The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Public Works 1993-01-214 :4 t , 6 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE AGENDA Jan. 21, 1993 1. US West - Request for an easement on Town property. V/'/0/ 2. EVRPD - Request approval to construct a building on Town property. 3. Plantation Bldg. - Contractor request for construction parking. 4. Water Tap Fee Study:- 1) Review and request approval to adopt 2) Additional ' Scope of Services. 5. Dry Gulch Water Main - Request oversizing charge to rural customers. 6. Marys WTP - Request to approve a change order. 7. Crystal Water Tank - Request approval to sell to high bidder. REPORTS: 1. Customer Service Response 2. Monthly Water Reports 3. Water Consultant Update 4. Marys Lake Lodge 5. Public Works Dept. 1993 Activity Plan The Public Works Committee reserves the right to add or delete items from the agenda as necessary. r '11 Daniel R Haley U S WEST Communications ,Manager 12121 Grant St. Garden Level Right-of-Way Department Thornton, Colorado 80241 1@.DWESy=. Network Facilities Engineering . COMMUNICATIONS @ Office 303 451-2670 Digital Pager 303 821-6758 Facsimile 303 451-2420 January 6,1993 Town of Estes Park % Bill Linnane P. O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 RE: Request for Easement Dear Bill, As I discussed on the phone with you yesterday, we are in the process of upgrading the telephone facilities in the Carriage Hills Area. To do this we need to place an area cross connect facility. I did, by the way check with our engineer, Ed Heinz, and he confirms that this work will be for the people who presently live in Carriage Hills. I am including with this request an Easement that will incorporate Exhibit "A". The approximate location of our request is just east of the new bike path on Carriage Drive. It is on the north side of Carriage Drive and is 392 feet east of State Hwy 7. I do realize that this process is your call, but in an effort to facilitate things I am including two copies of this easement. If this easement appears to be acceptable as is, then one cory would be for you to keep and the other copy would need to be executed and returned in the enclosed envelope. The 225 dollars is compensation based on a dollar per square foot. Ed Heinz will be attending your Public Works meeting on the 2lst. If there is something else you would like him to be aware of he can be contacted in Ft. Collins on 224-7471. I did tell him to bring a picture of the facility and the site. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, f Dan Haley 1-1 0 12/14/92 EASEMENT DESCRIPTION - Â¥ Attract of land in the North 1/2, Section 1, Township 4 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, said tract is described as follows: . From the Westerly corner of Outlot 'D', Carriage Hills Seventh Filing, Larimer County, i Colorado; thence S 57'06'15" E 287.68 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, said 4, point being on the Southwesterly line of said Outlot 'D'; A thence N 32'53'45" E 15.00 feet; thence S 57'06'15" E 15.00 feet; thence S 32Â°53'45" W 15.00 feet to the said Southwesterly line of y Outlot 'D'; thence N 57Â°06'15" W 15.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, said tract contains 225 square feet, more or less. | O/ The basis of bearings for this easement description is the said Southwesterly line of Outlot 'D' as platted, said line bears S 57'06'15" E. Ido hereby certify that this easement description is true and ,)~~ correct to the best of my knowledge and information furnished. Â¢ 4 0Â» U 14--24 0/S> 36hn J. Hall 00 PLS #15278 Â·:Â·,11~,0-#b, - ''~* 1. 4>44 40 <&<6\ S 4*.*, 421 <1., re, 457% 402 , 000/%700 ff * :. 11 1,1,1,h SH ri : 16Â£/d .OÂ» 0 4:' : ' S'#10Â·7.f>r.,4/ NOÂ» 0 *dhk, BEARINGS .%32'... 0,1,2.-t.,0 \.32>, f aâ‚¬) 2 C** 40, e P A ~ ..5. 42, 31* .. Jabo ego 59Â·, aÂ· O 1 FND 1 92' ALUM.CAP LS/0385 HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. Professional Land Surveyors . 873 N. Cleveland Loveland, CO 80537 (303) 663-1177 HAI FILE NO. 92-500 - 2-11 NAME OF SUBDIVISION CARRIAGE HILLS 7th FILING COMMUNICATIONS, INC. U.S. WEST @ N 1/2 SECTION | TOWNSHIP 4N RANGE 73 W SCALE: 1 "= 40' 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO ekh JOB NO. CS-9G2M ARTIES EXCH. R.O.W. NO. DATE: 12-14-92 GEO. CODE 200000 1-2 . 