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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />a viable option. For this appraisal study, it is an alternative <br />that shows promise because of the low cost. The cost estimate <br />shown on Table IV-E assumes that each well would be able to <br />yield about 30 gpm and would be about 60 feet deep and would <br />cost about $65.00 per foot to drill. A treatment plant would <br />not be required but chlorination would be necessary. <br /> <br />Route A would be slightly more expensive than the other two <br />routes if a treatment plant is required but less if the gallery <br />is feasible. Field work by a geohydrologist would be necessary <br />to evaluate the gallery but would not be performed until it is <br />evident that water rights can be obtained; this work has been <br />performed and is described later in the report. The acquistiton <br />of right-of-way (ROW) is also a consideration when evaluating <br />the three routes; the highway plan offers the least problem with <br />ROW. <br /> <br />- 18 - <br />