STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT - Bayfield · STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT ... Design Live Load HL-93 and...

Bayfield Pkwy over Los Pinos River and Overflow Channel

Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT

Bayfield Parkway over the Los Pinos River

and Overflow Channel Bayfield, Colorado

Replacement of Existing Structures: P-06-G & P-06-H

Prepared for The Town of Bayfield

By AMEC

July 2014


Bayfield, Colorado

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROJECT HISTORY .............................................................................................................................. 1

STRUCTURE PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................... 1

STRUCTURE DATA AND DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................. 2

FOUNDATION ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 3

STRUCTURE LAYOUT – LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE ................................................................... 4

STRUCTURE LAYOUT – LOS PINOS OVERFLOW CHANNEL BRIDGE ..................................... 5

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING STRUCTURE TYPES ..................................................................... 6

STRUCTURE TYPE ALTERNATIVES – LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE ........................................... 8

STRUCTURE TYPE ALTERNATIVES – LOS PINOS OVERFLOW CHANNEL BRIDGE ............ 9

STRUCTURE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................................ 10

ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 11

1


Bayfield, Colorado

PROJECT HISTORY Bayfield Parkway was the original route of US 160 and was later converted into a business route US 160-B (Bayfield Parkway) when a town bypass was constructed. The route connects the eastern and western portions of town with the downtown, city hall and park area just east of the Los Pinos River. During 2012, Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) transferred ownership of US 160-B to the Town of Bayfield. As part of the ownership transfer, CDOT agreed to fund the replacement of the structures over the Los Pinos River and Los Pinos overflow channel. The roadway was renamed Bayfield Parkway.

The existing Los Pinos River Bridge has an approximate length of 162 feet and a clear width of 24 feet. The Los Pinos overflow channel bridge has a length of 182’-10” with a clear width of 24 feet. Due to both structure’s substandard roadway geometry, they are classified as functionally obsolete. Both bridges have truss superstructures that are considered fracture critical. According to the latest available CDOT inspection report, the fracture critical gusset plates were inspected in a detailed manner during 2010. The results of that inspection were not available for AMEC to review. The Los Pinos River Bridge received a deck rehabilitation in 2003, but still exhibits signs of efflorescence and spalling underneath the structure. With functionally obsolete and fracture critical classifications, CDOT and the Town of Bayfield have determined that the bridges will be replaced.

The new structures will accommodate the required 4-foot shoulder widths, two 12-foot travel lanes, and a 5-foot sidewalk with curb and gutter width of 1’-6” on the south side only. As part of this project, a pedestrian path will be constructed to connect Pine River Picnic Pavilion and town hall to the recreation fields south of Bayfield Parkway.

STRUCTURE PURPOSE The purpose of this project is to replace two functionally obsolete, fracture critical three-span bridges. The new structures will have an out to out width of 41’-6” and will be outfitted with Type 10M Bridge Rail. The bridge rail on the south side of the road will be a modified version of the Type 10M to accommodate pedestrian height requirements. The proposed horizontal alignment of Bayfield Parkway will be shifted slightly north of the existing alignment at both bridge sites to allow side slope approaches to remain within the right-of-way. The vertical alignment is being raised at the Los Pinos River bridge to provide adequate clearance for a pedestrian path near the east abutment.

CDOT Str. No. P-06-G Overflow Channel Bridge

CDOT Str. No. P-06-H Los Pinos River Bridge

2


Bayfield, Colorado

The General Layout sheets in the “Attachments” section shows the proposed Bayfield Parkway structures over the Los Pinos River and the Overflow Channel. Two alternatives had been proposed prior to the preparation of AMEC’s involvement. These alternatives involved utilizing either multiple prefabricated or precast arch panels to span the waterways, or constructing prefabricated truss structures. Neither of these options are considered in this report. The arch panel structures are not being included because of the difficulty involved in working within the waterways. For the prefabricated truss option, the cost of steel and transportation to the site makes this structure cost prohibitive.

STRUCTURE DATA AND DESIGN CRITERIA The following structural data and design criteria are applicable to these structures:

Overall Bridge Width 41’-6” Roadway Width 33’-0” clear (two thru lanes, shoulders) Shoulder Width 4’-0” outside shoulder on north side; south 5’-

0” to provide a curb and gutter section off of the bridge.

