My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00358
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00358
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:03:43 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:51:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153717
Contractor Name
South Platte Ditch Company
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
64
County
Logan
Bill Number
SPL
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.
/
86
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 />. <br /> <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 />Alternatives Evaluated <br /> <br />A range of alternatives were considered including 1) don't build the project, 2) repair the <br />structure saving as much of the old structure as possible, 3) completely remove the old <br />structure and replace it with a new structure, and 4) abolish the river diversion structure and <br />replace it with pumped well water. <br /> <br />A subjective evaluation of the alternatives follows: <br /> <br />L Don't build the project: <br /> <br />Shareholders would be unable to irrigate 4,400 acres of cropland. The do <br />nothing alternative is not feasible! <br /> <br />2, Repair the existing structure: <br /> <br />Repairing this structure will enable the Company to divert water and operate its <br />recharge project before the irrigation season, This alternative would also be the <br />most economical. This alternative is feasible and is considered the preferred <br />alternative. <br /> <br />3. Completely remove the old structure and replace it with a new structure: <br /> <br />This would increase the cost of the project considerably with no added benefits, <br />This alternative is feasible but not very economical. <br /> <br />4, Abolish the use of the river structure and pump well water into the ditch: <br /> <br />This alternative would be contingent on the plan being approved by the water <br />court. Considering the time getting court approval and construction time, water <br />would be unavailable for shareholders to irrigate this summer. This alternative <br />is not feasible, <br /> <br />The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD) provided technical engineering <br />assistance in the evaluation of the above alternatives, particularly concerning the type and <br />configuration of gate structures for the headgate and for the river dam. Pneumatic crest gate <br />systems (from Obermeyer Hydro Accessories, Inc.) as well as radial gates, lift gates, and flash <br />boards were considered. The critical design issue was to keep sand from washing into and <br />plugging the ditch. This required that water flow over the top of the ditch headgate (low <br />approach velocity with little sand), and out the bottom of the adjacent river dam sluice gate <br />(where high velocity washes the sand downstream,) <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />.. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.