Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 10/21/1983F MINUTES Water Board October 21, 1983 MEMBERS PRESENT Ward Fischer, Norm Evans, Bernie Cain, Ray Glabach, Neil Grigg, Tom Moore, Ev Richardson, Tom Sanders, Dave Stewart, Mort Bittinger (alt), Mary Lou Smith (alt.), Gerry Horak, City Council Liaison STAFF PRESENT Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Curt Miller, Ben Alexander, Andy Pineda MEDIA Sue Diehl, Coloradoan GUESTS Mark Rohloff, Student Intern for Public Works David Prange, CSU Student MEMBERS ABSENT Henry Caulfield (excused) The meeting was opened by Vice -Chairman Norm Evans. The following items were discussed: Minutes The minutes of the September 16, 1983 meeting were approved. Film An excellent film was shown which was produced by the Salt Lake City Bureau of Reclamation. The film entitled, "1983, The Record Water Year," documented the events which had occurred prior to and following the record run-off during the spring of 1983 in Utah and Colorado. Spectacular shots of tons of water cascading through the outlet tubes and spillways of the Glen Canyon Dam, as well as the flooding that resulted from the record run-off in both states were depicted. How the enormous problems associated with the flooding were handled, was the major emphasis of the film. Status of Water Resources Planning Dennis Bode and Andy Pineda brought the Board up to date on their efforts, for the past two years, to develop a capability to work on water resources planning. Their work involved data gathering, learning about some of the intricacies of the Poudre River Basin, as well as developing some of the tools needed to analyze the supply system. The reasons for developing this capability are the need to formulate plans to ascertain where we are and where we are going and the need to analyze various projects so that better and, hopefully, more economical decisions can be made. Mr. Bode added that there is also a need to respond to questions that arise from Council members, Water Board members and the public. N, Water Board Minutes October 21, 1983 Page 2 Andy Pineda explained the two computer models that are currently being used by Water Utilities. The Annual model uses a supply allocation program whereas the other model, recently added to our system, is a program that was developed at CSU known as MODSIM. The Annual model seeks to satisfy a given demand based on a number of water supplies that can be put into it. Sources that can be plugged into the program are the water rights owned by the City, including direct river flows, and the Michigan Ditch/Joe Wright water. The program is - then allowed to use this data base to satisfy the demands that are imposed on it. The historical time period that was used was from 1953 to 1982. It was selected as a representative period because it contains several dry periods as well as a number of wet periods. The input numbers, as the name implies, are annual figures, not monthly or daily. Several demand points have been determined that are necessary to make it run, and the most important one is City treated water, which is determined by population and a per capita use number. The number is adjusted for weather variability over that 30 year period. Another demand that is calculated is Parks and Recreation water use. This supply is reserved in order to provide irrigation water for parks, cemeteries and golf courses. Finally, another amount is reserved for irrigation rental water. The first two are satisfied initially and any excess is used as rental water for agriculture. To make the mass balance so the supply is equal to the demand, two extra categories were created: "Not Used" and "Unavailable". "Not Used" demand is water that is available to the City but the demand was not great enough to use it. An example of this is carryover water that is left in Horsetooth Reservoir. "Unavailable" is another portion that, due to exchange restrictions or limitations on what the City can do with that water, is not available for treatment, Parks and Recreation or irrigation rental. Thus, the sum of all those demands listed above equal the supply. The advantages of the Annual model are: 1) Its implementation is relatively fast. 2) There is flexibility to vary the input parameters. There are, however, some limitations. 1) It uses only annual numbers. 2) It does not help in determining the net yields. 3) Currently, it has no reservoir operational capabilities. 4) There is no way to carry water from year to year in this particular program. MODSIM is another program that is being implemented with the help of John Labadie from CSU. It operates on monthly figures rather than annual figures, thus, the detail in the results, it is hoped, will be much better. Water Systems can be represented physically in this model. By the first of the year it is hoped that a network system will be set up and some trial simulations made. Dennis Bode continued the presentation by saying that the primary goal in developing the capability to look at our water resources is simply to provide an adequate supply through the framework of policies that exist, cost/benefit analyses, and any kind of safety margin that is desired. The computer simulation model gives the staff the capability to examine different scenarios and to be able to analyze any changes. The study period of 1953-1982 that was mentioned earlier was selected for several reasons: 1) Most of the data is available. 2) It is a recent period which many can relate to. 3) It also includes the dry period of 1953-1956 which is frequently used as a critical period in water supply planning in this area. 4) When looking at flow records t � • Water Board Minutes October 21, 1983 Page 3 on the Poudre River this 30 year period is relatively representative, and may even be somewhat drier than the long term average. Mr. Bode showed some graphs which depicted the City's supply and some of the characteristics of it. The City currently supplies about 77,000 people. Average annual use is presently at about 200 gallons per capita per day. With its present supply, and given several assumptions the model shows that the City has the capability of supplying 110,000 people. If the remainder of the Southside Ditch stock becomes available and ready to use, additional supplies can be added which would result in the City being able to serve more people. The question is where do we go from here? The Annual model can be used for quick looks. However, it is believed that better results can be obtained from developing the monthly data from the MODSIM computer model. Moreover, the staff is now more capable of anlyzing the effects of either adding supplies or changing the demands. During and following the presentation, Mr. Bode answered questions from the Board. He assured them that they will be kept informed of further developments in this area. Resolution: The Construction of Dams on the Poudre River Prior to the meeting, Water Board members had received a memo attached to a Council resolution on Construction of Dams on the Poudre River. The memo, from Assistant Mayor Gerry Horak, asked the Board to respond to the resolution. Councilman Horak attended the Water Board meeting to answer questions and listen, and serve in his capacity