Bridge_Inspection_Rpt_STR_5140-053P.pdf

CULVERT INSPECTION REPORT

LAUREL FORK CULVERT

BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY OVER LAUREL FORK

BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY

LN

STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

INSPECTION TYPE: ROUTINE

INSPECTION DATE: 10/27/14

Report prepared by: ED

MILE POINT: 173.95

Federal Highway Administration KILOMETER POINT: 279.86 Federal Lands Bridge Office Bridge Inspection and Management Program 21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, Virginia 20166 https://bridge.flhd.fhwa.dot.gov

STRUCTURE SUMMARY STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

LAUREL FORK CULVERT INSPECTION DATE: 10/27/14

CULVERT IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION

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

FOUNDATION: ....................... SPREAD FTG ON BEARING MAT'L BARREL LENGTH: ............... 63 FT (19 M)

STRUCT. TOTAL LENGTH: ... 24.3 FT (7.4 M) SKEW ANGLE: ..................... 40 °

MAX. SPAN LENGTH: ............ 10.2 FT (3.1 M) YEAR BUILT:

PROJ./PLAN REF. NO: .......... 1T2 / 1020 YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .. N/A

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

STRUCTURE HISTORY: ....... 1982-JOINT REPAIR.

LOCATION

BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY MILE POINT: ..................... 173.95 (KM PT 279.86)

STATE: .................................. VIRGINIA LOCATION: 1.4 MILES TO VA ROUTE 603

FACILITY CARRIED: ............. BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY

FEATURE INTERSECTED: ... LAUREL FORK

STRUCTURE EVALUATION SUMMARY

This two barrel concrete box culvert is in fair condition overall. Problems include several headwall and wingwall stones shifted outward with deterioration of the masonry mortar joints, exposed rebar on the slab underside of both barrels, sediment in both barrels, and vegetation growth in the channel.

Repairs should be made as outlined in this report to prevent the possible development of more serious or costly problems in the future. In addition, consideration should be given to installing a guardrail system over the structure to help improve motorist safety.

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

CONDITION ASSESSMENT:

MICHAEL R. PUTALLAZ, P.E., FIELD TEAM LEADER

REPORT REVIEW :

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

REPORT APPROVAL: DATE: 3/31/15

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

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

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.

C226 PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT

ITEM

NO.

MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS

(GENERALLY NOT FLHP ELIGIBLE)

QTY. UNIT COST

UNIT

ESTIMATE

COST

PRELIM.

62.3,4 CLEAN AND REPOINT HEADWALL AND WINGWALL MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS,

WHILE RESETTING STONES AS NECESSARY.

204 LF

61.4, 62.5 REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM SOUTH BARREL AND VEGETATION GROWTH FROM

CHANNEL.

1 LS

62.1 PATCH VOIDS IN MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS BETWEEN STONE AND CONCRETE

PORTION OF END WALLS AT BARREL ENDS.

10 LF

62.1 CLEAN EXPOSED REBAR ON SLAB UNDERSIDE AND COAT WITH APPROVED

SEALANT.

6 SF

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL :

ITEM

NO.

REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION

(TYPICALLY NEEDED WITHIN 5 YEARS)

QTY. UNIT

UNIT

COST ESTIMATES

PRELIM. COST

REHAB. RECONSTR.

62.9, 222.3 INSTALL GUARDRAIL SYSTEM OVER STRUCTURE AND AT

APPROACHES.

1 LS $0

PRELIM. REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL : $0

COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL:

PRELIM. REHABILITATION TOTAL:

PRELIM. RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL: ...

TOTAL ITEMIZED COSTS:

$0

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.

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

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)

STREAM BED COMPOSITION :9.

AVG. CLEAR OPENING 8.

NORMAL VELOCITY 7.

ADEQUACY OF OPENING 6.

OTHER 5.

WATERWAY OBSTRUCTIONS 4.

CHANNEL PROTECTION 3.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR 2.

ALIGNMENT 1.

61. CHANNEL 7

G G G F

5 FT.

LOW

SUFF

N

ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

62. CULVERT 6

PARAPETS AND/OR RAILINGS 9.

ADEQUACY OF COVER 8.

SETTLEMENT AND/OR DEFLECTION 7.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR 6.

DEBRIS AND/OR SILT 5.

WINGWALLS 4.

HEADWALLS 3.

FOOTINGS 2.

BARREL(S)1.

ROADWAY SURFACE 10.

RIDEABILITY 11.

OTHER 12.

F N F F F G G G N G G N

222. APPROACHES 7

OTHER 9.

ALIGNMENT 8.

SIGNS 7.

SETTLEMENT 6.

EROSION 5.

SURFACING 4.

APPROACH GUARDRAIL 3.

RELIEF JOINTS 2.

1. APPROACH SLABS N

N N G G G G G N

223. RETAINING WALL N

OTHER 6.

SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION 5.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR 4.

FOUNDATION 3.

WEEP HOLES 2.

1. WALL

36. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY FEATURES

APPROACH GUARDRAILS C.

TRANSITIONS B.

BRIDGE RAILINGSA.

APPROACH GUARDRAIL ENDS D.

STONES, SAND

61.2 MINOR EROSION OF DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL BANKS.

61.4, 62.5 NO FLOW IN SOUTH BARREL DUE TO SEDIMENT (1' DEEP) WITH

HEAVY VEGETATION GROWTH AT BOTH ENDS OF BOTH BARRELS.

MINOR SEDIMENT (7" DEEP) IN NORTH BARREL.

62.1 MINOR CRACKING WITH EFFLORESCENCE ON TOP SLAB AT

HEADWALLS IN BOTH BARRELS; RANDOM AREAS ELSEWHERE.

SEVERAL AREAS OF MINOR HONEYCOMBING OF TOP SLAB WITH

EXPOSED REBAR.

MINOR SCALING OF CONCRETE EXTERIOR BARREL WALLS AT

WATERLINE. MINOR VERTICAL CRACKING WITH EFFLORESCENCE

ON EXTERIOR BARREL WALLS. MINOR TO MODERATE

DETERIORATION OF MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS BETWEEN STONE

AND CONCRETE PORTIONS OF EXTERIOR BARREL WALLS. MINOR

DETERIORATION OF INTERIOR BARREL WALL MASONRY AND

MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS WITH EFFLORESCENCE AT SOME

LOCATIONS.

62.3,4 MINOR MOSS AND VEGETATION GROWTH OVERHANGING

HEADWALLS. MINOR TO MODERATE DETERIORATION OF

HEADWALL AND WINGWALL MASONRY AND MORTAR JOINTS. TOP

COURSE OF MASONRY AT NORTH END OF EAST HEADWALL AND

SOUTH END OF BOTH HEADWALLS DISPLACED UP TO 7". SEVERAL

DISPLACED STONES AT SOUTHWEST WINGWALL (UP TO 7") AND

WEST HEADWALL (UP TO 4").

222.4 MINOR LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE CRACKING OF ASPHALT

PAVEMENT AT BOTH APPROACHES.

222.7 ROADWAY CLOSURE NOTIFICATION SIGN ON EAST SIDE OF

ROADWAY AT STRUCTURE.

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 19

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

ADDITIONAL ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

36.A,B,C,D NO GUARDRAIL SYSTEM PRESENT.

STRUCTURE LOAD RATING STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

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 31 28 52 47

TYPE 3S2 50 45 83 75

TYPE 3-3 60 54 100 91

DESIGN LOADING: H15 (M13.5)

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: RATING IS BASED ON DESIGN LOAD OF STRUCTURE.

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

STRUCTURE IDENTIFICATION

(201) PARK: BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY (1) STATE: ....................................... 513 - VIRGINIA (VA)

(202) STRUCTURE NAME: .......... LAUREL FORK CULVERT (2) STATE HWY. AGENCY DIST:

(203) STRUCTURE KIND: ............ 2 - CULVERT (3) COUNTY CODE: ........................ 063 - FLOYD

(204) STRUCTURE NUMBER: ..... 5140-053P (4) CITY/PLACE CODE:

(205) NPS REGION: .................... 4 - SOUTHEAST (5) INVENTORY ROUTE:

(206) ROUTE CODE NUMBER: ... 1 (6) FEATURES INTERSECTED:....... LAUREL FORK

(207) ROAD SECTION NO: .......... 053P (7) FACILITY CARRIED: .................. BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY

(208) NPS ROAD CLASS: ............ 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD (8) STATE STRUCTURE NO: .......... 5140053P0000000

(209) WITHIN NPS BNDRY?: ....... YES (9) LOCATION: ................................ 1.4 MILES TO VA ROUTE 603

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

(211) PROJECT NO(S): ................ 1T2 (11) MILE POINT: ............................. 173.95 (KM PT 279.86)

(212) DRAWING NUMBERS: ....... 1020 (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:

2 - CONCRETE CONTINUOUS

19 - CULVERT

10.2 FT (3.1 M)

24.3 FT (7.4 M)

2 - SPREAD FTG ON BEARING MAT'L

2 - SPREAD FTG ON BEARING MAT'L

2 - SPREAD FTG ON BEARING MAT'L

6 - N/A

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

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

LOAD RATING AND POSTING

(31) DESIGN LOAD: ................. 2 - H15 (M13.5) (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: 10/14 (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. 5140-053P

