FLOOD01339 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Sp~ial Environmental Clearance Worksheet City of Loveland, Colorado Page 8 H. 3. Measures to Reduce Adverse Impacts (Continued) 9. FDAA will include these measures as part of the approved scope of work. Reimbursement by FDAA will be based on applicant compliance with the approved scope of work. The consultant will provide full-time inspec- tion of construction and the contractor's operation. Supplemental inspections will be performed by the city, State, U.S. Forest Service, FDAA and USBR personnel. 4. Compliance with Policies and Standards There are no HUD and other Federal, State or local policies or standards which are Tn danger of being violated or ignored, I. Alternatives Three (3) alternatives were selected in accordance with the National Environ- mental Policy Act of 1970 (NEPA). The evaluation of each alternative was conducted based on considerations involving NEPA and the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (PL 93-288), None of the alternatives selected are considered to be acceptable alternatives to the proposed project. The alternatives considered and determined unacceptable are as follows: 1. Move the Dam to a New Location Approximately 150 Yards Downstream from the Old Dam This alternative was considered because at this point downstream it would be possible to anchor both abutments directly in to the undisturbed canyon wall, whereas the old site has a debris fan at one abutment. From a structural point of view, this would have been desirable. However, because of the rapid drop in hydraulic gradient just below the old dam, it would have required a much higher structure to maintain the same head for power generation purposes. In addition, the alternative would have caused signi- ficant problems for the adjacent U,S, Highway #34 since the highway would have required significant raising of its elevation, resulting in grades in excess of 6%. This alternative was analyzed and it was found that this dam would cost two times as much at this location versus the old location and would result in greater environmental impacts. Further it was calculated that anchoring both abutments to solid rock was not essential for protection against the 100 year flood if the base of the dam were anchored to bedrock. Since bedrock is only 15 feet below the stream bed at the proposed site, the above alternative was not selected. 2. Relocate Dam 1000 Feet Upstream from Original Location This would result in a lower structure that is more pleasing to the eye and less expensive. However, the additional costs of extending the pipeline and obtaining right-of-way, would offset potential savings. The relocation would also result in a significant reduction in reservoir capacity severely reducing the potential for fishing and would result in unnecessary disruption of additional canyon areas.