PUB00029 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. v. Water System Analysis . Future Supply Options . The current Denver Water system, while having more than sufficient capacity to reliably provide high-quality service to current customers, will require additions and upgrading to supply the projected service area build-out demand many years from now. . During the IRP, the analysis of options to add additional water to the Denver system proceeded in several steps: l. defining supply option possibilities; 2. screening options; 3. categorizing remaining options; and 4. selecting and analyzing representative options from each category. To help ensure that no potentially viable supply alternative was inadvertently omitted from IRP consideration, the analytical process began by defIning a reasonably inclusive list. Select staff from all Denver Water divisions were convened in brainstorming sessions to develop a list based on the staff s knowledge of projects and proposals studied and discussed over the years. . . The list included an extensive assortment of supply options from the Metropolitan Water Supply Environmental Impact Statement of the early 1980s. These were supplemented by input from numerous stakeholder groups, including the Citizens Advisory Committee, an Eastern Slope stakeholder group, a Western Slope stakeholder group, and various individuals knowledgeable in water supply throughout Colorado. A list of more than 200 possibilities was identified; it included different types of structural and non- structural alternatives without regard to cost, technical feasibility, or other potential limitations. Particular care was taken to see that all possible adjustments to, and efficiencies in, Denver's water system were included as well. . . . The options were then subjected to a "fatal flaw" screening. A fatal flaw in a given project could include site limitations, insufficient gross water yield, inability to deliver water where needed, extremely negative outside perception, unacceptable environmental effects, or insurmountable institutional obstacles. The first screening resulted in 44 options being rejected. Another 34 were e){pected to require cooperative effort between Denver Water and one or more metropolitan area water suppliers outside Denver's service area. Since the Governor's Metropolitan Water Supply Investigation was concurrently examining potential cooperative action projects between Denver and entities outside its service area, it was determined to leave such projects to that process. . The remaining 154 options were retained for further study and fell into five functional categories: effluent reuse, south system storage, north system storage, new stream diversions, and miscellaneous or "system refinements." By using a functional approach, . 33