Bridge Rail Type 10M (Modified on South Side for Pedestrians)

Deck CIP Concrete w/3” asphalt wearing surface and waterproofing membrane

Sidewalks 5’-6” on south side of bridge (includes 6 inch curb)

Design Live Load HL-93 and Colorado Permit Vehicle Design Dead Load Includes 5 PSF for permanent deck forms

(where applicable) with no allowance for additional wearing surface

Design Methodology Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Specifications AASHTO LRFD, 7th Edition; CDOT Bridge

Design Manual

Utilities Conduits in bridge rail curbs (each side); gas line; sewer line; future water line

Hydraulics Zone A floodplain Pedestrian Path Requirements

8’-6” minimum vertical clearance; 10’-0” width

Freeboard Bridge low chord: 5-foot over 10-year water surface elevation for recreational users in the river, 8’-6” clearance for the pedestrian path at the eastern abutment, and 1.96’ freeboard over the 100-year water surface elevation.

3


Bayfield, Colorado

FOUNDATION ALTERNATIVES A geotechnical investigation was done during April of 2014 for the Bayfield Parkway bridge replacement project. One boring at each of the bridge’s abutments was investigated. The results show that the subsurface material consists of soil and rock with very dense alluvial deposits above bedrock. The underlying bedrock is Animas Formation. This includes layers of claystone, shale and sandstone materials. Bedrock was found anywhere between 18 to 28 feet below the roadway surface. Groundwater was located at approximately the river elevation at all sites.

The preliminary design report recommends using piles or caissons for the deep foundations. Pile foundations are preferred at the abutment locations to allow for integral abutments. Integral abutments will allow the design team to eliminate expansion joints on the project, which reduces future maintenance requirements. Caissons will be used at the Los Pinos River Bridge’s center pier. Caissons are easier to install in a sensitive location such as in and around the river. A pile foundation would require a pile cap, which is expensive and increases the work zones needed within the river. Both bridge sites are subject to scour, which eliminates shallow foundations such as spread footings. Predrilling is recommended for pile sections so they can penetrate the weathered bedrock layer. A temporary casing is recommended to assist predrilling through areas with groundwater and cobble/gravel material. For the purpose of this report and the associated cost estimates, HP 12x74 piles are used.

The geosynthetic reinforced soil integrated bridge system (GRS-IBS) was evaluated as a foundation alternative for this project. The Los Pinos River and Channel Overflow Bridges do not fit within the FHWA span criterion, making it not a candidate for GRS-IBS. In addition, based on geotechnical and hydraulic limitations listed in the GRS-IBS Interim Implementation Guide, the use of GRS-IBS at this site is not recommended. Bedrock is fairly deep at both abutment locations, resulting in a potential for scour. Mitigating the scour potential requires constructing walls at or below the maximum scour depth, which requires construction below the water table. Building these abutments under the water table on the banks of a river is difficult and costly. Therefore, GRS-IBS is not recommended at this location.

4


Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE LAYOUT - LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE There are several possible configurations for the Los Pinos River Bridge. Due to the large width of the Los Pinos River channel at Bayfield Parkway, a single span structure would require a deep superstructure. Since a pedestrian path is going to be placed at the eastern abutment, minimizing the superstructure depth is an important span criteria. Based on preliminary design calculations, there are no feasible single span options that can satisfy the geometry for the pedestrian path. Therefore, a single span structure will not be considered further.

A three span bridge offers the shallowest superstructure options for this site. However, the pier locations would be in the Los Pinos River channel and the irrigation ditch, which increases environmental impacts making the construction difficult. A two span option allows the center pier to be placed near an island in the middle of the channel. While temporary river impacts are still expected, they will be greatly minimized with this configuration.

The following are the two-span layouts being considered:

LAYOUT SPAN CONFIGURATION COMMENTS 2:1 Spill Slopes, 100-100 foot Spans Minimal environmental impacts or

modifications to the river Span provides a larger hydraulic

opening than the existing bridge Minimizes dewatering requirements Requires a greater superstructure

depth than layout B Integral stub abutments are simple

to construct

A

B

Full Height Abut. Wall, 78-78 foot Spans

This provides a similar hydraulic opening to the existing structure

Full height abutment walls are expensive and timely to construct

Large amounts of dewatering required

Reduces superstructure depth Will require the use of expansion

joints at the abutments

5


Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE LAYOUT - LOS PINOS OVERFLOW CHANNEL BRIDGE The Pinos Overflow Bridge does not see a constant flow like the river site. It does contain marsh areas and wetlands. During preliminary engineering, AMEC tried to reduce this bridge’s span as much as possible. The original intent was to provide a series of box culverts. Based on hydraulic design with the FEMA no-rise criteria, this is not possible. Numerous adjacent properties to the bridge site see a raise to the 500-year floodplain. Therefore, a bridge is warranted at this location.

