Bridge_Inspection_Report_5460-023P_Laurel_Culvert__1.pdf

CULVERT INSPECTION REPORT

LAUREL CREEK CULVERT #1

LAUREL CREEK ROAD OVER LAUREL CREEK

GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK

LS

STRUCTURE NO. 5460-023P

INSPECTION TYPE: ROUTINE

INSPECTION DATE: 5/17/16

EDReport prepared by:

Federal Highway Administration FLH Office of Bridges and Structures 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166 703-404-6201 https://bridge.flhd.fhwa.dot.gov http:https://bridge.flhd.fhwa.dot.gov

STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

LAUREL CREEK CULVERT #1 INSPECTION DATE: 5/17/16

STRUCTURE SUMMARY

CULVERT IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION

MAIN SPAN MATERIAL: ........ CONCRETE NO. OF BARRELS:

FOUNDATION: ....................... SILL

BARREL LENGTH: ............... 42 FT (13 M)

STRUCT. TOTAL LENGTH: ... 38.3 FT (11.7 M) SKEW ANGLE: ..................... 0 °

MAX. SPAN LENGTH: ............ 17.7 FT (5.4 M) 1948

YEAR BUILT:

PROJ./PLAN REF. NO: .......... 000000000000 / NONE

YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .. N/A

NPS ROAD CLASS: ............... 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD

STRUCTURE HISTORY: ....... 2002-ROADWAY AND APPROACHES RESURFACED.

LOCATION

GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK MILE POINT: ..................... 4.56 (KM PT 7.34)

STATE: .................................. TENNESSEE LOCATION: 3.4 MI TO NPS ROUTE 500

FACILITY CARRIED: ............. LAUREL CREEK ROAD

FEATURE INTERSECTED: ... LAUREL CREEK

STRUCTURE EVALUATION SUMMARY

This double barrel concrete culvert is in fair condition overall. The main problem is scour from the stream flowing against the north wall of the north barrel and migrating back along the north wingwalls; however, there is no exposed footing and the foundation appears to be stable. Other problems include minor cracking and spalling of the top slab undersides, accumulation of silt and debris in the barrels, missing headwall markers, and debris and vegetation at the ends of the barrels. In addition, consideration should be given to installing a traffic barrier system to help improve motorist safety.

Corrective measures should be taken as outlined in this report to help prevent the possible development of more serious or costly problems in the future.

INSPECTION TEAM: G. GOODLIN, H. SALAD

CONDITION ASSESSMENT:

GARY J. GOODLIN, FIELD TEAM LEADER 703-404-6253

REPORT REVIEW:

MARCUS MILLER, P.E., BRIDGE INSPECTION ENGINEER 703-404-6252

REPORT APPROVAL: DATE: 9/30/16

JORGOMAI CEESAY, PH.D., P.E., BIP SUPERVISORY ENGINEER 703-404-6244

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

226 PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT D

A (Critical) - Structure is closed, in imminent danger of collapse, or presents a critical safety hazard.

B (Major) - Structure exhibits severe deterioration, presents a safety hazard, or is designated a high priority due to age and/or condition.

C (Moderate) - Structure is deficient, functionally obsolete, or requires substantial repairs to prevent a serious deficiency or unsafe condition.

D (Minor) - Structure is generally in good condition. Preventative maintenance may be required.

E (Special) - Structure is under construction or reconstruction.

ITEM

NO.

MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS

(GENERALLY NOT FLHP ELIGIBLE)

QTY. UNIT COST

UNIT

ESTIMATE

COST

PRELIM.

61.4, 62.5 REMOVE DEBRIS AND VEGETATION FROM DOWNSTREAM END OF NORTH BARREL

AND UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF SOUTH BARREL. REMOVE SILT

AND DEBRIS FROM INSIDE BARRELS.

1 LS

222.7 INSTALL HEADWALL MARKERS. 2 EA

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL :

ITEM

REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION

QTY. UNIT

UNIT

COST ESTIMATES

PRELIM. COST

NO (TYPICALLY NEEDED WITHIN 5 YEARS)

REHAB. RECONSTR.

