HomeMy WebLinkAbout20180715.tiffTo: Weld County Board of Commissioners
1150 O street
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80631
From: Patrick and Kelly Auker
2793 CR 17
Brighton, Colorado 80603
Re: Thornton Water Project
Dear Weld County Commissioners,
2/5/2020
RECEIVED
FEB 12 2020
WELD COUNTY
COMMISSIONFRC
As owners of property involved with the Thornton Water Project, we are writing this letter to Weld
County to bring your attention to our concerns of the litigation with the City of Thornton's Water
Project. We realize the importance of this project, however there is only one way the City of Thornton is
handling the litigation, and that is their way. Our concerns are mounting, and it is time that you as
commissioner know that this is a one-sided deal.
The pipe in question is designed to come down CR 17, mainly on the east side of the road. At our
location of CR 8 and CR17 to CR 6 and CR 17, it is designed to come across the road to our property on
the west side.
Since the beginning of the litigation we have asked several questions, with no response to our concerns,
only a contract that is loaded in their favor.
We have enclosed a plan that shows Thornton's pipeline alignment and the home they are trying to get
around at this junction. There is only a need for 180' x 25' of easement on our property. Not 942' x 50'.
No response of this issue from The City of Thornton.
The Auker property on CR 17 is already overburdened with several easements. Another 50' easement
will over distress the property immensely. There is no answer for the cause/reason by The City of
Thornton due to their non response.
County Road Easement
Electric Easement
Telephone Line Easement
High pressure Gas Easement
Irrigation Water Easement
Total feet prior to City of Thornton Water Easement
o_ib two V n i ca+ ; can s
oa/ 19 /ao
cc: PLC -re). oc, cam),
Ca C s r sc.). ROCCCKF),
PcvcJen ERICH). V(-tcSFIU-)
30'
10'
10'
25'
10'
85'
aOIg-o71S
The amount of compensation this project is offering is not enough to pay for attorney fee's to litigate
property owners rights. We have been offered a fraction of other easements within our boundaries
within the last 18 months. These are not fair offers, and the City of Thornton will not respond to any
communications regarding the easement they are wanting.
In November 2019 correspondence again was attempted to the City of Thornton to no avail. We have
included this correspondence. Again, their response was, no response. A contract arrived by mail in
January 2020 with no changes in design and that there would not be any design changes.
We would like response from Weld County Commissioners regarding your position in this matter.
This is to serve as public notice to all parties involved.
Sincerely,
Patrick Auker
Kelly Auker
CC: City of Thornton Mayor
Western States Land Services
Weld County Commissioners
ENC: City of Thornton's Design Plans
Letter dated 11/18/19 to City of Thornton Mayor & Western States Land Services
1
2
3
4
5
MATCHLINE, SEE DWG PA1-11
NOTES:
1. FOR PROPERTY 3-5 NOTES SEE DWG PA1 •' 1.
2. FCR PROPERTY 4-1 AND 4.2 NOTES SEE DWG PA•13.
3. TAP PA -I WATER PIPELINE LOCATION SHOWN ON
DRAWINGS IS APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO
FINAL DESIGN.
BARBED WIRE
FENCE
15° CMP
0
50
100
150
�• /- FENCE
40
C--
•• -
e•/a. .tee- 4. • ••ems ••w -w• ---- •••.
a— BARBED WIRE
1► FENCE
wait r....•...•..► w+-.•..•...
414.1•010 OEMS
I
I
ea.. —1 —&-elf
teala WM. MIS
See
C
RIF
Sca'e it Feet
C.
NO P
3-5
PN: 146921000006
REC 3711365
REC 3711366
(BLANKET IN NATURE • EXCEPTIONS 5, 6)
J
•- -
C)
N1/2, NE1/4
SEC. 20
T -1-N, R -67-W
3-8
PN: 146920000019
ze-- TAP PA -1 40' TE1: PCR ARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
r C
TVia PA -1
50• PERMANEN-
EASEMENT
s.4,10a EL •••.••
L3-7:
PN: 146921000073
W. 526'. N. 990'. N1/2, Mp1/1/4. SEC. 21
LOT A
AMENDED
RECORDED EXEMPTION
1469 -21 -2 -RE 287
REC. 1987560
(EXCLUDES RIGHT-OF-WAY)
EASEMENT NOTES • PARCEL 3-7
•
PARCEL IS SUBJECT TO A WATER WELL AND EASEMENT TO
THE WELL AS DESCRIBED IN WARRANTY CEED RECORDED
MARCH 27, 1943 IN BOOK 1107 AT PAGE 436 LOCATED In rrdE
Nall OF THE NW1/4 OF SECTION 21. THE EASEMENT IS SAID TO
BEGIN AT THE WELL AND A TANK AND RUNS SOUTH TO TI -E
W1/2 OF THE S'Wt/4 OF SECTION 2'. NEITHER -HE WELL NOR
THE EASEMENT IS t/ATI-V,IATICALLY DEFINED AND THERE=CRE
IS NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP. (EXCEPTICN 4)
i!
ems. •a•...
•
INS _.•. S.
ED WIRE
•: RN,
60 ROW. EXST
AND FUTURE
CC
0
0
._..- C -- C .../.__........._.a.. w
can av
GATE 1
FSEPSIt:TERAL ,.ON
1
HOUSE
DECK
25e YELL 6 WATERLINE ESM T
RICI IARD OLSON
REC. 4284724
(EXCEPTION 11 3.7)
APPROXIMATE
LOCATION
(NO SIGNAL)
.e.. Write w..+• -
}\j
flee .--. •-.•. ..,r at
r
of CMP =
BARBED WIRE.........--
i FENCE /• ( III
an"41 •-.. .•
• [ .•....r0.......1...1
Z
•
II.- •--.1_-... a•. W
N
..e••-•.• .•-w
EL He
MTL SHdD
12
_not:, u 4► fi r• s4- Y t
I V,14 i •
GRAVEL ROAD ( ) h L.,z,
--
60' ROW. EXST
AND FUTLRE
I
I
-" •
i
I
h
is)
I
To: City of Thornton Colorado: Mayor Heidi Williams
9500 Civic Center Drive
Thornton, CO 80229
To: Western States Land Services
505 N Denver Ave
Loveland, CO 80537
From: Patrick and Kelly Auker
2793 CR 17
Brighton, CO 80603
Dear Mayor,
November 18, 2019
Over the past six months we have tried to contact the City of Thornton and Western States Land
Services regarding the water pipeline you have proposed to property owners on which you seek an
easement. No one person from either entity find it necessary to respond.
On June 6, 2019 (Patrick and Kelly Auker) owners of property of which city of Thornton is proposing an
easement, met with Nancy of Western States Land Services to discuss what Thornton needs are. Upon
review, Thornton is running a water line up and down east side of CR 17.
The reason for needing to cross over to West side into at 2793 CR 17, is to bring a pipeline around the
dwelling at 2990 county road 17. Located on the South East corner of County Roads 17& 8. We
downloaded Thornton's plan of this area for the pipeline and plans show the pipeline crossing to the
west side for approximately 900 feet, then back over to east side of county road 17.
The only part of property needed on West side of county road 17 is 160' to accommodate water line
around the above said dwelling at 2990 CR 17.
The West side of County Road 17 at address of 2793 has an over burden of easements: telephone line,
high pressure gas line, electrical lines and irrigation easements, for a total of 40 foot wide.
Another 50' would render 90' of property unable to be used for any future developments on road 17.
We do understand the need to get the pipeline around dwelling on east side of county road 17, but only
160' or close to this distance is necessary for said pipeline.
As there is a need to get pipeline of this nature around obstacles, and seeing on plan that the pipeline is
on east side of County Road 17 and will return to east side of County Road 17 after dwelling at corner,
therefor there is only a need for 160' of easement needed on the West side County Road 17
Please review plan attached, to understand what our position is.
In closing I would like to say that I have been trying to get this resolved for many months without any
response from the City of Thornton or Western States Land Services, with the exception of
November 11, 2019 contact that only states your position. We have reached out to Nancy on several
occasions and could not get any answer back or call back regarding this matter.
It appears that we are being ignored and that this is part of the tactics being used to push this pipeline
through without any regards to anyone but the City of Thornton.
We would like to meet and see if we could come to an agreement on this matter as soon as possible.
Thank You,
Patrick & Kelly Auker
(303)921-0804
patsgreenacres@gmail.com
Patrick and Kelly Auker
2793 CR 17
Brighton, Colorado 80603
WELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE BOARDS OFFICE
1150 O STREET
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
Patrick and Kelly Auker
2793 CR 17
Brighton, Colorado 80603
CITY OF THORNTON
MAYOR HEIDI WILLIAMS
9500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THORNTON, COLORADO 80229
Patrick and Kelly Auker
2793 CR 17
Brighton, Colorado 80603
WESTERN STATES LAND SERVICES
505 N DENVER AVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537
To: TWP Stakeholders
From: Mick Ondris
Re: Compromise Alternative
February 25, 2019
Dear Stakeholder,
Enclosed is a revised copy of the Shields Street/Poudre River Alternative: A Compromise
Proposal for the Thornton Water Project. This is a citizen -initiated, compromise Alternative
that provides for the delivery of Thornton's water, protects existing water rights, and re -vitalizes
twenty miles of the Cache la Poudre River in Larimer County.
Please feel free to share this proposal with any interested party. If you have any questions or
comments, do not hesitate to contact me.
