|
<br />Feasibility Report for Improvement of Paonia's Water Supply System
<br />Town of Paonia
<br />April 21, 2000
<br />
<br />7. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
<br />
<br />7.1 Formulation of Alternatives
<br />
<br />The comparisons of firm yield and projected future water demands were reviewed with
<br />representatives of the Town, the CWCB, GEl, WestWater, BBC, and the local water
<br />commissioner during the first study progress meeting on November 16, 1999, Several structural
<br />solutions were discussed as potential alternatives for meeting future d~mands: yvI
<br />'0:. ' \5 J
<br />1. Enhancing existing raw water storage; "'1." ,.r;f' :r,,;',~,) . ?,
<br />2. Constructmg ne~ raw water storage;;j;;,j. , . ";;if~~fffP' ,Jet
<br />3, Constructmg additIonal underground st?~a. ge tanks, ,"\':" ~ I . ..'lti.::".'.:::'.' ....... &ii. ". $F
<br />4, Upgradmg eXIstmg plpehnes; and ~s.: .1." \ v. r <'.-.\'i~'::\:'i&:'1';Y\lf"
<br />5, Enhancing existing treated water storag~;1;,;,.,,;1j,i~ {l/"" I,. ;.)~!i;""
<br />~,";,",;~~)~~{;:':,'}~\~~:
<br />During the meeting, everyone agreed that because of the firrnng'orthe water demands versus the
<br />peak production months of the springs (Figures 6.1, ~:2, aIld'~~i!)ith~obvious solution to the
<br />Town's water supply challenge is to provide additionalraw water't~s~~ir storage, Upgrading
<br />pipelines or enhancing springs may increase the yield of'the system duTIrig peak flow periods of
<br />the springs, but unless this water can be sto.J:t:,d for lati:i\l~e"these alternatives will not help the
<br />Town during the late spring and summer ll).dnlhs whdi"\%;ief;.IeI)}llllds exceed the capacity of the
<br />, . .~' ~~~~~y
<br />Town s spnngs. :l\'. . -"Nyii':.'(J'
<br />_"1~,-j r'':. '
<br />/);?i;! ~~'.<
<br />Several citizens suggested that the.J~est solutiqn may be to.J:)ui1d more underground storage tanks
<br />for raw water storage, The estiw.,&'ted defiSjt betweertgle year 2030 Scenario B demands (255
<br />million gallons) and the TO\vn'~fcurrent fipnyield(203 million gallons) is 52 million gallons,
<br />This concep('~ould reql1iffcohstructing.;~2 additional I-million-gallon storage tanks or 26
<br />addition.l.l:,~,;rriilli~p-gali('j~~~o~~#;tllIlks ag6~~ the service area, This option was considered to
<br />be impractical due to. cost and aesthetic reasons,
<br />, :$~~;'~f{2.:~,}~~~, ' . ,'~&t~.:,;: '"r
<br />Non-structural Alt~iri;aI~es. ~i!i~it. .
<br />
<br />]B)':~'> ;:-,'" - ;""~~l?i':i@,~~" \(;. ..- .
<br />The following non-stnictuta.1 concepts were also discussed during the November 16 progress
<br />meeting: ,:;,,-'7!: "
<br />".- ~
<br />
<br />
<br />1.
<br />2.
<br />3,
<br />43';: .
<br />
<br />i'
<br />Additio.nill water conservation;
<br />Ren((gohate the tap agreement with the AReO;
<br />Fix'systems leaks; and
<br />'. Purchase other storage rights,
<br />
<br />. J:\PROJECTS\9936Ir\Repons\FeasmiliIY.wpd
<br />
<br />7-1
<br />
<br />m GEl Consultants, 1ne,
<br />
|