Microsoft Word - Draft Report_Dec2014.docxAdams Street Bridge
Bridge No. 00004 KAS Project#: 806140128 Artisan Project#: 14240
Prepared for: Town of Fair Haven 3 North Park Place Fair Haven, VT
05743-1066
DRAFT ENGINEERING STUDY
January 19, 2015 Prepared By:
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study i
January, 2015
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
.............................................................................................
1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
...........................................................................................................
1
2.1 VTrans 2012 Inspection Summary
......................................................................................................
2 2.2 Project Team 2014 Investigation Summary
.......................................................................................
3 2.3 Traffic Data and Design Speed
..........................................................................................................
4 2.4 Bridge Approches
..............................................................................................................................
4 2.5 Clear Zone
..........................................................................................................................................
5 2.6 Crash Data, Nearby Intersection, and Emergency Response
............................................................
5 2.7 Right of Way
.......................................................................................................................................
6 2.8 Utilities
.................................................................................................................................................
7 2.9 Hydraulic Analysis
...............................................................................................................................
7 2.10 Natural Resources
.............................................................................................................................
7 2.11 Cultural Resources
............................................................................................................................
8 2.12 Geotechnical Conditions
...................................................................................................................
8
3.0 ALTENATIVES ANALYSIS
.........................................................................................................
8
3.1 Alternative 1: Do Nothing and Permanently Close the Bridge
.......................................................... 9
3.2 Alternative 2: Rehabilitate the Existing Structure as a Vehicle
Bridge ............................................... 9 3.3
Alternative 3: Rehabilitate the Existing Structure as a Pedestrian
Bridge ....................................... 12 3.4
Alternative 4: Remove and Replace the Existing Bridge with a New
Structure ............................... 13 3.5 Alternative
5: Removal of Existing Bridge and Construction of
Utility/Pedestrian Bridge .............. 14
4.0 PERMITTING
...........................................................................................................................
15
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
...........................................................................................................
16
Appendices Appendix A Site Plan Figures Appendix B Memo and Bridge
Figures from Artisan Engineering Appendix C Project Photo
Documentation Appendix D VTrans Inspection Reports Appendix E
Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis Backup Data Appendix F
Geotechnical Analysis Backup Information Appendix G VT ANR
Environmental Interest Map Appendix H Alternatives Presentation
Meeting Minutes
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 1
January, 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND This report has been prepared for the
Town of Fair Haven, Vermont (Town) and provides documentation for
the development of this engineering study for the Adams Street
Bridge. The project area for this engineering study includes the
approaches to the bridge, the bridge, and nearby intersections.
This study evaluates the project site’s existing conditions and
proposed conceptual alternatives for correcting deficiencies
associated with the bridge.
The Project Team for this project included experienced engineers
and bridge contractors from KAS Inc, Artisan Engineering, and S.D.
Ireland. Mr. Stephen Diglio, P.E., of KAS was designated as project
manager and is a Vermont Licensed civil engineer with over 10 years
of design experience. Mr. John Higgins, P.E. and Josh Golek of
Artisan Engineering provided structural engineering services
including a limited investigation of the existing bridge
conditions, and structural design of proposed replacement
alternatives. Mr. Ron Bushnell of S.D. Ireland, project manager for
bridge construction projects, provided budgetary estimates for the
various alternatives considered.
The Adams Street Bridge is located approximately 75-feet north of
Vermont Route 4A, where Adams Street crosses over the Castleton
River (refer to Site Location Map in Appendix A). The one lane
bridge is a historic plate riveted through girder bridge with a
concrete deck. The bridge is supported on concrete abutments, has a
single span length of approximately 50 feet, and a curb to curb
width of 12 feet. The Adams Street Bridge was closed in March 2014
by the Town due to safety concerns posed by the severe
deterioration of the concrete bridge deck, including full depth
holes. Elements of this engineering study include an evaluation of
the existing conditions, an alternatives investigation, budgetary
cost estimates, permitting, and a proposed recommendation.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Per State of Vermont Department of Highway
plans dated 1960 (refer to Appendix B), the current Adams Street
Bridge is a salvaged structure. It is believed that the bridge was
originally built in 1919 as one of two single lane bridges that
conveyed local River Street traffic over the Castleton River. When
the River Street Bridges were replaced, the “better” half was moved
to its current location in 1961, and reconstructed as the Adams
Street Bridge. Based on interviews with Town personnel (past and
present), this appears to be the last record of any significant
maintenance work being conducted on the bridge.
At the time of the 1961 bridge placement, older concrete abutments
were already on site. The existing abutments were rehabilitated and
updated as part of the “new” bridge placement. On the Route 4A side
a cast-in-place bridge seat was doweled into the older structure.
On the Adams Street side a new stem and seat was
Figure 1: Project Site Area
Figure 2: Adams Street Bridge looking north
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 2
January, 2015
poured. Original wingwalls on both abutments were resurfaced and
extended where required to retain grade. Both sets of abutments are
founded on ledge and the pre-1960’s abutments appear to have at
least some stone rubble backfill.
There are several stacked slate retaining walls near the bridge in
varying states of disrepair. In some cases these walls are held in
place by steel rod anchors doweled into ledge. The 1960 plans show
a penstock for the nearby dam on the Route 4A side of the crossing.
Most of the penstock slate was removed in 1961. Retaining walls
closest to the abutments appear to have been reworked; walls
further up and downstream seem to have been in place longer and are
typically kept from collapse by steel rods doweled into
ledge.
The bridge was last inspected by the Vermont Agency of
Transportation (VTrans) in April, 2012. As part of the development
of this study, representatives from project team visited the Adams
Street Bridge in June, 2014 to take field measurements and conduct
a limited investigation of the existing conditions and structural
systems. The findings of these inspections are summarized in the
sections 2.1 and 2.2.
