Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Photographs are included in Appendix A which shows all the checks listed in Table 1. A map is <br />provided in Appendix B which shows the location of each structure on the system. <br /> <br />ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />Three alternatives have been considered for the structures covered in the NEEDS Secti.on. They <br />include: (1) Do nothing; (2) Repair existing checks and add a one new check at Hurrich; or (3) <br />Replacement of all checks with new concrete structures using Obermeyer control gates. An <br />assessment of each alternative follows. <br /> <br />Alternative # 1 <br /> <br />One course of action considered was the .DO NOTHING ALTERNATIVE. This option is not <br />viable for the system to continue to operate and is only valid if the irrigated land is to be taken out <br />of production and the water stock liquidated. The system is at an age (in excess of 100 years) <br />where most of the structures have problems or have deteriorated such that certain areas of the <br />system are becoming very difficult to operate. The failing existing structures are labor intensive <br />to utilize, unsafe, and unreliable. Replacement or repair of these structures must be pursued if the <br />ditch company is to continue making water deliveries. <br /> <br />The option to "do nothing" does not mean spending no money on the system. The Company has <br />been operating under the "do nothing" option for many years and the structures are at or beyond <br />their effective life. Operation of most of the checks can not be maintained without significant <br />repair . <br /> <br />Alternative #2 <br /> <br />The second alternative explored was to repair ten structures and add one new structure at the <br />Hurich location. All the structures would require some stabilization of the wing walls; <br />stabilization of the base slab due to undercutting; the addition of a downstream apron and energy <br />dissipation sill; and the placement of riprap for downstream erosion protection. <br /> <br />The estimated construction cost to repair the structures is estimated to be $ 487,125 as shown in <br />Table 2. This cost is approximately 46% ofthe cost to replace all the structures with new concrete <br />structures with automated control gates. <br /> <br />Larimer & Weld Feasibility Study <br /> <br />Page 7 <br />