Loading...
Appendix-G-SB610 Water Supply AssessmentAPPENDIX G SB610 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT • VIII°°°°°' VIII VIII VIII IIII""""'lllk VIII 6uIIIIIII IIII"'Y 2012 caties wet' mi4 company/ Lam, Altos, Subun t stroo Lam, ARM,, C*[amiss . 24 Introduction California Water Service Company (Cal Water) is submitting this California SB 610 Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for the proposed Apple Campus 2 project (also referred to as "AC2"). The location of the project site, which is approximately 176 acres, is in the northeast corner of the City of Cupertino. The site is bounded on the south by 1280, on the west by North Wolfe Road, on the north by East Homestead Road and the east by North Tantau Avenue. There is also an area consisting of 6 buildings east of N. Tantau Ave that is part of the project. The site currently is fully developed and contains over 26 buildings used as business office space by Apple Computer and other companies, parking lots and landscaped areas. Maps, figures and drawings showing location, existing facilities and proposed design layout for new Apple 2 Campus facilities are contained in Planned Development Permit drawings prepared by Foster + Partner, ARUP, OLIN and Kier & Wright and should be referenced for more specific information on the proposed project. The WSA uses information from documents characterizing existing facilities and those proposed for the Apple 2 Campus. The project will be implemented in two phases. For Phase 1, Apple proposes to construct on the site a very large main building (2,800,000 square feet) that houses administrative, engineering, research and development functions. The building will be an annular ring design with four stories. Phase 1 will include a large cafeteria in the main building, a separate 1,000 seat auditorium building and a separate fitness center area with an Olympic sized swimming pool. Parking will be under the main building and in a separate multi -story parking structure to the south of the main building. The project will include a central power plant in the southeast corner of the site. Approximately 117 acres of landscaped areas comprised of a variety of plantings of trees, orchards, gardens and grass are proposed. Orchards, gardens, trees, lawn and a large pool and fountain will be at the center of the area inside the ring formed by the main building. Phase 1 of the new campus is expected to accommodate 13,000 Apple employees upon occupancy — 12,000 in the main building and 1,000 in research and development buildings east of N. Tantau Ave. Phase 2 will add new research buildings with a total space of 300,000 ft2 to accommodate another 1,200 employees. At full development, the project will accommodate 14,200 employees. The Los Altos Suburban (LAS) District of Cal Water currently provides water service to the proposed project site. The LAS District is in Santa Clara County approximately 45 miles south of San Francisco and 11 miles north of San Jose. Figure 1 is a general location map of the LAS District. 122-9"'w 122_4"W 122_:�"w 177_2"W 122_1"W 122 -()"W 171 _9"W 171 _A"W 171 _7"W The LAS district system serves all of the incorporated City of Los Altos and sections within the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Sunnyvale and adjacent unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County. The LAS district service area boundary is shown in Figure 2. The cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara own and operate water systems northeast and southeast of the District. The balance of the City of Cupertino's water system is operated by San Jose Water Company. Purissima Hills Water District is north of the City of Los Altos Hills. 37°24'N y Mounn View, CAtcas o Service Area ms 37'2311 , 4 J Boundal r 37°22'N o ' Los Altos District unn� K _,.. 1 C mina Rei 37'21'N 37°20'N III The Apple Campus 2 project was not specifically included in Cal Water's 2010 LAS District Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP); therefore, its water requirements are addressed in this WSA. The LAS District UWMP document provides historic and forecasted water demand and supply data and can be referenced for more detailed information on those topics. Senate Bill 610 (Chapter 643, Statutes of 2001) (SB 610) amended state law as of January 1, 2002, to include consideration of water supply availability when cities and counties are making land use development decisions. SB 610 requires detailed information on water supply availability be provided to local public agency decision -makers prior to approval of development projects that meet or exceed any of the following criteria: 1. A residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. 2. A shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet. 3. A commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. 4. A hotel or motel with more than 500 rooms. 5. An industrial, manufacturing or processing plant or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons occupying more than 40 acres of land or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. 4 6. A mixed -used project that includes one or more of the projects specified above. 7. A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project. Because the proposed AC2 exceeds either criteria 3 or 5 above, a WSA is required. This WSA assesses the adequacy of the water supply to meet the estimated demands of the proposed AC2 over the next 20 years and those of Cal Water's LAS District customers and projected new users under normal, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. (Water Code §10911(a).) SB 610 requires that the information presented in a WSA be included in the administrative record that is the basis for an approval action by the local public agency. SB 610 recognizes local control and decision-making regarding availability of water for projects and approval of projects. A WSA is to be provided to local governments for inclusion in environmental documentation for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (as defined in Water Code 10912 [a]). 1 Service Area Population The LAS District is growing at a relatively slow rate of 0.13 percent based on increases in total services over the past five years. LAS services growth rate averaged 0.15 percent for the last ten years. Based on developable space and past experiences the same rate of growth is expected to continue in the foreseeable future. Based on U.S. Census data, the LAS District population was approximately 55,177 in 2000. Using actual service connection increases and assuming population density has remained unchanged since the census was conducted, Cal Water estimates that by December 2009 LAS District population increased to approximately 55,270 — an increase of only 93 people in 9 years. A density of 2.72 persons per residential service (single family plus multi -family units) was used in making this estimate. Cal Water uses U.S. Census data in estimating population for all of its California districts. Estimating population involves overlaying U.S. Census 2000 Block data onto Cal Water service area maps (SAM). This method for estimating existing and future populations is accepted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which provides regulatory oversight. In its 2010 LAS District UWMP, Cal Water used year 2000 census data because 2010 data were not available until the end of 2011. A summary of census data for year 2000 is shown in Table 1. LandView 5 and MARPLOT ® software were used to generate the data. This data was used as a baseline for estimating population starting in 2000. To estimate population after 2000, the Census 2000 population was divided by the total number of dwelling units served by Cal Water in 2000 to produce apopulation density value. This value was then multiplied by the estimated number of Cal Water dwelling units in each future year. To establish a range of future service counts the five-year and ten year projected growth rates for each service type were continued through 2040. The five-year average is the short-term growth rate calculated for 2005 to 2009 and had an annual average growth rate of 0.13 percent. The ten-year average, the long- term growth rate calculated for 2000 to 2009, had annual average growth rate of 0.15 percent — not much different than the five year rate. Based on growth trends and potential, Cal Water used the five-year growth rate for future growth forecasts. Cal Water estimates the LAS District service area population will be 62,650 by 2040. Table 2 shows the population estimates (2005 and 20 10) and forecasts growth in 5 -year increments. , o i4iii 55,950 56,940 57,860 58,800 59,740 60,700 61,670 62,650 1 The climate for the LAS District is moderate with warm dry summers and cool winters. Most precipitation occurs during late autumn, winter, and early spring. Table 3 shows average annual conditions for the Palo Alto weather station, which is closet to the LAS District, Figure 3 shows LAS District average monthly temperature and rainfall. 3.50 3.00 2.50 s a i 1.00 0.50 0.00 Historically, Cal Water projected water demand by multiplying the projected number of services for each user class by one of three (high, average and low) historic service rates for that class. The three service rates were derived from customer water records. The sum of the projected demands for each user class equals the total projected demand for the LAS District. Three separate demand projections for the LAS District were calculated in this manner: high, average and low. After the passage of Senate Bill 7 (SBx7-7) this method was no longer used by Cal Water for projecting water demands. However, these calculations are still used as the basis for projecting growth in services, population, and distribution of demand among user classes. The method used in the 2010 LAS UWMP to determine future water demands is a response to SBx7-7 requirements. Two demand projections are made: an unadjusted baseline demand and a target demand. The unadjusted baseline water demand projection is the total demand expected without water conservation. It is equal to forecasted population multiplied by the 2005-09 average per capita water use - or 238 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). The target water demand projection includes conservations savings due to both passive and active demand management, which is described later in the WSA. The target demand is calculated by multiplying SBx7- 7 target gpcd values and projected population. A comparison of projected demands based on the former method (high, average and low) and the new SBx7-7 (unadjusted Baseline and Target) is shown in Figure 4. As indicated, the Target Demand forecast falls between the low and average demand forecasts using the previous method. 24,000 22,000 20,000 t 18,000 toto w p 16,000 U 14,000 12,000 A 10,000 8,000 6,000 I �C+TR't:� iA ���� �?�iTC+�i a�3i.77[+�1 E:# •�'t�?f�+ . E���F.f 'i �-Z�""f:Tiia 4,000 1 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Year Actual Demand +u Projection Low Projection Average %ProjectionHigh Target Demand Unadjusted Baseline Demand Projected water deliveries by customer type can not be determined by the SBx7-7 method. To obtain a breakdown of future deliveries, Cal Water calculates the ratio of demand for each user class to total demand for the unadjusted water demand projection. These calculated ratios are applied to the total adjusted baseline demand to obtain projected demand by user class. Tables 4 and 5 show actual 2005 and 2010 demands, respectively. Tables 6 through 9 show projected demands in five (5) year increments through 2040. These demands include the conservation savings associated with SBx7-7 demand management requirements. s 10 California Senate Bill x7-7 Baseline and Targeted Demand Cal Water is expanding water conservation programs for its 24 California service districts. Over the next five years, conservation program expenditures will increase significantly due to the state requiring future reductions in per capita urban water use. Senate Bill No. 7 (SBx7-7) adopted in November 2009 mandates a statewide 20 percent reduction in per capita urban water use by December 31, 2020. The CPUC is directing Class A and B water utilities to adopt conservation programs and rate structures designed to achieve reductions in per capita water use. In preparing to achieve increased water conservation, Cal Water in 2010 developed five-year conservation program plans for each of its service districts. The complete Los Altos Suburban District Conservation Master Plan is in Appendix G of the 2010 UWMP. SBx7-7 requires progress toward the 2020 goal by reducing per capita water use by at least 10 percent on or before December 31, 2015. Each urban retail water supplier must develop 2015 and 2020 urban water use targets in accordance with specific requirements. SBx7-7 provides several ways to calculate water use reduction targets. Retail water suppliers can also form regional alliances within the same hydrologic region to achieve compliance. Under the regional compliance approach, water suppliers within the same hydrologic region can comply by either meeting their individual target or being part of a regional alliance that meets its regional target. For all Cal Water districts within the same hydrologic region, Cal Water intends to form regional alliances as listed in Table 10. The LAS District is part of the San Francisco Bay Area hydrologic region, along with Bear Gulch, Livermore, Mid -Peninsula and South San Francisco districts. Table i d by HydrologicRegion North coast Redwood Valle San Francisco Bay Area Bear Gulch, Livermore, Los Altos, Mid -Peninsula, South San Francisco Central Coast King City, Salinas South Coast Dominguez, East LA, Hermosa -Redondo, Palos Verdes, Westlake Sacramento River Chico, Dixon, Marysville, Oroville, Willows San Joaquin Stockton Tulare Lake Bakersfield, Kern River Valley, Selma, Visalia North Lahontan None South Lahontan Antelope Valley Colorado River None District specific and regional targets for Cal Water districts within the San Francisco Bay hydrologic region are shown in Table 11. The 2015 and 2020 district -specific targets for the LAS District are 217 and 193 gpcd, respectively. Over the last five years LAS District demand averaged 238 gpcd. Thus, per capita demand would need to fall by 9 percent by 2015 and by 19 percent by 2020 in order to meet targets. Alternatively, if average per capita water use for the five districts listed in Table 11 does not exceed 166 gpcd in 2015 and 151 gpcd in 2020, then all five districts will be in compliance with SBx7-7 requirements. 