5.3.1    Atascosa County Water Supply Plan

Table 5.3.1-1 lists each water user group in Atascosa County and their corresponding surplus or shortage in years 2030 and 2050.  For each water user group with a projected shortage, or need, a water supply plan has been developed and is presented in the following subsections.

Table 5.3.1-1.
Atascosa County Surplus/Shortage

Water User Group

Surplus/Shortage1

Comment

2030
(acft/yr)

2050
(acft/yr)

City of Charlotte

958

900

Projected surplus

City of Jourdanton

1,069

933

Projected surplus

City of Lytle

-514

-628

Projected shortage – see plan below

City of Pleasanton

450

1

Projected surplus

City of Poteet

529

379

Projected surplus

Rural Area Residential and Commercial

764

-10

Projected shortage (2050) – see plan below

Industrial

0

0

No projected demand

Steam-Electric Power

1,496

-8,504

Projected shortage (2040 and 2050) – see plan below

Mining

-995

-1,239

Projected shortage (2030 through 2050) – see plan below

Irrigation

-43,726

-40,713

Projected shortage – see plan below

Livestock

0

0

No projected surplus/shortage

1  From Table 4-1, Section 4.1 – Water Needs Projections by Water User Group.

5.3.1.1     City of Charlotte

The City of Charlotte is projected to have adequate water supplies available from the Carrizo Aquifer to meet the city’s projected demand during the planning period.

Working within the planning criteria established by the SCTRWPG and the TWDB, it is recommended that the City of Charlotte implement the following water supply plan
(Table 5.3.1-2).

            ·        Municipal demand reduction (conservation) to be implemented in 2000.  This project can provide an additional 30 acft/yr beginning in year 2000, decreasing to 24 acft/yr of supply in 2050 (See Section 6, Supplement 2 and Volume III, Section 1.1).

Table 5.3.1-2.
Recommended Water Supply Plan for the City of Charlotte

 

2000 (acft/yr)

2010 (acft/yr)

2020 (acft/yr)

2030
(acft/yr)

2040
(acft/yr)

2050
 (acft/yr)

Projected Need (Shortage)

0

0

0

0

0

0

Recommended Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun)

30

32

34

22

23

24

Total New Supply

30

32

34

22

23

24

 

The costs of the recommended plan for the City of Charlotte are shown in Table 5.3.1-3.

Table 5.3.1-3.
Recommended Plan Costs by Decade for the City of Charlotte

Plan Element

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Cost ($/yr)

$7,845

$7,758

$7,720

$2,284

$2,062

$2,023

Unit Cost ($/acft)

$261

$242

$227

$104

$90

$84

 

5.3.1.2     City of Jourdanton

The City of Jourdanton is projected to have adequate water supplies available from the Carrizo Aquifer to meet the city’s projected demand during the planning period.

Working within the planning criteria established by the SCTRWPG and the TWDB, it is recommended that the City of Jourdanton implement the following water supply plan (Table 5.3.1-4).

            ·        Municipal demand reduction (conservation) to be implemented in 2000.  This project can provide an additional 63 acft/yr beginning in year 2000, decreasing to 52 acft/yr of supply in 2050 (See Section 6, Supplement 2 and Volume III, Section 1.1).

Table 5.3.1-4.
Recommended Water Supply Plan for the City of Jourdanton

 

2000 (acft/yr)

2010 (acft/yr)

2020 (acft/yr)

2030
(acft/yr)

2040
(acft/yr)

2050
 (acft/yr)

Projected Need (Shortage)

0

0

0

0

0

0

Recommended Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun)

63

68

72

45

48

52

Total New Supply

63

68

72

45

48

52

The costs of the recommended plan for the City of Jourdanton are shown in
Table 5.3.1-5.

Table 5.3.1-5.
Recommended Plan Costs by Decade for the City of Jourdanton

Plan Element

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Cost ($/yr)

$16,474

$16,485

$16,348

$4,672

$4,303

$4,384

Unit Cost ($/acft)

$261

$242

$227

$104

$90

$84

 

5.3.1.3     City of Lytle

The City of Lytle’s current water supply is obtained from the Edwards Aquifer.  The City of Lytle is projected to need additional water supplies beginning in the year 2000.  The following options were considered to meet the city’s projected need:

            ·        Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun.)

            ·        Edwards Irrigation Transfers (L-15)

            ·        Carrizo Aquifer – Local Supply (SCTN-2a)

Working within the planning criteria established by the SCTRWPG and the TWDB, it is recommended that the City of Lytle implement the following water supply plan to meet the projected need for the city (Table 5.3.1-6).

            ·        Municipal demand reduction (conservation) to be implemented in 2000.  This project can provide an additional 41 acft/yr beginning in year 2000, increasing to 55 acft/yr of supply in 2050 (See Section 6, Supplement 2 and Volume III, Section 1.1).

            ·        Edwards Irrigation Transfers (L-15) to be implemented in 2000.  This project can provide an additional 500 acft/yr from 2000 to 2030 and 700 acft/yr in 2040 and 2050.

Table 5.3.1-6.
Recommended Water Supply Plan for the City of Lytle

 

2000 (acft/yr)

2010 (acft/yr)

2020 (acft/yr)

2030
(acft/yr)

2040
(acft/yr)

2050
 (acft/yr)

Projected Need (Shortage)

376

414

447

514

569

628

Recommended Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

Demand Reduction (Conservation) (L-10 Mun)

41

44

47

28

53

55

Edwards Irrigation Transfers (L-15)

500

500

500

500

700

700

Total New Supply

541

544

547

528

753

755

The costs of the recommended plan to meet the City of Lytle’s projected need are shown in Table 5.3.1-7.

Table 5.3.1-7.
Recommended Plan Costs by Decade for the City of Lytle