The Dec 16 Daily Brief noted The Signal’s reporting on Valencia Water’s then-forthcoming plan to categorize customers on a scale from “Wasteful” to “Super Efficient.” The program is modeled after similar implementations by other water utilities, including Irvine Water District in the City of Irvine.
2010 marks the rollout of categorization; 2011 will bring tiered rates.
The categorization is under the banner “Water SMART Allocation Program”, so named because an algorithm will determine each customer’s water “allocation”:
The Valencia Water Company Water SMART program is a fair and equitable method of providing residents an amount of water calculated to efficiently meet their specific needs. This system is based on extensive national research and local studies.
Calculations take into account lot size, amount of landscaping for each property, and daily weather readings to give each house an individualized allocation. Allocations are divided to show indoor and outdoor amounts. Indoor amounts will generally remain constant, but outdoor amounts will fluctuate depending upon actual weather conditions.
The categories are as follows (based on percentage of assigned allocation):
- Super Efficient: 0-40%
- Efficient: 41-100%
- Inefficient: 101-150%
- Excessive: 151-200%
- Wasteful: 201% +
There is at least one obvious flaw with VWC’s system: individuals with smaller homes are penalized. How does VWC know how many people are in a home? I’m admittedly taking an educated guess, but I’d bet it’s based on home size. My neighbors have a smaller home but one more person in their home. Their allocation will certainly be smaller, but all things being equal, usage will be higher.
On the whole, though, I like the concept and motives of the approach. Water has been called “liquid gold” for good reason, and the ridiculousness of our water infrastructure combined with long term drought conditions makes for interesting debate about policy and circumstance.
So… is it as “fair and equitable” as VWC touts? I’ll offer my household circumstances as a guide.
Customer Profile
We moved to new construction in the West Hills development in Valencia and, having spent a number of years in Irvine, are quite familiar with tiered water rates. Our 2009-built stucco box has the latest in tract home efficiency, including:
- Weathermatic “Smartline” weather-based irrigation timer
- High Efficiency Clothes Washer (front loading-style)
- Aerators installed on all faucets
- Sterling High Efficiency toilets with 2 flush modes (1.6 gpf + 0.8 gpf)
Variable Toilet Flush. "Press the Left Side When You..." (oh nevermind)
Smartline Irrigation Timer. But is it VWC SMART?
Weather station for the sprinkler timer
We deliberately installed native California landscaping and plenty of ‘crete to cut down on maintenance, though I couldn’t convince my OC-bred wife to give up the bona fide Marathon fescue (and the cost honestly didn’t pencil out) – there are patches front and back. There is no pool nor spa, and the home has a traditional (though new) water heater.
Front Patch o' Fescue
Rear Patch o' Fescue
We have 2 small kids, no pets, and the home is just shy of 2500 square feet on a 5000-ish square foot lot. I’d say that’s square in the Valencia Water Company demographic.
Habits
- daily showers
- wash one car per week
- average two loads of laundry per day
- one dishwasher run per day
- typical ‘faucet off while brushing teeth’ and similar conscientious behaviors
- use mostly RO drinking water from home
- check the water meter at the sidewalk for leaks (bi-monthly)
With the exception of our grass, I’m proud of our consumption and habits. You can imagine my reaction when I received the first VWC bill with the “SMART Allocation” system.
SMART Category
I was shocked-SHOCKED-to read that VWC marked our recent month’s activity as “Inefficient.” We had guests over for a portion of that time, so that may have contributed. But aside from tuning the irrigation timer a bit (let’s just say the grass is not the greenest in the ‘hood), I’m not sure what else I’d change.
Including irrigation, we’re using about 100 gallons per person per day. The feds say 80-100 gallons per person per day is average, but that’s excluding irrigation — which is 35% of the December SMART allocation for our household; that would put our indoor usage below the national average.
