Laserfiche WebLink
2.5..2 <br />The capacity of the reservoir would be 8,900 acre-feet (10.9 <br />3 <br />X 10 m ] at the normal high water line elevation of 5,322 feet MSL <br />[1,622m]. The. surface area of the reservoir et high water would be <br />approximately 445 acres [1BOh a]. The crest elevation of the dam would <br />be 5,333 feet MSL (1,62 5m). Recreation and flood control benefits <br />would be essenti a L ly the same as Alternative A. <br />2.5.1.3 Alternative D would require approximately 3 miles of <br />4 telephone line relocation. Approximately 2,100 feet I638m) of <br />Co lore do Highway 64 would need to be relocated upstream of the Staley <br />Gordon Mine Bri dge. <br />2.5.2 ~O~L~,#1.~1~.~1~~.~..,._F~.~Id.L~_~L~.tl.~S~l].~.~.1..~. <br />2.5.2.1 Dam Design - The dam height for Alternative D is <br />approximately 58 fast (17.7m] from the stream b~d to the top of the <br />dam. Approximately 173,000 cubic yards (132,267 m ) of materiel would <br />be used. in the dam construction. The outlet works would consist of a <br />6-foot (1.83m) diameter modified horseshoe tunnel terminating into a <br />stilling basin simi lar to Alternative A. The construction schedule <br />would be the same as Alternative A. Figure 2-5 depicts the dam <br />concept and features. <br />2.5.2.2 Spillway DesigJn - The spillway capacity is assumed to be <br />65,300 cfs (1 , 849 m /s) which is the same as for the other <br />Alternatives. .The crest length and the amount of concrete in the <br />spi L lway i s the same as for Alternati ve A. <br />2.5.2.3 Outlet Works - The configuration of the outlet works is <br />similar to the other alternatives. The capacity of t~e outlet works <br />at the high water line is approximately 940 cfs (26.6 m /s). <br />2.5.2.4 M~terial Sources - The majority of the 173,000 cubic yards <br />[132,267 m ] of material would come from within the reservoir basin. <br />Most of the gravel required for construction would come from terraces <br />adjoining the immediate dam site. Riprap for the project would come <br />from the same source area as for the other alternatives. Concrete <br />aggregate would be trucked from Jensen, Utah. <br />2.5.3 ~~LY.Q..LL_~L~~II <br />2.5.3.1 The reservoir would be operated similar to A lterne ti ve C with <br />proportionally less water available for sale than Alternative A. The <br />firm com ar ble annual yield of tF~is altern live would be 14,100 AF <br />(17 X 10~ m~) requiring 6.950 AF [8.5 X 106 m~) of storage. With the <br />same assumptions utilized for Alternative A, the water budget for this <br />alternative would be: <br />-23- <br />