RMOW Tri-city Water Distribution Master Plan

Tri-City Water Distribution Master Plan Final Report Prepared By: Earth Tech Canada Inc. 101 Frederick Street, Suite 702 Kitchener, Ontario N2H 6R2 July 2008 Project: 93489 The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Transportation & Environmental Services Department 7th Floor Water Services Division 150 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4J3

AECOM 101 Frederick Street, Suite 702 Kitchener, Ontario N2H 6R2

Project 81539 May 2009

Region of Waterloo

Tri-City Water Distribution Master Plan Final Report Prepared by:

AECOM 702-101 Frederick Street Kitchener, ON N2H 6R2 Date:

May 2009

May 2009 Project Number: 81539 Mr Jorge Cavalcante Manager Engineering & Planning Region of Waterloo 150 Frederick Street 7th Floor Water Services Division Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 Dear Mr Cavalcante: Re: Tri-City Water Distribution Master Plan Final Report We are pleased to provide our report of the Tri-City Water Distribution Master Plan. This report outlines the existing water distribution system within the urban boundaries of the cities of Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge. It characterizes some of the constraints and opportunities within the existing system and provides an outline for upgrades to the water distribution system to meet the demands of the Region of Waterloo through to 2031. Sincerely, AECOM Duncaun McLeod Senior Project Manager [email protected]

DM:jk Encl. cc: File

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO TRI-CITY WATER DISTRIBUTION MASTER PLAN

Signature Page

Report Prepared By: Report Reviewed By:

Joe Gemin Senior Project Manager

Duncaun McLeod Senior Project Manager


Final Report i

Executive Summary Overview The Region of Waterloo (ROW) initiated this study to review the existing water distribution system within the urban boundaries of the cities of Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge. The intent of the study was to review the existing infrastructure, identify opportunities and constraints within the system and to provide a framework for future growth within the Tri-City urban boundaries. Section 1 of this report provides an introduction to the study. It outlines the objectives of the study, describes the current Water Distribution Master Plan and provides a description of background information used to support this document. Section 2 provides a description of the methodology used to complete this study. The section introduces the project team and organization structure. This study is being completed under the Guidance of the Master Plan requirements of the Class Environmental Assessment Process as amended in 2007. As such, public involvement into the project was very important. Outlined within this section are: Project Steering Committee; Project Agency and stakeholder contact list; Notices of Project Commencement and Study completion; Project Workshops held; and Public Information Centres including dates and locations In 2003 the Region developed a Long Term Regional Growth Management Strategy (RGMS) to plan for and guide future population and employment growth in the ROW. The RGMS concluded that over the next several decades it is realistic to anticipate that the Region will grow to approximately 700,000 by 2041. Subsequently, the Province of Ontario identified the Region as a Future Growth Area in the Places to Grow Act, passed in June 2005, and designated the downtowns of Kitchener and Waterloo as Priority Urban Centres and Downtown Cambridge as an Emerging Urban Centre. Places to Grow indicates that the population of the ROW will be 729,000 by 2031. The RGMS helps to ensure that Smart Growth principles are realized in the Region. As part of this, the RGMS recommended the Water Distribution Master Plan be updated to provide a plan for water distribution services to meet the needs of customers in a safe, efficient, cost effective and fiscally responsible manner. As a result the ROW initiated this study to determine and evaluate water distribution and servicing strategies to meet the long term needs of residents and business until 2026. The study was to be completed as a Master Plan under the Environmental Assessment Act in accordance with Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MEA) requirements. The objectives of the Master Plan are as follows: 1. Determination of the future demand requirements on the Regions Water supply and distribution

systems. 2. Identification of future demand requirements. 3. Determination of the feasibility of upgrading or expanding the Regions water distribution system to

meet the capacity requirements determined above.


Final Report ii

4. Identification and evaluation of a range of alternatives to meet the water distribution needs of the

Region as a whole. 5. Provide sufficient and meaningful public and agency consultation at appropriate stages of Master

Plan development being completed to fulfill Municipal Class Environmental Assessment requirements, so that the preferred strategy can have the support of the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), other agencies and local municipalities.

6. Determination of a preferred approach to providing water distribution upgrades or expansions of existing Regional water distribution facilities, and any new Regional water distribution or facilities required.

The updated Water Distribution Master Plan provides an overall plan for the upgrade and expansion of facilities to ensure adequate water distribution capacity for the Region until 2026. Public Consultation Based on the work presented, and comments received from the public, agencies, and other stakeholders throughout the project and at three Public Information Centres (PICs) held in June 2008, the preferred water distribution strategy until the year 2026 was completed. The following is a chronology of the opportunities for public involvement during the WWTMP Update: June 2005: Notice of Commencement Advertisements were placed in local newspapers informing the public of the commencement of the Water Distribution Master Plan. In addition, the local area municipalities, potential concerned area municipalities, neighbouring municipalities, provincial agencies, federal agencies, First Nations and the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) were notified by letter. Steering Committee Meetings The scope of work of the Steering Committee was to comment on and give directions to the Project Team on the development of the Water Distribution Plan update. It consisted of the project consultant, assigned Regional Councilors, and representatives of the Regions Water Services, Planning and Finances, the local area municipalities, GRCA, and MOE. A total of seven Steering Committee meetings were held throughout the project. June, 2008: Notice of Public Information Centres Advertisements were placed in local newspapers informing the general public of the PICs. June 17, 24 and 25, 2007: Public Information Centres The PICs were held in the Cambridge Centre Mall (Cambridge), Conestoga Mall (Waterloo), and Regions Administration Headquarters (Kitchener) to request input from interested parties on the Master Plan. Spring, 2009: Notice of Completion Following Council approval April 2009, advertisements were placed in the local newspapers informing the general public of the 30 day review period for the Final Report. All comments received became part of the Update project file.


Final Report iii

Section 3 establishes current water demand for the Tri-City area. The first step in determining water demand was to identify current and proposed population between the years 2003 and 2026. The total equivalent population of the Tri-City was in 2026 was determined to be 936,490 people year. The year 2003 was selected to be used as the basis of water demand since it represents a typical demand year for the Region Waterloo. To determine water demand, the 2003 population for both residential and employment lands were provide by the Region. In addition to the population and water demand information, a review was conducted of the water demand by landuse to determine current and future patterns of use. Through the review, it was identified that the residential areas placed the largest water demand on the system accounting for almost 70% of the total water demand. A listing of the top 50 water users was identified to determine how the major water users affected the overall water distribution system. Based on the sensitivity analysis conducted, it was noted that the top 50 users were not sensitive to the Residential Zonal consumption rate. However, it was also noted that the top 50 users were very sensitive to the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Zonal consumption rates. As a result of this analysis a common Residential consumption rate was identified for Residential users while a distinct consumption rate was applied to each municipality to better describe consumption characteristics. Finally, the amount of Unaccounted For Water (UFW) was reviewed to determine the current overall water demand requirements. With the base information collected and analysed, projection of present and future trends in water demand were identified. Using projected populations and per capita consumption, the total average day and total maximum day and total maximum week demands were determined The total average demand ranged from 35.7mgd to 46.3 mgd from 2003 through 2026. Similarly the total maximum day demand ranged from 48.2 mgd to 62.5mgd and the total maximum week demand ranged from 44.6mgd to 57.9mgd for the time period from 2003 through to 2026 respectively. ICI Diurnal patterns were developed for each of the pressure zones, where applicable. A common residential diurnal pattern was identified for residential usage (based on Kitchener Zone 5). Finally Peaking factors for maximum day and maximum week usage were identified. For the purposes of this study, the following factors were used: Maximum Day Demand factor 1.44 Maximum Week Demand factor 1.25 Section 4 of this report describes the existing water distribution system. The distribution system is made up of Region watermains, dual purpose watermains and local municipality owned watermains. It operates using 14 separate existing pressure zones: Cambridge Zones 1, 1A, 2E, 2W and 3 Kitchener Zones 2, 4, 5 and future 6 Waterloo Zones 4, 4B, 4C, 5, 6, 7


