PROJ00252

• Contract/PO #: C150028
• Contractor Name: Colorado Division of Wildlife
• Contract Type: Grant
• Water District: 0
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

II
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

A set of six evaluation factors was used to analyze the alternative sites: water sources;
water quality, including temperature; site physical factors; biological considerations;
location factors; and probable cost, The evaluation factors were weighted with the highest
weights assigned to water source, water quality, and site physical conditions, A site could
receive a fatal flaw rating if site conditions were determined to be not acceptable,
The purpose of the evaluation was to screen the 16 sites to the three highest -ranking sites
for which feasibility-level recovery facility designs could be developed later. The results
of the evaluations are shown in the matrix in Table 2-1 on the following page, All three of
the highest-ranking sites in the evaluation were located in the San Luis Valley,

The reconnaissance study also included several conceptual designs and cost estimates for
various levels of production and sources of water supply for both a total recovery facility
and for a core facility. Estimated costs at that time ranged from about $10 million to $44
million for the type offacility envisioned in the report,

Evaluation of Additional Sites

The San Luis Valley became a priority location in the site selection process due to the
availability of geothermal water from wells, which provide an unpolluted source of
disease-free warm water. San Luis Valley locations also provide sufficient lands, wetland
areas for discharge, and water rights available for acquisition.

In 1994 and 1995, two additional sites in the San Luis Valley, Mountain View and Chiles
Farms, were evaluated as possible facility locations, The two sites were evaluated using
the same methodology and evaluation factors used in the 1993 reconnaissance study, The
results of those evaluations are given in Table 2-2 and show that the two sites ranked
somewhat below the top three sites in the 1993 report but still have a fairly high
evaluation rating.

1996 Conceptual Desil!:n Report

Upon further evaluation and discussions with landowners, the three highest-ranking sites
in the San Luis Valley and the Mountain View site were eliminated from consideration.
In the spring of 1996, the CDOW began a closer evaluation of the Chiles Farms property,
which is located about two miles west of Alamosa in the San Luis Valley,

In mid-1996, CDOW retained the firm ofFish Pro, Inc. of Port Orchard, Washington to
conduct a conceptual design analysis and develop a preliminary cost estimate for a Native
Aquatic Species Restoration Facility at the Chiles Farms site. The 1996 report provided a
preliminary design and cost estimate for the facility, The estimated cost, at that time, was
about $3.5 million for the first phase of proposed a two-phase facility.

2-2