My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02121
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:12:18 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:11:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/24/2000
Description
CF Section - Peoples Ditch Company
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />Peoples Ditch Co. <br />July 24-25, 2000 <br /> <br />Agenda Item 128. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />set annual assessments to be paid by the shareholders, the power to cut off water deliveries to .a <br />shareholders that fail to pay their assessments, and the power to offer stock for sale to pay .. <br />back assessments. <br /> <br />Water Riahts <br />The water rights diverted at the PDC headgate consist of direct flow rights in amount of 16 cfs, <br />adjudicated in 1885. Annual diversions averaged about 1200 acre-feet per year prior to 1997, <br />according to records of the State Engineer's Office. <br /> <br />Proiect Description <br />Four alternatives were analyzed in the feasibility study: <br /> <br />1. The no-action alternative. <br />2. Restore the ditch and diversion to its pre-flood condition. <br />3. Abandon the Peoples Ditch, and drill wells instead. <br />4. Install a pipeline to deliver water from the Bravo Ditch to the Peoples Ditch. <br /> <br />Alternative 2, Restore the ditch and diversion to its pre-flood condition, was ruled out because it <br />was considered a temporary solution that would be washed out during the next major flood. <br />Alternative 3, Abandon the Peoples Ditch, and drill wells instead, would be inexpensive for the <br />Company, but expensive for the individual shareholders that would pay for new wells. It would <br />also mean the end to diversions at times when there was no call on the river. For these reasons <br />Alternative 4 was selected, since it is considered to have the least overall cost, and to be a <br />reliable approach. The no-action alternative waS considered unacceptable since it means the _ <br />PDC could not deliver water to its shareholders. .. <br /> <br />Selected Alternative 4 involves construction of a new 24 inch pipeline, 1,040 feet in length and <br />having a capacity of 20 CFS. The pipeline will have an inlet structure and Parshall flume on the <br />Bravo Ditch, and an oullet structure on the Peoples Ditch. Water for the Peoples Ditch will be <br />diverted at the Bravo diversion on the South PI<iltte River, flow down the Bravo for <br />approximately 1 mile, and then to the Peoples Ditch through the new pipeline. The PDC has a <br />written agreement to use the Bravo Ditch for deliveries, at an annual cost of $1080. The project <br />would conform to NRCS standards and specifications 430-DD, and would require the PDC to <br />obtain a change in the point of diversion for their ditch. <br /> <br />The implementation schedule calls for completion of financing arrangements and final <br />engineering design in summer 2000. Construction is scheduled to be completed in fall 2000. <br /> <br />Financial Analvsis <br />The total estimated cost of the project is $ 75,000, and the water is used by the shareholders <br />for agricultural purposes. Staff is recommending a 20-year loan from the Small Project Account <br />in maximum amount of $43,000 (about 57%of the estimated cost.) <br /> <br />Alternative financing sources: The Company actively sought alternative financing. They were <br />able to obtain a grant from the NRCS to cover project planning and design ($5,000 estimated <br />value), and a grant for just under $27,000 from the USDA-NRCS EQIP program for <br />construction. The PDC also requested a loan from their bank (Bank of Colorado, Sterling), but <br />were turned down because the bank does not provide long-term fixed rate financing, and .a <br />because of the lack of marketable collateral. .. <br /> <br />z <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.