imtrea duria$ construcuod' rite 0( 3 paceal
2. The total Phase 11 Facilities ConsllX%loe cog% Oasis in TWO 1, tools a proift-W 114047.140. "
Tlaa protected consvxboo talc it increased by 14.260.000 for iatvea dung conantcuon which is
computed u prsuded below. Thin raulu In a IOW projected poles cm of
111307,140 This sou doa na include eoouoSmey and raerva fund mquuemeou t if
tny) Led Mvsaus tsperatures by Irvielto eanneennS audits, legal fees, ticI
YEAR AMOUNT PROJIMU LYFWM D O CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
of K" YEAR WTERur
1 7
1991 $2.000, 10• SW, 004 160•
1 $2.000, 147. 190 $90, 190, 190 1113,
54.000, 160. $120, 11120, 1120• 1420,
2001 MAX 6700. $606. "N.000 $1300
lao2 $70.000, $450.000 $900,000 $1,730,
2007 $!7.000• f271.
O $4.160.
06a: tabk ass .
l
I
i
INS + ,
i r
r ,
~ 1.
i
4 e' ~ i I
ae .
25x(] 32x~Q
01
e
WOMAN
TABLE 3
PROJECTION OF UTRWD'S MELWE CAPITAL AND DEBT SERVICE COST FOR PHASE 1 FACILITIES
DESCRIPTION TOTAL IRVDIGI IR DIG'S UI'RWD'S UTRWD UTRWD'S
CAPITAL HALE CAPITAL SHARE CAMAL ANNUAL
COST OFPHASEI COST OFIRVING'S COST DEBTSERVICE
FACII 97ES PHASR I (6.016 FOR
FACILITIES 20•YRARS)
Phase I Facilities $55,131,317 5000% $27,579,159 22.94% $6,326.659 $551,511
file, lahle3 als
l ~
{
jv-
32-do
mown= jI
A t
I:nlmu '
c^Ar~rnxa
TABLE 4
PRILIM W A RV ASSIGNM L71T 01 Ills![ O /ACILIT713 LAMA L CUBE 1"WRI0+ IRVOIO AND UM"- 1911 COST
ISOVACLI MONTGOMERY • WATSON DALLAS, TUAS AML IIM
A
Vera • 7usctl 1t6 MtAI Y I bob Willow Irel9l'r Inl9l't U111"'1
Use Use►elee 9W Ma tW Psom 11 ferllee of twW9 of
C9p6eI Cr Mw U 0 Mw fl a
71,66% 11.94•
I Improwmtnuv Wt tpmu►.mpinl ItUal
e 10 mid Vvlr6le Speed h ui ks 11110,010 31,750,000 {1730.000 $1.311,550 9401450
Silt 111i sold ApprnenvKre I It 11311 3150,000 6150,000 3115,390 $11110
1 LNm Tom m awswel hmpmp Sul"
e 19 mid pump, ►rddlnl, plppel, cmlrole, tie' A Wit 'Ws I 11 31,000,000 S9.DW 00 69 wo.wo b 91 1100 31 061,60
1 Simile Tv16 vd Cmuoll 10 ntl gal 43.90 11 Wo06 {1,115.900 1544,1
t Matnnlluuon II $730,000 3750,ON 1750.000 {717,110 1111,050
d Oulu Spvnn,'rmpn13111Mm budding I,I00 tq A 3170 319,001 1160,000 $136.701 511,191
1 66• piplw end Apponentrcu 159,691 II $110 543,11140 511.117,670 $11.116.161 39,891,119
1 Tem A@l Ftcdivet I ills I30, 3!0,000 43o,o00 111130 111170
5 fch"U7 and Iemult Cmuul I I 1 5700,000 3500,000 6500.000 4317,100 1111,100 I
6 .Txmtl lmpr, ememt for Fv lscr Clock 01,amI f l I II $1,000, $1,000,000 11,0116,000 1170.600 51114100
7 imlisom W Dc-Olonnmum I"Whiel I I I SSN,000 S1110 000 $500,000 1187,300 111/,100
1 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION !1 947 1107 650 0.076.189 111,111P .M1 P.MMFAJ fend RqM Of Wry 175 eee99 31,3151 A 11,371,000 11039,173
3113,115
10 1. W Acquui0m 5 Wfe1 510,111.41 950 150,000 111.510 $11,1
II IpJ Cutts Ajlwwed*AL"Aegw Olwn 1 U 5110, $450,000 1450 5116,170 11012
11 Femru I e 170, 1}9.976 131519 SIL IQ
11 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTJON LAND COM i PMMM 160,411.67 160,111.6 166.361,6N 111.160!36
11 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 110161 M 0412M 10,031,311 11.171,Iap Milikppf
17 SVI I OTAL CONSTRUCT'ION *I LAND COM A CONTINGENCY ! 161711 !1 If J11111-7252
16 auk EAlprenng 3 ,fl fAI30m 11111600 $2,716,111 ISM419
17 LW AcqulUUm wid Plain of Wtg 1916,000 1440.000 5431,044 1100116
It Br11le 1pecld Se1rM113wmep, OOMthOKJ. FneummnW,ele 3 1196, 3194,300 (196,100 5690,941 $105.611
II av9vtuenMwlemeM 971/, fM/,100 {941,100 1111,113 1111,943
10 mW6elee SpeclJ Se"It" IMewlelt Tefunl, Comrol Surer, eK l 3570. 1130,000 4310,000 1111, III SM701
11 SMA Up Will Oprt60rK Srppn (161, hium 11 1119210 111.113
Il N TAL LNGINLLR1r G 1 M 131163 11.441.137
11 L14GINURING CONTINGENCY 1150
11 SUBTOTAL ALL ENGMEERINO WITTI CONTINGENCY $7,949, $1,10./00 5!.316111 31661.111
13 Legal "A FlnvKlnl Cutts 1112125 Wt III MAN 111.111
16 /ROJECTtO TOTAL W IMATk i%:AIITAL COSTS) 71 igue'l $74.541.14011 51 /10,126 16 916111
Nsed 1 wit I pRxnu prthlm.wf ten p/r I."s m P"J emg9teel16w won reefO M D..eA Awbandiftsiml
t
Y 7
e `I
1 ,
• i
• 1 ,
TABLE
PROJECTION Or M*I)'S BASELINE WI TAL AN-D 014T SERVICE COST TOR MUSE 11 TActLrrMS
DESCRIPTION TOTAL VING'S V vmwv,s C
/ A ITAL NATS WAL NABS MAL AWUA6L
COST ►IUSEtl COST rmvr401 COOT DE 975ERVWE
ACCLMU MUSE tl 6-11 ►OR
f4Ctl.TT6J 16-VIA M
- '
UpcJw 041140 7706% IS7W"1 03 Ma 111916.116 CAROM)
ll a Dun6i Cam M Ho 7701% 111121; 0116% 1Q11
M 1
rOTAL
p1.M7J S60.Y60 412 117.0676!1 it J66136 1'.
1. cn 6n 6YS dY s.
L dtw DwS C"tu va6 Cat m flora T66M1
DM. u6W W
f.
i
i
Ia
IL
%
1
J
r , h
01 x
NEC
TUL~ 1
IMUW%Aar WLr11TOV fOl CMCFIUrtCI IMLI'SIS OILAM O6rU MAMMM04
nOM Leal CWA/r1Aw Id UKt Uwprfi LC 911 IMLft I ArO nwa It 11CIt1lTt1
flLLRltla TITCO" O ~L CArT
al rpyw
Ih/r"411111f rl11f1uIruM w fM1M
UM Tr rL U"n Mr
LLti fw 914W Wt N lu Muw lw1M
ar m r
r w Nraw f. IUU
I cr/tl l M.F. a r'r Man
H L"m 11t ft P*w fl/wa ff. rLtn
0*r • n LOX Crw
0ma Im111,It"Gan Cw 111111 Uf 111
Ir L'a Mp f,u kiai ~ a4L
Nm wfa I1N 4/r►IMr C014M 4l fill
w tAl Clwww i trLb VIA". I"$
f Car lafa a 1 Ia / a r IIIfIM
%oba Llrrfa frluM 0011 Plum
A9wra 0 -
I , CwIm:mi r r....
L11m veIV W" flocm m®
tram ■
1 Lrr ti 111119 so" r Oft
Clllaa Nw 0
O^P."%r ahwn"4MM WJ11
: lyer Tabu how 1' a . L
law, Nl+Cqa Ilan kas au*
11a LOW Vdm 1 "IN
/ Uwet.IWL!nu A~.Vm"
1fYlw [~'1VYI mOaMa11a101 Mail
IMM [IIM'T1 911/N.19 LLlawY R RI1100
,ft o11r k.. m
t aayw r Irr ha l hr 1l r fa ewer
Lbw M 4prlw ~lollfa Mr OW I 1 f Om IS.mO
CIa•IIw Mr ICLSL a'w l sI m
I.IeM.r Mr 1rR you N.,W
M Arles ti Crap 111 Om f]a®
Mr rr •
1 O-W soon
1*WM %Mpw Um 11,m0
IN C406 M%hall lam
It, II - LOW r Mr a rw.y r ,
a lw lyr f10~ mlm
Caesar IVral m
♦I1-ledI I" " E10,0
'Oft A1aaa Ia lrpr R® 1110
w~ rra, m
a U. MraL.u
Iamw Iw -mama
1alrwy r MN 11101
L1aa 111miny UDAw 1 IJ=
tt~ I IQSIq U m11 u
ay
m®
~ L7Maa M~ ~
Moto • U Lrwrd .A /wla 4^11' 1,
. 1109• ltlmOyl a aMa MI 11 radb flum WAS
0~.14 a 11040v Oal,w.111 kfb I 1110/ Ulm
Ib Tow
r
15 . tars
Maw lrya111 tm la ww afar IIOmI Riml
~ ~a.a r1. e •
11 ~ lama
Van i O • III
*r RWaC[mm0U9md 4rOm Al W8
11 t oYra
,1101111 Illlaa !loall.
POW Ilm
$a m
a
p% !I
All, CI¢ I ~ A R
A AL fU RM1
wLa Y
1
,I
r
e
ateual
o
a ,
;
TABLBT
PRELIMINARY COST OYSERVKV ANALYST! FOR RAW WATIR TRANSML4SION FROM LAKE CIIAIMAN TO LAKE LKWISVILLK
VIA PHASE I AND PHASE If FACD rm
ITEM D RIP'FION LAK9 LLAKXCHAPMAPU LAKRIAVOW A O&M I PRORATION ►A NUALO&MCOM
NO. CHAPMAN LAKELAVON LLEWISVILLR COST RRILATIM IRVINO'9 UTRWD'S
IPELINIV PIPELDtF1 LAKE COSTIAS90 COST RASED
PUMPITATION PUMP STATION CHAPMAN AND NPRORATA ONPRORATA
PHASE I AND 11 HARK OF NON- SHARE OF NON-
FACILITIES LAKRCHAPMAN LAKECHAPMAN
EIPMAS EXPENSES
PLUSLAKR
CHAPMAN
e
OPERATION AND MA4piPliANCS EXPENSES EXPENSES
I SIIIAamdWatts so $99,11/ S94,144 $191.281 $152,101 $41.417
7 Contrlel lmbd fnr R cmc emaS OA M Kota
Function of We1et Pumped S2011 S1,000 17,0W 136.111 S)A,M9 12,144
I wwwl ubW (of
Itwcunlnl O&M Ihel 1s
a Furctlan of welts
Pumptd $0 $7,000 $1,000 510,000 $1,106 17,294
1 m,ullMCI Treeonenl 10 $16,000 116,000 1)0.000 SISAII 54.511 'a
s. Uulitln76rbull6tn$
OperWom am Sec only Sfl Stl1,f01 i11.7W 5164,1)8 S150.3)0 $11,791
6 U hies For If, 1h
SenkePumpsIForhalt I kvlly696RA(J7RWD304%j so 5920,000 5920,000 $1.640.000 11,210.640 Ms9,160
' 1 Reptln ltd Munlenmce hull. 1200.120, Iney, $4,.1201
M i for Rememmn I O&M Not vmwl)a1119,1101 tlnlW.U»1102 i
e Funtdm of Wmet
~j Pumptd W 515.000 s17.J00 $10,600 $11,111 $6112
1 Reors Ind Melnlf nma
fa Aowsmn6OAMlhet
is I FuncUm of Wale
Pw"w $0 117,000 IISA00 00,000 $21,111 $6,512
P Offke i epphet 56611 5600 $600 51,100 $1,52S 1215 I
IQ Repllr W Mlmlttwfl m !
Vehkk.IerdSmallF*ip M $10,000 110,000 $20,000 '
• 11 . Small Tmle and Pqulpmeln 50 12,000 $15.412 51.711
12,01UD $4,000 11.012 $911 •
i 12 AofenlmllseNkee So SIS,000 $151000 930,000 $],111 $6 Of
IS Adminltttlllon DAM 110,110 110,00 521.000 3210,111 64,931
14 Tun so to S6 (O to so ' i
is. Iiuwlt►t 50 $10x0 110,000 120.000 115.412 $011
16 Rtilt" EapenM 56,117 10 s0 20.317 96,1)1
17 Mlsce6eneoul so M,Wp 1110 31m HAD w ,
i
11 SOTAL OAMEXPINSFA )1610 11,201701 $1,20)201 $2445096 1s,1S7,116 $664,296
Note. None o t hlpmm t0M illowis .11n inele In Ike w t W111 06 M tan prorwon
Ilk table" 7111
K10 32XID
' O
1
1
( NiuuRE
'T'YPICAL CITY OF IRVING PUMPING SCHEDULE BASED ON TU TTME•OF-DAY
LIMITATION AND CURRENTLY INSTALLED 55 MGD PUMP AT LAKI; CHAPMAN
PUMP S'TA'TION
MILLION GALLONS PER DAY
70
60
SO PI iA}I'IN(r kA11, SS MOD H INPINO RA I F SS Will
P1!KKA) Of' 11MF. OF DAY LIMIT A I )ON
40
H UMI INC RATE- 36 67 W~li
'10 I Al. WA 'I LR I IIA'I' CAN POTENTIAL LY BE
30 FK1MI'F:h QY€KAYF!~ SIBS AF---
0
20 _
i
10
(l
JAN FSH MAR APR MAY !UN JUL AUG SEP OCT NO V DEC
om BASED ON PUMPlNO IRVINU'S MAXIMUM AUINORIZED DIVERSION FROM LAKE CI'APMAN OF fl,rk'XI AF/VR
file figure) pro
2 S x Q 1 32 x 1❑
-
1
e
o ,
FIGURE 2
TYPICAL UTRWD FIRM ANNUAL YIELD WA'T'ER DELIVERY RATE? 'I'O LAKE:
LEWISVIL LE VIA PHASE; I AND PIIASF,11 FACILITIES (-'XCI.(JSIVE OI'
CONVEYANCE LOSSES) BASED ON TU TIME-OF-DAY LIMITA'T'ION AND
ADDITIONAL PUMPING CAPACITY A'1' LAKE: IAPMAN r1JMt, STATION
70 MILLION GAU,ONS PER DAY
-
60
50
40 30
26 I.
I INI I UlV 8411 I I ? S14 it) INI I (111• KAI1, I i k1 il)
INI I (IW f(A l 1, % N M(~U '
10
• 101 AI, DH 1%4-IIY 'IO LAKI•. I UW15VllA.h L* 11, I IK AChL: l 11- l H H VL'AN •
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY !UN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
lilc Ggure2 pro
2 ~ > 0 32 x O
o
soup"
i
,
r
y
i
v
I'vouRi 3 {
CUMULATIVE U'fRWD WATER DELIVERY RATE' (EXCLU.'IV1, OF CONV1,YANCI,
I.OSSF.S) TO LAKE LEWISVILLE WITH TU TIME-OF-DAY LIMITATION AND
INCREASED PUMPING CAPACITY A'f I.AKE. CI IAPMAN PUMP STATION
ACRE FEET (Thousands)
20
15 v
l0
o
{ M o ~1
O I I I I I I I_ I
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
rile figure3 pr4
32 x a
Plow
o ,
0
TYPICAL UTRWDTNRCC MAXIMUM AUf•HORIZE'D WATER DELIVERY RATE: TO
LAKE; LE?WISVILLE VIA III IASE I AND PHASE II FACILITII'S (EXCLUSIVE OF
CONVEYANCE LOSSES) BASED ON FU TIMI?-OI.-DAY LIMITATION AND
ADDI"I WNAI. PUMPING CAPACI'T'Y AT LAKI; CI IAPMAN I)UMI' STA'I ION
MILLION GALLONS PF.R DAY
70
60 _
40
30
J
INIIUW(AII 1b2M(sl) 1'41(AVHAII 11)2NIi) 20
{I
INI LOW RA 1!, W g M(T)
10
O 101 Al DELIWAY 10I AKC ) FWI.0,V1111 OF 16 II06 ACAF-FLFr H H N1 AR ~
i
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Jill, AUG SUP OCT NOV DEC
file ligure4 pr4
I
„ye. 25 x a 32 X I a
o
Boom
O
FIGURE 5
CUMULA'I'IVI: U7'RWD MAXIMUM INRCC WATER DELIVERY RATE ([:XCLUSIVf, 0,
CONVf;YANCE LOSSES) TO LAKE LEWISVILLE WITH TU'TIMI?-OF-DAY LIMITATION
AND INCRHASE:D PUMPING CAPACI'T'Y AT LAKE CIJAPMAN PUMP STA'T'ION
20 ACRE F'EFT (Thousands)
-
IS
v
u
m
la
•
s
r a Lee- 1 ! 1 Wu l I I i I
00
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG si,,P OCT NOV DEC
file Ugurei pro
i
- ,~x 32 X I O '
•
0
RESOLUTION 396 „ Van.Sute 102
D 0 Drawer 305 - Lew cAlle rx 75017
+-mow..--~.-~...'IONAL 1NAT[q OIfTgICT
19 1212 19-1'a - Fa, 19 ;1221 9390
RESOLUTION 0 98 -_2j_
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
'JPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT
CONCERNING THE COST AND FEASIBILITY OF THE
PROPOSED PROJECT TO CONVEY WATER FROM
CnOPER (CHAPMAN) LAKE TO THE DISTRICT AND ITS
MEMBERS,
WHEREAS, the Upper Trinity Regional Water District entered into a contract with City of Commerce
to purchase water out of Cooper Lake (recently renamed Chapman Lake), which contract Is dated
July 5, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, the Contract and subsequent approval by Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Comm:ssion suthorue the District to convey the water from Sulphur River Basin to Trinity River
Basin for at least fifty years; and,
( WHEREAS, to share the water, the risk, and the cost, the District entered Into a subsequent contract
dated June 10, 1991, with Cities of Denton, LeisWis and Highland Village and with Denton County
Fresh Wafer Supply District No, 1A (collectively referred to as'onginal Participants') to purchase
specified amounts of water from the project; and,
WHEREAS, the District subsequently entered into a Simi sr contract dated October 1, 1997 with
Lake Cities Municipal Utility Authority to purchase a specific amount of water from the project; and,
WHEREAS, both contracts require the District to conduct a study to confirm feasibility of the project
before proceeding with final Implementation of a strategy to transport the water from Cooper Lake
to the Denton County area-, and,
• WHEREAS, the City of living also holds rights to water in Cooper lake and proposes to enter into
an agreement with the District, for Irving to construct fac4litles to convey water for both parties from
Cooper Lake to Lewisville Lake; and
WHEREAS, a report dated June 3, 19a. prepared by Don Rsuschuber, P. E. of DORA, Inc. ti
confirms feasibility of the proposed project, including a strategy to discharge the water into LeWaville
• Lake and to convey the water through the lake to the respective intake s"ures; and, O •
WHEREAS, in the contract with the original Participants, each parWpant has the option to
+Vf / participate or not to participate in funding a project to transport the water from Cooper lake, and,
i
1
l
7~; w, ILI 32XID
mom
O
1AILMJQ
7
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE DRAFT
From: Thomas C. Gooch, P.E. FREESE AMD NICHOlS
Freese and Nichols, Inc. INC.
D OM C. MHO P.E.
,,q
Dale: September 16, 1998 TEXAS No. 6066
Project DTN-98396 rile DTN98396IrmFJ-l0%?D
Subject: Review of City ofDer'.onParticik. t~on in Lake Chapman Water Delivery with Upper
Trinity Regional Water District
INTRODUCTION
In September of 1998, the City of Denton hired Freese and Nichols to evaluate Denton's
participation with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRW D) in facilities to deliver water
from Lake Chapman in East Texas to Lake Lewisville, Freese and Nichols' assignment included the
following:
• Revicw new population projections for Denton from Rust Environment and Infrastructure,
Inc., and develop a revised set of water use projections for Denton based on Rust's figures.
` • Analyze expected demand and sourcesof supply t-i determine when Denton might make use
of water supplied from Lake Chapman.
• If desired, accompany Denton Ftaff tea meeting with Dallas Water Utilities (DWU)officials
to discuss extending the raw water sales agreement between Denton rnd DWU.
• Contact the Texas Natural Resource Conservatir,i Commission (TNRCC) to discuss current
reuse policies ana the potential for indirect reuse of water imported from take Chapman.
• Make a quick review of other sources of raw water available to Centon.
0 ra Estimate the anticipated cost to Denton of participating in the Lake Chapman system and
compare to the projected cost of water from DWU. Consider the impact of reusing Lake
Chapman water, if possible, on the comparative costs.
• Provide Denton with the results of the analysis and factors to consider in reaching a decision
on participation in UTRWD's Lake Chapman project, Provide a memorandum and make
?resentations to the Denton's Utility Board and City Council, if desired. O
Mritor currently ha-, a contract with UTRWD for a 17,064846 percent share of water in Lake
Chapman AhichUTRWDhaspurchased from theCity ofCommerce. UTRWD Is about to contract
t, with the City of Irving for delivery of water from Lake Chapman to Lake Lewisville, where it can
EXHIBIT II
32 x0
a
u
yam.
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thoinas C. Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
September 15, 1998
Page 2 of 12 ,
he used by UTRW D, Denton, and others. Denton must now decide whether or not to participate in
the celivery of water from Lake Chapman to Lake Lewisville.
BACKGROUND
Lake Chapman, fortnerly known as Cooper Lake, was built by the U,S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The project was complete l in 1991, and it is located on the South Fork of the Sulphur River in Delta
and Hopkins Cc,inties, nea, the town of Cooper. (Figure I shows the location of Lake Chapman,
Lake Lewisville, and other water supply lakes in North Texas.) Storage in Lake Chapman is
controlled by three local sponsors:
• North Texas Municipal Water District (diversion right of 54,000 acre-feet per year)
a City of Irving (diversion right of 54,OFA acre-feet per )car)
• Sulphur River Municipal Water District (diversion right of 38,520 acre-feet per year)
These three local sponsors have obtained Texas water rights allowing them to impound wxtcr in
Lake Chapma i and r divert water for municipal and indusuial use. The Sulphur River Municipal
Water District water rights were acquired on behalf of three cities located near the reservoir,
Commerce, Sulphur Springs, and Cooper.
In 1990. shonly before the construction of Lake Chapman was completed, the Upprr Trinity
Regional Water District signed a contract with tho City of Commerce to purchase Commerce's
portion of the Sulphur River Municipal Water District's Lake Chapman water. According to the
contract, UTRIVD obtained the right to divert up to 16,106 acre-feet per year (14.4 mgd) from the
reservoir. The contract indicates that the estimated firm yield of Commerce's share of Lake
Chapmanis 13.122 acre -feet perycar(11.7 mgd), The contract gives Commerce the right to reclaim
A up to 25 percent of its water after 50years, to reclaim up to 50 percent or its water after 75 years, and
reclaim up to 100 percent of its water after 100 years. Thus the estimated firm yield committed to
the UTRWD over time is as follows ' ,
• 1990.2040; I. A.7 mgd
• 2040.2065: 8.8 mgd
• 2065.2090:5.85 mgd
W" ;
v F.
• After 2090: None
a,: 5 4.1 32do
,
o
Nil
mood"
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C. Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
{ September 15, 1998
Page 3 of 12
r
Sinc. Commerce is not required to exercise its ort.on to reclaim water, UTRWD could have the
right to make use of more than the minimum amounts listed above after 2040. Denton has
contracted with UTRWD to purchase 17.064846 percent of UfRWD's water in Lake Chapman.
Denton's 17.064846 percent share of UTRWD's 11.7 mgd firm yield is 2.0 mgd. Denton's
17.064846 percent sha x of I ITRWD's 14.4 mgd diversion right is 2.46 mgd.
Since the completion of Lake Chapman, North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD) and
Irving have constructed an 84-inch pipeline from Lake Chapman to near Lake Lavon and a pump ,
station at Lake Chapman, The current capacity of this transmission system is 110 mgd, shared
equally between Irving and NTMWD. Because of excessive costs forelectricityduring peak demand
times, Irving and NTMWD do not plan to operate the pump station and pipeline during TU Electric's
on-peak demand period, which is 12:00 non to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays during June, July, August,
and September.
At the current time, UTRWD plans to pay Irving to transport UTRWD water, using a part of Irving's
capacity in the 84-inch pipeline from Lake Chapman to near Lake Lavon, In addition, Irving plans
t toconstruct a pipeline from the end of the 84-inch pipeline near Lake Lavon todeliverwater to lake
Lewisville for Irving and UTRWD. In January of 1994, Irving signed a contract with Dallas,
allowing Irving to make use of Dallas' storage in Lake Lewisville"O. This will allow Irving to store
water delivered from Lake Chapm.m in Lake Lewisville and to meet peak summer demands in part
from stored water. Irving will also pass water delivered from Lake Chapman through Lake
Lewisville for treatment by Dallas.
UTRWD has reached an agreement wiCr Denton that allo%vs UTRWD to pass w:te-delivered from
Lake Chapman through Lake Lewisville for treatment at plants owned by UTRt'JD, Denton, and
Lewisville. This agreement is discussed in a May 1, 1998, memorandum from Freese and Nichols
°r. Unlike Irving, UTRWD does not plan to make use of storage in Lake Lev +sville.
The details of UTRWD's plans for delivery of its water from lake Chapman are as follows:
a Irving will install a larger pump at Lake Chapman, so that Irving's capacity in the
transmission system from We Chapman to near Lake Lavon is increased to 78 mgd.
a Irving will share its capacity in the Chapman-Lavon transmission system with UTRWD for
a fee r'; he plan Is for UTRWD to use 22,74% of 78 mgd, or about 18 mgd"'.) O •
a Irving will construct a pump station and pipeline to Lake Lewisville from the end of the
3M► Chapman-lavon transmission system to the east of Lake Lavon.
K 32
5 El
J
ate.
0
rVww~d
DRAFT NIEbIORANJUM TO FILE from Thomas C. Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
l September 15, 1996
Page 4 of 12 ,
• Irving will deliver UTRWD water through the Lavon-Lewisville transmission system for a
fee.
• Irving will use Lake Lewisville storage pt+rchased from the City of Dallas for peaking and
will deliver raw water transported from lAke Chapman through Lake Lewisville to Dallas
for treatment.
• UTRWDwilluseitspass-throughagreementwithDenton anddeliverrawwater transported
from Lake Chapman through Lake Lewisville to Denton, Lewisville, and UTRWD for I
treatment.
I
• UTRWD will use other existing contracts for water from Lake Chapman (with Dallas and
Benton) to meet peak demands when deliveries from Lake Chapman are not sufficient.
UTRWD will not use storage in Lake Lewisville and will not acquire storage in Lake
Lewisville.
• UTRW D will pursue a Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission permit for reuse
of return flows originating from water transported from Lake Chapman.
POPULATION AND WATER USE PROJECfIONS FOR DENTON
Table 1 shows historical population, water i ,e, and percapita municipal water use data for Denton.
The population and per capita use figures in i ,%ble 1 are uncertain. The Texas Water Development
Board (TWDB) has two sets of historical M. l,dion data for Denton. One set is TWDB's estimate
of the population in the city limits, The other set is Denton's estimate of the population supplied
with water, which includes those in the water service area but outside of the city limits. We h'v~e
used the population estimates supplied by Denton, which result in more consist.nt per capita use
figures. Figure 2 shows the historical per capita municipal water use for Denton, including retail
customers outside of the city limits. Per capita municipal use averaged 161 gallons per person per
day from 1997 through 1996. The average increases to 165 gallons per person per day if the
extremely low use in 1994 is excluded.
Rust Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc., is currently developing population projections for
Denton"', °1, Their work predicts a period of rapid growth because of Denton's favorable location
near Dallas and Fort Worth and the growth opportuniti, from Dallas-Fort Worth Regional and 0 '
Alliance Airports fb), Rust has not yet finalized their projections, buk they have developed
preliminary figures through 2020. Table 2 gives Rust's projected population for Denton's retail
water service area through 2020 and the projected population after 2020, assuming that growth
declines to 2 percent per year after 2020. The projected growth would increase the population of
~5 32X
k
4
swuraa
O
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILL from Thomas C, Gooch, P.E. o. Freese aril Nichols
September 15, 1998
Page 5 of 12
Denton's water service area from 78,786 in 1997 to over 400,000 by 2050. Table 2 also gives the
latest Texas "liter Development Board projections for the population in the City of Denton. The
TWDB projects a 2050 population of 142,813. Figure 3 shows these two projections graphically.
Obviously, these two comparisons differ substantially. Points to consider ie forecasting Denton's
future population include the following:
• Between the 1980 census 2nd the 1990 censuses, the population of the City of Denton
increased at an average compounded rate of 3.26 percent per year.
• Aco:,rding to North Central Texas Council of Government population estimates, Denton's
population increased by an estimated 2.14 percent per year from 1990 through 1996.
0 The TWDB projections reflect an average compounded growth rate of 1.29 percent per year
from 1990 through 2050.
0 The projections based on Rust's work and assuming that growth declines to 2 percent after
2009 result in a 3.16 percent per year everage compounded growth rate from 1997 through
2050.
Given Denton's favorable location, current development trends in the Metroplex, and Denton's
historical population growth, the TWDB projections seem unrealistically low. For the purpose of
this study, we will adopt Rust Environmental and Infrastructure's preliminary figures through 2020
and assume that growth declines to 2 percent per year after 2020. Rust's I . liminary figures project
a sustained period of rapid growth for Denton from now through 2020, and it is possible that growth
will be slower. However, they are clearly more reasonable than the Texas Water Development
Board figures,
Table 3 shows projected water use for Denton based on the following assumptions:
0 Use of Rust's population projections through 2020 with growth declining to 2 percent per t
year after 2020.
0 Municipal per capita water use of 165 gallons per person per day.
e 0 Projected industrial use of 53 percentofTWDB projected basecase Industrialuse for Denton
County. (The ratio of 53 percent is based on 1990 historical figures, in which Denton's
industrial use was 53 percent of the county total.)
~P { • Municipal sales by Denton to UTRWD through 2004 based on UTRWD projections, with
k
~1*' 25 x 10
10
p
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C, Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
September 15, 1998
rage 6 of 12
I
sales in 2001, 2002, and 2003 limited to avoid shortages. (UTRWD can buy from Dall s.)
These projected sales are primarily excess raw water, with some sales of treated water.
• No municipal sales by Denton after 2004 based on discussions with Denton staff. (Denton
can sell excess raw water to UTRWD if Denton has excess supplies and UTRWD needs the
water.)
• In a dry year, additional pet capita municipal demand would be 25 gallons per person per
day.
Table 3 shows Denton's projected average-day water use in a normal year increasing to 68 mgd by
2050, with dry-year use at 78 mgd.
TIMING OF USE OF LAKE CHAPMAN WATER
Denton's current supplies include 19,76 mgd from Lake Ray Roberts, 4.34 mgd from Lake
Lewisville, and about 0.6 mgd from':) nton's share of return flows of treated wastewater to the two
lakes"'. Denton's total supply, not including its contract with DWU, is about 24.7 mgd, Because
Denton's share of return flows of treated wastewater to Lakes Ray Roberts and Lewisville Is
expected to increase over the years, Denton's supply is expected to increase to about 25.4 mild by
2030.
Based on the water use projections given in Table 3, Denton's water use is projected to exceed its
supply in 2012, one year after the city's current contract with DWU expires 1". At that time, Denton
wi'i need additional supplies from Lake Chapman, DWU, or some other source(s). If population
f owth is slower than Rust's preliminary figures, Denton'scurrent supply will meet the city's needs
longer, and the need for additional supplies will be delayed
r
OTHER SOURCES OF RAW WATER AVAILABLE TO DENTON
Because Den ton's projected demands exceed the amount of water available from current sources and
from We Chapman, Denton will have todevelop other sources ofraw water whether or not the city r
participates in the Lake Chapman project. Other potential sources of raw water include the
following
i
• Dallas lVc ter Utilities. Denton could seek to extend its existing contract for raw water with
/ DWU beyond the current 2015 expiration date. 1
l
i h x 10 32XI
u
..%*WNW
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C, Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
September 15, 1998
Page 7 of 12
0 lake Texoma. Denton could import water from Lake Texoma in the ReJ River Basin and
blend the water (which is high in dissolved salts) with water in Lake Ray Roberts and Lake
Lewisville. (This could be done in partnership with DWU, which also owns storage in Lake
Ray Roberts and Lake Lewisville.)
• New Bonham Lake. Denton could participate in the development of New Bonham Lake near
the city of Bonham on Bois D'Arc Creek in the Red River Basin. Because of the size of this
project, this option would require cooperation with other area water suppliers.
• George Parkhouse Lake or Marvin Nichols Lake. Denton could participate in the
development of George Parkhouse Lake or Marvin Nichols Lake in the Sulphur River Basin.
Because of the sire of these projects, this option would require cooperation with other area
water suppliers.
Purchasing raw water from Dallas Water Utilities is likely to be significantly less expensive than any
of the other alternatives listed above. Bringing water from Lake Texoma is likely to be significantly
less expensive than the development of a new water supply reservoir,
COMPARISON OF COSTS WITH AND WITHOUT LAKE CHAPMAN
Bringing Lake Chapman waterto Lake Lewisville will require asubstantW investment in raw water
transmission facilities. According to a recent cost estimate developed for UTRWD by Mr. Don
Rauschuber the initial cost would be significantly higherthan Dallas' current rate forraw water.
In order to comparc Denton's cost for additional raw water with and without the Lake Chapman
project, it is necessary to make a number of assumptions. Because some future costs are very
uncertain, we have made three analyses of the comparative costs, using assumptions unfavorable to
' the Lake Chapman supply, assumptions favorable to the Lake Chapman supply, and most likely
assumptions between the two extremes.
Assumptions Common to All Three Cases
There are a number of assumptions common to all three of the analyses comparing costs with and
without the Lake Chapman Project: O ,
I • Projected water use is taken from Table 3. (Note that this projection Is based on the rapid
1yf population growth proj:cted in Rust Environment and Infrastructure's preliminary results. ,
Slower growth would be unfavorable to the Lake Chapman project, and faster growth would
I
25 ~t U 321LJr
A ,
0
I '
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C. Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
September 15, 1998
Page 8 of 12
be favorable to the Lake Chapman project.)
i
• On an average-day basis, Denton's shares of Lake Ray Roberts and Lake Lewisville will
supply 19.76 mgd and 4.34 mgd, respectively.
• Denton's share of treated effluent inflows to the lakes through 2017 is taken from a
projection by DWU "%and Denton's share is assumed to increase by2 percent per year after
2017.
41 It is assumed that DWU will sell water to Denton through 2050. (Dente-n's current contract
with DWU extends only to 2015 and wuuld then have to be renewed.) j
• Costs in Don Rauschuber's memorandum to Thomas Taylor of UTRWD1101 are assumed to
be valid.
• Denton is assumed to be able to obtain 17.064846 percent of the total brought from Lake
Chapman by UTRWD. Based on Mr. Rauschuber's memorandum, this is assumed to be
17,06 4846 percent of 12.295 mgd, or 2.10 mgd in an average year. (in a drought, the amount
brought from Lake Chapman would be somewhat less. Denton's share would be 17.064846
percent of 11.7 mgd less an assumed 5 percent loss, or 1.9 mgd).
• Denton's share of debt service is assumed to be 17.064846 percent of UTRW D's total debt
service. Debt service for transmission facilities is assumed to be for 20 years (2004.2023).
This results in an annual payment of $361,389 for Denton.
• Denton's share of raw water debt service and lake operation and maintenance costs are
computed similarly. These costs are assumed to continue through 2050.
• Ut, ton's share of [TCRWD's Lake Chapman transmission operating cost is assumed to be
• proportional to the amount of water Denton brings to Lake Lewisville.
1
• Operating costs are assumed to increase due to inflation at 3.0 percent per year.
rt A discount rate of 3.0 percent per year is applied to compute the present worth of future
expenditures.
• O •
Other factors which influence the economic analysis of bringing water from Lake Chapman are less
I certain, and different assumptions are made in the different analyses. These factors include:
{ 0 Whether or not UTRWD is able to obtain a reuse permit for water imported from Lake
0
u
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C. Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
September 15. 1998
Page 9 of 12
M
Chapman.
0 Whether or not UTRWD purchases Denton's unused Lake Chapman water in years before
Denton needs the water.
• Whether or not Irving charges a fee f : use of its transmission facilities after the bonds are
paid off.
• Whether or not Commerce exercises its option to reacquire some of the Lake Chapman water
after 2040.
• Future raw water rates charged by DWU. (DWU has projected its raw water rates through 1
2012, and the projected 2012 rate in 2012 is $0.5373 per thousand gallons, compared to the
current rate of $0.4155 per thousar i gallons. This represents an average compounded rate
increase of 1.85 percent per yearover 14 years. DWU's projections are used in all analyses,
with rates after 2012 based on assumed annual rate increases which vary in the three
analyses.)
Analysis with Assumptions Unfavorable to the lake Chapman Supply
I
Table 4 shows an analysis of Denton's cost of additional supply assuming that Denton participates
in the Lake Chapman project. The assumptions in this analysis are unfavorable to the Lake
Chapman supply Lnd include the following:
• No reuse of Lake Chapman water is assumed,
• UTRWD is assumed not to purchase Denton's unused Lake Chapman supply.
• • It is assumed that Irving will charge a'ce for water transmission facility use equal to yi of
the debt service amount after the bonds are paid off.
• Commerce is assumed to reacquire 25 percent of its Lake Chapman water in 204E
• DWU's raw water rate is assumed to increase by 2.0 percent per year from the projected
• 2012 level of $0,5373 per thousand gallons. (This is a low rate of increase,)
Table 5 shows an analysis of Demon's cost for additional raw water without Lake Chapman under
the same assumptions. Table b gives the culeu.ative present worth costs with and without Lake
Chapman water under these unfavorable assumptions, and Figure 4 shows the comparison. Table
---,~,--ff f5 x 10 432x d
moons
s ,
0
Y
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols
Septe ber 15, 1999
Page 10 of 12
6 shows that the cumulative present worth of the Lake Chapman project is negative until after 2050
under these assumptions. In other words, Denton's Investment in the Lak: Chapman project does
rot pay off until sometime after 2050.
n Favorable to the lake Chapman Supply
Table 7 shows an Aitemative aralysis of Denton's cost of additional supply assuming that Denton
participates in the Lake Chapman project. The assumptions in this analysis am favorable to the
Lake Chapman supply and include the following-
• Full reuse of ).Ake Chapman water is assumed, including reuse of the return flows from
reused water, The resulting additional supply frorn re se would add 3.15 mgd to the 2.10
rngd brouglt from Lake Chapman,
• UTRWD if assumed to purchase all of Dentot,'t unused Lake Chapman supply at the current
DWU price.
0 It is assumed that Irving will not charge a fee for pipeline use after the bonds are paid off.
• Commerce is not assumed to reacquire any of its Lake Cho, man water.
a DWU's raw water rate Is assumed to increase by 4.0 percent per year from the projected
2012 level of $0.5373 per thousand gallons. (This Is a hi-4 rate of Increase.)
Table R shows an analysis of Denton's cost for additional raw water without lake Chapman u lder
these favorable assumptions, Table 9 gives the cumulative present worth costs with and without
Lake Chapman water, and Figure S shows the comparison. Table 9 - Lowe that the cumulative
oresent worth of the Lake Chapman project is negative until 2019 under these assumptions. In other
vxrds, Dcnton's investment in the Lake Chapman protect pays off In 2019.
I
Analysts with Most Likely Assumpriors
Table lU shows a third analysis of Denton's cost of additional supply assuming that Denton
A participates in the Lake Chapman project. The assumptions in this analysis are those considered •
most likely based c:, enginceringjudgment and include the following:
J~v a Ne reuse of Lake Chapman water is assumed.
I
I
C u '
DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thom" 2. Gooch, RE, of Freese and Nichols
September 15, 1998
Page I 1 of 12
a UTRWD is assumed to purchase Denton's unused Lake Chapman supply at the DWU raw
water price from 2009 until Denton needs all of the water.
• It is assumed that Irving will not charge a fee for water transmission facility use after the
bonds are paid off.
• Commerce is not assumed to reacquire any of its Lake Chapman water.
• DWU's raw water rate is assumed to increase by 3.0 percent per year from the projected
2012 Iesel of $0.5373 per thousand gallons. (This is a moderate rate of inerzase.)
Table I 1 shows an analysis of Denton's cost for additional raw water without Lake Chapman under
these most likely assumptions. 'cable 12 gives the cumulative present worth costs with and without
Lake Chapman water, and Figure 6 shows the comparison. Table 12 shows that the cumulative
present worth of the Lake Chapman project would be negative until 2039 under these assum-lont
In other words, Denton's investment in the Lake Chapman project would pay off I i ?~34.
FACTORS TO CONSIDER
The City of Denton should consider the following factors in deciding on parti.,ipation la the Lake
Chapman project,
• [kit nn's current contract with ')atlas Water Utilities runs until 2015. If Denton cannot
extend that agreement, the city will need a major amount of additional water supply from
some other source or sources as its demand increases.
• It appears likely that investment in the Lake Chapman project would payoff in the Iongrun,
^ once the initial capital investments are amortized.
• In the near future (at least until 2012, when the city can use the water), participation in the
Lake Chapman project is likely to a Id to D enton's raw water costs without any immediate
I benefit.
• Key factors in the economic analysis of the Lake Chapman project include the following;
- Whether Denton can extend Its raw water purchase contract with Dallas Water 0
Utilities beyond 2015,
- What DWU charges for raw ,,,b r in the future.
2h 10 32X10
r,
•
vroauia ,
1
V
1 DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO FILE from Thomas C, Gooch, P.E. of Freese and Nichols I
( September 15, 1998
Page 12 of 12
Whether UTRW D can obtain a reuse permit for Lake Chapman water,
Whether UTRW D will purchase Denton's Lake Chapman water In the years before
2015, when Denton cannot use it.
Whether Irving charges a fee for III RWD's use of its raw water transmission
facilities from Lake Chapman after the bonds are paid off.
• The amount of water available from UTRWD is relatively small. Under each of the sets of
assumptions used in this analysis, it will not make a large difference in Denton's total supply
or in the overall unit cost of the water provided to customers.
0 It should be emphasized that the decision on the Lake Chapman project is nut a matter of
critical Importance for the City of Denton. Of much greater importance Is the potential
termination of the raw water purchase agreement with the City of Dallm in 2015. There is
no renewal clause in the existing Dallas contract, and Denton should promptly begin to
/ explore the outlook for a new agreement to replace the existing one as of 2015 or earlier,
Even with the estimated 2.1 mgd of water from Lake Chapman, Denton is projected to need
over 40 mgd of additional supply by the year 2050 from Dallas or some other source not
currently available.
i .
P f.
"1 1
t ~
32 X'
b.' f \ 5 II
„
4
,
I
I
.i
I
d;
iF f
n
C11i-1yJ]K8(~a
LIST OF_REFERENCES
1
a ,
L 0,
j
APPENDIX A +
LIST OF REFERENCES
(l) Upper Trinity Regional Water District and Commerce: "Water Sale Contract by and between
the City of Commerce, TcAUS and the Upper Trinity Regional Water District," July 5, 1990.
(2) Dallas and Irving. "Water Treatment Services Contract," January 8, 1998.
(3) Freese and Nichols, Inc.: Memorandum to File from Thomas C. Gooch, P.E., "Review of
Proposed Lake Le-wisville Pass-Through Agreement between Upper Trinity Regional Water
District and City of Denton," May 1, 1998. r
.t,
(4) Don Rauschuber,DORA,Inc, andDwidRyburn,CityofIrving: "Draft•Subject to Revision
Presentation Packet Regarding the Delivery and Treatment of [wing's Lake Cooper Water
Presented to the Irving City Council," July 16. 1997.
(5) Rust Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc.: Letter from Albert C. Petrasek, Jr., to Dave Hill
of Denton, April 17, 1998.
(6) Rust Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc.: "Presentation to Denton City Council,
Population Forecasts 1998 through 2020;" March 24, 1998.
l (7) Rust Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc.: Material Provided to Denton by Fax and
Computer File, September 8, 1998.
(8) Dallas and Denton:"Untreated Water Purchase Contract,"August7,1985,andSupplemental
,
Agreements 1 and 2.
(9) Dallas Water Utilities, "Exhibit C - Denton's Projected Water Use and Demand," undated.
(10) DORA,Inc.: Memo rand u m to Tha n as Taylor of UpperTri nityRegional Watt r District from
s Don Rauschubcr, "Delivery of UTAWD's Lake Chapman Water to Lake Lewisville," June
3, 1998, t ,
i
'r K1J 32x~~
r. , r1 7 1 y: 5'
x 1
e
0
i
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Texas Water Development Board Historical Data
Table 2 Projected Population for Denton
Table 3 Projected Water Use for Denton
Table 4 Cost of Additional Raw Water with UTRWD Chapman Water -Assumptions
Unfavorable to Chapman Water
Table S Cost of Additional Raw Water without UTRWD Chapman Water - Assumptions
Unfavorable to Chapman Water
Table 6 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs - Assumptions Unfavorable to
Chapman Water
Table 7 Cost of Additional Raw Water with UTRWD Chapman Water -Assumptions
Favorable to Chapman Water
Table 8 Cost of Additional Raw Water without UTRWD Chapman Water - Assumptions
Favorable to Chapman Water
Table 9 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs - Assumptions Favorable to
Chapman Water
'rabic to Cost of Additional Raw Water with UTRWD Chapman Water - Most Likely
Assumptions
Table 11 Cost of Additional Raw Water without UTRWD Chapman Water - Most Likely
Assumptions
Table 12 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs - Most Likely Assumptions
J 1
1 fi
J
I'
1
1
r} l
,a, a ry 32 X 10
e
0
Table 1
Texas Water Development Board Historical Data
Use in Acre-Feet Per
Year Self-Supplied Purchased Total Municipal Industrial Power Raw Sales Net Municipal Population Capita
Use Sales Sales Sales Use
1980 5,272 ',197 10,669 188 _ 333 266 9,882 48,063 184
48,063 137
1981 5,186 2,777 7,963 _ 146 268 194 194 7,355 48,06.3 144
119982831 55,,053 5,070 53,207252 8,322 169 275 120 _ 120 7,758 4806
' 9l 163
10,260 210 - . 313 87 _ 87 _ 9 ,650 52 , 8
1984+ 5,124 6:522j 11,646 318 - 750 _ 88 88 10,490 55,000 170
1985' 5,052 6,376 11,4281 7491 407 79 10,193 60,000 152
19865,089 6,668 11,757 588 331 10,832 64,796 149
1981] 5,498 7,591 !3,0894 903 281 11,905 66,0001 161
1988 5,938 8,105 14,043` 961 291 9 12,780 67,000 170
1989 12,920 741 13,663 1,016 283 12,364 67,500 - 164
1990 14,052 83 14,135 1,124 350 12,661 68,560 165
1991 13,296, 1181 13,414 1,122 332 _ 11,960 66,470 _ 161
1992 13,296 1201 13,416 1,019 326 296 39 11,775 67,000 157
1)9.11 14,5571 601 14,6171 1,037 368 _ 702 442 12,510 67,406 166
1994 13,023' 622 13,645 2,441 390 668 _ IO146 68,467 132
1995 14,185 615 14,800 1,654 376 76 12,694 69,550 163
1996 16,025 67 16,0921 1,693 543 84 13,772 70,450 173
Nutcs: a. Self•supplied, purchased, municipal sales, Industrial sales, and power sales data were provided by Denton to TWDD.
b. Population estima!es were provided by Denton to TWDB. They include retail customers outside of the city.
c. Municipal sales are sales by Denton to outside water suppliers.
d. Average per capita water use from 1987 through 1996 was 161 gallons per capita per day, Excluding 1994, average
was 165 gallons per capita per day.
32 x C7
O
l Table 2
Projected Population 'cr Denton
Year Prected Population
Rust Proiections for Water Service Ara I TWDB Most Likely
Projection Increase Source - (City Limits)
1997 78.786 ! Rust
1998 82,l~ 1 4.3% Rust
- - -
1999 85,671 4.3% Rust
2000 -
89--,380- ---4 3%-- Rust - - 77,090
L
2001 93,277 Rust
2002 t 97,365 4.4% Rust
2003 101,653 4.4'b Rust
2664 i._ 106,145 - - 4.4% - - Rust----- ~----v_
Rust
2005 1 110,as0 4.4%
2006 ` 115,775 4.4% 1 Rust
2W7 ` 120,927 _ 41% ' Rust
Rust
2008 126 314 r 4 596 Rust -
2009 131944 15% Rust
2010 137,827 4.5 % Rust 90,051
2011 143,973 -45 - % Rust
2012 150,390 4,50c Rust
_ _
2013 157,090 4 Rust
2014 t 164,083 4 5%
2015 0- 3-8-2 4417c Rust _
2016 178,998 4 4% - Rust -
2017 186,945 _ 4.4% Rust
2018 195,215 4.470 Rust
2019 203,884 .44 50 Rust l
2020 212,905 4.4% 1 Rust 104,253 -
2011 221,421 4 0% A.ducini to 2% growth
.
n to 2% 8_rowth
2022 229,_392 { 3 6% RednciB
~ 2023 _ ~ 2J6,7t3 3 2% Reductng to 2% growth., ~
2024 243,362 2.8 % 1 Rcductnj to 2% growth
2025 249,203 J 2.4% Reducing to 2% growth
2026 254,187 l 2 0% Assumed 2% growi'
2021 1 259,271 29' Assumed 2% growth
2028 264,456 2.6% Assumed 2%~rowth j
r 2029 -
269,745 2 Assumed 256 growth _ 0
2030 275,140 i 2.0% Assumed 2% growth I II9,486
l
~71~ 4
r
O
'MiMM -
Table 2, Continued
Year Projected Population
Rust_ Projections for Water Service Area TWDB Most Likely
Projection Increase Source (City Limits)
_
2031 2_ _ 280286,,643 256 22..0%_0% _ Assumed Assumed 2% 2% g rowth
growth -
-
_40-3 33 291,981 2.0% Assumed AgroW_t
2034 - 297,821 _2.0% Assumed 2% growth 2035 - - !03,777 Assumed 296 rowth
-
2036 309,9 53 2.0% Assumed 2% growth
2037 316,030 2.0% Auumed 2% owth _
2038 322,371 2.C9'0 Assumed 2% growth
_ 2039 328,818 2.0% Assumed 2% growth _
_ 2040-_ 333,394 Assumed 2% growth 130,6.3_0-
2041 342,102 _ 2.0% Assumed 2% growth
2642 348,944 2% growth
355,923 2.0% II 6ssumed2%rowth
2044 - } 363,041 2,0% Assumed 2°o~rowth -
2045 370,302 _ 2.0% Assumed 2% growth _
2016 _ 377,708 2.0% - Assumed 2% growth
2047 f 385,262 2 0% Assumed 296 rowth
rowth {
2048 j 392,967 20% Assumed L%
_ -
2049 i 400,8j6 } 2 0 Assumed 2% growth
2050 408,843 2.0% Assumed 2% rowth 142,813
Notes: a. Rust Environmental and Infrastructure projections are used through 2020.
I
Growth is assumed to reduce to 2>b per year by 2026 and be 2% per year therafter.
b. IWOB most likely projections are for the City of Denton only, not
including the part of the water service area outside of the city limits.
i
1 r
• ~ Q A
l
32X`
s
i
,
• o ,
l
I
i
Table 3
Projected Water Use for Denton
Projected Average-Day Wale; Use in MGD _
Year Projected Growls Projected Projected Project d Total I Additional it
Population Rate Municipal Vet Industnal Use Muncipal Normal DryYearUse Dry Year Use
(165 GPCD) Sales Year Use (25 GPCD)
1999' 85 611 _ _ 14.14" - 0.37 6_67 2138 2.14 _23.32
20001_ 89 380 3 0% _I4 751 D 38 _8.83 23.96 223 - 26.19
2001 93,217 44b~ -1539 8,951 24.731 21.06
_O y ---8.28 2474 233
2002 97,36 5 243 17.17
2003 101 6-1- 4.496r W 16,77 0.407.58 24.15 2.34 27,19
55 106,143 44961 --11511 __.--0.4i 0.00 11,92 2,63 20.31
110,850 4 496 _ _18 29 _0,42 0.00 y 18,71 2,T72il48
2006 1157751 1,496 19.10} _ 0.42_ 000 _ 19,52 -_2,8922.41
2007 120921 _43% 19.931 0.00 20.38 302 23.4
- - -------t-- -
20081 126,314 4,3% 20.- 1 0001 21_28 _ 3.16 24.44
0091 131,944 43% 21.77 044 0.00 22.21 3.30 23.51
.010 137,921 4596 22.7 045 000 23.19 3.43 _ _26_64
2011t__ -14-3,97-3 4 5% 2~ 76 ~ O A6 __000 24.22 3.60 17.82
2012$ 150 790 -4-34 2481 0.46 0.00' 25 2T 3.76 29.03
2013 137090 4596 2592+ O.K_ 26.39 _ 193 3032
2014+ 164.08 3} 4 5% 27.07L 0 411I 000 27 54 A 101 - -31 64
10131 171,3821 1496r 2828 -0487 -0.00---28161-_-- 428 3304
2016 1789981 4496- 2933 0,48 000 3001$ 443446
2017
2018 186 945 4.4 ',t 70 83 0 49 _ 0,00 31 34 4.61 3601 i. 4t 3221 0 49 0.001 32.70 4 BB 3738
f , 31,64 0,50 _D003414
0 2-t -__3924
2019 207 884 4 35.13' _ _
-050,
2 29US~ a-4.4-%
20221 1 221,421 _ 0,50 - 000 37 63 3.32 4095
.f4 4'4)% 36.53 t _ - Osi oa_- -
j___ o 31.04 Ss4~~4i.sa
2022 ~ 229 392 3 696 _ 37.85' 0.51 O OOi 38.36 5 73 44.09
392 45.50
2027 236733 31% 39.06} 032 000 _3938 ___573
1024 243,3621 2.81* 40.15 1 0.3 21 000 40,67 6.08 46.73
2025 249,203+ 2.41 A 41, l2i 0 33+ 0 DD~ 41 63 6 23 47.88
I - - - 7 4
2026 254 181 2.0116 ' 41.94 - 053 r 0 OD, 42.47 _ 6 3S 48,82
,8
-44 ,78
6341-- 0.00 4
202 259, 27 7
2028 264,456 2D% 96 1 371 648 49
1 1 Z2 0 341, 0.00 1 44,16L 6.61 50.79
43
2029J 269,743 a% w 44 41
51
2076' 275,140 2096 43.40 0.35} 0,000 45.95 688 32.83
v
e .
iv
ti
e r I
*ANPM la
O
a
Table 3, Continued
Projected Avenge-Day Water Use in MOD
Year Projected Orowth Pro~ecled Projected Projected II Tout [-Addidonal r Total
Population Rate I Municipal Use I Industrial Use Muncipal , Dry YeuUse Dry YearUse
(165 OPCD Sales i 25 OPCD
2011 280,643 2.0%1 46.31'_ 055 0.00' _4687} 7.02 33;89
_._..-__._._.~-i-
2032 286 256I~2~01 47,23 0.3T - 0.00 +7.80 1.16 54.96
2033, _ 291,9811 2,0%t - 48.11 0. 9 000 _ 004 7.356A)71
20347 297,8211 20% 49.14 0601 _ 000 49.74 _ 7.43 37.19
2035$ 303,777 2.0% _ 50.12 061 0000 :0.73 7.39 3832
2036 309, 153 2.0% 31.13 062 _ 0,00 5175 7.75 5950
2. OlTj 316,050+ 210_% J-32.13t -063 0.00 5278 -7.90 6068
2-0387 322,371 2.0% 53.19065 _0_00 33 84 _ 806 61.90
8.22 63.13
_ 2039, 328 818 _ 2.0% _ $4.25 000 _ 50_I
2040 335 3d4~ 2.0% SS 34 0.67 0.00 36 01 8,38 64.39 2041 342,102 1 20% 56,43 0.68+ 0.00 37,13 8.33 63 68
2042 3.1,944-2 0% 57.51 _ 0 70 0.00 5828 J 8.72 67A0
2043 _455,913 2.0% _5873 0.71 0.00' 39.148.90 6814
2044 363,041 2_0% _ 39.90 0.72 0.00 -60.62 9.08 69.70
20451 3?0302 - 9.0% 6_1.10+___-_ 0.74 - 0.000' 61.64 9.26 71.10
7251
2046, 37' f08' 2.0+ 62 32+ _ 0.73 _ O.OOr 63.07 _ -----i-.4-4
2047E 383 262 _ 2 63_STj -0. a=00 6433 9.63 392 13.96
2 0% 071 00 } - O.Wt 65611 9,82 73.43
2048 967 64 84 __u.__
2419 400,8''6' 2.0% 6614 000 6693, 10,02 76.95
2050 - 409,843 61.46 0.80' ` 000 68261--- -10,22 78.48
Nnles a. Population is for water service area. Figures through 2020 ue from Rust Environment and Infrastructure,
b. Projected Municipal Use is 165 gallons per person per day.
c. Projected Industrial Use is 53% percent of TWDB base eve projected Denton County industrial use,
d. Proj&ted Municipal Sales Arougb 2004 are from IYMWD, with sales limited In 2001, 2002, and 2003 to
avoid exceeding the supply. After 2004, municipal sales are only made if water is available.
e. Additional Dry Year Use is 25 gallons per person per day.
1
M '
i
Aft
+ r ' ' 1rJa.'ti
( 1
e
11
2 5
o .
o ,
J,
r..... .i.... .,-a~1iwM.JY~~✓'eM,~L~Rrvw,YiN.~,r•..1'Rn1vmIMM4Aw•M~.Y,IYYN1MMe,!'WM M.I+N?M!!M.'N'e?'Y~YV'eMN,,!f^N1Nnuh~1`1~'INMFMPtIYYfY'.NN+44WPMYYR'.V•'~IIY'kH/9111~1•/~ITNN`wiM'w.~.1
Yr~M'~.,a
Table 6
Cost of Addlylanal Raw WeIrr with UTRW'D 0a3ma1 Water
• Aleum pylons Unru9ur1h 1e W Chapman Water -
Yea AoJforj ewed Supplj!I u el „ - Mbliond lomrn _ _ _ _ Coal of AM onJ l9ppl,n r
Watee We Ras R,Irne Itwyerflk Lfflued Taed 6fji UMW'D Ds1yu UTkw UTAW6 VN14b iJeb DJlar TaJ ►rium Lvo99L111Yr
(S6unee) CT an C idllflm Rn Waler rarln UMWD Ud1 Caal Carl Wute Rea. Wat6
1994 3111 1976 _ 474 061 2a 11~ 3.1] 000 000 D 0 0 L _ 0 0 0
2l1uJ 31 W _ 1976 1._34 061 7473 0.70 _ 0001 0,30 0 0. 0 0 _0
141 7171 1976 114 063 21731, 06D 0001 0(10 D 0 6 0 D 0 0 0
2001 2474 1975 _ 4l4k 066 N11 000 000111 000 0 0 _ 0 0 0 _ .0
1110) 7473 1976! 114 061. 2113 D.on 000 D00 0 0 0 0 - 0 _ 0 - 0 0
211W 179! 19761 IH 067 1/713 6.13 _ 000 oa 1161,719 141240 0 D L4,134 0 1109659 UIJ 011 !N41,051
1 _
ZIm 21116 111071 1 1 19 V 76 76 1 _ / 14 u D076r 7 71 2/ 71 12 1 I 607 W 000,7 00 D 0 00 00 167611,119 ,119 41/l71u1 l 0 0 _ _ a 0
0 041 45x6 1 0 0 40940994730 1 J3 1411J1k41 66 1,311,10 676 ~♦n
2111 20 19
2W9 71 24 t47b` 1.34 074 N 14 .,1 36 _ OW _ ,000 761,319 1117 ,0 D 01963 D _ 410 Q31 ]0 ll6 1,619~C7!
7104 2231 19761 414 071 14111 267 000 000 1611119 4117! 0 0 DJn61 0 _ 411,16 _7961111 1,011,346
2010 1119 19764 134h 010 7400 1.11 _ 000 OW 361,519 11197 0 0 05165 0 _410211 _:17763 2.201109
Illy 113 1976 /141 Dal 24931 071 000 000 761119 1 19017 0 0 0.5]61 _ 0 410,403, 279,461 _ 3.4
1014 .417 1970 131` 0 36 7196 713
2011 614 ,976 _ 1'A 019 26"1 •0.10 OIW _ 0017 361,719 1976 _'22]52 0 OSIIO 6 5 935 ' 345076 I, ,159 I
111, Q0
7014 7154 1976 4 N 0 92 ISO 217 2 10 011 361119 49,196 111916 0 0 ]796 611695 61! 46 427 121 31 . 40, . $52
70 161 361,119 49,!71 194,594 0 0!707 315071 910792 $04741 4,109,616 '
15 76 76 1976 111 1 O DS ]103 •711 1 l0
..9f1 10,11 1916 _ 411 096 _7S 06 •491 Ito 713 361,199 19611 200,412 0 03116 50076 1117210 717071 4,151.699
__..0 {139,13 39.12. 11309,107 160,967 ,6@•661
]x1111 3111 1976 1311 1021 2315 611 2to 412 161.719 49,914 20d,- 3
71116 12 70 1916 1 31 1 D4 23 14 •7 56 _ 7 10 3 46 361,339 49.952 217,671_ ~...0 0.6011 1,70196 1,1291193 „ .1,011
167 6.093121
7019 1414 1016 134 1 Def It 16 -.1-98 I la 111 70L.U0 SO,IiS 219,017 - 0 06171 IMS9911 7 1101411 , 1,177001 7,k1,919
7r170 156 1076 111 101 ]311 •1015 710 117 561119 30,211 f 1,71 _ 0 06795 1,911119 _7,7331111 3,.117 J37 91701,776
1011 1103 19 76 111 110 1170 -it 14 710 9 1 361.149 !0Ul 717,731 0 0.651 t71!<730 ,7976003 „1,41160 IO,AW,116
2022 1116 1976 _ 414 117 2175 •I! 14 110 116 361,319 50,6W 779,736 0 0.6549 2171,913 _),790700 ..1611,610 _ If,}17,126
71171 19 IN 1916 4 H7 114 7521 `1174 _ 710 1771 361,119 J0,711 1,404 0 0.6610 791/s337 1631011 I,U1,/71 1410/1131
2013 10 Dt 1916 _ 131{ 116 757b •1111 110 1711 IIOp95 50,941 557,901 _ 0 06114 _1720,147 ..1193117 _l17W 13] _ 151107,:17
71171 1167 1916 U/ 111 1521 •1617 110 1417 110,093 SIIM 761311 _ 0 06910 {61994! _4117713 .1111731 11,073,74,
• 3076 4247 1916 4311 120 7530 _`17,17 210 1101 1!0.69! !1,711 b1t64 0 07019 1199710 {400117 1921,451 19$7904
2017 402 1076 134 1211 2537 [100 210 1500 110,69! 51111 i 7141 _ 0 07711 4,196311_ 1106161 1,99167 21,113,136
21773 1116 1976 _ 4341 12111 133/ .IIW _ 710 _ 1611 110,895 31110 1131766 0 01)16 446110 _50711963 070,526 !5._651967
7019 tlIX, 1916 IN I2` - SS 36 •19.10 f10 1760 110,691 51,911 7911711 0 01321 4133,411 3760]131_ 2,16071 23,7906.0
]11111 4395 1076 IJI IN 2539 21. $61 710 1666 110 97 12137 301,171 0 0167 1,170,664 37066! 211610 21606143
k
J
X15 W Kta a2x a
v
6/44X311
k
5
. .._..,n..r.+M1.~wu~,~,+../te,w.,.~n•, 4ww1~••~~,,.1;t.~Mv,-vnr~,lwln/MM1M1MMy,etl+iM l Mi~I,M.,y..~RIMMYIM1lN.a WaniTe MnMM MVII.~.`RMJ•r.vlnf~MP'.~n,!i'~(~.1`. ~1`IYNM..a
f4RN„WNhY.
Te6k C4nlinued
3'er PfrjKled _ Cares 59x1 Sourcu _ Addkwml S4wco Coq of Add Mhli I11B3M/
Wma U. I. It Ruhene Wllrllk E1R ei ToW ESa4e tfl71WD D611tl trmim ~VIAWD U7RWD Seer Ddlr Tai hucr Cianuhelre
7031 1611 _ 1976 I N 177 3317 211! 110 19.7! fM691 _!7313 31 I HIS 766 0 0.7117 3 21014 / 0 70 79!,91!
C 14 m _ _ LO t- 79N _ 1.0,903 171_ - Nall PM Worth
7077 17 10 1976 1.71 I'll 7! 1 7135 2 10 20 35 1/0695 11 7319100
- -.51 _ _!3 7 b,
1!6,070 2 )6),11! 35,65/ 171
7037 1117 1976 171 13 941 7729 210 11.19 110695 $7757 771,7/7 0 0111 6,791115 6161,630 31)9,120 3309476
2074 4914 _ 19.76 41 111 77.51 7113 210 2113 11069! 3]075 )11227 _ O 0.1]07 6709L_ 971 711.190 3315,!31 471111199
y L
23114 5013 1976 431 _ IN' 7731 1519. __310 2J 09 11069! S1v219 )51,1!1 D _D .N17 7,110917 3126,19 33757 l9! 30700091
Mr .1115 _ 1976 171 _ _ l at 111.37 2615 _ _ 310 2101 110691 37,!31 _ 361y003 0 _0.1612 7,!9!,621 1. 1 ;7y5_ 766110! 4716/799
7n, -5211 ]976 _ 41 130 25.60 3111 710 27.06 IY7,693 _!1191 371 M] 0 0.//13 1061137 I i7 - 2,131- /5601071
1 5 0 114 I9 76 1 M 153 _ 61 _ 2171. _ 110 _ _76 a 11069! 34,051 14_:711 0 0.1991 -A-%!:M. 1111119 L116,M1 15170,169
203§19 _ 1976 _ /J4 _I M if 66 •1973 710 1175 160695._ Sa~137 4951x_69 0 1,9171 90A1,131 9,71!,134 3,193591 77,777063
, 799 1569 7031 110 7122 180,693 !9,611 407437 0,9351 961,901 10,171,6!0 ~2 lis9,131 11121!7
1410 3601 mu 11 _
7G 1 17 14 _ 19 76 I A ~162~ 1171 -310 1 57 79.11 160 69! _ 11 112 313,!x6 _ 0 0.9541 10 391,676 10 fPA" 706!,577 31,11
/M
9 11 IM 7,14913 60 r-1)
y .54
:04 .7111 19 76; j !I _ -161 25 77 .32'5'3 1 !7 M_% 130,695 41 /01 - 737,131 _0 111771 10,99'1
7M3 19 44 19'6 / 34~ _ 1 61 1511 3].66 351 _ 33.09 _ 110693 41164 _ 372,975 0 O.7A31 I I,6Dg746 121111151 7 211,!33 6! 7139)7
]
7044 Wen _ '916{ 774 171 7511 7111 157 7314 1 W695 /1, I79 747135 _ D ID'36 17717,111 1l,/w11! )196791 61.013-22
iGn614 19761 171 151 7660 _ 137 3/43 110691 ILI26 3374111 _ 0 WD 179/0,10! I1SMy17 3,779031 70793111
7016 6707 1916 11 _ 111 _2517 7170 _ 7 756! _ IIOWS_ __/L]!0 _M7,717 0 1.0dM 17701y011 ,ALIM07 ]/31,81 714150/31
7G7 NN r•6 !1 _ 713 71.91 41/2 _ 157 __M I! _ 110369! /2317 )71,!79, O ._11147 11,95391 .1703 919 35LM`D! 777~N-,170
101 63 61 _ 19.761 /1 .,.,._,b 71.9! 4966 1!7 309 160,69!. 4L910 393m? 0 10%1 157403W 11949,776 115,146 11003'116
2G9 669! 1976 _l1 119 17.99 _ 4094 157 ._)9,77 _ 110,693 17,11/ ]97,M7 _1.111! 16067,113 16,611,379 _969le11/ ._11,691,160
-3010 6126 1976 4.1 191 1603 •43]7 1!7 1066 110695 1]174 109 7 O I! 169M 1719 I3 773,335 1111769! ,
Hula: 6. t15RWDcep6eltam of 170641516 of 12.117.741 dca ertee w)ayore(Rar n 9),m$361,759. Fr 5ap1wrom meof11q,6479r ytaf rfwr66VraPr.
A RIW Wow cal to 17064146% dde61 emlu d Vfi),005titefarma 0) Phu 11.0611461 of [Ake C%,W"DAM d516,415107996 OtdMm%wdl DAM WIeMdli 7.04 Parts.
c UTIM13 TamYnl eal it omvnl dw5H/y ficnim tAtled by 12.291 total brought (Rdeftwo0)Omee 1991 oaf of 361921111 (Rdgtbc/ 9) ldlrld A 14 per yue.
d ball., Un'u Cw 111n6eb from DW'U Rtecuto ihim1A 2017 ri rlumed I91xiew 74 per yer Ihoredr,
e 1A7..vru fala 7a pets, W9nA 91 i'1<ptf ]er
j
j
rR~
I
T7
1 ^ 6 71 95 ) 32X 0
e
e
n
S r
v,-...rarr.~v'rnan.r•urw.a."r..!•... F., un~n,~!n Mrn.r«.r. r.lrYra ♦,..r.m~.f1ti^r~Vf~•.•nr VrNIfYM`'.•rWa,.nn.FMAY,•,~f,W rM'0.,:1'M( TtM IF.~,M-:(.f'N,I..NT•V1'I4MMYMr'M'nF.rap:vr
W.Y.IYwmr~
1
Table S
Coal of Additional Raw Water will out MWD Chapenaa Water
AuunVU<CA Udwweble 10 ChQ911a6 Wile
Yee rl,Jealed Cu SUITIZ SOdcel__ Addgwal SOUrcd _ _ CmetAddalOOal Suppllel
_ _
%'wel Use Ray Ubcm 14whvitle Imam Told E19ae U1AWDrbind VIRWD UTRWD -um-W,61 lFDIOr Twat present Cwmule0ve
S1wr1 e! 10rn C itelfid An W9~ in VmWD Ud16 m Cm Watt 141. W'a06
19)9 71 31 .1916! 0G1 2411 ".313 Dub _ 000 0 0. 0.. 0. 0 D 0 0
7000 2196 1916 414 062 1472 _ 076 0DO 000 0 0 0 a 0 0
7001 1111 1976E « 3411 061 7474 000 000• _ P00 _._0 Q Q 0 0 0 0
2W2 7471 1916! 43/ 0641 2111 000 000 D00 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0
11311 7473 1976 434 065 277 000 000 000 6 0 0 0 6 01 0 _0
1 0 0
7W4 1742 19161 lH1 061 24171 617 000 OW 0 0. 0 _ 0 ONSt 0 O _
{ 11 _ _ Ii
21%17 11'll 1976 _ 414 061 1471 607 0,00 _ 000 0 0 0 0 04361 0 0 0 0
21" 1472 19161 463 0691 2479 117 000 _ 000 ___0 Of 01776 0 ___0 0 0
/fH
2007 20 to 19161 151{ 0721 _H li}_ LN _000._ ODO 0 0 0 0 0
2Cm6 2176 19761 4A 0111 2414 3.56 000 _ 000 0 6 _ 0 0 04963 0 _ 0 _ 0 _ ~0
119'7 2121 19761 434 071 2116 6T 000 ODD 0 _Ill 0 !0 03064 0 0 0 0
2010 1114 1976 4)11 D101 2490 171 000 _ 000 0 0 0 01163
]011 2421 19161 431! 013 7{94 071 000 000 0 D 0 _.0 05261 0_ _ 0 0 0
7012 7727 19 Is 4.34 016 1496 .011 000 011 0 D 0 _0 0.5573_ SM1P NS _ 1601793 _ V0193 340i19J
7015 2677 1976` IH 019 2199Ib OOD tb __0 0 _ 0 0 03410 110 D71 280,021 _1791779 219972
2014 7734 1916 4631 093. 2501 -117 000 - 52 0 0 _ 0 - 0 05390 311161 __!14161 320,412 _140311
371 _-LL 0 0 0 0 0,5707 777136 -_171,1 M _ 467,155 1007199
20!! 7176 7976 341 0951 _2305 •3.11 000
lots 3001 _ 1976 .131 041• ,.-24D1 _ {9) 000 493 0 0 0.3111. ixm360 _1016360 ._61W 11622.143
00
illl7 31 H 1976 1 31 101 .7117 -0 it 0 _ 122 _---D, 0 0 0 03972 «~6741 1,$411.7413 _ 761021 7_390771
2011 3170 1916 431 110 04 - -34 .736 a. 136 a 0 0 06051
1 1 06 27 16 191 000 7 9t 0 0 0 06173 1027 996 ! 027 996 1 017,460 4102111
21719 N 14 _ 1976, 434, J
3020 M 61 19761 4N t01 7511 1017 000 IO/S 0 0 0 _ 0 067% 1401070 Ib1070 IU)0~ S.633,311
22$ 0 DO 0 110 1114 000 4S U -0 641-1 D _ D 0 0 ..a 52" _77711199 `f,17L699 11;ig 10 0 ),)14,151
2011 3104 19161 3 4 _ i106L011 1061 M9
2072 11th 19161 1111 111 _ 1522 .1114 000 11 _0 _..,_0 0 06!19_ JLA19,966 _1140966 11,S45l4l 11606,116
)2 J 19 t6 476 134 111k 1521 11 11 00D 1134 0 D 4 0 06610 {/9637W 3,496,119 1660 10.71e.566
+074 4061 1 1 111 I 16 2526 1111 000 1141 0 0 0 0 06611 7131677 ,302,611 1,777,174 12(IM 0
21127 1161 1147b76 4 63 117 2311` 1611 000 16 17 7 0 0 D 06'150 11321660 4132660 1169117 15,9731021
1u26 1247 1976 34 I:'ff JS 3U17❑ OOU Uli u ._,__0 0 D 07014 1447,717 1412,717 1411101{ IS_S64~131
7077 4112 Y916~ /331 172 2f 12I IIW 000 tam __0 0 0 _ 0 01171 4,75 0767 __1150767 7015971 _17,00799
_ 0 0 0 _ 0 1 07776 017110 5,072,190 7.019671 19,974170
7071 4s IN 1976 111 1211 N1{` 111.1 0001_. II9 3
2024 47(N, 1976` 4141 1261 2516 1910 000` 1970 0 0 0 0 07524 _1,430~02 .5410157 7,161917 31 ,1 N/53
- -
7010 45 45 19 16] / H~ 1 29~ 25 39 20 70 0 00 7076 0 0 0 0 01611 },7S1071 51!1171 7 7k 417 241;101311
•
'I
1
1
i I
7 I
32hOU
1
p
A r.
O y
. 1.
Amen"
7
..................w•.+.w.......,y,y..v.w....,.....*++.w.r~+nrwwv,s.rMn~wrta•wl+rwK^~wel....•trN.M+~te+.vlwnwrx.,Wnwsw•iv~M.+r,mf.M.nRwe'Y+w*vrMtrlrYtlM]M1'nM!"YYCtr/MeweleAYvrvMVFM•~+°r~.r
gym. r ~ r
Taek 1, Cmtiwed -
Year Ralmid Men Su3glY faucel__ Aatifflal Saortll, CotdMdi16M1 Supplld
Water llw Aly Autxna l~wllrlik FJ13urn Ta_W Eaco1 1R11WD 0001 VI 97 VRIWD IlrRwo Kidd Dam Tow 0rrnn Cumutriw
Shan e) C ilRWW IIIwW V LrM..WD Ue0Cu7 Cop Wong Pro. WW%b
2011 Id 61 ,_..._1976 4M _ 1.71 27.17 .1145 _ 000, 71_4 0 0 0.1127 127~95i 6,:7i95! 2510x799. __26,6111777
_ 2011 17 60 _ _ 19 76 LN L7! 25 4 -72.77 _ 0.00 2117 0 0 0, 0 0.11194 UI 6 Ur1/1 1J11~1D3 _ IS,0673
1071 1111 1975 44 IL 21a _1119 000 _ 2.119 0 .__0 0 0_ Alto 343.097 6 IMM "60.3 711fU 6191
1911 ._..1976 _ 4U III 1074 _3771 :171. 013m 9 7 6.669 _13341179 31.060,513
]075 5017 .__1976 134 _ IN ._7711+ _'13,19 000 77190 __0 _0 _ 41172 _1,790.377 7,790,777_ 7.609 b1 k,6701H
2076 1111 _ 197611 1 Ut 117 75 17 4611 900 _ 1616 _ 0 _ 0 _ 0 0 0.1617_ _ 1 u6,OX 1391031 76111779 H77 --5.1104
60 v11 000 2116 0 G 0 ___0 0,1117 _ILIII,Or 17!5097 7M1291 42117,199
M17 5276 1976 41 3 1 150 13
2011 5111 _197613 4U 157 1361 •2611 _ 000 2111 0 _ 0 0 _0 01991 _9257,111 1,2311711 2,. 7417 953,116
2039 5191 197611 _ 134 156 756e 1925 0077935 00171 _1.'!91.119 979UIl ,2,111131 /116/)/1
2040 3601 19761 _ /N 179 7389 1013 _ 060._._ 7032 0 0 0.9114 ~!_I,IO.. 103SIA157_99 577 30160,671
7011 5711 _ , 191677 _ 04 1 ei 2571 41 _ t io __71.4 0 _ _ 0 0 0 0,9541 10._931177 4-1971.133 11061697 53929111
4 _ 9 76 +j /U 1 ,3 4 161 _ 1575 7253 000 7151 0 _ _0 0 000.A 1193! 42 _II 3l lx 7a 11117)7 57,076,M0
7911 Sl is
2017 59 1976 A!3 3,177170 60,301,190
106•? - 60.11 .19161 LU lel _ 7371 dJ 66 000 2166 0 0 0 04937 Ik-6 I
_ 11 171 __tsll •3411 DOD 3491 0 0_ _ 0 0 IAI26 71163x41 13,16!74_ 7.707.06 e7,101," <
2045 it 14 1976 __..lH 1,1!.__ 3334 -3600 000 36 DO 0. 0 10319 U 71,706_ 3x72,706 3, MIG 6~69VN-3
7016 6107. __..1976 _ _4,71 _ 1.71 ?!I7 __•11.70 _ 000 1110 0 0 ICSM 14,)05,711 11.70! 711 SiM1917 701349191.
7047 6431 ._...1976 34 111 _ 7591 •714 000 3{tl ____•0.__0 10117 11070ul 13M I _J 'o K_? 17,99179) 1
2D01 o 976 _ 1,51 111_._2397 _3966 - 0(0___79,66 _0 0 0 0 _1_0967 15161492 ISi1W 47 1,6Hi113 __771110 W7.
..2049 54M 1916 _ 4_34 1.19 _ 1199 1091 000 0 _ 0 1.1111 11170_7x430 10,107,1W _31100110 IIyf 10,W
SONI 6126 1976 134 191 7603__7715 000 12L 0 0 0 0 1110! 17 79 10 1779 1010 7779M1 1709') M
- Nme•. . D.'21u Unit CalbWnhanDWUfa9clnl duou16701i an6 munwdro lxrew 34 pa Se11 Mre4Av.
0. bvnam rr'Irr for p19en wards h 771 Arr 7eI.
f
r V
{
I,
a
,r~kt119~, , 25 Io A 32XID
as
o
U
l
( Table 6
Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs
Assumptions Unfavorable to Chapman Water -
Year Cumulative Present Worth Cost
with { without Chapman
Chapman I Chapman Savings
1999------- - a - 0
20001 - - - 0
_ -2001 t 0 -----_0 0
2002 0- - - 0
2003 - 0 - 0 0
2004' 534310 y ($343,058)
2005', - 676,206 - - 0 1 (676,206)
(999,733)
2006 999,7331I 0
200, 1,313,919 0 (1,313,919)
0077
1,619035' 0 (1,619,035)
2009 1,9153461 0 (1,915,346)
2010 2,203,109 0 (2,203,109)
2011 2,482,573 IF 0 r (2,482,573)
2012 1 2,771,359 40,193
2013, 3,113,4301 _ _219,9321 (2,893,498)
2014 3,540,552 540,344 (3,000,208)
20151 _ 4,109,626 1007,499 (3,102,127)
-2-0-16L _
4,821 699 (3,199,456)
2017 l
2 390,271 (3 292,390)
17 5,682,661
a------ -
2018, 6,695,828 _ 3,314,751 3,381,077)
7,667,919 _ _ 4,402,211 - (3,465,708)
2019
20201 - 9,20076, 5,655,311 ° (3,546_465)
(3,623,487)
2021 10,684 8l6 ! 7,061,329
L
A 2022 _ V 12,303,426 , i - 947)
20T3 14.043 - --12,053,540 (3 66, N24 -15,803,487 -
2025 - ,79,947
17,655 -
,24_3 13,923,022 - (3,732,221)
15,W,828 (3,713,866)
2026 19,j78,694 _
_2027 21,575,736 17,880799 (3,694,937)
19,970,470 - (3 675,492)
2028 _ 23,643 962
• -20291 25,790040 22,134,453 (3,655,587) B •
---2030 28,006,145 -24,379,8381 3,633,307)
1
aI 1~
32XI[,7
e
Q . i. ,t
J
r
{ Table 6, Continued
Year Cumulative Present Worth Cost
with without Chapman
Chapman Chapman I Savings
2031 30.295,945 26,681,237 (3,614,708)
- --32,659,156 29,065,342 (3,593,814)
20331 _35_098,376 31,525,694 (3,572,682)
2034 37,611,899 34,060,533 (3,551,366)
2035 _ 40,200,094 36,670,175 3,529,919
2036 42,864,299 39,355,904 (3,508,395)
203745,604,021 -42,117,199 (3,486,822) ,
_ 2038 48,420,469 44,9955,216 (3,465,253)
't 302 302 4 51,313,065 47,859348 (3,443,717)
2040 _ 54,282,887 50,860,621 (3,422,266
2041 _ 57,348,464 53,929,318 (3,419,146)
60,492,399 57,076,640 (3,415,759)
02042 -
2043 63,713,932 60,361,790 (3.412 142)
67,013,223 63.604,896 {3,408,327)
_ 20441,
204570,392,261 J 70,392,261 66.987,912 (3,404,349)
2046' 73,850,135 _ 70,449,894 (3,400,241)
T 73,990,792 (3,396,038)
2047 77,386,8 L
30
1
20481 _ 81,002,276 _ 77,610,505 (3,391,771
2049, 84,698,160 81,310,685 (3,387,475)
2050 88,473,6951 85,090,526 3,383,169
r
1
V 1
j. ,
4
IO
to 32x
o
R9a`SY19.iP
_,....,..,...:.......~.............w.......r..,r....,r.r-...~...,.,...e~or,,,..,,...,ve,rt....rrn.-....:....,...v..rn.ree.vw. r..w. ,,-.a...vra .w.~v...e,;~; .rr.,-a}cf-.o-.
n..,.~.,."..,,...