AMEC iterated hydraulic openings to minimize the spans required and save project costs. Only options C and D are feasible at this location. Since there are no clearance restrictions, a two or three span structure is not economically viable at this location.

LAYOUT SPAN CONFIGURATION COMMENTS 2:1 Spill Slopes, 130 foot Span Minimal impacts or modifications

to the marsh and wetlands Span provides an adequate opening

to satisfy FEMA requirements Integral stub abutments are simple

to construct Requires a greater superstructure

depth than layout D

C

D Full Height Abutment Wall, 92 foot

Span Requires work in the marsh to

install footings and deep foundations, dewatering possible

Full height abutments are expensive and difficult to construct

The superstructure depth can be shallower than layout C

Will require the use of expansion joints at the abutments

E Concrete Box Culvert (CBC) A box is simple to construct

Saves design costs if the CDOT standard designs are used

Hydraulically, this option is not feasible due to impacts to the FEMA floodplain, even with a multi-cell option

6


Bayfield, Colorado

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING STRUCTURE TYPES Key considerations for the project include: providing economical structures within the project budget, minimizing the need for temporary easements, minimizing environmental impacts, providing pedestrian access on both structures, a pedestrian underpass on the river bridge, and allow for current and future utilities to be placed on both bridges. Other criteria include maintenance, aesthetics, and a construction detour.

Construction Cost Construction cost for the bridge structures is an important consideration in the structure selection process. For comparison purposes, detailed cost estimates were prepared for the major items of each structure type. These costs do not encompass the total project cost and should be used for comparison purposes only. Quantity costs were derived from recent CDOT Cost Data Books on projects of similar size and location and adjusted for market trends.

Environmental The project site has numerous wetlands near the river and overflow bridges. There are also some threatened and endangered species in the area. These include the Southwest Willow Flycatchers, Yellow Billed Cuckoos, and the New Mexico Jumping Mouse. The project team will consider these impacts as the project progresses.

Schedule The construction schedule for this project is anticipated for approximately one year. The contractor will close Bayfield Parkway and construct the bridges, one at a time to maintain property access. Due to the migratory bird treaty, clearing and grubbing operations need to occur prior to spring restrictions. A temporary easement will likely be required during construction.

Utilities The bridge structures currently carry multiple utilities including gas, sewer and telephone lines. The proposed bridge rails on the new structures will carry 2-2 inch diameter conduits for future fiber optic or telephone lines (4 total for each bridge) and utility space for a new gas and sewer line. The gas and sewer lines will be mounted on the exterior girder for box superstructures or on the overhang for bulb tees. The town requested that the gas and sewer lines run on the south side of the bridges.

Maintenance All options investigated are considered to be low maintenance structures. Full height abutment options will require an expansion joint at abutment locations. These joints require ongoing maintenance and replacement every 5 to 15 years. This difference in maintenance activities will be weighted into the final selection criteria.

Aesthetics Aesthetic considerations do not play a large role in the structure selection for this bridge. All of the options are roughly equivalent in regards to aesthetics. It is anticipated that architectural enhancements to the bridge will be very basic and will not have an impact on the selection of the preferred structure.

7


Bayfield, Colorado

Constructability and Construction Phasing Since both of the existing bridges have truss superstructures, phased construction by removing half of each bridge while reconstructing the new bridge in halves is not feasible. With right-of-way tight throughout the corridor, building the new bridge on a different alignment is not possible. Therefore, the project team decided to close Bayfield Parkway during the construction. However, in order to maintain continuous access to a private property in between both bridges the phasing will include the construction of one bridge at a time. This will elongate the construction time frame compared with closing the road and building the bridges simultaneously.

8


Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE TYPE ALTERNATIVES - LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE Four alternatives were evaluated for the bridge over the Los Pinos River. All options are two span structures. A steel girder with stub abutments option was not considered due to the increased cost and structure depth associated with steel girders over prestressed options. Typical sections and detailed cost estimates for these options are provided in the “Attachments” section:

Structure Type Options

Option 1, Layout A: Adjacent Prestressed Box Girders with Integral Stub Abutments $1,650,000 The prestressed adjacent box girder option utilizes a 5 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced side-by-side with a clear overhang of 9”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 3’-11” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). 2:1 spill slopes covered in riprap are placed in front of the integral stub abutments.

