Part I in a series examining the Town of Estes Park’s 2026 Water Master Plan
The Town of Estes Park is preparing to embark on what could become the largest water infrastructure investment in its history, a decades-long effort that would replace aging facilities, modernize the town’s drinking water system, and eventually require water rate increases to help pay for the work.
Under the town’s 2026 Water Master Plan, a comprehensive 1,192-page report that contains graphs, charts, photos, and maps, officials with the town’s water district are recommending construction of a new year-round water treatment plant, replacement of aging water lines and storage tanks, upgrades to pump stations, and other improvements designed to ensure reliable drinking water service through at least 2045.
Before any rate increases are proposed, however, the town board will first be asked to adopt the master plan on Tuesday night. Utilities staff then plan to complete a rate study and return to the town board later this year with recommendations for financing the work.
“This is going to cost a lot of money,” Utilities Director Reuben Bergsten said during an interview with the Estes Valley Voice about the plan. “It’s better to start slowly accumulating that money now. But let’s not make any quick rush decisions, because we would like this plant to be the last plant you have to build.”
The research behind the report and the argument it lays out
The extensive master plan contains two studies. One was conducted by Harvey Economics, a Denver firm that provides economic and demographic forecasting, socioeconomic impact analyses, economic and financial feasibility analyses, financing plans, resource valuation, and economic benefit-cost analyses to public and private-sector clients.
The other study was conducted by Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC. Based in Grand Forks, South Dakota, with offices in Englewood, a specialized civil environmental engineering firm.
The master plan reviews the history of the town’s water system and incorporates information about the community’s demographics, the demands placed on the system by residents and visitors, and the science and engineering of water treatment to paint a picture of an aging water system that has served the community well but faces growing challenges.
The town’s water utility serves more than 5,700 metered customers, along with several bulk water users, including the YMCA of the Rockies and other outlying systems. The system includes two water treatment plants, nine storage tanks, five pump stations, and more than 100 miles of water mains.
Water officials say the biggest concern is that neither of the town’s existing treatment plants can reliably operate year-round on their own.
History and future meet in the now and the unexpected
The Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant, built in 1992 and upgraded in 2010, remains in generally good condition. But it lacks enough redundancy to function as the community’s sole treatment facility without major upgrades. The Glacier Creek Water Treatment Plant, originally built in 1971, was rated in fair-to-poor condition and is approaching the end of its useful life.
The Glacier Creek plant faces additional operational challenges. During spring runoff, water quality deteriorates to the point that the plant cannot reliably operate due to elevated sediment, organic material, and color in the source water. As a result, the town alternates operations between its two treatment facilities depending on season and water conditions.
At the same time, aging infrastructure throughout the distribution system is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
More than 35 percent of the town’s water distribution system consists of cast iron or galvanized steel pipe that is in fair, poor, or failing condition, according to information in the master plan. Many sections have exceeded their expected service life.
Jacqui Wesley, the town’s utilities project manager and interim water manager, said the issue is less about an impending collapse and more about managing risk before failures occur.
“Things break when they break,” Wesley said, explaining that staff evaluate infrastructure based not only on condition but also on the consequences of failure. A deteriorated pipe serving a handful of homes may rank lower than a somewhat newer pipe serving hundreds of customers because the impact of a failure would be much greater.
Lessons from floods and wildfires
The plan also reflects lessons learned from decades of natural disasters.
The report cites impacts from the 1976 Big Thompson flood, the 1982 Lawn Lake flood, the 2013 flood, and recent wildfires, including the East Troublesome and Cameron Peak fires. Town officials say those events demonstrated the importance of redundancy and resiliency throughout the water system.
The Marshall Fire in Boulder County provided another warning. Water utilities there experienced significant infrastructure damage, pressure losses, and operational disruptions during and after the fire. Estes Park officials say those experiences underscored the need for a system that can continue operating even when parts of the infrastructure are compromised.
Considerations: resiliency, infrastructure, demand, reliability, financing, and regulatory compliance
The new master plan is designed to provide a long-term roadmap for delivering safe, reliable, and sustainable drinking water to Estes Park residents, businesses, and visitors through 2045.
The plan focuses on:
- strengthening the system’s resilience to drought, wildfires, floods, and other natural disasters
- maintaining and upgrading aging infrastructure
- ensuring compliance with evolving state and federal regulations
- preparing for future water demands driven by population growth and development
- changing conservation trends
It also evaluates the reliability of existing water sources amid increasing weather-related risks and establishes a framework for long-term financial planning, including capital improvements and ongoing operations and maintenance.
Ultimately, the plan is intended to help the town maintain high standards for water quality, pressure, reliability, fire protection, and customer service while proactively managing its water system for future generations without overbuilding, Bergsten explained.
