Preliminary Structure Report 11-21-2014

Preliminary
Structure Report
Bridge No. 05222
November 2014
State Project No. 0230127
Town Bridge Road over Farmington River
Canton, CT

Prepared By:
TranSystems Corporation
530 Preston Avenue Suite 100
Meriden, CT 06450
TSC Project: P712110001
TownBridgeRoadoverFarmingtonRiver
Canton,CT
RehabilitationStudiesReport
FinalSubmission
Table of Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Executive Summary
Location Map
Detour Map
Introduction
Project Purpose
Project Need
Project Area Description
Historical and Technological Significance
9. Existing Condition (Bridge Inspection and Field Observations)
10. Material Testing
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Lead/PCB Testing
Bridge PIN UT Testing
Steel Coupon Testing
Steel Replication Testing
Abutment Vertical Borings
13
13
13
13
13
11. Load Capacity Analysis

12. Design Criteria
13. Alternative Analysis
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
4
5
6
7
7
8
8
9
11
13
14
14
15
Compatibility with Project Needs

Impacts to Historic Resources
Impacts to the Surrounding Environment
RightofWay Impacts
Maintenance of Traffic Impacts
Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost
Opinion of Probable Life Cycle Cost
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
14. Discussion of Alternatives

17
Alternate N: No Build or Null Alternative
17

Alternate 1: Bridge Rehabilitation in Accordance with the Secretary of
17
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation

Alternate 1A: Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)
18

Alternate 1B: Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)
18

Alternate 1C: Bridge Rehabilitation Widened to 20' Roadway Width (HS20) 20

Alternate 2: New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26' Roadway Width 21

(HL93); Truss Bridge restored/preserved as a Pedestrian Facility
1
Canton,CT

15. Preliminary Preferred Alternative
23
a. Permits
b. Bridge Removal Sequence
24
24
16. Cost Considerations

25

FinalSubmission
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
List of Figures
FIGURE
DESCRIPTION
PAGE NO.
Location Map
Detour Map

List of Tables
TABLE NO.
1

DESCRIPTION
PAGE NO.
Alternative Cost Estimation Breakdown
25

Appendices

DESCRIPTION
Sketches
Photographs
Inspection Report
Traffic Counts
Roadway Design Criteria
Test Results
Wetland Delineation
Hydraulic Analysis
Calculations
Cost Estimate
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission

1. Executive Summary

Existing Bridge
Town Bridge over the Farmington River (ConnDOT Bridge No. 05222) was constructed
by the Town of Canton in 1895 as the replacement for a wooden covered bridge at the
same location. The single lane through truss, was fabricated and assembled by the
Berlin Iron Bridge Company of Berlin, Connecticut. Town Bridge has entered its second
century of service to the Town. It is quickly becoming one of a limited number of
through truss bridges constructed in the late 1800s that is still in active vehicular use.
Scope of Rehabilitation Work
Based on the 2013 inspection and evaluation of Bridge No. 05222, the bridge is both
structurally deficient and structurally obsolete. Key issues to be addressed in the
rehabilitation include repair of the deterioration, improve load carrying capacity,
provide internal redundancy, stabilize stone abutments, improve approach profile and
sightlines, and maintain original construction methods and materials. Rehabilitation
and replacement alternatives are provided to determine the most prudent and cost
effective method of advancement for this bridge. The alternatives studies are listed
below.
N. No Build (Null Alternative)

1. Bridge Rehabilitation in accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards
1A.
Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)
1B.
1C.
Bridge Rehabilitation Widened to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)
2. New Bridge on Upstream Alignment to 26 (HL93); Truss Bridge

restored/preserved as a Pedestrian Facility
Maintenance and Protection of Traffic
Town Bridge Road over the Farmington River will be closed throughout the
construction period. Traffic will be detoured approximately 2 miles. Temporary access
to driveways within the Town Bridge Road closure limits will be maintained throughout
the project.

Canton,CT
FinalSubmission

2. Location Map

BridgeLocation
Figure 1 Location Map

Canton,CT

3. Detour Map

Figure 2 Detour Map
6
FinalSubmission
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission

4. Introduction
The Town of Canton has identified the need to study engineering alternatives to improve
the structural condition and roadway width/alignment of the Town Bridge Road Bridge
(Bridge No. 05222) over the Farmington River. The bridge is located in Hartford County,
Connecticut. The project study focuses on the approximate 0.6 mile segment of Town
Bridge Road bounded by Powder Mill Road to the south and River Road (Route 179) to the
northeast.
Town Bridge Road is a narrow twolane rural local road that typically runs through the
steep wooded terrain of the scenic Farmington River. The area is characterized by very
lowdensity residential development, farming and recreation. Town Bridge was constructed
by the Town of Canton in 1895 as the replacement for a wooden covered bridge at the same
location. The single lane through truss, was fabricated and assembled by the Berlin Iron
Bridge Company of Berlin, Connecticut. The Bridge has entered its second century of service
to the Town. It is quickly becoming one of a limited number of through truss bridges
constructed in the late 1800s still in active vehicular use.
The Bridge was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1999 and is listed with
the Historic American Engineering Record, but has not been documented for inclusion in
the collection of the Library of Congress. In consideration of the Town of Cantons desire to
make improvements at this crossing of the Farmington River, this report has been prepared
in accordance with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended 916 U.S.C. 470 et seq. The requirements under Section 106
mandate that a determination be made of the effects that an undertaking has on a historic
property. Concurrent with the Section 106 requirements, this report is also in compliance
with Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act which requires documentation that there are no
prudent and feasible alternatives to the taking or use of a historic property.
The intent of this preliminary engineering study is to evaluate appropriate methods to
restore and rehabilitate the bridge in order to increase its loadcarrying capacity and to
improve the safety of the crossing while complying with appropriate conservation
standards and treatments for historic properties. The ultimate goal of this project will be to
develop the required elements of the structural rehabilitation in such a manner that will not
have an adverse effect on the historic nature of the bridge while increasing the structural
capacity in accordance with minimum standards required by AASHTO/FHWA. This report
summarizes the rehabilitation and or replacement options and recommends a preliminary
preferred alternative.
5. Project Purpose
The purpose of this project is to study methods to address the structural deficiency and
functional obsolescence of the existing bridge. The rehabilitation of the bridge will allow for
7
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
an increase in load capacity of the bridge and possible improvement of some of the
geometric and safety deficiencies of Town Bridge Road. This report is based on the findings
of the latest bridge inspection performed in October 2013, material testing findings,
rehabilitation plans and other records on file.
6. Project Need
In recent times, the Bridge has undergone major repairs in 198384 and in 19891990. The
198990 repairs rehabilitated the Bridge to a 12 ton load posting. The load rating of the
Bridge has been reduced several times over the years to reflect continued deterioration of
the structure. The current load restriction is 7 tons for a dualaxle vehicle and 10 tons for a
triaxle truck. Due to the configuration of the portal bracing, the Bridge has a vertical
clearance restriction of 12' 4". The current Sufficiency Rating of the Bridge is 14.73 and the
Priority Rating is 11.03 as listed on page 107 of the Local Bridge Program Manual Fiscal
Year 2010. The Bridge is listed as eligible for Federal funding.
The paint film applied during the 198990 work has reached the end of its service life and is
allowing moisture to directly attack the metal work of the Bridge. This has resulted in a
significant change in the rate of deterioration of the Bridge. Without intervention to arrest
material deterioration and rehabilitation to strengthen structural connections and select
member replacements that do not have adequate capacity, the Bridge will soon reach the
end of its service life; no longer providing continued service to the community and
ultimately resulting in the loss of this valuable historic resource.
7. Project Area Description

Bridge Description. Bridge No. 05222 is a 160foot long single span Parker1 through truss
bridge having a stringerfloorbeam framing system and corrugated metal pan deck with
bituminous concrete infill. The truss is supported on full height stone masonry abutments
with concrete backwalls; the bridge wingwalls are of stone masonry construction. The
existing bridge has an overall length of 172feet and provides a 14'4" clear roadway width
between railings. The vertical clearance is 12'4". The truss incorporates a mix of riveted
and pinned member connections. It is complete with ornate latticework railings and
decorative finials.
The bridge was built in 1895 by the Berlin Iron Bridge Company and underwent a major
rehabilitation in 1989. Town Bridge carries one lane of alternating direction traffic over the
Farmington River in the Town of Canton, CT. The span is located approximately 0.2 miles
west of River Road (Route 179) and 0.7 miles south of the Litchfield Turnpike (Route 202).
TheParkerthroughtrussbridgeisaPratttypetrusshavingapolygonalupperchordthatincreasesthedepthof
thetrusstowardthecenterwherethegreateststrengthtosupportloadsisneeded.
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
Roadway Description. The total roadway width varies at the approaches to Town Bridge;
no lane line striping is present. The typical roadway width at the southern approach is 26';
the northern approach roadway width varies between 21 and 29 within 300 feet of the
bridge. The approach roadway narrows to a 16 wide paved roadway before the bridge and
narrows further to a limiting 144 width between Wbeam rail elements on the span.
The horizontal alignment of Town Bridge Road consists of a series of curvilinear segments
(SCurves). The roadway generally runs parallel to the Farmington River. At the bridge
approaches, the alignment at each approach is a sharp hairpin curve that brings the
crossing near perpendicular to the stream alignment.
The vertical alignment on the southern approach consists of a steep near 11.0% (approx.)
downgrade on a sag vertical curve from the intersection of Powder Mill Road and crosses
the river on a slight crest vertical curve. The northern approach consists of a series of crests
and sags and a steep climb (approximately 14.1%) to reach the north abutment of the
bridge.
Town Bridge has alternating oneway traffic controlled by a stop sign on the south approach
where motorists must yield the right of way to southbound traffic. There is a yield sign on
the north approach. Due to the sharp vertical curve on the north approach, combined with a
sharp horizontal curve, sight distance is limited to approximately 100 with the horizontal
sight distance controlling (limited by the truss).
Traffic. The estimated Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for Town Bridge Road at the project
location is 593 vehicles (bidirectional) based on data collected during a 7Day Automatic
Traffic Recorder Count in 2013 (Refer to Appendix D).
8. Historical and technological Significance

Town Bridge Road Bridge is one of two surviving pinconnected Parker through truss
bridges in the state, but its historic and technological significance far exceeds it being a rare
example of its truss type. It has been recognized as one of the most interesting records of
metal truss bridges in the state for the historic context and the development and eventual
design standardization. With its combination of idiosyncratic details and standardized
components typical of the period, the bridge chronicles the technological advances in a host
of areas from metallurgy to the transition from pinned to rigid field connections and the
very development of the profession of structural engineering. The Bridge is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places and included in the Connecticut Historic Bridge
Inventory.
Town Bridge was built for the Town of Canton in 1895 by the Berlin Iron Bridge Company,
the most prominent instate bridge fabricating company of its day. The bridge has
characteristic details developed by consulting engineer J.E. Buddington (18531931), an
1877 graduate of Yales Sheffield Scientific School, who had a long career in bridge design.
As one of three Parker through truss bridges built in the area between between1892 and
9
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
1895 and designed or attributed to the longtime railroad engineer J. E. Buddington, Town
Bridge and two Simsbury bridges provide a rare record of the mid1890s advances in
design and understandings about building strong and costeffective bridges. Each of the
three has differences in how members are constructed and connected with Town Bridge,
illustrating how standardized details proved more effective than the idiosyncratic concepts
Buddington used on the two bridges in Simsbury.
Town Bridge owes its basic design to Buddington, but since it was fabricated and erected by
a wellestablished company, it is more traditional of mid1890s highway bridge
construction except for the lower chords and use of riveted (rigid) field connections for
verticals and floorbeams; details that can be attributed to Buddington and are reflective of
emerging design theory and technology. Portable pneumatic riveting equipment was being
perfected during the 1890s, making it possible to drive rivets in the field, thus facilitating
the transition from pinned to riveted panel point connections. Metal truss bridges provided
the cost effective, permanent and strong crossings vital to improving the highways and
byways that contributed so significantly to economic development and changes to the urban
and rural landscape prior to World War I and represent one of the most important
technological advances of the second half of the nineteenth century.
When the Berlin Iron Bridge Company fabricated Town Bridge, it replaced Buddingtons
oldfashioned details with standardized ones typical of the period, like verticals and
diagonals composed of toeout channels with lacing and floorbeams connected at the lower
panel points. The company retained the rigiddesign of the lower chords instead of using
eyebars; and framed the floorbeams into the bottom portion of the verticals using rivets to
achieve the same stiff design.
Another significant feature of Town Bridge is the preservation of its superb aesthetic
detailing a hallmark of the Berlin Iron Bridge Company. With its Eastlakestyle cresting
and lattice railings with cast iron bosses, robust finials atop each hip panel, radiating
pattern strap work fills at the portal knee braces, and one remaining cast iron railing end
post, the bridge presents as complete an array of period decoration as any pin connected
through truss bridge in the nation. The portal detailing, which is particularly choice, is also
remarkably complete. The railing and finial design are trademarks of the Berlin Iron Bridge
Company and are found on other middle 1890s bridges.
Distinguishing Characteristics of Town Bridge. To assist with developing rehabilitation
options and assessing the effects on the historic truss bridge, the following features are
considered to be distinguishing characteristics that are important to preserve in order to
maintain historic significance.