11 Table 11: Regional San Francisco Bay ... Region 1,777/77/7/1/7777=7 „i ON Bear Gulch 56,013 214 190 Los Altos Suburban 55,290 217 193 Livermore 53,888 178 158 Mid -Peninsula 126,284 131 124 South San Francisco 58,297 138 124 Regional Targets' 166 151 I Regional targets are the population -weighted average of the district targets. Under SBx7-7, an urban retail water supplier may adopt one of four methods for determining its 2020 gpcd target: 1. Set the 2020 target to 80 percent of average gpcd for any continuous 10 -year period ending no earlier than December 31, 2004, and no later than December 31, 2010. 2. Set the 2020 target as the sum of the following: a. 55 gpcd for indoor residential water use. b. 90 percent of baseline CII water uses, where baseline CII gpcd equals the average for any contiguous 10 -year period ending no earlier than December 31, 2004, and no later than December 31, 2010. c. Estimated per capita landscape water use for landscape irrigated through residential and dedicated irrigation meters assuming water use efficiency equivalent to the standards of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance set forth in Section 2.7 of Division 2 of Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations. 3. Set the 2020 target to 95 percent of the applicable state hydrologic region target, as set forth in the state's draft 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan dated April 30, 2009. 4. A method determined by DWR through the urban stakeholder process. For the LAS District, Methods 1 and 3 were selected for evaluation. Method 2 is not feasible due to a lack of required data. Method 4 was not considered because it was not available when Cal Water's Conservation Master Plan was developed. For Method 1, the 2015 and 2020 targets are set to 90 percent and 80 percent of baseline water use, respectively. Baseline water use is the average water use for any continuous 10 -year period ending between 2004 and 2010. For the LAS District, the 10 -year base period of 1999-2008 was selected. The 2015 target is 217 gpcd and the 2020 target is 193 gpcd. Table 12 summarizes selected base period information and Table 13 shows per capita demand over this ten-year base period. 12 Under Method 3, the 2015 and 2020 targets are set to 95 percent of the 2015 and 2020 targets for the hydrologic region in which the district is located i.e. San Francisco Bay hydrologic region. Los Altos District's 2015 target is 137 gpcd and the 2020 target is 124 gpcd. The SBx7-7 target for 2020 cannot exceed 95 percent of the District's five-year baseline water use, where the baseline period ends no earlier than December 31, 2007 and no later than December 31, 2010. The District's 2020 target cannot exceed this level, regardless of which method is used to calculate it. The maximum allowable target in the Los Altos District is 241 gpcd, as shown in Table 14. For the LAS District, neither Method 1 or 3 results in a target exceeding the maximum allowable target, so no adjustment is necessary. 13 Method 1 targets were chosen for the Los Altos District and are summarized in Table 15. F011,1111 1111116,1111:43 P1a111-2111 VVITRIM �-, MI The LAS District does not sell water to other agencies nor does it provide water for groundwater recharge or recycling. Other than water sales to LAS District customers, the only other water "used" is unaccounted for system losses from the distribution system which must be included in determining total system demand. Table 16 presents projected LAS District unaccounted for system losses. 14 Table 17 presents actual and projected LAS District water demand through 2040 based on total demand projections meeting SBx7-7 gpcd targets and projected unaccounted for distribution system losses. It is noted that the actual 2010 demand dropped from 2005 due to above normal rainfall in 2010 resulting in substantial reduction in irrigation demand. Projected demand for 2015 is lower than 2005 and demand in 2020 is lower than 2015 due to anticipated results of increased water conservation. For the years 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 and 2040, small increases in demand (-220 AFY) occur due to modest growth in the District's customer services. , Cal Water is significantly expanding its water conservation programs. SBx7-7, CPUC directives and a state water conservation organization are all focused on reducing urban water use through implementation of water conservation measures. The first has already been discussed. The CPUC's Decision 07-05-062 directed Class A and B water utilities to submit a plan to achieve a 5 percent reduction in average customer water use over each three-year rate cycle. This policy was refined under Decision 08-02-036, which established a water use reduction goal of 3 to 6 percent in per customer or service connection consumption every three years once a full conservation program, with price and non -price components, is in place. These decisions anticipated the enactment of state legislation (SBx7-7). The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Urban Water Conservation in California offers three ways in which a water supplier can comply with conservation requirements. The first is to implement a set of water conservation best management practices (BMPs) consistent with Exhibit 1 of the MOU. The second, Flex Track compliance, is to implement conservation programs expected to save an amount of water equal to than the BMPs would result in. The third is to reduce per capita water use. Each of these options is briefly described. Originally, the MOU established BMPs that signatories agreed to implement in good faith. For each BMP, the MOU established actions required by the water supplier (e.g. site surveys, fixture and appliance rebates, water use budgets, volumetric pricing and conservation rate designs), an implementation schedule, and level of effort. Additionally, the MOU established terms by which a water supplier could opt out of implementing a BMP. BMPs are grouped into five categories. Two categories (Utility Operations and Education) are "Foundational BMPs" because they are considered essential water conservation activities and are adopted for implementation by all signatories to the MOU as ongoing practices with no time limits. The remaining BMPs are "Programmatic BMPs" and are organized into Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII), and Landscape categories. Table 18 lists the BMPs by category. The requirements and coverage levels of each 15 BMP are set forth in Exhibit 1 of the MOU. Cal Water's CUWCC annual reports, which detail BMP implementation, are included in the 2010 UWMP as Appendix G. Under Flex Track, a water supplier can estimate the expected water savings over the 10 -year period 2009-2018 if it were to implement the programmatic BMPs in accordance with the MOU's schedule, coverage, and exemption requirements, and then achieve these water savings through any combination of programs it desires. Through the Flex Track compliance option, a water supplier agrees to save a certain volume of water using whatever it determines to be the best combination of programs. Because the savings target depends on the programmatic BMP coverage requirements, which in turn are functions of service area size and composition of demand, the volume of water to be saved under this compliance option must be calculated separately for each supplier. The methodologies and tools for water suppliers to implement these calculations are still being developed by the CUWCC. Table : Practices 1. Utility Operations Programs (F) Conservation Coordinator Water Waste Prevention Wholesale Agency Assistance Programs Water Loss Control Metering & Volumetric Rates Retail Conservation Pricing 2. Education Programs (F) Public Information Programs School Education Programs 3. Residential (P) Residential Assistance Program Landscape Water Surveys High Efficiency Clothes Washer Program Watersense Toilet Program Watersense Specifications for Residential Development 4. Commercial, Industrial, Institutional P Reduce baseline CII water use by 10% in 10 years 5. Landscape (P) Large Landscape Water Budget Programs Large Landscape Water Surveys F = Foundational BMP, P = Programmatic BMP Under the gpcd option, a water supplier can comply with the MOU by reducing its baseline gpcd by 18 percent by 2018. The baseline is the ten-year period 1997-2006. The MOU also establishes interim gpcd targets and the highest acceptable levels of water use deemed to be in compliance with this option. The MOU's gpcd option is similar to using Method 1 to set the SBx7-7 target, except that it uses a fixed baseline period and only runs through 2018. This compliance option may be difficult to achieve for Cal Water districts that are part of a regional alliance for purposes of SBx7-7 compliance because savings as a percent of demand will vary considerably among the districts in the alliance. It may also conflict with district -specific SBx7-7 targets set using method 3 (hydrologic region -based target). Because of these potential conflicts, this is not considered a viable MOU compliance option for Cal Water districts. Cal Water plans to use Flex Track to comply with the MOU. This compliance option offers the most flexibility in selecting conservation programs suited to each Cal Water district and allows for more streamlined reporting. Because CUWCC tools for calculating a district's Flex Track savings target are not yet available, Cal Water developed its own target estimates for planning purposes. Cal Water will update these estimates if necessary following release of the CUWCC Flex Track target calculator. Water Conservation Master Plans To comply with requirements for urban water use reduction, Cal Water developed Water Conservation Master Plans (WCMP), which set forth a framework for compliance and describe specific conservation actions to be implemented in the next five years. Major tasks in the WCMPs include: 16 A complete review of State policies and development of a compliance strategy Calculating all appropriate per capita targets Determining water savings required from new programs Performing an analysis of conservation programs Developing a portfolio of conservation program actions Creating a plan for monitoring and updating the WCMP The Water Conservation Master Plan for the LAS District is included in its entirety as Appendix G in the LAS District 2010 UWMP. A discussion of baseline and target water use is in Section 3 of the UWMP. Table 19 is a summary of water conservation programs selected for evaluation. 17 Rebate/Vouchers for toilets, urinals, and Provide customer rebates for high -efficiency All customer segments clothes washers toilets, urinals, and clothes washers Residential Surveys Provide residential surveys to low-income All residential market customers, high -bill customers, and upon customer segments request or as pre-screen for participation in direct install programs Residential Showerhead/Water Provide residential showerhead/water conservation All residential market Conservation Kit Distribution kits to customers upon request, as part of segments residential surveys, and as part of school education curriculum Pop -Up Nozzle Irrigation System Offer high -efficiency pop-up irrigation nozzles All customer segments Distribution through customer vouchers or direct install. Public Information/Education Provide conservation messaging via radio, bill All customer segments inserts, direct mail, and other appropriate methods. Provide schools with age appropriate educational materials and activities. Continue sponsorship of Disne Planet Challen e ro in. . Toilet/Urinal Direct Install Program Offer direct installation programs for replacement All customer segments of non -HE toilets and urinals Smart Irrigation Controller Contractor Offer contractor incentives for installation of smart All customer segments Incentives irrigation controllers Large Landscape Water Use Reports Expand existing Cal Water Large Landscape Water Non-residential customers Use Report Program providing large landscape with significant landscape customers with monthly water use reports and water use and potential budgets savings Large Landscape Surveys & Irrigation Provide surveys and irrigation system upgrade Non-residential customers System Incentives financial incentives to large landscape customers with significant landscape participating in the Large Landscape Water Use water use and potential Reports programs and other targeted customers savings Food Industry Rebates/Vouchers Offer customer/dealer/distributor rebates/vouchers Food and drink for high -efficiency dishwashers, food steamers, ice establishments, institutional machines, and pre -rinse spray valves food service providers Cooling Tower Retrofits Offer customer/dealer/distributor rebates/vouchers Non-residential market of cooling tower retrofits segments with significant HVAC water use Industrial Process Audits and Retrofit Offer engineering audits/surveys and financial Non-residential market Incentives incentives for process water efficiency segments with significant improvement industrial process water uses 17 The LAS District conservation program is based on the budgetary constraints of the current General Rate