All: 

 

            I am attaching some photos in pairs for comparison of conditions before and after the storm early this morning. 

 

            First pair, #4148 (before) and #4195 (after show the drainage headwall and the box culvert in particular, from slightly different perspectives.  In the “before” picture you
can clearly see that the box culvert has a lot of silt/rock/sand inside, a little of which has washed out onto the apron.  The “after” photo shows that the box culvert now appears to
be completely free of silt, but there is a large deposit of silt, sand, and rock in an area that was previously cleaned out.  Also note the darker, finer silt from the round culvert
in the north wing wall … this is some of the material I think may be coming from that project up Westgrove a little ways, on the other side of the street.

 

            Second pair, #4139 (before) and #4187 (after) show the channel looking upstream from a vantage point near the west headwall. The “before” picture shows a clear channel and
smoothly graded topsoil on the north slope of the ditch (but no grass!). The “after” photo shows significant erosion of the north slope, with much of the topsoil carried away leaving
a lot of small rocks exposed.  Some of the silt deposits in the middle of the channel are evident as well.

 

            The remaining photos are all “after”, showing the erosion, silting, and scouring in the channel.

 

            I like Frank’s idea of asking Olden to regrade the north side slope and install slope protection (wood fiber matting over seed) in lieu of a payment deduction for no flumes
or culvert extension, but I would also like to throw in removal of the silt in from the concrete apron area downstream of the east headwall.  I figure they owe us for disturbing the
slope (theirs to fix regardless) and for not constructing the flumes and culvert extension per the plans.  Removal of the silt from the concrete apron area is not really their responsibility,
since it all washed out from upstream (mostly from the box culvert) but they will have to have the equipment on site to dress the slope, it wouldn’t cost them much to remove that additional
silt … they already will need to remove silt from the new channel.  And the fiber matting I think is a fair trade for them not doing the flumes.  Item 19 in their bid / quote specifically
addresses warranty for defects in workmanship and/or materials, which I assert should apply here: the north side slope didn’t hold up through the first rainfall event.  Again, their
item 11 states that they will not be responsible for restoration or establishment of vegetation, but as previously noted, we can certainly argue that they disturbed the existing slope
far beyond what was necessary and unavoidable.  I think the main reason they built up and dressed out the north slope was to use all the silt and muck they dug out of the channel rather
than haul it away.  I’m ok with that, but only if they do something that will stabilize the slope.

 

            One big concern, I absolutely cannot afford to spend any more money on this project.  Olden needs to come back out and fix what they messed up and not charge me any more
to do it.

 

Happy Friday to All,

 

Joel