Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Project Description and Alternatives <br /> <br />Three alternatives were analyzed in the feasibility study: <br /> <br />1. The no-action alternative. <br />2. Construct an augmentation well and groundwater recharge ponds. <br />3. Construct a reservoir. <br /> <br />Alternative No.1, no-action, was considered unacceptable since it could lead to curtailment of <br />junior wells on the lower South Platte River. <br /> <br />Altetl1ilfift~jN()"~',COQstruct[iff'fjugh7ent~tf:9~"well.a~d~roundwaterrechaF~~ ponels, \lVa8'1~~ <br />preferredalternat~'V,'ebecauseof the 10V\lywstper acrefwot, and the speed with))whichthe!proJeqt <br />could be placedOriH'IQ,e (summer 200ttc,y: ????? <br /> <br />Alternative No.3, Construct a reservoir, was ruled out due to cost. <br /> <br />The selected alternative, Alternative No.2, consists of the following: <br /> <br /> <br />Table 1: LSPWCD Pro'ect Costs <br /> <br />Estimated Cost <br />$45,000 <br />$15,000 <br />$10,000 <br />$15,000 <br />$15,000 <br />$20,000 <br />$120,000 <br /> <br />A more detailed cost estimate is found in Appendix E. <br /> <br />Implementation Schedule <br /> <br />The implementation schedule calls for completion of financing arrangements by May 2001. <br />Engineering design will also be finalized in May 2001, and construction is scheduled to be <br />completed by July 2001. <br /> <br />Permitting <br /> <br />~II' easements, an~;'r:,i,~hts of wax', ha\lebe~l'i'karf:an~~d,f()r.'TherieVf, w~U 'fln9.rt!~eline.win' be~r <br />private land., The 0i~~ricthas'obtaine9' , rmit frwmthe'$t~lte',l3ngine'rrs,Offiy,e forcoflstr on <br />Qf the welt The L$P~CD!,~~s an age , entwitp theJulesb~rgtn;:ig~tiQ\'10i8tfltc;;UQ run in <br />the Stateline Ditch bayl<t(j)'~heSouthPlatte River. ??????? <br /> <br />Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District <br />Well and Recharge Ponds <br />May 2001 <br /> <br />Page 8 of 11 <br />