Bids are due June 12. They expect work to take 60 days.

https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/bidops/current_bid_opportunities/construction/#amr11521

[url=https://ibb.co/chjYxCc][/url]

Glad to see them expending some resources to improve public access.

I do wonder if they realize that there isn't much elevation difference between the entrance to Nails Creek and the flag pond canal. Id guess around 6" difference between the two. And it just silts in more with every big rain.

Long overdue project, so glad to see something being done. One of the only public hunting hunting areas near B/CS and surroundings. Almost impossible to access when the lake is at pool in it's current state. Ran up to it the other day only cause the lake was 3ft high. Up until about 2017 you could get up there in a shallow draft outboard if the lake was just above pool. Now it needs to be almost 2ft high before you could run a mud boat back there and even then there were some very shallow areas.

$50,000


HAHAHAHA - ok.

They state the project intent is to return the bottom of the channel to 233', 5' below the pool elevation of 238'.

It's the government....

It's gonna cost 50K to haul the sediment removed from the channel.

TPWD is basically requiring 16,000 CY of sediment removal...

$3/CY removed and hauled off.... yikes.

Sounds like they are just posting this to say they did something. Costs almost $5 CY to just move dirt around on a job site.

OnlyForNow said:

---

It's gonna cost 50K to haul the sediment removed from the channel.

TPWD is basically requiring 16,000 CY of sediment removal...

$3/CY removed and hauled off.... yikes.

Sounds like they are just posting this to say they did something. Costs almost $5 CY to just move dirt around on a job site.

---

For that small amount, it's closer to about $7 a yard. Maybe $8 these days with everything being stupid expensive.

I get your point, but...

1) there is no haul off, disposal is on site
2) assuming a 3:1 side slope in the channel, you forgot to divide by 2 on your volume calc
3) 8k cu yd * $5 comes "government work" close to their number at $50k.

It's why I'm an environmental guy and not an engineer, BUT the contract doesn't state a 3:1 side slope.

Where'd you see there's no haul off? Missed that! Big difference. I guess they want them to just throw it on the road?

OnlyForNow said:

---

It's gonna cost 50K to haul the sediment removed from the channel.

TPWD is basically requiring 16,000 CY of sediment removal...

$3/CY removed and hauled off.... yikes.

Sounds like they are just posting this to say they did something. Costs almost $5 CY to just move dirt around on a job site.

---

I'm pricing a job now that requires export with disposal.. $25/cy.

But yes if it's just moving around on site, we budget $5.50/cy in the private world.

normaleagle05 said:

---

I get your point, but...

1) there is no haul off, disposal is on site
2) assuming a 3:1 side slope in the channel, you forgot to divide by 2 on your volume calc
3) 8k cu yd * $5 comes "government work" close to their number at $50k.

---

You still have to move the excavated material, even on the same general site it costs money.

I had a jobsite a few years back where we had a borrow pit a half mile on the same site as where we needed the fill. It cost me $7 a yard to move the dirt. And it was significantly more than this will be. Moving dirt is, generally speaking, a function of volume - the more you need to move, the cheaper per yard it is to do so.

Also, given the sensitive nature of that area (wetlands), you aren't just dumping the dredged material willy-nilly. ACE would have to approve how and where it is depositied and given the fact that it is the Army Corps of Engineers - they have likely picked the most expensive spot on site to transport material to.

Also looking at this - access is going to be an absolute beetch. The trails are unimproved roads that will either need to be restored (not part of the scope, unless the state determines the ruts left are too deep) or mats will need to be brought in to keep equipment from sinking. Odds are mats will be required.

Beyond that you have significant issues with access at multipel points where an excavator will not be able to track or reach without doing a fair amount of additional work. The little creek that dumps in the canal at essentially the midpoint and the wide opening closer to the water control structure are both problem zones - even a long stick isn't reaching those areas. Maybe a pontoon excavator, but those are nightmares to deal with by themselves. Access on the north side doesn't look great, so all work will likely be done from the south/west side. It's going to cost $50k just to get access - probably more than that really.

