My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD01374
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
FLOOD01374
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 12:58:18 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:58:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
Designation Number
521
County
Weld
Community
Erie, Firestone, Dacono
Stream Name
Tri-town drainageway, Godding Hollow Basin
Title
South Weld I-25 Corridor Master Drainage Plan
Date
9/8/1999
Prepared For
Weld County
Prepared By
Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
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 />:1 <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I I <br />I <br /> <br />· Land development in the Tri- Town Basin will be required to limit the stormwater <br />runoff for the area located north of WCR 18 to the magnitude of the existing <br />condition, lO-year and 100-year flood event. For that portion of the Tri- Town <br />Basin located south of WCR 18, stormwater runoff should be limited to the <br />magnitude of the existing condition, 2-year flood event. <br /> <br />· . Releases from land development in each subbasin will be conveyed in a safe and <br />stable manner to the major drainageway. This statement implies that stormwater <br />runoff will be conveyed in an appropriate outfall facility such as a channel, storm <br />sewer, etc. <br /> <br />· All existing railroadfroadway detention ponds previously discussed must remain <br />intact or be replaced. <br /> <br />5.4 Cost Estimates <br /> <br />Estimates of the costs were developed for the proposed improvements and provided the <br />basis for the opinion of costs generated for the comprehensive plans for each basin. Data used to <br />develop unit costs were obtained from bid tabulations, quotations from various suppliers and <br />manufacturers, and information supplied by local contractors and city utility departments. The <br />unit pricing data compiled and used to generate the cost estimates is provided in Appendix C. The <br />cost estimates for the comprehensive plans included the following categories: (a) general drainage <br />infrastructure; and (b) engineering, permitting, legal, fiscal and administrative costs. <br />General drainage infrastructure costs are defined as the costs associated with the labor and <br />materials for the drainage improvements as well as the drainage ROWieasements or land <br />acquisition for the construction and maintenance of the drainage improvements. A contingency, <br />of 35 % was included in the estimate of construction costs to include those real and intangible items <br />not directly accounted for in the unit pricing data and the costs associated with mobilization, utility <br />relocation, bonds, and insurance for the contractor. <br />The flIlal cost category was estimated to be approximately 20 % of total construction costs. <br />This category is intended to include professional engineering and construction services, labor <br />required to obtain the necessary permits, and legal requirements. Administrative costs relate to <br />the implementation of the construction plan by the various governmental agencies. <br />The cost estimates for the comprehensive plans are presented in Tables 5.1 and 5.2. <br /> <br />T:\OPEMCoweldOllcoweldOI fill rpt.wpd <br /> <br />5.30 <br /> <br />September 8, /999 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.