That being said, the majority of our usage has been below the allocation (with the exception of June, when our landscape was first installed). And it nailed us dead-on for October and November. I would be surprised if VWC will allow its customers to ‘rollover’ unused allocations in a future period.
Now What?
Compare your situation and habits to ours. If a household with no obvious low hanging conservation fruit is considered essentially average, the SMART allocation methodology might surprise or even infuriate some VWC-served households. Perhaps homes such as ours — with fancy toilets, mostly-native landscaping, and front loading washing machines — is where the bar is set. Maybe military showers plus other drastic measures are what will be required to move the needle. Or perhaps the NickelDime household will be ponying up the coin for some fake grass after all. Now to convince the better half….
Loading ...
Wow. Interesting. Even with all that conservation tech ( I really like the two button toilet) you still get tagged as inefficient.
This scares me.
Conflict of Interest? Monopoly? Something?
The water companies are all looking to force conservation as they define it down folks throats, all the while assuring us that they have plenty of water for new developements. The City does not help matters either as their current code requirements and those under OVOV don’t even require drought tolerant landscaping but just “prefer” it. As a Santa Clarita WAter customer, I will see my water rates rise almost 90 percent in a ten year period. Much of this is due to CLWA’s expensive capital projects required to build the facilities necessary to accommodate more growth. Why do we need more water treatment facilities? To accomodate new users. The costs of these facilities are passed right through to the retailers by CLWA. Santa Clarita Water and Newhall Water customers bear the same costs, even though the bulk of these facilities are being built to support new Valencia Water customers.
There is a huge cost to current users that will continue until new houses are built to help share these costs.
If you build it, they must come!
I do question how they arrive at one’s allocation figure, but it would appear that your notion that smaller homes are allocated less water is incorrect. We live in a 1500 sq. ft. townhome and our indoor allocation is the same as yours. There are only 3 of us, one of whom is a teenager who takes very long showers and another a husband who loves to let the water run while he does dishes. And our washing machine is not a water efficient front loader. Our total usage for the same period was 11 CCF or 249 gallons per day — half of our total “allocation.”
Our outdoor allocation is 13 CCF to cover our assigned landscape area of 3,278 sq.ft. That means we are allowed a more generous 2.966 gallons per sq. ft. per month than your allowance of 2.5 gallons. But we are in a much older development, so perhaps newer developments are expected to be more efficient.
My guess is that your company may be to blame this month. Also, your lawn, though small, is a water hog. I’d put in something more drought tolerant in the backyard particularly. Consider drip irrigation for trees and shrubbery.
Agreed that current users are subsidizing new development, despite the fact that this expressly violates current County General Plan policy.
But board members are inthe business of maximizing revenue and growth, fed by huge contirubutions by the buildging and RE industry in (and outside) this valley.
Clean Money practices would help, but the GOBN is fighting that hard.
Newhall Ranch should be 100% recycled for landscaping, but they are only doing it for public places. Same old water hungry grass irrigated with drinnking water for each resident. 1950s thinking for new development!
ND, I understand your kids’ desire for grass on which to kick a ball. But once they are past the age of ball kicking, you may want to consider removing grass from the backyard and putting something in that uses less water. As for the front yard, it’s pretty ridiculous for an HOA to require grass in front yards given our water shortage. But rules in HOA governed developments are often ridiculous. We certainly have our share.
As to the accuracy of our assigned landscape area, I couldn’t begin to know how accurate it is. We have a private patio area, which we water ourselves, but the rest of the development has extensive green belts and lots of trees which are maintained by a landscape service for the HOA. What the total square footage of all that is and how they divide it amongst owners for water allocation purposes is a mystery to me.
Rather than asking your neighbors for copies of their water bills, you may wish to consider calling the water company and asking them directly how they arrived at your “landscape area” figure and on what basis water allocations are made with regard to older and newer developments.
“But once they are past the age of ball kicking…”
Past the age? Were you born an adult?