Option 2, Layout A: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 54) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments $1,370,000 The prestressed concrete BT 54 girder option utilizes an 8 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-7 ½” with an overhang of 3’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 5’-8” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). 2:1 spill slopes covered in riprap are placed in front of the integral stub abutments. Since this option has a greater superstructure depth compared with the adjacent box option, it requires an additional roadway raise. This cost is not reflected in the above number.

Option 3, Layout B: Adjacent Prestressed Box Girders with Full Height Abutments $1,730,000 The prestressed adjacent box girder option utilizes a 5 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced side-by-side with a clear overhang of 9”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 3’-5” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). The girders will be supported on non-integral full height abutments.

Option 4, Layout B: Prestressed Concrete I (BT42) Girders with Full Height Abutments $1,630,000 The prestressed concrete BT 42 girder option utilizes an 8 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-7 ½” with an overhang of 3’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 4’-8” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). The girders will be supported on non-integral full height abutments. Since this option has a greater superstructure depth compared with the adjacent box option, it requires an additional roadway raise. This cost is not reflected in the above number.

9


Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE TYPE ALTERNATIVES - LOS PINOS OVERFLOW CHANNEL BRIDGE Four alternatives were evaluated for the bridge at the overflow channel. All options are single span structures. A steel girder with stub abutments option was not considered due to the increased cost and structure depth associated with steel girders over prestressed options. Typical sections and detailed cost estimates for these options are provided in the “Attachments” section:

Structure Type Options

Option 5, Layout C: Spread Prestressed Box Girders with Integral Stub Abutments $1,140,000 The prestressed spread box girder option utilizes a 5 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-4 ½” with a clear overhang of 1’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 6’-2” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). 2:1 spill slopes covered in riprap are placed in front of the integral stub abutments.

Option 6, Layout C: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 72) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments $1,040,000 The prestressed concrete BT 72 girder option utilizes an 8 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-7 ½” with an overhang of 3’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 7’-2” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). The girders will be supported on non-integral full height abutments.

Option 7, Layout D: Spread Prestressed Box Girders with Full Height Abutments $1,280,000 The prestressed spread box girder option utilizes a 5 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-4 ½” with a clear overhang of 1’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 5’-2” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). The girders will be supported on non-integral full height abutments.

Option 8, Layout D: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 54) Girders with Full Height Abutments $1,230,000 The prestressed concrete BT 54 girder option utilizes an 8 inch composite concrete deck. The girders are spaced at 8’-7 ½” with an overhang of 3’-6”. The bridge has a superstructure depth of 5’-8” (measured to the top of the HMA wearing surface). The girders will be supported on non-integral full height abutments.

10


Bayfield, Colorado

STRUCTURE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION This selection procedure is intended to identify a structure that best encompasses the established project criteria listed in this report.

For the Los Pinos River bridge, the adjacent prestressed box configuration detailed in Option 1 provides the most economical solution while satisfying all of the project criteria and goals. The primary advantage of utilizing an adjacent box girder superstructure is that it provides the necessary clearance needed for the pedestrian path at the east abutment. The bulb tee option cannot satisfy this constraint without raising the road’s profile. Any further raise requires permanent easement for approach grading.

For the Los Pinos Overflow Channel crossing, the prestressed I (BT 72) girder configuration detailed in Option 6 provides the best solution. This configuration will produce the most economical and efficient structure.

The above options also have the advantages of maximizing the hydraulic openings and provide integral abutments which eliminate expansion joints and reduce long term maintenance costs.

At the Los Pinos River crossing, the design team recommends proceeding to final design with a 200-foot, two span adjacent prestressed box beam girder bridge with integral stub abutments on driven H-piles and a pier founded on caissons.

*At the Los Pinos Overflow Channel crossing, the design team recommends proceeding to final design with a 130-foot, single span prestressed I (BT 72) girder bridge with integral stub abutments on driven H-piles.

*Amec Foster Wheeler was instructed to use a reduced bridge length of 105’. This allowed the use of BT 54 girders as opposed to BT 72 girders.

11


Bayfield, Colorado

ATTACHMENTS (Location Figure)

(Cost Estimates)

(Proposed General Layout)

(Typical Sections)


Bayfield, Colorado

Vicinity Map

N

Overflow

Structure

Location

River

Structure

Location

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: JWJ/BAC

ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE COST

202-00001 Removal of Structure EACH 1 100,000.00$ 100,000$

206-00000 Structure Excavation CY 770 20.00$ 15,400$

206-00100 Structure Backfill (Class 1) CY 204 35.00$ 7,140$

203-00060 Embankment Material (Complete In Place) CY 50 25.00$ 1,250$

403-34701 Hot Mix Asphalt (Grading SX) (75) TON 140 110.00$ 15,400$

502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 14 150.00$ 2,100$

502-11274 Steel Piling (HP 12x74) LF 378 75.00$ 28,350$

502-00100 Drilling Hole to Facilitate Pile Driving LF 329 90.00$ 29,610$

503-00042 Drilled Caisson (42 Inch) LF 50 350.00$ 17,500$

506-00000 Riprap CY 406 80.00$ 32,480$

515-00120 Waterproofing (Membrane) SY 884 25.00$ 22,100$

601-03040 Concrete Class D (Bridge) CY 420 650.00$ 273,000$

602-00020 Reinforcing Steel (Epoxy Coated) LB 56500 1.50$ 84,750$

606-11030 Bridge Rail Type 10M (Modified) LF 482 200.00$ 96,400$

618-01994 Prestressed Concrete Box (Depth 32" Through 48") SF 8033 70.00$ 562,310$

Bridge over Los Pinos River

Cost Estimate

Bayfield Parkway Bridges

14040

Structure Selection Report (Field Inspection Review)

Option 1, Layout A: Adjacent Prestressed Box Girders with Integral Stub Abutments

a) 1,287,790$

b) Contingency 20% of a) 257,558$

c) Mobilization 8% of a) 103,023$

TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,648,371$

Main - Opt 1 Page 1 of 1

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: JWJ/BAC







502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 14 150.00$ 2,100$




506-00000 Riprap CY 406 80.00$ 32,480$





618-00154 Prestressed Concrete I (BT54) LF 1004 240.00$ 240,960$


Cost Estimate


14040

Option 2, Layout A: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 54) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments


a) 1,071,605$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,371,654$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: EHP






502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 32 150.00$ 4,800$




506-00000 Riprap CY 100 80.00$ 8,000$





618-01992 Prestressed Concrete Box (Depth Less Than 32 Inches) SF 6273 60.00$ 376,380$


Cost Estimate


14040

Option 3, Layout B: Adjacent Prestressed Box Girders with Full Height Abutments


a) 1,407,124$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,730,763$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: EHP






502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 32 150.00$ 4,800$




506-00000 Riprap CY 100 80.00$ 8,000$







Cost Estimate


14040

Option 4, Layout B: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 42) Girders with Full Height Abutments


a) 1,274,098$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,630,845$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: BAC

CHECKED BY: TF







502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 14 150.00$ 2,100$



506-00000 Riprap CY 344 80.00$ 27,520$





618-01996 Prestressed Concrete Box (Depth Greater Than 48 Inches) SF 3208 85.00$ 272,680$

Bridge over Los Pinos River Overflow Channel

Cost Estimate


14040

Option 5, Layout C: Spread Prestressed Box Girders with Integral Stub Abutments


a) 889,615$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,138,707$

Overflow - Opt 5 Page 1 of 1

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: BAC

CHECKED BY: TF







502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 14 150.00$ 2,100$



506-00000 Riprap CY 344 80.00$ 27,520$







Cost Estimate


14040

Option 6, Layout C: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 72) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments


a) 809,045$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,035,578$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: BAC







502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 32 150.00$ 4,800$



506-00000 Riprap CY 228 80.00$ 18,240$





618-01996 Prestressed Concrete Box (Depth Greater Than 48 Inches) SF 1857 85.00$ 157,845$


Cost Estimate


14040

Option 7, Layout D: Spread Prestressed Box Girders with Full Height Abutments


a) 1,002,575$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,283,296$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

7/2/2014

CREATED BY: TF

CHECKED BY: BAC







502-00460 Pile Tip EACH 32 150.00$ 4,800$



506-00000 Riprap CY 228 80.00$ 18,240$







Cost Estimate


14040

Option 8, Layout D: Prestressed Concrete I (BT 54) Girders with Full Height Abutments


a) 958,380$



TOTAL a)+b)+c) 1,226,726$


brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

SA

SA

6880

6880

68806880

6870

6870

687

0

6870

6870

6870

687

0

6870

6870

6870

68756875

6875

6875

687

5

6875

6875

6875

6875

6875

68806880

6880 6880 6880

202'-6" BF Abut. to BF Abut.