Table 7
Cast 91 Addlllonal Raw Water with CTRW13 Chapman Well"
• A.uumptiona Favorable m CTlpmm Water -
led 14,,n Wd Cueem Supply f9Vlre1-_. .A6,atlmel So9ta1 _ Cas 9rApgalgl 3.,W6n_
N'elpl4e Key PCl,ene 1e.tlOlie F10uem --Tud Eueu lf1RWD 1RRWD LA" IJfAWD 11T9'ND I/1NWD Saleb DWI/ TOW _herm-- C9muletlve
8hwu a Cfi ma6 A.. C 'teWee R. Waa9 Ian UTAWD Moil C!" Cva WON hu, WOnh
1999 7111 1976 - 111 _ 061 _71,71 .___7.17 _ 000 ____000 -_Ow _ 0 0 .l.0 0 _000. .-.0. __a. 0
3000 Jim 1976 IN ___062 7172 076. _ 000 000 000 0 ~0 _ 0 0 0000 0 0 _ 0 0
Q In
lt 24 71 2M2 2473 1976 1311. _ 063 7/7e 000 ___000 OW 000 0 _0 0 0 0000 - 0 a
2M 1 7175 1976 _ 151111 065 2171 000 000 000 000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 d _ 0
low 1192 1916 4341 _ 061 31.77 615 000 000 OD0 -f61719 H1,7/o flWslfl _jSU 799 DM34 0 1'31fW - 3174174 _117/11
_ 2171 607 000 0_00 000 761169 /1„MI IM 796 _(3!16101 04511 ~0 203,3.16 164,940 319,111
]WS 1111 2976 _ Iu OM - -
2u70 1952 1970 Iii _ 00 24N _ 327 _ 000 000 000 _61769 46,445 111110 562 mit 01726 0 I%726 _ 115,297 {95,111
2007 20 36 _ 1976 4311 0771 2167 4 _ 000 a', aDo _61119 _e153 j!511 OR 371132 -1-W! _0 190413 _I/1147 _ 611,357
00 0 _ DO 61 1 411 0!764 0 11 121]]3 I 617r111 2128 19761 434 011 2114 355 000 0W 000 _ 61769 /1
662 81,721 (3{O k7 01%5 0 1171 139,673 710 M
20"w r21 1976 4 341 071 _.2151 167 000 _ _000._ p ._61119 43 5 _I190 ~)u~ 1566 0104 _._._0 _ 164 a" 1116]1 _ 014357
° _ l9,{
Ill
2 111 313! 1976 /u _ 0 17 21V7 071 0 _ 000. _ 9 1? _ijw3,793j
71112 1f D
7011 6191976 144 0193 U99 _ 110 000 000 _61109 p1J1 171011QlI,015 O.S17] 0 6,567 157y01/. 1111167 .1410 197e /341
G66• 21%{ -0ll 031 000 009 6111 /9 _
t - 161 IISQI _11/27737 _01131 0 151.107 _ 2"671 16111/1
201+ 3731 1976 431`.- 092 602 1.51 210 0,00 _6161 1u 911 0 ,05{11 599711 _ 173720 _ ,1114,161
818 217, 1976` 4311 095 It 01 371 710 161 0 301,389 19)11 104594 _0 0604 0 605514 361346 7151,M7
2016 Vol 1961 1111 091 02 2101 -491 _ 210 111 0 613" 194611 260151 0 06114 _0 611193 ]5/161 7110,104 I
4 10711 2511 b 6 it 210 121 017 !61319 19111 306115 _ 0 0031 {2011!12 16110. _ 110617 _ ]111011
2UII 3131 19 770 U/ 1
2011 1270 1976 114 104 2514 .7 2t0 !75 211 61119 19%1 212611 _ 0 06791 311161 Ill. I SD __14913m __YI30,Ili
1079 JI 14 1976 UI{- 1 OO} 17161 196 - 710 1_ 36) ._16/9 10111 _~I91017 9 _01010 96,710 167,761 _ 143110
2081 11 el 1916 1 N 101 it IIf{ 191 71 311 910 _ 61 !l0 ]0171 26r5r1 0 _0]737 161 2 D060LI0 _1 d, 16927 _ 117 19 45
1 3
21711 3701 1976 1311 1101 20, 1144 210 36 119 61369 10133 131551 0 _D~T617 II1L1a/9 3,3173117 _1111111 363.166
T1t 1676 1116 131 1134 62111 1111 110 ,]6 779 36019 10.600 0 0,7953 712611311 79171631 ~12i16 lil%a~1
L '1 10 56 197 6 I ul 1 11 29, 21 14 34 7 10 211 199 _ 361119 Sam 20eWf 0 _ 01111 ~17110M 114.1171 _ 1 ,10101 10007,197
` -
81:1 10 e1 197E4 /s4 IIO` 311e~ .ii 541 110 121 1006 _ 0 Sow, at 0 ~O.lw1 71SsSN 316!4111 1~10f 95716ui61
71175 Il hi 1976tttt` IN III 75201 !llSII 0. _01911 3)911]70 39109.91 1760M1 75171149
11 dell it 171 1t o1 0 51,10 361
571.0 12+7 Iv Sa /111 3 120! 256 1111 210 ,121 111! _0, 31,_ 20 lW_ 0 01)01 4,011025 /134707 _1104600 15161619
. Tor 41.12 197 111 1 23i. _6124 d1_ - 210 111 170 D ,77117 277111 0 0%76 1_44 71651 1,796606 _l OJ~f21 - 8101071
1
70;1 1111 1916 1111 124 1534 .1114 210 ]IS 1119 0 !1,110 715,161 _ 0 1_000 /93/,170 31/2341.._ l1lW 144 391/14,41
61 I 1 261 75 it .191U 110 1 25 1111 0 5;111 204111. _ „ _ 0 I D166 3.H 11,121 !,111011 67711111 11,111,601
2029 H IM 19 7 N
20Ir1 1595 19761 134 111911 .20! 210 125 4421 0 5216 105.171 0 IOf13 1141971 091,267 1,49404 71 00291
I
JMI- ' 1 6; K 32 x a
e
_.......,.,..,.«+~.....,.n.,nr.nw.v.,..:,rnrnnir•,.~,.,..n.-.sa»..e.r..ow,.vnwa.nwrawa~ieno,wtaerr..er«..n..+rrwmi,ie.err~.'•+nrs+~n~ we:'+t'r.7!`~~wY`TIMl4eewr tlFwewaerrvw
C■
4
TAk 1, Caak"d
Yew PrO*id Cumin l.j _Sourcr AMld.W foam _ Cos of Addldaml 7a99Ew1
Wue Ur Pry Ro1rA L<wkrdla EM" Tdaf TJar 1711tWD 7T3RWD D.pr U'RWD ~U17tW0~ U711 WD S k10 DeAr 7oW ftetb Crawtdvo
6b+ae d, -m7r R. C 117'Tr Iam. Wwei Omadom LrMWD t3ait Cos Caw Ww6 PM WWh
7071 4617 _ 1976 IN 1.37 Up 7117 10 7.5__161 0 LNJ _ 3f" 0 1.1170 665&194 7 6101 7yN _7190,111
O 74,191
10 7111 66
9 a IIOA 0
7037 17.10 1976_ /H 13! 41 0 _ 77 15 _110 )U _ 1700 _0 37,47 )82N _0 1.177) 7x510
SOD 1177 1476 /H4 131 79.{I 2179 _ 7.IO~ 741 _ Il 0 51,791 7JIp13 u, 0 1714 _ 1O17,F/ 141,371 1015710 37142.171
0 _0035 111,7)7 I_7734 f773i751 9,lef,lll 7dh1119 339M3N
xH 011 1976 11_1 111 4151 1173 110 741 11111
6 MI3 x77 1976 4311 M 23 59 25 19 71 !U IfN 0 31r__ 779 751151 _.,0 11217 I ,051 0221,711, a5/1 D" N,231,{79
fi3 ...1~7s _ 1911/Ny+-_IA _3131 - h 3.10 _7b- MIi -____D s7}31 x7,00: 0-_11717 ~011~7._19,9N ?i51.O~x) 423_207
1037 3271 _ 1914 -4-341 434 I4 _ I760~ 1111 _ 1.10, 341 _ 711 0 53 TI _.57103 0 142121 Ity1 t1kM 173R30! 16~D~7011
1.4N7 1 1/ri901 Iy1N 011 ]i9M 776 10 f11 q/
7011 73N 1976 /H -,.I-S7, 4163 3131 1101 741 ___77 0 31101f 7M
- /N 1x 11 U 66 39 U 7.10 J U 77 _=-0 _ % 79-j- Y_ 0 1319! 13,515119 11,9671311 4,136,441 x/ 631,125
241a 5191 19 76
1 16 1.59 869 x37 7.1 775 7191 0 51617 10113) 0 1610 _HyNy169 15,1 Qr573_ -VnAL ~011iN1
7010 560 D
osk
7611 1141 1976 /N .167 t51310 216 141 M 0 N 119160 0 1.67x 15100 011 14 61i d,f0f 007 _I1,1i~141
2017 31 211 1976 1 N II-61 2175 3153 _ 11 741 7111 - -0 SSd10 17734 0 17/H _17,319 796 117)71!!. ~11y027 Mf54967.
7141 39W 19161 /H _ 1611 3311 .5166 1.1 171 71lI 0 33520. 413317 0 1.11]! 111E IN If__ lL71, _1AP -11 i 003
-1
I - -
SOa 6062 1976 / H 171 3f 11 N11 .7 .10 78 714 0 311)9 15631) LYx 7d 217 70~713i619 _l,S7lc411 11179,923
M3 61N 1176 IH 174 31N_ M _1,10 $25 __xd! D x167 _117171 ___1 11601 714/1165 2.'t 3 N{71,771
70x6 136 7 19 76 / H 1 71~ 75 " ^ 3T _ 1.10 131 )111 0 xtw6 164!01 7.0711 11,fi 1e7M 7d 7M 561 7,116 90,~SI5 i139
7041 6141 1976 IHI -111 7591 ,_)61 _ 710 _ 78 7107 0 !6155 xl~D% 1l7d b 16,1 SIM , _6145,_01 %Je9Ov
31 Y_ 0 l1~1T/_. ~Ib<11J 0 _ 37031 17/616010 71.119, )91 _6,00X10 1072Olx
,mm 707! 6161 N76 _I1157 _895 N
7019 6613 19 76 434 _ 119 4199 !711'61 1611 0 3.AN Ify74]10611 301711 3 _y1 _cj!
M1I 101,64,167
731. x 1976 4,N 111 ]601 X373 710 ).U 461 0 57%7 'i- t 0 3.3111 W06-0 s2.711134 7057161 111611117
Suki u Ul'PWDupiW tos of ff 0611161 a1 p,111,7i7 hblarrlu lu l0lea lReleeno 13w3x1,160.
6 Ru.wst+conb110NN6f ofdrb eniu of 5163,00! Ulthnnn lJ D~u111.0N5Jd1 Wl3eCTaprtw OkMd116,/151n 1991 (141ert1ual)91m OlM NArds)04pJrr,
c UTRN'D oOnutlnl coukunoam lMW7b 67Ckbun dlVlded 1712791 bell bnnrllq lRlfen71u43 dna 7991 msaf1661,3%(Rak1em 111nflsdw7Rpyr7. '
d Dellis Uali Cau btden Iron bWUfwrru eMwlA xll udrwmedellrnw /S 9wWAnaller
u Dncaum frown fa PKeN wu0h d 311 p Kw
1
I
iv (r
r,
, I
t y 3~
2 5 32XIo
e
p
l
i
, I
. r.r. rw ♦aw:rneMN.:NYinM,lY.... vwl.mx..•rn Y'..nTn?x-.v~nu..wxMtix"nr lr.Yej\Y{4rrv N.rt Yixl4[JvY'YMFnJ`eJ..~*9n11n4Mr~rA~~1t'/'i,M':!,>r1T'^V'Mn'nls`1+9,NNMH}s„ykjR^n.o,ff
w1YI`YV1'K>'w•.i r.
Table I
Cott of Addlllonal Raw Wake a llhou} UTRWD Chapman Wain
• Anumpiaae Flvm4ble 1o Chapman Welt/ •
Tcr Ru1>nd Cunem Sqpl7 Lwan PAN kW Swn __Crwl of A6diUOnel Sap~w1
Wan Ute Fly Ill uw4uic Eflluemr Td41 Eueu_ UT7eWb Dallu IfI71W'0 LIfRWD 2vmv --Sde I9 -Odlu _ Tod Peum C1mwWire
Amte e7 Ct min C ,kTa RAW WW". enlm 16i9W0 Urw Cwl Cad Worth Fret Wu11h
1949 3136 .1976 171 061 2471 _733 OOU 000 0 0 0. 0 0 0
10(10 211S 1916 1713 062 117 016 000 _ _ 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0
!WI 2171 19161 171 061 2173 000 000 _000 D 0 0 Q 0 0 0 ~0
2110' 2474 _ 1916 171 014 217{ 003 _ 000 _ 0110 0 0 _ 0 ---0 _ 0 0 -__0 I
7003 2415 1976 434 065 _ 2475 000 030 __000 0 _ 0 _ 0 _0 _ 0 0 ,_.0 1
204 17 91 1916` 4.34 0 671 2177 615 000 _ 000 D 0 _ _ 0 _ 0 01{56 _ 0 0 D _ 0
71r15 1111 _ 19161 434 061 217' 601 C00 .__000 _0 0 04166 _ 0 0 0 _,.0
200 1957 1916 414 069 1119` 11 000 _00 0 _ 0 _ D 04726_ _ 0 0 0
21617 7038 1916 34 on 812! 114 000 000 0 0 0 _0 04561. D 0 0 0
2038 712 _ 1916 434 074 2114 1.16 000 000 _ 0 0 0 _0 01965 0 0 0
2009 72;1 1916 434 011 14,88 767 a00++ 0DO 0 0 __.0 05061 _ 0 _ 0 0 _ D
2UIII n 9 19761 434 010 2490 171. 000 ON 0 0 . 0 05165 0 0 0
2011 2431 1976 434 017 7193 011 „000 _000 0 _D 03261. _ Q 0 0 0
20,2 25 21 19 16 1 71 016 74 96 .0 1 000 _0 31 0 0 _ 0 _ 0 0!373 SeD 195 (60,795 310 191 (10.191
2011 27 11 19 16 4 _78,311 113117 717,175 Y
3020111 1 2M126J4 76 1919i6 161 / 1 11 141 0191 7499 140 000 _ 110 o 0 __0 05511 __213,547
092 7501 252 000 1 0 0 0 0 03117 531 18__331311 337131 33616 17
31+ 095 2501 •371 000 771 -0 D 0 -0 06044 114811 p1/11 493176 10!1111
1n16 1001 1976 4 31~ 091 2501, 493 _ 000 401 _C _ 0 0 0 06166. 1333 131 1,13118 6611427 _111v,710
1011 711 11 1976 /54`1 102 15111 _623_ a%
,607 3 6131 176
2015 12 713 19 76 _ 4 )<I 1 04 01 111 -736 Ono 156 0 a 0 0 0 6791 1175 W _ 1,175 UD 1 0)1
2 00 14 U1
_731738 ~1y71t 1741611 _686137
1019 34 II 1976 -4 34 106 771 191 000 f91 0 D 0 0.70M
6 _ s1 0 ~00 _..~0 077!3 7101616 7 0016011 1,1673'709 6
20M 1561 1976 4111. 106 7511 4015 000 1015 _ 63
Intl 311 1970 /HI 110 2520 1161 000 _.IIN _0 0 0 0 07647 7,JW~77s y701771 Ii67/111 7913,0"
2022 IN lb 19 1V11 4n n7 19761 1
2021 l9 1~ 1976 )4 1 14 2 24 -14 !11 Ile _1 1 26 Is '37 Ogoo 1414 127, DD . 17/1 0 0 0 --P _01607 _/131 p4 .11111
71/4,505 14,17/7,53
7Uls 4165 1916 134 1.11 _ 717s~ •1637 007 16,37 0 0 _ 0 _0 01916 5382q S,.W lp. „2,_106,111 16,371,957
70tH 1347 1916 4311 120 7110 li 17_ 000 737 a 0 0 a 09101 3170167 7130161 7,541313 79127
0 I - - f `1 '02 ~4e7
73131 4; t2 19 76 1311 1 71 71 1! 1100 D 00 1100 0 0 0 _ 0 0 _6 6 6 757 137 s,3fl 87 7697 676 11,123.11)
711:6 4/IA 3476 171 121 7111 111'1 000 1114 0 0 0 0 10067 69171 1,919931 760917 711160.10
]1.9~ Q 06 14161 1111 1261 7316 1910 s W 19 70 0 7,78,577. __11.111517 71010 04 71616,161
701u 1145 14761 45/~ 1791 11 Sq 4036 000 70.16 D 0 0 0 1,018 1161319 1161319 7171146 30151710
"4F i!
I
M, <D❑ 32XIO
M4
r
a
s
• o
*r17we9w
1
e
w.+..y.w'~.~,., N,~. M~a•ti Vxtreww,WyMP,.YYI x~uV♦.w?n,eMav.+,.~A'MIP:Y'dM{'M~•"M.-LwMn,r-n,WV.•I•.eVe.vn,M„r•MT.!f,l'wMMM'a1!!11..1!.!~3'A!a'~l/WRIMA ~I!15161`~NMMN ~
r.bk 1. faoliaued
Year P _i I[J 1 'ro _S -AddYiaml_Swcn i LJ- WDe -_lw 1IiRWD~IIwof Addh 'l Colo lam. PtnearW~ - N
Wpv V. e Ra)Aoberl4 ltwnilk C311ueM Tuml Eu w e7 ChmpW Dtllr Ln. wv W9 V'I11WD lfml'RWO Sde to i Trial CLm9atiw
an/
7011 _ 4617 _,1976 434 131 _2717 21.45 000 1143 0 0_ 0 _0 1.1320 1,161741 1,167,111_ ),41475 34.199711
2032 _ 1710 1976 4.31 133 _ ._U/3 2135 000 _ 1125 0 0 0 0 1.1777 960111t9 9,601119 _ 3.51!339 )7,7!!`734
2033 4117 1976 4_34 1V _2716 1719 000_ 7729 0 0 _0 .__0 1.2134 10`1d14/t 10401_1341 917 11,111311
2034 4934 1976 _-434 141 571 24~ 000. 7!D D 0 0 0 11751 11761/16 1_1_261166 7,11T16 /1.37
2033 7071 1976 __434 134 1371 __14.19 _ 000 1319 _ 0 ____0 _ 0 0 _1521] !71174,071 13,176,071 /,071 _ 19,771,10!.
2016 1177 1976 ♦34 !/7 1317 •M. 11 600 1611 0 G 0_ 0 .377) 1%163, 6! 17,161066 4,E10,511 !3,659171
1017 5211 .__1976 _ 431 150 _810 1111 000_3711 0 0 0 0 1.4524 14,710,111 1~E10111 116c9tl 11,116111
E031 911 1976! 434 111 _11 63 212, 000 2121 0 0 _ 0 __0 1.119'1 1Sa111_9'JI N Sjl lfl0 170115! 61,IA,761
1079 5491 19761 _ 134 136 _ 2366 1923 000 _ 2925 0 0 0 0 13193_ 16.140111 415/0714 1,921960 67,711517
1010 5601 1976E 451 139 250 3052 000 3077 0 _ 0 0 0 1.6113 17ULM !I)L3S 3.151702 7 RCM9
1041 5111 1976 _ 414 162 _777I 7141 000 1141 _ 0 0 _ 0 0 16731 1s112y/60 _19,1121160 5319,920 71i141f69
2012 51]6 4 /34 163 _b 7! 719 000 3253 0 0. _ 1.7413 10691 9 M693)4 _3,63412u1 63.950,113
2041 - 3944 - _1916 _ 151 161 _ 777{ 3366 000 - $166 0 0 0 0 1118 73161,191 _11,261,194 !11,_1371 49,931,741
20" 6062 4976 4 171 _-2511 _ .34 11 000 1411 0 0.._0 0 1100 33950,130 25,050.130 6,141178 95,911,621
7045 6134 _ 1976 134 471 23 61 7600 000 3600 _0 D 0. O 19604 25_59,136 15,1591656 6,tl01M 102401 MI
1146 6107 1976 _ 4 341 177 75 11 -3720 000 ]7 ]D 0 0 _ 0 0 2.D366 37611116_ .77,693 936 1,_69;11 109,107.653
1017 6193 _1976 134 IN 7791 _ 000 _..3112 0 0 0 1706 19173405. 1177 _1,966x711 116,047,900
7046 6761 _ 1916 434 193 1393 39 _6e 000_-,7966 0 _,0 _ 0 0 1.7051 71,927,733 31,177,85 1,211691 _193,393,!97
1049 6697 _ 1976 431 _ I{9 __7799 _-10.91 _ 000 __!090__.___0 0 _ , _ 0 ___0 3.39]1_ 3111 1506 14,]70_646_9,93! 136%S,1/7
20YJ 6126 1916 .4 N ID3 16 OJ ~7 U 000 1] b D 0 0 0 3.7171 76...: M6163111 --1904690 931669977
Nue. a Da11u Unl1 fon h ble9 hum DN'V 6weruu Ovau)A 30139nd uaomed 1u kueue q H yer )er 0,170,.
b DlacauM lr5a ful peuM Wd1h o(SA pr )cr.