Final Report iv

The water distribution system operates with a number of elevated storage tanks and at grade reservoirs. The storage vessel capacities are identified in Table 4.3 of Section with actual operating levels noted in Table 4.4. Each of the storage tanks and reservoirs constraints and opportunities were identified. The Regulatory and Policy Framework of this report is identified in Section 5. Section 6 is an update of the Water Distribution Master Plan. The Regions hydraulic model H2OMAP was used assess the water distribution system behaviour and capability for different design year scenarios. The following conditions were modeled: Maximum Week Demand 48 Hour Extended Period Simulations; and Fire Flow conditions. In assessing the fire flow events, two fire events based of Fire Underwriters Survey (FUS) were assigned to one critical consumer r node in the distribution system and one local residential area in any location within the Region simultaneously. This approach asses the water transfer capability in the event of two simultaneous fire events in lieu of a major fire in each zone simultaneously (which is considered unrealistic). Together with Regional staff, 39 predefined critical water consumers were identified across the Region. A review of the pressure zone boundaries was completed to determine high and low pressure areas within the distribution system. The evaluation criteria used to identify the hydraulic performance of the system falls under three categories: maintaining minimum system pressures, limiting maximum system pressures and observing pipeline velocities or headloss gradients. The following pressure zone boundaries were identified: Expansion of the Cambridge Zone 1A pressure zone into Cambridge Zone 1; Modification of the Cambridge Zone 1 operating strategy i.e. new TWL; Expansion of Kitchener Zone 2E into Breslau South (East Side); Modifications to the Kitchener Zone 2W with possible inter-connection with Kitchener Zone 2E with

Kitchener Zone 2W (detailed review undertaken by others); Modification to the Kitchener Zone 4 system (i.e. new elevated reservoir); Modifications to the Waterloo Zone 4/5 pressure zone including incorporation of sub zones 4B and

4C to Zone 5; amd Detailed analysis is incorporated into Technical Memorandum #6 (included in Appendix F) A detailed storage analysis was completed. The evaluation used three different approaches: MOE Storage Capacity Evaluation Criteria; Alternate Capacity Evaluation Approach (Zonal); and Integrated System Approach. The storage analysis indicated that there is sufficient storage within the Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo Integrated Supply System. In order to determine key infrastructure that will cause a major impact if taken out of service, a criticality assessment was completed. Critical infrastructure was identified as: Infrastructure when taken out of service would result in zone pressure below 140kpa and/ or not

sustain fire pressure; and Infrastructure that is a lone or single point of supply into a zone or subzone.


Final Report v

The following infrastructure was considered critical Manitou PRV; River Road MTV; New Dundee PRV; MV2; University Tank inlet; and University Tank outlet. The impacts and solutions for critical infrastructure is listed on Table 6.9 The hydraulic model was used to identify upgrades or modifications to the water distribution system to meet current demands and demands up to 2026. Table 6.11 outlines a number of modifications that were identified. Each of the modifications has been costed to provide a preliminary estimate of the work to be completed. It is expected that the total medication costs will be in the range of $65,000,000 to $80,000,000. In addition to the costs for the modifications Table 6.11 outlines the Class EA schedule that would be required for each project modification. Estimated capital costs in 2009 dollars are also summarized for each of the recommendations outlined for capital works budgeting purposes. Budgetary estimates for the mid to long-term recommendations are preliminary in nature and are subject to Class EA and Preliminary Design recommendations to confirm the estimated costs provided and relative timing shown. The Master Plan should be revisited every five years to update population projections and water demand requirements (incorporating the success of water conservation and I/I reduction), to review regulatory status and to include advances in water technologies. Following the main body of this report are Appendices A through G. Each of these appendices were developed as a Technical Memorandum to discuss and provide details for the summaries in this Executive Summary and in the main body of this report. Appendix A Tech Memo 1 Landuse, Population, Demand Analysis and Projections Appendix B Tech Memo 2 Pressure Zone Boundary Analysis and Rationalization Appendix C Tech Memo 3 Storage Analysis and Projection Appendix D Tech Memo 4 Review and Assessment of Existing Infrastructure Appendix E Tech Memo 5 Evaluation Methodology Criteria Appendix F Tech Memo 6 Water Servicing Alternatives Appendix G Public Consultation


Table of Contents

Final Report

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1.1 Changes from a Planning Perspective .....................................................................................1 1.1.2 Objectives of the Water Distribution Master Plan Update ........................................................1 1.1.3 Current Water Distribution Master Plan....................................................................................2 1.1.4 Related Studies ........................................................................................................................2

2. UPDATE METHODOLOGY.................................................................................... 3 2.1 Project Organization .............................................................................................................. 3

2.1.1 Project Team and Consulting Team.........................................................................................3 2.1.2 Steering Committee..................................................................................................................4

2.2 Public and Agency Consultation Program ............................................................................. 4 2.2.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................4 2.2.2 Public and Agency Notifications ...............................................................................................7 2.2.3 Project Discussion Meetings ....................................................................................................9 2.2.4 Public Information Centres (PICs) ..........................................................................................10

2.3 Workshops and Technical Memoranda ............................................................................... 11 2.3.1 Internal Project Workshops ....................................................................................................11

3. WATER DEMAND ................................................................................................ 13 3.1 Population and Water Demand Projections......................................................................... 13

3.1.1 Population Projections............................................................................................................13 3.1.2 Water Demand Projections.....................................................................................................14

3.2 Definitions ............................................................................................................................ 16 3.3 Water Demand Forecast...................................................................................................... 16 3.4 Residential and ICI Diurnal Patterns.................................................................................... 20

3.4.1 Residential Diurnal Pattern.....................................................................................................20 3.4.2 ICI Diurnal Pattern ..................................................................................................................20

3.5 Max Day and Max Week Peaking Factors........................................................................... 24 3.5.1 Impact of Water Efficiency on Demand ..................................................................................24 3.5.2 Impact of Outdoor Water Use Restrictions on Demand .........................................................25

3.6 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 25

4. WATER DISTRIBUTION....................................................................................... 27 4.1 Description of Existing Water Distribution System............................................................... 27 4.2 Existing System Pressure Zone Boundary Analysis ............................................................ 40 4.3 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 43

5. REGULATORY AND POLICY FRAMEWORK................................................. 44 5.1 Applicable Legislation, Regulation and Policy Initiatives ..................................................... 44

6. UPDATED WATER DISTRIBUTION MASTER PLAN ........................................ 45


Table of Contents

Final Report

6.1 Updated Master Plan ........................................................................................................... 45 6.1.1 Infrastructure and System Evaluation Criteria........................................................................45

6.2 Components of Updated Water Master Plan ....................................................................... 46 6.2.1 Hydraulic Modeling and Analysis............................................................................................46 6.2.2 Fire Flow Analysis...................................................................................................................47 6.2.3 Summary Modeling Results....................................................................................................53 6.2.4 Pressure Zone Boundary Analysis and Rationalization .........................................................57 6.2.5 Storage Capacity Evaluation ..................................................................................................82 6.2.6 Criticality Analysis...................................................................................................................84 6.2.7 Eastside and Future Servicing Areas .....................................................................................88 6.2.8 Lake Based Water Supply System.........................................................................................91