1 1, I , / 474'~~Li-tr,1044,1 ESTES VALLEY RECREATION ancl PARK DISTRICT Pout Office Uox 1379 â€¢ Eutou Pork, Colorndo 80517 690 Big Thompuon Avenue â€¢ [303] 586-8191 January 12, 1993 Public Works Committee c/o Bill Linnane, Public Works Director P. O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Bill: Estes Valley Recreation and Park District is planning on constructing a new maintenance facility at the 18-Hole Golf Course. The golf course land is owned by the Town of Estes Park, and the Recreatiori District manages the property through an intergovernmental agreement called an "Operating Agreement" dated January 15, 1990. Under item 17 of the Agreement, the District must obtain permission to improve or modify the facilities. The Operating Agreement requires that the District must obtain written permission from the Town of Estes Park to make improvements or modify existing facilities with expenditures of $25,000 or greater. The facility is described in greater detail in the enclosed attachment. We hereby request permission to construct a maintenance facility at the Estes Park Golf Course on land owned by the Town of Estes Park. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, S tanl qfy C. G e~gler Execu~ive DirUctor Attachment: Page 10, Operating Agreement Proposed Maintenance Facility Plan Golf Course Site Plan 2-1 t 4 shall have the option of renewing this Agreement for an additional five-year period by giving the Town notice on or before June 1, 1994 of its intention to renew this Agreement for an additional five-year period. This Agreement shall automatically renew for additional one-year periods following either the end of the first five-year term, or the second five-year term, whichever is applicable, Unless this Agreement is terminated by either party pursuant to Paragraph 16 below. 16. OPTION TO TERMINATE. At the end of either the first five-year term or second five-year term set forth in Paragraph 15 above, whichever is applicable, either party shall have the option to terminate this Agreement upon giving written notice to the other party at least 180 days prior to the automatic renewal date which is January 15th of each year. Said notice shall be given pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 23 below. 17. IMPROVEMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE FACILITIES. Following the completion of the construction, the District may modify the Facilities only upon receipt of written approval or such modification by the Town. This shall only apply to improvements or modifications requiring the expenditure of more than $25,000.00. 18. TAX EXEMPTION WARRANTY. The District certifies and covenants to and for the benefit of the Town that so long as any of the Certificates remain outstanding, the District shall at all times do and perform all acts and things necessary or desirable in order to assure that interest paid on the Certificates shall, for the purposes of federal income taxation, be excludable from the gross income of the recipients thereof and exempt from such taxation. It is ' hereby covenanted and agreed by the District that it will not make, or permit to be made, any use of the original proceeds of the Certificates, or of any moneys treated as proceeds of the Certificates within the meaning of the Code and applicable regulations, rulings and decisions, or take, permit to be taken or fail to take any action which would adversely affect the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Certificates under Section 103 of the Code and applicable regulations, rulings and decisions. The covenants contained in this Section shall continue in effect until all Certificates are fully paid, satisfied and discharged. 19. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The District is not an agent or employee of the Town hereunder, and all of its activities relating to the Facilities shall be in its capacity as independent contractor to the Town. 2-2 -10- 1 Estes Valley Recreation and Park District Proposed Maintenance Facility Need for the Facility: The proposed facility will serve as the maintenance center for all District operations. The proposed maintenance facility will replace an existing shop that is insufficient in size, deteriorated, and does not meet safety guidelines. The existing maintenance shop will be demolished once the new facility is completed. Location of the New Maintenance Shop: The proposed shop is to be located on the 18-Hole Golf Course just south of the existing shop. The new shop will be placed on bare soil that currently serves as employee parking and a work staging area. See Attachment "A" . Type and Size of the Building: The new maintenance facility will be approximately 70' X 60' and will be a metal structure. The west and south side of the building will have an upgraded exterior or wood facade that blends with other buildings on the site. Internal Building Components: The proposed building will have space dedicated to: open shop and work area, woodworking, welding, wash bay, cold storage, irrigation and parts inventory, offices, employee lounge, and rest rooms. See Attachment "B" . Building Approach: The District will implement a design/build approach in constructing the maintenance building. All construction costs will be borne by the Recreation District, and the building will meet all purchasing guidelines of the District and State laws. The building will meet all construction requirements as outlined by the Town of Estes Park Buildings Department. Construction Schedule: The District plans on constructing the building in 1993 with completion in late spring or early summer. 2-3 1 1 \ 1 13-7 - 1 1 Vl -7 Vl-10 ~ 91-5 __ GH_ J-'-r---e---------0 ------- - - e--- - - 1 .......... 13-3 -*-- l --- 1 ,-1- - - 3< t t 1 TD-5 1 1 07-10 ' v1-1 07-1 1 Vl-4t -43 1- ----------0 1 - 1 - 1 0-7-5 ,/ 3 1, 1 W 01 018-4 Clut3$4005â‚¬ 1 C . 1 3 0 04 CART aAR,3 4 / CAQI-gAOJ ~ C r r-6 93 F t./Â»1 '' %06,0, , , LL /1 1 i (=6 , 6Hoe ' ' \3 + 1 , , XEEÂ« i G16- \ -010-2 ~ 7 DO' SWOp 016- 14 j l 4 G 16-2 i ' - 015-1 016-3 , 1 1 - . \ 016-9 ,,' I \ I -17 , / / el 1 -0- 016-4 -- ---'r i -/,/i 016-11/Â· , eL' \ < 016-8 C )' 1 (16 k -orâ€žo \ >--7 016-7 (016) -00~- =ft \ ./Sku//' -1 - yx <Gll ) _EJU--s-~--5~-Â«~~ -1-- --' / / 1 -- -le I , FOURTH DRAFT REPORT ON WATER CONNECTION CHARGES PREPARED FOR THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK BLACK & VEATCH Progress by Design January 6, 1993 4-1 . Presentation On Proposed Wate r Connection Charges M.led se*3 JO UAAol 866 L ' LE Klenuer 40Â»A 9 >10218 u13!sea Aq sse]13oid 4 LL 1 1 1 1 111111 1 * 2/ - , I. 1 /7 4 2- - V - Connection Charge sesses Equitable Fees for Amount of acility Being Used vvater System Value Jstomer Share of ~ ystem Capacity N E 2 i i i abtj C Z P LO a U CUC')91-1.0(DACCIC 0 13 - 2 2 Four-Year Line No. Description 1992 1993 1994 1995 Average Replacement Cost of Total System $8,399,500 $8,735,500 $9,084,900 $9,448,300 $8,917,100 Scheduled Major Capital Improvements $2,262,200 $2,755,700 $3,364,400 $3,817,400 $3,049,900 000'Z96' 1 L$ OOZ'992'81$ 008'6**'ELE 008' [6*' L L$ OOZ'L99'0[$ 10 1900 lueuleoeidabl Cooe' [90'Â£$) (000'906'2$) (000'9 Lot$) (000'9 1 1'8$) (000'0 LE'â‚¬$) iqea Buip edlouud Pledun:ssel 002'906'8$ 002'098'0 [$ 008'DED'6$ 002'9Ze'8$ 002' 1914$ 089'9 029'9 099'9 009'9 09*'9 *~v LI (12) suur' Al!oedeo 0 L9' [$ 01,87$ 002'1$ 029' L$ OZE' L $ (q) Hu~ 4!oedes Jed eed eseg CALCULATION OF WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEE PER CAPACITY UNIT 'l#MO]6 lenulle %1 el.Unssv *Jeluotsno Ie#uep!SeJ JO# 00' L sienbe l!un 9 eun Aq pep! R Be Z = E m 40 6- ILI 01 e 01 Connection Year Charge 1992 1,370 2,000 9,370 PROPOSED 1992 - 1995 CONNECTION CHARGES 1993 1,520 2,000 3,520 OOZ'E 000'8 00Z' L 466 L 048'8 000'E 0*8' L 966L 0L9'E 000'g 019' L Jeel inod PER CAPACITY U 'JeWolsno le!luep!SeJ JOJ O' L sienbe 1!un *1!oedeo GOBJeAV 355~D 211 0 05 d add 1 Â·i 0 8-v. CO CD < C, I CJ C.