Capital Improvement Plan, 2006-07

2005·35.8 MB·English

by  Santa Clara Valley Water District.

CIP
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
SM
2006/2007
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
June 2006
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Larry Wilson, Chair
District 4
Tony Estremera, Vice-Chair Rosemary C. Kamei
At Large District 1

Joe Judge Richard P. Santos
District 2 District 3

Gregory A. Zlotnick Sig Sanchez
District 5 At Large

Submitted by

Stanley M. Williams
Chief Executive Officer

TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW

Introduction .............................................................................................................................I-2
Industry Trends Impacting Capital Program..............................................................................I-2
Alignment with Ends Policies ....................................................................................................I-4
CIP Process .............................................................................................................................I-4
CIP Summary ..........................................................................................................................I-7
District Background ...............................................................................................................I-11
WATER SUPPLY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Water Supply Overview ..........................................................................................................II-1
Water Supply Funded Projects ...............................................................................................II-3
Storage Facilities.....................................................................................................................II-5
Transmission Facilities ...........................................................................................................II-31
Treatment Facilities ...............................................................................................................II-49
Recycled Water Facilities .......................................................................................................II-83
FLOOD PROTECTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Flood Protection Overview .....................................................................................................III-1
Flood Protection Funded Projects ..............................................................................................III-3
Lower Peninsula Watershed ...................................................................................................III-5
West Valley Watershed .........................................................................................................III-15
Guadalupe Watershed ........................................................................................................III-29
Coyote Watershed ...............................................................................................................III-37
Uvas/Llagas Watershed .......................................................................................................III-53
Multiple Watersheds ............................................................................................................III-57
MITIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Mitigation Overview ..............................................................................................................IV-1
Mitigation Funded Projects ....................................................................................................IV-2
ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Environmental Enhancement Overview ...................................................................................V-1
Environmental Enhancement Funded Projects ............................................................................V-2
BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Buildings and Grounds Overview ..........................................................................................VI-1
Buildings and Grounds Funded Projects ...................................................................................VI-2
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Information Technology Overview .........................................................................................VII-1
Information Technology Funded Projects ................................................................................VII-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FINANCIAL PLANNING AND SUMMARY
CIP Financial Planning .........................................................................................................VIII-1

CIP Financial Summary .......................................................................................................VIII-5
Project Funding Schedules
Water Enterprise Fund ....................................................................................................VIII-6
Lower Peninsula Watershed Fund ...................................................................................VIII-8
West Valley Watershed Fund ..........................................................................................VIII-9
Guadalupe Watershed Fund ........................................................................................VIII-10
Coyote Watershed Fund...............................................................................................VIII-11
Uvas/Llagas Watershed Fund ......................................................................................VIII-11
Clean Safe Creeks and Natural Flood Protection Fund .................................................VIII-12
Watershed and Stream Stewardship Fund ....................................................................VIII-13
General Fund ............................................................................................................ VIII-13
All Funds ....................................................................................................................VIII-14

APPENDICES
Appendix A – CIP Priority Criteria ...........................................................................................IX-1

Appendix B – Project List by Priority ........................................................................................IX-7
Appendix C – District Partnership Summary List ....................................................................IX-13
Appendix D – Summary of Capital Expenditures ..................................................................IX-15
Appendix E – Glossary.........................................................................................................IX-17
OVERVIEW
With its headquarters
in San Jose,
California, the Santa Clara Valley Water District is
the primary water resources agency for Santa Clara
County. Its key products and services are wholesale
treated water; flood protection; environmental
stewardship; and open space and trails.
The District provides a reliable supply of clean,
safe water for the more than 1.7 million residents
of the county. It also works to protect residents and
businesses from the devastating effects of flooding;
and serves as environmental steward for the county’s
700-plus miles of streams and creeks, groundwater
basins and District-owned reservoirs.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District is unique in
the state as an independent special district with
countywide responsibility for multiple key aspects of
water resources management.
2006/2007 5-Year Capital Improvement Program I-
OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION 5. Specific planning, engineering study, or design work
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) Fiscal related to an individual project which falls within
Year 2006-07 Five-Year Capital Improvement Program the above categories
(CIP) is a projection of the District’s capital funding 6. Significant one-time investment in tangible goods
for planned capital projects from Fiscal Year 2006-07 of any nature, the benefit of which will accrue over
through Fiscal Year 2010-11. The purpose of the CIP several years. Examples include items such as large
is to serve as a tool to integrate District work with the initial investments or improvements in technology
larger community by aligning District planning with or the purchase of a new telephone system.

other local planning efforts, and clarifying regional
INDUSTRY TRENDS
roles to avoid wasteful duplication of effort.
IMPACTING CAPITAL

