WSP03260

• File Number: 8276.120.10
• Description: Grand Valley Unit-Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 9/10/1991
• Title: Final Environmental Assessment: Alternative Lining Methods for the Government Highline Canal - Grand Valley Unit
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: EIS

0')
OJ
o
o

,-~

adjacent to and on the north side of the canal. In addition,
acquisition of a 30- to 80-foot wide temporary ROW is needed above
the additional fee land to provide room for construction. The land
acquired along the north (upslope) side of the canal is needed to
accommodate the wider canal cross section and the north O&M road.
The temporary ROW would be needed only during construction and
would be reclaimed, as near as practical to its original condition
after construction.

~.~.~

Exceptions to the above stated land requirements would occur.
Where there are high value improvements (such as residences or
permanent crops) and/or unwilling sellers, the purchase of fee land
and/or temporary ROW would be reduced or avoided if possible. Fee
land in excess of 25 feet may be purchased from willing sellers to
provide land for needed spoil disposal areas and other O&M
activities. More than 80 feet of temporary ROW might be sought for
construction staging areas. Other exceptions might occur where
purchase of a portion of a parcel significantly affects the value
or use of the remaining parcel and purchase of the entire parcel
was desired by the landowner.

In response to public concerns about land acquisition, Alternative
Ml has been modified to minimize both fee land and temporary ROW
needs. The width of the additional fee land requirement has been
reduced--from the originally proposed 45 feet, to 25 feet in the
draft EA, and finally to a range of from 15 to 25 feet in this
final EA. Temporary ROW requirements have also been reduced--from
the originally proposed 80 feet in the draft EA, to 30-80 feet.

Figure 1 depicts a typical canal cross-section for membrane lining
where the design centerline of the canal has been shifted 10 feet
south, and displays the associated fee land and temporary ROW
requirements. The 10-foot adjustment makes better use of the
existing U.S. land on the south side of the canal, and would not
cause significant increases in construction costs. It also
reduces, from 25 to 15 feet, the need to purchase additional fee
land. Also in Reach lB, the centerline would be moved about 20
feet south (similar to Alternative M4) for 3/4 of a mile to avoid
Interstate Highway 70.

Affected landowners would be compensated for all fee land and
temporary ROW based on appraisals utilizing current fair market
values. Compensation would include costs associated with lost use
of the land and associated damages on the temporary ROW.

Reclamation would only condemn land as a last resort. The width of
fee land or temporary ROW purchased would depend on 1)
Reclamation's ability to adjust the design centerline, 2) the
existing use and value of the affected lands, and 3) the
willingness of the adjacent landowner to accommodate the project.
Reclamation's preference is generally to purchase 25 feet of fee
land and 80 feet of temporary ROW when a willing seller exists.

10