FLOOD01223 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

David Walker May 5, 1982 Page Two as to how this metro demand might be satisfied and what sources of supply may, be, used to meet this demand. We would also like to point out some of the apparent errors in the document. One such error is the inclusion of Reservoir No. 22 in Table 5 on page 32. Reservoir No. 22 and Gross Reser- voir are one and the same. Reservoir 22 should be deleted and the capacity of Gross Reservoir corrected to 41,811 acre feet. The present capacities for the other Denver Water Department Reservoirs listed in Table 5 are as follows: Antero 15,878 Acre Feet (presently useable) Eleven Mile 97,779 " " Cheesman 79,064 " " Marston 17,213 " " Ralston 11,272 " " Some of Denver's reservoirs are decreed for storage greater than their present capacities. In particular, the enlargement of Gross Reservoir would increase the capacity from the present 41,811 acre feet to 113,078 acre feet. The en}4hgement of Gross is one of the alternative future projects, in adtl'!tion to those mentioned in Table 21 on page 99, of the report. In conclusion, we would like to comment on the scope of this study as it relates to the water supply needs of metro Denver. We do understand the desire for habitat maintenance in the Upper Platte River region; however, we question the concern for the Upper South Platte Basin with respect to the habitat maintenance needs of the central Nebraska portion of the Platte River as described in this report, It appears to us that use of waters of the South Platte River 'in Colorado will be dictated by the South Platte River compact and the Constitution and laws of Colorado relating to ap- propriation and use of water, and that all efforts should be exerted by Colorado officials to maintain that position. Thank you for the opportunity to review the report. We look forward to seeing the final product. Sincerely, ar1l9ll~ W. H. Miller Manager WHM:cjw