The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDocumentation_Workshop_Tab 01_01/28/2008C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. .: Tequesta Drive Bridge over the Loxahatchee River presented 2~0: Village of Tequesta January 2008 1 r j ~(~'e ~sh 51-~~ Shh~ .~; ~, P -~, Tequesta Drive Bridge ~ d 3i C 4 ~ E4'4it'5'~' r2i 7 Y.,, , K ~ 1 „ ., West CONSUL 7 1 N G E N G I N E E R S BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. - -- 2 East ~. .~ . -_ ~M CON 3 U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S South E I evat i o n - BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, ING. _.___ ..,,. .,G, `~,. ~,,, ~n_.~h+,.~.., ,~, ,~ .. .. m...i~„...w,. ,sW._:-:. ,,,.,.".a::...,.'s3~&~~.,µ,i.;..~,.;.~`:.1.'s.5i.4.~~uA.w~~civ~.t~::i tws.~`JG~w":~,d'&:,.,..v'k.a, b,,. n:a ,wd9 ., ,.~:n,it r,~...v;;.;'I.~N,.n.M~,.,.,~.udwa~k,~..,:a:J~r ;:.. ,~~d~Fk'NGl'`~I~dN ~~Y 4,,,~ "'~,,;.. CONSULTING ENGINEER S North E I evat i o n - BRIDGE DESIGN -- ASSOCIATES, INC. ..:,,.. „tip ti ., .., .,~_'iw<k +.,r,r~.w .~ ~,a~~~..rw~a,,~i,<~.rw~,~+~. r~ ~ ~~xr..,a.,.!~Y.~~:hh ~ ~k~a~~-.n•.. ,..e,,,~,~,~.~«», ,~„~.a,~~:~; ~e~atJl~a~~YiA~~,~d~rn.y~~~+4~&~a, xa~5,r«"~~'~,~rGr`r,'~M~ -- . ~~ .,;~ *~ ~' . ~ ~ ~~~ ~,"" °~ ~ ~ ''~ ts ~ ~ ~ ~ . i .~«~~ . ._ _ .,, .. fl' _ .w ~ ~ '4'b,G. ' ~ . > .. ., MktI :. ..-_. - eta v.. South Elevation CONSUL 7 1 N G ENGINEER S _ BRIDGE DESIGN _ ASSOCIATES, INC. _. , _ day , ~ 5 CONSULTING ENGINEER S Lookin West _ BRIDGE DESIGN _ AS OCIATES IN --~:..:_ S C __. „ e,.~~;...., ,~< „~ ~.. ~ ~,. P~~. t n ...4 ~a ~•, ~a ~~ ~ t ~" s"" ~~rv .. r„ 3~ ~~ ~ ~ v ~ . ~ ; " r~... a ~w ~as. h ~ ~ m,;r , ~~ ~ ~' '~ ~ ~ ~, a M1 . ... , k . .4 - ~,. - =.-w. ... . v. ~.. , 6 !s~ CONSULTING ENGINEER S Looki n East BRIDGE DESIGN g --- ASSOCIATES, INC. ... ~....~ ._,.~ _....~ _ ... ._ . ~ ~.~.~.. w ~~ ,.. `~.,. ~ `V , _t, ~,. ~Na r. ,. ~ - ,.~ !~ .. ,,_ ~~, , ~_ ~ ~ ,~. ~ _, ~ { ?~ a , ~,, ° ~- ,~~ ~p+;~~.:rss~ .sr ,.. err„ ^`° ""` ~. ~. _,4 a' ~~ '_' e 6 7 End Bent BRIDGE DESIGN - ASS4CIATES, INC. -e ,. ... ...x,, ~~... ,,.. ,~ ~ , v. -:. ~~ gi . ~ e M ~~''?tl6i' ..~. ~~~~ ..~ ~.+ ~,; r a ~ ~ a'> s -~~~ ~ > ~ w s , , I, &s~ ,y .~„ r * _ , , ~, ._ ' ~ r ,r ,~;~ ~ ~' n. 1 :, ~ ,mss` ~ : ~ ,~ ., . 8 C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S T i ca I Pile BRIDGE DESIGN Yp ---- ASSOCIATES INC. - _. ..,. i~~6~~ z~,`G'.'u w~ .. „ I, t,A ~![ h „~i r ~.. ). ~.V~U r ... ,x ~~ ~;n~d~ , ~^~y»4 ~4 < ~ ~' ~. a ~ 4 S 04 A 9 CONSUL 7 1 N G E N G I N E E R S Intermediate Bent _ BRIDGE DESIGN - ASSyyOCIATES, INC. _ - t t ~ . ~ ~1, = ~,~~. ... ~~~~~'~ ~ r~ Yom- ~ ~:.: ,- .. - _.__ -_ ,~" ~~ ~~., •~-:.~ C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S New S I o e P rote ct i o n BRIDGE DESIGN p = ASSOCIATES, INC. --- --- fJ:,, ,,~ u~ -: 11 CON 5 U L T I N G ENGINEER S New S I o e p P rotect i o n - BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. - ~Y~ mfr ~ ~~ > ;,, , :~. 12 C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S Co n c rete S a l l i n /Deck BRIDGE DESIGN p g ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ~ , , ~-- ,~ ._ ,.. ,. .. ~ ~„ ,~ ~. v .~,,. ~<< ~ ,~...~ as, ..,~ ~ ~,w~. ~ ~, ti~ .. S~.r, v., . , , ~~, , .., , , ~ ~,„,dtr ~~"Sri~t~~ ~,,~,,,~~r#i~r~r.2 e..~~~~ ~f~~ ,sin ~` ,m~ 2 . 1 Fii ~r~. ~~ x~ ~` ~a ~ f 13 ~ ~ ~ '~ ~,~ n~ t ~ ~ "'~ - '~a ~` t r ~ a 3a~ Concrete Spalling /Deck CONSUL 7 1 N G ENGINEER S BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. mm.__ ,. ~~ ~~~ U t, s,.., , ri. ,.. , ~ ~.. ....,, 14 .~; r .~ ~ C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S T i ca I R a i l i n BRIDGE DESIGN Yp ~ -- ASSOCIATES INC. ---__- -_.~_ (l hr/ ! „ ,. ~: fi~ ~`11~„a.ffh,+}~i~.k~an .~ T~<w\nnrofkFi.a ~..>5'~,Uka`~4 wear kmt...a ~." 15 C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S T i ca I Ra i l i n ___ BRIDGE DESIGN ._____ yp g _ _ - - ASSOCIATES, INC. _ _ ... .r ~ ~ ~... i r. ::: ~ .:n k:m,Y n t y.g. g;. ,q ~xty r ~ t.: ,H.y.- 1. r, d. n ,~„ ~H~ , ~,,,1,i~h. H~6 _'~dk~ fiY ~~,{(~ C~,p, f ~{~ . ,,. ~, .Stm,s.. k,..<Nt,., .,.. r ~. ,.-. ,... ~ ....:l s..,~ .~~..v ..~.~. ~,,,.Yer~.,.....~f.?>w•,,.,.u~,F4,,w.,~.x....,`aea e.~.at~if. s~.'..,.al ..., tug».uo,X. 5.2....,.~7n :~.. ~. ~~.Yn~i,~'mr~ttc.»aaw..~~4~°Yt~,~. ko-,. ~.v-..... ~ _ ~ ~H .t!~Wi t~~~~~x,~~*8,~~~~x%~~^~;kA~.~~kYL~h'Si,~'1.;~i'f"tHrwWn#i.. n~ r`- e.~ ~w , 3 "2:Y~ .~'T ~: r ~`d^ e,. x~.•'~ .e Y _:3 ~.~ E f ,: x rc s*.~fx ~" .: ' ,~~ ~;5~,,, . ~r, 16 . . C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S Uti I ~t~es BRIDGE DESIGN - ASSOCIATES, INC. _- ,<s CONSULTING ENGINEER S U t i ~ i t i e ~7 BRIDGE DESIGN --- ASSOCIATES, INC. _- ._~s~.a ~..,._ .~ w .u~. _, ~7~.,.v.. wm, .. ...~C...~~h >, .,.,. a,. ,Y~,~,> ~s.e~,~~ u,.d~u„ _ s.~~ 1,_,~~. ~~+1sd~o-i5.~~~r~iu~k'ti6~&~ii4'3~SY3 .~u~n .u.i~~`~~~'~?_ f ~. ~ .. k ? .. v 18 r s. ~ CONSULTING ENGINEER S North Side BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. -- ~~' ~ ~ CONSUL 7 I N G E N G I N E E R S North S ~ d e BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. ,±~ 4~ ~r ,~ sia~a it t t ~ ,s -~~~7~rrrc7:i~n . - . sia~r_asrz~~rt~a~r~a:mz~i ~_ ~:;, 4 Off, 20 '°" ni,..+N c~.r„ CONSULTING ENGINEER S O r't ~ G BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. - ._ w ~.~_. 4 ~ __. r . ~ 'i" ':(r ~r I'R~ ~7 ~77CrL~ :f i~ri ~ - ~ - a iTa SiT:FI i F~ ~T~l TTa :li~I--l i :oY s a~ 21 '~" North Side „~y ~,: . . ~ _ ., , ~~, ~. 'YYWPr 4 ~4`^v..,,.~ ~~ ~ t pC v 22 "~~ CONSULTING ENGINEER S ___ BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. `~u~~;~~~~~r<"~'` ~+~~-.`~s~{~'~~' : `~`f~.~m~~:, ' ~•'~'~ua `~~'`~~;~~~ ~-~~ri,~c?~~~^~34„~~+s~#~Mar~~~z,~,,~s<,d 4-,~~ < . ~. ;, ~„~ z> ..~„ C O N S U L T I N G ENGINEER S South Side BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. - _____. >n ~ ;' 1 4:. ~{ t, 2 ~ .~~~ Y ~, u r ~, "`h, Sy, ' ~ ~ ' ~1 ~~~ ~ _Z~Y" '6 =~ ~ •~ ~ - ... ~. .. 23 ~rn rth Flavatinn C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S BRIDGE DESIGN ---- ASSOCIATES, INC. ---- _._ ., ,. ~ r.w ~_~<F.. ~ ~_ _r_., .s%~ ~.~ .: ~ ~s.~ r aar ~; 6,i ._.w Y. '~~h«E~,Bx~'~+~~'.~~~~r~ ~~}'~.~rc ,„,u, 5fit. h~i~gher Lo~v I~ern~er 24 ` C®uzz®, 11AichaeB f=rom: David B. Thompson [DThompson@kisingercampo.comj Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 6:22 PM To: Couzzo, Michael Cc: Patrick O'Grady; Dave Crissey Subject: Tequesta Bridge Inspection Report 930227 Hi Mike, The copy of the report I referred to in our conversation is not the most recent, but. should provide a good representation of the overall condition of the bridge. I just spoke to Patrick O'Grady in our inspection office- although we have some good field notes, the most recent report is not quite ready for distribution. I've attached a link to the past two reports in electronic format for your use. Please send whatever information you have available on the meeting location, agenda, etc. by noon Monday if possible. Based on our conversation, I'll be prepared to answer any questions on the bridge condition and future service life. Best Regards, Dave T. l (~k~.! f E~~G~ICLG~.~'~6~~ l ~E iF%.l4.S Ct~4 9~~~.~F 4.JY a~~tf .l.~n~.( ~_L~L!~~/~4~~ username of kcaftp and password of kca if needed ®avid 13. Thotrnpsoro, P.E. l~isinger Campo ~ Associates Corp 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1200 Tampa, FL 33607 (813) 871-5331 email: dthompson(a~kcaena.com website: www.kisingercampo.com ' IS-I~E P® ®CIATS ~Po ,, ~~ June 15, 2007 Mr. Mike Couzzo, Jr. City Manager Village of Tequesta P. 0. Box 3273 Tequesta, FL 33469 RE: Bridge Inspection Report Submittals to Local Owners FDOT Local Government Consultant Contract In District IV Dear Mr. Couzzo: In our agreement with FDOT District IV, KCA is responsible for submitting the FDOT approved bridge inspection report(s) to the Village of Tequesta in a timely manner throughout the duration of the contract. The fallowing is a list of inspection report(s) for your review: Bridge No. Type Insp. Insp. Date Dive Date Analysis Analysis Comment 930227 Post-Repair 2/14/07 N/A Type N/A Date N/A N/A If you have any questions, please e-mail (tlocicero@kinsin ercampo com) or call me @ (813) 554-1919, ext. 509. Sincerely, 7 ~ Thomas A. LoCicero, P.E. Bridge Structures Engineer TAL:em Encl. Cc: Skip Ferrera, CBI, FDOT Consultant Inspection Contracts Coordinator Brian O'Donoghue, P.E., FDOT District Bridge Inspection Engineer Patrick O'Grady, CBI, KCA Bridge Inspection Supervisor File: 4200620.066 •; ~~ s, r• ~l) 'l ~, ._. .~. ._... Brandon Office ° 9270 Bay Plaza Boulevard • Suite 605 a Tampa, FL 33619 = Phone: 813/554-1919 ~ Fax: 813/621-8582 Visit our web site at www.kisingercampo.com BY: Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp BRIDGE NAME: Not Recorded OWNER: City/Municipal Hwy Agenc YEAR BUILT: 1962 MAINTAINED BY: City/Municipal Hwy Agenc SECTION NO.: 0093000114 STRUCTURE TYPE: 5 Prestressed Concrete 01 Stab MIP: 0.325 LOCATION: 1.2M1 W OF US-1 ROUTE: 00000 SERVICE TYPE ON: 5Highway-pedestrian FACILITY CARRIED: TEQUESTA DRIVE SERV TYPE UND: 5 Waterway FEA TURE INTERSECTED: NO FORK LOXAHATCHEE RIV THIS BRIDGE CONTAINS FRACTURE CRITICAL COMPONENTS I THIS BRIDGE IS SCOUR CRITICAL ~' THIS REPORT IDENTIFIES DEFICIENCIES WHICH REQUIRE PROMPT CORRECTIVE ACTION FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE 'XJ STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT TYPE OF INSPECTION: Interim DATE FIELD INSPECTION WAS COMPLETED: ABOVE WATER: 2/14/2007 UNDERWATER:01/31/2006 SMART FLAGS: OVERALL NBI RATINGS: 359 Soffit Smart Flag: Soffit cracked DECK: 4 Poor SUPERSTRUCTURE:4Poor SUBSTRUCTURE: 6 Satisfactory CHANNEL: 7 Minor Damage CULVERT: N N/A (NBI) SUFFICIENCY RATING: 32.1 FIELD PERSONNEL / TITLE /NUMBER Botha, Colin -Bridge Inspector (CBI#00422) (lead) Carreno, Fernando - BI Tech REVIEWING BRIDGE INSPECTION SUPERVISOR: O'Grady, Patrick -Bridge Inspection Supervisor (CBI#00274) CONFIRMING REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: INITIALS LoCicero, Thomas - PE #31136 Kisinger Campo & Associates 9270 Bay Plaza Blvd., Suite 605 Certificate of Authorization #2317 Tampa, FL 33619 SIGNATURE: DATE ~~ 31~1~~ REPORT ID' INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 03/29/2007 All Elemen4s UNIT: 0 DECKS ELEMENT/ENV: 9914 PS Conc Slab 7607 sf. ELEM CATEGORY: Decks/Slabs CONDITION STATE (5) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Repaired areas and/or potholes or impending potholes 7607 sf. and/or raveling or rutting exist. Their combined area is more than 2% but less than 10% of the total deck area. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4. and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab uhits in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 8. Sidewalk slab units 8 and 9 had previously been identified as 10 and 11. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, all comments can be found in the attached addendum. CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN: Slab Units 3-3 through 3-7 have been replaced and all previously noted exposed steel in the deck underside has been patched, but the patches are starting to delaminate. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 03/29/2007 FL®R~®A ~EF~~RI°Il~Ef~`T ~F T° ~S~C~I~ ~ DTI®R~ ~R~®GE A~AGEET ~Y~T~ Inspecti®n/CI® Rep®rt (INTERIM INSPECTION REPORT) BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 3 OF 11 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 2/1412007 DPLV1l Smart Flag Summary UNIT:O SMART FLAG ELEMENT/ENV: 359/4 Soffit Smart Flag 1 ea. ELEM CATEGORY:Smart Flags CONDITION STATE (5) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Cracking and efflorescence on the undersurface is moderate. The 1 distressed area is 10% or less of the underside area. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Underside of the slab units have extensive spalling with exposed and corroded rebar and prestressed cables. Refer to Element 99 PS Conc Slab for related comments. Structure Notes BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Note: Bridge inventoried from west to east. Note: This structure is on a 12 month inspection frequency due to SIA Items #58 (Deck), #59 (Superstructure) and #70 (Bridge Posting) are all rated a 4. INSPECTION NOTES: DPLW 2/14/2007 Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by knkcabc-P at 2007-03-29 07:32:39 Note: This was an interim (post-repair) inspection. Only Element 99 PS Conc Slab was inspected and evaluated, and will be included in this report. For all other deficiencies, refer to the previous routine report dated 1/28/06. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 03/29/2007 FL JDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page ~ of 11 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 03/29/2007 ®~SCriptt®Ol Structure Unit Identification Bridge/Unit Key: 830227 0 Structure Name: Description: SPAN 1 THROUGH 5 Type: M Main Roadwav Identification: NBI Structure No (8) 930227 Position/Prefix (5) Route On Structure Kind Hwy (Rte Prefix) 5 City Street Design Level of Service 1 Mainline Route Number/Suffix 00000/ 0 N/A (NBI) Feature Intersect (6) NO FORK LOXAHATCHEE RIV Critical Facility Not Defense-crit Facility Carried (7) TEQUESTA DRIVE Mile Point (11)0.325 Roadwav Traffic and Accidents Lanes (28) 2 Medians 0 Speed 15 mph ADT Class ADT Class 4 Recent ADT (29) 13486 Year (30) 2004 Future ADT (114) 23398 Year (115) 2027 Truck %ADT (109) 2 Detour Length (19) 3 mi Detour Speed 15 mph Accident Count -1 Rate -1 Latitude (16) 026d57'30" Long (17) 080d06'12" Roadwav Classification Nat. Hwy Sys (104) 0 Not on NHS National base Net (12) Not on Base Network LRS Inventory Rte (13a) 93 000 114 Sub Rte (13b) 00 Functional Class (26) 17 Urban Collector On Federal Aid System Y Defense Hwy (100) 0 Not a STRAHNET hwy Direction of Traffic (102) 2 2-way traffic Emergency^ Roadwav Clearances Vertical (10) 99.99 ft Appr. Road (32) 24.6 ft Horiz. (47) 38.7 ft Roadway (51) 27.8 ft Truck Network (110) 0 Not part of natl netwo Toll Facility (20) 3 On free road Fed. Lands Hwy (105) 0 N/A (NBI) School Bus Route ^/ Transit Route ^ FL ,IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Structure ID: 930227 Page 5 of 11 DATE PRINTED: 03/29/2007 Structure Identification Geometrics Admin Area Palm Beach County Spans in Main Unit (45) 5 District (2) D4 - Ft. Lauderdale Approach Spans (46) 0 County (3) (93)Palm Beach Length of Max Span (48) 36.4 ft Place Code (4) Tequesta Structure Length (49) 181.1 ft Location (9) 1.2M1 W OF US-1 Deck Area 7607 sgft Border Br St/Reg (98) Not Applicable (P) Share 0 % Structure Flared (35) 0 No flare Border Struct No (99) Age and Service FIPS State/Region (1) 12 Florida Region 4-Atlanta Year Built (27) 1962 NBIS Bridge Len (112) Meets NBI Length Year Reconstructed (106) 2006 Parallel Structure (101) No ~~ bridge exists Type of Service On (42a) 5Highway-pedestrian Temp. Structure (103) Not Applicable (P) Under (42b) 5 Waterway Maint. Resp. (21) City/Municipal Hwy Agenc Fracture Critical Details Not Applicable Owner (22) City/Municipal Hwy Agenc Historic Signif. (37) 5 Not eligible for NRHP Structure Type and Material Deck Type and Material Curb/Sidewalk (50): Left 5.2 ft Right 5.9 ft Deck Width (52): 42 Bridge Median (33): 0 No median Skew (34): 0 Main Span Material (43A): 5 Prestressed Concrete Deck Type (107): 2 Concrete Precast Panet Appr Span Material (44Aj: Not Applicable Surface (108): 6 Bituminous Main Span Design (436): 01 Slab Membrane: 0 None Appr Span Design (448): Not Applicable Deck Protection: None Appraisal Structure Appraisal Open/Posted/Closed (41) P Posted for load Deck Geometry (68) 2 Intolerable -Replace Underclearances (69) N Not applicable (NBI) Approach Alignment (72) 8-No Speed Red thru Curv Bridge Railings (36a) 0 Substandard Transitions (36b) 0 Substandard Approach Guardrail (36c) 0 Substandard Approach Guardrail ends (36d) 0 Substandard Scour Critical (113) U Unknown Scour Minimum Vertical Clearance Over Structure (53) 99.99 ft Under (reference) (54a) N Feature not hwy or RR Under (54b) 0 ft Load Rating Design Load (31) 4 M 18 (H 20) Rating Date 3/28/2006 Initials JLL Posting (70) 4 0.1-9.9%below fi Schedule Current Inspection Inspection Date: 02/14/2007 Inspector: KNKCABC-P -Colin Botha Bridge Group: N/A Primary Type: Interim Review Required: ^/ Navigation Data Navigation Control (38) Permit Not Required Nav Vertical Clr (39) 0 ft Nav Horizontal Clr (40) 0 ft Min Vert Lift Clr (116) 0 ft Pier Protection (111) Not Applicable (P) NBI Condition Rating Sufficiency Rating 32.1 Structural Eval (67) 4 Minimum Tolerable Deficiency Structurally Deficient Minimum Lateral Underclearance Reference (55a) N Feature not hwy or RR Right Side (55b) 0 ft Left Side (56) 0 ft Operating Type (63) 1 LF Load Factor Operating rating (64) 42.6 tons Alternate -1 Inventory Type (65) 1 LF Load Factor Inventory Rating (66) 25.5 tons Alternate -1 Alt Meth -1 Next Inspection Date Scheduled NBI: 1!28/2008 Element: 01 /28/2008 Fracture Critical: Underwater: 01 /28!2008 Other/Special: 01 /28/2008 REPORT ID: INVT001A Structure ID: 930227 FL .:IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report COMPREHENSIVE Frequency (92) Last Date (93) mos ~- - 6 Schedule Conti Inspection Types Performed NB10 Element ^ Fracture Critical ^ Underwater ^ Other Special ^ Inspection Intervals Required (92) Fracture Critical ^ Underwater Other Special ^/ NBI CUStOf71 General Bridge Information Parallel Bridge Seq Channel Depth 7.9 ft Radio Frequency -1 Phone Number (000) 000-0000 Exception Date Exception Type Unknown Accepted By Maint 01/01/1962 Warranty Expiration 00/CO/0000 Bridge Load Rating Information HS20 Govr. Span Length 34.4 ft L-Rating Origination Design Plans Load Rating Date 03/28/2006 Method Calculation AASHTO formula Load Dist. Factor 0.68 Impact Factor 30 Design Method Load Factor Design Measure English Recommend SU Posting 32 Recommend C Posting 99 Recommend T Posting 99 Gov FB Span 0 ft Gov FB Spacing 0 ft FB H$20 Rating 0 FB SU4 Rating 0 FB Present N FB INV Rating Factor0 FB OPR Rating Factor0 FB FL 120 0 tons Bridae Scour and Storm Information Pile Driving Record Unknown Foundation Type Unknown Mode of Flow Tidal Rating Scour Eval Scour Susceptible -Low Highest Scour Eval Phase I completed 24 mos 01 /31 /2006 11 mos 02/14/2007 24 mos (91) 01 /28/2006 (90) Page 6 of 11 DATE PRINTED: 03/2912007 Inspection Resources Crew Hours 4 Flagger Hours 0 Helper Hours 0 Snooper Hours 0 Special Crew Hours 3 Special Equip Hours 0 Bridge Rail 1 Concrete post & beam Bridge Rail 2 Not applicable-No rail Electrical Devices No electric service Culvert Type Not applicable Maintenance Yard 0 FIRS ON /OFF No Routes on FIHS Previous Structure Single Unit Truck 2 Axles 31.8 tons Single Unit Truck 3 Axles 33 tons Single Unit Truck 4 Axles 32.5 tons Combination Unit Truck 3 Axles 48.3 tons Combination Unit Truck 4 Axles 44.1 tons Combination Unit Truck 5 Axles 48 tons Truck Trailer 5 Axles 50 tons Posting Weight 5 tons Actual SU Posting 99 tons Actual C Posting 99 tons Actual T Posting 99 FL 120 Long Gov Span -1 tons FL 120 Trans -1 tons Single Axle Trans -1 tons Tandem Axle Trans -1 tons Wing Span -1 ft Web to Web Span -1 ft HS20 OPR Rating Max Span -1 tons FL120 Long Max Span -1 tons Scour Recommended I Stop scour evaluations Scour Recommended II No recommendation Scour Recommended III No recommendation Scour Elevation -1 Action Elevation -1 Storm Frequency -1 1 Condition', NBI Rating Channel (61) 7 Minor Damage Deck (58) 4 Poor Superstructure (59) 4 Poor Substructure (60) 6 Satisfactory Culvert (62) N N/A (NBI) Waterway (71) 7 Above Minimum Unrepaired Spalls -1 Review Required ^/ REPORT ID: INVT001A Structure ID: 930227 FL .IDA DEPARTfl~ENT OF TRANSPORTATIOFI BRIDGE nflANAGEIViENT SYSTEIIA Inspection/CID Report COMPREHEIJSII/E Page 7 of 11 DATE PRIPITED: 03/29/2007 Elements Inspection Date: 2/14/2007DPLW pan Id ElemlE Description Qty1 %1 Qty2 %2 Qty3 %3 Qty4 %4 Qty5 %5 T Qty D 99/4 S Conc Slab ~~~ 7607 100. 0~0~ 7607 sf. Notes Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab units in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 9. Sidewalk slab units 8 and 9 had previously been identified as 10 and 11. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, all comments can be found in the attached addendum. CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN: Slab Units 3-3 through 3-7 have been replaced and all previously noted exposed steel in the deck underside has been patched, but the patches are starting to delaminate. 301/4 ourable Joint Seal I. ~ ~J~~ 84 100. ~~~~ 84 If. Notes Note: Total quantity represents the visible portion of the joints in the curb and sidewalk areas. Roadway portions are no longer visible due to the new asphalt overlay. Sealant within the sidewalk portion of the joints is completely deteriorated and in some areas they are packed with dirt and debris. Refer + to photo 10. The sidewalk joints show no significant change from the previous report. 331/4 one Bridge Railing 244 7.05 ~0 120 2.95 ~0©~ 364 If. Notes CS3= Most of the posts have delaminations up to full height x 8" throughout. In addition, the following posts have spalls with exposed reinforcing steel: Left side: Posts 1-4, 2-1, 2-4, 2-5, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-1 and 5-4. Right side: Posts 1-2, 1-6, 2-1, 2-3, 3-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-2 and 5-5. Refer to photo 11 for typical view. The bridge railings show no significant change from the previous report. The approach guardrails were considered incidental to this element: The steel approach guardrail panels typically have minor dents and the timber posts have some splintered edges. Northwest guardrail Post 13 is missing the nut for the anchor bolt. Southwest guardrail is missing the anchor bolt nuts at Posts 1, 2, 4 and 6. Refer to photo 12. The approach guardrails show no significant change from the previous report. ~ 204/4 /S Conc Column 21 8.33 013.89 10 7.78 000 36 ea. Notes Note: Only the outside faces of the piling in Abutments 1 and 6 are visible due to concrete added between the piles (backwalls were jacketed). Refer to Element 475 R/Conc Walls for any related comments regarding the two (2) support piles at each retaining wall. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, all comments can be found in the Element Notes section of the addendum. The following is a brief summary: Several piles have cracking, mostly as a result of corroding reinforcing steel. Refer to photo 13. FL .IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM InspectionlClD Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 8 of 11 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 03129/2007 Elements Inspection Date: 2/14/2007DPLW CS2= Abutment 1 cap and Abutment 6 cap have intermittent horizontal cracking up to 1164" wide developing within 8" of the bottom edge. Abutment caps have vertical cracks up to 30" long x 1/32" wide. CS3= Abutments have other more significant cracking and delaminations as follows: Abutment 1 cap: Delaminated repairs up to 24" long x 30" wide in the east face at the haunched areas adjacent to Slab Units 1-3 and 1-9. Abutment 1 cap: Horizontal crack 4' long x 1/64" wide in the lower east face between Piles 1-4 and 1-5, which is beginning to delaminate. Abutment 6 cap: Horizontal and vertical crack 4' long x 1/8" wide that starts above Pile 6-5. Abutment 6 cap: Spall with exposed reinforcing steel 40" x 10" x 4" bottom west edge between Piles 6-7 and 6-8. Refer to photo 14. Abutment 6 cap: Delaminated patch 1' long x 6" wide in the top west edge under Slab Unit 5-10. Refer to photo 14. The abutment caps show no significant change from the previous report. 0 234/4. Conc Cap 109 2.62 25 14.38 40 ~0~0~ 174 If. Notes CS2= Bent caps have random cracking up to 1/32" wide. CS3= The following is a list of delaminated areas, most of which are previous repair areas: Bent 2: West face, under Slab Unit 1-2, 18" long x 12" wide Bent 2: West face, south end, (two) 6" x 5" Bent 3: Bottom northeast corner, 18" long x 12" wide Bent 3: Bottom face near the southwest corner of Pile 3-1, 18" long x 18" wide Bent 3: East face, under Slab Unit 3-8, 18" long x 12" wide (at haunch) Bent 3: East face, lower edge from Pile 3-2 to north end, 16' long x 3" wide Bent 4: West face, lower edge between Piles 4-4 ~ 4-5, 6' long x 3" wide Bent 5: Bottom west face between Piles 5-1 and 5-2, 4' long x 18" wide. Refer to photo 15. Bent 5: Bottom west face between Piles 5-4 and 5-5, 6' long x 10" wide The following was considered incidental to this element: Some of the intermediate bent caps have heavy rooted vegetation growing on the ends. Refer to photo 16. The bent caps show no significant change from the previous report. D 396/4 they Abut Slope Pro 2400 100. 0~©~0~~~ 2400 sf. Notes Note: This element represents the concrete filled fabric mat slope protection. CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN: All four approach slopes have been covered with concrete filled fabric mats. Grouted over rip rap bags at the northwest and northeast corners of bridge were removed. 290/4 hannel 1 100. 000~~0 ~00 1 ea. Notes CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN: Lateral erosion at the southeast and northeast channel slopes was repaired during installation of the concrete mat slope protection. Erosion at the ends of the northwest and southwest retaining walls was also repaired during installation of this slope protection. FL .cIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 9 of 11 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 03/29/2007 Elements Inspection Date: 2/14/2007DPLW 321/4 R/Conc Approach Slab 2 100. ~~~~~~~~ 2 ea. Notes Note: The approach slabs are not visible due to an asphalt overlay. Both approach slabs are outlined with cracks up to 3/8" wide. Refer to photo 17. West approach slab surfacing has a longitudinal crack, 8' long x 1/8" wide in the westbound lane. Southwest approach sidewalk has a diagonal crack 3' long x 1/8" wide, adjacent to Abutment 1. The approach slabs show no significant change from the previous report. Note: The approach sidewalk and approach slopes were considered incidental to this element. Southeast approach sidewalk has a fractured area with exposed steel, 5' long x 3" wide x 3" deep, on the outside edge at the end post. Refer to photo 18. Northeast approach sidewalk (new section) is exposed the outside edge, 17' long x 6" high. Refer to photo 19. Some construction debris has been left on the approach shoulders. Refer to photo 20. CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN: Undermining at the southwest and southeast approach sidewalk has been repaired. Fractured area at the southeast approach sidewalk has been repaired. Some of the vegetation along the approach slopes has been cut down. ) 475/4 Conc 1Nalls L=am--J 193 5.39 63 4.61 0~~ 0~~ 256 If. Notes Note: Total quantity includes both abutment backwalls and all four wingwalls, including the the two support piles at each corner of the bridge. Backwalls were jacketed in the past. CS2 8 CS3: The retaining wall caps have cracking up to 1/32" wide, some with efflorescence and/or corrosion bleedout. Northwest retaining wail cap has a delaminated patch, 6' long x 10" wide, located at the angle break. Northwest and northeast retaining wall support piles have up to 1/16" wide vertical cracking with corrosion stains. Refer to photo 21. Northeast retaining wall support piles are delaminated up to 3' long x 3" deep with corrosion stains extending up from the marine growth. At Abutments 1 and 6, there is concrete between the piling that extends down to within 8" of the groundline. Below this concrete, a ruler can be probed back to the original wall. The retaining walls show no significant change from the previous report. Total Number of Elements: 11 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 02.14.2007 Type: Interim Inspector: KNKCABC-P -Colin Botha Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by knkcabc-P at 2007-03-29 07;32:39 Note: This was an interim (post-repair) inspection. Only Element 99 PS Conc Slab was inspected and evaluated, and will be included in this report. For all other deficiencies, refer to the previous routine report dated 1/28/06. Inspection Date: 03.08.2006 Type: Interim Inspector: 843 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn538p1-P at 2006-03-29 16:26:23 FL .DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION , EtRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM InspectionlClD Report REPORT ID: INVT001A GOMPREFiENSIVE Page 10 of 11 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 03/29/2007 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 01.28.2006 Type: Interim Inspector: KNKCAST-P -Timothy Sweeney Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by KNKCAES-P at 2006-02-24 15:29:08 Note: This structure is closed until further notice, due to the 100% corroded prestressed strands and permanent fracture in Slab Unit 3-7 at mid-span. Due to the failed state of these strands and the numerous exposed and severely corroded strands in other slab units at Span 3 underside, the NBI rating for Deck and Superstructure has been lowered from a 5 (Fair) to a 2 (Critical) during this inspection. Inspection Date: 10.26.2005 Type: Special-Nat Disaster Dmg Inspector: KNKCAPO-P -Patrick O'Grady Inspection Notes: NOTE: Storm damage assessment completed on 10/26/2005 following Hurricane Wilma. No storm related damage was found in the structure as a result of the hurricane. Inspection Date: 08.26.2005 Type: Special-Nat Disaster Dmg Inspector: KN853KR-P -Ken Reinhold Inspection Notes: NOTE: Storm damage assessment completed on 08/26/2005 following Hurricane Katrina. No storm related damage was found in the structure as a result of the hurricane. Inspection Date: 03.15.2005 Type: Interim Inspector: 840 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by KNKCAES-P at 2005-04-12 11:03:56 Inspection Date: 02.24,2004 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KN738AB-P -Anthony Bibelhauser Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb-P at 2004-03-18 16:58:09 KN738AB-P inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 2004-02-24 - Inspection Date: 02.18.2003 Type: Interim Inspector; KN738WW-P -Wade Wolfe Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb-P at 2003-03-04 16:36:23 KN738WW-P inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 2003-02-18 - This is an interim inspection, only elements 99 P/S Conc Slab and 359 Soffit Smart flag are included. Inspection Date: 02.28.2002 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KN738SH-P -Scott Hughes Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738ma at 3/7/02 11:45:19 KN738SH inspection comments -Routine inspection. Structure 930227 - Date 2/28/02 - FLT .DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: IN~lT001A COMPREkENSIVE Page 11 of 11 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 0 312 912 0 0 7 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 04.11.2001 Type: Interim Inspector: KN738R0-P -Rick O'Connor Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb at 5/15/01 17:34:36 KN738R0 inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 4/11/01 - This is an interim inspection conducted based on SIA item 70 Bridge Posting being rated 4 or less. Only Element 99/4 PS Conc Slab and 359/4 Soffit Smart Flag are in this report. For a comprehensive list of all other deficiencies and recommended repairs, see the previous report dated 02/09100. The following deficiencies noted are not covered by elements in the PONTIS program. Repair recommendations for these elements can be found in the recommended repair section of the attached addendum. Signs- signs are posted at each approach fora 33 ton weight limit. The sign configuration does not conform with FDOT Standard Index 17357 guidelines. Tequesta Drive is posted at several points prior to reaching the bridge for "No Thru Trucks Over SOOOIbs. Net Wt".. Inspection Date: 02.09.2000 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: 311 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738dc at 3/1/00 11:45:20 KN738DC inspection comments - Siructure 930227 - Date 2/9/00 - Refer to the attached addendum for all non-Pontis and additional element deficiencies and recommendations. Inspection Date: 02.24.1999 Type: Interim Inspector: 311 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn7381p at 3/24/99 13:33:04 Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn7381p at 3/24/99 11:42:14 KN738DC inspection comments - This interim inspection is being conducted based on SIA Item 70 Bridge Posting being rated 4 or less. Structural deficiencies affecting the load carrying capacity were reviewed and will be included in this report. For a comprehensive list of all other deficiencies and recommended repairs, see the previous report dated 1/20!98. Structure 930227 - Date 2/24/99 -The following deficiencies noted are not covered by elements in the PONTIS program. Repair recommendations for these elements can be found in the recommended repair section of the attached addendum. Signs-Signs are posted at each approach fora 33 ton weight limit. The signing configuration does not conform with FDOT Standard-Index 17357 guidelines. Tequesta Drive is posted at several points prior to reaching the bridge for "No Thru Trucks Over 5000 lbs. Net Wt". Previous comments > (none) Structure PVotes BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Note: Bridge inventoried from west to east, Note: This structure is on a 12 month inspection frequency due to SIA Items #58 (Deck), #59 (Superstructure) and #70 (Posting) are all rated a 4. ~~®RD®~ ®E~~RT ENT F TRAN~PRT~T~®~ RAGE ~~PECT~®N REPRT ~®®EN®UM ,. • CONTENTS OF ADDENDUM Location Map Photo Section & Sketches Weight Limit Sign Photos * Fracture Critical Data Load Rating Analysis Summary Recommended Repairs Element Notes * Scour Evaluation * This section is not included in this re ort. BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TE(~UESTA EY: I(ISINGER CAMPO 8~ ASSOCIATES CORP. REPORT IDENTIFICATION Bridge Number: 930227 Post-Repair Inspection Date: 2/14/07 Bridge Name: Tequesta Drive over North Fork of Loxahatchee River Road Name/Number: Tequesta Drive Feature Intersected: North Fork of Loxahatchee River Critical Deficiency Statement: None Traffic Restrictions: According to the current load rating analysis dated 3/28/06, this structure should be posted at or below the Operating Rating for the SU type vehicles as follows: SU-32 tons. This structure is current) osted for a blanket wei ht limit of 5 tons. Refer to hotos on a e 3. Page 1 of 13 ~~ FLO' 'DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT~`~''~N BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 LOCATION MAP South Elevation ~~ y~ ~ POPLAR Rb ,bnef r~>,aa V4 ~ ~ ~~ l LEEWAftO CVR l ~ ql'{~ Q~~` p ~ Bti CYPRESS CIi{ JT11P'0 L C '~~ RPI- c 00~ ~ z P cu~i'ne 1& Deli- ~ ~ Gt ~ ~FP1AL ~ STARBOARD WAY T o ~ OAR RIDGE LN ~~ 8 ~ `, m y ~ GOLF PL y~ &hNA4 Rb n z ~ x o WILLOW RD ", ~ ST~Ubp OR ~ ~`y °a ~ ~ Y PINETREE CIR y ~. ~ ~ O ~(t Q J(PJ ? GULF CT y v° ~WESIWOOD AVE ~" AIAtFA CiR ~ ~ 1 $~ pP~, ~~~e` ,~ ~ g Q~ yx~w H~YLGR IR OAKIAND CT - OANLEAF CT p. -y 'i' 2 3 m 930227 Z N p~ J ~ p WINDWARD AVE m Oy sa m Teque#a Village o/ Icoae En~orcemenl (a gS PO m p x~ O c fohoe Devl Gallery Oiille Gr SEaOE ` ~AcCarlhys } Rest crant aG ~ o Dw Tequesta m . o ~ ~ a y( (~ MIDGE RD $ ,~~ SAWIEwTER ~ a < CHURCH RD z < 9~ ~ I~ j ~ g ~ BAYVIEW CT ? RIVER DR i3 ~ ~ ~ RNERTER ° +p ~ ~ .. FRANKLIN RD m m vQ,P ~+ C I U7R0 ~~~~` ; ~ S~4 ,Q H a ~~Y xoooaein. ~~~.` kRo ENINDSORRD O j p ~` f' 9 WBEVERL Y R ~.. ~ ~'~ j EYEBALL E 09 NoRworoRD x ~ ~ A ,® o g p ~ ~ I Dld Dixie ~a1S FRPZIER RD R$ ~ ~ ~ a z .~ y m e ~ ~qA, ~ m ~ q m ~ ~'q~ ~ { D~ €` m h ~ 2 m c3 4 POINT LNE x ~ ~~ ,: N Date use su6jed tD §cense. 0 wo toro 15~ ®2N40eLame. Street Atles USA®2005. www.debrme.com MN (5.0' VV) Dale Zoom 135 Tequesta Dr. over North Fork of Loxahatchee River l.~ Miles w/U US-1 Page 2 of 13 ' FLO~ 'lA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTp~'7N BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 POSTING PHOTOS ~~ ~ ,... ~ r;~ < ems' r ~ ~, 2 s s^ ~ ~~ ~ ~ . a x.o,~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SSS§ L, `~ ~ ~ ~~ TONS ~ ~,~ i ~ y -, ,. . ~~ - ., .,_ ,.. n i RIDGE OPEN ~~~ i. . "~ `~" THANK YOU FOR °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ YDOR PATIENCE , "T . 97tlAGE MAYOR 0.NR i` - r, ; s ,gig., West Weight Limit Sign Page 3 of 13 East Weight Limit Sign F~~°" '~~ ®EPAR~~IENT ®F TR~N~P®RT6'~°®~9 ~R!®GE ~APIAC~E~E~T SYSTENd ~R~®~E INSPECTS®~ REP®R~' ~~i~9ge ~®: 930227 9raspec4s®n ®~4eo 2/14/07 LOA® F~ATIR9C~ P,~1,4LYSIS SUMNIAF2Y STATE OF FLORIDA DEPAATN ENT OF TRANSPORTATION D: LOAD CAPACITY I,NB'ORNIATION L BRIDGE DATA: Bridge Number ___ 930227 Datc 3/2 8/2006 _ STR Type Main [BID Item Dt(43)] 501 ~ _ _ Sl'R "type APR [B1D Item B2(44)~ _ 000 2. POSTING DATA : Posted YES If yes, Existing Posting Necd ed YES 1(yes, Proposed Res6ictions _ ST Res o"ictions SIJ-J2"r BID item }I8(4t) _ P _ -_ BID item HI l(70) - 4 --~-~-- BIDRemH7(JI) -- -~ 4 3. ANALYSIS DATA n. Method o~alvsis: C. Analysis Based On: ~ D- Darn Stored: X Load Factor X Design Drawings X District Office __ Working Stress As-Built Record Plans Gcnttral Office B, fvtalvsis System: Shop Drawings Microfilm X BARS X Field Measurerne,u Bridge Owner __ SALOD Catalogs __ Materials lest Lab BRUFEM Sa mple Teyling X Other KDrive Load Test Other Other - Other E. Controlline Member Analvzed~ Material: Function: Substructure: Steel X Slab Bent Construction X_Concrete __ ~ Stringer Piling Cast in Place floor Beam Cap X Precast Girder Pier Constnclion X Prestressed Culvert -~--- - Piling ___ Post Tensioned - Truss __ Footing Timber -------~-Column Other -_..__.. -Cap Soan~. Shame: _ X Simple RollvJ Continuous ___ __ _ Built-up Welded lrnoact Factor: 0.300 -Frame Built-up Riveted Slab: __ ~ _ - Box Shape X Non-Composite _ ___ ~ ~~ AASHTO Girders _ Composite X Other Voided Slab 4. Load Ratine Summary Table: LOAD RATING SUhIMARY FOR OPERATING RATING GROSS TONS VEHICLE TYPE TONS OPR RATING OYH FACTOR SPAN No. SPAN LENGTH CONTR MF.h1BER hf or V hLDF SU2 17 31.8 L87 2 34'-6" G01 M 0,680 SU3 33 33.0 1.00 2 34'-5" G01 M 0.680 SU4 35 32.5 0.93 2 34'-5" GOI M 0.680 C3 28 48.3 1.73 2 34'-5" G01 M 0.680 Ca 36.6 44.I 1.21 2 34'-5" GOI M 0,680 CS 40.0 48.0 1,20 2 34'-5" G01 M 0.680 STS 40.0 50,0 1.25 2 34'-5" G01 M 0.680 HS 20 36 42.6 1. I8 2 34'-5" CO l M 0.680 ,..,... .,,...,~w,ry ~.a.~„~ ____ nnung racrur v.r i 5. Comments Member G01 is a prestressed concrete voided slab with a span length of 34-416 ft. Member GOl has a large spall and exposed tendons. Reductions for material strengths and section loss have been taken. 6. Computations: Performed By Jason L. LaBarbera, P.E. Date 3/28/2006 Checked Dy Patrick Mulheam Date 3/28/2006 Reviewed By David B. Thompson, P. E- Date 3/28/2006 7. Responsible Eneioeer: Jason L. IaBarbera- P.E. P.E.