PROJ01948 ‎(2)‎

• Contract/PO #: C150121
• Contractor Name: Little Thompson Water District
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 2
• County: Weld
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Service Area

,
I
CWCWD provides water to a 250-square mile area in Weld County. It currently
provides water for domestic, agricultural, commercial, industrial, and municipal
entities. CWCWtJ is generally bounded by Greeley on the north; the Tri-Cities
area of Dacono, iFirestone, and Frederick on the south; 1-25 on the west; and
I
Kersey and Hardin on the east. A service area map is shown on Figure 1.
I
CWCWD currently serves approximately 9500 taps and delivers approximately
1.5 billion gallo~s per year to its 40,000 customers. CWCWD maintains
supplemental and emergency connections with other water supply systems to
meet demands of its customers as necessary. The following entities are served
in whole or in part by CWCWD: the Town of Kersey, the Town of LaSalle, the
Town of Milliken (approximately 50% of Milliken's supply), the Town of Gilcrest,
the Town of Firestone, the Town of Frederick, the Town of Dacono, and the
I
Town of Plattevill;e. Of the 9500 taps, 1550 are in Firestone and 1932 are in
Frederick and both of these towns are classified as high income by the CWCB.
The remaining ta!ps are in areas classified as moderate income areas by the
CWCB.

Water Rights

Water used by qWCWD is Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) water delivered to
Carter Lake. CWCWD owns 4371 shares of C-BT water. A letter from the
Northern Coloradc;> Water Conservancy District (NCWCD) stating the water rights
owned by L TWO is in Appendix B.
I

PROJECT DESC~IPTION AND ALTERNATIVES

I
The purpose of the project is to provide raw water storage for the Carter Lake
Filter Plant in ord~r to augment limited supply, and to overcome interruptions in
supply from Carter Lake. Several alternatives were considered as outlined
below.
I
1. No action. ; <t \0, S-OO) 0 <? 0 ~~--
2. Construct Ffacilities for Dry Creek Reservoir ($8,873,086)
3. Construct Facilities for reservoir at an alternate location (greater than
I
$25,000,OqO).

Alternative 1

The no action alte:rnative does not meet the need for raw water storage for Carter
Lake Filter Plant. It leaves L TWO and CWCWD vulnerable to service
interruptions caus'ed by limited supply from Carter Lake. If supply is interrupted
from Carter Lake ifor an extended time, both water districts would be dependent
on availability of water from other entities to meet the needs of their customers.
Obtaining water from other entities could be extremely expensive. For 2003,
L TWD has budg:eted $500,000 for rental water to meet the needs of its.

I
,

I
Dry Creek Reservoir Feasibility Study

.5