The following letter was communicated to the West Bay Sanitary District on May 31st. This letter was drafted by the Los Trancos County Water District in response to the initial study regarding annexation of some properties in the Los Trancos Woods area to the West Bay Sanitary District. This is an important issue for our water District and it is felt that it is important to keep the District's customer-owners informed on what is transpiring.

Stan Gage
for the Los Trancos County Water district Board of Directors



LOS TRANCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
455 Old Spanish Trail Portola Valley CA 94028
Phone: 650-851-1924 Fax: 650-851-7018




June 6, 2001
Mr. Tim Clayton, District Manager
West Bay Sanitary District
500 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025

Re: Response from Los Trancos County Water District to the West Bay Sanitary District Los Trancos Woods Service Area Annexation Project Initial Study (the Study)
Dear Mr. Clayton:
The Los Trancos County Water District Board of Directors has reviewed the aforementioned Study and has a number of concerns that the Board feels still remain unaddressed after the Board's earlier response to the "Preliminary Draft" of this Study and that are not resolved by the proposed mitigations.  As was pointed out in previous written and verbal communications from this District, the Board remains firmly behind the proposition that sewer installation is necessary for correcting problems with failing septic systems within the Study area and in areas beyond the scope of the Study area which have for unexplained reasons not been included as a part of the Study. However, the scope of the Study's proposal transcends the issue of correcting current health hazards and includes the goal of enabling a significant level of new residential development in the community. Taken as a whole, the proposed project creates a problem of insufficient infrastructure resources including insufficient water to supply the increased demand that is expected as a result of the large number of new houses that will be enabled by the proposed annexation. Rather than proposing a comprehensive solution including the necessary and practical approaches to realizing all of the required infrastructural improvements that must be implemented when an unplanned 28% growth situation is created in a community, the proposals embodied in the Study simply create new problems for other agencies thereby compounding infrastructural insufficiency leading ultimately to new conflicts, not to real solutions.

