https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/1...tch-collapses/
Printable View
Well, I want to laugh or make jokes, but what an unfortunate mess! Didn't they use engineered soil? Did the clay just slip out between the layers? Hope that private, non-US, company that owns that road (Plenary Group) is warming up their check books and getting all hands on deck.
On another note, is that really the best/only picture the Denver Post could come up with?
Local news showed that, bummer for folks that have to go around that to get to work this week. Might be fixed by Wednesday the bit said.
I'm not going to try to drive it any time soon. Driving to Broomfield is bad enough as it is.
Taking I-25 and then Highway 7 into Boulder isn't terrible....when 36 is available.
I stand by my previous statement.
Going across the city sucks no matter what. I would rather drive to Fort Collins for work than the Tech Center, and it's twice the distance!Quote:
Originally Posted by izzy
I did S. Littleton to ft fun for 2 years, 5 days a week, then back home. Doesn't matter where you have to drive the state is never going to widen the roads, or get mass transit up before the next tsunami over takes it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
I'm sure it was undercompacted soil built hastily. This was built at a time CDOT was making a change to address this issue. It may have been built with the older requirement. I am sure the soils engineers in my office have been busy all weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
At 1sr when I heard cracked concrete, I thought the heat and moisture caused the concrete to thermally expand and buckle.
Similar but smaller soil failure have occurred at I25 & I225 tunnel and on I25 between Colorado and University. COSMIX in Colorado Springs is another example of failed soil.
All these projects were build under Design-Build contracts in haste. CDOT has little control and say in QA. QA failures can still be accepted through "value engineering" buy the designer, who is also the builder. Ultimate Jerry rigging boondoggle. Cant wait to see what C470 and I70 bring after completion.
But I thought some here sabotaged the road to keep crazy in boulder.
Eh. Any Jeep or Subaru should easily handle a road like that. No real need to close it.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...6ceab84972.jpg
It continues to get worse. They haven't even begun to repair it.
Who pays? Drivers/Taxpayers will continue to pay. I doubt the contractor will be held accountable.
what a mess. The commuters that use that daily will also be in a mess of traffic when they all detour the same way. That is going to take some time to fix, even with crews working 24/7.
The roadway continues to slide. The retaining wall that is supposed to contain the soil under the roadway is bowing dangerously and some of the concrete slabs have fallen off. Won't surprise me if that retaining wall blows out.
How long before the westbound side starts to fail?
They're reporting that it's OK and hasn't moved. If the retaining wall does fail in a significant way, who knows if that will be a problem as it becomes unsupported?
I would also be concerned about the location where the retaining wall is blowing out as it's also a support structure for the overpass over the railroad tracks.
A little history on that area:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
In 1985 two trains collided at a railroad underpass right near there and caught fire, destroying the bridge. The bridge had to be rebuilt and was done so very hastily.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...pass/427366033
When US36 was widened in the mid 90's I believe quite a bit of fill was brought in from the dredging of Hidden Lake and Sloans lake, I know for a fact this soil was used on I-76 which explains why it is a roller coaster ride from Federal east.
Quality fill material.
Groundwater in the area of the recent failure is also present.
I commute from centennial to Broomfield, not today though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
It was reported it is falling 1" per hour.
I heard this morning that the fact that it's still moving is delaying any action on remediation. It would almost be better if it just collapsed, because they could then safely fix it. As it is, getting close to the bowing retaining wall is too dangerous.
[ROFL2] (only because no one was hurt)
If all the roads into Boulder would fail maybe we could right this ship?
FIM-92
Sorted.
I like yer style.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickNorris
At 1st it was thought a shear slope failure was occurring at the toe. You may gave noticed crew hauling in dirt and placing it next to the wall. This was extra dead weight to keep the toe from pivoting.
But it's a not a shear slope failure alone. The wall was sinking, and the initial fix plan would not have worked. The soil is overloaded and collapsing from the extra height of the new wall.
This will be a long fix. Complete reconstruction. They are not worried about blame now, so some lawyers will be getting rich.
The toll company will loose 2-3 months of tolls, and reconstruction costs will need to be allocated to the responsible party. The toll company may be 100% responsible.
Fun, fun.
That's what boulder gets for giving us polis
Thanks for the details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
I hope the responsible party and the congresscritter(s) they bought go down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
See my earlier post regarding groundwater.
When 36 was just 2 lanes of bituminous pavement in each direction CDOT Maintenance battled pavement issues in that area due to groundwater.
But the Engineers never listen to those stupid old Maintenance guys...they dont know nothin...
Funny thing, that lake on the west side of this issue was always a year round lake. It seemed to me that after CDork came in with all the new construction in 2012ish it went to mostly dry except in the spring.
Sorry, duplicate post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
Have friends very close to the area on the west side of 36 and south that have cattails growing in one corner of the property always been very wet
This is a pretty monumental failure of a major roadway system.