# 64004 _ Date 3292006 royoo y x/29 /o~ Page 4 of 13 F~®`~ °~A ®EPART~E~T ®F T'R~NSP®RTP°'°~N SRI®C~E MA~AC~Ei~IENT SYSTEM ~R6®C~E ~R9SPEC~S®N REP®RT ~e~dge ~®: 930227 Bnspec~i®sa ®atea 2/14/07 ELEMENT ~®TES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab units in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 9. Sidewalk slab units 8 and 9 had previously been identified as 10 and 11. CS3= The following is a list of spans and/or delaminations noted in the underside of the roadway slab units. All conditions noted are at or near mid-span unless otherwise noted: Several of the slabs in Spans 2 and 4 have diagonal cracks up to 12" long x 1/32" wide at the bent caps. Refer to photos 1 through 5 for views of below conditions. Note: A11 of the delaminated patches have moisture penetrating through them. Slab Unit 1-3: 14" x 8" delamination at the east scupper Slab Unit 1-8: 6' x 4" delamination along south edge Slab L'nit i-9: 3' long x i/16" wide longitudinal crack adjacent to Bent 2 near the center Slab Unit 2-3: 9' x 3' delamination near the center Slab Unit 2-4: 8' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 2-5: 7' x 3' delamination near the center Slab Unit 2-7: 3' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 2-8: 4' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 2-9: 4' x 8" delamination with an 8" x 5" x 1" spa n with exposed steel at Bent 2 Slab Unit 2-8: 13' x 6" delamination south edge from mid-span toward Bent 3 Slab Unit 4-3: 18' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 4-4: 5' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 4-5: 5' x 3' delaminated patch Slab Unit 4-6: 5' x 2.5' delamination near the center Slab Unit 4-7: 9' x 3.5' delaminated patch Slab Unit 4-8: 16' x 2' delaminated patch and delamination Slab Unit 4-9: 3' x 16" delamination along south edge at Bent 4 cap and a 12' x 12" delamination at center Page 5 of 13 F9~C" °~~ ®EP~RTME~~ ®F ~~~~5~®R~~ --°®i~ SRI®CaE i~AAN~4GE~lENT SYSTEM Etl®GE ~E~S~ECTS®RR REP®RT EPis9ge ~®: 930227 in~pecti®¢~ ®a~e: 2/14/07 ELEi~Ef~T R~®TES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Slab Unit 5-3: 3' x 1' delamination along south edge and intermittent span length x 8" delamination along north edge Slab Unit 5-4: Intermittent span length x 8" delamination along north edge; 8' x 1' delamination along south edge Slab Unit 5-9: 6' x 14" delamination along south edge at 2/3 point and 5' x 12" delamination at Bent 5 Underside of the 1' wide cast-in-place curb section in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 typically has significant cracking, delaminations (unsound concrete), or spalling as a result of corroding reinforcing steel. In some cases, the delaminations or spalling extends 3/4 of ,the span length. Refer to photos 6 and 7. The metal utility conduits attached to the north overhang are heavily corroded with several areas completely corroded through, exposing the plastic coated cables within. Refer to photo 8. Traffic face of the curbs in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 have longitudinal (horizontal) cracks up to 1/16" wide and several delaminations with and without corrosion staining in areas throughout. Top of the- sidewalks have numerous shallow spalls and delaminations with and without exposed reinforcing steel. Refer to photo 9. The following is a list of top side sidewalk deficiencies: Span l: North sidewalk adjacent to Abutment 1 has a delaminated repair 6' x 4' Span l: North sidewalk adjacent to Bent 2 has a delaminated repair 18' x 3' Span l: North sidewalk under utility pipe at mid-span has two (2) spalls with exposed steel 18" x 4" x 3/4" Span 1: South sidewalk adjacent to Bent 2 has four (4) delaminations and spalls with exposed steel up to 5" x 3' x 3/4" Span 2: North sidewalk adjacent to curb at Bent 2 has a delamination 17" x 4" Span 2: North sidewalk under utility at 3/4 point has a spall with exposed steel 5" x 9' x 1" Span 2: South sidewalk adjacent to curb has an intermittent delamination and spall with exposed steel 25' x 5" x 1/2" Span 3: South sidewalk adjacent to curb, 8' & 16' from Bent 3, has two (2) delaminations with exposed steel up to 7" x 3" x 1/2" (popouts). Other minor spalls with no exposed steel exist along new curb. Span 3: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks up to 1/32" wide and minor spalls with no exposed steel along new curb. Page 6 of 13 ~~~~ ~~®®®~~9'i tl'~~p9Y~Y g~tl~pe® ®p~F ~U ®BYg~Igtl~~~a~®9~"9~~0 d ^~®9~ ~f'6I®~~ ~P~~lggltl~V,,ppe~glYl ~Ep~tl~ 6®~ p®~a~~~A@~U ~a~idge Ri®o 930227 @n~pec~i®a~ ®atee 2/14/07 ELEMENT NOTES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Span 4: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks up to 1/32" wide Span 4: South sidewalk adjacent to curb has a spalled and delaminated area with exposed steel and corrosion stains 25' x 6" x 1/2" Span 5: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks up to 1/32" wide Span 5: North sidewalk, 9' from Bent 5, has a spalled and delaminated area with exposed steel and corrosion stains 16" x 4" x 1/2" The following is a list of deficiencies noted in the underside of the sidewalks: Slab Unit 3-1: At 1/2 point, delamination with corrosion stains up to 3' x 12" wide Slab Unit 3-9: South edge at 1/2 point crack/spall/delamination 12' long x 1/32" wide (spall 4' x 3' x 2" deep) Slab Unit 9-l: At I3er~t 5, delaminations 3' x 1' and 7' x i6" at centerline Slab Unit 4-10: At 1/2 and 3/4 points, two (2) delaminations each up to 3' x 1' Page 7 of 13 FLQ" '~A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT`"ON BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 PHOTO SECTION Page 8 of 13 Photo #1 Element 99 - Slab Unit 2-4 delaminated patch and Slab Unit 2-5 delamination near center Photo #2 Element 99 - Slab Units 2-7 and 2-8 delaminated patches ' FLO" 7A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTS ''~N BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 PHOTO SECTION y, ~:k <, ,.; L .~. ~, ,~. - -- -- . - . ~~' Page 9 of 13 Photo #4 Element 99 - Slab Unit 4-3 delaminated patch FLO' ~7A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT/° "ON BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 PHOTO SECTION delaminated patch Page 10 of 13 Photo #5 Element 99 - Slab Unit 4-4 and 4-5 delaminated patches ' FLO' '~A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTF" ~~N BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 PHOTO SECTION Page 11 of 13 Photo #7 Element 99 - Typical underside of cast-in-place curb section showing delaminated patch Photo #8 Element 99 - Typical view of heavily corroded utility conduits on the north side of the bridge ' FL®^'7A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT' ~'ON BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 PHOTO SECTION Page 12 of 13 Photo #9 Element 99 - North sidewalk in Span 1 showing spalls with exposed reinforcing steel e,.~ FkL®" °D~ ®EP~RT~EP~T ®F TR~i~SP®RT~' ~°~iR9 ~R9®GE ~Ne4GEMENT SYSTER~d ~~~®~E 9Rl~PECTI®P~ REP®~~ fridge b~®: 930227 i~aspecti®a~ ®atee 2/14/07 ~~con~~~~®~® R~~~eRs Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab Repair all delaminated (unsound) and spalled concrete throughout the underside of the bridge. This includes all delaminated areas and patches, and spalls in the slab unit underside and underside of cast-in-place curb section. Clean and paint the utility conduits along the north side of the bridge. Repair all top of sidewalk delaminations and spalls. Repair underside of sidewalk spalls in Slab Units 3-1, 3-9, 4-1 and 4-10. Page 13 of 13 i Memo ~®: IVlayor/Council ~ronv: 11~ichael F2. Couzzo, .7~r.._~G-~:L~~-___._._.~~,.,~.- ®a~~: 5/21 /2007 fie: Engineering Status Report and Recommendations for the Tequesta Drive Bridge Attached please find a copy of Bridge Design Associates, Inc. assessment report and recommendations for the Tequesta Drive Bridge. This report is submitted for your review and consideration. I believe this subject may be appropriate for discussion by Council at a future workshop. With regard to engineering recommendations related to existing delamination, our Public Works Department has been directed to coordinate removal (in boat traffic areas). Please feel free to contact me should you wish to discuss this matter. Palm )3each C®unty, Fl®rida Tequesta Dave ridge Over the North Prong of the Loxahatchee River Prepared by: BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. April, 2007 ~-/~~~ Brian C. Rheault P.E. 38797 Pr~~est ®verview Bridge Design Associates, Inc. was retained to investigate and report on the condition of the Tequesta Drive Bridge. Recent construction on the bridge includes the replacement of the center roadway deck in 2006. Inspection of the bridge focused on determining the areas of the bridge that exhibited signs of corrosion and concrete delamination. Concrete roadway panels were investigated using visual inspection and soundings from striking the panel with a metal hammer. Several areas of severe concrete delamination were observed in the roadway and sidewalk panels. Major areas of concern include the roadway panels in spans 2 and 4, sidewalk panel in span 3, and the cast-in-place concrete curb in some locations. The majority of rail posts were found to be in bad or poor condition. Posts were observed to have large sections of missing concrete with exposed reinforcement. Reinforcing was found to be routinely corroded. Concrete rail posts that did not have sections of missing concrete or exposed reinforcement exhibited moderate to severe cracking. Cracking and delamination was observed on the comer of the revetment walls on the southeast, southwest, and northwest revetment. Large cracking and spalling were observed in these locations. Some of these sections were over the area of existing patching. Piping attached to the bridge showed areas of severe corrosion. Some sections had been completed corroded through the exterior of the pipe. Brackets attached to pipe also showed areas of corrosion. Traffic barriers on the approach slab had loose connections between the barrier and post, with some posts not connected to the barrier and some missing nuts to secure the railing. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. I revetment Wall C®nditi®at Severe cracking and delamination was found along the revetment walls in the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners. In the northwest corner of End Bent Number 1 and fourteen foot long zone of cracking and delamination was observed. Cracking was Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 2 r ~ Areas of cracking were observed in the same regions as areas that were observed to have been patched. ~~.{ >k ~ ~~~ . ,~,: , ,~._,: Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 3 ~S ~ I Concrete Rail Post Condition The condition of the concrete rail posts was found in most cases to be poor or bad. Posts routinely were observed to have large sections of missing concrete and exposed rebar. Reinforcing bars were heavily corroded and in some cases completely exposed to the corrosive environment. '. ~f ;: Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 4 Bridge Design Associates, Inc. Posts were also observed to have moderate to severe cracking. This cracking was severe enough to expect that the rail posts would very shortly have sections of concrete fall off. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. Pile Cap Condition Pile caps at the joint between the roadway and sidewalk panels in some areas showed signs of delamination and cracking. On bent No. 2 there was a section of missing concrete with exposed reinforcing steel. Bent No.l had a previously patched section that was delaminated and cracked. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. '7 The bottom of the pile cap on the End Bent No. 1 had an area of delamination with quarter to three quarter inch wide cracks. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. An area of cracking and delamination on the bottom side of Bent No. 4 Bridge Design Associates, Inc. C®ncrete Pale C®aadata®n Concrete piles were only inspected above the level of low tide. The majority of piles are considered to be in good condition. Cracking was observed in piles eleven and twelve of End Bent Number 1 and in pile four of bent number 2. Sections of rust bleeding were discovered on some piles. The piles' pickup locations were occasionally found to have exposed reinforcing bars. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 10 Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 11 C®ncrete Panel C®ndati®n Roadway panels in span 2 had large areas of delamination and cracking. In some cases delamination and cracking was observed in areas that were previously patched. Areas as large as Oft by 12ft were observed to be delaminated. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 12 ®ne of the sidewalk panels in span 3 showed signs of severe delamination with the presence of large cracking. Roadway panels in span 3 also showed signs of severe delamination and cracking. Some panels show several separate areas of delamination. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 13 The joint between the cast-in-place concrete curb and roadway panels were found to be routinely cracked. This cracking and delamination was found in some regions that were previously patched. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 14 A patched section that shows signs of delamination and severe cracking on the cast-in- place curb in span 5. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 15 Sidewalk C®~dlti®n The ground beneath the sidewalk on the northeast corner of the bridge show signs that the ground beneath the sidewalk has been eroded away. The concrete sidewalks show signs of cracking along the joint of the cast-in-place concrete curb and the sidewalk panel. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 16 Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 17 ®ther t~reas ®f C®ncern Traffic railing post connections were routinely found to be loose. These connections were also found to be unattached between rail and post, with several bolts that did not have any nuts to secure the bolt. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. Ig Pipes that were connected to the bridge also exhibited signs of deterioration. 'This deterioration included signs of severe corrosion, in some cases entire sections of pipe cover is no longer present. Connection brackets were also found to be heavily corroded. ~;.- Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 19 Conclusion Based on the observed condition of bridge, there are several areas of concern. Concrete roadway panels in spans 2 and 4 showed signs of severe delamination. The southern sidewalk panel in span 3 had areas of severed cracking and delamination. There is concern over the danger of sections of concrete falling from the deck onto boats below the bridge. Concrete rail posts were found to be mostly in poor to bad condition. Several posts had large sections of missing concrete with exposed reinforcing strands. Other posts had areas of cracking that will give way if hit. The concrete piles of the bridge were in good condition, with the exception of a few piles that had areas of cracking. Piles were only investigated above the waterline, so Bridge Design Associates, Inc. is unable to affirm the below water condition of any pile. Pile caps were found to be in mostly good condition. There were some areas of delamination and cracking observed in the pile. These areas of concern were generally found at the corner between the road~h~ay and sidewalk panels. Two pier caps showed areas of delamination. Recommendations Based on our site observation: Spans number 2 and number 4 need to be replaced within the next 24 months. The sidewalk slabs and railings need to be replaced within the next 24 months. We also recommend removing any loose patches or spalling concrete for boater safety. Based on the inspections it is clear that within four to five years the entire bridge deck will have to be replaced. We recommend the village decide to continue the piece by piece replacement b ~ a y close g the bridge down every two years to continue the repairs or take st s to replace t bridge in the next 24 months. It is our opinion t at con ete repai on span number 2 and 4 and the sidewalk- slabs of span number 3 will not extend th ~ ife of the deck slabs significantly enough to justify the expense. S:12006-Jobs\06-517 Tequesta Drive Bridge\report\06-517 Tequesta.doc Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 20 PROJECT: Tequesta Dr. NUMBER: 06-517 Date:- 3-22-07 Tequesta ®rive Bridge Inspection 06-517 Post Number Condition Notes Post Number Condition Notes N 1 Good S 1 Good XB N 2 Good S 2 Bad N 3 Poor S 3 Bad N 4 Bad XB S 4 Bad N 5 Poor S 5 Poor CR N 6 Bad S 6 Bad MC N 7 Bad XB S 7 Bad MC N 8 Poor S 8 Bad N 9 Poor PT S 9 Bad MC, XB N 10 Bad S 10 Bad N 11 Bad MC S 11 Good PT, CR N N 12 Poor 13 Bad CR MC, XB S S 12 13 Bad Bad MC, XB CR N 14 Bad MC, XB S 14 Bad PT N 15 Bad S 15 Bad CR N 16 Bad MC, XB S 16 Good N 17 Bad MC S 17 Poor N 18 Poor S 18 Poor N 19 Bad MC, XB S 19 Poor N 20 Bad MC, XB S 20 Poor N N 21 Bad 22 Bad MC S S 21 22 Bad Bad MC, XB XB N 23 Bad MC, XB S 23 Bad N 24 Poor S 24 Poor N 25 Bad XB S 25 Poor N N 26 Good 27 Poor PT S S 26 27 Bad Poor XB, CR N 28 Bad MC, XB S 28 Poor N PJ 29 Poor 3G Good CR S S 29 3G Bad Good XB MC Missing concrete sections XB Exposed Rebar CR Cracked Concrete PT Existing Patch Post numbers begin at the west side of bridge The absence of a note does not necessarily imply that missing concrete, exposed rebar, cracked concrete or existing patches were not present. Christopher LaPorte, E.I. 21 PROJECT: Tequesta Bridge NUMBER: 06-517 Date: 3/29/07 Span Panel (Votes sw 2 R1 R 2 Minor BL 4 in R3 Span 1 R a R5 R6 R7 SW 3 SW 1 BL sw 2 R 1 PT-XB R2 PTw/DL R 3 PT w/ DL Span 2 R a R5 DLw/SP,4ft by 12 ft R 6 PT w/ SP and DL, aft by 8 ft R 7 DL, 3 ft by 4 ft - DL, 3 ft by 5 ft - CR along edge btw R 7 and SW 3 3 SW 1 DL, 3 ft by 6 ft section SW 2 CR and SP along joint btw SW 1 and R 1 R1 R2 R3 Span 3 R 5 Recently replaced panels all appear in good condition , R6 R7 SW 3 PT 2 locations SW 4 XB - PT SW 2 DL - 2 locations R 1 DL and CR along edge btw sidewalk and road panel R2 PTw/DL R3 PTw/DL Span 4 R 4 DL R 5 DL; 1 ft by 1 ft - DL, 1 ft by 2 ft R6 Ptw/DL,6ftby4ft R 7 PT w/ DL and SP, 1 fi by 1 ft - DL, 3 ft by 6 ft SW 3 SW 4 DL - SW 2 XB, 3 in R 1 DLw/ DL along ed e btw SW 2 and R 1 R2 R3 Span 5 R 4 R5 R6 R 7 PT w/ DL SP and CR along edge btw R 7 and SW 3, 5 ft - BL SW 3 Panels are numbered from the south to the north XB - Ex osed Reb r' MC - M~ ~ C ~ BL R p a , issing oncrete, - ust Bleed; DL - Delamination Present; CR -Cracked; SP - Spalled; PT -Existing Patc ~ Christopher La orte E.I. 22 PROJECT: Tequesta Bridge NUMBER: 06-517 DATE: 3/29/2007 Tequesta Drive Bridge - 06-517 Pile Condition Pile Benl Pile Notes Pile Cap DL btw 1 and 2 - PT btw 7-8-9 - XB north of pile 12 - PT w/ CR north of pile 12, 15 ft horiz 9 in either side of corner- PT w/ DL south of pile 1 i 2 3 4 BL End Bent s No.1 s 7 PT 8 PT 9 PT io 11 CR4ftvert-BL 12 CR4ftvert-BL Pile Cap XB over pile 1 west side - PT w/ SP btw piles 4 and 5 west side Bent No i . 2 1 3 4 XB at pick up location Pile Cap PT w/ DL over pile 1 - MC XB btw pile 4 and 5 east side - CR along east bottom corner - DL bottom btw 4 and 5 -plant growing over pile 1 Bent t No.2 2 3 4 B t Pile Cap CR btw pile 1 and 2 west side - Cr btw pile 4 and 5 bottom - DL btw pile 4 and 5 en 2 No.3 3 4 CR SP 5' vert Pile Cap PT ever pile 5 - DL btw pile 4 and 5 botto~ ~ ~ east corner - CR btw pile i and 2 west side - CR above pile cap south side Bent 1 No.4 2 3 4 Pile Cap CR south of pile 1, 5 ft horiz - PT w/ some DL south of pile 1, 15 ft - CR 1 ft over pile 5 - BL north pile 12 1 2 3 4 End Bent 5 BL No.7 s s s 10 BL 11 BL 12 BL Piles are numbered from the south to the north; XB -Exposed Rebar; MC -Missing Concrete; BL - st Bleed; DL - Delamination Present; CR -Cracked; SP - Spalled; PT -Existing Patch -~ Cristopher La Forte E.I. 23 CddAd2l,dE CRdS'd' G®VERN®1g District 4 Structures ~i Facilities 3400 Commercial Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, FL 333309 Telephone: (954) 777-4150 Fax: (954) 777-4697 Toll Free: 1-866-336-8435 February 15, 2007 CERTIFIED .MAIL, 7004 1350 0002 6320 7868 Mr. Mike Couzzo Jr. Village Manager Village of Tequesta P.O. Box 3273 Tequesta, FL 33469 RE: Sig®ificant Bridge Deficiencies FDOT 4 -Local Government Bridge Inspection FPN:23406017204 & 23406417204 Bridge ID: 930227 Tequesta Drive over N. Fork of.Loxahatchee River Dear Mr. White: S'd'EEddANdE dC®d'Edl®dJSOS dN'd'ERNd SECRE'd'ARY Our bridge inspection consultant performed the Post-Repair field inspection on February 14, 2007 and has noted the following deficiencies (overa111VBI ratings for deck and superstructure will both remain a 4 Poor ~_~-.,:._~-~ condition): 1) Even though repairs were accomplished to the bridge's deck and superstructure, a span and numerous delaminations were noted in the underside of the roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 (Span 3 slab units were replaced except for those located in the sidewalk areas). Most of these deficiencies are located at or near mid-span. Several of the slab units in Spans 2 and 4 have diagonal cracks up to 12" long x 1/32" wide near the adjoining bents. 2) The underside of the roadway slab unit delaminations include delaminated repairs. The delaminated repairs have moisture penetrating through these areas. A 8" x 5" x 1" deep span with exposed steel is located within a 4' long x 8" wide delamination in the underside of Slab Unit 2-9 at Bent 2. Refer to photos 1 and 2. 3) The top of the sidewalk sections have numerous spans, some with exposed reinforcing steel, and delaminations. The delaminations include delaminated repairs. 4) The underside of the slab units in the sidewalk sections in Spans 3 and 4 have a span and delaminations. Refer to photo 3. 5) The underside of the 1' wide cast-in-place curb sections in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 has significant cracking, delaminations (unsound concrete) and spalling as a result of corroding reinforcing steel. Refer to photo 4. www.dot.state.fl.us Mr. Mike Couzzo Jr February 15, 2007 Page 2 In addition to the above conditions, there is concern for boater/marine vessel safety due to the potential f falling objects (delaminated or unsound concrete that could break free). or Sincerely„ I,~ ~ /,r , ~ ~ ~L `~ John Danielsen, P.E. Structures & Facilities Engineer District Four JD: tl cc: Skip Ferrera, CBI, FDOT District 4 Brian O'Donoghue, P.E., FDOT District 4 Patrick O'Grady, CBI, Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. Thomas A. LoCicero, P.E., Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. File: 930227 SIGDEF(POST-REPAIR) PHOTO SECTION Photo #2 Spall with exposed steel in underside of roadway Slab Unit 2-9 PHOTO SECTION Photo #3 Delamination in underside of sidewalk Slab Unit 3-9 Photo #4 Delaminations in underside of curb section in Span 5 IVlerx~ °~®: IVlayor/Council ~rorn: fVlichael Couzzo, Village NIa~--= ~~-- - ,aL.,y~ ®aee: 1 /9/2007 9~e: Tequesta Drive Bridge As a follow-up to previous discussions/inquiries and in preparation of a long range Capital Improvement Plan, please find the attached proposal from Bridge Design Associates, Inc. (Bridge Design Associates consulted on the recent bridge repairs). As you will note the proposal is in two phases, providing alternative analysis for repair or replacement of the existing structure. Original time frame for this work was approximately 7 years after repairs recently completed. This time frame may be extended or accelerated based upon regular inspection and maintenance of the existing structure. Last year's replacement cost for the center span was $235,000.00 (this amount is for the replacement span and installation only.) This information is provided for your use considering how to proceed. Please contact me should you have any questions. Thank you. January 2, 2007 !tillage of Tequesta 250 Tequesta ®rive, Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 3349 p+TTEIVTIOf~: REGAR®Ihl(~: PROJECT IVO Bear Michael: ~ O ~ ~ ~ LT @ ~ ~ E Pd c~, ~ R! ~ E R s Michael Couzzo Tequesta ®rive Bridge Ofa-517 t$Id~1 C. fltH~UJt,T, ~.~. PresidenP Pursuant to your request, Sridge ®esign ~ssociataes, Inc. can provide the following engineering services: Phase l: Revieve of the existing bridge conditions and preparation of a repair plan for future span replacements and other needed repairs. Phase II: Study of existing conditions to determine the cost and permit requirements to replace the existing structure utilizing the current or similar love member elevations and spans and outline the costs to raising the bridge and modifying the existing spans to increase the .width and height for boat clearances. ®ur base fee for Phase 1 is $x,500.00. Our fee to complete Phase Il studies is $9,500.00. if you have any questions, please give me a call: Respectfully, 13R0fDGE ®ES1G1V ~4SSOCIATES, fNC. Brian G. Rheault, P.E. President BCR:kedS:~2006-Jobs106-597 Tequesta Drive BridgelCorrespondencelpro 010207.wpd 2035 Vista Parkway, Sui#e 200 e West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 (561) 686-3660 ~ Fax: (561) 686-3664. JAf~J-82-2007 11:59AM FAX: 561 686 3669 ID: PAGE:0a1 R=93~ ®~8~~~ ~e~~~a~ Page 1 of 2 From: Debra Telfrin [dtelfrin@tequesta.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 3.27 PM To: Geraldine Genco (E-mail) Cc: Pat Watkins (E-mail); Tom Paterno (E-mail); Michael Couzzo (E-mail); Debra Telfrin (E-mail); Jim Humpage (E-mail) Subject: Tequesta Bridge Memo Importance: High 11Aemo T®: Council IVlember Genco Fa~aaL IVlichael Couzzo, Village ~/lanager ®~: 12/19/2006 R~ Tequesta Bridge I have reviewed your email regarding the Tequesta Bridge, and provide the following observations: March 2006 -Village of Tequesta replaced center span of bridge (approximately $235,000.00). Replacement life 50 years+. m October 2006 -Village of Tequesta repaired underside of bridge (approximately $57,000.00). Repairs extend life of sections 5 to 7 years. Estimated cost to replace remaining four sections in today's dollars, $900,000.00 - $1,200,000.00. © Potential to raise bridge and costs? This analysis would require additional engineering, and could vary considerably based upon specified design and timing. Important to note as you indicated, raising the bridge may not be possible given design parameters and existing conditions. o If the bridge can be raised, and the Council desires to move forward in this direction, I would recommend looking into cost sharing with all affected parties. 1/9/2007 1 ci~V L V1 G Fortunately, the Village has ample time to consider these options. I understand however that providing funding for these improvements may be desired well in advance. If the Council wished to investigate these options further, I would recommend the involvement of a qualified engineer. Thank you. Cc Mayor Jim Humpage Vice-Mayor Tom Paterno Council Member Pat Watkins 1 /9/2007 1=ebruary 24, 2t?Ot~ 250 Tequesta Drive, Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 33469 ATTENTION Michael Couzzo, Jr. Village Manager REGARDING: PROJECT NO.: Dear Mr. Michael, f~; 1 ~g ~s C O N S U L T t fV O ENO ! fd E E L S Tequesta Drive Bridge 06-517 ~RIAIV C. IZHE,~UL~', P.~. President ~O As we discussed, the Tequesta Drive structural repairs should be completed Saturday morning, February 25, 2006. It is our professional opinion that the bridge can be opened to traffic 6:00 AM Monday February 27, 2006. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Respectfully, BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian C. Rheault, P.E., #38797 BCR:kedA:llet 06-517 02-24-06.wpd 2035 Vista Parkway, Suite 200 • West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 (561) 686-3660 • Fax: (561) 686-3664 No Text ~S~®~'~.°~~5~ ~N~o 2035 ~Iista Parkway, Suite 200 ~1est Palm Beach, FI.33~11 (561) 686-3660 During our site visit we observed the tensioning of the strands for (5) deck units. The strands were initially pulled to 7,000 lbs., marked, and then pulled to 31,762 lbs. The final elongation is the measured difference between the two pulls. All the strands were within the 15.63" +/- 5 %. See the field tensioning report for individual results. TS:ts:\06517-021506 -FIELD laEP,: -~~ ITT SIGNED Tim Sherwood ~- SIGNED ~ ' - ~ - .~ ~ .-- Brian C. Rheault, P.E. #38797 -- .___ ~~- ~_~,, ~~~ ,~; Mpg®ti.«~,.~~;ew'4rT~`.-. ~ -.^~''..: Z~R ... q - f.~ ~1.,`I ,. ~. ,Sy ~~....,. _~ . Tequesta Dr. SEPC 02-15-06 During our site visit ~e observed the rebar location for three (3} type A, and fi~o (2) type 13 prestressed deck slabs for the above-mentioned job. The reinforcement ~nras properly placed, Gearances mere in tolerance, and the correct number of bars vuere observed. Flo problems ire observed. ~~ J ~~~ SIGNED: Timothy R. Deland, E.l. SIGNED_ Brian C. Rheault, P.E. #38797 ~. ~ ~-~~~ TEI1dP. ~~I~I7'~' C®1~~'R®L DATE ~?80E esas Vargas/Brooks /NSPECTOR 1;1NAL. 'I'E1~JS 1®N ' 3 ] , 762 Ibs. PIIi'Al, Ei,®NGA~'I®)al: 15.b3 ins- Minus 5% Plus 5% TENSION: 4 ELONGATION : 14.883 l 6 408 Strand Elong. Before Elong-After Seatin S E-1 0.5 0 o.s C~1 0'S D 0.5 A-4 0-5 0 0.5 COIL NUMBER M1~ ~ e JCCEADXK2D -, ~ 28 543 AREA z JCCJAIOlE7B ~: . 2 0.153 3 JCC~TAUZVOD 2 0.153 ~ JCCEAIJXK2B -153 s - 28-717 0.153 6 ~ 7 -~_ AVERAGE I~'~-r-. ~~®~~cT: _ Iis~ ~~1~ f~ ~ ,i I F'I)i~'I' ~ C®162A'1. ~~ Decks 6 0000000000000000000000000000 5 0000000000000000000000000000 4 tiOOOOOOOOOO 0000000000®000 3 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOO _ 2 OOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ' (iYiiYlrfiliir6liYi~riYl~IsbKYi~d~Y1~YYYr,._,;.°~f..-,;,•.. I :.~ ~ f i !~ $ C,DE ~ G HI 1 KLJa1N P I a t Q Q R S: T U V W~ Y Z A B_ Elongation 15.7633 15.3389 I5- 7395 ' 15.6697. rorn~ nr c-a During our site visit we observed the set up of the crane on the bridge. The deck units were removed and set on span # 4. The crane was moved off the bridge and the deck units were swung around and set on the ground on the east side of the approach to the bridge. The loading of the new deck units is expected for tomorrow in the reverse order of operation today. TS:ts:106517-022106 FIELD 1~P®iZ'T SIGNED Tim Sherwood SIGNED _ _ Brian C. Rheault, P.E. #38797 _ f -' f . -- s~ ~,..~--~ .~ i ti. ,a •~ .'a . rir~.. ~% •~t r -,c.. ~ . v y . ~.,,. _ .* - :;~`. .~; ... ~t.~r y ~. _ _r Tequesta Qr. 02-21-06 ^+ y'^ ~,~: -~~ ~# '` ~>..•~ 9 ~ W~ ~F _- • 'r :5s ~ ` - '. +p ' ~~ ~. r. s1t~<y/ ~s4a`.~ ~" yRi° ~~ . Tequesta Dr. 02-21-06 /u I~- k~i;a``'~°+s ~~a~~~s+y~r ifr~~..0.~ ~5~3 Y~~•a./ ,~, 1, .°r}~'.J ~~~_c:LU ~~C'Y ~~Ui~CI_.~r~ l~.JD~~,~ I~iNV~ ~5~~~ ~~6e3~6<J ~~.a- u i..~l.. ~`~'~ ~~ t.8~ ~ i~-i a ~y° '~ Ij ~ -eP.,e tai. ~ ~ -y~ ~.'C~.P~~'~~u~. ale,. ~- a F ~,a~~~~a~r~ ~,.e.®, n~ ~eq~es~a, ~'1. ~®r~~~~7^~~ ~®ne ~~~~ , ~u~~~~~ ~~~'L" a~~~ <za~y~ ~:,s~ `~:~~~~ ~7~~ ~~-t~ ?i:~i~eT ~~fb~~ a~~~l~ a~~~ :%e~~F r~~~~ ~i>~~E~~,~2~ieE~~:. Z~'E~ ~~~~.°~.e.~sl.` ~q~~~~ ~~~, ~@~~~~ i.~~3~c~5 ~ ~~SY ?~~a?€' E,~CRSF~.I°" ~~3~~'. ~~.~?e f ~;Iiu~f~~'~~~k~ . ~~w~ ~%4j~~ ~~~~~~. ~"~"~ ~~'!~ ~~9iL ~~~~ ~ k3~€~~~ ~~ ~ -~ ~~: ~? ~E`r; Ye't' .ti~i~~~w s s'~ ~.r:+~~d ~;e`;~~~o,~; Asa p,, S'~yy~~~+i~e1~~'. ~ rA. ldl~7 hl'~`it. ~'t$::1'¢~`F~~, ~: ~tE,~ k Gt ,~~i V~ R~:~~%. B~.EP.i~i~<i~". ~X~,.7 ~F i~~AM ~~~ ~2.?I~f~~E. t ~~~~~ '~~~ ~he~~s~®d SICiI~El~ ~. ~ ` _- ~riatt C. IZheault, P.E. #38797 ~~g~~~~~ fir. ~~2tl€~6 ;, ,~ ,, ; r~ ~-~ T Fr ~:~ ~a~~ ~~~l~~:~~~~ ~~~ ~'Lf~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ %~~~ ~jns~~ ~~'~~a~~r, ~ta~~~ r~~ ~~~~} ~~~-366 E-ter, ~~°:-'''.~i-des .bCT~ rvC^. ~ ~~3-~ i` s L'~:i~.11lf:~ 1 i:~l~'~.~~~q,s ~~. ' ~,~e.F~~~®~' ~'~Ct~~~~c , hI. ~t.~3~ r~~pT' .F.'E'EG" ~':"`.~F~ rTi'~ ~~.'~~~r'':'~'~ t;~'E~ ...sE~G~I<°IFk~, ~~~~~% L:t£ f~f~~ ~~~.~~~ :5.1k2s ~~~~~ $~fi~~t°`TY`t~s`i~~. ~~Er~ ' - ? .~' a ~a F~'il~ ~~~~~j~€~~ ~~i~ ~. east, ~.~. #3797 tf ;' t f' [~ ~ s i '#tl t t $ ,!; 'J 1 ~ { s• ~},~ O c+~ N N O G es- Q> ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~e c0:~5 ~Tis~a ~~~s.~, ~~~~~ 20~Y ~~I~s~ ~~~ ~~~c~9 ~~, 33~I ~56I~ 6~6-3660 ~~%'~~~~ ~i:at;;t` ~b~~ ?i~-°~~ ~~+~ s~~~~~~~~ ~~T~ ~~~FSE•°~:~:f.is~~3~~ C~~~~~~ ~5~~'~:' ~~E ~~'~~ t~ZEE~~~ ~.~~~~ ~~~~~~ '~ ~~ ~~i ~~~~ ~l~s I000 ~s~.9 ~~~ s~~~~~~ ~~as ~P~2 ~W~e ~'~~ ~~I'f~~~~.c~. ~~~s ~~~~~Y~~d ~s ~~~~ ~~~~~~~F~~~~ ~~P~z~~ F~~~s ~e~~~~r;~ ~~~, ~~ de~Fs~~~zFr~~ z~~~~: ~2.~0"~; s~~ ~~~;~~Ia~~_. ""~~~ ~~~sa~~s ~~%~x~ ~~s~ ~s ~<r~~~ ~s •~~~~ ~~s, ~`t~~ I`~~F~9.~,ri~g ~~r~s ~~~ ~c~x~~~~f:~ ~ sa~~~~~~~r .~ p~~g~Z~ zz1~~:&~?iF. ~~ ~~° T~~~.I~~~,Is~ ~~00 I~~~,' ~~~~~~ ~~~s~~~~; "~ 0 ~~.g~.s 6. ~ g, vl~~~~ ~?~~~ ~;~~~, ~ ~ ~~'~60 v~~;.ti ;~ t ~:6~ ~~~~~~~: ~ ~r.3~ ~ ~~~~ ? ~~E~~g ~~~~~~.~~s~ '~ %~fl ~D~~ SI~I~D - 'I'ir~ ~~er~r®®d ~ICp~TED - _ __ _ ~~ -.-. Arian C. ~ea~xlt, ~.~. #3797 ::: . ~. 1~,;.,. 7equesfa Dr. 02-24-06 5674 ~~,CI1~ T~4~PE: 0.6 Jaclcs ~ Accessories I~~FG TIDE®. RAiili AREA: 7.95 QA T t~: 2/20/2006 ~AC6~ i6S: J&A97-016 __ C®fiIIPUTE® RAM AREA: 7.48 PRESSURE GAUGES: FVIASTER GAUGE CALI®FtATI~N STA,Ii!®AV~Q: ANSI 45.2 IVIASTEP GAUGE: 356 SERI~ICE GAUGE C~ALII3RATI®fil STANQA~Q: AI'riSi 4ft.1 {{ SERliICE GA9,9C~E8S): GAUGE 1: 6-30474 GAUC9E 2: GAUGE3: GAUGE 4: iJ L.GA®CEI,L: CA~ISR~,TB®N S'fAl~®AR®: ASTM E4 Af~® E74' TYPE: Slope Vndicator I.®. fil0. 10112 6ifIETER NUMI~ER: 7292 QUIETER MFG: Slope Indicator C®NVERSBGN ECaUAT9®iV: AVG. X 1 •a• 0 Ternperatura: 75 E-lumid'oYy: 26% ~aiibrati®n Locati®n: DYWIDAG SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. CaiihratecE lgy: Allan Rainwater Calibration Firm: DYWIDAG SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. Ve~°i~es~ S~ Ed Pueschel Ve~-ifcati®n Eiret~: DYdll/IQAG SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL. INC. ~@3st68691e~: Cone & Graharrl, Inc. ~~~ Number: J0573$8 MASTED GAUGE 9 GAUGE 2 GAUGE 3 GAUGE 4 RUi~ 1 RIJh! 2 EtUI~ 3 AVG ACT I~Ei~S 1000 1000 0 ........ .. _._ 0: 0 ..... 6.1.9... _ .......6.1.7_ .. ... 6.2 _. ....... .._6.187 6.187 2000 2000 - .0...- .. .. -...0 ~ 0 ~ 13.79 14.1 . 14 13.963 13.963 2500 .......2500 ...... 3000 3000 ~.• ~ :.:::::..::0...:::.:::::. _ . ..._ 0 ..... :::::.: __ .. :::::0.:.::::::::.,::.: . 0......... .. _ :::0....::..,:::.: 0, ..., ._ . ..::17.69,:: 21 63 ... ........ . :...:::::.:::1,7.95,:.: 21 85 ....... ......... :::: .... .::.:::::17.82.:::::::.. 21 78 ............................ .:17.820.:.. 21.753 ...... . ........17.820.. 21.753 i 3500 3500 0 0 0 W 25.45 ~ 25.6 25.68 ....... .......... 25.577 .......................... 25.577 X000 4000 0 0 . .....0 29.4 29.49 29.59 29.493 29.493 4500 4500 0 0 0 33.33 33.42 33.47 33.407 33.407 .._,5000.-...- .5000...._. ... .._..::..:0 ..:::::::. ... .... __ :.:.0._::.::..~:.::..:. ::: 0 ..::::::.:.::.: .:.37.1,.:::: ::.::.:::::37.28: ..: :::: _37.31 .:::. . . 37. 25 3 37.253 0 0 ~ 0 41.09 . 41.06 .. : :::. .:._: 41.03 , .:: . ._..:, 41.060 :::::..._ 41.060 6200 6200 0 0 0 46.34 46.41 46.39 46.380 46.380 i=~r Monostrand Use ®nly True Gauge PS6: 62.67 ~R 46.880 = 80% of U.T.S Use Gauge PSI: 6300 ~b5 40 35 w rs. 30 n 25 ~ 20 95 ~0 5 0 0 I~e~n~PC's°~cetec~Fsy: 7tuss~lt f~ud~s~ansdci 1$epcrt Number: 11-3-EIa'TS-R3 I~eviscd Date: 4-~-00 9000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Gauge Reading = PSI ~~'4 ~~~~~I~T ?;Q~ s ~~tst~ Pa~l~r~.y, ~1F~te ~QD ~T~~est ~~~~ Eeac~a, ~'~ 33~~~ 1 `~61~ 636-366Q i~~~ ; ~: ----~ I Q2-~ I-~ ~~~ ~~~ r~r~. ; Q~-~ ~ 7 ~~~~~~;~ ~'e~~~sc~ ter. P,®~~F~~®r~, i '~'e~uesta, Pl. ~~r~~~~~®~. done ~i ~rah~a ~t 1~~~ ~~x~ site Fr~s~t ire ®~se~e~ t~~e cs~~-~~Stete~ b~r~ge. ~'I~e e®s~t~~et~~ ~~~s e~e~~s~~ ~.~ tie site a~~ ~e~~r~fl~~ ~~e ~~r ~~~ ~eE ~ ~~~ ~~e ~~~te~. ~~ ~r~~~e~~s c~~~se~°~re~. ~~5~~ ~~~•~F A~a~ SIG1mIEI~ ~i~ ~1~~~~~~~ SICi1VEI7 - ~" ~ '~~°~ ~ :`~ Erian C. Rheault, P.E. #33797 o~/a~./~aa~ aja.i ®F ~r.~t 0~~ ~ e .e ,~ .w_ - - - Bi11s ~f r~r:.~~~aial t-vesvie~ pint terial Ma d+e6Cripticst :. :~1. 1`~ter N .LLOf~ ~~ pp~~{.~1. ~],~ ~~ ~ y.~~ "~- -~`~ 1`Yile~~ cl~SLa.+LPl.~i~ __ a. 1,0$9 1.1,508~a. F1N{'S X6500, RT]Ct, 6.5", 2~,T1,AD1 00].0 2.001613 C'.EM, POIZT,TSfPB I/I~rC~iY, SiTIiIC r 0031 107202 AnG,#4:S~Il~C'~,CbNQZEI~ 0050 103689$ AOG,1 1/2":#59,A3]M,.DOT,LIl~'lt~ 0080 1.259$4 A~C,HLK:~A60,C~i~E,id2R, 0494 TYPE D 009D 101.989 a ALt~.K,AiNA FONT,SC)P~2PL,A~S1~,Y~f3,CA9~4,'~ 013a aaai~~:~ ,ct~t N d ~-- P- '[1 Z 4 V 7 to -.e d V x V W !-- W b Q 0 c4 v d N '. H. .& a ~A7,~ 8 Quantity ase T~rl tity P Oust Ref Dsztge~~7alid from valid to P7xed Qty atp.5c~ o~axsc~°a 1 1.040 YD3 1 02/lb/20D6 ].2/32./9999 960.000 hH X 0.00 0.00 1,102.000.. LB X 0.00 0.00 1,741.000 L8 X 0.00 0.00 30.000 FCYL X 0.00 0.00 38.000 F~DZ x a.00 0.00 32.000 Cam, 0.00 0.00 GrATf~ FeD 09 9Lb6 - ~~,~ m ~~~o p ^~ 3 om ~'s ~ ~-, ~Fi~2 D ~_ 0 p N Z 0 n m m IIIIIIIIIII 'i _x O e~ o~ wy° IIIIIII~~~ I E U O ~ W F'$ ~ N• ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ rn~ ~ O `~ ~ ~ (°'~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~~ QG n o ~ ,~ ~~~,0 ~ ~+ ~~ r ~ '~;`<; I- v ~ ~ ~ Q m ~• ~'' :d a~~ ~n ~ (Dn N mm ~ Zi ~m f~~» Om ~m m= o rn oa ~ o ~ ~ a ~ ~ J Z O I V +~ 0 a ~ a i/ v: Z ~ ~ ~- o°o~ C'~ O~ ~~~w ~ a ~ ~' ~ Z~ -0 c^ C ~ ~ ~ i~ O Z' `~ -A 0 p Z ~ ~? ~.~ i (n fTl D Z I~ W ~1 fTl Z I~ v + ~ ~ Z j p O . `_ pj O .~ _ ~ ~ W ~ r~ ~ n ~ -i ~ m ~ D IZ ~ ~ i` J IZ J O + I. 'o ~~ _' ~ I O a o ~ ~ i~ D ~ ~~.. ~" ~ ~ -+ I JIZ O p +I N N OI O (~ a v cn ao ~I~ D z -~ °~~O _ c,.. ~I 0 0 ~~ "~ Dlz n ~ a ~ OJI z 0 +I ~ ~' ~I 0 0 I c~ipfjjpif FF j 1'i~~k ` II 1 1 I, yt5 4 ?,1 1 t': ;I -: ~1 kilo C ~ ~ ~~~~ I ~ 11 ' ff Ir rlit~,~~ I I~'~ f h ti ~' K~':. i lit L ~ r !~,. ,i~ ,I I t~} 1 f i ~ { 11~ 111 ' 15_ I j }I~1 1. ;~ "x' < < ,.. ~ 1 ~ S 1 ; ~ ~ i I ~ ~4~~t~ ~ 1 -.1 ~,III~A t ,>::~,5` ~ S~, .. I.... ii •,1=9 t v; *~ ~ '~kl-'`-.' 1 ''~ .7h~ , _ . ..'f;~~ ~+~ ~; C~' ~ ~ ~1cr' ~ ~ o ~A ~ .., ., ~;U ~, ~ Q n, ~ V Il ~^. i J p \, >) Cr..J 6~'~ `~ \; ~ ~~~1 ~ ~° ~ G~ ~, cc` ~~;;; c C'? v d ~ ~ °u' ~ '; ~, ~:., ~ t J ~ ~~ ~~, ~=~) C~ ~Jj _, `7. ~'~ __ ~ __~ i Y _ ' ~ ~, ~_ ;'~ ~ ~ O z ~II T ~.1JI~ m ~ Z~~ W (n U VJ ~ _; o a: i ~ c~ ~I~ O zip ~ zl~ ~, wiQ m ~ ~ Cy ~ 0 0 ~~ ~'~+ o~~ z ~I~ z w~Q m~ IU ~~.1 W ~~ I~ N I~ .~~- O I~ z~Q w ~- m cn ~-- o i° ~IcD J d- + ~' O ~I~ Z~Q Q W !-- U m (~ W Cy.i ~- O I~ ~ O Z I`- z ~ + W (f~ CD ~~Q Z f- W (n C V N c Q Q a 0 i < ~ a oz Q ~° o ~ N MO (Z J V ) 0 t z O ~ o N ~ Q ~~ j ~ m~ ~~ o~~ d- ~ , ~ ~ ~~g ~~W °~ v q Z n 2 ~ W ~ VI ~ rcO 4 ^+ Y ~Yy' ~' 3 Oc m ~ tD p W O W 3m Y~ W uF- ~ ~ <Q wU o0 NZ ot~ Sm N In O Q N~~ W ~ .rC-{ ~ ~-i U r_ ~ W N .°a +' ~ ~ ~ . ,~ .~ (O ~ ~" ~ ~ °U ~ °° .~, G 0 ~~~~ W ~ ~+ ~z~ v b ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ oa ~~ ~~~plllu- E_ 9. go ~~~~IIIIIII m ~ W o I Z ~ I I W I I rc o i z grx N ~ Zu~ KN~ ~~~~ woBl~Ol - 9004 '60 9a~ ~Jf6t7 ~ ° ~ y -0 G fly cb ° ~ ~'~ Q ° U ~ O v 0 0 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ O .