\1 0 C\- E e f ME C a) P -a 2 2SE gaE 1.2 Cd CO Er LO 1 -- >5 DLL- d 02 8 Proposed 1992 Connection Charge Line Capacity Unit Assessment ($ per~~~essment 0 2â‚¬â‚¬ OZE'E n Cl Jed 0' L 12!luep!sekl + 9 PL 698'g 'n'a led ZO NEL Type of Customer Assessment Amount 11 1<2 210' n a Jed 9Â·0 u0!lepOLLIU.1000Â¥ â‚¬5 <41 Ayd Jed go'o lepJaUJUIOj 'll.1000Â¥-UON CONNECTION RGE PROPOSED Aa Jed o' L elov-O 1 113]nu Fixture Value Units 22 Ln 065 c 0 5 3 00 1 CD 0 -gh m 0 - CD 0 C -m == Connection Charge 5/8 or 3/4 1,338.00 2,376.00 11/4 3,713.00 5,352.00 9,515.00 0090*'LE 00 090'88 009+9'98 00'006' k$ --~ 40ee~27!J Jel $ P!1!u j'EEoui O ~e46no]~npA J ~U SCHEDULE OF EXISTING ONNECTION CHARGES Water Tapping Charge 88:1 sill Â£5!H JeleM eJnp<!1 04 Bu!Aell 6umeMP Al!Ulet el6UiS 41 'Siesn JeleM J ue41 ssal jo j Che 90 00-GICDO,IM#elf)(UNLOCD#LOCD CD - Â¢9 e W 00 0 0 . Fixture Type Fixture Value HEDULE OF EXISTIN NNECZUHARGES Plumbing Fixture Values uouseul.100 4ou!-8/L 'eu!40ew Su!4se/\A Drinking fountain (cooler) Kitchen Sink, 1/2-inch connection Lavatory, 3/8-inch connection uo!pauuoo Llou!-2/l '*enX]pune-1 (NUO JeMotis) peoll Je/V\04S Uoiloeuuoo liou!-2/L 'Muls 30!Alas 8Ale/\ 4snit leisaped 'leu!.In eAleA 4sni:I 'lesolo JeleM adA; Muel uoiloeuuoo 40u!-2/L 'Je4SeAA4s!a UO!10euuoo 4ou!-2/1 'sq!q esoH Bathtub Drinking fountain (public) Ilms Jo IleM (1!un 1001-8) 46noil 2 1 at e- e.2- (90 Â©- - 4. 1-- 2522 r 0 0 0 0 3# 34 (8 8 N 8 j 0 4â‚¬3\ 1 CO O 4 co~ \91 0 CO s_ + 44 12* 4 - 00 LO LO O e CO- CR. O- CO N 00 CD CO Z e E E = W 6 91- LO . f3 Type of Customer Service Parameters Existing Proposed 992'ee SA=Id 009 'Wou!-1 lepieLLILL100 411000V-UON 808' E SA=Id 29 , na L '4ou!-WE eJOV-O L lejnkl PROPOS E D~6 ONNECTION CHARGES sA=Id 29 ' AOL '4oul--f/8 le'luapisabl COMPARISON OF EXISTIN SA=Id 08* 'sna EL 'Wou!-2 SA:Id 009 'sna 08 '40u!-8 UOREPOLULL1000Â¥ . 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Introduction The Town of Estes Park (Town) provides water service to about 3,100 customers. Tlie Town funds its daily witter utility operations through water rates and assesses connection charges to each new customer and to existing customers whose remodeling affects their connection charge assessments. The present connection charges include a water tapping charge based on water connection size and a water rights fee based on plumbing fixture values. According to the Town staff, this connection charge structure has been difficult to administer and explain to new customers. The purpose of this study is to develop defensible connection charges that are both equitable and practical to implement. These charges consist of system development fees (SDF) and water rights fees. B. Study Findings and Recommendations The principal findings and recommendations of the study are as follows: â€¢ A schedule of connection charges has been developed for 1992 through 1995 based on the system buy-in method and is shown below. The SDFs are intended to recover the equity that existing customers have established in the water system backbone facilities. The water rights fees are intended to recover the current regional market value of water rights. $ Per Capacity Unit Water Riglits Connection Year SDF Fee Charge 1992 1,370 2,000 3,370 1993 1,520 2,000 3,520 1994 1,700 2,000 3,700 1995 1,840 2,000 3,840 Four Year 1,610 2,000 3,610 Average 4-2 â€¢ Three capacity bases are used to calculate connection charges: billable water usage, meter capacity and combined. It is recommended that SDFs be calculated using the combined basis. â€¢ It is recommended that the residential (single family) connection charge be on a per customer basis with each customer assessed a capacity unit of 1.0. â€¢ It is recommended that the multi-family connection charge be on a per dwelling unit basis. Based on the Town's water usage records, each multi-family dwelling unit is equivalent to 0.7 capacity units. Thus, it is recommended that the multi-family connection charge, per dwelling unit, be 70 percent of the residential connection charge. â€¢ It is recommended that the accommodation connection charge be on a per dwelling unit basis. Based on the Town's water usage records, each accommodation dwelling unit is equivalent to 0.6 capacity units. Thus, it is recommended that the accommodation connection charge, per dwelling unit, be 60 percent of the residential connection charge. â€¢ It is recommended that the non-accommodation commercial connection charge be on a per plumbing fixture value basis and use the fixture values included iii the existing charge schedule. Based on the Town's records, a non-accommodation commercial