2.1 VTrans 2012 Inspection Summary
Prior to its closure, the Adams Street Bridge was inspected every
two years by VTrans. The bridge was last inspected by VTrans in
April, 2012 and received a design load rating of H-15, which
corresponds to a 30,000 lb box truck. Please reference Appendix C
for a copy of the VTrans inspection report. As part of the
inspection, VTrans provides the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) with inspection findings. FHWA utilizes the inspection
findings to determine a Federal Sufficiency Rating (FSR) for the
bridge. The FSR is derived from a formula that considers aspects
such as the condition of bridge components, average daily traffic,
and the alignment of the approach roadway. Please note that the FSR
is not an indication of the bridge’s ability to adequately carry
traffic loads. The result of the FSR is a percentage where 100
percent is indicative of a completely sufficient bridge, and 0
percent would be considered a completely insufficient bridge.
Structures that receive a FSR of 50 percent or less are eligible
for federal replacement funds, and structures with a FSR of 80
percent or less are eligible for federal rehabilitation funds. The
2012 inspection results determined a FSR of 74.2 percent, which
means the bridge was eligible for rehabilitation funds.
The bridge safety inspection information is also utilized to
determine if a bridge is considered to be “structurally deficient”
or “functionally obsolete”. A bridge is considered “structurally
deficient” if the primary load bearing components are found to be
in poor condition due to damage and/or deterioration. A bridge is
considered to be “functionally obsolete” if the bridge geometry
such as lane width, shoulder width, and guard rails do not meet
current criteria. A bridge given these classifications does not
necessarily imply an inherently unsafe structure. However, in some
cases, load limits or vehicle restrictions may be imposed while the
bridge remains in service.
The 2012 inspection determined that the Bridge was “functionally
obsolete”. The bridge is considered to be “functionally obsolete”
because the bridge railings, transitions, approach guardrails,
approach guardrail end, and deck geometry all do not meet current
standards. The bridge deck had a rating of intolerable with
replacement needed. The VTrans evaluation for this bridge provided
a superstructure rating of satisfactory (6) and a substructure
rating of satisfactory (6). In addition, there was no
Figure 3: H-15 Design Vehicle
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 3
January, 2015
recommendation to post or close the bridge. Consequently, the
bridge was not deemed to be structurally deficient during the 2012
inspection.
The inspection summary and needs section recommended that the
concrete deck be rehabilitated with a reinforced concrete overlay,
the steel superstructure needed extensive cleaning and painting to
slow corrosion which was progressing, and to reface the southern
abutment due to heavy scaling and sectional loss. In addition, the
laid up marble retaining walls (stacked slate) were called out as
being unstable and likely to collapse in a few years; though their
eventual failure was determined to have no impact on the bridge
itself. The inspection also mentioned that the locals had expressed
concern regarding the steep drop offs at the upstream side of the
bridge where there is no type of pedestrian barrier.
The bridge has continued to deteriorate since the VTrans inspection
in 2012 leading to the failure of the bridge deck. VTrans
inspectors were dispatched to the bridge in the spring of 2014, but
an inspection was not conducted since the bridge has been closed to
traffic. It is the project team’s opinion that the recent failure
of the concrete bridge deck would have resulted in a structurally
deficient determination had VTrans conducted the 2014
inspection.
2.2 Project Team 2014 Investigation Summary
Representatives of the project team (Mr. Stephen Diglio and Mr.
John Higgins) visited the Adams Street Bridge in June 2014 to take
field measurements and conduct a limited investigation of the
existing conditions and structural systems. The investigation found
that the existing bridge is suffering from long term deferred
maintenance and deterioration consistent with a structure of this
type and age. Annotated photos taken during the investigation are
provided in Appendix C, and help to illustrate the findings of the
investigation. The findings and major areas of concern noted are as
follows:
• Severe deteriorating of the concrete deck including a number of
large holes. In several locations, reinforcing steel is exposed
(see photo 1);
• Significant section loss at girder ends. There is also notable
section loss and rusting of the girder web at deck level, with
comparable loss on the bottom flanges (see photos 2 and 3);
• Severe deterioration of the rivet heads also called “pinning”.
Pining is most common at girder ends and where vertical stiffeners
allow debris to accumulate on the bottom flange of the main girders
(see photo 4);
• Severe cracking of the curtain walls at the beam ends (see photo
5);
• Bridge bearings were buried in concrete during the 1961 bridge
replacement and could not be observed. However, it is likely that
they have seized and need replacement based on prior experience
with similar structures;
• Heavy spauling of concrete off the original (pre-1960’s)
abutments is noticeable on both sides of the crossing. Large
amounts of concrete efflorescence on the pre -1960’s abutments and
some on the newer abutments was also noted (see photo 6);
• Map cracking on the 1961 abutment faces and vertical stress
cracks under the bridge bearings on the Route 4A side (see
photo7);
• General loss of the bridge’s protective paint;
• Slate retaining walls nearest the abutments are near collapse
(see photo 8); and
• A cursory review of the existing pipe hangers supporting the
water and sewer mains indicated that they are in good condition.
Pipe hangers should be examined carefully during a full inspection
to determine their adequacy.
Please note that the project team did not conduct a full inspection
or structural analysis of the existing bridge. However, based on
the limited investigation and experience with similar projects, the
project team was able to draw a number of conclusions and
recommendations for various bridge elements that are deficient,
which are provided in Section 3.0.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 4
January, 2015
2.3 Traffic Data and Design Speed
Per the 2012 annual inspection report, the Average Daily Traffic
(ADT) estimate in 2008 was approximately 640 vehicles per day with
approximately 2 percent as truck traffic. Since the bridge is
closed, an updated traffic count is not possible. Consequently, the
ADT data from 2008 is considered to be the best and only traffic
data available for the bridge and was utilized for the development
of this study. However, per interviews with Town residents and
personnel, the consensus opinion was that the Adams Street Bridge
was mainly utilized by local residents as a convenient shortcut to
the post office and to cut around the village square, and that most
through traffic on Route 4A would continue to the intersection with
Route 22A.
The village speed limit in Fair Haven is 30 miles per hour (MPH)
unless otherwise posted. Since Adams Street does not have a posted
speed limit, 30 MPH was utilized as the design speed for evaluating
the project area.
2.4 Bridge Approches
The southern end of Adams Street terminates at a “T” intersection
with Route 4A. The bridge is located approximately 70-feet north of
this intersection. The southern road approach tapers from two lanes
at the intersection to one lane at the bridge over the 70-feet
length. A metal guardrail is located on the west side of the road
from the bridge to the intersection, and a small section of
guardrail is located near the bridge on the east side of the road.
The southern approach has an estimated sight distance of 200-feet,
which is adequate for stopping sight distance on a low traffic road
at 30 MPH. There is minimal room for north bound vehicles to stack
to allow for south bound vehicles to cross the bridge. It is
estimated that at most two vehicles could stack on the southern
bridge approach before backing up traffic onto Route 4A. However,
given the low traffic use, this appears to have been
adequate.
The road approach from the north contains a sharp curve just prior
to the bridge. The curve radius is estimated at approximately
80-feet, which is less than the recommended minimum design radius
for a 30 MPH road. Guardrails extend approximately 40-feet from the
bridge on both the east and west side of the road. The northern
approach has an estimated sight distance of approximately 220-feet
to the intersection with Route 4A. The northern approach has better
capacity for vehicles to stack to allow for north bound vehicles to
cross the bridge.
When considering the low vehicle traffic and physical constraints
along Adams Street, the bridge approaches, while not ideal, are
considered to meet minimal tolerable criteria. However, if the
bridge is to be reopened to vehicle traffic in the future, it is
recommended that the Town consider the following improvements to
bridge approaches:
Figure 4: Southern Approach (from Google Maps)
Figure 5: North Approach (from Google Maps)
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 5
January, 2015
• Providing one lane bridge signage in accordance with Section
2c.17 of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD),
• Providing signage that makes south bound traffic yield to north
bound traffic, and
• Providing new and extended guardrails that meet current
standards.
In addition, it may be possible to extend road shoulders to allow
vehicles to more easily pass each other after crossing the bridge.
There are steep drop offs along both bridge approaches and no
pedestrian barriers. It is recommend that pedestrian rails be added
along the approaches on the upstream side of the bridge, on the
bridge wingwalls, and along the existing bridge to prevent
falls.
2.5 Clear Zone
The clear zone is a horizontal offset distance from the edge of the
travel lane to a hazard such as a tree, utility pole, structure,
steep slope, etc. VTrans design standards recommend a clear zone of
5 to 7-feet for the project area. Possible clear zone deficiencies
within the vicinity of the bridge may include steep slopes, utility
pole guy wire, and a hydrant.
2.6 Crash Data, Nearby Intersection, and Emergency Response
The Fair Haven police department was contacted regarding crash data
for the Adams Street Bridge. Per discussions with Town police
personnel, the Adams Street Bridge was not considered to be a crash
prone area. In addition, there was no recollection of police
responding to an accident related to the bridge.
Now that the Adams Street Bridge is closed, former bridge traffic
is likely to utilize the intersection of Route 4A and Route 22A,
which are both roads under the jurisdiction of VTrans. The road
intersection essentially forms a “Y” shape, and also has commercial
driveway access located on the east side of Route 22A. When
approaching the intersection from the south (on Route 22A), traffic
descends a hill, which steepens on approach to the intersection
after crossing over a railroad grade. North of the intersection on
Route 22A, the road is relatively flat while crossing over the
Castleton River, and then begins to climb uphill towards the
village. Refer to Figure 6 below for an aerial view of the
intersection.
Figure 6: Intersection of Vermont Routes 4A and 22A (obtained from
Google Maps)
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 6
January, 2015
A railroad crossing of Route 22A is located approximately 230 feet
south of the intersection. The change in grade between the hill and
railroad crossing reduces sight distance to approximately 230 feet
to the south for traffic attempting to turn left onto Route 22A
from Route 4A. Per VTrans Design Standards, the minimum recommended
corner sight distance is 330 feet for a 30 MPH design speed.
However, for most drivers, the change in grade caused by the
railroad crossing also serves as a traffic calming measure, as most
northbound vehicles on Route 22A must slow down or risk bottoming
out. Based on interviews with Town personnel, a stop sign used to
be located on Route 22A near the railroad tracks for northbound
traffic, which appeared to be effective in further calming traffic
per the opinion of the people interviewed. This stop sign was
removed by VTrans to make the intersection approach more consistent
with their overall policies for traffic. The sight distance is
adequate when looking north on Route 22A from the intersection. The
horizontal alignment of the intersection is less than ideal. Route
4A enters the intersection at a somewhat skewed angle, but it is
preferred to have roads approach an intersection at a perpendicular
angle (squared off).
Figure 7: View of Intersection looking south Figure 8: Looking
North from Intersection
A review of the 2012 State Crash Database indicates that there were
no accidents reported at this intersection in 2012. Per discussions
with Town police personnel, this intersection is not considered to
be accident prone, but police personnel do recall having responded
to accidents at this location in the past. As previously stated,
most through traffic on Route 4A would continue to the intersection
with Route 22A regardless of the status of the Adams Street Bridge.
It should be noted that alternate routes are available to avoid
turning at this intersection, if so desired by local residents or
thru traffic travelers.