E,
~5 K 10 32x ❑
e
a~sr
o
Table 9
Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs
Assumptions Favorable to Chapman Water - '
Year C_umuative ?resent Worth Cost
with -
h II without Chapman
Chapman - 1 Chapman
Savings
1
19991 _0 _0 0
2000--- 0 0 0
_2001] _ 0 _0~-0
20021 1- - ---o 0
20031 0
20o4_ $17a 874 ($174s74)
20051 _ $339,814 - -,0_ (339,814)
- 2006 $495,111 0 _ (495,111
2007. $641,054 0 J (641,054)
2008 $780,726 0 _ - (780,726)
2009 - $914,357 (914,357)
(1,042,178)
-2010 $I,a12 178 i---- 0,
$1,164411 _0.1__ (L164,411)
{ 20121 _ $1,321,4671 _ _ _40,1931_ (1,281,274)
_ 20131 $1,611,141 223,475 1 (1,381666)
2014' $1,984,861 v556,613~ (1,428,248)
2015 S2,351207 1,051,788 (1,299,419)
2016.__ _$2,710,394 1,716,210 (994,184)
20171 $3,181,011 2,562,569 (618342)
2018, $3,830,113 i 3,601,176 (128,937)
20191 $4,672,593 + -4,846,857 } - 174,264
2020 $5,719,515 b,310,56_6 _ 591,u3 i
202iY--~ $6,963,766' _ 7,985,044 1,021,278
a ` 20221-_ $8,396,587_- ,-9,861,446 1,464,859
11,929,060 1,921,667
2023 $10,007,393
_ 2024 $11,613,361 1,4.172 565 I 2,559,204
2025 $13,374,049 - 16,578,952 3,204,903 1i
2026 $15.2686491 - 19,127,487 3,858,838
2027 $17,3 04 071 21,825,113 - 4,521,042 '
,5,191,582
- -2028 --$19,484,448' 24676,0301
I
27,68 6,164 5,870,557
2 0 29 $21, 15.
2030 $24,300,291 1 - - O
30,858,310 6,558,019
f
i
i
~SKa u~Xlo
Now
•
o
Table 9, Continued
t Year I Cumulative_ Present W_o th Cost _
{ with- without I Chapman
Chapman Chapman Savings
2031 526,945,8111 34,199,785 _ 7,253,974
_ 2032 x29,756,797 _ 37,715,324 7,958,527
2033; 532,742,577 ; 41,414,311 _ 6,671,734
20341 _$35,906,356 _ 45,300,027 9,393,671
_ 2035 $39,254,439 49,378,805 10,124,366
2036S42,795,201 53,659,128 10,863,927
_ 2037 $46,533,706 58,146,116 11,612,410
2038 550,478,484 62,848,367 12,369,883
2039 $54,634,925 67,771,347 13,136,422
2040 40- $59,011,941 72,924,049 13,912,108
2041 f $63,616,944 78,313,969 14,697,025
204 $68,458,967 __83,950,172 15,491,205
2043 _ 573,544,008 89,838,743_ _ 16,294,735
- 20ud - $78,879,925 95,997621 17,107,696
2M4 $84,478,273 102,408,44.___,_ 17,930,168
_ 2046' $90,345,429_ 109,107,6521_ 18,762,223
r 2047;$96,489,930 _ 116,093,900 19,603,970
2048 $102,920,130 123,375,592 20,455,462
t $109,648,462 965,247 _ 21,316,785
2049+____ .130,
2050 $116,681,9251 138,869,937 - 22,188,012
3
F
f
C
r.,
a'~Yrt 'f X 32 X I O
4 +
vKrm111a
TON 10
Cost Or Addllblul Rex W aler with UTRW D 0ap7Dan 1iY419r
Mml Ll4efy A4w11peionl
ter M1.9ated Currr1n 5or.12 Sum u. Ad[uwal Sau¢a_ .._____.__Cott of Adde lad SuppUn
I Wne4 U. prypwrk [swlr+ilkl Effuer 7a.1 Ewen U7pW0 0.0r lfllAW'D 1710110 17171110 Sdeb Ddl_r _ ToW h h Pin Worth
f ISIa1. V C wM7Ter Rew Wrer ralin vmwD Vdt Cat Cal Worth Pin Wal6
1999 2136 _ 1916 _ 4391 0.61. 14.71 7.31. 000. _ 000 _0 __0. a 0 0. 0 0
7000 2196 19,76 6131 _ I ___7!_13 076 _ 000 000 0. 0 _0 0 0 0
7001 3171 1976 _ 1;/_ 061 7477 000._ 000 _..000 0. 0 6 _ 0 0. 0. 0
71101 2474 1976 434 0641 24.14{ ODD 000 000 0 0 0 `0 0 0 0 0
2111 2471 1976 _ 4111_ 0657 2475 000 000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0
2114 1792 _ 1976 4)11 061` 5417 6117 000 _0M $161199 $41240 _ 0 0 04434 0 $109629 1343,OA 0167014
2005 1171 19.76 4 54 069 1 2471 6-61 _ 000 coo 361,199 41,14L _ 0 _0 0.1511. _ 0 409 7b 331 141 676 206
MA 1952 19431 0691I 7479 _ 127 000 OW 161,329 411447 0 0 04726 0 109174 323,521 9991]3
- - -
2x17 2018 19764 _ 439 OIl1 7412 444._ 000 000 561319 11351 0 -0 _04661._ 0 409,941 314116 131)919
Imp 7728 197bk 4.74 071{11 1439 356 _ 000k 000 361,399 11663 0 _ 0 04%! 0 /10031 305116 1619 DJ!
201:ro 7711 1976 434 071 14.111 _ 261. 0004 000 W1189 43715 5763969 !77811161 cm4 _ 0 _ 94917 _ 111,631 1712666
1010 2179 19.16k ..4 34 010 14,901 171 _ 000 --000 M1389 16191, ,.167,151 _ _(795197) _0.!765 _ 0 752]41 116121 1,110.447
2011 24 22 19161 124{ 0871. .2491 011 _ 000 000 361,389 49017 1171% LID1,793) 05211 0_ __179,104 _ 122,211 I,OO]720
2012 2127 7976 434 086 2496 -0 11 ON .000 561389 49117 .111091 5411140) 0!'11 0 _ 176,767 11656/ 3,119,311
2011 26)9 19761 /H1 099 2499 •1 c 140 UU0 361149 49364 113,423 !411111) 05534 0 169995 109,049 7,221_6}7
2014 2754 19761 43411 09l 2307 252 _ 110 042 761±19 493% 111,926 !476,905) 0!700 1113, _250197 255,903 7,111
41
2015 1175 _ 19761 _ 131 093 2301 371 710 161 761,319
2016 30C 191 49511 1%!% 34!0,012) 0!971 )47011 300311 707117 71611,351
_ 0 I N { 094 23 Da 1 93 710 213 361,78_9 19671 _200/37 0 06047 611625 1,216,117 _ 716011 740,396
2017 71 W 1976 _ 434 _ 102 1117 -671 I10 -417 761319 49!11 206165 0 06119 936 77 11},213 Ik 377 1,299797
7011 1710 1976111 _ 4141 104 21,11 716 210 546 36089 19962 212x61{ 0 06395 1771145 - 1001,474 103JM 5,7574
2019 1414 1976 _ 4W 106 21.16 .196 210 611 361,389 50117 219017 0 06607 _16791230 3219611 11701{11 6!13,9)6
2020 1564 1976 4A 106 15161 1045 Ila 8}5 361,139 50172 211,761 --.0 0690! 2077994 1111241 1114917 7991,1
V _ { ! ' 2S 747 I I N _ _
702 2021 3716 W 16 1 199 .76 76 41 1 1 111 10 2 2i.t1 43 11 73 10 10 19 7 14 4 1636111 !9 319 50 50433 271355 0 _07119 1191,170
3171397 1,561051 1,1177811
` 600 '119326 -_-~0 01719 7901.%1 747 117!1423 119}94 .560
_ _ .v T
2021 1951 1916 4 311 1 11' 7124 14 74 3 10 1714 M1,369 50 771 716 506 _ _ 0 07116. 7 7211,01 7110 777 11001,739
11,241, 31
20.4 4067 2976 114 176 026 -7541 210 _ 11_31 D 50911 257001 0 0169 7770157 1023706 1166699 11
. 1071 !1 61 1976 / 34~ 1 to 7!_21 46 37 710 1_I 21 _ 0 51130 361 7117 _0 01119 / 1103! 4121 6}J 1990519 17,097, 11
1 t _ _ _ 1 0971q 11 ,107,13
2016 4247 1976 /34120 7110 •1711 110 ❑01 0 !1111 H9361 0 011126 4!69117 _4790179 7 191606
2027 4112 1976 1341 122 71._33 IIDD 710 _1190 _6 11,711 771444 01 08}70 49$7 30 31116//3 7,70Q166 71}92477
7021 16 11 1916 134 1 24
6 7114 4114 310 1611 _ 0 !1170 _3tl 16r -___0 01631 ! 261517 7111,995 I .V9 IN 13.701.63d 7029 11116 197 1344..
176
6 75.}6 4910 710 I7 DO 0 31 X911 3%NI 0 _01190 5~701~117 _60W~161 -i1~202H _ 16 _I7L951 111
1116 0 5717! 701111 0 09146 0416711] 6714601 611 ] 21 1! i7
7UL3 4191 197 1.34 114 73.29 •2016 ii I
1
I
I
i
7+,y, r 5 51. ❑ 32X
KIM
4
1
701~Q16D r.~, •
1
0
I
tYA91e1 ,
4
. _ ...~(:~.._.--..«.....:..,.w«+.n.....a..wwn,+«..n...w.ewwr,~rwr.u.cw.w+.i«..n..ww,.w.._wwWn~an~~r.~+ww+w..vn+.w..w.raw...wn...ww.~.ws.ew...w ee~.r.gar+.rwe+r.+ww~w~.Mei+n«nr•w,rwwrw
-
\ a
able 10, Conlinoed
AddWieeal Ikl_
Yea haJeakJ Curren Supply 5orcn _ Addnlotul_Swren.. Cad of
W na Uu A4f Rubena lewkrllk Tm.en Tad Elcne U7AWD DOW U1AW4 ll7RWD VTAWO tale la Dallu Taut Preur. C141WIIIr1
16n e1 C7i C WIFu Kew Wler OMMMi V37cWD Ud1 Cql Caq Wain I'M Walb
2011 46.11 -1976 434 173 7311 •2t 41 _ 710 793° 0 _12ji! 7171!06 0 09/m eeSJ,~n_ 7AI7,730 _]1617 46?. 31, II li!I
2032 4190 1976 I N 1,751.,, . 231! _ i•0 20 b 0 71,!07 32L634 _ 0 01703 _1,171~7A 1647,971 }763 tJ0 37641761
2011 41.71 .1976 1_31 _ 116__. 1511 •7729 71, _ 71190 _ 4797 111113 D 0.999{ _7114709 _K1171719 3133506 _ X*1761
1974 1976 /,N 111 7371 113 2 3311. D 77071 641.133! 10294 1711,917 1109111 _3001931 13 1,719
2615 >D 7) 19 76 4 14 I N 25 S/ 25.19 3 10 3109 0 37 279 351.459 0 1 203 1,9711099 9 3/D 1/ 4 119 OW _ 92196Q73
1076 1175 _ 197e LN 117 _ 757+ k!1 310 NLI 0 11JA 311,02 _0 10931 9991,615 10.011211 Iz%164 _ 46711,6119 o4 L
10+915160 10.7 -_AA 17 _7y366~Ii% _191107,117
•2
21117 1771 1976 _ 111 ISO _1160 711 _ 710 13 01 0 _97,791 717,_642 0 1,1240
.7"
5'1701 64 19 19 76 16 1 464 1tt 1!1 75 11 7131 110 _ 361! 0 51,0_6 764091 1.1516 II, F11 S
. _1.10 3122 _ D l1~7.73] ~h II-M !~S19 193 57 170:7N
3011 11 91 1976 1711 136 1l 66 1925 710 1715 _ 0 31,333 791,561 0 _11964 11I34796 12 I3 !Ls 198 91 _ 3,637110 16171
2010 2016,
. 21 69 1032 9 661129 17117111 719106- _60,161,111
3011 3711 1976 IN le! 1177 3111 1,10 3931 0 S/f541.0011 1 /D'l19! Uf 6 ___0 0 _ 1.1661 11921 11019/97 _7 135071 NG101,117
2D12 7631 1916 /N 165 _ 1575 ?7.5) 270 217 0 5111011230 0 S1M11N157J. 11,1I1a032 _I D77979 11-796!1
3013 5944 1976 1Jd1 I 1 fil 2371 •1766 710 _ 7156 0 51,520 115317.,^ 0 _LH1l 15,1771131 ISi9T 3 "11,214.033 _.13 b1479 1124
60 62 1976 131 Ill 35 91 64.11 2 0 _ _ 7171 _0 5j."09 151377 0 !3617 16,517,111. Il O7I ]M _ 11371793 _ 71'1 MAl4
3015 6111 1916 1 Nf _ I i l 35 64 •3_100 310 1! 90 0 76167 172 L ,0 _ L{770 171117,231 II t6oi? ,117]1123 1
.524
.315
1GJ6 6107 _ 1976 131} 177 2517 47.30 710 ]510 0 36,0 116501 0 11611 11101,12 11 N7~27_ _ 161111+1 714
1011 6413 19" 161} 2191 •1113 _ 710 1613 0 _56111 _3070%. Y ISI11 .2,0116X. 3019991511 _1119171 _91a22.q i
1011 6561 If ~e 131 111..,. 3393 !9.66 710 _ 3T Sa 0 371311. 516111 0 I.SS7 311/1711 71,111,610 _3000177 967,,U11H
2049 6691 1976 4-114 1191 7l 99 1094 710_.. 3664 0 _37,!64 531,612 60H ]7737_649 3]i111L93... 1164 W2 _1011641_961
2050 0 16 19 76 I N 1 :f ;4-;' 4-23 1 10 4017 0 57%5 54J.561 0 1.612 14 197 97 71107 111 3.132.917 106 721X3
Nan 4 UI'Rwb ceplhl can d17061N6'6./{1,717,711 deb urvk!la 2yevf (Releenrc 92 84361,719.
b Raw wukrnn11, 170X1164 ddts eervkl dl163,OnS lAefveae 9)p1q 1106eN61{Wl~1t CTpman OdMa S16AIS 16199101efaerc997 wNb l7LM Ufk1e6 a1J 0!{On 7ev.
c VI KWD unerring con b am nl beaugln by Denim dirldcd by 11.295 wcml h9ugM IRelenrce 910mn 7991 con d N1e' ,7147eeerc4911iWM 1176146 ym.
d. Dells Un6 Coll, labe4 Rum DWU f8xntl t yr O 212 4M 41eumedW Ilknue A Pen Few 0rre4Ar,
e ILK,Vnl LUe fw gaen w~!tbd3%ln yer. ,r 1,
i
Jw
I •
I,
f
+ c+p ~n e
e
a
*Zion
O
t
~ ..-«,:.,«.a v.. ,...`/..:~,n .a....:.,,:~ r.-.._w, ......o-e.. .nrr,.,. er.. .•1WAw.Mr+vrvaiinnn F~..Tlhle 11
Cent of Additional Raw Water without UTRWD Chapman Wafer
Mal LiLily Asmoiwn-
Yea r.u3enrd Currea Sulglz S.w'r Add511on11 Sores _ ___Cow of A6die Su IA,
N'41er U.. pay Aden Lewlnlt4 Emue61 Tow £ac"I ErritiD -DaOn mm iVM D UTpW'D S6Am _ Ddlr TuW Re1eN C1mul014
Oix~z ml VIAWD UnYCmt Cwt Ww16 Rn Worth
StarRa el CM n C IALrce A4'4 Wiles
19" 111e 1976 111Otl 2111` .3 .31 000 _ OW 0 _0. _a. 0 ~ .0 _.__.0 0
2nuo 1196 _ 1976 1111 067 2473 0.76 000 C00 0 0 ..__-_.0 0
2001 2171 1976 4.311 061 1471 000 0001 000 0 0
2002 7174 1976 411 064 - 1474 000 _ 000 0W 0 _ p
9767 4I 0651 _.7113 OW 000 1 _ OW 0 0 0 0 0.. 0 _ 0 0
1(0 74 71
MA 119: 19761 434 0671.. 74114 615 000'._ 010 _ 0 0 0 _ 0 04451 _0, 0 0 _.._._0 24 78 607 _ ) _ 0 ONII
0 0 0 _ 0
1 000 OW 0 0 _ 0 04176 0 0 0 0
10M 1916 1 4 34 0 69 . 34 341 u 071 1 74121 1477{{ 5 2 444 000 OW 0 _ 0 0 _0 04161 0 0
2015 1811 - ,976 / 41 61 111 _..2111.._...267 Ono _ 000.__--0 0. 0 0 0!061 0 02. 0 _ .0
1U9P 11 2OD7 ;0 1 11979 9 776 4 N 0 11 -748411 736 OW 000 _0 0 _ 0 01967. 0
'l 16 I
2~ 21 71 0 0 _0
7010 2)1') _ 19761 1.31 010 2490 173 000 11 OW 0 0. 0 0 0.5163 0 _ 0 0 _0
7011 24N 19761 '1e 011 2493 071 , _O OD 000 _0. 0 03266 0 0
2012 2171 19761 4111 0961fT 24% •011 _ 600 0 03173. (60793 _ 100795_.._316191 11,193
200 26 J9 196 441 92 1109 110 000. 110 0 0 - 0 05331 212,,711 _ 272717 .,.ALSO 77,701
0 712 0 0 0 _ 0 05700 524,215 _ 521266 _.776111 !11,121 ,
2014 7154 _ IV7 76 4)14 0 091 1 -7103 111 00
2015 2616 1976 4) 0911 1505 Jli OW _ 311 0 0 0 0 09li 791D31 795,021 _.11 001 1,079,122
1016 MOI 1976 34 096111 -U01 497 OOOn 491 0 0 0 _ 0 06017 3M/131 _1012121 - 119160 116611/1
21111 1134 19161 114 102 1717 612 am 617 0 _ 0 O 0 06271{} 1/0947 1 /13 DU 106351 2}71971
2018 37 10 19 76 1 34 1 Dajf4 - 25 14 .736 0 00 7 36 0 _ 0 0 D 06115y k,11 133 1 176153 _960 092 3.453 026
1019 3414 _ 19161 11~ 106` 7316 191 0001 191 _ D _ 0 0 T 0 Omm 7145,976. _2161376 1,164104 _1,61911
7U 20 UM 10 26~ IJ/1 106}` 2511 IOU OW 164 _ 0 0 0 0 06103 ii X93,197 239V97 i,NS4617 1,977$1
2021 71w 19764 111 110 7120 1164 OW 11 14 0 O 0 _ 0 07009 6019,009 ~29,OW 1,7]1174 73W Il
2012 1116 19761 114 112' -2527 •1314 OW 014 _ 0 _ 0 0 0 01719 7462,15 _7461,30! 1,703225 9,7117!7
2021 1931 - 19761 4341 114 _-2174 •1414 0m 14 l4 0 _ 0 0 07136 1292077 _1192r17 -1,111171 _11,0106)0
202. 1067 19761 (U~ 1161 2176 111 OW' 1141 0 0 0 07639_ 6101,919 _617119 1997359 13,061,119 _
7015 1101 19161 1. 11' 25211 16.17 OWi 3677 C ,_0 0 0 071 t9 6713717 1117717 _7_1276" 15,190,7!3
S 2026 4111 19761 4.711 130 2130 17.17 000 _ 1111 0 CN26 5,092,691 709 605 1,277159 17,116,112
2021 1111 1916 4144 112 7152 18110 DW IIW Og70 l/99l090 .3199090 SI9 I
213,14 44 t6 197e 4111 124 2114 •1121 0.00 1900 d 0 0 0 00621 09211117 1,(11717 7.441711 77,A1,019
2029 4516 1916y1 431 1263 2536 ID IU Pa 1910 0 0 _6 0.681 6715364 61111" 24111114, _..14,746,00}
2010 4545 19761 43 129 15}9 40.1 OW 2056 P 0 0 0 09316 116]514 6163524 1665161 77411764
I `new ,
T
}
"0 El 32 x I0
1
• e ,
O r
o
I
1
r ,
r
_........-...•......,,..,.~r.+w•......,,.,wwwr:.r ~~nwn+ew.M.rti.na...n..w.•wrwn,a•n.a+ew,raarinxe+ww+.nsw.evwrwrysvrn.wrwrrornv:aw~~,wrwsww,+nenaF{fw''~s~fnwnwwr.~w+,rrey rrM..w
cable 14 Coined
Year Omlecled Cunene Savoy Spwcn_ _ _ Ab1hiWW Source, ___W_ Con of AMWcad 30X4304.
