Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tolbs17]

What happened here....

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2702318,-78.6169756,3a,75y,299.35h,114.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWTpR9tXMN688AX8Cn-3rIw!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192

You mean the corrugated aluminum panels?  That's standard design now in some states.  Michigan has been including them in new bridges for at least a dozen years.  It prevents crumbling concrete from falling onto the roadway below.

But look at the sanford bypass and the winton one.

[Mapmikey]

What happened here....

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2702318,-78.6169756,3a,75y,299.35h,114.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWTpR9tXMN688AX8Cn-3rIw!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192

You mean the corrugated aluminum panels?  That's standard design now in some states.  Michigan has been including them in new bridges for at least a dozen years.  It prevents crumbling concrete from falling onto the roadway below.

But look at the sanford bypass and the winton one.

Every bridge isn't required to have these...could be contractor's preferred design or NCDOT might have certain criteria about when that is necessary.

In the link above, the metal was added when they raised the height of the bridge with spacers.  The US 70 Bus Smithfield bridge was raised even higher with spacers but no metal placed underneath.  Was it because one deck was in worse shape than the other?  Or is there flexibility on stuff like this?  NCDOT-region specific?

I've seen these much longer ago than 12 years - some I526 bridges from the early 1980s have them.

[tolbs17]

I've seen these much longer ago than 12 years - some I526 bridges from the early 1980s have them.

And when I-40 was first built going to Wilmington, they have them and it was in the 80s.

[tolbs17]

In this area, there used to be a swing bridge going straight to Winton.

[plain]

I've seen these much longer ago than 12 years - some I526 bridges from the early 1980s have them.

And when I-40 was first built going to Wilmington, they have them and it was in the 80s.

I used to wonder about these. I believe they were first used in the 1970's, at least they were in VA. Most of I-195, as well as I-95 between the James River and Petersburg has overpasses with this underneath them.

[Mapmikey]

In this area, there used to be a swing bridge going straight to Winton.

Eastern NC used to have quite a few of these

[kphoger]

I like how Branson (MO), after building the new bridge across Taneycomo, kept the old bridge in service.  GSV

[tolbs17]

In this area, there used to be a swing bridge going straight to Winton.

Eastern NC used to have quite a few of these

They will all disappear soon. It's a goodbye to the swing bridges.

There's still one on US-64 which is the alligator river bridge and will soon be replaced by a high rise one.

This one will probably stay movable, but it will be turned into a bascule bridge (the one similar in New Bern).

[tolbs17]

Remember this? They had 5 alternatives. They went with 3 which was replace this bridge with a bascule bridge.

It says 2019-10-21 but this document is actually from 2004.

https://files.nc.gov/ncdcr/historic-preservation-office/PDFs/ER_90-8222.pdf

[MCRoads]

Remember this? They had 5 alternatives. They went with 3 which was replace this bridge with a bascule bridge.

It says 2019-10-21 but this document is actually from 2004.

https://files.nc.gov/ncdcr/historic-preservation-office/PDFs/ER_90-8222.pdf

Alt. 5: Replace Existing Bridge With A Tunnel.

The fact that that was considered is weird. A tunnel seems very out of place in this situation. I might be wrong, but it looks like the river it crosses only serves pleasure craft. Opening the bridge on a schedule would probably work just fine. Or, maybe even just calling ahead could work. Most of those alternatives seem like way overkill.

Also, regarding the Branson, NO bridges, which one is the newer one? I would guess the plate girder bridge, but that seems like an odd place to put a new bridge, why not just build the new bridge as a second span for the existing road?

[Big John]

^^ The EIS statement requires you to use all possible alternatives.  While doing one we had to consider a double-decker bridge on a county road in order to reduce wetlands impact and came out to a conclusion that it was too expensive.

[kphoger]

I like how Branson (MO), after building the new bridge across Taneycomo, kept the old bridge in service.  GSV

Also, regarding the Branson, NO bridges, which one is the newer one? I would guess the plate girder bridge, but that seems like an odd place to put a new bridge, why not just build the new bridge as a second span for the existing road?

Yes, the one in the foreground is the newer one.  The answer is that they serve different corridors.  The old bridge is MO-76 and what used to be US-65-Business.  The new bridge was constructed as part of the whole Branson Landing development.  The road it connects to (Branson Landing Blvd) didn't exist before that—not in its current iteration, anyway.

Take a look at this GSV, and you can see that the area connected by the newer bridge (Branson Landing) is lower in elevation, down along the lakefront riverfront—whereas the area connected by the older bridge (the western half of the old downtown) up higher above the shoreline.

[tolbs17]

I'm glad they used alternative 3. Alternative 4 would have some height restrictions, so that's prolly why they didn't choose that. Alternative 2 would be risky, cause swing bridges are a pain in the ass. Alternative 5 is expensive as hell and not so pedestrian friendly. Those can be used if large amounts of traffic go on it.

Alternative 1 wouldn't be the best choice either. We always need a direct gateway to downtown!

Alternatives 6 and 7 are too expensive imo and just unnecessary.

I love having movable bridges..... I wish the Pitt and Greene streets had one of those but they are fixed and hardly any boats get on it cause the river is soo thin.

[tolbs17]

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1236654,-79.8827846,3a,75y,277.76h,82.43t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sh9FX6w6hhZQEbfM5kpzCJg!2e0!5s20190401T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Why is this being replaced with a bridge...

[Big John]

^^ I assume there is a culvert under that road now, and I assume it can't handle stormwater flow.

[kphoger]

So you're wondering why they didn't leave one half of the road a culvert and just construct the other half as a new bridge?

[MCRoads]

They did something similar on US-1 near where my grandfather worked in Ft Belvoir. From what he told me, that road sometimes had issues during heavy rain because the culvert had deteriorated or clogged up. They just did away with the culvert and put a bridge when widening the road. I’m guessing it’s a similar situation.

[tolbs17]

So you're wondering why they didn't leave one half of the road a culvert and just construct the other half as a new bridge?

That would look retarded. They did propose that for NC 73 but it wasn't chosen.

[kphoger]

Why is this being replaced with a bridge...

So you're wondering why they didn't leave one half of the road a culvert and just construct the other half as a new bridge?

That would look retarded. They did propose that for NC 73 but it wasn't chosen.

Then what exactly are you wondering?

[tolbs17]

Why is this being replaced with a bridge...

So you're wondering why they didn't leave one half of the road a culvert and just construct the other half as a new bridge?

That would look retarded. They did propose that for NC 73 but it wasn't chosen.

Then what exactly are you wondering?

To make them both culverts. (like I-77)

[UnumProvident101]

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0139705,-85.2521206,3a,63.9y,35.4h,95.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9haBqBwJokky66E0LcC9Ig!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

these two bridges in Chattanooga, TN are being replaced since they were built in 1964 and are 56 years old and the ABC method is being used to build the two new bridges

[tolbs17]

This is what kphoger was asking - https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/nc-73-mecklenburg-cabarrus/Documents/davidson-concord-us-29-meeting-map-3.pdf

This is what I was thinking would be done - https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/nc-73-mecklenburg-cabarrus/Documents/davidson-concord-us-29-meeting-map-3a.pdf

This is the final design plans! - https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/nc-73-mecklenburg-cabarrus/Documents/R-5706-map-3-wellington-chase-east-reservoir.pdf

[Tom958]

What happened here....

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2702318,-78.6169756,3a,75y,299.35h,114.26t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWTpR9tXMN688AX8Cn-3rIw!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192

You mean the corrugated aluminum panels?  That's standard design now in some states.  Michigan has been including them in new bridges for at least a dozen years.  It prevents crumbling concrete from falling onto the roadway below.

Sometime between 2013 and 2015, the two main spans were replaced. In this 2015 Streetview you can see that the side spans were formed with plywood which was removed, while the main spans rest on metal decking. That's also why the steel girders are different colors on the main and side spans. This 2013 Streetview shows no metal decking under the main spans and all of the girders the same color. I can't imagine why they would've done this other than crash damage on both spans. Even then, why not replace the steel girders with voided slabs to increase the clearance, as they did elsewhere along I-95? I dunno.

Annoyingly, http://bridgereports.com/1327621 makes no mention of what so obviously happened.

[tolbs17]

Oh, what happened here?

Did a car hit that area? Did the bridge collapse by itself?

It needs replacing.

[Big John]

^^ Looks like a vehicle hit that.  The guardrail is a temporary fix until they replace the railing in that area.