PROJ00540 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Water may be of higher quality than that stored in the Town reservoirs, where algae and bottom vegetation tend to grow. There may be operation and maintenance problems in winter due to low water levels and cold temperatures. Feasibilitv. The pipeline appears to be feasible from an engineering and construction standpoint although the intake may present some problem. A cost estimate would have to be prepared to determine if it is cost effective. There may be institutional prOblems related to possible objections from Farmers Water Development Company. Since it has a number of advantages, the pipeline system will be subjected to a more detailed evaluation. 2. Alternative ~ ~ Construction of Additional winter storaae Near Headaate. Discussion. Under this alternative, a second reser- voir would be constructed to hold Gurley Water (or other water rights) in winter. Calculations in chapter IV, Section A4 indicated that an additional 30.2 million gallons of reservoir storage will be needed to provide winter water without a refill. Actual reservoir volume would be about 31.6 MG (97 AF) to account for losses (sediment and evaporation). One approach for partially meeting the requirement for more storage is to expand the existing reservoir. However, the existing reservoir will be difficult to expand for several reasons: 1) Downstream side slopes are steep and there is no toe drain. If embankments are raised, considerable earthwork and other improvements are needed. 2) The reservoir either has a bottom built into rock or rock will likely be encountered near the bottom. This will increase excavation costs and will require additional lining. It is probable that the most cost-effective option for expansion is construction of a new reservoir. There are three possible sites for a new reservoir. 1) The mouth of Gurley Canyon near the headgate 2) A tributary drainage of Gurley Canyon about 1~ miles south of the headgate V-4