Issues
The key issue for the Los Trancos County Water District is the availability of sufficient water supply to meet the demand increases that will be forced upon the District if the annexation is implemented as currently proposed. Based on the results of the current version of the Study and on information supplied by the San Mateo County Planning Department, the increase in demand could be as high as 32%.
The final Study cites the written communication of December, 2000 from the Los Trancos County Water District estimating a 7% to 17% increase in demand as a result of the sewer installation, ignoring the follow-up communication addressed to you in January of this year. The 7%to 17% projections were based on the 35 potential new housing units that would be enabled by the sewer project that was suggested in the Preliminary version of the Study. The issue of just how many new houses may result from the extension of the sewers is still not fully addressed. On subsequent analysis, the latest version of the Study now cites a number of as many as 64 new units in the Study area. Using the numbers supplied by the County of San Mateo Planning department, as many as 89 new units may be created in the entire area of Los Trancos Woods if the areas excluded from the Study but having a high probability of future annexation are included. These numbers were pointed out to you and Mr. Kitajima in our communication of January 26 (attached) and have, for some reason, been totally ignored in the preparation of the final version of the Study. The District's written communication of December 2000 is, therefore, superceded by this letter.
Based on an increase of 64 new units and an ultimate non-sewer projected build-out of 315 units in the Los Trancos County Water District there would be a 20% increase in the demand for water due solely to newly constructed housing units. If the 89 unit number is utilized instead, this becomes 28% increase in demand. There is, as well, a significant unknown demand increase factor related to additional usage in residences that will no longer constrain usage due to failing septic systems, residences where additions may be made that will increase occupancy and residences that may be torn down and rebuilt with provision for increased occupancy. Using the Study number of 117 current residences in the Study area and making the assumption that 50% of these residences are now significantly constrained in usage due to one of the above factors and using current indoor monthly usage, the District estimates an annualized usage increase in the Study area of approximately 2100 units of water per year. (3 additional units per residence per month x 117 residences x 0.5 x 12). This represents an additional demand increase of about 4 % across the District as a whole. In total the increase in demand due to both new residences and removal of demand constraints might range from a low of 20% to a high of 32% or more. The District believes that the true long term impact of the annexation is best represented by the 89 new housing unit number. It is quite naive to have constrained the scope of the Study to only a subset of the Los Trancos Woods area, not acknowledging the reality that the proposed annexation that brings sewers still further up the hill will result in relatively short order in additional annexations of other properties that currently are experiencing failed septic systems (some of which are directly adjacent to the study area boundary).
The authors of the report for some reason felt compelled to address the fact that the District has provided water service to the Blue Oaks subdivision. ("In the immediate project area, the developers of the Blue Oaks subdivision did not request additional water allocation for that development: therefore a will-serve letter was granted.") The intent of the inclusion of this passage is unclear. However, what is clear is that here again, through failure to seek and utilize appropriate information from the agency involved, the authors of the report have made a significant error. The predecessors of the Blue Oaks project go back to before 1989. In the early 1990's, when the current supply assurance levels were being negotiated among the members of the Bay Area Water Users Association, the Los Trancos County Water District recognized the potential impact of what appeared to be the likely development of the property that eventually became Blue Oaks. The District, at that time, requested an increase to the proposed 0.09 mgd (million gallons per day) supply assurance level. Based on this request, the District's supply assurance level was raised by ~22% to 0.11 mgd. The statement in the Study that the developers did not request an increase is factually correct. Developers do not make such requests. The Los Trancos County Water District is the appropriate agency to make the request, and, in fact, did.
The District's supply assurance may be open to revision in 2009 when the current contracts between the individual members of the Bay Area Water Users Association and SFWD expire. However, at this time there is no basis upon which to forecast whether the District's assurance level would increase, decrease, or remain the same.
Impact and Proposed Mitigation
Regardless of whether the increase in demand for water is 20% or 32%, the District does not have guaranteed water supply available to address either level of increase. (In fact, none of the 31 water districts that comprise the Bay Area Water Users Association could accommodate such an increase at the present time.) The ramifications of this shortfall are far from the self-serving finding of the Study suggesting that the issue of available water is a Less than Significant Impact.  It is, without question, a Significant Impact. In addition, the mitigation measures suggested by the report are quite misleading.
=A8       First, the suggested mitigation measures are not in any way supported by the communication from John Mullane of the San Francisco Water Department. (See letter from John Mullane to Tim Clayton dated 3/21/2001, copy attached.)  The mitigation suggests that the Los Trancos County Water District should apply to SFWD for additional allocation. In fact, Mr. Mullane's letter correctly states that "In order for Los Trancos County Water District to obtain an increase in its individual water supply assurance, it will require that some other entity take less water, thus reducing another wholesale customer's supply assurance." This is not an issue that is arbitrated by SFWD. It is an issue between Los Trancos County Water District and the 30 other agencies that comprise the Bay Area Water Users Association. The letter could probably go on to point out that the probability of another agency making such a concession of willingly giving up a portion of its water allocation is close to zero. In addition, the mechanisms for such transfers of allocations do not currently exist among the BAUWA agencies and it is unclear whether such allocation transfers would be permitted under the terms of the Settlement Agreement between the BAWUA member agencies and the SFWD. Please review carefully the terms of the Settlement Agreement and Master Sales Contract between The City And County of San Francisco and Certain Suburban Purchasers in San Mateo County, Santa Clara County and Alameda County.
=A8       Second, the development of new water supplies is an extremely protracted, costly, and environmentally sensitive issue in and of itself. Since the current contracts with SFWD prohibit interagency transfer of water resources and allocations, the Los Trancos County Water District is currently constrained to supplies obtainable roughly within the current District Boundary. Further, surface water and well water utilization are limited by a host of environmental issues, treatment requirements and extremely high costs for development and operation of small-scale supplemental water supplies. Even if such development were proven to be achievable at any cost there is a high probability that the current excellent water quality enjoyed by the local population would be significantly degraded through the additional mineral content. A very rough estimate of the cost to develop and operate such supplemental sources is an additional long term indebtedness of about $3000 for every customer in the District and increase in the monthly base rate for water service of about $13, that is about 50%. It is not clear that the current customer base as a whole is willing to or should be expected to make such a commitment in support the economic gain of just a part of the District wishing to build on parcels that are not currently legally buildable sites. Such an extension of District indebtedness would certainly need to receive approval from a vote of the residents.
=A8       Third, the suggestion that the problem of available water supply can be addressed by using the concept of will-serve letters does not really resolve the issue. It simply, and inappropriately places the Los Trancos County Water District into the position as the constraining agency on the construction of 64 (or 89) new housing units. It is further noted, that the financial practicality of the proposed annexation and construction is apparently dependent on annexations of a significant number currently vacant parcels. It seems difficult to reconcile the implied suggestions of the Study that by annexation to the West Bay Sanitary District these properties would become buildable sites while at the same time the Study suggests that a mitigation option open to another agency (i.e. the Los Trancos County Water District) would be to deny access to infrastructure services these same properties would require in order to become buildable sites. Such inconsistencies need to be rectified so that potential participants in the annexation can make an informed choice.

Suggested Approach
The Los Trancos County Water District believes that through current District programs aimed at efficient use of water within the District, the water demand of those customers currently having water service and those properties in the District that could currently be built on in the absence of the proposed sewer annexation can be met. Also, the District can accommodate the additional 2100 units per year forecasted increase in demand resulting from the shift to sewers from septic systems among customers in the Study area who connect to the sewer to correct current health hazards. Beyond these levels of service, however, the District simply cannot accommodate additional service connections until such time as the District can secure an increase in its sources of supply adequate to meet the demand.
The Los Trancos County Water District therefore, requests that the proposed annexations be limited to those properties that currently have on-site waste disposal systems plus those currently undeveloped parcels that are large enough to meet the current requirements of San Mateo County for on-site waste disposal systems. Annexation of smaller properties that do not meet requirements for on site waste disposal systems should be deferred until a balanced solution to the infrastructure needs of the possible 89 new residences can be reasonably foreseen. Such a balanced solution needs to address the entire range of infrastructure requirements including sewer, water, roads, gas, electrical, communications, and other services. Unfortunately, the current Study fails to address the necessity for such a comprehensive solution. More important, the real facts regarding the housing development related impacts of the annexation, when properly identified and addressed, do not in any way meet the requirements for a negative declaration. Therefore, if the West Bay Sanitary District does not limit the scope of the annexation as requested above, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared.
Sincerely,
Stanley R. Gage
for the Los Trancos County Water District Board of Directors