Case (GRC) decision, Cal Water conservation program administrative capacity, program market and water savings potential and benefit -cost estimates. After accounting for water savings from existing water efficiency codes and ordinances, scheduled adjustments to water rates, and past investment in conservation programs, the projected 2015 baseline demand in Los Altos District is projected to exceed the SBx7-7 target by 1,353 AF and the MOU Flex Track target by 427 AF. The conservation analysis indicates the LAS district will not be able to meet its district specific SBx7-7 target by 2015 so instead will use the regional compliance option. Reasons for this are: The District's high per capita water use results in a higher water savings target. The relatively small amount of non-residential demand in the District limits the affect of commercial and industrial conservation programs. The amount of conservation investment the District can undertake in 2011 through 2013 is capped by Cal Water's current GRC decision, which prevents the LAS District from scaling up programs rapidly enough to reach the target. LAS District conservation programs selected and the activity level of each are shown in Table 20. Table i: LAS District Conservation Programs to. i � ,,, 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 CORE PROGRAMS Rebates/Vouchers Toilets 340 340 340 520 520 Clothes Washers 750 750 750 790 790 Urinals 0 0 0 0 0 Customer Surveys/Audits 290 290 290 450 450 Conservation Kit Distribution 580 580 580 600 600 Pop -Up Nozzle Distribution 6,900 6,900 6,900 7,190 7,190 NON-CORE PROGRAMS Direct Install ToiletsiUrinals 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,830 1,830 Smart Irrigation Controller Vendor Incentives 180 180 180 410 410 Large Landscape Water Use Reports 0 0 0 0 0 Large Landscape Surveys/Incentives 40 40 40 40 40 Commercial Kitchen Rebates/Vouchers 0 0 0 50 40 Cooling Tower/Process Water Retrofit Incentives 0 0 0 0 0 Program levels for 2011-2013 reflect the funding approved in Cal Water's most recent GRC settlement with the CPUC. Program levels for 2014 - 2016 will be based on the outcome of Cal Water's GRC filing for those years. 18 Table 21 shows projected water savings associated with the programs listed above. Projected savings fall short of the amount needed to meet the district -specific SBx7-7 target by 491 AF, but are about twice the amount required for MOU Flex Track compliance. 21: Projected LAS Water Savings by ProgramTable i 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 CORE PROGRAMS Rebates/Vouchers Toilets 8.8 17.3 25.4 37.8 49.7 Clothes Washers 13.9 27.3 40.1 53.0 65.3 Urinals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Customer Surveys/Audits 14.7 28.0 39.9 58.9 76.0 Conservation Kit Distribution 8.9 16.8 23.7 30.1 35.8 Pop -Up Nozzle Distribution 27.6 55.2 82.8 111.5 140.2 Subtotal Core Programs 73.9 144.4 211.8 291.3 367.1 NON-CORE PROGRAMS Direct Install ToiletsiUrinals 73.5 144.1 211.9 286.2 357.5 Smart Irr. Controller Vendor Incentives 5.1 10.1 15.2 26.8 38.5 Large Landscape Water Use Reports 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Large Landscape Surveys/Incentives 6.2 12.4 18.6 25.0 31.5 Commercial Kitchen Rebates/Vouchers 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8 18.0 Cooling Tower/Process Water Retrofit Incentives 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Subtotal Non -Core Programs 84.8 166.6 245.6 347.8 445.5 Total Core and Non -Core Program Savings 158.7 311.1 457.4 639.1 812.6 Cal Water has assumed that there will be a linear reduction in gpcd from 2015-2020 to achieve the district -specific 2020 SBx7-7 compliance target. Programs required to achieve 2020 SBx7-7 compliance will be outlined in the next Conservation Master Plan for the district, which will be included in the 2015 UWMP. The activity level of each future program will depend on Cal Water's success in obtaining the necessary funding through the CPUC rate case process. Water Shortage Allocation Plans Cal Water has also developed Water Shortage Allocation Plans (WSAP), which are plans of action to reduce water demand should significant water supply shortages occur, primarily due to drought. These actions may be implemented for several months or several years depending on circumstances. The WSAP differs from the WCMP, which is focused on achieving permanent reductions in per capita water use by Cal Water's customers and is not driven by significant short or long reductions in supply. In the short-term, the WSAP assists Cal Water in further reducing demand so that it matches significant reductions in supply. Cal Water has developed a four stage approach as shown in Table 22 to drought response that corresponds to specific levels of water supply shortage. At higher stages Cal Water will become more aggressive in requiring water use reductions from its customers. The decision to move to a higher stage is 19 based on consideration of a variety of factors including wholesale supply, availability of alternative supplies, time of year and regional coordinated activities. These stages are designed to guide Cal Water personnel in making informed decisions during water shortages. A certain amount of flexibility is built into the stages based on characteristics of water shortage events and supply conditions in Cal Water's districts. In each progressive stage, actions taken in earlier stages are carried through to the next stage either at the same or an increased intensity level, therebv becomin4 more restrictive. 1 5to10 2 10to20 3 20 to 35 4 35 to 50+ A description of each stage follows. Stage 1 is for water supply shortages of up to 10 percent and can be used to address annual variations in precipitation and mild dry year periods of one or two years duration. All reductions in Stage 1 are voluntary and impacts to customers are considered minimal. Actions to be taken by Cal Water in Stage 1 are listed in Table 23. Table Demand i r, �iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii • 5 to 10 percent • Request voluntary customer conservation as described in CPUC Rule 14.1. • Shortage Up to 10 • Maintain an ongoing public information campaign. Percent Reduction Goal • Maintain conservation kit distribution programs. • Voluntary Reductions • Maintain school education programs. • Maintain incentive programs for high efficiency devices. • Coordinate drought response with wholesale suppliers and cities. • Lobby cities for passage of drought ordinances. • Discontinue system flushing except for water quality purposes. • Request that restaurants serve water only on request. Stage 2 is based on projected water supply shortages between 10 and 20 percent. Stage 2 is for water shortages of moderate severity such as those caused by a multi-year dry period. Reductions by customers can be voluntary or mandatory depending on percentage of water shortage. Mandatory requirements would likely be implemented if supply shortage exceeds 15 percent. Customers will experience moderate impacts on normal water use and some businesses may experience financial impacts. In Stage 2, Cal Water intensifies demand reduction by implementing the actions listed in Table 24. • 10 to 20 Percent Shortage • Increase or continue all actions from Stage 1. • Up to 20 Percent Reduction • Implement communication plan with customers, cities, and wholesale Goal suppliers. • Voluntary or Mandatory • Request voluntary or mandatory customer reductions. Reductions • File Schedule 14.1 with CPUC approval if necessary. • Request memorandum account to track penalty rate proceeds and other drought related expenses. • Lobby for implementation of drought ordinances. • Monitor water use for compliance with reduction targets. Stage 3 will be activated if there is a water supply reduction between 20 and 35 percent. This stage can be triggered by a very severe multi-year dry period or major failures in facilities for storage, transmission, 20 treatment water and distribution facilities due to a natural disaster such as an earthquake. Supply reduction of these percentages could impact public health and safety and cause significant financial impacts on local businesses. All reductions are mandatory and customer allocations will be made. In Stage 3, Cal Water will take the actions listed in Table 25. • 20 to 35 Percent Shortage • Increase or continue all actions from previous stages. • Up to 35 Percent Reduction • Implement mandatory conservation with CPUC approval. Goal • Install flow restrictors on repeat offenders. • Mandatory Reductions • Require customers to have high efficiency devices before granting increased allocations. • Require participation in survey before 2rantin2 an increased allocation. Stage 4 would be triggered by a reduction of supply greater than 35 percent and possibly above 50 percent. This would be a crisis caused by a most severe multi-year dry period, a severe natural disaster resulting in catastrophic failure of major water supply infrastructure. Impacts to public health and safety would be significant. In Stage 4, Cal Water will take the additional actions listed in Table 26. • 35 to 50+ Percent Shortage • Increase all actions from previous stages. • Up to and above a 50 percent • Discontinue service for repeat offenders. Reduction Goal . Monitor water use daily for compliance with reduction targets. • Mandatory Reductions • Prohibit potable water use for landscape irrigation and other non- essential activities The proposed site of Apple Campus 2 is in the northeast corner of the City of Cupertino. As indicated, the site is bounded on by 1280, N. Wolfe Road, East Homestead Road and N. Tantau Avenue. The site currently is fully developed and contains over 26 buildings used as business office space by several companies, parking lots and some landscaped areas. Maps, figures and drawings showing location, existing facilities and proposed design layout for new Apple 2 Campus facilities are contained in site plan documents and drawings prepared by Foster + Partner, Arup, Olin and Kier & Wright and should be referenced for more specific information. The WSA uses information from documents prepared by this team for characterizing existing and proposed Apple Campus 2 facilities and water demands. The project will be completed in two phases with virtually all of the improvements being made in Phase 1. In Phase 1, Apple proposes to construct on the site a very large main building (2,300,000 ft) that will house 12,000 employees performing administrative, engineering and research and development work. The main building is an annular ring design, four stories high. A large circular -shaped landscaped courtyard with a fountain and pool will be in the center of the main building. A separate nearby building will provide a 1,000 seat auditorium (100,000 ft2). A separate fitness center area with an Olympic sized swimming pool will be located on the northeast corner of the site. Parking will be provided under the main building and in a separate multi -story parking structure to the south of the main building. The project will include a central power plant in the southeast corner of the site. On the east side of North Tantau Avenue six new research buildings with a total of 300,000 ft2 will be constructed for an additional 1,000 employees. 21 Apple plans on obtaining a Certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) by September 30, 2012 and to commence demolition of existing facilities shortly thereafter. Full occupancy and use of the facility is planned for September 2015. Phase 2 is anticipated to be implemented about 5 years after completion of Phase 1 or in September 2020 and will provide an additional 300,000 ft2 for another 1,200 employees at a location yet to be determined on the project site. Approximately, 117 acres of landscaped areas will be created comprised of a variety of plantings of trees, orchards, gardens and grass. Orchards, gardens, trees, lawn and a large pool and fountain will be in the area inside the ring formed by the main building. The campus is expected to accommodate 14,200 Apple employees upon completion of Phases 1 and 2. Table 27, adapted from the August 9, 2011 Project Description prepared by Apple's consultants, summarizes use of the existing site, AC2 and net new development. ComparisonTable 27: Summary .. 4011 Existing Site Apple Campus 2 Net Difference Number of Employees 9,500 14,200 +4,700 Phase 1 Occupied Area (sq ft) Phase 2 Occupied Area (sq ft) 2,683,700 0 2,405,300 300,000 -278,400 +300,000 Parking Space Capacity 9,220 Up to 10,500 Up to 1,280 Site coverage (sq ft) 1,400,000 1,000,000 -400,000 Number of Trees on Site 4,273 6,000 +1,727 Permeable Landscape (sq ft) 1,856,000 1 5,725,000 +3,419,000 The Phase 1 project includes: Main building: 1. Four stories, gross floor area: 2,800,000 sq ft 2. Restaurant and dining: up to 80,000 sq ft with seating capacity up to 4,450 persons if fully occupied. 3. Meeting space: 83,000 sq ft 4. Kitchen: 130,000 sq ft 5. Plant (mechanical) rooms: 260,000 sq ft Corporate fitness Center: 45,000 sq ft (changing rooms, gym, multi-purpose rooms, showers, laundry Corporate Auditorium: 100,000 sq ft accommodating up to 1,000 people Research and development facilities: 300,000 sq ft Central Plant: 75,000 sq ft (fuel cells, back up generators, chillers, condenser water storage, hot water storage, electrical substation, water and fire pumps) 22 The Phase 2 project includes an additional 300,000 sq ft of new building space at a location on the campus yet to be determined. As part of Apple's sustainability goals, water efficiency initiatives being evaluated include use of low flow fixtures, use of recycled water and rainwater capture/reuse. Apple is in discussions with South Bay Water Recycling, the City of Cupertino, Cal Water and others regarding supplying and conveying recycled water to the Apple Campus 2. Apple Campus 2 Project Water Demand Forecast Arup Engineers cite major project water uses as: Landscape irrigation Process water for mechanical cooling systems Indoor water using fixtures on the main campus and auxiliary buildings (includes the fitness center): toilets, urinals, sinks, drinking water fountains, showers) Cafeteria for washing, cooking and cleaning Courtyard reflection pool and Olympic swimming pool In making water demand estimates, Arup made assumptions or estimates as follows: 1. Phase 1 employees: 13,000; Phase 2 employees: 1,200; Phase 1 and 2 employees: 14,200 2. Cafeteria used by 80% of employees: Phase 1: 10,400 employees; Phase 2: 1,040 employees 3. Cooling towers concentration cycles range between 3 and 5 4. Water losses from the Olympic swimming pool and courtyard pool 5. 6 acres of lawn and turf (4.2 acre-ft/yr/acre) 6. 53 acres of meadow (1.5 acre-ft/yr/acre) 7. 4 acres of orchard (3.0 acre-ft/yr/acre) S. 53 acres of trees and native plantings (1.2 acre-ft/yr/acre) 9. 1 acre of redwood trees plantings (2.3 acre-ft/yr/acre) 10. Recycled water supply for cooling (Item 3) and irrigation (Items 5 — 9) Two scenarios were evaluated by Arup: 1. Typical Commercial Development 2. Apple Campus 2 Design Water demand projections for the Apple Campus 2 project made by Arup were updated as of January 24, 2012. The typical commercial development scenario uses demand rates and assumptions representative of a project built in Silicon Valley today. Typical commercial development annual water demand for the Apple Campus 2 project is estimated by Arup to be 722 acre-ft/year. The Apple Campus 2 Design scenario is based on implementation of water efficiency measures for office uses, landscape irrigation, and cooling systems. Water demand for this scenario is estimated by Arup to be 520 acre-ft/year. So the potential total water savings for this scenario are 202 acre-ft/yr or 28% less than the estimated total typical commercial development demand. Table 28 compares water demand estimates for the two scenarios by water use category for potable and non -potable supplies. The largest projected savings for the Apple Campus 2 design are associated with irrigation water for landscaping, which is estimated at 181 acre-ft/year versus the typical commercial development estimate of 336 acre-ft/year or a reduction of 155 acre-ft/year (46%). 23 The use of water saving fixtures (toilets and urinals) for the Apple Campus 2 scenario is estimated to be 56 acre-ft/year versus the typical commercial development estimate of 86 acre-ft/year or a reduction of 30 acre-ft/year (35%). Table 28: Apple Campus 2, Phases I & 2 Potable and Non- Potable Water Demand Summary Water Demand Fixtures Process Water Cafeteria Water Pools Landscape Typical Commercial Development Demand: (Total: 267) 39 0 57 43 Process Potential Apple Campus 2 Demand: (Total: 242) Water 0 Water Demand Fixtures Water Cafeteria Pools Landscape Typical Commercial Development 0 12 200 0 0 Demand: (Total: 722) 86 200 57 43 336 Potential Apple Campus 2 Demand: (Total: 278) 30 183 0 0 (Total: 520) 56 183 57 43 181 Potential Savings: (Total 202) 30 17 0 0 155 Table 29 shows the estimatedop table water demands for the two scenarios under the assumption that non - potable water supply (recycled water) is available. The Apple Campus 2 scenario has a lower total estimated potable water use of 25 acre-ft/yr. Table 29: A.. Potable // ,iM �, „/%/ ��� Water Demand Fixtures Process Water Cafeteria Water Pools Landscape Typical Commercial Development Demand: (Total: 267) 39 0 57 43 128 Potential Apple Campus 2 Demand: (Total: 242) 26 0 57 43 116 Potential Savings: (Total 25) 13 0 0 0 12 Table 30 shows the estimated non -potable (recycled water) water demands for the two scenarios. The Apple Campus 2 scenario is estimated to use 176 acre-ft/yr less recycled water than the typical development scenario. Table i A..Non-Potable Process Water Water Demand Fixtures Water Cafeteria Pools Landscape Typical Commercial Development Demand: (Total: 454) 46 200 0 0 208 Potential Apple Campus 2 Demand: (Total: 278) 30 183 0 0 65 Potential Savings: (Total:176) 16 17 0 0 143 The method for estimating Apple Campus 2 water use was developed by Arup Engineers and based on preliminary architectural and landscape plans and input from other specialized consultants. It was reviewed here and determined to be a reasonable forecast of project demand. For both scenarios for each 24 water use category, Arup provided an estimate of: 1. Fixtures - number of each type: toilets, urinals, drinking fountains, lavatory faucets, showers, kitchen sinks 2. Process water for cooling towers assumptions: peak tower load, peak flow, range, cycles of concentration, drift efficacy, evaporation, blow down, drift, run hours. The cooling water required was based on Arup's highest use projection. 3. Cafeteria water usage is based on the restaurant consultant's experience and assumes 6 gallons per diner per day, 83% of 14,200 or 11,786 persons per day eating in the cafeteria. 4. The courtyard reflection pool and the Olympic Swimming Pool use are based on assumption about make-up water rates developed by the pool consultant based on the pools design features and climate data for the site. 5. Landscape water use estimates are based on the proposed landscape plan (lawn and turf areas, meadows, orchards, trees and native plantings, one acre of redwoods) and various annual irrigation rates depending plant type, micro climate factors, density factor, irrigation efficiency assumptions and landscape coefficients. The City of Cupertino maximum applied water allowance is assessed for compliance and requirements for higher application rates of recycled water to prevent salt build up in the soil are also included. More detailed information on the above items is presented in Arup's Water Demand Assessment document dated January 24, 2012. On the conservative side, it is assumed here that the typical commercial development scenario will be implemented. For potable water supply, estimates from Table 27 in acre-ft/year or AFY in five year intervals are the basis for the Apple Campus 2 water demand. Since both water demand scenarios assume that a recycled water supply will be delivered to Apple Campus 2 and used to meet process and most landscape water demands, recycled water demand in AFY in five year increments is presented. Table 31 is the potable project water demand forecast for both demand scenarios for Phases 1 (completed and occupied in 2015) and 2 (completed and occupied in 2020). Table 32 is the non -potable (recycled water) demand forecast for both scenarios for Phases 1 (completed and occupied in 2015) and 2 (completed and occupied in 2020). Table 31: Apple Campus 2, WSA Potable Water Demand Forecast — AFY 2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 Typical Commercial Development 0 237 267 267 267 Apple Campus 2 0 215 242 242 242 Difference 0 22 1 25 25 25 Table 32: Apple Campus 2, WSA Non -Potable Water Demand Forecast — AFY 2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 Typical Commercial Development 0 454 454 454 454 Apple Campus 2 0 278 278 278 278 Difference 0 176 176 176 176 25 While it is noted by Arup that the amount of water used for landscape irrigation for some of the plantings will be decreased after the plants have become established, the more conservative assumption of no change in irrigation usage is used here. Table 33 is the combined total water demand for both scenarios for Phases 1 and 2. Table 33: Apple Campus 2, WSA Potable & Non -Potable Water Demand Forecast — AFY 2012 2015 2020 2025 2030 Typical Commercial Development 0 691 722 722 722 Apple Campus 2 0 493 520 520 520 Difference 0 198 1 202 1 202 1 202 I7im11r&VATJff li i I TfT '34i3T i3�:i4 1 Exhibit A-1 (attached) in the project description information is a figure showing the existing Site Map and Gross Site Areas. Exhibit A-2 (attached) provides more specific information about the plot areas shown in Exhibit A-1. Plot 1 called the Pruneridge Campus (formerly the Hewlett Packard campus) contains nine buildings with 1,300,000 sq ft of office space. The site occupies 98.2 acres and contains a large number of parking lots. Based on the aerial photo of the existing site (Existing Site Plan P-1.12 Foster + Partners), irrigated landscaped areas appear to be about 20% of the total area or about 20 acres. Total metered water use records for the past 5 years for Cal Water's for the three (3) active meter services that provide potable water to all facilities on the Pruneridge Campus were obtained and are summarized in Table 34. 26 Table .. ii Meters to Year Ian e IMar A r I gy un IJu uq I ep ct lNov Dec Total Service A 2006 127 108 106 11 107 200 216 217 253 206 204 193 1,948 2007 215 186 19 70 122 139 198 124 291 137 94 100 1,695 2008 124 109 80 62 97 86 133 162 165 191 90 132 1,431 120091 26 1021 146 153 137 140 170 161 161 176 175 86 1,633 120101 4 51 17 91 114 96 136 176 169 184 89 75 1,156 Total for 5 representative years (2006 - 2010): 7,863 Average 5 year use in 100 ccf: 1,573 Average 5 year use in gallons: 1,176,462 Service B 2006 1,216 1473 1138 1144 3546 6766 7189 9606 10533 5100 4893 2011 54,615 2007 2631 4016 4356 5002 5623 7827 7171 7196 7930 4480 3775 2742 62,749 2008 905 526 483 3782 3992 5190 6454 6654 6198 4916 2763 1217 43,080 2009 1323 826 1177 3270 3752 4784 6524 5796 5751 4489 1915 703 40,310 120101 320 505 408 1338 3081 6134 8873 8832 7899 6160 3231 1343 48,124 Total for 5 representative years (2006 - 2010): 248,878 Average 5 year use in 100 ccf: 49,776 Average 5 year use in gallons: 37,237,126 Service C 2006 3,182 3444 3301 3712 4933 5217 5717 5686 6742 4357 5103 4353 55,747 2007 4761 4813 4689 4747 5112 6825 6374 6288 8159 6177 7291 5713 70,949 2008 6044 5279 5623 8154 7520 7296 8719 7254 7647 7645 6830 5398 83,409 2009 5900 5596 5503 5789 6806 6946 7909 7149 7707 7488 6055 4948 77,796 20101 4446 5165 4592 5275 5756 6594 7328 6346 6509 7312 5586 4678 69,587 Total for 5 representative years (2006 - 2010): 357,488 Average 5 year use in 100 ccf: 71,498 Average 5 year use in gallons: 53,487,355 Average Annual Total Water Use for All Permises in gallons: 91,900,943 Average Annual Total Water Use for All Permises in AF: 282.3 Water use data in Table 34 includes irrigated landscaped areas and internal building use. Metered data for only landscape irrigation in the LAS District is not available. In other Cal Water district's irrigation usage for parks and public areas ranges from 3.0 — 4.0 AFY per acre. For a park area in San Mateo, metered sales records for two existing parks for 34 months (2001 to 2004) yielded an irrigation rate of 3,615 gallons per day/acre or 4.05 AFY per acre. For commercial office landscaping in South San Francisco for the July 2007 — June 2008 period, total landscape irrigation water use was 7,219,192 gallons for an area of 250,143 square feet. Therefore, average daily irrigation water use was: 0.079 gallons/day/ft2 or 3.85 AFY per acre. For the existing Pruneridge Campus site, it is assumed that the existing application rate of irrigation water is 4.0 AFY per acre or 3,570 gpd/acre. For 20 irrigated acres, estimated water used is 3,570 gpd/acre x 20 acres = 71,400 gpd. 27 Average total daily water use for the existing Pruneridge Campus is 91,900,943 gallons / 365 days = 251,800 gpd. Internal office use is therefore estimated to be 251,800 — 71,400 = 180,400 gallons per day. The total existing office space in the Pruneridge Campus is estimated by Apple's consultants to be 1,300,000 ft2. Therefore, the estimated existing average daily water use rate is 0.139 gal/day/ft2. For all of the buildings in the Apple Campus 2 site, south of Pruneridge Ave in the area designated as Ridgeview Court, Cal Water obtained 5 years of metered usage data. Since there were 17 service meters and 12 months of data for each, three years (2006, 2008 and 2010) were selected and the data compiled on historic water use. Table 35 presents the data for all buildings which have an estimated combined area of: 1,175,000 ft2. TableRidgeview ii Premises Year Jan Feb Mar Apr Mav Jun Jul Auq Sep Oct Nov Dec Total All 2006 1,345 1168 1319 1088 2555 4074 6318 5301 4385 4965 3520 1776 37,814 All 2008 961 613 1156 1988 2722 2974 3689 3603 3548 3408 1575 842 27,079 All 120101 603 550 552 850 1595 2584 3648 3869 3462 3570 1467 975 23,725 Total for 3 selected years: 88,618 Average 3 year use in 100 ccf: 29,539 Average 3 year use in gallons: 22,098,375 Average Annual Total Water Use for All Permises in AF: 67.9 Year 2006 use in gallons: I I I 1 28,288,653 Year 2006 Total Water Use for All Permises in AF: 86.9 For the existing Ridgeview Court area, the application rate of irrigation water is assumed to be 4.0 AFY per acre or 3,570 gpd/acre. It is estimated that irrigated landscape areas are about 10% of the area or 5.6 acres. Estimated irrigation water use is: 3,570 gpd/acre x 5.6 acres = 20,000 gpd. As shown in Table 34, water use in 2008 was 71.6% of 2006 use and water use in 2010 was 62.7% of 2006 use. These declines are apparently due to lower use and worker occupancy of the buildings. The average water use for the 3 selected years in Table 34 is not representative of prior established annual water use for Ridgeview Court. Accordingly, the 2006 water consumption record is used as the basis for existing water use for this area. Average daily 2006 water use was 77,500 gallons/day. Internal office use is therefore estimated to be 77,500 — 20,000 = 57,500 gallons per day. The internal estimated existing average daily water use rate is 57,500 gpd/1,175,000 ft2 = 0.049 gal/day/ft2. This is about 35% of the estimated internal use for the Pruneridge campus. 