|
<br />.. 'oriZH8
<br />
<br />EXECUTlVE SUMMARY
<br />
<br />~'~:~,-::W::;;.:::::-;~;:::,>>.:.;::::::<::::::<;:,.<,~::-:~::;.;.;~,::;;::::~,,::,:.:.~;.<:",:::~~;.::::.<,,:::":<:-::,;;::;-::;:g:::..-::-);;:::,"l'::~~'::::;';:~,"".:;.~;;;,'-;;,,-;;,,::::-:<;~,":,;:::,;:;:':";:;:,<<,.;.<;-.'<';>.'.~.','(;.:Z"'~;~':<:"1~:".:".'.,Z":~:";::;~-:::'::;;';:;:::":::=:::::;%:::-:<:,:,::":w.::::;;;:::z":"~;:;:::=:::;::;lS':"::::;::,:..;:<~,~:;;,::
<br />
<br />The estimated cost of Alternative C is $4,200,000 which equates to a unit cost (cost per AF of water)
<br />of approximately $4,600/ AF.
<br />
<br />Environmental Consequences of Alternative C
<br />
<br />The environmental consequences of Alternative C are the same as Alternative B with the following
<br />excepuons:
<br />
<br />. 8.80 acres of wetlands would be impacted
<br />
<br />. Mt. Werner and the City would have to develop additional water supplies to meet
<br />projected long-term water demands
<br />
<br />. The additional water supply would not be of the same water quality as the water
<br />from Fish Creek
<br />
<br />. The total financial obligations for reservoir expansion ($4,200,000) would be less
<br />than under Alternative B
<br />
<br />. The COSt of construction per AF of water would be $4,600
<br />
<br />· Potential impacts to the socioeconomic climate of the community could result if
<br />the lack of water resources restricts growth
<br />
<br />. A long-term fisheries pool may not be possible
<br />
<br />· Future in-stream flow augmentation may be reduced, or not possible, during cenaln
<br />times of the year
<br />
<br />A further examination of impacts is presented in Section 2.5 Comparison of Alternatives Analyzed
<br />in Detall and in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences.
<br />
<br />The following three alternatives are available to the City and Mt. Werner. They are not available
<br />to the Forest Service because the Forest Service does not have the authority to require conservation
<br />or expansion of the infiltration galleries. However, as previously explained, under the National
<br />Environmental Policy Act, agencies must include:
<br />
<br />.... reasonable alten/il.tives not within the jurisdiction of the lead agency (40 CFR
<br />1502. 14(c). .
<br />
<br />If the Forest Service selects the No Action Alternative, the City and Mt Werner would have to
<br />evaluate other water supply alternatives including conservation, expansion of the infiltration galleries,
<br />or a combination of these alternatives. Additionally, some modifications to the reservoir could be
<br />required of the City by the Forest Service under the existing Special Use Permit to address public
<br />safety and environmental concerns. Water Conservation and Infiltration Gallery Expansion were
<br />discussed in the Draft EIS. The Combination Alternative (which includes Water conservation,
<br />infiltration gallery expansion, and Fish Creek Reservoir modernization) has been developed to
<br />address the comments of the Environmental Protection Agency (EP A), the U.S. Army Corps of
<br />Engineers (COE), and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), on the Draft EIS. This
<br />
<br />'l'h:'~~Z-::~"::;,""',~'::::::;:-::' :."." ~,,:~:::,~::::~:'';:;: ::~;..;.::;.:<:..:..;:.::g ,;;,~:;..; ;. :.,:.,,:<::';~~X;'::< : :-x,,::.,,;;;.::. :.:~,~: ;::',~~:;<,: .~:<< ;.;.: :<~;,~;:. :.:,:.~:<::.; ,,:;<:.,: .,:.,: ,~;'::~~.;.: :<::';>::w.;:~.":~~' ";':'. mX-~:. :~.~ ::;:;~;,z.,:,:, :~::~; ,~,\ ;,:~'l'.. ,;:-, ;:-,"''i'..>~..,~-;:;,;.:-:::..,~:~:;:>:;,:.:,,:.~:.z
<br />
<br />September 1993
<br />
<br />Pase 5.9
<br />
|