A new treatment plant emerges as the preferred solution
Based on information provided through various studies conducted by consultants, the Town evaluated five potential strategies before recommending the construction of an entirely new treatment facility.
The preferred alternative calls for building a new water treatment plant with enough built-in redundancy to continue meeting peak demand even if one treatment train is offline. The facility would be designed to accommodate future treatment technologies and changing regulations, including potential requirements related to PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” and other emerging contaminants.
Under the proposal, the Glacier Creek plant would eventually be decommissioned while Marys Lake would continue operating until the end of its useful life.
The location of the new facility has not yet been determined.
Wesley said a site-selection process could begin in 2027 if the master plan is approved. The search will consider factors including access to raw water supplies, environmental impacts, wildlife habitat, zoning requirements, and long-term operational efficiency.
Even under an aggressive timeline, officials do not expect construction to begin before 2030, with 2032 viewed as a more realistic target.
A price tag exceeding $100 million
The master plan’s preliminary cost estimates illustrate the scale of the undertaking.
Construction of a new water treatment plant is estimated at $70 to $90 million. A new raw-water intake and pumping system could add another $15 million to $20 million. Additional projects include replacing the Thunder Mountain storage tank, replacing the Big Thompson tank, upgrading pump stations, and continuing ongoing water-line replacement programs. Altogether, the identified projects carry an estimated cost of between $105 million and $142 million, excluding future annual pipeline replacement work.
Those figures are planning-level estimates and could change substantially as engineering and design work progresses. The master plan notes that costs are intended for comparison purposes and remain subject to significant variation.
Rate study expected to shape future increases
The financial question facing the town will be how to pay for the improvements.
The water division operates as an enterprise fund supported by water rates and tap fees rather than general tax revenues. The master plan states that a rate study is already underway to determine both the revenue level needed to fund the proposed improvements and whether the current rate structure fairly allocates costs among customers.
The last water rate increase occurred in 2022. The master plan warns that “significant rate increases over several years” are anticipated because of the scale of the improvements and the urgency of developing a replacement treatment facility.
According to Wesley, consultants are currently building financial models using preliminary assumptions. Once the town board adopts the master plan, those assumptions will be replaced with finalized project costs and schedules. Staff then expect to return later this year with specific rate recommendations and conduct two public hearings before any increases are approved.
Additionally, the town will need to pursue outside funding sources, including low-interest federal and state loans, municipal revenue bonds, and grant opportunities, to help reduce the burden on ratepayers.
For residents, the most immediate decision will not be whether rates should increase, but whether the town should formally adopt the roadmap that will guide water infrastructure investments for the next two decades.
Town officials say the choice ultimately comes down to whether the community wants to address aging infrastructure now or risk paying more later.
A convergence of infrastructure demands and competing needs
The question comes at a time when there are many competing demands for infrastructure improvements.
The Upper Thompson Sanitation District is preparing to move forward again with a wastewater treatment plant and lift station project now expected to cost close to $100 million. Last year, plans were shelved when construction estimates came in $14 million over the anticipated $80 million.
The Estes Park Police Department is planning to build a new police station and public safety command center, which is expected to cost more than $30 million. To fund this, the town wants to redirect a portion of the sales tax revenue it currently allocates to the Estes Valley Fire Protection District toward the costs of the new facility.
Under an intergovernmental agreement, the town provides the fire district with 7 percent of its collected sales tax, or about $1.3 million annually. The district’s annual budget is $3.1 million. Estes Park voters also approved a special sales tax in April 2024, sometimes referred to as the 1A sales tax, which dedicates an additional 9 percent of these renewed sales tax funds, or about $400,000, to the EVFPD for wildfire prevention and mitigation staffing.
As the town considers reallocating a portion of its regular sales tax funding, the Estes Valley Fire Protection District is looking at asking voters to approve a new sales tax in November to become financially independent and meet its capital needs. The district is currently preparing financial projections to present a comprehensive picture to voters of its future financial needs, including fleet vehicle replacement and station facility improvements.
The Estes Park School District, which is primarily self-funded through a mill levy, is facing maintenance on three aging school buildings, the oldest of which is more than 60 years old. In 2025, the school’s long-range planning committee studied the school’s needs and determined that over the next 10 years, the school will need $15.2 million in maintenance on its facilities. In addition to local property taxes, the Estes Park schools receive funding from the state and the federal government in a complicated formula.
And the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District is facing the 2028 sunset of Ballot Measure 4C, a local property tax assessment that provides approximately $200,000 annually to support the Estes Valley Community Center’s operations. The community center is partially funded by the operating mill levy and a separate debt-service mill levy approved by voters in 2015.
“Everything hits at the same time. Everything was built at the same time, and it reaches the end of its useful life at the same time,” said Wesley.
As the town’s water district faces the challenges of addressing its infrastructure needs, Bergsten said, “It’s unlikely to get cheaper.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.