Laserfiche WebLink
<br />h~'" , <br />~ i ",-,'.} <br /> <br />Plan of Development <br /> <br />There was considerable dissatisfaction by some valley residents <br />with the rights-of-way costs within the two reservoir sites as <br />originally computed by the Bureau of Reclamation. The Colorado Water <br />Conservation Board then employed the firm of Justin H. Haynes and <br />Company to estimate the value of land to be ac~uired in fee, flood <br />easements, and severance damages at each of the two reservoir sites. <br />A documented report from that firm was rendered to the Board under <br />date of May 1, 1964. The report estimated the costs of ac~uisition <br />at the Narrows site at $5,787,000, and the Weld County site at <br />$3,750,000. This compared to the Bureau's estimated costs of <br />$4,238,000 at the Narrows site and $3,544,000 at the Weld County site. <br />Those costs do not include allowances for contingencies, engineering, <br />and overhead. Final estimates include such allowances and increased <br />the costs by about 50 percent. The report of the appraisal consultants <br />was used by the Bureau of Reclamation in its reanalysis. <br /> <br />'t. <br /> <br />Under date of September 1, 1964, Region 7, Bureau of Reclamation, <br />transmitted its final cost estimates on the two reservoir sites, along <br />with supporting data, to the Colorado Water Conservation Board. At <br />the same time, the consultants, Woodward-Clyde-Sherard and Associates, <br />who had been following the course of the Bureau estimates, submitted <br />their report on comparative cost estimates. <br /> <br />A summary comparison of the cost estimates is as follows: <br /> <br />Bureau of <br />Reclamation <br /> <br />Woodward-C1;yde- <br />Sherard & Associates <br /> <br />Difference <br /> <br />$69,854,000 <br />46,208,000 <br />$23,646,000 <br /> <br />$58,109,000 <br />46,290,000 <br />$11,819,000 <br /> <br />Weld County <br />Narrows <br /> <br />The prinCipal difference between the two estimates is that the <br />consul tants recommended a structure at the Weld County site utilizing <br />a much thinner core of impervious material than the designs prepared <br />by the Bureau of Reclamation. The Chief Engineer's office of the <br />Bureau of Reclamation stated that there would be no compromise with <br />safety; therefore, if a dam were built at the Weld County site by the <br />Bureau of Reclamation it would be built according to the specifica- <br />tions prepared by the Chief Engineer. The cost would then be <br />essentially as estimated. <br /> <br />In a memorandum to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, on <br />September 4, 1964, the Director of the Board concluded and recommended <br />as follows: <br /> <br />30 <br />