The overall proportions associated with a Parker design through truss span, including
the placement and shape of the members, like the slope of the upper chord and the
alignment of the portal brace on the inclined end posts.
All aesthetic detailing, like the finials, cresting, knee braces, railings, and the remaining
10
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
railing endpost.
Type of connections; pins or rivets. A high strength buttonhead bolt is an acceptable

replacement for a rivet.
Idiosyncratic details like the design of the lower chord. Such details should not be
altered nor should the method of connection for inkind replacement material or
members.
How the truss members are composed and how loads are transferred back to the
ground (load path).
The rehabilitated stone abutments with flared wingwalls have associative significance.
They are the appropriate period detail.
There are many members that are not distinguishing characteristics. They include the deck,
stringers, and floorbeams and the strength of material. It is acceptable to replace wrought
iron with steel, but all wrought iron should be salvaged and securely stored to support
other restorations/rehabilitations of historic structures. The welded repairs are not
distinguished.
9. Existing Condition (Bridge Inspection and Field Observations)

TranSystems personnel performed an indepth inspection of Bridge No. 05222 on October
2122, 2013. The bridge was found to be in Serious Condition (National Bridge Inspection
Standards NBIS condition rating of "3"). The inspection objective was to provide a detailed
field evaluation of the overall condition of the structure. Findings were compared to
previous inspections and general bridge dimensions were verified. The inspection also
included verification of member sizes, observation of critical connection details and
evaluation of rehabilitation concepts.
Deck. The deck is in good condition (rated "7"). The deck consists of a bituminous
concrete filled galvanized corrugated metal deck. The deck exhibits areas of heavy rust at
end dams and there are areas of light rust in the fascia overhang areas at scupper pipes.
The bituminous overlay exhibits longitudinal, transverse and map cracks that are up to 3/4"
wide, areas of uneven bituminous patches and moderate raveling throughout. There are
isolated potholes up to 3' long x 1' wide x 1" deep. The compression seal deck joint at the
south abutment has tears up to 21" long, plow damage to the steel extrusion, and there is a
1/2 vertical misalignment between the concrete header and the approach pavement. The
backer bar at the eastern side of the south deck joint has fallen down due to
deteriorated/broken anchor screws on the underside. The paved over north abutment deck
joint has areas of raveling, deteriorated patches and extensive cracking. There is evidence
of leakage at the underside of both deck joints. There are galvanized steel curbs/splash
guards at the edge of the deck. The ornamental bridge railing along both fascias exhibits
minor impact damage with scrapes and bent/broken lattice bars with areas of heavy rust
11
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
and up to 100% section loss. There are 4" diameter PVC scupper pipes along both curb
lines. The pipe supports that connect the pipes to the truss bottom chords are severely
deteriorated at most locations.
Superstructure. The superstructure is in serious condition (rated "3"). The trusses with
wrought iron eyebars have areas of active corrosion, pack rust, painted over pitting and
isolated perforations. The vertical truss members have up to 20% section loss in the gross
cross sectional area; concentrated at the lower nodes primarily at the clip angle connection
to the floorbeams (East Truss U6L6 at L6). The bottom chords have section loss up to
26.5% in the gross cross sectional area; concentrated at the nodes, scupper locations, and
metal beam rail post connections (West Truss at node L5). The top chord exhibits material
section loss but this is less severe in comparison to the bottom chord condition.
The Stringer 4 web at Floorbeam 7 is buckled outofplane 1/4 over the full height. The
stringer end portions at both abutments exhibit areas of painted over pitting and areas of
heavy rust with material section loss up to 28% on the flanges (Stringer 7 @ 1/3 of panel
span). The floorbeams typically have deterioration at the ends surrounding the clip angle
connection to the vertical truss member. Floorbeams typically have areas of material
section loss that is painted over; the paint system is failing and active corrosion is common.
The maximum floorbeam section loss is 19% in the web (Floorbeam 8 near East Truss) and
5% in the flanges near midspan.
The truss bearings have up to thick impacted rust between shoe plates and truss chord
channels. The expansion bearings (south abutment) show evidence of normal movement.
The sliding expansion stringer bearings at the south abutment have peeling paint and
isolated laminated rust; some bearings are missing keeper plates and show no evidence of
movement. The fixed stringer bearings at the north abutment have random rusted off
anchor bolts and several anchor bolts with section loss up to 50%.
Substructure. The substructure is in satisfactory condition (rated "6"). The stone masonry
abutment stems and wingwalls exhibit up to 25% cracked, loose and missing mortar with
up to 8" deep penetration between stones. The south abutment stem along the waterline
and ends of the northeast and northwest wingwalls has minor voids up to 1' deep between
the stones. The southwest reinforced concrete wingwall exhibits moderate scaling; the wall
is tipped outward up to 2" over the full height at the south abutment interface. The north
abutment concrete backwall has severe scaling with deteriorated concrete along the top
edge in Bays 36.
Channel. The channel is in good condition (rated "7"). Channel flow is directed toward the
south abutment. The stone riprap protection placed along the south abutment appears to
be stable. Based on dropline measurements, there are minor changes in the channel depth
at the bridge compared to a previous inspection dated 2008.
Approaches. The approach roadway is in satisfactory condition (rated "6"). Metal beam
12
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
approach rails at all four corners of the bridge have minor impact damage with small dents
and scrapes throughout. There are areas of light pavement raveling and random
longitudinal and transverse cracks open to 1" wide. There are cracked and uneven patches
in localized areas. The pavement along the north abutment deck joint is slightly heaved and
has plow scrapes.
Vertical Clearance. The minimum vertical clearance over the bridge roadway occurs at the
south end of the bridge. The minimum clearance measured at the time of this inspection
was 12'8" to the portal knee brace at the southwest curb line. The clearance to the south
portal at the center of the roadway is 14'2" and 13'11" to the bottom on the posting sign.
10. Material Testing

a. Lead/PCB Testing
On October 10, 2013 lead paint and PCB testing was completed by Thielsch Engineering.
The samples contained total lead results of 14,200 and 17,100 milligrams per kilogram
wet or parts per million (ppm). Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act TCLP Standard, total lead over 100 ppm is
considered hazardous waste. The results of the PCB testing were 0.112 ppm, which is
considered nondetectable (see Appendix F).

b. Bridge Pin UT Testing
On October 30, 2013, all the truss pins on the bridge were inspected by Team Industrial
Inc. using a straight beam ultrasonic testing method. All pins were found to be free of
measurable indications (see Appendix F).

c. Steel Coupon Testing
On November 20, 2013 steel coupons were collected by Thielsch Engineering. There
were two (2) steel coupons extracted from the bridge structure. Chemical analysis and
tensile tests were performed on both samples; the samples meet the tensile
requirements and chemical composition of ASTM A36, ASTM A572 Gr 42 and ASTM
A709 Gr 36 except for phosphorus content (see Appendix F).

d. Steel Replication Testing
On November 15, 2013 eyebar replication testing was completed by Thielsch
Engineering to determine the composition of the truss eyebars (steel or wrought iron).
Two areas were ground, polished, etched with 2% nital then examined with an optical
microscope to determine the microstructure. The sample microstructure consisted of a
ferritic matrix with numerous longitudinal inclusions, typically found with wrought iron
material as shown in the photomicrograph in Appendix F.

e. Abutment Vertical Borings
On May 22, 2014 vertical borings of the abutments were taken to determine the
abutment foundation conditions and soil characteristics in the vicinity of the existing
13
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
bridge. Four borings were taken at the existing abutment locations, including two
vertical coring's through the abutment stem to determine interior rock quality and
identify the bottom elevation of the foundation. In order to establish the slope of the
existing abutment backwall, two vertical probes were also taken (see Appendix F).

11. Load Capacity Analysis

The bridge is currently posted for 7 tons (single unit trucks) and 10 tons (semitrailer
trucks). The Connecticut Department of Transportations (ConnDOT) latest bridge
inventory rating is 10 Tons for an HS20 Vehicle. As part of this evaluation, all members of
the bridge were analyzed to determine their load carrying capacity for the current (as
inspected) condition. Member capacity was also calculated for each proposed
rehabilitated/replaced condition developed for the various alternatives analysis. Based on
the 1895 year of construction and 2013 material testing, the properties used in the load
capacity analysis are as follows:

Wrought Iron Eyebars:
Fy= 26 ksi
Original Structural Steel:
Fy = 36 ksi (Trusses, verticals, diagonals, floorbeams)
Rehabilitated Steel:
Fy = 50 ksi (Stringers and floorbeam coverplates)
Member capacities were determined using HS7 truck loading for Alternate 1A, HS20 truck
loading for Alternate 1B & 1C and HL93 truck loading for Alternate 2. Truck loadings were
chosen based on the minimum loading requirements for historic structures, AASHTO
Standard Specifications and AASHTO LRFD Specifications. See Appendix I for calculations.

Figure 1 AASHTO HL93 Truck Design Load

12. Design Criteria

Roadway Design Criteria. In order to provide comparison between various rehabilitation
and replacement alternatives for the Town Bridge study, design criteria were first
established based on the characteristics and usage of the roadway. Functional classification
is the grouping of highways by the character of service provided and is central to the
development of design standards. Town Bridge Road is classified as a "Rural Local Road
(Open Density)". Local roads are intended to provide access to residences, farms,
14
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
businesses, and are not typically intended to serve through traffic. Design criteria will
utilize ConnDOT Highway Design Manual (HDM2003) guidelines as well as AASHTO
standards for Geometric Design.
The HDM2003 recommends a travel lane width of 10' for Rural Local Roads having AADT
between 4001500. Further, shoulder widths of 2' to 4' are recommended. Based on the
adjacent roadway segment of Town Bridge Road, south of Powder Mill Road, a 25 mph2
design speed is selected as the proposed design speed for the evaluation of alternatives.
The design parameters recommended for this project are listed below. A comparison of the
proposed alternate roadway design elements for new construction, with the current Design
Standards specified in the HDM2003, is included in Appendix E:
2013 Traffic Volume: 593 vehicles per day

Design Classification: Rural Local Road
Design Speed: 25 mph
Posted Speed: NA
Travel Lane Width: 10 feet
Shoulder Lane Width: 2 4 feet
Travel Lane Cross Slope: 1.5 2%
Shoulder Cross Slope: Same as adjacent travel lane
Minimum Radius: 190 feet
Minimum and Maximum Grade: 0.5% and 11%
Stopping Sight Distance: 155 feet
Minimum Vertical Clearance: 14'3"

Bridge Design Loading. The proposed bridge will be designed in accordance with the
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition, 2010 with 2013 Interim Revisions
for HL93 loading, as supplemented by the Connecticut Department of Transportation
Bridge Design Manual, 2003 with latest revisions.

