WSPC03808 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

than 1,500 people during the study period. Eleven have be~n identified as small, growing suppliers indicating that, while they will experience some growth, they are expected to serve no more than 1,500 people. The remaining 30 suppliers are classified as small, fully developed; for these agencies, what little growth does occur will require no new facilities, The distribution agencies, those which do not operat~ supply or treatment facilities, have been grouped and discussed with the supplier from which they receive treated water. Of the 67 supply agencies, 17 are municipal systems, 18 special districts, 3 mutual companies 13 water associations, and 16 are other private operation~, such as resorts or mohile home parks. All 17 municipal agencies are classified as major suppliers, as are six special districts, two mutual companies and one association. Population Population projections for the primary area are summa- rized in Table 1. The total population presently served is 1,518,000. Of this total, approximately 59% is served by Denver, 7% by Aurora, 6% by Boulder, 5% each by Thornton and Arvada and 3% by Westminster. By 2010, the total population is projected to be 3,598,000. At that time, these proportions are expected t,o be 51 %, 11%, 7%, 5% each and 6% respectively. Water Demand Each agenc.y was asked to supply historic cunsumption data as part of the study questionnaire. Where this data was unavailable, estimates of current water consumption were made by comparing areas of similar configuration. From this data and from all analysis of the economic base and type of growth expected in each area, per capita consumption projections were derived for each study year. From these projections and from the population forecasts, the yearly supply requirements were determined for each agency. These are also summ<lrized in Table 1. From the table, it may be seen that the present raw water requirement in the primary area is 376,000 acre-feet per year and is expected to increase to 944,000 ac-ft/yr by the end of the study period. Raw Water Supply The raw water supply available to the primary area has been analyzed 011 both an "average year" and a "dry year," or safe annual yield basis, With a dry year base, the total of supplies currently available to the area is 430,000 acre-feet per year and 562,000 acre-feet in an average year. Compared with the demands of Table 1, this indicates that present supplies arc adequate through the late 1970's. Most agencies in the primary area have sufficient resources for their current needs. A few, however, such as Westminster, Thornton, Broomfield, Golden, Lafayette, Louisville Erie and Frederick would be unable to meet current dema~ds in a dry year. Only Englewood among all of the major suppliers, due to a future of limited gl.owth, can be rated as having an adequat.e supply for the entire study period. The total of all planned projects reported by all agencies would yield approximately 280,000 acre-feet per year, bringing the total dry year yield to 710,000 acre-feet. This would satisfy demands until about 1996. Additional sources of 230,000 ac-ft would need to be found beyond th<1t date to meet demands through 2010. Studies indicate that the main stem of the South Platte River, the Big Thompson and the Blue River include adequate storage for the economical development of the aV<1ilable supply. Tributaries of the South Platte, partic- ularly Clear Creek, and the Moffat, Homestake and future Blue River transmounb.in systems could yield increased supplies with additional storage such as the Bureau of Reclamation's proposed Two Forks reservoir, neal' the confluence of the Nurth and South Forks of the South Platte_ This project would allocate about two-thirds of the reservoir's capacity to the regulation of municipal and industrial supplies including posfiibJe exchange of trans- mountain return flows and also would allow for storm runoff storage_ Conversion of water from other uses, primarily agricul- tural, will continue to increase the domestic supply. Most supply agencies are actively pursuing acquisition of addi- tionnl water rights. Some agencies are accomplishing this through annexation policies which require the contribution of water righ ts for any annexa tion. Importation of transmountain water appears to offer Ow best poten,tial for the largest amount of additional supply. Included 111 the supply projections in this report is additional water from the present Moffat, Blue River and ~omestake sources and new supplies. These new supplies II1clude Denver's Eagle-Piney and East Gore-Straight Creek projects and the Six Cities~Windy Gap project. Other sources of additional supply, which have not d~veloped beyond the preliminary stages, but which might Yield needed water beyond 1998, include transmountain water from the Eagle-Colorado project, storage on the TABLE 2 COMPARISON OF METROPOLITAN SERVICE ALTERNATIVES Costs and Savings (January 1975, mi.llions of dollars) Capital Savings Capital Alternative Costs A Status Quo 2,691 B. Raw Water 2,649 C. Treated Water 2,634 D, Total Service 2,576 Alternative A. Status Quo B. Raw \Vater C. Treated Water D. Total Service Improved Water Quality x X X O&M Savings 42 57 115 148 Non-l\lonetary Benefits (available to some customers) Improved Water Availability Improved Water Service X XX XX X XX Page 2 - COGnotations - January 1975 0785