OP
v8dave
Platinum Member
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( How did you figure the 4' culvert and why would you need one if you are building a bridge?
The reason I ask is because I have a seasonal creek, also, that I needed to across. The contractor that needed to cross it had me send in a check with his intended use to the PA something or rather and they sent back the plans on how it needed constructed. We were going to fill it in with gravel to drive across and even though the culvert pipe upstream is only 2' diameter, I needed a 3' diameter pipe plus all kinds of landscaping to prevent bank errosion.
After my project was done I had him rip it back out. It was only in half-a**ed anyway and the culvert was smaller than what the state told him to use. I can ford it with no problem and prefer the look of the creek.
I don't understand why you would need the culvert if you are building a true bridge and not filling it in like we did. )</font>
The culvert would be an alternate to using a bridge. I would not use a pipe. I'd use a half culvert inverted and fill in to the sides and then rock face the outside edges. This would give the appearance of an arched rock bridge. This also keeps the stream bed intact.
My property is basically two slopes leading to the stream, which divides the property roughly in half. The slopes to the stream bed vary from 4:1 to 2:1. This (culvert) would work in only one of the two spots I intend to cross the stream. In this spot the two slopes down to the stream are near a 2:1 slope and the stream bed is only 1.5' wide, in addition the downhill run of the stream is about 4:1 at this point. A 4' span (at base) inverted culvert would more than contain the existing stream bed at its maximum flow.
The soil around here is not quite decomposed granite. Not much stream bed erosion over time. The soil supports steep slopes and has a high absorption rate when it rains. Not a lot of natural run-off from the soil. The "stream" flow source is the street drain up hill from me. It does run year around though because my neighbors overwater their lawns.
The reason I ask is because I have a seasonal creek, also, that I needed to across. The contractor that needed to cross it had me send in a check with his intended use to the PA something or rather and they sent back the plans on how it needed constructed. We were going to fill it in with gravel to drive across and even though the culvert pipe upstream is only 2' diameter, I needed a 3' diameter pipe plus all kinds of landscaping to prevent bank errosion.
After my project was done I had him rip it back out. It was only in half-a**ed anyway and the culvert was smaller than what the state told him to use. I can ford it with no problem and prefer the look of the creek.
I don't understand why you would need the culvert if you are building a true bridge and not filling it in like we did. )</font>
The culvert would be an alternate to using a bridge. I would not use a pipe. I'd use a half culvert inverted and fill in to the sides and then rock face the outside edges. This would give the appearance of an arched rock bridge. This also keeps the stream bed intact.
My property is basically two slopes leading to the stream, which divides the property roughly in half. The slopes to the stream bed vary from 4:1 to 2:1. This (culvert) would work in only one of the two spots I intend to cross the stream. In this spot the two slopes down to the stream are near a 2:1 slope and the stream bed is only 1.5' wide, in addition the downhill run of the stream is about 4:1 at this point. A 4' span (at base) inverted culvert would more than contain the existing stream bed at its maximum flow.
The soil around here is not quite decomposed granite. Not much stream bed erosion over time. The soil supports steep slopes and has a high absorption rate when it rains. Not a lot of natural run-off from the soil. The "stream" flow source is the street drain up hill from me. It does run year around though because my neighbors overwater their lawns.
