My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05529
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05529
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:18:45 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:05:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8149.700
Description
Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - Homestake Project
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
10/29/1982
Author
various
Title
Documents related to the Homestake Project
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />343Pctober 29, 1982 <br />~~8 <br /> <br />b) [See 4-306(1)(b) concerning county and regional plan <br />conformity.] <br /> <br />c) Both Cities have long implemented institutional structures <br />designed to encourage and cause efficient utilization of <br />water. These institutional structures include total metering, <br />straight line and increasing block rate structures, active <br />educational programs, increased operational control, and in <br />the case of Aurora, an ordinance restricting the amount of <br />Kentucky Bluegrass lawn installed for new homes. Both Cities <br />charge rates reflecting the real cost of water such that price <br />increases continue to result in water consumption reduction. <br />The average gallons per capita per day (GPCD) consumed in <br />Aurora is 145 gallons. (This includes residential and <br />supporting commercial and governmental use); and in Colorado <br />Springs the GPCD is 197 gallons. (This includes residential, <br />commercial, and municipal uses, including power plants and <br />major industries.) <br /> <br />d) Mass balance analysis of the Eagle River below Cross Creek <br />demonstrates that removal of upstream water will not cause <br />water quality standards adopted by the Colorado Water Quality <br />Control Commission to be exceeded. Accordingly, no surface <br />water resources will be contaminated. <br /> <br />e) The Cities expect to enter into an agreement with the Town of <br />Minturn assuring protection of the Minturn water supply from <br />significant adverse impacts, if any, due to the Cities' <br />diversions. Water diverted is very high quality and will <br />easily meet Colorado and Federal Drinking Water Standards. <br /> <br />f) See (d) above. <br /> <br />g) See 4-306(1)(q) concerning no significant impacts upon aquatic <br />habitat, wetlands, etc. <br /> <br />h) No salinity impacts in Eagle County will occur. Since <br />salinity in the Colorado River Basin is a basin-wide problem <br />which the Colorado River Salinity Forum seeks to resolve <br />through basin-wide projects, site specific mitigation is not <br />required. Furthermore, the Cities will pay mitigation fees <br />when a central authority collects such fees from all <br />consumptive users within the Basin. <br /> <br />i) See 4-306(1)(v) concerning no significant impacts upon <br />existing communities. <br /> <br />Accordingly, the Board must conclude that all of the above criteria are <br />met and that this application shall be granted. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.