My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ01996
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
0001-1000
>
PROJ01996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:43:36 AM
Creation date
7/3/2007 1:46:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
FS0068FX
Contractor Name
Minturn, Town of
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
0
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.
/
47
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 />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 />600,000 gallon tank: <br />Supply line: <br />Access road: <br /> <br />Total <br /> <br />$ 313,000 <br />$ 171,000 <br />$6.000 <br />$490,000 <br /> <br />The costs shown above do not include a contingency allowance. <br /> <br />2, Non-construction and Other Projects. Not applicable. <br /> <br />3. Annual Operation and Maintenance. Future maintenance costs for cleaning and applying <br />a new interior coating or exterior paint, commonly required only after a period of 15 years or <br />more, have not been quantified in this preliminary study. Other than periodic inspection, no <br />other maintenance expense is associated with the storage tank. It should be noted that operation <br />and maintenance work associated with the new tank will merely be replacing that which is <br />currently performed on the existing tank. Because the new tank is replacing an older tank which <br />is in poor condition, the required maintenance effort should be less than what is now required. <br /> <br />4. Present Worth, Because operations and maintenance of the new tank will be approximately <br />the same, or less, than the existiJlg tank, it does not represent an added burden to existing <br />operational expense. A present worth cost analysis does not, therefore, add to the evaluation; <br />alternative cost comparison can be made based on the initial construction cost. <br /> <br />H. AdvantageslDisadvantages <br /> <br />This site location will meet the owner's needs for increased fire flow capacity and increased <br />system water pressure. Construction costs will be minimized due to the shorter, direct routing <br />of the pipeline and due to the fact that a less expensive steel tank can be used at this site, rather <br />than a buried concrete tank, This site is owned by the town and will not require additional land <br />purchase, condemnation, or easements for constructing the tank, supply main, and construction <br />road, except for the railroad crossing, <br /> <br />The tank pipeline to this location will require a cased boring under the existing railroad track <br />and a bridge-hung river crossing, both of which will proportionally add to project cost. Use of <br />an above ground steel tank may impart a negative visual image to some people and could be <br />susceptible to damage due to vandalism <br /> <br />Town of Minturn Water System Upgrade Project, March, 1995 <br /> <br />28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.