PRELIM. REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL :

PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE TOTAL* :

(*Includes typical contract costs for mobilization, traffic control, and design/construction engineering; but does not include detour bridges, work beyond the bridge limits, or work not listed above. Estimates are approximate and are for preliminary planning purposes only; they should not be used as a complete or final engineers estimate.)

REMARKS: Cost estimates assume that recommended actions will be combined with similar work being performed on other structures.

Consideration should be given to installing a traffic barrier system to help improve motorist safety.

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

CONDITION RATING CODES FOR ITEMS 58 - 62, 222, 223

N

NOT APPLICABLE

EXCELLENT CONDITION

VERY GOOD CONDITION - no problems noted.

GOOD CONDITION - some minor problems.

SATISFACTORY CONDITION - structural elements show some minor deterioration.

FAIR CONDITION - all primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling, or scour.

POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling, or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION - loss of section, deterioration, spalling, or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible.

Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

CRITICAL CONDITION - advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the structure until corrective action can be taken.

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Structure is closed to traffic but corrective action may return structure to light service.

FAILED CONDITION - out of service; beyond corrective action.

CONDITION RATING CODE EQUIVALENTS FOR SUB-ELEMENTS

G = GOOD (CODES 7 - 9) F = FAIR (CODES 5 - 6) P = POOR (CODES 0 - 4)

61. CHANNEL 6

F ALIGNMENT1.

F EROSION AND/OR SCOUR2.

F 3. CHANNEL PROTECTION

F4. WATERWAY OBSTRUCTIONS

N 5. OTHER

6. ADEQUACY OF OPENING SUFF

NORMAL VELOCITY LOW 7.

6 FT.AVG. CLEAR OPENING 8.

ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

9. STREAM BED COMPOSITION :

SILT, STONES

62. CUL VERT 6

PARAPETS AND/OR RAILINGS 9.

ADEQUACY OF COVER 8.

SETTLEMENT AND/OR DEFLECTION 7.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR 6.

5. DEBRIS AND/OR SILT

4. WINGWALLS

3. HEADWALLS

2. FOOTINGS

1. BARREL(S)

ROADWAY SURFACE10.

11. RIDEABILITY

12. OTHER

F

N

G

F

F

F

G

F

N

G

G

N

222. APPROACHES 8

OTHER9.

8. ALIGNMENT

SIGNS 7.

6. SETTLEMENT

EROSION5.

SURFACING4.

APPROACH GUARDRAIL3.

RELIEF JOINTS 2.

APPROACH SLABS1. N

N

N

G

G

G

N

G

N

223. RETAINING WALL N

6. OTHER

5. SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION

4. EROSION AND/OR SCOUR

3. FOUNDATION

2. WEEP HOLES

1. WALL

36. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY FEATURES

C. APPROACH GUARDRAILS

B. TRANSITIONS

A. BRIDGE RAILINGS

D. APPROACH GUARDRAIL ENDS

N

N

N

N

TRAFFIC SAFETY RATING CODES

0 - Does not meet standards or a safety feature is required and none is provided.

1 - Meets currently acceptable standards.

N - Not applicable or a safety feature is not required. 3 OF 15

61.1,2,3, 62.6 STREAM IS FLOWING AGAINST NORTH WALL OF NORTH BARREL,

CAUSING UP TO 2'-3" OF SCOUR ALONG FULL LENGTH OF NORTH

WALL OF NORTH BARREL, WITH NO EXPOSED FOOTING. CHANNEL

MIGRATES UP TO 4' ALONG NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST

WINGWALLS. ROCKS HAVE BEEN PLACED ALONG EMBANKMENT

ADJACENT TO NORTHWEST WINGWALL.

MODERATE EROSION OF NORTHEAST WINGWALL SLOPE.

61.4 MODERATE TO HEAVY VEGETATION GROWTH UPSTREAM OF SOUTH

BARREL. MODERATE DEBRIS DOWNSTREAM OF NORTH BARREL.

HEAVY DEBRIS ACCUMULATION AGAINST FALLEN TREE ACROSS

STREAM AT DOWNSTREAM END OF NORTH BARREL.

62.1 MODERATE EFFLORESCENCE AT JUNCTION OF RING STONES AND

TOP SLAB OF CULVERT. MINOR TRANSVERSE CRACKING WITH

EFFLORESCENCE ON UNDERSIDE OF SOUTH BARREL TOP SLAB.