ReaderMama, I agree that it’s pretty ridiculous that HOAs require front lawns. We’re all supposed to conserve water, yet there’s a fine if you plant anything other than shortly-cut, turf-type grass in the front yard. The minimum amount of irrigation water required for a lawn in our region is about 56″ (http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8044.pdf — SCV is Sunset Garden Zone 18). It seems like such a waste of resources when many people never use their lawn. That same amount of water could do something useful, like grow rice or other “thirsty” crops.
ND, you may be on to something with regard to your allocation amount or you may not. At this point there are no tiers, so you are simply paying for what you use, as are we — directly to VWC & indirectly to the HOA through our dues. Once tiers go into effect, our HOA usage will be billed according to a tier system as well, no doubt.
If you feel you have more than 1496 sq. feet of outdoor space to water, you should certainly take that up with the water company before they begin charging in tiers.
As to grass, I understand the desirability of having a lawn for recreation purposes, but your front lawn does not look as though it would offer much in the way of recreation. Although if you had a dog, it might make for a good spot to pee! Of course the HOA wants things to look nice to help maintain property values, but that doesn’t have to involve big green lawns — real or artificial. One nice thing about living in Valencia has been the plethora of parks within walking distance and the popularity of cul de sacs, which allow children to play in the street more safely.
With regard to toilets and washers, I agree that water efficiency is desirable, although low flush toilets don’t always “get the job done” in one flush
and front loading machines are expensive.
As to your contention that there should be no difference in allocations for newer vs. older homes, I think an argument can be made both ways. Folks in newer developments often have to pay Mello Roos fees to cover the costs of streets, sewer systems, fire & police protection, etc. New developments place a burden on the community in many ways, especially when it comes to supplying water in a desert state like California. Perhaps it is fair that those who are placing that increased burden should pay extra. Of course it’s easy for me to say that, living in an older area!
That said, I think everyone should do their best to avoid waste and conserve water. Have you thought about giving up your weekly car wash in favor of patronizing a facility that recycles the water? The water that you use to wash your car at home goes directly into storm drains whereas commercial car washes are required to treat and recycle the water they use.
Duh, isn’t this just another way to penalize apartment dwellers who are less likely to vote than homeowners who would have larger homes and are more likely to vote? This is a politicized system of water management.
ND, I am simply exchanging information with you because you posted an article complaining about your allocation and making public your water habits. If you didn’t want anyone to post responses, ideas and offer their own figures, you should have made that clear.
I’m glad high efficiency toilets get the job done in your home. We have had low flush toilets for years and Mr. RM has found it necessary to keep a toilet plunger handy. Perhaps the engineering on your toilets is superior or maybe you don’t eat as much fiber as Mr. RM.
I would love to have one of those pretty new fangled washing machines, but I guarantee you that buying one of those would cost more than allowing your patch of grass to die and planting drought tolerant ground cover — if you do the work yourself.
You are correct that washing a car weekly is expensive; I don’t wash my car weekly. It is parked in our garage, not outside, and it may get washed once every 3 months or so. And the water usage/cost is not the main issue with me; sending 50 gallons of polluted water into the storm drain is.
As to my teenager and the showers, let’s talk again in about 7 years. Right now it may be a fight for you to get them to bathe. Soon enough it will be a fight to get them out of the bathroom.
I was surprised at the amount of laundry in your household, 2 loads a day seems excessive. What cut down on ours was when we put the laundry away instead of asking the kids to do it. When they did it, it ended up on the floor and then back in the hamper without being worn.
If someone, like yourself, has a generous allocation, they likely won’t change behaviors and are on an artificial moral high ground because they’re tagged as “efficient”.
Oh, there’s nothing artificial about it. I am morally superior!
But seriously, how can the indoor allocation system be truly fair unless it is based on how many people live in a household? There are 2 bedroom condos in Newhall that house multiple families and large single family homes that house only one or two people. Who would be responsible for checking up on the number of people in a household? Can you imagine the paperwork? I am afraid there will be many inequities.
