HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-05-21 WSB AGENDA1
AGENDA
ENGLEWOOD WATER AND SEWER BOARD
MAY21, 1996
_ 5:00 p.m.
CONFERENCE ROOM A
BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE MEETING
SANDWICHES WILL BE SERVED
1. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1996
WA TER AND SEWER BOARD MEETING. (ATT. l}
2. LICENSE AGREEMENT -FIBER OPTIC CONDUIT FOR
ARAPAHOE COUNTY. (ATT. 2)
3. WATER STANDARD VIOLATION OF 4-28-96. (ATT. 3)
4. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS -RECOMMENDATION TO
COUNCIL.
5. S. ENGLEWOOD SAN. DISTRICT MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
RENEWAL.
6. LETTER FROM MARTIN & WOOD DATED 4-15-96
RE: ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF ENGLEWOOD'S WATER
SUPPLY AND DEMAND. (ATT. 4)
7.
8.
9.
10.
LE TTER OF AGREEMENT
RE : DENVER/ENGLEWOOD/CYPRUS.
CABIN MEADOW CREEK MAINTENANCE. (ATT. 5)
LETTER FROM MARCIA HUGHES DATED 4-25-96
RE : WILD & SCENIC TASK FORCE. (ATT. 6)
A. WATER COMPLAINT FROM 4440 S. PENNSYLVANIA ST.
(ATT. 7)
B. LETTER FROM BRAD REED OF 3651 S. CHEROKEE,
#6. (ATT. 8)
A. ARTICLE FROM THE DENVER POST DATED 4-24-96,
"WATER DEPT. CLEARED IN FALL.". (ATT. 9)
B. ARTICLE FROM THE DENVER POST DATED 5-2-96
"DEAL PUTS S. PLATTE INTO FLOW OF FUN."
(ATT. 10)
C. ANNUAL REPORT. (WILL BE DISTRIBUTED AT
MEETING)
D. LETTER DATED 3-5-96 FROM DENVER WATER BOARD
RE: LONG RANGE PLANNING (ATT. 11)
11. CENTENNIAL INTERCHANGE -BIKE TRAIL, ROADS, ETC.
12. OTHER.
A TT. I
WATER AND SEWER BOARD
MINUTES
APRIL 9, 1996
The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m.
Chairman Fullerton declared a quorum present.
Members present:
Members absent:
Also present:
Habenicht, Fullerton, Higday,
Neumann, Otis, Resley,
Vobejda, Wiggins
Burns, Otis
Stewart Fonda, Director of
Utilities
John Bock, Manager of Admin.
Tom Brennan, Utilities Dept.
l} MINUTES OF THE MARCH 12, 1996 MEETING.
The Englewood Water and Sewer Board Minutes from the March
12, 1996 were approved as written.
Mr. Fullerton moved;
Ms. Habenicht seconded:
Ayes:
Nays:
Members absent:
Motion carried.
Tom Burns entered at 5:20 p.m.
To approve the March 12,
1996 Englewood Water and Sewer
Board Minutes as written.
Habenicht, Fullerton, Higday,
Neumann, Otis, Resley,
Vobejda, Wiggins
None
Burns, Otis
/
2) COM PRELIMINARY DESIGN PROPOSAL.
Carl Houck of COM appeared before the Board to review the
Agreement for Professional Design, Bidding and Construction
Services for the Allen Filter Plant Improvements. Carl
presented a Water Treatment Plant Upgrade Modifications
Schedule to the Board.
All Water Board members were satisfied with Actiflo .
presentation, except for Jim Higday. Mr. Higday felt that
cryptosporidium and giardia removal was not addressed. Mr.
Higday also had questions regarding by-products of· the
process. Carl Houck noted that they are waiting for test
results to be received for evaluation and that the Actiflow
process . is ne of several b~ con~idered. ~ Cl/I'\-~t1, "'4-; P-v'-V'-1.
/}'M, H 1 Cf-U-f'1-ke-"V w~ .. -<..-a~'. ti · 7 ~ II
A copy of t e final proposal will be forwarded to the Water
Board. Carl will conduct a workshop at a future meeting to
discuss design. Stu requested a bound set of calculations
from COM and noted the City will own the documents.
The Board concurred that Stu should proceed with the COM
Engineering Services Agreement and should go to Council
after city Attorney approval.
3. ARTICLE FROM "HIGHLANDER"
Stu discussed an article from the Highlands Ranch newspaper,
. The Highlander, which was titled, "Ranch has plenty of water
for development."
4. SERVICE POLICIES FOR UTILITIES DEPT.
The Board recommended the following policies be instituted
regarding service line and stop box repair, maintenance and
ownership responsibilities.
A. Water Line Leaks:
The City will be responsible for the section located in
the public right-of-wa~ and resident is responsible for
the section located on their property.
B. Frozen Water Lines:
city will assist thawing the first time a line is
frozen. After that, the resident will be assessed the
City's costs to thaw the line.
City Code 12-lA-8, E states:
In the event that the Water Division is requested to
and does thaw or otherwise provide related services for
a frozen or cold-damaged residential service line that
is not in the public right-of-way but is on a
licensee's private property, the licensee shall pay a
fee to the Water Division amounting to the fair market
value of the services provided for thawing or other aid
in restoring service to the property, but in no event
less than one hundred dollars ($100.00). This fee
shall not be imposed if the licensee's request for
thawing or other services is his or her first such
request and if the licensee has followed any and all
previous recommended precautions from the Water
Division regarding the location of the lines and the
risk of freezing.
In any event, the Water Division and the City are not
obligated to perform such services nor to provide any
protection from leaks or freezing on the licensee's
property, which is solely the responsibility of the
licensee.
c. Lead/Galvanized Water Lines:
The City will split the responsibility at the property
line if the resident replaces their side of the service
line with copper.
The City will replace the section of service line in
the public right-of-way when doing a meter pit
installation.
D. Poor Flow Characteristics:
E.
City and Owner will share responsibility. If a
property owner agrees, the City will excavate the
service line at the curb stop so the property owner can
hire their own plumber to clean the service line. The
City will back-fill the excavation.
Curb Stop Valve Responsibility on
Service Line:
The resident will be responsible.
only means to shut off the service
excavating the main line.
the Resident's
The curb stop is the
line without
F. Concrete Repair and Re.placement:
The Water Department tries to avoid concrete removal
and replacement. If a curb stop has been covered with
concrete during a concrete or paving district, the
Water Division will remove the concrete, repair the
curb stop and replace the concrete. If the concrete is
damaged due to a water main break, the Water Department
will pay for the repair. During water meter
installations, the Water Department will try to avoid
concrete. If concrete must be removed to install a
meter pit, the City will replace the concrete. The
City will not replace landscaping beyond sod
replacement. ·
G. Private Irrigation system:
If a private sprinkler system is in the way of a meter
pit installation, the customer must relocate any
necessary piping or the control box before the City
will install the meter pit.
5. PROPOSAL TO LEASE DITCH AND MANIFOLD CAPACITY IN THE
LAST CHANCE DITCH AND NEVADA DITCH TO CENTENNIAL.
Stu reviewed the first draft of the Proposal to Lease Ditch
and Manifold Capacity in the Last Chance Ditch and Nevada
Ditch to the Centennial Water and Sanitation District. Stu
noted that a counter proposal is being discussed and he will
be meeting with Denver and Aurora next week to discuss.
The next Water and sewer Board meeting will be May 21, 1996,
at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Room A.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathy Burrage
Recording Secretary
.. . ..
ATT. 2
LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of the
8th day of Ma , 19~9 ..... 6 ___ _
_ b_y_a_n_d-b-e-tween the CIT Y· OF ENGLEWOOD, a municipal
corporation of Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "City"
and
. Araoahoe County .-..... ·· ............ ....__ ..... _..-....;......._ ___________ _
, hereinafter referred to as "Licensee," ---
WITNESSETH: The City without any warranty of its title
or interest whatsoever, hereby authorizes Licensee, its
successor, assigns, to install a
Fiber Optic Conduit
the City's rights-of-way for the City Ditch,
under
described as a
parcel of land situated in the _:..;.W~e~s~t~C~o~r~n~e~r _______ __ of
Section 1 6 , Township _ ____.5_,,...c;_..a_,,.,.11-...t ...... h.__ ___________ _
Range 6 8 West of the ___ 6u,,t._h..,,_~---.-,-,...
P.M., County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado and lying within
the following described lines:
The above-described parcel contains
acres, more or less.
3 .. . .
1. Any construction contemplated or performed under this
License shall comply with and conform to standards
formulated by the Director of Utilities of the City and such
construction shall be performed and completed according to
the plans, consisting of one sheet, a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. The Licensee shall notify the City's Director of
Utilities at least three (3) days prior to the time of
commencement of the construction of, or any repairs made to,
Licensee's
Fiber Optic Conduit
so that the city may, in its discretion,
inspect such operations.
3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of the
commencement of construction of said
Fiber Optic Conduit the Licensee
shall complete such construction, place and maintain
permanent, visible markers, of a type and at such locations
as designated by the City's Director of Utilities, referring
to the centerline of the installation and shall clear the
crossing area of all construction debris and restore the
area to its previous condition as near as may be reasonable.
In the event the placing of the centerline markers and the
clearing and restoration of the crossing area is not
completed within the time specified, the City may complete
the work at the sole expense of the Licensee.
4. The city shall have the right to maintain, install,
repair, remove or relocate the City Ditch or any other of
its facililties or installations within the City's rights-
of-way, at any time and in such manner as the ~ity deems
necessary or convenient. The city reserves the exclusive
right to control all easements and installations. In the
event the Fiber Optic Conduit should interfere
with any future use of the city's rights-of-way by the City,
the Licensee shall, upon request and at its sole expense,
relocate, rearrange, or remove its installations so as not
to interfere with any such use.
5. Any repair or replacement of any City installation made
necessary, in the opinion of the City's Director of
Utilities because of the construction of the
Fi be r 0 D ti c Con d 11 i t
or other appurtenant installation thereof, shall be made at
the sole expense of the Licensee.
6. The stipulation and conditions of this License shall be
incorporated into contract specif i6ations i~ the
construction herein authorized is to be done a contract
basis.