plumbing fixture value of ].0 is equivalent to 0.05 capacity units. Thus, it is recommended that the non- accommodation commercial connection charge per plumbing fixture value be five percent of the residential connection charge. It is further recommended that the total charge be no less tlian 60 percent of the residential Â·connection cliarge. â€¢ It may not be appropriate to assess certain non-accommodation comniercial customers with high water usage on a per fixture value basis. Their fixture values may not adequately represent their capacity requirements. The Town may want to consider basing connection charges for such customers on their anticipated or actual water usage. â€¢ A SDF fur rural customers with ten-acre or larger lot sizes has been developed for 1992. The proposed SDF of $6,050 per capacity unit recognizes that a greater distribution system investment per customer is needed to serve such customers. 4-3 BLACK & VEATCH 1400 Soulh Polomac Slreel, Suite 200, Aurora, Colorado 80012, (303) 671 -4200, Fax: (303) 671-4285 Estes Park, Colorado B&V Project 18682 Water Tap Fees December 9, 1992 Mr. Bill Linnane, P.E. Director Town of Estes Park P. 0. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Bill: As discussed with you over the past several months and at your request, we are submitting this fee estimate for supplemental services associated with the current water connection charge study. The Town has requested several tasks be performed which were not included in the original scope of work contained in our August 19, 1991 proposal. These supplemental services include: 1. Preparing two additional draft reports. Only one draft report was anticipated in the original estimate. 2. Performing additional calculations to determine and present connection charges on a per dwelling unit basis for multi- family and accommodation customers. 3. Attending meetings with the Town representatives to discuss the second and third draft reports. A fee of $6,000 is estimated to perform these supplemental services. The basis for these fees is the same as that used in the August 1991 proposal. 4-4 ' BLACK a VEATCH Page 2 Estes Park, Colorado B&V Project 18682 Mr. Bill Linnane, P.E. December 9, 1992 Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit this estimate for these additional tasks. Your consideration of this matter is greatly appreciated. Please let me know if you need further information. Very truly yours, 94, 4, bÂ«Af~ ~jf .John A. Giall~gher jag/alh Enclosure cc: Mr. Kerry Prochaska 4-5 BLACK & VEATCH 1400 Soulh Polomac Slreel, Suite 200, Aurora, Colorado 80012, (303) 671-4200, Fax: (303) 671-4285 Estes Park, Colorado B&V Project 18682 Water Connection Charges January 15, 1993 Mr. Bill Linnane Director Town of Estes Park P. 0. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Dear Bill: As requested, I am enclosing revised Pages 1-2 and 3-2 to our Fourth Draft Report. The revisions pertain to connection charges for large volume non-accommodation commercial customers and rural customers with ten-acre or greater lot sizes. With regards to Trustee Habecker's request regarding our January 4, 1993 supplemental fee request, we estimate our staff effort for the supplemental services would total 140 hours. I am looking forward to meeting with your Public Works Committee next Thursday morning. Please call me if you need any additional information. Very truly yours, (k 62. iuu C--- ~/ John A . Gal 1 a~-~r jag/alh Enclosures cc: Mr. Kerry Prochaska, w/enclosures 4-6 12" DRY GULCH WATER MAIN OVERSIZING CONTRACT FEE TO TOWN GIVEN 1.) Honda Co. paid $238,249 for their minimum size 8" water main to their property. The Town paid an additional $86,235 to upsize to a 12". 2.) The Honda requested rebate is $1,200 per 3/4" single family tap. This is in line with Thunder Mtn. rebate ($1,200) and also in line with the Town's contract line rebate ($1,100). 3.) Working backwards...approximately 198 lots will be required to rebate Honda $1,200 to recoup $238,249. SOLUTION Oversizing cost per lot = Town cost to oversize to 12" No. of lots that will rebate to Honda = $86.235 198 = $435/lot with a 3/4" tap* * Cost for taps larger than 3/4" will be increased by the direct relation of the respective tap area size. 5-1 ROCKY MOUNTAIN CONSULTANTS. INC. gmc 437 South St. Vrain Estes Park, CO 80517 (303) 586-2458 Metro (303) 825-8233 FAX (303) 825-8912 January 19, 1993 Bill Linnane Town of Es tes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Re: Mary's Lake Water Treatment Facilily Dear Bill: Rocky Mountain Consultants, Inc. (RMC) has obtained n price quote. for work related 1.0 1.he Mary's Lake WaterÂ· TrÂ»entment Facil i 1.0 (MLWTF) . The proposed work i ncindes i }19 1,:11 ling n phase fnil ure relay und related wiring. This will allow for automatic shutdown of the facility in the event of n power failure aL the site. The new componehts will work integral with the exi BLing Uninteruptable Power Supply and compuLer aL Lhe site. The cost of the addition as quoted from Littleton Electric, Inc. is $1740.00. 1 f yow have nny quasi.ions, 1,1 ense. do noL hesj t.:11.â‚¬ 1.0 call . Sincerely, ROCKY MOiJN'PAIN CONSULTANTS, INC. â€¢n Kevin P.Kielb Civil Engineer K P K\w,j k 6-1 CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING â€¢ PLANNING 11%92- -792. Auâ‚¬N:Spaq,c_ WATEL ~ 3419,711-)ON 3/s-zi:ucr 2,8 s 4 2000 91 ts< 77Â£ /29,000 GALLON wAT@k. 726wk. ON 7 dj<luuÂ»v . '*,MouÂ£44_ Feawl sy,-1 72) 8Â£ Aces,7/1:/5,(ED 39 A/=~30 5udc@,N724<:73<- s riase Â«:n=uuM Stam iR-to -- 7/1.h.6 GAN 542Â£71,24 C .1-kÂ£MugÂ«- APw SO 7-1 4 . TOWN OF ESTES PARK PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITIZEN SERVICE RESPONSE REPORT DECEMBER 1992 TYPE OF CALL NO. OF CALLS HOURS BLEEDER MAINTENANCE 3.00 3.00 UTILITY LOCATION - MAIN 7.00 10.00 UTILITY LOCATION - SERVICE 7.00 12.00 SERVICE LINE INSPECTION 2.00 2.00 TAP REQUEST 2.00 5.00 WATER QUALITY - COLOR 2.00 5.00 LINE BREAKS - MAIN 1.00 1.00 LINE BREAKS - SERVICE 5.00 13.50 Â£ METER REPAIR 6.00 10.50 FINAL INSPECTION 6.00 6.00 SNOW REMOVAL 6.00 4.00 STORM DRAINAGE 1.00 2.00 ======== TOTALS FOR DECEMBER 1992 48.00 74.00 HISTORICAL DATA THIS MONTH LAST MONTH LAST YEAR TOTAL CALLS 48.00 45.00 28.00 TOTAL MAN HOURS 74.00 159.75 40.00 0/oCHANGE(CALLS/MHS) +6.670/0/-53.68% -43.04%/-62.98% +71.43%/+85.00% Rl-1 TOWN OF ESTES PARK DECEMBER, 1992 ACCOUNTABLE WATER REPORT I) Treated water for November 14, 1992 through December 13,1992: November 14 to 31 Water Treated: Black Canyon -34,000 *Fall River O Glacier Creek 3,400,000 *Big Thompson O *Marys 11,808,000 December 1 to 13 Water Treated: Black Canyon -12,000 *Fall River O Glacier Creek 5,409,000 *Big Thompson O *Marys 6,138,800 Total Water Treated iii Billing Period 26,709,800 Gal. 2) Water accounted for from November 14 to December 13: Adjustments: 2,195,540 Billing: 17,476,340 *Backwash 0 Total Water accounted for: 19,671,880 Gal. 3.) PERCENT ACCOUNTED FOR: 74% R2-1 . ADJUSTMENTS DECEMBER, 1992 1.) Water Dispenser TOTAL WATER DISPENSER (Gal.) 119,000 2.) Bleeders a. Stanley Heights, Fall River 1,411,440 b., Metered plus Mize 105,100 TOTAL BLEEDERS (Gal.) 1,516,540 3.) Flushing/Leaks/Misc. a. 17-Nov Fall River !2 10,000 b. 23-Nov Honda 16,000 c. 24-Nov Honda 5,000 d. 25-Nov Lake Meadow Flush 25,000 e. 26-Nov Honda 100,000 f. 30-Nov Honda 150,000 g. 2-Dec Fall River 2,000 h. 3-Dec Fall River 2,000 i. 7-Dec Fall River 85,000 j. 9-Dec Fall River 150,000 k. 10-Dec Honda 15,000 1. m. TOTAL FLUSHING, MISC. (Gal.) 560,000 TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS (Gal.) -2,195,540 R2-2 , TOWN OF ESTES PARK WATER USE RECORDS DECEMBER, 1992 | DATE BLACK FALL GLACIER SUBTOTAL i BIG MARYS SUBTOTAL }' TOT k-Â·: CANYON RIVER CREEK (GAL] CFS THOMP. (GALI CFS } (Gb 1 0 0 305,000 305,000 0.47 > 0 551,100 551,100 0.85 856,1 0 0 - 492,000 492,000 0.771: 0 351,600 351,600 0.54: 843,6 0 0 416,000 416,000 0.655 i 0 490,100 490,100 0.76 2 906,1 0 0 300,000 300,000 0.47 Â§ 0 406,600 406,600 0.63: 706,6 0 0 411,000 411,000 0.64: 0 539,200 539,200 0.83 950,2 0 0 452,000 452,000 0.70 0 374,000 374,000 0.58: 826,0 0 0 464,000 464,000 0.72 f { 0 563,300 563,300 0.87: 1,027,3 -1,000 0 469,000 468,000 0.73 ~ 0 482,700 482,700 0.75. 