WSP06406 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

w --- w... - = - ~RockyMountainN~ws,"Sun"Qct 8,.19J8, Denver., Cola, ~orps'Foothills ruling may be near . ", By JERRY BROWN NewaStafl t Corps of Engineers may act within . on the Denver Water Board's appli- .. -ermit to build the Foothills water . ~roject, a Corps official said Satur- 'IrpS' decision is lavorable and no other ''<Ild in the way, construction of the ,.ergi31 project will begin this win- _ger James Ogilvie of the Denver. Water 'lenladded. '-l'i!,\\vie had said earlier that construction ."Would be delayed \lIItil next spring at the earliest \lIIless the Corps approved the permit in time for his department to let bids on the project by~t. L ~ . However, Ogilvie said Saturday the Water De- partment woUld "begin construction as soon as possible" if the permit is approved. Co!. Peter Selleck, newly appointed Missouri River Division engineer lor the Corps, said his staff has only one more issue to study before he o o en (4) c.:l can reach a decision on the proposed permit. A report on that issue, possibleaUernatives to the Slrontia Springs Dam which the Water Board wants to build to impo\llld water lor the Foothills water treatmenl plant, should be ready in about three weeks, Selleck said. Selleck said he would allow another two weeks for public comments. At that time, aboutfiveweeks from now, "lex- poet to be in a position to finalize. my finding," Selleck said. The Environmental Protection Agency, which opposes the permit application, would then have 15days to review Selleck's decision. , After EP A completes its review, Selleck could approve the permit. disapprove it, or reler the malter to the Corps' chief of engineers in Wash- ington for a final decision.. Three reports published by Selleck's o!lice to date, including one issued Saturday, appear to support the Water Board's position that. the project is needed and would not cause W1due environmental damage. Thus, the major question appears to be whether Selleck will approve the permit or refer the malter to Washington. He will have to fefer the issue to the Corps' Washington headquarters if EPA Regional Administrator Alan Merson or.Gov. Dick Lamm objects to his proposed action. Selleck could decide the issues are too impor- tant or too complex to be decided by him and reler the matter to Washington on his own. And he could be ordered by the Corps' chief of engi. neers to buck the decision to Washington. Lamm has favored the project in the past and thus is unlikely lD object to what appears to be . Selleck's most likely decision, lD approve the permit. ; Merson opposes the permit. but agreed in J\lIIe that be should have no problem I\'ith the Corps' decision - even if the Corps decided to issue the permit- providing the Corps conducted a "fair and thorough" review of the project. As a result. Merson could find it difficult to opo :p --- - . pose a decision by Selleck lD issue the permit. selleck. made publie' Saturday a report by Llewelyn-Davies Carson Ltd. of ToronlD conclud- ing that limits on water supply alone are insufli~ cientin controlling urban sprawl. .' The Corps asked the Candadian firm to study the issue because the Corps felt it didn't feel it had the expertise lD resolve that issue, Selleck" said. A major reason lor Merson's objection to the Foothills project is his contention that it would encourage urban sprawl and would lead to a worsening of the Denver area's air pollution. . But Llewellyn-Davies Carson conclllded that past attempts lD control growth by imposing re- strictions on new water taps in Denver belped contribute to the present urban sprawl because developers simply went elsewhere in the area. The Corps also issued findings by. the U.S. Ge0- logical Survey indicating Foothills wouJdn't have any major impact on water quality on the West- ern Slope. - -- --