My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C150081 feas study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
C150081 feas study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/4/2011 3:53:17 PM
Creation date
8/4/2011 3:14:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150081
Contractor Name
Victor, City of
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
12
County
Teller
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.
/
55
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
Assuming that there has been no reduction in storage capacity caused by sedimentation, the <br />alternative recommended in the 1987 Feasibility study is considered to be the most advantageous <br />of the alternatives. This also assumes that the City does not wish to increase the storage capacity <br />beyond their water rights and that the City does not intend to purchase additional water rights. <br />The majority of the material required to raise the dam embankment will come from the <br />excavation required to enlarge tt}e spillway. Alternatives No. 1 and No. 2 require much more <br />embankment material than the alternative recommended in the 1987 Feasibility Study but do not <br />require a significantly lazger spillway. As a result, an additional bonow site might be required to <br />raise the dam embankment for Alternatives No. 1 and No. 2. <br />VI. COST ESTIMATES <br />°`Constivction cQSt estimates were prepared for both Alterciatives No. 1 and Na 2 and the cost ,,-� <br />estimate for the altemative recommend�d in the 198'7 Feasibility Study was update�: The cost <br />estimates aze based on typical unit prices which include profit and overhead. The construction <br />cost estimates are presented in detail in the Appendix to this report. <br />The estimated project cost, which is presented in Table 3 for the recommended alternative, was <br />developed by adding a 15% contingency to the construction cost and then adding an additional <br />15% for Engineering and 5% for Legal And Administration services. The estimated cost of this <br />report has also been added to determine the total project cost. <br />Table 3. Total Project Cost for the Recommended Alternative <br />Total Estimated Construction Cost <br />Contingency (15%) <br />Total Estimated Cost <br />Updated Feasibility Study <br />Engineering (15%) <br />Legal and Administration <br />Total Project Cost (rounded) <br />8 <br />$485,795 <br />$ 72,869 <br />$558,664 <br />$ 15,000 <br />$ 83,000 <br />$ 27.933 <br />_ _ ,�'�"'�, <br />f� � 5686,000 �,i <br />..- <br />�--� '� <br />��.i <br />\ <br />\ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.