7. The rights and privileges granted in this License shall
be subject to prior agreements, licenses and/or grants,
recorded or unrecorded, and it shall be the Licensee's sole
responsibililty to determine the existence of said documents
or conflicting uses or installations.
8. The Licensee shall contact and fully cooperate with the
City's personnel and the construction shall be completed
without interference with .any lawful, usual or ordinary flow
of water through the City Ditch. Licensee shall assume all
risks incident to the possible presence of such waters, or
of storm waters, or of surface waters in the City Ditch.
9. All trenches or holes within the City's rights-of-way
shall be backfilled and tamped to the original ground line
in layers not to exceed six (6) inches loose measure to a
compaction of ninety per cent (90%) Standard Proctor Maximum
Density.
10. Licensee, by acceptance of this license, expressly
assumes full and strict liability for any and all damages of
every nature to person or property caused by water from the
ditch leaking through the ditch banks or pipeline at the
point or points where the Licensee performs any work in
connection with the crossing provided by this license. The
Licensee assumes all responsibility for maintenance of the
installation .
To the extent authorized by law,
11. Licensee shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its
officers asnd employees, against any and all claims,
damages, actions or causes of action and expenses to which
it or they may be subjected by reason of said
Fiber Optic Conduit
being within and across and under the premises of the City
or by reason of any work done or omission made by Licensee,
its agents or employees, in connection with the
construction, replacement, maintenance or repair of said
installation.
12. It is expressly agreed that in case of Licensee's breach
of any of the within promises, the City may, at its option,
have specific performance thereof, or sue for damages
resulting from such breach.
13. Upon abandonment of any right or privilege herein
granted, the right of Licensee to that extent shall
terminate, but its obligation to indemnify and save harmless
the City, its officers and employees, shall not terminate in
any event.
14. See attached addendum.
In granting the above authorization, the City reserves the
right to make full use of the property involved as may be
necessary or convenient in the operation of the water works
plant and system under the control of the City.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed
as of the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD,
city Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
LICAGM6
ounty Commissioners
0
/
ADDENDUM
Arapahoe County will put in five (5) potholes to insure that said proposed Fiber Optic Conduit
"ill be at a minimum of ten (10) feet from center line of the city ditch.
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD RIGHT-OF-WAY CROSSING
ST A TE LAND BOARD (OWNER)
\
A fiber optic cable wh is proposed to be located in the Southwest quarter of Section 16,
Township 5 South, Ra lL 68 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Arapahoe County, State of
Colorado and lying within the existing 25 foot wide right-of-way described in Book 4172 at Page
46, Reception No. 24 14107 among the land records of Arapahoe County; said fiber optic cable is
intended to be located 5 feet west of the easterly line of said right-of-way, and is more
particularly described as follows :
Beginning at a point on the westerly line of said right-of-way, from which the west quarter
corner of Section 16 bears North 78° 53 '46" West, a distance of 1162. 76 feet; thence through
said City of Englewood Ditch Easement the following course:
South 44°13'58" East, a distance of 22.93 feet; thence parallel to and 5 feet westerly of said
easterly right-of-way line the following five (5) courses :
South 16°28 '45" West , a distance of 132.05 feet; thence
South 24°28'26" West , a distance of 109.32 feet; thence
South 13°06'16" West , a distance of200.06 feet; thence
South 20 °58'46" West, a distance of 446 .31 feet; thence
South 20°19'05" West, a distance of 164 .38 feet; thence
South 11°55'42" East, a distance of 9 .37 feet, to the point of terminus, which is located on said
ea s terly right-of-way line; from this point the west quarter corner of Section 16, bears North
33 °15 ' 19" West , a distance of 1484 .38 feet.
The bearings of this project are based on coordinates established by Benchmark Surveying, Ltd .
for the west quarter corner of Section 16, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian (found a 3" axle in a range box) and Benchmark's control point 1514 (found a
#5 rebar with a plastic cap stamped "LS 16401 "), both of which are shown and listed on a
drawing entitled "Improvement Survey Plat of Southwest Corridor R .O . W. in part of Section 16,
T.5S., R.68W ., 6th P .M . State of Colorado", Sheets I and 2 of 2 . The bearing between said
points is calculated to be South 72 °01 '03" West.
Mark A . Miller, PLS
Colorado Registration No . 28626
EXHIBIT B
POINT 01' Bt;r;lllNINC
STAT ION 15+56.9
TI E rROM W 1/4 COR .
SECTION 16. rouNO J"
A XLE IN RA NGE BOX :
S 1 e·53·45• E 11 6 2.76' \
\
\.
\
\
\.
\
S44"13'5B"E
22.93'
STA: 111+1'.I
25' CITY OF ENG LEWOOD-........_ .fs/
RIGH T-OF-WA Y --........I\
BOOK 4 17 2 PAGE 46 .
RIG HT-OF -WAY CENTERLINE
----+----<j ~~H;1_T~ ?~A~N GLEWOOO
-BOOK 4172 PAGE 46 i rl CE N TE~LIN E
::x 1 s~.'.N ~-'.f.~~0.,~1 . f-. ,,J _ w w
i EXISTING I
_ 5 4" RCP(b -PROPOSED TIBER
OPTIC CABLE _ _.... __
j . JMin.
~o~;o.,, or I
EXCAVAT10Ni
E!!Q[fil
NOT TO SCALE
SW 1/4 OF SECTION 16
TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH,
RANCE 68 WEST,
ARAPAHOE COUNTY, ft:
COLORADO .
I
,~ I
,,_,_T~·
PROPOSED FIBER
OPTIC CABLf WCATION
I
I
I
~ rouNO 15 REBAR
IMTHOUT CAP .
£-£~ (-
SU RV(Y[O B Y
I WI LLI AM S
DR AWN BY.
r GEN DRON
CHE CKED BY :
l.l MILLER
OAT[
05/01/96
---(---(---(~
)@
I
I
BASIS OF BEARINGS
The beorin9' of th ia project ore bosed on coordin ates
established by Benchmorlc Surveyin9 , ltd. for the wes t
quar ter cOf'ner of S.ct ton t6, Township 5 South , Ron9e
68 Wes t of the Sixth Princip al Mer idian (found o J.
ax le in o ronc;ie box) ond Benchmark's control po int
1514 (found o f5 rebor with o plas tic cop stomped
'\.S 16401}, both of which ore shown ond Hated on o
drawing entllled '"lmprowment Survey Plot of Southwes t
Cor rlda< R.O.W. W, port ol ~e c tion 16, T.55., R.68W.,
6th P.M. Stole of Coforodo . Shee ts 1 ond 2 of 2. The
bearing be tween so ld poin ts is colculoted to be
Sou th 72'01'0J" Wes t.
NOTE : THtS EXH IBIT IS INTEN DED ONLY TO DEP IC T TH( PR OPOSED
FI BER OP TIC CABLE LOC A TION, AN O DOES NO T REPR(SENT
A MON UUEN TED BOUNDAR Y SUR V(Y. I r=-k-J5 · r I HOR IZONTAL SCA L[: 1" = 50'
100'
I
Proposed Fiber Optic Cable Location
GREENHORNE & O'MARA, INC.
En g ine era / Architec t>/ Planner>/ Scientist•/ Surveyors
BOOK o PA G[S.
CLIE NT:
PRE UIER NETWORK SOL UT IONS . INC.
SECTI ON
16
TOWN SHIP
5S
RANGE
68W
J00 NUUBER
42 24 -001-699
rlLE NUUB ER
A -FI BOPT \OWG\
LEGAL.OWG
SC ALL
SIXTH PRINCIP AL l.I ERIOIAN
1---------------tSH [[T·
ARAP AHO[ COU NT Y, COLOR ADO
1" -50'
1 o l 2
AT T. 3
NOTICE TO ENGLEWOOD WATER CUSTOMERS
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets drinking water standards
and has determined that the presence of microbiological contaminants are a health concern
at certain levels of exposure . If water is inadequately treated, microbiological
contaminants in that water may cause disease. Disease symptoms may include diarrhea,
cramps, nausea and possibly jaundice,_ and any associated headaches and fatigue . These
symptoms, however, are not just associated with disease-causing organisms in drinking
water, but also may be caused by a number of factors other than your drinking water.
EPA has set enforceable requirements for treating drinking water to reduce the risk of
these adverse heath effects . Treatment such as filtering and disinfecting the water removes
or destroys microbiological contaminants . Drinking water which is treated to meet EPA
requirements is associated with little to none of this risk and should be considered safe .
At the Allen Filter Plant, an EPA standard was exceeded. The standard that was
exceeded is called maximum allowable turbidity . Turbidity is a measure of all matter in a
given water sample . Turbidity cannot exceed EPA standards (.5 turbidity units) in more
than 5% of all tests in a month . In Englewood's case this is no more than eight tests . It
cannot exceed 5.0 turbidity units in any one test. The turbidity standard was lowered
from 1. 0 turbidity units to . 5 turbidity units in July of 1993 . This limit was exceeded
thirteen times in April of 1996 . The maximum reading was .93 turbidity units. Chlorine
dosages were increased to provide increased disinfection in accordance with State
Standards and at no time was the water considered unsafe .
The occurrences of high turbidity were caused by algae blooms in our treatment reservoir
and by the increased presence of manganese from bottom sediments in the reservoir. The
increased manganese was due to seasonal thermal turnover and high winds which stirred
up sediments . The reservoir has returned to normal and turbidities are within limits . The
plant staff has determined how to treat for high manganese in the reservoir during these
unique circumstances .
The Water Department and City Council recognized that there would be difficulties at
times in meeting these new standards and recommended new facilities be built which will
bypass the reservoir and provide a high level of treatment. City Council has passed an
increase in water rates to fund this program and design is about to begin . It is estimated
construction will commence in the spring of 1997 and the facilities should be completed in
late 1998 .
If you have further questions regarding this matter, please call the Englewood Water
Department at 762-2635 .