44'-

7"

42'-

6"

41'-

6"

12'-

0"

12'-

0"

4'-

0"

4'-

0"

1'-

6" Type 10

M

100'-0"100'-0"

1'-

6"

5'-

0"

100'-0"100'-0"

24'-

6"

18'-

0"

PLAN

6890

6875

6860

30'0' 15' 60'

B01 of B04

B. Chamberlin

C. Fisher

Bridge

6845

6890

6875

6860

6845

307+00 308+00 309+00 310+00

(Typ)

Steel H-Piles

SECTION30'0' 15'

0'

30'

15'

0.18%

F F

Grade

Proposed

Grade

Existing

To Durango

To Pagosa Springs

Grade

Proposed

Slab (Typ)

Approach

Ò Abutment 1 Ò Abutment 3Ò Pier 2

Abutment (Typ)

Integral Stub

310

+00

309

+00

307

+00

308

+00

Existing Fence

Structure

Proposed

(Typ)

Approach Slab

(Typ)

Wingwall

Lane

Lane

Shldr

Sid

ewalk

Gutter

Curb and

Brid

ge

Rail (

Typ)

Shldr

Gravel Road

Edge of

Proposed

SSRPLANS

PRELIMINARY

2:1Min.

Pedestrian Path

Proposed10'-0"Caissons

F

Los

Pin

os

Riv

er

Water Line

8'-6"

2:1

(To be removed)

Existing Structure P-06-H

(To be relocated)

Gas Line

High Pressure

Ò Bayfield Pkwy. HCL & PGL

(To be relocated)

Telephone Line

(To be relocated)

Sewer Line

LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE

GENERAL LAYOUT

(Taken at Ò Bayfield Pkwy.)

Box Girder

Prestressed Concrete

Numbers

Structure

No Revisions:

Revised:

Void: Sheet Subset:

Detailer:

Designer:

Sheet NumberSubset Sheets:

Init.CommentsDate:

R-X

Sheet Revisions7/2/2014Print Date:

Horiz. Scale:1:30

14040-GLA_River.dgn

Vert. Scale: As Noted

Project No./CodeFile Name:

Unit Information

carl.fis

her 2:3

5:2

0

PM

P:\

Project\

Transportatio

n\

To

wn of Bayfield\

9.0

CA

DD\

9.0

1 Brid

ge\

Dra

win

gs\

14

04

0-

GL

A_

Riv

er.d

gn

Construction

Unit Leader Initials:RDB14040

Denver, Co 80222 Phone: 303-935-6505

2000 S. Colorado Blvd Suite 2-1000

AMEC Colorado Center Tower 2

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

BRO M065-006

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

12'-0" 12'-0"4'-0" 5'-0"4'-0"

1'-6"

1'-6"

41'-6" Out to out

3'-

11"

12'-0" 12'-0"4'-0"5'-0"

4'-0"

1'-6"

1'-6"

41'-6" Out to out

12'-0" 12'-0"4'-0" 5'-0"4'-0"

3'-6" 3'-6"4 Spa @ 8'-7•" = 34'-6"

1'-6"

41'-6" Out to out

1'-6"

8"

Deck

3'-

5"

4'-

8"

12'-0" 12'-0"4'-0" 5'-0"4'-0"

3'-6" 3'-6"4 Spa @ 8'-7•" = 34'-6"

1'-6"

41'-6" Out to out

1'-6"

8"

Deck

5'-

8"

7 Spa @ 5'-0" = 35'-0"3'-3" 3'-3"7 Spa @ 5'-0" = 35'-0"

3'-3" 3'-3"

B02 of B04

B. Chamberlin

C. Fisher

Bridge

LOS PINOS RIVER BRIDGE

TYPICAL SECTIONS

SSRPLANS

PRELIMINARY

Numbers

Structure

No Revisions:

Revised:

Void: Sheet Subset:

Detailer:

Designer:


Init.CommentsDate:

