Janelle Egger

Comments for Jan. 12, 2009



Last week I asked the City Council to reconsider building the new 2 million gallon reservoir for Zone 1. I based my request on these facts:


I believe we need to look at the alternative of using Vancil reservoir in combination with the existing ½ MG reservoir at Stewart Street.


I would like to address my comments to the Conclusion, which is in the Staff Report on page 9 and then again on page 26. It must be important if it bears repeating.


The first sentence, describes Pressure Zone #1 and mentions structure age and setbacks.


I agree with this statement, this is an important area, full of beautiful historic structures. It is also true that every part of the city is important and should be provided a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water. [HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 116555(a) (3)]


Some reasons why the staff feels using Vancil would not be prudent:


In consideration of the city’s existing water system moving ALL fire flows through Pressure Zone #1,


Fire flow is about having water available and a means to deliver it at all times. Again, this should be true in every part of the city. In Fortuna, the water for a fire is stored in the tank or reservoir serving that zone. While all the water originates in zone 1, the delivery of water for a fire is usually by pipes and pumps from the reservoirs. For Zones 2 to 4 these are not in Zone 1. For Zone 6-8 a fire on a high usage day may require water to be pumped from the wells through Zone 1, due to the reservoir not meeting the 1 ½ million gallon storage recommendation. As of April ’07, the Kenmar pumps, which would pump this water lacked a back-up generator. Has a back-up generator been installed at the Kenmar pump station?


The Zone 1 age and setback issues mentioned may relate to fire flow. I assume these were taken into consideration when the fire flow recommendation was determined for Zone1. Is this not the case?


regulatory and design recommendations,


Tony Wiedermann’s letter tells us that either a new water tank or the Vancil reservoir will comply with the Waterworks Standards. I while I agree that gravity feeding zone 1 is a better design option, we must remember that will cost around $4 million dollars. At $2.6 million, using Vancil would also provide a design improvement; the new piping will provide greater protection against loosing flow following an earthquake. The reduced price tag would also allow us invest in solar to control energy costs, make needed improvements to protect our water during flooding and power outages, address issues in other pressure zones or reduce our debt. I spoke with an accountant today and Staff’s presentation of costs (pp. 22-23) has a typographical error or all the costs are not listed Could staff prepare a simple cost breakdown with the analysis?


potential financial impact associated with fire insurance rates,


I spoke with an insurance agent and was told that the largest factor affecting our fire insurance rates was having a volunteer fire department. A fully staffed 24-hour department would reduce insurance rates. We have been well served by our more cost effective volunteer fire department.


inherent risk to the general public and to the community at large, and the potential compromise of overall system reliability;


A leaking reservoir on a steep slope is inherently dangerous. The rectangular tank should be drained, and the temporary storage used while relining Vancil moved to Stewart as soon as possible.


The elimination of storage within Pressure Zone #1 would require the City to be dependent upon automatic operation of mechanical valves which have proven unreliable in the past,


I assume this is in reference to the Pressure Reducing Valves. I spoke with engineer Ronnean Lund, Department of Public Health Division of Drinking Water. We should investigate using a series of valves with each reducing the pressure gradually. Then if one should fail the system performance would not be jeopardized.


the availability of electrical power to run the water system control software,


As I believe the water system control software is a citywide system, this is an issue throughout the city, how is it being addressed?


would reduce the overall system storage significantly,


The only reduction in storage is in from draining a leaking reservoir and not replacing it. That reservoir holds ½ million gallons. There would still remain 2 million gallons of emergency water above what has been recommended.


thereby reducing the community’s ability to provide water during a major disaster.


How much emergency storage does the City’s Emergency Response Plan recommend? The California Waterworks Standards require protecting any new wells from flooding. Which is more cost effective, protecting the wells or building storage? Have the Campton Heights and Hilltop Reservoirs been evaluated for earthquake vulnerability as recommended in the Apr ’07 PDR? Are there back-up generators for the pumps in every zone?


It is possible that the elimination of storage within Pressure Zone #1 may be in violation of regulatory requirements contained within Title 22…, and could result in regulatory sanctions


Tony Wiedemann, Department of Public Health has indicated that either using Vancil or building new will meet the regulations. In an email to me today he stated, “State drinking water regulations do not provide guidance for prioritizing projects… I do not have an in-depth familiarity with the City’s water system and therefore, I cannot provide any knowledgeable opinions. “


and increased fire insurance rates.


Is there fire flow to every zone? Are there neighborhoods, besides Angel Heights, without a fire hydrant? These are also issues relevant to insurance rates.