Spoils are to be deposited on the "levee" on the south/west side, that eliminates any significant trucking but doesn't eliminate the need for equipment to dress and work it.

And that is if its dry. If it rains, all bets are off anyway.

$250k is my bet.

Aint no jurisdictional wetlands out there any more thanks to SCOTUS.

If there weren't so many stupid requirements and stipulations a few eager college kids could rent a bobtail and excavator and get this done over the course of two weeks this summer and make some $$$$$$.

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

OnlyForNow said:

---

If there weren't so many stupid requirements and stipulations a few eager college kids could rent a bobtail and excavator and get this done over the course of two weeks this summer and make some $$$$$$.

---

The local Delta Waterfowl had even suggested this as project. We have a fund of allocated resources we could have put towards making it happen.

TXCAV said:

---

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

---

Would be really nice if they could get them all up and holding water. Would help to hold birds in the area and give walk in hunters more options.

Whoever did the original work did a bad job and wasted a lot of money. I think it was a DU project? They were designed to only handle small local rainfall rather than for when the creeks got out and flowed over them. There were no emergency overflows and the levees are way too narrow and steep to handle being overtopped.

TXCAV said:

---

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

---

What are the L ponds? I'm not super familiar with Somerville.

After they dredge out the way in to Flag Pond, go ahead and work your way down to the Pecos High Bridge boat ramp & start dredging the confluence of the Pecos and Rio Grande.

GulpJuiceFingers told me there is 60' of silt right there at the ramp.

schmellba99 said:

---

TXCAV said:

---

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

---

What are the L ponds? I'm not super familiar with Somerville.

---

There is some walk in TPWD WMAs (wildlife management areas) just north of the lake off of the Yegua watershed. It's around 3K acres in total. There were some ponds built long ago, the levees were "L" shaped. they used to hold water and were available for pubic hunting with the Annual Public Hunting Permit through TPWD. The levees washed out some time ago after a hard rain. There is little to no public hunting is this area and those ponds were some of the only public walk in waterfowl hunting areas available within an hour or more of B/CS.

CS78 said:

---

TXCAV said:

---

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

---

Would be really nice if they could get them all up and holding water. Would help to hold birds in the area and give walk in hunters more options.

Whoever did the original work did a bad job and wasted a lot of money. I think it was a DU project? They were designed to only handle small local rainfall rather than for when the creeks got out and flowed over them. There were no emergency overflows and the levees are way too narrow and steep to handle being overtopped.

---

They had water control structures in place, in fact that is where the failure occurred. The water box was definitely not large enough to handle the overflow, especially if it got clogged with debris/floaters. The water came up and cut around the water box and blew out.

TXCAV said:

---

CS78 said:

---

TXCAV said:

---

They need to take the excavated sediment, haul it over to the WMA, and use it to repair the broken levees on the L-ponds

---

Would be really nice if they could get them all up and holding water. Would help to hold birds in the area and give walk in hunters more options.

Whoever did the original work did a bad job and wasted a lot of money. I think it was a DU project? They were designed to only handle small local rainfall rather than for when the creeks got out and flowed over them. There were no emergency overflows and the levees are way too narrow and steep to handle being overtopped.

---

They had water control structures in place, in fact that is where the failure occurred. The water box was definitely not large enough to handle the overflow, especially if it got clogged with debris/floaters. The water came up and cut around the water box and blew out.

---

Right but your riser board box should not be expected to function as an emergency overflow. There should be an emergency overflow designed into the very end of the levee where the ground is flattest. Some failed at the box. Some at low spots in the levee. None of the riser board drain pipes had seep collars, which allowed water to get a foothold to eventually blow them out. The ones that still have their drains in place had levees breeches from bad levee design. Either way, someone spent a whole bunch of money to do a really bad job.

Each one could be fixed right with just a couple days work, but that's not how the government works.

Ahh. I had to go back in time to 2014 to find them, I see what you are talking about now.

Ehh, it's a function of how much you have to spend and what you want to do.

The flow control looks like it was a puny little 24" corrugated culvert on each one, which is way too small. Doubt anybody did any type of math - probably bought what they thought would work or got a good deal on.

