2022 structure inspections rsoi

Request for Statement of Interest (SOI) Kane County Division of Transportation (KDOT)

2022 Structure Inspections Sec. 21-00541-00-BR

The Kane County Division of Transportation is in need of professional services from a qualified engineering

firm to conduct NBIS inspections of county and township structures in 2022. The work will also include

load rating and various structural on-call services.

This work will begin in early 2022, with a duration of approximately twelve months. At the County’s

discretion, the County may pursue a 2023 inspection contract and 2024 inspection contract, without again

advertising the work.

The 2–page Statement of Interest document shall be submitted electronically via KDOT QBS no later

than 4:00 pm on September 10, 2021. If you plan to enter into a joint venture with another firm for this

project please note this on your Statement of Interest, including the name of the firm you are entering

into a joint venture with for this project. The Short-listed firms will be posted on our Consultant Selection

Summary Table website at http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Pages/SOI-Summary.aspx .

Any new firm interested in doing work with the Kane County in regards to this or any other future

professional service, must first submit their Prequalification Document to Kane County by following the

instructions found at http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Shared%20Documents/QBS.pdf. The

prequalification document will be reviewed and approved in a short period of time if the appropriate

documentation was provided. Each firm must first be prequalified in order to electronically submit their

Statement of Interest via KDOT QBS no later than the deadline described above.

More information regarding the Qualifications Based Selection process may be found at

http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Shared%20Documents/QBS.pdf.

Firms interested in providing services to Kane County are hereby notified of the Kane County’s Ethics

Ordinance No. 10-206, in particular, Section 10, page 15. Only the firm that is ultimately selected for these

professional services will be required to provide the Ethic Ordinance information directly to the Kane

County Division of Transportation as part of the consultant services agreement. The complete Ethics

Ordinance No. 10-206 document is available online at the following link Kane County Ethics Ordinance.

A Statement of Interest (SOI) received after the above noted deadline will not be used as part of our

consultant selection process.

http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Pages/SOI-Summary.aspx

http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Shared%20Documents/QBS.pdf

http://kdot.countyofkane.org/Shared%20Documents/QBS.pdf

http://www.countyofkane.org/Documents/Department%20of%20Human%20Resources%20Management/Ethics%20Ordinance.pdf

PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF SERVICES

2022 STRUCTURE INSPECTIONS

A. History

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 required that all public bridges over 20 feet in length

be inspected and inventoried in accordance with the National Bridge Inspection Standards by December

31, 1980. In October 1988, NBIS was modified to require special inspections of fracture critical details and

underwater features of bridges. Since then, changes have been made to address increased focus on scour

inspections, timely reporting, inspector qualification, and other issues. Qualified personnel must typically

inspect bridges every two years and have their findings submitted to IDOT for inclusion in the state and

national databases.

B. Qualifications

The Consultant shall provide personnel qualified to perform the bridge inspections. An IDOT approved

Team Leader shall supervise, in the field, all inspection activities.

The Consultant shall also supply an IDOT approved staff member to act as Program Manager for all

inspections.

The Consultant shall also provide, on an as needed basis, a structural engineer registered in the State of

Illinois to review any bridges that are determined to be structurally deficient.

The Consultant shall provide the specific qualifications for all members on the inspection team, and for all

related work.

C. Scope of Work

The Consultant shall inspect all structures necessary, in accordance with the National Bridge Inspection

Standards and the Illinois Department of Transportation Structure Information and Procedure Manual.

The Consultant shall submit the following to the County for each major structure inspected:

1) IDOT Bridge Inspection Report, BBS-RIR

2) Bridge Inspection Report Narrative (in a format similar to the attached).

In addition, the consultant will provide a detailed cost estimate for each structure that includes the costs

of all repairs mentioned in the report’s recommendations.

The Consultant shall also provide a plan of access for inspection of the bridges. It is anticipated that

specialized equipment such as snooper trucks or rigging may be required to allow the inspector to closely

examine the bridge elements. Generally, the inspector must be within arm’s reach to adequately inspect

a bridge element. Safety of the inspector is of extreme importance to the County and is the responsibility

of the Consultant. The Consultant is solely responsible for the safety practices and methods used to

perform any and all inspections.