6.3 Estimated Costs................................................................................................................... 94 6.4 Future Updates .................................................................................................................. 103 6.5 Summary and Recommendations ..................................................................................... 103


Table of Contents

Final Report

List of Figures Figure 2.1 - Organization of Master Plan ..................................................................................................................3 Figure 2.2 - Master Planning Process ........................................................................................................................6 Figure 3.1 - Water Demand Projection Process.......................................................................................................17 Figure 3.2 - Residential Diurnal Pattern (Based on Kit Zone 5) ...............................................................................20 Figure 3.3 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM 1 + CAM3)....................................................................................................21 Figure 3.4 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM2E).................................................................................................................21 Figure 3.5 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM2W)................................................................................................................22 Figure 3.6 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (KIT2 + KIT2A) .......................................................................................................22 Figure 3.7 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (KIT2B + KIT4 + BreslauN + BreslauS) .................................................................23 Figure 3.8 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (WAT5 + WAT4 + KIT4A + Market) .......................................................................23 Figure 4.1 - Pressure Zones.....................................................................................................................................28 Figure 4.2 - Existing Water Supply System..............................................................................................................29 Figure 4.3 - Ownership of Watermains ....................................................................................................................35 Figure 4.4 - Future Water Supply System (New KIT4 Storage Facility)...................................................................36 Figure 4.5 - Future Water Supply System (New CAM1 Storage Facility) ................................................................37 Figure 4.6 - Definition of Elevated Storage .............................................................................................................40 Figure 6.1 Fire Flow Locations ..............................................................................................................................51 Figure 6.2 - Future Cambridge Pressure Zone 1A Boundary ................................................................................59 Figure 6.3 Location Options for New Cambridge Storage Facility ........................................................................60 Figure 6.4 - Potential Option No. 1 for new CAM1 Storage Facility.........................................................................61 Figure 6.5 - Potential Option No.2 for new CAM1 Storage Facility..........................................................................61 Figure 6.6 - Potential Option No.3 for new CAM1 Storage Facility..........................................................................62 Figure 6.7 - Potential Option No.4 for new CAM1 Storage Facility..........................................................................62 Figure 6.8 - Potential Option No.5 for new CAM1 Storage Facility..........................................................................63 Figure 6.9 - Tank Cycling Pattern for Location 1......................................................................................................63 Figure 6.10 - Tank Cycling Pattern for Location 2....................................................................................................64 Figure 6.11 New Zone 1 Turnbull Pumping Station (located adjacent to Turnbull Reservoir)..............................66 Figure 6.12 Areas within Cambridge Zone 1 Low and High Pressure Issues.......................................................67 Figure 6.13 Areas at Location 1 with Low and High Pressure Issues...................................................................68 Figure 6.14 Areas within Location 2 with Low and High Pressure Issues ............................................................69 Figure 6.15 Areas within Location 3 with Low and High Pressure Issues ............................................................70 Figure 6.16 -Potential Watermain Connection for System Integration.....................................................................72 Figure 6.17 - Kitchener Zone 2W Change in Pressure ...........................................................................................73 Figure 6.18 -Change in Zone 2E Storage Level (Freeport Tank).............................................................................73 Figure 6.19 - Change in Flow at Manitou PRV.........................................................................................................74 Figure 6.20 -Change in Flow at River Road PRV ....................................................................................................74 Figure 6.21 Existing Waterloo Pressure Boundary Zone 5 ..................................................................................76


Table of Contents

Final Report

Figure 6.22- Future Boundary for Waterloo Zone 5 ...............................................................................................77 Figure 6.23 - System Pressure Differences in Cambridge Zone 1A ........................................................................78 Figure 6.24 - System Pressure Differences in Existing Waterloo Zone 4C .............................................................78 Figure 6.25 - System Pressure Differences in Existing Waterloo Zone 4 ................................................................79 Figure 6.26 - Potential Location No.1 for KIT4 Storage ...........................................................................................80 Figure 6.27 - Potential Location No.2 for KIT4 Storage ...........................................................................................81 Figure 6.28 - System Pressure Comparison - St. George ET vs. New KIT4 Tank ..................................................81 Figure 6.29 - Storage Evaluations Methodology ......................................................................................................83 Figure 6.30 - Eastside Servicing Area Location .......................................................................................................89 Figure 6.31 - Infrastructure Requirements 1 for Eastside Servicing Areas..............................................................90 Figure 6.32 - Infrastructure Requirements 2 for Eastside Servicing Area................................................................90 Figure 6.33 - Preferred Ultimate Supply Strategy ....................................................................................................92 Figure 6.34 - Lake Based Supply Option 1 ..............................................................................................................93 Figure 6.35 Recommended Upgrades for Cambridge ........................................................................................100 Figure 6.36 Recommended Upgrades for Kitchener...........................................................................................101 Figure 6.37 Recommended Upgrades for Waterloo ...........................................................................................102


Table of Contents

Final Report

List of Tables

Table 2.1 - Steering Committee Members .................................................................................................................4 Table 2.2 - List of Agency and Stakeholder Contacts ................................................................................................8 Table 2.3 Project Discussion Meetings ...................................................................................................................9 Table 2.4 Master Plan Update Municipality Workshops..........................................................................................12 Table 3.1- Existing Population 2003 ........................................................................................................................13 Table 3.2 - Total Projected Equivalent Population*..................................................................................................14 Table 3.3 - 2003 Demand Summary per Landuse ...................................................................................................14 Table 3.4 - Total Demand for the Top 50 Water Billing Records Ranked by Landuse ............................................15 Table 3.5 - UFW in Each City (2003) .......................................................................................................................16 Table 3.6 - Average Residential and ICI Water Per Capita Consumption Rate.......................................................17 Table 3.7 - Total Average Day Demand (L/s)...........................................................................................................18 Table 3.8 - Total Maximum Day Demand (L/s) ........................................................................................................19 Table 3.9 - Total Maximum Week Demand (L/s)......................................................................................................19 Table 3.10 - Max Day/Max Week Demand (L/s) (2003)...........................................................................................24 Table 3.11 - Projected Average Day Demand with Water Efficiency Consideration ...............................................25 Table 3.12 - Recommended ICI Consumption Rate by Zone ..................................................................................26 Table 4.1 - Water Supply Information.......................................................................................................................30 Table 4.2 - Hydraulic Modeling Results - Water Facility Outputs Summary ............................................................33 Table 4.3 - Existing Storage Facility Information......................................................................................................38 Table 4.4 - Actual Operating Levels in Existing Water Systems..............................................................................39 Table 4.5 - Summary of Pressure Issues and Possible Mitigation...........................................................................41 Table 5.1 - List of Legislation, Regulations and Policy Initiatives.............................................................................44 Table 6.1 - Water Distribution Master Plan Scenarios Maximum Week ...............................................................46 Table 6.2 - Fire Flow Locations ................................................................................................................................48 Table 6.3 - Hydraulic Results for Potential High/Low Pressure Problems ...............................................................53 Table 6.4 - Summary of Watermain Deficiencies.....................................................................................................56 Table 6.5 - Summary of Technical Feasibility for CAM1 Storage ............................................................................71 Table 6.6 - Summary of Infrastructure Requirements ..............................................................................................82 Table 6.7 - Storage Evaluation Summary for Cambridge Integrated Supply System.............................................83 Table 6.8 - Storage Evaluation Summary for Kitchener and Waterloo Integrated Supply System..........................84 Table 6.9 - Criticality Analysis Results for Watermains............................................................................................85 Table 6.10 - Criticality Analysis Results for Booster Pumping Stations ...................................................................86 Table 6.11 - Cost Estimate Summary ......................................................................................................................94


