Deferring Water Tower a Potential Gamble by County, Expert Says

Baltimore County could be gambling if it ignores industry standards for water storage by deferring a decision on constructing a water tower, a Johns Hopkins University professor said.

A 2-million gallon water tank was proposed to be built in the area until county executive Kevin Kamenetz decided to on Monday, after relentless .

The county's Department of Public Works previously said that, based on established industry standards, water storage was needed immediately in the Owings Mills, Reisterstown and Glyndon area.

“According to the recent 2010 census data, additional storage is needed in the Reisterstown service area now,” said a fact sheet distributed at a public meeting last week. The service area includes all of Reisterstown, Glyndon and a large portion of Owings Mills.

Officials said the tank was needed to keep up with water demand, ensure there was enough water for fire protection and emergency situations, to better distribute water throughout the system and ensure high water quality. Because of old pipes in the system, drinking water may benefit from re-chlorination, which would occur as needed in the new water tank, officials said.

According to the fact sheet, chlorination levels need to be at recommended standards, but only minimum standards have been maintained.

If standards actually indicated a present need for water storage and re-chlorination, Hopkins professor John Boland said the county is taking a calculated risk.

"There are standard formulas for calculating the storage necessary, and they don’t make those up, they’re industry wide," said Boland, a professor in the geography and environmental engineering department at Hopkins.

"There are industry standards, and that’s an interesting conclusion if they’re postponing it."

Kamenetz would not comment beyond a letter in which he said he is deferring the project because a community consensus seemed hard to reach. The need for the water and public safety issues informed his decision, a spokeswoman said.

“All of that was taken into consideration fully when the decision was made. So, beyond the county executive’s letter, we’re not going to comment further,” said county spokeswoman Ellen Kobler. “The judgment was that it was prudent to move forward at this time and defer the tower.”

But last week, Public Works director Ed Adams said that firefighters could potentially run out of water if there were two fires in the area on a day with high water usage.

A public works fact sheet also cited a 2010 incident in which a major water line break left 39,000 customers without water for three days. Public Works officials deferred comment to Kobler.

Boland, who spoke generally and not specifically about the case in Owings Mills, Reisterstown and Glyndon, said industry standards are calculated based on worst-case usage scenarios, such as if everyone in an area were watering lawns and there were multiple house fires on the same day.

On such a high usage day, the area could run out of water, he said.

"That doesn’t mean there’s going to be a major [issue] tomorrow," Boland said. "These standards are fairly conservative, as you’d want them to be. They’re developed to be sure water storage wouldn’t be an issue if a number of unfortunate things happen at the same time."

Though local residents were elated Monday that the tower would not be built in anyone's backyard, there was some question as to why a project deemed a public safety priority was being deferred.

"It was clear the engineering seemed to substantiate the need for the tower," resident Ayanna Chen said. "We’re not debating whether there was a need or not.

"That issue still is not resolved."