Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS <br />Three studies have been made to identifY alternate water supplies in the region. The first was <br />made by Nelson Haley Patterson & Quirk in 1967. The second was made by Nelson Haley <br />Patterson and Quirk in 1969. The third was made by Morton Bittinger and Associates in <br />1973. <br /> <br />1. The 1967 report by Nelson Haley and Quirk covered the Lost Creek Drainage <br />Basin. It dealt only with capacity of the basin and not with quality considerations. It <br />was dwing the perfonnance of this study that it was fOlmd that the Hay Gulch basin <br />was separate from the Lost Creek basin. <br /> <br />2. The 1967 study by Nelson Haley Patterson and Quirk examined the whole region <br />including Wildcat Creek, Beaver Creek, San Arroyo Creek, Badger Creek, local <br />bedrock formations and importation from Carter, or Rattlesnake reservoirs. Wildcat <br />Creek was determined to be too small to be worthy of development Local bedrock <br />formations were detennined to be unacceptable. The other SOIU"CeS have been <br />developed to their potential, except for importation from Carter Lake. <br /> <br />3. The Bittinger 1973 report provided a further review of the Hay Gulch basin, along <br />with study of the Lost Creek basin, and the previously not reviewed Camp Creek <br />basin. Bittinger concluded that the quality of the Camp Creek water was not <br />acceptable and the longevity of lhe water quality in the Lost Creek basin was <br />questionable. The work on Hay Gulch resulted in lhe selection of that source by lhe <br />District. <br /> <br />Review of all studies leads to lhe conclusion that all possible sources that could be utilized as a <br />backup for lhe present District supplies have either been developed or excluded from <br />consideration for valid reasons. <br /> <br />ESTIMATED COST <br />The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has estimated the total cost oflhe <br />remaining portion oflhe pipeline to be $16,000,000. The cost wiD be divided between Fort <br />Morgan and lhe District in proportion to lhe capacity reserved in lhe line for each entity. The <br />capacities for lhe District and lhe City are 1.5 and 9.5 cubic feet per second respectively. The <br />estimated cost for lhe District is, Therefore, $2,180,000. <br /> <br />17 <br />