The consultant shall coordinate all inspections over railroads with the appropriate railroad. Any costs for

licenses and permits shall be included in this work.

The consultant will provide on-call design services, review services, and inspection services to be billed

against the on-call item in the contract.

The consultant will assist in any other needs as defined by the county to comply with the requirements of

NBIS.

D. Schedule

The notice to proceed will be issued on approximately January 1, 2022.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Any questions regarding the requested services or the Qualifications Based Selection Process should be

directed to Michael Zakosek, P.E., Chief of Design, by email at [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

Bridge Inspection Report

STRUCTURE NO. 045-3001

West County Line Road (CH 1) over Young’s Creek

Prepared For

Kane County Division of Transportation

INSPECTION TYPE: In-Depth DATE: January 22, 2020

Hampton, Lenzini and Renwick, Inc. Civil Engineering • Structural Engineering • Environmental Services • Land Surveying www.hlrengineering.com

Bridge Inspection Report for SN 045-3001; January 22, 2020

2

I. ADMINISTRATIVE DATA

Region / District: 1 / 1 County: Kane Feature Carried: West County Line Road (CH 1) Feature Crossed: Young’s Creek Latitude / Longitude: 41.8545°N, 88.6019°W Inspection Team: Scott Shoup, Joshua Burdin Weather: 25° F, Cloudy

II. ROADWAY/STRUCTURE DATA

ADT (current): 2,500 (2018 – IDOT Master Structure Report) ADTT (current): 8% (2018 – IDOT Master Structure Report) Inventory Rating Factor: 0.75 IDOT 2016 (LFR) Inventory Rating Factor: 0.79 HLR 2018 (LFR) Operating Rating Factor: 1.26 IDOT 2016 (LFR) Operating Rating Factor: 1.32 HLR 2018 (LFR) Functional Classification: 6 – Minor Collector Existing Clear Width: 40’-0” CONSTRUCTION / RECONSTRUCTION / REPAIR HISTORY Year Constructed: 1931 – Two simple span concrete slab bridge (Unknown

Design Live Load) Year(s) Reconstructed: 1981 – Superstructure replacement on widened abutments

and conversion from two span to single span PPCDB structure, with PC channel beam spans on approach shoulders (HS 20 Design Live Load)

Year(s) Rehabilitated: 2005 – Installed PCC Pavement between shoulders in approach span, reinforced concrete (RC) wearing surface, guardrail improvements, and substructure repairs

STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION Type: PPC Deck Beams (10 – 17”x 48”) with Precast Concrete

Channel Beam (4 – 18”x45”) approach spans and 4” RC concrete wearing surface

Span Arrangement: 36’-1” Single Span/ 2 Appr. Span Shoulders: 17’-0⅛”, 17’-0⅛” Structure Length: 39’-11” back-to-back of abutments, 74’-10 1/4” back-to-back

approach spans Deck Width: 40’-0” out-to-out of deck and face-to-face rail

Skew: 42°35’ Right Forward

Abutments: Closed reinforced concrete abutments on untreated timber pile supported spread footings


3

INSPECTION HISTORY (NBIS Ratings) Year Deck Super Sub 2020 6 6 6 2018 6 6 6 2016 6 6 6

III. INSPECTION PROCEDURES This In-Depth inspection was performed by a certified NBIS Team Leader and reviewed by a Structural Engineer / NBIS Program Manager. The structure was observed for new and additional deterioration since the previous inspection. A Routine Inspection Report (BBS-BIR) was completed and submitted to IDOT.

IV. STRUCTURE CONDITION FINDINGS

APPROACH ROADWAY The HMA approach roadway is in satisfactory condition (Photos 3 and 4).

There are longitudinal and transverse cracks, some of which have been sealed, throughout the approach roadways.

APPROACH SPANS The Portland cement concrete pavement (8”) and precast concrete channel beam shoulders have a 4” reinforced concrete overlay. The approach spans are in satisfactory condition (Photos 5 and 6).

There are longitudinal cracks in both approach span pavements and a 1’x2’ spall in the south approach span pavement.

BRIDGE RAILING The Type S-1 side mounted steel bridge railing is in good condition (Photo 7).

There are no notable deficiencies in the bridge railing.

