Report_Bridge Insp_6160-019P1694.pdf

BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT

WASTE WIER BRIDGE

FITZWATER ROAD OVER CANAL FLUME

CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK

LW

STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

INSPECTION TYPE: ROUTINE

INSPECTION DATE: 10/23/08

Report prepared by: ND

Federal Highway Administration Federal Lands Bridge Office Bridge Inspection and Management Program 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, Virginia 20166 http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/FLHBO/BIP

STRUCTURE SUMMARY STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

WASTE WIER BRIDGE INSPECTION DATE: 10/23/08

BRIDGE IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION

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

MAIN SPAN TYPE: ............... TEE BEAM NO. OF APPR. SPANS:

# OF BEAMS, MAIN SPAN: .. 6 STRUCT. TOTAL LENGTH: .. 76.0 FT (23.2 M)

DECK TYPE: ......................... CONCRETE CAST-IN-PLACE MAX. SPAN LENGTH: .......... 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

WEARING SURFACE: .......... BITUMINOUS DECK WIDTH: ...................... 29.0 FT (8.8 M)

ABUT. FOUNDATIONS: ........ PILE BENT CURB TO CURB WIDTH: ..... 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

PIER FOUNDATION(S): ........ PILE BENT YEAR BUILT:

ABUTMENT / PIER MAT'L: ... CONCRETE YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .. N/A

PROJ./PLAN REF. NO: ......... 000000000000 / NONE SKEW ANGLE: ..................... 0 °

NPS ROAD CLASS: .............. 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD FRACTURE CRITICAL: ........ NO

STRUCTURE HISTORY:

LOCATION

CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK MILE POINT: ..................... 0.00 (KM PT 0.00)

STATE: ................................. OHIO LOCATION: 100 FEET FROM CANAL ROAD.

ADJACENT TO STRUCTURE NO. 6160-018P. FACILITY CARRIED: ............ FITZWATER ROAD

FEATURE INTERSECTED: .. CANAL FLUME

STRUCTURE EVALUATION SUMMARY

This concrete tee beam bridge is in poor condition. The main problem with this bridge is the widespread moderate to severe deterioration of structural concrete, more specifically the tee beams (which includes the deck underside), bent cap ends, and the bent piles, with numerous exposed and rusted rebars exhibiting loss of section. In addition, the railing system is functionally obsolete and has moderate to severe deterioration.

Other problems include widespread moderate cracking of the wearing surface and deterioration of the approach pavement.

It should be noted that rehabilitation or replacement of this structure is currently being considered under Project No.

PRA-CUVA 18(1), 164(1). This structure is adjacent to Structure No. 6160-018P; for maximum economy and efficiency, both structures are scheduled to be replaced under the same contract.

INSPECTION TEAM: M.R. PUTALLAZ, L.M. MUELLER (CLARK NEXSEN)

CONDITION ASSESSMENT:

MICHAEL R. PUTALLAZ, FIELD TEAM LEADER

REPORT REVIEW:

SAMANTHA LUBKIN, FIELD TEAM LEADER 703-404-6256

REPORT APPROVAL: DATE: 2/23/09

MARCUS MILLER, P.E., LEAD STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 703-404-6252

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

226 PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT B

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

B (Major) - Structure is seriously deficient or presents a safety hazard, but can remain in service at reduced loads or with frequent inspections.

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.

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL :

ITEM

NO.

REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION

(TYPICALLY NEEDED WITHIN 5 YEARS)

QTY. UNIT UNIT

COST ESTIMATES

PRELIM. COST

REHAB. RECONSTR.

58, 59, 60 REPLACE STRUCTURE. 2,204 SF $270 $0 $600,000

PRELIM. REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL : $0 $600,000

COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL:

PRELIM. REHABILITATION TOTAL:

PRELIM. RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL:

TOTAL ITEMIZED COSTS:

$600,000 $0 $0

$600,000

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.)

$1,200,000

REMARKS: Replacement is recommended due to the high cost of rehabilitation and maintenance, functional obsolescence, insufficient load carrying capacity, scour susceptibility, and/or substandard geometry of the existing structure.

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

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

N NOT APPLICABLE 3 SERIOUS CONDITION - loss of section, deterioration, spalling, or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible.

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION - no problems noted. 2 CRITICAL CONDITION - advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present

7 GOOD CONDITION - some minor problems. or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the structure until corrective action can be taken.

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION - structural elements show some minor deterioration. 1 “IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal

5 FAIR CONDITION - all primary structural elements are sound but may have movement affecting structure stability. Structure is closed to traffic but minor section loss, cracking, spalling, or scour. corrective action may return structure to light service.

