Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 03/27/19680 &arch 27, 1968 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE WATER BOARD Held March 27, . 1968, at 3:30 o'clock P.M. in the City Manager's Office. Present: President Ward Fischer, Vice President Frank Ghent, Board Members Harvey Johnson, Fred Feit, Owen Moore, Norman Evans and Secretary John Bartel. Also present: Acting City Manager Stan Case, Director of Finance Charlie Cain, Assistant City Attorney Arthur March, Jr., Director of Public Works Charles Liquin and Superintendent d' Water and Sewer Eddie Hilgenberg. The President opened the meeting by presenting the follow- ing report: • M i MEMBER WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 1240 WEST SAYAUO AVENUE DENVER, COLORADO, 80223 March 18, 1968 Mr. Ward Fischer, President Water Board of the City of Fort Collins P. 0, Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Dear Mr. Fischer: PHONE T44 ANx -2326 We have briefly investigated the water fact situation surrounding Mirror Lake and Lost Lake, as authorized by your letter of February 12, 1968. Various docu- ments relating to the Lakes were obtained from the owner, Mr. Jay Lee, and examined. Mr. Lee visited our office and presented the facts as known to him. Information regarding the water rights of the two lakes and of releases made from Lost Lake were obtained from the Office of the State Engineer. The fact situation as we know It and the stage of the Investigation is described for each of the Lakes separately in the following pages. All of the figures given for capacities derive from the records we have seen. We have not visited the two reservoir sites, and have made no independent measurements. It had been agreed that initially only brief studies would be made in order that the approximate picture could be presented to you so that a decision could be made to study the water rights further, or the matter dropped without additional studies. You will note that our investigations reveal that the water rights appear pro- mising enough to warrant the optioning of both rights. I"M Location Mirror Lake is a natural body of water lying in Sections 28 and 33, Township 7 North, Range 74 West of the 6th P.M. It appears on the Comanche Peak, Colorado, U.S.G.S. quadrangle, at the north line of Rocky Mountain National Park.. The southern portion of the lake In Section 33 was originally included within the Park by the Act of January 26, 1915 (38 Stat. 798). Subsequently, two 40-acre tracts were eliminated from the Park by the Act of June 9, 1926 (44 Stat. 712). The whole of the Lake, and almost all of the basin tributary to the Lake, now lie outside of the Park and within Roosevelt National Forest. The Lake lies at the lower end of a cirque west of Comanche Peak. Normal access to the Lake Is by horseback from the vicinity of Browns Lake, 5 miles to the north. so 2 Drainage Basin The basin tributary to the Lake is about 1.2 square miles In extent and forms the headwaters of Cascade Creek, tributary to Cache la Poudre River. Cascade Creek flows southerly into the Park and thence westerly to Join the Cache la Poudre at the Park's west boundary about one mile north of the confluence of the Poudre with Long Draw Creek. The Lake lies at an elevation of about 11,030 feet. The besin rises to a maximum elevation of 12,702 feet at Comanche Peak. Mean basin elevation is about 11,600 feet. The basin is above timberline and has a north -south orientation. The mean annual rum -off is estimated to be about 1400 acre feet, the bulk of which would occur in late May, June and July. Critical year run-off Is estimated to be about 700 acre feet. Water Rights Mirror Lake lies in Water District 3 and is not decreed. No releases have been made from the existing natural Lake for beneficial purposes. Two filings are on record in the State Engineer's Office for Mirror Lake. They are summarized below: Surface Filing Date of Capacity Area Number Date Filed Survey Ac. Ft. - Acres 14303 12- 9-1925 11-21-1925 822.89 24.44 21363 9-25-1958 i1-21-1925 822.89 24.44 9-10-1958 Claimant W. L. Porter & J. W. Slapper Jay Lee The reason given on Filing 21363 for the submission of the new filing is to tie the initial point of survey to a more recent General Land Office survey. Construction Required The filings contemplate a 48-foot high dam including 6 feet of freeboard. The 42 feet of water depth over the invert of the outlet tube represents 26 feet of existing natural depth plus 16 feet of additional depth to be impounded by a man- made dam of 22 feet constructed upon the natural granite dike. Access to the lower 26 feet of water depth would be achieved by constructing a 4' x 6' tunnel some 120' long through the granite dike. The area -capacity table for the lower 26 feet of water depth appears to have been projected from the survey made above the water surface. Mr. Lee states that he has plumbed the lake at the location of the upstream end of the proposed outlet tunnel and found no bottom with 90 feet of line in the