C150069 Benefits & Potential Roles Report

Home Browse Search

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . somewhat slowly initially, despite the idea's rapid takeoff in other localities in the Rocky Mountain region. It was only toward the end of the decade that interest really intensified, frequently lead by subdivision developers seeking ways to counter the rising cost of raw water turnover requirements to municipalities and rural domestic water districts for potable water supplies. In addition, although perhaps not crucial to this growing interest, a workshop was organized by the principal investigator of this study on secondary water systems, including the invitation of several enterprises, such as the Kennewick Irrigation District (Kennewick, Washington), the Davis and Weber Counties Canal Company (Sunset, Utah) and several of the Colorado West Slope irrigation companies that were in the process of seeing more urban growth and looking for ways to accommodate this growth through secondary water supply development.4 What has emerged in Colorado today, principally through the inspiration and energy of land developers and civil and irrigation engineers, is a plethora of secondary system designs. Even local municipalities have entered the picture, in the Denver Metro Area, Boulder, and in Larimer and Weld counties. The City of Greeley now has a well-developed secondary supply system, albeit mainly for parks and open space landscapes (Le., not residences), by way of converting a traditional irrigation company canal to serve these needs. This particular instance, although highly successful, does not necessarily represent the strategy being discussed in this report, and involving the participation of irrigation companies or districts that are still predominately agricultural in nature. However, the City of Greeley program is quite viable because the city itself is managing the secondary system. What has transpired since the entry of the City of Greeley, and the City of Windsor, Colorado, into secondary water supply suggests some equity and sustainability concerns for future water users in the area. Current Trends Before discussing these equity and sustainability issues, we should point out that most municipalities and rural domestic potable water suppliers have been reluctant to enter into the provision of secondary service. Why? There are perhaps new administrative cost and legal issues that municipalities and rural domestics do not want to shoulder. Although, in the event of a lawsuit over accidental drinking of pressurized secondary water by a homeowner or pet, municipalities would seemingly have governmental immunity, this might not be the case for rural domestic water suppliers. Furthermore, rural domestics are often governed by bylaws, and entering into secondary supply might require major changes in these bylaws. However, the main reason appears to be that both municipalities and rural domestic water suppliers are already hard-pressed to secure water supplies for their potable systems. The provision of secondary water simply places an additional burden on these entities, and since the provision of water service of any kind is often a volatile public issue, it is therefore not an attractive prospect. This fact begins to narrow down the candidates for operating and maintaining secondary systems. This list of candidates includes homeowners' associations, special districts, private water companies and traditional agricultural water suppliers. Taking northeast Colorado as a useful case study area, it appears that homeowners' associations initially became popular among housing subdivision developers as the decade of the 1990s came to an end. This area experienced a 25 percent growth rate during the decade, and much of the growth occurred in unincorporated areas. For instance, Larimer and Weld counties, and to some extent, Boulder County, saw a rapid increase in large acreage housing subdivisions outside city boundaries. These often included the development of a localized secondary system for these large lots, fed by an excavated pond or pumped directly from an open farm ditch. Land developers were aware that the property values of these lots could be enhanced by the presence of secondary water service, particularly if water was needed to maintain recreational livestock. It was a relatively simple engineering task to develop a sound system. The long- term issue of maintaining the secondary system was largely left in the hands of a subdivision 19