The bridge railing does not meet current IDOT requirements for height. Given the ADT and operating speed, a higher performance bridge rail may be considered.

DECK / SUPERSTRUCTURE Wearing Surface The 4” reinforced concrete wearing surface is in satisfactory condition (Photo 8).

There are multiple full length longitudinal cracks in the wearing surface (Photo 9).

There are two 1’x1’ spalls with exposed reinforcement in the wearing surface (Photo 10).

Beams The PPC deck beams are in satisfactory condition (Photos 11 and 12).

A majority of the keyway joints have water leakage with efflorescence (Photo 13).

There is an 18”x6” spall with exposed reinforcement on Beam 9 near the north abutment (Photo 14).


4

SUBSTRUCTURE The substructure is in satisfactory condition (Photos 15 and 16).

Abutments

The abutments have some vertical hairline cracks with efflorescence and map cracking at the west end of the south abutment (Photo 17).

There is a 2’x2’ spall on the back of the south abutment cap near the east end (Photo 18).

Wingwalls

The wingwalls are sound with no notable deficiencies.

SCOUR

Scour was evaluated in 1996 by Rational Analysis and found to be “8 – Stable for Scour”.

There is a 1’ deep scour hole at the east end of the south abutment; the footing is not exposed.

CHANNEL CONDITION The channel is in very good condition (Photos 19 and 20).

Slope Protection

The channel banks are moderately sloped and well vegetated.

WATERWAY ADEQUACY

The chance of overtopping the approach roadway is remote.

TRAFFIC SAFETY Pavement markings are present and visible.

Guardrail

The approach guardrails are in good condition.

The Traffic Barrier Terminals Type 5A, Steel Plate Beam Guardrail Type A, and Traffic Barrier Terminals Type 1 (Special) Tangent meet current IDOT standards.

There is impact damage at the southeast approach rail.

Signage / Posting

Terminal end markers are present on the end terminals.

GEOMETRY / UTILITIES

The structure is located on a tangent horizontal alignment and a relatively level vertical profile grade from south to north.

No utilities are attached to the structure.


5

STRUCTURE RATING The condition of the structure is still reflected by the load rating performed in 2018 by HLR.

The load rating information is shown below. No changes have been made.

The load rating results for the HS20 load are as follows:

o Inventory Rating Factor (IDOT 2016): 0.75

o Inventory Rating Factor (HLR 2018): 0.79

o Operating Rating Factor (IDOT 2016): 1.26

o Operating Rating Factor (HLR 2018): 1.32

The structure is adequate for legal loads and IDOT routine permit loads.

The Kane County Standard special permitted vehicles KC-1, KC-2, and KC-3 have restricted gross vehicle weights. The rating factors and permitted gross vehicle weights are listed in the table below.

Permit Vehicle GVW (lbs) Rating Factor Permitted GVW (lbs)

KC-1 170,000 0.83 141,100

KC-2 165,000 0.83 136,900

KC-3 140,000 0.84 117,600

KC-4 115,000 1.07 115,000

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

The bridge was originally constructed in 1931 and reconstructed in 1981, removing the pier and thereby converting the structure from a two-span structure to a single span structure, replacing the superstructure with PPC deck beams on widened abutments, and installing PC channel beams on the shoulders of the approaches. In 2005, the bridge was rehabilitated by constructing a reinforced concrete wearing surface, PCC pavement approaches between the channel beams, guardrail improvements, and substructure repairs. The structure is in overall satisfactory condition. No notable change was observed since the previous inspection. There is one small spall with exposed reinforcement on Beam 9 of the PPC deck beams. The top of the approach spans and bridge concrete wearing surface have multiple longitudinal cracks and a few areas of spalls with exposed reinforcement. This is allowing water infiltration through the shear keyways, causing deterioration of the joints. This will lead to the joint failure and cause the beams to deteriorate and lose load carrying capacity. It is recommended to repair the spalled areas, and seal the concrete wearing surface and approaches to extend the life of the superstructure. The substructure has some deficiencies, including vertical cracking, map cracking, and 1 spall on the back of the abutment cap. Sealing the wearing surface will help limit water infiltration to the abutments, which will slow the deterioration and prolong the life of the substructure. A 1’ scour hole was observed at the east end of the south abutment with no exposed footing. No scour countermeasures are required at this time. The scour progression should be monitored as part of future inspections.