Table of Contents

Final Report

Appendices A Technical Memo 1 Landuse, Population, Demand Analysis and Projection B Technical Memo 2 Pressure Zone Boundary Analysis and Rationalization C Technical Memo 3 Storage Analysis and Projections D Technical Memo 4 Review and Assessment of Existing Infrastructure E Technical Memo 5 Evaluation Methodology Criteria F Technical Memo 6 Water Servicing Alternatives G Public Consultation


Final Report Page 1 of 103

1. Introduction

1.1 Background The Region of Waterloo (The Region) awarded the Tri-City Water Master Plan Study to AECOM (formerly Earth Tech Canada Inc.). The Master Plan is intended to provide a framework to ensure that the Tri-City area has sufficient water distribution infrastructure to meet the demands until 2026. The basis for the framework was established through a review of the existing water distribution system in the cities of Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge, and an assessment of the current and future needs of the population based on the Regions Long Term Growth Management Strategy, the Province of Ontarios 2005 Places to Grow Act and the Regional Official Plan (ROPP). The following sections outline the information reviewed during the project and the desired objectives from each stage of investigation.

1.1.1 Changes from a Planning Perspective

As part of the deliverables for the project, AECOM provided recommendations for required infrastructure upgrades to the existing water distribution system based on the current supply system. However, since the inception of this project, a fundamental development occurred that necessitated a revision in focus for the project. This change in focus was initiated by the development of the Province of Ontarios Places to Grow strategy. The Places to Grow plan outlined areas in Ontario that were expected to expand over the next 40 years. The plan outlined expected population growth patterns and clearly identified the Region of Waterloo as a prime growth area within the province. This anticipated population and demand growth necessitated a review of the water distribution system based not only on the existing well based system but also on the short term and longer term impacts of switching to a lake based system.

1.1.2 Objectives of the Water Distribution Master Plan Update

The primary objective of the Master Plan Update was to rationalize the Region of Waterloos water distribution system configuration/requirements in conjunction with the various options associated with the Long Term Water Supply Strategy (LTWSS). A phased water distribution plan was proposed to achieve this objective. As stated above, due to the information provided in Places to Grow, the proposed plan needed to ensure that the system upgrades met the demands of future population scenarios while coinciding with the future lake based water supply system. Although the Regions hydraulic water model (H2OMAP) served as a basis for the project, a high level conceptual review of the water distribution system based on the Long Term Water Supply Strategy (LTWSS) was also provided as part of this study. To complete the Master Plan Update, AECOM provided the findings as a series of Technical Memoranda that addressed each concern individually. A total of six memoranda were produced and are included in Appendices A through F of this report. This Final Master Plan report serves as a summary of the Technical Memoranda and provides broad long-range plans for The Regional Municipality of Waterloo. This report outlines required projects, implementation plans and development scenarios.



1.1.3 Current Water Distribution Master Plan

The existing and proposed infrastructure was reviewed for the traditional/conventional water distribution analyses which are typically demand side driven, i.e. maximum day, maximum week, peak hour, minimum hour, fire flow, etc. However, in order to determine the true robustness of a distribution system, emergency planning and facility outage planning principles need to be adopted and these issues were studied in this project. Emergency planning focuses on modeling a variety of unplanned and undesired facility outages. The purpose of this part of the distribution master plan is to determine the criticality of water distribution elements. These elements have been identified and recommendations are formulated in Section 6 (of this report) to reinforce these facilities. Additional facilities and systems modifications have been identified to compensate for taking a facility out of service. Technical Memoranda have been prepared to fully detail these requirements and are located in Appendices A through F. Section 4 of this report discusses the status of the existing water distribution infrastructure. This is supported by Technical Memorandum No. 4(Appendix D) and 6 (Appendix F), the latter for detailed analysis of existing and future infrastructure improvements.

1.1.4 Related Studies

To begin the project, AECOM met with Regional and local Municipal Administrative, Operations and Planning staff to identify, review and catalogue all available background information. Additional required information was gathered and reviewed. This information included but was not limited to: Operating records Maintenance records Oral histories As-recorded drawings Operating and maintenance manuals SCADA information Agency policies and codes Municipal records (as cited in attached Bibliography). As well, the Region of Waterloos Tri-City Hydraulic Model (H2OMAP) was reviewed and suggestions for refinements were recommended.



2. UPDATE METHODOLOGY

2.1 Project Organization The Tri-City Water Distribution Master Plan was conducted by AECOM and the Region of Waterloo. The overall project organization is outlined in Figure 2.1 below.

2.1.1 Project Team and Consulting Team

The project team was made up of individuals who were responsible for day-to-day activities involved in the project. The project team included: Jorge Cavalcante Region of Waterloo Edvin Yohanna Region of Waterloo (prior Reg Russwurm, Samuel Ziemann) Joe Gemin AECOM Duncaun McLeod AECOM

Figure 2.1 - Organization of Master Plan 1

1 Figure 2.1 and further information included in Appendix G



2.1.2 Steering Committee

A Steering Committee was established at the project initiation to provide guidance to the Project Team and the Consulting Team. The Steering Committee was comprised of the following: Designated Regional politicians with a direct interest in the project; Representatives from the Cities of Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the Township of Woolwich;

and Staff from the Region of Waterloo Steering Committee Members (Table 2.1) were involved in several meetings during the course of the project. Further detail of these proceedings can be found in Section 6 of this report.

Table 2.1 - Steering Committee Members

Edvin Yohanna Engineering & Planning Region of Waterloo Jorge Cavalcante Engineering & Planning Region of Waterloo John Holowackyj Engineering & Planning Region of Waterloo Lane Stevens Water Operations Region of Waterloo John Melfi Water Operations Region of Waterloo Nancy Kodousek Director of Water Services Region of Waterloo Jim Robinson Water Resources Region of Waterloo John Lubczynski Community Planning Region of Waterloo Jo-Anne Ing Design and Construction Region of Waterloo Jim Wideman Regional Councillor Region of Waterloo Phil Antoniuow City of Cambridge Bill Garibaldi City of Waterloo Dan Ditaranto City of Waterloo Cam Rapp City of Waterloo Mayor Carl Zehr Regional Councillor City of Kitchener Nancy Corbett City of Kitchener Rod Kruger Township of Woolwich Joe Gemin AECOM Devan Thomas/Benny Wan AECOM Karl Grueneis AECOM Duncaun McLeod AECOM

2.2 Public and Agency Consultation Program

2.2.1 Overview

The Master Plan process included consultation with the public, agencies and stakeholders through the issuance of a Notice of Commencement, the development and regular updating of a contact list and one Public Information Centre (PIC) (per City) to present findings and receive comments. A process map of the Master Plan is provided in Figure 2.2.



The public and agency consultation program was multi-faceted and involved the following: Steering Committee Meetings; Public and Agency Notifications; Project Mailing List; An Internal Project Workshop; and Public Information Centres (PICs) for each City. Further details on the public and agency consultation program are provided in following Sections 2.3.1 to 2.3.4. Additional materials on the public and agency consultation program are included in Appendix G.



