My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00105 (2)
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00105 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:44:50 PM
Creation date
3/7/2007 11:07:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/23/2007
Description
CF Section - New Project Loans - Seven Lakes Reservoir Co. - Dry Creek Railroad Crossing Rehabilitation
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />1 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Seven Lakes Reservoir Company <br />January 23-24, 2007 <br /> <br />Agenda Item ge <br /> <br />Reservoir, providing about 600 AF per year. In an average year, SLRC delivers about 22.5 <br />AF/share, or a total of 9000 AF. <br /> <br />Proiect Description <br /> <br />Four alternatives were developed to meet the project purpose of replacement of the Dry Creek <br />railroad crossing culvert structure. The alternatives were: . <br /> <br />1. No-action Alternative <br />2. Tunneling Alternative ($1,420,200) <br />3. Main Tracks Temporary Relocation Alternative ($1,151,400) <br />4. New Railroad Bridge Alternative ($850,210) <br /> <br />Alternative 1, No-action alternative - This alternative was not recommended since the <br />existing restriction causes significant operational problems for both SLRC and GLlC in the <br />diversion and storage of water. Additionally, the age and condition of the exiting culverts needs <br />to be addressed to avoid potential safety problems with the railroad operation and avoidance of <br />loss of flow capacity between Lake Loveland and Horseshoe Reservoir. The no-action <br />alternative in this case is more costly than appropriate rehabilitation alternatives. The no-action <br />alternative would result in an inability of the Company to divert water that it is legally entitled to. <br /> <br />Alternative 2, Tunneling Alternative - This alternative involved tunneling through the existing <br />culvert structure under the railroad. This alternative would require two 120" bores and additional <br />concrete work for new headwalls, wing walls and miscellaneous demolition of the existing <br />structure. <br /> <br />Alternative 3, Main Tracks Temporary Relocation Alternative - This alternative to <br />temporarily relocate the main train track and install new culverts was investigated. This would <br />involve the temporary construction of 1,300 feet of new track, the construction of 240 feet of <br />144-inch CMP, demolition of the existing culvert structure and replacement of the train track in <br />its original position. <br /> <br />Alternative 4, New Railroad Bridge Alternative - This option considers construction of <br />a new railroad bridge over Dry Creek with appropriate erosion protection, and demolition and <br />removal of the existing five-barrel culvert structure. <br /> <br />Selected Alternative 4, New Railroad Bridge Alternative - Based on construction cost and <br />the desires of the SLRC and BNSF, this was the selected alternative. Construction will occur <br />while the track remains in continuous service. Since trains traveling on this section of tracks <br />can be expected on a frequency of one about every six hours, close coordination between <br />personnel building the new bridge and those responsible for scheduling and running the trains is <br />critical. In discussions with BNSF Railroad personnel, it was determined that bridge support <br />pilings could be driven during the time intervals when trains are not near the site, and pile caps <br />could then be installed, rails, ties and ballast can then be removed and the prefabricated bridge <br />would be installed. The design of the new pre-fabricated railroad bridge would be based on <br />BNSF Railroad design requirements. All structural plans will need to be reviewed and approved <br />by BNSF. The primary hydraulic design consideration for the culvert structure replacement is <br />meeting SLRC flow requirements of 1,000 cfs with Lake Loveland full, and avoiding the creation <br />of flood and property damage downstream. <br /> <br />30f5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.