spacer spacer   spacer   spacer   spacer  
Title Header spacer
 
HOME
spacer
 
CONTACT
spacer
spacer  
SEARCH!
spacer
spacer
spacer
  NCDOT icon  NC DOT
  NCDOH icon  NC DOH
  NCgov.com icon  NC GOV
spacer
spacer spacer spacer spacer spacer spacer spacer spacer spacer
 
 
spacer
 
Unit Support    |    Staff   |    Project Special Provisons    |    Project Services    |   
spacer spacer
spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer spacer spacer
spacer
  Spring Field Review Site 9
spacer
spacer spacer  
Spring Field Review Site 9

Description: B-3189 - HAYWOOD COUNTY

Location: Bridge #272 on SR 1643

Item(s) of Interest: Future project – to be let 12/06. Site will require a 130' single span steel bridge. The site is adjacent to a historic site and a corner of a building is at the right-of-way line.

Other challenges on this site include: An historic building butts the existing bridge, the existing end bent slope consists of fragile concrete and stone retaining wall butting up to a historic building. Failure of the stone wall would likely cause damage to the historic building. The stone wall is entirely on NCDOT R/W.

Observations and Points of Discussion:

An abutment wall, with a maximum 30 ft. height, to the proposed grade has been suggested.

  • Proposal is to use temp tieback wall to excavate slope back to existing end bent, similar to Hillsborough St. bridge in Raleigh. Abutment wall would be MSE wall, possibly using a cast-in-place face. The MSE wall option would require a 2'-6" thick crash wall to be built in front of the MSE wall.
  • Straps for the MSE wall could be up to 35 ft. long.
  • Bridge would be supported on 2-tsf spread footing bearing on MSE wall fill. Spread footing avoids need to drive piles near historic building, and is cheaper than drilled piers.
  • MSE option may not be feasible. Alternate is to use a shaft wall.
  • Abutment wall – 30 ft. maximum height to proposed grade. Right side wingwall/retaining wall also 30 ft. in height. Shaft wall option inefficient and expensive due to 30 ft. height and 20 to 25 ft. depth to rock. Would also require lightweight aggregate.
  • Use of Geofoam fill behind the wall ruled out due to the complex geometry and cost.
  • The Department should consider options that eliminate the crash wall.
  • Other concerns include the effects of post-construction settlement.


picture 1 picture 2 picture 3 picture 4 picture 5 picture 6
 
picture 7 picture 8 picture 9 picture 10 picture 11 picture 12
 
picture 13 picture 14 picture 15 picture 16



spacer spacer
spacer
 
North Carolina DOT Logo   The North Carolina
Department of Transportation