THREE MINOR SPALLS WITH EXPOSED REBAR ON UNDERSIDE OF

TOP SLAB AT CENTER OF SOUTH BARREL, NEAR WEST END.

62.3 MODERATE EFFLORESCENCE ON MASONRY RING STONES AND

ELSEWHERE ON HEADWALLS. MINOR VEGETATION GROWTH ON

HEADWALLS. CRACKING WITH LOSS OF MORTAR ABOVE RING

STONES AT EAST SIDE SOUTH BARREL.

62.4 MODERATE VEGETATION GROWTH ON WINGWALLS. MINOR

DETERIORATION AND LOSS OF MORTAR JOINTS AT WINGWALLS.

62.5 HEAVY SILT AND DEBRIS ACCUMULATION THROUGHOUT SOUTH

BARREL AND ALONG SOUTH WALL OF NORTH BARREL (NO WATER

FLOW THROUGH SOUTH BARREL).

62.8 FILL HEIGHT OVER CULVERT IS BETWEEN TYPICALLY GREATER

THAN 2'-0".

STRUCTURE LOAD RATING STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

TRUCK TYPE

INVENTORY RATING (NORMAL TRAFFIC) OPERATING RATING (MAXIMUM LOAD)

TONS METRIC TONS TONS METRIC TONS

H 15 14 25 23

HS 27 24 45 41

TYPE 3 24 22 39 35

TYPE 3S2 35 32 59 54

TYPE 3-3 43 39 72 65

DESIGN LOADING: UNKNOWN (H15 ASSUMED - SEE REMARKS)

X CAPACITY MEETS OR EXCEEDS DESIGN LOAD

CAPACITY IS LESS THAN DESIGN LOAD

ORIGINAL LOAD RATING CALCULATION APPLICABLE

ORIGINAL LOAD RATING CALCULATION REVISED

DATE OF LOAD RATING CALCULATION:

LOAD RATING CONTROLLED BY:

REMARKS: DESIGN LOADING ASSUMPTION IS BASED ON STRUCTURE TYPE, LOCATION, AGE, AND CONDITION.

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

STRUCTURE IDENTIFICATION

(201) PARK: GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK

(202) STRUCTURE NAME: .......... LAUREL CREEK CULVERT #1

(203) STRUCTURE KIND: ............2 - CULVERT

(204) STRUCTURE NUMBER: ..... 5460-023P

(205) NPS REGION: .................... 4 - SOUTHEAST

(206) ROUTE CODE NUMBER: ... 15

(207) ROAD SECTION NO: ..........023P

(208) NPS ROAD CLASS: ............ 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD

(209) WITHIN NPS BNDRY?: ....... YES

(210) OPERATING UNIT: ............. N. DIST.

(211) PROJECT NO(S):

(212) DRAWING NUMBERS: ....... NONE

(21) MAINTAINED BY: ................. 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

(22) OWNER: ............................... 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

(1) STATE:

(2) STATE HWY. AGENCY DIST:

(3) COUNTY CODE:

(4) CITY/PLACE CODE:

(5) INVENTORY ROUTE:

(6) FEATURES INTERSECTED:

(7) FACILITY CARRIED:

(8) STATE STRUCTURE NO:

(9) LOCATION:

(10) INV. RTE. - MIN. VERT. CLR: ..

(11) MILE POINT:

(27) YEAR BUILT:

(106) YEAR RECONSTRUCTED:

(20) TOLL:

(37) HISTORICAL DESIGNATION: ..

474 - TENNESSEE (TN)

155 - SEVIER

164000150

LAUREL CREEK

LAUREL CREEK ROAD

5460023P0000000

3.4 MI TO NPS ROUTE 500

99.99 FT (99.99 M)

4.56 (KM PT 7.34)

N/A

3 - FREE ROAD

3 - POSSIBLY ELIGIBLE

STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION, FOUNDATION, AND DECK TYPE

(43A) MAIN STR. MATERIAL: ..

