My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C150367 Feasibility Study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
C150367 Feasibility Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2024 4:43:23 PM
Creation date
10/9/2013 8:01:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
CT2015-007
C150367
Contractor Name
Lamar, City of
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
67
County
Prowers
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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
SECTION 5 - SELECTED ALTERNATIVE <br />.JUSTIFICATION OF SELECTED ALTERNATIVE <br />Replacing the South Well Field Water Transmission line with Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) pipe is <br />the most cost effective solution. Although Ductile Iron (DIP) pipe is an alternative solution that <br />meets the design criteria, it is not financially competitive. No action is not an alternative due to <br />the high rate of water loss in the existing main and the existing lack of redundancy. <br />PROJECT DESCRIPTION <br />The selected alternative is approximately 34,200 LF of PVC raw water transmission line, to be <br />used between the Pump Station No. 1 (PSI), south of the South well field and Pump Station No. <br />2 (PS2), which is adjacent to Lamar's water storage tanks and just south of the golf course. As <br />proposed, 14 -inch C -900 DR 25 pipe will be installed between PSI and the South well field, and <br />16 -inch C -905 DR 25 used between the South well field and PS2. Construction drawings for the <br />proposed project are attached in Appendix A. <br />MAP & PROJECT PLANS <br />Figure 1 from the previous section and the proposed construction documents, as attached in <br />Appendix A, depict the entire project area, with components of the existing infrastructure and <br />features of the proposed improvements. The 100 -year floodplain has not been studied in detail <br />for either hydrology (flow estimate) or hydraulics (depth of floodway) by the Federal Emergency <br />Management Agency (FEMA) or the tlrban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD). <br />CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FEATURES <br />The pipeline has been sized for maximum hydraulic flows at build -out. The maximum flow <br />through the transmission line at build -out will be 2,000 gpm, or nearly double the existing <br />maximum raw water flow of 1,140. <br />Table 2 — Design Features <br />Pipeline <br />Design Flow <br />[gpm] <br />Inside <br />Diameter [in] <br />Pipe <br />Length [ft] <br />Velocity <br />[fps] <br />Friction <br />Loses [ft] <br />Elevation <br />Head [ft] <br />Existing Flows <br />PS1 to South Well Field <br />1,140 <br />15.35 <br />23,580 <br />2.0 <br />17.3 <br />-14.29 <br />South Well Field to PS2 <br />1,140 <br />12.07 <br />10,620 <br />3.2 <br />24.7 <br />20.68 <br />Future Flows <br />PS1 to South Well Field <br />2,000 <br />15.35 <br />23,580 <br />3.5 <br />60.1 <br />-14.29 <br />South Well Field to PS2 <br />2,000 <br />12.07 <br />10,620 <br />5.6 <br />85.9 <br />20.68 <br />City of Lamar Raw Water Feasibility Study — Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.