How do you fix this washed out road?

[pabstist]

After Hurricane Irene, we have some washed out roads in Vermont. How would you go about fixing them, after seeing the pics posted below? The State doesn't know what to do, nor do I. Do you appreciate the aesthetics of the steel guard rail dropping off over the new river banks? Or how the pavement has disappeared like a Tetris game.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/barrettscary/DSCF03681.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/barrettscary/DSCF03671.jpg

[Terr]

After Hurricane Irene, we have some washed out roads in Vermont. How would you go about fixing them, after seeing the pics posted below? The State doesn't know what to do, nor do I. Do you appreciate the aesthetics of the steel guard rail dropping off over the new river banks? Or how the pavement has disappeared like a Tetris game.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/barrettscary/DSCF03681.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/barrettscary/DSCF03671.jpg

Well. On the second picture it shows that there is space on the left to move the road that way. Obviously make it a gentle curve.

[Omar Little]

You can move to the left as Terr said or you can fill it in and shore up the side against the river. If Boston and Hong Kong can fill in parts of their harbor and build skyscrapers on it, I'm sure you Vermonters can figure out how to fill in a hole and build a road across it.

[Mr Downtown]

Yeah, I think anyone from CalTrans or Colorado DOT would be a little amused at the idea that "no one knows what to do." You blast out a little more of the mountain to create a new shelf.

[Joey P]

ISTM that curving it to the left would involving buying up the properties on that side of the road. The public doesn't tend to take well to eminent domain (but they do tend to forget a few months later). Besides, that might end up eroding away as well.
I'd think the best way would be to build a retaining wall on the river side, backfill it, and lay a new road on top of that. Done properly and anchored well it shouldn't wash out again since this time, since it's man made, it'll have proper drainage built in. Now, after a heavy rain, instead of absorbing all the water and collapsing it'll just let it all out into the river.

[Joey P]

Yeah, I think anyone from CalTrans or Colorado DOT would be a little amused at the idea that "no one knows what to do." You blast out a little more of the mountain to create a new shelf.

I thought that was a bit odd as well. My first answer was "Maybe 'the state' should look up 'engineers' in the phone book and ask one of them." Looking at the picture, I'm bit surprised they let it erode that close to the road without doing anything about it. That looks like an accident waiting to happen. It seems like before it collapsed they could have setup a giant "A" shaped form (on pilings), poured concrete (with drainage holes) into it, pulled the form, backfilled the space with gravel and probably been good to go.

That's basically what I'm suggesting now, but it's just that they'll be starting from scratch and they'll have to remove all the rubble first.

It's not like this is the only road in the country that rides 50 feet above a river. They don't have to re-invent the wheel here.

[aceplace57]

Why not build a bridge over the bad area? Treat it just like you would any ravine or gorge that's in the way of a road.

Seems like that would be easier than trying to fill it in with 20,000 dump trucks worth of dirt & fill. Anytime you fill a hole that huge it's never as stable as undisturbed soil.

I bet that area washed out because it was fill dirt. Maybe not man made fill. It could have been deposited there over a period of hundreds of years. It's just dirt sitting in a hole with rock under it. A flash flood can wash it out pretty easily.

[TriPolar]

Moving the road away from the edge is the least expensive option, and the only practical one. You have pretty good evidence that the road was too close to the edge already. The state may already have a right to the property. Borders formed by waterways aren't fixed. They may have a right to use the land a certain distance in from the riverbank, and the river just got a little wider right there.

[J Cubed]

Call up my former employer, Fort Miller, just over the border in NY, and ask to purchase some of their fine products:
http://www.super-slab.com/productsmaster2.htm

[kenobi 65]

Why not build a bridge over the bad area? Treat it just like you would any ravine or gorge that's in the way of a road.

I'm no civil engineer, but I'd be willing to bet that building a bridge would be far more expensive and time-consuming that either of the other options which have been floated here (filling in the eroded area, or moving the road to the "left").

[sparky!]

Possibly excavate to sound soil, then fill with possible anchoring systems and placement of rip rap. Or retaining wall and fill.

The problem is that rivers always have and always will erode their banks and change shape. That area just downstream may get washed out at the next flood event.

Most likely that bank was native soil and quite possibly tree covered. I have seen 100' + sections of river bank with old, native trees be washed away due to flood waters.

Rivers are powerful things and don't traditionally stay in one place.

[Al Bundy]

It's a weak spot in the road that doesn't look much different from the rest of the road edge. They can support the river edge with boulders, which is the cheapest way at a few cents per pound or they can come in with equipment and drive tong and groove steel pilings deep in the ground. Then everything can be backfilled with stone and gravel up to the road.

[Telemark]

I'm not sure why the OP thinks VT doesn't know what to do. They fixed similar washouts on Rt 4 and Rt 100 by dumping lots of fill and building retaining walls. They'll do the same here.

[Kiber]

As others have noted - the least expensive method would be to simply move the road and repave a bit further from the river. However, if they want to keep it in the same location, then mechanically stabilized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanically_stabilized_earth) earth is a likely solution - essentially backfilling behind a retaining wall, and then building on top of it.

[jeffgorc]

Ironically, they will first need to do some excavation to cut the slope back and create a haul road down to the river bank so they can get equipment down there safely. Then they can start filling in with fill and rip rap from the bottom up. They can also install soil stabilization as they work their way up.

[md2000]

Yes, sems to me they would start at river level, put in a wall that the river won't undercut, and build it up in steps. A lot of roadwork I see has those giant wire cages full of big rocks as the wall. Backfill behind it. Step upward and inward. If necessary fill with crushed rock rather than soil to enhance the drainage. As others point out, drainage! Put a few pipes under the new road so water accumulating on the uphill side ditch drains quickly and cleanly away from the road instead of soaking in. Presumably also have a few gravel-filled channels in the bank on the way up to drain any water accumulating in the deep soil.

Even if they do move the road over to the left through Charlie's front yard, they will still have to do something like I describe to stabilize the mud cliff, or it's going through his backyard next hurricane.

I'm guessing this is covered in civil engineering 101.

[kayaker]

Around here they would begin by placing lots of orange cones, and a MEN WORKING AHEAD sign. And folks would begin using an alternate route.

[Smeghead]

I'm not sure why the OP thinks VT doesn't know what to do. They fixed similar washouts on Rt 4 and Rt 100 by dumping lots of fill and building retaining walls. They'll do the same here.

Yeah, that's what they've done to repair roads in my area of Vermont. Lots and lots of rocks in the holes.

Around here they would begin by placing lots of orange cones, and a MEN WORKING AHEAD sign. And folks would begin using an alternate route.

"Alternate route". Hee hee. Know how I know you don't live in Vermont?

[kayaker]

"Alternate route". Hee hee. Know how I know you don't live in Vermont?

Aint none?:p

[Smeghead]

Aint none?:p

Well, let's put it this way. The bridge by my house was temporarily destroyed by Irene. It took us two days to find another route to civilization, and it required driving a half hour in the wrong direction, then backtracking. And I'm in one of the more heavily populated areas of Vermont. It was weird to have all these places that used to be within walking distance (well..."all" meaning like three - small town) now be a 45 minute drive away, even though I could see them across the river from my front yard.

[Telemark]

I have a friend who lives in Stockbridge (Stuckbridge, she called it) who couldn't drive out of town for 4-5 days. They finally let them take a very rough dirt road that was still connected to civilization once they were sure drivers wouldn't block to only route that construction and emergency workers were using.

[paperbackwriter]

There's a reason the old cliche "Can't get theahr from heahr." was born in VT...

[boytyperanma]

There's a reason the old cliche "Can't get theahr from heahr." was born in VT...

I always thought that was Maine.

Anyway Vermont is pretty good at fixing roadways and can even do it in a timely manner. This example (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/16/7789190-vermonts-route-4-before-and-after) made the Rachel Maddow show not to long ago.

I don't see why they would be baffled by the problem in the pictures. They just need to put the engineers on it.

The only problem I see is preserving the natural look, specifically from the river, that's a bit more time consuming because then you're trying to appease people's find more architectural senses. Then you have committees, approvals and everyone wanting to give their opinion. Making it a Massachusetts project....

An ugly straight forward solution could be done in a few weeks.

[Telemark]

Then you have committees, approvals and everyone wanting to give their opinion. Making it a Massachusetts project....

An ugly straight forward solution could be done in a few weeks.

Same thing happened on roads in western Mass and they were fixed with similar speed and efficiency as the washed out roads in NH, VT, and NY as far as I can tell. Most of the major roads are already fixed.

[pabstist]

Here's the latest official news I can find-
http://www.weathersfieldvt.org/news/875-route-106-washout-update-as-of-9142011

The following was written by a representative from the Vermont Agency of Transportation.