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Utilities Director
City of Englewood
3400 So. Elati
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Dear Stu:
April 15, 1996
A TT. '-f
602 Park Ebivt Dr. Suite 276
Golden, Colorado 80401
FAX (303)626-2624
(303) 626-2600
Re: Engineering Analysis of Englewood's
Water Supplies and Demand
Job No. 159.1
At your request we are submitting this proposal for engineering services required to perform
an analysis of Englewood's water supplies and their ability to satisfy Englewood's water
requirements. Generally , we propose to (1) describe and quantify each of Englewood's
water supplies over the historic 1952-1980 study period; (2) quantify Englewood's present
water requirements and her future water requirements at maximum buildout; (3) identify
factors which limit Englewood's realization of yields available from her various water rights;
(4) determine and identify in a general manner those water rights and their yields which are
necessary for Englewood's own uses and those water rights and their yields which are
available for delivery to Centennial Water and Sanitation District; and (5) recommend actions
to improve Englewood's abilities to realize yields available from its various water rights.
Specifically, we propose the following scope and methodologies.
I. Description and Quantification of Englewood's Water Supplies
A. Englewood's Senior Main Stem Rights
For the very senior water rights owned by Englewood in the Petersburg, Nevada,
Platte Canyon, Brown and City Ditches, we will calculate daily yields over the 1952-
1980 study period and prepare monthly summary tables of the yields of each water
right and of all of the water rights.
Yields will be calculated in a two-stage manner as follows . Streamflows available for
diversion will be (1) the calculated historic accretions in the Waterton-to-Littleton
reach of the South Platte River, and (2) the calculated "natural streamflow" at
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 2
April 15, 1996
Denver's intake in Waterton Canyon. Englewood's water rights in the Chatfield-Union
Avenue reach will be meshed with other senior water rights in the same reach, and the
available streamflow (i.e., the calculated water accretions) will be distributed among all
rights in this reach according to their presently decreed rates of diversion as limited by
historic river calls. If all of Englewood's water rights are not fully satisfied from such
stream flow, then all of the unsatisfied water rights in this lower Chatfield-to-Union A venue
reach will be meshed with the senior rights in Waterton Canyon, and the historic "natural
streamflow" calculated at Denver's Waterton Canyon intake will be distributed on a priority
basis, as limited by historic calls , among both the senior Waterton Canyon rights and the
unsatisfied Chatfield-to-Union Avenue rights.
(We have already prepared a computer program to perform these daily yield analyses.
Remaining tasks here are (1) to modify and to calculate "natural streamflow" at
Denver's intake; (2) to verify our listings of senior water rights in the two reaches;
and (3) possibly to calculate historic Waterton-to-Littleton accretions on a daily basis.)
B. Englewood's McBroom Ditch Rights
1. 1989 Municipal Right for 16 cfs
We propose to incorporate the daily yield studies from the 1941-19 85 period
which we prepared for Englewood's litigation of the junior, 1989 rights which
the Water Court awarded Englewood in Case No. 89CW063. These studies
used recorded streamflows at the Bear Creek gage at Sheridan, just below the
McBroom Ditch headgate, and records of historic calls. We propose to
prepare monthly tables of the amounts of water available in-priority under
Englewood's 1989 priority, as well as amounts physically available from Bear
Creek which could be augmented under 89CW063 .
2. 1859 Right Changed to Municipal Use in Case No. 88CW203
Because this water right i$ the number one priority in Bear Creek, and because
the changed diversion rates which the Court approved for Englewood's
munic ipal use are so small, a brief examination of recorded streamflows of the
Morrison gage will be made to determine if historically there were ever any
periods during which the flow of Bear Creek was insufficient to satisfy
Englewood's changed McBroom Ditch rights plus the unchanged one cfs in
McBroom Ditch still owned by others. Reductions from the decreed
entitlements will be made for any periods of insufficient flow, and tables of
monthly yields will be prepared.
/
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 3
April 15, 1996
3. 1862 Olsen and Bell Ditch
This water right, changed in Case No. W-8271, provides water from wells to
irrigate the Englewood Municipal Golf Course. We propose to segregate this
water right and the demand for irrigation water from the golf course from the
yield studies otherwise described herein. Because this water right is so ~enior,
and because the water which it can provide is sufficient for the golf course, we
will separate both its supply and the golf course's demand fr~m the study.
4. Guiraud Ditch
Under the change decree entered for Thornton in Case No. W-8345,
Englewood may divert from the South Platte River at Chatfield Reservoir
between 0.4 cfs and 0.6 cfs during the months of May, June and July. Daily
yields will be calculated using historic records of call on District 23 (South
Park), assuming that sufficient water was always physically available at the
original point of diversion, and a monthly summary of such available yield
will be prepared.
5. Dunbar No. 3 Ditch
Under the change decree entered for Thornton in Case No. 84CW57,
Englewood may divert at Chatfield Reservoir 0.15 cfs of the May 30, 1880,
priority originally awarded to the Dunbar No. 3 Ditch, located in South Park.
Daily yields will be calculated using the methodology described above for the
Guirard Ditch, and a monthly summary table will be prepared.
6. Demick Ditch
By stipulation with Thornton in its change of the 1875 Demick Ditch water
right in Case No. 86CW222, Thornton is to provide Englewood with up to ten
acre-feet upon certain conditions. We propose to describe this agreement, but . .
we propose to perform no analysis of its yield due to its relatively small size.
7. J.D. Brown Ditch
In Case No. 85CW324 the Water Court approved a change of water right of
Englewood's J.D. Brown Ditch priority to the City's municipal use. This
changed priority for 0.59 cfs is to be diverted from Big Dry Creek at a
location very near Englewood's Allen Filter Plant. Daily yields will be
calculated based upon historic call records, assuming that a sufficient flow in
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 4
April 15, 1996
Big Dry Creek is available, and a monthly summary of yield will be prepared.
8. Boreas Pass No. 2 Ditch
We propose to collect recent diversion records following Englewood's
rehabilitation of this transmountain diversion structure and tabulate them along
with other records of historic diversions. Based on these records and other
available information, we propose to describe in approximate terms the yield
anticipated to be available from this water right.
9. Como Reservoir
In Case No. 85CW393 the Water Court awarded Englewood a conditional
7 ,900 acre-foot storage priority in South Park from Trout Creek, Tarryall
Creek and Park Gulch. At this point, we propose only to describe this water
right and not to perform any yield analyses.
10. Ranch Creek Collection System
Denver's obligations to deliver "Basic Delivery Water" and "Paid Delivery
Water" under the August 11, 1995 , agreement will be described. No yield
analyses will be performed.
11. Thornton/Westminster Standley Lake
As a result of Englewood's settlements with Thornton and Westminster over
these two cities' changes of their Standley Lake water rights (Cases 89CW132,
86CW397 , 88CW267 and 89CW129), Englewood is to receive 75 acre-feet of
comsumptive use water each year, and from zero to 375 acre feet of additional
consumptive use water, depending on the extent to which Standley Lake fills
each year . We propose to gather and prepare a summary of actual delivery
requirements from the inipal year of 1992 to present. We will then present a
general description of expected deliveries, but we will not prepare any
analyses of the yield from these agreements.
12. Denver Evaporation Agreement
In partial settlement of Englewood's complaint against Denver in Case No.
90CW82 , Denver agreed to provide up to 750 acre-feet per year to make up
shortages in the supply to those senior Englewood water rights described in
this proposal 's item I A (1) above. We propose to assess the results of the
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 5
April 15, 1996
yield analyses described in item I A (1), above, to identify the extent to which
this agreement could be exercised in order to enhance the yields of these
revised water rights.
13. 1948 McLellan Reservoir (4616 acre-feet);
1990 Union Avenue Intake (38 cfs);
1990 City Ditch Outlet Manifold (38 cfs);
1990 McLellan Reservoir Enlargement (1510 acre-feet);
1990 McLellan Reservoir Refill (4616 acre-feet)
The daily yields from this junior set of Englewood's water rights will be
calculated in a sequential manner as follows. Streamflow available for
diversion will be calculated by taking recorded flow at the USGS Littleton
gage for 1952 through 1976 and the Corps-calculated inflow to Chatfield
Reservoir for 1976 through 1980. Flows at Littleton will be reduced by 15 cfs
in the winter and by 40 cfs in the summer to reflect diversion of water needed
by senior priorities, namely by Englewood. The Chatfield inflow will be
reduced further by 40 cfs during the summer to reflect the remaining active
entitlements to water by users of The Nevada, Last Chance and City Ditches .
Then, from the remaining flow and only under historic free river conditions,
yield under the 1948 McLellan right will be calculated as up to 58 cfs as
further limited to an annual volume of 4,616 acre-feet. (The rate of 58 cfs, of
course , relates directly to the design capacity of the new piping of City Ditch
down to the City Ditch pump station. However, this rate of 58 cfs is nearly
identical to Englewood's contractual right with Denver to carry Englewood
water in the High Line Canal when it is diverting its 1879 irrigation priority.
For this study a single filling rate of 58 cfs will be used.)
Next, reflecting Denver's 1977 municipal storage priority for Chatfield
Reservoir, all of the remaining flow each day until an annual volume of
approximately 10,000 acre-feet has been reached will be attributed to Denver's
exercise of its storage rigl)t. (We may modify this annual "fill" for Chatfield
Reservoir after discussions with Denver Water.) Admittedly, such treatment is
perhaps at variance from Denver's contractual obligations to keep Chatfield
Reservoir partially full for recreational purposes, and it is clearly at variance
with Denver 's storage of other waters in Chatfield and its exchanges of water
by releases from Chatfield. It is also at odds with Denver's use of an
operational year beginning on April 1. However, there is no practical way to
consider prospectively Denver's actual use of Chatfield Reservoir in the
context of its overall operation of its complex and widespread water collection
and storage system. This proposed treatment of Chatfield Reservoir is
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 6
April 15, 1996
regarded as conservative and limiting in so far as its treatment of the yield of .
Englewood's junior 1990 water rights.
Next, reflecting the 1980 20 cfs DOW fish rearing priority at Chatfield and
numerous 1984-1988 Ceo_t ennial rights to direct flow and for storage, these
DOW and Centennial rights will be recognized under historic free river
conditions from the remaining river flow at a rate of 150 cfs from April
through October, and at a , rate of 170 cfs from November through March.
Then, from the remaining flow and only under historic free river conditions,
up to 38 cfs of the remaining flow will be calculated as the yield of
Englewood's two 38 cfs rights--the 38 cfs right at Chatfield under 90CW222
and the 38 cfs right at Union Avenue under 90CW221. Even though these
rights are separate and are not constrained to be operated as one 38 cfs right,
partly for simplicity this analysis will calculate yield under only one such 38
cfs priority.
