Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />il <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />!I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. U1i Kappus, P.E. <br />Colorado Water Resources and <br />Power Development Authority <br />Page Two <br /> <br />The plan could be developed in stages. A financial analysis was <br />performed on an initial stage which includes one storage reservoir <br />and the ten recreation components. The total capital cost of Stage 1 <br />would be approximately $32 million based on the Tomichi Creek <br />Reservoir, The analysis showed that the total annual cost associated <br />with Stage 1 would be about $1.25 mill ion. The annual income from <br />the project is estimated to be about $140,000 but the project would <br />result in significant economic benefits to the Study Area through <br />increased tourism (estimated to be about $4.45 million. Construction <br />of Stage 1 will also result in year-round increased streamf10ws which <br />would result in fish and wildlife benefits. Although the recommended <br />plan is not financially feasible based solely on direct project <br />income, its benefit-cost ratio is attractive when all project <br />benefits are included. Therefore, several methods of generating <br />income in addition to direct project income were investigated as a <br />means of meeting annual project costs. These methods included the <br />following: formation of a special recreation district with taxing <br />powers; use of authori zed, but as yet unappropri ated Aspina 11 Unit <br />mitigation funds; and the lease or sale of land adjacent to and in <br />the vi c i ni ty of the proposed reservoi rs. It was conc1 uded that, if <br />implemented, these methods could provide sufficient income to repay <br />the annual debt service of the recommended plan. <br /> <br />The study also evaluated potential pumped-storage hYdroelectric and <br />transmountain diversion projects which, when combined with the <br />preferred in-basin development plan, would result in a more <br />comprehens i ve project. Thi s was evaluated because it was thought <br />that a more comprehensive development plan might be more financially <br />attractive than an in-basin plan by itself provided that benefits and <br />costs could be equitably shared between the project participants. <br /> <br />The study effort showed that numerous potential pumped-storage <br />hydroelectric sites exist in the study area and that several of these <br />sites appear to be economically attractive. These projects may <br />adversely affect existing reservoirs that are included in the <br />project and future studies, if conducted, should evaluate these <br />potential impacts, <br /> <br />Transmountain diversion projects that would divert water from the <br />headwaters of the Taylor Ri ver and from 81 ue Mesa Reservoi r were <br />investigated. There are significant institutional and environmental <br />considerations involved with potential out-of-basin diversions, <br />These may include: perfecting water rights, changing existing water <br />rights or exchange agreements, changing operations of existing <br />facilities, and a wide array of environmental issues. There may also <br />be other potential constraints identified if the study proceeds into <br />a more detailed phase. For purposes of analysis, preliminary <br />evaluations were made of alternative export plans which might yield <br />