13. Alternative Analysis

The alternatives analysis section documents the development of alternate schemes to
address the project need based on a set of proposed design criteria. A comparative
evaluation is made assessing the merits of each alternative relative to compatibility with
project need, environmental impacts, permitting requirements, rightofway takings, cost
effectiveness and public acceptability. The No Build or Null alternative is used as a
baseline for the evaluation. The comparison of the alternatives is presented in a Summary
Matrix. The report concludes with a recommendation of a preliminary preferred alternative.
ConnDOT,10/01/2010,CantonApprovedTownRoadSpeedLimits,Retrieved:12/16/2013,
http://www.ct.gov/dot/lib/dot/documents/dstc/townspeeds/canton.pdf
15
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
The alternatives studied in this section, as listed below, consider various courses of action
for the Town Bridge Road Bridge. It is noted, that a goal of this project has been to develop
the required elements of structural rehabilitation and safety in a manner that will not have
an adverse effect on the historic bridge. To this end, Alternatives 1A, 1B, 1C and 2 were
developed to avoid the loss of the Section 4(f) property (Town Bridge).
N. No Build (Null Alternative)

1. Bridge Rehabilitation in accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards
1A.
1B.
1C.
Bridge Rehabilitation Widen to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)
2. New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26 Roadway Width (HL93); Truss Bridge
restored/preserved as a Pedestrian Facility
Constraints that influence the viability of alternative solutions for improvements of the
Town Bridge Road crossing include the Section 4(f) property that is currently identified as
Bridge No. 05222, itself. Other potential Section 4(f) properties may include the
surrounding scenic areas of the Farmington River. Impacts to sensitive environs associated
with freshwater wetlands, aquatic resources, threatened & endangered species, openspace,
et al. will also influence the comparison of alternatives. Rightofway availability, cost
efficiency as well as temporary impacts of construction/detour are also considerations in
the evaluation of alternatives.
Evaluation Criteria. A summary decision matrix comprised of several diverse evaluation
criteria is utilized in the assessment of each alternative. Employing this comparison
technique, the feasibility and effectiveness of each alternative is revealed. The Alternatives
Analysis Summary Matrix of the studied alternatives is located immediately following the
discussion of alternatives. The assessment for each alternative includes consideration of
the following evaluation criteria:
a. Compatibility with Project Needs. This criterion considers whether the alternative
addresses the project needs either partially or entirely. This criterion applies to both
bridge structural upgrades (Structural Deficiencies) and improvement to Town Bridge
Road and Bridge geometric deficiencies (Functionally Obsolete).

b. Impacts to Historic Resources. This criterion examines the degree of impact of an
alternative on the existing bridge listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
c. Impacts to the Surrounding Environment. This criterion considers the level of
impact of an alternative on the natural surroundings i.e. wetlands, rare and endangered
species, parklands, etc. A listing of anticipated permits is included.

16
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
d. RightofWay Impacts. This criterion discusses the rightofway takings and easements
that will be necessary to construct the alternative under consideration.

e. Maintenance of Traffic Impacts. This criterion examines the impact of maintenance of
traffic and or detour, including the estimate of construction duration, needed to
complete construction for each alternative.

f. Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost. This criterion considers the costs of
initial construction and rightofway acquisition for each alternative. The estimate
includes the expenditure for a qualified contractor to build the proposed improvements
including estimated right of way costs. Estimated rightofway acquisition is provided in
terms of number of parcels impacted.

g. Opinion of Probable Life Cycle Cost. This criterion discusses the life cycle cost, the
expenditures associated with maintaining a structure over a period of time. For this
study, the life cycle cost for each alternative will be established for a useful life of
seventyfive (75) years based upon year 2014 dollars. The life cycle cost is determined
by assuming the frequency of maintenance repairs and major rehabilitation actions. A
less expensive initial construction cost does not necessarily equate to a less costly
alternative when the life cycle of the bridge is considered.

14. Discussion of Alternatives

Alternate N: No Build or Null Alternative.
The No Build alternative, or doing nothing, presumes that the existing bridge will remain
in service with routine maintenance work and priority/flag conditionprompted repairs
until it is rehabilitated or replaced in the future. As such, this alternative establishes a
baseline for comparison with other rehabilitation or replacement options. In its present
physical condition, left unattended with only routine maintenance and priority/flag
condition repairs, the bridge is presumably capable of providing continued uninterrupted
service for another five (5) years without a significant undertaking. This time frame was
established considering the past frequency of major rehabilitation projects, the present
physical condition of the bridge, and the other project needs.
a. Project Needs Compatibility. Alternative N does not meet the project needs given that
the physical condition of structural components will not be improved. Bridge members
with insufficient structural capacity will not be strengthened or replaced and the vehicle
weight limit restrictions will remain. Existing and future transportation demands will
not be met as the bridge roadway width and the adjacent approach roadways will not be
improved and existing geometric deficiencies will remain. Adequate safety features
including bridge and approach railings will not be provided. This alternative is not
feasible and prudent since it does not address the project needs.

17
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
b. Historic Resources Impacts. Several of the existing bridge elements have already
been impacted by physical deterioration. Without repair, the structure will be prone to
damage due to continued material deterioration and hopes of a meaningful
rehabilitation will be greatly diminished.

c. Environmental Impacts. There will be no environmental impacts or permits
associated with this alternative.

d. RightofWay Impacts. There will be no rightofway takings.

e. Maintenance of Traffic Impacts. Not applicable.

f. Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost. $0. There are no construction costs or
rightofway acquisition costs associated with this alternative.

g. Opinion of Probable Life Cycle Cost. The cost of maintaining the bridge over the next
five (5) years in 2014 dollars is estimated to be $50,000. This cost presumes that the
bridge will be replaced in 2018.
Alternate 1: Bridge Rehabilitation in Accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors
Standards for Rehabilitation
This alternative considers the rehabilitation of the bridge in accordance with the Secretary
of the Interiors Standards that is defined as follows:
Rehabilitation is defined as the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through
repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving
those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural,
and cultural values.
As stated in the definition, rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of
the potentially historic bridge will be needed in order to provide for an efficient
contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy
materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the structures historic
character. The intent of this alternative is to retain integrity and avoid adverse effects to the
existing bridge under Section 106 and use of the structure under Section 4(f).
Alternate 1A: Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)
Alternate 1B: Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)
This alternative is the sensitive rehabilitation of Town Bridge in the existing configuration
and alignment that will provide a minimum increase of HS7 Loading (12.6 tons) (Alternate
1A) to provide functional adequacy. An evaluation of the existing structure was preformed
to identify the work required to attain a minimum capacity of HS7 Loading, as well as the
18
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
work necessary to provide an increase to HS20 Loading (36 tons) (Alternate 1B) capacity.
The improvement in load carrying capacity would be dependent upon the maximum extent
of repairs that is prudent and feasible without adversely affecting the historic nature of the
bridge. The current 14'3" clear bridge width and 124 vertical clearance will be
maintained. Elements of the rehabilitation include full replacement of the bridge deck,
floorbeams, vehicular railing system, and bridge truss and stringer bearings. The existing
stringers will be replaced and the stone and concrete abutments and wingwalls repaired, as
needed. The existing steel trusses with wrought iron eyebars will be carefully dismantled,
appropriately marked and cataloged prior to delivery to a qualified fabrication shop. The
truss components will be cleaned, including lead paint removal, rehabilitated and duplex
coated with paint over galvanizing off site, before being reassembled at the bridge site.
a. Compatibility with Project Need. This alternative partially meets the project need as
deteriorated, low capacity members will be strengthened, replaced and/or repaired as
needed, to increase the load carrying capacity of the span to provide functional
adequacy. This alternative maintains the existing bridge and roadway configurations.
There will be no improvement to the geometric elements that are substandard; the
bridge will remain as a onelane structure with alternating twoway traffic. Vertical
clearance at the bridge remains substandard. There will be no improvement to
approach roadway alignment.

b. Impact on Historic Properties. This rehabilitation alternative was developed to avoid
adversely affecting the 1895 Town Bridge Road Bridge. Distinguishing characteristics of
the truss, lattice railing and aesthetic details will be appropriately restored; connection
details for replacement members will be made in a compatible manner. There will be
no visible changes to the truss lines. All proposed work will be in conformance with The
Secretary of the Interiors Treatment for Historic Properties. The historical and
technological significance of the bridge and the aspects of integrity that qualify it for the
National Register of Historic Places will not be changed.

c. Environmental Impacts. There will be no environmental impacts associated with this
alternative as the work will be completed within the footprint of existing bridge. In
addition to normal environmental best management practices, any work by the
contractor on the structural steel would require proper measures to prevent lead paint
from entering the river or upland areas. Work adjacent to the stream to repair and
repoint stone masonry walls is minimal and there will be no impact to the existing
floodplain of the Farmington River. The DEP Natural Diversity Data Base indicates that
a state species concern for the Wood Turtle occurs in the vicinity of this project. The
anticipated permits are listed in Section 15a of this report.

d. RightofWay Impacts. There will be no permanent rightofway impacts with this
alternative. Temporary easements will likely be required during construction.

19
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
e. Maintenance of Traffic Impacts. The bridge and roadway will be closed and traffic
detoured for the duration of construction. The estimated duration is 10 Mos.

f. Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost.
$2,560,000 (HS7 Loading) (Alternate 1A)
$2,860,000 (HS20 Loading) (Alternate 1B)

seventyfive (75) years in 2014 dollars is estimated to be $175,000.
Alternate 1C: Bridge Rehabilitation Widened to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)
This alternative is the rehabilitation of Town Bridge in a widened configuration on the
existing alignment or footprint that will provide an increase to HS20 (36 ton) load capacity.
This alternative consists of restoring or replacing all deteriorated steel members, as needed.
The trusses will be spread apart by 59 (229 c/c Truss Lines) and two new stringer
lines added to provide a minimum 20foot clear bridge width. Replacement of the deck and
floorbeams will be included (similar to Alt. 1A). All upper and lower truss bracings will be
replaced due to the widening; replacement connections will be compatible with the original
design. There will be a new vehicular bridge railing system and bridge bearings. The
aesthetic details and lattice railings will be preserved to the fullest extent possible. The
existing stone and concrete abutments and wingwalls will be modified to accommodate the
widening of the bridge roadway and new truss bearing seats. The existing steel trusses with
wrought iron eyebars will be carefully dismantled, appropriately marked and cataloged
prior to delivery to a qualified fabrication shop. The truss components will be cleaned
including lead paint removal, rehabilitated and duplex coated with paint over galvanizing
off site, before being reassembled at the bridge site.
a. Compatibility with Project Need. This alternative meets the project need as
deteriorated, low capacity members will be strengthened, replaced and/or repaired as
needed, to increase the load carrying capacity of the span to HS20. This alternate
provides improvement to the narrow existing bridge width to accommodate twoway
traffic. Vertical clearance at the bridge will be increased. Minor approach roadway and
profile improvement will be made for consistency with the bridge widening.

b. Impact on Historic Properties. This rehabilitation alternative was developed to
maintain the distinguishing characteristics and the overall proportions associated with
a Parker design such as the slope of the upper chord and the alignment of the portal
brace on the inclined end posts. The lattice railing and aesthetic details will be
appropriately restored to the fullest extent possible; connection details for replacement
members will be made in a compatible manner. There will be moderate visible change
to the truss lines that will be spread apart by less than 6feet. This widening will
increase the loads in the truss top chord and vertical members by up to 60%. In order to
increase the load carrying capacity of the bridge to the required strength, more than half
20
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
of the members will require complete replacement or extensive repairs. All proposed
work will be in conformance with The Secretary of the Interiors Treatment for Historic
Properties. The historical and technological significance of the bridge and the aspects of
integrity that qualify it for the National Register of Historic Places will be maintained to
the fullest extent.

c. Environmental Impacts. There will be minor environmental impacts associated with
this alternative as the work will be completed along the same footprint of existing with
minor widening. In addition to normal environmental best management practices, any
work by the contractor on the structural steel would require proper measures to
prevent lead paint from entering the river or upland areas. Work adjacent to the stream
is necessary for reconstruction of the wingwalls to facilitate the widening of each
abutment. There will be an impact to the existing floodplain of the Farmington River
based on the placement of fill within the floodplain. The DEP Natural Diversity Data
Base indicates that a state species concern for the Wood Turtle occurs in the vicinity of
this project. The anticipated permits are listed in Section 15a of this report.

d. RightofWay Impacts. There will be no permanent rightofway impacts with this
alternative. Temporary easements will like be required during construction.

detoured for the duration of construction. The estimated duration is 15 Mos.

f. Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost. $3,700,000.