28 The third area in Apple Campus 2 to be redeveloped are the four (4) buildings east of N. Tantau Ave and south of Pruneridge Ave and the two (2) buildings east of N. Tantau Ave and north of Pruneridge Ave. The estimated area of all six buildings is 285,500 ft2. Water use records selected for 3 years for the four buildings south of Pruneridge Ave with an estimated office space of 211,070 ft2 are presented in Table 36. Table ii Premises Year Jan Feb Mar Apr Mav Jun Jul AugSep Oct Nov Dec Total 10300, 10400, 10590-96 N. Tantau Ave 20061 105 19 111 88 104 546 3271 308 5141 416 628 702 3,868 2008 233 417 413 548 830 1358 1459 1315 1589 937 737 631 10,467 2010 583 556 461 643 724 719 908 809 994 947 575 427 8,346 Total Water Used for 2008 and 2010 years: 18,813 Average annual use for 2008 and 2010 in 100 ccf: 9,407 Average annual use for 2008 and 2010 in gallons: 7,037,152 Average annual use for 2008 and 2010 in AF: 21.6 Based on aerial photos, parking lots and buildings occupy nearly all available space. Therefore, the estimated existing internal daily water use based data for 2008 and 2010 is: 19,280 gpd/211,070 ft2 _ 0.0913 gpd/ft2. This is about 1.86 times greater than the rate estimated for the Pruneridge Campus. The estimated total existing annual water use for this area is 285,500/211,070 = 1.353 x 21.6 AFY = 29.2 AFY. In summary, existing total estimated annual potable water use for the proposed Apple Campus 2 site is as follows: Pruneridge Campus: 282.3 AFY Ridgeview Court: 86.9 AFY North Tantau Ave (Areas A, B and C): 29.2 AFY Total estimated existing potable water use: 398.4 AFY Based on data from Table 33, total potable and non -potable estimated water use for Apple Campus 2 Phases 1 and 2 is 722 AFY for the typical commercial development scenario and 520 AFY for the proposed Apple Campus 2 scenario. If recycled water is used to meet landscape irrigation and cooling tower process water requirements, estimated POTABLE water use for either the typical commercial development or Apple Campus 2 scenario will be less than recent existing project site water uses. The estimated potable water use for the typical commercial development scenario is 267 AFY (131.4 AFY less than existing use) and for the Apple Campus 2 scenario it is 242 AFY (156.4 AFY less than existing use). If the proposed project does not use recycled water, then the net increase in potable water use would be: • Typical Commercial Development Scenario: 323.6 AFY • Apple Campus 2 Scenario: 121.6 AFY 29 Clearly, there is a significant benefit to using recycled water for reducing the project's requirement for potable water. With respect to the WSA, it is conservatively assumed that ALL water use will be potable and that the typical commercial development scenario will be implemented. This is based on the current situation where planning level discussions are being held by Apple, its consultants, Cal Water and public agencies that would have to participate in the planning, environmental impact assessment, permitting, design, construction and operation and maintenance of a recycled water system for delivery of both the quantity (average, peak day and hourly flows) and quality required (plants, trees, cooling water) by the new Apple Campus 2. In addition, while it may be reasonable to assume that all new fixtures and other proposed water conserving systems will be implemented to achieve required water savings as presented here, until actual design, permitting and construction commitments are made, the more conservative approach is to assume the typical development scenario with respect to water demand. The combined LAS District and Apple Campus 2 demand forecast using the typical commercial development scenario is presented in Table 37. California Water Code 10631, Paragraph (e) (2), requires a water use projection in five-year increments for the 20 -year forecasted period. As Table 37 shows, the change in LAS District demand with the addition Apple Campus 2 demand using the most conservative assumptions are not significant — in 2035, Apple Campus 2 demand is 2.35% of total LAS District demand. Anticipated reductions in potable water demand due to Cal Water's implementation of its conservation plan, plus Apple Campus 2 potable water demand (assuming no recycled water for non -potable water uses) still results in a net DECREASE in overall water use in the next 20+ years. Actual 2005 water use is 374 AF less than the projected 2015 water demand for both the LAS District and Apple Campus 2 Phase 1. Because of Cal Water's plans to achieve its 2020 conservation goal, even with Apple Campus 2 Phase 2 implemented, total forecasted water demand is expected to be lower in 2035 than in 2015. The effect of the Apple Campus 2 potable water demand increase is offset by the anticipated reduction in demand for the entire LAS District. If Apple, Cal Water and others implement use of recycled water for landscape irrigation and cooling tower process water and the more water conserving Apple Campus 2 scenario, the effect will be to further reduce projected LAS District demand by 156 AFY. In 2035, LAS District demand forecast would be 13,764 - 156 =13,608 AFY or 776 AFY less than projected 2015 LAS District demand. Either way, Cal Water will not have to increase its supply to provide potable water service to the Apple Campus 2 project if it achieves its water conservation objectives. The LAS District will have an even lower demand if Apple is able to implement use of recycled water and its more water conserving plan. 30 Therefore, Apple Campus 2 demand is treated as part of the projected demand increase for the LAS District as summarized in Table 37. Water Sources Water supply for the LAS District is a combination of groundwater from wells in the District and purchased treated water from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). For the past five years, approximately 32 % of supply has come from groundwater production and 68% from SCVWD. In a given year, the amount of groundwater production versus purchased treated water varies depending on the supply available from SCVWD. SCVWD imports surface water to its service area from the South Bay Aqueduct of the State Water Project (SWP), the San Felipe Division of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's (SFPUC) Regional Water System. However, Cal Water only receives SCVWD water from the SWP and CVP sources. Purchased SCVWD water projections are based on historical trends being extended to 2040 and include "Non -Contract" water. The approved treated water delivery schedule from SCVWD is expected to increase by about 30 AF per year. Details of the availability and scheduling of surface water deliveries are described further in the following section. Groundwater supply projections are based groundwater production matched to meet the difference between LAS District demand and supply deliveries from SCVWD in a given year. Cal Water has adequate well capacity to meet projected demands through 2040. As wells reach the end of their useful life are taken out of service, they are replaced with new wells. Table 38 presents the supply plan to match the projected LAS District and Apple Campus 2 demand forecast in Table 37. The assumption is that for each five year increment, Cal Water will get an increased delivery from SCVWD of about 150 AFY (5 years x 30 AF/year). The amount of groundwater pumped is the difference between projected total demand (Table 37) and the projected supply from SCVWD. 31 SCVWD owns and operates three separate surface water treatment plants (the Penitencia, Rinconada, and Santa Teresa water treatment plants) that are supplied by surface water supplies from local runoff and imported water from the CVP, SWP and SFPUC. Treated water is delivered to the LAS District from the Rinconada treatment plant through a large -diameter high pressure transmission pipeline that runs through Cupertino and along Foothill Expressway. This transmission pipeline, commonly referred to as the West Pipeline, has branch lines that distribute water to the cities of Santa Clara and Mountain View ("distributaries"). Cal Water has a contract to 2035 with SCVWD to purchase treated surface water and convey it to the LAS District. SCVWD "Contract" water is delivered through four connections with its transmission system. These connections are called the "Vallco", "Granger", "Farndon", and "Covington" turnouts. The Farndon and Granger turnouts are located directly on the West Pipeline, while the Tantau-Vallco turnout is located on the Santa Clara Distributary, and the Covington connection is located on the Mountain View Distributary. Each of these turnouts is equipped with pressure and flow control devices that provide a hydraulic transition between their respective delivery main and the LAS district distribution system. When surface water supplies are abundant (above normal hydrologic years generally), SCVWD makes available for sale "Non -Contract" water in order to promote increased storage in groundwater aquifers in the region. Because there is usually a lower cost for purchasing "Non -Contract" water, the LAS District reduces production of groundwater and increases its purchase of treated surface water from SCVWD during these periods. This has the effect of "banking" groundwater. When surface water supplies are more limited due to drought, SCVWD can and has imposed both voluntary and mandatory reductions in amount of its treated water it delivers to its customers including the LAS District. During periods of SCVWD supply reduction and because of increased groundwater storage, the LAS District increases groundwater pumping to make up the difference. Because SCVWD recharges groundwater aquifers within its boundaries, it levies an assessment on the production of groundwater to the utilities it supplies to cover the costs associated with this program. During normal hydrologic periods, the groundwater pumping assessment is set so that the cost of pumping groundwater approximately equals the cost of purchased treated surface water from SCVWD. Because it is unknown whether "Non -Contract" water will be available when the purchase water schedules are prepared, and because "Non -Contract" water is only available in the months between October and April of the upcoming year, scheduling of deliveries is set to maximize the delivery of purchased water in the summer and utilize groundwater production capacity to its fullest during all other periods. This scheduling pattern enables the LAS District to take advantage of the economic incentive provided by the sale of "Non -Contract" water and in turn assist SCVWD in accomplishing the goal of groundwater storage of surplus supplies. SCVWD has scheduling restrictions regarding the purchase of direct deliveries. These restrictions currently limit the "Peak Day" deliveries to 180 percent of the average day delivery, and the maximum monthly delivery cannot exceed fifteen percent of the annual scheduled delivery. The reliability of imported water supply from the SWP and CVP has been adversely affected by the Wanger Decision that limits pumping in the Delta. Pumping restrictions have been implemented, at least temporarily, because of the negative impact of pumping on Delta Smelt populations, which are protected under the California Endangered Species Act. The restrictions will be in place from late December through June and could reduce available supply from this source by up to 30 percent. This level of reduction may limit SCVWD's ability to deliver normal amounts to each of its retail customers, especially in dry or consecutive dry years. Delta pumping restrictions due to Delta Smelt and other emerging species of concern are expected to be issues in the foreseeable future. 32 The LAS District has 27 wells, 23 of which are currently active and operational. The active wells have a combined design capacity of 14,743 gpm, which is 21.2 MGD if operated 24 hours a day or 23,850 AFY. While it is not realistic to operate all wells continuously wells, the LAS District has produced 650 to 750 AF in a given month or about 7 to 8 mgd, or approximately 1/3 of well design capacity. Annualized 750 AF/month is 9,000 AF, which is more than twice projected well production for 2015 as shown in Table 38. Maximum day demands, both current and projected, are supplied by deliveries of treated water from SCVWD. Production records show that average day demand reached a high of 13.83 MGD in 2008 and has a ten-year average of 13.36 MGD, while maximum day demand reached 28.72 MGD with a ten-year average of 24.91 MGD. These values result in a typical average day to maximum day ratio of 1.86:1. The LAS District distribution system is designed to deliver anticipated maximum day demands. Average static groundwater elevations in the District have remained relatively consistent since the SCVWD began its recharge program. Over the period of record, average static levels have fluctuated due to hydrologic conditions. The extended multi-year drought in the early 1990's reduced groundwater surplus water and caused a 40 -foot decline in static groundwater elevation. Drought recovery began in 1992, with an increase in the average static groundwater elevation to pre -drought levels, as shown in Figure 5. �[. iRt: •#1 � � �] i9f+�i���C I R ►T:� WMEEMIM 0 ,. 7, 3 f 40,00 ,,,, -'a ,,,,,,,, ..... m ,,,,, m ,,,,, , 4 $000.......................... . ..................... ...... .. .. �. . f� 00 70,00 0 10000 _..,. ........ II 2,4 $3000 � 114 _ 11,11 .,.., ...... ..... ..... ..., ...., l The historical volume of LAS district groundwater pumped is shown in Table 39. 