HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 12/17/1982MINUTES
Water Board Meeting
December 17, 1982
MEMBERS PRESENT Ward Fischer, George Wallace, Tan Moore, Tom Sanders,
Norm Evans, Dave Stewart, Bernie Cain, Henry Caulfield,
Ray Glabach, Mort Bittirger (alt.)
STAFF PRESENT Mike Smith, Roger Krempel, Dennis Bode, Paul Eckman,
Andy Pineda
MEMBERS ABSENT Ev Richardson (excused)
Minutes
The minutes of November 30, 1982 were approved with the following amendment:
The Water Board recommended that the proposed contract between the City and
Anheuser-Busch include the provision that if reservoir capacity were
required as part of Anheuser-Busch's obligation to the City to provide water
service, that the Brewery would pay for it.
Engineering Committee Recommendation Regarding Water Treatment Plant No. 1
Tom Sanders, a member of the Engineering sub -committee, reported that the
committee had studied carefully the reports prepared by Black & Veatch. In
addition they had met with the consultants and had extensive discussions
with staff on design alternatives to bring Water Treatment Plant No. 1 up to
water quality and quantity standards for the City of Fort Collins. As a
result, the Engineering sub -committee recommends to the Water Board that the
water treatment plant be moved out of the canyon to a new site near the
mouth of the Poudre Canyon. This recommendation is based primarily on the
risk factor from floods from either the mainstem or the North Fork of the
Poudre River which could damage severely or destroy Water Treatment Plant
No. 1 in its present location and destroy from one to seven miles of the
seven miles of transmission lines that transmit the water from the treatment
plant to the City and are located in close proximity to the river. The
details of the basis for this decision are recorded in the two reports and a
December 14th letter from Black & Veatch and are summarized in a memo from
the Engineering sub -committee distributed to Board members.
Dr. Sanders related that the Black & Veatch study was based on the 100 year
flood. The committee thought that the facility should be protected from the
standard project flood which would be comparable to the Big 'Thompson flood.
Following a lenghty discussion involving the engineering aspects and the
political ramifications of the recommendation, Henry Caulfield moved that
the Water Board accept the Engineering sub -committee's report. After a
second from Norm Evans, the Board voted unanimous approval of the motion.
Water Board Minutes
Page two
Henry Caulfield also moved that the staff be instructed to prepare an
appropriate report from the Water Board to the City Council noting the
Board's agreement on the basis of the engineering studies for relocating the
plant and the reasons why the City should move now on such an action.
Following a second from Ray Glabach, this motion also received unanimous
approval.
The matter will be set for consideration of the staff report and the
transmittal of the Water Board's recommendation to the Council at the next
regular meeting of the Water Board which will occur on Friday, January 21,
1983.
Ward Fischer suggested that, in the meantime, if any Board member thinks of
something which is of sufficient importance to be included in the report, he
should contact Mike Smith.
Staff Reports
Water Production Summary
Dennis Bode, Water Resources Engineer, noted that in November the City used
about 84% of what had been projected, which means that by the end of the
year, the City will have used approximately 15,600 acre-feet, substantially
less than had been projected.
Committee Reports
TWo-term Limit
Roger Krempel reported that the mayor would like to have something prepared
on this issue for the Council the first part of January. Henry Caulfield,
the committee chairman, said that he and his committee would set a time to
prepare a memorandum following the Board meeting.
Water Issues
Roger Krempel distributed some water information sheets that had been
prepared by the Water Utility staff for use by the City Council to clarify
two particular areas that had concerned the Council with regard to Anheuser-
Busch.
'the first item reviewed the yearly water use rate in acre-feet per acre for
some of the City's large volume water consumers. All City land developers
provide water at a rate of 3 acre-feet per acre of land developed. Anheuser-
Busch will provide the equivalent of 28 acre feet per acre of land. After
reviewing the water consumption of come of the major water users, it was
concluded that most of the list used above the 3 acre feet per acre of land,
some considerably above the rate.
The second item was in response to questions asked about the net yield of
water rights that may be acquired for use by Anheuser-Busch. The staff
first used a table to simulate the yields for a 30 year historic period.
Water Board Minutes
Page 'three
The water rights used were from a variety of sources as contemplated in the
agreement. Next they used a graph to show the relationship of Anheuser-
Busch water to the projected supply and demand for the year 2010. It was
based on the 1953-82 hydrologic period. The.graph showed how both the
supply and demand vary from year to year. Because the City obtains its
water from a variety of sources, the supply does not vary as much as might
be expected. In a dry year such as 1954, the margin between supply and
demand is less then in a wet year such as 1979.
Henry Caulfield reminded the Board that the Legislative and Engineering
Committees were asked to combine their efforts to study the long tens water
demand and supply question for the City. He suggested that Tennis Bode
provide the necessary information to get the committee equipped to proceed
with the study. Norm Evans offered to facilitate getting the data base from
CSU which is necessary to simulate the entire basin. Ward Fischer
recommended that, following a check into the data base at CSU, the staff
apprise the joint committee of the steps they could take, in cooperation
with the staff, to develop the points that Henry Caulfield had addressed.