6

RECOMMENDATIONS

Short Term (1-3 Years)

Perform deck slab repairs (partial depth) repairs to the concrete wearing surface.

Apply concrete sealer to the concrete wearing surface and approach spans. Long Term (4-8 Years)

Recommend full structure replacement due to the age, condition and potential for a load posting in the near term due to continued PPC beam deterioration. The existing abutments will not be suitable for rehabilitation due to the footings being supported by timber piles.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A. Routine Inspection Report (BBS-BIR) Attachment B. IDOT Master Structure Report Attachment C. Structure Sketches Attachment D. Structure Photos Attachment E. Cost Estimates Attachment F. Structure Load Rating Summary (SLRS)

Attachment A

Illinois Department of Transportation

Structures Information Management System

Master Structure Report (S-107)

Date: 2/14/2020

Structure Number: 045-3001 District: 1

Page 1

Inventory Data

Facility Carried: W. COUNTY LINE RD

Feature Crossed: YOUNG'S CREEK

Bridge Remarks:

Bridge Status: 1

Status Remarks:

Maint County: 045

Maint Responsibility: 03

Service On/Under: 1 5

Bridge Name:

Location: 3.5 MI S MAPLE PARK

StatusDate: 4/1/1988

KANE

OPEN - NO RESTRICT

COUNTY

/HIGHWAY WATERWAY

Reporting Agency: 3 COUNTY

Main Span Matl/Type: 5 PRESTRESS CONCRETE 05 BOX BEAM OR GIRDER-MULTIPLE/

Maint Township: 11 KANEVILLE

Nbr Of Main Spans: 1 Nbr Of Approach Spans: 2

***Approaches***

Near #1 Matl/Type: A

Near #2 Matl/Type:

Far #1 Matl/Type:

Far #2 Matl/Type:

A

PRECAST CONCRETE/NOT PRESTR / 29 CHANNEL BEAM

/

PRECAST CONCRETE/NOT PRESTR / 29 CHANNEL BEAM

/

Median Width/Type: 0 Ft. 0/ None

Guardrail Type L/R: 0 None 0 None/

Toll Facility Indicator: 0 No Toll

Latitude: 41.85453893 Longitude: 88.60188625

Structure Length: 39.9

AASHTO Bridge Length: 34.5

Length of Long Span: 36.0

Bridge Roadway Width: 40.0

Appr Roadway Width: 30.0

Deck Width: 42.2

Deck Structure Type: E PCAST PRES CN DK BM Deck Structure Thickness: 17.0

Sufficiency Rating: 91.9

No

Replaced By:

Replaces:

Last Update Date: 07/05/2012

HBP Eligible:

Parallel Structure: None

Multi-Level Structure Nbr:

Skew Direction: Right

42 DSkew Angle:

Structure Flared: No

NoHistorical Significance:

Border Bridge State:

Bdr State SN:

Bdr State % Responsibility: 0

Structural Steel Wt: 0

Rated By: 3 Rate Method: 6Consultant LOAD FACTOR (LF) REP

Inventory Rating: 0.750

Operating Rating: 1.260

(27)

(45)

Design Load: 02 HS20

Load Rating Date: 05/12/2016

Sidewalk Width Right: 0.0

Sidewalk Width Left: 0.0

Sidewalks Under Structure: 0

Key Route On Data

None

Navigation Vert Clear: 0

Navigation Horiz Clear: 0

Navigation Control: 0 No

Culvert Fill Depth: 0.0

Number Culvert Cells: 0

Culvert Cell Width: 0.00

Culvert Cell Height: 0.00

Culvert Opening Area: 0.0

0 Ft 0 In

Crossing 1 Nbr:

RR Lateral Underclear: 0.0

RR Vertical Underclear:

Crossing 1 Nbr:

***Railroad Crossing Info***

Functional Class: 6

2500Curr AADT Yr/Count: 2018

Est Truck Percentage: 8

Number Of Lanes: 2

One Or Two Way: 2

Horizontal: 40.0 0.0

Min Vertical: 99 00

41

1

1

Designated Truck Rte: NONE

Bypass Length: 3

Urban Area: None

Natl. Hwy System: Not on NHS

*** Marked Route On Data ***Designation

** CLEARANCES ** South/East North/West

Key Route Nbr: COUNTY HIGHWAY

Two-Way

0001

Segment:Main RouteAppurtenances 00000

MINOR COLLECTOR

Station: 1.7200

Inventory County: 045

Township/Road Dist 11

574Future AADT Yr/Cnt: 2032

KANE

Special Systems: No

11Ft

In

00Ft

In

KANEVILLE

Linked: Y

Inventory Direction:Municipality 0000

Max Rdwy Width: 40.0

10 Ft Vertical: 99 0011Ft

In

00Ft

In

/

/

Mainline

Mainline

Mainline

FAS, CH, or TR's Unmarked

Key Route Under Data

Curr AADT Yr/Count:

Est Truck Percentage:

Number Of Lanes:

One Or Two Way:

Designated Truck Rte:

Bypass Length:

Natl. Hwy System:

Segment:

Station:

Future AADT Yr/Cnt:

Special Systems:

Linked:

Inventory Direction:

/

/

South/East North/West

Ft

In

Ft

InFt

In

Ft

In

Lateral: Ft Ft

Kind Number

Route #1:

Route #2:

Route #3:

*** Marked Route Under Data ***Designation Kind Number

% %

Substructure Material: 5N

FO: NSD: N

Attachment B

jburdin

Line

jburdin

Typewritten Text

40.0

jburdin

Typewritten Text

jburdin

Line

jburdin

Typewritten Text

34.5

jburdin

Line

jburdin

Typewritten Text

36.1

Illinois Department of Transportation

Structures Information Management System

Master Structure Report (S-107)

Date: 2/14/2020

Structure Number: 045-3001 District: 1

Page 2

Data Related to Inspection Information

***Inspection Intervals ***

Routine NBIS: 24

Fracture Critical: 0

Underwater: 0

Special: N

MOS

MOS

MOS

Bridge Posting Level:

5 No Posting RequiredOne Truck At A Time: 0

Single Unit Vehicles:

Combination Type 3S-1:


*** Maximum Allowable Posting Limits ***

Tons

Tons

Tons

Inspection/Appraisal Information

SATISFACTORY CONDITION - MINOR DETERIORATION

Inspection Date: 01/22/2020

Deck: 6

Structural Evaluation: 6

Deck Geometry: 6

Superstructure: 6

Underclearance-Vert/Lat.: N

Substructure: 6

Channel and Protection: 7

Waterway Adequacy: 8

Culvert: N

Approach Roadway Align: 8



GOOD CONDITION - SOME MINOR PROBLEMS

NOT APPLICABLE

EQUAL TO PRESENT DESIRABLE CRITERIA

EQUAL TO PRESENT MINIMUM CRITERIA

EQUAL TO PRESENT MINIMUM CRITERIA

NOT APPLICABLE

EQUAL TO PRESENT DESIRABLE CRITERIA

Pier Navig Protection: N N/A

Inspection Temperature: 25 Deg. F

One Truck At A Time: 0

Single Unit Vehicles:



** Actual Posted Limits **

Tons

Tons

Tons

Utilities Attached: N N/A

N/A

N/A

N

N

Deck Wearing Surf: R

Total Deck Thick: 22.0

Last Paint Date:

Insp by (Name): JOSH BURDIN

F NONE

A EPOXY COATED REINF

Inspection Remarks:

Item 58 -Two 1'x1' spall with exposed rebar on deck. 1'x2' spall on south appro ach span deck. Item 36A -Rusting with minor hole on east railing, appears to be old name plate location. Item 36C -Impact damage at SE guardrail.

Deck Membrane:

Deck Protection:

Underwater Inspection/Appraisal Information

Inspection Date:

Appraisal Rating:Inspected By:

Inspection Method:

Temperature:

Inspection Remarks:

Scour Critical Information

09/28/1996

8 B

FOUAD ALSABBAGHAnalysis Date:

Rating: Evaluation Method:

Analysis By:

CALCULATED SCOUR ABOVE FOOTING Rational Analysis Fracture Critical Members:

Microfilm Data Recorded:

No

No

Miscellaneous

Meets Standards

Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Bridge Railing Appraisal: 3

Approach Guardrail: 333

Insp by (Name): Shoup, Scott

Inspected By:

Last Paint Type:

1931

FAS 97

80-00080-01-BR

129+89.9

00000000000000

3

1981

FAS 97

80-00080-01-BR

129+89.9

00000000000000

0

Construction Information

Year: Original Reconstructed

Route:

Section Nbr:

Contract Nbr:

Fed Aid Pr #:

Built By:

Sta: Sta:

COUNTY AGENCY UNKNOWN

Proposed Improvement

Bridge Cost:

Total Project Cost:

*** Costs in Dollars ***

Roadway Cost:

Cost Estimate Year:

Type of Work:

Done By:

Length:

Remarks:

Attachment B

N

N

LOCATION SKETCH

045-3001

3rd. P.M.

R. 5 E.,

3rd. P.M.

R. 6 E.,

(Looking North)

2-18''x45'' PCB

(Typ.)

3'-9''

4'' Reinforced Concrete Wearing Surface

10-17''x48'' PPC Deck Beams = 40'-0''

2'-

1''

Wearing Surface

4'' Reinforced Concrete

40'-0'' Face to Face of Rails and Out to Out of Deck

TBT, TY. 5A, Typ.

Top/Water

(Looking West)

PLAN

(Typ.)

Concrete Channel Beams

2 Approach Precast

(Typ.) Wingwall

Original

¡ of Structure

¡ Roadway

42°35'

24'-

0'' Road

way

crack on Wingwall

'' Diagonal211

/ft.''41 /ft.''4

1

39'-11'' bk.-bk. Abutments

Rebuilt Cap (Typ.)

Back of

N. Abut.

Back of

S. Abut.

1' Deep

Pocket

Scour

GENERAL PLAN AND ELEVATION

SHEET 1 OF 3

Steel Railing

Type S-1, Typ.

Steel Railing

Type S-1, Typ.

40'-0'' Face to Face of Rails and Out to Out of Deck

7'-6'' 7'-6''

2-18''x45'' PCB25'-0''

PCC Pav't, 8''

SECTION THRU APPROACH SPAN

TYPICAL DECK CROSS SECTION SPAN

Steel Railing

Type S-1, Typ.

''8517'-5''8

517'-5Bk. Appr. Cap Bk. Appr. Cap

'' Total Length4174'-10

40'-

0'' o.-

o.

deck

Back of

Appr. cap

Back of

Appr. cap

(Looking North)

ELEVATION

1'x2' SP

1'x1' SP, RF

Flo

w

Flo

w

T.

39

N.

Structure No.

A B C D

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1098

Approach cap, (Typ.)

'' fc.-fc. Abutments4334'-5

Original Concrete

Footing (Typ.) Untreated Timber

Piles (Typ.)

TBT, TY 5A, SPBGR

Tangent (Typ.)

TBT, TY 1 (Spl.)

P:\aaa KANE CO INSPECTION\BRIDGE INVENTORY\045-3001 (C) County Line-Young's Crk\CAD\3001-sht-bridge.dgn

LEGEND

Crack

Scour Pocket

Spalls

Delamination

Water Leakage

Efflorescence

Shear Stirrup

WL =

EF =

SS =

Spall

Rust Staining

Repair

Reinforcement

Prestressed Strand

Plugged Drain Hole

Leaching

Delamination

Crack - Closed

Crack - Open

SP =

RS =

RP =

RF =

PS =

PD =

LE =

DL =

CC =

CO =

PROJECT 20.0001.180

Hampton, Lenzini and Renwick, Inc.

Land Surveyors . Environmental Services

Civil Engineers . Structural Engineers

DRAWN BY: RDH

CHECKED BY: JKK 06 / 25 / 2020

DATE:

SHEET 1 OF 3 WOODRIDGE . MT CARMEL

ELGIN . SPRINGFIELD

SN 045-3001

KANE COUNTY

OVER YOUNG'S CREEK

WEST COUNTY LINE ROAD / C.H. 1

Attachment C

N

UNDERSIDE OF DECK PLAN

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Approach Precast Concrete

Channel beam (Typ.)

1'x6'' SP, RF

Wet full length

Spots EF

UNDERSIDE OF DECK

SHEET 2 OF 3

EF spots full length (Typ.)

1


LEGEND

Crack

Scour Pocket

Spalls

Delamination

Water Leakage

Efflorescence

Shear Stirrup

WL =

EF =

SS =

Spall

Rust Staining

Repair

Reinforcement

Prestressed Strand

Plugged Drain Hole

Leaching

Delamination

Crack - Closed

Crack - Open

SP =

RS =

RP =

RF =

PS =

PD =

LE =

DL =

CC =

CO =

PROJECT 20.0001.180




DRAWN BY: RDH


DATE:


ELGIN . SPRINGFIELD

SN 045-3001

KANE COUNTY

OVER YOUNG'S CREEK


Attachment C

SOUTH ABUTMENT ELEVATION

NORTH ABUTMENT ELEVATION

RS

EF

Map Cracking,

CO

ABUTMENTS

SHEET 3 OF 3


LEGEND

Crack

Scour Pocket

Spalls

Delamination

Water Leakage

Efflorescence

Shear Stirrup

WL =

EF =

SS =

Spall

Rust Staining

Repair

Reinforcement

Prestressed Strand

Plugged Drain Hole

Leaching

Delamination

Crack - Closed

Crack - Open

SP =

RS =

RP =

RF =

PS =

PD =

LE =

DL =

CC =

CO =

PROJECT 20.0001.180




DRAWN BY: RDH


DATE:


ELGIN . SPRINGFIELD

SN 045-3001

KANE COUNTY

OVER YOUNG'S CREEK


Attachment C

Kane County SN 045-3001

January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 1 – West Elevation

Photo 2 – East Elevation


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 3 – South Approach, Looking South

Photo 4 – North Approach, Looking North


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 5 – Top of South Approach Span, Looking West

Photo 6 – Top of North Approach Span, Looking East


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 7 – East Bridge Rail, Looking Southeast

Photo 8 – Top of Wearing Surface, Looking Northwest


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 9 – Longitudinal Cracks in Wearing Surface, Looking North

Photo 10 – Spalls with Exposed Reinforcement & Cracks in Wearing Surface, Looking West


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 11 – Underside of PPC Deck Beams, Looking Southeast

Photo 12 – Underside of PPC Deck Beams, Looking Northeast


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 13 – Water Leakage with Efflorescence from Keyway Joints, Looking South

Photo 14 – Spall with Exposed Reinforcement on Beam 9, Looking North


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 15 – South Abutment, Looking Southeast

Photo 16 – North Abutment, Looking Northeast


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 17 – Map Cracking with Efflorescence, West End of South Abutment, Looking South

Photo 18 – Spall on Back of South Abutment Cap, East End, Looking Northwest


January 2020

Attachment D

Photo 19 – Upstream Channel, Looking East

Photo 20 – Downstream Channel, Looking West

KANE COUNTY DIVISION

OF TRANSPORTATION

STRUCTURE 045-3001

WEST COUNTY LINE ROAD OVER

YOUNG'S CREEK

ESTIMATE OF COST - SHORT TERM (1-3 YEARS)

ITEM UNIT

NO. ITEMS UNIT QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL

1 Structural Repair of Concrete (<5") Sq Ft 10 600.00$ 6,000.00$

2 Concrete Sealer Sq Ft 2994 3.00$ 8,982.00$

3 Traffic Control and Protection L Sum 1 10,000.00$ 10,000.00$

SUBTOTAL $24,982.00

6% MOBILIZATION 1,500.00

15% CONTINGENCY 3,750.00

TOTAL ESTIMATE OF COST $30,232.00

Made by: JRB 2/14/2020

Checked by: JKK 3/27/2020

Attachment E

KANE COUNTY DIVISION

OF TRANSPORTATION

STRUCTURE 045-3001

WEST COUNTY LINE ROAD OVER

YOUNGS CREEK

ESTIMATE OF COST - LONG TERM (4-8 YEARS)

3 SPAN RC CONCRETE SLAB, CONCRETE PARAPET

800' OF ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT

ITEM UNIT

NO. ITEMS UNIT QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL

1 ROADWORK L. SUM 1 388,385.00$ 388,385.00$

2 REMOVAL OF EXISTING STRUCTURE L. SUM 1 35,000.00$ 35,000.00$

3 PROPOSED STRUCTURE L. SUM 1 1,126,590.00$ 1,126,590.00$

4 TRAFFIC CONTROL AND PROTECTION L. SUM 1 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$

SUBTOTAL $1,599,980.00

3% MOBILIZATION $48,000.00

10% CONTINGENCY $160,000.00

CURRENT TOTAL ESTIMATE OF COST $1,807,980.00

16% ESCALATION $289,280.00

FUTURE TOTAL ESTIMATE OF COST $2,097,260.00

Made by: JKK 4/23/2020

Checked by: JRB 6/4/2020

Attachment E

~ IDinois De rtment ~of Tran~rtation

STRUCTURE LOAD RATING SUMMARY (SLRS) Structure Number (SN): 04S-3001

Rating Type: Rerating Date of Previous Load Rating: S/12/2016

Rating Method: (6) Analytical- LFR r As Built Plans

r Shop Drawings

r Material Testing

P Design/Rehab. Plans

r Field Measurements

r LRI Dated :

Rating Model: (M) Rating Model Exists r Overlay

r One Traffi c Lane used for Opr. RF's r Load Testing ~

I Rating Controlling Comments Factor Force Effect (controlling span, element, location, etc.)

-Max . Allowable

GVW j Vehicle Name

·--VI HS 20 Vl HS20 - -

Q)

0.0 Co c: c: Vi ·;:; Vl 0 ~

0 ~

E 0 u

Q) ..... c: .E ·;:; ::::! .... 0 Q)

a:: ~

i s: E Ql ..... >

IL-PS2-21 IL-PS3-31 IL-PS4-28 IL-PS4-34.7S IL-PSS-36 IL-PS6-3S.7S IL-PS7-39. 7S IL-PC3-31 IL-PC4-41 IL-PCS-41 IL-PDG-40 IL-RS3-34 IL-RS4-38 IL-RCS-SO IL-RC6-60

EV2 (axle) EV3 (tandem)

Remarks:

-

~

----

0.79 lnv. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO% 1.32 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO%

1.42 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO% 1.01 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO% 1.33 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO% 0.99 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at SO% 1.46 Opr. Flexure B9_2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.15 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.09 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.75 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.13 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.06 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 2.29 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.00 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.16 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.22 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50% 1.06 Opr. Flexure B9 2sr, Span 1 at 50%

1.42 Opr. r------F.,...Ie_x_ur_e_-+_B9~2,-s__,r,'-S_,_p_a_n_1_a_t--,4,..,0_%-,-o ------------1

0.92 Opr. J___:_F.;.:Ie:;;x:.=u.:...:re=--__J..-=B-=-9=2::.:s:;;r!,...;, S::.!p:.:a:;;n:...:1=-=-at:...:5:...:0:..:%-=-o ----- --------l

!Ratings based on Beam 9 with 2 strands removed (previous Collins rating).

Single span 10 -17"x48" PPCDB superstructure with 4" reinforced concrete wearing surface.

Model: AASHTOWare BrR Version= 6.8.2; NBIS Inspection= 2018-01-24; WS = S.O inches.

lSay okay for IL-PS4-34. 7S and no restrictions required.

Special Inspection Interval: Months Inspection Type: Not Required

Remarks: N/A

Commercial/Private Vehicle Posting

Single Unit Vehicle: Combo (3 or 4 Axles) :

Combo (5+ Axles): One Truck at a Time: No Sign R12-1106 or 1107 Bridge Posting Level : (5) No Posting or LL Restriction

Rated By: S. Shoup- HLR Inc.

Si ngle Unit:

34 tons

3 or 4 Axles:

n/a +Axles:

n/a 5

Restrict

Below

LL

I certify that the load rating for the designated structure was done by me or under my direct

supervision, and that the load ratings and posting recommendations were derived in accordance

with the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation.

Lie. Nbr.:

Lie. Exp .:

Printed 5/11/2018

081-006S29

11/30/2018

) /

rive, Suite 201, Springfield, ll62704

BBS 2795 (Rev. 09/20/17) Attachment F