~. v ~ ti ~ C b ~ v p -0 ° -0 ~ O rnE ° ~ O Q `° a ~ ~ coo, 3 J `^ ° b ~ ~ C ~ OU ~ ° ~ O ~' t ~ °i j ~ U I ° C ~~o ~ U Z C ~ c -~ ~ ~ O b v C h b~ m y vvi 4 V v~ J U 'C s~ ~ O ) o b v O oo-0 a ° ~ C~ E o, c_ o j C o~N in O O-0 J , C O_ E U~~ v c b°' 4 h cc-'-` F ~ E °wo c-0 3 v ~ ° c w I ~ ~ O u E~ ° o c - oyo b 4c ~°c~ ~ r 4o U ~ ° , ~ O p 1 ~; y o ~ o o` °iy h b O N v U U ~ v v 'e -0 U° Q U ° Z-0 ti C `O O b ° v O o U y C J; a~ o °-0 ~ t~ y y v ~ v ~ p j W~~ R ~l y b Q ~b m O t c~ ~ o x w ~, W ~~ °io > G ~ ° ~ ° ~ J ~ ' ~~ v a U N C ~ y U ^ p J O Cy W W h~ ~ O ~O L, yt O U U` _ J~ h ~~ U ti 3 ~ ~_ v o -- o a y j ? t W._. ~ _~,~ c ° ~ o ~ ~ o~r~ o° o ~ o~ o.° ~ ~v ~ ~o~~ ~~ -0 2 o z~ ~ C v - h -~~~ U U v a~ Go Z° `~ o vy Q W ~~ to O 10. y o U o C7 ~hCJ U o _~~ y 4 Q ` Q ai O 2 ti Z ~ O Z O O ~ ~ _~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ :i N y ° o ~ I ~, o O ~ c 3 0 0~ ~ rNj ~' o~~ O ti "_~ m y '~ ~~ O O _`-~~- `t ° ° ~ r o'~ ° m~ c o' ~ b -c v ~ 0.v -0 ~a q ~ ~ ° o O O v 0 t ° y N v .a O ~ C ~ 0.U , O .O C c~ ~ 0 ,C ~ co,~J v ~' ~ a o 0.N O ~ Ear ' = QCi 3`0, v °U O U v r3 ~ p ~ ~ v y ° y b v VCi ~ Y ~ ~ C v 0 'G ` C 0.p J E ~ o• U° C C O U v .N 0 t b 0-0 "~ O ~ ~fn C -~ al ' U fn b .Q v s I j ~~ q v C J ~ b b Q °° J = ° J O v ~ C I ~~ O hr c o v. t v„O ~ ~ o~ o °~ u a~ 4° v~ o ~ v, .c m °' air ~ rn` y E o ~° ~ o° m 4c o J ~ -O v ., v C b vj O :.. j h t ~ ~ Oi ~ ~ v ~ o Q O - U O p - y h v .4'4-0 y . j Di ~ j j c ~n c O ° L ~ ° ~ ° C U E ~ ~ U k _O b y N N _~_ O ~° v ° O i ~ b H v J C ~ ~n vOi ~ C° O O U -~ t om C~ ~- ~ b . ca .'.3~~ ° Z Y°° -G ~~ ~. b J v ~ O U b O C 4 ~ V~ O ° -0 ~ O o s ° ' o , _ I~ y 0. ~ ~ I y~ C O GNi ^ v C ~ o p h y E Q ~LJ ~`~ O C O ~n 0.v C U ~ y U ~ E ~ v C r ° M ill tby~ ~3 v4 o e aci v C v ` 0. vii~~n ~'~c ,.,' U v U N 0~ fib .tv.. UO O - J v N.O j O O ~ O~ O N E { v O O~ v ~ -~ O t.t.. ~ Q o ai O . ~ -0b O 3 ` . `nom C ~ Cy b o Q`°j N~ 0 W O rn ~ O t h v D h yb v O E a i N W bU O Q~ a O O b E ~ ~ - C v-0. x ~ ~ O y H v ~ O O i v h C b 4 C Q vi 0.a~i j N U° p OU ~ W H-o 2° ~b m u ~i=O rn E vi ° j ~ ~ l•Zj w H ~ ° Q J ~ ~ O ~ (/1 ~ O pO ~ -0 Q[ O y y o oow,, ~o\ ~ 2o oF ~m~ j Wo 20~4~ oho ` o~~o~ c°° c ~~ , Q c ~n~. ' O Q E k N 3 u 4; ~ °i Q Qr ° ~ `~ ~' u~ o c ` "/ I, h rra o I~...C~ Q 4 U ~ c; O J c Q~ ~ W~ ~ a, a~ a , o- Q Oti~i ~' °, o v ~ v o ~ U J ~Q ~ n ~2 N ~ti qo-o Q li U T ~ c~ ? m 4 ° ,~ -0. ti °i v v 3 v `v - c E V) ~ _N v ° ~ ~ vvi -0 " 4 m b ~ q ~ 4 _ ~' 3 ,O C O O~ 3 v k E m h O v O ~ ~ 40 ` o L v b -° ~ C l c O O ~ o l b ° o, w O y ~ O ° J C O 0. q -v v O O -0 b U U y= U .U v ~ ` y ° C v o -- U ,~ ° ~° 3~ v 4 ~ O mm ~ v k b~ ~ C o v ~ C J ° O U „` CO ~ ~O = U. U b O~ v H OU ~ 3 b m v ~ ° ' . ~ C J u 0 0 3 . v j ~ ~ m y 4 ~ c q O U c h 3 U ° ~ -C "~ C O O O b O r h ~ C v v 0.a ~ b h O p oU h E O ~0. ~ (~ U ~ h ~= v O• v N U ` ,_ j m ~ v ~- r O -0 c ° O u U O O~, b " 3 ~ W ~- O o wo C v _O O ~ b ~ O O v ~C C U W ~ U c~ c m~ ° c b ~ ° a ~.O c~ °~ O O o v`_m N o m ~ 0. .° ~ O U O v b a. v o v O` h Q C b ` ~~ u O O 0 0 4 y Oti U. E c C o E p Q u m cQ o / ~ 0 20 v C m a~ ~ ~~ 3 O V ~ ~ ~ O ~`i p v w -v0 ' ~ ~ Q~~ O ~ ~.C ~~ O D i o .y A r c °' C O vi cO ~~ Z oO ; .~ ° , u O 3~" H j E ' c o m~ 0 0 Z DEN 2 0 0 ~-~ O O 3 ~ p u) O V v C "` 'oh ~~ J v h 0.O' 4~ U 40 Q.0 .O ° W~ ~ c W hb ~~ C ~ ~ N E ° ~l 40~ U,.." ~ ~o~ ~a ono ~ U o` v,. o O b W W O ~`1 ~ +.. ~ 0 0 ~ v ~ ` W J C v W U v" v 0 W b ~ ~ c 4OO O~ ~~~.' J v v y v h ~~ b .~.,'~ c~ o~ c E v ~° o moo ~+~, q~U NN Z ,,; ° QQ E c J o ~ wU ° c o ~ o U °C~ W ~ ~U m U ° p ~ ~ c o~ a m' m ~ Z Z w c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ aca U O Q ~. ~cn E Q" r ^ = Vl V) ti m a U ~ v U O O ~ ._ O- W - 2 ~ i ~ U I N W ~ C Q a W c~ o O w z mH aQ °(J ip uZ rcv um r ~cn nlO Q W ~ a r~ ~ O I'-I U ~ ~ ~"' [~, ro j ~~t ~ ,1 i O • 1~1 ~,y O ~_ w ~ o ~ ~., ~ ~i ~ tr~ O ~j ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ 0 b o~ z ~cc~" aCi ',,' r~ ~ N O V I~ O u ~ 7j N ~ O C O ~, j.' '~v J,. ri U h ti ~(!) ~ ~ ^ O C-0 JO J O u k ,` 9: ~'~ t.: a ~~ IIIIIIIIIII 0343 Go s' v~ v O p l b I i-. Yc UcO~C o ~ o- 3 ONC V ~'° b~u~ v 0 0 0 -0 o `O ~.~, E b o u `i c" _ O ~ ~ C E C ! ;'. - v L 2 O O ~~ U~ C v _ IIIIIIIIIII ~aoN'~ o J b (~ ~ U H O y U _ O L C O v C -.1.d h ° ~ ~ .t.. 3 : .~ r vib Uti. O m y b v m h 0. \ w U h c V~ O .O --_- _" o m o, y v ~, ..:v I cv by a v-0 H ~.~. ~.~c a p~ 0 4 C -0 ~ ~ g j N v O U J ~_ > h~ y~ t y h 3 i - rc v -0 O -~ h ~b O ~ ~ +~iS '~. ~l C ~~ l Q -.. i; ~ m e .o v ~ (ij o z ac O Q.o=~ti m ~ U o U y o ti b u~ C x C Q C w 2~~ °v O-0 a ~ ~zW _ v zip ~'~~Nmho CIi~~' tiR ~q v ~ o QIrU rc y~ i O m ~~ 0. U o` -0 C 3 o `o t O ~ C U N h v ~ r~ . m ti C O ` v 3 ~ o a ~ a ~ ~ CO y E W O 4 O v A c 3 ~ O -0 U U U CO S N o 0 0 .c p ~ 0. W w y O m c b ° ~ o b ° ~ b c -0 C O " C ° H b O c O y b `•- ~ ~ ~ N D E v J O ~ `. U O 0 J °b b ~ U O -0 O C ~0. J ~ v C v ° ~ ~ °°' b~ y m m °~ Q ] O~ ~ U c O'U Q Q v . h y p ~o ~ v ~ h J ~, ~~ 3 R . c E y ° ~~ ~ a i E v~ ~N r h~ °'° U °c' o, o ~ ~~' k ° ` ~ 'a .c o o m ~' W W p o o ~ j~;u N °1o b Uo mo ~ O ~~ c O O O I~ v Q V~ ~ U ~~~ C y O ~ ~ h O. ~ ,.. v ~ W U vo E O ~~ h C om C7 O ~ W U J C ~-C E E 2~''0 op OZE 0 z ~ J :~ ti--J cb v (Oj 4> -E ,~ .p Q W 1, W a ~Q W Q 2 0 h W U E~ ~ jv E in i°~ 2Q W~ zcnc'n Za°.c _~ U j ~ ~ 2 W J 2 ~ 'i ~ O ~ W 4 ~ ' _. _ ~. ~' } ~,~ _ 36'-0" SPAN 3 POUR STRIPS TO BE CAST dfTCD rrelC`Innuern ASPHALT TO (6 3/4'J MATCH EXISTING BY OTHERS 2 `-~/~~x 35 9~„ ~_J j, .... _..,.. ---------- -.9.:. ----'----- CLOSURE POI~R DERAIL ~"DEEP saw Jo1Nr- FILC W1TN AN APPROVED BITUMINOUS JOINT SEALER CAST POUR-STRIP AFTER TENSIONING PROPOSED NEW PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SLAB UNIT 1/2" X 6" CONT NEOPRENE PAD - 1/2" EXPANSION MATERIAL TYPICAL PULL END PUCI POST-TENSIONING CABLES TO 132, 000 EACH CAB1f USING THE SEQUENCE SHOWN 4 1/2" PARTIAL BRIDGE PLAN a t SPAN REPAIR FXISTINC CONCRETE PILE CAP EXISTING 18° SQUARE PRESTRESSED CONCRETE PKE DOWEL SPACING 2 - ~4 x 29'-3" ~5 DOWECS x 2'-0" CONG at 4'-D" o. c. DRILL 1'-D" DEEP HOLE AND EMBED !N APPROVED f.D.Ol. EPOXY EXISTING PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SLABS EXISTING CLOSURE POUR TO REMAIN SAW CUT AND REMOTE CLOSURE POUR AS REQUIRED TO INSTALL NEW SCABS SECTION a t INTERIOR BENT VERIhY SCALE ~~--t N0. A VISION OAT BY BI110C~' DCSIGN ASSOCUTtc ING u ~, o~,~ ~. ,~ ~ „ ,~. ~, ... ,° 1„° ~;,_„w ,,. `°,"„_„" Bridge Repair For: ' AwN SEAL sn r c.a,e ' ~ e u t D i B ~HE~KED rl 1 A Na . q e s a r ve ridge B.C.R. 3 [tN IS ONE INCH ON - DATC D~ ~~55. _ = over the North Prong of the Loxahatchee Rive oz os os " "CCESSARL - - - r SCrtLC PROJECT ND. --- = P a l m Beach County , F l o r i d a As NoTeo Brian c. FhEouu-36T9t noua rt.IwE ~ Mum 08-517 O ~V N ~J ~ o ~ ,i I 0 0 _~ i 0 i a- ~>. --i o - _, __ j q- - - ; i~c'-=~1 ~ I ~___. _ _ _~. i t __ _-_ ~i-;..___ _~ O -- ~~-..r_ y O -- _ _ __i -_ ~ __ _ __j 0 -- Cf- 0 G ~ ~tii r Y. ~'., ~ ~ }+ '~ ~~ 4 ~ 14{~ i _~ ~ q 1 `, F3~ ~;;; «b`zt ~d [ yp~pp!\ ~^Yj~Lyi ~jr:i if ~ ti j Z mg g~ Jo ~~ ~l f ~<t~~ ~ j m L~ ~ 4~ ~~~ ~~~~ z~°~ ~~~ ~~_~ C ~_ ~ J C!) ~ ~ ~ ~ s p ~ J Q O - 1 O L~ •\\xJl W ~ ~- ~yat7 ~~. ~ ti; i ~„~ ~ _ -1 4 ri L ~~ N 2~ , I~~jy~6 G"y_i. F~.,~ f- , J O U ~~ ~~ ~~ 0 - < 0 q l Z ~ r ~ I ~ W ~ p m 0 oar W N ~ .: o m W O w ~m x~ rm ~O rc¢ WU ~~ uZ oU Vpj ~ N N Ul o a '~ v ~' . Cr..~ ~ ~ r'i U ~ +' nl k W ~ ~ p •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, 0 ~ °U .~ ~ ~ a ~ a ~ a~~~ ~z~ ~~~~ .~, ~~~~ ~~ oa IIIIIIIIII ~-~~ - rs =i- IIIIIIIIIIII r W r O Z O N 1 2 W O~n J i~y~j~ Q U'~ <;` }N ?K WNW 1~ O QoQ a~ yW~ W ~ NU<~ ~, ~~ - 9002 J5'-J" 3" ~, b U C ~~ - .w Y1 ~ ~ - h > ~, ~~ - b M 5'-112" 8'-0" ~ 8'-0" 8'-0" 5-712" g" 112° 31'-0" 711° C^ JJ SPACES of l'-0° l I I I I I I I I I -- -~ 1-- ~- ~- I. I-I 1_.__I,.-_~ __ I I l l l i i l I l l l l l l i i l_._~ -i _ I - -t= I- I I I I r~ I I I i -~ ---~-.~- I7i..i ... ~ -- ~ -- ~_ ~_ ~ -- i _. i-III I I I -LI _ I J I - 11 I ~ _ _.I _..~.._..._. _..... .~.._. -_-.- i I T I I I ~!_~-.. _. I i IIII I I I 1 I I I I I I ~ I I I U i I i I I I I I I I I I ~ - II 1 1 1 1 1 1 ... I- I- 1.1 I I--~.__~..-~---I~- ~---~- ~ li ~ ..-~ ~~--1 I I I I I~ I I I I I I I I I I i i I I I i T I T -~ -- Ii---~ .-~ _.-._ ~ ... ~ 1 ~ ~ I~ --- J~ I_ ~ _ I I T __ i i I I I ~ i I I I ill I , ~, ~ I I, _,_. I I I IIII I I II I I IIII PRESTRESSED SLAB UNITS `~" v TYPE PLAN 1/2" _ ,'-a ~ _ J5'-J" SPACING fOR FOR J D TUBE J" 34R5 S & G ~ BARS C TYPICAL v ~~'t ,~;`' :: ~~~ ~ ' w~< GARS r YARD BEN ~ _~ ~ ~"~ D - 1YPICA( A i kY ..~ I J ~ ~: 1 P PLASTIC DUCT -TYPICAL J' 1YP BARS C J' lYP TYPICAL PRESTRESSED SLAB UNITS TYPE A ELEVATION ,/zN = ,~-o• `r 5'-71/1' 8'-0` N1 J` ~I I C IIII I I I I TI I I IIII I I I I I I _.. ~ ~ ... ~ -- ~ -- ~ ~ r.-~-~--~ -~ - ~ --~1 ~I ~o m"~ _-. ~- I--- I _. I- I -III I I I -I - I _- I ~' ~~ .L 1 1 1 111 --~--~--~--I I I IIII I I 1 1 I~~I _I I I I I I < <1'-1111" B'-0' IIII hI- I I I J]'-D" J] SPACES of I'-0° I~~I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 )~ ~-...~...~_..T..-T----~-~--~--~ ~S Y 1 ROWS BARS X of 1'-D` a,c r-11~r PRESTRESSED SLAB UNITS TYPE B PLAN 1/z• _ ,'-o• L JS'-J" J l PLASTIC DUCT -TYPICAL t . ~~~ I B4R5 T ;., ~ YARD 8fN0 -TYPICAL 0 ~ J" 7YP 8" x U" x 5' BLOCKOUT B4RS C J" ]YP TYPICAL PRESTRESSED SLAB UNITS TYPE B ELEVATION T/z• = r-o• ESTIMATED QUANTITIES ITEM UNIT QUANTITY TYPE A SLAB UNITS (3 REQUIRED) l.F. 105'-9" TYPE B SLAB UNITS (2 REQUIRED) L.F. 70'-6" ~iLL OF REINFORCING STEEL MARK, $I~F NUMBER REi~UIRED LENGTH BENDING TYPE A B C 4 12 12 4'-4 1/2" SEE DMG. G 4 42 42 5'-5 1~2" STRAIGHT S 4 42 18'-10" SEE DIAC. S1 4 42 19'-4" SEE DIAG. T 4 24 24 1'-9" SEE DIAC. V 5 4 4 3a'-9" STRAIGHT D 3 55 2'-0" STRAIGHT X 4 65 1'-4" STRAIGHT VERIfY SULE N0. REVIS~Od DATE BY GE DESIGN ASSOCIATES. INC Q9LP Bridge Repair For: ogAw c A e ~L sN E ~1' --+~ __ ,e, n~ >,N9~ eoe, , ~~ ~ e,.e. ~~ (N.°(e9i1 eee->esa s°r (sa (eee-eeu ~~ . . . CHECKED 1 Te uesta IIrlve Brid e B ~ 5 9® - e,9 , ~ 9. NO. 1953 q g pq;R aw is DNE INCH aN 02 OB O6 OgID~Na DRI91ND5~ _- __ over the North PronE of the Loxahatchee River ADJIISI $Ce3E5 AS NECESS+Rf _ " SCALE A$ ~TE RIIfWI-36I97 BoOq C pgOJECT N0. . - = y Palm Beach C(~uri E,y, Florida ~ N . f1999A1[yy(t~y~q D6-51~ ~ III 1 III 1 1 1 1 1 1 II ~r~ -~-~-~--~~--~~~--~---~ ...h 3'-1 1/1° -~.: ~;,. `F.!c ,v~~2. ;, ~~ _ - SPACING f OR 1 POR J O TU ;~J~.;. ~: } r~ srNS: _ . f '~ l IIII BARS 1 T f ~~:; ~,, T..:_ L . ._ ~ h ~ ~ IIII ~« ~r. ~ ` l1 ~ ..-~ --_.-~--~~ - ~----~ ---I 11 I .._..- ~ . ~~I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I~~I I I -.-1_-7 -~--~~ -. ~_..~...~~...r...T- 7006 - 4: a4pm 5:,1006-Job. ~1 V / n _-I z ,~ ~lO ~~~ z~ O TV O l"~^lll `-' J z~ ~c ~~ 0 ti~ o~~ 1 '-3" 11/2° I I/7 0 ti~ o~ 0 e" o 0 ti~ o~ ~~~~ ~` ~~~a ~ A a"o; _ ~ ~~5~_ N~2 ~ D In = O ~ o m m <. IIIIIIII~II _ _ eg Iilllll~~~~~ VY b° ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~. ~ a ~ ~ ~ o~ rn~ ~ 0 `V ~ ~ ~ ~ro~b F~ y FJ o ~, ~ ~ 00 n o ,~ ~ ~ ~, 0 ~ ~ . ~+ r ~ ~ ~ f11 ('~' N ~ O ~ (^~J ~f ~ I~ ~' ~1 a ~•~ ~~ ~ (D// N m om~~ 0~ ~y nz Ds ~~ om ~o m o rn ~ N o 1 0 S O ~ ~ ~ ~ ti S µ ~ ~ Z O _~ m C7 °' f~l W O O 0 D_ ~~ k m ~ O ~ k~ ~ o cn ~ ~ o 0 0 Z W ~= ~~ rxr__ T~ vl 1 v '`~ vc ~ ~ C7 C V ~~ O I O ~\ T B ",,=V ~ V p v j ~~ ~ o a z o n D r v m D r~7 ~k ~ ' i ~,~~~~ ~ 4„• m n -~ O ~ ~ z ° o 0 tiff I~ o~ ti ti ,~ o'er 0 ,~ °p ~ o ~'~ `~ I rn~ 11 ~ ~ C~j ti I ti ~ n D r ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ z z o ~ o ~ ~ o Z~~ ~ ~ ~ _~~ y ~ a ~-- Z \ C7 ~° ~ n rn o D ~ ~ ~ 8 ~, r ~~ ~ o ~ T `~ z ~ ~I .I OV _ ~ TO N ~ ~ -- ~' ti ~ ` ~ 1/2" 3 1/2"' _D ~° ~~ r" co-~ I T I " 1 O ~\ ~ZN OO~C ~ o a -.. z o z ,~~„ Mr;\. i ~r~, I ~ I I ~~ -~ ;- ti ~, ~ I I ~n cn ti ti ti I' /- ~ v ~ r~ I~ ~ O `A I ` T~ ''N^ vl C ~~ C ~ ~ I I O ~\ O ~ ~ ~ N o ~' °o~~ ~ o a n ~ ~ o 6` 6„ 10 1/1' ~' 10 1/1 ° °' ~ ~2 -A 101/2" ~ ~ ~ ~' ~' 10 1/1 " ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ o , ti Io I/2' ~ ° cn `~ ° ~ ~ n~ * o ~~ ~"" m2 to r/z ~^' ~ ~ ~ ~ z A ~ ' ~ 10 1/1 " ~ T 10 1/2 ~ 6, - 6„ C~ Z o~ 2 c ~~ ~ D 6° D ,, o ~ rn ~ ~ I~ I ~ ,~ ~ _ _ C - ~k J 1 ~ e '~ ~, o z ZCI2 O ~ U~,~ G~ Z ~ ~ y ~~ ~ 1-~ ~~2 ~ ? o ~ _ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.1 / ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ T ~N ^^ vl O ^~ z~ o ~ !' z~ ~ t vl ,; ~' ~ ~~~ I I 1'-3" 11/2°,11/1 ~~, ~ KISINGER CAMPO 8c ASSOCIATES CORP. ,. ~ s . April 1, 2008 Mr. Michael Couzzo, Jr. Village of Tequesta P.O. Box 3273 Tequesta, FL 33469 RE: Bridge Inspection Report Submittals to Local Owners District Four Bridge Inspection Report Dear Mr. Couzzo: The following inspection report is attached for your review: Bridge No. Type Insp. Insp. Date Dive Date Analysi s Type Analysi s Date Commen t 930227 Routine 1/15/08 1/22/08 N/A N/A N/A If you have any questions, please e-mail (tlocicero@kisingercampo.com) or call me @ (813) 871-5331, ext. 509. Sincerely, Thomas A. LoCicero, P.E. Bridge Structures Engineer TAL:lr Enclosure Cc: Skip Ferrera, CBI, FDOT Consultant Inspection Contracts Coordinator Brian O'Donoghue, P.E., FDOT District Bridge Inspection Engineer Patrick O'Grady, CBI, KCA Bridge Inspection Supervisor File: 4200620.189 ~~ ~{ w~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ Brandon Office • 9270 Bay Plaza Boulevard • Suite 605 • Tampa, FL 33619 • Phone: 813/554-1919 • Fax: 813/621-8582 Visit our web site at www.kisingercampo.com FLORID~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION 4 BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 1 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL BY: KCA OWNER: 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy MAINTAINED BY: 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy STRUCTURE TYPE: 5 Prestressed Concrete 01 Slab LOCATION: 1.2M1 W OF US-1 SERVICE TYPE ON: 5Highway-pedestrian SERV TYPE UND: 5 Waterway STRUCTURE NAME: Not Recorded YEAR BUILT: 1962 SECTION NO.: 93 000 114 MP: 0.325 ROUTE: 00000 FACILITY CARRIED: TEQUESTA DRIVE FEATURE INTERSECTED: NO FORK LOXAHATCHEE RIV FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE ~ STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT TYPE OF INSPECTION: Regular NBI DATE FIELD INSPECTION WAS COMPLETED: ABOVE WATER: 1/15/2008 UNDERWATER: 01/22/2008 SUFFICIENCY RATING: 32.1 HEALTH INDEX: 77.70 This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 ,. 1 FLORI~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 2 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1 /1 512 0 0 8 EFLL BY: KCA OWNER: 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy MAINTAINED BY: 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy STRUCTURE TYPE: 5 Prestressed Concrete 01 Slab LOCATION: 1.2M1 W OF US-1 SERVICE TYPE ON: 5Highway-pedestrian SERV TYPE UND: 5 Waterway STRUCTURE NAME: Not Recorded YEAR BUILT: 1962 SECTION NO.: 93 000 114 MP: 0.325 ROUTE: 00000 FACILITY CARRIED: TEQUESTA DRIVE FEATURE INTERSECTED: NO FORK LOXAHATCHEE RIV ^ THIS BRIDGE CONTAINS FRACTURE CRITICAL COMPONENTS ^ THIS BRIDGE IS SCOUR CRITICAL ^ THIS REPORT IDENTIFIES DEFICIENCIES WHICH REQUIRE PROMPT CORRECTIVE ACTION ^ FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE Q STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT TYPE OF INSPECTION: Regular NBI DATE FIELD INSPECTION WAS COMPLETED: ABOVE WATER: 1/15/2008 UNDERWATER: 01/22/2008 SMART FLAGS: 359 Soffit Smart Flag: Soffit cracked OVERALL NBI RATINGS: DECK: 4 Poor SUPERSTRUCTURE: 4 Poor SUBSTRUCTURE: 6 Satisfactory CHANNEL: 7 Minor Damage CULVERT: N N/A (NBI) SUFFICIENCY RATING: 32.1 HEALTH INDEX: 77.70 FIELD PERSONNEL / TITLE /NUMBER INITIALS O'Grady, John -Bridge Inspector (CBI# 00344) (lead) ~ ~~ Elborne, Paul - BI Tech Hoogland, Keith -Bridge Inspector (CBI#00341) Lead Diver Brewer, James -Diver Miller, Shawn -Diver REVIEWING BRIDGE INSPECTION SUPERVISOR: Crissey, Dave -Bridge Inspector (CBI#00321) CONFIRMING REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: LoCicero, Thomas - PE #31136 Kisinger Campo & Associates 9270 Bay Plaza Blvd., Suite 605 Certificate of Authorization #2317 Tampa, FL 33619 SIGNATURE: DATE: This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORI~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 3 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 DECKS ELEMENT/ENV: 99/4 PS Conc Slab 7607 sf. ELEM CATEGORY: Decks/Slabs CONDITION STATE (5) 3 DESCRIPTION Repaired areas and/or potholes or impending potholes 7607sf. and/or raveling or rutting exist. Their combined area is more than 10% but less than 25% of the total deck area. QUANTITY ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab units in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 9. The asphalt surfacing over the expansion joints has roadway width x 1/4in. wide transverse cracks - NEW. There is a light to moderate accumulation of dirt and debris along the curbs -NEW. The topside and underside of the sidewalk slab units have numerous spalls and delaminations, some with exposed steel -INCREASE. The underside of the roadway slab units have numerous spalls and delaminations, some with exposed rebar -INCREASE. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, refer to the Element Notes section in the addendum for a list of specific deficiencies noted in the sidewalk slab units and the roadway slab units. Corrective Action Taken: The worst areas of corrosion on the utilities along the north side of the structure have been repaired by installing PVC sleeves around the corroded areas. The utilities still have varying degrees of corrosion. ELEMENT/ENV: 301/4 Pourable Joint Seal 84 If. ELEM CATEGORY:Joints CONDITION STATE (3) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Major adhesion and/or cohesion failures may be present. 841f. Signs or observance of leakage along the joint may be present. Joint may be heavily impacted with debris and/or stones. Major spalls may be present in the deck and/or header adjacent to the joint. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: The quantity and condition state represent only the visible portion of the joints in the curb and sidewalk areas. Roadway portions are not visible due to the asphalt overlay and are considered incidental to this element. Sealant within the sidewalk portion of the joints is completely deteriorated and in some areas, they are packed with dirt and debris - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 10. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 e FLORI~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 4 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUPERSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 331/4 Conc Bridge Railing 364 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Railing CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY The element shows little or no deterioration. There may be 304 If. discoloration, efflorescence, and/or superficial cracking but without effect on strength and/or serviceability. 3 Some delaminations and/or spalls may be present and 601f. some reinforcing may be exposed. Corrosion of rebar may be present but loss of section is incidental and does not significantly affect the strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: CS3 =Most of the posts have delaminations up to full height x Bin. wide throughout - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 11 for typical view. In addition, the following posts have spalls with exposed rebar up to full height of post x full width of post: Left side -Posts 1-4, 1-6, 2-1, 2-4, 2-5, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-1 and 5-4 - INCREASE. Right side -Posts 1-2, 1-6, 2-1, 2-3, 2-6, 3-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-2 and 5-5 -INCREASE. Refer to photo 12 for typical view. The approach guardrails were considered incidental to this element: The steel approach guardrail panels typically have minor dents and the timber posts have some splintered edges - NO CHANGE. Random cushion blocks are loose -NEW. ELEMENT/ENV: 20414 PIS Conc Column 36 ea. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY The element shows little or no deterioration. There may be 22 ea. discoloration, efflorescence, and/or superficial cracking but without affect on strength and/or serviceability. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORID~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 5 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 204/4 P/S Conc Column 36 ea. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION 2 Minor cracks, spalls and scaling may be present and there may be exposed reinforcing with no evidence of corrosion. There is no exposure of the prestress system. 3 Moderate cracks, spalls, scaling and some delaminations may be present. There may be minor exposure but no deterioration of the prestress system. Corrosion of non-prestressed reinforcement may be present but loss of section is incidental and does not significantly affect the strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge. 8 ea. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: Only the outside faces of the piling in Abutments 1 and 6 are visible due to the concrete added between the piles (backwalls were jacketed). Refer to Element 475 R/Conc Walls for any related comments regarding the two support piles at each retaining wall. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, all comments can be found in the Element Notes section of the addendum. The following is a brief summary: Several piles are cracked/delaminated, mostly as a result of corroding rebar. Corrective Action Taken: The previously noted deficiencies in Piles 1-2, 1-3 and 1-4 have been repaired since the 3/8/2006 Post-Repair Inspection. ELEMENT/ENV: 215/4 R/Conc Abutment 98 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY The element shows little or no deterioration. There may be 861f. discoloration, efflorescence, and/or superficial cracking but without affect on strength and/or serviceability. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. QUANTITY 6 ea. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02!27!2008 FLORI~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale PAGE: 6 OF 20 INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 215/4 R/Conc Abutment 98 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Some delaminations, moderate cracks, spalls and/or 121f. scaling may be present and some reinforcing may be exposed. Corrosion of rebar may be present but loss of section is incidental and does not significantly affect the strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: CS1 =The east face of Abutment 1 cap has less than 1/64in. wide cracking that outlines a repair area from Pile 1-1 to Pile 1-3 and between Piles 1-5 and 1-6 - NO CHANGE. Abutment caps have vertical cracks up to 30in. long x 1/32in. wide - NO CHANGE. Abutment 1 cap and Abutment 6 cap have intermittent horizontal cracking up to 1/64in. wide developing within Bin. of the bottom edge - NO CHANGE. CS3 =Abutments have other more significant cracks and delaminations as follows: Abutment 1 cap has delaminated repairs up to 24in. long x 30in. wide in the east face at the haunched areas adjacent to Slab Units 1-3 and 1-9 - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 16. Abutment 6 cap has a Oft. long x Bin. wide delamination above Pile 6-5 -INCREASE. Abutment 6 cap has a delaminated patch 1ft. long x bin. wide in the top west edge under Slab Unit 5-10 - NO CHANGE. Abutment 6 cap has a 3-1/2ft. long x 1ft. wide delaminated patch in the lower west face between Piles 6-7 and 6-8 -NEW. Corrective Action Taken: The previously noted delamination in Abutment 6 cap between Piles 6-7 and 6-8 has been repaired, but the patched area is now delaminated as noted above. ELEMENT/ENV: 234/4 R/Conc Cap 1741f. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY The element shows little or no deterioration. There may be 951f. discoloration, efflorescence, and/or superficial cracking but without affect on strength and/or serviceability. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORID~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 7 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 23414 R/Conc Cap 174 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 2 Minor cracks, spalls and scaling may be present but there 25 If. is no exposed reinforcing or surface evidence of rebar corrosion. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORIC~DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 8 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 23414 R/Conc Cap 174 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Some delaminations, moderate cracks, spalls and/or 541f. scaling may be present and some reinforcing may be exposed. Corrosion of rebar may be present but loss of section is incidental and does not significantly affect the strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: CS1 =Some of the intermediate bent caps have heavy rooted vegetation growing on the ends - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 17. CS2 =Bent caps have random cracking up to 1132in. wide - NO CHANGE. CS3 =The following is a list of deficiencies noted: Bent 2 cap west face under S.U. 1-2, 2-1/2ft. long x 2ft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 2 cap west face under S.U. 1-10, aft. x 2-1/2ft. delamination -NEW. Bent 2 cap west face at south end, 1ft. 4in. x 1ft. 4in. x 1 in. spalled and delaminated area with exposed rebar -INCREASE. Refer to photo 18. Bent 3 cap bottom northeast corner, 18in. long x 12in. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap bottom face near the southwest corner of Pile 3-1, 2-1/2ft. long x 18in. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap east face under S.U. 3-8, 2ft. long x 1ft. Tin. delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap east face lower edge from Pile 3-2 to north end, 16ft. long x Sin. wide delaminated patch - NO CHANGE. Bent 4 cap west face lower edge between Piles 4-4 & 4-5, 7ft. long x 1 ft. wide delamination - INCREASE. Bent 4 cap lower west face at south side of Pile 4-1, 4-1/2ft. x 2-1/2ft. delaminated patch -NEW. Refer to photo 19. Bent 5 cap bottom & west faces between Piles 5-1 and 5-2, 6-1 /2ft. long x 3-1/2ft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 5 cap lower east and west faces and bottom face between Piles 5-4 and 5-5, Eft. long x Eft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORI~DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM InspectionlClD Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 9 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT/ENV: 396/4 Other Abut Slope Pro 2400 sf. ELEM CATEGORY: Substructure CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY There is little or no deterioration. Surface defects only are 2400 sf. in evidence. Random open joints may exist. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: This element represents the concrete filled fabric mat slope protection. ELEMENT/ENV: 359/4 Soffit Smart Flag 1 ea. ELEM CATEGORY: Smart Flags CONDITION STATE (5) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Cracking and efflorescence on the under-surface is 1 ea. moderate. The distressed area is 10% or less of the underside area. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Underside of the slab units have extensive spalls with exposed and corroded rebar. Refer to Element 99 PS Conc Slab for related comments. ELEMENT/ENV: 321/4 R/Conc Approach Slab 2 ea. ELEM CATEGORY: Other Elements CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 1 The slab has not settled and shows no sign of 2 ea. deterioration other than superficial surface cracks. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: The approach slabs are not visible due to an asphalt overlay. Both approach slabs are outlined with cracks up to 3/bin. wide - NO CHANGE. The west approach slab surfacing has a longitudinal crack, 8ft. long x 1/bin. wide in the westbound lane - NO CHANGE. The following was considered incidental to this element: The southwest approach sidewalk has a diagonal crack aft. long x 1/bin. wide, adjacent to Abutment 1 - NO CHANGE. The northeast approach sidewalk has a 12in. x Bin. delamination at the fourth guardrail post from the structure -NEW. The asphalt surfacing of the approach roadways has random cracking up to Eft. long x 1/bin. wide -NEW. Corrective Action Taken: The construction debris has been removed from the approach shoulders. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORID~DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 10 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 MISCELLANEOUS ELEMENT/ENV:475/4 R/Conc Walls 256 If. ELEM CATEGORY: Other Elements CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 2 Minor cracks and spalls may be present but there is no 2291f. exposed reinforcing or surface evidence of rebar corrosion. Open joints may be prevalent. Some delaminations and/or spalls and/or minor settlement 271f. may be present and some reinforcing may be exposed. Corrosion of rebar may be present but loss of section is incidental and does not significantly affect the strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Note: Total quantity includes both abutment backwalls and the four wingwalls, including the the two support piles at each corner of the bridge. Backwalls were jacketed in the past. CS2 =The retaining wall caps have cracking up to 1/32in. wide, some with efflorescence and/or corrosion bleed out - NO CHANGE. Northwest retaining wall support piles have up to 1/16in. wide vertical cracking with corrosion stains - NO CHANGE. CS3 =The northwest retaining wall cap has a delaminated patch, Eft. long x 10in. wide, located at the angle break - NO CHANGE. -Refer to photo 20. The southwest retaining wall cap has a aft. x 10in. delamination at the angle break and a 7-1/2ft. x 1-1/2ft. delamination at the end -NEW. The northeast retaining wall cap above the support pile has a 1-1/2ft. x Sin. x Sin. spall with exposed rebar -.NEW. Refer to photo 21. The exposed faces of the northeast retaining wall support piles are delaminated up to aft. long x Sin. wide with corrosion stains extending up from the marine growth - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 22. The concrete sheet piling between the support piles of the southeast retaining wall has a Eft. x Eft. delaminated area -NEW. The following was considered incidental to the element: The slope behind the end of the northwest retaining wall has a Eft. x Eft. x 1-1/2ft. deep washout located directly above an outfall pipe in the retaining wall -NEW. Refer to photo 23. Due to the amount of text, refer to the Element Notes section in the addendum. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORI~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 11 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL All Elements UNIT: 0 MISCELLANEOUS ELEMENT/ENV: 29014 Channel 1 ea. ELEM CATEGORY: Channel CONDITION STATE (4) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 1 The channel is in good condition, channel banks are 1 ea. protected or well vegetated, river control devices and embankment protection are not required or are in good condition. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 FLORID~EPARTMENT OF TRANSP~TATION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report BRIDGE ID: 930227 PAGE: 12 OF 20 DISTRICT: 04 Fort Lauderdale INSPECTION DATE: 1/15/2008 EFLL Smart Flag Summary UNIT: 0 SMART FLAG ELEMENT/ENV:359/4 Soffit Smart Flag 1 ea. ELEM CATEGORY:Smart Flags CONDITION STATE(5) DESCRIPTION QUANTITY 3 Cracking and efflorescence on the under-surface is moderate. The 1 distressed area is 10% or less of the underside area. ELEMENT INSPECTION NOTES: Underside of the slab units have extensive spalls with exposed and corroded rebar. Refer to Element 99 PS Conc Slab for related comments. Structure Notes BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Note: Bridge inventoried from west to east. Note: This structure is on a 12 month inspection frequency due to SIA Items #58 (Deck), #59 (Superstructure) and #70 (Bridge Posting) are all coded a 4. INSPECTION NOTES: EFLL 1/15/2008 Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn538oj-P at 2008-01-24 17:13:08 This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. REPORT ID: INSP005 (condensed) PRINTED: 02/27/2008 ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: Page 13 of 20 02/27/2008 4 Description- Structure Unit Identification Bridge/Unit Key: 930227 0 Structure Name: Description: SPAN 1 THROUGH 5 Type: M Main Roadway Identification: NBI Structure No (8) 930227 Position/Prefix (5) Route On Structure Kind Hwy (Rte Prefix) 5 City Street Design Level of Service 1 Mainline Route Number/Suffix 0000010 N/A (NBI) Feature Intersect (6) NO FORK LOXAHATCHEE RIV Critical Facility Not Defense-crit Facility Carried (7) TEQUESTA DRIVE Mile Point (11) 0.325 Roadway Traffic and Accidents Lanes (28) 2 Medians 0 Speed 30 mph ADT Class ADT Class 4 Recent ADT (29) 13486 Year (30) 2004 Future ADT (114) 23398 Year (115) 2027 Truck %ADT (109) 2 Detour Length (19) 3 mi Detour Speed 30 mph Accident Count -1 Rate -1 Latitude (16) 026d57'29" Long (17) 080d06'13" Roadway Classification Nat. Hwy Sys (104) 0 Not on NHS National base Net (12) Not on Base Network LRS Inventory Rte (13a) 93 000 114 Sub Rte (13b) 00 Functional Class (26) 17 Urban Collector On Federal Aid System Y Defense Hwy (100) 0 Not a STRAHNET hwy Direction of Traffic (102) 2 2-way traffic Emergency^ Roadway Clearances Vertical (10) 99.99 ft Appr. Road (32) 24.6ft Horiz. (47) 38.7 ft Roadway (51) 27.8 ft Truck Network (110) 0 Not part of natl netwo Toll Facility (20) 3 On free road Fed. Lands Hwy (105) 0 N/A (NBI) School Bus Route ^/ Transit Route ^ This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 14 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 Structure Identification Geometrics Admin Area Palm Beach County Spans in Main Unit (45) 5 District (2) D4 - Ft. Lauderdale Approach Spans (46) 0 County (3) (93)Palm Beach Length of Max Span (48) 36.4 ft Place Code (4) Tequesta Structure Length (49) 181.1 ft Location (9) 1.2M1 W OF US-1 Deck Area 7607 sgft Border Br St/Reg (98) Not Applicable (P) Share 0 % Structure Flared (35) 0 No flare Border Struct No (99} Age and Service FIPS State/Region (1) 12 Florida Region 4-Atlanta Year Built (27) 1962 NBIS Bridge Len (112) Meets NBI Length Year Reconstructed (106) 2006 Parallel Structure (101) No ~~ bridge exists Type of Service On (42a) 5Highway-pedestrian Temp. Structure (103) Not Applicable (P) Under (42b) 5 Waterway Maint. Resp. (21) 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy Fracture Critical Details Not Applicable Owner (22) 4 City/Municipal Hwy Agy Historic Signif. (37) 5 Not eligible for NRHP Structure Type and Material Deck Type and Material Curb/Sidewalk (50): Left 5.2 ft Right 5.9 ft Deck Width (52): 42 Bridge Median (33): 0 No median Skew (34): 0 Main Span Material (43A): 5 Prestressed Concrete Deck Type (107): 2 Concrete Precast Panel Appr Span Material (44A): Not Applicable Surface (108): 6 Bituminous Main Span Design (43B): 01 Slab Membrane: 0 None Appr Span Design (44B): Not Applicable Deck Protection: None Appraisal. Structure Appraisal Open/Posted/Closed (41) P Posted for load Deck Geometry (68) 2 Intolerable -Replace Underclearances (69) N Not applicable (NBI) Approach Alignment (72) 8-No Speed Red thru Curv Bridge Railings (36a) 0 Substandard Transitions (36b) 0 Substandard Approach Guardrail (36c) 0 Substandard Approach Guardrail ends (36d) 0 Substandard Scour Critical (113) U Unknown Scour Minimum Vertical Clearance Over Structure (53) 99.99 ft Under (reference) (54a) N Feature not hwy or RR Under (54b) 0 ft Load Rating Design Load (31) 4 M 18 (H 20) Rating Date 3/28/2006 Initials JLL Posting (70) 4 0.1-9.9%below Navigation Data Navigation Control (38) Permit Not Required Nav Vertical Clr (39) 0 ft Nav Horizontal Clr (40) 0 ft Min Vert Lift Clr (116) 0 ft Pier Protection (111) Not Applicable (P) NBI Condition Rating Sufficiency Rating 32.1 Health Index 77.7 Structural Eval (67) 4 Minimum Tolerable Deficiency Structurally Deficient Minimum Lateral Underclearance Reference (55a) N Feature not hwy or RR Right Side (55b) 0 ft Left Side (56) 0 ft Operating Type (63) 1 LF Load Factor Operating rating (64) 42.6 tons Alternate -1 Inventory Type (65) 1 LF Load Factor Inventory Rating (66) 25.5 tons Alternate -1 $C~'IedU~e~ Alt Meth -1 Current Inspection Next Inspection Date Scheduled Inspection Date: 01/15/2008 NBI: 1/15/2010 Inspector: KN5380J-P -John O'Grady Element: 01/15/2009 Bridge Group: N/A Fracture Critical: Primary Type: Regular NBI ~ Underwater: 01/15/2010 Review Required: ~/ Other/Special: 01/15/2009 This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI(S BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 15 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 i ~ Schedule Cont., Inspection Types Performed NBI^/ Element ^/ Fracture Critical ^ Underwater ^/ Other Special ^/ Inspection Intervals Required (92) Frequency (92) Last Date (93) mos Inspection Resources Fracture Critical ^ Underwater ^/ Other Special ^/ NBI ~ Custom' General Bridge Information Parallel Bridge Seq Channel Depth 7.9 ft Radio Frequency -1 Phone Number (000) 000-0000 Exception Date Exception Type Unknown Accepted By Maint 01!01/1962 Warranty Expiration 00/00/0000 Bridge Load Rating Information HS20 Govr. Span Length 34.4 ft L-Rating Origination Design Plans Load Rating Date 03!28/2006 Method Calculation AASHTO formula Load Dist. Factor 0.68 Impact Factor 30 Design Method Load Factor Design Measure English Recommend SU Posting 32 tons Recommend C Posting 99 tons Recommend T Posting 99 tons Gov FB Span 0 ft Gov FB Spacing 0 ft FB HS20 Rating 0 tons FB SU4 Rating 0 tons FB Present N FB INV Rating Factor0 FB OPR Rating Factor0 FB FL 120 0 tons Bridge Scour and Storm Information Pile Driving Record Unknown Foundation Type Unknown Mode of Flow Tidal Rating Scour Eval Scour Susceptible -Low Highest Scour Eval Phase I completed 1 Condition NBI Rating Channel (61) 7 Minor Damage Deck (58) 4 Poor Superstructure (59) 4 Poor Substructure (60) 6 Satisfactory 24 mos 01/22/2008 12 mos 01 /15/2008 24 mos (91) 01/15/2008 (90) Crew Hours 8 Flagger Hours 0 Helper Hours 0 Snooper Hours 0 Special Crew Hours 3 Special Equip Hours 6 Bridge Rail 1 Concrete post & beam Bridge Rail 2 Not applicable-No rail Electrical Devices No electric service Culvert Type Not applicable Maintenance Yard 0 FIHS ON /OFF No Routes on FIHS Previous Structure Single Unit Truck 2 Axles 31.8 tons Single Unit Truck 3 Axles 33 tons Single Unit Truck 4 Axles 32.5 tons Combination Unit Truck 3 Axles 48.3 tons Combination Unit Truck 4 Axles 44.1 tons Combination Unit Truck 5 Axles 48 tons Truck Trailer 5 Axles 50 tons Posting Weight 5 tons Actual SU Posting 99 tons Actual C Posting 99 tons Actual T Posting 99 tons FL 120 Long Gov Span -1 tons FL 120 Trans -1 tons Single Axle Trans -1 tons Tandem Axle Trans -1 tons Wing Span -1 ft Web to Web Span -1 ft HS20 OPR Rating Max Span -1 tons FL120 Long Max Span -1 tons Scour Recommended I Stop scour evaluations Scour Recommended II No recommendation Scour Recommended III No recommendation Scour Elevation -1 ft Action Elevation -1 ft Storm Frequency -1 Culvert (62) N N/A (NBI) Waterway (71) 7 Above Minimum Unrepaired Spalls -1 sq.ft. Review Required ^/ This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. . ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 16 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 Elements Inspection Date: 1/15/2008EFLL pan Id Elem/Env Description Qty1 %1 Qty2 %2 Qty3 %3 Qty4 %4 Qty5 %5 T Qty 0 99/4 iPS Conc Slab '~~ 0 ;~ j'~r- 7607 100. ~0~'I ~~ 0 ;~~ 7607 sf. Notes Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab units in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 9. The asphalt surfacing over the expansion joints has roadway width x 1/4in. wide transverse cracks -NEW. There is a light to moderate accumulation of dirt and debris along the curbs -NEW. The topside and underside of the sidewalk slab units have numerous spalls and delaminations, some with exposed steel -INCREASE. The underside of the roadway slab units have numerous spalls and delaminations, some with exposed rebar -INCREASE. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, refer to the Element Notes section in the addendum for a list, of specific deficiencies noted in the sidewalk slab units and the roadway slab units. Corrective Action Taken: The worst areas of corrosion on the utilities along the north side of the structure have been repaired by installing PVC sleeves around the corroded areas. The utilities still have varying degrees of corrosion. 301/4 Pourable Joint Seal ~~~ j~~ 84 100. ~!~~~i~i 84 If. Notes Note: The quantity and condition state represent only the visible portion of the joints in the curb and sidewalk areas. Roadway portions are not visible due to the asphalt overlay and are considered incidental to this element. Sealant within the sidewalk portion of the joints is completely deteriorated and in some areas, they are packed with dirt and debris - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 10. ) 331L~ one Bridge Railing 304 83.52 ,;~ 0 ~; ~ 16.48 ~0 C;I 0 i • -~~ 3 Notes CS3 =Most of the posts have delaminations up to full height x Bin. wide throughout - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 11 for typical view. In addition, the following posts have spalls with exposed rebar up to full height of post x full width of post: Left side -Posts 1-4, 1-6, 2-1, 2-4, 2-5, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-1 and 5-4 -INCREASE. Right side -Posts 1-2, 1-6, 2-1, 2-3, 2-6, 3-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 5-2 and 5-5 -INCREASE. Refer to photo 12 for typical view. The approach guardrails were considered incidental to this element: The steel approach guardrail panels typically have minor dents and the timber posts have some splintered edges - NO CHANGE. Randorr cushion blocks are loose -NEW. 204/4 /S Conc Column ~ 22 6~~1-~ 16.67 ®2.22 ' 0 ~~~0 ~ 36 ea. Notes Note: Only the outside faces of the piling in Abutments 1 and 6 are visible due to the concrete added between the piles (backwalls were jacketed). Refer to Element 475 R/Conc Walls for any related comments regarding the two support piles at each retaining wall. Due to the amount of text noted under this element, all comments can be found in the Element Notes section of the addendum. The following is a brief summary: Several piles are cracked/delaminated, mostly as a result of corroding rebar. Corrective Action Taken: The previously noted deficiencies in Piles 1-2, 1-3 and 1-4 have been repaired since the 3/8/2006 Post-Repair Inspection. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 17 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 Elements Inspection Date: 1/15/2008EFLL pan Id ~Ele /m Env~~Description Qty1 %1 Qty2 %2 Qty3 %3 '~' %4 QtyS %5~ 7 Qty 0 215/4 R/Conc Abutment i 86 7.81 '~~0 12 12.19 ~0 ~~~ ~ 98 If. Notes CS1 =The east face of Abutment 1 cap has less than 1/64in. wide cracking that outlines a repair area from Pile 1-1 to Pile 1-3 and between Piles 1-5 and 1-6 - NO CHANGE. Abutment caps have vertical cracks up to 30in. long x 1/32in. wide - NO CHANGE. Abutment 1 cap and Abutment 6 cap have intermittent horizontal cracking up to 1/64in. wide developing within Bin. of the bottom edge - NC CHANGE. CS3 =Abutments have other more significant cracks and delaminations as follows: Abutment 1 cap has delaminated repairs up to 24in. long x 30in. wide in the east face at the haunched areas adjacent to Slab Units 1-3 am 1-9 - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 16. Abutment 6 cap has a Oft. long x Bin. wide delamination above Pile 6-5 -INCREASE. Abutment 6 cap has a delaminated patch 1ft. long x bin. wide in the top west edge under Slab Unit 5-10 - NO CHANGE. Abutment 6 cap has a 3-1/2ft. long x 1ft. wide delaminated patch in the lower west face between Piles 6-7 and 6-8 -NEW. Corrective Action Taken: The previously noted delamination in Abutment 6 cap between Piles 6-7 and 6-8 has been repaired, but the patched area is now delaminated as noted above. D 234/4 R/Conc Cap j 95 i54 57 25 14.38 ~ 54 31.06 ~~j 0 J 174 If. Notes CS1 =Some of the intermediate bent caps have heavy rooted vegetation growing on the ends - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 17. CS2 =Bent caps have random cracking up to 1/32in, wide - NO CHANGE. CS3 =The following is a list of deficiencies noted: Bent 2 cap west face under S.U. 1-2, 2-1/2ft. long x 2ft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 2 cap west face under S.U. 1-10, aft. x 2-1/2ft. delamination -NEW. Bent 2 cap west face at south end, 1ft. 4in. x 1ft. 4in. x tin. spalled and delaminated area with exposed rebar -INCREASE. Refer to photo 18. Bent 3 cap bottom northeast corner, 18in. long x 12in. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap bottom face near the southwest corner of Pile 3-1, 2-1/2ft. long x 18in. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap east face under S.U. 3-8, 2ft. long x 1ft. Tin. delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 3 cap east face lower edge from Pite 3-2 to north end, 16ft. long x Sin. wide delaminated patch - NO CHANGE. Bent 4 cap west face lower edge between Piles 4-4 & 4-5, 7ft. long x 1ft. wide delamination -INCREASE. Bent 4 cap lower west face at south side of Pile 4-1, 4-1/2ft. x 2-1/2ft. delaminated patch -NEW. Refer to photo 19. Bent 5 cap bottom & west faces between Piles 5-1 and 5-2, 6-1/2ft. long x 3-1/2ft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. Bent 5 cap lower east and west faces and bottom face between Piles 5-4 and 5-5, Eft. long x Eft. wide delaminated patch -INCREASE. D 1396/4 ther Abut Slope Pro 2400 100. i 0 ~~~ ~i 0 I~~ ~~~ 2400 sf Notes Note: This element represents the concrete filled fabric mat slope protection. 290/4 Channel ; 1 i'10 0• i~0~~~~- ~~ ICS 0 ~ 1 ea. Notes 359/4 Soffit Smart Flag I p ~~ p~~~~ 100. ~0 ~ 0 ~ 1 ea. Notes Underside of the slab units have extensive spalls with exposed and corroded rebar. Refer to Element 99 PS Conc Slab for related comments. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATt~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REPORT ID: INVT001A Structure ID: 930227 Inspection/CID Report COMPREHENSIVE Page 18 of 20 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 Elements Inspection Date: 1/15/2008EFLL pan Id ElemlEnv Description Qty1 %1 Qty2 %2 Qty3 %3 Qty4 %4 Qty5 %5 '~ T Q 0 321/4 R/Conc Approach Slab 0100. ~0 L ;~~~ 0 ~~0 ~ tea. Notes Note: The approach slabs are not visible due to an asphalt overlay. Both approach slabs are outlined with cracks up to 3/bin. wide - NO CHANGE. The west approach slab surfacing has a longitudinal crack, 8ft. long x 1/bin. wide in the westbound lane - NO CHANGE. The following was considered incidental to this element: The southwest approach sidewalk has a diagonal crack aft. long x 1/bin. wide, adjacent to Abutment 1 - NO CHANGE. The northeast approach sidewalk has a 12in. x Bin. delamination at the fourth guardrail post from the structure -NEW. The asphalt surfacing of the approach roadways has random cracking up to Eft. long x 1/Sin. wide -NEW. Corrective Action Taken: The construction debris has been removed from the approach shoulders. 475/4 R/Conc Walls ~~~ 22 i9 89.45 '~ 27 10.55 ~0 ~~O~C~256 If. Notes Note: Total quantity includes both abutment backwalls and the four wingwalls, including the the two support piles at each corner of the bridge. Backwalls were jacketed in the past. CS2 =The retaining wall caps have cracking up to 1/32in. wide, some with efflorescence and/or corrosion bleed out - NO CHANGE. Northwest retaining wall support piles have up to 1/16in. wide vertical cracking with corrosion stains - NO CHANGE. CS3 =The northwest retaining wall cap has a delaminated patch, Eft. long x 10in. wide, located at the angle break - NO CHANGE. Refer t. photo 20. The southwest retaining wall cap has a aft. x 10in. delamination at the angle break and a 7-1/2ft. x 1-1/2ft. delamination at the end -NEW. The northeast retaining wall cap above the support pile has a 1-1/2ft. x Sin. x Sin. spall with exposed rebar -NEW. Refer to photo 21. The exposed faces of the northeast retaining wall support piles are delaminated up to aft. long x Sin. wide with corrosion stains extending up from the marine growth - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 22. The concrete sheet piling between the support piles of the southeast retaining wall has a Eft. x Eft. delaminated area -NEW. The following was considered incidental to the element: The slope behind the end of the northwest retaining wall has a Eft. x Eft. x 1-1/2ft. deep washout located directly above an outfall pipe in the retaining wall -NEW. Refer to photo 23. Due to the amount of text, refer to the Element Notes section in the addendum. Total Number of Elements: 11 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 01.15.2008 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KN5380J-P -John O'Grady Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn538oj-P at 2008-01-24 17:13:08 Inspection Date: 02.14.2007 Type: Special-Posted Bridge Inspector: 957 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by knkcabc-P at 2007-03-29 07:32:39 Note: This was an interim (post-repair) inspection. Only Element 99 PS Conc Slab was inspected and evaluated, and will be included in this report. For all other deficiencies, refer to the previous routine report dated 1/28/06. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. ' ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Inspection/CID Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 19 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02/27/2008 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 03.08.2006 Type: Interim Inspector: 843 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn538p1-P at 2006-03-29 16:26:23 Inspection Date: 01.28.2006 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KNKCAET-P -Timothy Sweeney Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by KNKCAES-P at 2006-02-24 15:29:08 Note: This structure is closed until further notice, due to the 100% corroded prestressed strands and permanent fracture in Slab Unit 3-7 at mid-span. Due to the failed state of these strands and the numerous exposed and severely corroded strands in other slab units at Span 3 underside, the NBI rating for Deck and Superstructure has been lowered from a 5 (Fair) to a 2 (Critical) during this inspection. Inspection Date: 10.26.2005 Type: Special-Nat Disaster Dmg Inspector: KNKCAPO-P -Patrick O'Grady Inspection Notes: NOTE: Storm damage assessment completed on 10/26/2005 following Hurricane Wilma. No storm related damage was found in the structure as a result of the hurricane. Inspection Date: 08.26.2005 Type: Special-Nat Disaster Dmg Inspector: KN853KR-P -Ken Reinhold Inspection Notes: NOTE: Storm damage assessment completed on 08/26/2005 following Hurricane Katrina. No storm related damage was found in the structure as a result of the hurricane. Inspection Date: 03.15.2005 Type: Interim Inspector: 840 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by KNKCAES-P at 2005-04-12 11:03:56 Inspection Date: 02.24.2004 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KN738A6-P -Anthony Bibelhauser Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb-P at 2004-03-18 16:58:09 KN738AB-P inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 2004-02-24 - Inspection Date: 02.18.2003 Type: Interim Inspector: KN738WW-P -Wade Wolfe Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb-P at 2003-03-04 16:36:23 KN738WW-P inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 2003-02-18 - This is an interim inspection, only elements 99 P/S Conc Slab and 359 Soffit Smart flag are included. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. • ~RIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM InspectionlClD Report REPORT ID: INVT001A COMPREHENSIVE Page 20 of 20 Structure ID: 930227 DATE PRINTED: 02!27!2008 Inspection Information Inspection Date: 02.28.2002 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: KN738SH-P -Scott Hughes Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738ma at 3/7/02 11:45:19 KN738SH inspection comments -Routine inspection. Structure 930227 - Date 2/28/02 - Inspection Date: 04.11.2001 Type: Interim Inspector: KN738R0-P -Rick O'Connor Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738vb at 5/15/01 17:34:36 KN738R0 inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 4/11/01 - This is an interim inspection conducted based on SIA item 70 Bridge Posting being rated 4 or less. Only Element 99/4 PS Conc Slab and 359/4 Soffit Smart Flag are in this report. For a comprehensive list of all other deficiencies and recommended repairs, see the previous report dated 02/09/00. The following deficiencies noted are not covered by elements in the PONTIS program. Repair recommendations for these elements can be found in the recommended repair section of the attached addendum. Signs- signs are posted at each approach fora 33 ton weight limit. The sign configuration does not conform with FDOT Standard Index 17357 guidelines. Tequesta Drive is posted at several points prior to reaching the bridge for "No Thru Trucks Over 50001bs. Net Wt". Inspection Date: 02.09.2000 Type: Regular NBI Inspector: 311 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn738dc at 3!1/00 11:45:20 KN738DC inspection comments - Structure 930227 - Date 2/9/00 - Refer to the attached addendum for all non-Pontis and additional element deficiencies and recommendations. Inspection Date: 02.24.1999 Type: Interim Inspector: 311 Inspection Notes: Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn7381p at 3/24/99 13:33:04 Sufficiency Rating Calculation Accepted by kn7381p at 3/24/99 11:42:14 KN738DC inspection comments - This interim inspection is being conducted based on SIA Item 70 Bridge Posting being rated 4 or less. Structural deficiencies affecting the load carrying capacity were reviewed and will be included in this report. For a comprehensive list of all other deficiencies and recommended repairs, see the previous report dated 1/20!98. Structure 930227 - Date 2/24/99 -The following deficiencies noted are not covered by elements in the PONTIS program. Repair recommendations for these elements can be found in the recommended repair section of the attached addendum. Signs-Signs are posted at each approach fora 33 ton weight limit. The signing configuration does not conform with FDOT Standard Index 17357 guidelines. Tequesta Drive is posted at several points prior to reaching the bridge for "No Thru Trucks Over 5000 lbs. Net Wt". Previous comments > (none) Structure Notes BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Note: Bridge inventoried from west to east. Note: This structure is on a 12 month inspection frequency due to SIA Items #58 (Deck), #59 (Superstructure) and #70 (Bridge Posting) are all coded a 4. This report contains information relating to the physical security of a structure and depictions of the structure. This information is confidential and exempt from public inspection pursuant to sections 119.071(3)(a) and 119.071(3)(b), Florida Statutes. Only the cover page of this report may be inspected and copied. • FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT ADDENDUM • .. CONTENTS OF ADDENDUM Location Map Photo Section & Sketches Weight Limit Sign Photos * Fracture Critical Data Load Rating Analysis Summary Recommended Repairs Element Notes * Scour Evaluation ~` This section is not included in this report. BRIDGE OWNER: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA BY: KISINGER CAMPO & ASSOCIATES CORP. REPORT IDENTIFICATION Bridge Number: 930227 Routine Inspection Date: 1/15/08 Bridge Name: Tequesta Drive over North Fork of Loxahatchee River Road Name/Number: Tequesta Drive Feature Intersected: North Fork of Loxahatchee River Critical Deficiency Statement: None Traffic Restrictions: According to the current load rating analysis dated 3/28/06, this structure should be posted at or below the Operating Rating for the SU type vehicles as follows: SU-32 tons. This structure is current) osted for a blanket wei ht limit of 5 tons. Refer to hotos on a e 3. Page 1 of 26 FL~DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO ION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15!08 LOCATION MAP South Elevation Tequesta Dr. over North Fork of Loxahatchee River 1.2 Miles W of US-1 Page 2 of 26 FDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION ' BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 000000 Inspection Date: 00/00/00 POSTING PHOTOS w~, -° Page 3 of 26 West Weight Limit Sign East Weight Limit Sign FL~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR~ION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 LOAD RATING ANALYSIS SUMMARY 5'fA'tF OF F(.()R1DA DEPARI'~tFN'r pF I'RAVtiFORTATlON U: LOAD CAPACT'I'Y INFOKMA'1'IU,Y I. BRIllGF; DATA: Bridge Number 930227 Date 3;23:2006 S'TR "i'ype Blain IBiD item BI(43)] 501 ~ STR "type APR (BID Item 82(44)] 000 - 2. POSTING DATA: _ -_ Posted YES If yes, Existing Posting Neaini _ YES If ye., Proposal ---- Rcstrictiana ST Re,trictions 5[J-32-f _.__ BIU Item H8(41) --P ---~-- BID Item HIl(70) IiID Item H7(31) 4 3. .4N:A LYSIS DA-pA: A. hict}u ?d o_f a\nalvsis_ Load Factor )b'orking Stress e. Analy sis Svstcmr: X BARS __ _ _ _ SALOD _ _ BRL;FF:\T load ~I'v~st Other _Other --_----- F.. Controlline Mentbcr Analyzed: 61ata'ial• _._,.-.. __-~-' -- _ Steel -X ~~- - Concrete _ Cas[ in Place _ X Precast __ __ ?( ~ Presvcssed Post Trnsionerl Timber - ~~~OthcT Sean.. -- ---- X - Simple -' Continuous Frame Slab X - Non-Composite ~- Composite 1. load Ration Summarv'1'able: C. _'~3la lysi5 F3a£23 Qit.;_ X Design Drawings _-_. _ __ As-Built Record Ylans Shop Drawings X Field Measrremc-In Catalogs _..._ .--Sample Tcaing _,.~.--- Uther X Slab - - ---Stringer ..-'----- Floor Beam _.. __Cirdcr ____ _ Cu Ivert Tntss Shag: RollcYl _.-.._ --Built-up W'eldctT ___-____-_ Built-up Riveted Box Shape -----~_~__~ ~ - AAS HTO G ir(iers X Other Voided Slab D. data tit(~r=3: X Uisvict Office _-_--_ --'--~ C ~tval Offir~e ~~ Microfilm - ------ Bridge Owner _----___-_ Materials Test I ab __X __ Other K Urive Subsvuctu~c~ Bent Consuvetiun Piling Cap Pier Construction -__.._ ..