My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00507
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00507
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:43:27 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:58:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153513
Contractor Name
Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
Water District
0
County
Montezuma
Bill Number
XB 99-999
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.
/
154
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 cost differential for increasing the pipeline capacity from 2.5 cfs to 3.0 <br />cfs is 1 ess tl1an fi ve percent. The percentage noes not appear 1 arge ann yet <br />the total rlollar value is enough to provide a number of the alternative <br />features outlined for the Towaoc municipal imorovements. There is very little <br />difference in the cost of installation as pipe trench is basically at the <br />minimUM size for either 12 or 14-inch pipe. There 'Ire SOMe reductions in the <br />other items, but the total difference is not great. <br /> <br />If the overall fundi ng of the project is arlequate, it appears that provi di ng <br />the large 3.0 cfs capacity would not cost much more and would assure the Tribe <br />that even extreme peaking conditions could be covered. <br /> <br />The most critical evaluation is between Alignment A and Alignment B. The cost <br />differentials here are also relatively narrow when cost of right-of-way <br />acquisition is included. <br /> <br />Alignment A is the least expensive for the 3.0 cfs capacity by approximately <br />$250,000. While the additional installation costs due to constricted space, <br />travel control and utility congenstion have been estimated, there is also a <br />chance that the slowed construction rate along Alignment B could result in <br />construction not being completed by the end of 1988. Similarly, possible <br />delays in regard to right-of-way acquisition could slow the progress on <br />Alignment A. It is sometimes possible, however, to leave a 'laD in the line to <br />be comp1 eterl in the 1 ast few months if there is diffi cul tv in Durchasi nq the <br />easements. <br /> <br />There is one factor regardi ng 11.1 i gnment B that is di ffi cu1 t to assess in <br />monetary terms. That is the potenti a1 for expansi on of State Routes 145 or <br />666. Alignment B would include approximately ten miles of pipeline within the <br />State road ri ght-of-way. Expansi on by the State of those roadways woul rI <br />require extremely high relocation costs to be incurred by the Tribe. Acquired <br />easements and some paralleling of county roads under Alignment A would provide <br />a more positive long-term operating condition, free of major risk of future <br />relocation expenditures. <br /> <br />3-52 <br /> <br />l060c <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.