Laserfiche WebLink
<br />41. The recreatLon facLlLtLes model, Block 12, accepts the number of <br />visitors in days per year and computes the cost of the recreation facilities. <br />The model uses the annual visitation as a basis to compute the Design Load. <br />The Design Load is then used to compute the antLcipated number and type of <br />facilities that will be required. Uni,t and total costs for the facilities <br />are computed. <br /> <br />42. The reservoir preparation subroutine, Block 13, accepts the total <br />acreage of the reservoir at full pool, type of land to be cleared, vegeta- <br />tion density, slope class, and type of floatables, based on correlations <br />of the above factors (i.e. acreage, land type, vegetation, slope, etc.). <br />The unit cost per acre for land clearing and removing of floatables is <br />computed. <br /> <br />43. The relocation subroutine, Block 14, requires inputs of land use <br />classification, miles of interstate roads, paved two-lane roads, and gravel <br />roads to be relocated, miles of railroads, number of cemeteries, and full <br />pool acreage. From the Rowlesburg GDM and data from existing reservoirs in <br />the area, relationships were derived to compute the quantity of bridges, <br />culverts, power lines, telephone and telegraph lines and gas lines to be <br />relocated. The program also computes unit costs for each item to be <br />relocated. <br /> <br />44. The land acquisition subroutine, Block 15, uses the full pool <br />acreage as the basis for computing the quantity of each land use type and <br />structure that must be purchased. Using data from the Rowlesburg GDM and <br />from existing reservoirs in the area, unit cost per acre and per structure <br />are computed, and total cost calculations are made. <br /> <br />45. The maintenance and operations subroutine, Block 16, uses the cost <br />of dam and appurtenances, land available for public use, visitation, and full <br />pool acreage as inputs, coupled with relations derived from the Rowlesburg <br />GDM and data from existing reservoirs in the area, to compute the maintenance <br />and operations costs for a proposed reservoir. <br /> <br />46. The accuracy of the model was roughly checked by comparing the <br />cost of the Rowlesburg project, as computed by the model, against the costs <br />estimated in the Rowlesburg GDM. The two values differed by less than two <br />percent. <br /> <br />47. The model was intended for use as a rapid way of estimating the total <br />systems costs of a number of alternate plans, each plan consisting of a differ- <br />ent combinatLon of dam heights and locations within the Cheat River drainage <br />basin. It was obvLously critical that the flood control capability of each <br />proposed alternate system be within acceptable limits, which is why it was <br />necessary to incorporate the relatively sophLstLcated flood storage and <br />release routines. The resulting model, even though many of the subroutines <br />are very generalized, appears to be a highly useful tool. If the reservoir <br /> <br />24 <br />