PROGRAMS
The District’s CIP is developed in
Mission
accordance with Government Code The District’s capital improvement
The mission of the
(GC) Section 65403 which governs program is facing many of the same

t District is a healthy,
the development and annual review c challenges that water resource
ri safe, and enhanced
of Capital Improvement Programs t agencies throughout the state of
s quality of living in
developed by special districts in the i California are experiencing. These
D
Santa Clara County
State of California. State law requires challenges include:
r
e through watershed
that the program be reviewed and
t
a stewardship and Urgent Need to Upgrade or
updated annually. It also requires W
comprehensive Replace Aging Infrastructure
circulation of the document to all
y management of This year, the devastating effects of
planning agencies having land use e
ll water resources Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, plus
authority within the District prior a
V in a practical, the 100th anniversary of the 1906 San
to adoption of the program. This

a cost-effective and Francisco earthquake, underscored the
document is intended to provide all r
a environmentally importance of effective infrastructure
of the information necessary to allow l
C sensitive manner. and infrastructure planning, from the
planning and facility construction to
a Governor’s office to smaller water
meet the needs of Santa Clara County. t
n Vision districts. Growing acceptance of
a
The CIP is prepared in accordance S Getting Cleaner, climate change impacts also challenge
Greener and Leaner
with the guidelines established by traditional assumptions about the
the Government Finance Officers effectiveness of existing infrastructure.
Association (GFOA). The capital
A large portion of the District’s capital program is
projects in this document exceed $50,000 in cost, have
dedicated to asset management of flood protection
long-term life spans and are generally nonrecurring.
and water utility facilities throughout the county.
They usually fall within one of the following six
Flood protection capacity of existing facilities will be
categories.
maintained and improved through the implementation
1. Acquisition of land for public purpose of projects such as: capacity improvement of Calabazas
2. Construction of a significant facility, i.e. a flood Creek, upgrading Sunnyvale East and West Channels to
protection facility, a water treatment facility, or a the one percent standard, replacing bridges on Upper
building Guadalupe River, rehabilitation of Babb, Piedmont,
3. Addition to or expansion of an existing facility and Los Coches Creeks. Asset management activities
4. Nonrecurring rehabilitation or major repair to all for water utility facilities include completing treatment
or part of a facility provided the total cost is process upgrades at the Penitencia Water Treatment
more than $50,000 Plant, inspecting and repairing raw and treated water
I- 2006/2007 5-Year Capital Improvement Program
OVERVIEW
pipelines throughout the county, rebuilding key pumps Population Growth
at the Pacheco Pumping Plant and updating seismic The most populous state in the nation, California is still
stability studies of District dams. attracting thousands of new residents every year.
Regionally, the Association of Bay Area Governments
Despite the need for infrastructure improvement,
(ABAG) projects that Santa Clara County’s population
raising water rates to pay for them is often unpopular
will increase nearly 35 percent by 2030, from 1,682,585
with rate payers. However, the Santa Clara Valley Water
in 2000 to 2,267,100 people in 2030. The District
Commission, a key stakeholder, identified maintaining
continues to implement new flood protection projects
adequate reserve levels and funding infrastructure
and build new water supply infrastructures to meet the
repair and replacement as key priorities for the
growth of Santa Clara County.
District’s Water Utility Enterprise.
Shortage of Technical Staff
Technological Advances
Increasingly, across the nation and within California,
Customers benefit from improved water supply
a lack of qualified technical staff is challenging water
reliability and quality associated with advances
agencies’ ability to plan, design, operate and maintain
in technology, including water efficient plumbing;
increasingly complex water supply facilities. Agencies
advanced treatment for recycled water; ozonation;
have adopted short-term approaches, such as trying to
and desalination. Other technologies including cyber-
keep retirement-age staff on the payroll or hiring back
security also benefit overall reliability. However,
retirees for needed expertise. These approaches are
technological advances are expensive and add to the
not sustainable in the longer term, and more innovative
cost of providing water.
ways to increase the availability of a diverse, qualified
work force must be found.
Improving the Security of Water Supply
Facilities
Cost and Availability of Land and
Following September 11, 2001, water agencies across the
Construction Materials
nation began an urgent evaluation of the security of their
Santa Clara County real estate costs are some of the
physical facilities and their computer networks. After
highest in the nation. Yet the District must acquire land
taking immediate steps following 9/11 to safeguard the
for required mitigation of construction impacts from
District’s ability to deliver clean, safe, reliable water to
its flood protection and water supply projects. From
the public, the District completed a security vulnerability
2004 to 2005, on average, District land acquisition costs
assessment as required by the Environmental Protection
rose 20 percent year over year, while construction costs
Agency. The District continues to implement system-
averaged increases of 13 percent and continue to rise
wide upgrades to further improve security in the most
due to global demands for construction materials.
cost-effective manner.
The District has incurred major cost
increases over the past couple of years
for supplies and services outside of
District control. Supplier costs appear
to be stabilizing between FY 2006 and
FY 2007. However, over the previous
three years, costs rose approximately
60 percent.
2006/2007 5-Year Capital Improvement Program I-