Alternate 2: New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26 Roadway Width (HL93);
Truss Bridge restored/preserved as a Pedestrian Facility
This alternative involves the construction of a new bridge upstream on an improved
roadway alignment. The existing historic truss will be rehabilitated as per Alternate 1A, and
remain in place as a pedestrian facility.
The new alignment will improve the geometry by connecting at the intersection of Powder
Mill Road and Town Bridge Road, then proceeding directly across the Farmington River on a
skew and touch down at a location near the current north abutment. The new alignment
will require a significantly longer bridge, approximately 400 feet in total length. The most
feasible and cost effective option for the new bridge is a multispan girder type bridge. The
new bridge will provide a 26foot minimum roadway width and full legal load capacity
(HL93).
21
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
Alternative 2 will have approximately 925 feet of new approach roadway. The proposed
horizontal alignment will seek to eliminate the existing sharp hairpin curvature at
approaches to the bridge and provide a long tangent section from Powder Mill Road across
the proposed bridge connecting to the exiting alignment with a 395 radius curve. The
proposed horizontal and vertical alignment will be designed to current design criteria for a
25 mph design speed. This alternative will result in fill material being placed below the 100
year flood elevation, warranting further evaluation of the potential impacts to the floodway.
The existing driveway serving the Munroe property on the south side of the river would be
extended along the existing Town Bridge Road alignment to meet the proposed roadway
near the intersection with Powder Mill Road. The proposed location shown on the Roadway
Plan has been evaluated and selected to meet intersection sight distance criteria for 25 mph.
The work requires the closure of the bridge for the duration of the project.
a. Compatibility with Project Need. This alternative meets the project need as the new
multispan/multigirder bridge will be designed in accordance with all AASHTO LRFD
design standards providing HL93 capacity and meeting all geometric and safety
standards. Further, this alternative includes preservation of the existing historic truss,
inplace as a pedestrian facility.

b. Impact on Historic Properties. This rehabilitation alternative will result in no adverse
effect to the 1895 Town Bridge Road Bridge as preservation of the existing bridge is
included. The overall proportions associated with a Parker design as well as the
distinguishing characteristics will be maintained and properly restored in accordance
with The Secretary of the Interiors Treatment for Historic Properties.

c. Environmental Impacts. There will be significant environmental impacts associated
with this alternative for the work to construct a new alternate roadway alignment and
bridge. Work adjacent to the stream is necessary for the new construction upstream.
This alternative will require the greatest degree of new fill in the floodplain and
regulatory permitting is expected to be extensive. The DEP Natural Diversity Data Base
indicates that a state species concern for the Wood Turtle occurs in the vicinity of this
project. The anticipated permits are listed in Section 15a of this report.

d. RightofWay Impacts. There will be significant rightofway impacts (greatest of all
alternatives) associated with this alternative. It is estimated that 3 properties are
impacted, totaling approximately 42,830 ft or .98 Acres. Temporary easements are
likely to be required for construction access.

detoured until the existing historic truss is rehabilitated as per Alternate 1A. Once
rehabilitated, the roadway will reopen until the upstream bridge is complete allowing
the historic truss to remain as a pedestrian facility. The estimated duration is 24 Mos.

f. Opinion of Probable Total Construction Cost. $10,190,000 (HL93).
22
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission

15. Preliminary Preferred Alternative

In summary, Alternate 1B: Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width to HS20
capacity (36 tons), provides the most comprehensive solution, overall value and benefit,
and is recommended for the rehabilitation of Bridge No. 05222. The widening alternatives
that reuse the existing trusses are not prudent and feasible due to the extensive amount of
member replacement required. As a result, this would adversely affect the historic nature of
the bridge. The remaining alternatives suggest full replacement of the existing structure and
would come at extreme costs.

Alternate 1B will replace all deteriorated steel within the single span truss bridge to provide
functional adequacy and repair the substructure as needed. The distinguishing
characteristics of the truss, lattice railing and aesthetic details will be appropriately
restored to the fullest extent with no visible changes to the truss lines.

There are no permanent right of way impacts as this alternative maintains the existing
bridge and roadway configurations. The bridge will be rehabilitated within the existing
footprint and all normal environmental best manage practices will be taken to minimize any
environmental impacts.

Although the bridge and roadway will be closed and traffic detoured for the duration of
construction, this alternative provides the quickest return to service when compared to the
other alternatives. Once rehabilitation is complete, this bridge structure will provide an
estimated 75year service life, with minimum future maintenance costs.
Preservation Recommendations:
In light of the historical and technological significance of the bridge, preservation is being
studied. Any proposed action that would have an adverse impact, like removing it or
significantly modifying the original design, would need to be meticulously documented to
support the conclusion that there were no other prudent or feasible alternatives. There are
a variety of conventional and costeffective treatments to address structural deficiencies on
metal truss bridges and that conform to The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation.

23
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
a.
Permits
Due to potential impact, the following permits will be required:
Local Inland Wetlands
USACOE CAT II General Permit
CT DEP (may not be needed)
Flood Management Certification (State MOU Process)
Coordination with DEP Biodiversity

b. Bridge Removal Sequence
The bridge is required to be taken off site for cleaning, repainting, and galvanizing.
Wetlands surrounding the bridge will necessitate all work to be done at the roadway level.
The truss will be removed segmentally by jacking the bridge at the abutments, stabilizing
the bridge with a crane located at the north approach, and pulling the truss sequentially
over at the south approach. The proposed removal sequence is as follows (See Appendix A):
The wearing surface, deck, MBR and stringers will be removed.

The north and south approaches will require site preparation. The north approach
will be excavated to allow the crane to sit on a level surface and to decrease the
earth pressure on the abutment. The south approach will be leveled for the use of
the removal skid.
A temporary diagonal strut will be installed between Panel points L2L3 and L4L5
to accommodate for sequential disassembly.
The bridge will be jacked to the elevation of the rollers with two jacks at each
abutment.
Panel point L8 & L9 at the north end of the bridge will be secured to the crane.
Panel point L2 & L3 at the south end of the bridge will be secured to the crane.
The bridge will be lifted a
nd pulled from the south end onto the removal skid.
Truss panel point L0 to L2 will be disassembled.
Panel point L4 & L5 at the south end of the bridge will be secured to the crane.
The truss will be pulled over the removal skid, and the truss will be disassembled at
the next two panel points. This process will be repeated until entire structure is
disassembled.

The proposed reinstallation sequence is as follows (See Appendix A):
Truss panel points L8 to L10 will be assembled.
Panel point L9 will be secured to the crane and the truss will be pushed over the
removal skid.

The next segment will be assembled (L7 to L8).
This procedure will be repeated until the entire bridge is constructed.

24
Canton,CT
FinalSubmission
16. Cost Considerations

The appendices include the itemized construction cost estimates for each of the studied
alternatives. The estimates summarized in the table below consider highway and bridge
work items. See Appendix J.

Rehab. Alternative
Estimated
Construction
Costs
1A. Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)
$ 2,560,000
1B. Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)
$ 2,860,000
1C. Bridge Rehabilitation Widen to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)
$ 3,700,000
2. New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26 Roadway

Width (HL93)
$ 10,190,000

Table 1 Rehab. Alternative Cost Estimation Breakdown

25
APPENDIX A
SKETCHES
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U2
U9
19'
-0"
26'
-0"
U1
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
10 PANELS @ 16'-0" = 160'-0"

{ EXP BEARING
{ FIXED BEARING
SOUTH ABUTMENT
NORTH ABUTMENT
EXISTING ELEVATION-EAST TRUSS

LEGEND
EAST ELEVATION SHOWN, WEST OPPOSITE HAND
2"~ PIN
3"~ PIN AT BRGS
EYEBAR
TOWN OF CANTON
REHABILITATION OF BR. NO. 05222
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
OVER FARMINGTON RIVER
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
1
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
12"X"
C6X8.2
LACING
LACING
DIAGONAL & VERTICAL
L3X2X
TOP CHORD
LONGITUDINAL
BRACING
2"~ PIN
U4
U3
ABOUT {
SYM M ETRICAL
C10X15.3
LACING
U5
U2
VERTICAL
D
O
N
AL
Q
S
E
R
A
U
E
AR
U
Q
S
SQ
G
IA
U1
S
AR
EB
EY
2
S
R
A
B
E
Y
E
S
R
A
EB
EY
E
R
A
U
LONGITUDINAL BRACING
"
"
1
"
3"~ PIN
L1
L0
L2
L3
L4
L5
10"X"
L2X2X
10"X"
L2X2X
C6X10.5
LEGEND
2"~ PIN
BOTTOM CHORD
BOTTOM CHORD
L0-L3 WEST TRUSS
EAST TRUSS &
3"~ PIN AT BRGS
EXISTING TRUSS MEMBERS
L3-L10 WEST TRUSS
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
2
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
WEST TOP CHORD
(TYP)
TOP TRANSVERSE
SW AY FRAM
BRACING
TOP TRANSVERSE
5"X"
T
O
C
P
R
I
O
S NT
S
E
R
B
M
R
A ED
C
IN IA
G TE
T
O
C
P
R
E
O
S ND
S
B
R
A
C
IN
PORTAL
PORTAL
NORTH & SOUTH
SW AY FRAM
(TYP)
L3x2x
ABOUT {
SYM M ETRICAL
L3X2X
L4X3X
BRACING
LACING
L2X2X
L0
U1
U2
U3
U4
U5
EAST UPPER CHORD

TOP TRANSVERSE
BRACING
W8X28
L3X4X
STINGERS (S1-S7)
WEST BOTTOM CHORD
(TYP)
ABOUT {
SYM M ETRICAL
EXISTING FRAMING MEMBERS (UPPER BRACING)
STRINGER
FLOORBEAM
FLOORBEAM
FLOORBEAM
C
R
O
E
R
L
O
S15X42.9
S
S
FLOORBEAM
4"X"
FLOORBEAM
B
R
A
C
IN
S1
S7
7"X"
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
EAST BOTTOM CHORD
FLOORBEAM
EXISTING FRAMING MEMBERS (LOWER BRACING)
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
3
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
U1
12'
-7"
14'
-2"
U1
EXISTING PORTAL
(ALTERNATIVE 1A SHOWN, 1B & 2 ARE SIMILAR)
SCALE: " = 1'-0"
U1U2
U1
PORTAL CONNECTION
@ PIN
EXISTING PORTAL LOCATION

WITH MINIMUM VERTICAL
CLEARANCE OF 12'-7"
U1L0
U1L1
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
4
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
{ TRUSS EXP. BRG.

SOUTH ABUTMENT
{ TRUSS FIXED BRG.

NORTH ABUTMENT
160'-0" SPAN
WEST TRUSS
14'
-3"
BEGIN BRIDGE
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
END BRIDGE
17'
-0"
"
15
P
CM
MBR
EAST TRUSS
ALTERNATE 1A & 1B - PLAN

SCALE: 1" = 25'
D
LE
G
10 PANELS @ 16'-0" = 160'-0"
{ TRUSS EXP. BRG.

SOUTH ABUTMENET
{ TRUSS FIXED BRG.

NORTH ABUTMENET
ORNAMENTAL RAIL
{ STRINGER
FIXED BRG.
{ STRINGER
EXP. BRG.
MBR
L1
L2
L3
|35'
L0
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
100 YEAR FLOOD

157'-6" CLEAR SPAN
OHW
EXISTING
ABUTMENT
(TYP)
ALTERNATE 1A & 1B - ELEVATION

SCALE: 1" = 25'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
5
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
DECK
3" BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT OVERLAY
EXISTING
NEW FLOORBEAM
W8X28 STRINGER
16'-0" OUT TO OUT DECK
17'-0" { OF TRUSS TO { OF TRUSS
2"~ PIN AT TOP

AND BOTTOM
CHORD, 3"~ PIN
AT BEARINGS
ALTERNATE 1A & 1B - PROPOSED CROSS SECTION

SCALE: " = 1'-0"
6
JBM
CHECKER:
JLS
7/2014
RIVER
BRID G E RO AD
FARM IN G TO N
O F BR.N O .05222
DATE:
METAL BRIDGE
WATERPROOFING
TO W N
MEMBRANE
O VER
{ TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DESIGNER:
DRAW ING:
DRAW N:SAD
O F CAN TO N
TO W N
14'-3" ROADWAY
REH ABILITATIO N
ORNAMENTAL LATTICE RAIL
WEST TRUSS
L0
U1
U2
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U9
L10
EAST TRUSS
FRAMING (UPPER BRACING)
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U2
U1
L0
L1
U9
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
L9
L10
REPAIR CONNECTION WEST TRUSS ONLY
ELEVATION - EAST TRUSS
14'
-3"
*S2
*S3
*S4
*S5
*S6
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
FRAMING (LOWER BRACING)
ROADW AY
LEGEND
NOTE
MEMBER REPLACEMENT
* STRINGERS 2-6 NEED REPLACEMENT FOR L0L1
MEMBER REPAIR
ALTERNATE 1A (HS7) - MEMBER REPLACEMENT
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
7
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
WEST TRUSS
L0
U1
U2
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U9
L10
EAST TRUSS
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U2
U1
L0
L1
U9
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
L9
L10
REPAIR CONNECTION WEST TRUSS ONLY
L0
14'
-3"
*S2
*S3
*S4
*S5
*S6
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
ROADW AY
LEGEND
NOTE
MEMBER REPLACEMENT
* STRINGERS 2-6 NEED REPLACEMENT FOR FULL LENGTH OF BRIDGE
MEMBER REPAIR
ALTERNATE 1B (HS20) - MEMBER REPLACEMENT
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
8
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
{ TRUSS EXP. BRG.

SOUTH ABUTMENT
{ TRUSS FIXED BRG.

NORTH ABUTMENT
160'-0" SPAN
-0"
10'
-0" 10'
WEST TRUSS
BEGIN BRIDGE
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
END BRIDGE
22'
-9"
"
15
P
CM
MBR
EXISTING BRIDGE
EAST TRUSS
TO BE WIDENED
MODIFY EXISTING
ABUTMENT DUE TO
TRUSS WIDENING
ALTERNATE 1C - PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 25'
10 PANELS @ 16'-0" = 160'-0"

{ TRUSS EXP. BRG.
SOUTH ABUTMENET
{ TRUSS FIXED BRG.

NORTH ABUTMENET
ORNAMENTAL RAIL
{ STRINGER
FIXED BRG.
{ STRINGER
EXP. BRG.
MBR
L1
L2
L3
|35'
L0
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
100 YEAR FLOOD

157'-6" CLEAR SPAN
OHW
MODIFIED
ABUTMENT
(TYP)
ALTERNATE 1C - ELEVATION
SCALE: 1" = 25'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
9
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
DECK
3" BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT OVERLAY
2%
2'-4"
2%
NEW FLOORBEAM
NEW W8X28 STRINGER

(CONTINUOUS)
(TYP)
21'-9" OUT TO OUT DECK
22'-9" { TRUSS TO { TRUSS
2"~ PIN AT TOP
AND BOTTOM
CHORD, 3"~ PIN
AT BEARINGS
ALTERNATE 1C - PROPOSED CROSS SECTION

SCALE: " = 1'-0"
10
JBM
CHECKER:
JLS
7/2014
RIVER
FARM IN G TO N
TO W N
BRID G E RO AD
DATE:
METAL BRIDGE
O VER
{ TOWN BRIDGE ROAD

MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING
DESIGNER:
DRAW ING:
DRAW N:SAD
O F CAN TO N
TO W N
O F BR.N O .05222
20'-0" ROADWAY (2-10' LANES)
REH ABILITATIO N
ORNAMENTAL LATTICE RAIL
2'-0"
22'-9"
(TYP)
{ PROPOSED
{ PROPOSED
W8X28 STRINGER (TYP)
TRUSS BRG
TRUSS BRG
END OF EXISTING
6'
-0"
BACKW ALL
BACKWALL (TYP)
BRG
REHABILITATE BACKWALL
2'-4" (TYP)
{ EXISTING
{ EXISTING
EXISTING STONE
FOR WIDENED ROADWAY
BRG
BLOCK
RESET 4' X 4' X 2'-8"

STONE BLOCK (TYP)
EXISTING STONE
MASONRY ABUTMENT
CONCRETE EXTENSION
WITH STONE FORM
1-" (TYP)
LINER DUE TO TRUSS

WIDENING (TYP)
1'-3"
25'-0"
(TYP)
1'-3"
(TYP)
ALTERNATE 1C - MODIFIED NORTH ABUTMENT

SCALE: " = 1'-0"
2'-0"
22'-9"
{ PROPOSED
{ PROPOSED
(TYP)
W8X28 STRINGER (TYP)
TRUSS BRG
TRUSS BRG
REMOVE CHEEKWALL
6'
-0"
BACKW ALL
REHABILITATE BACKWALL
2'-4" (TYP)
{ EXISTING
BRG
EXISTING STONE
FOR WIDENED ROADWAY

{ EXISTING
RESET 4' X 4' X 2'-8"
BRG
STONE BLOCK (TYP)
BLOCK
MODIFY
WINGWALL
EXISTING STONE
MASONRY ABUTMENT
1'-" (TYP)
1'-3"
(TYP)
25'-0"
ALTERNATE 1C - MODIFIED SOUTH ABUTMENT

SCALE: " = 1'-0"
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
11
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
WEST TRUSS
L0
U1
U2
U3
EAST TRUSS
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U9
U3
U4
U5
U6
U7
U8
U2
U1
L0
L1
L10
U9
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
L9
L10
EAST VERTICALS ONLY
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
10'
-0"
LANE
LANE
*S1
*S2
*S3
*S4
*S5
*S6
*S7
**S8
**S9
10'
-0"
LEGEND
NOTE
* STRINGERS 1-7 NEED REPLACEMENT FOR FULL LENGTH OF BRIDGE
MEMBER REPLACEMENT
** STRINGER 8-9 ARE NEW DUE TO ROAD WIDENING

MEMBER REPAIR
ALTERNATE 1C (HS20) - MEMBER REPLACEMENT
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
12
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
LC
BC
3
6
"M
8
4
9
5
F#
{ BRG.
7
4
3
1
6
NORTH
3
00
0
3 1+
2
0
8
7
4
2
"O
A
C
C
K
H
IS H
O
M
N
E
A
E
R
L= BO LE
U DS K
3
LD
0
Q
8
U
.6 E
R
A
7
R
E
ABUTMENTBEN
0
8
W
2
8
6
3
8
.6
9
0
0
F#
7
5
2
8
7
F#
7
6
W
F#
0
7
7
7
8
1
2
8
6
F#
0
0
0
3
W
W
8
3
F#
3
9
0
+
2
8
5
CM P
W
S
4 28
0 6
3
1
6
- PLAN
2
0
6
2
E
L
A
P
C
"R
5
1
T
O
W
V
N
O N
/
L
. OF F
10
4
C
3
3
A
P NW
T
IN
IN
10 O
FN
V
0
V
IN
7 #3+0 W
O
F#
=
U
4 17
3
T
8
3
1
=
"
8
O
2
3
3
.3
A
T
0
K
F= .4'
C
8
6
.3
'
4
(S
C
23
6
E
1
B
+
(N
6
1
1
.8
5
W
S
"R
6
ALTERNATE
2
U
1
C
M
5
P
"C
P
)
=
M
3
P
0
) SCALE: 1"
6
.8
6
3
0
3
6
1
-1
+
PIER
+
-1
0
0
2
8
6
BRIDGE RAIL (TYP)

00
T
O
0+
W
V
N
O N
/
L
O
.
F F
10
C
3
A
P NT
O
1EXISTING
BRIDGE
0 N
7
TO REMAIN 00
+
0
P
A
R
IP
R
A
P
LE
3
6
NORTH
7
3
{ BRG.
3
0
2
T
R
A
V
#
5
3
1
6
3
1
9
.4
T
'
F=
C
7
'
(S
C
3
E
S
2
B
11
.
2
U
1
.6
M
44
5
"R
P
7
1+
=
C
3
P
3
1
)
3
6
1
.8
5
7
2
F#
+
-1
F#
-1
+
89
O
U
T
=
2
8
6
00
1+
-
2
4
"D
B
L
2
.3
5
5
4
0
3
34
W
IN
V
7
2
6
3
3
0
3 SOUTH
3
0
1
2
8
8PIER
2
ABUTMENT
END BRIDGE
F#
6
8
SOUTH
W
7
6
3
1
6
F#
82
.
10
+
0
2
0
+2
-
7
1
3
5
{ BRG.
1+
F#
3
1
6
69
.
{ BRG.
48
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
13'
-0"
T
R
A
V
#
8
4
6
2
9
0
LANE (TYP)
00
1+
W
3
4
5
156'-0"
1
3
0
9
2
L
P YO
N
O
V
W NS /F
O
L DE
.
R &
3
JU
M
7
7
I
D
L
I
T
P L
H
16 RO
F
4 AD I
F
I
E
L
D
6
0
2
9
1
0
2
00
0+
P
.
5'
-0"
2
5
am
re
St
of
ge
Ed
3
4
8
E
S
SHOULDER
START BRIDGE
2
8
7
156'-0"
1'
-10"
JA
M
3 W
0 F
2 #
3 3
2 4
3
1
6
80'-0"
= 60'
3
9
2
'
0
"T
OT
AL SP
AN
SL
OP
E = AP
P
ROX.7
%
PROPOSED
PROPOSED
PIER (TYP)
ABUTMENT
(TYP)
100 YEAR FLOOD
{ BRG.
SOUTH
ABUTMENT
OHW
{ BRG.
{ BRG.
SOUTH PIER
NORTH
ABUTMENT
{ BRG. NORTH PIER

ALTERNATE 2 - ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION SHOWN, WEST SIMILAR
SCALE: 1" = 60'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
13
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
34'-8" OUT-TO-OUT
5'-0"
13'-0" LANE
13'-0" LANE
1'-10"
SHOULDER
(TYP)
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD {

BRIDGE RAIL
(TYP.)
POINT OF APPLICATION
OF GRADE
3" H.M.A. ON
MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING
(WOVEN GLASS FABRIC)
8" CONCRETE DECK
2%
2%
70" DEEP GIRDER
3'-10"
3'-10"
3 SPACES @ 9'-0" = 27'-0"
OVERHANG
OVERHANG
ALTERNATE 2 - PROPOSED CROSS SECTION

SCALE: " = 1'-0"
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
14
DESIGNER:
JLS
CHECKER:
JBM
NOTES:
1.
TYPICAL SECTION FOR ALTERNATIVE 4 IS SHOWN.