I've never put seep collars on culvert pipe, it wouldn't do any good anyway because you can't make them big enought to do their job. Remember - all dams and levees leak, it's a function of controlling how much and where they leak. Some riprap at the interior corners and on the tails of the levees would probably have made a difference as well, but doesn't look like any was added. Probably because of cost. Just like an overflow weir and erosion control for downstream flow at the weir wasn't installed - probably because of cost.

When any earthen structure gets overtopped for any significant amount of time, it's going to fail. Saturation, weight and flow guarantee that. Those are levees of convenience, not really structural or designed for major flow control, you have to understand their limitations and likely the funding limitations in building them.

schmellba99 said:

---

I've never put seep collars on culvert pipe, it wouldn't do any good anyway because you can't make them big enought to do their job.

When any earthen structure gets overtopped for any significant amount of time, it's going to fail. Saturation, weight and flow guarantee that. Those are levees of convenience, not really structural or designed for major flow control, you have to understand their limitations and likely the funding limitations in building them.

---

Getting off subject but I have to disagree with you on a few things. I have personally seen the culverts on riser board levees go from leaking to not leaking with the add of a 3ft seep collar. The ones I worked on are exactly like the ones that failed.

2nd, with good soil and proper design, you absolutely can build a levee that withstands being overtopped. Ive built two that get major flow over the top, for days at a time, multiple times a year. Remember, these are waterfowl impoundments. They only need to hold a foot of water. The levee doesn't have to be tall. It literally only needs to be 2ft tall but wide across the top, and wide across the slopes. Establish good grass and you're good to go. It takes more effort than popping up a short narrow levee but it's not near as involved as a typical pond levee.

Dirty-8-thirty Ag said:

---

After they dredge out the way in to Flag Pond, go ahead and work your way down to the Pecos High Bridge boat ramp & start dredging the confluence of the Pecos and Rio Grande.

GulpJuiceFingers told me there is 60' of silt right there at the ramp.

---

I took this pic on March 11, 2018. It was bad then. The ramp was almost too shallow to use.


Looks like it is worse now.

Please see the attached scope and pricing.

CS78 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I've never put seep collars on culvert pipe, it wouldn't do any good anyway because you can't make them big enought to do their job.

When any earthen structure gets overtopped for any significant amount of time, it's going to fail. Saturation, weight and flow guarantee that. Those are levees of convenience, not really structural or designed for major flow control, you have to understand their limitations and likely the funding limitations in building them.

---

Getting off subject but I have to disagree with you on a few things. I have personally seen the culverts on riser board levees go from leaking to not leaking with the add of a 3ft seep collar. The ones I worked on are exactly like the ones that failed.

2nd, with good soil and proper design, you absolutely can build a levee that withstands being overtopped. Ive built two that get major flow over the top, for days at a time, multiple times a year. Remember, these are waterfowl impoundments. They only need to hold a foot of water. The levee doesn't have to be tall. It literally only needs to be 2ft tall but wide across the top, and wide across the slopes. Establish good grass and you're good to go. It takes more effort than popping up a short narrow levee but it's not near as involved as a typical pond levee.

---

It always goes back to cost.

I have serious doubts that a high coehsive low PI soil was brought in to make duck pond impoundment levees. It was probably just the crap that was scraped off the top, because nobody is bringing in select fill for such a project. High PI, likely heavy clay soils that aren't the world's best for backfilling around things. It is what it is.

You can spend enough money to do whatever your heart desires. But every single project I have been associated with - and it's been multiple hundreds of them - have one thing in common no matter the size or scope of the work, location of the work, sector, etc. - they all have budgets. Some big, some small. But ultimately you look at what you want to do versus how much money you have available to do it and there are ALWAYS compromises made.

In this case, it looks like it was the sizing and construction of the flow control pipes. They were too small and not sufficiently installed. You get things like that with volunteer projects or projects with very little money to spend.

Obviously your experience is completley different and thus negates anything I've done or seen, we'll leave it at that.

You and I should bid on this.

We can do it.

Agreed! Good, Fast, Cheap... Every project only gets 2 of the 3...