Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br /> <br />short-term deficit planning. Arvada has planned its water supply to be adequate for <br />the 100 year drought. Drought induced measures would be required if and when a <br />more severe drought were to occur. These drought measures will be developed <br />when and if the supply and demand analysis indicates Arvada is vulnerable. <br /> <br />Water Conservation Program <br /> <br />Arvada is in the process of implementing the water conservation measures as set forth in Table <br />1, Water Conservation Measures, which are based on a Denver Metropolitan area-wide <br />conservation program developed by the proponents of the Two Forks Dam and Reservoir project <br />and endorsed by the Governor. This Metro program was based on implementation of a full- <br />range of conservation measures. The levels of voluntary customer participation are realistic and <br />flexibility exists for more rapid movement in the areas yielding the greatest water demand <br />reduction. The promotional, educational, and other measures require voluntary participation of <br />water users to achieve the projected water savings. Arvada will make a good faith effort to meet <br />the established time frames, levels of effort and compliance reporting proposed therein. <br /> <br />Arvada chose to begin expanding its conservation program beginning in 1988 in lieu of waiting <br />until a permit for Two Forks was issued because of the uncertainty of that project and the benefit <br />Arvada stands to derive from water conservation. Further, by early implementation, Arvada <br />will have more time to evaluate the reliability of water demand reduction. The projected <br />demand reduction from specific measures are based on water customer participation rates <br />anticipated to be achievable on a voluntary basis. <br /> <br />Projected Water Savings <br /> <br />The projected reduction in water demand for Arvada from implementing the water conservation <br />measures in Table 1 amounts to 2,410 acre-feet per year at City buildout according the <br />Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Table 2 summarizes the projected demand reductions for each <br />conservation measure. It was assumed that ultra-low-volume (ULV) toilets that use 1.6 or less <br />gallons per flush would be accepted and required in all new construction in Arvada. The water <br />savings from ULV toilets is significantly more thim the amount from all other measures <br />. - - combined. The detailed -calculations- fonheptojecfed waler oemliIfd -reaucfion -iifAiVida- from <br />implementation of the proposed water conservation measures are shown in Table 2. Table 2 also <br />shows that 1,719 acre-feet of the total demand reduction of 2,400 acre-feet will be realized from <br />future growth (new customers). The existing water custOmers in Arvada will account for only <br />28 percent of the total water savings. <br /> <br />The costs to the City for implementing the water conservation program are also presented in <br />Table 2 in 1989 dollars. The estimated cost to achieve water demand reduction through <br />conservation is about $1,500 per acre-foot. At this cost, it is readily apparent that the cost of <br />water obtained through conservation costs less per acre-foot than new water from any <br />foreseeable water supply project. By way of comparison, the 1990 market price for Farmers <br />Highline Canal water rights is $7,666 per acre-foot. <br /> <br />-5- <br />