Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 09/20/1974WATER BOARD SPECIAL MEETING September 20,1974 3:00 P.M. Present: Ward Fischer Robert Brunton Bernard Cain, Jr. Karl Carson Norman Evans Harvey Johnson Everett Richardson James Waltz W. G. Wilkinson Raymond Anderson Absent: Henry Caulfield, Jr. Staff members present: Di Tullio, Bingman, Hays and Lewis. Also City Attorney March, Jr. Also: Members of the Press and the following: 1. Harold Ellingson 2. Stan Thorfinson 3. Fred Davis 4. Jim Irish Chairman Fischer called the meeting to order. Minutes of June 14, July 23 and August 27, 1974 minutes Approved Chairman Fischer inquired if there were any corrections to the above minutes, hearing none, he stated the minutes stood approved as published. Chairman Fischer stated the next item was a letter from Board member Caulfield requesting that the consideration of the need for a study of water supplies available to the City be put on the agenda for the next regular meeting. The Chairman requested that the Secretary place this item on the agenda and send a copy of Mr. Caulfield's letter with the agenda to the Board members. Application for out -of -City sewer on West Vine Drive by Michael Histand approved. Director of Community Development, Roy A. Bingman, identified the area as a property on the north side of Vine Drive; the property is already on the City's water line. It is a single family residence, and they are having problems with their septic tank and the County has requested that he be connected to I the sewer system. Mr. Bingman stated his department did not see any con- flict from the standpoint of zoning or development, since it is single family, an existing building and already on the City Water system. Chairman Fischer inquired into the utility extension policy. Mr. Bingman stated the policy is that the zoning and development meet the development plans of the City, and the property is not eligible for annexation. Mr. Bingman stated he recommends approval of the application. Board member Carson made a motion, seconded by Everett Richardson, to apprpve the application. The Chairman put the motion which was unanimously adopted. (Board member Wilkinson abstained from voting) Election of Officers Chairman Fischer stated the Board had set September as the time for election Of officers, adding the floor was open for nominations for President of the Water Board. Board member Evans nominated Ward Fischer as President. The nomination was seconded by Harvey Johnson. Dr. Evans spoke in favor of the nomination as follows ---"it would be rather unusual if we could find another member of the Water Board who could donate the time and attention and the background expertise, not only in acquaint - ship with the water situation in this commMity and in this area, but in the legal aspects which are very important and I realize your comment about passing it around is a kind of point of view that I expect from you, but I want to say that we are fortunate to have you willing to serve, if you will." Board member Carson made a motion, seconded by Everett Richardson, that nominations close. The Chairman put the motion which unanimously adopted. The Chairman next stated the floor was open for Vice -President. Board member Wilkinson nominated Norman Evans as Vice President. The nom- ination was seconded by Raymond Anderson. Board member Johnson made a motion, seconded by Karl Carson, that nominations be closed and that the Secretary cast a ballot.in favor of Norman Evans. The Chairman put the motion which was unanimously adopted. The Chairman appointed Verna Lewis as Secretary. City Manager Brunton stated he would like to personally thank Dr. Evans for the tremendous help he had given the City in the last year in terms of the grants received from the State and Federal Government,totaling around 10 million dollars. Woodward-Clevinger geological report on feasibility of Joe Wright Reservoir given vote of confidence Chairman Fischer stated the purpose of the meeting is primarily to investi- gate wiihthe members of the Ellingson firm the extent to which, they have confidence that the Joe Wright Reservoir is, from a geological standpoint, a satisfactory site for the proposed reservoir. The question had been raised by a member of the Water Board who had not been on the Water Board when certain of the studies had been presented. The Chair requested the representatives of the McCall Ellingson/Woodward/ Clevenger firm to present their qualifications as a matter of public informa- tion. Mr.Harold Ellingon, Mr. Fred Davis, Mr. Stan Thorfinson and Mr. James Irish spoke to their qualifications at length. Board member Waltz next made the following opening remarks, " I suppose my first contact with the Joe Wright area was back in 1971 when I was working as a consultant with Mort Bittingel and I think as the City was considering it initially, as a potential enlargement site, that we wanted to get an idea of what might be involved in even determining its feasibility sort of a pre - feasibility stage at that time, and I spent a number of days up there looking at the general geology; there were no existing maps, to my knowledge, in any detail of that area, and I was struck by the complexity of the site geologically. I was curious about how the investigation would be handled eventually by wherever was to do it because it seemed to me a very frightening setting. The voicanics, the structural deformation, the blanketing of the area with the glacial material combined with its high topographic elevation and com- bined with the fact that it was upstream from another reservoir, Chambers Lake, which is held in by two earthfilled dams, which as I understand, were constructed around the turn of the century and are presently being investi- gated as to their suitability by the State Engineer's office; the conse- quences of a dam failing, at Joe Wright would be enormous, I think larger than many dam sites that exist. And I suppose my hang' -up right now is whe- ther or not the investigation which is within the state of the art of the profession, in this case,is quite enough. As I see it, I think when you go in to build the dam, that any problems that have not been forseen would be discovered and ultimately the design would be adopted to fit the condi- tions, so I really do not anticipate ultimate safety problems, but what my concern is that the cost of adopting the designs to change the conditions might, really put the City in a jig bind. By virtue of my being a geologist on the Water Board, I have felt the responsibility to advise the City that perhaps additional insurance against unforseen costs would be appropriate. I have great respect for Woodward/Thorfinson, and I know Jim Irish real well, but I have certain concerns, I know in any investi- gation that there are questions that are left lingering, you are never 100% sure. I reviewed, pretty carefully, the data that were obtained when the investi- gation was done, I even came down to your offices in Denver and inspected the core, several years ago, and 1 remained plagued by the problems that perhaps our knowledge was not as complete as it could be. Now, probably as complete as w i it could be for the budget that was assigned