RECIPIENTS
Larimer County:
Commissioner Tom Donnelly
Commissioner Steve Johnson
Commissioner John Kefalas
Rob Helmick, Planning Department
City of Thornton:
Emily Hunt, Director of Water Resources
Mark Koleber, Thornton Water Project Director
Water Supply and Storage Company:
Dennis Harmon, General Manager
City of Fort Collins:
Mayor Wade Troxell
Fort Collins City Council
Windsor Town Board:
Mayor Kristie Melendez
Weld County Board of Commissioners:
Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair
No Pipe Dream
Save The Poudre
Sincerely,
Mick Ondris
(970) 225-0083
micksspralt@gmail.com
Cc' rvw'‘ca„ iota s
31n11q
Cc. PUT P),cAW /Pc.),
PLOCEiti3111/ aG��sr��
2O1$-0-1 15
THE SHIELDS STREET/POUDRE RIVER ALTERNATIVE
A COMPROMISE PROPOSAL for the THORNTON WATER PROJECT
In the mid -1980s, the City of Thornton began purchasing farms and their attendant water rights
in eastern Larimer County and Weld County. Given the population growth that has occurred
since that time, and based on future population growth projections, Thornton would now like to
develop a delivery system to transport that water for the use of its current and future residents.
In order to develop such a system, it is necessary for Thornton to obtain a "1041 permit" from
Larimer County. There have been five alternatives proposed for the delivery of water to
Thornton.
The "Canal Option," as proposed by the Larimer County Water Projects Working Group, would
utilize the existing Larimer County Canal (LCC) to convey water east of Interstate 25 to Black
Hollow Reservoir, where it would then be pumped to existing treatment facilities in the City of
Thornton via the proposed pipeline (discussed below). The advantages of this option are the use
of existing infrastructure, elimination of a considerable amount of construction activity and the
associated negative impacts of that construction on Larimer County residents, delivery of water
that is similar in yield and quality as the water held under the original agricultural rights, and
proximity to the designated Pipeline Corridor as proposed by Thornton. Thornton expressed
concerns that the Canal Option would require improvements to the canal system, would
necessitate the construction of additional water storage, might require additional water treatment,
and stated the opinion that Thornton is entitled to the quality of water stored in the Water Supply
and Storage Company (WSSC) Reservoir #4 as opposed to the quality of water purchased from
the individual farms located along the LCC. WSSC expressed concerns that at times the LCC
would lack the capacity to simultaneously convey water to Thornton and to the other water right
owners who utilize the LCC, that portions of the LCC would need to be modified in order to
meet the new conditions of operation, and that required annual maintenance and repair could not
be performed with year-round use of the system.
The non-profit organization "Save the Poudre" proposed the "Poudre River Alternative" to
convey water to Thornton. As described by Save the Poudre, this option would bypass the
"Canyon Mouth" diversion structure that supplies water to the LCC and WSSC reservoir system
and instead utilize the Poudre River to deliver water through Fort Collins and downstream to
Windsor, where it would then be diverted and pumped to Thornton's water treatment facilities
via the proposed pipeline. The majority of the Thornton allocation would be supplied during
peak runoff to create a more natural flow regime, which would enhance stream and floodplain
functions. This option has overwhelming public support, an indication of the value that Larimer
County residents place on what many consider to be the most important asset in the County.
Thornton expressed concerns that there would be a decrease in water quality relative to water
stored in WSSC #4, that additional storage would have to be constructed, that this construction
would require federal permitting (a process Thornton has stated it wants to avoid), and that
delivery via this option would violate an existing Agreement with WSSC and the Water Court
Decrees (see below). WSSC concurs with Thornton's assessment of the Agreement and
Decrees; and emphasizes its responsibilities to owners of other water rights on the LCC.
The City of Thornton has offered two proposals via the 1041 permitting process. The original
proposal was to draw water from WSSC #4 and convey it through a buried forty-eight inch
diameter, pressurized pipeline across private property to the Douglas Road right-of-way. The
water would then be piped east to County Line Road (CR 13), and then be conveyed south,
where it would be processed in Thornton's two existing water treatment plants. A forty million
gallon per day pump station would be constructed on the private property located immediately
south of WSSC #4. This proposal was met with strident opposition by Larimer County residents,
especially those who would be negatively impacted by the two to four year construction project.
In response to the proposal, the citizen organization "No Pipe Dream" was formed to oppose the
pipeline. Residents consistently expressed concern that the true costs of the project were being
externalized; and that few benefits accrued to Larimer County as a result of bearing those
external costs. In view of these negative impacts, and the social and economic benefits of a re -
watered Poudre River, No Pipe Dream supports the Poudre River Alternative.
In response to the intense public backlash to the Douglas Road proposal, Thornton resubmitted
its 1041 permit application with a modified "North Route" proposal that would still rely on the
pressurized pipeline, but reconfigured the alignment to cross private property to the south, west,
and north of WSSC #4, and then run in or along the County Road 56 (CR 56) right-of-way, north
of Douglas Road. While fewer people would have been impacted by the modified proposal,
vehement public opposition remained. Thornton's claims of benefit to Larimer County faced
considerable skepticism. In particular, the notion that "return flows" to the Poudre River as
mandated in the Water Court Decrees could be monetized at current market rates, and touted as
the major portion of the "benefits" provided to the County, was perceived to be without merit.
Section 14.4 of the Larimer County Land Use Code delineates twelve "review criteria" that
must be met before the Commissioners can approve a 1041 permit application. The Larimer
County Board of Commissioners determined that some of these criteria had not been met in view
of the impacts associated with the pipeline proposals, and also determined that Thornton failed to
meet Criteria #2. Criteria #2 states "The applicant has presented reasonable siting and design
alternatives or explained why no reasonable alternatives are available." As a result of these
deficiencies, on February 11, 2019 the Board unanimously voted to deny the "Thornton Water
Project Supplement #3" 1041 permit application.
There is one reasonable alternative that considers the benefits and concerns expressed by a
majority of participants throughout the 1041 permitting process. The "Shields Street/Poudre
River Alternative" (SS/PR Alt) is a citizen -initiated, compromise Alternative that provides for
the delivery of the water that Thornton is entitled to, protects the existing water rights of other
users on the LCC, and revitalizes twenty miles of the Cache la Poudre River in Larimer County.
The Alternative provides, but does not mandate, several opportunities for regional cooperation
among a number of stakeholders. This compromise Alternative builds on numerous ongoing
efforts by a variety of entities that continue to improve the fluvial and biological functions of the
Poudre River. While these improvements are often done as individual projects, each of these
efforts positively reinforces and compliments the others. As these efforts continue, the overall
stream function and health of the Poudre River will continue to improve.
The following is a revised version of the SS/PR Alt originally submitted to the Larimer County
Board of Commissioners, the City of Thornton, and numerous other stakeholders on September
19, 2018. This version of the actual SS/PR Alt should not be conflated with the similarly titled
"Shields Street to Poudre Option" devised by the City of Thornton and presented in lieu of the
original SS/PR Alt at the November 15, 2018 "Community Open House."
POINT OF DIVERSION / EXISTING WATER RIGHTS
The SS/PR Alt utilizes the existing Poudre River Canyon Mouth point of diversion to the
Larimer County Canal (LCC) and the proposed outlet at Water Supply and Storage Company
Reservoir #4 (WSSC #4). Utilization of these existing facilities is mandated in the 1986
operational Agreement between the City of Thornton and WSSC.
When the "beneficial use" of a water right is re -adjudicated (a "change of use" proceeding), the
Courts apply a "no injury" doctrine to protect other existing water rights that might be impacted
by the change of use. In this case, the original agricultural uses of the individual WSSC water
rights (shares) were converted to municipal use rights held by the City of Thornton. The 1994
District Court, Water Division No. 1, State of Colorado (i.e. the "Water Court") decision, the
1996 Colorado Supreme Court decision and remand, and the final 1998 "Thornton Northern
Project Decree" all mandate that the existing Canyon Mouth point of diversion continues to be
utilized and that the general operational functions of the WSSC reservoir system and the LCC
continue in a manner as to avoid injury to the remaining WSSC shareholders and any other
existing water rights. At virtually every public opportunity to comment, WSSC has repeatedly
and emphatically stated that it has a legal obligation to, and absolutely will, vigorously defend
the water rights of all LCC users as set forth in the existing Agreement and Decrees.
ALIGNMENT
The SS/PR Alt is comprised of three segments (please refer to the attached sketch map that
outlines the general routing):
SEGMENT #1 — approximately 1.1 miles. Outtake at WSSC #4 at 5080 ft. elevation. Buried
pipeline generally contouring (with consistent gradient) with the Dry Creek Ditch easement,
south across Douglas Road, and then to the west side of Shields Street at 5040 ft. elevation. As
will be described below, most of the pipeline alignment and other components of this Alternative
have some flexibility as to the ultimate siting. Unfortunately, the WSSC #4 outtake is a
specifically defined location with no other viable option. As a result, pipeline construction
would still need to occur on private property immediately south of the WSSC #4 dam and along
the east side of Starlite Drive. These properties, as well as properties immediately south of
Douglas Road at the Starlite intersection, would be negatively impacted during the construction
phase of the project. Auger boring technologies (such as those proposed for numerous and
extensive wetlands along the CR 56 "North" alignment, under Interstate 25, and under the
Poudre River along the CR 13 alignment in the Thornton pipeline proposals) could be employed
at this location in order to minimize some of the negative impacts. The 40 foot elevation
differential (approximately 36 ft./mile gradient) allows for gravity flow through the pipeline and
thereby eliminates the need for the controversial pump station and its redundant power feed,
lighting, and maintenance access on private property. While there would still be significant
negative impact on residents in this area, the removal of the pump station does, to some degree,
address one of the major concerns expressed by impacted property owners during public
comments.
SEGMENT #2 — approximately 2.1 miles of buried pipeline (or 1.9 miles of pipeline and 0.2
miles of lined ditch south of the Larimer Weld Canal) south to the North Shields Ponds at 4980
ft. elevation. The 60 foot elevation differential provides for an average 29 ft./ mile gradient,
allowing for gravity flow through this segment of the alignment. This routing utilizes the
existing Shields Street utility right-of-way or could be sited immediately adjacent to the right-of-
way. The majority of property on this route is undeveloped agricultural land, though there are
approximately eleven private residences and two commercial structures that may require some
adjustment of the alignment or negotiated easements. The Highway 287/Union Pacific Railroad
corridor crossing could also employ the aforementioned auger boring technologies. Open trench
construction bisecting the Larimer Weld Canal would need to occur outside of irrigation season.
To reduce surge effects, water entering the Shields Street Ponds would be baffled and then
dispersed through a series of riprap check dams and vegetated distributary channels flowing into.
the Poudre River. The Fort Collins Natural Areas Program and Larimer County have already
cooperated in developing public access and interpretation at this location. It seems reasonable to
assume that they would coordinate with Thornton to develop this aspect of the project to the
benefit of visitors, residents, and the natural habitat. As stated in Thornton's pipeline design
parameters, the maximum delivery capacity for the project is 40 million gallons per day. This
equates to a flow of 61.9 cubic feet per second (cfs), thus any fluctuations in river discharge
would be well within the existing range of variation that occurs during the irrigation season. The
total distance from the WSSC #4 outtake to the North Shields Ponds is approximately 3.2 miles.
The Douglas Road and Shields Street crossings and the 2.1 mile segment paralleling Shields
Street would impact traffic in this area. These negative effects would be similar to those created
by the CR 56 pipeline configuration, although the duration of these impacts would be
considerably less in view of the significantly reduced length of pipeline in the SS/PR Alt.
SEGMENT #3 — approximately 20 miles within the Poudre River (with the 14 mile Shields
Street to 1-25 reach within the city limits of Fort Collins) to the general vicinity of the Poudre
River and County Line Road (CR 13) intersect, in the Town of Windsor, along the proposed
Thornton Pipeline Project Corridor (hereafter referred to as the "CR 13 intake"). In this general
vicinity, a diversion weir/intake works, settling and short-term storage basins (see below), and a
pump station (relocated from WSSC #4) would need to be constructed. Approximately twenty-
one miles of pipeline are eliminated from either of Thornton's proposed routes, therefore the
CR13 pump station would be located 24.5 to 26.5 miles (as opposed to 45.5 to 47.5 miles) from
the proposed Firestone/Frederick pump station. As a result, it is possible that one or both of the
pump stations could be downsized; or could be consolidated into a single pump station, thereby
reducing project and operational costs (refer to http://thorntonwaterproject.com for locations).
This alignment, particularly the Poudre River Segment, provides the greatest benefit with the
least disruption to Larimer and Weld counties, while protecting water quality and quantity
(discussed below) for the City of Thornton.
The approximately 45 mile long (CR 13) Windsor to Thornton segment of the pipeline remains
identical to the existing Thornton Pipeline Proposal and is therefore not impacted by the
SS/PR Alt.
OPERATION
The SS/PR Alt would utilize a seasonal and daily operational fill and drawdown schedule from
WSSC #4 that would be essentially identical to either of the Thornton pipeline proposals.
WSSC #1-4 and Kluver Reservoir would remain operational in order to provide primary storage
and "release -on -demand" water deliveries to the CR 13 intake. These releases would be
coordinated to account for in -river conveyance flow time and sediment settling requirements.
Fluctuation of the WSSC #4 shoreline elevation, and any aesthetic impacts on surrounding
properties as a result of reservoir drawdown, would be the same for the SS/PR Alt or either of
the pipeline proposals.
WATER QUALITY MITIGATION
The City of Thornton has expressed a concern that water that would flow through the Poudre
River may be degraded relative to the quality of raw water delivered from WSSC #4. Neither
source would directly supply potable water to consumers in Thornton. It is the intent of the
SS/PR Alt to deliver water to the Thornton water treatment facilities that is of similar quality as
the non -potable irrigation water delivered from WSSC #4; i.e. a level of water quality that allows
for treatment at Thornton's existing facilities as provided for in the pipeline proposals.
Several factors need to be considered in regards to water quality. Among these factors are
sediment load, agricultural runoff in the reach from the Canyon Mouth to CR 13, municipal
stormwater runoff, discharge from wastewater treatment facilities in the City of Fort Collins,
reduced biological function as a result of this combination of factors and, most importantly, the
current depleted flow regime within the Poudre River.
The single most effective long-term water quality mitigation is simply the re -watering of the
Poudre River from Shields Street to CR 13.
Sedimentation: With the exception of some periodic storm -induced increases in sediment load
as a result of recent (2012) fire scars in the upper basin, the Poudre River has relatively low
turbidity. A considerable amount of watershed restoration has been performed by the Coalition
for the Poudre River Watershed and other volunteer organizations. These notable efforts are
ongoing and help reduce the base sediment load throughout the entire river system. As a result,
the stream water that would be "mixed" with outtake from WSSC #4 contains less sediment than
pre -mitigation runoff. The Coalition's "Upper Poudre Watershed Resilience Plan" (2017)
provides a framework for future mitigation and presents a "Sediment Transport Model" for the
Lower Basin.
Turbidity is a function of river discharge and therefore fluctuates on a seasonal basis, with
maximum sediment load occurring during the spring runoff. The existing WSSC reservoirs, in
conjunction with Kluver Reservoir, function as "settling basins" for waters diverted from the
Poudre River via the LCC. While this water is relatively sediment free, it is not classified as
potable and treatment is still required. In order to achieve similar water clarity, the SS/PR Alt
would require the construction of settling and short-term storage basins in the vicinity of the
CR 13 intake. These settling and short-term storage basins and any pipeline connecting to the
CR 13 Pipeline Corridor would be constructed, off river, near Jodee (JoDee) Reservoir in
Larimer County or in the vicinity of the Frank State Wildlife Area (WSA) in Weld County. As
mentioned above, WSSC Reservoirs #1-4 and Kluver Reservoir would remain operational in
order to provide primary storage and allow for demand -based water releases. The CR 13 short-
term storage basins would be operated in conjunction with Thornton's existing water storage
system in order to moderate peak demand on any one storage facility as it supplies the Thornton
and/or Wes Brown Water Treatment Plants. A major advantage of an on -demand model of
delivery is that the need for short-term storage and pump station forebay capacity can be
minimized. In view of the storage capacity in the WSSC system, the water delivery schedule
could (especially in late summer) also be coordinated to provide steady supply to maintain
storage levels throughout Thornton's existing water storage network.
As with all works of this type, inlets to the settling basins would be grated, screened, and
skimmed; and would utilize headgates to shunt water during extreme flood events or anomalous
incidents such as forest fire sediment load increases. During such events, drawdown of system
wide storage would occur. The use of three different sources of supply in Thornton's domestic
water system provides flexibility and redundancy. In the event of an extreme and unpredictable
occurrence, Thornton maintains an emergency raw water interconnection with Denver Water as
do most municipalities in the metropolitan area.
Depending on configuration, a low -head pump might be required to move water from the
diversion structure to, or within, the settling and short-term storage basins. The final outtake
from the basins would require a pump station similar to the station proposed for the WSSC #4
outlet in the various pipeline proposals, and a segment of pipeline leading from the pump station
to the CR 13 Pipeline Corridor.
The annual hydrograph of the Poudre River (USGS Lincoln Street gauge) indicates that the
maximum stream discharge, and therefore maximum sediment load, typically increases in May,
peaks with the "June Rise," and diminishes rapidly by early July. The water demand curve for
the City of Thornton begins its annual rise from May to June, then peaks during the July and
August lawn watering season, and begins to diminish in September. The implication of this lag
in peak consumption demand relative to peak flow/sediment load is that maximum stream
withdrawal would occur during periods (July and August) when the sediment load is naturally
reduced as a function of reduced streamflow. This also coincides with maximum annual
agricultural demand and the resulting maximum water diversion at the Canyon Mouth; thereby
further reducing the peak flow and peak sediment load in the reach from the Canyon Mouth to
CR 13. In fact, average stream discharge from mid -July through August ranges from 140 cfs to
50 cfs, levels at which minimum sediment transport occurs. During the roughly five month
Thornton peak demand season, there would be on average twenty-nine days in which the Poudre
River flow would exceed 600 cfs, a threshold that might be considered as requiring maximum
settling duration and/or the possibility of some need for flocculation in the settling basins.
Should Glade Reservoir of the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) be constructed,
considerable reductions in sediment load would be realized during peak demand season. By
design, the peak flow/sediment load would be significantly truncated as this is the exact flow
regime from which NISP would be drawing water out of the Poudre River at the Canyon Mouth
diversion structure, per the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District's 1980 priority right.
Agricultural Runoff: Agricultural runoff can negatively impact water quality by introducing
nutrients, primarily phosphorous and nitrogen compounds, into the stream system. These
nutrients may create conditions favorable to algal growth, and in turn increase Biological
Oxygen Demand; which would have a deleterious effect on stream ecology. While generally
moderate, agricultural runoff in the Canyon Mouth to CR 13 reach could be further reduced by
utilizing voluntary, market -driven Conservation Easements to create buffer zones along the river
corridor. With the advantage of tax benefits or other economic incentives for property owners,
entities such as the Larimer County Open Lands Program, the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas
Program, the Coalition of Colorado Land Trusts, and other non -governmental organizations
(NGOs) could identify willing participants and negotiate mutually beneficial agreements that
reduce non -point source pollutants while preserving the agricultural heritage of Larimer County.
These agreements could include a menu of non -point source mitigation strategies such as berms,
vegetated swales, improved fertilizer management, manure management, conservation tillage to
reduce soil compaction and runoff, and the use of seasonal cover crops.
Additionally, ongoing improvements in floodplain connectivity (e.g. Fort Collins Natural Areas
Program "Riverbend Ponds" enhancement) would increase the amount of time and surface area
that river water would be filtered through plants and alluvium, thereby increasing the uptake of
nitrogen and phosphorus compounds (while also providing the ancillary benefit of reducing
sediment load).
Stormwater Management: Most stormwater runoff occurs in urban areas, particularly from
non -permeable surfaces such as roofing and pavement. The primary source of stormwater runoff
in the relevant reach of the Poudre River is the City of Fort Collins. Fort Collins continues to
address this issue through its Stormwater Management Program. A typical stormwater
management approach is demonstrated by the recently completed West Vine Drive Stormwater
Project. This Project utilizes a catchment basin to collect stormwater and dampen the surge of
stormwater run-off. That captured water is then more gradually directed to dispersed filtering
areas that utilize native phreatophytes to remove contaminants and allow infiltration into the
water table. The remaining filtered surface and subsurface flow is then channeled to the Poudre
River via the Soldier Creek outfall located immediately upstream of the proposed North Shields
Ponds distributary channels.
