Severance hears final water master‑plan update; consultants highlight three supply paths and efficiency gains

Consultants from WestWater Research presented a final update to the Severance Town Board on Tuesday, outlining three main pathways to meet the town’s projected future water gap and recommending a modest water‑efficiency program as part of the overall strategy.

Cassidy (WestWater Research) told the board the master plan analysis narrowed a long list of options to three feasible alternatives: participation in the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) with associated Clearwater treatment capacity; purchase of treated non‑tributary groundwater being developed by Front Range H2O (the VIDA project); or building a portfolio of ditch‑company shares and Colorado‑Big Thompson (CBT) units coupled with conveyance and treatment. The consultants modeled a planning volume of roughly 300 acre‑feet and ran three cost/timing scenarios to capture uncertainty in project timelines and inflation.

“Under our assumptions, NISP can be affordable but likely will require pulling on cash reserves and depends heavily on timing of the Clearwater treatment and the town’s planned Greeley interconnect,” Cassidy said. The presentation found that NISP—and the Clearwater treatment capacity required to treat that water—would require multiple large bonds and, in the consultants’ scenarios, could be manageable only if the town accepts lower reserve buffers or phases projects differently. In particular, bringing the Greeley interconnect online on the same timeline makes NISP financially risky under the team’s baseline reserve assumptions.

The VIDA non‑tributary groundwater option was presented as more financially straightforward: a private developer would construct a wellfield and pipeline and sell treated water under a long‑term purchase arrangement. The consultants modeled bonding in 2026 for the town’s share and concluded the town could bond for VIDA and associated pipelines without drawing on cash reserves under the assumptions used. Cassidy noted a pro for VIDA is that the developer’s contract with Fort Collins‑Loveland includes delivery commitments, and the VIDA project have delivery dates in the 2029 timeframe.

The ditch‑shares/CBT alternative can be advanced through phased purchases or developers’ dedication of units over time. That pathway carries supply‑availability and price‑escalation risk—CBT prices have risen and the pool of available units may shrink—but it offers flexibility because purchases can be made gradually and often with cash rather than bonds. Consultants warned, however, that if the town defers buying shares while bonding for treatment and pipelines, market availability could tighten and prices could rise.

Consultants emphasized tradeoffs among affordability, risk and timing for each alternative and said choices about the town’s capital‑project schedule—especially the Greeley interconnect and any Clearwater participation—drive affordability outcomes. “There’s not a silver bullet; each path has trade‑offs,” Cassidy summarized.

In a separate but related presentation, WestWater reviewed Severance’s required water efficiency plan. The consultants analyzed billing and usage data (2019–2024) and found the town’s per‑capita potable use has dropped substantially; the most recent per‑capita potable number cited was about 92 gallons per capita per day, down from higher levels in earlier years. Consultants proposed a near‑term efficiency target equal to 10% of the town’s current estimated supply gap (roughly 286–300 acre‑feet), and highlighted two practical near‑term savings opportunities: converting a school account (Rainview Elementary) from potable to non‑potable irrigation (estimated savings about 12 acre‑feet annually) and reducing non‑revenue water toward prior plan levels (a potential ~21 acre‑feet per year by restoring non‑revenue water to circa‑2017 levels).

Board members asked about risk, timelines and legal/political constraints. Consultants said VIDA’s supply is “firm” under contract and less vulnerable to hydrology than NISP, which faces cost and timeline uncertainty exacerbated by recent project cost increases (consultants used Northern Water’s most recent estimate of roughly $2.7 billion as a baseline and ran higher‑cost scenarios). Staff and board members discussed the town’s limits on treated‑water purchases from the existing North Weld/Northwell provider; consultants confirmed that Northwell has a practical cap on additional treated deliveries and that Severance has effectively reached its current allocation in that relationship.

Board members also discussed municipal growth scenarios, the role of developer dedication versus town acquisition, and the political realities of bonding and rate impacts. Consultants said that a dedication policy—requiring developers to dedicate water or water rights rather than the town acquiring them up front—can reduce immediate bonding needs and make some treatment/interconnect projects affordable earlier in the timeline.

Consultants said the draft master plan will be finalized and shared with town staff for review, with a full presentation to the board scheduled for November. No formal board action was taken at this meeting; the session was an informational update and discussion.