4 POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling, or scour. 0 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)

58. DECK 4

ABUTMENTS

ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

P1. DECK SLAB

N2. EXPANSION JOINTS

F3. WEARING SURFACE

F4. RIDEABILITY

P5. CURBS, SIDEWALKS, AND MEDIAN

P6. PARAPETS AND/OR RAILINGS

P7. DRAINS AND DRAINAGE

P8. UTILITIES

G9. DEFLECTION AND/OR VIBRATION

N10. OTHER

59. SUPERSTRUCTURE 3

N1. BEARING DEVICES

P2. GIRDERS OR BEAMS

N3. ARCH(ES) OR SLAB(S)

N4. FLOOR BEAMS AND STRINGERS

N5. TRUSSES

N6. DIAPHRAGMS AND BRACING

N7. PAINT

N8. FASCIA(E)

G9. DEFLECTION AND/OR VIBRATION

G10. ALIGNMENT

N11. OTHER

60. SUBSTRUCTURE 4

58, 59, 60 STRUCTURE NOT CURRENTLY OPEN TO THRU TRAFFIC DUE TO

ADJACENT BRIDGE CLOSURE. VEHICLES PARK ON STRUCTURE

ALTHOUGH "NO PARKING" SIGNS EXIST.

58.1 WIDESPREAD DELAMINATION AND SPALLING OF DECK UNDERSIDE

WITH EXPOSED AND RUSTED REBAR DUE TO INSUFFICIENT COVER;

WIDESPREAD MINOR CRACKING WITH EFFLORESCENCE AND

HONEYCOMBING ALSO PRESENT.

58.3,4 WIDESPREAD MODERATE CRACKING OF ASPHALT WEARING

SURFACE; ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO SEAL SOME CRACKS IN

THE PAST. SOME PATCHING ALSO PRESENT, CAUSING A

MODERATELY ROUGH RIDE.

58.5 MODERATE TO SEVERE DETERIORATION OF CURBS WITH

EXPOSED REBAR.

58.6 MODERATE CRACKING AND DETERIORATION OF SEVERAL

CONCRETE POSTS WITH EXPOSED REBAR; SEE ALSO 36.A.

3 POSTS AT EAST END OF NORTH RAILING HAVE BEEN REPAIRED

(ENCASED) IN THE PAST.

MINOR PEELING OF PAINT ON RAILS.

RAILING IS LEANING OUTWARD FROM BRIDGE UP TO 3" ON BOTH

SIDES.

58.7 PVC EXTENSIONS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO DECK DRAINS TO HELP

DIRECT RUNOFF AWAY FROM EXTERIOR BEAMS IN THE PAST;

DECK DRAINS ARE BLOCKED DUE TO ASPHALT WEARING

SURFACE.

58.8 UTILITY PIPE ALONG SOUTH EXTERIOR BEAM. SUPPORT

BRACKETS FOR UTILITY PIPE NOT ATTACHED TO BEAM #6 DUE TO

SPALLS; PIPE BROKEN AND ABANDONED.

58.9, 59.9 STRUCTURE IS NO LONGER OPEN TO THRU TRAFFIC.

1. BREASTWALLS OR COLUMNS N

2. PILE BENTS G

3. CAPS AND/OR BEARING SEATS G

4. BACKWALLS AND/OR BULKHEADS N

5. FOUNDATIONS N

6. WINGWALLS G

7. WEEP HOLES N

8. EXPANSION JOINTS N

9. EROSION AND/OR SCOUR G

10. SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION G

11. SLOPE PROTECTION N

12. OTHER (Vegetation) P

PIER(S)

WALLS AND/OR COLUMNS 13. N

PILE BENTS14. F

CAPS AND/OR BEARING SEATS15. P

FOUNDATIONS16. N

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR17. G

SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION18. G

OTHER 19. N

ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

STREAM BED COMPOSITION : 9.

AVERAGE CLEAR OPENING 8.

NORMAL VELOCITY 7.

ADEQUACY OF OPENING 6.

OTHER 5.

WATERWAY OBSTRUCTIONS 4.

CHANNEL PROTECTION3.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR2.

ALIGNMENT1.

61. CHANNEL 7

G G N G N

HIGH

SUFF

4 FT.

SILT, ROCK

222. APPROACHES 6

OTHER 9.

ALIGNMENT 8.

SIGNS7.

SETTLEMENT 6.

EROSION5.

SURFACING4.

APPROACH GUARDRAIL 3.

