Laserfiche WebLink
<br />II" <br /> <br />4) No data, information, or analysis have been provided as evidence that the water right <br />application flows are the minimum flows necessary for a reasonable recreation <br />experience. The design criteria do not pro vi die this information. The structure design <br />analysis does not provide this information. The REP Report has not responded to the <br />critical question of what the minimum flow for a reasonable recreation experience should <br />be in the Durango Boating Park. <br /> <br />5) CRS ~37-92-103(1O.3) requires the RICD to be "placed to beneficial use between <br />specific points". The RICD water rights in the Durango application are for specific <br />structures or points, not between structures. Therefore, the application does not meet this <br />technical requirement. <br /> <br />The REP Report does not provide the technical evaluations and analysis to meet the requirements <br />ofCRS ~37-92-103(10.3), nor has this information been provided by the City of Durango in any <br />other report; therefore, the RICD water right application should be denied. <br /> <br />Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this analysis. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Steven C Harris <br />Colorado Professional Engineer, #14,303 <br />