Carrollton-SY 890517 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
May 17, 1989
Mr. Russell Doyle
City Engineer
City of Coppell
P.O. Box 478
Coppell, TX 75019
Dear Mr. Doyle:
As you may be aware, the City of Carrollton is currently
considering the possibility of zoning a site for a landfill
which would be located north of Sandy Lake Road and west of
Interstate 35E. The primary access to the landfill as proposed
by the applicant is to be via Sandy Lake Road. The applicant
has claimed that all loaded trash vehicles will come from the
west and cross the bridge across the Elm Fork of the Trinity
River on Sandy Lake Road. It is our understanding that this
bridge is in the City of Dallas. The State Department of
Highways and Public Transportation inspected this bridge on
December, 1987, and again April, 1989. Both reports
recommend the safe load capacity of the bridge to be 24,000
pounds gross weight (R12-4Tb posting).
As part of the applicant's submission, the City of Carrollton
has required a study of both the roadway and the bridge
structure in order to determine the possible life of the road,
and also what may be necessary in order to strengthen the
bridge structure so that it can handle 80,000 pound loads. The
city has just received the study and wanted to make you
aware of the information in the study, and allow you to
comment on the proposed zoning. A copy of the study is
attached for your review.
We would like to have your comments back by June 13, 1989. I
apologize for the short review time, but we do feel it is very
important to have your input concerning this case. The case
is anticipated to be considered by the Carrollton City Council
on June 20, 1989. We do appreciate your prompt attention to
this item. If you should have any questions, or if you would
1945 Jackson Road, Carrollton, Texas 75006, Telephone 214/466-3050
Mr. Russell Doyle
May 17, 1989
Page Two
like to reply by phone, please feel free to contact me or Ms.
Cissy Taylor, Traffic Engineer, at 466-3050. Thank you very
much.
~~nsportation
DP/gr
Attachment
0
0
5
B-9 B-1 B-', B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8
Symbols and Terms Used on Boring Logs
SO~l o~ Rock Types
~m..~., GRAVEL ORGANIC '~':b:. SANDSTONE
FIGURE 3
CORE SAMPLE RESULTS
BRIDGE ELEVATION LOOKING SOUTH
288'0'
T-BEAM A ~ CRACK
.-. SOLE PLATE
MASONRY PLATE
CAP
TYPICAL SHEAR CRACKS
AT ABUTMENTS AND PIERS
APPENDIX A
BRIDC~ SECTIONS AND ~L~ATION
-~i STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
AND PUBUC.TRANSPORTATION
I: Fo.. 53,-,-,o.,5 Bridge Inventory Record
, District 1~ County o$7 Cont.-Sec. j?o72-/~ Structure ~ Route ~,/ ~ ~.
Bridge Name 5~o~
]~ Odometer Reading at beginning of Road 5~./~, At Bridge Milepoint E. Io
General Description
Clear Width between Curbs 2 ~' o" Approach Roadway Width Excluding Shoulders ~ '- ~"
2
Type Deck & Surfacing ~.~'~-~ ~_ o~. ~-~ . /.~...,,,~ ~,~ (~,~) ~~_
o~ ~r /v~ o~ ~' / (~ ~~ ~) Ve~icalClearance ~'~/~,r~o
Stringers: Spans /, =.. ~, &. 7.
Type ~o~( T- ~ Size /~'~[z'-~Sl~'' ,~,~,~ Number ~
Spacing
Controlling Span Length (C-C Bearings) 3o - ~
Stringers: Spans ~, ~
Type ~ g¢~ Size ~*~,=o ~,~ Number ~
Spacing & '- ¢" Controlling Span Length (C-C Bearings) ~/ '- 7 Yz"
Stringers: Spans
Size Number
Type
Remarks ~~ ~6,~, 4 5x~r,o~ ~ 5o~r~ s,~ o~ ~ ~
Date Built I ~ Inventoried by ~ ~, ~
Advisory Speed $¢ ~ ~°~ ~) Date of Inventory ~- ~e-p~
Posted Load Restriction No~ Sheet No. I of Sheets
STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYSAND PUBLIC TRANSPORTAllON ~ "~"
Fo.. Bridge Inspection Record
District ')~ County Q.~ 7 Cont-Sec ~O?Z - t~l' Structure 003 Route saNov z~;~£ ~,o.