2. RELIEF JOINTS

APPROACH SLABS1. N

N P F G F N G N

223. RETAINING WALL N

OTHER 6.

SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION5.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR4.

FOUNDATION3.

WEEP HOLES2.

1. WALL

36. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY FEATURES

APPROACH GUARDRAIL ENDSD.

APPROACH GUARDRAILSC.

TRANSITIONSB.

BRIDGE RAILINGSA. 0

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.

59.2 CONCRETE TEE BEAM SUPERSTRUCTURE.

SEVERE DELAMINATION, SPALLING (UP TO 2" DEEP ON BOTTOM

AND 4" DEEP ON SIDES), AND SCALING OF EXTERIOR BEAMS IN ALL

SPANS AND BEAMS #4 AND #5 IN EAST SPAN; NUMEROUS EXPOSED

AND RUSTED REBARS WITH 25% LOSS OF SECTION TYPICAL OF

MAIN REINFORCING. STIRRUPS ARE ALSO BROKEN; THREE AT

BEAM #6 IN CENTER SPAN AND TWO AT BEAM #1 IN WEST SPAN.

MODERATE CRACKING AND SPALLING OF OTHER BEAMS WITH

SOME EXPOSED REBAR AND EFFLORESCENCE. MODERATE

SCALING OF BEAM BOTTOM FACES IN CENTER SPAN.

EAST CHANNEL BANK ON SOUTH SIDE OF STRUCTURE IS FILLED

AGAINST BEAM #6.

60.3 MINOR VERTICAL CRACKS EXTENDING FROM BOTTOM OF BEAMS.

BOTTOM OF WEST ABUTMENT BENT CAP EXPOSED UP TO 8"

VERTICAL X FULL LENGTH X 27" UNDER WITH PILES EXPOSED.

60.6 MINOR CRACKING OF NORTHEAST WINGWALL.

60.12 HEAVY VEGETATION GROWTH AROUND ENDS OF STRUCTURE.

60.14 MINOR VERTICAL CRACKING OF INTERIOR PILES AND MODERATE

VERTICAL CRACKING OF EXTERIOR PILES WITH DELAMINATION,

RUST STAINING, AND EFFLORESCENCE. PILE #2, #7, AND #9 OF

EAST BENT HAVE CONDITION SIMILAR TO EXTERIOR PILES.

SEVERE DETERIORATION OF PILE #1 OF EAST BENT. MODERATE

SPALLING OF PILE #2 OF EAST BENT.

MODERATE SCALING IN WATER ZONE AT EAST BENT.

60.15 SEVERE SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR OF BENT CAP ENDS.

MINOR VERTICAL CRACK BETWEEN BEAMS #2 AND #3 AT EAST

BENT. MINOR HORIZONTAL CRACK BETWEEN PILES #5 AND #6 ON

WEST SIDE OF EAST BENT.

61.2 MINOR SCOUR UPSTREAM OF WEST BENT.

222.3 SEVERE CRACK IN RAIL POST ON NORTH SIDE OF WEST

APPROACH.

222.4,6 MINOR TO MODERATE CRACKING AND SPALLING OF CONCRETE

APPROACH PAVEMENT AT EAST END.

MODERATE CRACKING OF ASPHALT APPROACH PAVEMENT AT

WEST END; PAVEMENT SETTLED UP TO 2" AT BACK OF BACKWALL.

36.A BRIDGE RAILING IS FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE AND NOT CAPABLE

OF SAFELY REDIRECTING ERRANT VEHICLES.

ADDITIONAL ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

36.B,C,D APPROACH RAILS ARE NOT ATTACHED TO BRIDGE RAIL.

SOUTHWEST APPROACH RAIL MISSING.

APPROACH RAILING IS FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE AND NOT CAPABLE OF SAFELY REDIRECTING ERRANT

VEHICLES.

STRUCTURE LOAD RATING STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

TRUCK TYPE

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

TONS METRIC TONS TONS METRIC TONS

H 15 14 20 18

HS 25 23 34 31

TYPE 3 20 18 28 25

TYPE 3S2 31 28 42 38

TYPE 3-3 40 36 54 49

DESIGN LOADING: OTHER OR UNKNOWN

CAPACITY MEETS OR EXCEEDS DESIGN LOAD

X 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: H20 EQUIVALENT DESIGN LOADING IS ASSUMED; ASSUMPTION IS BASED ON TYPE, LOCATION, AGE, AND

CONDITION OF STRUCTURE. LOAD CAPACITY REDUCED BY DETERIORATION OF CONCRETE

SUPERSTRUCTURE.