_ _ N'D
UTA hallo UTRWD U7AD UTAWDIdeb ,__Dd1o Tad ReeeW Clurlulell:/
Wrier Vae Ray Rabem IxwbrllH EfDueM iotd FJCe,I
Cot Wanly Oro, Want
I C mu C hal¢ae Raw WWr~--1. Iln IITAWO llon Cat _
2011 4611 1916 _ 4.34 172 3541 _ :1, a _ 000 71150_ 0 0 0 09410 1 731N 1 731N 7,710017 191 MI
2012 47 U7 _ 1970 /.H _ 133 73133271 _000 17.33,__-_ 1914 1bS W7,116 ] 064,107
1017 1177 1471 _ 1.14 171 7511 _-_11 .19. _ 000 -__71 w 0 0 O.f991 Ic195,1/9 AA N ]c019,711 76~IDIiS3S
2014 4977 - 19.76 4 141 1531 .2413 000 1 11 0 0. 0 1,0191 _970],967 _9 103,961 1,141,162 79,7191,117
2015 30 71 _ 19 70 4 H 144 _ _.15 N •25 19 000 U 19 _0 0 0 0 10607 9,7,41769 9,741 709 1265.671 15,41i
1016 SI 71 1916 w 4M 147 255 ]011 000 2611 0 0 _ 0 0 1.0121 104517710 101115710 -76793969 45909,477
7011 1176 1170 _ 131 IX 3701 2711 000 .._7111 0 0 _ 0 D 1t249 1111791 .1`139795 7331,743 49/731,311
1010 3564 1976 _ 434 153 U63 •1171 000 .2121 __0 0 _0 0 1,1166 .111p~699 11,919, 699 _7,6!1`7 53090,757
2019 54 91 1916 I H _ 1 36 _ 2366 .29 23 _ 000 29.23 0 0 0_ _ 1.1914 17,711031_ _ I1-,141077 7.791069 56,117,041
_7J 69 •70 J7 _ _0 DD -7012 0. D 0 0 13197 I-3_60711 1!,6011711 _]970101 _00_LO 131v44
2040 lb bl 1976 -1 _ 119 _
2041 3711 11,16 1.14 101 2111 4111 000 __-7141 0 _ _0_ _ 0 0 I_A61 11,711,]9] 14AW-51 __IDWII 1 _N1130,435
73 15,INl156 17461166 111 1 UO 49_OLW
1 1^ __.7333 000 7113 0
7W7 l1 2tl 19 7 /3t 163 0 0 0 I.
_ • .1. I
3 7117 I 171 1 ,/71 4,707.911_ _ 71.m 743
_ 0
101_} 1944 _ 1976 /H 1 6r 7571 7766 0DO 7166 _0 0 J
71 743
7041 6061 Iv 10 151 171I 1511 N 67 000 3111 _0 0 0 0 1.7633 17511 67 17371,4614,!17,911 71179"1
1W1 6111 1976 1N Viii 1311 7600 -000 3600 0 0 0 0 0 I.I1f0 I6e71/3d0 11724 4}667.716 Idyl
2046 6107 1976 /N1 1111 _ 3317 77.211 _000 _ 1411 _,0 ,1671_ 191,919,766 119.1,791,1,11 4IT dA 11.469,9U
2D4 64 13 19 IN _ 4 N] 1111 _ 2391 JI 42 _ 000 3142 0 0 _ 0 _e,0 131!1 21 X0473_ 11,1 _ 1y91e~J1 4!1,017
3041 6501 19761 /H] 1131._7595 66 000 _7966 0 0 _ 0_ __0 IS377 _231611171 3fyH-I 1 !141960 x/7,167
2049 6691 1976 _ 131 1 19 _3f 99 10H 000 1091 0 - Of___ _ 0 _1_0079 3]967,771. 11% !1,,_W7161, 107A-Oi111 1
IOlU 6176 1976 431, 195 76.03 ii 11 000 --17.71 0 0 0 0 LNX 29167 113 111671117 9.475.05$ 1017751% ,
Nm a Dellor Unit Can Is lAen ham UWU fmcuv daougb V12 and Plumed to Wreoe h7 N6 per yes OKredle,
b Dbuulnl fw le, M1r pee:m worth M J% per fet.
y
1
4
e
A~r
AV, a 7 x 10 32 x O
Pena"
0
9"M.
Table 12
Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs
Most Likely Assumptl,j„
Year Cumulativc Present Worth Cost
-
with without Chapman
Chapman Chapman Savings
1999' 0 - 0 - ----0
2000iJ__- 0 0
20011 0 0 ~
- -
200_23 0 0 0
200-- - - 0 0
2004 $343,058 -_($343,058)
2005+ 676,206 0 (<76,206)
2006 _ 0 - - {999,733)
2007 - -0 (11313,919)
2008 l 393,919 _
619 035 _ 0 (1,619,035)
2009+ - 1,752666 _ - -_0- (1,752,666)
20104 1,880,4871 0 (1,880,487)
- _ 20111 2,002,720 k 0 x2,002,720)
2012f - 119,584 40,193 (2,079,391)
201312 228,633 221,703 (x,006,930)
2014h 2 384 541 _ 548,421 - (1,836,120)
2015 2,687,35 1,029,422 (1,657,936)
2016 (1,744,864)
2017 4,299,793 2T,474934 - (1,824_859)
2019} 5,353,125 ---3,455026--_ (1,898,0x9)
- (1,961,806)
2019r 6 583 936 4 .619,130
2020 7,998,9 11 5,973,753 (2,025,160)
202it - 9,587871_ 7,508,527 - (2,079,344)
2022 11,339,294 1 9,211,752 (2,127,542)
0 2023E _ 13,240,533 ! 11,070,630 _ (2,169,903)
2024 15,107,2321 13,068_,189! (2039,043)
2025 17,097,821 } 15146,253 I (1,907,568)
_ 31 (1 I
2026' 19,191,606 17,416,112 ,
_ 20271 21,392,472 - 19,749,6 (1,612,841)
2028' 23,701,656 22,192019 (1,509,637
;
• - 2029
20.0+ 26,1215 24,746,003 (1,375,882)
28.5352947 p
1- - 27,411,364 - _ 1,123,883
~ri
O f
Table 12, Continued
Year Cumulative Present Worth Cost _
j with without Chapman
Chapman Chs man Savings
2031' 31,181,112 31,191,991 (989,121)
2032; _ -33,943,262 3.-,,089,4017 _ (853,855)
2033, _36,826,768 3,106655 _ (718,113)
20 4 34.831,119 31,249,817 - (581,902)
2035 42,960,723 - 4 .2,515,488 (445,235)
2036 46,217,609 15,909,477 _ (308,132)
_-2036----
203 4 49,603,817 _ 49,433,222 - (170,595)
2038 - 53,123,009 53.090,353 (32,656)
2039, - 56,776,749 56,882,442 105,693
2040~-~ 60,568,814 60,813,244 244,430
20411 64,501,88_5 61,885,435 383,550
20421 68,579,844 69,102,885 523,041
2043, 72,803,879 73,466,762 662,883
20_441--__ 77,176,674 77,979,745 803,071
_ 2045 81,703,397 -_82,646,99--v 943,594
20461 96,385,524 87,469,97E 1,084,452
_
r 2W4 _ _91,225.402 91,451,012 1,225,620
20481 96,225,879 - -97,592,982 _ 11367,103
2049 101,391,961 102,900,843 1,508,882
2050: 106,724,948 108, 375, 896 1,650,948
• i
r
ti?
32X
O
QUM"
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I City of Denton Location Map
Figure 2 Historical per Capita Municipal Use
Figure 3 Projected Population
Figure 4 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs with Unfavorable Assumptions
Figure 5 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs with Favorable Assumptions
Figure 6 Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs with Most Likely Assumptions r'
C
C,
rt
y
,
25)( 32X 10
Moog
au~swrr A
1 ,
4L {
ur~r~ra►r ~ .
Y
Y
I:
1
S e
Y M
}Y
s
Figure 2 • Historical per Capita Munic!pal Use
200
y • 01544x • 1562
ISO R'
r 160
a 140 V---
4-- Per Capita Municipal
120 - - Linear (Per Ca100 SO 60 40 2p u 1950 1951 1982 1963 1984 1986 1966 1981 1958 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1494 1995 1996
Year
a. N
_ ,
32X
•
A
j
r ~ r
}1
S CIF
Figure 3 • Projected Population
-
450,000
400,000
350.600 -
-s -Rust Projection Exlended
woo
300.000
a-NYDB Most likely
c 250,000 - - - - - -
3
c
a° 200000 ;
M.
• 100,000 - - -
r~
l
a~v~oN, ~0.")1~,y1o,~ oy%~°~sao3e1o~a~~~,1~n z~y~~~ ad9a~,
Year
ri; .
3 X10
•
srs~ws
i
Mara=
%
- ._..__._...,..._.........-.._.............wr.w~.w~.wKSr+Y~. r++wm, t~ww•MiaMAliitM:ft`o ''Irv rwkOMY;wmwwrYMMwiMta g1•M.suY O^r~.1MM.~Mts
Figure 4 • Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs with Unfavorable Assumptions
$100,000,000 -
a
f
$60.000.000 -
$ wWith Chapman
d $40,000,006 -Without Chapman
5 Savings from Chapman `
s '
6
'41 n~A M1~~ M1py '~,O
U ,
• $20.000 OaO - - - - t
t . ,
4gJ~„ year
r T"~r x r.'10
25 32 x
i
' 7 MON
0
i
%
1
Si4MOO
f
sT I
.:.:_......_-.-..........o........,.. ....~•.r....~.~itwww+~.u~w.w+..n+......u...+ww.~+rnw.+rw~nr.~ws4elrrM~+~v*w+ltlM ~I
Figure 5 • Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs With Favorable Ansumptlons
$100,000,000 - -
$140,000,006 _ - - - - - -
3
n $120,000,000
"c -
_-----==j
Q ~ $100.000,000 with Chapman
0 0
a ~ -without Chapman
$ a $80.000,h0 Savings from Chapman
1
. LL $40,000,000 - - -
9 520,000.000
l y ti „p N q°, o~y O°1 O°~ ~y ry q ~ ry ry ` 4 ^ ^i h ` 4
~Cp J •
$0 ti`rtip e 'ti ti6
-520,00,000 --tl'- - - 6-•----
Ywr
d~ ~s~;tiw ? 5 >t 32 x
10
~ ~ r,1 ^ of ' V, I ` iY
Y
e'- r C
r
1 Fr
~F
1
1 /1
~ _v.-.-.+..._,._.-....._....-..~....~....•_.•.r.n.....rr~.ra..rw..ryrvJlw~1~V•i•'+rYw~w~~M~MM"v+wMYMYWMY/~MI~~M +MYI~/'~F.+ 1 ~ 1
Y.
Figure 6 • Comparison of Cumulative Present Worth Costs with Most Likely Assumptions
$101,000,000
i
r
$60,000,000 - -
~ I
$60,Ou0,000 with Chapman
E -withoulChaprrlan
c g - Savino from Chapman
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
A
C
,cP %rp -0, 10, IP, 10, If' 10, 149' '0, '0, 10, 10, ~P 49 49 le le e 4P lye
$20,000,000 Year
£Y
EMI 1 ~
Y 5 322 Q
h
r
I 0
1 <
Exhibit 111: Key Factors
1. Denton s. untreated water supply contract with the City of Dallas
expires in 2015.
2. Denton is located within the City of Dallas water supply
planning area and the City of Denton has been an untreated
water supply c;.s:-)mer of Dallas since the mid 1960's.
3. Denton's existing water supply without the City of Dallas
contract is approximately 25 MGD. 1
4. Denton's projected water supply needs by the year 2050 is
approximately 75 MGD.
5. Denton's share of the UTRDW Lake Chapman water supply
project is between 2 to 5 MGD dcptnding upon whether or not
the '1NRCC will approve indirect reuse of the imported Lake
Chapman water supply.
I
6. The City of Dallas will likely oppose efforts by the UTRWD to
obtain reuse permits from the TNRCC.
7. Under the current TNRCC regulations, obtaining a permit for
i
indirect reuse is unlikely.
r
8. Denton's payback for the UTRWD Lake Chapman project is
• dependent upon may variables and could range between 27 to in
1 excess of 52 years.
F '
• 9. Denton 's current water rates are significantly impacted by
current water supply obligations associated with Lake Ray ; 0' •
Roberts.
1 r
EXHIBIT 111 I It
10 32xI❑
0 '
.Y
10, Denton's water rates will be significantly impacted over the
next ten years to expand the water system and to comply with
more stringent water quality regulations.
11. Currently three regional entities supply the majority of the
water supply for the Dallas ! Fort Worth metroplex area ( Dallas
Water Utilities, Nonh Texas Municipal Water District ind
"farrant County Regional Water Supply District
12, The Cities of Denton and Dallas are the only water right
holders within the upper Trinity river basin reservoirs ( Lake '
Lewisville and Lake Ray Roberts
13. Long term water supply partnership opportunities exist
between the cities of Dallas, Denton 'and other regional water
supply entities.
14. Senate Bill One regional planning activities are currently in
progress and partnership opportunities with the City of Dallas
should be considered at this time.
~ a
l 1 a,
a
J x ~ a~
r..i
o. V fy c
10
1 9 A' t
I !6k Y.
3
A P, ^ I' ~ S li I
I lN~l I
1 i ~1 4N
.9 i.
'I
I '
II Si
' ,1 r
I ,
LOCA'nON MAP
I au
~N:.rx wa I rolvl t ~ ~I ~ r r I
mww nryr"~^ 000KE
~,aHxrut i0 GRAYSON ? , r FANNIN LAMAR ~f.
RED RIVER 90WIE d
AA+~ t r u, f
f - I I ~ ~M, ~ R~+ 1 ~ ■a am ~ I ~ Kr we~ rtuftsA DELTA ♦.ir
COLLIN X11 a r:
1 1 { :FRANKLIN{ ow. oo P^" ' , rr.wN 11i,~
i I COWAOM I TITUS I
C>"114-LNAA PIPELINE Y .un j aM°"a+a i r r MORRIS:
I q I !CO I
1 I y I I I I I Oi-ml Ch ~ L DEN10N i "~'"i1 HOPKVNS fin+~nrwxm 1 '
CASS V I MIDI lW UM' ~ ~ 'V ~ ~ ~ aww -i HUNT AM?
{
C
Naa~iu , i ' -------'-•-•-^IV_ea 'E~'°'ml 1
ROCKYIALI. I RAINS I 1 nNrl` 1,
1 MARION
I1~W000 L1~ ala y~artraw woe LWI
I \
SHUR Coto ' UP
gg KnUFMAN~ VAN~2A>'~vWw' A i rvx T awv Vw IIARRISON DALLAS - I J r IaWi:~RA Nn I
MNALL
~ EILIS
e JOHNSON i I / ~L * i M«orMwd
Weun/oaf ` I G L LW !GREG
N
r LLf~t10
11M SIAM LAND
p FEDERAL LAND
RAW. tEA H~Lr,L 0 10 20 CITY OF DENTON r y 11M LAS LOCATION MAP'
scttE ah MILES 1998 FIGURE 1
Ids EXHIBIT P/
d~
- 25x ED
'25 El 32X 0 r r' rr~l ~6~1
ro '
earwvs '
O
.naaua+n
AgendaNo.
AaWs 1110M
AGENDA INFORAIATION SHEET ZL • 4
AGENDA DATE: September 22se,1998
DEPARTMENT: Planning& Development
CMlDCNVACNI: Rick Svehla
SUBJECT
Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding zoning notification procedures.
BCKGROUM
The subject of public notification for public hearings related to rezonings, replats, planned
developments, variances and other development proposals was discussed by City Council during the
May 26u', 1998 work session. Questions were raised regarding the cost of the proposed signs, and staff
indicated that more time was needed to develop an efficient system for the mailing of Coiulesy Notices
to individuals located between 200 and 500 feet of a property subject to public hearing. The details of
the mailing system for legal and courtesy notification are ready for review. The sign system as
proposed by staff, remains intact without any revisions. If a less expensive system is preferred, staff
will respond as directed.
The public hearing notification process, as of January 1", 1999, would include:
I, Newspaper Publication: Notice of Pubile Hearing
0 current process
A notice of public hearing is published in the Denton Record Chronicle twice, one notice
for the P&Z hearing no Irss than 10 days in advance, and one notice for the City Council i
hearing no less than 15 days in advance.
P oposed ftw sl
No changes arc proposed by staff.
2. properly dwngr Written Notices
4 Current Pra ems.
• The current process involves legal notification of property owners located within 200 feet
of the subject site. The "Legal Notice" form used curr,:nlly is shown in Attachment 0 L
Planning stall'deselops a mailing fist for each public hearing from the "most recently
approved municipal tax toll" manually, prepares the notice, and mails the notices via
regular first class postage, The cost of mailing is 50,32 per notice.
f '
~ ~._Proposed_procsss ~ ~ p 0
Legal Notice (200' List)
The current legal notification process for owners of property located within 200 feet of
the subject site should be retained with one revision. The notices should be sent to property
owners via certified mail, In order to send one notice certified/return receipt, there is a
1
2 5 x 10 32XIO
o
U
I
Y
$0.32 postage charge, 51,35 certified mail charge, and a $1.10 charge for return receipt, for
a total of $2,77. This process certifies delivery and provides positive i:roof through a
signed receipt. Many cities use certified mail to avoid claims of delivery failure. Potential
drawbacks to certified delivery include the expense of postal processing, and could cause
inconvenience to those property owners not available to sign for the receipt of the notice.
Courtesy Notice (200'+ to 500)
Residents or occupants of property located more than 200 but less than 500 feet of the
subject site will receive a "Courtesy Notice" (see Attachment N2) that is a different format
and paper color than the Legal Notice. The Courtesy Notice would be sent via regular first
class postage, costing 50,32 per notice. As opposed to the Legal Notice procedure, staff
will prepare the mailing list from the City's Geographic Information System (GIS), using
parcel addresses to determine the locations to which the Courtesy Notices will be sent.
Rather than being mailed to specific individuals, the Courtesy Notices will be mailed to the
"Resident / Occupant". The reason for the use of the GIS system is to allow the mailing list
to be generated very quickly, with little or no loss of reliability.
The cost of certified mail for the Legal Notice and first class postage for the Courtesy
Notice should be charged directly to the applicant, above and beyond any application fees.
NOTE The proposed implementation date for the above-referenced changes is
January 1', 1999. In addition, please be aware that neither of the addressing systems are
fail-safe. By slate law, the "most recently approved municipal lax roll" must be used to
generate property owner mailing lists. one propgrty owners will not receive the notices if
J aye moved recently or if their address is listed incorrectly on the tax roll, and
occupants within 200 feet of thesu 'e •t pto~rty will not receive notices if they are not
rp opgrty owners Property owners in the ETJ are not entitled to rxeive legal notices, nor
does state law allow their opposition to affect the 20% Rulc. Signs are typically used by
municipalities to provide an alternative to those who do not receive mailed notices.
3. Site SI¢naa
i Prt►ioui Process
Small cardboard signs approximately 28"(W) X 22"(L) in size were posted on the subject
site by Planning staff using 3-feet tall wooden stakes. The signs were not readily visible,
highly vulnerable to weather damage and vandalism, and ineffective, The posting of these
signs has been temporarily discontinued because of constant replacement and
ineffectiveness. Ordinance 79.62 was adopted in 1979 to authorize staff lo post zoning
s change signs on private property,
•
♦ Sign Fabrication 11laterlal+Proposal: %[a) 1998 Option
INielal 3' X 3' sign whh Interchangeable information placards]
A reusable 3' X 3' metal sign, fabricated by the city's Traffic Division, was recommended JI
to City Council in May 1998, The sign is made of standard highway sign materials, 1
including renective backing and vinyl transfer lettering. Detailed informalion was
0 proposed to provide specific public hearing details. Fabrication of the 3' X 3' base sign and 0 •
smaller interchangeable metal placards, installation, inspection, and removal was proposed
to be handled by city staff, al a cost of $200.00 per sign per public hearing. The cost 1
estimate was based on the staff assessment that a new full-time position would be needed to
perform all related sign responsibilities. A request was made at the May 1998 work session
to explore less expensive sign options
2
In 32X
4
0
slim"
Since May 1998, the decision has been made to r, :ate a Zoning Inspector position that
could be assigned to ins!all and remove the signs, among other duties, relieving the need to
create a position for the sole purpose of handling the sign system. Two options are shown:
CITY OF DENTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSAL: ZONING CHANGE
CASEN Z-98-015
SITE SIZE 0.482 ACRES
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC 7,00 pm MAY 12, 1991
HEARING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY HALL
215 E. McXINNEY STREET
FOR MORE INFO: CITY PLANNINO a DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
221 N. ELM STREET 1940) 2498750
Detailed Information Sign Proposal. Original May 1998 Sign Copy
After reviewing the signs used by Lewisville and Flower Mound, staff felt that a generic
sign option would be a feasible alternative to the original sign proposed. With less sign
information, the likelihood of increased phone inquiries becomes greater, The trade-off is
the simplicity involved in the notification.