(43B) MAIN STR. TYPE:

(45) NO. OF MAIN SPANS:

(48) MAX. SPAN LENGTH:

(49) STRUCTURE LENGTH:

(216A) ABUTMENT #1 FDN:

(216B) ABUTMENT #2 FDN:

(217A) PREDOM. PIER FDN.: ..

(217B) SECOND. PIER FDN: ...

(107) DECK TYPE:

1 - CONCRETE

19 - CULVERT

17.7 FT (5.4 M)

38.3 FT (11.7 M)

1 - SILL

1 - SILL

1 - SILL

1 - SILL

N - NOT APPLICABLE

(44A) APPR. STR. MATERIAL: ........ 0 - OTHER

(44B) APPR. STR. TYPE: ................ 00 - OTHER

(46) NO. OF APPROACH SPANS: .. 0

(108) WEAR SURFACE/PROTECT SYSTEM:

A) TYPE WEARING SURFACE: .. N - NOT APPLICABLE

B) TYPE MEMBRANE: ................. N - NOT APPLICABLE

C) TYPE PROTECTION:

N - NOT APPLICABLE

YES(218) IS SALT USED?:

LOAD RATING AND POSTING

(31) DESIGN LOAD:

0 - UNKNOWN (41) LOAD RESTRICTION:

A - OPEN, NO RESTRICTION

(66) INVENTORY RATING: ...... 27.0 TONS (24.0 METRIC TONS) (70) BRIDGE POSTING: .............. 5 - NO POSTING REQUIRED

(64) OPERATING RATING: ...... 45.0 TONS (40.8 METRIC TONS)

INSPECTION DATES

(90) INSPECTION DATE: 5/16 (91) FREQ. OF INSP: 24 MONTHS (92 / 93) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION (CFI):

(219) ADD. STUDIES NEEDED: N - 0 - NONE (A) FRACTURE CRITICAL: ... NO

INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. : (220) SPECIAL STUDY TYPE: 0 - NONE

(B) UNDERWATER: .............. NO

(221) SPECIAL STUDY DATE:

INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. :

(C) SPECIAL INSPECTION: .. NO

INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. :

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

GEOMETRY, TRAFFIC, AND NAVIGATIONAL DATA

(16) LATITUDE: ............................. 35°37'05.80" (51) CURB TO CURB WIDTH: ........... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(17) LONGITUDE: ......................... 83°44'08.00" (52) DECK WIDTH: ............................ 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(19) DETOUR LENGTH: ............... 50 MI (80 KM) (32) APPR. ROADWAY WIDTH: ........ 38.0 FT (11.6 M)

(28A) LANES ON STRUCT: .......... 02 (213) APPR. PAVEMENT WIDTH: ..... 20.0 FT (6.1 M)

(28B) LANES UNDER STRUCT: ... 00 LEFT SHOULDER: .................. 10.0 FT (3.0 M)

(42A) SERVICE ON: ..................... 1 - HIGHWAY RIGHT SHOULDER: ................ 8.0 FT (2.4 M)

(42B) SERVICE UNDER: .............. 5 - WATERWAY (33) BRIDGE MEDIAN: ....................... 0 - NO MEDIAN

(29) AVG. DAILY TRAFFIC: .......... 3060 (34) SKEW ANGLE: ............................ 0 °

(30) YEAR OF ADT: ...................... 2010 (35) DECK FLARE?: ........................... NO

(114) FUTURE ADT: ..................... 3366 (47) TOTAL HORIZ. CLEARANCE: .... 39.2 FT (11.9 M)

(115) YEAR OF FUTURE ADT: ..... 2030 (50) SIDEWALKS:

(101) PARALLEL STRUCTURE: ... N - NONE LEFT : ...................................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(38) NAVIGATION CONTROL?: ... 0 RIGHT : ................................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(39) VERTICAL CLEARANCE: ...... 0.0 FT (0.0 M) (214) BRIDGE RAIL TYPE:

(40) HORIZ. CLEARANCE: ........... 0.0 FT (0.0 M) RAIL CONFIGURATION: ......... 0 - N/A

(111) ABUT. OR PIER PROT: ....... MATERIAL: .............................. 0 - N/A

DESIGN TYPE: ........................ 0 - N/A

LATERAL UNDERCLEARANCE:

(55) RIGHT: ....................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M) (215) BRIDGE RAIL HEIGHT: ............ 0.00 FT (0.00 M)

(56) LEFT: ......................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M) (53) MIN. VRT. CLEAR. OVER DECK: 99.99 FT (99.99 M)

(54) MIN. VRT. UNDERCLEARANCE: 0.00 FT (0.00 M)

CONDITION AND APPRAISAL DATA, PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, AND COST

(58) DECK: .................................N

(59) SUPERSTRUCTURE: .........N

(60) SUBSTRUCTURE: ..............N

(61) CHANNEL:

(62) CULVERT:

(222) APPROACHES:

(223) RETAINING WALL: ........... N

(36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEAT: ... NNNN

(75A) TYPE OF WORK:

(75B) WORK DONE BY:

(76) IMPROVEMENT LENGTH: ..

(67) STRUCTURAL EVALUATION:

(68) DECK GEOMETRY:

(69) UNDERCLEARANCES:

(71) WATERWAY ADEQUACY:

(72) APPROACH ALIGNMENT:

(113) SCOUR CRITICAL:

(225) PURPOSE OF IMPROVEMENT:

(226) PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT:

(227) MAINTENANCE COST:

(228) REHAB./RECONSTR. COST: ...

(229) CONSTRUCTION COST:

N

8 - Stable; scour above top of fo

1 - MAINTENANCE

D - MINOR

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(230) STRUCTURE HISTORY:

2002-ROADWAY AND APPROACHES RESURFACED.

(231) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:

(330) ADDITIONAL CONFIG. INFO.:

http:83�44'08.00 http:35�37'05.80

APPENDIX STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

PHOTOGRAPHS STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023P

FLOW

PHOTO #1 - LOOKING NORTH TOWARD GATLINBURG

PHOTO #2 - WEST (UPSTREAM) SIDE

PHOTO #3 - GENERAL TOPSIDE VIEW LOOKING NORTH

PHOTO #4 - GENERAL VIEW LOOKING EAST THROUGH SOUTH BARREL

PHOTO #5 - SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR

ON UNDERSIDE OF TOP SLAB AT CENTER OF

SOUTH BARREL, NEAR WEST END

PHOTO #6 - TYPICAL EFFLORESCENCE AT

JUNCTION OF RING STONES AND TOP SLAB

OF CULVERT, EAST END OF NORTH BARREL

SHOWN

PHOTO #7 - ADDITIONAL SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR ON

UNDERSIDE OF TOP SLAB AT CENTER OF SOUTH BARREL, NEAR WEST

END

PHOTO #8 - TYPICAL TRANSVERSE CRACKING WITH EFFLORESCENCE

ON UNDERSIDE OF SOUTH BARREL TOP SLAB

PHOTO #9 - CRACKING WITH LOSS OF MORTAR ABOVE RING STONES

ALONG EAST SIDE OF SOUTH BARREL

PHOTO #10 - CLOSE-UP VIEW OF LOSS OF MORTAR ABOVE RING

STONES AT EAST SIDE SOUTH BARREL ; NOTE ALSO MOSS AND

VEGETATION GROWTH

STRUCTURE NO. 5460 023PPHOTOGRAPHS

PHOTO #11 - SCOUR ALONG NORTH WALL OF

NORTH BARREL DUE TO STREAM FLOW

AGAINST WALL

PHOTO #12 - TYPICAL VEGETATION GROWTH

ON WINGWALLS, NORTHEAST WINGWALL

SHOWN; ALSO NOTE EROSION ALONG THIS

WINGWALL

PHOTO #13 - SILT AND DEBRIS ACCUMULATION IN SOUTH BARREL;

NOTE NO WATER FLOW THROUGH SOUTH BARREL

PHOTO #14 - LOOKING UPSTREAM THROUGH STRUCTURE, NORTH

BARREL (PHOTO FROM 5/10/14 INSPECTION REPORT)

PHOTO #15 - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM THROUGH STRUCTURE, NORTH

BARREL; NOTE DEBRIS DOWNSTREAM OF BARREL

PHOTO #16 - CRACKING WITH LOSS OF MORTAR ABOVE RING STONES

AT EAST SIDE SOUTH BARREL;