Laserfiche WebLink
Option B: Remove existing wall and grade the adjacent property to a slope such <br />that wall replacement is not necessary. <br />Details: Variations on this option include: <br />1. A steep slope (perhaps as steep as 1:1) with low maintenance <br />landscaping. This would reduce the tree loss and excavation costs. <br />2. A flatter slope that could be mowed (Perhaps 4:1 slope). This <br />would require more tree loss and grading. <br />Advantages: Slightly less costly than Option A. Long life with low <br />maintenance. <br />Disadvantages: The aesthetics of this option may be questionable. <br />This option will require loss of mature trees and will necessitate <br />work on private property (easements). <br />COSTS OF OPTIONS <br />The following table summarizes the results of a preliminary cost estimate of these options. <br />SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE <br />OPTION A $20,000 to 25,000 <br />OPTION B $15,000 to 20,000 <br />Note: Costs include: construction, engineering and miscellaneous expenses. Costs <br />for easements for Option B are not included. <br />Comments: These costs are provided for the purpose of Council's deliberation of general <br />coarse of action. Essentially to provide information for a "go - no go" decision and / or to <br />direct us in a more specific direction. <br />The cost estimate is a general rough estimate. Ranges are provided to reflect the relative <br />undefined nature of the scope of work and the degree of uncertainty in the bidding market. <br />FUTURE ACTIONS <br />If Council decides to pursue a corrective action, we would confirm the costs with a more <br />detailed cost estimate based upon the option or modifications thereof selected by Council. <br />This would include confirmation of probable bid unit costs by contractors etc. We would <br />further recommend that we meet with the adjacent residents to explain the project and to <br />get their input. <br />Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. Page 56 <br />