DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[mhays]

The confluence is more interesting, usable, and well-done than 99% of of the world's urban waterfronts. It's already pretty prominent in marketing and on the trail system. I'd say call it successful and don't change much, unless you want more people there.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Not exactly.
Actually given their limitations is exactly why the project makes good sense. In good years they let water they have rights to, run off because they don't have the capacity to store it. BTW, nothing precludes Denver Water from purchasing additional water rights.

Denver Water has nothing to do with this project, it's the little pissant water utilities in DougCo, with practically zero water rights on the Platte, that are trying to fund this project with the subsidization of 50-year federal bonds as assistance, and will probably default on the bonds because they can't pay for both the water to fill the expansion and the increased water usage of their customer base once the aquifer runs dry. I don't expect this project to fill up to it's stated capacity ever.

[PLANSIT]

Small and crappy, but cool view:



Source

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Denver Water has nothing to do with this project, it's the little pissant water utilities in DougCo, with practically zero water rights on the Platte, that are trying to fund this project with the subsidization of 50-year federal bonds as assistance, and will probably default on the bonds because they can't pay for both the water to fill the expansion and the increased water usage of their customer base once the aquifer runs dry. I don't expect this project to fill up to it's stated capacity ever.

Are you sure you're not confusing issues? To the best of my recall, South Suburban and/or specific communities are part of a reservoir project built near Castle Rock to collect and store snow melt and rain runoff. There's also some sort of compact among Denver/Aurora and South Suburban to send "used" Denver water back around through the plains to prairie pipeline that Aurora built in the (near) future that would start with modest amounts and potentially grow over time.

Chatfield is owned and operated by Denver Water. One reason why Denver Water also wants to enlarge Gross reservoir is for better source balance between north and south communities as well as creating redundancy that could be available in emergency situations. Expansion is needed to meet future growth within the existing Denver Water boundaries as well as withstanding an extended period of drought.

[bunt_q]

Isn't Chatfield operated by the Corps? Denver Water may utilize some space, but that is not and never was a Denver a Water facility as far as I know.

[LAM]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Isn't Chatfield operated by the Corps? Denver Water may utilize some space, but that is not and never was a Denver a Water facility as far as I know.

You are correct. There is no party that is contracting for the water yet.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/e...pansion-ok-d-by-army-corps.html?page=all

[TakeFive]

^^ Oops, I stand corrected. I obviously missed the DBJ article. Plus a quick check of the Denver Water site lists Gross but not Chatfield as theirs. The Corps had to approve both projects.

But who owns the water, the state? I was under the impression that the water that flowed into Chatfield was owned by Denver Water. Doesn't Denver, in effect, control the amount of water in Lake Dillon? Reading the DBJ article a 2nd time it says that the state will be selling storage space. So I guess if you own water (rights) for water that will flow into the reservoir then you rent the space to store it.

[DownhomeDenver]

RiNo is getting their second pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks at 35th/36th:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26957307/denver-city-council-green-lights-river-north-pedestrian

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

But who owns the water, the state? I was under the impression that the water that flowed into Chatfield was owned by Denver Water. Doesn't Denver, in effect, control the amount of water in Lake Dillon? Reading the DBJ article a 2nd time it says that the state will be selling storage space. So I guess if you own water (rights) for water that will flow into the reservoir then you rent the space to store it.

Denver Water has storage rights at Chatfield, so they do own some of the water in the reservoir that's designated for municipal and recreation use, about 27,000 acre ft. But Denver Water uses this storage capacity to capture bypass water it has to release from Strontia Springs Reservoir in Water Canyon to maintain the trout fisheries in the canyon. Denver Water is not releasing any water flows that they don't own further down the Platte. The rest of the capacity at Chatfield is designated for flood control and is owned by the Corp of Engineers. The DBJ article is wrong on ownership

This expansion project would redesignate a portion of the flood control capacity as municipal and recreational use, allowing the reservoir to fill up a bit further at all times. But, all of the water in the Platte is already spoken for and filling up this extra capacity would require the water utilities that have bought into the expansion plan, which doesn't include Denver Water, to secure water rights on the Platte from other parties. A couple of the storage requestors are agricultural and have enough of a history to have senior water rights on the Platte, but the utilities are all of the shitty Douglas County type that have only recently begun to look at purchasing surface water rights such as the ongoing WISE development with Denver and Aurora Water to sell reused piss-water to Douglas County when available. But that's not enough to fill this reservoir expansion, nor the recently completed Rueter-Hess reservoir, and the flows can be shut off at any time that Denver or Aurora Water deem necessary.

