Zephyrhills hears consultants'''update on water permit, options and risks to future growth

Consultants briefed the City of Zephyrhills on Nov. 17 about the status of its water-use permit and the options the city can pursue to meet projected demand through 2040. Mike Clark of Jones Edmunds and Associates and Michelle Hayes of Liquid Solutions told the council the city's 2020 permit initially authorized roughly 3.3 million gallons per day and that a later modification increased the authorization to 4.49 million gallons per day to support projected growth.

The consultants emphasized a central condition: the district set a compliance limit of 87 gallons per day per capita and requires the city to continue returning flows to rapid infiltration basins (RIBS) as part of the permit. "The permit authorizes 4.49 MGD," Clark said, "and it keeps the compliance per capita rate of 87 gallons per day and also requires continued return flows to the RIBS." That compliance metric, consultants warned, will be part of the district's five-year status report review that begins in 2026.

Why it matters: the five-year reports act as a recurring "report card" the water management district uses to judge whether the city still needs its allocation. Clark told council members that if actual demand falls far short of projections, "you can expect questions from them" and the city could face difficulty retaining allocations if neighboring communities demonstrate greater need.

What the consultants recommended: they reviewed three categories of options. First, adding or reconfiguring groundwater wells (including an agricultural well already in the permit and a proposed YMCA well). Clark said modeling shows the ag well could yield roughly 1.1 MGD at its current location and that moving the withdrawal a few miles north could, by model estimates, add about 600,000 gpd, though he cautioned, "that's just from a modeling standpoint, nothing's ever guaranteed." Second, converting reclaimed water to potable supply and maximizing reuse was presented as a potential augmentation but would require infrastructure and district approvals tied to the RIBS offsets. Third, buying or interconnecting with neighboring systems (Pasco County, Tampa Bay Water or Dade City) is technically feasible but costly and complex; Clark noted differences in chemical treatment mean imported water would need re-treatment before entering the Zephyrhills system.

Council and public questions focused on the reliability and cost of options. For rough budgeting, Clark offered planning figures: transmission mains can run on the order of $1 million per mile depending on route and complexity, and remote well development can reach into the multi-million-dollar range because of piping, pumping and power needs. When asked if existing wells in the Hillsborough River basin remain usable, consultants said the city is "grandfathered" on the wells covered by the current impact analysis and could typically retain what it has unless impacts are detected.

On policy timing, staff told the public the development moratorium tied to water availability remains in place until council acts or until its stated end (cited in discussion as June 25/26); staff said council could revisit the moratorium at the next meeting. Local landowners and developers attending the workshop pressed for clarity on whether the moratorium could be lifted sooner.

Next steps: consultants will identify and return with the most viable, costed options for council consideration. They stressed conservation and reclaimed-water strategies will remain part of any long-term approach and that accurate demand data and coordinated planning between utilities and growth-management staff are essential to defend allocations in the five-year reviews.

The city will receive a written report and subsequent staff recommendations to bring back to council for policy direction and potential contract decisions.