The whole 270-36 diagonal seems to have problems.
-John
I'm reading conflicting info on this but seem to recall Hick being really resistant to sharing the details of this deal.
CDOT may have to reimburse tolls during emergency closure of US 36
https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...6-22fbe26ae3df
Katz INAL AFAIK. The initial closure might be LE mandated (safety) but not the days/weeks/months of rebuilding. This could all be left up to the lawyers (settlement) and I have no idea the scale of this (thousand, millions, ???).Quote:
Plenary Roads Denver, the private company that paid for, designed and constructed half of U.S. 36, currently is under a 50-year contract with the state to collect tolls in an express lane that runs the entire length of highway. The company is also responsible for maintenance and rehabilitation of the roadway, under that contract.
[snip]
Under its contract with CDOT, Plenary can seek reimbursement of average toll revenue if the toll lanes have been temporarily suspended for more than 12 hours. CDOT couldn’t provide an estimate of an average day’s revenue in tolls by the time this article was published.
The company’s spokesman said it was too early to say whether Plenary would seek that sort of reimbursement.
CDOT’s liability for lost toll revenue may all be a semantics issue.
“It appears how US 36 is closed matters,” said Danny Katz, state director of Colorado Public Research Interest Group, COPIRG, who analyzed the initial contract released by CDOT in 2014.
Katz said the contract doesn’t require reimbursement if the lanes are “temporarily ordered to be closed” by law enforcement, a semantic difference that will likely be key as both sides decide financial responsibility for the problem.
For the state to privatize any portion of a roadway and accept any liability when tolls can't be collected is short bus stupid. Who else gets this kind of deal?
I also read that CDOT is footing the bill for the repair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip
That doesn't seem that uncommon for contracts. I'd don't think any of my contracts have that kind of wording, but they might. I'd have to check.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip
I'm saying privatized.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
If the road was not privatized, then this would be fine. If I'm a state vendor and you prevent me from doing my job, I'm still getting paid. But if I have a stake in the thing generating the revenue, then I need to make sure I get paid.
I don't understand were you're going. Of course privatized. If you invest in something, your investment partners need to have the responsibility of keeping your investment up and running. I'm looking at this through a pretty narrow focus of what I do, but I can see the parallels. I wish I had more experience with larger privatization projects in which to discuss this, but it doesn't seem unusual to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip
I'll restate...Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Why should the state have any liability for lost toll revenue to the private company?Quote:
The company is also responsible for maintenance and rehabilitation of the roadway, under that contract.
If the state took an action that caused lost revenue, I get it.
If the roadway maintenance is the responsibility of the state, I get it. (still a shitty deal for taxpayers, but I get it)
The taxpayer is assuming the liability of lost revenue for an asset that is the responsibility of the company.
Okay, I'm on board. I'm in agreement that I don't understand where the state is liable here, especially since the private company was involved in the construction to boot.
It's called corruption. Private company gets a sweet deal for 50 years, the terms of which are effectively secret, to collect tolls on a road that was built by a "public-private partnership". They are nominally responsible for maintenance, but when something goes wrong, those unpublished contract provisions kick in to ensure they get their money, regardless of their responsibility to rectify the fault. Essentially, they deny responsibility for the repair, as it's not "maintenance", and continue to profit at the taxpayer's expense. Not to mention, the Boulder Turnpike was already paid for once by tolls, and the tollbooths removed, one of very few cases where that actually happened.
The ONLY case where that has ever happened in the US, from what I was told.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
It makes no sense. It's like the company needed to be guaranteed revenue no matter what, even for factors under their control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
I'm starting to get more interested in who Plenary Group is. They have a "Plenary Roads Denver" and a website...Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
https://plenaryroadsdenver.com/
Only contacts are a service center and PR guy. No office in Denver.
SoS has two entities in good standing. Both filed through a local attorney in Denver with principal office listed in LA (CA). So they appear to have no business presence in CO but didn't opt to file as a foreign entity.
The Group website has their management team/leadership...
https://plenarygroup.com/
With a page on 36...
https://plenarygroup.com/projects/no...-express-lanes
It sounds like they come in with capital to displace the mismanaged state funds to complete the project and are then given a stake in the revenue. All of which should be infuriating to taxpayers who aren't relieved of any financial burden and apparently have to guarantee the company's RoI.Quote:
The operating and maintenance contract is for 50 years which commenced following construction completion in early 2016. The partnership between Plenary Group and CDOT will see the delivery of an efficient, well-maintained multimodal transportation corridor 20 years sooner than originally planned.
Not surprising Hick didn't want to talk about this. And I wonder about the ties to Sr. leadership.
Just imagine what a dysfunctional and corrupt government would do...and you're probably closer to reality than you know.