Banik G.,Tennessee State University |
Daugherty L.,Alaska DOTandPF. |
Kleweno K.,Regulatory Commission of Alaska. |
Bazan-Arias N.C.,Gray and Asso. LLC. |
And 3 more authors.
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Forum papers are thought-provoking opinion pieces or essays founded in fact, sometimes containing speculation, on a civil engineering topic of general interest and relevance to the readership of the journal. The views expressed in this Forum article do not necessarily reflect the views of ASCE or the Editorial Board of the journal. © 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers. Source
Hayden W.S.,Mead and Hunt Inc.
Association of State Dam Safety Officials Annual Conference 2013, Dam Safety 2013
Building water impounding structures within the main watercourse of a river typically requires diversion of the stream to create a dry work area for accomplishing the construction. Selection of an appropriate design capacity in terms of the magnitude of flood protection provided by the stream diversion system is an important consideration in relation to the overall complexity, phasing/staging, and cost of the construction project. As part of the reconstruction of the gated spillway and an addition of a low-flow hydroelectric unit at a dam in Black River Falls, Wisconsin, the issue of what constituted an appropriate design capacity for the stream diversion system became a point of contention between the engineer and the contractor prior to the start of construction. This paper presents the story of how the choice of stream diversion system capacity ultimately affected the construction at Black River Falls. Drawing upon actual events that occurred prior to and during construction, this paper discusses the engineer's selection and specification of the design stream diversion capacity, the contractor's interpretation of and challenge to the specified capacity, the events that ultimately unfolded during construction, and the consequences associated with adopting a design stream diversion capacity less than that initially specified by the engineer. The contractor's decision to argue for and implement a design stream diversion capacity less than the design capacity specified by the engineer turned out to be a mistake. With the benefit of hindsight, the question of the appropriate design stream diversion capacity is revisited, and areas for improvement are identified with regard to development of particular language within the stream diversion specification. © (2013) by Association of State Dam Safety Officials All rights reserved. Source
Rathke J.,Mead and Hunt Inc. |
Squitieri A.,Mead and Hunt Inc. |
Long C.,Mead and Hunt Inc. |
Rearick A.,Office of Structural Services
Transportation Research Record
This paper describes Indiana's efforts to prioritize historic bridges for preservation with the use of a systematic analysis that considers both relative historic significance and engineering condition. The state's historic bridge preservation program was initiated in 2006 with the execution of a programmatic agreement (PA) between FHWA, Indiana Department of Transportation (DOT), Indiana State Historic Preservation Officer (INSHPO), and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The PA streamlines the Section 106 regulatory process and allows Indiana DOT and local agencies to manage the state's population of historic bridges effectively and programmatically instead of using an inefficient project-to-project approach. The most innovative aspect of Indiana's historic bridge program is the establishment of a prioritization method. Each historic bridge is evaluated and then classified as either select, meaning the bridge is an excellent example of its type statewide and is suitable for preservation, or nonselect, meaning the bridge is not the best example of its type and may not be suitable for preservation. Upon agreement by FHWA, Indiana DOT, and INSHPO, lists of select and nonselect bridges were issued in March 2010. The methodology for identifying and prioritizing individual bridges is explained, highlighting the effort to achieve balance between historic significance and engineering and economic criteria, including functionality, safety, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness. Indiana DOT also developed standards for treating historic bridges on low-volume roads. If historic bridge rehabilitation can meet the standards, then rehabilitation for vehicular use must be implemented. Source
Pettis E.,Mead and Hunt Inc. |
Squitieri A.,Mead and Hunt Inc.
NCHRP has developed a model for evaluating the mid-century residences that soon might trigger a huge need for Section 106 compliance by Federal-aid or federally permitted highway projects. In order to comply with Section 106 for transportation projects, State DOTs, on behalf of FHWA, have to consider steps to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse project impacts on properties that are listed on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register through the survey and evaluation process. If a project is expected to affect a listed or eligible property, Section 106 outlines specific steps the Federal agency needs to follow. The agency must take into consideration the type of resource and effect, and the outcome of consultation during the public involvement process. A few DOTs and SHPOs have begun to address the challenge of surveying and evaluating the ever-increasing number of postwar residences by developing statewide historic contexts and tailoring National Register eligibility requirements. Source
Botz J.,Mead and Hunt Inc. |
Kemps M.,Mead and Hunt Inc.
Association of State Dam Safety Officials Annual Conference 2014, Dam Safety 2014
When traffic was rerouted over the Montello Dam embankment crest in 2008 due to potential instability of a downstream bridge, it led to studies that revealed potential safety risks. The earth embankment was reconstructed to meet current design standards. Unsuitable embankment soils were selectively undercut and the slopes, flattened, adding a new toe drain, and a cutoff wall through use of a vibrating beam slurry wall, a first for Wisconsin dams. The overflow and gated spillway were replaced and fish passage was added. Recreational improvements included fishing piers, a new boat launch, and canoe portage. The historical significance of the 150year-old facility was maintained. Granite masonry was used for the fish passage and spillway abutment walls. Local granite stone from the original dam was reused for all project rip rap and the toe drain rock fill. This paper details the design methodology, maintenance of its historic significance, and reconstruction. Source