Also included in the Management Program are public education and enforcement components
that focus on automotive byproducts and lawn care products; and in some cases provide rebates
for stormwater or surface run-off improvements. "Low Impact Development" practices are
encouraged for new and retrofit construction projects. Construction site runoff and erosion are
more effectively controlled through improved on -site management techniques. Building code
modifications permit semi -permeable parking and other hardened surfaces to be substituted for
pavement in some applications.
The Colorado State University Stormwater Center also provides resources for Best
Management Practices for stormwater districts, "green infrastructure" design and construction
guidance, and additional Low Impact Development strategies.
Wastewater Treatment Discharge: The Boxelder Sanitation District and the City of Fort
Collins Mulberry, Drake, and Fossil Creek wastewater treatment plants are operated in a manner
that meets or exceeds all state and federal standards for wastewater reclamation. Physical,
biological, and chemical processes are used to treat wastewater prior to discharge into the Poudre
River (Mulberry and Drake facilities) and into Boxelder Creek and Fossil Creek Reservoir
(tributaries of the Poudre). This reclaimed water is essentially free of organic, pathogenic, and
metal contaminants that may pose an environmental or human health risk. Aeration is utilized as
a means of odor control. The City of Fort Collins has a cooperative service agreement with the
United States Geological Survey to monitor water quality within the Poudre River. As with the
raw water in WSSC #4, reclaimed municipal wastewater is not categorized as potable and must
be treated prior to household consumption. Treatment of reclaimed wastewater is a standard
practice in municipal water supplies and is utilized numerous times in the Platte River drainage
throughout the Front Range Urban Corridor.
In view of the fact that the City of Fort Collins would receive considerable quality of life and
economic benefits from a re -watered Poudre River, it is reasonable to suggest that Fort Collins
may be willing to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Thornton to
further improve the quality of effluent water from its reclamation operations (especially the
Mulberry and Drake points of discharge), in order to compliment the currently planned treatment
of WSSC non -potable irrigation water at Thornton's existing treatment facilities. Increased
aeration or ultraviolet irradiation are examples of enhanced treatment. While desirable from
Thornton's perspective, these potential enhancements are not required for the functionality of the
SS/PR Alt. Nonetheless, opportunities for regional cooperation, when feasible, should be viewed
as the preferred approach.
It is again important to emphasize that these mitigations would take place in conjunction with,
and would complement, existing and future efforts designed to improve overall river health.
Biological Function: Functioning, intact river systems deliver a variety of ecosystem services.
The services most relevant to municipal supply water quality are chemical and nutrient uptake,
algae control, water temperature moderation, and the resulting dissolved oxygen content.
When healthy, the benthic and riparian plant communities and streambank alluvium can remove
much of the dissolved chemical and nutrient load, further enhancing the above mentioned
mitigations related to agricultural and stormwater runoff.
The amount of algae in a stream will remain in general equilibrium unless impacted by
increases in nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen. Water temperature and exposure to
sunlight also influence algal growth. Hence, so called "algal blooms" occur most frequently in
warm, standing water that is exposed to sunlight and a high nutrient content; conditions
frequently found in irrigation water storage reservoirs. A flowing Poudre River would rarely
present conditions conducive to algal blooms. Furthermore, a more natural stream ecosystem
cools (shading and alluvial flow) and oxygenates the waters within it. These natural stream
functions are so effective that the City of Aurora utilizes them as a major purification component
in its Prairie Waters Project. That Project provides treated wastewater effluent of such high
quality that it is directly mixed into the potable water supply. Increased flows from WSSC #4
would enhance these purifying functions of the stream ecosystem as well as improve ecosystem
connectivity.
It is important to note that while some degradation of water quality in the Shields Street to
CR 13 reach might occur as a result of agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, and water
reclamation discharge; the biological and fluvial functions of a healthier, re -watered Poudre
River would simultaneously mitigate or negate many of those impacts.
INSURING FULL ALLOTMENT
The City of Thornton is entitled to its full allotment of water as specified in the 1998 Water
Court Decree. A legitimate concern with the SS/PR Alt is loss in yield during conveyance
within the Poudre River. The SS/PR Alt provides for options should loss mitigation be required.
Some reduction in yield would occur as a result of increased evapotranspiration from a
somewhat more densely vegetated stream course, infiltration to the adjacent alluvium, and direct
evaporation from the surface of the river.
The amount of consumed water would decrease over time as the stream system moves towards
equilibrium under the new flow regime. Water use would be greatest during the early increase in
streambank plant growth and the initial recharge of alluvial bank storage (not actually
"consumed," but retained in bank storage) of the Poudre River under the SS/PR Alt. During this
beginning phase of operation, Thornton's consumptive demand would be considerably less than
the full 14,000 acre foot annual allotment (anticipated to meet Thornton's water needs through
2065); thereby reducing or negating the need for supplemental water sources. In particular,
alluvial bank storage would reach a seasonal equilibrium within the first year of operation.
While some WSSC water would be stored in the alluvium, the majority of recharge would still
be the result of the (diminished) seasonal peak flows that currently occur within the Poudre River
watershed. This dynamic bank storage function of a more naturally flowing Poudre River would
dramatically reduce any potential for reduction in yield. As an additional benefit, when water is
released from bank storage during periods of low flow it is cooler, more oxygenated, and
contains less algal growth than water stored in a reservoir.
If needed, there are three mechanisms available to mitigate any potential reduction in yield.
Since full allotment would not be required during the initial phase of alluvial recharge,
Alternative Transfer Methods (ATMs) could be employed to compensate for any potential
shortage. The Colorado Water Plan calls for acquisition of 50,000 acre feet of water through
these mechanisms. The most frequently used ATM approach is the "interruptible water supply
agreement." Under recent State legislation, these agreements allow agricultural users to fallow
lands and lease water (held under an agricultural right) for municipal use for three out of ten
years. That agricultural use right may not be challenged as "abandoned" when it is leased for
municipal consumption through such an agreement. This is an ideal mechanism for
compensating for any possible short term reduction in yield (or construction delays) in that the
quantity of leased water can be readily adjusted to meet existing demand, the quantity leased can
be easily reduced over time, agricultural land is not permanently taken out of production, and the
cost is considerably less than outright purchase and conversion of agricultural water rights.
A second mechanism is the continued purchase and change of beneficial use of existing
agricultural rights within the Poudre River drainage. This is the least desirable option as it
results in permanent removal of productive agricultural lands, has the potential to injure other
existing water rights, and is expensive.
A final option that could be used to mitigate the long term evapotranspiration/evaporative loss
is an in -kind exchange of water rights between entities that receive benefits from a re -watered
Poudre River, especially the City of Fort Collins. Fort Collins would need to analyze the value
of any potential water rights transfer vis-�-vis the economic benefits inherent in a healthier,
aesthetically more pleasing re -watered Poudre River flowing through a significant portion of the
City. From a legal perspective, any such transfer should be relatively free of contentious
litigation as it is a municipal -to -municipal transfer with little potential to injure other existing
water rights. Any such voluntary, good faith transfer of rights is not a requirement of the SS/PR
Alt, but would represent an ideal compromise in which both parties would benefit.
Should Glade Reservoir be constructed, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has
committed (as a condition of its U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit application) to providing
a minimum flow of 18 cfs in winter and 25 cfs in summer as a component of the NISP
operational plan. This flow would originate just downstream of the Canyon Mouth and be
withdrawn at Mulberry Street, thereby partially re -watering the reach of river that is upstream of
the Shields Street gravity flow pipeline. These flows would help eliminate the seasonal "dry up
points" below irrigation diversion structures along this reach of the Poudre River and provide
ecosystem connectivity, which in turn would enhance stream function. This release would help
maintain alluvial bank storage and partially compensate for evapotranspiration and evaporative
losses in this reach of river. The net result would be a decrease in the long term need to acquire
water to compensate for any possible loss in yield in the Thornton allocation.
COST COMPARISON
Until a more detailed engineering and construction cost analysis for the SS/PR Alt and the final
alignment of either of the Thornton pipeline proposals is completed, it is difficult to provide
much more than a general comparison of the Alternatives.
Obviously, with a net decrease of approximately 18 miles of buried 48" pipeline (25% of the
total proposed length), significant cost reduction would be realized with the SS/PR Alt. This
cost reduction could be used to defray the cost of the CR 13 diversion structure, the settling and
short-term storage basins, and any pipeline needed to rejoin the CR 13 Pipeline Corridor from
the Jodee Reservoir or Frank SWA diversion site. As previously mentioned, construction costs
and operational costs would decrease as a result of downsizing or consolidating the relocated
CR 13 and Firestone/Frederick pump stations, although more information on pump capacities
would be needed to quantify this reduction in cost.
Other costs would remain similar regardless of which Alternative is constructed. The potential
for litigation exists in all of the proposals. The outlet works at WSSC #4 would be virtually
identical in cost for any of the three pipeline configurations. The cost of the (CR 13) Windsor to
Thornton pipeline and connection to existing water treatment facilities would be identical for all
five of the options.
Additional costs that might be incurred with the SS/PR Alt would be Section 404 permitting
(see below) and water rights acquisition, if needed.
Perhaps the most difficult cost to estimate is the possibility that a treatment plant or a pre-
treatment process, such as flocculation, would be needed if the Poudre River is utilized as a
means of conveyance. An important consideration is that the SS/PR Alt need only supply water
of a quality that is comparable, from a treatment perspective, to that supplied by WSSC #4.
Again, neither source would supply potable water, so water from either source would need to be
treated at the existing Thornton water treatment facilities as provided for in the Thornton pipeline
proposals.
