My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00156
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00156
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:02:52 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:40:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153721
Contractor Name
Lyons, Town of
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
5
County
Boulder
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.
/
55
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
<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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Mid-Term Expansion of C~aci(y <br /> <br />If the above short-term improvements (and other improvements which may be identified) <br />are performed, the existing WTP may be rated from 1.3 to 1.5 MGD. The remaining 1.0 to 1.2 <br />MGD must be supplied by an expansion of treatment facilities. The required capacity could be <br />supplied by an expansion of the existing WTP or a peaking facility. This peaking plant would be <br />located near the St. Vrain Canal and Highway 36. Refer to Figure 7. Issues to be considered in <br />the decision to build a peaking facility are: delivery for raw water from both the river and the <br />canal, pumping requirements and operating costs, comparisons of overall capital and operating <br />costs, standby power and overall system reliability (including the redundancy of treatment <br />facilities offered by a new WTP). The construction of a packaged 1.0 to 1.2 MGD peaking <br />facility east of town is feasible and should be assessed. <br /> <br />Conceptual cost to design and build a WTP similar to the peaking plant described above, <br />excluding costs for land and legal services, is about $1.13 million. <br /> <br />8.3 Water Storage and Distribution <br /> <br />Chapter 4 and Section 4.3 discuss the performance and the needs of the storage and <br />distribution facilities. The existing system has reached its capacity to provide adequate storage <br />and meet maximum day flow requirements. It has significant deficiencies for fire protection, <br />especially in the upper pressure zone. <br /> <br />In summary, the following improvements are proposed: <br /> <br />1. Add a storage tank and associated piping improvements for the upper pressure zone at <br />the same hydraulic grade line as the existing storage tank in the high pressure zone. <br />Preliminary location for this facility is above the Russell Subdivision. The existing 0.35 <br />MG tank could be moved to satisfy this requirement. <br /> <br />2. Add a 1.0 to 1.5 MG storage tank and associated piping improvements for the lower <br />pressure zone. This tank should be located south of town in the vicinity of the proposed <br />Lyons Valley Park south of the town at the same hydraulic grade line as the water system <br />at the PRY at 68 psi. <br /> <br />3. Begin a replacement program for all water lines that are less than six inches in diameter <br />with 8-inch lines. In addition, we recommend looping of water mains to and within all <br />future developments. This investment will greatly improve fire flows in the main part of <br />town. <br /> <br />4. Upgrade a portion of the distribution system in the main part of town to connect the <br />existing PRY to the proposed Lyons Valley Park tank with 12-inch diameter pipe. The <br /> <br />47 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.