HomeMy WebLinkAbout20000229 MEMORANDUM
QI �. TO: Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney
Esther Gesick, Clerk to the Board
COLORADO FROM: Kim 94e, Current Planner
SUBJECT: Faith Tabernacle Church, USR 1217
Independent Review by Ed Toms of Boyle Engineering for
the private irrigation ditch (an extension of the
Boomerang Lateral) across subject property.
Lee,
Enclosed is a copy of the review of the proposed irrigation ditch re-alignment of the Boomerang
lateral extension that shall be re-located and placed in a pipe on the property.
I met with Gary Weiderspon Friday afternoon January 7, 1999 to discuss his concerns, and for him
to present this letter for our review. Per the BCC hearing on October 13, 1999, Danny Perdew
agreed to be held for complete liability and to provide maintenance to the re-located irrigation water
line for a period of two years. Further, in the BCC Resolution dated October 25, 1999, the Board
moved to Find that COA#2.n has been met by Faith Tabernacle Church based on its willingness
to agree to all of the items in the proposed agreement with item#4 being amended to state"Existing
ditch easement will not be released until the new underground ditch is accepted by the ditch
owners."
My question to you, what if anything should be done with this recently received information? Given
that the ditch needs to be accepted by the impacted property owners, is any action necessary at this
time? Any thoughts that you have will be most appreciated.
Esther,
I have enclosed the original letter from Ed Toms of Boyle Engineering for case file USR 1217.
January 10, 2000
SERVICE,TEAMWORK,INTEGRITY,QUALITY
deniaratlit [
U 2000-0229
O1 - 17 -,ROce PL 13015
From: LEE Morrison
To: NORTHDOMAIN.NORTHPOST.KOGLE, EGESICK
Date: 1/12/00 11 :05am
Subject: Faith tabernacle- your undated memo received 1-12-2000
It appears that the neighbors have legitimate technical concerns that should
probably be addressed by TOTAL engineering . Maybe the engineering concerns
can be addressed . Also there may be information in the landscape plan and
conditions of approval which address the easement and planting material. The
applicant or his engineer should respond before further action by County is
appropriate
Lee Morrison
Assistant Weld County Attorney
CC: BBARKER
weld County Planning Dept.
JAN 07 2000
rdik
ECEIVED BOYLE EnG//-7EE/71r7G CO/ PO/ AT/O/-7 3ULTWG ENGINEERS
Suite 200
165 South Union 303/987-3443
Lakewood, CO 80228 FAX 303/987-3908
Mr. Gary Weiderspon December 1, 1999
6923 West 28th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
Faith Tabernacle Church Irrigation Design Review
Dear Mr. Weiderspon:
As requested, Boyle Engineering Corporation (Boyle) has reviewed the design drawings dated
October 20, 1999 for the Faith Tabernacle Church development. The design was prepared by
Total Engineering Service, Inc. located in Evans, Colorado.
The required capacity for the system is 3 acre-feet/day, which is equal to 1.5 cfs. The hydraulic
calculations indicate the flow capacity is approximately 5 cfs. Based on the presented
calculations, the capacity of the system is adequate.
There are two approaches related to presenting technical specifications for the construction of the
project. The first, is to present the specifications on the drawings. This method is usually used
for smaller projects like the proposed design. The second is to prepare written technical
specifications under a separate cover. There are no technical specifications given for the project.
Based on the information presented for review, the Contractor could construct the project by his
own methods and the Owner does not have any recourse if a portion of the system failures in the
future.
The following are additional comments related to the proposed design:
A. Inlet Structure Detail "A"
1. The foundation preparation for the inlet structure is not indicated on the drawing. The
excavation lines should be shown on the drawings to define proper construction limits for
backfill and compaction.
2. The type and strength of concrete is not indicated on the drawings for any of the
structures. The size and placement of reinforcement steel is not indicated on the drawings.
3. The bottom of the structure floor should be sloped to drain into the 12-inch pipe.
Mr. Gary Weiderspon December 1, 1999
Page 2
4. The structure is not an inlet for storm water. The top of the structure should include a
steel cover with hinges for easy access. The cover should also have a lock.
5. There is no indication on the drawings how the pipe will be installed with respect to
bedding and compaction.
6. The type of backfill around the structure and at compacted density of the backfill is not
indicated on the drawings.
7. The trash rack is not anchored into the structure. A drawing should be prepared to detail
the trash rack connection to the structure.
B. Irrigation Line Profile
8. The cover over the 12-inch pipe ranges from 6-to 12-inches. The depth should be at
least 3 feet to prevent damage to the pipe.
9. The rubber gaskets should be used to join the pipes.
10. There is no indication on the drawings how the irrigation line encasement will be
installed with respect to bedding and compaction.
11. There should be a structure at the 90-degree bend. The structure should be designed as a
manhole or box structure to allow easy access for maintenance and line cleaning.
12. Vegetation, other than grass, should not be planted within 10 feet of the irrigation pipe so
that easy access to the pipe can be achieved during maintenance.
13. The irrigation system should be constructed in a dedicated right-of-way so there will not
be any misunderstanding to the access to the system for maintenance and operation.
C. Irrigation Box Detail "B"
14. The site grading is indicating that overland flow is conveyed into the irrigation box. The
irrigation system should only convey irrigation water. The system will fill with sediment
over time. It could also increase the discharge to the property located to the east.
15. See comments 1 through 6.
D. Irrigation Outlet
16. The pipe outlet should be supported by a concrete headwall.
17. The placement of the outfall riprap should be indicated on the drawing.
18. The type of filter fabric is not indicated on the drawing.
Mr. Gary Weiderspon December 1, 1999
Page 3
Boyle would not recommend accepting the design. The presented design will not have a long
service life due to the above indicated design issues. The system will probably experience a line
brake within 2 years due to the shallow bury depth of the pipe.
The construction methods are not defined in enough detail to ensure that the system will function
properly. Maintenance of the system will be extremely difficult if the proposed trees and shrubs
are planted. The pipe could possibly be damaged due to the roots of the trees and shrubs. Please
give me a call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Boyle gi ' g Corporation
Z- 1/4...
Ed A. oms, P.
Assistant Managing Engineer and
Project Manager
Hello