Laserfiche WebLink
• S <br /> 7/20/82 Page -22- <br /> fosal is to have suburban interests pay <br /> or portions of that study. Hobbs ad- <br /> vised the proposal has been amended at <br /> least 20 times in the last two months. <br /> If a participant buys into the EIS study, <br /> they can also buy into the water that <br /> Denver has on its planning board to develop <br /> over the next twenty years. Basically <br /> Denver identified 6 projects as stated in <br /> his letter. The cost of all the water <br /> supply that Denver is anticipating is 1.58 <br /> billion dollars - construction cost, which <br /> is a 1980 figure. This figure sounds stagger- <br /> ing but is to develop a approximately 346,000 <br /> acre feet of water. Obviously the City <br /> of Louisville does not need that kind of <br /> water supply. What does the City need in <br /> the way of water supply to complete our <br /> inventory? Going from our current level <br /> of service, the City would need approximately <br /> 1, 700 acre feet of additional water supply <br /> to meet the needs of our comprehensive plan <br /> area as projected over the years. Based <br /> on these figures if the City were to buy <br /> their ortion of EIS, and estimating it <br /> to be $5,000,000 today - there is no firm <br /> figure on that. Denver is saying it is <br /> probably a $3,000,000.00 study, but it <br /> could go to $8,000.000.00 or $10,000,000.00. <br /> If we assume that the study will be $5 ,000,000, <br /> the City's cost would be 525,000. 00, which <br /> is is of 17.. If Denver will not accept anything <br /> less than 1% of the EIS study, the City's <br /> cost would be $50,000 for the study and <br /> 15.8 million dollars for the capital con- <br /> struction cost. It was his feeling that <br /> there was an opportunity between now and <br /> Sept. 7, 1982 to develop figures that Council <br /> wants to have along with those on other <br /> alternative he City may have. There <br /> also must be ,ertain conditions the City <br /> would want such as the water be delivered <br /> to South Boulder Creek and not the Platte <br /> River. The City wants to have the capability <br /> of utilizing Denver' s surplus water, and wants <br /> to be able to reuse it . The contract that <br /> we have today does not allow for that. Finan- <br /> cially the City could sell this water to <br /> someone else. so reuse would definitely be <br /> an issue, and could be a viable asset at <br /> a later time. They would like to talk with <br /> the Denver Water Board as to annual yield <br /> rather than safe annual yield as they have <br />