Outdoor square footage is a much fairer method for basing outdoor allocation, provided it is accurately measured and applied. On the other hand, older neighborhoods with mature trees and lush landscaping may have preferred treatment in that regard. That naturally benefits the morally superior.
Now do your boys wear a fresh pair of pajamas every day?
Our 7 year old home has toilets that are low (not ultra low) water usage, and they just fail. Plunger is never far away, and it takes 2 full flushes most of the time.
Kids, dogs, sports… 2 loads of laundry a day seems normal to me.
The answer is reclaimed water for irrigation. Drinking water is too precious. Heck, even our drinking water is not good enough with the chloride hysteria for the avocado growers downstream.
Blaming the end user for using the systems developers built to specs of water companies is insulting and self-serving.
And our local politicians sit silently…
My 1.6 doesn’t get the job done. Clogs unless I flush once before the last of the paperwork.
Maybe we need a lower-tech answer?:
http://www.onrustig.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/scenic_outhouse.jpg
Retrofitting recycled (not grey-) water systems is expensive. But Newhall Ranch is building from flat bare ground– already trenching, so adding “purple pipe” is almost cost-free. We must press them to adopt this. They already are building a plant at the west end– plumb for it up front while it is cheap!
If the City really wants a “sphere of influence” then they should ACT like it and push for this! And of course the County should. But there’s too much developer/CLWA/conflict of interest money in the City elections to allwo this…
Conservation can help but won’t solve our water woes. As long as bureaucrats continue down this path of attempting to solve the water crisis through conservation-only methods, none of us, no matter how water wise we are, will be able to measure up to the increasingly draconian water rules.
spineflower, thanks for the “back up” on the toilet issue! I have talked to others who have the same issue with low flush toilets.
And of course you’ve hit the nail on the head about the developer/water conflict of interest issue. And yet our citizens generally take no interest in local elections until it hits them in the wallet.
ND, you have my word that I will not “sniff” you should we cross paths at TJ’s!
Buy a Toto toilet. They get the job done.
ND, I’m curious as to how many days/week you watered in December, and for how long on each station.
I work with Burbank Water and Power, and we’ve implemented tiered rates for single family homes as of July 1, 2009. We don’t brand anyone with any categories, and we don’t specify how much water anyone should use, its a standard tier structure across the board.
Regardless, there was some moaning and groaning from people about their lawns initially, but we’ve done a good job at educating our customers on the proper technique for a good lawn, even in times of water shortage.
I’d venture a guess you might be overwatering the lawn… but thats just a guess.
Grass doesn’t have to look ugly, nor does it have to go away… it just has to be managed well.
What is the optimum cutting height for fescue? Too low, and the soil dries out from lack of shading and insulation. Too tall and transpiration/evaporation through the blades increases.
Also, I tried to establish deep roots by watering infrequently but deeply. When I put in the sod, I put in GOBS of compost and rototilled in down 8-10 inches.
But in the end, if I don’t water every day, it dries out. Too much water at once to go deep, and it runs off. I have tried two lighter waterings, an hour apart to let it soak in, and that seems the best I can do. But it’s stille very day. If we put “odd/even” watering limits in place it would just die.
Spineflower-
No matter how much it pains you, you MUST get out of the habit of daily waterings. Grass will not develop a proper root system with them.
In the winter, Tall Fescue should be about 2″ tall, and summertime extend to 3″, and should be watered to a depth of 3-4″. If its running off before it gets that deep, then water in intervals.
Fescue is a bad choice in grass for us in the SCV due to the demand for water in the summer. It needs a LOT of water. Sure it looks GREAT… but damn it needs a LOT of work.
Honestly, Bermuda grass or Zoysia De Anza is a good choice. Fescue just takes too much damn work. (But its GREAT if you’re on the coast!!!!)