The fight is on over the proposed Genesee dam, according to the Denver Post [December 1, 2005, "Water district pursues dam"]. Reservoirs are the least costly way to store sustainable water supplies but environmental and aesthetic concerns often put up roadblocks. From the article, "The Genesee Water & Sanitation District voted unanimously to move ahead with building a controversial dam in Bear Creek Canyon, choosing to ignore Jefferson County Planning Commission opposition. As a special district, the Genesee district board has the authority under a 20-year-old state law to reverse the county's decision after going through the site-approval process. Designs for the 100-foot-high and 500-foot-long dam and 125-acre-foot reservoir have been submitted to the state engineer's office. District officials said work could begin this spring."
Southeastern Colorado communities are studying supplies and combining efforts, according to the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article, "A consultant is beginning the task of weaving together domestic and municipal water interests in the Lower Arkansas Valley in a study to answer questions about a proposed $280 million conduit. Black & Veatch engineers will begin meeting next week with water districts to determine critical issues surrounding the Arkansas Valley Conduit. 'The game plan is to address the two key questions: Do we have enough water, and how do we pay for it?' Project Manager Kevin Meador told a Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District committee Wednesday. The $150,000 study has two goals: to answer the short-term questions by early next year and to determine whether the project should proceed to preliminary design. The questions of local funding and water availability were raised last summer by U.S. Sens. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., and Wayne Allard, R-Colo."
Pueblo County's assertion of control over the Southern Delivery System is the subject of this editorial from the Pueblo Chieftain. They write, "Colorado Springs is challenging Pueblo County's authority to apply new land use regulations to the Colorado Springs proposed massive Southern Delivery System. Pueblo County needs to defend itself to the utmost. The complaint has been filed in El Paso District Court. A spokesman for Colorado Springs Utilities says that agency doesn[base ']t believe Pueblo County's revised 1041 regulations should apply to the proposed project. We wonder whether El Paso County would have the same view if Pueblo wanted to build a new pipeline through a portion of that county. We doubt it. Colorado Springs' complaint asks the court to declare Pueblo County's revised 1041 regulations Ñ so named for the 1974 state law that created the land-use control provisions Ñ invalid and to exempt SDS. It also alleges that Pueblo County revised its regulations this year out of hostility toward the project."
One water issue that is getting little play is that of aging infrastructure. The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reports that Palisade's water customers may have to pay 61% more to repair and update their treatment plant after it's failure 14 months ago. From the article, "Hundreds of Palisade water users gathered Wednesday night to hear preliminary results from engineers on how the town of Palisade will proceed in building a new water treatment plant and storage facility. 'This Board (of Trustees) is going to build our water treatment plant and keep our water in Palisade,' Palisade Mayor Doug Edwards told a full house in Palisade High School's auditorium. Residents listened to reports from financial, engineering and water experts, explaining the town board's decision to pursue about $6 million in improvements to the town's failed water system. The town operated its own water system until 14 months ago when technical problems made it impossible to continue service. The Ute Water Conservancy District has provided water to the town ever since, charging the town for its emergency service. Under one option, the town has the ability to become part of Ute Water's district and forgo building a new treatment and storage facility. Customers would pay about the same amount they currently pay, but Palisade's coveted water rights, reservoirs and water assets would be given to Ute Water in exchange. Larry Clever, general manager of Ute Water, called the exchange 'a wash,' citing the system's needed improvements and the liabilities surrounding taking on Palisade's water system. But under the town board's suggestion to build the facility, Palisade would have to raise its water revenue by approximately 61 percent to cover the costs of bringing its own water back to business."
Category: Colorado Water
6:21:56 AM 
|
|
