My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00235
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00235
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2011 3:47:18 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:44:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153633
Contractor Name
Greeley, City of
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
3
County
Larimer
Bill Number
HB 91-1006
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.
/
83
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 />6.0 <br /> <br />ESTIMATED COSTS <br /> <br />6.1 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS <br /> <br />The project costs to rehabilitate Hourglass Dam are given in Table 6.1 that follows. Included <br />are the cost of the feasibility study, the estimated 1990 costs of construction, contingency, <br />engineering, project cost escalation and interest. It is assumed that CWCB funding for the <br />project wiil become available in mid-1991, and that Option 1 project construction can be carried <br />out from June to November of 1993. Option 2 project construction is assumed to follow in two <br />years. <br /> <br />Costs are given for the two aiternatives selected by the City of Greeley. These are Option 1 . <br />Downstream Drainage Construction, and Option 2 - Partial Depth Slurry Wall. Option 1 consists <br />of that work required to bring the dam into compliance with current safety standards and <br />reasonable improvements to minimize potential maintenance costs. Option 2 - Partial Depth <br />Slurry is the cost of subsequently placing a partial slurry wall to reduce seepage losses from <br />the reservoir at some date following the completion of the Option 1 construction. The costs <br />shown for Option 2 are the lC. Shallow Soil Bentonite (low cost estimate). The work required, <br />as contained in the original unit price Option 2 cost estimate, in recognition that the Option 1 <br />work will be in place before the Option 2 work is started, include the following items given in <br />the Option 2 unit price cost estimate. <br /> <br />C. Shallow Soil Bentonite <br />(low cost estimate) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ 840,000 <br />9. Mobilization (recalculated as 10-percent of the <br />foregoing cost) ............................ 84.000 <br /> <br />TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $ 924,000 <br /> <br />If for any reason the Option 2 work is to be undertaken before the Option 1 work, the Option <br />2 - Low Estimate (1 C) of $1,346,975 for construction applies. For cost escalation and interest <br />during construction calculations, it is assumed that Option 2 will be constructed in 1995, <br />following construction of Option 1 in 1993. <br /> <br />Construction cost estimate details are at the end of this section. <br /> <br />6-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.