During the Public Hearing on August 1, 2018 the City of Thornton presented a table
summarizing cost projections for a generic Poudre River Alternative withdrawing water at
CR 13. Included in that table was an estimate of $440 million to $760 million for "water
treatment." The City of Thornton recently upgraded the Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant at a
cost of $75 million. The costs of land acquisition and the basic infrastructure associated with a
treatment plant are not reflected in the $75 million retrofit. Based on the figures provided by
Thornton, $365 million to $685 million is the estimated cost for the basic footprint of a treatment
facility located near CR 13 or some point down pipeline (i.e. treatment facilities, if actually
needed, could be located in Adams County or the City of Thornton). Such a cost implies design
criteria based on water quality parameters far exceeding the existing water quality in WSSC #4,
or Thornton's current sources of supply - Clear Creek and the South Platte River.
The Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant is described by the City of Thornton as a facility that
"uses advanced water treatment processes including state-of—the-art ultrafiltration membranes."
The quality of Thornton's current primary sources of raw water (Clear Creek and the South
Platte River) should be considered when addressing treatment requirements. While mitigation
has since occurred, it should be noted that the Clear Creek/Central City site was placed on the
Superfund National Priority List in 1983. Clear Creek runs adjacent to Interstate 70 for roughly
twenty-eight miles and adjacent to Hwy 6 for roughly sixteen miles, subjecting it to direct
surface runoff containing de-icing agents and automotive byproducts. In addition, two
wastewater treatment facilities discharge reclaimed water directly into the stream; and other
wastewater facilities in the metropolitan region discharge into tributaries of Clear Creek or the
South Platte River. In the twenty-one mile reach from Chatfield Reservoir to the Burlington
Canal diversion (which conveys raw water to the Wes Brown facility) the South Platte River
flows through the southern portion of the largest and most densely populated metropolitan area
in the State of Colorado. This reach of river contains some of the oldest stormwater
infrastructure in the state and has numerous heavy industrial sites immediately adjacent to the
river. Reverse osmosis treatment (implied as needed for Poudre River conveyance in various
cost estimates provided by Thornton) is not utilized, nor is it required, for these significantly
degraded raw water sources. The City of Thornton reports that "aesthetic changes" of a "pondy
or dirty taste and odor in your drinking water" occur on an annual basis as do algal blooms in the
reservoirs that feed the two Thornton water treatment facilities.
It seems improbable that water that flows from an outtake at WSSC #4 through approximately
twenty miles of the Poudre River could be as degraded as the water in the South Platte River at
the Burlington Canal diversion. A treatment facility that is estimated to cost 5.8 to 10.1 times
more than the Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant retrofit is difficult to reconcile with the water
quality currently documented in the Poudre River. It might be possible that some pre-treatment,
such as occasional flocculation, would be needed for water drawn from the CR 13 settling and
short-term storage basins in order to insure that it is of similar quality/clarity as water drawn
from WSSC #4. That such a process could possibly cost multiple times more than one of the
most sophisticated water treatment facilities in the State of Colorado is simply implausible. At
the December 17, 2018 Larimer BoCC meeting Thornton's Water Resources Manager and a
"principal technologist" with Jacobs Engineering stated that water treatment costs might range
from "$50 million to more than $100 million." Most of Thornton's references to the need for
any additional water treatment contain phrases such as "treatment, if needed" or "treatment may
be needed." It is difficult to compare Alternatives when there is no definitive statement that
additional water treatment is, in fact, actually required; and when a range of $50 million to $760
million is the point of reference for any such treatment. To be valid, any cost comparison
between Alternatives must be based on similar water quality standards and use the same
technical and financial platform of analysis.
PERMITTING and CONSTRUCTION
Construction of the CR 13 outtake diversion structure and the construction of the settling and
short-term storage basins of the SS/PR Alt could potentially impact wetlands. As a result, this
activity would be subject to environmental review and federal permitting requirements.
Thornton has stated that it would prefer to avoid obtaining any federal permit in order to
complete its pipeline project. The appropriate permitting process for the SS/PR Alt is the Clean
Water Act Section 404 Permit. Large scale projects with the potential for significant
environmental impact require the expensive and time consuming "Individual" permit process
administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Smaller scale projects with minimum
potential for negative environmental impacts, such the CR 13 outtake component, only require a
"General" permit under Section 404. This type of permit application process is often completed
within one year. When compared to the possibility of lengthy and expensive litigation over 1041
permitting or eminent domain disputes related to the Thornton pipeline proposals, permitting of
the SS/PR Alt lies within a timeframe that appears to be less than onerous.
A recent, local example of the Section 404 permitting process exists. During the September
2013 Poudre River flood, the Fossil Creek Reservoir diversion structure, owned and operated by
the North Poudre Irrigation Company, was destroyed. North Poudre redesigned the structure
(including a fish passage component), obtained the required Section 404 permit, and completed
construction in a two and one-half year period at a cost of $860,000. The project is another
example of regional cooperation along the Poudre River. The City of Fort Collins, the Colorado
Water Conservation Board, and Colorado Parks and Wildlife coordinated with North Poudre to
analyze the design of the overall structure, particularly the fish passage "ladder," and provided
grant and loan funding to complete the project.
The City of Thornton began acquisition and planning for water delivery over three decades ago
and expects the Project to meet future water needs through 2065. Relative to that timeframe, a
reasonable amount of time is required for a thorough and transparent review and planning
process that incorporates the involvement of the citizens of Larimer County and other impacted
parties; and that utilizes a clearly defined, consistent platform of analysis. While Thornton has
stated a desire to begin water delivery in 2025, it should be noted that the full allotment of water
would not be required at that time. It should also be noted that federal, state, and local
permitting processes are not required to be completed based on that proposed timeline; nor are
these processes bound by Applicant defined "Exclusion Areas" that implicitly disqualify the
Poudre River as a means of conveyance. A combination of continued water conservation, such
as the commendable efforts under the Thornton Water Conservation Plan, and possible
augmentation through temporary ATMs would be adequate to address any potential short-term
water deficits until permitting and construction of any of the Alternatives is completed.
Since the Poudre River provides a natural physical break between segments in the SS/PR Alt,
construction of various segments of the supply system could occur simultaneously. For example,
the WSSC #4 outlet works and Shields Street pipeline component could be built while
simultaneously building the CR 13 diversion structure, settling and short-term storage basins,
pump station, and any pipeline required for connection to the proposed CR 13 Pipeline Corridor.
Regardless of which of the five alternatives may ultimately be developed, the segment of
pipeline from the Firestone/Frederick pump station to Thornton would be identical. Similarly,
any infrastructure needed to deliver raw water to Thornton's existing water treatment facilities
would also be identical. Construction of these components of the Project could begin at any
time, assuming the local permits have been acquired and easements have been negotiated.
A GENERATIONAL LEGACY
The SS/PR Alt represents an irreplaceable opportunity to re -water a significant portion of the
Cache la Poudre River and create what would truly be a generational legacy for Larimer County,
Weld County, and the State of Colorado. The twenty mile Shields Street to CR 13 reach would
serve as a functional, permanent anchor and provide an incentive for continued restoration of the
health of the entire length of the Poudre River. As mentioned above, a variety of entities are
currently working to restore the Poudre River and have made significant improvements in river
health and stream function. SB 97 (1973) created the legislative authority for the Colorado
Water Conservation Board (CWCB) to acquire water rights for "in stream flows" in order to
"protect environmental values to a reasonable degree." Subsequent legislation has provided
further opportunities to enhance in stream flows though leasing arrangements similar to ATMs
and clarified that in stream flows may exceed flows that merely "preserve" minimal stream
functions. The Colorado Water Trust is actively engaged in acquiring and transferring to the
CWCB such in stream flow rights.
While it is imperative to protect the interests of the existing agricultural users and communities
in Larimer County; even small, incremental increases in summertime flow would lead to a more
connected river system in which the biological and hydrological functions of the Poudre River
could be significantly restored. These flows could help reduce or replace any potential loss in
yield that might result from an in -river conveyance, and thereby deliver the full allotment under
the City of Thornton's water rights. The benefits of even minimal in stream flow rights would
positively impact the entire River system, including the 30 mile reach from the CR 13 intake to
the confluence with the South Platte River at Greeley.
One can envision a future in which "the hardest working river in Colorado" would continue to
deliver its historical benefit to the agricultural communities of Northern Colorado, while
enhancing the quality of life for a growing population along the Colorado Front Range. The
compromise SS/PR Alt represents a unique opportunity for intergovernmental and NGO
cooperation that respects the concerns and rights of all stakeholders, while providing the least
disruptive and most beneficial solution to address one of Colorado's most important needs.
Revised by Mick Ondris on February 25, 2019.
Questions or comments are welcome at micksspralt@gmail.com.
a •
•
506.E
N
•
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i0.15.
1•
a .
t
i
5077•
I'.
•
•
,, •
Rocky = 'cdge_J
4 Sch
:iM 51
at_enyrs
••• 1
0955
ea
0
•
September 19, 2018
At the Larimer County Board of Commissioners meeting on August 1, 2018, a decision was
made to table the City of Thornton's 1041 Application for the Thornton Water Project. In
issuing the decision, the Commissioners articulated several reasons for their unanimous decision.
Among these reasons were inadequate levels of public input during the application process and a
lack of comprehensive analysis and consideration of viable Alternatives that would utilize the
Poudre River as a means of conveyance. Enclosed is a discussion of such an Alternative that is
based on a model of regional cooperation and compromise. The intent of the Alternative is to
deliver Thornton's full allocation of Poudre River water rights in the least disruptive, most
beneficial manner at a reasonable cost.
Attached is a list of stakeholders/commentators who have also received a copy of this
Alternative. Should you wish to share this document with other interested parties, I request that
the document be shared in its entirety. If you would like to discuss any material in this
document, please feel free to contact me.
