March-April 2010

The Cost-Effective Retaining Wall

Strength and good looks can be affordable.

Article Tools

Create a Link to this Article

Photo: SRW Products

By Carol Brzozowski

Comments

These days, the function of a retaining wall isn’t merely to hold back soil or rock. They have come to serve a dual function of becoming aesthetically pleasing and blending into the environment while providing the necessary strength to do a proper job.

Another benefit is that engineers and project managers are finding more cost-effective ways of building retaining walls.

Four years ago at Hall Winery in St. Helena, CA, winery owners sought to cut a 2-acre aboveground detention pond in half to gain a building site for constructing a processing plant.

John Bowman Construction, a general contracting company in Napa, CA, had priced out a poured-in-place straight concrete wall of approximately 300 feet. The company began the job, cutting the 2-acre pond in half and, in an area that wasn’t cut, taking out 6 feet and recompacting it; this had been the bottom of the old pond.

Photo: SRW Products
A stable base was created using SRW
Products’ SS5 soil-stabilization fabric
and SRW geogrid.

After finishing that portion of the job, company owner John Bowman thought that the straight concrete wall would not be aesthetically pleasing.

“I got the owner’s representative to look at a Keystone wall,” says Bowman. Keystone manufactures a concrete segmental block retaining wall system that includes a high-strength fiberglass pin system. 

Bowman says the choice gave the architect the freedom to be creative, and the design then focused on a curved wall instead of a straight, poured-in-place concrete wall with a 12-foot footing.

“Because you offset each block by an inch, you don’t get a straight, ugly wall,” Bowman says. “It’s all offset, so it looks pretty.”

John Bowman Construction drained for pressure using the same type of drainage that would have been used for a poured-in-place wall.

Bowman was pleased with the onsite clay material, as it meant he could sink the geogrid into clay instead of another type of material.

In addition to aesthetics, Bowman likes the wall because his company didn’t have to put down a 12-foot footing to hold a 12-foot concrete wall. The construction time was shorter as well, he notes.

Advertisement

Plus, there was a money savings. The footing would have cost about $150,000.

Bowman says he had never worked with Keystone walls previously, but after doing so has added it to his menu of retaining wall options. He’s now using it in a subdivision project. Next Page >

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

Be the first to tell us what you think!

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Erosion Control E-mail Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Erosion Control e-mail newsletter!