historic stone arch bridge rehabilitation · 2019-10-31 · historic stone arch bridge...

Brian J. Carlson, P.E. - Greenman Pedersen, Inc. and Michael J. Mann, P.E. - McMahon & Mann Consulting

Engineering and Geology, P.C.

HISTORIC STONE ARCH BRIDGE REHABILITATION SOUTH MAIN STREET BRIDGE

JAMESTOWN, NEW YORK

NYSDOT Local Bridge Conference Syracuse, NY

October 2019

Presentation Outline

1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction

Brooklyn Square Circa 1866

1872 -Bridge Built

Jamestown Journal, Friday, January 3, 1873

“Built under the superintendence of Messrs. M. W. Hutton, R. J. Barrows, and Ira Young, road commissioners of the town, by A. Reed, of Pennsylvania, contractor. The bridge was designed and plans drawn by Engineer Scott of Fredonia, .. It is of solid masonry and spans the creek with two thirty-foot arches, the road bed being sixty six feet wide. In the piers, abutments and arches are 1,000 yards of masonry, resting on piles that are capped with oak and hemlock planking…. The total expense of the work was $12,000, the contract price for the stone work being $9,750, the balance of the work being done by the commissioners.”

South Main St. From Brooklyn Square Circa 1925

1974 –Brooklyn Square Urban

Renewal

As buildings along Main St. were torn down, some of which spanned the Chadakoin River, the original arch bridge was exposed.

Profile Showing New Wingwalls

2000 Rehab Plan

2000 Rehab Section

Steel sheeting cofferdam

4

Project Timeline and Cost

Timeline • June 2014 Biennial Inspection – 3 Red Flags, 1 PIA, 1

Safety Flag, 1 Yellow Flag;• July 2014 Upstream Sidewalk Closed and roadway width

reduced to 1 lane each direction centered on bridge;• February 2015 GPI awarded Design Contract;• January 2016 Design Approval; • April 2016 – PS&E;

Project Timeline and Cost

Timeline (Continued)• April 2016 – PS&E;• August 2016 - Approval to advertise:• September 8, 2016 – Bids Opened;• February 2017 – Project Awarded to Union Concrete• April 2017 – Preconstruction Meeting • May – December 2017 – Pier Rehabilitation• April 2018 –May 2019 – Superstructure Rehabilitation

• Road reopened to Traffic November 2018• Final stone coping and site landscaping – May 2019

Project Timeline and Cost

Costs• Engineer’s Estimate - $2,223,823.58 • Low Bid (UCC) - $3,466,419.50

• ~1/2 the increase was in the masonry work items• Final Cost - $3,269,465.99

Quiz Time

What were two probable causes of the arch damage?

Quiz TimeAnswers 1. The timber piles and or cribbing were disturbed from

driving sheetpiles.

2. The arch was sealed up with injection grouting during rehabilitation without benefit of weeps preventing drainage, resulting in freeze/thaw damage.

3. The underdrain pipe allowed drainage into the fill which migrated through the cracks and imperfections of the sandstone.

Presentation Outline

1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction

Subsurface Exploration Plan FH-B-2

BH4-15

BH1-15

BH3-15

BH2-15

DA-B-1

Subsurface Conditions

Till N= 25 - 89

Sand and Gravel N= 21 – 57

Sand and Clay with Gravel N= 30-76

Presentation Outline

1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction

Design Approach

• Rehabilitate Bridge – Repair arches, spandrel walls, replace parapets, etc.

• Abutments appeared to be in good condition

• Work had been done in the 70’s to enhance foundation conditions at the abutments

• Center pier was in poor condition – needs foundation improvement

Lightweight fill

Bridge Rehab Plan

Structural slab

Reinforced concrete arch saddlePier collar

Foundation Improvement Considerations

• No access to drill or drive new deep foundations around the perimeter of the pier.

• Considered drilling new piles through the center pier to support it.

• Rejected that due to narrowness of center pier and poor condition.

REINFORCED CONCRETE PIER COLLAR

CENTER PIER FOUNDATION PLAN VIEW

TB-2 TB-1

MICROPILES DOWELSCRACK IN PIER

Foundation Improvement Approach

Center Pier – Foundation Improvement

• Micropiles at Pier Ends

• Reinforced Concrete Pier Collar

• Permanent Pipes in Pier

• Grouting Beneath Pier

Plan of Pier

Profile

Quiz Time

Name 2 reasons that micropiles were selected for this project.

Quiz Time

- Answers -1. Can be installed with small equipment

without a crane.2. Design can be varied to suit

subsurface conditions.

Presentation Outline

1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Options4. Construction

Subsurface Explorations

• Results are consistent with borings completed at the abutments

Micropile Installation

Micropile Testing

Load Test Results - Graph

Quiz Time

Why do the micropiles have a cased section and a bonded section?

Quiz Time

Answers

1. The cased section provides moment resistance.

2. The bond zone provides axial capacity.

Upstream – West Pier End

Gap in Sheet Piling

at end of Wood Bow

Upstream- West Pier End

Subsurface Exploration Plan

Concrete Placement

Lightweight fill

Bridge Rehabilitation Plan

Structural slab

Reinforced concrete arch saddlePier collar

QUESTIONS ??

Acknowledgements• Chautauqua County Department of Public

Facilities• Fenton History Center• Union Concrete Construction Corp.• Hayward Baker, Inc.• Earth Dimensions, Inc.• Stimm Associates, Inc. • Jamestown Bureau of Public Utilities.

Grouting Profile

Permanent Vertical Pipes

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Volu

me

of G

rout

(ft3 )

S. Main St. Permanent Vertical Pipe Grouting Quantity

4/10/2018 4/11/2018

Grout Hole Take

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Volu

me

of G

rout

(ft3 )

S. Main St. Subsurface Grouting Net Take

PrimarySecondary

Grouting Summary