Roger Krempel distributed a letter from Harlan Seaworth to Board members
indicating that North Ebudre would be willing to work with the City on a
water source and a water storage source. Acquisition of North Foudre
Reservoir No. 6 had been discussed previously by the Water Board. Mr.
Krempel advised Board members to consider the points that were listed on the
memo. Further investigation will be required and the Board will be
discussing this further at the January meeting.
Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m.
Water rd 9ecretary
580. Fort
PUBLIC WORKS and WATER UTILITIES DEPT.
CONFIDENTIAL
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 16, 1982
TO: John E. Arnold, City Manager
FROM: Roger E. Krempel, P.E., Director of Public Works & Water Utilities
RE: Harlan Seaworth Letter of December 9, 1982
At the December 9, 1982 Anheuser-Busch hearing Harlan Seaworth, president
of the North Poudre Irrigation Company, advised the City of a water re-
development opportunity.
Their Reservoir No. 6 is in need of extensive rehabilitation which their
company and shareholders can not afford. They are already committed to a
great expense with the rehabilitation of Fossil Creek Reservoir.
It is quite possible North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 could be lost to the
Company and the basin as a whole without a means of financing the rehabil-
itation. The City and North Poudre have been contemplating this for some
time. A-B presence on the scene may provide the way and the means.
This is explained in the attached letter from Mr. Seaworth. This is an
important opportunity. There are a number of factors which must be con-
sidered when evaluating the offer which we consider a beginning point for
negotiations.
Determination of fair value.
Development of moving some of our Southside Ditch water
to this reservoir in addition to the storage proposed in the
letter.
Development of the reservoir outlet.
Development of working agreements with irrigation companies
that have canals below the reservoir.
Determine the possibility and cost of connecting the Rawhide
water reuse pipeline to the reservoir to enhance the possi-
bility of future water reuse programs utilizing foreign
waters.
Harlan Seaworth Letter
Page 2
December 16, 1982
The above is not all inclusive, but is intended to show the potential for
Reservoir No. 6.
We should take this offer seriously and proceed in an expeditious manner to
develop the information necessary to make a decision.
If you have any questions at this time please let us know.
December 9, 1982
City of Fort Collins
Municipal Building
Fort Collins, CO
Attn: Mr. Krempel
Dear Members of the City Council:
This letter is to provide you an indication of the
support of the North Poudre Board of Directors for providing
certain water rights for the benefit of the City of Fort
Collins.
This letter states the general principles and there
would need to be a written agreement working out the details.
North Poudre would provide the City a minimum of 3,000
acre feet and a maximum of 5,000 acre feet of water yearly
which would be provided either from or through North Poudre
reservoirs, five and six. North Poudre would do this by
creating preferred water rights to indicate the entitlement
of the City to the amount of water selected. These rights
would be like preferred stock, which would mean the City
would be entitled to this amount and North Poudre would have
to manage its system to be able to deliver it. In turn for
these water rights, the City would initially pay the amount
of $1,000.00 an acre foot, a minimum of $3,000,000, -
for 3,000 acre feet. The assessment would be equivalent to
the assessment being paid by North Poudre shareholders. An
example of this follows:
If the City takes 3,000 acre feet, using 5 acre feet as
an average for delivery, then 5 is divided into 3,000, an
equivalent of 600 shares of North Poudre. The 600 figure
would then be multiplied times the annual assessment for
that year and that would be the yearly assessment owed.
No voting rights would be created by this device.
North Poudre has the obligation to rehabilitate reservoirs
5 and 6 and to operate and maintain them.
Mr. Krempel
December 9, 1982
Page Two
The water would be delivered at a weir below the outlet
to reservoir number 6. The maximum delivery rate would need
to be worked out, but should not exceed 50 cubic feet per
second because North Poudre must retain some delivery capacity.
Below the weir, the City could take delivery by pumping if
it decided to do that or it could consider pumping it from
the dam site and metering it out.
The City would be obligated to make any exchanges if
desired, but this water must come out of North Poudre number
6 and it would not be provided by North Poudre at any other
reservoir or in Horsetooth.
The substance of this proposal was approved unanimously
by the entire Board at the December 8, 1982, meeting.
Very truly yours,
l�
Ha lanh
cc: Alden V. Hill
cc: Mr. Ward Fischer
0.4 rn s-e-c C, i)JLila lll.c.<<c t4 ct �t
r
4
LL CC
O c
>-
r w
Hr
U Q
3
0
w
H
*z
* 7
EOM P O P P
r'P0000*
InNM 'M 'r *
Wwo OM*,
M In Ln Ln *.