950,7 9 -1,000 0 426,000 425,000 0.66 >: 0 509,600 509,600 0.79 934,6 10 0 0 372,000 372,000 0.58:1 0 417,500 417,500 0.65 789,5 11 0 0 372,000 372,000 0.58. ; 0 481,900 481,900 0.75{ 3 853,9 12 -2,000 0 400,000 398,000 0.62:l 1 0 488,700 488,700 0.76 886,7 13 -8,000 0 530,000 522,000 0.81:' 0 482,500 482,500 0.751 : 1,004,5 14 -10,000 0 492,000 482,000 0.75 0 295,000 295,000 0.46 777,0 15 -10,000 0 654,000 644,000 1.00 { 0 96,100 96,100 0.15 740,1 16 -10,000 0 996,000 986,000 1.54 0 335,400 335,400 0.52: 1,321,4 17 -40,000 0 292,000 252,000 0.39 0 454,500 454,500 0.70 706,5 18 -17,000 0 375,000 358,000 0.56 0 839,500 839,500 1.30: 1,197,5 19 -2,000 0 408,000 406,000 0.63 i 1 0 568,500 568,500 0.88: 974,5 20 -2,000 0 410,000 408,000 0.64 f j 0 475,700 475,700 0.74 883,7 21 -2,000 0 391,000 389,000 0.61 J 0 538,200 538,200 0.83: 927,2 22 0 0 383,000 383,000 0.60:i 0 467,100 467,100 0.72: 850,1 23 0 0 472,000 472,000 0.73 1 0 647,500 647,500 1.00 1,119,5 24 0 0 483,000 483,000 0.75..j 0 666,500 666,500 1.03 E 1,149,5 25 0 0 382,000 382,000 0.59 0 440,800 440,800 0.68 : 822,8 26 0 0 688,000 688,000 1.07% 0 511,400 511,400 0.79: 1,199,4 27 0 0 474,000 474,000 0.74: : 0 494,400 494,400 0.77 E 968,4 28 0 0 502,000 502,000 0.78 li 0 532,900 532,900 0.82 i 1,034,9 29 0 0 521,000 521,000 0.81 i] 0 554,900 554,900 0.86 1,075,9 30 0 0 457,000 457,000 0.71 i 0 522,800 522,800 0.81 979,8 31 0 0 641,000 641,000 1.00> 0 620,000 620,000 0.96 1,261,0 TOT. -105.000 0 14,430,000 14,325,000 : 0 15,200,000 15,200,000 : 29,525.0 AF -0.32 0.00 44.29 43.96 0.00 46.65 46.65 90. CFS -0.01 0.00 0.72 0.72 2 2 0.00 0.76 0.76 .: > 1. BWI-) N/A O N/A 0 .0 0 0 BL(-) N/A N/A N/A N/A c N/A N/A N/A : -2,195,5 GAL -105,000 0 14,430.000 14,325,000 0 15,200,000 15,200,000 ~ 27.329.4 AF -0.32 0 44.29 43.96 0.00 46.65 46.65 83. 1st-13 -12,000 0 5,409,000 0 6,138,800 14 - 31 -93,000 0 9,021,000 0 9,061,200 R2-3 m Ve CIA W N TOWN OF ESTES PARK TOTAL WATER PLANT PRODUCTION (CALENDER MONTH MINUS BLEEDERS) 1991 1991 1992 1992 % 0/0 MONTH YTD ? MONTH YTD MONTH TOTAL TOTAL : TOTAL TOTAL t j CHANGE CHANGE (GAL.) (GAL.) (GAL.) (GAL.) (GAL.) (MONTH) (YTD) JANUARY 25,753,376 25,753,376 i 22,227,168 22,227,168 -13.69% -13.69% FEBRUARY 20,818,236 46,571,612 ~ . 18,753,245 40,980,413 -9.92% -12.01% MARCH 23,065,946 69,637,558 1 : 22,019.445 62,999,858: -4.54% -9.53% APRIL 23,868,231 93,505,789 24,054,701 87,054,559 0.78% -6.90% MAY 33,828,478 127,334,267 \ 39,232,054 126,286,613 : 15.97% -0.82% JUNE 47,550,123 174,884,390 J 44,414,452 170,701,065( -6.59% -2.39% JULY 61,171,426 236,055,816 58,684,781 229,385,846 -4.07% -2.83% > AUGUST 54,753,043 290,808,859 ' 54,405,908 283,791,754: -0.63% -2.41% SEPTEMBER 45,080,259 335,889,118 ; I 46,502,599 330,294,353 3.16% -1.67 % ~ OCTOBER 29,400,590 365,289,708 31,968,183 362,262,536 1 8.73% -0.83% NOVEMBER 21,662,560 386,952,268 23,475,870 385,738,406 E 8.37% -0.31% DECEMBER 21,290,647 408,242,915 : . 27,329,460 413,067,866 28.36% 1.18% TOTAL 408,242,915 413,067,866 1.18% AC - FT 9,372 9,483 , R2-4 , . 4 ESTES PARK DECEMBER & YTD WATER BILLED 350,000,000 -# 8.856 Â£7 , 300,000,000 - 0 C, C. 0 - Ii - - - 250,000,000 -' 00 , CIr . 0 0 200,000,000 : 4 GALLONS 150,000,000 -' - - - - - -' -' 100,000,000 - -3 -1 -: -v -' - 9 - - - 2 - - 20.46% ' i 50,000,000 - , -:l' -4 -4 -4-l -Â·f -9 -' CN PO k .O LD h DO O, 0 - N 00 00 00 CO CO 00 CO 00 01 01 al 01 01 01 01 C> O-1 01 C) 01 01 U YTD YEAR Â¤ DEC R2-5 .. ESTES PARK DECEMBER & YTD WATER REVENUE 1,000,000.00 -' 0 900,000.00 - =--C--47-: - 4.5 % - - ~*~li~ - 800,000.00 - 700,000.00 - :41 , 600,000,00 - 'i: 4 0 . DOLLARS 500,000.00 -i - .-' - 400,000.00 -' f - -rÂ· -1 -4 -11 P Â·t 300,000.00 s , t.: - - - ill- - -- 200,000.00 -' 100,000.00 - , - - - - - il- - - O.00 , e B e S 1- ' 8 â‚¬1- til'- 18~- h ER- 9- 04 rn k M (-O fÂ·\ CO 0 0 - 04 00 CO CO CO 00 CO CO 00 m 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 0 01 07 01 01 U YTD YEAR 5 DEC R2-6 i t , HAMMOND, CLARK AND WHITE LAW OFFICES FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING, SUITE 418 LYNN A. HAMMOND 200 EAST SEVENTH STREET ALFRED P. DAVIS ROGER E. CLARK LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537 OF COUNSEL GREGORY A. WHITE MARTHA P. ALLBRIGHT 303-667-1023 TELEFAX 303-669-9380 January 12, 1993 Mr. Bill. Linnane Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Bill: You requested that I give you a further wri-tten opinion concerning the service of water to Mary's Lake Lodge by the Town. On June 1, 1992, I rendered an opinion concerning the obligation of the Town to provide water service to Mary's Lake Lodge. I have attached a copy of that opinion to this letter. Since June 1, 1992, the Town has received a letter dated December 23, 1992 from Paul Kochevar concerning this matter. Also, Mr. Kochevar reviewed my files and found an indication of a tap owned by the Chalet in the scliedule of water resource agreements, also known as Water Tap Agreements which were provided to the Town by Crystal Water. Further, I have been provided a copy of a letter from Paul Kochevar to Burt Wadman concerning a conversation that Mr. Kochevar had with Mr. Bill Scott, Sr., concerning this matter. From a review of all of the above documents, it is my opinion that the Mary's Lake Lodge, formerly known as the Chalet at Estes Park di.d purchase a water tap from the Crystal Water Company in April of 1973. Although the actual purchase receipt or invoice has not been located, I feel it is reascnable to ass'ume that the Mary's Lake Lodge did purchase a water tap from Crystal Water Company on April 17, 1973 by paying the total sum of $4,285.56. Si.nce that time, the Chal.et has received untreated water from the Crys tal Water Company and then the Town on a gallonage basis. Based upon the above documentation, it is my opinion that the Chalet did have a tap through the Crystal Water Company, which the Town is legally obligated to honor, pursuant to the agreement with the Crystal Water Company in the purchase of the assets of the Crystal Water Company. R4-1 6 I 4 Mr. Bill Linnane Page 2 The 2" tap purchased by the Chalet in 1973 should be credited with the number of fixture units being served at that time. It is my opinion that the Town and the current owners of Mary's Lake Lodge should agree to the number of fixture units to be served by the 2" tap for purposes of determining future change in water service to the Mary's Lake Lodge. If you need anything further, pl~ase do not hesitate to give me a call. ~/ V~ry ~Luly yours, C.egory A. White GAW :jc Enclosure R4-2 . 0, . -6 0 > Z Z t? 2 * 2 ED >>5 2 toliazoo hammottj 0- ' 0 - - -C -C .C B. -c .c ;E Â® EE p o >0 Â£k h 9 i & & & * 6 & i 3/ E o caaÂ·ga'-3 ~~ a,Â® Z LL LI- 5<N===2$<05<3; 0 â‚¬0 1- 222 -C --- 0 0 .C .C > 1 > 9 co al) It. O 24 E CO U) 1 1 U) 0 LUZ CD C o UJ r- u; d LU U.1 000 0 - ujuicneujuie u) u) J 12 000 == --- 469999e44 00 CE O Ujujujujus u) US (4 0 Jo -6 CO ce cidaciciedee. as 00000 00 00 000000 O 000 00000 00 00 000000 0 000 00OOON O LO *0 91-01.001~0 0 000 --- 00 h h OLD LO 00 h â‚¬ .- r- Loor*CD O 6Â· Lf') 6Â· M LO LO Lf) O p N N * * * 0 0- * ~w-c 0 6, t- g g -C 0 0- a:2 - . E Â£ co 9. CD ad G g BS . E 3 r.-5 5 m JM M =200 o E % 1 E g E 1 % R Z m 6>00 i a, U .9 c , L V' 6- M 00-24 2 CD -IC **0g64444i 2 OU)< < 22 1.1- O 00 U.1 0 0- U)=00 0.<OIU) 40_U) U - CO Ow R5-1 1993 P.W. DEPT. ACTIVITY PLAN PROJECT **BID/AWARD AWARD BEG. March AWARD BUDG. . PWC Bnv Ainr Ainr 40Je~Al .S led JaqUIe43 'qad .qed .uer 1!JdY 1!Jdv 40JeVV Ule]503 'uer 1!.Idv 40JeIAI Ainr Ainr uer useum Roof Jan. Feb. 000000 Jan. Feb. Tel. System L. Jan. Feb. J Jan April BUILDINGS un. Bldg. Elect. 9N833NBN au!43 Jaln l.11 apeopalll uieja U.IJO 41:. 0 Z LU >>>>> E> A. r.. ~. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. B. JO aififaa 12 -C--- 0 0.2 -C .C 2 maan N <<C< ro m m m m i@ C/5 0 WZ O LU N U; e W LU 000 MEN 0 4 2 1 d I 0.61 9 62 9 e 0000000(3000090 FO-/Je 5 44401 midajoidaimajcdmaicdood 0 Em- ~Ci M 6 6 6 00000 00000000000000 00000 00000 0001.01.0000000000 00000 00 Lf)000 1.0 0 1.0 h C) 1.0 0 00 0-) M 00 1.0 0 0 00000 ---- 0 Li. r. r. Lri rt. Nhorn - AN - - -(DN M h If) OLD If) N 7 - N * *** * 0* 0- * * 4 W C < 85 0 E w &3 5 -2 53 2 IJ a, =m=E @-0 52 .c B v .E 00Â®0 O 3 h J <ES=tr~ *Â£ #A E 2 E- 2 0 0 m E 9 M m E&02Â§Â¥ 00= 0 +24-2 8 ir i E 3 8 E ~ S : 7 .5 9 8 c 3 - BU)6LL-mo.0. ek-1-IL]36* CM-JOOZLLO R5-2 ARD BUDG. PROJ. C PROJ. PROJ. Shop Addition 7,000 D.S./G.S. April May Islands Sept. Feb. March April May Sept. .AON Aew ludv |pdv 40/evy qed Ainr ludv 40JeV\1 Ainr lud V 40Jew PROJECT *BID/AWARD AWARD BEG. 1993 P.W. DEPT. ACTIVITY PLAN June? Launr .leK zeH One Ton Truck PARKS duction se!ouaDu!luo