Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3 <br /> <br />a few days of operations with Moffat out of raw water, and <br /> <br />Kassler closed down because of river turbidity, the nearly <br /> <br /> <br />one million people served by the Denver Water Department <br /> <br /> <br />would be down to only 210 million gallons of treated water <br /> <br /> <br />per day -- not 520 million ~allons. It is a time bomb, wait- <br /> <br /> <br />ing to explode, unless Foothills ~ets under way in 1978. <br /> <br />II. Cost Effectiveness -- Capital Investment <br /> <br />The cost of Foothills is climbing. Even with a <br /> <br /> <br />construction start this spring, the first phase Foothills <br /> <br /> <br />price tag will be in the neighborhood of $135 million. That <br /> <br /> <br />is an inflationary cost rise of $65 million from the original <br /> <br /> <br />$70 million estimate in 1973 when the people of Denver approved <br /> <br />a bond issue including Foothills. <br /> <br /> <br />However, the investment still is a bargain. Over <br /> <br /> <br />a 75-year period, if present and future suburbanites were to <br /> <br /> <br />cover all Foothills first-phase costs, it would amount to <br /> <br /> <br />only $19.81 per year, per household. <br /> <br />III. Cost Effectiveness -- Treatment Operations <br /> <br />Among the long-term benefits of the proposed Foot- <br /> <br />hills Water Treatment Complex to the metro Denver residents <br /> <br /> <br />served by the Denver Water Department is a much lower cost <br /> <br /> <br />per gallon than" is offered by any existing treatment plants, <br /> <br /> <br />or any alternatives to Foothills. <br /> <br />00719 <br />