__ Piling .-._._---'-' Footing .. _ - _.... - C'olu nw _---__._ Cap ~iLiaet Faeroe U ?Op LOAD RA'T'ING Sl1DTSTARY FOR OPERATING R ATINC GROSS 'CON S VEHICLE TYPE TO\S UPR RA~1'fNC OPN FAC'iOR SPAN Nn. SPAP LKNG-fH f_ONTR ~1F,AIBF:R ~1 or v LLDF sue 17 31s Is7 z 3s-5^ col bf o6so SU3 33 33.0 1.00 2 ia'-5" (i01 M 0.680 SIJ4 35 32.5 0.93 2 34'-5" G01 ~f 0.680 C3 28 48.3 1.73 2 34'-5" GOI M 0.680 C4 36.6 44.1 1.21 2 34' S" G01 M 0.680 CS 40.0 48.0 L20 2 34' S" G01 M O.GBU STS 40.0 50.0 125 2 J4'-5" GUl M O.f 80 HS 20 }6 42.6 1.13 2 14' S" GOI `v'f O.n80 t1SA) Inventory Kanng LS ? Kattng Factor U ! I ~~O RSlnent5 Member G01 is a prestressed concrete voided slab with a span.lenglh of 31.416 R. Member G01 has a laree spall and exposed tendons _ Reductions for rnatert3l ctrcngths and section loss have been taken 6. Comoutations: Ycrformed By ]anon L. LaBarbera, P.F.. Dale 3i28i2006 Chc-ckal By Patrick Mulheam Date 3282006 Rtwiuw(x1 By Uavid B. 3 hompson. P F. Date 3282006 7. Resttonsible Engineer: Jason L. [a Barbera, P.E. P.E. # 64004 Date 7r29200ti -_. _. _._ ~~iooy ~/a9 /o~ Page 4 of 26 FL•IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~ION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 ELEMENT NOTES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Note: Roadway slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 3 through 9. Sidewalk slab units in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 are numbered 1, 2, 10 and 11. Roadway slab units in Span 3 are numbered 3 through 7. Sidewalk slab units in Span 3 are numbered 1, 2, 8 and 9. The following is a list of spalls and/or delaminations noted in the underside of the roadway slab units. All conditions noted are at or near mid-span unless otherwise noted: Several of the slabs in Spans 2 and 4 have diagonal cracks up to 12in. long x 1/32in. wide at the bent caps. Note: All of the delaminated patches have moisture penetrating through them. Slab Unit 1-3 has a 14in. x Bin. delamination at the east scupper - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 1-8 has a Eft. x 4in. delamination along south edge - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 1-9 has three longitudinal cracks up to aft. long x 1/16in. wide adjacent to Bent 2 near the center - INCREASE. Slab Unit 2-3 has a 9ft. x aft. delamination near the center - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 2-4 has an 8ft. x aft. delaminated patch - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 1. Slab Unit 2-5 has a 7ft. x aft. x Sin. spalled and delaminated area with three exposed rebars having up to 10% section loss near the center - INCREASE. Refer to photo 1. Slab Unit 2-7 has a 9ft. x 3-1/2ft. delamination and delaminated patch - INCREASE. Refer to photo 2. Slab Unit 2-8 has a Oft. x aft. delaminated patch - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 2-9 has a Oft. x Bin. delamination with an Bin. x Sin. x lin. spall with exposed steel at Bent 2 - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 2-8 has a 13ft. x bin. delamination south edge from mid-span toward Bent 3. Slab Unit 4-3 has an 18ft. x aft. delamination and delaminated patch - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 4-4 has a 5ft. x aft. delaminated patch near center - NO CHANGE; Longitudinal cracking less than 1/32in. wide exist along north edge east of mid-span - NEW. Slab Unit 4-5 has a 5ft. x aft. delaminated patch with corrosion staining - INCREASE Slab Unit 4-6 has a Eft. x aft. delamination - INCREASE Slab Unit 4-7 has a 9-1/2ft. x 3-1/2ft. delamination and delaminated patch - INCREASE. Slab Unit 4-8 has a 16ft. x 2ft. delaminated patch and delamination - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 5-3 has a aft. x lft. delamination along south edge - NO CHANGE. Page 5 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION ' BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1 /15/08 ELEMENT NOTES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Slab Unit 5-4 has an intermittent span length x Bin. delamination along north edge; 8ft. x lft. delamination along south edge - NO CHANGE. The underside of the lft. wide cast-in-place curb section in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 in Slab Units 2-3, 2-9, 3-3, 4-3, 4-9, 5-3 and 5-9 typically have significant cracking, delaminations (unsound concrete) and/or spalling as a result of corroding reinforcing steel. In some cases, the delaminations or spalling extends 3/4 of the span length - INCREASE. Refer to photos 3 and 4. The metal utility conduits attached to the north overhang are heavily corroded with several areas completely corroded through, exposing the plastic coated cables within. Refer to photo 5. The top and traffic faces of the curbs in Spans 1, 2, 4 and 5 have longitudinal (horizontal) cracks up to 1/16in. wide, some with corrosion staining, and several delaminations with and without corrosion staining in areas throughout. Top of the sidewalks have numerous shallow spalls and delaminations with and without exposed reinforcing steel. The following is a list of top side sidewalk deficiencies: Span 1: North sidewalk adjacent to Abutment 1 has a delaminated repair Eft. x Oft. - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 6. Span 1: North sidewalk adjacent to Bent 2 has a delaminated repair 18ft. x aft. - NO CHANGE. Span 1: North sidewalk under utility pipe at mid-span has two spalls with exposed steel up to 18in. x 4in. x 3/4in. - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 7. Span 1: South sidewalk adjacent to Bent 2 has four delaminations and spalls with exposed steel up to Sin. x aft. x 3/4in. - NO CHANGE. Span 2: North sidewalk adjacent to curb at Bent 2 has a delamination 17in. x 4in. - NO CHANGE. Span 2: North sidewalk under utility at 3/4 point has a spall with exposed steel Oft. x Sin. x lin. - NO CHANGE and a 14ft. x bin. delamination, starting 5ft. from Bent 2 - NEW. Span 2: South sidewalk adjacent to curb has an intermittent delamination and spall with exposed steel 25ft. x Sin. x 1/tin. - NO CHANGE. Span 3: South sidewalk adjacent to curb, 8ft. & 16ft. from Bent 3, has two (2) delaminations with exposed steel up to Tin. x Sin. x 1/tin. (popouts). Other minor spalls with no exposed steel exist along the curb - NO CHANGE. Span 3: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks, some with corrosion staining, up to 1/32in, wide and minor spalls with no exposed steel along the curb - NO CHANGE. Page 6 of 26 FL~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 ELEMENT NOTES Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab (Continued) Span 4: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks up to 1/32in. wide, some with corrosion staining - INCREASE. Span 4: South sidewalk adjacent to curb has a spalled and delaminated area with exposed steel and corrosion stains 25ft. x bin. x 1/tin. - NO CHANGE. Span 5: South sidewalk has longitudinal cracks up to 1/32in. wide, some with corrosion staining - INCREASE and a Eft. x aft. x 1/tin. deep spalled and delaminated area with exposed steel at Bridge Rail Posts 5-3 and 5-4 - NEW. Span 5: North sidewalk, Oft. from Bent 5, has a spalled and delaminated area with exposed steel and corrosion stains 16in. x 4in. x 1/tin. - NO CHANGE. The following is a list of deficiencies noted in the underside of the sidewalks: Slab Unit 2-10 near mid-span has a 5ft. x aft. delamination - NEW. Slab Unit 3-1 at mid-span has a delamination and delaminated patch with corrosion stains up to 13ft. x aft. wide - INCREASE. Slab Unit 3-2 at mid-span has a llft. x 2-1/2ft. delamination - NEW. Slab Unit 3-8, previously noted as 3-9, at mid-span has a crack/spall/delamination with exposed rebar 12ft. long x aft. wide x tin. deep - INCREASE. Refer to photo 8. Slab Unit 3-9 just west of mid-span, has a 7ft. x aft. delamination - NEW. Refer to photo 9. Slab Unit 4-1 at Bent 5 has a delamination aft. x lft. and a 7ft. x 16in. delamination at centerline - NO CHANGE. Slab Unit 4-2 at mid-span has a 5ft. x 1-1/2ft. delamination - NEW. Slab Unit 4-10 at mid-span and 3/4 points has two delaminations each up to aft. x lft. - NO CHANGE. Page 7 of 26 ` F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 ELEMENT NOTES Element Cateaorv: 204 P/S Conc Column Note: Only the outside faces of the piling in Abutments 1 and 6 are visible due to concrete added between the piles (backwalls were jacketed). Refer to Element 475 R/Conc walls for any comments regarding the two support piles at each retaining wall. CS1 = Most of the piling in Bents 2 through 5 have un-patched pickup points up to 18in, below the top of the marine growth - NO CHANGE. CS2 & CS3 = Several piles have cracking, mostly as a result of corroding rebar. The following is a list of deficiencies noted above the waterline: CS2 = Pile 1-l, SE corner, 18in. below cap, vertical crack aft. long x 1/64in. wide - NO CHANGE. Pile 1-5, NE corner, aft. below cap, vertical crack with corrosion staining lft. Bin. long x 1/64in. wide - INCREASE. Pile 1-8, NE corner, Oft. below cap, vertical crack 2 1/2ft. long x 1/64in. wide - NEW. Pile 2-l, SE corner, at cap, vertical crack lft. long x 1/64in. wide - NO CHANGE. Pile 6-2, NW corner, Oft. below cap, vertical crack 2ft. long x 1/64in. wide - NO CHANGE. Pile 6-3, NW corner, aft. below cap, vertical crack aft. long x 1/64in. wide - NO CHANGE. CS3 = Pile 1-5, NE corner, 3 1/2ft. below cap, lft. Bin. long x 1/64in. wide vertical crack with corrosion staining - NEW. Pile 1-6, NE corner, corrosion stains in grout patch - NO CHANGE. Pile 1-7, SE corner, Oft. below cap, vertical crack with corrosion stains 2ft. long x 1/16in. wide - NO CHANGE. Refer to photo 13. Pile 2-3, NW corner, 5ft. below cap, delamination 5ft. bin. x 15in. - INCREASE. Refer to photo 14. Pile 4-2, NE corner, Oft. below cap, delamination 5ft. bin. x lft. bin. - INCREASE. Refer to photo 15. Pile 6-l, NW corner, Oft. below cap, vertical crack/delamination with corrosion stains Oft. long x 1/32in. wide - NO CHANGE. Pile 6-4, NW corner, 18in. below cap, vertical crack that extends up through grout patch, 5ft. long x 1/32in. wide - NO CHANGE. Pile 6-4, W face, aft. Bin. below cap, delamination lft. bin. long x Bin. wide - NEW. Pile 6-6, NW corner, 2ft. below cap, vertical crack with corrosion stains Oft. long x 1/32in. wide - NO CHANGE. Page 8 of 26 ` F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE~ BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 2/14/07 ELEMENT NOTES Element Cateaorv: 204 P/S Conc Column (Continued The following was noted by the underwater inspectors: Piles 1-2, 1-4, 6-1, and 6-4: There are 1/32in. wide cracks that extend a maximum of 12in. into the marine growth with corrosion bleed out above water - NO CHANGE. Element Cateqory: 475 R/Conc Walls The following was noted by the underwater inspectors: The south piling on the NE and NW wingwalls have a 1/16in. wide crack with corrosion bleed out. The north pile on the NE wingwall has a delamination/patch extending bin. into the marine growth, Bin. below the cap, 5ft. x 17in. - NO CHANGE. Retaining Wall: At Abutments 1 and 6, there is concrete fill between the piling that extends down within Bin. of the groundline. Below this concrete a ruler can be probed back to the original wall - NO CHANGE. On the west wall, north side of Pile 1-4, there is a void in the fill, 7ft. bin. below the cap, Sin. x Sin. x 3-1/tin. - NEW. On the west wall, south side of Pile 1-7, there is a void in the fill, 8ft. below the cap, Sin. x Sin. x tin. - NEW. On the west wall, north side of Pile 1-8, there is a void in the fill, 8ft. below the cap, Sin, x Sin. x Sin. - NEW. On the east wall, north side of Pile 6-1, there is a void in the fill, 8ft. below the cap, tin. x 3-1/tin. x 3-1/tin. Previously noted as south side of Pile 6-1 - NO CHANGE. On the east wall, south side of Pile 6-3, there is a void in the fill, 8ft. bin. below the cap, tin. x Sin. x 18in. - NEW. On the east wall, south side of Pile 6-6, there is a void in the fill, 8ft. below the cap, tin. x 12in. x 3-1/tin. - NO CHANGE. Page 9 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Page 10 of 26 Photo #2 Element 99 - Slab Units 2-7 and 2-8 delaminated patches FLlIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOI~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Page 11 of 26 FI.~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 Photo #5 PHOTO SECTION m.. ~, .; ~~*~f ~4 ~s ^ x9 }'~~:_. Element 99 - Typical view of heavily corroded utility conduits on the north side of the bridge showing PVC repair sleeve in-place Page 12 of 26 Photo #6 Element 99 - Delaminated patched area in the top of the north sidewalk at Abutment 1 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION ` BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Photo #7 Photo Element 99 - Spall with exposed rebar in the top of the north sidewalk of Span 1 a'® ~a° w4 ~ .~r~,' corrosion staining in the underside of Sidewalk Slab Un it 3-8 Page 13 of 26 ' F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE~ BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION ~~ ~,. Photo #5 ~ - ~~ ~~~ q-r ~ y x „'' ' ~°' ~r ~ 'z ~-~, ,- .¢ ,4, ~ .a ~" -".~~; ( tf } # ~ k S ~ ~ ~' v~~. ~_ Element 99 - Delamination with corrosion staining in the underside of Sidewalk Slab Unit 3-9 Photo #10 Element 301 - Typical view of deteriorated sidewalk joint sealant Page 14 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Photo #11 Element 331 - Typical delaminated bridge rail post (Post 3-4 left shown) s- •»w« a u 1. , . ~ :, ~`~• r,~ ~' .c gym a^ 'W°. ''3 i~" j o- n .~+ ~~ ~rw,' r s ~. P M;d, -~~ Element 331 - Typical spall with exposed rebar in bridge rail post (Post 4-5 left shown) Photo #12 Page 15 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION ` BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION ,, ~ ~ { ~~ . ~ » e .. ~ Rv' ~ t£ ~ f * ab t`~ w rr~ ~ .. S ' . 4 ~ J t r 4 b ., ,y~~pe~ aN T ~ w,Ds V ~ ~ :S p ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~'~~ kY'S ~~° r ~ k ~ f ~ N . " ~SS ~ ~ , TMl 9. @ ~ ` d~ . nw °~A~ 4 ~ ~a~J ' _ _ _~ '`'~' `"°` -fir. ...-: ~. Photo #14 E1e ~~~a ~. - ~ ,..,__.. , _.., ~„ , -_ Page 16 of 26 FL.~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION ' BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION v y„. z ~:. :' ~,. Page 17 of 26 Photo #15 Element 204 - Delamination in Pile 4-2 Photo #16 Element 215 - Delaminated patch in Abutment 1 cap r ~ F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Photo #18 ~~ ~=: ~~ _,~ ~Y 1~ Element 234 - Spalled and delaminated area in the west face of Bent 2 cap at the south end Page 18 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE~ BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT PHOTO SECTION .~ ti ~- .~ Photo #19 Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 Page 19 of 26 Element 234 - Delaminat~ed patch west face of Bent 4 cap at Pile 4-1 FI~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION " BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION ~' ~, ~,, ,} 1 . ' ° -~~ ~: sr~ ,.ti ~; ~n , ~ ~ ~',~. ~~ ~'~ Photo #22 Element 475 - Delamination witr~ corrosion staining in northeast retaining wall support pile Page 20 of 26 F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~ION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 PHOTO SECTION Page 21 of 26 Photo #23 Element 475 - Washout in slope behind the northwest retaining wall FL~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~ION ~ BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 RECOMMENDED REPAIRS Element Category: 99 PS Concrete Slab Repair all delaminated (unsound) and spalled concrete throughout the underside of the bridge. This includes all delaminated areas, patches and spalls in the slab unit underside, the sidewalk slab units underside and the underside of cast-in-place curb sections. Repair the utility conduits along the north side of the bridge. Repair all top of sidewalk delaminations and spalls. 301 Pourable Joint Seal Clean and seal the expansion joints. 331 Conc Bridge Railing Repair all bridge post spalls with exposed rebar. 204 P/S Conc Column Clean and repair Piles 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, 1-6, 1-7, 2-l, 2-3, 4-2, 6-1, 6-2, 6-4 and 6-6. 215 R/Conc Abutment Repair the delaminations and delaminated patches in Abutment 1 and 6 caps. 234 R/Conc Cap Remove vegetation from intermediate bent caps. Repair all spalled and delaminated areas, including patches, in the bent caps. 475 R/Conc Walls Repair the delaminated patches, spalls and delaminations in the retaining wall caps, sheet piling and support piles. Repair the washout in the slope behind the northwest retaining wall. i n n r t, -, ., ,., ,, i Backfill and stabilize the erosion at the ends of the northwest and southwest retaining walls. Page 22 of 26 FL~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~ION * BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1 /15/08 SCOUR EVALUATION LEFT SIDE 10/01/89 01/28/06 01/15/08 Chan e Abutment 1 18.0 18.3 17.5 0.8 Bent 2 21.3 21.6 21.1 0.5 Bent 3 23.3 24.3 23.7 0.6 Bent 4 23.6 24.6 24.0 0.6 Bent 5 21.0 22.5 21.9 0.6 Abutment 6 16.7 18.0 17.4 0.6 Waterline at Bent 3 15.0 15.0 RIGHT SIDE 10/01/89 01/28/06 01/15/08 Chan e Abutment 1 18.0 17.6 17.4 0.2 Bent 2 21.3 22.0 21.6 0.4 Bent 3 23.3 23.6 22.9 0.7 Bent 4 23.6 24.1 23.6 0.5 Bent 5 21.3 21.8 21.5 0.3 Abutment 6 16.7 17.7 17.0 0.7 Waterline at Bent 3 15.0 15.0 LEFT OFFSETS (100ft.) 01 /01 /96 01 /28/06 01 /15/08 Chan e 20.7 20.7 20.8 -0.1 20.7 20.7 20.9 -0.2 21.7 22.0 22.0 0.0 22.0 22.0 21.8 0.2 23.0 22.7 22.5 0.2 23.0 23.0 22.9 0.1 RIGHT OFFSETS (100ft.) 01 /01 /96 01 /28/06 01 /15/08 Change 23.0 23.0 23.0 0.0 23.6 23.4 23.6 -0.2 24.0 24.5 24.1 0.4 24.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 23.6 24.0 23.8 0.2 22.6 23.3 23.2 0.1 NOTE: - = An increase in degradation. Blank box = No previous measurement available. Relative Channel Plots Are Not To Scale. Any Vertical Curvature Of Datum Point Is Not Reflective In Plot. The waterline and mudline measurements, in reference to the top of the bridge rails, are provided for future comparison. All measurements are in feet. Page 23 of 26 r FL~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE~ BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 SCOUR EVALUATION 0.0 5.0 10.0 d 15.0 D i4 r ~ 20.0 25.0 30.0 0.0 5.0 Left Side Profile -+- 10/01/89 ~ 01/28/06 ~- 01/15/08 E a m m m E m Right Side Profile 1o/ovfis ~o1rza/os ~ov1s/ofi E m m m E m 10.0 d 15.0 O C 20.0 25.0 30.0 Relative Channel Plots Are Not To Scale. Any Vertical Curvature Of Datum Point Is Not Reflective In Plot. Page 24 of 26 ' F~IDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO~TION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 0 r 20.0 25.0 30.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 0 C 20.0 25.0 30.0 SCOUR EVALUATION Left Offset Profile -~-01/01/96 -~-01/28/06 X01/15/08 E E m m m m Right Offset Profile ~--01/01/98 X0128/06 X01/15108 E ~ E m m m m a Relative Channel Plots Are Not To Scale. Any Vertical Curvature Of Datum Point Is Not Reflective In Plot. Page 25 of 26 r FL~DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR~ION BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT Bridge No: 930227 Inspection Date: 1/15/08 South channel T _- ~ ~~'-, m, .M ~~,~.- ~ , _ _ "`"" North channel Page 26 of 26 SCOUR EVALUATION