The Arizona Republic

Reality of retrofitti­ng water system

- Joanna Allhands Columnist Arizona Republic USA TODAY NETWORK Reach Allhands at joanna.allhands@arizonarep­ublic.com. On Twitter: @joannaallh­ands. If you love this content (or love to hate it – hey, no judging), why not subscribe to get more?

Phoenix’s plan to handle dwindling supplies of Colorado River water remains a fight.

Critics understand that the city needs to invest in new infrastruc­ture to keep taps flowing during shortages.

But the plan requires sacrifice — for some more than others — and that makes it a hard pill to swallow.

It’s an interestin­g case study, even if you don’t live in Phoenix. Because for decades, we’ve all been relatively insulated from sacrifice when it comes to water.

But that won’t always be the case. Other cities will have to grapple with Phoenix’s central problem — that it cannot continue to heavily rely on Colorado River water to meet existing demands — and that will come with tough choices.

Phoenix’s problem stems from the fact that it is heavily reliant on renewable supplies to meet its water demands. Normally, we’d say this is a good thing — that Phoenix, unlike many other Arizona cities, is in the fortunate position to use almost no groundwate­r.

Phoenix built its system so that the northern end of the city largely relies on Central Arizona Project water, which comes from the Colorado River, while the southern end is largely fed by Salt River Project and its Arizona watersheds.

Few pipes exist to carry water between the two.

But that’s a problem if the Colorado River goes into extreme shortage. There won’t be enough water to continue supplying the northern parts of the city, water officials say.

That’s why Phoenix is planning to drill wells, so it can use the water it has long stored undergroun­d, and install pipes, so it can move resources between systems as needed.

But this plan isn’t cheap, and that’s why the City Council initially balked at a rate increase. The city has long tried to minimize water costs for residents.

Again, normally, we’d say this is a good thing. Water bills here are lower than in many other major cities.

But that also can cause a sense of complacenc­y and make it more difficult to invest in big water conservati­on or augmentati­on projects – especially if cities want to construct them ahead of the curve.

Granted, Phoenix did eventually approve the rate increase, in part, to fund new connecting pipes and wells. But that also has come with controvers­y.

Because while people understand the need for infrastruc­ture, many of them say they weren’t properly informed about the city’s plans for their neighborho­od streets and the Dreamy Draw Recreation Area, where trails could be closed intermitte­ntly for years.

The city says it needs to install a 66inch-wide pipeline to connect its 24th Street water-treatment plant with areas further north, and that going around the preserve not only would be cost prohibitiv­e but also would end up impacting more homes.

Water officials note that regardless of where the new pipeline goes, the city will still need to work in the park to replace a 48-inch pipeline that predates the preserve.

The 66-inch pipeline would initially follow the 48-inch pipeline’s route north from the 24th Street water plant. But it was proposed to deviate through a residentia­l community near the preserve and what environmen­talists say is an especially sensitive section of the park.

As an alternativ­e, Phoenix is now working with the Arizona Department of Transporta­tion to place the larger pipeline in a special easement near Arizona

51 — which would avoid the most vocal residents and the most sensitive part of the preserve — but the deal isn’t finalized.

Either way, there’s a lesson here — and it’s one that other cities likely will face as Colorado River water dwindles. CAP and SRP also are considerin­g building a pipeline so water can flow both ways through their systems. The interconne­ct project is isolated from homes and still in conceptual stages, so the cost is uncertain.

But it would likely require funding from multiple cities for constructi­on. And that’s not counting the additional pipes, wells, water recycling plants and conservati­on programs cities may need to save and move water within their borders during shortages.

It’s tempting to not-in-my-backyard these projects, because constructi­on is a pain. Or to put off those that can’t be easily baked into existing water rates.

But we’re all going to have to retrofit our systems at some point. The sooner cities begin preparing residents for this new reality, the better.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States