My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SR0084717_SSNL
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
285
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
SR0084717_SSNL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2022 12:18:44 PM
Creation date
1/13/2022 9:53:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
FileName_PostFix
SSNL
RECORD_ID
SR0084717
PE
2602
FACILITY_NAME
285 S AUSTIN RD
STREET_NUMBER
285
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
22802048
ENTERED_DATE
1/12/2022 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
285 S AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\tsok
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1028
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
california Water Today 109 <br />local and regional public and private entities manage over 150 hydroelectric <br />facilities. In some areas, local resource conservation districts are charged with <br />overseeing ecosystem-related land and water management. <br />This institutional diversity creates the potential for innovation and flexible <br />responses to management challenges, but it can also limit the scope for effec- <br />tive coordination (Bish 1982). Coordination can be particularly important— <br />indeed necessary—when water management involves multiple functions, or <br />when the scope of management is geographically defined. For instance, water <br />and wastewater utilities need to collaborate to effectively manage recycled <br />wastewater programs, and significant problems can occur if land use authori- <br />ties do not coordinate with water suppliers, wastewater utilities, and flood <br />management agencies when making zoning and land-use-permitting deci- <br />sions. Coordination at the level of groundwater basins is required to limit <br />problems of groundwater overdraft, and broader watershed coordination can <br />create benefits that cut across institutional lines (e.g., recharging aquifers with <br />stormwater to augment water supply and limit polluted runoff from enter- <br />ing local streams). Coordination also can enable local entities to realize scale <br />economies in some activities. <br />Some of California’s local water management entities already benefit from <br />structures that facilitate coordination. For instance, a few agencies manage <br />both water supply and floods, and about 40 percent of water utilities also treat <br />wastewater.38 About 70 percent of large urban water utilities belong to wholesale <br />networks, the largest of which—the Metropolitan Water District of Southern <br />California—indirectly serves roughly 18 million of the state’s residents.39 <br />Utilities that jointly manage water and wastewater and members of wholesale <br />networks produced significantly better urban water management plans than <br />utilities not benefitting from this integration (Hanak 2009a). The physical link- <br />ages and institutional arrangements within wholesale networks also can sig- <br />nificantly improve the capacity to respond to supply shortfalls. Many Southern <br />California utilities are also linked through their membership in adjudicated <br />basins, supervised by court-appointed water masters who oversee water supply <br />and use; such adjudications facilitate the trading of supplies.40 <br />38. Estimates on the share of joint water and wastewater utilities are from Hanak (2005b). Examples of agencies that <br />provide both water supply and flood control functions include the Yuba County Water Agency and the Santa Clara <br />Valley Water District. <br />39. Estimate on the share of retail utilities within wholesale networks is from Hanak (2005b). <br />40. For instance, sales of water between members of the Mojave Basin and several other Southern California adjudicated <br />basins are common (Water Strategist, various issues).
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.