Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the MEC Crossing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Improvements committee recommends armored culverts for MEC crossing, punts final cost review to board
Summary
After reviewing options including a clear‑span bridge, the committee recommended replacing the failed MEC crossing culverts with corrugated metal pipe (CMP) protected by riprap and bank armoring, and asked staff to return to the full board with refined cost and survey data.
The Rancho Murrieta Improvements Committee on Jan. 6 heard a consultant review of six options for the MEC crossing and recommended that the district replace the failing culverts with armored corrugated metal pipe and protective riprap rather than simply reinstating the existing configuration.
Consultant Joe of Joe and Associates summarized modeling that showed the existing culverts would not convey a 100‑year design event and said simply putting the same arrangement back would likely leave the district repairing the crossing repeatedly. "Something that's that could convey more water would be an improvement," Joe said, while noting a clear‑span bridge would be the best hydraulic option but far more expensive.
Directors and stakeholders pressed for more survey and environmental work before construction. Joe told the committee the design will need permitting — including involvement from fish and wildlife — and a topographic and channel survey to determine what can fit through the crossing without increasing upstream backwater. "We definitely need a little more detail, and we have a survey quote to go out and survey the channel upstream and downstream and at the location to see what we can fit in there to get more water through," Joe said.
A committee member representing users who cross the structure said they supported the engineer's recommendation, and another member formalized that support into a recommendation to the full board to replace the culverts with CMP and include sufficient riprap to protect the structure. Staff said the committee's recommendation will be included on the consent calendar for the full board unless members request additional detail or cost breakdowns.
Next steps: staff will obtain a survey, refine design and cost estimates, clarify permitting steps with fish and wildlife if required, and return to the committee and the full board with a recommended procurement path.
