21.03.2014 Views

Coordinated Water System Plan - Kitsap County Government

Coordinated Water System Plan - Kitsap County Government

Coordinated Water System Plan - Kitsap County Government

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Kitsap</strong> <strong>County</strong> May 9, 2005<br />

<strong>Coordinated</strong> <strong>Water</strong> <strong>System</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />

Regional Supplement 2005 Revision<br />

7.4.1 Peaking Factor<br />

<strong>Water</strong> system data reported on the surveys were also used to<br />

calculate a peaking factor for water systems in <strong>Kitsap</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />

A peak day factor was calculated for eight water systems that<br />

reported total and maximum day water supply requirements.<br />

The peaking factor was calculated by dividing maximum day<br />

water supply requirements by the average day requirements.<br />

<strong>Water</strong> Use: On a<br />

per household<br />

basis, average<br />

daily water use is<br />

356 gpd inside the<br />

UGA and 237 gpd<br />

outside the UGA.<br />

Table 7-5 summarizes the peak day factors for eight water systems in years 1998, 1999,<br />

and 2000, and calculates the average peaking factor of 2.32.<br />

Table 7-5<br />

Peak Day Factors<br />

<strong>Water</strong> <strong>System</strong> 1998 1999 2000 3 Year Average<br />

Annapolis W.D. 2.27 2.41 2.51 2.40<br />

City of Bremerton 1.81 1.65 1.75 1.74<br />

Indianola 3.51 2.79 2.97 3.09<br />

Keyport 2.36 2.59 2.43 2.46<br />

North Peninsula 2.16 2.16 2.18 2.17<br />

North Perry W.D. 2.32 NA 2.40 2.36<br />

Silverdale W.D. 2.45 2.00 1.96 2.14<br />

Vinland 2.34 2.28 2.12 2.25<br />

Average 2.40 2.27 2.29 2.32<br />

NA - data is not available<br />

7.4.2 Per Capita and per Household <strong>Water</strong> Supply Requirement<br />

Projections<br />

The average water supply requirement factors discussed above were applied to the<br />

demographic forecasts in order to develop the water supply requirement projections. The<br />

per capita water supply requirement factors were multiplied by the forecast population to<br />

determine the per capita water supply requirements for 2000-2030. The per household<br />

water supply requirement factors were multiplied by the forecast number of households<br />

to arrive at the per household water supply requirements. Table 7-6 provides a<br />

comparison of the two countywide average day water supply requirement projections,<br />

indicating that the per-household approach yields a higher projection. For the purpose of<br />

this CWSP, the slightly higher projections associated with the per-household approach<br />

have been selected as the base projections used in the other analyses which consider<br />

conservation and additional industrial water supply requirements. Appendix E contains<br />

the detailed water supply requirement projections, organized by method and by subarea.<br />

Table 7-6<br />

Comparison of Per Capita and Per Household Projections (gpd)<br />

Year Per Capita Per Household Difference<br />

2000 26,219,937 26,454,856 234,919<br />

2010 30,314,789 31,696,036 1,381,247<br />

2020 35,098,307 37,738,518 2,640,211<br />

2030 39,229,463 42,559,305 3,329,842<br />

Section 7 - <strong>Water</strong> Supply Requirements 7-5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!