My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C153804 Feasibility Study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
C153804 Feasibility Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2011 3:26:42 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:51:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153804
Contractor Name
Left Hand Ditch Company
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
5
County
Boulder
Bill Number
HB 95-1155
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.
/
145
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 />The Company's property skirts the knob just below the level of the tops of the two dams. <br />Therefore, to widen the existing spillway would require the purchase of a relatively large tract of <br />land now owned in common by the Homeowners Association. The Association officers reported <br />that any sale of commonly owned property would have to be approved by 75 percent of the <br />mortgage holders or title holders of the 157* lots within the subdivision. This approval, if it could <br />be obtained at all, would likely be time consuming and could be expensive because of meetings, <br />paying the Association's expenses for a right-or-way agent and their attorney, preparing exhibits, <br />etc. It is our opinion that the typical homeowner in the subdivision would not react favorably to <br />locating the spillway by excavating through the rock knob and therefore would not support the sale <br />of property to the Company. <br />'. <br /> <br />The financial feasibility appears to be no better, and could be much worse, than the Plan C <br /> <br /> <br />and Plan D alternatives discussed in subsequent sections of this report. The construction estimate <br /> <br /> <br />for Plan C-3b (the cheapest alternative) is approximately $384,000 (Table V-2). In order for the <br /> <br /> <br />excavated spillway to be more feasible it must cost less. Preliminary estimates indicate Plan B <br /> <br /> <br />would require approximately 60,000 to 70,000 cupic yards of excavation, $100,000 worth of riprap <br /> <br /> <br />for the stilling basin and for the berm guiding the flow away from the developed area to the natural <br /> <br /> <br />drainage in the northeast, and an allowance of $50,000 for construction of the concrete spillway <br /> <br /> <br />crest, revegetation and other miscellaneous con$truction expenses. Plan B also has an associated <br /> <br /> <br />unknown condition, the possible existence of hard rock excavation required when cutting through <br /> <br /> <br />the knob and down the chute. The cost of excavation of the 60,000 to 70,000 cubic yards of <br /> <br /> <br />material could vary dramatically depending on the nature of the material to be removed, especially <br /> <br /> <br />if blasting is required. Subtracting the estimated $150,000 for riprap, concrete and miscellaneous <br /> <br /> <br />expenses from a maximum of $384,000 (to be no more expensive than Plan C-3b) leaves $234,000 <br /> <br /> <br />for all earthwork - including excavation, placement of excavated material as fill, and disposal of <br /> <br /> <br />excess material or about $3 35 to $3.90 per cubic yard. <br /> <br />We believe that the cheapest at which elCcavation alone could be accomplished would be <br /> <br />assuming that 70 percent of the material to be removed could be easily handled with standard <br /> <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.