0 City of Denton
ZONING CHANGE
REQUESTED
For
PUBLIC HEARING a
Information Call
349.8350 i
i
Generic Sign Option
3 ill
rv~' o L
0 ,
I a+r~,~e
O
rs<rs~.
gn~abrlcallon ! dlaterlals Alternative: Lewlsvlli4 Systr,
(Corrugated plastle-laminated cardboard, 2% X 4' generic sign)
The City of Lewisville requires the use of 21/4' X 4' signs made from a corrugated vinyl
called "core•tex". Only one sign copy is used, as illustrated below:
LEWrtSVILLE
ZONING
CHANCE REQUESTED
For Information Call
219.3455
A Lewisville sign will be available at the September 22nd work session for Council
inspection, The cost of each sign is $35.00, and is sold over the counter at the Lewisville
Planning department,
According to information obtained from Lewisville officials, the Planning staff determines
the number and location of signs, and the applicant is required to install the sign. The
number of signs is determined in accordance with site size and road frontage, but the staff
does exercise discretion to require more or less signs depending on individual site
characteristics. No special resources are devoted to regular inspections to determine the
sign is installed in the proper location and is visually conspicuous, nor does the sign have to
be installed in a specific manner. If the owner of the sign does not remove the sign within
two weeks of the date of the City Council decision, the staff removes the sign for reuse if is
reasonable shape.
Sign FabLlceslon I N14 erlals Alternative: Flower Mound Systtam
The city of Flower Mound uses the same cure-tex sign material as Lewisville, with some
variations. Flower Mound's signs are 3' X 4', and a metal frame is required that reinforces
the sign face and has spikes for ground installation. Rather than selling the signs over the
counter, Flower Mound provideF a list of sign vendors to developers, who are then
responsible for sign purchase and installation. The sign copy for Flower Mound is similar
to that of Lewisville:
0
i
TOWN OF FLOWER MOUND, TEXAS
SPECIFIC USE
PERMIT REQUEST
0 IS BEING MADE 0 •
ON THIS PROPERTY
i FOR INFORMATION CALL
539.6012
4
4 ra ;
32;K~❑
in M
0
rJHWW
There are four types of signs required by Flower Mound for the purpose.- of advertising a
'SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST,' 'SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST', -ZONING
REQUEST', or "MASTER LAND USE PLAN REQUEST.' The number of signs required
depends on site size and road frontage. A sign vendor contacted by Planning staf indicated
that each 3' X 4' sign costs 565.00, and each metal frame costs 540.00 when these items are
purchased individually.
ESTIMATEp SCHEDULE OF PROJECT
Implementation of the revised public hearing notification procedures is proposed to begin on January
I", 1999. Amendments to the fee schedule and Ordinance 79.62 would be required prior to
implementation, and will be prepared upon direction by Council,
PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
This is the second work session scheduled to discuss specific public notification procedures. The
Denton Plan Policies, adopted by City Council on April 7e, 1998 encourage extensive public
participation and input in all local governmental processes.
In early 1998, Planning staff was asked by City Council members to explore new methods to provide
better information to more citizens regarding development-related issues. When rezoning requests,
annexation petitions, planned development ordinances, specific use permits, subdivision replats, and
variances are considered by City Council and other appointed boards and commissions, public hearings
are required by law to allow public access and input during governmental decision-making processes.
Comments received by staff during the last year indicate a strong Council commitment to encourage
public participation during the formation of the Denton Plan, to encourage staff facilitation of
neighborhood meetings before public hearings are held, and to improve the public hearing notification
process.
The latter objective, the public hearing notification process, was the subject of discussion for the May
26th work session. I
i
The Public Hearing Notification Process
Currently, State law requires a notice in the local newspaper to advertise that a public hearing will be
held for rezonings, planned developments, specific use permits, and zoning variances as per the
w following section from the Texas Local Government Code (TLGC):
Section 211,006(a) of the TLGC:
The governing horh, of a ownicipolile w0hing to exercise the hrahori(c rezatltg to :oning
regulalrons arrd:oning drsrrict hoondaries shall establish procedrues Jirr adopting and e+Jiircing
the regulations and boundaries. A regulation or boundary is not effective until af)er a public
hearing on the matter at which parties in interest and citizens have an opportunity to be heard
Before the 15'* day before the date of the hearing, notice of time and place of the hearing must be
published in an official newspaper or a newspaper ofgeneral circulation in tho r.runicipality. 0
In addition to newspaper publication, State law also requires public hearing notification of Fill property
Oil owners within 200 hundred feet for rezoning (including planned developments end specific use 1
permits) and variances request. Section 212.015 requires Police to be given for residential replats that
have been zoned or deed restricu-if for properties with a density that does not exceed two family
development within the last five years.
S ~
j
t.
o '
0
w
echo 211.007(c) of the LGC states:
Before the 10` dm' before the hearing date, written notice of each public hearing before the
zoning commission on a proposed change in a zoning classification shall be sent to each owner,
as indicated by the most recently approved municipal tar roll, of real property within 100 feet of
the property on which the change in classification is proposed. The notice may be served by its
deposit in the municipality, properly addressed with postage paid in the United States mail. If the
property within 100 feet of the property on which the change is proposed is toeated in territory
annexed to the municipality and is not included on the most recently approved municipal far roll,
the notice shall be given in the manner provided by Section 111.006(a).
Once a notice is received in opposition, it is attached to other notices in opposition and is used in
calculating the total percentage of p•operty within 200 feet. State law requires a three-fourths vote (6
of 7 City Council members) of the governing body if the property owner(s) of twenty percent (20%) of
the property located within 200 feet are opposed to the proposed reclassification, This has been
referenced as the "201/6 rule"by staff.
)FISCAL INFORMATION
Z N'WRM EN NOTICE 11fA[LMS
The cost of mailing the Legal Notices would increase from $0.32 to $2,77 each. Courtesy notices
would costs 50.32 each. Staff proposes that these costs be directly assigned 10 the applicant
specifically by amending the fee schedule. The fee should be collected before the notices are mailed.
If the applicant withdraws the application after the notices are mailed, no refund would be made.
ZSICNACE
Signage cost estimates are provided for five option as described below. Stafffeels &il. the core-teK
material may be a feasible option that could be tested in the field. Staff is also convinced that any
signs used should be installed, inspected, and removed by city personnel to ensure proper performance.
The cost trade-off between sign simplicity and increased phone inquiries is difficult to gauge, although
calls to the Planning & Development Department will almost certainly increase under either the
detailed or generic sign information options.
MAILED INF'ORNIATIQN)9 zI! MF.'fAL SIGN
• base sign installed once for duration of project, placards changed between public hearings
• date, time, type of request, site size, case 0 specifically provided on placards
fee collected at time of application, $100.00 per sign (materials & labor)
installed. Inspcvwd regularl), and rcmused b) Ciq /.oning Inspector
sign remains the property of the City
• GENERIC 3' it Y ,NETAIASIGA
. • sign(s) installed once for the duration of the development project
• four potential sign copies include Zoning Change, Planned Development, Specific Use
t l Permit, Variance
fee collected at time of application, $75.00 per sign (materials & labor)
installed, inspected regularly, and removed by City Zoning Inspector
sign remains the property of tho City
6
i
.AMMOM Eno
1!~ 32 x
.
0
ti
* LEWISVILLE 21/4'x 4' CORE-TEX SIGN
sign(s) installed once for the duration of the development project
only one sign copy used (Zoning Change)
sold over the counter, $35.00 per sign
hstalled by applicant
sign becomes the property of the applicant
FLOWER Nf ND ' s 4, CORE-TEX SIGN WIiMETAL FRAME
sign(s) ii stalled once for duration of development project
four pote trial sign copies used (Special Permit, Specific Use Permit, Zoning, Master Plan)
sold by private vendors, 565.00 per sign, $40.00 per metal frame (no discount)
- installed by applicant
- sign and frame become the property of the applicant
• "CITY-STAFFED" CORE-TEX SIGN & METAL FRAME OPTION
-sign(s) installed once for duration of development project
• four potential sign copies include Zoning Change, Planned Development, Specific Use
Permit, Variance
• fee collected at time of application
• 0 - 45 mph roadway: $65.00 per 2'x 3'sign/frame ($25.00 materials & $40.00 labor)
• 45+ mph roadway: $100 per 3' x 4' sign/frame (545,00 materials & $55.00 labor)
• city purchases signs at high quantity silk-screen discounts (approximately 5000 lower cost)
• installed, inspected regularly, and removed by City Zoning Inspector
• sign(s) remains the property of the applicant
• frame(s) remains the property of the City
CONCLUSION
Staff recommen s implementation of the follnwing public hearing notification procedures:
• The legal notice of public hearing will be published in the local newspaper as per by state law.
e The state-required 200-foot legal notice will be delivered via Certified Mail
4 Courtesy notices will be delivered to resident/occupants located between 200 and 500 feet of f
a public hearing property via first class mail.
• The "City-staffed" core•tex sign option will be implemented as indicated above, using only
two different sign copies: "Zoning Change Requested" and "Variance Requested
♦ The public hearing notification improvements will be implemented starting January 0, 1998.
EXHIBITS ' t
Attachment # I: Sample Legal Notice of Public Hearing
Attachment q2: Sample Courtesy Notice
Respectfully Submitted; •
•
I.
J~4
David M. Hill
Director of Planning and Development
LE 309
j
I~ 0 1;' r •
ATTACHMENT MI
LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Z•98.019
The P inning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing e + Wednesday,
May 43, 1998, to consider rezoning a 4.998 acre tract located on the east side of FM 2181 (Teasley
lane) across from Sent Oaks Street, commonly known as 3311 Teasley Lane, from an Agricultural
(A) zoning district to an Office (0) zoning dletrid (see map on backside). The 4.998 acre property Is
legally described as Tract 7 of the J. Fisher Survey (AbslreC 421), Denton County, Taxes. The
purpose of the zoning change Is to develop offices. The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.m. In the
City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you
own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning
Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoMng change request and invites you to
attend th9 public hearing. Please, In order for public opinion to be taken into eocount return this form
with your comments by mail, fax or in person to:
Planning and Development Department
221 N. Elm 8T
Denton, Texas 78204
Attn: Wayne Reed, Planner i
A zoning pettion follows a two step process designed to provide opportunities for citizen Involvement
and comment. The first step, following the submission of an application for a zoning change, Is to
schedule a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Landowners within two
hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the Planning and Zonlny Commission public
hearing byway of this notice. The Commission Is Informed of the percent of responses In support and
In opposition. Second, the zoning petition Is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the
Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitloner may
then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land
area within two hundred (200)1 feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of
the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the
percentage of landowner opposition.
Ple4fe circle one:
In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request
Comments: i
I
Signature: u
Printed Name:
Malting Address: r •
City, State Zip:
Telephone Number, _
Physical Address of Property within 200 feet:
8
1, 10" 32X10
1111011111 t PAN
a
0
74I
ATTACHMENT q2
court rEsy NorrcE
Z-98.019 f
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday,
May 13, 1998, to consider rezoning a 4.998 acre trait located on the east side of FM 2181 (Teasley
Lane) across from Bent Oaks Street, commonly known as 3311 Teasley Lane, from an Agricultural
(A) zoning district to an Office (0) zoning district (see map below). The 4.998 acre property Is legally
described as Tract 7 of the J. Fisher Survey (Abstract 421), Denton County, Texas. The purpose of
the zoning change is to develop offices. The public hearing will start at 5:30 p.m. In the City Council
Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. 8eceu0 you o.wrt proverfv
within five hundred 1500} feet of tha sublecf nrooen`v the Commissioners encourage you to exvres3
j2r views about this zoning ch nge mquest and Invite you to attend the DII hearinrr.
Neighboring property owners located within 200 foot of the subject site may have received a dNferent
type of nodes, giving them an opportunity to submit written support or opposition for this proposal
In accordance with state law. You are still encouraged to offer written a mments or verbal
comments at the public hearing. Please call the City Planning d Developr.renl Department at
003494350 If you have any question,
I
A
S~B
r t SITE
LOCATION MAP
9
l I ❑ 32 x I [i
' 7.1 K
a
T , VY ~ ~ ~ ,u
i Agenda No _.1 Agenda Item _2v'i-YL y
Date
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
i AGENDA DATE: September 22, 1998
,.r
DEPARTMENT: Economic Development
ACES: Kathy DuBose, Assistant (Jty Manager for Finance
SSU13JECT
P.-ceive a reps rt and hold a discussion concerning the business and development
activities, Texas Department of Transportation grant projects, and future growth and
development of the Denton Municipal Airport,
ti f
BACKGROUND
The Denton Municipal Airport has experienced significant airside and commercial
I development in the past five years. At your September 22^a meeting, Mark Nelson,
Airport Manager, will provide Council with a summary of recent grow.: and
development activities and outline several future development issues of the Denton
Municipal Airport.
) Xll1BITS
Exhibit 1: Airport Layout Plan
Exhibit 2, List of Airport Businesses
Exhibit 3: Southeast & Apron Development Plans
Exhibit 4: Texas Depattment of Transportation Projects
Respectfully suFmitted:
i Linda Ratliff, Direcrir
Economic Development partment
Prepared by:
~ • Mark Nelson
Airport Manager
I `
F
yy Y ! ~
t 32X
A ~1 ~ ~~A'~u~ 1/'921Y 4 I•PC t
~ 11 I~i
L
1 ~ of ~ ~ • t
a
I 41
J~
r , t
II I
'r
1 I
..,...+wilreaY!te', ,~I~~~Rfi11tM^JS'rtlN:r Nee,N..~
. f lI ~~I. lA r
'>•In,Y •41M1I ~ 1
Awr Yl ~ 1 IW\IuY1M•Mr 11 / I 1 lY1F~ I IIY ~ n YN r.wVrNNY 1
13 1wq 4YI IY ~ r ~ • , y~ / ICY 4 . _ 1 I Y ~ 1 • Yi
, 1 I rI ~ ~ Iw^ N IM+ i t r I" r . F.Iq 1 z
h`~ IC a= 1I(` 1 IMI~YI ` ~f ll V. Iw~YYy1 bY'' I ~ ..~~MI ~ 1 II Pn Ix ~~ll~~ I I
114 IIA~N ~.u. 1 ~ I ~~S ~i' 1
11Y~11 ~ V J Il w~~Ce7 7pp {f[y~~ Iwn N. )
f / ~G i ri.l Y NY N1 It k~l, I
~ 1 I ~ ly I~ I Y • Y,. YNYiMt 1 ~ 1
_ li
_ iiww~I YnJ ' ` 1'n-G = _ lu _ = ~ 1.Y I ,r 14Y Y V • ~ Y f[~ '
IwYY 411N 1 ^
~"//~1 ~ II _ '~Ct I MrYn b.l w.,, -w IY' I 1 v_lvvv/ wII MYM Irly r I
j ~ wuiilw tG~~~F+i fAgN A'alfC..r YNr.. ~ RIwY II, -
I1
II. I•YMI 1 „ 1 ~r
rnn,lY r wn»ry ~ ~'I F~,
~ I+I A.nI YIV rw~ II I~1 •HIMI co
.T ~ r"r_` 9 ~ I C[,I r.,Ir IN ic-~ W b
I IY
~I\\ 11' CV~r~ 11 ~ ~N~ III ` ~1.
p Y.OItI \1NR11 0 YYY W I l
1 ~ I ff~~ ~ YYI 7fYIYLL r0A1 r
YY I YYI L,rNY IM IMI Ir YYM Y wY Iri P r.wr,Y lY•MMY. rMY.NR WN - r
~Y\M YMI/.IYN 4,V \Jlt irY l.N4Yl NMY YNY11 1~ \XYw IN Ili 1 IMINYY YNNNYYI IYYI MI NII•S I
I 1 ~~~-r~~^`w J/ YNI Y M.AwY la 1111pY1~,
j Uv DIN'S fA:IL~ S ~ ~ ILr.Nwn rr. w.wnw~. 'Y: V I INN YMIq ~ aYx•na xSMC 1 ! INMr
1 , dYflili. 1•.~ - - ^III N~AM~ I ~ N r
~pMlw YWIO! MITI , M1
S AIRAOAI LAYOUT PIAH ' WNY Y~rly b ~1 I'
oM,M Oro f 11~y_~•~,~,ryY~iY ~ Iw.e n • ~ ~ I A~~r ~ ~ 1
S ~ 11Y 11 T 4A YR h 1 YYYYw W ~ M Lw rnYYY ~ i , y
4 ~ ~ 1 YNM1IIII MI Oro "II II, e ► "°1
- - gin''?',=h x 32 d ~'Y ,~~f,~
x 25X I
t
0
EMPLOYEES AT DTO
SEPTEMBER 1998
EMPLOYERS FUIJ.TIME PART-TIME TOTAL.
AEROSMITH PIPER SALES I 0 1
AVIONICS INTERNATIONAL 31 0 31
BAIRD, BILL - - 22 1 23
EZELL AVIATION 2 2 v 4
HULCHER(FIRST FINANCIAL)-PILOTS' 2 _2 4
r~ NEBRIG & ASSOCIATES 7 1 6
H NORTH AMERICAN FLIGHT ACADEMY I 11 12
m
y RITCHEY, ALAN--PILOTS'" 2 - 2 4
SIMMS, MIKE-PILOT' 0 1 1
STEIN, JOHN - AVIATION MECHANIC 2 0 2
TEXAS AIR CENT ER 5 10 IS
TEXAS AIR CHARTER-PILOTS l9 3 21
TEXAS AIR CHARTER-MECHANICS 3 0 S
TO,MLINSON AVIONICS 8 2 10
TOTAL l06 35 141
'C'OMMERC'IAL P1LUT5 BASED HERE
tMr~ oi'resar uro rxx ro,rarvie
2s K 32x
o .
Zen"
DENTON
MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
M Airport Buildings
L
C-t-? \ 9 s Fmc. Lines ParklnB loldAprons
r \ ran I(V
'~'V~~~pggG=:Q r~
BuIId1n90aauplnb
11 r 1. DotiMahon191onp•
2. 9.r1 MshWillorapps
f. Dew AUelln-Dwlghl Hatcher
u b iJ~•, g. flnlflnanclellfSOnps
Vt ST 6. RalphflelerFlSorege
6. John 1eivldge161oroge
a 7, Dr. J.R. AlmondlAlreraltMvnum
S 6. sob 9mlth/Roborl PowelsoN6olle
......U9. ChltdrWoAlrIItV9tofs9l
10. Excel AdellonlAlrcrsll MaInlensnca
11. E:dlAvlalloelslorogqs
6 12.Ejell Adellonlilxedsued0porator
lAbporliumin W
in el
U., A qP0 R 14. C111rofDnntwInAl.ls1l"
lio JIIxed Noted OPeteta
r~ - 16 A
.r or
loxes Alo ClharterlAlr C7rga
North nAmerican
John 6ts
16. Alr0soton,Inc.lBtorage
17, AlrDgnton.lna.161orape
19. Alrb.nton,100J6t0ragYo
It, Avionics lnlsrnetlonallAlrclatl Porte
d 20Milo" Judge Don Wlndlefflmape pofIWA1rcrotlMueeum
22. Nebrl R AssoodAlrcraft 6rokaage
22. Robe MaGsoheckfslow ago
2d, Eleven Molrcheck/6lorepe
}yr - 2s, Dar1d Raeoll9l*togs
y - 'snnnin J ii 26. Charles OronUflaups
lk7J
r:
F
Cr n g1#1 CAI1fIFLL. N '
n III
tee' 300,
1 41 - _ 110,
i 4: O O
(1) 96'r 110' is
Ito' y 110'
I!,
10 J G X I O
0
YJL*A y.11rw
- - To DDT t mumcIPAI-
1 AIRPORT
,
U nl1p0l t-j
~EU '9 1 rince Linea porF hrp lololnprone
n 1
1 Du9Jlnp Occupurlt
" tl
s ' 1. D+r1 MalionfBloropo
2, port Mallet" to r o yy0
y! 2, DOre Auetbl-Dnlplrt llnlc'Of
1. 4. rlrelrlnenclAsto"ll"
U.. , . I
S. rlrlpl+610tdgmMoro
0. Jolm Betvl nl Btoga
o Dr.J,11.AImonJ1A11crnltMuo+lun i
B. Doh 6rnlthllSo6nrt l owoleenlBnlor
all
iS U•_p 10CEacellAvle 1 illlAt ctoftMelotoneneo
n 6 11.EiollA.letlonl6torean
6 12. Eeol1 AVInt10P/rlred GPled Dppaelor
"fi"t°n 1on1111cnAvlonlellAv!ontcl hop
DO U 17. city of D+rllon/8lorege '
1■ erl~ Ivrv..• 14. Cltr of ponloulAbporl iennlrrni
Z l fY~_IprA;fiJ~01 10.Alrp anion,}no.Irlxnd Daeod Opornlor
levee Alt Cher tnr/Air Cal go
Nor tit Alnerlonnrllpt.1Acedanlr
John BleeolBlnropn
I 10• AbDenfou,Inc.IBlorege
11. AlrDenton.lno dBteroga
_IJ t` 16. AIrD+nte n,lne.IPlorntln
11~'Indl~~illo/rnpern rr l'.ru
11 20,J Jql volt
2 l rllanper l UTAlecrell Muenurn
rrm IA 562 21. Ndnlyy 6, Aoeoc.lAtrrrnit proknrnpn
21. noborl Mdaoliacitl6larspo
r 24. Slot w Mnlnehoc1d6101 epa
11; D Ovid noeoll6 ronpn
5p An I AN Dj~}} 261 Chnht OrnnVRlnnpe
VIII
JUIIIJ CAMIELL~I n
j 100' l r I,
j r 300' `V
_.900
U 1 ,lo
80 Y ilOv n r
11~' tI I10
40
r '
ny fir. a x 32 X I D