D

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

STRUCTURE IDENTIFICATION

(201) PARK: CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK (1) STATE: ....................................... 395 - OHIO (OH)

(202) STRUCTURE NAME: .......... WASTE WIER BRIDGE (2) STATE HWY. AGENCY DIST:

(203) STRUCTURE KIND: ............ 1 - BRIDGE (3) COUNTY CODE: ........................ 153 - SUMMIT

(204) STRUCTURE NUMBER: ..... 6160-019P (4) CITY/PLACE CODE:

(205) NPS REGION: .................... 5 - MIDWEST (5) INVENTORY ROUTE:

(206) ROUTE CODE NUMBER: ... 0 (6) FEATURES INTERSECTED:....... CANAL FLUME

(207) ROAD SECTION NO: .......... 019P (7) FACILITY CARRIED: .................. FITZWATER ROAD

(208) NPS ROAD CLASS: ............ 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD (8) STATE STRUCTURE NO: .......... 6160019P0000000

(209) WITHIN NPS BNDRY?: ....... YES (9) LOCATION: ................................ 100 FEET FROM CANAL ROA

(210) OPERATING UNIT: ............. PARK (10) INV. RTE. - MIN. VERT. CLR: .. 99.99 FT (99.99 M)

(211) PROJECT NO(S): ................ 000000000000 (11) MILE POINT: ............................. 0.00 (KM PT 0.00)

(212) DRAWING NUMBERS: ....... NONE (27) YEAR BUILT:

(21) MAINTAINED BY: ................. 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (106) YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .... N/A

(22) OWNER: ............................... 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (20) TOLL: ........................................ 3 - FREE ROAD

(37) HISTORICAL DESIGNATION: .. 5 - NOT 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

04 - TEE BEAM

26.0 FT (7.9 M)

76.0 FT (23.2 M)

4 - PILE BENT

4 - PILE BENT

4 - PILE BENT

4 - PILE BENT

1 - CONCRETE CAST-IN-PLACE

(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: .. 6 - BITUMINOUS

B) TYPE MEMBRANE: ................. 0 - NONE

C) TYPE PROTECTION: .............. 0 - NONE

(218) IS SALT USED?: ..................... YES

LOAD RATING AND POSTING

(31) DESIGN LOAD: ................. 0 - OTHER OR UNKNOWN (41) LOAD RESTRICTION: ......... R - POSTED (OTHER)

(66) INVENTORY RATING: ...... 25.0 TONS (23.0 METRIC TONS) (70) BRIDGE POSTING: .............. 4 - POSTING REQUIRED

(64) OPERATING RATING: ...... 34.0 TONS (31.0 METRIC TONS)

INSPECTION DATES

(90) INSPECTION DATE: 10/08 (91) FREQ. OF INSP: 24 MONTHS (92 / 93) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION (CFI):

(219) ADD. STUDIES NEEDED: (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. 6160-019P

GEOMETRY, TRAFFIC, AND NAVIGATIONAL DATA

(16) LATITUDE: ............................. 41°21'25.30" (51) CURB TO CURB WIDTH: ........... 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

(17) LONGITUDE: ......................... 81°35'49.20" (52) DECK WIDTH: ............................ 29.0 FT (8.8 M)

(19) DETOUR LENGTH: ............... 0 MI (0 KM) (32) APPR. ROADWAY WIDTH: ........ 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

(28A) LANES ON STRUCT: .......... 02 (213) APPR. PAVEMENT WIDTH: ..... 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

(28B) LANES UNDER STRUCT: ... 00 LEFT SHOULDER: .................. 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(42A) SERVICE ON: ..................... 1 - HIGHWAY RIGHT SHOULDER: ................ 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

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

(29) AVG. DAILY TRAFFIC: .......... 40 (34) SKEW ANGLE: ............................ 0 °

(30) YEAR OF ADT: ...................... 2002 (35) DECK FLARE?: ........................... NO

(114) FUTURE ADT: ..................... 50 (47) TOTAL HORIZ. CLEARANCE: .... 26.0 FT (7.9 M)

(115) YEAR OF FUTURE ADT: ..... 2022 (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: ......... 3 - PARAPET ONLY

(111) ABUT. OR PIER PROT: ....... MATERIAL: .............................. 1 - CONCRETE

DESIGN TYPE: ........................ 1 - CONTINUOUS RAIL

LATERAL UNDERCLEARANCE:

(55) RIGHT: ....................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M) (215) BRIDGE RAIL HEIGHT: ............ 1.00 FT (0.30 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:

(59) SUPERSTRUCTURE:

(60) SUBSTRUCTURE:

(61) CHANNEL:

(62) CULVERT: ........................... N

(222) APPROACHES:

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

(224) EST. REMAINING LIFE: .... 8 YEARS

(36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEAT: ... 0000

(75A) TYPE OF WORK: .............. 31 - REPLACE

(75B) WORK DONE BY: ............. 1 - CONTRACT

(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. Calculated scour abov

3 - CONSTRUCTION

B - MAJOR

$0

$0

$600,000

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(230) STRUCTURE HISTORY:

(231) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:

(330) ADDITIONAL CONFIG. INFO.:

APPENDIX STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

PHOTOGRAPHS STRUCTURE NO. 6160-019P

PHOTO #1 - LOOKING EAST

FLOW

PHOTO #2 - SOUTH (UPSTREAM) SIDE

PHOTO #3 - GENERAL TOPSIDE VIEW LOOKING WEST

PHOTO #4 - TYPICAL "NO PARKING" SIGN DISPLAYED ON RAIL POST;

NORTH RAIL POST AT WEST END SHOWN

PHOTO #5 - TYPICAL CRACKING OF ASPHALT

WEARING SURFACE; EAST SPAN SHOWN

PHOTO #6 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

CURB WITH EXPOSED REBAR; SOUTH SIDE IN

CENTER SPAN SHOWN

PHOTO #7 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF RAIL

POSTS WITH EXPOSED REBAR; SOUTH SIDE

IN CENTER SPAN SHOWN

PHOTO #8 - TYPICAL PEELING OF PAINT ON

RAILS AND DETERIORATION OF RAIL POSTS;

NORTH SIDE OVER EAST PIER SHOWN

PHOTO #9 - TYPICAL RAILING LEANING

OUTWARD FROM BRIDGE; NORTH SIDE OVER

EAST PIER SHOWN

PHOTO #10 - FALLEN AND ABANDONED

UTILITY ALONG SOUTH SIDE OF STRUCTURE

PHOTO #11 - TYPICAL CRACKING AND

SPALLING OF EAST APPROACH PAVEMENT

PHOTO #12 - TYPICAL CRACKING OF WEST

APPROACH PAVEMENT

PHOTO #13 - SETTLEMENT OF WEST APPROACH PAVEMENT

PHOTO #14 - GENERAL UNDERSIDE VIEW LOOKING EAST, CENTER

SPAN

PHOTO #15 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

DECK UNDERSIDE WITH EXPOSED AND

RUSTED REBAR; BAY #3 IN CENTER SPAN

SHOWN

PHOTO #16 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

INTERIOR BEAMS; BEAM #5 IN CENTER SPAN

SHOWN

PHOTO #17 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF EXTERIOR BEAMS;

EXTERIOR SIDE OF BEAM #1 IN WEST AND CENTER SPANS SHOWN

PHOTO #18 - CLOSE-UP OF PREVIOUS PHOTO IN CENTER SPAN

PHOTO #19 - SPALLING OF BEAM #1 IN WEST

SPAN WITH TWO BROKEN STIRRUPS

PHOTO #20 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

EXTERIOR BEAMS; EXTERIOR SIDE OF BEAM

#6 IN CENTER SPAN SHOWN

PHOTO #21 - DETERIORATION OF BEAM #4 IN

EAST SPAN

PHOTO #22 - DETERIORATION OF BEAM #5 IN

EAST SPAN

PHOTO #23 - GENERAL VIEW OF WEST ABUTMENT BENT

PHOTO #24 - EXPOSURE OF PILES AT WEST ABUTMENT BENT

PHOTO #25 - TYPICAL VERTICAL CRACKING

OF ABUTMENT BENT CAPS FROM BOTTOM OF

BEAMS; WEST ABUTMENT BETWEEN BEAMS

#2 AND #3 SHOWN

PHOTO #26 - GENERAL VIEW OF EAST PIER

BENT, WEST FACE

PHOTO #27 - TYPICAL SPALLING OF END OF

PIER BENT CAP; SOUTH END OF WEST BENT

SHOWN

PHOTO #28 - TYPICAL SPALLING OF END OF

PIER BENT CAP; NORTH END OF WEST BENT

PHOTO #29 - TYPICAL CRACKING AND

DETERIORATION OF EXTERIOR PILES; NORTH

PILE AT EAST PIER SHOWN

PHOTO #30 - DETERIORATION OF PILES #1

AND #2 OF EAST PIER BENT

PHOTO #31 - UPSTREAM CHANNEL

PHOTO #32 - DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL