Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />1 <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />1. Primary outlet would be a 36" conduit with a 2-way riser and stilling <br />basin. <br /> <br />2. Emergency spillway with a crest length of 250' would be required for each <br />alternative. <br /> <br />3. 5' of flood storage and 3' of freeboard would be required for each <br />alternative. Note: This put the top of dam elevation 8' higher than <br />normal pool level. <br /> <br />4. The typical cross section for each alternative would have a 20' top width, <br />and 3:1 sideslopes. <br /> <br /> <br />5. Cut off trench in the valley 15' deep and 5' deep along abutments. <br /> <br /> <br />6. Shrinkage Factor of 15%. <br /> <br />The three storage levels evaluated for the two axes were 250 acre-ft., 500 acre <br />ft., and 750 acre-ft. Stage-Storage-Area relationships were also developed for <br />the two axes. Alternates 1 and 2 are shown in Fi gures 4-1 and 4-2. The <br />principal outlet works as shown in Figure 4-3 is typical for both <br />alternatives. <br /> <br />A cos t es ti mate was made of the dam for opt ions 1 and 2 and storage versus <br />construction cost relationships were developed for the alternatives. <br /> <br />The material on which the embankment is founded can have a significant effect <br />on the cost of constructing a dam. Although no geotechnical data, such as <br />borings or testing, was obtained as a part of this study, generalized <br /> <br />4-3 <br />