PROJ00060

• Contract/PO #: C153721
• Contractor Name: Lyons, Town of
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 5
• County: Boulder
• Bill Number: SB 96-153
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I

Alternatives

In the process of reviewing the conditions, alternative actions were considered. Three
alternative actions are available. They are: no action (delay), alternative supply point with
new pipeline and reconstruction at the existing site.

I. No action, do nothing until complete failure. The advantages of delay is initial cost
savings, avoidance of site disturbance and no interruption of current operations.
Disadvantages of delay are: lack of reliability of continued service, increasing risk of water
treatment violations, inability of the Town to control critical operations if unexpected failure
occurs and probable higher future costs due to failure. In the face of increasing risk of
violation of drinking water standards due to high turbidity or outright loss of water supply due
to failure of the diversion system, delay of action to improve the diversion of raw water does
not seem prudent. Failure will eventually occur. If attended to now, site disturbance and
temporary interruption of raw water intake can be planned and controlled.

2. Delivery of raw water by new pipeline. At least two possible route for a pipeline have been
discussed. One is an established pipeline from a point of connection to Longmont's Button
Rock Reservoir supply line, routed down through the North 5t. Vrain Creek canyon and
emerging upstream of the present Lyons' diversion site. The pipeline, now in disrepair and
reportedly unusable, was placed on this route in about 1972. Another possibility is a new,
longer pipeline route from Longmont's supply line directly to the treatment plant. Either of
these has several advantages: efficiency due to l11inimal river losses, increased water quality to
the WTP through most of the year, and probable increased reliability in extreme weather
conditions. Disadvantages, however, are numeroUS. First, cost of either of these pipelines
exceeds $2.0 million. For the canyon route, cOl11plete replacement would be required since it
is reportedly 6 inches diameter (too small) and in poor condition. Visual impacts and
construction impacts of the canyon route may trigger an enviroumental assessment. The other
route crosses federal land uphill from the WTP. This, also, will require impact assessment to
acquire right of way permits on federal property. Another potential disadvantage is that a
pipeline will reduce water in the creek, impacting fisheries, wildlife, water-based recreation
activities. Expensive legal proceedings are also required to change the point of diversion of
Lyons' water rights, if and when a joint pipeline operating agreement can be obtained with the
City of Longman!.

3. Reconstruct the facilities at the existing site. Advantages to this alternative are several:
reliability of water supply operations is increased considerably, the long-term cost is probably
lower than either of the other options, water qU;l.lity to the WTP will be improved, instream
flows can be controlled and monitored (with the addition of a stream gage to the proposed
project), Disadvantages are considered minor: temporary outages for raw water deliveries, the
burden of initial capital cost, disruption of the stream bed during construction.