Figure 2.2 - Master Planning Process1

1 Figure 2.2 from PIC slides included in Appendix G



2.2.2 Public and Agency Notifications

Notice of Commencement

A Notice of Commencement was issued June 17, 2005. The Notice of Commencement was advertised in local newspapers, on the Region of Waterloo website and by direct mail out to stakeholders. The Notice of Commencement included Steering Committee Member contact information so that members of the public who had questions or wanted more information on the project could participate in the Master Plan. Federal, provincial and municipal agencies, along with stakeholders, were also notified of the project by letter. An example of the Notice of Commencement Letter is included in Appendix G. Table 2.2 outlines agencies and stakeholders who were notified throughout the project. There were no responses from the Public regarding the Notice of Commencement. There were no responses from the Agencies regarding the Notice of Commencement. Notice of Public Information Centres

The Public Information Centres (PICs) were advertised in advance on the Region of Waterloos website, as well as twice in local newspapers and posted on the Region of Waterloo website. A Notice of PICs was also sent to those on the project mailing list, which consisted of those agencies and stakeholders listed in Table 2.2. Notice of Completion

A Notice of Completion, including the compilation of the Water Distribution Master Plan and the availability of the draft report for public review and comment, was published in the following newspapers: The Record Waterloo Chronicle Cambridge Times A Notice of Completion was also mailed to all those on the project mailing list. The Notice of Completion was advertised in advance on the Region of Waterloos website, as well as twice in local newspapers.



Table 2.2 - List of Agency and Stakeholder Contacts

Federal/Provincial

Ministry of the Environment Grand River Conservation Authority Ministry of Natural Resources Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Ministry of Culture Ministry of Transportation Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Municipal

Region of Waterloo City of Cambridge City of Kitchener City of Waterloo Township of North Dumfries Township of Wellesley Township of Wilmot Township of Woolwich County of Brant County of Oxford County of Perth County of Wellington

Utilities

Kitchener Utilities Union Gas Limited Cambridge-North Dumfries Hydro Waterloo-North Hydro Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Hydro One Networks Rogers Cable TV Bell Canada

First Nations Six Nations of the Grand River Territory Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation

Institutions University of Waterloo Wilfred Laurier University Conestoga College

Environmental Groups

Waterloo Public Interest Research Group Friends of the Grand River Cambridge Environmental Advisory Committee City of Waterloo Environmental Advisory Committee Kitchener Environmental Advisory Committee Canadian Water Resources Association

Agricultural Group Waterloo Federation of Agriculture

Business Groups

Greater KW Chamber of Commerce Cambridge Chamber of Commerce Kitchener Downtown Business Association Waterloo Region Home Builders Association



2.2.3 Project Discussion Meetings

A total of 17 Project Discussion meetings were held with interested stakeholders such as the Steering Committee, Operations and Maintenance staff, local municipal Engineering and Planning staff and other interested parties. The meetings occurred as follows:

Table 2.3 Project Discussion Meetings

Meeting Date Purpose of Meeting January 07, 2005 Meeting No. 1 (Steering Committee)

Review Draft Report Review results of zone boundary comparison Review status of deliverables

January 31, 2005 (additional meeting) (Project Team)

Discuss format of an Evaluation Workshop

March 30, 2005 Meeting No. 2 (Steering Committee)

Discuss delivery of population projections Review revised Workplan Schedule Evaluation of Workshop agenda and timing

April 25, 2005 (Project Team)

Provide internal update and co-ordinate the staff efforts on this project

May 31, 2005 Meeting No. 3 (Steering Committee)

Review Project Work completed to date Discuss EA Process

June 16, 2005 (EA Subcommittee Meeting)

Review Project work since last meeting Review Revised Steering Committee List Revised Purpose Statement

October 3, 2005 (Operations Subcommittee Meeting)

Review Technical Memoranda #1, #2 & #4 Technical Memorandum #5- Review and Assessment of

Existing Infrastructure October 5, 2005 (EA Subcommittee Meeting)

Review Tech Memoranda #1, #2 & #4 Technical Memorandum #1-Landuse Population, Demand

Analysis and Projection May 5, 2006 Meeting No. 4 (Steering Committee)

Review Places to Grow Information Review Population Forecasts

May 30, 2006 City of Cambridge

Discuss City of Cambridge Personnel issues with water distribution system

October 16, 2007 (Project Team)

Provide a strategy for future work on the project November 29, 2007 Findings Workshop (Steering Committee)

Identification of Concerns

December 07, 2007 City of Waterloo Operations

Discuss the operation of the water distribution system issues with City of Waterloo Personnel

Continued



Continuation December 14, 2007 City of Kitchener Operations

Discuss the operation of the water distribution system issues with City of Kitchener Personnel

December 18, 2007 City of Cambridge Operations

Discuss the operation of the water distribution system issues with City of Cambridge Personnel

May 15, 2008 Meeting No. 5 (Project Team)

Review boards for PIC Review Project Schedule Review Technical Memorandum #6

May 23, 2008 (Project Team)

Review boards for PIC

2.2.4 Public Information Centres (PICs)

PICs were held at the following locations to provide an opportunity for the public to review the results of the work completed to date and to provide comments on the Master Plan.

City of Cambridge

Date: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 Time: 5:00-8:00 PM

Location: Cambridge Place Mall

City of Kitchener Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Time: 5:00-8:00 PM Location: Region of Waterloo Headquarters 150 Frederick Street

City of Waterloo

Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 Time: 5:00-8:00 PM

Location: Conestoga Mall A copy of the notification for the PICs is provided in Appendix G. Agencies and stakeholders on the project mailing list were also sent a letter notifying them of the PIC. Steering Committee members were available to provide information, answer questions and discuss comments. Sign-in sheets were provided at all three PICs. Original copies of the sign-in sheets are in the AECOM file copy. They have not been included in this report to safeguard privacy. Following the PIC, only one comment sheet was received from the public. A copy of all of the display board materials is included in Appendix G. The display boards were used to provide the general public with some of the pertinent findings of the Master Plan study. The details described on the display boards at the PIC were derived from the study results and recommendations (see Appendix F for more detailed study information).



2.3 Workshops and Technical Memoranda The project was organized around six Technical Memoranda, individual meetings with each of the three municipalities (Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo) and Public Information Centres within each of the municipalities. The six Technical Memoranda* summarized the following topics:

Technical Memo 1 Landuse, Population, Demand Analysis and Projection (Appendix A) Technical Memo 2 Pressure Zone Boundary Analysis and Rationalization (Appendix B) Technical Memo 3 Storage Analysis and Projections (Appendix C) Technical Memo 4 Review and Assessment of Existing Infrastructure (Appendix D) Technical Memo 5 Evaluation Methodology Criteria (Appendix E) Technical Memo 6 Water Servicing Alternatives (Appendix F) * Copies of all the Technical Memoranda are provided in Appendices A through F. Prior to meeting with the individual municipalities, the project team prepared the background work on the existing water distribution system (Technical Memoranda 1-4). Subsequent to stakeholders meeting and public consultation the final two (Technical Memoranda 5-6) were prepared.

2.3.1 Internal Project Workshops

Three internal project workshops were individually held with the staff from the three municipalities; City of Waterloo, Kitchener and Cambridge. The workshops were facilitated by the consulting teams and Regional staff from the Transportation and Environmental services departments participated. These meeting were held in the Cities of Waterloo, Kitchener and Cambridge on December 7, 14 and 18, 2007 respectively (See Table 2.4).



