Laserfiche WebLink
<br />POPULATION PROJECTIONS <br /> <br />Su~ry of Comments <br /> <br /> <br />The selection of population projection Series 1 for use in devel- <br /> <br />oplng water demand forecasts was the subject of a great deal of com- <br /> <br />ment. Those who felt that Series 1 projections are too low based their <br /> <br /> <br />oplnions on the following points: <br /> <br />The COE has repeatedly revised the Task <br /> <br /> <br />analysis, and each revision reflects arbitrary and <br /> <br /> <br />to lower future water demand. <br /> <br />2 demand forecast <br />caprlcious efforts <br /> <br />In achieving convergence of the Denver growth ra te wl th the <br />national growth rate, the Denver growth rate actually becomes lower <br />than that of the Nation. <br /> <br />It is inaccurate to assume that the quallty of life in the <br /> <br />Denver metropolitan area will deteriorate. Such an assumption would <br /> <br />ignore continuing benefits of the region such as climate, recreational <br /> <br />opportunities, energy availability, cultural opportunities, educational <br /> <br /> <br />services, and health and public service levels. Other large <br /> <br /> <br />metropolitan areas in the United States continue to grow despite <br /> <br /> <br />serious problems which Denver does not have. <br /> <br />The Series 1 assumption that there will be zero net migration <br />in the year 2035 implies that there will be only 1,800 new jobs created <br />in the Denver area frrnn the yesr 2000 through 2020 and no new jobs from <br />the year 2020 to 2030. This incorrectly portrsys the Denver area as <br />stagnant. The Denver metropolitsn area has not experienced a capture <br />rate anywhere close to that assumed under Series 1 in recent history. <br /> <br />10 <br />