as Council liaison to the Board. He related that the Council had discussed this issue recently and he emphasized that the resolution was not a unanimous view. Mr. Fischer responded that he could see the political desirability of the Council making some kind of statement. However, he asked whether it is wise for the Council to urge anything that would have irrevocable results when so many questions remain to be answered. Historically, both the Council and the Water Board have strongly recommended a basin -wide study which would answer some of the questions such as, what is possible, what is desirable, and what the environmental effects of any of the trade-offs would be. Another concern, he said, is the City's relationship with the agricultural community. A large segment of that community is very anxious to have these studies done on the upper as well as the lower Poudre. This resolution could be interpreted by them to be a conflict between the City and agricultural interest, which, through the last 20 years or so, the City has tried so hard to avoid. Mr. Fischer suggested that another whereas be added to the resolution as follows: "Whereas the consistent position of the Water Board and the Council of the City of Fort Collins has been that a basin -wide study of potential water development and conservation projects should be accomplished before any available alternative is irrevocably foregone." Also, take out Section B of the "now therefore" part and substitute: "Be it resolved that no designation of any portion of the Poudre is appropriate until a basin -wide study of the available water development and conservation projects is completed." Some of the following are comments and viewpoints offered by Board members: Neil Grigg commented that the only reason for offering a resolution like this would be to put certain segments of the population at rest regarding the intentions of the City; thus, by its nature, it works in opposition to good } Water Board Minutes October 21, 1983 Page 4 planning. The Board, he said, has to be sensitive to preserving the City's options for the future, along with being sensitive to those feelings of the population. He concluded that the City needs to remain flexible with regard to its options. Ev Richardson remarked that it would be a shame to set this policy and then in 20 years find a need for water in the Canyon and have to ask the federal government for permission to build; in other words, "Why are people of 1983 trying to tie the hands of people in 2020?" The question arose as to what segments of the community favor Wild and Scenic and oppose dams on the Poudre. Councilman Horak stated that it isn't just one group. The sentiment is rather widespread among the community, he said, particularly since there are many who associate the possible construction of dams with Anheuser-Busch and a new water treatment plant; recent major Council decisions. Mr. Horak sees the Poudre River issue as having two focal points; one dealing with major construction projects on the river and second favoring, disfavoring, or having no opinion relative to the Wild and Scenic designation. Tom Sanders observed that if the Council continues to approve water intensive industries such as Anheuser-Busch, it may be necessary to dam the river in the future, although he would be unhappy to see that happen. Mary Lou Smith favored the idea of presenting the Council with a letter representing the concerns of the Board rather than "patching up" the current resolution. Ray Glabach commented that he feels the City has been remiss in not having its own plan for water in the future. Questions that need to be answered, he continued, are: "When are we going to institute water metering? When can we bring a Rockwell or a Sheep Creek reservoir on line? Do we know if we would have to participate in a dam on the main stem of the Poudre? He added that it is not necessary to look to state and federal governments totally for all of these answers. "We are going to have to look after our own back yard." He summarized by saying that the Water Board needs to implement a study determining the City's needs and where those needs are going to be satisfied. Ev Richardson responded that the impending drought study and water rate study should help the City to develop a long range plan for water. Norm Evans reminded the Board that the combined Engineering and Legislative Committees have been assigned the task of looking at water supplies for the future. Ward Fischer added that the committees are trying to define some of the things the City has been investigating such as Rockwell vs. Sheep Creek vs. North Poudre No. 6 Reservoir renovation. The City is getting to the point where they need to make a decision among these options. Following the questions and comments, Ev Richardson moved to recommend Ward Fischer's proposed change in the resolution which was stated earlier. After a second from Neil Grigg, the Board was polled with the following results: Bernie Cain yes, Ray Glabach No, Tom Sanders no, Mary Lou Smith no, Norm Evans yes, Ward Fischer yes, Ev Richardson yes, Tom Moore yes, Mort Bittinger yes, Neil Grigg yes. The motion passed 7 to 3. Along with this recommendation, Ward Fischer will compose a letter to the Council expressing the various c� Water Board Minutes October 21, 1983 Page 5 concerns of the Board. (It should be noted that Dave Stewart had to leave the meeting early so his vote was not recorded among the members polled.) Water Rate and Drought Studies Ward Fischer pointed out that since the Council has approved the water rate study and the drought study, would it now be appropriate for them to designate funds for each of these studies? Mike Smith responded that the staff would first like to "scope out" the studies with a committee from the Water Board within the next month to find out what needs to be studied, and review the results at the November Water Board meeting. Following that, staff will submit the recommendation to the Council, and subsequently, go to them formally and request the money for the study. At this point Ward Fischer appointed Ray Glabach and Neil Grigg to the Engineering Committee in order that all the engineers on the Board will be involved in the meetings with the staff to develop the scope and cost for these studies. Councilman Horak suggested that an economist be involved in the water rate study. It is as much an economic consideration as an engineering question, he said. Both require technical expertise. Mary Lou Smith asked for a clarification on the length of time which will be required for the studies since the Council appears to want them accomplished rather quickly. Mike Smith said that he has sent a memo to the City Manager indicating the guidelines and requirements for studies like these. New Business Mike Smith reported that the City Manager is requesting information on dual water systems (separate systems for drinking water and irrigation water). The staff has begun investigating some existing systems. Norm Evans has provided some information which has been helpful. Mr. Smith asked Board members to contact him or Dennis Bode if they can be of further help in this area. Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m. Water Harard Secretary