and probably sufficiently complete to represent a state of the art performance; maybe I am a little bit like a nervous father whose child needs an operation, he knows there is a good surgeon in town, but he would kind of like to have the guy from New York come in who is known to be the world's best. Because it is his child. Well, maybe that's not a good analogy, I don't feel that sentimen- tal about the City, but I do feel that there is a potential for considerable extra costs that could result if we have missed the mark a little bit. And I think the potential for missing the mark is greater at that dam site than it would be at any of the ones you have described. Unfortunately, I am not an expert on dams, I wish that I were, because maybe we could elimate all of this, but I have had had some some experience, enough to know that some of the data that were collected could be interpreted other than the way they were interpreted. And it frightens me a little bit that this was the case, and I know that considerable experience is needed. Now I am not familiar with who all has reviewed the data within your respective firms, I know for sure that the expertise lies within the Woodward/Clyde complex to evaluate. I don't know who all has done it. What I have suggested to the City is that an independent appraisal be made by the best geologist that we could find who has bad the most experience with dams of this type to be drought in for a few days to review the data and look at the site and to say you do have a lot of potential for change of condi- tions problems which might result in a substantial increase in your con- struction costs. I feel that there is a good possibility that this could result; a substantial increase in the costs and this is my main concern. I have some support in my concern in the letter which you received from the Colorado Geological Survey, Pat Rogers, who also has had some experience and good qualifications for evaluating studies of this type. He mentions two major concerns of his own in his letter of March 9, he concludes, "in our view the above two problems that are so serious that until they are better resolved, actual design and realistic cost concepts will be virtually impossible:, Board member Evans requested the two concerns be outlined. Board member Waltz stated they were, briefly, "the one concern involves the area of severe fractured and faltered volcanic rocks underlying the high- est part of the proposed dam" and the second one "from our interpretation of the data presented in the general site geology, we are -not convinced that effective cut off can be acheived in deep morainal embankment at a. depth of approximately one-third of the dam height as is suggested by the consultant". A detailed technical question and answer session followed regarding the geology investigation. Chairman Fischer next called for specific questions. Board member Carson stated his question was do you "feel that you have pro- tected yourself and the City adequately on the variables on the estimates?" Mr. Stan Thorfinson responded "Yes". Board member Evans stated he had a question for Mr. Irish on the lava rock on the site; Dr. Evans also inquired if there was a question of the struc- tural integrity. Mr. Irish responded"not at all". Board member Cain stated his question had been answered by Dr. Evan's inquiry. Board member Wilkinson inquired into advantages and disadvantages of mov- ing the reservoir upstream from the existing reservoir. The Chairman stated, as he understood the Consultants, there was no doubt about the structural safety of the dam, secondly, he understood them to say that all earth dams seep and this one is not going to seep any worse than any earth dams and thirdly, that the consultants planned to do some work, if necessary, to control seepage. Then, the consultants had done all of the geology and engeering work up to this point and that they feel is feasi- ble and they would not recommend any more because they feel it is not money well spent, and that they feel confident with what they have found so far. Lastly, in the estimates on the dam, to what extent do we have a margin of error because of the unknown's. Mr. Ellinson and Mr. Thorfinson spoke to contengencies of from 1% to 1.5%. Chairman Fischer stated that the Board was appreciative of the consultants time in providing answers to the questions raised. As the Chair saw the matter, the Water Board could take one of several courses; if it takes no action, it appears the result would be to leave the matter where it was left which is to have recommended to the City Council that City build Joe Wright reservoir and would imply acceptance of the report as heretofore, other alternatives might be to recommend that the Council request Woodward/ Thorfinson to make further geological intestigations, or that the Board recommend that another wider known geologist review the material that the geologists have already developed and give us his opinion as to the validity of the recommendation. Board member Waltz stated he remained concerned about the liability for excessive expenses associated with change of conditions related to Joe Wright. Board member Waltz made a motion that the City have an independent assess- ment of the potential for costs due to change of conditions unless the present contractors are sufficiently certain to be able to assume the liability for costs which would run 10%. Chairman Fischer declared this motion lost for lack of a second. Board member Richardson made a motion, seconded by Karl Carson, that the Council be advised that the Water Board has, again, carefully considered the consultants recommendations, is satisfied and expresses confidence in it and recommends continued implementation of its prior recommendations. The Chair called for a roll call on this motion. Yeas: Anderson, Cain, Wilkinson, Evans, Fischer, Johnson, Carson and Richardson. Nays: Waltz. City Attorney authorized to investigate City's interest in Chaffee Ditch Rights City Attorney March stated the City anticipated that it will be offered water in connection with the land that is owned by Riverbend Farms. The water on there now is Arthur Ditch, Horsetooth and Chaffee Ditch. The City has never accepted Chaffee water before and he felt that by some means find out out if the City will accept that as satisfying water rights. Various Board members spoke to the value of the Chaffee water. Board member Carson made a motion, seconded by Norman Evans, to direct the City Attorney investigate the acquisition of the water and report back to the Board. The Chairman put the motion which was unanimously adopted. Discussion with South Side Ditches Encouraged Board member Evans stated he had had contact with the South Side Ditch Companies in which they indicated that they are anxious to resume con- versations with the City. City Attorney March stated he had written them several letters and would probably bring back some information to the Board at the next meeting. Dr. Evans requested the Board go on record as asking the Attorney to pursue further conversations with the South Side Ditch Companies. Adjournment Nothing further to discuss at this time, the Board adjourned. Chairman ATTEST: Secretary