water. Utilizing the entire capacity of 823 acre feet would require a new embank- ment 22 feet high and about 250 feet long and the 120 foot tunnel. There are other alternatives which would require less construction and result In less capacity. One alternative would be to build the 22 foot embankment only. The capacity available to an outlet at the base of this embankment would be about 350 acre feet. The embankment would have a crest length of about 250 feet. A second alternative would be to construct a very minor dam across the notch in the granite dike through which the lake now spills. Mr. Lee states that the notch is about 14 feet wide and 4 feet deep, This relatively small embankment would result in an active capacity of some 80 acre feet. This dam could be con- structed of rubble masonry quite reasonably. A third alternate would be to construct only the tunnel, or only the tunnel and the 4 foot high dam. Both these Items lend themselves to typical burro hauling and mining type construction activity for which the site remote- ness creates only limited restrictions. The tunnel and small rubble dam might result in as much as 540 acre feet of active storage. A construction cost of per- haps $40,000 should be anticipated at this time for the tunnel and small dam. The dam site apparently lies on U. S. Forest Service Property. Mr. Lee may have a forage right for the area. Construction would require a Forest Service permit. The topography of the area is rough and the area remote so that construc- tion equipment and men would probably have to cross Park property to reach the site, unless a helicopter were to be utilized. Reservoir Yield The basin drained by the lake produces sufficient water, we believe at this time, to fill the 823 acre foot reservoir in most years. However, the quantity of water legally storable by an as yet undecreed reser- voir is much less. Presumably a decree for Mirror Lake would be senior to Narrows Reservoir on the South Platte, though a legal opinion is required in.this regard. if Mirror were able to store ahead of Narrows, then It could take water during periods of larger flow on the Poudre and South Platte. We have not made a detailed study of the times and quantities but believe that a 350 to 540 acre foot reservoir could probably fill in years comparable to 1947, 1949, 1,957, 1961, and 1965. The 80 acre foot reservoir could fill in these and several additional in-between years. Mirror Lake might also store by exchange of Horsetooth water. The exchange potential at the mouth of Poudre Canyon is such that the 350 - 540 acre foot reser- voir could fill in most years, assuming NCWCD units were available for exchange. The storability of the 823 foot reservoir would also improve by exchange but addi- tional study would be required to come up with a good estimate for the larger reservoir. Conclusion The value of the Mirror Lake water right filing to the City of Fort Collins as a raw water source lies in its potential for high country storage for water use during dry periods. Difficult access, required Forest Service approvals, and probable costs for a reservoir of significant size bring up questions which the City must ponder. M 4 It is our opinion, however, that the City should option the reservoir site with the following conditions: a. That the adjudication of the reservoir is successful in obtaining a decree senior to Narrows. b. That a U. S. Forest Service permit is obtained with reasonable con- struction and operational requirements placed upon the City. c. That the National Park Service does not prohibit access to the site through the Park. d. That the City's consulting engineers find the reservoir reasonably feasible after visiting the site and estimating costs, and that de- tailed water yield analyses indicate a satisfactory cost benefit ratio to the City. e. That Mr. Lee has proper and correct ownership to the filing and has something to sell. From the reservoir site and filing value standpoint, we believe the City could reasonably consider a payment of $ 5,000 to $15,000 for Mr. Lee's rights. An option payment of about $1,000 would be reasonable for an option running approximately 18 months. However, full option payment would be due only upon the satisfaction of the above five conditions. LOST LAKE Location Lost Lake is inside of Rocky Mountain National Park in Section 8, Township 6 North, Range 73 West. It is 4 miles south of Pingree Park and 9 miles east southeast of Mirror Lake. It is shown on the Pingree Park, Colorado, 7-1, minute quadrangle. The lake lies on a minor tributary of North Fork Big Thompson River, known as Lees Fork. It is not Cache la Poudre water. Normal access to Lost Lake is by horseback or foot along the Lost Lake Trail from the east line of the Park, which in turn can be reached by automobile from Glen Haven. The road from Glen Haven appears to be a public right of way. See Maitland vs. McWhorter, Division 1, No. 14834, Larimer County District Court. Trail distance within the Park is 5 miles. Drainage Basin The basin