F1
SEP 2.6 MR
Respectfully,
(7Lt
/LL7c
Mick Ondris
3761 Dalton Drive
Fort Collins CO 80526
(970) 225-0083
C�(Y'mu co'4iarNS
10/1/t$
cc• PLCTPA,CA_CFH),CT(3CTJ)
PwCICH/Jm)
9/97/II?
tw- 01 IS
d
Larimer County Board of Commissioners
Larimer County Planning Office
Larimer County Open Lands Program
Mark Koleber, Thornton Water Project Director
c/o City of Thornton
Fort Collins City Council
City of Fort Collins Natural Areas Program
City of Fort Collins Utilities
Weld County Commissioners
Windsor Town Board
Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Colorado Water Institute / PRTI Study Action Group
Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed
Stop Thornton's Pipe Dream
Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper
Fort Collins Coloradoan
North Forty News
KUNC Community Radio
SHIELDS STREET/POUDRE RIVER ALTERNATIVE
TO THE THORNTON PIPELINE PROPOSAL
During the ten month 1041 Permit review process, and particularly during the two public
comment periods before the Larimer County Board of Commissioners, several concerns were
expressed by the Commissioners, the Larimer County Planning Commission, citizens, and
various organizations representing stakeholder groups. These concerns centered on the
disruptive nature of the Douglas Road Pipeline Proposal, the lack of public engagement in the
decision making process, the short Proposal review period, the perception that the evaluation of
Alternatives that utilize the Poudre River as a means of conveyance were superficial, and the
summary dismissal of those Alternatives. In reference to Alternatives that utilize the Poudre
River as a means of conveyance, the City of Thornton expressed concerns regarding water
quality, delivery of the full allotment of water, compliance with the Colorado Water Court and
Colorado Supreme Court Decrees that authorized the change in beneficial use from agricultural
(Water Supply and Storage Company original rights) to municipal use (City of Thornton), and
potential increases in the cost of the overall Project.
The Shields Street/Poudre River Alternative (SS/PR Alternative) is a compromise Alternative,
based on the principle of regional cooperation that is designed to provide the least disruptive,
most beneficial option for the delivery of water from the Poudre River to the City of Thornton in
a cost effective manner. This Alternative builds on numerous ongoing efforts by a variety of
entities that continue to improve the fluvial and biological functions of the Poudre River. While
these improvements are often done as individual projects, each of these efforts positively
reinforces and compliments the others. As these efforts continue, the overall stream function and
health of the Poudre River will continue to improve.
ALIGNMENT
The SS/PR Alternative utilizes the existing Poudre River point -of -diversion to the Larimer
County Canal (aka Larimer County Ditch) and the proposed outlet at Water Supply and Storage
Company Reservoir #4 (WSSC #4). Therefore, this Alternative complies with the Colorado
Water Court and Colorado Supreme Court Decrees that authorized the change in beneficial use.
As a result, no injury to existing water rights related to the Canal, ditches, or laterals and the
subsequent agricultural applications occur. The Alternative is comprised of three segments
(please refer to the enclosed sketch map):
SEGMENT #1 — approximately 1.1 miles. Outtake at WSSC #4 at 5080 ft. elevation. Buried
pipeline roughly contouring (with consistent gradient) with the Dry Creek Ditch easement, south
across Douglas Road to the west side of Shields Street at 5040 ft. elevation. The 40 foot
elevation differential (approximately 36 ft./mile gradient) eliminates the need for the
controversial pump station within the residential/agricultural properties in the vicinity of WSSC
#4. Some private residences might be affected by this routing, though considerably fewer than
the more than 200 residential properties that would be impacted by the Douglass Road Proposal.
By minimizing residential impacts and eliminating the pump station, this Alternative addresses
many of the concerns expressed by Larimer County residents and their respective Home Owners
Associations during the two Board of County Commissioners public hearings. Note that the
properties in the immediate vicinity of the WSSC #1 outlet would be equally impacted regardless
of which Alternative might be constructed. Equipment access via privately owned Starlight
Drive would most likely still be needed during the construction phase.
SEGMENT #2 — approximately 2.3 miles of buried pipeline (or 1.9 miles of pipeline and 0.4
miles of lined ditch south of the Larimer Weld Canal) south to the Poudre River at 4980 ft.
elevation. The 60 foot elevation differential provides for an average 26 ft./ mile gradient,
allowing for gravity flow through this segment of the alignment. This routing utilizes the
existing Shields Street utility right of way or could be sited immediately adjacent to the right of
way. The majority of property on this route is undeveloped agricultural land, though there are
approximately eleven private residences, two commercial structures, and one public facility that
may require some adjustment of the alignment or negotiated easements. The Highway
287/Union Pacific Railroad corridor crossing and the Larimer Weld Canal crossing could employ
boring technologies similar to the proposed borings under wetlands as described in the Thornton
Pipeline Proposal. To reduce surge effects, water entering the Poudre River would be dispersed
through a series of riprap check dams and vegetated distributary channels in the vicinity of the
North Shields Ponds Natural Area. Total distance from the WSSC #4 outtake to the Poudre
River is approximately 3.4 miles.
SEGMENT #3 — approximately 20 miles within the Poudre River (with the 14 mile Shields
Street to I-25 reach within the city limits of Fort Collins) to the intersection of the Poudre River
and County Line Road near the Town of Windsor per the proposed Thornton Pipeline Project
Corridor (hereafter referred to as the "Windsor intake"). In this vicinity, an intake works,
settling basins, a pump station, and possibly a (pre)treatment facility would need to be
constructed. Since approximately twenty miles of buried 48" pipeline are eliminated, and the
Windsor pump station is located 24.5 miles to 26.5 miles from the zone proposed for the
Firestone/Frederick pump station, it is possible that one or both of the pump stations could be
downsized; or could be consolidated into a single pump station, thereby reducing project and
operational costs.
This alignment, particularly the Poudre River Segment, provides the greatest benefit with the
least disruption to Larimer and Weld counties while protecting water quality and quantity
(discussed below) for the City of Thornton.
The Windsor to Thornton segment of the pipeline remains identical to the existing Thornton
Pipeline Proposal and is not impacted by the SS/PR Alternative.
OPERATION
The SS/PR Alternative would utilize a seasonal and daily operational reservoir fill and
drawdown schedule that would be essentially identical to the Thornton Pipeline Proposal.
Fluctuation of shoreline elevation, and any aesthetic impacts on surrounding properties as a
result of reservoir drawdown, would remain the same for either Alternative.
WATER QUALITY MITIGATION
The City of Thornton has expressed a concern that water that would flow through the Poudre
River may be degraded relative to the quality of water delivered from WSSC #4. Neither source
would directly supply potable water to consumers in Thornton. It is the intent of this Alternative
to deliver water to the Thornton water treatment facilities that is of similar quality as water
delivered from WSSC #4.
Several factors need to be considered in regards to water quality. Among these factors are
sediment load, agricultural runoff in the reach from the Canyon Mouth to Windsor, municipal
stormwater runoff, discharge from three wastewater treatment facilities in the City of Fort
Collins, reduced biological function as a result of this combination of factors and, most
importantly, the current depleted flow regime within the Poudre River.
The single most effective long-term water quality mitigation is simply the re -watering of the
Poudre River from Shields Street to Windsor.
Sedimentation: With the exception of some periodic storm -induced increases in sediment load
as a result of recent (2013) fire scars in the upper basin, the Poudre River has relatively low
turbidity. A considerable amount of watershed restoration has been performed by the Coalition
for the Poudre River Watershed and other volunteer organizations. These notable efforts are
ongoing and help reduce the base sediment load through the entire river system. As a result, the
stream water that would be "mixed" with outtake from WSSC #4 contains less sediment than
pre -mitigation runoff. The Coalition's "Upper Poudre Watershed Resilience Plan" (2017)
provides a framework for future mitigation and presents a "Sediment Transport Model" for the
Lower Basin.
Of course, turbidity is a function of streamflow (volume, velocity, and gradient) and therefore
fluctuates throughout the course of the year. The existing four WSSC reservoirs, in conjunction
with Kluver Reservoir, function as a "settling basin" for waters diverted from the Poudre River
via the Larimer County Canal. While this water is relatively sediment free, it is not classified as
potable and treatment is still required. In order to achieve similar water clarity, the SS/PR
Alternative would require the construction of settling basins in the vicinity of the Windsor intake
and pump station. As with all works of this type, inlets to the settling basins would need to have
the capability to shunt water during flood events or anomalous incidents such as forest fire
sediment load increases. This presents an opportunity for a collaborative effort in which the City
of Fort Collins Natural Areas Program, Larimer County, and The Town of Windsor might
cooperate in the design and construction of the settling basins in conjunction with a floodplain
enhancement and/or recreational development.
The annual hydrograph of the Poudre River indicates that the maximum volume, and therefore
maximum sediment load, typically increases in May, peaks with the "June Rise," and diminishes
rapidly by early July. The water demand curve for the City of Thornton begins its annual rise
from May to June, then peaks during the July and August lawn irrigation season, and begins to
diminish in September. The implication of this lag in peak consumption demand relative to peak
flow/sediment load is that maximum stream withdrawal would occur during periods (July and
August) when the sediment load is naturally reduced as a function of reduced streamflow. This
also coincides with maximum annual irrigation demand and maximum water diversion at the
Canyon Mouth, thereby further reducing the peak flow and peak sediment load in the reach from
the Canyon Mouth to Windsor.
Should Glade Reservoir of the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) be constructed,
considerable reductions in sediment load would be realized. By design, the peak flow/sediment
load would be significantly truncated as this is the exact flow regime from which NISP would be
drawing water out of the Poudre River at the Canyon Mouth diversion structure per the Northern
Colorado Water Conservancy District's 1980 priority right.
Agricultural Runoff: Agricultural runoff can negatively impact water quality by introducing
nutrients, primarily phosphorous and nitrogen compounds, into the stream system. These
nutrients often create conditions favorable to algal growth, and in turn increase Biological
Oxygen Demand (BOD). Agricultural runoff in the Canyon Mouth to Windsor reach could be
significantly reduced by utilizing voluntary, market -driven Conservation Easements to create
buffer zones along the river corridor. With the incentive of tax benefits for property owners,
entities such as the Larimer County Open Lands Program, the City of Fort Collins Natural Areas
Program, the Coalition of Colorado Land Trusts, and other non -governmental organizations
(NGOs) could identify willing participants and negotiate mutually beneficial agreements that
reduce non -point source pollutants while preserving the agricultural heritage of Larimer County.
