WSP02303 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

than 1,500 people during the study period. Eleven have been identified as small, growing suppliers indicating that, while they will experience some growth, they are expected to sene 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 a.gencies, those which do not operate 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 operations, such as resorts or mobile home parks. All 17 municipal agencies are clauified 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, .~t that time, these proportions are expected to be 51%, 11%, 7%, 5% each and 6% respectively. Water Demand Each agency was asked to supply historic consumption da.ta as part of the study questionnaire. Where thi5 data was unavailable, estimates of cur'lent water consumption were made by comparing areas of similar configuration. From this data and from an anaJy.sis of the economic base and type oC growth expected in each area, per capita consumption projections were derived for each study year. From these projectioas and from the population forecasts, the yearly supply requirements were determined for each agency. These are also summariz;ed in Table 1. From the table, it mn.y be 5een 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. Ra w Water Supply The raw water supply avaJiable to the primary area has been analyzed on 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 ao average year. Compared with the demands of Table 1. tJlis indicates that present supplies are adequate through the late 1970's. Most agencies in the primary .]fea have sufficient resources for their current needs, A few, however, such as Westminster, Thornton, Broomfield, Gol.di!n, Lafayette, Louisville, Erie and Frederick would be unable to meet current demands in a dry year. Only Englewood among all of the major suppliers, due to a future of limited growth, can be rated as having an adequate 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. Thi~ would satisiy demands until about 1996. Additional sources of 230,000 ac-ft would need to be found beyond that date to meet demands through 2010. Studies indicate that the main stem of the South Platte Rivet, the Big Thompson and the Blue River include adequate storage for the economical development of the available supply. Tributaries of the South Platte, partie' ularly Clear Creek, and the Moiht, Homestake and iuture Blue River transmountain systems could yield increased supplies with additional storage such as the Bureau of Reclamation's proposed Two Forks reservoir, near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the South Platte. This project would allocate about two-thirds of the reservoir's capacity to the regulation oi municipal and indU8trial supplies including possible exchange of trans- mountain return t10ws and also would allow for storm runoff storalle. Conversion of water from other uses, primarily ag-rlcul- tural, will continue to increase the domestic supply. Most supply agencies are actively pursumg acquisition of addi- tional water rights. Some agencies are accomplishing this through annexation policies which require the contribution or water rights for any annexation. Importation of trans mountain water appeBl'3 to offer the best poten.tiaJ for the largest amount of additional supply. Included In the supply projections in this report is additional water from the present Moffat, Blue River and ,Homes take sources and new supplies. These new su pplies Include Denver's Eagle--Piney and East Gore.Stnight 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 tTansmountain water rrom the Eagle-Colorado project, storage on the TABLE 2 COMPARISON OF METROPOLITAN SERVICE ALTERNATIVES Costs and Savings (January 1975, millions of doUan) Capital Savings Alternative A. Stat\U Quo B. Raw Water C. Treated Water D. Total Senice Capital Costs 2,691 2,649 2,63~ 2,576 Alternative A. Status Quo B. Raw Water C. Treated VVater D. 1'otal Service Improved Water Quality x X X O&M Savings 42 57 115 148 Non.MoDetary Benefits (available to some c~tomers) Improved Water AvailabiHty Improved Water Service x x..X XX x XX Page 2 - COGnotations - January 1975 00686