TYPICAL SECTION FOR ALTERNATIVE 3 IS IDENTICAL.
MATERIAL AND LIFT THICKNESSES SHOWN ON THIS
SHEET ARE FOR QUANTITY DEVELOPMENT/COST
ESTIMATION PURPOSES ONLY. THE PROPOSED
PAVEMENT STRUCTURE WILL BE DESIGNED DURING
FINAL DESIGN.
ALTERNATIVE 3 PROPOSES SIDE SLOPES STEEPER
THAN 2:1 IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED BRIDGE
AND TO LIMIT FILL INTO THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN. SLOPES
STEEPER THAN 2:1 SHALL BE PROTECTED BY RIPRAP.
2.
3.
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD C

L
4'
13'
13'
LANE
LANE
4'
EXISTING
GROUND
2:
M 1
AX
.
1
2
:
1
2.0%
2.0%
1
2
:
1
2:
1
(
SE MA
E
X
NO .
TE
3)
B
C
F
EXISTING
GROUND
D
E
ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION

LEGEND
A
POINT OF APPLIED GRADE
3" HMA
4" PROCESSED AGGREGATE BASE
12" SUBBASE
FORMATION OF SUBGRADE
METAL BEAM RAIL (TYPE R-B 350)
BITUMINOUS CONCRETE LIP CURBING
TURF ESTABLISHMENT
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD

SCALE: 1" = 8'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
12/2013
DRAWN:CRH
DRAWING:
15
DESIGNER:
CRH
CHECKER:
TPR
(FL
O
OD
WA
12 TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
CONSTRUCTION
F#
W
1
B
o
u
n
d
a
ry
W
F#
F#
W
F#
1
3
-2
3
F#
F#
W
1
7
W
F#
F#
1
9
2
1
2
0
F#
O
C
6
6
W
W
F#
3
3
N/F
APPROXIMATE SLOPE LIMIT (TYP.)
F#
3
4
F#
F#
7
0
ZONE
AE
ZONE
X
F#
CURVE ALT. 4 #2
T = 244.61
7
1
RI
P RA
P
L = 438.03
W
AD
RO
3
9
0
F#
F#
52+00
5
3
+0
0
F#
3
5
AL
T
.4
7
3
F#
PI E 951652.36
54+
00
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN (TYP.)
#2
TO
W
7
4
F#
PROPOSED
BRIDGE
7
5
W
F#
7
6
W
F#
7
8
7
7
B
R
ID
G
E
30
0
W
F#
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD C

L
0
30
55
+
00
F#
7
9
F#
R
O
360
3
7
W
F#
3
8
IN
L
IN
F#
K
F
E
N
N/F
8
2
TOWN OF CANTON
C
E
3
9
+
57
EXISTING BRIDGE NO. 05222

(TO REMAIN)
)
EA
AR
F#
F#
00
4
1
AY
E
L
A
F#
3
'
C
H
4
0
W
S
'
0
1
PI E 950989.83
F#
NK
LI
N
AI
E
CH
NC
FE
'
2
1
PI N 861052.41
F#
A
D
LO
(F
R = 500.00
F#
P
A
R
IP
R
350
L = 102.52
8
1
0
0
PC
52+ 84.
55
F#
BITUMINOUS CONCRETE
DRIVEWAY
+
6
5
NK
I
N L
CHAI
NCE
E
F
0
30
8
0
3
6
370
T = 51.44
PI N 861580.88
CURVE
F#
R = 395.00
30
0
7
2
CURVE ALT. 4 #1
51+00
PT
0
38
47+ 33.
12
PC
0
30.6
46+
E
DG
I
BR
13'
0
9
2
0
+0
6
4
50+00
49+00
13'
am
re
St
of
ge
Ed
360
48+00
0
+0
7
4
WN
TO
6
9
0
30
RIVERS EDGE CONDOMINIUM

VOL. 119 P 148
R
R IV E
L
P YO
N
O
V
W NS /F
O
L DE
.
R &
3
M JU
7
7
I
D
L
I
T
P L
H
16 RO
F
4 AD I
F
I
E
L
D
FEMA FLOODWAY (TYP.)

6
8
E
SWAL
0
30
P
.
F#
6
7
0
29
E
S
2
5
F#
F#
VER
RI
CURVE ALT. 4 #1
3
2
0
34
F#
350
F#
E
AL
SW
JA
M
WOOD
BL
DG.
F#
ON
N GT
I
M
FA R
F#
VOL. 119 P 148
6
5
N/F
25 POWDER MILL ROAD
330
RIVERS EDGE CONDOMINIUM

F#
JAMES P. LYONS & JUDITH FIFIELD
AE
ZO NE
X
ZO NE
8
FW
2
2
N/F
VOL. 377 P 164

F#
0
8
3
F#
F#
F#
1
2
310
FW
F#
F#
6
4
3
1
320
W
1
5
F#
290
W
F#
1
8
1
6
W
FW
F#
O
IN G T
FA R M
F#
F#
PO W D
ER
W
e
tl
a
n
d
s
FLAGGED WETLANDS
(TYP.)
M ILL
LIMITS OF ROADWAY
Fe
d
e
ra
l
W
RO AD
VOL. 272 P 497
N
E
C
R
T
D
I
I
C
N
U
A
T
T
E
G
R
I
D
Y A
REA
)
N/F
R
DE
RI
RRIS.T
E
.& T
DWARD J
E
8
3
4
2
N/F
ROBERT S. & ROBIN A. ATWATER
N/F
55 TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
JANICE W. & ROBERT C. DAVIDSON
VOL. 377 P 1011
11 TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
CONC
.WAL
L
320
W
W
F#
5
8
F#
5
9
W
0
31
5
7
F#
4
6
6
0
5
6
F#
8
4
F#
8
8
9
6
9
5
67
.
PC 77
+
58
FW
F#
9
4
B
o
u
n
d
a
ry
P
o
n
d
F#
L = 92.11
F#
9
3
FW
E
d
g
e
F#
9
2
o
f
S
tr
ea
m
F#
LIMIT OF ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION
NG
I
LD
I
BU
CK
I
BR I
O
T
PA
L
I
W
W
O
TI
PA
RA
PI E 952056.59
T
P
77
69.
59+
OD
WO
PI N 861392.73
5
3
9
1
AR
F#
F#
GU
9
0
0
30
R = 515.00
F#
CK
I
BR
00
60+
5
2
FW
LE
VOL. 140 P 640
T = 46.18
AB
F#
8
9
C
2-
DALE B. & KATHLEEN F. MUNROE

17 TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
CURVE ALT. 4 #3
ST
N/F
CURVE ALT. 4 #3
e
tl
a
n
d
s
F#
PO
13 TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
5
1
FW
E
ON
LL
ST
WA
T.
RE
F#
9
7
OD
F#
WO
N/F
R
VE
RI
ZO NE
5
0
THOMAS J. & JUDITH E. CHESTER
8
7
0
+0
59
E
A
F#
F#
FW
Fe
d
e
ra
l
W
72 RIVER ROAD
W
O
B
O
L
D D
G
.
0
29
F#
ROBERT S. & ROBIN A. ATWATER

VOL. 377 P 1012
8
6
'
FW
N/F
W
O
B
O
L
D D
G
.
8
5
AE
0
34
F#
3
1
0
0
E
30 O N
Z
6
1
F#
290
F#
5
5
O
Z
F#
4
9
TO
4
8
F#
290
VOL. 320 P 375
G
IN
33
0
36
0
F#
4
7
F#
F#
F#
4
5
W
W
35
0
F#
R
FA
PATHWAY FOR PEDESTRIAN

ACCESS
F#
4
4
0
31
BITUMINOUS CONCRETE
DRIVEWAY
LANDSCAPED BUFFER
F#
0
+0
58
300
0
4
3
3
3
0
0
1
3
59
.
PT 22
+
57
VOL. 112 P 135
F#
E
ON
ST
K
L
WA
9
2
5
4
S
P
FL
A
G
0
29
P
O
LE
S
P
ROADWAY PLAN
S
P
ALTERNATIVE 2
F#
S
P
S
P
9
3
S
P
SCALE 1" = 100'

W
200
100
F#
S
P
ST
ONE
P
OST
(
T
Y
P
.
)
9
4
200
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
12/2013
DRAWN:CRH
DRAWING:
16
DESIGNER:
CRH
CHECKER:
TPR
45+00
400
46+00
47+00
48+00
49+00
50+00
51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
55+00
56+00
57+00
58+00
59+00
60+00
61+00
400
LIMIT OF ROADWAY
CONSTRUCTION
390
390
380
EL.
= 335.
43
PVT STA.
49+ 60.
00
EL.
= 341.
38
G2 =-7.14%
PVI STA.
48+ 76.
71
G
=
11
.
00
%
360
G1 =-11.00%
EL.
= 350.
55
370
K=43
PVC STA.
47+ 93.
42
380
S.S.D.=247'
EL.
= 363.
57
PVI STA.
46+ 75.
00
L.V.C.=166.58'
370
360
LIMIT OF ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION
350
350
L.V.C.=298.95'
L.V.C.=158.75'
S.S.D.=157'
330
EL.
= 303.
50
EL.
= 303.
50
G2 =0.90%
PVI STA.
60+ 00.
00
G1 =-4.37%
EL.
= 306.
25
PVRC STA.
58+ 41.
16
EL.
= 308.
77
PVI STA.
57+ 83.
62
EL.
= 307.
51
H.
P.STA.
57+ 83.
52
PVT STA.
56+ 53.
27
PROPOSED PROFILE
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
EL.
= 303.
09
G2 =4.35%
EL.
= 307.
26
G=
7.
14
%
340
K=30
G1 =-7.14%
PVC STA.
53+ 54.
32
330
320
S.S.D.=176'
K=26
PVT STA.
59+ 99.
91
PROPOSED BRIDGE
340
320
310
310
%
5
3
.
G=4
300
EL.
= 303.
37
L.
P.STA.
59+ 72.
91
%
0
9
.
G=0
PVI STA.
59+ 20.
54
EL.
= 306.
26
PVC STA.
57+ 26.
08
EL.
= 300.
63
280
EL.
= 296.
58
EXISTING GROUND
L.
P.STA.
55+ 40.
07
290
PVI STA.
55+ 03.
79
EL. 302.47
(SEE NOTE)
EL.
= 302.
79
G=4
.
3
7
%
100 YEAR FLOOD
300
290
280
L.V.C.=115.09'
S.S.D.=181'
270
270
K=13
G1 =4.35%
G2 =-4.37%
260
250
45+00
260
46+00
47+00
48+00
49+00
NOTE:
100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION DISPLAYED ON THIS SHEET IS THE
RESULT OF PRELIMINARY HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS. THE EXACT ELEVATION
MAY CHANGE AS A RESULT OF FURTHER DETAILED DESIGN AND ANALYSIS.
50+00
51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
55+00
56+00
57+00
58+00
59+00
60+00
250
61+00
ROADWAY PROFILE
ALTERNATIVE 2
HORIZ. SCALE IN FEET
0
60
120
VERT. SCALE IN FEET

0
12
24
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
12/2013
DRAWN:CRH
DRAWING:
17
DESIGNER:
CRH
CHECKER:
TPR
RADIUS
(FT)
REMOVAL SEQUENCE STAGE 1:

1. REMOVE WEARING SURFACE, MBR, DECK, AND STRINGERS.
REACTION AT
CRANE PICK
POINT (TONS)
2. SITE PREPARATION.
40
27
3. JACK STRUCTURE AT ABUTMENTS.
50
26
4. INSTALL TEMPORARY DIAGONAL STRUT FOR LIFTING
60
24
5. SECURE NORTH END OF BRIDGE TO CRANE AT PANEL POINT L8-L9.
70
23
6. SECURE SOUTH END OF BRIDGE TO CRANE AT PANEL POINT L2-L3.
80
21
7. LIFT AND PULL TRUSSES AT SOUTH END ONTO REMOVAL SKID.
90
20
100
18
INSTALL TEMPORARY
110
17
120
15
130
14
140
12
150
11
160
10
170
10
180
10
DIAGONAL STRUTS FOR

LIFTING.
100 TON CRANE
REMOVAL
SKID
230 TON CRANE
L2
LEVEL SOUTH
L3
L4
L5
L8
L9
100 YEAR FLOOD
APPROACH FOR
157'-6" CLEAR SPAN
REMOVAL SKID.
OHW
BRIDGE JACK (JACK TO
EXCAVATE EARTH AT NORTH
ROLLER ELEVATION)
APPROACH TO ALLOW
CRANE TO BE LEVEL
AND DECREASE EARTH
PRESSURE ON ABUTMENT.
REMOVAL SEQUENCE STAGE 1 - ELEVATION

SCALE: 1" = 40'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
18
DESIGNER:
SAD
CHECKER:
JBM
REMOVAL SEQUENCE STAGE 2:

1. DISASSEMBLE TRUSS (PANEL POINT L0 TO L1).
2. CONTINUE PULLING TRUSS OVER REMOVAL SKID.
3. DISASSEMBLE TRUSS (PANEL POINT L1 TO L2).
4. REPEAT PREVIOUS STEPS UNTIL ENTIRE BRIDGE IS DISASSEMBLED.
REINSTALL SEQUENCE:
1. ASSEMBLE TRUSS PANEL POINT L8 TO L10.
2. SECURE TO CRANE.
3. PUSH TRUSS OVER REMOVAL SKID AND ASSEMBLE NEXT SECTION (L7 TO L8).
4. REPEAT UNTIL ENTIRE BRIDGE IS CONSTRUCTED.
DISASSEMBLE
SECTION L0-L2.
100 TON CRANE

230 TON CRANE
L3
L4
LEVEL SOUTH
L5
L8
L9
100 YEAR FLOOD
APPROACH FOR
157'-6" CLEAR SPAN
REMOVAL SKID.
OHW
BRIDGE JACK (JACK TO
EXCAVATE EARTH AT NORTH
ROLLER ELEVATION)
APPROACH TO ALLOW
CRANE TO BE LEVEL
AND DECREASE EARTH
PRESSURE ON ABUTMENT.
REMOVAL SEQUENCE STAGE 1 - ELEVATION

SCALE: 1" = 40'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
19
DESIGNER:
SAD
CHECKER:
JBM
C'CB
'
TF= 316.86
INV IN= 312.36(SE 15"RCP)
INV OUT= 308.36(NW 15"CM P)
SUM P= 306.86
"
15
P
CM
230 TON
AE
E
N
X
E
ZO
N
ZO
LIFTING CRANE
REMOVAL SKID
JACK LOCATION
P
RC
15"
100 TON
LIFTING
CRANE
D
LE
PA
VE
D
W
TO
RI
VE
0
30
N
GE
DI
BR
31
0
REMOVAL SEQUENCE PLAN
.
RD
SCALE: 1" = 40'
TOWN OF CANTON
TOWN BRIDGE ROAD
DATE:
7/2014
DRAWN:SAD
DRAWING:
20
DESIGNER:
SAD
CHECKER:
JBM
APPENDIX B
PHOTOGRAPHS
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 1:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
West elevation (looking upstream).
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 2:
July 2014
P712110001
Typical truss detail.
G:\WT11\0001\Bridge\Preliminary Report\Appendix B - Photos.doc
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 3:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Bridge from the south approach.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 4:
July 2014
P712110001
Bridge from the north approach.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 5:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
South abutment.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 6:
July 2014
P712110001
North abutment.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 7:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Typical truss expansion bearing at the south

abutment.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 8:
July 2014
P712110001
Typical truss fixed bearing at the north abutment.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 9:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Typical floor system.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 10:
July 2014
P712110001
Connection of floorbeam 8 to the west truss.

Typical floorbeam and truss connection.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 11:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Typical pin connection at bottom chord.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 12:
July 2014
P712110001
Typical deterioration of floorbeam top flanges at

the connection to truss.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 13:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Section loss at stringer 7 between L0 and L1.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 14:
July 2014
P712110001
Typical pin connection at top chord.
Bridge No.
Town:
Feature Carried:
Feature Crossed:
Photo 15:
Prepared by
05222
Canton, CT
Town Bridge Road
Farmington River
Top of deck looking south. Note cracking in

overlay.
Date:
Project No.:
Photo 16:
July 2014
P712110001
Typical ornamental railing. Note collision damage.
APPENDIX E
ROADWAY DESIGN CRITERIA
Canton,CT
Design Element
Project Classification
Functional Classification
Design Speed
Travel Lane Width
Shoulder Width
Cross Slope (travel lane)
Cross Slope (shoulder)
Minimum Radii
Horizontal Sight Distance
Minimum Grade
Maximum Grade
Vertical Curvature (KValue)
Crest
Sag
AppendixE
RoadwayDesignCriteria
CTDOT Design Value
New Construction/Major
Reconstruction
Rural Local Road (Open)
20 mph 30 mph1
10 ft
2 ft 4 ft
1.5 % 2 %
Same as adjacent travel lane
190 ft (emax = 6.0%)
155 ft
0.5 %
11 %
12
8
26/14
155 ft
14 ft 3 in
2 ft
Yes
100 ft 5
0.35 %
14.1 %
3
9
79 ft
12 ft 4 in
12 ft
No
StructureReport
FinalSubmission
Existing Geometry
Alternative 1A
Alternative 1B
Alternative 2
Spot Improvement
Spot Improvement
Spot Improvement

15 mph2
12.5 ft3
0 ft
1 % 3%
N/A
105 ft

25 mph
14 ft 3 in4
0 ft

25 mph
10 ft
0 ft

25 mph
10 ft
0 ft
Maintain Existing Roadway

Geometry

Geometry
100 ft6
80 ft7

Geometry

Geometry
Maintain Existing
Roadway/Bridge Geometry
Alternative 3
Reconstruction
25 mph
13 ft
0 ft
2%
2%
Same as Existing Geometry
Alternative 4
Reconstruction
25 mph
13 ft
0 ft
2%
2%
395 ft
120 ft7
1.00 %
9.08 %
14
20
199 ft
N/A
TBD
Yes
300 ft
0.90 %
11.00 %
13
26
157 ft
N/A
3 ft
Yes
Stopping Sight Distance (Crest)

Minimum Roadway Vertical Clearance
14 ft
14 ft
14 ft
12 ft
12 ft
12 ft
Minimum Vertical Clearance Above 100 Year Flood9
Bridge Width Match Approach Roadway (Yes/No)
No
No
No
Notes:
1. Values are given for 25 mph, the proposed design speed.
2. Posted speed limit per the State Traffic Commission's Approved Town Road Speed Limits table.
3. Existing roadway width varies throughout the project area, value represents an average roadway width.
4. The bridge will maintain one 14 ft 3 in lane operating under alternating oneway traffic.
5. Existing horizontal sight distance is limited by the existing truss encroaching on sightlines to the inside of the curve near the north abutment.
6. The proposed horizontal sight distance will be limited by the truss encroaching upon sightlines to the inside of the curve near the north abutment. Should this alternative be selected, further design refinement may enable greater horizontal sight distance.
7. The proposed horizontal sight distance will be limited by the end cap. Should this alternative be selected, further design refinement may enable greater horizontal sight distance.
8. The required Kvalue to provide the required Headlight Sight Distance for the 25 mph design speed is 26. The required Kvalue to meet the Comfort Criteria for the 25 mph design speed is 14
9. Vertical clearance heights are based upon preliminary hydraulic analysis which provided 100 year flood water surface elevations through the project site.
APPENDIX J
COST ESTIMATE
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1A
BridgeRehabilitationatExistingRoadwayWidth(HS7)
ProjectNo:P712110001
Calculatedby:KHIDate:12/18/13
Checkedby:SADDate:7/11/14
Town of Canton
Rehabilitation of Bridge No. 05222
Alternative 1A (HS7)
Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate
FOR STRUCTURE
Item #
Item
0219001
Sedimentation Control Systems
0406173
H.M.A S0.25
0503000
Removal of Floorbeams and Deck
0503001
Removal of Superstructure (Truss)
0503946
Reset Existing Superstructure (Truss)
0513003
1-1/2" Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic Pipe
0520035
Silicone Expansion Joint System
0522155
Replace Bridge Bearings
0522156
Replace Expansion Bearings
0522281
Steel Bearing Assemblies
0601201
Class "F" Concrete
0602006
Deformed Steel Bars- Epoxy Coated
0603142
Field Touch up Painting
0603270
Orthotropic Steel Deck
0603446
Painting of Structural Steel (Truss)
Class 1 Containment and Collection of Surface
Preparation Debris
0603653
0603851
Structural Steel (Low Alloy)
0603851X
Structural Steel (Low Alloy) - Eyebars
0603444
Lead Health Protection Program
0707001
Membrane Waterproofing (Woven Glass Fabric)
0904042
Metal Bridge Rail (Combination) - Alum
120900X
Painted Pavement Makings
1401045
Handling Water
1500126
Utility Conduit Relocation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
FOR HIGHWAY
Item #
202000
207000
212000
304002
406171
703010
815001
922501
Item
EARTH EXCAVATION
BORROW
SUBBASE
PROCESSED AGGREGATE BASE
HMA S0.5
STANDARD RIPRAP
BITUMINOUS CONCRETE DRIVEWAY
Qty
250
60
2,800
1
1
24
32
7
7
4
30
5,250
710
2,752
7,100
Unit
LF
TON
SF
LS
LS
LF
LF
EA
EA
EA
CY
LBS
SF
SF
SF
Unit Price
$4
$125
$50
$160,000
$200,000
$40
$380
$400
$400
$800
$1,000
$2
$30
$50
$20
Total
$1,000.00
$7,500.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
$200,000.00
$960.00
$12,160.00
$2,800.00
$2,800.00
$3,200.00
$30,000.00
$10,500.00
$21,300.00
$137,600.00
$142,000.00
7,100
280
2,480
1
360
384
516
1
500
SF
CWT
LBS
LS
SY
LF
LF
LS
LF
$20
$450
$50
$25,000
$40
$95
$2.0
$20,000
$10.00
$142,000.00
$126,000.00
$124,000.00
$25,000.00
$14,400.00
$36,480.00
$1,032.00
$20,000.00
$5,000.00
Unit
CY
CY
CY
CY
TON
CY
LF
SY
Unit Price
$15.00
$12.00
$40.00
$45.00
$120.00
$80.00
$5.00
$35.00
Total
$3,750.00
$1,200.00
$5,000.00
$2,250.00
$7,200.00
$24,800.00
$1,375.00
$1,925.00
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$1,365,732.00
$136,573
Subtotal (A)
$1,502,305.20
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$47,500.00
$4,750.00
Subtotal (B)
$52,250.00
Subtotal (C)
$1,554,555.20
Qty
250
100
125
50
60
310
275
55
STRUCTURE ESTIMATE
HIGHWAY ESTIMATE
STUCTURE AND HIGHWAY SUBTOTAL
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1A
FOR LUMP SUM ITEMS

Item #
Item
201030
Clearing & Grubbing (3% of C)
971001 A Maintenance & Protection of Traffic (4% of C)
975002
Mobilization (7% of C)
980001 A Construction Staking (1% of C)
Qty
1
1
1
1
Unit
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Price
Total
$46,636.66
$62,182.21
$108,818.86
$15,545.55
LUMP SUM ESTIMATE

TOTAL (D)
ROADWAY/STRUCTURES TO
$233,183.28
$1,787,738.48
ADDITIONAL ITEMS
INCIDENTALS 25% OF E)
CONTINGENCIES (7% OF E)
$446,934.62
$125,141.69
TOTAL CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION COST (2013)

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST WITH 4% INFLATION (2015)
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
$2,359,815
$2,552,376
$2,560,000
* Prepared in accordance with the Connecticut Department of Transportation's Preliminary Cost Estimating Guidelines 2013.
G:\WT11\0001\Bridge\Calcs\Alt 1A - HS7 - 14' Roadway\[Estimate - Alt 1A (HS-7).xlsx]Alt 2
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1B
Town of Canton
Alternative 1B (HS20)
FOR STRUCTURE
Item #
Item
0219001
0406173
H.M.A S0.25
0503000
0503001
0503946
0513003
0520035
0522155
0522156
0522281
0601201
Class "F" Concrete
0602006
0603142
0603270
0603446
Preparation Debris
0603653
0603851
0603851X
0603444
Lead Health Protection Program
0707001
0904042
120900X
1401045
Handling Water
1500126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
FOR HIGHWAY
Item #
202000 0
207000 0
212000 0
304002 0
406171 0
703010 0
815001 0
922501 0
Item
EARTH EXCAVATION
BORROW
SUBBASE
HMA S0.5
STANDARD RIPRAP
Qty
250
60
2,800
1
1
24
32
7
7
4
30
5,250
710
2,752
7,100
Unit
LF
TON
SF
LS
LS
LF
LF
EA
EA
EA
CY
LBS
SF
SF
SF
Unit Price
$4
$125
$50
$160,000
$200,000
$40
$380
$400
$400
$800
$1,000
$2
$30
$50
$20
Total
$1,000.00
$7,500.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
$200,000.00
$960.00
$12,160.00
$2,800.00
$2,800.00
$3,200.00
$30,000.00
$10,500.00
$21,300.00
$137,600.00
$142,000.00
7,100
550
3,500
1
360
384
516
1
500
SF
CWT
LBS
LS
SY
LF
LF
LS
LF
$20
$450
$50
$25,000
$40
$95
$2.0
$20,000
$10.00
$142,000.00
$247,500.00
$175,000.00
$25,000.00
$14,400.00
$36,480.00
$1,032.00
$20,000.00
$5,000.00
Unit
CY
CY
CY
CY
TON
CY
LF
SY
Unit Price
$15.00
$12.00
$40.00
$45.00
$120.00
$80.00
$5.00
$35.00
Total
$3,750.00
$1,200.00
$5,000.00
$2,250.00
$7,200.00
$24,800.00
$1,375.00
$1,925.00
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$1,533,232.00
$153,323
Subtotal (A)
$1,686,555.20
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$47,500.00
$4,750.00
Subtotal (B)
$52,250.00
Subtotal (C)
$1,738,805.20
Qty
250
100
125
50
60
310
275
55
STRUCTURE ESTIMATE
HIGHWAY ESTIMATE
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1B
FOR LUMP SUM ITEMS