Next, the yield for Englewood's 1990 McLellan Enlargement for 1510 acre-
feet will be calculated from the remaining flow under historic free river
conditions, as limited by a maximum rate of diversion of 58 cfs, as described
above for the 1948 McLellan priority, and as limited by an annual volume of
1510 acre-feet.
Last, the 1990 McLellan Refill right for 4616 acre-feet will be calculated as
limited by 58 cfs and as limited by a flow rate of 58 cfs.
Monthly tables of the yields of each of Englewood's water rights will be
prepared. The yield study will pay no regard to transmission and storage
limitations at this point in the analysis. Also yields and a summary table of
water physically available, but out-of-priority and augmentable, will be
prepared for the 1990 38 cfs direct flow priority.
II. Englewood's Water Demands
A. Present Demand
Englewood's municipal uses of water over the past fifteen years, during which
Englewood's population has generally remained at approximately 30,000, will be
tabulated on a monthly basis and used as an expression of Englewood's present
demand.
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 7
April 15, 1996
Englewood's requirements for water for irrigation of its parks will be identified, as
well as its minimal obligations to supply water to Littleton and to South Suburban
Parks and Recreation District.
B. Future Demand
Englewood's future demands for municipal water will be calculated based on the ratio
of future to present population as applied to present water demands, assuming that
residential and commercial irrigation within the City remain unchanged.
ID. Water Supply and Demand
A. Assessment of Englewood's Needs for Water
Assessments of Englewood's needs for water from her various sources of water will
be conducted for both Englewood's present and future demands. These assessments
will be general in nature in that they will simply ascribe a minimum set(s) of firm
water supplies necessary to satisfy Englewood's own needs for water. The remaining
set(s) of Englewood's supplies will then be described as being available for lease to
Centennial or to others. The selection of these sets of water supplies will depend on
the outcome of the yield analyses.
We do not anticipate creating every conceivable set of water supplies which could be
obligated to supply Englewood, and the resultant sets of rights which could be
available for lease . We anticipate that the preparation of the report--including the
analyses of yields and present and future demands--will allow the reader to reach
his/her own conclusions in these regards.
B. Limitations
We propose to identify present capacities of Englewood's raw water diversion and
storage facilities as they relate to, the yields for the individual rights. We will further
identify such limitations of diversion and storage facilities and, where appropriate,
recommend actions to alleviate such limitations.
IV. Engineering Report
We propose to prepare a thorough engineering report describing all of the yield
analyses, presentations of water demands, and the assessments of water supply and
water demand.
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 8
April 15, 1996
We propose to charge our costs on an hourly basis in accordance with the attached Schedule
of Hourly Rates and Expenses. We estimate that the total cost of our services will range
between $30,000 and $35,000, and we agree not to exceed a maximum cost of $35,000
unless we obtain approval from you to do so .
We would be happy to meet with you to discuss and explain this proposal.
Very truly yours,
JTW:rc
cc: David Hill
/
SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES AND EXPENSES
SCHEDULE A
CLASSIFICATION
Principal Engineer
or H ydrogeologist
Project Manager
Project Engineer or
Project Hydrogeologist
JANUARY 1, 1996
Staff Engineer/Staff Hydrogeologist
Draftsperson /
Technician
Typist
OTHER CHARGES
Vehicle Mileage
Outside Serv ices
And Expenses
RATE PER HOUR
$ 95.00
$ 75.00
$ 65.00
$ 55 .00
$ 35.00
$ 30.00
35 cents/mile
Cost plus 10%
THE ABOVE RATES ARE EFFECTIVE FOR ONE YEAR FROM 1HE DATE GIVEN ABOVE.
MEMORANDUM
TO :
FROM:
DATE:
Stu Fonda, Director of UtililJ
Dan Brotzman, City Atto ;;i
May 1, 1996 U
A TT. 5
REGARDING: Agreement be en Denver, Englewood & Cyprus of 8/11/95 .
The letter dated April 24, 1996 is an interpretation of the August 11, 1995 Agreement. As this is
an interpretation rather than an amendment this document will not need to go to Council.
The typo may be corrected without the Agreement going to Council.
Attachment
DB/nf
-":"~
.:::. -·-::.-. ---:..) .. .: ::: ::_=.::e:~ ~\·
Denver Board of Water Commissioners
April 24, 1996
Ronald L. Lehr, President
Ri~nt A. Kirk, 1st Vice President
Hubert A. Farha, Jr.
Denise S. Maes
William J. Shoemaker
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Department of Utilities
City of Englewood
3400 South Elati
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Stu :
Hamlet J. Barry, Ill, Manager 1600 West 12th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80254
303/628-6000
Fax 303/628-6509
As I'm certain you will recall, the recently executed agreement dated August 11, 1995,
between Denver, Englewood, and Cyprus was very meticulous in its handling of the many
aspects surrounding the operation and maintenance of the Cabin-Meadow Creek System.
In spite of this, there appears to be a small oversight which we believe can be simply
addressed and is the purpose of this letter.
Section 3.3 of the agreement sets out Denver's obligation to annually designate up to
700 acre-feet of water ("Paid Deliveries") provided that the amount designated, when
added to the amount designated in the previous nine Water Years, not be less than
3,200 acre-feet. However, unlike provisions involving specific designation obligations
over similar time periods for Basic Deliveries set forth in Section 3 .2, the agreement is
silent with respect to the volume of Paid Deliveries which is assumed to have been
delivered over the previous nine years. This assumed designation volume is needed in
order to determine Denver's minimum Paid Deliveries obligation for the forthcoming years
under the agreement.
Our recommendation is to assume that Denver designated 510 acre-feet during each of the
nine Water Years preceding the Water Year (as that term is defined in the subject
agreement) in which Denver first designates water. The 510 acre-feet was arrived at by
taking the average of the maximum possible annual designation of 700 acre-feet and the
minimum average annual designation obligation during any ten-year period of 320 acre-
feet. This was similar to the procedure followed to initialize deliveries under the Basic
Deliveries provisions . Because snowmelt runoff is expected to be well above normal this
year, Denver will be designating the maximum permissible under the agreement and as
such, this year's designation will not be affected by this oversight.
CONSERVE
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Page 2
April 24, 1996
Even though Cyprus was a signatory to the agreement, we don't believe the
recommendation affects their interest. Nonetheless, we are forwarding a copy of this
letter for their information .
In another housekeeping matter involving the Cabin-Meadow Creek Agreement, it
appears that there is a typographical error that appears near the top of page 24, section
8.5 . The reference to Section 6 .2 is incorrect. It should instead refer to Sections 5.2 and
5.3 .
If you concur with this recommendati<;m, please so indicate by signing below and returning
the original to us. If you have any questions , please direct them to Bill Bates at 628-6547.
\~~~~
/.{Barry
Manager
n:\HJB\BatesmrlSECJ-3.doc
cc : Scott Johnson, Cyprus-Climax
Carl Wood , Cyprus-Climax
Joe Tom Wood , Martin & Wood
David Hill
Brian Nazarenus
Casey Funk
Concurrence
Stewart Fonda
City of Englewood
MARCIA M. HUGHES, P.C.
Attorney and Counselor At Law
April 25, 1996
Mr. Rick Cables, Forest Supervisor
United States Forest Service
1920 Valley Drive
Pueblo, CO 81008
Re : Right-of-Way and Alternative "H"
Dear Rick:
AT T. 0
Thank you for our recent meeting in which we discussed many of the
concerns of the Suburban Water Suppliers, Wild and Scenic Task Force. Two
key concerns we discussed were matters related to the Right-of-Way and the
Forest Service depiction of Alternative "H". I am addressing those issues in
more detail in this letter.
RIGHT -OF-WAY
It is my understanding from a recent conversation with Steve Davis that
he has been told by others in the Forest Service that our questions regarding
how the Forest Service would treat the Right-of-Way have been answered. That
is inaccurate. We have waited for two (2) years for an answer. I am writing
today to address three spec ific concerns related to the Right-of-Way. They are :
1. Our questions regarding how the Right-of-Way will be treated have not
been answered. It is important that we do receive a reliable written
response from the Forest Service. This needs to happen soon . This
information seriously impacts our ability to comment accurately as the
Forest Service prepares the Draft EIS.
2. The public has been left in the dark by the Forest Service regarding
this Right-of-Way . We are deeply concerned that there are actually
numerous limitations regarding the Forest Service choice to impose a
wild and scenic designation given the existence of the Right-of-Way.
It is inappropriate that the public not be informed of these existing
restrictions .
3 . We are also concerned with the actual interpretation that the Forest
Service applies to the Right-of-Way and the attention the Forest
390 Union Boulevard, Suite 415 Lakewood, Colorado 80228-1556
(JOJ) 980-8668 FAX (303) 980-9551
Mr. Rick Cables
April 25, 1996
Page 2
Service gives this matter to be certain that the Right-of-Way remains
viable.
RESPONSE TO WATER SUPPLIERS ON THE RIGHT -OF-WAY
As I mentioned, the Forest Service has still not responded to our request
which has been posed for over two years now. I am enclosing a copy of the
letter I wrote to Elizabeth Estill on March 24, 1993 and the letter we received
from Jack Weissling in response. As you will see, the question of the Right-of-
Way precluding a wild and scenic river designation is not answered in the
response .fr;or:n~:'1ack.,Weissling to me. Rather, he says that the existence of the
Right-of-Way does not "vitiate the need for eligibility and classification
determination.• He also makes more general statements that existing rights,
etc., will be considered as a part of the suitability analysis. Surely we are due an
answer now that the suitability EIS is underway. The matter has still not been
addressed by the Forest Service!
The Forest Service interpretation of the restrictions imposed given this
existing Right-of-Way are critical for us to be able to send you meaningful
comments on the EIS evaluation. The Forest Service's prompt, written response
to this important matter is critical.
THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE INFORMED OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
We have been asking throughout this process that the Forest Service
inform the public explicitly of the existence and import of the Right-of-Way. This
request has been ignored by the Forest Service, much to the detriment of an .
informed public. The first information document from the Forest Service sent out
in November, 1995, makes no mention of the Right-of-Way. Although we raised
our concern again, the concern still was not addressed by the Forest Service.
