My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJC01422
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
PROJC01422
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2011 2:37:07 PM
Creation date
10/6/2006 12:22:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150133
Contractor Name
Low Line Ditch Company, The
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
64
County
Logan
Bill Number
MC3
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.
/
100
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 />A1ternatives Evaluated <br /> <br />A range of alternatives were considered including 1) don't do a <br />project and continue to rely upon the existing diversion, 2) <br />completely rebuild the diversion using the best available <br />technology, or 3) rebuild only that portion of the diversion to <br />allow for more efficient diversions. <br /> <br />A subjective evaluation of the alternatives follows: <br /> <br />1. Don't build a project: <br /> <br />If a project were not pursued, the LDC would continue to use <br />their existing diversion in its inefficient state. This <br />winter has shown for the first time in decades that winter <br />"calls" do exist on the South Platte River, thus reducing <br />the time available to systems wishing to divert water into <br />recharge. This means that ditch companies wishing to divert <br />recharge water must do it in a more timely and efficient <br />manor. This alternative is not acceptable to the Company. <br /> <br />2. Completely rebuild the diversion using the best <br />available technology: <br /> <br />Many ditch companies up river from the Lowline ditch <br />currently use this alternative. They utilize a bladder gate <br />system for controlling flows into a ditch. The LDC could use <br />100 feet of bladder gate along with a new radial gate to <br />control sanding into the ditch. The project would require a <br />new concrete floor under the new gates with a perimeter of <br />sheet piling to prevent under currents from washing away the <br />structure. The cost of this alternative is approximately <br />$450,000. <br /> <br />3. Rebuild only that portion of the diversion to allow for <br />more efficient diversions: <br /> <br />This alternative would consist of building two, less <br />sophisticated, mechanical lift gates and three sections of <br />concrete rollover wall. The gates and rollover sections will <br />require a new concrete floor along with sheet piling. The <br />cost of this alternative is $72,500. <br /> <br />Feasibility Study <br />towline Ditch Company <br />Diversion Structure <br />March 2003 <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.