Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I. <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />. <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />. <br />. <br />I <br /> <br />Table ES-1. Frequency Entity Met its Target Release for 1946-1990 <br />Scenario 20,600 AF Pool 7,700 AF Pool <br /> <br />2,900 AF Pool <br /> <br />1. Denver <br /> <br />88.6% <br />78.0% <br />90.8% <br />99.3% <br /> <br />83.4% <br />32.3% <br />83.2% <br /> <br />84.9% <br />50.2% <br />85.9% <br /> <br />2. Central <br /> <br />3. Greenway and Littleton <br /> <br />4. South Metro' <br />5. Mixed Use: Central and <br />Greenway/Littleton 55.1% 40.5% 26.5% <br />'Frequency of meeting target release is very high because the targets provided by South Metro were based on <br />modeled storage results which indicated these targets could be met 100 percent of the time. <br /> <br />99.5% <br /> <br />99.7% <br /> <br />Tables ES-2 and ES-3 below compare: (I) the average daily increase in Chatfield Reservoir <br />water surface elevation (in feet) that resulted from the reallocated storage space with (2) the <br />present situation in which there is no reallocated storage space. <br /> <br />Table ES-2. Average Daily Increase in Chatfield Reservoir Water Surface Elevation <br />With Storage Reallocation for 1946-1990 (feet) <br />Greenway and <br />Littleton <br />6.22 <br />2.08 <br />0.69 <br /> <br />Pool Size (AF) Denver Water <br />0,600 8.97 <br />',700 3.80 <br />>,900 1.53 <br /> <br />Central <br />6.28 <br />1.63 <br />0.40 <br /> <br />South Metro <br />3.48 <br />2.36 <br />1.42 <br /> <br />Central and <br />Greenway/Littleton <br />4.69 <br />1.34 <br />0.34 <br /> <br />Table ES-3. Average Daily Increase in Chatfield Reservoir Water Surface Elevation With <br />Storage Reallocation for Memorial Day to Labor Day for 1946.1990 (feet) <br /> <br /> Greenway and Central and <br />Pool Size (AF) Denver Water Central Littleton South Metro Greenway/Littleton <br />20,600 9.38 6.84 6.90 5.24 5.40 <br />7,700 3.88 2.07 2.43 2.84 1.80 <br />2,900 1.57 0.73 0.93 1.16 0.68 <br /> <br />In conclusion, results from this investigation indicate that there is additional storage space <br />available in Chatfield Reservoir, and that there are sufficient water rights and demand to utilize <br />this additional storage. Based on the data, analysis and findings from this investigation, the <br />following detailed conclusions and recommendations are presented: <br /> <br />I. Available water rights to those entities expressing interest in acquiring and <br />utilizing reallocated storage space in Chatfield Reservoir are sufficient to allow <br />these entities to make efficient use of at least 20,600 acre-feet ofreallocated <br />Chatfield Reservoir storage. <br /> <br />2. If the new HEC-5 runs by the Omaha District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for <br />investigating Chatfield Reservoir, Bear Creek Reservoir and Cherry Creek <br />Reservoir system operations indicate potential for reallocating more than 20,600 <br />acre-feet of storage in Chatfield Reservoir, the analysis described in this report for <br />determining the effects of reallocating Chatfield Reservoir storage could be <br />repeated for a larger reallocated storage pool. <br /> <br />P:\Data\GEN\CWCB\Chatfield\Report12.02\RevisedChatReportl 03\Report2.03 .doc <br /> <br />4 <br />