R-X


Horiz. Scale:1:10

14040-Typical Section_River.dgn



Unit Information

carl.fis

her 2:5

2:5

0

PM

P:\

Project\

Transportatio

n\

To

wn of Bayfield\

9.0

CA

DD\

9.0

1 Brid

ge\

Dra

win

gs\

14

04

0-

Typic

al Sectio

n_

Riv

er.d

gn

Construction


Denver, Co 80222 Phone: 303-935-6505



Lane LaneShdr Shdr Sidewalk

TYPICAL SECTION

Gutter

Curb and

Barrier (Typ)

Type 10M

membrane

waterproofing

3" HMA over

Lane LaneShdr ShdrSidewalk

TYPICAL SECTION

Gutter

Curb and

Barrier (Typ)

Type 10M

membrane

waterproofing

3" HMA over


TYPICAL SECTION

Gutter

Curb and

Barrier (Typ)

Type 10M

Girder BT42 (Typ)


membrane

waterproofing

3" HMA over


TYPICAL SECTION

Gutter

Curb and

Barrier (Typ)

Type 10M

Girder BT54 (Typ)


membrane

waterproofing

3" HMA over

Box Girder (Typ)


Box Girder (Typ)


33'-0" Clear Roadway 33'-0" Clear Roadway

33'-0" Clear Roadway33'-0" Clear Roadway


Ò Bayfield Pkwy. HCL & PGLÒ Bayfield Pkwy.HCL & PGL


Girders with Integral Stub Abutments

Option 1, Layout A: Adjacent Prestressed Box

Concrete I (BT54) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments

Option 2, Layout A: Prestressed

Girders with Full Height Abutments

Option 3, Layout B: Adjacent Prestressed Box

Concrete I (BT42) Girders with Full Height Abutments

Option 4, Layout B: Prestressed

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

BRO M065-006

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

SA

SA

6880

6880

6880

68806880

687

0

6870 6

87

06870

6870

6870

6870

6875

6875

6875

6875

6875 6875

6875

6875

6880

6880

6885

6885

6885

6890


44'-

7"

42'-

6"

24'-

6"

18'-

0"


12'-

0"

12'-

0"

4'-

0"

4'-

0"

5'-

0"

1'-

6"

1'-

6" Type 10

M

41'-

6"

B03 of B04

B. Chamberlin

C. Fisher

Bridge

PLAN

SECTION

30'0' 15' 60'

30'0' 15'

0'

30'

15'

6900

6885

6870

6855

6900

6885

6870

6855

Overflo

w

Channel

Los

Pin

os

Riv

er

Grade

Proposed

Grade

Existing

Ò Abutment 1 Ò Abutment 2

Grade

ProposedF F

(Typ)

Steel H-Piles

1.06%

2:1 (T

yp)Abutment (Typ)

Integral Stub

302+00 303+00 304+00 305+00

Proposed Structure

To Pagosa Springs

To Durango

Slab (Typ)

Approach

Wingwall (Typ)

BT72 Girders

Slab (Typ)

Approach

Existing Fence

Existing Fence

Lane

Lane

Shldr

Shldr

Sid

ewalk

Gutter

Curb and

302

+00

303

+00

305

+00

304

+00

Sign (Typ)

Water Line

Existing

Brid

ge

Rail (

Typ)

SSRPLANS

PRELIMINARY

CHANNEL BRIDGE

LOS PINOS OVERFLOW

GENERAL LAYOUT


(Taken at Ò Bayfield Pkwy.)

(To be relocated)

Sewer Line

(To be relocated)

Telephone Line

(To be relocated)

Gas Line

Existing High Pressure

(To be removed)

Existing Structure P-06-G

Numbers

Structure

No Revisions:

Revised:

Void: Sheet Subset:

Detailer:

Designer:


Init.CommentsDate:

R-X


Horiz. Scale:1:30

14040-GLA_Overflow.dgn



Unit Information

carl.fis

her 2:3

3:5

8

PM

P:\

Project\

Transportatio

n\

To

wn of Bayfield\

9.0

CA

DD\

9.0

1 Brid

ge\

Dra

win

gs\

14

04

0-

GL

A_

Overflo

w.d

gn

Construction


Denver, Co 80222 Phone: 303-935-6505



brad.chamberlin

Text Box

BRO M065-006

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

ij >

0 I c 0

t " Ill 0 u

~ I

0 ... 0 ... :;: g i ~

0 /

i ~

ID

0

"' / 0

5i u 0

"' / "0 o;

~ ID

0 c • 0

1-/ c 0

~ 0

4'-0" Shdr

~

0

4'-0"

4'-0" Shdr

~ - ,-

3 1-6"

