Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />event the district has to go out and actually purchase a water right <br />sufficiently senior to guarantee a sufficient supply. It would be <br />purchased from an agricultural user in the' area and working with the <br />Denver Water Department through an exchange, Denver would then supply <br />the district with water. .' . <br /> <br />MR. BROWNELL: This isn't right now, then? <br /> <br />MR. FISHER: No. <br /> <br />MR. BROWNELL: But you anticipate it later? <br /> <br />MR. FISHER: We have had to identify a number of varying -alternatives <br />for water rights, which are dependent upon a numb~r of different actions <br />that may come up. We have not finished talking with the Denver Water <br />Board as far as trying to work out some sort of arrangement with them. <br />The most feasible alternative at this point is going out and purchasing <br />a water right and exchanging it with Denver for a supply to the district. <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: I have two questions. One is that I note from your plan, <br />which I briefly read, that there are a number of owners:that have their <br />own water supply. In those cases where an 'owner may think his, supply <br />is adequate, will those particular people ,be required to hook on to <br />your system? <br /> <br />MR. BUCHHEISTER: I posed this question to our attorney, and the attorney <br />stated that possibly we would have some authority. However, it would <br />be the best move of the district to make it as financially feasible as <br />possible for these people to hook on to the system, in essence, hang a <br />carrot in front of them in terms of non-tap fee. <br /> <br />As those of you who read the report,recall, they have projected a tap <br />fee of twelve hundred dollars. If it's financially possible, the <br />district would like to be able to waive that. It is our plan to waive <br />that for the initial users. However, after the system in in effect <br />and these people want to hook on, it would be a quite high tap fee. We <br />would hope that we could prevail on these people to hook on to the <br />system when it's available to them. <br /> <br />We have discussed this with many users of the district, and the one <br />negative comment that we did recieve was that this particular user did <br />feel he had an adequate system and did not want to be forced into it. <br />We feel that we don't want to force anyone, but we would like to make <br />it as feasible as possible for them. <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: My other question is a technical question. I note in the <br />report that there is presently an upper distribution system which has <br />been built to adequate standards. Will that upper system be integrated <br />into what you're proposing? <br /> <br />MR. BUCHHEISTER: Yes, it would. The upper system as it~s~outlined in <br />the report is currently owned by Winter Park Recreation Association, <br />and we would have to work out some arrangement with the Winter Park Ski <br />area on that one. It would certainly be feasible for us to take over <br /> <br />-49- <br />