Table 2.4 Master Plan Update Municipality Workshops

Date Municipality Purpose of Workshops

2008 Cambridge

Discussed and presented key assumptions in the Water Distribution Master Plan, including demand scenarios (average max, week, fire etc) population forecasts and allocations

Reviewed preliminary results of existing and future hydraulic modeling including, pressure issues, water quality and servicing problems

Discussed current pressure issues and proposed revisitation through hydraulic modeling

Identified and reviewed criticality and infrastructure assessment Discussed reassessment of Zone 1 either by sporting or rearranging

zone Also involved enlargement of Zone 1A

2008 Kitchener

Discussed and presented key assumptions in the Water Distribution Master Plan including demand scenarios (average max, week, fire etc) population forecasts and allocations

Reviewed preliminary results of existing and future hydraulic modeling including pressure issues, water quality and servicing problems


Identified and reviewed criticality and infrastructure assessment Reviewed criticality of mains Bridgeport, Zone 3 PRV settings (Deer Ridge, Manitou) Decommissioning of St. George and new tank or direct pressure system

2008 Waterloo

Discussed and presented key assumptions in the Water Distribution Master Plan including demand scenarios (average max, week, fire etc) population forecasts and allocations

Reviewed preliminary results of existing and future hydraulic modeling including pressure issues, water quality and servicing problems


Identified and reviewed criticality and infrastructure assessment Reviewed incorporation of Zone 4B, 4C and part of University Research

Park from existing Zone 4 to Zone 5 Reviewed pipe, decommissioning fluoridation and impending Zone 6

amalgamation



3. WATER DEMAND A review of existing water demand data was conducted based on 2003 billing records received from the Region of Waterloo. The 2003 demand data was selected since it best represents a typical demand year for the Region of Waterloo. It is noted that for this study the total demand at St. Jacobs Market, Breslau North and Breslau South was estimated since no billing information was available for those areas. The following information was found: The total average water demand for 2003 was approximately 132.3 ML/d or 1531.3L/s; and Overall, approximately 69% of the total billed authorized consumption is residential and the

remaining 31% is attributed to Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) consumption for the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.

The baseline or existing information on the Tri-City water users has been supplied by the Region and the three local cities including demand data, water billing information and GIS data. A more detailed analysis of landuse, population, demand analysis and projections can be found in Technical Memorandum #1 (included in Appendix A of this report). Technical Memorandum #1 provides information on existing unaccounted for water (UFW), identified the top 50 water users, prepared diurnal patterns based on land use on a zone by zone basis (residential and ICI basis) and summarized existing water use for the Tri-City area.

3.1 Population and Water Demand Projections

3.1.1 Population Projections

An interpolation method was applied to estimate the 2003 population for both residential and employment population since data for 2001 and 2006 was provided. Both residential population and equivalent population were provided by the Region. Table 3.1 presents a summary of population data in each city for 2003.

Table 3.1- Existing Population 2003 3

City Residential PopulationEquivalent

Employment Population Cambridge 117,704 64,761 Kitchener 202,860 93,979 Waterloo 104,769 60,175

North Dumfries* 108 7 Wilmot** 700 98 St. Jacob 1,436 1,864

Elmira 8,024 5,003 Total 435,601 225,887

* Included Lloyd Brown Subdivision ** Included Mannheim and Shingletown

3 Table 3.1 from page 7 of Technical Memorandum #1



Projected population information was provided by the Region in May 2006. Table 3.2 details the projected residential equivalent and employment equivalent populations to the year 2026 by the Municipality.

Table 3.2 - Total Projected Equivalent Population*4

Municipality 2003 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Cambridge 182,465 196,290 212,947 227,536 240,479 255,431

Kitchener 296,839 314,192 339,300 365,676 394,658 422,132

Waterloo 164,944 180,986 195,152 207,621 218,399 230,670

North Dumfries

115 115 115 115 115 115

Wilmot(1) 799 804 808 813 821 827

Woolwich(2) 16,326 17,510 19,560 21,614 24,630 27,315

Total 661,488 709,897 767,882 823,375 879,102 936,490

* residential and equivalent employment population (ICI)

3.1.2 Water Demand Projections

The 2003 Water Billing Records for the three cities were reviewed. It was determined that residential users comprised the majority of the water demand as outlined in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 - 2003 Demand Summary per Landuse5

Landuse Type Total Demand

(L/s) Total Demand

(%)

Commercial 111.3 7.3% Industrial 252.0 16.5%

Institutional 98.3 6.4% Other 5.2 0.3%

Residential 1064.3 69.5% Total 1531.1 L/s 100.0%

(Source: 2003 Water Billing Records)

However, further examination was completed to identify the top 50 water billing records in order to determine any significant and/or special water users. This analysis determined that the Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) sectors comprised the majority of the Top 50 billing record group. Table 3.4 details the Top 50 User percentage distribution.

4 Table 3.2 from page #22 of Technical Memorandum#1 5 Table 3.3 from page #3 of Technical Memorandum #1



Table 3.4 - Total Demand for the Top 50 Water Billing Records Ranked by Landuse6

Land Use

Top 50 Billing Records Demand

(L/s)

Total Demand per landuse in

RMOW (L/s)

Percent Distribution per

Landuse (%)

Commercial 2.1 111.3 1.9%

Industrial 162.0 252.0 64.3%

Institutional 38.6 98.3 39.3%

Other 0 5.2 0.0%

Residential 18.7 1064.3 1.8%

Total 221.4 L/s 1531.1 L/s 14.5%

The influence of the top 50 customer demands was evaluated and the methodology used to determine the approximate population for each top 50 billing account is provided below: Scenario 184 of the Regions Planning Department population data set was used as the baseline

population and population distribution. An equivalent population from the PLUM (Population Land Use Model) zone was assigned to each Top 50 Users based on their shared geography

The Zonal populations in Scenario 184 and the final population data set were compared. Adjustment factors were calculated based on population growth and distribution

The adjustment factor for each zone was applied to each Top 50 User and the equivalent population for each user was adjusted to match the final population data set

For each PLUM zone that contains one or more Top 50 billing records, a specific consumption rate was calculated based on the total water consumption and total population associated with that particular PLUM zone

Water consumption and population data associated with these PLUM zones (i.e. the zones where the Top 50 billing records are located) are then subtracted from the total water consumption and total population of that particular pressure zone

Water consumption and population data sets for the remaining PLUM zones are obtained and the consumption rate for the remaining PLUM zones was calculated

The impacts of the Top 50 User on the residential and ICI consumption rates were evaluated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine how the Top 50 water users affected the water distribution system. The detailed results were presented in Technical Memorandum #1 (Appendix A). According to the sensitivity results, the Top 50 Users were not sensitive to the zonal residential consumption rate. Conversely, the Top 50 Users were very sensitive to the zonal ICI consumption rate. As a result of the analysis, a common residential consumption rate was applied for the municipalities consumption rates. Conversely, a distinct ICI consumption rate for each zone was applied for each municipality to better describe the consumption characteristics.

6 Table 3.4 from page #5 of Technical Memorandum #1



3.2 Definitions Average daily water demand, maximum weekly water demand, and total annual water use projections were used as part of this report. The consumption data presented in this report is based on the per capita demands shown in Table 3.5. A maximum week factor of 1.25 was used in this Master Plan (See Technical Memorandum # 1 for details). Unaccounted for Water (UFW) is the amount of water in the distribution system which is not billed due to leakage, inaccurate system flow meters, illegal water taking, water system maintenance, and fire fighting. UFW was calculated by pressure zone through the use of SCADA records and water billing data. (Note: SCADA limitations required the combination of some zones. Details of the zone changes are presented in Technical Memorandum #2-Appendix B). A summary of UFW by city is presented in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5 - UFW in Each City (2003)7

Municipality Total Demand Based on SCADA Record

(L/s)

Total Demand Based on Billing

Record (L/s)

UFW (L/s)

%UFW per Municipality

Cambridge 588.0 482.4 105.6 18%

Kitchener 819.5 681.6 158.4 19%

Waterloo 404.0 370.6 34.2 8%

Total 1832.0 1531.3 300.7 16%

3.3 Water Demand Forecast In order to estimate future water use projections, two types of information are required: population data and water consumption data. Both were reviewed and the findings were listed above in Section 3.1.1 and Section 3.1.2. It should be noted that, in addition to billing information, the following was reviewed: GIS data including Land Use, Parcel Fabric for spatial allocation of demands Population projections approved by the Regions Planning Department Diurnal Water Demand Patterns developed by AECOM in conjunction with the RMOW Figure 3.1 illustrates how the generation of the water demand projections were accomplished.