Mc
�In n
O�oPOPco*.
co M I0) -7
Ni N N N
Go O co O Co P
e • J • *
<t' O It O +f N
IT IT vM*
N N N N *'
le!1 O O� O M
M Pi IT *
'INS •!cr' *;
In 10 N O LV M *;
MM co -O
*I
(*Ji M 1O 01 10 n Mc�
;'t"Ln O Ln M *'
ti IM 7*'
MMn n'O
-OM
��t Ln OLn O*'
'r IT Ln � Ln �T *'
tiOn INTO*!
7', IT co O M 10 �Ic,
*'
., P � W*
w10 Ln 00Ln IT
'T PM ML?
Ln M *.
'rP0000*
�O PLO O -,OM*.
co In Q' *
M O M O M O
o 'o ! ,o Ln
C4 N INNW
I
M OCIO OMO]*
0 0 0 0 0 0*
CL' C7 N 0404
4 0*,
N N *
10
LO OLn O Lnm *.
M M IM Ln
N N N (V *
I
ME U m
V H a
z rr>
CD Nr_H
r r N J O D U
U is it¢
O M. d r w K Of
O r r 0 0 0 0
03 zt <L lL lL
K
d ;
j. *(
•-W CO
r
1 *
0,Q n
Minn*
*
*
7k;
n M N
1 • .*
01,0 Co *I
Ln M
. N
P O
O LO
c N
-QT M
P n
i Co Ln
�O Co
M M OIs
a<
OI M O *;
M Ln n
*
*
*
*
LK,
E S 2 *
u F r *
zz
Moox*
w£Er*
H Z *
w co (D o
W X)E--
> H H *
H W 2'W
J > > O
W Inn Li
NxzL_o
J Q H >
H E £ Q
n P
in Ln
Co Ln
• Co
CD
*
MCI M - *
MN O
1 • .O
,M 00
In
n 0
Ln
0 0
• M
N co
CO
M O
N
Co 10
CO
W O
c
•N*
OM cL*
N LO
c yr
*
O P P *
OO *
*
•`,
O O *
1� n O Ac
fll �c
*
•n*
O N Co
MN • *,
Con0 �K
*
*
*
*
*
*
r+ *
H Li O
H II^Inc
*
U UrO_*
6LL\*
F u ci
¢ U
CO W u Q
W M u
H U J
W '-) =1
W -1�H *
>orr*
J d Q K
W
O *
*I
co
NO- O- Co *,
nP .*
N UTOco *.
c �*jt
o v Go
n P
N LnO*
Co to �Ir
O • Co
NMo*
M co
�O CO
M-0
014-
o co m
LnMO
< c *
� LOCO
cqc
•n
NM*,
Ln Co ri?
C of
• M *
O co
c�0
�o
CO n Lld
N O
Ln
Ln Ln LIG
(y N
fl •O*
OMP k
N O
•0�0*
I} •n�
ON M
M N • LiG
Co n 0
*
*
M
W
af
H *
w
H tI. O
W Ura-
n
¢LL�*
u I • *
W U r
F-n<r0
Q W u Q
n F-
L) J
O W ¢ O
I —3=3H
0
K K *
¢a
W �Ic
-T"
N'
i
:CoM*
N
1*7 Y
�Ln !00
00 Ncr)
CoN OO
4-10 Pn
• •
00 M 10
IL7 Cl)
Q Ln 00
nO CV) CD
O CoP
cv
Ln 0 N cr)
M< N�
W04 00
+f In n P
O� �M
n10
10 n 00
M N M
nn
Q Ln 00
M n P Ln
. •.
10 Ln < 1O
l70
00
0Co
N—
tn N
Ln lO
Ln Ln
NLn 100
Mn iN17'
O—
n O
IT Q'
�t n
00
l0 O
0-f0
O
0,0
7 M
in
00'
O ¢
10 M
MM:
LnN
00'
Nt
OP:
00
Co O
NN:
H
Q
£
pv
.W
J z
>
>
¢o
¢-i
¢
m¢
Mr
M
O r
P z
P
J H
'r O
'r
Col
-"NO£NO
cumwzmw
£ W P P¢
P P
"W�W"
J a
E
U
1
U
O
�a
�a
�Ja
Y
Y(
xn
LLJ
F—
LLJ
F—
LLJ
F—
0'1
O
W
(D-)
O
H
U
i
cn
c,
z
H
_J
U
U
d
F—
0
LL
LL_
CD
>'
F.
e
U
0
H
LL
1
U
v
O
Z
i
W
0
W
F-
C
J
Z
U
Cl-
W
cn
C7
i
Y
i
Z
9
m
W
LL
Z
O
C)
mod'
N
O
p
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
(V
O
O
O
m
O
. O
O
fD
O
O
O
-It
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
O
O
O
fD
O
O
O
.i
O
O
O
N
O
C
9
U
I
Y
i
K
W
M
F=--
CD
C3
Li
W
C
C
O
cm
I
I
•