GEOMETRY, TRAFFIC, AND NAVIGATIONAL DATA

(16) LATITUDE: ............................. 36°46'35.10" (51) CURB TO CURB WIDTH: ........... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(17) LONGITUDE: ......................... 80°24'14.70" (52) DECK WIDTH: ............................ 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(19) DETOUR LENGTH: ............... 4 MI (6 KM) (32) APPR. ROADWAY WIDTH: ........ 28.0 FT (8.5 M)

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

(28B) LANES UNDER STRUCT: ... 00 LEFT SHOULDER: .................. 4.0 FT (1.2 M)

(42A) SERVICE ON: ..................... 1 - HIGHWAY RIGHT SHOULDER: ................ 4.0 FT (1.2 M)

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

(29) AVG. DAILY TRAFFIC: .......... 1061 (34) SKEW ANGLE: ............................ 40 °

(30) YEAR OF ADT: ...................... 2012 (35) DECK FLARE?: ........................... NO

(114) FUTURE ADT: ..................... 1167 (47) TOTAL HORIZ. CLEARANCE: .... 28.0 FT (8.5 M)

(115) YEAR OF FUTURE ADT: ..... 2032 (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: ... 0000

(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

2 - REHAB/RECONSTRUCTION

C - MODERATE

$0

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(230) STRUCTURE HISTORY:

1982-JOINT REPAIR.

(231) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:

(330) ADDITIONAL CONFIG. INFO.:

http:80�24'14.70 http:36�46'35.10

APPENDIX STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

PHOTOGRAPHS STRUCTURE NO. 5140-053P

FLOW

PHOTO #1 - LOOKING SOUTHBOUND TOWARD CUMBERLAND KNOB

PHOTO #2 - WEST (UPSTREAM) SIDE; NOTE VEGETATION GROWTH IN

CHANNEL

PHOTO #3 - GENERAL TOPSIDE VIEW LOOKING NORTH

PHOTO #4 - TYPICAL LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE CRACKING OF

ASPHALT APPROACH PAVEMENT; SOUTH APPROACH SHOWN

PHOTO #5 - GENERAL UNDERSIDE VIEW

LOOKING WEST, NORTH BARREL

PHOTO #6 - TYPICAL CRACKING WITH

EFFLORESCENCE ON TOP SLAB; SOUTH

BARREL AT EAST HEADWALL SHOWN

PHOTO #7 - TYPICAL CRACKING WITH

EFFLORESCENCE ON TOP SLAB; NORTH

BARREL NEAR WEST HEADWALL SHOWN

PHOTO #8 - TYPICAL HONEYCOMBING WITH

EXPOSED REBAR ON TOP SLAB; NORTH

BARREL NEAR EAST HEADWALL SHOWN

PHOTO #9 - GENERAL VIEW OF BARREL WALL, NORTH WALL OF

NORTH BARREL

PHOTO #10 - GENERAL VIEW OF BARREL WALL, SOUTH WALL OF

NORTH BARREL

PHOTO #11 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS BETWEEN STONE

AND CONCRETE PORTIONS OF EXTERIOR

BARREL WALLS; EAST END OF SOUTH BARREL

SHOWN

PHOTO #12 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

MASONRY AND MORTAR JOINTS WITH

EFFLORESCENCE ON INTERIOR BARREL

WALL; SOUTH SIDE AT EAST END SHOWN

PHOTO #13 - SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION IN SOUTH BARREL

PHOTO #14 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF HEADWALL MASONRY

MORTAR JOINTS; EAST HEADWALL SHOWN; ALSO NOTE TYPICAL

OVERGROWTH OF VEGETATION

PHOTO #15 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

HEADWALL MASONRY MORTAR JOINTS; WEST

HEADWALL OVER SOUTH BARREL SHOWN;

NOTE DISPLACEMENT OF STONES

PHOTO #16 - DISPLACEMENT OF SOUTHWEST

WINGWALL MASONRY

PHOTO #17 - DISPLACEMENT OF STONES AT

NORTH END OF EAST HEADWALL

PHOTO #18 - TYPICAL DETERIORATION OF

WINGWALL MASONRY AND MORTAR JOINTS;

NORTHWEST WINGWALL SHOWN

PHOTO #19 - LOOKING UPSTREAM THROUGH NORTH BARREL; NOTE

VEGETATION GROWTH

PHOTO #20 - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM THROUGH NORTH BARREL;

NOTE VEGETATION GROWTH

PHOTO #21 - VEGETATION GROWTH AND SEDIMENT BUILD-UP IN

CHANNEL AT DOWNSTREAM END OF SOUTH BARREL