The Februacy.c~1'996\'Update simply lists "consideration of water rights and
operation of existing water developments• as an issue. Again, the Right-of-Way
is not listed nor is the public given any information on this important restrictions
affecting the Forest Service decision making. We have also asked that the
Right-of-Way be depicted on maps such as those put before the public at the
public meetings. That also has not been done thus far. Please inform the public
soon of this matter and put the Right-of-Way on your maps!
MAINTAINING THE VALIDITY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
As you are aware , the federal government has made a decision regarding
the appropriate use of the South Platte as reflected by the existing Right-of-Way
/
Mr. Rick Cables
Apri l 25, 1996
Page 3
number 032121 which was issued to the Denver Water Board by the Department
of Interior on October 22, 1931 pursuant to the provisions of the February 1,
1905, Act of Congress. The Forest Service cannot now make a new
determination on the stream segments affected by the Right-of-Way as the
federal government has already determined that it is appropriate to locate a
reservoir at this site. The Forest Service cannot revoke this decision on which
the metropolitan area so heavily relies . Furthermore , the Forest Service cannot
also regulate other parts of the South Platte, such as the stream between Eleven
Mile and Wigwam, as wild and scenic thus imposing restrictions on water flow
which would destroy the viability of the Right-of-Way.
It is oun:mderstanding from the communication from Jim Sanderson of
February 21, 1989, to the Forest Service that the Forest Service issued Interim
Directive No. 45 on May 11, 1988 to establish "instructions for the administration:
of certain rights-of-way on National Forest System lands that were granted under
several previous authorities and administered by the Secretary of the Interior.• It
states that "[t]he 1986 amendment applies to fill. such rights-of-way previously
issued by the Department of the Interior-(emphasis added). The first instruction
expressly states :
1. Administration of water conveyance system righ t s-of-way covered
by Section 501 (b)(3) of FLPMA must be done in a manner fully consistent
with the directives contained in Deputy Assistant Secretary Douglas
MacCleery's October 1, 1986 letter to Senator Malcolm Wallop (Cong .
Rec. October 9 , 1986, p. S15,807) .... Thus , authorizing officers ...
must be guided by the following policies :
a) ... If a valid existing easement is shown to exist prior to
October 21, 1976 ... , the authorizing officer must administer such
grants ... , guided by the following :
(2) The authorized officer shall be careful to avoid actions
that will reduce the rights conferred under such grants;
grantees are entitled to the full use of the estate granted.
We are very concerned that the Forest Service is prohibited from taking
two act ions which are contemplated in the February 1996 Update in its list of
preliminary alternatives . Those are :
Mr. Rick Cables
April 25, 1996
Page4
1. No designation can be made on the stream segment which is directly
affected by the Right-of-Way. Thus , Alternatives UB", "C ", UD", and "E"
must have the relevant portions eliminated .
2 . To develop the Right-of-Way flow in the North Fork and the South
Platte above the Right-of-Way will be modified and could have some
effects on the proposed outstandingly remarkable values for all
segments named in Alternatives "B" through "G". Thus, these
alternatives are precluded from being designated as wild and scenic
as a designation would directly and significantly adversely affect the
ability to bring water to the reservoir to be developed under the Right-
of-Way. ·strould the F-orest Service recommend designation of these
sections, it would be violating the existing law, regulations and policies
of the Forest Service including Interim Directive No. 45. The Forest
Service would be taking action that would reduce the rights conferred
under the Right-of-Way. The Forest Service would be taking from the
grantees the full use of the estate granted . This is expressly
prohibited by statute, regulation and policy.
In fact , we believe the existence of the Right-of-Way precludes the
ability of the Forest Service to establisn any wild and scenic
designations i n the segments identified . This entire action by the
Forest Serv ice is topsy turvy because of the Forest Service refusal to
deal with th is significant matter up front. It is essent ial that the Forest
Service inform those responsible for supplying water and the general
publ ic of its intended interpretation of this Right-of-Way.
We have waited over two years for an answer on this matter. We would
greatly appreciate an answer in the very near future . Thank you for your
attention to th is matter.
ALTERNATIVE "H"
As we have emphasized , it is important for the public to have more
knowledge about Alternative "H " so that they can provide meaningful comment
on this alternative to the Forest Service during your EIS comment time period .
The Suburban Water Suppliers again .urge the Forest Service to develop a more
complete depiction of Alternative "H" than the one line contained in your
February Update and distribute this to the public with a meaningful opportunity
to comment. We believe this will greatly improve the public participation in this
process and assist in ach iev ing the most approp r iate deci sion for Colorado.
Mr. Rick Cables
April 25, 1996
Page 5
I am enclosing a copy of an updated state·ment of what might be included
in Alternative UH ". This includes the items related to concurrency zoning and the
Front Range Mountain Backdrop and other open space strategies used by the
counties . These two items were addressed in the recent letter from the Douglas
County Commiss ioner, Jim Sullivan, to you .
We look forward to hearing from the Forest Service in the near future in
response to these concerns . Please do not hesitate to call if we can further
clarify these matters.
MMH :sh
Enclosures
Very truly yours ,
MARCIA M . HUGHES, P.C.
Marcia M . Hughes, Legal Counsel
Suburban Water Suppliers ,
Wild and Scenic Task Force
cc: Colorado Congressional Delegation (w/o enclosures)
Suburban Water Suppliers , Wild and Scenic Task Force (w/o enclosures)
Denver Water Department (w/o enclosures)
Steve Dav is
MARCIA M. HUGHES, P .C.
Attorney and Counselor At Law
Honorable Hank Brown
U.S. Senate
902 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 2051 O
iJa..-....AZ
Dear~:
April 25, 1996
Thank you for your many years of assistance to people in Colorado in
calling for a balance of uses on Forest Service lands. We recognize this is a
challenging job .
I am writing as legal counsel to the Suburban Water Suppliers, Wild and
Scenic Task Force . By this letter, I am requesting that you assist us in providing
the Forest Service staff who are specifically conducting this Wild and Scenic EIS
eva!u3tion on the South Platte with information regarding the struggle that
Colorado water users have had with the Forest Service in our attempts to protect
our water rights .
The members of the Forest Service conducting this study have made
various statements reflecting a possible lack of awareness of the potential
significant consequences which can occur with Forest Service and other federal
agency regulation of our waters . Probably the most significant Forest Service
statement is found in the first memorandum to the public initiating the wild and
scenic river study. In that document the Forest Service states at page 7 that a
wild and scenic river "designation has little effect on valid water rights: This is
not accurate. In fact, the Forest Service has also stated in the document that
"federal water projects. including dams, are prohibited.· And that "the principle
effect of the Act is to preclude or severely limit the construction of dams and
other water resource development." These are obviously contradictory
statements .
There will be an effect on water rights, probably at all stages -building
new dams , modifying existing dams , all stages of water operations and the effect
on conditional water rights , which are valid water rights . The Forest Service may
not understand these nuances .
3 90 U nion Boulev ard, S uil e 415 Lakewood, C olo rado 802 28-1556
(303 ) 9 8 0 -86 68 Fl\X (303) 9 8 0 -9 5 5 1
Honorable Hank Brown
Page 2
Apr i l 25 , 1996
We anticipate the need to bring more water through the mainstem of the
South Platte and the North Fork in order to serve the vital and growing Denver
metropolitan area . Because the Forest Service action focuses on preventing
any action which would not protect or enhance the named "outstandingly
remarkable values," currently contemplated to include aquatics and recreation ,
we are deeply concerned that the Forest Service and any other permitting
agencies, be they state or local, would preclude the ability to move water
through the streams as well as preventing the expansion of existing dams or
creation of new dams. We are concerned with the potential impacts if we sought
FLPMA permits, 404 permits, and any other form of federal permission to use
our water rights.
In order to assist the Forest Service staff, we are requesting that you
transmit to the Forest Service any documents of which you are aware which
could help them recognize the significant struggle that has occurred between the
Forest Service and the western water users . These documents might include
the letter you sent to Secretary Madigan of August 12, 1992; Secretary
Madigan 's response to you of October 6, 1992; your letter to Dan Glickman of
September 14, 1995; H .J . Barry's letter to you of March 6, 1996; and any matters
related to the significant struggle the northern cities have had in renewing the
perm its for the ir existing reservo irs.
Your assistance in th is matter will be greatly appreciated . If we can be of
any help, please do not hes itate to ask.
MMH :sh
cc: Suburban Water Suppliers,
Wild and Scenic Task Force
Denver Wate r Department
Very truly yours,
MARCIA M . HUGHES, P.C.
Marcia M . Hughes, Legal Counsel
Suburban Water Suppliers,
Wild and Scenic Task Force
ATT. 7
.. · ... ···.···
... Iii-,~ ~41
---
. . ... ~ ·.· . . • . ... : :> .
AT/. 8
/
,
'Wednesday, April 24, 1996 AT7: 9 THE DE1'
D __ ..
Water dept.
cleared in fall
A man who fell into a water-
meter pit on a friend's property
cannot sue the Denver Water
Department for liability be-
cause it does not maintain the
pits, the state Supreme Court
has ruled.
The high court's 4-3 decision
overturned the Colorado Court
of Appeals, which it said im-
properly broadened the mean-.
ing of the term "public water
facility" to include such pits.
The decision went against
Troy Orlando Gallegos, who
stepped on a water-meter pit
lid on a friend's property in
1991. The lid gave way and he
fell inside , sustaining injuries.
Before suing the department,
Gallegos settled with the
friend 's insurance company for
$8,200.
The Supreme Court said the
only exception to governmental
immunity for the Denver Wa-
ter Department would be if
Denver operates and maintains''
the pits, which it doesn't. /
._.L't-vear~ld rqbbe'd
in wesrmDVer alley
A 13-year-old Denver youth
was robbed of his mountain bi-
cycle, a Raiders jacket, a pa-
ger, a pair of athletic shoes and
his wallet containing $10 in the
alley between Broadway and
Lincoln Street, just north of
East Ellsworth Avenue, Den-
ver police reported yesterday.
Danny Padilla told officers
he was approached by a young
man in his 20s about 5:45 p.m.
Monday, according to a police
report. The man said, "You
look like an Inca Boy,'' then
forced the youth to the pave-
ment and kicked and punched
him before taking his property
and fleeing .
The suspect told the victim
he had a knife, but Padilla told
police he didn't see it.
Aurora man reports
. g~nlt.. car _!heft --· --,-_u ...
Local authorities
reassure residents
on trial security
in Jefferson
County , and to
e Denver area can expect beefed keep order
u but not always visible , security around the
n the Oklahoma City bombing tri-downtown fed-
gins late this year or early next eral . cou'tt-
' local law enforcement officials house .
tol a well-heeled lunch crowd yes-"The system
ter ay . we have in
e multi-agency security force in place will have
pl e for upcoming hearings and the as little nega-
tri 1 of defendants Timothy McVeigh tive impact on
an Terry Nichols has run smoothly the community as possible ," Rowe
effectively but will be fine-tuned said.
a a yet-to-be-set trial date ap-Denver. District At~orney Bill Rit-
p aches said Tina Rowe U.S. Mar-ter explained th~t w_h1l_e there are no
' ' -state laws making 1t illegal for un-
-scrupulous people to try to profit
·"The security that has the most im-from the April 19 , 1995 , tragedy that
ct is the security that you don't killed 168 , his office will discourage
. ,"Rowe told the Brown Palace au-that kind of behavior.
· ence of about 200 , who paid $125 a "It just go~s back to violence and
plate to benefit the Denver Victims victimization in general ," Ritter said .
Service Center . "They have many faces , and they all
Organization co-chairwoman Judi are ugly and they all are evil. They
Wolf opened the fund-raiser with "an are tragic and they sometimes seem
old Mediterranean adage ," she said . to go on forever .
"And that is, 'God made the world "It's a matter of educating the pub-
round so you can 't see what's com -lie ," Ritter said . "We need to educate
ing.' Hopefully , our speakers can tell people not to sell T-shirts with pic-
us what 's coming ." tures of the Oklahoma City victims
Rowe told the crowd that multiple on them."
law enforcements agencies -includ-Wolf asked Ritter about the grow-
ing the marshal's service, the Denver ing number of "fringe-group , radical-
police , the Federal Protective Ser-crazies " in the state.
vice and the Colorado State Patrol -Ritter responded: "Law enforce-
have successfully combined to trans-ment is mindful of them and tracking
fer McVeigh and Nichols to and from their activities . Suffice it to say we 're
the Federal Correctional Institution keeping an eye on them ."
~ ........
1....:
t--
<C
Deal puts S. Platte into flow of fun
By Bruce Finley and Michael Booth
Denver Post Staff Writers
Tiiey landscaped it.
They invited children to pan for gold .
They built an amusement park along the
·banks .
But a river is not a river if it 's only a trick-
le.
So Denver officials have negotiated a deal
that would keep 150 cubic feet of water per
second flowing through the metro area along
more than 20 miles of the South Platte River
-enough to float a small ho.at -from May
to September.
U the water board approves the deal, Den-
VI •. : would release more summer watt,., to
flow bet~een Cha.tf!eld ~eservoir ancff the
. .
Water swap would
·revive the river
Burlington Ditch on the north edge of Denver .
In return for the summer water, the owner of
the ditch would repay Denver by allowing
more winter water to stay in Chatfield.
This is thought to be one of the first times a
major Western city has arranged to move wa-
ter downstream not only for human consump-
tion but for recreation and the environment
-a practice pioneered in wilderness and re-
creation areas.
Releasing water for urban boa. .~rs and
wildlife "is contrary tn what water ~uppliers
have viewed as their role In the world," ·said
John Akolt, manager of the -Farmers Reser-
voir and Irrigation Co ., whicb .supplies water
to northern suburbs . "I thin!' Ws put the water
board into shock .·• · '. . ~ /
Denver Water Board Manager' Chips Barry
acknowledged a shift in urban river policy ,
and a milestone in cooperation among water
suppliers .
"We 're just beginning that kind of think-
ing," Barry said .
Raising the water level during summer is
also a key part of Mayor Wellington Webb 's
campaign to turn the sleepy waterway that
locals jokingly call "The Mighty Platte" into
Please see PLA TJ:E on 1 OA ·
IOA*
S.·Piatte
revival
pushed
1'.LA TTE from Page 1 A .,
~genuine source of civic pride.
··Webb declared 1996 the Year of the
Platte. After devoting most of his
time in office to finishing projects
launched by Mayor Federico Pena,
such as Denver International Airport,
Webb wants to pursue his own dream.
~~ plans to spend $40 million over
lour years dressing up the South
!»latte -more than 20 times what
the city spent from 1974 to 1981 on a
P,.evious river beautification cam-
O)llgn .
.. But all the new boat chutes and ri-
Y'erf ront marketing envisioned in
Webb's Platte plan would be pointless
1flthout water.
.... As the Denver area has grown, res-
iaents have claimed more and more
'II the South Platte's mountain head-
waters for their homes and lawns.
C:ess water was available to flow
a.i>wn through Denver.
.. '.'Now we'll finally have ... more
Olan just rocks in a stream bed," said
tater board member Joe Shoemaker,
the last of the five board members
strategically appointed by Webb .
'." Two decades ago, after serving in
the state legislature and as Denver's
public works manager, Shoemaker
devoted himself to reviving the South
{>.latte. Mayor Bill McNichols gave
him $1.89 million and a mandate to
fevive what author James Michener
~lied "a sad, bewildered nothing of a
river." • .. .
Shoemaker built trails and boat-
ways, and led the plugging of 257
pipes that spewed grease, oil and gas-
oline directly into the South Platte.
"But I pe v~r could guarantee a wa-
ter flow before," Shoemaker, now 72 ,
said in an interview this week . "It's
the right thing to do."
For residents such as 33 -year-old
Stacy Burrell -a Denver mother of
four boys -a guaranteed flow
means more pleasant family walks
along the river. "It's so low now ,"
Burrell said . "To see the river flow-
ing nicely would be a reward ."
Yet a guaranteed flow of 150 cfs
(equal to more than 67 ,000 gallons
per minute) is far from the medicinal
flood that U.S. Interior Secre tary
Bruce Babbitt recently released for
the health of the Grand Canyon . Bab-
bitt's simulated flood was designed to
simulate nature, a torrent designed to
regenerate life:
The 150 cfs through Denver is de-
THE DENVER POST
The South Platte River
would get enough water to
allow people to float their
boats through the metro ar-
ea under a deal negotiated
by Denver officials.
The Denver Post
Shaun Stanley
·"'··~~;,:,
signed just to keep the South Platte
alive . It's less than some river lovers
want, but more than what flows
through the South Platte during dry
months in late winter and August.
(Peak flow as mountain snow melts
in spring c an top 11 ,000 cfs; lows are
around 100 cfs .)
When water board manager Barry
created controversy by releasing
more wate r as a pleasing backdrop
for Vice President Al Gore 's environ-
ment speech here in March, the
boosted level reached 200 cfs .
The guaranteed flow is supposed to
attract wildlife. A r e port to Ma yor
Webb from Barry, the product of a
task force that has worked the issu e
since late 1994 , says 17 species of
fish -e ating birds, song birds and deer
could live along the river.
Ta s k forc e members envision sport
fishing . They don 't mean the trout or
bass you see on Sunday television
wildlife shows. They're talking about
warm water species such as green
sunfish, black bullheads and carp.
Denver negotiated the pact with
the Farmers Reservoir and Irrigation
Co ., which brings water to farmers
northeast of Denver as well as some
suburbs. The deal basically involves
exchanging water, not paying money .
FRICO would let Denver keep the
water the company now claims from
the Platte in winter months. Denver
will store that water at its own reser-
voirs to replace the summer releases.
The deal is the first of many new
water exchanges metro area water
managers are considering.
There are dozens of potential
trades or water sales between water
a gencies, farmers and developers
that could smooth future population
growth as well as environmental re-
vivals. Other cities such as Littleton
have filed for more water for the
South Platte with no results so far.
They are banking on Denver to sue-
ceed .
"This will create a precedent for
other Western cities to do the same
thing," said Ken Salazar, former head
of the Colorado Department of Natu-
ral Resources, who is workipg for
Denver on this project.
On Saturday, he plans to float down
the river with Mayor Webb, federal
officials, and city council members.
Meanwhile , Stacy Burrell and Sis -
ter Cathy Mueller of St. Ignatius Loy-
ola Catholic Church will help in a
cleanup along the banks.
"It's important that there be a
steady and consistent flow, not only
for recreation, but to help us tap into
the bigger purpose and meaning of
the river," Mueller said . "We are in a
much more interdependent situation
with water and soil and crops . And as
city people , we forget that. Part of all
this is the need for city people to tap
into something bigger that just the
city."
DENVER \'YATER
1600 West 12th Avenue •Denver, Colorado 80254
Phon e (303) 628-6000 • Telecopier No. (303)628-6199
March 5, 1996
Mr. Stewart Fonda
Director of Utilities
City of Englewood
3400 S. Elati
Englewood, CO 80110
Dea~da:
ATT .. II
Enclosed is a summary of the January 30 meeting with distributors and other Metro
area water suppl iers regarding Denver Water's long-range planning process . It briefly
describes what Denver Water staff discussed on various subjects , as well as the
comments received from those in attendance.
If you have any comments or questions about the meeting or this summary , please
feel free to call me at 628-6553 , or Rocky Wiley at 628-6520 .
w~
Leslie Parker
Community Outreach
LP/cmc
Enclosure
--------------CONSERVE =::=::::=:==
SUMMARY OF JANUARY 30, 199&
DENVER WATER MEETING WITH DISTRIBUTORS
AND METRO AREA WATER UTILITIES
As Denver Water eva luates the options on how to provide adequate water supplies for
growth in its service area , Denver Water staff met with representatives from 21 distributors , 8
metro area water suppliers-and Metro Wastewater Reclamation District on January 30 , 1996
(Attendee List , Attachment 1 ). The purpose of the meeting was to: 1) inform distributors
and other water interests of current policy regarding future water service and to review the
preliminary analysis of the many conservation , reuse and storage opt ions currently under
consideration ; and 2) identify the concerns and recommendations of those attending.
Chips Barry , Manager of Denver Water, welcomed the group , stating he was interested in
hearing their thoughts and responses to the long range planning issues facing all of them .
Denver Water then briefly presented information on several issues . Key points are listed
below, with copies of more detailed presentation material attached . Discussions were led by
Rocky Wiley, Manager of General Plann ing . Comments and questions were then recorded ,
also listed below.
Some noticeable differences in opinion occurred between distributors and the independent
water utilities . Generally, distributors were concerned with the availability of future supplies
for their customers at today's level of service , while outside entities were looking for
opportunities to obtain excess supplies for growth outside Denver Water's service area.
Schedule:
Ed Pokorney, Director of Planning, reviewed the overall long-range planning study and its
schedule (Attachment 2). To date , Denver Water has been forecasting future needs,
identifying resource guidelines , and identifying and evaluating conservation , supply (storage
and reuse), and treated water management options for how to meet demand in its service
area. To identify the ideas and preferences of others who might be impacted by the
selection of options, Denver Water has met with Citizens' Advisory Committee work groups ,
the environmental community, West Slope community, downstream users, distributors and
others.
Denver Water is now developing "strategies" or combinations of conservation, reuse , and
storage options for different ways to meet future demand. These strategies will emphasize
different types of options such as conservation, reuse, storage, or different characteristics
such as least expensive , most reliable , least environmentally damaging, and the like.
Development and review of the strategies is expected to occur over the next several months .
After th is work is completed , Denver Water will then evaluate options of what it might do with
excess supplies, if any. This last effort is expected to begin this fall.
/
• How do the forecasts affect gallons per capita per day? Response-: The gallons per
capita per day in the current forecast drops from 210 in 1990 to 201 by 2045 . The
gallons per account per day also declines from 497 in 1990 to 419 by 2045.
• Does the environmental community agree with this forecast , or are we likely to continue
to see debates as we d id during Two Forks? Response: Key members of the
environmental community were invited to participate in review of the forecasts . While
some comments disagreeing with the assumptions behind th~ forecasts were sent to us ,
to date no major disagreement has been voiced from the environmental community .
• Fo recasting long-term is difficult, but Denver Water staff seems definite on a 70 ,000 acre
foot defici t. Is this realistic? Response : We have worked with not only DRCOG but the
State Demographer and other technical experts from the beginning of this process . The
State , DRCOG and others are in agreement on these population forecasts . Natura l ly ,
forecasts always change , but we do feel at this time that these are solid projections from
experts .
Treated Water Analysis:
Mary Hodd inott discussed load shifting opt ions , service level design criteria , and
unaccounted-for-water (Attachment 5). At peak loads , at build-out, Denver Water's treated
water system will be fully committed . At off-peak times , there may be capacity available to
outside entities . ·
Comments Received:
• To use Foothills capacity , do we need more raw water storage? Response: If Denver
Water was to use the ful l Foothills capacity, yes, we would need more raw water storage .
• Denver Water should look at trade-offs on reducing pressure. You are asking customers
if they would accept less pressure , but of course they would say no . Still, you should
consider this (from outside service area).
• Denver Water should be wary of reducing pressure . Some areas are already marginal .
• L.Jse your excess capacity now. Don't keep it for 30 years (from outside service area).
Safety Factor and System Reliability:
Two different issues regarding system reliability were discussed by Dave Little . One relates
to the fact that Denver Water estimates its c Ii of 345 000 AF on he
· assum tion it could meet emand for three years of a mid-1950s drought without wate ·
use restr ict ions . §_gme water uti l ities determine t e1r y1e ase on acing restrictions after
one or two years of a drought. The other issue is that of a safety factor, which in the past
• Management opportunities exist to benefit both Denver Water and others (outside service
area). These opportunities:
. 1) will not take water during dry years .
2) will be able to return water during wet years.
• Provide water to the highest outside bidder to reduce today's inside service area rates .
• Keep the needs of non-renewable supply separate. We all know that need will turn to
Denver and you need to be prepared to provide water (from outside service area).
• C~ent Board policy means you are working toward abandonment of excess
undeveloped supplies (from outside service area).
• Concern that existing customers will be asked to conserve and pay higher rates to
provide outside service
• If Denver Water does serve outside its existing service area , Denver Water customers
will receive increased revenues and no taking of water during droughts (from outside
service area).
Customer Survey and Focus Groups:
To determine how customers , especially those unlikely to attend public meetings or submit
letters, think about some of these issues, Denver Water had a phone survey of 500
customers taken( half in Denver, half in suburban contractual service area). Two focus
group~of customers who answered the phone survey were also held . The customer survey
report and a summary of focus group findings are available by calling Leslie Parker, 628-
6553 .
General Findings :
• Protecting the environment was more important to customers than keeping costs down or
avoiding watering restrictions. 78% said they would pay more to avoid environmental
damage. Nearly half were willing to pay $60/yr with about 40% willing to pay $100/yr.
77% were willing to face water use restrictions during droughts to protect the
environment.
• Among types of options, customers wanted more conservation first. Focus group
discussions indicated that customers wanted more public awareness -on TV, radio and
in newspapers. They wanted education in the schools and for themselves so they knew
more of what they could do. They not only liked incentives (and were willing to pay
higher rates for incentives), about half the survey and focus groups participants wanted
mandatory conservation programs for new customers .
ATTENDANCE LIST
DISTRIBUTORS I METRO WATER SUPPLIERS
MEETING -.JANUARY 30, 1996
Distributors
Gordon Milliken , South-East Englewood Water
Ron Culbertson , C ity of Arvada
Ken Peterson , City of Arvada
Sterling Schultz , City of Arvada
Attachment 1
Pat Fitzgerald , Platte Canyon/Southwest Metro Water & Sanitation District
Ed Gray , Bear Creek Water & Sanitation District
Sandra Boster, Bear Creek Water & Sanitation District
Lou Soderberg , Bear Creek Water & Sanitation District
Karl E. Bell , Bear Creek Water & Sanitation District
Khanh T Le , Willows Water District
Charles Coward, City of Cherry Hills Village
W . A. Jack Dempsey , Lockheed Martin
Ben Cra ig, Consolidated Mutual
Wally Welton, Consolidated Mutual
Dick P!astino, City of Lakewood
Bob Arnold , Valley Water District
Bob Brendstetter, High View Water District
Walt Pettit ! Wheat Ridge Water District
Scott White, Cherry Hills Farm Metro District
Michael Raisch , North Pecos Water & Sanitation District
Helen Whitney, Bancroft-Clover
Judy Dahl , Green Mountain Water & Sanitation District
Robert J . Flynn, Willows Water District
Carmine Iadarola, Cherry Creek Valley Water & Sanitation District
John R. Warford, Cherry Creek Valley Water & Sanitation District
Duane Tinsley, Southgate Water District
Gary Sears , City of Glendale
Bill Roecker, Crestview Water & Sanitation District
leslie/distmtg . lst/317/96
Denver's Integrated Resource
Planning Process
Task 1: Study Objectives · 07/01/94 to 09/06/94 .
Task 2: Resource Decision Guidelines 10/01/94 to 01/31/96
Task 3: Treated Water System 07/01/94: to 06/01/96
Task 4: Raw Water Supply 08/01/94 to 02/28/96
Task 5 .: Water Demand Forecasts
Task 6: Demand Management
Task 7: Develop Resource Strategies
07/01/94 to 01/31/96
07/01/94 to 10/31/95
11/01/95 to 09/30/96 I
Task 8: Remaining Resource Options 09/02/96 to 12/31/96
Task 9: Report Preparatior1 ·11/01/96 to ()5/31/9'7
Task 10: Public lnvolven1ent/lnformatior1 Ongoing
;!::<
rt
rt
°' 0
i
::J
rt
N
·•· s
February 1996
· Attachment 3
Denver Water
Service Area vs. Metro Cities
mu Qty• County or o.nv.
-Denver W*' Dislributora
r 11 •-. Fbllld --.. ... ContNots
l•itnl ---
LEGEND
SCALE 1:600,000
6 0 5 10
MILES
16 20
,...,...w... ,._,_ DMaioft. The
.._.,., .,,,. __ •nd looMndwioo ..,_,onil*
..., _ -•••• ...i 1.-.ffd tor ....,,Ing
IMPO-only. Thlo lllllP lo not~., be UNd
fwourwv ......... rtng. or 1o9.i-.
31
LL
Denver Water Service Area
Demand Forecast & Existing Supply
450 -..--~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~-~--~~~~--.
400 ·-100 KAF
Difference
445
415
GI 350 T I ~ Existing Supply -345 KAF
"tJ c cu
~· 300 -·-
0 .c ....
2/26196
250 .
200 _, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -H -~I I I I H-· I I I I I I I I '
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Year
N :\GENPLAN\PRESENTA\IRPTASK5\JL7_14A 1.XLS
:r;,,
rt
rt
Ill
()
f rt
.t:.
/
Attachmen t 5
TREATED WATER ANALYSIS
LOAD SHIFTING OPERATIONS
Add Treated Water Facilities
Construct a Raw Water Pipeline
Provide Winter Treated Water Interconnects for
North Side Raw Water Users
Expand or Construct Additional North Side Supplies
Use Restrictions
-Service Level and Design Criteria
Headloss for Conduit Design
1 f oat/thousand feet
Allowable Pressures
40 psi minimum
110 psi maximum
Maximum Fluctuations
30 psi
}0:ax Day Service
Customer Phone Survey:
67°/o believed pressure was good or excellent,
3 3 % believed pressure was fair or poor;
23 o/o were willing to pay more for higher pressure,
none were willing to pay less for lower pressure.
••
•
•
Baseline Reliability
Denver's system will meet 345,000 AF of ·
demand each year of a 50s type drought (3
years) without restricting demand
The.ability to· restrict demand creates an .
emergency supply available to the Board
The emergency supply can be used in 3 .
ways:
-reserved as part of a safety margin
. .
-"spent" with a conservation program
-"spenf• by assuming drought
curtailment when calculating baseline
yield
~ rt
rt
ni
0
~
;:J
rt
°'
Types of Safety Margins
• Amount added to the projected
demand line
I
~
• Amount reserved from use outside
the combined service area
• Amount that can be saved with
emergency restrictions
Meeting Future Demand
• Conservation
-pricing
I
-·education
-. incentives
•-Effluent reuse
-potable (direct, ··
indirect)
-nonpotable .