~ Bayfield Pkwy. HCL & PGL I

41'-6" Out to aut 33 1-0" Clear Roadway

I '

12'-0" I

12'-0" 4'-0" Lane Lane Shdr

3" HMA aver ~waterproofing

membrane

N I

to

' I

0 0 0 ~Prestressed Concrete

Box Girder (T yp)

4 Spa @ 8 1 -41,/;~" = 33 1-6"

TYPICAL SECTION Option 5, Layout C: Spread Prestred

Box Girders with Integral Stub Abutments


41'-6" Out to out 331-0" Clear Roadway

I ' I

12'-0" ' 12'-0" 4'-0" Lane I Lane Shdr

3" HMA over I f waterproofing ' membrane I

~ I ~

.__,......... N ""' u I Ql r.... 0

~

Prestressed Concrete Girder BT72 (Typ)

4 Spa @ 8 1-71,/2" = 34 1-6"

I 1'-6" Curb and Gutter 5'-0"

Sidewalk

~

0

4'-0"

1'-6" Curb and Gutter 5'-0"

Sidewalk

~ --

3 1-6"

1'-6" 4'-0" Type 10M Shdr Barrier <Typl

~ 0

4'-0"

1'-6" 4'-0" Type 10M Shdr Barrier <Typl

! 3 1-6"


41'-6" Out to out

331-0" Clear Roadway

I '

12'-0" I

12'-0" 4'-0" Lane Lane Shdr

3" HMA over ~ ~aterproofing

membrane

' I N 0 ' 0 0 Ln

\__Prestressed Concrete Box Girder (Typ)

4 Spa @ 8 1-41,/2" = 33 1-6"

TYPICAL SECTION Option 7, Layout 0: Spread Prestressed Box

Girders with Full Height Abutments


41'-6" Out to out 33 1-0" Clear Roadway

12'-0" Lane I

3" HMA over I /waterproofing '

/ membrane I

12'-0" Lane

""' u Ql

0

Girder BT54 (Typ)

4 Spa @ 8 1-71,/2" = 34 1-6"

4'-0" Shdr

1'-6" Curb and Gutter 5'-0"

Sidewalk

~

0

4'-0"

I 1'-6" Curb and Gutter 5'-0"

Sidewalk

3 1-6"

1'-6" Type 10M Barrier <Typ)

1'-6" Type 10M Barrier <Typl

f;l-

~ TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL SECTION PRELIMINARY ~ Option 6, Layout C: Prestressed Option 8, Layout 0: Prestressed PLANS " Concrete I (BT72) Girders with Integral Stub Abutments Concrete I (BT54) Girders with Full Height Abutments ~ SSR ~~P~r=in=t=oa=t=e:~7=/2~/~2=01=4==================:r---~------~S~h-e-e~t-R~e~vi~s~io_n_s------~------------------------------------~--C-o_n_s_t_r_u_c_ti_o_n--~-------T~Y~P~IC~AL~~S~E~C~T~I~D~N~S~----~~P-r_o_j_e_c_t_N_o_._/_C_o_d_e~

~ F~e Name: 14040-TypicaiSeclion-Overflow.dgn Date: Comments !nit. ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L~O~S~~P~I~N~O~S~~O~~~E~R~F~L~O~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Horiz. Scale: 1:10 Vert. Scale: As Noted ~ •osT oFFicE sox 2683 No Revisions: CHANNEL BRIDGE ~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-i ~ ~~~~r-~~~~~~~~~~-i 0-i Unit Information Unit Leader Initials:RDB c:::::> 1------+----------+----i :~:-A:,:~~ 5c3o;

81302-2683

Revised: Designer: B. Chamberlin Structure ~~------i 1kljljklkjl0 De c. Fisher Numbers

:!! 2000 S. Colorado Blvd Suite 2-1000 '----' 970 - 259 · 7472 ·FAx 1-------------t---.... ·•-------i g Denver Co 80222 Phone: 303-935-6505 c:::::> Void: Sheet Subset: Bridge Subset Sheets: B04 of B04 Sheet Number

brad.chamberlin

Inserted Text

brad.chamberlin

Inserted Text

brad.chamberlin

Inserted Text

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

18888

brad.chamberlin

Text Box

BRO M065-006

STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT - Bayfield · STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT ... Design Live Load HL-93 and...

Documents

Transcript of STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT - Bayfield · STRUCTURE SELECTION REPORT ... Design Live Load HL-93 and...