I want to provide you with an update of our activities and direction for the route 106 repairs. Initially there were a few options coming from the field regarding this site, cut the approaches, acquire ROW and move the road completely, rebuild/repair in place etc. Yesterday a VTrans Geo-technologist and Geo-morphologist were brought in to investigate the site and advise on the preferred way forward. From their analysis and collective thinking, the best and right way to address this slide (shy of total relocation) is to initiate a permanent fix in place from the onset. Due to the magnitude of the slope the river bank must be armored and erosion control must be achieved. Gurney Brothers has begun to divert channel waters to allow safer access to the base of the slope. The final plan on the fix might be ready within two weeks+/-. VTrans is moving forward to develop this plan and initiate the permanent repair. Once this plan is developed, we will certainly share the plan with you so that you in turn can make it available to interested parties in the town. We think we can have the roadway up to grade by late November+/-, barring any significant high-water events that would impede or destroy progress made.

So it's going to take two weeks to formulate a plan, and the work may be done by late November. Guess it's not as easy as some of you think! And FYI, also read that bank is 200 feet tall! That's a lot of fill to dump in.

[ZenBeam]

And FYI, also read that bank is 200 feet tall! That's a lot of fill to dump in.Read where? From those pictures, it looks less than half that.

[Ignatz]

Here's how they do it in North Carolina, but the water level is a tad higher and they have more room at the side.

http://www.sbckiteboard.com/video_display/video:3894/TEMPORARY-BRIDGE-TO-RESTORE-LINK-TO-OUTER-BANKS

[Telemark]

So it's going to take two weeks to formulate a plan, and the work may be done by late November. Guess it's not as easy as some of you think!
I don't think anyone claimed that this was going to be easy, but the work doesn't seem to be significantly different than we described. It's just the scale of the 106 work is pretty large.

[kanicbird]

Flying car

[Yllaria]

. . . Yesterday a VTrans Geo-technologist and Geo-morphologist were brought in to investigate the site and advise on the preferred way forward. . . . So it's going to take two weeks to formulate a plan, and the work may be done by late November. Guess it's not as easy as some of you think! And FYI, also read that bank is 200 feet tall! That's a lot of fill to dump in.

That's what I figured. It wasn't that they didn't know what to do, it's that the site hadn't been fully evaluated and the cost of the various possible fixes hadn't been calculated and compared. If, for instance, the geotech had found that both sides of the break had been undermined for half a mile in each direction in ways that didn't readily show, that would have raised the cost of a re-build.

Not knowing the cost of land acquisition in the area, or whether that pole means there's a utility easement that can't be messed with without a fight would have also left the cost of one option in the air.

Now that they've chosen a type of fix, they can start estimating the cost of different particular ways of achieving the fix. Maybe J Cubed's suggestion is one possible method of shoring up the road. But it may not be the most reliable in this situation and it may not be the cheapest. And maybe the cost of some materials has risen due to other needed damage repairs.

Only two weeks of estimating and analysis and writing the recommendation report to be used to justify the request for funds, not to mention routing the report for quality review and authorization, is pretty fast. I don't see them mentioning whether they have the funds available or whether they'll have to apply to a program for money. Sometime that takes longer than the planning does.

And planning isn't design. Design will come next, then review, then advertising for bid, then issuing the contract, then the construction will start. If it's an emergency, they might be able to contract the construction without a 4 week bid advertisement. November's not bad for all of that.

Irene hit, what?, August 28? I know it's easy for me to say I can live with that speed, but they don't sound outrageously slow to me.

[JustinC]

Lots of good suggestions, but before one of them is implemented I recommended a couple of well-placed ramps :p

[aceplace57]

If there's no practical detour then I'm surprised they don't temporarily take that land on the side and create a gavel lane to loop around the bad area. They could fix the road and still let limited traffic through.

Later, they could remove the gravel and sod with grass. Property would be good as new.

States imminent domain rights are pretty powerful.

[mack]

A few years back my road got undercut and washed out by the creek and they used panels similar to these (PDF) (http://www.contech-cpi.com/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=1895&PortalId=0&TabId=144) but thicker and made of iron to create a barrier, backfill, and repave it. Slightly smaller scale, though.

[BrotherCadfael]

You'd think it would be easy and quick to fix, but this is Vermont, after all:A seldom-seen sight has become legal and commonplace in parts of Vermont after Tropical Storm Irene: Excavators and bulldozers sitting in the middle of rivers to quarry gravel, rechannel the current and pile protective rock along eroded banks.

As the flood crisis abates, river advocates are raising more and more questions about this work. They say that in some cases the in-river work went far beyond what was necessary for immediate protection of roads, bridges and homes.

They object because work that straightens river channels and armors their banks to protect property in one place also can cause floodwaters to move even faster, creating bigger flood threats downstream.

In addition, anglers say unnecessary excavation has destroyed prime habit for trout in some rivers.
The environmental review process will have it wrapped up in court for twenty years.