Item #
Item
201030
975002
Qty
1
1
1
1
Unit
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Price
Total
$52,164.16
$69,552.21
$121,716.36
$17,388.05
LUMP SUM ESTIMATE

TOTAL (D)
$260,820.78
$1,999,625.98
ADDITIONAL ITEMS
$499,906.50
$139,973.82

$2,639,506
$2,854,890
$2,860,000
G:\WT11\0001\Bridge\Calcs\Alt 1A - HS20 - 14' Roadway\[Estimate - Alt 1A (HS-20).xlsx]Alt 2
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1C
BridgeRehabilitationWidento20'RoadwayWidth(HS20)
Town of Canton
Alternative 1C (HS20)
FOR STRUCTURE
Item #
Item
0203000
Structure Excavation - Earth (Complete)
0216000
Pervious Structure Backfill
0219001
0406173
H.M.A S0.25
0503000
0503001
503946
0513003
0520035
0522155
0522156
0522281
0601000
Class "A" Concrete
0601201
Class "F" Concrete
0602000
Deformed Steel Bars
0602006
0603142
0603270
0603444
Preparation Debris
0603653
0603851
0603851X
0707001
0708001
Damproofing
0904042
120900X
1401045
Handling Water
1500126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
FOR HIGHWAY
Item #
202000 0
207000 0
212000 0
304002 0
406171 0
703010 0
815001 0
922501 0
Item
EARTH EXCAVATION
BORROW
SUBBASE
HMA S0.5
STANDARD RIPRAP
Qty
1,045
330
250
80
2,800
1
1
24
44
9
9
4
85
40
10,200
7,000
710
3,741
7,100
Unit
CY
CY
LF
TON
SF
LS
LS
LF
LF
EA
EA
EA
CY
CY
LBS
LBS
SF
SF
SF
Unit Price
$40
$50
$4
$125
$50
$160,000
$200,000
$40
$380
$400
$400
$800
$800
$1,000
$1.75
$2
$30
$50
$20
Total
$41,800.00
$16,500.00
$1,000.00
$10,000.00
$140,000.00
$160,000.00
$200,000.00
$960.00
$16,720.00
$3,600.00
$3,600.00
$3,200.00
$68,000.00
$40,000.00
$17,850.00
$14,000.00
$21,300.00
$187,050.00
$142,000.00
7,100
1,130
3,500
489
40
384
516
1
500
SF
CWT
LBS
SY
SY
LF
LF
LS
LF
$20
$450
$50
$40
$20
$95
$2.0
$20,000
$10.00
$142,000.00
$508,500.00
$175,000.00
$19,560.00
$800.00
$36,480.00
$1,032.00
$20,000.00
$5,000.00
Unit
CY
CY
CY
CY
TON
CY
LF
SY
Unit Price
$15.00
$12.00
$40.00
$45.00
$120.00
$80.00
$5.00
$35.00
Total
$3,750.00
$3,000.00
$5,400.00
$2,700.00
$9,000.00
$24,800.00
$1,375.00
$1,925.00
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$1,995,952.00
$199,595
Subtotal (A)
$2,195,547.20
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$51,950.00
$5,195.00
Subtotal (B)
$57,145.00
Subtotal (C)
$2,252,692.20
Qty
250
250
135
60
75
310
275
55
STRUCTURE ESTIMATE
HIGHWAY ESTIMATE
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative1C
BridgeRehabilitationWidento20'RoadwayWidth(HS20)
FOR LUMP SUM ITEMS

Item #
Item
201030
975002
Qty
1
1
1
1
Unit
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Price
Total
$67,580.77
$90,107.69
$157,688.45
$22,526.92
LUMP SUM ESTIMATE

TOTAL (D)
$337,903.83
$2,590,596.03
ADDITIONAL ITEMS
$647,649.01
$181,341.72

$3,419,587
$3,698,625
$3,700,000
G:\WT11\0001\Bridge\Calcs\Alt 1B - HS20 - 20' Roadway\[Estimate - Alt 1B.xlsx]Alt 2
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative2
NewBridgeonUpstreamAlignmentwith26RoadwayWidth(HL93)
Town of Canton
Alternative 2 (HL93)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FOR STRUCTURE
Item #
Item
0203000
Structure Excavation - Earth (Complete)
0204001
Cofferdam and Dewatering
0216000
Pervious Structure Backfill
0219001
0406173
H.M.A S0.25
0508001
Shear Connectors
0513003
0520035
0521001
Elastomeric Bearing Pads
0601000
Class "A" Concrete
0601201
Class "F" Concrete
0602000
Deformed Steel Bars
0602006
Abrasive Blast Cleaning and Field Painting of
Structure
0603102
Preparation Debris
0603653
0603851
0702101
Furnishing Steel Piles
0702111
Driving of Steel Piles
0702115
Splicing of Steel Piles
0702XXX
Test Pile
0702120
Point Reinforcement for Steel Piles
0702797
Dynamic Pile Driving Analysis (P.D.A) Test
0707001
0708001
Damproofing
0904041
Metal Bridge Rail (Combination)
120900X
1401045
Handling Water
1500126
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
FOR HIGHWAY
Item #
202000
207000
212000
304002
406171
507001
651012
703010
815001
921001
921022 A
922501
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Item
EARTH EXCAVATION
BORROW
SUBBASE
HMA S0.5
TYPE 'C' CATCH BASIN
15" R.C. PIPE
STANDARD RIPRAP
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
STONE DUST FOR PATHWAY
STRUCTURE ESTIMATE
Qty
540
100
300
1,000
180
1
48
139
6,912
140
660
16,800
127,750
Unit
CY
LF
CY
LF
TON
LS
LF
LF
CI
CY
CY
LBS
LBS
Unit Price
$40
$230
$50
$4
$125
$10,435
$40
$380
$1.5
$800
$1,000
$1.75
$2
Total
$21,600.00
$23,000.00
$15,000.00
$4,000.00
$22,500.00
$10,435.00
$1,920.00
$52,820.00
$10,368.00
$112,000.00
$660,000.00
$29,400.00
$255,500.00
7,100
SF
$30
$213,000.00
7,100
SF
6,950 CWT
135,000 LBS
1,600
LF
4
EA
4
EA
20
EA
4
EA
1,220
SY
150
SY
824
LF
1,176
LF
1
LS
500
LF
Unit
Qty
1,800 CY
1,800 CY
1,000 CY
400 CY
525 TON
10 EA
250 LF
225 CY
1,850 LF
525 SF
4,600 SF
690 SY
$20
$450
$1
$30
$470
$12,000
$200
$5,000
$40
$20
$450
$2.0
$20,000
$10.00
$142,000.00
$3,127,500.00
$135,000.00
$48,000.00
$1,880.00
$48,000.00
$4,000.00
$20,000.00
$48,800.00
$3,000.00
$370,800.00
$2,352.00
$20,000.00
$5,000.00
Unit Price
$12.50
$9.00
$30.00
$35.00
$105.00
$2,400.00
$50.00
$80.00
$5.00
$10.00
$1.00
30
Total
$22,500.00
$16,200.00
$30,000.00
$14,000.00
$55,125.00
$24,000.00
$12,500.00
$18,000.00
$9,250.00
$5,250.00
$4,600.00
20700
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$5,407,875.00
$540,788
TownBridgeRoadover
FarmingtonRiver
Estimate
Alternative2
NewBridgeonUpstreamAlignmentwith26RoadwayWidth(HL93)
Subtotal (A)
$5,948,662.50
Subtotal
Minor Items-10%
$232,125.00
$23,212.50
Subtotal (B)
$255,337.50
Subtotal (C)
$6,204,000.00
HIGHWAY ESTIMATE
FOR LUMP SUM ITEMS

Item #
Item
201030
975002
Qty
1
1
1
1
Unit
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Price
Total
$186,120.00
$248,160.00
$434,280.00
$62,040.00
LUMP SUM ESTIMATE

TOTAL (D)
ADDITIONAL ITEMS
$930,600.00
$7,134,600.00
$1,783,650.00
$499,422.00

$9,417,672
$10,186,154
$10,190,000
* Prepared in accordance with the Connecticut Department of Transportation's Preliminary Cost Estimating Guidelines -
G:\WT11\0001\Bridge\Calcs\Alt 4 - 26' Roadway, New Alignment\[Estimate Alt-4.xlsx]Alt 3

Preliminary Structure Report 11-21-2014

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Preliminary Structure Report 11-21-2014

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Preliminary

11. Load Capacity Analysis

Compatibility with Project Needs

14. Discussion of Alternatives

Alternate 2: New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26' Roadway Width 21

16. Cost Considerations

Alternative Cost Estimation Breakdown

Roadway Design Criteria

1. Bridge Rehabilitation in accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards

Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)

Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)

Bridge Rehabilitation Widened to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)

2. New Bridge on Upstream Alignment to 26 (HL93); Truss Bridge

Figure 1 Location Map

7. Project Area Description

8. Historical and technological Significance

Type of connections; pins or rivets. A high strength buttonhead bolt is an acceptable

9. Existing Condition (Bridge Inspection and Field Observations)

10. Material Testing

11. Load Capacity Analysis

Wrought Iron Eyebars:

Original Structural Steel:

Fy = 36 ksi (Trusses, verticals, diagonals, floorbeams)

Fy = 50 ksi (Stringers and floorbeam coverplates)

12. Design Criteria

2013 Traffic Volume: 593 vehicles per day

13. Alternative Analysis

1. Bridge Rehabilitation in accordance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards

Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)

Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)

Bridge Rehabilitation Widen to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)

14. Discussion of Alternatives

15. Preliminary Preferred Alternative

The wearing surface, deck, MBR and stringers will be removed.

The bridge will be lifted a

nd pulled from the south end onto the removal skid.

Truss panel point L0 to L2 will be disassembled.

Truss panel points L8 to L10 will be assembled.

The next segment will be assembled (L7 to L8).

This procedure will be repeated until the entire bridge is constructed.

16. Cost Considerations

1A. Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS7)

1B. Bridge Rehabilitation at Existing Roadway Width (HS20)

1C. Bridge Rehabilitation Widen to 20 Roadway Width (HS20)

2. New Bridge on Upstream Alignment with 26 Roadway

10 PANELS @ 16'-0" = 160'-0"

EXISTING ELEVATION-EAST TRUSS

OVER FARMINGTON RIVER

L0-L3 WEST TRUSS

EAST TRUSS &

3"~ PIN AT BRGS

EXISTING TRUSS MEMBERS

L3-L10 WEST TRUSS

OVER FARMINGTON RIVER

WEST TOP CHORD

NORTH & SOUTH

EAST UPPER CHORD

WEST BOTTOM CHORD

EXISTING FRAMING MEMBERS (UPPER BRACING)

EAST BOTTOM CHORD

EXISTING FRAMING MEMBERS (LOWER BRACING)

OVER FARMINGTON RIVER

EXISTING PORTAL LOCATION

OVER FARMINGTON RIVER