Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />the economic analysis, page 13 it is stated that the analysis "omits any <br /> <br />evaluation of losses or costs arising from inundation of prqductive reser- <br /> <br />voir lands, although construction cost estimates do include amounts for <br /> <br />aquisition of rights-of-way", We understand that the annual gross produc- <br /> <br />tion of lands that would be submerged in the Narrows project is approximately <br /> <br />$3,000,000. Since it appears that the gross production of the Weld County <br />reservoir lands is considerably less, it is our opinion that evaluation of <br /> <br />the losses or costs arising from inundation of these lands should be in- <br /> <br />cluded in any comparison as this might have a great effect on the project <br /> <br />benefits. <br />d. Location of Weld County Damsite <br /> <br />Mr. Osborne of the Water Development Committee has investigated <br /> <br />the possibility of locating the Weld County Dam about l.4 miles downstream <br /> <br />from the site selected by the USBR engineers. It appears that such a <br /> <br />location would have the advantage of reducing the reservoir right-of-way <br /> <br />costs since less valuable lands would be inundated. Construction costs <br /> <br />for the dam, spillway and outlets would probably be about the same as for <br /> <br />the USBR Weld County site, We suggest that this lower site should receive <br />further consideration. <br /> <br />Conclusions <br /> <br />Our review of site selection criteria for the Narrows and Weld <br /> <br />County Projects indicates that additional studies are probably required to <br /> <br />fully evaluate the benefits and costs of each project. <br /> <br />The USER benefit-cost studies indicate that both projects are <br /> <br />feasible but that the Narrows project has a more favorable benefit-cost ratio. <br /> <br /> <br />-6- <br />