33 Santa Clara Subbasin 4,434 4,325 4,161 5,200 3,396 31% 28% 27% 37% 29% Basin Boundaries and Hydrology As described in DWR Bulletin 118 California's Groundwater, the Los Altos District is located in the Santa Clara sub -basin of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin. The Santa Clara sub -basin occupies a structural trough parallel to the northwest trending Coast Ranges. The Diablo Range bounds it on the East and the Santa Cruz Mountains form the Western border of Santa Clara County to the groundwater divide near Morgan Hill. The dominant geo-hydrologic feature is a large inland valley. The valley is drained to the north by tributaries to the San Francisco Bay including Coyote Creek, the Guadalupe River, and Los Gatos Creek. Additional details of the basin are given in the DWR's Groundwater Bulletin 118, see Appendix D. Groundwater Management Plan Groundwater quality and quantity in the Los Altos District are actively managed by SCVWD. SCVWD updates its Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) periodically. The most recent update is scheduled to be completed in 2011. Use of Recycled water helps reduce groundwater pumping, which can result in an increase in groundwater storage and an increase the sustainability of this supply source. Currently, no recycled is used in the LAS District. As previously discussed, this may change with the implementation of a recycled water supply for the Apple Campus 2 project. The City of Palo Alto administers the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant. Palo Alto, Los Altos, Mountain View and their sub -partnering sewer agencies, East Palo Alto, Stanford University, and Los Altos Hills share in the proportionate costs of upkeep for the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant. Each city owns, operates, and maintains its own collection system. The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant owns and maintains the wastewater treatment plant and effluent line. Nearly 80% of wastewater is from residential customers and the balance from industrial and commercial uses. The City of Sunnyvale operates and maintains its sewer system for residential, commercial, and some industrial customers. Collected wastewater is discharged to trunk sewers owned and operated by the City and conveyed to the Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant for treatment. The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment which includes chemical coagulation and dual media filtration. Treatment plant capacity is 39 mgd but current flows average 26 mgd. Treated effluent is discharged to San Francisco Bay. The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant can treat 2 mgd to meet Title 22 standards for unrestricted beneficial reuse. Recycled water is used to irrigate municipal golf courses in Palo Alto and Mountain 34 View and Greer Park in Palo Alto. Recycled water is used by tanker trucks to provide dust control at construction sites and for irrigation. Up to 3.7 million gallons per month of recycled water is used during the winter months to supply fresh water to a marsh southwest of the plant. The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant does not provide recycled water to any Cal Water service areas. The Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant provides wastewater service for the City of Sunnyvale. Treatment includes primary, secondary, and tertiary processes followed by chlorination and dechlorination prior to disposal to the San Francisco Bay. The Sunnyvale treatment plant has a treatment capacity of 29.5 mgd but currently receives an average flow of 16.9 mgd. The plant supplies recycled water to meet a peak demand of 2 mgd for landscaping and some industrial uses. Recycled water is provided to City of Sunnyvale areas that are not in the LAS District service area. South Bay Water Recycling (SBWR) operates a large recycled water transmission and distribution system consisting of over 120 miles of pipe serving the cities of Milpitas, Santa Clara and San Jose. During the summer, an average of 14 MGD of recycled water is delivered to over 600 customers. The recycled water is provided by the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant, which treats wastewater for over 1,500,000 people in the 300 -square mile area encompassing San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Gatos, Saratoga, and Monte Sereno. The treatment plant, located in Alviso at the southernmost tip of the San Francisco Bay, can treat up to 167 MGD of wastewater. About 90% of treated water is discharged through the Artesian Slough into South San Francisco Bay and the remaining 10% is recycled by SBWR for urban landscape and agricultural irrigation and industrial processes that can use non -potable water. Estimated LAS District Wastewater Generated Wastewater the LAS District service area is from residential, commercial, and industrial sources. The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant treats wastewater from LAS District service area communities of Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, and Mountain View. Stanford University and East Palo Alto are also served by this facility. City of Sunnyvale wastewaters are collected and treated at the Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant. Estimates for the LAS District's wastewater quantity since 1980 were calculated by annualizing 90 percent of January water use in the Cal Water's service area. The estimated volume of wastewater generated from the LAS District in five-year increments to the year 2040 is presented in Table 40. Approximately 9 percent of wastewater treated at the two facilities mentioned above is recycled. The remaining amount is discharged to San Francisco Bay. Potential for Recycled Water Use The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant reclamation program plans to expand its recycled water system when additional funding becomes available. However, a preliminary assessment of this source indicates it is too distant from the Apple Campus 2 site to be feasible as a source of supply. 35 The Sunnyvale Water Pollution Control Plant supplies recycled water to users in the immediate plant area. The plant is located in the northern part of the City. As part of Phase II of the City's reclamation plan, facilities to supply recycled water to parks and industrial areas located in the north part of the city near the treatment plant are underway. Since Cal Water's LAS District service area is in the southern part of the City, providing recycled water to that area has not been part of the City's plans for expansion of the system. Cal Water has recently been participating in discussions with Sunnyvale, South Bay Recycling, Apple, and the Santa Clara Valley Water district to inter -tie the Sunnyvale recycled water system with that of South Bay Recycling. Depending on adequate funding and regulatory and government agency authorizations, the plan includes in part constructing a recycled transmission line to the Apple Campus 2 site. If this plan is implemented, Cal Water will be the recycled water retailer to the project site. Project plans at this stage are to complete construction of required facilities in late 2014 in order to match Apple's Campus 2 construction schedule. Supply Adequacy and Reliability Assessment This section combines and compares previously presented information on projected demand and supplies for the LAS district to address the question of whether LAS district supplies are adequate and reliable for the next 20+ years for normal hydrologic conditions, one dry year and multiple dry year periods. Figure 6 compares annual rainfall from 1970 to 2010 (40 years) to the historic average and shows the demand per service for each year. Water use generally increases in the first years of a dry period, but after increased conservation efforts are implemented, demand per service decreases. b m m 7 0 m m JQ m m 7 m 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40% -60% -80% -100% Average Annual Rainfall Total: 15.63 inches Calendar Year 36 360,000 on C 336,000 m a 312,000 mb m 288,000 G 264,000 Z 240,000 QQ m 216,000 c 7 The statewide drought of 1987-1992 illustrates this pattern. Data show that in the Los Altos area the drought began as far back as 1984, with a corresponding increase in demand per service at the beginning and a consistent drop as the drought persisted. Water use has generally increased back to pre -drought levels since this time. The more recent drought from 2007-2009 also shows this pattern. A normal hydrologic year occurred in 2001 when precipitation was approximately 2 percent above the historic average. The most recent driest year occurred in 2003 when the rainfall was approximately 56 percent below average (6.7 inches). This is taken as the single dry year shown in Table 41. The most recent multiple dry -water years are based on the statewide drought between 2006 and 2009. Annual customer demand in normal, single dry and multiple dry years is shown as overall average demand per service for the LAS District in Table 42. Water use follows a typical pattern where demand may decrease than slightly increase but then decreases more significantly as dry years continue. Reduction in water use is the result of increased conservation efforts by water providers and general public awareness of drought conditions and their affect on water supplies. Historically, Non -Contract water has supplied a large portion of Cal Water's total supply requirements. However, this source is not considered a normally available supply. Non -contract water deliveries have a five year average of 3,368 AF, which was 22 percent of the total supply to the Los Altos District for this period. Non -contract water will be the first source of supply to be eliminated and will act as a buffer in the event of a single dry year or multi-year drought. During multiple dry years, decreased purchase water is made up by pumping stored groundwater. Currently, active wells in the LAS District produce approximately 30 percent of their design capacity. Any reduction in non -contract water is replaced by groundwater pumping. 37 According to the SCVWD 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, if reductions in SWP and CVP deliveries occur due to drought events, the diversion of water to percolation ponds will be curtailed first, followed by agricultural deliveries, and finally urban water deliveries. When this happens an increased reliance will be put on production from groundwater reserves, which were increased in years of surplus surface water deliveries. Because of this policy, SCVWD indicates that it will be able to meet all of its urban treated water demands by shifting supply sources even during multiple dry year periods Cal Water's well capacity is sufficient to accommodate reductions in treated water from SCVWD. The LAS distribution system has the ability to meet demands under reduced deliveries from SCVWD and increased use of Cal Water wells. LAS district groundwater supplies are not limited during multiple dry year periods. An adequate supply to meet projected demands is expected to be available during multiple - dry year events. During future dry periods customer water use patterns are expected to be similar to past events. •• W91•• In normal hydrologic years, Non -Contract water is expected to be available. Cal Water also expects increases in approved SCVWD deliveries will eventually reduce availability of Non -Contract water. According to the SCVWD Draft 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, LAS district projected water scheduled delivery amounts will be available through at least 2035. As previously indicated, the LAS district has historically pumped only a fraction of its total annualized well capacity (22,014 AFY), leaving the balance in groundwater storage. Because of this banking practice, there is an adequate supply of stored groundwater in the aquifers supplying LAS district wells. Total groundwater supplied is the quantity necessary to make up the difference between LAS District demand and SCVWD supplies — both scheduled and Non -Contract deliveries. Hence, total supply always equals projected demand for any given year. A normal hydrologic year supply is considered the same as the SBx7-7 target water demand projections plus the Apple Campus 2 demand (conservative assumptions). Table 43 shows that groundwater will be reliable throughout the planning horizon of this UWMP and that no supply deficiencies are expected. In single dry years Cal Water can expect a reduction in Non -Contract water and may possibly see a reduction in firm scheduled deliveries. Pumping restrictions in the Delta due to the Wanger Decision could also have a greater impact on imported supplies during single dry years. But if any reduction in scheduled deliveries were to occur, the needed supply could be made up by pumping stored groundwater. 38 During a single dry year it is unlikely that SCVWD would request a reduction its retailers water demand. SCVWD maintains carryover storage in its reservoirs, locally stored groundwater reserves, and has access to drought supplies stored as groundwater outside the Santa Clara Valley. According to SCVWD's Draft 2010 UWMP there will be a 5 percent shortfall in treated water contract deliveries in 2020 and 2025. After this time it is expected that projects resulting from their Water Master Plan will create sufficient additional supplies so that contract deliveries can be met during single dry years. It is assumed that groundwater will provide the necessary supply to meet dry year demands if purchased water reductions are required. Based on the data in Table 42, LAS district demand for a single -dry year would be 97% of a normal hydrologic year demand. The demand values shown in Table 44 were calculated by multiplying demand projections in Table 43 by 0.97. Since no reduction in SCVWD supplies are anticipated, the groundwater supply is reduced. Cal Water has also observed in other one-year dry periods that demand has increased above normal hydrologic year demand. Were this to occur, groundwater pumping would be increased to make up for the difference between SCVWD deliveries and increased demand. Again, the combination of pumped groundwater and purchased water will be sufficient to meet projected single dry year demands. ••q SCVWD gives highest priority to delivery of Contract water to urban water retailers and indicates it can deliver 100% of its contracted supply obligations even during multiple dry year periods. However, during such periods, SCVWD will reduce or eliminate deliveries of Non -Contract water. If drought conditions warrant, SCVWD will reduce or eliminate surface water recharging to aquifers within its service area. If further reductions are necessary, deliveries to agricultural customers will be reduced or eliminated. Deliveries to SCVWD urban water retailers are the last to be affected by drought conditions. Based on SCVWD supplies and policies, Cal Water expects that 100% of Contract water will be delivered to the LAS District during a multiple dry year period. Cal Water also plans on pumping its LAS district groundwater supplies so that there will be no reduction in total supply available to meet water demands. Modeling work reported in SCVWD's Draft 2010 UWMP uses the 6 year period from 1987-1992 as the baseline for future multiple dry year periods. Results indicate that supplies would be 100% reliable through the first three years of a similar dry year period. In the fourth year there is a maximum shortfall of 10% in 2035. For years 5 and 6, the projected shortfall in supply ranges between 10% and 20%. As recommended in DWR's UWMP guidance document, Cal Water's multiple dry year supply and demand comparison is based on the first three years of a multiple dry year period. For the fourth year, reduction of 10% in Contract water delivery is assumed and the difference will either be made up by inducing more customer demand reduction through intensified water conservation measures and/or pumping more groundwater from LAS district wells. Therefore, Cal Water believes its supplies are 100% reliable during multiple dry year periods through at least 2035. 