Figure 3.1 - Water Demand Projection Process

Water Billing Information

Unaccounted For Water(UFW)

Historical SCADA Water Use

Historical Serviced Populations

Water Consumption Rates (Residential &

ICI, etc.)

Land Use Information

Projected Water Service Areas

Population Projections per Service Area

Water Demand Projections for Each

Service Area

Hydraulic Model Demand Sets

Following the process outlined in the above diagram, water consumption rates were calculated for both residential and ICI users for each zone using the water consumption data as provided in the 2003 billing records, the UFW calculated information and the 2003 population data (as noted in Table 3.1 above). Detailed water consumption rate calculations were done and included in Technical Memorandum #1-Appendix A. Table 3.6 illustrates the results of the detailed water consumption calculation rates

Table 3.6 - Average Residential and ICI Water Per Capita Consumption Rate8

City Residential

Consumption Rate (L/cap/d)

ICI Consumption Rate

(L/cap/d)

Cambridge 204.7 280.8 Kitchener 227.7 178.6 Waterloo 214.7 156.9

Overall Tri-City 218.0 203.1 *to be applied to equivalent employment populations (ICI) Therefore, with the different consumption rates for residential and ICI water users, it is useful to review the average consumption rates of other municipalities outside of the Region of Waterloo before determining the rate that will be utilized in projecting future water demand in the system. AECOMs National Water and Wastewater Benchmarking Initiative collects relevant information for more than 35 Canadian cities and regional organizations, including the Region of Waterloo who has been a participant in this project over the last several years. Average day water consumption from participating




municipalities/cities was reviewed to compare the average water consumption rate determined in this study. From the data provided by the Region of Waterloo (1994-2004) it was determined that the summer population was lower than the winter population, due to the absence of students who lived outside of the Region of Waterloo however, the water consumption rates were acutely higher during summer months. Therefore, the summer population data (higher consumption rates) was used to calculate the total per capita consumption to ensure that a conservative scenario would be utilized. It should be noted that there was a noticeable decline in the overall water consumption rate over the past ten year period. Part of the decline may be attributed to the water efficiency program initiated in the Tri-Cities (further discussion of water efficiency program in Section 3.5.1 of this report). Detailed analysis and all data used can be found in Technical Memorandum #1 in Appendix A. Using projected populations (Table 3.2) and per capita consumption (Table 3.6), AECOM projected Total Average Day Demand, Total Maximum Day Demand and Total Maximum Week Demand (Tables 3.7 to 3.9 respectively).

Table 3.7 - Total Average Day Demand (L/s)9

Municipality 2003 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Cambridge 587 596 639 677 709 746

Kitchener 812 812 869 931 999 1,063

Waterloo 431 488 478 504 527 553

North Dumfries 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wilmot(1) 2 2 2 2 2 2

Woolwich(2) 46 47 51 56 64 72

Total 1,879 1,906 2,040 2,170 2,302 2,436

Total (MGD)(4) 35.7 36.2 38.8 41.2 43.7 46.3




Table 3.8 - Total Maximum Day Demand (L/s)10

Municipality 2003 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Cambridge 793 805 863 913 975 1,007

Kitchener 1,096 1,097 1,174 1,257 1,349 1,435

Waterloo 582 605 645 680 711 747


Wilmot(1) 3 3 3 3 3 3

Woolwich(2) 63 63 69 76 87 97

Total 2,537 2,8572 2,754 2,930 3,107 3,289

Total (MIGD) 48.2 48.9 52.3 55.7 59.1 62.5

Table 3.9 - Total Maximum Week Demand (L/s)11

Municipality 2003 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Cambridge 734 745 799 846 886 933

Kitchener 1,014 1,016 1,087 1,164 1,249 1,328

Waterloo 539 560 597 630 658 691


Wilmot(1) 3 3 3 3 3 3

Woolwich(2) 58 58 64 70 81 90

Total 2,349 2,382 2,550 2,713 2,877 3,045

Total (MIGD) 44.6 45.3 48.5 51.6 54.7 57.9

1. Municipality of Wilmot includes Mannheim and Shingletown 2. Municipality of Woolwich includes Elmira and St. Jacob 3. Tables 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 have been updated based on a residential per capita consumption of 209

l/cap/day as detailed in the conclusions of this report 4. Includes water efficiency saving of 1.64 MGD

10 Table 3.8 from page #23 of Technical Memorandum #1 11 Table 3.9 from page #23 of Technical Memorandum #1



3.4 Residential and ICI Diurnal Patterns A key aspect of the demand analysis portion of the project was the development of diurnal patterns for each pressure zone that were utilized in the hydraulic model. 3.4.1 Residential Diurnal Pattern As noted previously, the water consumption rate for the residential sector did not vary greatly from pressure zone to pressure zone. A common diurnal pattern was developed to illustrate the residential usage throughout the Tri-City study area. Kitchener Zone 5 (+Waterloo Zone 5A) was used to develop a common residential diurnal pattern because the residential demand accounted for over 90% of the total. Fig. 3.2 below illustrates the Residential Diurnal Pattern (based on Kit Zone 5). Detailed information on the residential diurnal pattern is noted in Technical Memorandum 1 (Appendix A).

Figure 3.2 - Residential Diurnal Pattern (Based on Kit Zone 5)12

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Peak

ing

Fact

or [/

]

Avg Day Max Day

3.4.2 ICI Diurnal Pattern The ICI Diurnal Patterns for each pressure zone were calculated for different demand conditions: average day, maximum week and maximum day demand. Since 95% of the water demand for zones Cam 1A, KIT 5, Wat 4B, Wat 4C and Wat 6 is from residential demands, no ICI diurnal patterns were generated for these zones. Figures 3.3 to 3.9 illustrate the various ICI diurnal patterns

12 Figure 3.2 from page #14 of Technical Memorandum #1



Figure 3.3 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM 1 + CAM3)13

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Peak

ing

Fact

or [/

]

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek

Figure 3.4 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM2E)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Pea

king

Fac

tor [

/]

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek

13 Figures 3.3 to 3.9 from pages 16 to 18 of Technical Memorandum #1



Figure 3.5 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (CAM2W)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Pea

king

Fac

tor

[/]

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek

Figure 3.6 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (KIT2 + KIT2A)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Peak

ing

Fact

or [/

]

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek



Figure 3.7 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (KIT2B + KIT4 + BreslauN + BreslauS)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Peak

ing

Fact

or

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek

Figure 3.8 - ICI Diurnal Pattern (WAT5 + WAT4 + KIT4A + Market)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

Peak

ing

Fact

or [/

]

Ave MaxDay MaxW eek

Using these overall diurnal patterns (blending residential and ICI), AECOM developed segregated diurnal patterns for each land use type by considering the land use and point source users in each zone. By establishing these segregated patterns, more accurate overall diurnal patterns for service areas having different proportions of residential versus ICI demands can be readily generated for the hydraulic model.



