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 />Alternatives Evaluated <br /> <br />A range of alternatives were considered including 1) don't build <br />the project, 2) rehabilitate the head gate structure and place <br />12,000 feet of ditch in pipeline, and 3) rehabilitate the head <br />gate structure and 12,000 feet of concrete ditch. <br /> <br />A subjective evaluation of the alternatives follows: <br /> <br />1. Don't build the proiect: <br /> <br />No action taken to solve this problem will leave the <br />shareholders short of water and dealing with the high <br />maintenance costs associated with a deteriorated ditch <br />system. This alternative is feasible, but is not considered <br />acceptable by the shareholders. <br /> <br />2. Rehabilitate the head qate structure and place 12.000 <br />feet of ditch in pipeline: <br /> <br />The head gate structure off the Grand Valley Canal would be <br />replaced, and the ditch would be placed in a pressurized <br />plastic pipeline with taps for water users. This option <br />would cost about $400,000, would solve the seepage problem <br />along the ditch, and would remove the hazards associated <br />with an open ditch. This alternative is feasible, and is <br />considered the preferred alternative by the shareholders. <br /> <br />3. Rehabilitate the head qate structure and 12.000 feet of <br />concrete ditch: <br /> <br />The head gate structure off the Grand Valley Canal would be <br />replaced, and the existing concrete ditch would be <br />rehabilitated. This option would solve the seepage problems, <br />but would leave an open ditch with the associated hazards <br />and maintenance problems. This alternative is feasible, but <br />is not preferred by the shareholders. <br /> <br />The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has provided <br />technical engineering assistance in the evaluation of the above <br />alternatives. <br /> <br />The Selected Project <br /> <br />The HLDC has decided to proceed with Alternative 2. The head gate <br />structure off the GVIC canal will be replaced, and the ditch will <br />be placed in a pressurized plastic pipeline with taps for water <br />users. The design will be for 13 cfs, and will include measuring <br />devises at all turnouts. <br /> <br />Feasibility Study <br />Rehabilitation of the Hawkeye Lateral Ditch <br />December 1997 <br /> <br />5 <br />