39 In the following multiple dry year period analysis, normal supply of Contract Water is expected to be available, but Non -Contract deliveries are not. This assumes that reservoir carryover storage in SWP, CVP, and local systems is average prior to the drought. At the beginning of a prolonged drought period, it is also assumed that there are ample supplies of groundwater stored in the aquifers it pumps from. Cal Water also assumes that in future multiple dry year periods, SCVWD would initially ask for voluntary reductions in supply requested by 10%. The magnitude of reductions requested could increase depending on the degree and duration of the drought. SCVWD considers its groundwater and imported supplies as one source and does not distinguish between water sources when asking for demand reductions from its retailers. As a result, retail agencies would be asked to reduce total demand, not just imported water use. Cal Water expects that its LAS District customers will be able to achieve these requested reductions in water use. In the LAS District, total annual water use per customer is expected to be lower than in previous dry year periods due to the greater investment in water conservation programs that will be implemented in the next 8 years. As seen in the more recent drought from 2007-2009, the response by Cal Water customers in reducing water use will likely occur faster than in past droughts due to improved water conservation plans and better communications on the need to reduce water use. Table 45 compares demand to supply for a 4 year multiple dry year period. For the first three years, the conservative assumption is used that demand remains unchanged from a normal hydrologic year (see Table 43) and that in the fourth year, demand decreases by 10% as does the delivery of SCWVD Contract water. In all cases, the supply is projected to meet 100% of demand. It is noted that even if demand did not decrease by 10% in year 4 and SCVWD supply did, the increased groundwater supplied in 2040 would be 1,090 AFY for a total of 4,410 AFY - the same as projected to be pumped in 2015 for the first 3 years of the dry weather period. PeriodTable 45: Multiple Dry Year Apple Supply.. I 14,587 13,259 13,484 13,713 13,944 14,180 10,110 10,260 10,410 10,560 10,710 10,860 4,477 2,999 3,074 3,153 3,234 3,320 ii� 14,587 13,259 13,484 13,713 13,944 14,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,130 11,930 12,140 12,340 12,550 12,760 9,100 9,230 9,370 9,500 9,640 9,770 4,030 2,700 2,770 2,840 2,910 2,990 0 0 0 0 0 0 il 40 Cal Water intends to prepare a Climate Assessment Report in 2013 that will evaluate potential effects of climate change on the water supplies of its 24 service areas in California. Based on the findings of this investigation, the report will present adaptation measures that Cal Water should take to address potential decreases in supply quantities or negative changes in source water quality. DWR's Guidebook to Assist Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, lists topics that will be examined in Cal Water's Climate Assessment Report. Adaptation measures are essentially designed to ensure that projected future supplies are reliable despite adverse changes in existing supply quantity and quality due to climate change. For example, snow in the Sierra Nevada provides 65 percent of California's water supply. Some predictions are that by 2050 the annual Sierra Nevada snow pack will be significantly reduced. Much of the lost snow will be in the form of rain, which will run off during winter and early spring and not be available to be stored as supplies for use during summer. Change in water runoff may significantly reduce groundwater recharge in the Central Valley increasing demands on surface water. For the next 20 years, DWR has identified potential climate change effects on water supplies, water demand, sea level, and occurrence and severity of weather events. Some of these potential changes are summarized below: • Water demand: more hot days and nights and a longer irrigation season will increase agricultural and urban irrigation needs; power plants and industrial processes will have increased cooling water needs. • Water supply and quality: increased potential for algal bloom and surface and groundwater chemistry changes; increased potential for seawater intrusion into surface and groundwaters due to elevated seawater levels and more powerful storm surges. • Extreme weather events are expected to become more frequent as climate variability increases, resulting in a higher frequency of more extreme droughts and floods. Design, Construction and Operation of Apple Campus 2 Water Supp Facilities I Cal Water will provide Apple with a will serve letter indicating its intention to provide water service to the Apple Campus 2 project. A complete water system includes distribution system, meters, etc. As planning and design proceed further, Cal Water anticipates working closely with Apple, its engineer and consultants, the City of Cupertino, CA Dept of Public Health and any other agencies that may be involved with the approval of required water supply facilities. Cal Water will design water supply facilities required for the project. Cal Water's LAS District, supported by its engineering, water quality and customer service departments in San Jose, will be responsible for providing ongoing local operations and maintenance services of the water system. SB 610 Section 10910 Paragraph (d)(2) requires identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts held by the public water system shall be demonstrated by providing information related to all of the following: (A) Written contracts or proof of entitlement to an identified water su�� Proof of entitlement to use of the wells cited as a major supply source to the LAS District is demonstrated by Cal Water's ownership of the property and the wells and its legal right to use the underlying percolated waters. 41 Proof of entitlement to the use of SCVWD treated water are provided in the contracts cited in this document between Cal Water and SCVWD and are available for review. (B) Copies of capital outlaX programforfinancing the delivery of water suppl that has been adopted by the public water system. Capital costs for design and construction of the water distribution system within the development site are the responsibility of the Apple. Cal Water's LAS District capital improvement program is separate from and does not include any of the costs associated with the design and construction of water system facilities for or within Apple Campus 2. The LAS District Water Supply and Facilities Master Plan provides specific recommendations for water system facility capital improvements. It is Cal Water's intention to update this plan and recommended capital improvements in 2013. (C) Permits for construction of necessaa infrastructure associated with delivering the water su�� For distribution system improvements, Apple will be required to obtain the necessary building permits from the City of Cupertino. Cal Water is highly experienced in obtaining permits and approvals, design, construction, startup and operation of water distribution facilities and is familiar with City of Cupertino and California Dept of Public Health requirements. Based on: ■ Adequacy of existing and planned supplies from SCVWD and LAS District groundwater, ■ Plans to construct new wells and maintain existing wells to maintain and increase current well production capacity, ■ Plans to continue to purchase of SCVWD Non -Contract water whenever it is made available and thereby increase basin groundwater storage for use during drought periods, ■ In-place, ongoing and planned expanded water conservation programs and best management practices for reducing demand during normal hydrologic years, single dry year and multiple dry years in compliance with SBx7-7, CPUC and MOU requirements, ■ Cal Water's historic proven success in obtaining increased reductions in water use during multiple dry years by implementing its demand reduction program, and ■ Over 80 years of experience in continuously providing an adequate supply to meet demands during normal, single and multiple dry years in the LAS District, Cal Water concludes that for the first 20 years operation (2015 — 2035), the LAS District will have adequate water supplies to meet projected demands associated with the proposed Apple Campus 2 (Phases 1 and 2) project under the most conservative assumptions regarding potable water use (typical commercial development scenario with no recycled water use) and those of all existing customers and other anticipated future customers for normal hydrologic, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. 42 PROJECT DIRECTORY PROJECT OVERVIEW OWNER APPIe mereateA le aero z -an ince tea 21st t,hn, deab ml. n,1, pmptses pP pus gra rytampussygreen spade. E, INC. . va eveltpment rvlll prevltle a serene antl secure envlrcnment reflectln9 Apple's values..bfl tf Inncvatltn. e beauty. The stall -ti -[hared tffite.re arch antl tlevelopmentfacilBies include strategies h: minimeeaenergy tlemantl. reduce car travel and Incmase the use of reclaimed ,rvater. E l e62kE''p"."V ARCHITECT FOSTER + PARTNERS 8111 The single bulltling ctnrprlses apprtrchna�ly 2.8 nrlllltn syual.feet tverftur sttrles. Campus amenitles will lncludea sttlking talc vehNh the math bulltling, a se parete —p—te Atha.. center antl a corporate-dit-t, seating 1,000 p.opl.. Perking will ba provided under th. mein building end in ons multi—, perking.Putt... along the 280 Freeway. ,e campus velli feature an oh -site low carbon C'ehtaI Pham situated along the 280 Freeway that.II1 supply the ma)orlR ohne power heetleditr me eampt.. In addhion, r, arch lanilnierc,.b, mi.D aIPrtrlmately 300,DD0 square l„tall be lh—d east of North Tanta. Avenue. These b.Ildlhyse vlll bo.se ON support fuhctloh'that need br be located adjacent to the main building. _TI I LGw m” PROJECT OBJECTIVES ENGINEER ARUP 71111 The objectives tithe proposed prtJem are the -1st ENNIL wranl.Anclrnesyyaruvrom Tt maximize efficiency and... hint, t0 Apple'semployees,developa new campus in close pmrimity 0Apple's • Ibn lts Loop Campus. Create A new campus that pmvld.s for —1— 1- antl ctnstlldatitn of employees In a single dlstlnctly. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT hfflce, --th antl tlevelophh-t bulltling, thereby Pmmhtlhg shared creath It, antl c.libb—A.h, redhcing the overall building mttpant on th. .it., and marci.izmg th. amount of landscaped gr.., spat.. OLIN I —11TH 1.11 n1111ST. Creme a physically a Nfed campus community that respects Apple s—,dtyneeds(i. ped through perimeter bb. -tion). "w 111T11T: 11-1 en.4L, rcua�osq o,naclNnhcLuom IN, Dues Internal circulation and elI,A,Gb unnecessary access points by consolldatihy flee ..IAD properties wlthlr, the ampul. PLANNING CONSULTANT Dptirtriz, the site tlesign tt balance out antl fill tp—ti-n to the rtra n— erten[ pmpticable antl treat, a grading plan that accommodates the slnyle dlstlnctive bullnln9 deslyn. KI ER & WRIGHT Respond to 4.ppl.'s curre,t -d future business need. vrlth a campus plan that marinrV.s employ.. use and Po. Ihctry—b,e tlesign antl use flerlblllty tt respond to hlAb, badhess neetls. Rs. saes Ter 1111• _TI I MIhIb,Inthe re11R—th e6,tddty P-1—bythe 91d by yehemtlhyaslyhlflcant amuuht of the—tht' 1—Dyneetls Jnr,0dpn_L', �ph,.h,h� et an [mite Central Plant. Atttmmtdate .p m 13,D10 emplty.es. • P—MF en expanse 0f open antl green space for Apple employeesenjoyment. Ch-b.di,J,, b and h,wimg Slat cemtry wh vNte. • E,—edb hhmlc, shchl.ahtle&-th-GI-uGfieblllty goalsthmhgh 1,Oe tbd designand tlevelopmeht. PERMITS AND APPROVALS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION Apple 1,'eeklhy fium the City the ehthlame nts and approvals head below. Apple may Ppit,— H th6Istas Me profett d,vel.ps. Apple may seek additio.1 .ppb. -I. from the appropriate Istel, regional, slate antl federal '-d". General FIR, AmeIdme,t(GPA )tt remove park tlesIb, A- a,d remove P1u,erltlge ase MHtr Edit,— h, the Circulation Element. • Zoning Amendm R(7)- Rema, park site m P(MP). • Deve ltpment Agreement(DA)torthe,ntire Prtpedy tt vest the PRIfNApprtvnls. • Vesting Tentative Ml, including -,—1 a grading plan. • CO1dNt,al Use Permlt(CUP). • Pla„ed Develophh-t Pem,H. • Prune ddye Street Vacatloh and—htlated agreements. • Wed Tran'ter Ayreem,nt,rvltb Clty fpr Ph,h,Idge 191Lt-pf•.rvay. Utility R.Iccatltn & F—h—t Agreem.nts with clry land ­11—IF .1111—. Tr.. Removal (TF) P.rmlt. • GV.