These agreements could include a menu of non -point source mitigation strategies such as berms,
vegetated swales, improved fertilizer management, manure management, conservation tillage to
reduce soil compaction and runoff, and the use of seasonal cover crops.
Additionally, ongoing improvements in floodplain connectivity (e.g. Fort Collins Natural Areas
Program "Riverbend Ponds" enhancement) would increase the amount of time and surface area
that river water would be filtered through plants and alluvium, thereby increasing the uptake of
nitrogen and phosphorus compounds (while also providing the ancillary benefit of reducing
sediment load).
Stormwater Management: Most stormwater runoff occurs in urban areas, particularly from
non -permeable surfaces such as roofing and pavement. The primary source of stormwater runoff
in the relevant reach of the Poudre River is the City of Fort Collins. Fort Collins continues to
address this issue through its Stormwater Management Program. Infrastructure improvements,
such as catchment basins that collect and temporarily retain stormwater runoff to facilitate plant
and soil filtration, are a primary component of the Program. Also included are public
education/enforcement components that focus on automotive byproducts; lawn care
contaminants such as fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides; and construction site runoff and
building code modifications that encourage semi -permeable parking and other hardened surfaces.
In some cases, rebates are available to facilitate reductions in surface runoff (and reduce overall
water consumption). The Colorado State University Stormwater Center also provides resources
for Best Management Practices for stormwater districts, so-called "green infrastructure" design
and construction guidance, and Low Impact Development strategies.
Wastewater Treatment Discharge: The City of Fort Collins Mulberry, Drake, and Fossil
Creek wastewater treatment plants are operated in a manner that meets or exceeds all state and
federal standards for wastewater reclamation. Physical, biological, and chemical processes are
used to treat wastewater prior to discharge into the Poudre River (Mulberry and Drake facilities)
and into Fossil Creek Reservoir. This reclaimed water is essentially free of organic, pathogenic,
and metal contaminants that may pose an environmental or human health risk. Aeration is
utilized as a means of odor control. The City of Fort Collins has a cooperative service agreement
with the United States Geological Survey to monitor water quality within the Poudre River. As
with the raw water in WSSC #4, reclaimed municipal wastewater is not categorized as potable
and must be treated prior to household consumption.
In view of the fact that the city of Fort Collins would receive considerable quality of life and
economic benefits from a re -watered Poudre River, it is reasonable to suggest that the City of
Fort Collins may be willing to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of
Thornton to further improve the quality of effluent water from its reclamation operations,
especially the Mulberry and Drake facilities that discharge directly into the Poudre River. This
IGA could consist of enhanced treatment (e.g. increased aeration or ultraviolet irradiation) at the
Fort Collins points of discharge or a financial/in-kind contribution to a pre-treatment facility
located at, or down pipeline of, the proposed Windsor pump station (in addition to the
aforementioned settling basin/floodplain improvement).
It is again important to emphasize that these mitigations would take place in conjunction with,
and would complement, existing and future efforts designed to improve overall river health.
Biological Function: Functioning, intact river systems deliver a variety of ecosystem services.
The services most relevant to municipal supply water quality are chemical and nutrient uptake,
algae control, water temperature moderation, and the resulting dissolved oxygen content. When
healthy, the in -stream and riparian plant communities and streambank alluvium can remove
much of the dissolved chemical and nutrient load, further enhancing the above mentioned
mitigations related to agricultural and stormwater runoff. The amount of algae in a stream will
remain in general equilibrium unless impacted by increases in nutrients such as phosphorous and
nitrogen. Water temperature and exposure to sunlight also influence algal growth. Hence, so
called "algal blooms" occur most frequently in warm, standing water that is exposed to sunlight
and a high nutrient content; conditions frequently found in water storage reservoirs. A flowing
Poudre River would rarely present conditions conducive to algal blooms. Furthermore, a more
natural stream ecosystem cools (shading and alluvial flow) and oxygenates the waters within it.
These natural stream functions are so effective that the City of Aurora utilizes them as a major
purification component in the Prairie Waters Project that treats wastewater effluent to such a
high quality that it is mixed into the potable water supply. Increased flows from WSSC #4
would enhance these purifying functions of the stream ecosystem as well as improve ecosystem
connectivity.
It is important to note that while some degradation of water quality in the Shields Street to
Windsor reach would most likely occur as a result of agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, and
water reclamation discharge; the biological and fluvial functions of a healthier, re -watered
Poudre River would simultaneously mitigate many of those impacts.
INSURING FULL ALLOTMENT
The City of Thornton is entitled to its full allotment of water as specified in the Colorado Water
Court and Colorado Supreme Court Decrees. A legitimate concern with the SS/PR Alternative is
water loss during conveyance within the Poudre River. Some loss would occur as a result of
increased evapotranspiration from a more densely vegetated stream course, infiltration to the
adjacent alluvium, and direct evaporation from the surface of the river.
The amount of consumed water would decrease over time. The initial increase in plant growth
and the initial recharge of alluvial bank storage (not actually "consumed," but retained in bank
storage) would be greatest in the earliest operation of this Alternative; a timeframe in which full
allotment exceeds consumptive demand. In particular, alluvial bank storage would reach a
seasonal equilibrium within the first year of operation. While some WSSC water would be stored
in the alluvium, the majority of recharge would still be the result of the (diminished) seasonal
peak flows that currently occur within the Poudre River watershed. As an additional benefit,
when water is released from bank storage during periods of low flow, it is cooler; more
oxygenated, and contains less algal growth than water stored in a reservoir.
There are three mechanisms available to mitigate these potential losses. While full allotment
would not be required during the initial, somewhat higher consumption phase of alluvial
recharge and stimulated plant growth, Alternative Transfer Methods (ATMs) could be employed
to compensate for any potential shortage. The Colorado Water Plan calls for acquisition of
50,000 acre feet of water through this mechanism. The most frequently used ATM approach is
the "interruptible water supply agreement." Under recent State legislation, these agreements
allow agricultural users to fallow lands and lease water held under an agricultural right for
municipal use for three out of ten years. The agricultural right may not be challenged as
"abandoned" under this legislation. This is an ideal mechanism for compensating for any
possible initial shortage in the SS/PR Alternative in that the quantity of leased water can be
easily reduced over time, agricultural land is not permanently taken out of production, and the
cost is considerably less than outright purchase and conversion of agricultural water rights.
A second mechanism is the continued purchase of existing agricultural rights within the Poudre
drainage. This is the least desirable option as it results in permanent removal of productive
agricultural lands, has the potential to injure other existing water rights, and is expensive.
Fortunately, only the water annually consumed in increased evapotranspiration and the baseline
surface evaporation losses would need to be replaced on a long term basis.
A final option that could be used to mitigate the long term evapotranspiration/evaporative loss
is an in -kind exchange of water rights between entities that receive a benefit from a re -watered
Poudre River, especially the City of Fort Collins. Fort Collins would need to analyze the value
of any potential water rights transfer vis-�-vis the economic benefits inherent in a healthier,
aesthetically more pleasing re -watered Poudre River flowing through a significant portion of the
City. From a legal perspective, any such transfer should be relatively free of contentious
litigation as it is a municipal -to -municipal transfer with little potential to injure other existing
water rights.
One other potential should be considered. While no formal agreement has been reached, the
Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has discussed a mitigation plan with the City of
Fort Collins that would allocate a minimum base flow for the Poudre River as a component of
the NISP operational plan. Should such an agreement be reached, the minimal flow would
eliminate the seasonal "dry up points" below irrigation diversion structures along the Poudre
River and thereby provide ecosystem connectivity, enhancing stream function. This release
would help maintain bank storage and partially compensate for evapotranspiration and
evaporative losses. The net result would be a decrease in the long term need to acquire water to
compensate for any possible depletion of the Thornton allocation.
COST COMPARISON
Until a more detailed engineering and construction cost analysis for the SS/PR Alternative and
the final alignment of the Thornton Pipeline Proposal is completed, it is difficult to provide much
more than a qualitative comparison of the two Alternatives.
Obviously, with a net decrease of approximately seventeen miles of buried 48" pipeline, some
cost reduction would be realized with the SS/PR Alternative. The segment eliminated also
represents some of the most expensive per mile costs of the pipeline as it includes the
replacement of Douglas Road and increased costs associated with minimizing disruptions and
maintaining emergency access during the construction phase. As previously mentioned,
construction costs and operational costs would decrease as a result of downsizing or
consolidating the Windsor and Firestone/Frederick pump stations.
Other costs would remain similar regardless of which Alternative is constructed. The outlet
works at WSSC #4 would be essentially identical as would be the various "appurtenant
structures" referred to in general terms in the Thornton Pipeline Proposal public presentations.
Components of the SS/PR Alternative that could be more expensive than the Thornton Pipeline
Proposal include the intake works and settling basins in the vicinity of the Windsor intake (see
prior reference to potential collaborative approach). Permitting, water rights acquisition (if
needed), and potential adjudication might also be additional costs associated with the SS/PR
Alternative.
Perhaps the most difficult cost to estimate is the possibility that a treatment plant or pre-
treatment plant would be needed if the Poudre River is utilized as a means of conveyance. An
important consideration is that the SS/PR Alternative need only supply water of a quality that is
comparable to that supplied by WSSC #4. Again, neither source supplies potable water.
During the Public Hearing on August 1, the City of Thornton presented a graph summarizing
cost projections for a generic Poudre River Alternative withdrawing water at Windsor. Included
in that graph was an estimate of $440 million to $760 million for "water treatment." The City of
Thornton recently upgraded the Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant at a cost of $75 million.
