Wjreky t1_iu7x3kv wrote
Not a judgement, but can someone please explain why this would have cost $100k?
Chaos43mta3u t1_iu81xla wrote
Fucking right!?!? They didn't even explain what exactly they did outside of remove blackberries and show some chains around stumps
GoogleOfficial t1_iu88ooe wrote
That’s about as far as $100k gets you in Kirkland.
[deleted] t1_iu97cl7 wrote
[deleted]
Wjreky t1_iu9br87 wrote
Thank you for your insight
samuswashere t1_iuaiv2l wrote
Copied from my comment above:
> I do this for a living. $100k is very cheap. A large driver of the costs are environmental regulations. You can’t just call up a contractor to show up and jam wood in a stream. The stream needs to be assessed to understand what can be done. It needs to be surveyed so you have a base to work from. It needs to be modeled to ensure that whatever you do doesn’t increase flooding. It needs to be designed to ensure that what they put there is going to stay put. Then it has to go through a rigorous permitting process. All that work needs to be done by experts who are expensive. That’s me - though I now work for a public agency myself.
> Once it’s finally time to construct the project, again you can’t just start ripping up a stream. You need to have biologists go through an capture all the wildlife. You need to carefully pump or divert the water so as not to harm the wildlife outside of the project. You need to protect the stream from any sediment or spills that could pollute the stream. All this is on top of working with natural materials that are oddly shaped requiring field adjustments as you construct.
[deleted] t1_iu7yq7n wrote
[removed]
KmartQuality t1_iu9chyg wrote
$100k is not really very much.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments