Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A - ATTACHMENT NO.3 <br />Saltworks Proposal- Water Group Summary Report (22 January 2010) Page 53 <br /> <br />3.8.2 OMS's Proposal for the Saltworks <br /> <br />The following description of DMB's proposal is based on presentations and discussions <br />with DMB representatives and on the written description of this proposal submitted by <br />DMB to the City on December 16, 2009. <br /> <br />DMB proposes to enter into agreements that are structurally similar to the 2009 <br />SCVWD/KCWAlDWR agreement to deliver Nickel water to Redwood City. The <br />agreements would differ in the following respects, however. <br /> <br />First, the SCVWD agreement was approved as a one-time transfer designed to augment <br />the District's supplies during a time of drought. The water was not earmarked for any <br />particular development, and no CEQA review was performed except for the Notice of <br />Exemption. In the case of the Saltworks proposal, by contrast, the availability of the <br />water to serve Saltworks would be expressly acknowledged. For CEQA purposes, the <br />Saltworks EIR would identify the water transfer proposal, and analyze its impacts. <br /> <br />Because the Saltworks EIR would provide the analysis of the environmental impacts of <br />providing this water, no agreements concerning the approval of this water could be <br />approved prior to the certification of the EIR. This approach is consistent with CEQA <br />case law providing that an agency cannot commit itself to a project until after the CEQA <br />process has been completed. (Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 Cal.4th <br />116; Riverwatch v. Olivehain Municipal Water Dist. (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th 1186.) <br /> <br />Second, Redwood City is not served directly by SCVWD. Instead, Redwood City <br />obtains its water from the SFPUC, primarily through the Hetch Hetchy regional water <br />system, as described in Section 3.3. SFPUC's system is connected to the South Bay <br />Aqueduct, which is part of the SWP that serves KCWA. For this reason, a direct transfer <br />of water from KCWA to Redwood City, by way of SFPUC, appears to be possible. <br /> <br />Alternatively, the water could be transferred to the City via an intermediary agency or <br />agencies. In this case, an agreement would have to be reached with the intermediary <br />agency. Such an intermediary agency would have to be served, directly or indirectly, by <br />both SFPUC and DWR. One or more wholesalers or retailers could enter into a water <br />transfer agreement allowing for the transfer of the Nickel water, and ultimate delivery of <br />that water to Redwood City for use at the Saltworks. <br /> <br />The location of key components necessary for a water exchange is shown in Figure 6. <br />Here is an example of how such an agreement would work: <br /> <br />. The intermediary agency would reduce its deliveries from Hetch Hetchy, and <br />increase by a corresponding amount its deliveries from the California <br />Aqueduct. Except as described below, net deliveries to the intermediary <br />agency would not be reduced. <br /> <br />. The reduction in deliveries to the intermediary agency from Hetch Hetchy <br />would be offset by a corresponding increase in deliveries to Redwood City. <br />Net deliveries from Hetch Hetchy would not change. <br /> <br />46 <br />