Obviously, the costs of land acquisition and the basic infrastructure associated with a treatment
plant are not reflected in the $75 million retrofit. Based on the figures provided by Thornton,
the estimate indicates a cost of $365 million to $685 million for the basic footprint of a treatment
facility located at Windsor. Such a cost implies a design criteria based on a water quality
parameter far exceeding the existing water quality in WSSC #4. The Wes Brown Water
Treatment Plant is described by the City of Thornton as a facility that "uses advanced water
treatment processes including state-of—the-art ultrafiltration membranes." The current primary
sources for Thornton's raw water are Clear Creek and the South Platte River. While
considerable mitigation has since occurred, it should be noted that the Clear Creek/Central City
site was placed on the Superfund National Priority List in 1983. The South Platte River flows
through the largest and most densely populated metropolitan area in the State of Colorado and
contains some of the oldest stormwater infrastructure in the state. The City of Thornton reports
that "aesthetic changes" of a "pondy or dirty taste and odor in your drinking water" occur on an
annual basis as do algal blooms in the reservoirs that feed the two Thornton water treatment
facilities.
It seems improbable that water that flows from an outtake at WSSC #4 through approximately
twenty miles of the Poudre River could be similarly degraded. A Windsor (pre)treatment facility
that is estimated to cost 5.8 to 10.1 times more than the Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant
retrofit is difficult to reconcile with the water quality currently documented in the Poudre River.
It is possible that some pre-treatment would be needed for water drawn from the Windsor
settling basins in order to insure that it is of similar quality as water drawn from WSSC #4. That
such a facility could possibly cost multiple times more than one of the most sophisticated water
treatment facilities in the State of Colorado seems implausible. To be valid, any cost comparison
between Alternatives must be based on similar water quality standards and use the same platform
for analysis.
PERMITTING and CONSTRUCTION
The SS/PR Alternative could potentially impact wetlands and would therefore be subject to
environmental review and permitting. While these processes are time consuming, some factors
suggest a somewhat more rapid timeline through permitting and construction. A considerable
amount of stream function data, hydrologic modeling, and environmental impact projections are
available for the reach contained in the SS/PR Alternative as a result of the extensive National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) requirements for
NISP. In addition to this body of work, the City of Fort Collins "River Health Assessment
Framework" (2015) and the aforementioned "Sediment Transport Model" provided by the
Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed (2017) could be directly incorporated into an
assessment of the SS/PR Alternative. While public comment is required for any permitting
process, it seems reasonable to assume that there would be far fewer, if any, major objections to
an Alternative that provides so many tangible, positive environmental benefits as the SS/PR
Alternative. When compared to the possibility of lengthy and expensive litigation over
permitting or eminent domain disputes related to the Thornton Pipeline Proposal, permitting of
the SS/PR Alternative lies within a timeframe that appears to be less than onerous.
The City of Thornton began acquisition and planning for water delivery over three decades ago
and expects the Project to meet future water needs through 2065. Relative to that timeframe, a
reasonable amount of time is required for a thorough and transparent review and planning
process that incorporates the involvement of the citizens of Larimer County and other impacted
parties; and that utilizes a clearly defined, consistent analysis platform. While Thornton has
stated a desire to begin water delivery in 2025, it should be noted that the full allotment of water
would not be required at that time. It should also be noted that the 1041 Permit process is not
required to be completed based on that proposed timeline. A combination of continued water
conservation, such as the commendable efforts under the Thornton Water Conservation Plan, and
possible augmentation through temporary ATMs would be adequate to address any potential
short-term deficits until permitting and construction of any Alternative is completed.
Since the Poudre River provides a natural physical break between segments in the SS/PR
Alternative, construction of various segments of the supply system could occur simultaneously.
For example, the WSSC #4 outlet works and Shields Street pipeline component could be built
while simultaneously building the Windsor to Thornton segment of the pipeline. Since the Weld
County segment of pipeline remains identical in either Alternative, construction could begin on
that segment upon issuance of the Weld county and other jurisdictions' permits. Similarly, any
intake works and other infrastructure needed to deliver raw water to either of Thornton's water
treatment plants could also proceed.
A GENERATIONAL LEGACY
The SS/PR Alternative represents an irreplaceable opportunity to re -water a significant portion
of the Poudre River and create what would truly be a generational legacy for Larimer County,
Weld County, and the State of Colorado. The twenty mile Shields Street to Windsor reach
would serve as a functional, permanent anchor and provide an incentive for continued restoration
of the health of the entire length of the Poudre River. As mentioned above, a variety of entities
are currently working to restore the Poudre River and have made significant improvements in
river health and stream function. SB 97 (1973) created the legislative authority for the Colorado
Water Conservation Board to acquire water rights for "in stream flows" to protect environmental
values to a reasonable degree. Subsequent legislation has provided further opportunities to
enhance in stream flows though leasing arrangements similar to ATMs. While it is imperative to
protect the interests of the existing agricultural users and communities in Larimer County; even
small, incremental increases in summertime flow in the eight miles from the Canyon Mouth
diversions to Shields Street would lead to a connected river system in which the biological and
hydrological functions of the Poudre River could be significantly restored. These flows could
reduce or replace any potential consumptive loss that might result from an in -river conveyance
and thereby deliver the full allotment under the City of Thornton's water rights. The benefits of
even minimal in stream flow rights would positively impact the entire River system, including
the 30 mile reach from the Windsor intake to the confluence with the South Platte River at
Greeley.
One can envision a future in which "the hardest working river in Colorado" would continue to
deliver its historical benefit to the agricultural communities of Northern Colorado while
enhancing the quality of life for a growing population along the Colorado Front Range. The
SS/PR Alternative represents a unique opportunity for intergovernmental and NGO cooperation
that respects the concerns of all stakeholders while providing the least disruptive and most
beneficial solution to one of Colorado's most important needs.
•
506
i•
1'
•
- •
• .
LA
•
•
•
1/4
4,
.
016-
•
•
Ij •
I I
I.
. ! •
.
•
•
••
I
•
so
O
its
` Grave
Pits
c
•
0 61)
VA'
SEGMENT #2
le y •
\k/i.
I
5005
• q•
.
N
I
.
"►
\ 1.
• -�'
c•/
8
O
tj
•
N
4
°,7c,
/'r
/ a9s4
I
•..
....,I
:II..r . • .:•.
4
•
a
If
February 19, 2018
Sent via U. S. Mail and Email
Larimer County Commissioners
Lew Gaiter Ill
Steve Johnson
Tom Donnelly
200 West Oak, Suite 2200
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Mr. Rob Helmick
Larimer County Planning
200 West Oak
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Mr. Mark Koleber
City of Thornton
12450 Washing Street
Thornton, CO 80241-2405
Weld County Commissioners
Mike Freeman
Julie Cozad,
Barbara Kirkmeyer
Sean Conway
Steve Moreno
1150 O Street
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80631
Re: City of Thornton 1041 Permit Application and the Thornton Water Project
Dear Commissioners, Mr. Helmick and Mr. Koleber:
RECEIVED
MAR 022018
COMMISSIONERS
We are writing in regards to the City of Thomton's 1041 Permit Application currently making its way through
the Larimer County process. As residents located along Larimer County Road 1 and Weld County Road
13, we would like to express our desire to have the Thornton Water Project pipeline placed in the middle of
the current road right-of-way. We understand that the Town of Timnath has agreed to allow the alignment
of the pipeline within the portion of the road located in Timnath immediately north or adjacent to our
properties.
The current maps supplied to us from Western States Land Services, Inc. show that the proposed pipeline
on LCR 1/WCR 13 south of Harmony Road is aligned within the road right-of-way until Larimer County
Road 32 where is crosses into private land in Weld County. The maps indicate a placement on the
3i iai tir
1
cc= PAC TP/ m m), cat ecz,
mot EP ICWain),C.TBCTS)
*J/CO/ l $-
2018-0715
Sondrup parcel in Weld County, then again into the road right-of-way until it crosses into the Hoff parcel in
Larimer County. The pipeline continues in Larimer County part way through the George parcel until it
crosses over to the Weld County property of Westwind Farm, LLC. This route causes concern for us as
property owners in that the proposed route cuts through irrigation ditches that are needed to service our
crops and would impact our property values.
We would ask that Larimer and Weld Counties require the Thornton Water Project pipeline to remain in the
middle of the County Line Road right-of-way from Harmony until Larimer County Road 32/Weld County
road 68 1/2.
We also note that Larimer County is now asking for additional information/materials from the City of
Thornton regarding Field Survey Information, Pipe Alignment, Anticipated Construction Schedule,
Pavement Restoration Plan and Utility Coordination. Larimer County requested this information in its
January 26, 2018 letter for the 2.6 mile segment along County Road 54. We would request the same type
of information for the portion of Larimer County Road 1/Weld County Road 13 that impacts our properties.
It is our hope that the City of Thornton will be consistent in its application to Larimer County to include the
additional information/materials for all properties along the TWP route.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Is/ See attached signature pages
David and Stephanie Hill, Larimer County Parcel No. 8601000008
Ron and Carole Sondrup, Weld County Parcel No. 080707000042
Jim and Sandy Helzer, Larimer County Parcel Nos. 8612406001 and 8612406002
Shawn and Pam Hoff, Larimer County Parcel No. 861200001
Mark and Linda George, Larimer County Parcel Nos. 8613105002 and 8613105001
2
Sincere
Al/ ..'/6/1:C egee-
David and Stephanie Hill, Larimer County Parcel No. 8601000008
4729 South Larimer County Road 1
Fort Collins, CO 80525
3
Sincerely,
Ron and Carole Sondrup, Weld County Parcel No. 080707000042
34310 Weld County Road 13
Windsor, CO 80550
a-)-,--e-e._( a_..=rze_e.ic7
So/7Ji(f
4
Sincerely,
Jim and Sandy Hetzar, Larimer County Parcel Nos. 8612406001 and 8612406002
6301 South Larimer County Road 1
Windsor, CO 80550
Sincerely,
Shawn and Pam Hoff, Larimer County Parcel No. 8612000012
6405 South Larimer County Road 1
Windsor, CO 80550
6
Sincerely,
Mark and Linda George, Larimer County Parcel Nos. 8613105002 and 8613105001
6801 South Larimer County Road 1
Windsor, CO 80550
Hello