When considering the intersection, the overall traffic situation
appears to be tolerable and should not be a factor when considering
bridge alternatives. However, it is recommended that the Town
contact Trans to review this intersection and consider additional
traffic clamming or traffic control measures. Given that the Route
22A bridge over the Castleton River is approximately 600-feet from
the Adams Street Bridge, emergency response time is not
significantly impacted by the status of the Adams Street
Bridge.
2.7 Right of Way
The right-of-way is assumed to be 3-rods (49.5-feet) through the
project area based on information provided by Town personnel.
Consequently, the alternatives analyzed in this study would not
result in right-of-way acquisitions or permanent easements.
However, temporary easements may be required for staging, the
removal of the existing structure, rehabilitation of stacked slate
walls, and construction of the roadway slopes though the project
area.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 7
January, 2015
2.8 Utilities
There is a water main pipe and a sewer collector pipe supported on
steel hangers that are fixed to the girder on the east side of the
bridge. The water main is located near the top of the girder and is
supported above triangular steel brackets that are fixed to the
girder. The sewer collector is hung below the bridge and is
supported by steel hangers that are also fixed to the girder. The
water and sewer line return underground north and south of the
bridge. A perched stormwater outfall was observed on the upstream
side of the southern abutment. Evidence of additional underground
utilities was not observed. Overhead utilities were observed along
the east side of Adams Street.
2.9 Hydraulic Analysis
In total, the Castleton River Basin covers approximately
ninety-nine square miles including all of the town of Castleton and
portions of the towns of Fair Haven, Hubbardton, Pittsford,
Proctor, West Rutland, Ira, and Poultney. It includes Lake
Bomoseen, Glen Lake, Pine Pond, and several other smaller ponds.
The contributing river basin area at the Adams Street Bridge
crossing is estimated to be approximately 98.3 square miles. Per
the FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Rutland County dated
August 28, 2008, the hydraulic modeling results show that the
current hydraulic opening has adequate hydraulic capacity to convey
the 10, 50, 100, and 500 year recurrence interval flood events
below the bottom of the bridge. Since the design recurrence
interval for this bridge is the 25-year event, the current
hydraulic opening is more than adequate. If needed, there is room
to lower the bottom of the bridge should a replacement require
deeper support beams. It should be noted that the sewer collector
hanging below the bridge may be susceptible to damage from a flood
event. However, the sewer collector was not impacted by the
flooding from Tropical Storm Irene. FEMA FIS map and profile
results are included in Appendix D.
2.10 Natural Resources
The Agency of Natural Resource (ANR) Natural Resources Atlas Map
was utilized to preliminary vet environmental resources (refer to
Appendix D). A summary of key findings are listed below:
Wetlands: There are no mapped wetland features in the project
area.
Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species: There are no mapped rare,
threatened or endangered species.
Wildlife Habitats: The project area is located in an area mapped as
Indiana Bat Habitat, which would restrict the allowable time period
of potential tree removal from November 1st to April 30th. The
Castleton River provides aquatic habit for native fish, plants and
aquatic organics. Water quality measures typical for bridge work in
Vermont will be required. There are also no mapped deer wintering
areas in the vicinity of the project.
Surface Waters: The Castleton River runs through the project
site.
Floodplain/Floodway: The portions of the project area are located
within a mapped FEMA flood plain, and a mapped FEMA Floodway.
Figure 7: Water and Sewer Utilities
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 8
January, 2015
2.11 Cultural Resources
Historic, Architectural and Archeological
Per the VTrans Historic Preservation Program, the Adams Street
Bridge is considered to be historic, as it was initially
constructed in 1919. More specifically, the riveted through plate
girder superstructure is considered historic. In addition, there
are multiple nearby historic properties and features including, but
not limited to, former mill buildings, former mill remnants and
foundations, stacked slate retaining walls, and a former mill dam.
Consequently, if federal funds are utilized for a proposed bridge
replacement or rehabilitation project, a Section 4 (f) resource
impact review will be required. Section 4 (f) stipulates that the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other DOT agencies cannot
approve the use of land from publicly owned parks, recreational
areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or public and private
historical sites unless the following conditions apply:
• There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land;
and
• The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the
property resulting from use.
Please note that Section 4 (f) is only applicable if federal
funding is utilized. The Town can privately fund a bridge
replacement project within triggering a Section 4 (f) impact
review.
Agricultural Lands
The project area is completely within the Village of Fair Haven and
includes previously disturbed areas. Regardless of the suitability
of soils for agricultural purposes, a viable agricultural operation
is not possible within the project area and it is not considered
likely that there would be impacts to agricultural lands as a
result of bridge improvements within the project area.
2.12 Geotechnical Conditions
Based on a review of the 1960 design plans for the bridge and site
observations, ledge is shallow in the project area and the existing
bridge abutments are founded on slate bedrock (ledge). The shallow
ledge appears sound and is assumed to have a very high bearing
capacity. Please note that geotechnical boring or test pit
investigations were not conducted.
3.0 ALTENATIVES ANALYSIS Based on field investigations and
coordination with Town officials, VTrans Historic Preservation
personnel, and project team members (including civil engineers,
structural engineers and bridge contractors), several possible
alternatives for the Adams Street Bridge were developed for
evaluation as follows.
• Alternative 1: Do nothing and permanently close the bridge
• Alternative 2: Rehabilitate the existing structure as a vehicle
bridge
• Alternative 3: Rehabilitate and convert the bridge into a
pedestrian bridge
• Alternative 4: Remove and replace the bridge with a new structure
meeting current design codes and safety requirements.
• Alternative 5: Remove and replace the bridge with a
pedestrian/utility bridge.
Adams Street is a Town maintained road with an estimated ADT of 640
vehicles per day with approximately 2 percent as truck traffic. It
is anticipated that the proposed alternatives would be constructed
with the use of State and Federal funding sources, meaning design
are subject to adhere to VTrans design criteria as follows:
• Structural Capacity: H-20 (Rehabilitation), HS-25 Loading (new
bridge)
• Bridge Span: 50-feet (current span), Bridge Width 12-feet
(current width)
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 9
January, 2015
• Bridge Minimum Cross Slope: 2%
• Design Speed: 25 to 30 MPH (horizontal alignment
constraints)
• AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition
• VTrans Structures Design Manual, 5th Edition
Advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are discussed in
the subsequent sections. Approximate budgetary costs have also been
provided for each alternative. Please note that engineering costs
were estimate at 15% of the construction cost, and inspection costs
were estimated at 10% of the construction costs, which are typical
planning costs for potentially federally funded projects.
Conceptual cross sectional drawings have been developed for some of
the alternatives investigated and are provided in Appendix E.
3.1 Alternative 1: Do Nothing and Permanently Close the
Bridge
This alternative for the project area would be a “Do Nothing”
alternative, which is to maintain existing conditions. Any
evaluation of transportation improvements should include a “Do
Nothing” alternative as a comparison of the costs and benefits of
not implementing any improvements. The bridge only services a small
number of homes on Adams Street and is readily detoured by using
nearby Marble Street, Route 22A, and Route 4A. Per interviews with
Town residents and personnel, the consensus opinion was that the
Adams Street Bridge was mainly utilized by local residents as a
convenient shortcut to the post office and to avoid the village
square, but that most through traffic on Route 4A continues to the
intersection with Route 22A and avoids Adams Street. In addition,
emergency response time will not be significantly impacted by the
bridge closure, assuming the bridge on Route 22A remains open.
Consequently, the closure of the bridge has negligible traffic
impacts. Access to, and support for, the two utility mains hanging
off the bridge needs to be maintained even if the bridge is closed.
Presumably, this requires some investment even if the crossing is
closed to regular traffic and pedestrians.
Advantages:
• Low cost, and
• Cultural resource of historic bridge will remain until continued
deterioration results in complete bridge failure.
Disadvantages:
• Loss of a convenient detour around Route 22A,
• Presumed minor increase in traffic on Marble Street, Route 22A,
and Route 4A,
• Still requires work to provide access to utility mains,
• Town has continued liabilities associated with a failing
structure and potential pedestrian falls, and
• Does not address concerns regarding lack of pedestrian barriers
for steep drop-offs near the bridge.
3.2 Alternative 2: Rehabilitate the Existing Structure as a Vehicle
Bridge
The project team did not conduct a full inspection or structural
analysis of the existing bridge. Consequently, if the Town chooses
to move forward with a bridge rehabilitation alternative,
additional engineering, structural analysis, planning, and
inspection will be required. The anticipated additional scope of
work includes the following:
• Complete removal of the concrete deck and curbs to completely
expose all steel superstructure elements. Based on prior project
experience, steel superstructure elements
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 10
January, 2015
that have been encased in failing concrete are likely places for
severe deterioration, due to the trapping of moisture and chloride
(salt) against the metal.
• After the removal of the concrete, installation of scaffolding
followed by a full bridge inspection conducted by a qualified
inspector or engineer. Special attention paid to deteriorated
steel, any remaining concrete, and inspection of the
connections.
• An inspection of the abutments and bridge seats to determine
repair extents. The project team expects the Adams Street side will
require limited chipping and resurfacing with gunite. The Route 4A
abutment is expected to need complete resurfacing and a new bridge
seat.
• If the original documentation from 1919 construction cannot be
found, the project team recommends testing of the structure to
determine the steel’s age and design properties.
• A complete structural analysis of the bridge by a qualified
structural engineer. After analysis, a judgment can be made if the
H20 rating is cost effective or if a lower rating should be
pursued. Since the connections are non-standard, quantifying
connection capacity and detailing repairs will take significant
design effort.
• If requested, review of special vehicles. For example, analyzing
the bridge for loads from plow trucks loaded with sand or Fire
Department water tankers.
• Design and drafting of new bearings.
• Drafting of rehabilitation plans, including demolition extents
for the abutments and wingwalls.
Although a full inspection or structural analysis was not
conducted, based on the project teams’ initial investigation and
experience with similar projects, we are able to draw a number of
conclusions and recommendation of potential bridge rehabilitation
needs. For this alternative, the project team assumed that the
rehabilitated bridge would be rated for H20, which is the
equivalent of a 40,000 lbs box truck (see Appendix E). This rating
typically allows all Police and Rescue vehicles, but may exclude
some Town Maintenance and Fire vehicles. Assuming rehabilitation
work progresses after inspection, which is no guarantee as the
bridge may be deemed unsalvageable, further anticipated
rehabilitation work would include but not be limited to:
• Implementing traffic control measures, such as vehicle barriers,
minor signage, and flaggers.
• Implementation of worker safety protection in compliance with
current OSHA standards.
• Implementation of an Environmental Protection and Sediment
Control plan that includes: o Lead paint removal enclosure and
paint capture system o Channel protection during abutment
rehabilitation o Sediment control fencing and other measures as
required
• Deck Replacement: The existing deck has failed and requires full
replacement. The current deck system does not contribute to the
bridge’s overall capacity; it only adds dead load to the structure
and serves as a driving surface. If rehabilitation is pursued we
recommend installing a lighter deck system. Options include:
o Build a nail laminated deck on site made from treated Southern
Yellow Pine 2x10’s. These systems are light but also labor
intensive and often difficult to build flat. However, this may be
an appropriate choice for a low use low capacity structure.
o Install a prefabricated “dowel laminated” wood deck.
o Install a lightweight “exodermic” concrete deck
• Bridge: Some flange and vertical stiffener angles at the girder
ends will need replacement. Girder end pates will need replacement.
The web will also need spot repairs. Decayed rivets can be replaced
with A325 “round head” tension controlled bolts to mimic the look
of rivets. 7/8” diameter is a common bolt size for repairs to
bridges of this age.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 11
January, 2015
• Bridge Coating: The entire structure will need positive pressure
enclosure to capture lead and cleaning to SSPC-SP5 (white metal
blast cleaning). To slow decay we recommend the application of an
approved three part field applied bridge painting system.
• Bridge Bearings: It is extremely likely that the bearings need
replacement. An inexpensive cotton polyester bearing pad such as
Sorbtex is recommended on the Adams Street side of the bridge. On
the Route 4A side, the project team recommends a bearing pad with a
bonded PTFE sheet (low friction resin sheet). Retrofit bearing
systems can often be field welded onto existing ones.
• Abutments: Generally the abutments appear structurally sound with
the main concerns being deterioration of the concrete and cracking
of the Route 4A bridge seat. Because of the high bearing capacity
of the ledge below and the low lateral pressures from the old
abutment/concrete backfill, it is our opinion that rehabilitation
rather than a complete replacement of the abutments is sufficient.
It is expected that most abutment work will be limited to chipping
away delaminated (failed) concrete and re-surfacing with Gunite
(shotcrete). The project team recommends the replacement of the
bridge seat on the Route 4A side. The project team also recommends
the removal of the curtain walls enclosing the girder ends to allow
maintenance of the bridge bearings.
• Bridge Approaches: A change in deck and/or bridge bearings may
alter the bridge deck elevation. This would require a limited
amount of grading and paving of the approaches.
• Installation of a code compliant pedestrian rails along the top
of all wingwalls and the bridge to prevent falls. In addition,
consideration should be given to providing pedestrian barriers
along the approaches to the bridge.
Advantages:
• Reuses historic structure and maintains bridge as a cultural
resource,
• Reopens bridge to vehicle traffic, and
• Continued access to and support of water and sewer utility
mains,
Disadvantages:
• Lower capacity than replacement option, with some vehicle
restrictions likely, and
• The bridge would require continued maintenance
The total budgetary estimate for this alternative ranges from
approximately $1,062,500 to $1,187,500 depending on the extent of
required structural repairs. Please refer to Table 1 for additional
information.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 12
January, 2015
Table 1: Alternative 2 Budgetary Estimate
Item Description Unit Price
2 Lead Paint Removal LS $285,000
3 Abutment Rehabilitation LS $85,000
4 Bridge Structural Repairs LS $200,000 to $300,000
5 New Bearings LS $30,000
6 New Deck LS $50,000
7 Pedestrian Rails LS $45,000
8 Traffic and Erosion Control LS $50,000
9 Road Approach Work LS $40,000
Construction Total $850,000 to $950,000
Engineering (15%) and Inspection (10%) $212,500 to 237,500
Total Budgetary Estimate $1,062,500 to $1,187,500
3.3 Alternative 3: Rehabilitate the Existing Structure as a
Pedestrian Bridge
This alternative is similar to Alternative 2 with similar scope.
The advantage to Alternative 3 is that structural repairs to the
bridge are likely to be less extensive. Keeping with section 3.4.6
of the VTRANS 2010 Structures Manual, the project team considered
rehabilitating the bridge to carry a 20,000 lb. maintenance vehicle
and a separate 75 pound per square foot pedestrian load (see
Appendix E for proposed bridge details per Figures 3-5 and for
design vehicle information). The scope of work for this alternative
is similar to Alternative 2 but with the following
modifications:
• Bridge deck replacement will consist of a timber deck.
• Installation of traffic bollards on both ends of the bridge to
prevent vehicles from crossing the bridge. One or two of the
bollards should be removable to allow small maintenance vehicles to
cross the bridge. Alternatively, concrete waste blocks can be used
to block the bridge and moved by the town with an excavator as
required.
Advantages:
• Reuses historic structure and maintains bridge as a cultural
resource,
• Continued access to and support of water and sewer utility
mains,
Disadvantages:
• Lower capacity than other options,
• Bridge is off a main route and away from downtown, it is unclear
that a pedestrian crossing would be used,
• Pedestrian facilities have already been provided on the nearby
Route 22A Bridge.
The total budgetary estimate for this alternative ranges from
approximately $946,900 to $1,133,700 depending on the extent of
required structural repairs. Please refer to Table 2 for additional
information.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 13
January, 2015
Table 2: Alternative 3 Budgetary Estimate
Item Description Unit Price
2 Lead Paint Removal LS $285,000
3 Abutment Rehabilitation LS $85,000
4 Bridge Structural Repairs LS $100,000 to $250,000
5 New Bearings LS $30,000
6 New Deck System LS $50,000
7 Pedestrian Rails LS $45,000
8 Traffic and Erosion Control LS $50,000
9 Road Approach Work LS $47,500
Construction Total $757,500 to $907,500
Engineering (15%) and Inspection (10%) $189,400 to $226,200
Total Budgetary Estimate $946,900 to $1,133,700
3.4 Alternative 4: Remove and Replace the Existing Bridge with a
New Structure
For Alternative 4, the project team designed a precast concrete
beam bridge with composite deck. To minimize cost and reuse
existing abutments, we assumed a one lane bridge with no sidewalk.
The replacement bridge would be the same width as the existing
structure, approximately 12-feet, but with VTrans compliant
guardrail. VTrans typically requires that replacement bridges have
a minimum width of 16-feet, but this would not be possible with the
reuse of the existing abutments. The proposed structure is designed
to carry the controlling HL-93 live load required for all new
structures by Section 3.4.1 of the 2010 Structures Manual. To
reduce cost is was assumed the deck would be to be poured in a
single day (see Figure 6 in Appendix E).
A concrete girder bridge was chosen over a steel bridge for a
number of reasons:
• Faster, easier, and safer construction
• Lower cost
• Less maintenance
• Longer design life
For this alternative the project team assumed the bridge would be
designed to meet AASHTO’s HL-93 design load and expected design
life of 75 years. The HL-93 loading is covers a wide variety of
vehicles. Designing to this standard allows for all expected
maintenance and rescue vehicles to cross the bridge. The expected
scope of work for this alternative is:
• Final design of bridge and substructure,
• Implementing traffic control measures, such as vehicle barriers,
minor signage, and flaggers,
• Implementation of worker safety protection in compliance with
current OSHA standards,
• Implementation of an Environmental Protection and Sediment
Control plan that includes,
• Channel protection during abutment rehabilitation,
• Sediment control fencing and other measures as required,
• Partial demolition and removal of the existing bridge and bridge
seats,
• Rehabilitation of the abutments,
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 14
January, 2015
• Casting of new bridge seats,
• Installation of precast bridge beams,
• Pouring the deck and installing guardrail, and
• Installing recommend code compliant pedestrian railings along the
top of all wingwalls to prevent falls.
Advantages:
• Faster construction times,
• Longer life structure with limited maintenance,
• Increase capacity, and
• Continued access to and support of water and sewer
utilities
Disadvantages:
• Does not maintain cultural resource of historic structure at that
site, which may also result in difficulty utilizing federal
funding.
• Removed liability associated with failing bridge, and
• Uncertain that a traffic crossing is needed at this
location.
The total budgetary estimate for this alternative is approximately
$582,000. Please refer to Table 3 for additional information.
Table 3: Alternative 4 Budgetary Estimate
Item Description Unit Price
9 Road Approach Work LS $40,000
Construction Total $465,000
Total Budgetary Estimate $582,000
3.5 Alternative 5: Removal of Existing Bridge and Construction of
Utility/Pedestrian Bridge
This alternative would remove the existing bridge, and install a
new bridge with the main purpose of supporting the utility mains
over the river. However, the cost for a utility bridge is similar
to the cost of a pedestrian bridge. Consequently, a pedestrian
bridge capable of supporting the utility mains was considered for
this alternative due to the increased functionality at minimal
additional cost. The expected scope of work for this alternative
is:
• Final design of bridge and substructure,
• Implementing traffic control measures, such as vehicle barriers,
minor signage, and flaggers,
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 15
January, 2015
• Implementation of worker safety protection in compliance with
current OSHA standards,
• Implementation of an Environmental Protection and Sediment
Control plan that includes,
• Channel protection during abutment rehabilitation,
• Sediment control fencing and other measures as required,
• Removal of the existing deck, bridge, and bridge seats,
• Rehabilitation of the abutments,
• Installation of pedestrian bridge structure, and
• Installation of pipe hangers and realignment of utilities,
Advantages:
• Lowest cost alternative that provides continued support and
access to utility mains,
• Faster construction times,
Disadvantages:
• Does not maintain cultural resource of historic structure at that
site, which may also result in difficulty utilizing federal
funding.
• Uncertain that a pedestrian bridge is needed at this
location.
The total budgetary estimate for this alternative is approximately
$393,750. Please refer Table 4 for additional information.
Table 4: Alternative 5 Budgetary Estimate
Item Description Unit Price
4 New Pedestrian Structure LS $145,000
5 Pipe Hangers LS $50,000
Construction Total $315,000
Total Budgetary Estimate $393,750
4.0 PERMITTING Reconstructing, reconditioning or constructing a new
bridge in the same general area as the existing bridge would
significantly reduce potential impacts to environmental resources.
Per preliminary research and coordination, the permitting
requirements are similar for each alternative. Permitting is
typically conducted during the preliminary design phase of the
project and would be dependent on the final design of the
alternative selected. The following permits and clearances would be
required, at a minimum, for the bridge alternatives
investigated:
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study 16
January, 2015
o Categorical Exclusion Documentation: If federal funding is
obtained for later phases of the project, Categorical Exclusion
Documentation would be required to receive clearances for natural
and cultural resources per the National Environmental Protection
Act. To obtain the Categorical Exclusion clearances, Archeological
and Historical Resource and Natural Resources Assessments would be
required for the project area.
o VT ANR - Stream Alteration Permit: This permit would be required
for any of the alternatives considered due to bridge construction
over the Castleton River. Per preliminary coordination with the
Vermont State Stream Alteration Engineers, all the alternatives
investigated for this study appear eligible for coverage under this
permit.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on a comprehensive evaluation of the
bridge alternatives developed, the project team recommends a
combination of Alternative 1: Do Nothing and Permanently Close the
Bridge and Alternative 5: Remove Existing Bridge and Replace with
Utility/Pedestrian Bridge. Alternative 1 is recommended only as a
short term solution. The Town should permanently close the bridge
to vehicular traffic and regularly monitor the structure for
safety, particularly in respect to pedestrian traffic. The utility
hangers should also be inspected on a regular basis to ensure
adequacy. Over time, the bridge will continue to deteriorate and
will eventually need to be fenced off to completely restrict all
access. As the bridge continues to deteriorate, the associated
liability for the Town will increase.
In the long term, a plan must be developed for the continued
support of the utility mains. Consequently, it is recommended that
Alternative 5 be planned and implemented within the next 5 to 10
years. Given the anticipated cost for the replacement
pedestrian/pipe bridge, the Town should use this time to line up
funding, seek clearances, and plan for this recommended
project.
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study
January, 2015
Appendix A
PROJECT SITE
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, Vermont
Site Location map July 1986 USGS Map
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study
January, 2015
Appendix B
Vermont AOT Bridge Design Plans (1960)
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study
January, 2015
Appendix C
Inspectiotr Report .for FAIR HAVEN bridge no.: 00004 District:
3
Locoted on: C3050 ove CASTLETON RIVER approximatell, 0.02 MI TO JCT
W CL2 TH Owner: 03 TOWN-OWNED
CONDITION
Chanttel Rilittg: I YERY GOOD
Culvert Riling: N NOT APPLICABLE
Federol Str. N u mher : I 01 I 070004 I I 07 I Federal Sulficiency
Rating: 074.2
Deticiency Sttlus ofStruclure: FD
Service On: I HIGHWAY
Service Under: 5 WATERWAY
Lanes On lhe Slructure: 0l Lanes Under lhe Slruclure: 00
Bltpnss, Detour Lcngth (niles): 00
ADT: 000640 % Truck ADT: 02
Yeur oI ADT: 2008
Slructure Lenglh (l): 000053
Britlgc RtlwS, Witlth Curb-to-Curh (ft): 12
Deck llidth Out-to-0ut (fi): I3 Appr. Roudwa.y Wirillr (fl):
026
Skew: 00
Bridgc Median: 0 NO MEDIAN
Min Verticul Clr Ot,er (l): 99 FT 99 IN Fenture Under: FEATURE NOT
A HIGHWAY
OR RAILROAD Min Verticol Underclr (I): 00 FT 00 IN
STRUCTURE TYPE Qnd MATERIALS
Numher o/ Approtch Spuns 0000 Numher of Main Spans: 001
Kind oJ'Mnleriol and,/or Design: -l STEEL
Deck Structure Tltpe: 1 CONCRETE CIP
Tlpe ol H/euring SurJace: 6 BITaMINOUS
Tlpe of Menfirane 0 NONE
Deck Proleclion: 0 NONE
Transitiotrs: 0 DOES NOT MEET CURRENT STANDARD
Approuclr Guurdroil 0 DOES NOT MEET CURRENT STANDARD
Appnnclt Guardruil Ends: 0 DOES NOT MEET CURRENT STANDARD
Structurul Evoluation: 6 EQAAL TO MINIMaM CRITERIA
Deck Geometry: 2 INTOLERABLE, REPLACEMENT NEEDED
Unrlcrclearunces Verlicnl and Horiuttrtul: N NOT APPLICABLE
llaterwn.y Adequuc.y: 7 SLIGHT CHANCE OF OVERTOPPING BRIDGE &
ROADWAY
Appronch Rotrtlwtt.y Alignment: 4 MEETS MINIMUM TOLERABLE
CRITERIA
Scour Critical Bridges: 8 STABLE FOR SCOUR
DESIGN VEHICLE, RATING, and POSTING
Lond Rating Method (lnv): 2 ALLOWABLE STRESS (AS)
Postittg Stntus: A OPEN, NO RESTRICTION
Bridge Posting: 5 NO POSTING REQUIRED
Loud Posting: 10 NO LOAD POSTING SIGNS ARE NEEDED
Po,sted Vehicle: POSTING NOT REOUIRED
Posled lleight (lons):
Itrsp. Date: 042012 ltrsp. Freq. (months) 24 X-Ref BrNum:
INSPECTION SUMMARY and NEEDS 04/18/2012 - Regukr inspection
utilizing VTrans servi lift unit. Concrete deck needs
rehfuititation t ith a rcinlorced oveilay. Deckwenring surface is
gelling quite rough and loss of concrete dong the surlace is
exposing corroded rebar. The steel superslruclure needs exlensive
cleoning anrt painting to slow conosion which is progressing, The
southem abutmenl is sound but has some heavy scaling anrl section
loss nnd coukl use rcfacing. The taitl up marble relaining wnll flt
the southeost cornet of the bfidge is unstable md will likely
collnpse into the chtnnel in afew yeus; though ilts eventual
fnilure, as ilrith the othet rclaining b'nlls, t't'ill not eflect
the bridge. Locals mentionerl lheir concerns legaftling the steep
drops offthe ups!rcam side ofthe brirtge, where there is no lype of
petleslrinn banier. - MJ/DK
05/18/10 Satisfflctory condilion hov)ever lop of deck conlinues to
deleilomte antl needs to be rehabbetl as pol holes are prcsenl flwl
exposed rebar is show in rnndom spots. Hewy erosion behind rnil
downslrcnm side v,ill need repnirc in lhe not loo disk,nce future
an(l unst(ble retaining walts will need. repoir. - MJK/FRE
llerlnesilq, Mnrch 05, 20 1 4
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204
Photo #4 Rivet pinning
Project # 14204
Photo #6 Deteriorating abutment
Project # 14204
Photo #8 Slate retaining wall
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study
January, 2015
Appendix D
1,072
54.5
Natural Resources Atlas - Adams Street Bridge Vermont Agency of
Natural Resources
750
38.0
1:
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
Meters38.00
NOTES
LEGEND
19.00
vermont.gov
DISCLAIMER: This map is for general reference only. Data layers
that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or
otherwise reliable. ANR and
the State of Vermont make no representations of any kind, including
but not limited to, the warranties of merchantability, or fitness
for a particular use, nor
are any such warranties to be implied with respect to the data on
this map.
January 14, 2015
1" = 62 1cm = 8Ft. Meters
Dog Sled Trail
Animal
Plant
Acidic Riverside Outcrop
Beaver Wetland (Non-NC)
Black Spruce Swamp
Adams Street Bridge Town of Fair Haven, VT Engineering Study
January, 2015
Appendix E
Project # 14204
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204
Figure #3 Schematic Pedestrian Bridge Section – Alternative 3
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204
December 15, 2014
Project # 14204