Casey inspection report

7/30/2019 Casey inspection report

1/79


2/79

RATING If YES please give priority:

HIGH ( MEDIUM ( LOW ( )))

CLEARANCE POSTING

Out of service - beyond corrective action.

ITEM 61 (This Report)

DEFECTS

Excellent condition.

No problem noted.

Some minor problems.

Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stablility.Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put it back in light service.

Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

Advance section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracksin steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

Advance deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may haveremoved substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.

REASON:

Request for Rating or Rerating (Y/N):

Date:

Rating Report (Y/N):

CHANNEL &

CHANNEL PROTECTION

RTB(2)04-07

ACCESSIBILITY

Lift Bucket

Ladder

Boat

Waders

Inspector 50

RiggingStaging

Traffic Control

RR Flagger

Police

Other:

(Y/N/P)DEF

ITEM 36 TRAFFIC SAFETY36 COND

A. Bridge Railing

B. Transitions

C. Approach Guardrail

D. Approach Guardrail Ends

ITEM 61

WEIGHT POSTING Not Applicable

Actual Posting

Recommended Posting

Waived Date:

Signs In Place

EJDMT Date:

(Y=Yes,N=No,NR=NotRequired)Legibility/Visibility

H 3 3S2 Single

At bridge Other Advance

STREAM FLOW VELOCITY:

ITEM 61 (Dive Report):

93b-U/W INSP. DATE:

PLANS (Y/N)

TOTAL HOURS

Signs In Place

Legibility/Visibility

Not Applicabl

Actual Field Measurement

Posted Clearance

inft

List of field tests performed:

S= Severe/Major Deficiency -

C-S= Critical Structural Deficiency -

M= Minor Deficiency -

CATEGORIES OF DEFICIENCIES:

URGENCY OF REPAIR:

DEFICIENCY:

I = Immediate-

A = ASAP-

P = Prioritize-

At bridge Advance

(For Items 58, 59, 60 and 61)

Dive Cur DEF

(To be filled out by DBIE)

Deficiencies which are more extensive in nature and need more planning and effort to repair. Examples include but are not limited to: Moderate to major deterioration in concrete, Exposed andcorroded rebars, Considerable settlement, Considerable scouring or undermining, Moderate to extensive corrosion to structural steel with measurable loss of section, etc.

Deficiencies which are minor in nature, generally do not impact the structural integrity of the bridge and could easily be repaired. Examples include but are not limited to: Spalled concrete, Minor potholes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.

A defect in a st ructure that requires corrective action.

[Shall be prioritized by District Maintenance Engineer or the Responsible Party (if not a State owned bridge) and repairs made when funds and/or manpower is available].

[Action/Repair should be initiated by District Maintenance Engineer or the Responsible Party (if not a State owned bridge) upon receipt of the Inspection Report].

A deficiency in a structural element of a bridge that poses an extreme unsafe condition due to the failure or im minent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrityof the bridge.

C-H= Critical Hazard Deficiency - A deficiency in a component or element of a bridge that poses an extreme hazard or unsafe condition to the public, but does not impair the structural integrity of the bridge. Examplesinclude but are not limited to: Loose concrete hanging down over traffic or pedestrians, A hole in a sidewalk that may cause injuries to pedestrians, Missing section of bridge railing,etc.

[Inspector(s) immediately contact District Bridge Inspection Engineer (DBIE) to r eport the Deficiency and to receive further instruction from him/her].

meterinft

SERIOUS

CRITICAL

"IMMINENT" FAILURE

FAILED

NOT APPLICABLE

CODE CONDITION

G

G

G

F

F

P

P

C

C

N

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

EXCELLENT

VERY GOOD

GOOD

SATISFACTORY

FAIR

POOR

Needed Used

B.I.N. BR. DEPT. NO.CITY/TOWN 8.-STRUCTURE NO. INSPECTION DATE

(Y=Yes,N=No,NR=NotRequired)

2PAGE OF

DEFICIENCY REPORTING GUIDE

Inspection data at time of existing rating

I 58: I 59: I 60: Date :

(V.C.R.)

TAPE#:

(Y/N):

1.

2.

3.

5.

6.

7.

8.

4.

CONDITION RATING GUIDE

Tidal ( High ( Moderate ( Low ( None ( )))))

N6 M-P

Y Y7 -

Y Y6 M-P N N

N N - 7 - N N

N N - XN N

N N - N NN N

N N -Y Y

N N -N N

N N - Y Y

N N -

N N - N N

Y

N

X

N Y N N

Y N

5 4 3

1

1

0

0

N N N N

N N N N

00/00/00 00/00/00

99

3.029 11 9 11

0 9 10

N N

700/00/00 7

05/01/2010

79

E W E W

N S N S

N S

4EX B16367-4EX-DOT-NBIBOSTON JAN 16, 2012B-16-367

01/29/2010

Channel Scour

Fender System

Aggradation

Rip-Rap/Slope Protection

Utilities

Vegetation

Debris

Embankment Erosion


3/79

LOCATION OF CORROSION, SECTION LOSS (%), CRACKS,COLLISION DAMAGE, STRESS CONCENTRATION, ETC.MEMBER

Signs In Place

Legibility/Visibility

At bridge Advance

(Y=Yes,N=No,NR=NotRequired)

PREVIOUS

WEIGHT POSTING

F.C.(1)7-96

Not Applicable

CRACK

(Y/N):

WELD'SCONDITION

(0-9)

List of field tests performed:

CONDITION

PRESENT

H-20 3 3S2

DeficienciesINV. RATING OF

MEMBER

I-59 I-60

B

A

C

D

E

(0-9) (0-9)

Request for Rating or Rerating (Y/N):

REASON:

RATING

Rating Report (Y/N) Date:

If YES please give priority:

I-58 I-62

(Overall Previous Condition)

(Overall Current Condition)

STRUCTURES INSPECTION FIELD REPORT2-DIS B.I.N. BR. DEPT. NO.

PAGE OF

CITY/TOWN 8.-STRUCTURE NO. 90-ROUTINE INSP. DATE

MEMORIAL NAME/LOCAL NAME 27-YR BUILT 106-YR REBUILT *YR REHAB'D (NON 106)

06-FEATURES INTERSECTED 26-FUNCTIONAL CLASS DIST. BRIDGE INSPECTION ENGINEER

43-STRUCTURE TYPE 22-OWNER 21-MAINTAINER

WEATHER TEMP. (air)

TEAM LEADER

07-FACILITY CARRIED

TEAM MEMBERS107-DECK TYPE

S= Severe/Major Deficiency -

C-S= Critical Structural Deficiency -

M= Minor Deficiency -

CATEGORIES OF DEFICIENCIES:

URGENCY OF REPAIR:

DEFICIENCY:

I = Immediate-

A = ASAP-

P = Prioritize-

Deficiencies which are more extensive in nature and need more planning and effort to repair. Examples include but are not limited to: Moderate to major deterioration in concrete, Exposed andcorroded rebars, Considerable settlement, Considerable scouring or undermining, Moderate to extensive corrosion to structural steel with measurable loss of section, etc.

Deficiencies which are minor in nature, generally do not impact the structural integrity of the bridge and could easily be repaired. Examples include but are not limited to: Spalled concrete, Minor potholes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.

A defect in a st ructure that requires corrective action.

[Shall be prioritized by District Maintenance Engineer or the Responsible Party (if not a State owned bridge) and repairs made when funds and/or manpower is available].

[Action/Repair should be initiated by District Maintenance Engineer or t he Responsible Party (if not a State owned bridge) upon receipt of the Inspection Report].

A deficiency in a structural element of a bridge that poses an extreme unsafe condition due to the failure or imminent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrityof the bridge.

C-H= Critical Hazard Deficiency - A deficiency in a component or element of a bridge that poses an extreme hazard or unsafe condition to the public, but does not impair the structural integrity of the bridge. Examplesinclude but are not limited to: Loose concrete hanging down over traffic or pedestrians, A hole in a sidewalk that may cause injuries to pedestrians, Missing section of bridge railing,etc.

[Inspector(s) immediately contact District Bridge Inspection Engineer (DBIE) to report the Deficiency and to receive further instruction from him/her].

X=UNKNOWN N=NOT APPLICABLE H=HIDDEN/INACCESSIBLE R=REMOVED

PROJ MGR

Inspection data at time of existing rating

I 58: I 59: I 60: Date :I 62:

Actual Posting

Recommended Posting

H 3 3S2 Single

Waived Date: EJDMT Date:

PLANS

(V.C.R.)

TAPE#:

(Y/N)

(Y/N)

)HIGH ( LOW (MEDIUM ( ))

SPECIAL MEMBER(S):

2011

N

Y

Y

N

Item 59.1 -Stringers

See remarks in commentssection.N 5 3 3 S-P

Item 59.9 -Bearing Devices

See remarks in commentssection.Y 4 5 4 S-A

Item 59.10 -Diaphragms

See remarks in commentssection.Y 4 3 3 S-A

Item 59.13 - MemberAlignment

See remarks in commentssection.N 5 4 S-A

Item 60.2.a -Pedestals

See remarks in commentssection.N 5 4 S-A

06 4EX

B16367-4EX-DOT-NBI Jan 16, 2012 Jan 16, 2012

ST203 ARBORWAY 047 CASEY OVERPASS 1951 1991

COMB WASH ST&AMTK&ORNG Urban Arterial

State HighwayAgency

State HighwayAgency

J. CAHILL, T. FRANCIOSA4 : Closed Grating Varied 5C

79

05/01/2010

M. P. Griffin

C. Seman

BOSTON

E W E W

93*-SPEC. MEMB. INSP. DA

Not Rated

Not Rated

Not Rated

Not Rated

Not Rated

ROUTINE & SPECIAL MEMBER INSPECTION

3

5 4 4

5 4 4

-

-

MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

X

5 4 3 -

Transystems

B-16-367

N N N N

N N N N

00/00/00 00/00/00

01/29/2010

302 : Steel Stringer/Girder

001.979

11-Kilo. POINT


4/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS

4EX B16367-4EX-DOT-NBI

4 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

BRIDGE ORIENTATIONThis bridge is oriented from east to west and south to north.

GENERAL REMARKSCasey Overpass (B-16-367 (4EX)) carries State Route 203 eastbound and westbound through the City of

Boston over several city streets, a parking lot for the West Roxbury Municipal Court and the MBTA ForestHills Station (see sketches 1 & 2 and photo 1).

The bridge consists of steel multi-beam spans with fascia girders and reinforced concrete piers. The spansare numbered from 1 to 20 from east to west. The 19 piers are lettered from A to U from east to westexcluding letters "I" and "O". The original rolled steel beams are numbered from 1 to 14 from south tonorth, and the built-up riveted steel fascia girders are designated as south and north. Sidewalk and medianstringers have been added since original construction and are designated by their location; either north orsouth. Piers A and B are pierwalls, piers C through L and S through U are hammerhead piers, and piers Mthrough R are straddle piers. The bridge labeling system follows the convention set in the previousinspection reports.

The bridge currently carries one centrally located lane of traffic in each direction as a result of theinstallation of thrie beam guardrails (see sketch 3 and photo 2). This guardrail restricts live load frombeams 1, 2, 7, 8, 13 and 14 as well as the median stringers.

CLEARANCE POSTING NOTEThe Arborway turnaround roadway is posted for a vertical under clearance of 9'-10"; a minimum verticalunder clearance of 9'-11" was measured beneath the north fascia girder in span 3 at the east curb line.

SPECIAL MEMBERSThe special members for this inspection are select stringers, bearing devices, diaphragms and pedestalsalong with member alignment.

SCOPE OF INSPECTIONThe scope of the routine and special member inspection covered by this report was to determine thephysical and functional condition of the bridge, to identify any changes from previously recorded conditions,and to ensure that the structure continues to satisfy present service requirements. It includes close-up,hands on inspection of selected members and identified special members (at worse-case locations) toestablish condition codings; identify deficiencies/defects that require corrective action; and determine theurgency of any needed repairs.

WORK ACCESS NOTESA 42 foot bucket truck and ladders were used to access this structure. Access to the spans over theparking lot for the West Roxbury Municipal Court (spans 4 through 10) was coordinated with courthousepersonnel. Access for the inspection of the spans over the MBTA Forest Hills Station busway (spans 12

through 17) was coordinated with the on-duty bus inspector. Alternating lane closures on South Street andWashington Street were utilized for this inspection. All areas of this structure were inspected during the day.

ITEM 58 - DECK

Item 58.1 - Wearing surface(Fair): The latex modified concrete wearing surface typically exhibits hairline map cracking throughout andscattered up to 3/16" wide transverse cracks with light rust staining and/or efflorescence. There arenumerous bituminous and portland cement concrete repairs throughout the wearing surface, some of whichexhibit areas of map cracks, delaminations and spalls. The wearing surface within the current live traffic


5/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


5 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 58.1 - Wearing surface (Cont'd)lanes exhibits isolated, up to 1 1/2" deep, random spalls (see photo 3). The eastbound roadway adjacentto the deck joint at pier U in span 20 exhibits a full width by 4" long by 2" deep spall (see photo 4). Theportions of the wearing surface outside of the thrie beam guardrail typically exhibit more severe areas ofdelamination and spalling. The most severe location is located in the eastbound roadway of span 13 along

the median. There is a 22'-0" long by 6" wide by 3" deep spall with an adjacent 7'-0" long by 2'-3" widedelamination heaved up to 3 1/2" high (see photo 5). In addition, locations along the curbs adjacent to thedeck joints typically have up to 3" deep spalls with exposed reinforcing and delaminations (see photo 6).

Item 58.2 - Deck Condition(Fair): The deck is comprised of a concrete filled steel grid with stay-in-place forms. The underside of thesteel grid deck typically exhibits heavy rust with up to 1/16" section loss to the main grid bars. There arerandom areas of moisture leakage through the deck near the deck joints. Also, there is water leakage atthe anchor bolts for the thrie beam guardrail posts (see photo 7).

The exposed areas of the underside of the concrete fill exhibit heavy scaling and efflorescence in locationswhere the stay-in-place forms exhibit 100% loss (see photo 7).

There is typically pack rust between the top flange of the beams and the underside of the grid deck whichappears to be causing the deck to be bowed upward over the beams in many locations. The worst case isabove beams 2 through 6 at the west end of span 12 at pier M. The grid deck in this areas is bowedupward, up to 1 3/4", and not bearing on the top flange of the beams (see photos 8 & 9). This conditionoccurs over a length of 12'-0" from pier M. The maximum upward bow at these beams occurs about 5'-0"from pier M. The deck exhibits approximately 1/8" of live load deflection in this area.

Similar but less severe gaps occur in scattered areas throughout the underside of deck. Most of these gapsappear to be approximately 1/2" due to impacted rust between the underside of grid deck and the top flangeof the beams. No live load deflection was noted at any of these areas.

The concrete along the fascia typically exhibits minor edge spalls and areas of delaminated concrete. Inaddition, at random locations there are gaps of 1/4" to 3/4" between the top flange of the fascia girders andthe underside of the deck where these edge spalls exist (see photo 10). Fabric shielding has beeninstalled at the majority of these locations since the previous inspection.

Item 58.3 - Stay-in-Place Forms(Serious): The stay-in-place forms typically exhibit areas of heavy rust with 100% loss (see photo 7). Thiscondition is generally more severe at the deck joints.

Item 58.4 - Curbs(Satisfactory): The curbs consist of granite curbs throughout the majority of the length of the bridge exceptat the deck joints where there are 2'-0" long sections of concrete curb. These concrete curbs are spalled at

several locations. The most notable location is at the south curb of the eastbound roadway at the westabutment deck joint in span 20. There is a full height by full width by 2'-0" long spall with an exposed tie barand minimal concrete remaining.

Several locations of spalled concrete curbs adjacent to the deck joints have been repaired since theprevious inspection. The granite curbs are typically in good condition.

Item 58.5 - Median(Satisfactory): The raised concrete median typically exhibits transverse hairline cracking for the entirelength of the structure.


6/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


6 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 58.8 - Railing(Satisfactory): There is a steel pedestrian railing with pickets along each fascia. This railing typicallyexhibits moderate peeling paint and scattered locations of missing fasteners at the sleeved connections tothe railing posts for the longitudinal pipe railing. Tree branches have grown between the pickets of the northpedestrian railing in spans 5 and 6 (see photo 11).

There is a single steel pipe railing, atop the curbs at the sidewalks, which is no longer exposed to traffic dueto the installation of thrie beam guardrail. This railing exhibits moderate peeling paint throughout.

The traffic railing along the roadway consists of thrie beam guardrail. The top 6" of the plastic guardrailblocking is cracked and/or missing in scattered locations due to collision damage (see photo 12).

Item 58.10 - Drainage System(Poor): The roadway scupper grates are typically almost completely clogged with sand, leaves and debris(see photo 13).

The sidewalk scupper grates are typically partially plugged with leaves and debris. Several locations exhibit

moderate vegetation growth (see photo 14). Also, there were up to 14'-0" long by full width areas ofponding water as a result of plugged sidewalk scuppers on the sidewalk in span 14 at the time of thisinspection. There is a broken grating bar to the scupper on the south sidewalk near pier C in span 4.

The drainpipes typically exhibit heavy rust with minor section loss, particularly beneath the median.

Also, scattered drainpipe hangers have become disconnected, ineffective, loose and are hanging from thedrainpipe (see photo 15).

Item 58.11 - Lighting Standards(Poor): The under-bridge lighting standards are mounted to the underside of the beams and piers. Manylights are not functioning and random fixtures have missing or broken lens covers. The lighting fixture at

pier F in span 7 is completely detached from the structure and is only attached to the utility conduit byheavily rusted light gauge wire (see photo 16).

There are highway lighting standards along the median. These lights were not functioning at the time ofinspection. The hand hole covers on the light poles typically have one of two fasteners missing. Some ofthe hand hole covers are dislodged exposing the wires inside.

Isolated concrete light poles exhibit minor spalling and cracking near the base, especially surrounding thehand hole covers. Some of these light poles exhibit minor vibration when pushed.

The following is a summary of other notable deficiencies on the lighting standards: The bottom portion of the lighting standard in span 1 exhibits a 3'-0" high by 1" wide by 1/2" deep spall

with exposed reinforcing (see photo 17). The lighting standard on the median in span 10 has one of four anchor bolts missing (see photo 18). The north light fixture of the lighting standard on the median in span 13 is missing. The lighting standards on the median in spans 12, 15 and 16 have been removed.


7/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


7 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 58.12 - Utilities(Poor): The 1" diameter utility conduits in spans 1 through 9 for the under-bridge lighting fixtures havescattered areas of heavy rust with moderate section loss. There are clips which fasten this conduit to theunderside of the bottom flange of beam 8. At the east end of span 8, there are ten consecutive broken clipswhich cause the conduit to sag 1'-0" over a 40' length (see photo 19). The east half of span 5 has an 8"

sag in the conduit due to two consecutive broken clips. The conduit in the east half of span 6 is similar.

The roadway median has embedded utility pull boxes adjacent to the highway lighting standards. The steelcovers typically exhibit heavy rust and typically have three of four fasteners missing. Scattered covers aremissing all of the fasteners and are ajar, exposing the wires inside. There are a few locations whereplywood has been used in place of the original pull box covers and the wood is moderately weathered.

There is a heavily rusted junction box with exposed wires on the east face near the base of pier C and adisconnected utility conduit on the east face at the base of pier H.

Item 58.13 - Deck Joints(Poor): The longitudinal deck joint at the median and the roadway deck joints at the piers allow extensive

water leakage. The roadway deck joints are typically filled with sand.

The roadway deck joints exhibit up to 2 1/2" of vertical differential between the adjacent wearing surfaceand top of the deck joints (see photo 20). This creates an uneven riding surface.

There is a crack in the east joint armor near the north end of the deck joint at pier L in the eastboundroadway (see photo 21). Also, the section of the joint armor south of the crack has separated from theconcrete.

There is an 8" long section of torn joint seal at the north end of the deck joint at pier U in the westboundroadway.

The east joint armor plate at the west abutment deck joint in the eastbound roadway has rotated westwardat the south end leaving a 1/4" gap between the joint armor and the concrete wearing surface.

The sidewalk deck joints have asphaltic material adjacent to the rubber plug seals. Scattered sidewalk deckjoints have loose seals that exhibit moderate cracking and heaving. The north sidewalk joint seal at pier Tis torn and dislodged for the full width of the sidewalk (see photo 22). The north sidewalk joint seal at pierR is similar but less severe.

There are vertical differentials of up to 1 1/2" at random sidewalk deck joints (see photo 23).

There are joint seals on the face of the curbs at the median and both sides of the sidewalks. In somelocations, the asphaltic material adjacent to the joint seal is cracked and heaved (see photo 24). At

numerous locations, the vertical sections of the joint seals are dislodged due to apparent plow damage (seephoto 13).

Item 58.14 - Shielding(Satisfactory): There is fabric shielding installed between the fascia girders and the first interior beam in themajority of the spans which are over parking areas, city streets and sidewalks. The fabric shielding typicallyhas scattered minor tears and light debris accumulation. The fabric shielding is torn at the locations ofcollision damage to the fascia girders in span 3.


8/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


8 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

APPROACHES

Approaches a - Appr. Pavement Condition(Fair): The bituminous pavement at the approaches typically exhibits minor wheel line rutting and up to 1/4"wide longitudinal and transverse cracks. There is a 1'-0" long by full width region of heavy map cracking

adjacent to the west abutment in the eastbound roadway of the west approach (see photo 25).

Approaches b - Appr. Roadway Settlement(Fair): There is 2" of settlement to the eastbound roadway in the vicinity of the west abutment at the westapproach (see photo 25). There was no settlement noted at the east abutment.

Approaches d - Appr. Sidewalks & Median(Fair): The concrete median at the east approach, adjacent to the east abutment, exhibits severe scalingover a length of 9'-0".

The west approach median, adjacent to the west abutment, has a 4'-0" long by up to full width area of heavyscaling. Also, at this location, in the eastbound roadway there is a 10'-0" long section of dislodged granite

curb.

Approximately 50'-0" from the west abutment, at the second lighting standard west of the west abutment,the concrete median has a 10'-0" long by full width by up to 10" deep spall with exposed reinforcing andutility conduits (see photo 26). This spall undermines two of four anchor bolts for the lighting standard.

ITEM 59 - SUPERSTRUCTURE

Item 59.1 - Stringers(Serious): The median and sidewalk stringers are supported by brackets which are cantilevered off of theadjacent beams. It should be noted that the stringers are not subject to live load due to the currentconfiguration of the roadway. The median and sidewalk stringers typically exhibit areas of heavy rust with

minor to moderate section loss.

Sidewalk Stringers: The sidewalk stringer ends at the deck joints exhibit the heaviest deteriorat ion withareas of 100% loss to the web (see sketches 4 & 5 and photos 27 & 28). Based upon the 1991reconstruction of the sidewalks, the sidewalk stringers experience reduced loading from their original designas the current reinforced concrete sidewalk slab is capable of spanning over the sidewalk stringer betweenthe fascia girder and the first interior beam (see sketch 3).

Median Stringers: There is up to 3/16" section loss to the web at the ends of the north median stringer andmoderate section loss to the flanges of the north median stringers at midspan (see sketch 5 and photo29). The south face of the north median stringer is encased in concrete. There is up to 2" of impacted rustbetween the top flange of the north median stringer and the underside of the deck at scattered locations.

The stringers in sketches 4 and 5 are considered special members.

The south median stringers have been replaced throughout the length of the bridge. The south medianstringers are in good condition. Gaps were noted between the top flange of these stringers and theunderside of the original concrete deck in various locations.


9/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


9 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 59.4 - Girders or Beams(Fair):

Beams: The beams at the median (beams 7 and 8) and at the curb lines (beams 2 and 13) typically exhibitheavy rust with minor section loss to the web at the ends (see sketches 6 - 8 andphotos 30 & 31). It

should be noted that these beams are not subject to live load due to the current configuration of theroadway.

Beams 2 and 13 exhibit areas heavy rust with minor section loss to the flanges in the midspan region (seesketch 6 andphoto 32). These beams typically exhibit approximately 1/8" section loss to the top surfaceof the top flange and 1/16" section loss to the top surface of the bottom flange.

Beams 7 and 8 typically have heavy rust delamination with minor to moderate section loss to the top surfaceof the flanges and lower portion of the web, on the side facing the median joint throughout the length of thebeam (see sketches 7 & 8).

The remaining beams exhibit random areas of peeling paint with heavy rust.

The bottom flange cover plates on the beams are connected to the bottom flange with intermittent filletwelds.

Fascia Girders: The fascia girders exhibit random areas of heavy rust on the lower portion of the web andon the bottom flange. The top surface the bottom flange cover plate overhang typically exhibits randomareas of heavy rust delamination with up to 1/8" section loss.

The bottom flange cover plates are connected to the flange angles with intermittent fillet welds.

There are numerous local minor bends and dings on the bottom flange cover plates of the fascia girders.These bends are typically 1/2" over a length of 6" and are most prominent in the spans over the courthouse

parking lot.

In span 3, over the Arborway turnaround roadway, there is moderate collision damage to the south bottomflange at midspan of the north fascia girder resulting in a 3'-0" long by 2 1/2" wide tear in the cover plate(see photo 33). The south fascia girder in span 3 exhibits minor scrapes on the underside of the bottomflange. This collision damage has been previously noted and remains the same since the previousinspection.

The north bottom flange at the eastern 1/3 point of the north fascia girder in span 5 is bent downward 3"over a 2'-6" length (see photo 34).

Item 59.7 - Conn Plt's, Gussets & Angles

(Fair): There is heavy rust with minor section loss on the connection angles below the leaking deck joints.

Item 59.8 - Cover Plates(Fair): There are areas of moderate to heavy rust on the cover plates, particularly on beams 2, 7, 8 and 13.See Item 59.4 for additional comments.


10/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


10 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 59.9 - Bearing Devices(Poor): At numerous rocker bearings, one of the keeper plates which is attached to the sole plate on thebottom flange of the beam has broken off or the weld has cracked due to lateral movement of the beam(see photo 35). The maximum lateral movement of the beam was measured as 2" (see charts 1-5 andphotos 36 & 37). These rocker bearings are considered special members due to this unrestrained lateral

movement.

Numerous rocker bearings exhibit pack rust between the curved surface of the rocker and the masonryplate. The pack rust appears to be jacking the bearings upward. In some locations, there are maximumgaps of 7/8" between the underside of the rocker and the masonry plate where there used to be pack rustand now exposes the pintels (see charts 1-5 and photos 38 & 39). These rocker bearings with sizeablegaps and uneven bearing conditions are considered special members.

There are two rocker bearings where the bottom of the sole plate is not bearing on the top portion of therocker bearing (see chart 1 and photo 40).

In addition, numerous rocker bearings appear frozen in the over-expanded position by heavy rust

delamination (see charts 1-5 and photo 41). Based upon temperatures in the 30's (Fahrenheit) at the timeof inspection, the rocker bearings were expected to be contracted rather than expanded.

Isolated rocker bearings have loose anchor bolt nuts (see chart 5).

The rocker and fixed bearings typically exhibit heavy rust with minor section loss, particularly at beams 1, 2,7, 8, 13 and 14.

The north anchor bolt for the beam 5 fixed bearing in span 1 at the east abutment is missing a nut.

The north anchor bolt nut for the beam 12 fixed bearing in span 3 at pier B is backed off (see photo 42).

Item 59.10 - Diaphragms(Serious): The diaphragms which are rolled W-sections cantilevered off of beam 8, on the north side of thelongitudinal median joint (north median diaphragms) typically exhibit heavy rust with areas of moderate tosevere section loss. Isolated north median diaphragms exhibit up to 1'-1" high holes in the web (see photo43). The third diaphragm west of pier L in span 12 along the north median stringer exhibits 100% loss tothe entire bottom flange. Also at this location, the web of the W-section is disconnected from the medianstringer connection angles due to 9" high corrosion holes and is considered ineffective (see photo 44). Thesouth median diaphragms have been replaced and are in satisfactory condition with areas of light rust. Itshould be noted that these diaphragms are not subject to live load due to the current configuration of theroadway.

The end channel diaphragms at the piers exhibit up to full height by up to full length holes in the web and up

to 100% loss to the bottom flange over the full length of the member, particularly between the fascia girdersand first two interior beams (see photos 45 and 46).

There are knee braces at beams 7 and 8 for the end channel diaphragms at the piers which support themedian stringers. The angles which comprise the knee braces and the channels are typically severelydeteriorated, some are ineffective due to advanced section loss (see photo 47).

The interior channel diaphragms are in fair condition and exhibit areas of light to heavy rust with minimalsection loss.


11/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


11 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 59.11 - Rivets & Bolts(Fair): There is heavy rust with up to 50% section loss to the rivets at the connection plates and anglesbelow the leaking deck joints.

Item 59.12 - Welds

(Fair): The bottom flange cover plates for the rolled beams and fascia girders are connected withintermittent fillet welds. These welds typically exhibit moderate rust.

There is a 2 1/2" long longitudinal crack at the base of the weld between the sole plate and the southbottom flange of beam 10 at pier R in span 16 (see photo 48).

The end channel diaphragms are connected to connection angles by two fillet welds. There are crackedwelds at the end diaphragm connections to the south fascia girder and beams 7, 11, 12, 13 and 14 at pier Uin span 19 (see photo 49). There are similar cracked welds at the end diaphragm connections at beams 2and 6 at pier U in span 20.

See Item 59.9 for additional comments.

Item 59.13 - Member Alignment(Poor): There is 1 1/2" of lateral misalignment of the superstructure at pier U. Span 19 appears to haveshifted south relative to span 20 (see photo 50). There is 1" of lateral misalignment of the superstructure atpier J on the north fascia, however, the fascia on the south side remains even.

The lateral movement at the bearings appears to have shifted the superstructure in spans 8, 10, 11 and 13through 20. See Item 59.9 for additional comments.

Item 59.14 - Paint/Coating(Poor): The paint system is failing at various locations throughout the superstructure, particularly near thedeck joints.

SuperStructure Collision NotesThe north and south fascia girders typically have minor collision damage to the bottom flanges throughoutthe length of the bridge. The north fascia girder exhibits moderate collision damage at midspan of span 3.See Item 59.4 for additional comments.

SuperStructure Load Deflection NotesThere is minor deflection under heavy live load.

SuperStructure Load Vibration NotesThere is moderate vibration under heavy live load.

ITEM 60 - SUBSTRUCTURE

Item 60.1 - AbutmentsItem 60.1.b - Bridge Seats(Satisfactory): There is up to 5" deep debris accumulation on the west abutment bridge seat.

There is 1'-4" high accumulation of pigeon debris between the web of the north fascia girder and bridge seatat the west abutment.There is an 11" diameter by 3" deep spall in the west abutment bridge seat on the south side of the bearingfor beam 6.


12/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


12 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 60.1.c - Backwalls(Satisfactory): There are a few hairline vertical cracks in both abutment backwalls. The vertical cracks inthe backwalls typically align with vertical cracks in the breastwalls.

There is a 3'-0" wide by 1'-6" high by 3" deep spall at the north end and a 1'-0" diameter delamination at the

south end of the east abutment backwall.

There is a 2'-0" wide by full height by 1 1/2" deep spall with exposed reinforcing in the west abutmentbackwall between the south fascia girder and beam 1.

Item 60.1.d - Breastwalls(Satisfactory): There are a few hairline vertical cracks with efflorescence and rust stains which are typicallylocated beneath the bearings at both abutment breastwalls. There is a 2'-0" diameter delamination beneaththe median at the top of the east abutment breastwall.

Between beams 9 and 10 at the west abutment, there is an up to 1/8" wide full height vertical crack (seephoto 51). At this crack, the south portion of the breastwall appears to have rotated eastward in relation to

the north portion of the breastwall. There is 3/8" vertical differential between the bridge seat portions at thetop of the crack.

There is extensive debris accumulation adjacent to the east abutment breastwall.

Item 60.1.e - Wingwalls(Satisfactory): The wingwalls are faced with brick masonry for the majority of the height. The brick issupported on granite headers atop a concrete base near the ground level. Two sections of granite headers(2'-1" and 3'-4" long sections) are missing at the base of the northwest wingwall, located approximately 100'from the west abutment (see photo 52). The concrete base for the wingwalls has numerous horizontal andvertical hairline cracks with efflorescence and minor to moderate spalls. The mortar between the graniteheaders and the concrete base is typically deteriorated and spalled.

There is a 9'-0" long by up to 2'-6" high by 5" deep spall with exposed reinforcing in the concrete base at theeast end of the southwest wingwall.

There is also a 7'-0" long by 5" high by 1 1/2" deep spall in the concrete base of the southwest wingwalllocated approximately 50' from the west abutment.

There is a 3'-0" long by 2'-0" high by 3" deep spall in the concrete base of the northwest wingwall at thewest abutment breastwall (see photo 53).

There is 5/16" of separation between the masonry facing at the northwest wingwall and the concrete whichcomprises the west abutment breastwall (see photo 54). The masonry appears to have rotated northward.

There is also an 1/8" wide by 12'-0" long horizontal crack in the mortar joint of the upper masonry course ofthe northwest wingwall, just beneath the granite cap stone, at the east end where it meets the bridge railing.

Item 60.1.g - Pointing(Satisfactory): The mortar joints for the masonry portions of the wingwalls exhibit scattered areas of minordeterioration, particularly to the upper courses. See Item 60.1.e for additional comments.


13/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


13 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 60.2 - Piers or BentsItem 60.2.a - Pedestals(Poor): There are stepped concrete pedestals atop the pier caps which support the bearings for the beams.These pedestals appear to be constructed of nonreinforced concrete, and in many cases there is little or noedge distance between the masonry plate and the face of the pedestal. Significant amounts of water and

debris has accumulated between the pedestals due to the leaking deck joints. The pedestals typicallyexhibit hairline to 3/16" wide vertical and longitudinal cracks, isolated areas of delamination, edge spalls,rust stains and light efflorescence. The vertical cracks are typically located beneath the bearings and oftenbehind the anchor bolts near the rear of the masonry plates.

It should be noted that beams 1, 2, 7, 8, 13 and 14 are not subject to live load due to the currentconfiguration of the roadway.

The pedestals at piers K, Q and S are considered special members in poor condition.

Pier KThe pedestal exhibits edge spalls along the top and up to 3/8" wide vertical cracks (see sketch 9). There

are large spalls on the east face of the pedestal which expose the anchor bolts at the bearings for beams 7and 8 in span 10 (see photos 55 and 56).

Pier QThe majority of the pedestal has been repaired since the previous inspection (see sketch 10). However,the masonry pads below the fixed bearings for beams 3 through 6 at pier Q in span 15 were not formedproperly, and there is severe undermining of these bearings (see photo 57). Also at pier Q in span 15, thefixed bearing for beam 2 exhibits minor undermining due to the spalling of the masonry pad (see photo 58).The portions of the concrete pedestal which were not repaired exhibit up 3/16" wide vertical and longitudinalcracks that typically propagate from the back of the bearings to the front face of the pedestal. The pedestalbetween beams 7 and 8 exhibits heavy spalling and punky concrete.

Pier SThe pedestal at pier S is similar to pier K (see sketch 11 and photos 59 & 60).

The remainder of the pedestals are in fair condition. The pedestals at piers C, D, G and M exhibit largespalls and other deficiencies which are summarized as follows:

Pier CThe west face of the concrete pedestal between beams 7 and 8 exhibits a 5'-0" wide by full length area ofconcrete breakup.

Pier DOn the east face of the pedestal, there is a 2'-4" wide by 1'-5" high by up to 1'-2" deep spall with exposed

reinforcing which undermines the concrete pedestal between beams 7 and 8 (see sketch 17 and photo61). The concrete pedestal at this location exhibits a 1/4" wide by full length crack.

Pier GOn the top of the east pedestal between beams 7 and 8, there is a 4'-0" wide by full length by up to 2" deeparea of concrete breakup with exposed reinforcing (see photo 62).

Pier MThere is a 9" high by 1'-0" long (full length) by 5" wide spall at the south end of the pedestal adjacent to thebearing for beam 1 in span 12.


14/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


14 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 60.2.b - Straddle Piers(Fair): Piers M, N, P, Q and R consist or reinforced concrete arched straddle pier caps integral with twocolumns. Portions of the straddle piers have been repaired. There are scattered areas of delaminated andspalled concrete on the straddle piers caps and columns (see sketches 12-16 and photos 63-65).

Item 60.2.c - Hammerhead Piers(Fair): Piers C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, S, T and U are hammerhead piers. All of the hammerhead piers wereretrofitted with external grouted post-tensioning tendons in 1991 due to the presence of structural shearcracks. These cracks started near the center of the upper portion of the cap and traveled down, diagonallyto the base of the cantilevered portions of the pier caps. Galvanized steel plates form a protective cabinetwhich completely encloses the post-tensioning tendons and anchorages. Therefore, these elements areinaccessible for inspection. The galvanized steel plates which comprise the post-tensioning cabinet exhibitscattered areas of moderate rust. The post-tensioning repairs appear to be secure and in satisfactorycondition.

Portions of the hammerhead piers have been patched. The hammerhead piers typically exhibit randomhairline cracks with efflorescence, rust stains and areas of hairline map cracks. There are scattered areas

of delaminated concrete and spalling on the stem and the cantilevered portion of the caps throughout thehammerhead piers (see sketches 17-19 and photos 66 & 67).

The following deficiencies on the hammerhead piers were noted:

Pier CThere is evidence of previous fire damage on the east face (charring and soot). Also, on the east facebelow the post-tensioning cabinet, there is a 22'-0" wide by 5" high by 4" deep spall/delamination. This spallextends to a height of 10" behind the post-tensioning cabinet (see photo 68).

Pier GThere is a 1'-0" diameter by 2 1/2" deep spall on the west face near the center of the cap and a 3'-0" wide

by 1'-3" high by 1'-3" long by up to 7" deep edge spall with exposed reinforcing in the top of the pier belowthe median (see photo 69).

Pier JThere is a 5" wide by 1'-2" high by 1 1/2" deep spall with an adjacent 4" wide by 1'-7" high delamination onthe west face of the cap beneath beam 7. On the underside of the south cantilever and the top of the stem,there is a 4 1/2" wide by 10" high by 2" deep edge spall with an adjacent 3" wide by 1'-4" high delaminationon the west face. There is a 2'-0" wide by 10" high by 3/4" deep spall in the north face of the stem.

Pier SThere is an 11'-0" wide by 4'-6" high by 1" deep spall/delamination on the east face and a 13'-0" wide by 5'-0" high delamination on the west face of the stem. There is a 5'-0" long by 4'-6" high delamination on the

north face of the stem. The south face of the stem has a 3'-0" long by 3'-0" high delamination.

Pier TThere is a 2'-0" wide by 2'-0" high by 2" deep spall with exposed reinforcing and a 3'-9" long by 1'-4" highdelamination on the west face of the north cantilever. Also, there is a 14'-0" wide by 6'-2" high by 1 1/2"deep spall/delamination on the west face of the stem near the base and a 15'-0" wide by 6'-0" high by 1 1/2"deep spall/delamination on the east face of the stem. There is a 1'-6" long by 1'-6" high by 3" deep spallwith exposed reinforcing surrounded by delaminated concrete on the north face of the stem near the base.

Pier U


15/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


15 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 60.2.c - Hammerhead Piers (Cont'd)

There is a 3'-0" wide by 6'-0" high by 2" deep spall in the east face of the cap below the median locatedbelow the post-tensioning cabinet.

Item 60.2.d - Pierwalls(Satisfactory): There are some hairline vertical cracks with rust stains and areas of adjacent delaminationon the pierwalls at piers A and B.

There is a 5'-0" wide by 2'-10" high by 3" deep spall with exposed reinforcing in the east face near the southend of the pierwall at pier B (see photo 70). Also at this location, there is a 7/16" wide crack in the topsurface of the pierwall. There is a similar spall beneath beam 5. On the west face of the pierwall at pier Bbelow beam 9, there is a full height by 1'-4" wide area of delamination.

There is extensive debris accumulation adjacent to the both faces of pier A.

Item 60.2.e - Cant. Beam Brackets

(Fair): There are rolled steel beams (14WF246 or 14WF287) which cantilever beyond the pier caps tosupport the fascia girders. These cantilevered beam brackets are typically surrounded by a heavy build-upof sand and debris which covers the bottom flange and lower portions of the web, particularly in locationswhere the concrete pedestals completely surround the cantilever beam brackets. There is typically up to1/4" section loss to the lower 6" of the web and up to 1/4" section loss by full width to the flanges throughoutthe length of the member.

The cantilever beam brackets are fastened to the pier caps by six anchor bolts (1 1/2" diameter). Theseanchor bolts exhibit heavy rust delamination to the lower 6". The majority of the anchor bolts have aremaining diameter between 1 1/32" to 1 3/16". At three locations (both cantilever brackets at pier P inspan 14 and the north cantilever bracket at pier M in span 13), the minimum remaining anchor bolt diameteris 7/8" (see photo 71). The lower 6" of the web stiffeners adjacent to the anchor bolts is typically reduced

to a 7/16" remaining thickness, compared to the original thickness of 3/4".

TRAFFIC SAFETY

Item 36a - Bridge Railing(Satisfactory): There are three types of bridge railing on this structure. There is a steel pedestrian railingwith pickets along each fascia. Atop the curbs at the sidewalks, there is a single steel pipe railing which isno longer exposed to traff ic due to the installation of thrie beam guardrail. The thrie beam guardrail has I-beam posts which have been bolted through the deck along both sides of the eastbound and westboundroadways. The thrie beam guardrail appears to meet the current standards. See Item 58.8 for additionalcomments.

Item 36b - Transitions(Good): The east and west approach thrie beam guardrails have impact attenuators at the leading endsand boxing glove end treatments at the trailing ends. The raised concrete median extends onto theapproach roadways. The transitions conform to the current standards.


16/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


16 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Item 36c - Approach Guardrail(Satisfactory): The approach guardrail consists of curb mounted single pipe railing which is continuous ontothe bridge. There is no approach guardrail installed along the raised concrete median at both approaches.The approach pedestrian railing is a solid concrete barrier. The approach guardrail does not conform to thecurrent standards.

There are three out of the four anchor bolt nuts backed off along the south pipe railing at the fourth postfrom the east abutment.

There is a 12'-0" long section of collision damage to the north pipe railing and curb at the west approach justwest of the west abutment. At this location, the curb has a 1'-7" long by full height by 2 1/2" deep spall withtwo exposed anchor bolts and two broken anchor bolts (see photo 72).

Item 36d - Approach Guardrail Ends(Good): Impact attenuators are in place at the leading end of the approach guardrail. There are boxingglove end treatments at the trailing end of each approach. These approach guardrail ends conform to thecurrent standards.

Sketch / Chart / Photo LogSketch 1 : Framing plan (1 of 2).Sketch 2 : Framing plan (2 of 2).Sketch 3 : Typical cross section.Sketch 4 : Sidewalk stringers (1 of 2).Sketch 5 : Sidewalk and median stringers (2 of 2).Sketch 6 : Beam cross sections (1 of 3).Sketch 7 : Beam cross sections (2 of 3).Sketch 8 : Beam cross sections (3 of 3).Sketch 9 : Pier K pedestal - partial plan view.Sketch 10 : Pier Q pedestal - plan view.

Sketch 11 : Pier S pedestal - plan view.Sketch 12 : Pier M elevations.Sketch 13 : Pier N elevations.Sketch 14 : Pier P elevations.Sketch 15 : Pier Q elevations.Sketch 16 : Pier R elevations.Sketch 17 : Pier D elevations.Sketch 18 : Pier K elevations.Sketch 19 : Pier L elevations.Chart 1 : Rocker bearing conditions (1 of 5).Chart 2 : Rocker bearing conditions (2 of 5).Chart 3 : Rocker bearing conditions (3 of 5).

Chart 4 : Rocker bearing conditions (4 of 5).Chart 5 : Rocker bearing conditions (5 of 5).Photo 1 : General view of the north elevation of spans 13 through 15.Photo 2 : General view of the roadway looking east from span 13.Photo 3 : Up to 1 1/2" deep spall adjacent to bituminous patch in the wearing surface in the westbound

roadway of span 18.Photo 4 : Full width by 4" long by 2" deep spall in the wearing surface adjacent to the deck joint at pier U

in span 20 in the eastbound roadway.Photo 5 : A 7'-0" long by 2'-3" wide delamination of the wearing surface heaved up to 3 1/2" high in the

eastbound roadway adjacent to the median in span 13.


17/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


17 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367

Sketch / Chart / Photo Log (Cont'd)

Photo 6 : A 3'-0" long by 1'-6" wide by 2" deep spall in the wearing surface with exposed welded wiremesh adjacent to the north curb in the westbound roadway of span 18.

Photo 7 : Areas of 100% loss to the stay-in-place forms, heavy scaling and efflorescence. Also, water

leakage at the anchor bolts for the thrie beam guardrail posts.Photo 8 : Concrete filled grid deck is not bearing on beam 3 over a 12'-0" length near pier M in span 12.Photo 9 : A 1 3/4" gap between the top flange of beam 3 and the underside of the grid deck near pier M

in span 12.Photo 10 : Minor edge spalls and 3/4" gap between the top flange of the south fascia girder and the edge

of the deck at pier M in span 12.Photo 11 : Tree branches growing between the pickets of the north pedestrian railing in span 6.Photo 12 : Cracked and missing plastic guardrail blocking due to collision damage along the south thrie

beam guardrail of the eastbound roadway in span 16.Photo 13 : Clogged drainage grate and dislodged section of joint seal at the median in the eastbound

roadway at pier U in span 19.Photo 14 : Moderate vegetation growth from the scupper at the north sidewalk at pier C in span 4.

Photo 15 : Disconnected drainpipe hanger at the west face of pier E.Photo 16 : Completely detached lighting fixture which is only attached by heavily rusted light gauge wire at

pier F in span 7.Photo 17 : A 3'-0" high by 1" wide by 1/2" deep spall with exposed reinforcing near the base of the lighting

standard in span 1.Photo 18 : One of four anchor bolts missing at the base of the lighting standard on the median in span 10.Photo 19 : Utility conduit sags 1'-0" over a 40' length due to broken clips at the east end of span 8.Photo 20 : Up to 2 1/2" of vertical differential between the adjacent wearing surface and top of the deck

joint at pier M in the eastbound roadway.Photo 21 : Crack in the east joint armor near the north end of the deck joint at pier L in the eastbound

roadway.Photo 22 : Torn and dislodged joint seal for the full width of the north sidewalk at pier T.

Photo 23 : Vertical differential of up to 1 1/2" at the north sidewalk deck joint at pier N.Photo 24 : Cracked and heaved asphaltic material adjacent to the joint seal at the median at pier A.Photo 25 : A 1'-0" long by full width region of heavy map cracking with up to 2" settlement adjacent to the

west abutment deck joint in the eastbound roadway of the west approach.Photo 26 : A 10'-0" long by full width by up to 10" deep spall with exposed reinforcing and utility conduits

at the median of the west approach at the second lighting standard west of the west abutment.Photo 27 : Areas of 100% loss to the web of the south sidewalk stringer at pier F in span 7.Photo 28 : Area of 100% loss to the web of the south sidewalk stringer at pier K in span 11.Photo 29 : Areas of section loss to the flanges of the north median stringer at midspan in span 17.Photo 30 : Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north face of the web of beam 2 at pier E in span 6.Photo 31 : Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north face of the web of beam 2 at pier G in span 8.Photo 32 : Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north flanges at midspan of beam 2 in span 5.

Photo 33 : Moderate collision damage to the south bottom flange at midspan of the north fascia girder inspan 3 (above the Arborway turnaround roadway).

Photo 34 : North bottom flange bent downward 3" over a 2'-6" length at the eastern 1/3 point of the northfascia girder in span 5.

Photo 35 : Cracked weld for the keeper plate on the north side of the sole plate of beam 6 at pier T inspan 19.

Photo 36 : Maximum lateral movement of 2" of the sole plate relative to the rocker bearing at beam 7 atpier T in span 19.

Photo 37 : Lateral movement of 5/8" of the sole plate relative to the rocker bearing at beams 4 and 5 atpier U in span 20.


18/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


18 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367


Photo 38 : A 7/8" gap beneath the underside of the rocker and the masonry plate which exposes thepintels at beam 5 at pier R in span 17.

Photo 39 : A 7/8" gap by 7 1/2" wide beneath the underside of the rocker and the masonry plate which

exposes a pintel at beam 3 at pier T in span 18.Photo 40 : Gap beneath the top of the rocker bearing and the underside of the sole plate at beam 3 at pierA in span 1.

Photo 41 : Rocker bearing appears frozen in the over-expanded position by heavy rust delamination atbeam 8 at pier J in span 10.

Photo 42 : North anchor bolt nut is backed off at the fixed bearing for beam 12 at pier B in span 3.Photo 43 : A 1'-1" high hole in the web of the second north median diaphragm east of pier E in span 6.Photo 44 : Areas of 100% loss to the entire bottom flange and the web is disconnected from the north

median stringer at the third diaphragm west of pier L in span 12.Photo 45 : Areas of 100% loss to the full length of the channel diaphragm between beams 1 and 2 at pier

D in span 4.Photo 46 : Areas of 100% loss to the web of the channel diaphragm between beams 1 and 2 at pier A in

span 2.Photo 47 : Areas of advanced section loss to the knee braces and the channel diaphragm at beam 8 at

pier H in span 9.Photo 48 : A 2 1/2" long crack at the base of the weld between the sole plate and the south bottom flange

of beam 10 at pier R in span 16.Photo 49 : Cracked welds at the end diaphragm connection at beam 7 at pier U in span 19.Photo 50 : Lateral misalignment of 1 1/2" of the superstructure along the south fascia at pier U.Photo 51 : Up to 1/8" wide full height vertical crack in the west abutment breastwall between beams 9 and

10.Photo 52 : Two missing sections of granite header at the base of the northwest wingwall, located

approximately 100' from the west abutment.Photo 53 : A 3'-0" long by 2'-0" high by 3" deep spall in the concrete base of the northwest wingwall at the

west abutment.Photo 54 : Separation of 5/16" between the masonry facing at the northwest wingwall and the west

abutment breastwall.Photo 55 : Spall in the east face of the pedestal which exposes the anchor bolts at the bearing for beam 8

at pier K in span 10.Photo 56 : Spall in the east face of the pedestal at the bearing for beam 7 at pier K in span 10.Photo 57 : Masonry pad not formed properly resulting in undermining below the fixed bearing for beam 6

at pier Q in span 15.Photo 58 : Minor undermining due to the spalling of the masonry pad below the fixed bearing for beam 2

at pier Q in span 15.Photo 59 : A 3/4" wide crack in the top of the west side of the pedestal on the south side of the fixed

bearing for beam 7 at pier S.

Photo 60 : Edge spalls and areas of delaminated concrete in the west face of the pedestal beneath thefixed bearings for beams 13 and 14 at pier S.

Photo 61 : Close-up view of up to 1'-2" deep spall with exposed reinforcing which undermines the eastpedestal between beams 7 and 8 at pier D.

Photo 62 : Up to 2" deep area of concrete breakup with exposed reinforcing on the top of the east side ofthe pedestal between beams 7 and 8 at pier G.

Photo 63 : A 7'-0" wide by 5" high by 11" long edge spall with exposed reinforcing in the straddle portionof the cap at pier M.

Photo 64 : A 3/8" wide crack with adjacent delaminated area in the top of the cap on the west sidebetween beams 5 and 6 at pier N.


19/79

PAGE

REM.(2)7-96

REMARKS


19 79

BOSTON JAN 16, 2012

OF


B-16-367


Photo 65 : A 8'-6" wide by 2'-6" high by 1'-6" long edge spall with exposed reinforcing in the east face ofthe cap at pier R.

Photo 66 : A 6'-0" long by up to 6'-0" wide by 3 1/2" deep spall with exposed reinforcing at the north end of

the cap at pier L.Photo 67 : Random spalls with exposed reinforcing in the west face of pier T.Photo 68 : A 4" deep spall which extends to a height of 10" within an area of delamination below the post-

tensioning cabinet on the east face of pier C.Photo 69 : A 3'-0" wide by 1'-3" high by 1'-3" long by up to 7" deep edge spall with exposed reinforcing in

the top of the pier on the west side below the median at pier G.Photo 70 : A 5'-0" wide by 2'-10" high by 3" deep spall with exposed reinforcing in the east face at the

south end of pier B.Photo 71 : Remaining diameter of 7/8" for the anchor bolts at the north cantilever beam bracket at pier M

in span 13.Photo 72 : Spall with two exposed anchor bolts and two broken anchor bolts at the north guardrail at the

west approach.


20/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Framing plan (1 of 2).Sketch 1:

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON 4EX B16367-4EX-DOT-NBI


PAGE OF20 79

B-16-367


21/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Framing plan (2 of 2).Sketch 2:



PAGE OF21 79

B-16-367


22/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Typical cross section.Sketch 3:



PAGE OF22 79

B-16-367


23/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Sidewalk stringers (1 of 2).Sketch 4:



PAGE OF23 79

B-16-367


24/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Sidewalk and median stringers (2 of 2).Sketch 5:



PAGE OF24 79

B-16-367


25/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Beam cross sections (1 of 3).Sketch 6:



PAGE OF25 79

B-16-367


26/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES




PAGE OF26 79

B-16-367


27/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES




PAGE OF27 79

B-16-367


28/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier K pedestal - partial plan view.Sketch 9:



PAGE OF28 79

B-16-367


29/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier Q pedestal - plan view.Sketch 10:



PAGE OF29 79

B-16-367


30/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier S pedestal - plan view.Sketch 11:



PAGE OF30 79

B-16-367


31/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier M elevations.Sketch 12:



PAGE OF31 79

B-16-367


32/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier N elevations.Sketch 13:



PAGE OF32 79

B-16-367


33/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier P elevations.Sketch 14:



PAGE OF33 79

B-16-367


34/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier Q elevations.Sketch 15:



PAGE OF34 79

B-16-367


35/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier R elevations.Sketch 16:



PAGE OF35 79

B-16-367


36/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier D elevations.Sketch 17:



PAGE OF36 79

B-16-367


37/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier K elevations.Sketch 18:



PAGE OF37 79

B-16-367


38/79

REM.(2)7-96

SKETCHES

Pier L elevations.Sketch 19:



PAGE OF38 79

B-16-367


39/79

REM.(2)7-96

CHARTS

Rocker bearing conditions (1 of 5).Chart 1:



PAGE OF39 79

B-16-367


40/79

REM.(2)7-96

CHARTS




PAGE OF40 79

B-16-367


41/79

REM.(2)7-96

CHARTS




PAGE OF41 79

B-16-367


42/79

REM.(2)7-96

CHARTS




PAGE OF42 79

B-16-367


43/79

REM.(2)7-96

CHARTS




PAGE OF43 79

B-16-367


44/79

REM.(2)7-96

General view of the north elevation of spans 13 through 15.

General view of the roadway looking east from span 13.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 2:


PHOTOS


PAGE 44 79OF

Photo 1:


45/79

REM.(2)7-96

Up to 1 1/2" deep spall adjacent to bituminous patch in the wearingsurface in the westbound roadway of span 18.

Full width by 4" long by 2" deep spall in the wearing surface adjacentto the deck joint at pier U in span 20 in the eastbound roadway.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 4:


PHOTOS


PAGE 45 79OF

Photo 3:


46/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 7'-0" long by 2'-3" wide delamination of the wearing surfaceheaved up to 3 1/2" high in the eastbound roadway adjacent to themedian in s an 13.

A 3'-0" long by 1'-6" wide by 2" deep spall in the wearing surface withexposed welded wire mesh adjacent to the north curb in thewestbound roadwa of s an 18.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 6:


PHOTOS


PAGE 46 79OF

Photo 5:


47/79

REM.(2)7-96

Areas of 100% loss to the stay-in-place forms, heavy scaling andefflorescence. Also, water leakage at the anchor bolts for the thriebeam uardrail osts.

Concrete filled grid deck is not bearing on beam 3 over a 12'-0"length near pier M in span 12.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 8:


PHOTOS


PAGE 47 79OF

Photo 7:


48/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 1 3/4" gap between the top flange of beam 3 and the underside ofthe grid deck near pier M in span 12.

Minor edge spalls and 3/4" gap between the top flange of the southfascia girder and the edge of the deck at pier M in span 12.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 10:


PHOTOS


PAGE 48 79OF

Photo 9:


49/79

REM.(2)7-96

Tree branches growing between the pickets of the north pedestrianrailing in span 6.

Cracked and missing plastic guardrail blocking due to collisiondamage along the south thrie beam guardrail of the eastboundroadwa in s an 16.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 12:


PHOTOS


PAGE 49 79OF

Photo 11:


50/79

REM.(2)7-96

Clogged drainage grate and dislodged section of joint seal at themedian in the eastbound roadway at pier U in span 19.

Moderate vegetation growth from the scupper at the north sidewalkat pier C in span 4.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 14:


PHOTOS


PAGE 50 79OF

Photo 13:


51/79

REM.(2)7-96

Disconnected drainpipe hanger at the west face of pier E.

Completely detached lighting fixture which is only attached byheavily rusted light gauge wire at pier F in span 7.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 16:


PHOTOS


PAGE 51 79OF

Photo 15:


52/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 3'-0" high by 1" wide by 1/2" deep spall with exposed reinforcingnear the base of the lighting standard in span 1.

One of four anchor bolts missing at the base of the lighting standardon the median in span 10.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 18:


PHOTOS


PAGE 52 79OF

Photo 17:


53/79

REM.(2)7-96

Utility conduit sags 1'-0" over a 40' length due to broken clips at theeast end of span 8.

Up to 2 1/2" of vertical differential between the adjacent wearingsurface and top of the deck joint at pier M in the eastbound roadway.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 20:


PHOTOS


PAGE 53 79OF

Photo 19:


54/79

REM.(2)7-96

Crack in the east joint armor near the north end of the deck joint atpier L in the eastbound roadway.

Torn and dislodged joint seal for the full width of the north sidewalkat pier T.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 22:


PHOTOS


PAGE 54 79OF

Photo 21:


55/79

REM.(2)7-96

Vertical differential of up to 1 1/2" at the north sidewalk deck joint atpier N.

Cracked and heaved asphaltic material adjacent to the joint seal atthe median at pier A.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 24:


PHOTOS


PAGE 55 79OF

Photo 23:


56/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 1'-0" long by full width region of heavy map cracking with up to 2"settlement adjacent to the west abutment deck joint in the eastboundroadwa of the west a roach.

A 10'-0" long by full width by up to 10" deep spall with exposedreinforcing and utility conduits at the median of the west approach atthe second li htin standard west of the west abutment.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 26:


PHOTOS


PAGE 56 79OF

Photo 25:


57/79


58/79

REM.(2)7-96

Areas of section loss to the flanges of the north median stringer atmidspan in span 17.

Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north face of the web ofbeam 2 at pier E in span 6.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 30:


PHOTOS


PAGE 58 79OF

Photo 29:


59/79

REM.(2)7-96

Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north face of the web ofbeam 2 at pier G in span 8.

Heavy rust with minor section loss to the north flanges at midspan ofbeam 2 in span 5.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 32:


PHOTOS


PAGE 59 79OF

Photo 31:


60/79

REM.(2)7-96

Moderate collision damage to the south bottom flange at midspan ofthe north fascia girder in span 3 (above the Arborway turnaroundroadwa .

North bottom flange bent downward 3" over a 2'-6" length at theeastern 1/3 point of the north fascia girder in span 5.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 34:


PHOTOS


PAGE 60 79OF

Photo 33:


61/79

REM.(2)7-96

Cracked weld for the keeper plate on the north side of the sole plateof beam 6 at pier T in span 19.

Maximum lateral movement of 2" of the sole plate relative to therocker bearing at beam 7 at pier T in span 19.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 36:


PHOTOS


PAGE 61 79OF

Photo 35:


62/79

REM.(2)7-96

Lateral movement of 5/8" of the sole plate relative to the rockerbearing at beams 4 and 5 at pier U in span 20.

A 7/8" gap beneath the underside of the rocker and the masonryplate which exposes the pintels at beam 5 at pier R in span 17.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 38:


PHOTOS


PAGE 62 79OF

Photo 37:


63/79


64/79


65/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 1'-1" high hole in the web of the second north median diaphragmeast of pier E in span 6.

Areas of 100% loss to the entire bottom flange and the web isdisconnected from the north median stringer at the third diaphragmwest of ier L in s an 12.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 44:


PHOTOS


PAGE 65 79OF

Photo 43:


66/79

REM.(2)7-96

Areas of 100% loss to the full length of the channel diaphragmbetween beams 1 and 2 at pier D in span 4.

Areas of 100% loss to the web of the channel diaphragm betweenbeams 1 and 2 at pier A in span 2.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 46:


PHOTOS


PAGE 66 79OF

Photo 45:


67/79

REM.(2)7-96

Areas of advanced section loss to the knee braces and the channeldiaphragm at beam 8 at pier H in span 9.

A 2 1/2" long crack at the base of the weld between the sole plateand the south bottom flange of beam 10 at pier R in span 16.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 48:


PHOTOS


PAGE 67 79OF

Photo 47:


68/79

REM.(2)7-96

Cracked welds at the end diaphragm connection at beam 7 at pier Uin span 19.

Lateral misalignment of 1 1/2" of the superstructure along the southfascia at pier U.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 50:


PHOTOS


PAGE 68 79OF

Photo 49:


69/79

REM.(2)7-96

Up to 1/8" wide full height vertical crack in the west abutmentbreastwall between beams 9 and 10.

Two missing sections of granite header at the base of the northwestwingwall, located approximately 100' from the west abutment.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 52:


PHOTOS


PAGE 69 79OF

Photo 51:


70/79


71/79

REM.(2)7-96

Spall in the east face of the pedestal which exposes the anchor boltsat the bearing for beam 8 at pier K in span 10.

Spall in the east face of the pedestal at the bearing for beam 7 at pierK in span 10.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 56:


PHOTOS


PAGE 71 79OF

Photo 55:


72/79

REM.(2)7-96

Masonry pad not formed properly resulting in undermining below thefixed bearing for beam 6 at pier Q in span 15.

Minor undermining due to the spalling of the masonry pad below thefixed bearing for beam 2 at pier Q in span 15.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 58:


PHOTOS


PAGE 72 79OF

Photo 57:


73/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 3/4" wide crack in the top of the west side of the pedestal on thesouth side of the fixed bearing for beam 7 at pier S.

Edge spalls and areas of delaminated concrete in the west face ofthe pedestal beneath the fixed bearings for beams 13 and 14 at pierS.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 60:


PHOTOS


PAGE 73 79OF

Photo 59:


74/79

REM.(2)7-96

Close-up view of up to 1'-2" deep spall with exposed reinforcingwhich undermines the east pedestal between beams 7 and 8 at pierD.

Up to 2" deep area of concrete breakup with exposed reinforcing onthe top of the east side of the pedestal between beams 7 and 8 at pierG.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 62:


PHOTOS


PAGE 74 79OF

Photo 61:


75/79


76/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 8'-6" wide by 2'-6" high by 1'-6" long edge spall with exposedreinforcing in the east face of the cap at pier R.

A 6'-0" long by up to 6'-0" wide by 3 1/2" deep spall with exposedreinforcing at the north end of the cap at pier L.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 66:


PHOTOS


PAGE 76 79OF

Photo 65:


77/79


78/79

REM.(2)7-96

A 3'-0" wide by 1'-3" high by 1'-3" long by up to 7" deep edge spallwith exposed reinforcing in the top of the pier on the west side belowthe median at ier G.

A 5'-0" wide by 2'-10" high by 3" deep spall with exposed reinforcingin the east face at the south end of pier B.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-367

Photo 70:


PHOTOS


PAGE 78 79OF

Photo 69:


79/79

Remaining diameter of 7/8" for the anchor bolts at the northcantilever beam bracket at pier M in span 13.

JAN 16, 2012BOSTON B-16-3674EX B16367-4EX-DOT-NBI

PHOTOS


PAGE 79 79OF

Photo 71:

Documents

Casey inspection report