~.~n~./; ~ P~cH 5~ Inspe~or'sSignature ~ ~' ~ Date
9-- New cond~ion
8- Good cond~ion--no repairs needed
7
Generally
g~d
cond~ion
potential
exists
for
minor
maintenance
6- Fair condition--potential exists for major maintenance
5-- Generally fair cond~ion-- potential exists for minor rehabilitation ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4-- Marginal cond~ion-- potential exists for major rehabilitation
3-- Poor cond~on--re.ir or rehabilitation required immediately 70 ~o~ ~.
2 -- Critical cond~ion--bridge should be closed until repairs are complete
I -- Critical cond~ion-- bridge closed but repairable
--bridge closed and beyond repair
0
Critical
condition
N- Not applicable
Enter a rating for each element of each component. The rating should equal or exceed the minimum rating listed to
the le~ of each element. ~e overall Component Rating should equal the lowest rating of any element of the
component. Fully supportive comments are to be made hereon or on a~a~ments for all ratings of 7 or below.
I R°adway(ltem58) I C°nd~i°n I Superstructure(Item59) I ~'°n
Min. Rating Min. Rating
1 Deck 0 Main Members-- Steel
6 Weadng SuHace ~- * ~ ~'~ :*' * '-: TM ~'=~ 0
Main
Membem
Concrete
6 Joints, Expansion, Open O Main Membem-- Timber
6 Joints, Expansion, Sealed O Main Member Connections
6 Joints, Other ~wz,~N F~ xg~ 1 Floor System Members
6 Drainage System 1 Floor System Connections
6 Curbs, Sidewalks & Parapets 5 Secondaw Membem
6 Railings 6 Ex~nsion Beatings
7 Railing Protective Coating. 6 Fixed Beadngs
7 Delineation (curve markers) 6 Steel Protective Coating
~her Other
Component Rating ~ Comp~ent Rating
Comments: Comments:
I~ 057 ~ ~o?z- I(~
District County ( -Sec Structure ~03 Route.
Min. Rating Min. Rating
0 Abutments
Caps ~ 5 Abutment Backwalls & Wingwalls
Above Ground ~ ~ ~ 5 Embankment Retaining Wails
Below Ground or Foundation 5 Culve~ Headwalls & Wingwalls
0 Intermediate SuppoAs Other
Caps - Concrete
Caps-Steel Component Rating ~ ~ .~
Caps-- Timber
i ~ I
Above G round -- Concrete Comments:
Above Ground-- Steel i. ~ ~/~"~0 o~ ~~
Above Ground-- Timber
Above Ground-- Masonw
~low Ground or Foundation
5 Collision Protection System
6 Steel Protective Coating
Component Rating ~ I Approaches (Item 65} r co~
Min. Ret~g
Comments:
z. ~,~o~ ~/~ ~ 5~z~o~ ~ 5 SlopeProtec~n~ ~,~
o~ ~ v~ ~P~ ~g~r ~o~Y ~ ~ ~zz~ 5 Slabsor Pavements
3 ~t~r ~ccv~ v~ ~,o~ o~ ~r ~ a~ 6 Relief Joints
~aa~a $~ ~ ~'~$' 6 Drainage
~. g~o~o s~r~c o~ ~s,~g a~ ~g~r 6 Guardfence
~ ;~,~ co~.,~, a~., 5a~r~ f~a~ 7 Delineation
~, ~,~ ~/*~cr ~6~ zo / co~ 7 Sight Distance
a~ F~ ~ ~ / $~r~ co~/ Other
~ - P/cE g~e r,o~$ Component Rating
I I
Min. [ Channel (Item 61)[ Send,ion Comments:
Rating I. E~sr ~c ~P~cd ~ ~/ I" /~ /~
4 Channel Banks ~ 2. rn~r~. ~ ~c/,.,~& ,.- ' ~r ~ c
4 ChannelBed I ~ ~ ~P~o~c~$ /~ z~/g ~ g' ~o~6
5 Rip Rap ~o o~ ~,~&~. ~o~ o~
5 Dikes o~' E~r~ ~p~c~ ~C
5 Je~ies J Miscellaneous
Cond~n
Other s~/~c ~A,/ Min. [ Rating
7 Illumination
Comments: 7 Warning Devices
/. ~,Pn~P S~p~S ~ ~ ~r~-¢~; ~ 7 UtilityLines I t-~
~,. 5~¢~ ~ ~o ~ ~z¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Comments:
$ovr~ oF ~n,~eE, ~EA/~
Form 1085-2 -- 10-85
I,
STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS ~ ~
AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
1387.-,-- 0-86 Bridge Appraisal Worksheet
District /~ County O~ ? Cont-Sec ~7 Z · /~ Structure t:;;O.~ Route
Appraiser's Signature /~,~1= /~. ~,,~,,~ Date
I General Features (Items 67 through 72) J
Items 67 through 72 are assigned a one-digit rating on the reverse side of this form. The following scale is used in
accordance with Section 3.2 of the 8RINS~P Manual.
9 -- Condition superior to present desirable criteria
8-- Condition equal to present desirable criteria
7-- Condition better than present minimum criteria
6-- Condition equal to present minimum criteria
5-- Condition somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is
4-- Condition meeting minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is
3-- Basically intolerable condition requiring high priority of repair or reconstruction
2-- Basically intolerable condition requiring high priority to replace the structure
1 -- Immediate repair or reconstruction necessary to put the structure back in service
of the to put back in service
0
Immediate
replacement
structure
necessary
N-- Not applicable
Traffic Safety Features (Item 36)
The four Traffic Safety Features are assigned a one-digit rating in the space below. The following scale is used in
accordance with Section 3.3 of the BRINSAP Manual.
1 -- Feature meets currently acceptable standards
0 Feature does not meet currently acceptable standards
N-- Not applicable
I Bridge Railing (1st Digit) J I Transitions (2nd Digit)
I Approach Guardrail (3rd Digit) J I Approach Ouardrail Terminal (4th Digit)
~ Rating -- ~ Rating-- ~
District_. //~ County 05 7 Cont-Sec ~o72 -/8 Structure 0~ Route -;~,/ ~ ~
. [ Structural Condition (Item 67) J I Safe Load Capa~ty (Item 70) J
,~ ~ -5- Rating -- ~-~ ~ ~7-Z'-~ Rating -- ~'~
Roadway GeomeCry, (Item 68) J I Waterway Adequacy {Item 71)
Rating - ~'~ Rating
(Item 69) Approach Roadway Alignment {Item 72)
!
i Rating -- ~ /~ ~-11
Form 1387-2-- 10-85
APPENDIX C
PHOTOGRAPHS
District: 18 County~ (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge Name· Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roil:
1
Frame:
12
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label:
8072-003
Profile of the bridge as seen from the east side of the channel south of the bridge.
Roll ·
Frame:
1
Date:
04-28-89
Pho to
Labe 1'
8072-003
I
Looking west along Sandy Lake Road towards the bridge.
HNTB
District~ 18 Counny: (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge Name' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roll'
1
%~'- '~ Date:
04-28-89
- Photo
Label:
.~.~ 8072-003
Underside of the bridge in span 2 looking towards the west abutment.
,- Roll'
· 1
Frame'
Date'
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Underside of the bridge in span 3 looking east.
HNTB
District' 18 County~ (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge Name' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roll:
1
Frame'
3
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Transverse deck crack at mid-span in span 3.
Roll
Frame:
4
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Typical view of surface scour and general deck cracking in span 3.
HNTB
District' 18 County' (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge ~ame' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roll
1
Frame:
6
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Deteriorated expansion joint between spans 4 & 5.
Roll'
Frame'
8
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label:
8072-003
I Large spalls with exposed rebar in the span 7 south parapet/curb.
I HNTB
District' 18 County' (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge Name' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roll'
1
Frame'
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Detail of the east spall in the span 7 south parapet/curb.
'~ Roll
Frame:
14
Date'
04-28-89
Photo
Label'
8072-003
Detail of the spalled curb/parapet over the south end of bent 3
HNTB
Districtz 18 County~ (057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge ~ame' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
Roll'
1
Frame:
11
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Labe 1 ·
8072-003
+/- 1/8" wide diagonal crack in the north ext. girder of span 5 over the west support.
Roll'
1
Frame:
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label:
8072-003
Diagonal crack in the north exterior girder of span 1 over the west abutment.
HNTB
Disnrict' 18 County' {057) Dallas Bridge' 8072-003
Bridge Name' Sandy Lake Road over Elm Fork of Trinity River
!
Roll:
Frame:
10
I Date'
04-28-89
~ - Photo
Label:
8072-003
Diagonal crack in the north exterior girder of span 7 over the west support {bent 6).
Roll:
Frame'
13
Date:
04-28-89
Photo
Label:
8072-003
Cracking in the east span 4 south exterior diaphragm at the exterior girder web.HNTB