Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CWCB Water Conservation Planning Grant Application <br /> <br />City of Rifle <br /> <br /> Table 5. Estimated Historical and Projected Future <br /> City of Rifle PODulation Data <br /> Population Growth Rate <br /> Year Population (ca. )1,2,3,4,5 (%) <br /> 2000 6,784 5% <br /> 2001 7,0362 5% <br /> 2002 7,2892 5% <br /> 2003 7,5413 4% <br /> 2004 7,7603 3% <br /> 2005 8,0383 4% <br /> 2006 8,6704 8% <br /> 2007 9,1655 6% <br /> 2008 9,6885 6% <br /> 2009 10,2415 6% <br /> 2010 10,8255 6% <br /> 2011 11,4435 6% <br />l. 2000 population value taken from Census Bureau, 2000 Census data <br />2. 2001-2002 population estimated based on assumed linear growth during 2000 to 2003 <br />3. 2003-2005 population data Source: Department of Local Affairs, Colorado State <br /> Demography Office, Population Estimation for Municipalities <br />4. 2006 population value based on municipal housing permit applications applied after 2005 <br />5. 2007-2011 population projected based on average annual population growth rate of5.7% <br /> observed in 2005-2006 <br /> <br />c. Estimated Water Savings Goals <br />A key objective of the 9-Step planning process to be used by the City in <br />developing its Plan, is to target a level of water conservation that, to some <br />degree, pays for itself through avoided infrastructure and operational costs. The <br />City ultimately will use this cost-benefit approach to identify a bc.::st-fit water <br />savings goal. The recent Water Master Plan, which did not consider potential <br />water conservation savings, indicates that the City faces about $40M (in 2006 <br />dollars) in water system infrastructure upgrade and expansion costs over the next <br />20 years. This does not include the bulk of distribution system expansion costs <br />that will be directly borne by developers, nor does it account for all replacement <br />costs for existing water system infrastructure. Therefore, there is a very real <br />driver for meaningful water conservation in Rifle. <br /> <br />Because the City will be in very early stages of water conservation, and because <br />some of the initial water conservation measures will likely focus on improved <br />tracking and understanding of water use, quantifying a water savings goal at this <br />time is challenging. However, being in these beginning stages also means there <br />may be significant "low-hanging fruit" water savings-wise. At this point in the <br />planning process, one of the lower-hanging fruits appears to be outdoor water <br />use, including that of raw irrigation water for City parks. Potable water <br />production figures indicate that the City has a moderately high maximum day to <br />average annual day demand peaking factor about 2.6. Optimization at the surface <br />water plants to reduce process waste also has not been a major priority. <br />Improving in these two areas alone could reasonably be expected to result in <br />reducing required per capita raw water diversions by approximately 10%. <br />Additional measures and programs to reduce distribution losses, improve water <br />use efficiency among large users, and reduce indoor water use might result in a <br /> <br />SGM # 99055A-387 <br /> <br />2-5 <br /> <br />Section 2.0 - Required Grant Application Info. <br />