tributary to the lake is about one half a square mile in size. Orientation is east -west and perhaps 15% lies below timberline. The U.S.G.S. topo map shows the water surface elevation to be 10,714 feet. Maximum basin elevation appears to be 12,100 feet and mean elevation is about 11,120 feet. Normal mean annual run-off is estimated to be 660 acre feet, over half of which would occur in late May, June, and July. E Water Rights Lost Lake has a decree for 137.74 acre feet, Priority 27, dated July 15, 1911, and adjudicated April 1, 1931. The decreed name of Lost Lake is Glacier Reservoir No. 1. The corresponding Filing number in the State Engineer's Office is 9185. Mr. Lee states that releases were made from Lost Lake for a number of years prior to his leaving the area in 1931. Recently Mr. Lee returned and the reservoir has been used for irrigation releases to Home Supply Ditch in several recent years. Records of the State Engineer indicate that the following releases have been made: June 29-30, 1962 34 acre feet July 10-17, 1963 49 acre feet June 13-18, 1966 66 acre feet The 66 acre foot release in 1966 apparently represents the active capacity of the lake available to the outlet. Mr. Lee has a photograph of the lake in drawn down condition which shows a ditch within the reservoir leading from an undrained pool at the upper end to the outlet gate. Construction Required The Lost Lake dam and outlet are In place. The only new construction required would perhaps be dredging the downstream portion of the lake to bring the active capacity to the decreed capacity, or at least closer to it. The rock and masonry dam is about 100 feet in length. There is a slide gate in the upstream face. A steel pipe about 16 feet in length is the outlet. A four -foot Cipolletti weir is located in the channel some 40 yards downstream. To prevent visitors to the lake from releasing water, the slide gate is raised by means of a hook lowered into the water to catch the gate. Increasing the active capacity of the lake with power equipment would require clearance of the U. S. Park Service, and the trail might need to be widened. However, hand equipment could be brought up by pack horse. Reservoir Yield Annual inflow to the lake is sufficient to physically fill the decreed capa- city of 138 acre feet. The 1911 appropriation date is junior to most reservoirs in Water District 4 and to the major downstream reservoirs on the South Platte, but is senior to Narrows Reservoir. Lost Lake could probably legally fill in most years, though we have not made a detailed analysis of this. Releases from Lost Lake could be utilized by a user on the Cache La Poudre by exchange with Horsetooth water released to a CBT user on the South Platte, or by exchanging the reservoir water to a Big Thompson user for CBT water on the Poudre. Lost Lake releases cannot be directly used on the Poudre. _ N 6 Conclusions The value of Lost Lake to .the City of Fort Collins as a source of raw water is, we believe, marginal. For practical purposes the quantity of water made avail- able to the City would be 66 acre feet less stream losses. The water would be available only by exchange. Operational and maintenance expense to the City would be high per acre foot because of the time required to gain access to the Reservoir. We believe that the reservoir deserves additional detailed studies, including both a field inspection and water yield analyses. Acquitition of an option on the reservoir would be prudent, such an option running at least six months. A purchase price of about $10,000 would be reasonable, with an option payment of $500 being fair for a six-month period which would allow the field investigation to be completed. Summary Both Mirror and Lost Lakes represent somewhat marginal water rights and physical location problems. The reservoirs, however, represent a diminishing breed. This diminishing breed is that storage right senior to the proposed Narrows Reservoir. High mountain storage of this nature is troublesome to operate and maintain and represents headaches. It would not be suitable for most municipalities, but we believe that Fort Collins is well enough "high mountain oriented" to cope with the remoteness problem. The water rights, we believe, would fit in the the long term water needs of the City and would add to its present water strength. On the basis of the present studies, which were limited by definition, it would appear to be a reasonable course of action for the City to option the two water rights, if the City is uncertain of the optioning step, the investigations could be carried into the second phase of detailed water yield analyses first, the cost of such analyses falling within the original allocation of funds by the City. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or if we can be of further service on this matter. Very truly yours, O"WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS ISTE �* 3084 W r� y �,dd David S. Gottlieb IL -FS`T�ONAI E�d\r� V 1 • and me/• 44?w�w� 6/ K§Kneth R. Wr ght did