Bottom line: these reservoirs will never fill up because Douglas County utilities don't have the supply, nor are there going to be enough interested parties wanting to sell their water rights, and if you're a resident of Douglas County you are going to be paying a small fortune for the little water you'll have available in a few short years. Bon't worry, I'll shake it a little harder when I piss so you can get a couple of extra drops.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Bottom line: these reservoirs will never fill up because Douglas County utilities don't have the supply, nor are there going to be enough interested parties wanting to sell their water rights, and if you're a resident of Douglas County you are going to be paying a small fortune for the little water you'll have available in a few short years.

It'll fill. There are always parties willing to sell. That person might be a dryland corn farmer 20 miles outside of Sterling. But there will always be somebody; cities are, without question, the highest and best use for the water. That is true everywhere on the planet.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It'll fill. There are always parties willing to sell. That person might be a dryland corn farmer 20 miles outside of Sterling. But there will always be somebody; cities are, without question, the highest and best use for the water. That is true everywhere on the planet.

The farmers who grow food might say otherwise, whether for economic or nostalgia reasons. But if/when they do sell, just imagine the water rates that will have to be charged for Douglas County to get a drink.

[Scottk]

Is Douglas County really that close to running out of water? I was under the impression that the aquifer would last them a while longer, but what do I know

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Denver Water has storage rights at Chatfield, so they do own some of the water in the reservoir that's designated for municipal and recreation use, about 27,000 acre ft. But Denver Water uses this storage capacity to capture bypass water it has to release from Strontia Springs Reservoir in Water Canyon to maintain the trout fisheries in the canyon. Denver Water is not releasing any water flows that they don't own further down the Platte. The rest of the capacity at Chatfield is designated for flood control and is owned by the Corp of Engineers. The DBJ article is wrong on ownership

This expansion project would redesignate a portion of the flood control capacity as municipal and recreational use, allowing the reservoir to fill up a bit further at all times. But, all of the water in the Platte is already spoken for and filling up this extra capacity would require the water utilities that have bought into the expansion plan, which doesn't include Denver Water, to secure water rights on the Platte from other parties. A couple of the storage requestors are agricultural and have enough of a history to have senior water rights on the Platte, but the utilities are all of the shitty Douglas County type that have only recently begun to look at purchasing surface water rights such as the ongoing WISE development with Denver and Aurora Water to sell reused piss-water to Douglas County when available. But that's not enough to fill this reservoir expansion, nor the recently completed Rueter-Hess reservoir, and the flows can be shut off at any time that Denver or Aurora Water deem necessary.

Thanks for the (much needed) clarification. I do seem to recall now discussion from DougCo users about the dilemma of building a needed pipeline. The only pick I'd have is I still think in (extra) good runoff years that Denver would be able to capture additional water from their existing rights although I can't recall when/where I read that.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

The farmers who grow food might say otherwise, whether for economic or nostalgia reasons. But if/when they do sell, just imagine the water rates that will have to be charged for Douglas County to get a drink.

Yep, (I wasn't dialed in) as not only are there agricultural rights users but Colorado "owes" certain flows into Nebraska as well.

Add to the list energy companies who wish to secure water for their thirsty fracking projects (depending on the strength of that market).

Originally Posted by Scottk

Is Douglas County really that close to running out of water? I was under the impression that the aquifer would last them a while longer, but what do I know

They're not at that point yet but the future is rather bleak. The aquifer was great for accommodating a more rural area. For individual users new wells drilled much deeper have been needed already though.

[TakeFive]

Never doubt the ingenuity of a Denver urban dweller.

Thanks to star.me

[Interzen]

The convenience of curbside parking. I wonder if it's a residential permit zone.

[TakeFive]

Hahaha... Ridiculous Boulder

"Boulder Planning Board approves Google campus plan — with conditions "
states the well written article by Alex Burness of the Boulder Daily Camera HERE.

After a more than seven-hour meeting that, at times, appeared to be headed nowhere, the Boulder Planning Board voted early Friday morning to conditionally approve Google's plan to construct a massive campus in the heart of the city, a facility that would give the tech giant room to expand locally to about five times its current size.

"Conditionally,” of course, was the operative word.

[DenverPoke]

According to DBJ,construction has started on The Confluence. Paid article so I'm not sure if that just refers to the old warehouse being demolished or if work has actually begun.

Also, Alexan Uptown will have an official groundbreaking on Dec 16th. Rates will be $2.22/sf...lower than I imagined.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Hahaha... Ridiculous Boulder
"Boulder Planning Board approves Google campus plan — with conditions "

Mother f**kin' Boulder. It's asinine some of the stipulations they want to put on what would be a major employment center. Denver should be calling Google right now and Hancock should be offering sexual favors to the entire Google workforce to get a Denver Google office set up. I'll take a 12-story brick DT with an EIFS facade and 1,500 Google employees any day.

[bunt_q]

The world really would be better off without Boulder. The one advantage of Udall losing is less Boulder influence on Colorado. They are terrible people; worse even than the rednecks Gardner represents.