3.5 Max Day and Max Week Peaking Factors Using the Region of Waterloo Population data, water demand on a zone by zone basis was developed.

Table 3.10 - Max Day/Max Week Demand (L/s) (2003)14

Zone AVG Day Demand

(L/s)

MAX Day Demand

(L/s)

MAX Week Demand

(L/s)

Week of MAX Day Demand Factor

MAX Week Demand Factor

Cam1 347.52 501.54 399.54 6-Jul-03 1.44 1.15 Cam 1A 10.86 21.96 19.36 6-Jul-03 2.02 1.78 Cam 2E 187.52 269.32 239.54 6-Jul-03 1.44 1.28 Cam 2W 29.54 84.64 48.8 12-Oct-03 2.87 1.65

Cam3 43.57 78.26 74.56 6-Jul-03 1.80 1.71 CAM 619.01 955.72 781.8 1.54 1.26

Kit 2W & Kit 4 694.47 907.71 826.59 6-Jul-03 1.31 1.19 Kit 2E 7.33 16.25 14.67 6-Jul-03 2.22 2.00 Kit 5 138.18 237.16 202.39 6-Jul-03 1.72 1.46 KIT 701.8 923.96 841.26 1.38 1.24

Wat 4 & Wat 5 336.02 463.52 411.37 6-Jul-03 1.38 1.22 Wat 4B 29.59 43.65 38.75 6-Jul-03 1.48 1.31 Wat 4C 3.16 5.91 5.13 6-Jul-03 1.87 1.62 Wat 6 35.21 62 51.81 14-Sep-03 1.76 1.47 WAT 403.98 575.08 507.06 1.42 1.26

Overall RMOW 1724.79 2454.76 2130.12 1.42 1.24 For this study the following factors were used Maximum Day Demand Factor 1.44 Maximum Week Demand factor 1.25

3.5.1 Impact of Water Efficiency on Demand

Water efficiency can be improved by implementing water conservation programs on a year round basis. Such programs have resulted in a decrease in the average daily per capita water demands. The Regions Water Efficiency Master Plan Update 2006 was reviewed, interpreted and incorporated to the future water demand estimation. However, in order to evaluate the sensitivity of the target water savings to the projected water demands, the savings in water consumption were regarded in three scenarios: Effective Water Efficiency Program (100% saved), Average Water Efficiency Program (50% saved) and No Participation (0% saved). Table 3.12 details the altered demands when the efficiency programs are taken into account.

14 Table3.10 from page #7 of Technical Memorandum #1s- Appendix E



Table 3.11 - Projected Average Day Demand with Water Efficiency Consideration15

Design Year Unit 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Note:

ML/d 164.6 170.3 179.3 190.7 202.3 Effective Water

Efficiency Program* MGD 36.2 37.5 39.5 41.9 44.5

Low Demand Projection

ML/d 164.6 173.3 183.4 194.8 206.4 Average Water

Efficiency Program

(50% of target saving

achieved). MGD 36.2 38.1 40.3 42.8 45.4

Med Demand Projection

ML/d 164.6 176.3 187.5 198.9 210.5 No Participation**

MGD 36.2 38.8 41.2 43.7 46.3

High Demand Projection

* 3% average day demand adjustment factor was excluded from the Low Demand Projection ** Demand incorporates the estimated savings of 1.21MGD that is already considered to have been

achieved through efficiency projects but assumes that no savings would be made in the 2007-2015 water efficiency programs (worst case scenario)

3.5.2 Impact of Outdoor Water Use Restrictions on Demand

Outdoor water use restrictions have been implemented by the Region (in the past) on a seasonal basis to reduce water use during high demand periods. In 2005 the Region implemented a once a week lawn watering restriction. It is now a permanent mandate. These restrictions serve to decrease the maximum week demands. It was noted that if no participation in the water efficiency program occurred implementation of seasonal outdoor water restrictions would reduce the estimated maximum week factor from 1.28 to 1.25.

3.6 Summary ICI Consumption Rate ICI consumption rates vary by zone as they largely depend on the type of ICI activities that exist. As a result, ICI consumption rates on a zone by zone basis were recommended and the ICI consumption rates for each zone are summarized below. For a detailed breakdown of ICI consumption rates please refer to Technical Memorandum #1-Appendix C found in Appendix A.

15 Table3.11 from page #25 of Technical Memorandum #1



Table 3.12 - Recommended ICI Consumption Rate by Zone16

Zone ICI Consumption Rate

(L/cap/d)

The City of Cambridge Cam 1 347

Cam 1A 84

Cam 2E 220

Cam 2W 255

Cam 3 195 The City of Kitchener

Kit 2 112

Kit 2A 383

Kit 2B 200

Kit 4 183

Kit 4A 90

Breslau N * 177

Breslau S * 177

Kit 5 133

WIL 5A * 177

Kit 6** 59 The City of Waterloo

Wat 4 166

Wat 4B 65

Wat 4C 10

Wat 5 198

Wat 6 59

Wat 7 * 59

Market * 157 * Due to insufficient data, these zones used the Citys average consumption Rate ** Recommended by the Region Residential Consumption Rate The recommended daily residential consumption rate is 225 /cap/day Maximum Day Peaking Factor The recommended max day peaking factor is 1.44 Maximum Week Peaking Factor The recommended max week peaking factor is 1.25

16 Table3.12 from page #28 of Technical Memorandum #1



4. WATER DISTRIBUTION

4.1 Description of Existing Water Distribution System The Regions water supply and distribution system is complex and highly integrated. The water supply is comprised of groundwater, surface water and aquifer storage and recovery from the Mannheim (surface) water treatment plant. The distribution system comprises a number of Regional (transmission), dual purpose and local municipality distribution mains operating within fourteen existing pressure zones as follows:

Cambridge: Zones 1, 1A, 2E, 2W, 3 Kitchener: Zones 2, 2A, 2B, 4, 5 (future 6) Waterloo: Zones 4, 4B, 4C, 5, 6, 7

Technical Memoranda #1, 2, 3 and 4 (Appendices A, B, C and D) describe system demand and supplies in considerable detail. These technical memoranda also describe system operation and pressure zone boundary issues and possible solutions. Refer to Figure 4.1 for pressure zone delineation and Figure 4.2 for the Existing Water Supply System. Population projections and population allocation were provided by the Region. These residential and ICI demands were reviewed in detail in Technical Memorandum #1 (included in Appendix A). Residential per capita consumption of 225 L/cap/day was recommended through review of historical information available from Regional records and as noted in Section 3 of this report. This is a testimony to the excellent demand management strategy undertaken by the Region since the last Water Distribution Master Plan. In the 1992 WDMP these values ranged from 211 Lpcd (Kitchener) to 234 Lpcd (low density residential).



Figure 4.1 - Pressure Zones17

17 Figure4.1 from page #2 of Technical Memorandum #4

Figure 4.1

Existing



Figure 4.2 - Existing Water Supply System18

18 Figure 4.2 from page #2 of Technical Memorandum #2



Tables 4.1 and 4.2 summarize the existing supply capacity at each zone and details each pumping station and direct input well supply.

Table 4.1 - Water Supply Information19

PUMPS DIRECT WELL SUPPLY TO SYSTEM Total

Capacity Total

Capacity ZONE Existi

RMOW Tri-city Water Distribution Master Plan

Documents

Transcript of RMOW Tri-city Water Distribution Master Plan