My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-09-25 Handout at Mtg.
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
2013
>
2013-09-25 Handout at Mtg.
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2013 7:48:33 AM
Creation date
9/26/2013 7:48:31 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
View images
View plain text
5 Stantec Memo <br /> To: Dallas Larson From: Mark Statz <br /> 1880 Main Street St, Paul MN Office <br /> Centerville, MN 55038 -9794 <br /> File: Royal Meadows Date: September 25, 2013 <br /> Reference: Royal Meadows Water Main - Draft Feasibility Report <br /> The following is a summary of the initial findings of our Feasibility Report for the Royal Meadows Water Main <br /> project. A total of 7 options were examined in detail. Cost estimates and schematic drawings were completed <br /> for each. Those options and their associated costs are: <br /> Option Description Cost Estimate <br /> i — OC Open Cut WM in street. Patch I/2 street. 1.5" Overlay. $61o,000 <br /> iA — OC Open Cut WM in street. Reclaim /Pave entire street. $619,000 <br /> i — DD Dir. Drill WM in street. Patch at service taps & fittings. 1.5" Overlay. $533 <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> 2 — OC Open Cut WM in boulevard. Patch driveways. 1.5" Overlay. $540,000 <br /> 2—DD Dir. Drill WM in boulevard. No driveway impacts. 1.5" Overlay. $523,000 <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> 3 — OC Open Cut WM in back yard. 1.5" Overlay. $543 <br /> 3—DD Dir. Drill WM in back yard. 1.5" Overlay. $537,000 <br /> City staff met to discuss these options and attempt to narrow down the choices. <br /> The first topic of discussion was the back yard options (Option 3). While the costs for Option 3 may be <br /> competitive with the others, the daunting task of getting 39 easements or right -of -entry permits was enough <br /> to compel us to eliminate that option. If the cost savings were more significant, this option might be more <br /> appealing. <br /> The next option which seemed obvious to eliminate was Option 1— OC. When compared to Option 1A — OC, <br /> we felt that the marginal cost difference was well worth getting a completely new pavement section, much like <br /> many of the streets recently done in the northeast part of town. <br /> Design with community in mind <br /> sm v \ 1938 \active\ 193802483 \design \draft feas report memo docx <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.