|
Posted by Chuck on November 17, 2006, 10:53 pm
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:28:27 -0600, DanG wrote:
> It was already stated that cost was a major factor. They will be
> trading off concrete for twice the form work, but, apparently labor is
> easier to come by than $$$.
> ___________________________
> Keep the whole world singing. . . .
> DanG
>
>
>>
>>> each 3.5' wide run of pavement.
>>
>> As I recall, the driveway is to be 9' wide, so with 7' total of
>> pavement width that leaves 2' of clear space in the middle. What is the
>> advantage of this configuration over a single 9' wide drive? Is it
>> simply the 2/9 materials savings, or is there some other advantage?
>>
>> Thanks, Wayne
>>
>>
Well, of course I wish cost wasn't such a major factor but with a 675 foot
drive like this(plus drainage) it really is. We could try to put it off
another year or two but at this point the road is simply impassible at
times and it really sets us back.
Oddly enough, there is one 50 foot section of the original driveway still
intact and it's the one section that was double lane. I wouldn't really
know, but my hypothesis is that being able to move independently may have
helped that section survive 12 years of harsh weather and erosion. I feel
like that is going out on a limb but it does strike me as odd.
As DanG mentioned already, labor is relatively inexpensive here(Mochima,
Venezuela). Concrete isn't that bad but transportation out to the middle
of nowhere is. And that goes for rocks and sand too.
This link below is a picture that gives a(very rough) idea of the
goegraphy where the road/driveway will be built. The houses on the far
side of the bay(or right side of the bay perhaps) are the ones the drive
will affect directly. I'm at the bottom so I REALLY need it.
http://www.mochimadivers.com/images/panarama-1200.jpg
Chuck
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap