Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> " . . <br /> t <br />,....., <br />, 1.0 INTRODUCfION <br /> 1.1 General <br /> <br />This proposal has been prepared in response to a verbal request by Mr, Grant Farnsworth, <br />President of the Minnesota Canal and Reservoir Company (MCRe). The request was made on <br />April 12, 1990 during a site trip. The purpose of the trip was to familiarize Steffen Robertson and <br />Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. (SRK) with the needs and desires of the MCRC and to view the potential dam <br />sites along the Dry Fork of Minnesota Creek. <br /> <br />1.2 Background <br /> <br />Based on the April 12, 1990 discussions, SRK understands that the MCRC is planning on <br />minimizing storage in the existing Minnesota Dam and Reservoir and possibly decommissioning the <br />facility at a future date. The action is contemplated due to unresolved slope stability problems <br />along the left abutment, which have impacted the existing spillway and have potential for impacting <br />the structural integrity of the existing embankment. In anticipation of this action, the MCRC is <br />proposing to develop a replacement dam and reservoir upstream of the existing facilities. The <br />feasibility study described in this proposal document is the frrst step in the design and permitting <br />process which will lead to fmancing and construction of the replacement facilities. <br /> <br />1.3 Project and Site Description <br /> <br />The MCRC has identified six possible dam sites along a two mile length of the Dry Fork of <br />Minnesota Creek. These sites, shown on Figure 1, are located above the existing Minnesota Dam <br />and Reservoir and below the inflow of the Deep Creek Ditch. The MCRC has indicated that these <br />sites were identified using USGS topographic maps and visual observations. The selection criteria <br />consisted of the following: <br /> <br />· Minimum storage volume of 500 acre-feet; <br />· Additional storage volume may be desirable (up to a maximum of 1200 acre-feet); <br />. Minimum embankment volume; and <br />. Stable foundation and abutments. <br /> <br />All six of the identified sites were viewed by SRK during the April 12, 1990 site trip. Based on the <br />visual assessment, sites 1, 2, 3, and 4 appear to have the most potential to meet the MCRC's <br />criteria. Sites 5 and 6 appear to have less potential due to storage limitations. SRK understands <br /> <br />1 <br />