My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00515
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00515
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:43:27 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:59:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
FS0019X
Contractor Name
Turkey Creek Snowball Creek Project CWRPDA 1985
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
0
County
Archuleta
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
218
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 /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />have to be purchased and reclaimed after the material is removed. If" the <br />land for the enlarged reservoir is not purchased initially, the additional <br />cost would have to be incurred during the enlargement. <br /> <br />The most cost effective alternative is to build the reservoir at the <br />increased size initially. The initial cost--for the five miles of pipeline <br />to the treatment plant represents almost 12 percent of the project <br />construction cost. For a smaller proj ect, the total pipeline cost would <br />remain the same, but the percentage of the total project cost would be much <br />higher. The same applies to the initial costs for road and pipeline <br />right-of-way and for access road improvement. <br /> <br />5.9 <br /> <br />ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST <br /> <br />Project costs were determined by estimating the quantities of various <br />materials required for each feature and applying an associated cost. Where <br />possible, unit prices were used rather than lump sum prices. The unit <br />prices are based on averages of bids received for similar projects <br />constructed by Western Engineers, Inc. and others during the last 5 years. <br /> <br />Costs for the dam and appurtenances came from bid abstracts from <br />Taylor Dra~v Dam near Rangely, Colorado, which was bid in July 1982; <br />Monticello Dam near Monticello, Utah, bid in April 1984; and <br />Smith-Moorehouse Dam in northern Utah, bid in September 1984. Both the <br />Monticello Dam and Smith-Moorehouse Dam are above 7,200-feet (MSL) and are <br />over 120-feet high. All three projects are close to small towns with <br />limited services. In order to estimate unit costs for similar construction <br />items found in the Snowball Dam, the average unit price from the three <br />projects for each bid item was determined. The high and low bidders were <br />then excluded and a new average determined. The values from the three <br />projects were then averaged and used as the unit price for determining <br />Snowball Dam's cost. Table 5.2 shows the unit costs for the Snowball Dam, <br />as well as the projects used to compile the unit prices. The averages of <br />the unit prices for the other dams are shown on the table. <br /> <br />5-9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.