Laserfiche WebLink
Gypsum Loan Feasibility Outline <br />CWCB Water Project Loan Program <br />Page 22 of 33 <br />appropriate federal permitting is in place, and cooperation with the Forest Service <br />on this project will occur. <br />ii. Colorado Dam Safety Requirements. In addition, as of the Special Use <br />Permit, the LEDE Reservoir was determined to be a Class B jurisdictional dam. <br />Since the permit issuance, the state's dam safety regulations were updated to <br />include different categories, as discussed previously. Therefore, in order to go <br />forward with any of the alternatives, the reservoir will require state and Forest <br />Service review of current dam safety regulations and updating the dam <br />classification. Thus, Gypsum will incur costs for ensuring compliance with <br />current dam safety regulations on both the state and federal level. <br />b. Consideration of Alternatives. <br />Additional consideration to evaluate these alternatives should be considered. There is a <br />considerable need for further investigations such as geotechnical analysis, construction <br />material availability, and hydrology that could impact the cost estimates of this project. <br />This uncertainty impacts the construction, design and permitting elements of the <br />comparable cost estimates. These impacts were addressed to a reasonable e~ent in the <br />contingency percentages of the construction, design and permitting line items. <br />Four alternatives were evaluated for this project. They include (1) No Action; (2) Repair <br />and Rehabilitate the existing dam and infrastructure to current dam safety regulations; <br />(3) Repair and upgrade the existing infrastructure and improve the dam to its highest <br />storage yield verses risk parameters; and 4) Repair and upgrade the existing infrastructure <br />and improve the dam to a capacity equal to its decreed storage volume of 947 AF. An <br />evaluation of each alternative follows. <br />i. Alternative # 1 <br />One course of action is the NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE. This option is not considered <br />viable as the existing dam and spillway do not meet current dam safety regulations and <br />there would likely be significant loss in storage capacity, due to safety restrictions being <br />placed on the reservoir water level. The existing spillway is significantly under capacity <br />and shows signs of erosion. The outlet pipe and control valve are showing signs of rust <br />and deterioration, especially in the original section to the pipe, which are least 78 years <br />old. The LEDE ditch would continue to periodically overtop and ditch failures would <br />occur causing erosion on the hillside below. <br />The NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE would not increase the yield of the reservoir nor <br />accomplish any of the goals the Town seeks for the LEDE Reservoir. While there is no <br />initial capital cost, the operations and maintenance costs would be greater than the other <br />alternatives. The LEDE ditch would require significantly more maintenance. The <br />spillway would have to be modified and rehabilitated to where the dam would be <br />classified as Minor Significant Dam where only a 100 yr storm flow design for the <br />