• Supply
-conjunctive
use
-reservoirs
-diversions
¥
:i:-rt rt
Ill
()
~
rt
-...)
THK Associates , Inc.
May 17, 1996
Mr. Stu Fonda, Director of Ut ilities
City of Englewood
3400 S. Elati Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
5325 S . Valen tia Way, Su ite 200
Greenwood Village , CO 80111
30 3 -770-7201
303-770-7132 FAX
Re: Proposed Highlands Ranch Boulevard/Bike Path's Impacts on Land Use and Market
Feasibility
Dear Stu:
In anticipation of the upcoming Ut ility Board and City Council meetings regarding the above-
mentioned project, I am providing this letter report to provide documentation on several issues
related to the City of Englewood's land ownership in the immediate vicinity of these
improvements .
Bike Path Alignment
As a result of meetings with Jeff Case , assistant general manager of the Highlands Ranch Metro
District , we have reviewed several potential bike path alignments. The most recently developed
alternative (#6) is the preferred alignment (see Exhibit 1). This alignment retains maximum
development flexibility within Parcels A and B of P A84 and affords the opportunity or option
to utilize the hiker/biker/equestrian trail as an amenity for the future user of those parcel(s) if
appropriate.
Access to Parcels A,B,C,D,& E
It appears that access to parcels C and Dis accommodated in presently approved (CDOT) plans
as presented by Felsburg , Holt & Ullevig . The proposed full movement at approximately the
midway point of the new boulevard between the Highline Canal and the interchange with C-470
will provide adequate vehicular access to those parcels to service future development . The status
of access for Parcel E is not known at this time , however , it appears that an opportunity to gain
access from the future F lying B Parkway is possible . It will be important to monitor the
development of that parkway now and in the future to insure access from that roadway to Parcel
E . This access would insure future development potential for this parcel.
Denver Phoen ix
Economic & Market Research Land & Development Plan ning ' Community Plann ing & Desig n I Golf Feasibility Ana lys is Appra isa ls Landscape Architecture
McLellan Reservoir Property
City of Englewood
EXHIBIT ONE
Right-In, right-out acess points.
Full movement access points.
HIGHUNE CANAL
~
N
r::: > ~ " :sr ::;; Jr I
=>njj -~ ~ z== __ .::::-r--1 -dH
Conceptual access points.
THK Aaeocla!ee, Inc,
THK Associates, Inc.
Mr. Stu Fonda
May 17, 1996
Page Two
Access to Parcels A and B need additional guarantees at the present time. Although the letter
from Fred Koch, P.E. Douglas County engineer dated May 7, 1996, does provide some
indication that the county will allow right-in/right-out access points for these parcels in the
future, I believe the language is not strong enough. Additionally, I believe it is important that
the design/construction of the proposed roadway adjacent to these parcels accommodate these
proposed turning movements to be built in the future . By gaining assurances from the county
and by constructing the roadway to Douglas County standards to accommodate the future access
to these parcels, future development can be insured.
Utility Service
I appreciated the update by you regarding the disposition of various utility extensions, sleeves,
etc. It appears that you have tracked the various utility runs that will be required for
development of your parcels. Although we have not reviewed that particular component as it
relates to future development, we strongly encourage your continued efforts in this arena.
Grading at Parcels A and B
It appears that the eventual development of Parcel A will require fill material. The fill will be
required to allow a reasonable development platform and also to enlarge the developable area.
At the present time, the net de velopable acreage is impacted by the high water line at elevation
75.6'. If fill is strategically placed on this parcel, it will move the high water line m a
northwesterly direction, thus increasing the acreage of the developable area.
During meetings with Highlands Ranch Metro District, it was indicated excess fill will exist at
the time of roadway construction. It is recommended that the City of Englewood pursue
agreements for the placement of that fill in the appropriate city parcels to minimize future
development costs. Additionally, it is recommended that the city explore other similar cost
cutting measures, i.e., site preparation provided by the construction equipment and materials
available as a result of boulevard construction.
The metro district is presently preparing grading plans for Parcels A and B in anticipation of this
available material. I would like to applaud the cooperation I have seen between the two entities
to ensure creation of maximum opportunities for both parties in this roadway improvement
project.
THK Associates, Inc.
Mr. Stu Fonda
May 17 , 1996
Page Three
Market Feasibility
Earlier studies by THK demonstrated that the subject parcels are strategically located to serve
commercial development opportunities including hotel/motel, restaurants , retail shopping, and
office and related uses . The environs of the subject development parcels has continued to evolve
into one of metro Denver 's premier retail/commercial real estate markets and with the regional
access provided by the new interchange , the subject parcels will be ideally located to service
these markets.
It is of paramount importance that convenient local access is provided to these parcels and also
that visibility is afforded to potential uses from major arterials. The final key ingredient to the
successful development of these parcels will be created by the immediate availability of utility
service including power , telephone, water and sanitary service. With these improvements, the
subject parcels will be immediately postured for disposition and an immediate marketing
program should be implemented on the hotel and retail/business parcels .
This hotel site would be one of the most unique in the metro Denver area. It would have a
strong market available to it complemented by convenient regional access . The hotel parcel
could be linked by a pedestrian access system to McLellan Reservoir for passive water-based
recreational activities , and this would make it unique in the metro Denver area. This would
encourage the convention/tourist potential of this hotel operation. In addition to the hotel
prospects , south metro Denver 's retail , office and related use markets are very active, and the
subject parcels will be postured for immediate development potential with these new road
impro vements . A pro ac tive program should be immediately formulated to position these
properties for their highest and most profitable return to the City of Englewood.
Please advise us as to any further assistance that you may require and/or comments or questions
regarding this summary report. It has been a pleasure continuing our consulting service on this
exciting and important proj ect to the City of Englewood .
incerely ,
oss Braz1
irector , Land & Development Planning
MAY-2 1-1996 14:57 303688934 3
~~ DouGIA5 CDuNJy
May 21, 1996
DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC WORKS
Engineering Division
Mr. Forrest Dykstra
Highland ranch Metropolitan District
62 West Plaza Drive
Highlands Ranch, CO 80126
Subject: Highlands Ranch Boulevard
Access to City of Englewood Property
Dear Forrest,
P.02
Douglas County Engineering conceptually approves your request for future access to the
parcel owned by the city of Englewood . These accesses are allowed by the Douglas County
Roadway Standards . These parcels are located on the east and west side of Highlands Ranch
Boulevard between the Highline Canal and County Line Road, see attached exhibit. The
construction plans, submitted by the Highlands Ranch Metro District, indicate that the district
will be constructing a raised median from County Line Road down to the Canal which will
limit the requested access points to right in/right out only . The exact locations of these access
points will be determined during the site plan process.
If you have any questions please feel free to call me.
Duane Fellhauer
Director of Public Works
cc: Fred H. Koch, P .E. County Engineer
Janet Sloan, P.E. Development Review Manager
Gary Walter, Engineer IV
P :\englwool.ltr
3030 Nocth Industrial Way• P.O. BOX 1390 • Castle Roc.:k. Colorado 80104 • (303) 660-7490
MA Y-21-1996 14:57 3 036889343
..
f.
~ \ j. ,· ..
1 ..
I
·~ ~ .... l B 1·
'· I f ~
\ .
\
P .03
,
. :··1
I ---/ -------. ------....,.. -t'< ,,--.-----;, .. c -
---.... .,...--"":"--...le=.+.-':J--1 1" , ~ .· !/ '.
->,· · ·H:.T
'~ 1-7. I
I I~
'
'\. J ;-i
~'--.;&-------j--
\ I
\\ t
¥1 I / I I . I
/ (
; ~
~
C-470 INTERCHANGE
AGENDA
MEETING WITH ENGLEWOOD UTILITIES BOARD
• Introduction to Highlands Ranch Metropolitan Districts
• Background and Status of Project
CDOT Approvals
Englewood Inclusions
• Review of Site Exhibits
Interchange Design
Englewood Parcels -Access
Highline Canal & Trail Realignment
Englewood Parcel A -Grading
• Englewood/HRMD #3 Cooperative Efforts
Interchange Construction
ROW Dedication
• Implementation Plan
C-470 INTERCHANGE
INTRODUCTION TO
HIGHLANDS RANCH METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS
• Highlands Ranch Metropolitan Districts
Five Separate Districts
Roadway Construction
Parks, Trails, and Open Space
Fire Protection
• Englewood Property is Included in Highlands Ranch
Metropolitan District #3
C-470 INTERCHANGE
BACKGROUND
Initiation Completion
Interchange Identified in Highlands 1979 1979
Ranch Development Plan
Regional Plan Designation Fall 1980 Summer 1981
Systems/Project Feasibility Winter 1985 Spring 1987
Study
Environmental Assessment and Fall 1987 Fall 1992
Finding of No Significant Impact
(5 Year Shelf Life)
Englewood Property Becomes Part 1988 1988
of Highlands Ranch Planned Development
Englewood Property is Included 1991 1991
in HRMD No. 3
Conceptual Development January 1994 December 19'J4
C-470 INTERCHANGE
COOPERATIVE EFFORTS
ENGLEWOOD/HRMD #3
• Highlands Ranch Metropolitan District #3 agreed to construct
Interchange ($9 Million)
• Englewood agreed to dedicate ROW at no cost to Highlands Ranch
Metropolitan District #3 (Approximately 20 acres)
• Englewood agrees to "property swap" with Denver Water
Department for Highline Canal realignment
• Englewood agrees to convey trail easement to Highlands Ranch
Metropolitan District #3 for Highline Canal Trail realignment
• Highlands Ranch Metropolitan District #3 agrees to place surplus
fill material on Englewood's Parcel A to grade site at no cost to
Englewood
C-470 INTERCHANGE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Preliminary Design
FIR Plan Approval
Final Design
FOR Plan Approval
ROW Conveyance
Construction
CDOT Review
Advertise Project for Bid
Construction A ward
Construction
Initiation
Feb 1996
June 1996
July 1996
Aug 1996
Oct 1996
Nov 1996
Completion
Feb 1996
June 1996
Aug 1996
Sep 1996
Oct 1996
Nov 1997