—M. klodifi A- Permit. • A rchitectural SBe Approval)ASA). Envirtnn,ental Review 1. EA,. • Other approvals es necessary ttr utilky,pe-Dian and v,hioulnr emssi of Calabazss Greek. PROJECT DATA TABLE GROSS SITE AREAS 1. Prhnerldge Campus 4,280 000.G k X98.25 acres) 2. Rldgevlew Court .445,000 sq fl (56.14 acres) 3. Vacati— 0 Pr.neHUge A-- 1 81,000 veue181,000 sq ft (4.14 acres) 0. —th Tanta. A -R.. A 15RD00 sG k (8.89 a r.$) 5. —H, Tanta. Avenue B 197,000 sq ft (4.53 acres) S. North Tanta. Avenue C 399,500 sq ft,9.17 acres) SITE INFORMATION SITE COVERAGE TOT AL HARDSCAPE AREA TOTAL SOFTSC.4PEA.REA GENERAL PWN DESIGNATION ZONING DESIGNATION GENERAL FLAN PIANNING AREA HOURS OF OPERATION NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TOTAL PARKING SPACE CAPACITY P4RKING RATIO (SO.FT. OFFICE SPACE PER STALL', RESEARCH FACILITIES PARKING BUILDING INFORMATION OCCUPIED BUILDINGS RESEARCH FACILITIES PARKING STRUCTURE EXISTING PROPOSED 32.1 23.0 130.4 r 51 r 42.0 acres 121.1 acres INDUSTRIAL I OFFICE INDUSTRIAUDFFICE PfMP).P(MP, Res)&PR P(MP) NORTH V—CO NORTH VALLCO lam -fpm lam -fpm 1.500 1e,D00 9I'D sMlla Up tt 10,500 -Il 202.0 312.8 DD'1af, a 600 stalls 4,SO0 stalls 750 stalls Up to 75D .falls EXISTING PROPOSED 2,157,DD sqk 2820 DDssGk 300,000 y H 12D b.D sy It sD,DDO au It 00 b.D sy It 75001'. 11 4,300,000 sy fl Area tb,. 57' 0" 346' -'R '-0" trdPrunedliarldge A. .nue PLOT 3 PLOT 4 PLOT 5 PLOT 6 okYp�/7 Foster+ Partners OLIN KIER & WRIGHT Apple, Inc. Apple Campus 2 Project Data 1856 06109111 Exhibit A -i -°° P-1.01 REGIONAL MAP (NTS) S 11 f r` S a nta C larao F ty 4 g \ € \ San.. Cruz Count ® CUPERTINO JM PROJECT LOCATION VICINITY MAP (NTS) IM EXISTING APPLE CAMPUS ® PROJECT SITE LIST OF DRAWINGS "....-"•- Drawing Drawing Drawing Drawing - u,. .inn�nro."� Number TIHe Number Title P-1.00 Cover Sheet P -26.D0 Aa ria)Via. 1 P-1.01 Pmje.t Data -'.D1 Aerial Vh to 2 '- 1.10 List al Drawings Pl'.D2 Vie"1 P-1.11 P-112 Land Lsa Diagrams Exst,g Ste Plai P-26.03 Via. 2 P -2 D4 Vi- 3 P, Proposed Co,cepival Sh Pla, P 26.D5 Vi -4 P 1.21 Ex st ,g e,d Pmposed Protect D .grams P 26.06 Vie" 5 P-1.22 EA.timg a,d Proposed Landscape P -26.D] Via. G P-1. 23 P 124 Ex st,y aid Proposed Trees Slte Security Dlagram Ste A Traff Z:25 26 ... s and o Ste Crcubtiau Diagram P-1 21 Bulltling HaightMau- P 1.28 LEED Summary 11.30 Exst ,g Ste Pla, North P-1.31 Emtimg Ste Pla, South P-1.40 Proposed Slte Plan Noah P-1.41 Pmposed Site Pla, South P-2.00 Proposed Site S.cti P-2.01 Proposed Slte Sections P-3.00 Proposed Street Elevat on East Homestead Road P-301 Proposed Sheet Elevato1 No ah Ad Road P 3 02 P3.10 Proposed Street Elevano tNoah Tanta. Avanue Bou�tlary Go,dlto,s At Street P 3.11 Boundary Co,d to, At Sireet P-4.00 P-4.01 Erlstng To poyraphyNoah Exlstny Topography South P 4.10 Grad ,g Pla, North P 4.11 Grad ,g Pla, South P-4.20 14L1 Street Improvamenis Street mpmveme,is P-4.22 Street Improvements a,d Struotura15eot ons P 4.23 Road Bldg, Ela,a[.n and CrossS-sal P 4.24 Parlestrlai Brldge Elev.tlon end Cmss-tloi P 4.30 StorrrwIt,, Control Plan North P-4.31 P-4.32 P5.00 Storawat., Control Plan South At.r,'water Qualty BMP NUN Ve tl g T t t Map Notes o P-5.01 Vet g T t t Map D,istill, Conditions North P-502 Vet gT tt eMap Ex s[,g Cond bons South P 5 03 Ve tl y T t tl a Map Proposer) C-dltlo,s North -.134 VestingT-tative Map Proposed co,dltlo,s South a P-6.00 E.i.tii,g Uhhhes North G P b P 60 l y U1111 -South sit, utlifty Plao Naah I� D 1-6.11 Sin Utility Plao South ��I�JII P ] 00 Exl tl y T Contlltlo,s Pla, Noah alit) O P-].01 P ].02 Existing Tree contlltlons Plan south Tree Disposition Plan North ''L0L\dV�lrJ O P-7.03 Tree Disposition Plan South ))illi Foster + Partners P-7.10 Landscape P Noah P-7.11 L.ndsaaPe Plan South P-7.12 PlantingPlan North P-7.13 Plantha Plan South P-7.14 P-].30 Pl.,ting Schedule Lantlsuape Material Plan Noah P ].31 Landscape Material Plan South A TT P !"11�V 1 P-8.00 P-6.01 Nlaln Bulltling Area Breakdown Proposed Man Building Levels Plan ,<< P-6.02 Proposed Main Building Level2 Plan °-- P-6.03 P-8.04 Proposed Main Building Level3 Plan Proposed Mala Bulltling Level4 Plan OLIN P -BAS Proposed Main Building Plant Level Plan ==t� P-6.06 Proposed Man Building Root Level Plan =� P-8.01 P-B.a. Propose d Mali Bu' ldlno Basemen Leval) Plan Pmposed Malo Bulltling Basement Level 2 Plan _ P-6.09 Main Building Basement Level Stall Size Plan Q!KIER & WRIGHT P-8.10 Main 1,ild,g I.ean,am La, alz Stan sLa Plan P-6.11 Mala Bulltling Typical Parkl,g B1 Plan P-9.00 Proposed Ma n euilding Elevations T P-0.01 Proposed Main Building Elevations P-1 o.0o Proposed Mal', Bulltling Secllons Typical Eotrance P-10.01 Proposed Main euilding Sections Restaurant P-10.02 Proposed Main Building Sactions- Restaurant cont.) P-10.03 Pro pose d Maln Bulldlno Sect ions -Typical OMce P-11.01 Proposed Parking Sirupture Level1 and 2p P-11.02 Proposed Parking Structure Level3 and 4 Plan P-11.03 P-11.11 Proposed Parking Structure Roof Plan Detail P.rking Struoture Typlo.l Lay - ayoutP-12.00 P -1 2.00 Proposed Parking Structure Elevations P -13.o' P-13.01 Proposed Parking Sirupture Seoilon Proposed Parking Structure Section P-14.00 Pro posed Centre) Plant Apple, Inc. P-1 ].00 Proposed corporate A.ditorwm Plan Levels P-1].01 Proposed Corporate Auditorto. Plan Level 32 P-17.02 P-17.03 Proposed Corporate Audlh�rlum Plan Level B3 Proposed corporate Autllmrum Roof Plan P-18.00 Pr.poaed Corporate A.ditodum S -i., Apple Campus 2 1-2DA1 P-21.00 Proposed corporate Fitness center Plan P-23.01 Proposed Research Facllity Bulltling 1 P-23.01 Proposed Research Facility Building 2 List of Drawings P-23.02 Proposed Research Facility Butldtng 3 las. Exhibit A-1 P_1.10 Exhibit A-2 Apple Campus 2 Apple proposes to create Apple Campus 2 - an integrated 21st century campus surrounded by green space. This new development will provide a serene and secure environment reflecting Apple's values of innovation, ease of use and beauty. The state-of-the-art office, research and development facilities include strategies to minimize energy demand, reduce car travel and increase reclaimed water use. Apple selected the internationally -renowned architectural firm Foster + Partners, headed by Norman Foster, as architects. Foster + Partners has drawn upon its global leadership in sustainability and design to help achieve Apple's goals. The project replaces the current disjointed assemblage of outmoded corporate facilities with a single distinctive office, research and development building. The single building comprises approximately 2.8 million square feet over four stories, resulting in a significant reduction of overall building footprint. The building is located to minimize the visual impact on adjacent residential neighborhoods and to enhance the existing deep landscape setbacks at the periphery. Campus amenities will include a striking restaurant within the Main Building, a separate Corporate Fitness Center and a 1,000 -seat Corporate Auditorium comprising approximately 120,000 square feet. Parking will be provided under the Main Building and in one multi -story parking structure along the 280 Freeway. The parking structure's roof canopy will incorporate solar photovoltaic panels. The Campus will feature an on-site Central Plant situated along the 280 Freeway that will supply the majority of the power needed for the Campus. Integration of the currently divided parcels will be achieved by reclaiming a portion of Pruneridge Avenue as green space. In addition, research facilities comprising approximately 300,000 square feet will be located east of North Tantau Avenue. These buildings will house technical support functions that need to be located adjacent to the Main Building. Appk (zmn1puts2 /u gush 09, 2011 The project replaces existing asphalt and hardscape with over 120 acres of landscaped green space for employees' recreation and reflection. The landscaping will incorporate both young and mature trees, and native and drought tolerant plants, that will thrive in Santa Clara County and minimize water consumption. The increase in permeable surfaces will promote natural drainage and improve water quality in Calabazas Creek. The thoughtful and extensive landscaping will recall Cupertino's agricultural past, which will be further celebrated by preserving and relocating the Glendenning Barn to a more appropriate off-site setting. Apple Campus 2 will promote creativity and collaboration by consolidating up to 13,000 Apple employees in one location. Apple will continue to occupy the existing Infinite Loop Campus, as well as other buildings within Cupertino. The project aligns with Cupertino's existing framework set forth in its General Plan for the Vallco Park North Employment Center. It maintains the residential neighborhoods, minimizes additional infrastructure demands and expands the existing perimeter protection to meet Apple's security needs. The project will strengthen Cupertino's competitive position in Silicon Valley and help Apple continue to attract the industry's leading talent. Apple Campus 2 will become a model for the 21st century workplace - a fantastic place to work, to create, to collaborate, and to shape future technology. Project Objectives Apple Campus 2 will result in redevelopment of the entire approximately 176 -acre site with a mix of office, research and development and ancillary land uses. The project's objectives are to: • To maximize efficiency and convenience to Apple's employees, develop a new campus in close proximity to Apple's Infinite Loop Campus. • Create a new campus that provides for co -location of services and consolidation of employees in a single distinctive office, research and development building, thereby promoting shared creativity and collaboration, reducing the overall building footprint on the site and maximizing the amount of landscaped green space. • Create a physically unified campus community that respects Apple's security needs (in part through perimeter protection), improves internal circulation and eliminates unnecessary access points by consolidating the existing properties within the campus. • Optimize the site design to balance cut and fill operations to the maximum extent practicable and create a grading plan that accommodates the single distinctive building design. • Respond to Apple's current and future business needs with a campus plan that maximizes employee use and incorporates design and use flexibility to respond to future business needs. • Minimize the reliance on electricity provided by the grid by generating a significant amount of the Campus's energy needs at an on-site Central Plant. • Accommodate up to 13,000 employees. • Provide an expanse of open and green space for Apple employees' enjoyment. • Create a distinctive and inspiring 21st Century workplace. • Exceed economic, social, and environmental sustainability goals through integrated design and development. Location The approximately 176 -acre site is bounded by the 280 Freeway, Wolfe Road, Homestead Road and North Tantau Avenue as shown on Exhibit A-1 and described more fully in Exhibit A-2. The Campus also includes parcels located to the east of North Tantau Avenue. Appk t ;ainpus 2 I I'roj� i D( ,, ripIioii � /u gush 09, 2011 Site Development Overview and Detail Apple is seeking from the City the entitlements and approvals listed below. Apple may supplement this list as the project develops. Apple may seek additional approvals from the appropriate local, regional, state and federal agencies. • Legislative Approvals • General Plan Amendments • Remove park designation Remove Pruneridge as a Minor Collector in Circulation Element • Zoning Amendments - Rezone park site to P(MP) • Development Agreement for the entire Property to vest the Project Approvals • Project Level Approvals • Vesting Tentative Map, including approval of a grading plan • Conditional Use Permit • Planned Development Permit • Pruneridge Street Vacation and associated agreements • Land Transfer Agreement with City for Pruneridge right-of-way • Utility Relocation & Easement Agreements with City (and applicable utilities) • Tree Removal Permit • Streamside Modification Permit • Architectural Site Approval • Environmental Review • Other approvals as necessary for utility, pedestrian and vehicular crossings of Calabazas Creek Apple anticipates commencing construction immediately after approval. Apple expects construction to be completed within approximately 32 months. As indicated, Apple Campus 2 replaces the current outdated office, research and development buildings. The result is an incremental net new development, as described in Table 1. Site Although there will be a moderate incremental increase in gross floor area of approximately 6%, the efficient use of the site will result in almost tripling the landscaped area. Underground and structured parking will replace 9,220 parking spaces - releasing almost three times more open space. The new open space will be developed using native and drought tolerant trees and landscaped to minimize water consumption. The increased permeability will assist in controlling site water run-off and help to improve local water quality. The sloping site will be regraded to provide a level ground floor for the Main Building. Table 1 Site Development Overview /rppk t zmri rus 2 I I'roj� i f (c ,, rilriioii � /u gucrh 09, 2011 Existing Site Apple Campus 2 Net New Development Number of Employees 9,500 13,000 +3,500 Phase 1 Occupied Area (sq ft) 2,683,700 2,405,300 -278,400 Phase 2 Occupied Area (sq ft) 300,000 +300,000 Parking Space Capacity 9,220 up to 10,500 up to +1,280 Site Coverage (sq ft) 1,400,000 1,000,000 -400,000 Number of Trees on Site 4,273 6,000 +1,727 Permeable Landscape (sq ft) 1,856,000 5,275,000 +3,419,000 Table 1 Site Development Overview /rppk t zmri rus 2 I I'roj� i f (c ,, rilriioii � /u gucrh 09, 2011