Laserfiche WebLink
<br />30 <br /> <br />31 <br /> <br />During feasibility in vestigBtions, other features were. studied as <br />potentinl additions to tbe pion of development, These lllelude tbe <br />Bijou Creek diversion channel to provicle control of floods Qriginating <br />on Bijou Creekj tbe Riverside, BijOll, and Sterling {Jumping plnnts; <br />and the O,-id weil field, Descriptions of these potcntuu additions are <br />presented Bubsequently in this part of the repol't. . <br />No provisi.ons for hydroelectric power development ha.ve been lll- <br />eluded since the conditions which rendered (,bis potentiality infellSihle <br />lIS dctermined in the 1951 definite plan in,estigntions, have not <br />changed, , <br />M unicipaJ and indust.rial wnter supply bns not been meluded as a <br />unit function for lack of my forsecable need as descnbed subsequently, <br /> <br />NARROWS DAM ANn RESERVOrR <br /> <br />elevation 4,453,0, A cutoff trench backfilled with impervious material <br />would extend under the leCt abutment sou across the river cha.nnel. <br />Tbe upstream face of tile dam would he protected by ~ 3-foot layer of ' <br />rock rlpra.p plt\ced on an IS-inch gravel blanket. The downstream face <br />would be covered wit1112 inches of topsoil and seeded t.o grass. Total <br />volume of embaukment in the dam would be ..bout 8,840,000 cubic <br />yards, <br />An llncontrol1ed concrete spillway di::3charging into a. chute and <br />stilling basin would be located io tbe Iclt abutment. A 30-foot-wide <br />concrete bridge would be provided ..cross tbe spillway for relocated <br />State Higbway 144, The spillway, with a crest elev..tion of 4,428,5, <br />the top of tbe flood control pool, was designed with a capacity of <br />27,600 cubic feet per second with the reservoir water surface at <br />elevation 4,447,0, tile top of surcharge capacity, In tbe design, a <br />surcharge of .176,000 acre-feet plus 384,000 acre-feet of exclusive <br />flood control capacity in combination with ll. spillway discharge of <br />27,600 cubic feet per second and a river outlflt discharge of 8,600 <br />cubic feet per second was provided to protect against all inflow design <br />flood of 344,000 cubic feet per second and a 20-day volume of 1,363,000 <br />acre-feet. Subsequent to this design the reservoir alloca.tions werfl <br />adjusted to allon" 475,000 8.Cre-feet ror exclusive Rood conlrol and <br />7.1,000 ..cre-feet. for joint use lor /lood control and irrigation, Adjust- <br />ment of tbe spillway capacity would be minor, and the design w..s not <br />changed. Area-capacity data and storage allocations for the re5ervoir <br />are shown on exhibit 4. Corresponding data shown on exhibit 3 are <br />rounded to the nearest 1,000 acre-feet. <br />The river outlet works would be located /lear the left abutment. <br />Two 10-Ioot~diameter circulo.l" concret.e conduits would lead from tbe <br />intake to it shaft and gate structure under the darn. Two lO-Ioot- <br />diameter steeJ pipes inside two 14-foot-diameter concrete horseshoe <br />cOrlduit!'l would exlend from the gate struc.ture t.o a. control house at <br />the downst.ream toe of the dam, High-prcssure slide gates would be <br />pro\;ded for each conduit jn the gate chamber and the control house. <br />Tbe outlct " arks would be capable of discharging 8,600 cubic feet <br />per second with t.he reservoir water surface at elevation 4,447, t.he top <br />of 5w-charge capacity, and would be lIsed tllong with the spillway to <br />prof.eet the dam during tloo&~. During normal operation, t.he outlet <br />works \\.'ould be used to make releases to the river for downstream <br />users. In a letter dat.ed September 14, 1965, which is appended to this <br />report, the Corps of Engineer5 indicated that an out.let capacity up <br />to ]0,000 cubic feet per second \\'ould ha,'e to be availahle, The corps <br />later explamed ihat tbe 10,000 cubic fcet per secoTld was intended to <br />represent the maximum allowable downstream. discharge to obtain <br />tbe ev~uatcd benefits nnd that the designed rker outlet capacity <br />was 58 tlsf Rctory. <br />An outlet for tbe Fort Morgan Callal would be located near the <br />right abutment and a short distance to the lefL of tbe existing Fort <br />Morgan Ctlllal which it \\'ould serve. A 9-foot 6-inch circular concrete <br />conduit would lea.d from the intRke to a gat.e chumber under the dam. <br />A 6-foot-d.i~meter steel pipe il\side a IO-root-diameter concrete Lorse- <br />ghoe condUIt. would extend from the gate chamber and control houge. <br />The capacity would be 350 cubic feet per second with the reservoir <br />water surface at e.levaUon 4,3.51, the bottom of the conser.....ation pool. <br /> <br />The Narrows Dam site is located in sections 7 tlnd 18, T. 4 N., R. <br />58 W, and sections 13, 23, 24, 25, and 26, T',4 N" R. 59 W" about <br />7 miles northwest. of Fort .Morgan. Th~ locatIOn (If the dan.ls!te With <br />proposed r~ilroad and highway relocatIOns is shown on exhIbIt 2, <br /> <br />Geology of d<L7nsite <br />Types of subsurface materials of imp~rtance at. the Na.rrows Dam <br />site are alluvial va.lle.y-fill sand, i.errace silt, nnd PIArre sh~le bedrock, <br />The present South Platte River channel has eroded into the north wall <br />of the oldcr and much deeper channel, the thalweg 01 ,which ,lies ~~- <br />proximately 3 miles to t.he south. The aUllvlal ~and With whlC~ thIS <br />ancestral cbanoel is filled is exposed belo>y the blgh water level m the <br />reservoir area. Since the sand bos n slgm.fic.a.nt coeffiCIent or perme- <br />ability, it ig expected t.hat an appreciable seepage J~ss wouId occ.ur <br />through the sand into the ancestral ch..nne!. Overl.l'lIlg the allU\'~al <br />sand, on t.he right side of the present channel, is a layel' of terrll.ce silt <br />of vnrying t.hickness. <br />At the left. abutment.nnd beneath the river cbaru1el, tbe shale is at <br />shallow deptbs, but bas undergone weathering ~ffcct.s to considerable <br />depth, Where the impervious cmbankment., spillway, and the outlet <br />condu,"s ,,,e on Picrre shale exeavatlOn should be made to un- <br />wcnthered rock, Because of ~welling tendencies wben subjected to <br />saturution, a spraved protective coating o~ mortnr w.ould be reqUIred <br />on excavated shale surfaces {or tbe condmt.s and spillway structure. <br />In ..ddition there will be some rebound as the load is removed by <br />excavation, 'and both design A.nd construction prac.tices should take <br />t,hh; into considerp.,tion. <br />The Pierre sbale formation slopes down from the river cho.nnel <br />toward tbe right end of the dam to such depth that. it is not. fel1.Sible <br />to seal the impervious embankment, to bedrock. Probable water losses <br />through the sand and gravel overlaying the shale along the right abut- <br />ment cannot be fully controUeo; but \elier weBs and toe drnins.. ~s <br />included in t.be dam design, would provl,de structural safety and hmlt <br />downstream seepage to tolerable q uan tItles. <br /> <br />Dam and reservoir <br />Thc dam .hown on the feasibility de.ign drawing, exhibit 3, would <br />be a zoned, rolled earthfill structure v..rith a height o.boye strea.mbed of <br />146 feet, a crest width of 30 feet, and a Icngth of 22,120 feet at crest <br />