Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />Agenda Item 18 <br />January 20, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />the project. Since November, the Board staff has worked with Norwood and with the <br />consultant, WestWater Engineering of Grand Junction, to develop additional information and <br />analyses to present at the January Board meeting and to complete the feasibility study. <br /> <br />Alternatives <br /> <br />The project, as originally proposed, consisted of a pipeline of about five miles in length <br />from Gurley Reservoir to the Norwood water treatment plant. The original cost <br />estimate of $320,000 was in error due to a misunderstanding on the part of the <br />administrator for the applicant at that time. <br /> <br />The draft feasibility study submitted in October 1994 by WestWater Engineering, as <br />recently updated, describes a number of structural and non-structural alternatives for the <br />project including several potential reservoir sites. Three alternatives are analyzed in <br />detail; they are: (I) the pipeline from Gurley Reservoir to the Norwood water <br />treatment plant, (2) a new 30 million gallon raw water reservoir at the water treatment <br />plant site, and (3) a new diversion on the San Miguel River with a pumping plant and <br />pipeline to Norwood's existing 10 million gallon raw water reservoir. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The following table gives estimated' capital costs, annual costs, and costs per acre-foot <br />for the three alternatives. (Acre-foot costs were estimated by staff using an ultimate <br />winter demand of 118 acre-feet for each alternative.) The numbers in the table very <br />clearly indicate that both the pipeline and the new reservoir are significantly less <br />expensive than the San Miguel River diversion. <br /> <br /> Annual Capital Cost Annual Cost <br />Alternative Capital Cost Cost per Acre-Foot per Acre-Foot <br />Pipeline from Gurley Res. $881,000 $71;000 $7,466 $600 <br />30 MG Reservoir $1,019,000 $71,000 $8,636 - $600 <br />San Miguel Diversion $1,275,000 $89,000 $10,805 $750 <br /> <br />Selected Alternative <br /> <br />For decision-making purposes, the consultant developed an evaluation matrix which <br />uses both monetary and non-monetary factors to evaluate the three alternatives (copy <br />attached). The matrix, which uses all of the evaluation factors recommended in the <br />Construction Fund Guidelines, indicates that the 30 million gallon reservoir (actual a <br />constructed capacity of 32 million gallons) is the preferred alternative. _ <br />