Loading...
ST9905-CS050803I Suzan Taylor - FW: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Page 1 j From: To: Date: Subject: <ccbond@transystems.com> <staylor@ci.coppell.tx.us> 8/3/2005 12:44:35 PM FW: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Suzan, I meant to forward Mike Hobbs results to you earlier today, but I wanted to look over his data first. It looks like raising the box culvert flowiine to 501.33 (proposed top of 18" sleeve) and using 6'x10' boxes will work, although it's close. The calculated water surface ends up being 508.82 just below 509.02 (top of road) or 509.52 (top of curb). Craig .... Original Message ..... From: FW-Mike Hobbs Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:18 PM To: DL-Charles Bond Subject: RE: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Craig, Attached is the revised model as mentioned below. I did re-grade the channel to tie in to the new elevations. The water does not go aver the mad but it is close. Less than .5'. I want to remind you that it will probably need to be noted somewhere that this box might have to be a direct drive box. I calculate approx 2' from the inside wall to the top of pavement. This does not leave much room for the top of the box and the pavement section. I just thought it needed to be mentioned. Michael Hobbs, E.I.T, Transystems Corporation Consultants Fort Worth, Texas mrhobbs@transystems.com P (817) 334-4449 F (817) 336-2247 .... Odginal Message ..... From: DL-Charles Bond Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:22 PM To: FW-Mike Hobbs Subject: FW: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Mike, Can you please m-run the HEC using a flowline elevation of 501.33 at the Bethel Road box culverts (using 4-6'x10' box culverts). Thanks. Craig ..... Original Message ..... From: Suzan Taylor [mailto:staylor@ci.coppell.tx.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:06 PM To: DL-Charles Bond Subject: Re: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Craig: Would you please have Mike Hobbs rerun the HEC with the new flowline and [ Suzan Taylor - FW: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Page 2 1 6' x 10' boxes before I approach Ken. I do not want to have to go back to Ken with another design if this design will not work. I gave Keith a copy of the design yesterday for him to review. Thanks Thanks >>> <ccbond@transystems.com> 08/02/05 2:30 PM >>> Suzan, I heard back from our structural engineer and he said the pipe penetration detail, with some minor modifications, will work. So, if the pipe penetration detail concept is acceptable to the City, I can set the box culvert flowline at the top of the sleeve (501.33) and proceed. I still need to have Mike Hobbs perform another HEC run using the new box culvert flowline (501.33) and 4-6'x10' boxes to see where the CWSEL ends up. Craig From: DL-Charles Bond Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 2:19 PM To: staylor@ci.coppell.tx.us Subject: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Susan, Attached is the proposed pipe penetration detail I sent to Mike Brown, our structural engineer, but I haven't received any comments back yet. Craig From: DL-Charles Bond Sent: Monday, August 01,2005 2:03 PM To: FW-Michael Brown Cc: FW-Mike Hobbs Subject: Bethel Road Box Culverts Mike Brown - Can you please take a look at the attached box culvert penetration sketch and let me know what you think. There is a 12" sewer line going under the box culverts at Bethel Road. We can't lower the sewer line so I'm proposing to encase the 12" PVC sewer line in an 18" cast iron pipe sleeve and add an 8" lap splice concrete slab (not sure I Suzan Taylor - FW: FW: Bethel Road Box Culverts Page 31 of my nomenclature) below the pipe sleeve penetration. The cast iron pipe penetration would go through a set of 4 multiple box culverts (see attached plan view for reference). I also looked at lowering the box culvert so the penetration could go through the box culvert walls instead, but the resulting down stream slope and COE permit requirements make this a poor option. Mike Hobbs - Since we can't lower the sewer line, I'm proposing to raise the box culvert flow line by 0.68 ft from 500.65 (ELMIN from your HEC run) to 501.33 If the rise in the CWSEL is proportional (as it appeared to be in earlier HEC runs), the CWSEL for the 4-5'x10' box culverts would increase from 508.74 to 509.42 F & N's roadway elevation is 509.02 (top of curb at 509.52), so we may need to bump up the boxes to 4-6'x10' to reduce the CWSEL The resulting increase in box size would put the top of the 4-6'x10' box culverts at 508. I spoke with Sam Meisner at F & N this morning and he is sending me their latest plan and profile so I can verify their roadway elevations. Craig Bond, P.E. TranSystems Corporation Consultants 3010 LBJ Freeway, Suite 990 Dallas, Texas 75234 Ph 972-280-9300 x 225 Fax 972-280-9715 Cell 817-296-8536 ccbond@transystems.com