fy20 capital improvement plan fiscal year 2022 - 2026
TRANSCRIPT
ORDER FUND FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 TOTAL Brook Road Bridge Design
and Construction 1 2,275,000.00$ 2,275,000.00$ Traffic Sign and
Signal Asset Management 2 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ Manomet Avenue
Wicking Wells 3 450,000.00$ 450,000.00$ Bartlett Road Bridge Design
and Construction 4 2,000,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ Traffic Signal -
Court Street @ Cherry Street 5 2,000,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ ADA
Compliance (Phase 2) 6 125,000.00$ 125,000.00$ Town Wide Sidewalks
7 1,000,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$ Roadway Asset Management Program 8
175,000.00$ 175,000.00$ EPA Stormwater MS4 Permit Compliance 9
250,000.00$ 250,000.00$ Relocating Long Pond Road 10 500,000.00$
2,000,000.00$ 2,500,000.00$ 5,000,000.00$
2,875,000.00$ 4,125,000.00$ 1,925,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ 2,500,000.00$ 13,425,000.00$
Person Submitting: Sheila Sgarzi
FISCAL YEAR 2022 - 2026
Department: DPW, Engineering Division
11/19/2020 Page 1 FY22 5-yr Plan - Engineering 11-19-2020
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 1
Project Title and Description: Brook Road Bridge Design & Construction Total
Project Cost: $2,275,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted: $511,454.60 in grants
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital
Operations & Maintenance
FY22
FY23
FY24
Total Capital $1,765,000.00 Rounded up from $1,763,545.40
Project Justification and Objective: The proposed Brook Road Bridge project will replace the existing one-lane bridge with a 30’-6” wide
steel and concrete structure, two 11’ wide travel lanes, a 5’-6” wide sidewalk and a new 8” ductile iron water main. The Brook Road Bridge
dates back to the 19th century. Improvements were made to the bridge in 1926 when the wooden floor was replaced with steel I beams. Bridge
inspection reports over the past ten years have rated the deck and superstructure in the range of fair to satisfactory condition and the
substructure in the range of poor to satisfactory condition. The posted weight limit precludes school buses, fire engines and garbage trucks
from crossing the bridge. The 1937 cast iron water main that crosses the bridge is hydraulically restricted due to tuberculation and is in need
of replacement. The roadway approaches are constructed within the floodway of Beaver Dam Brook; this alignment exacerbates the potential
for upstream flooding. The proposed bridge replacement project will address the current deficiencies and will enable two-way traffic to safely
cross the bridge. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: > 75 years, MassDOT standard Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
Item Cost Estimate Use Cost Estimate Basis
Design & Permitting 124,900.00$ 124,900.00$ Existing contract with Bayside Engineering
Land Acquisition 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$ Estimated 28,191 SF of proposed permanent easements
Construction 1,485,809.44$ 1,485,100.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/15/2020 cost estimate.
Construction Contingency (20%) 297,161.89$ 300,000.00$ Standard practice is to use a 20 - 25% contingency
Temporary and Permanent Utility Pole Relocation 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/28/2020 estimate
Police Details 132,000.00$ 135,000.00$ 150 days x 2 details x $55/hour x 8 hr/day
Construction Administration & Inspection 140,000.00$ 140,000.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/28/2020 estimate
TOTAL: 2,269,871.33$ 2,275,000.00$
ITEM NO. UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANT. UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED COST
*115.1 LS DEMOLITION OF BRIDGE NO. P-13-011 1 $26,000.00 $26,000.00
120.1 CY UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 640 $40.00 $25,600.00
140. CY BRIDGE EXCAVATION 730 $50.00 $36,500.00
141. CY CLASS A TRENCH EXCAVATION 475 $40.00 $19,000.00
143. CY CHANNEL EXCAVATION 95 $165.00 $15,675.00
144. CY CLASS B ROCK EXCAVATION 48 $150.00 $7,125.00
151.01 CY GRAVEL BORROW - TYPE C 505 $55.00 $27,775.00
151.2 CY GRAVEL BORROW FOR BACKFILLING STRUCTURES AND PIPES 420 $50.00 $21,000.00
156. TON CRUSHED STONE 310 $50.00 $15,500.00
156.1 TON CRUSHED STONE FOR BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS 35 $50.00 $1,750.00
170. SY FINE GRADING AND COMPACTING 1,240 $5.00 $6,200.00
450.22 TON SUPERPAVE SURFACE COURSE – 9.5 (SSC – 9.5) 105 $150.00 $15,750.00
450.31 TON SUPERPAVE INTERMEDIATE COURSE – 12.5 (SIC – 12.5) 125 $125.00 $15,625.00
450.42 TON SUPERPAVE BASE COURSE – 37.5 (SBC – 37.5) 230 $110.00 $25,300.00
450.6 TON SUPERPAVE BRIDGE SURFACE COURSE - 9.5 (SSC-B-9.5) 6 $500.00 $3,000.00
450.71 TON SUPERPAVE BRIDGE PROTECTIVE COURSE - 12.5 (SPC-B-12.5) 15 $410.00 $6,150.00
452. GAL ASPHALT EMULSION FORO TACK COAT 130 $8.50 $1,105.00
*482.2 FT HOT POURED JOINT SEALER 530 $3.00 $1,590.00
482.3 FT SAWCUTTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT 50 $35.00 $1,750.00
627.1 EA TRAILING ANCHORAGE 2 $1,825.00 $3,650.00
627.82 EA GUARDRAIL TANGENT END TREATMENT, TL-2 2 $4,100.00 $8,200.00
*698.4 SY GEOTEXTILE FABRIC FORPERMANENT EROSION CONTROL 75 $6.00 $450.00
701. SY CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK 177 $65.00 $11,519.44
751. CY LOAM BORROW 40 $60.00 $2,400.00
*754. CY WETLAND SOIL REHANDLED AND SPREAD 40 $100.00 $4,000.00
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Contract No. __________
ITEM NO. UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANT. UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED COST
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
*767.121 FT SEDIMENT CONTROL BARRIER 400 $10.00 $4,000.00
904.3 CY 5000 PSI, 3/4 INCH, 685 HP CEMENT CONCRETE 40 $1,880.00 $75,200.00
942.102 FT STEEL PILE HP 10 X 57 1,200 $190.00 $228,000.00
948.41 EA DYNAMIC LOAD TEST BY CONTRACTOR 2 $7,250.00 $14,500.00
948.5 EA PILE SHOES 12 $200.00 $2,400.00
983.1 TON RIPRAP 125 $60.00 $7,500.00
*991.1 LS CONTROL OF WATER-STRUCTURE NO. P-13-011 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00
995.01 LS BRIDGE STRUCTURE, BRIDGE NO. P-13-011 1 $760,000.00 $760,000.00
*996.3 SF PREFABRICATED ENGINEERED WALL SYSTEM 442 $35.00 $15,470.00
*999.99 LS WATER LINE PROTECTION/RELOCATION 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
SUBTOTAL $1,485,809.44
2 of 2 Brook Road Const Estimate.xlsm
From: Daniel Flagg To: Sheila Sgarzi Cc: Brian A. Boucher; Norman H. Brown Subject: RE: Brook Road Bridge - Capital Request Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 10:22:50 AM Attachments: image001.png
Hi Sheila, After discussion with Brian we came up with the following:
- We assumed that the construction work on the project would be restricted to 7 AM to 5 PM Monday – Friday.
- Based on that restriction we are assuming a conservative estimate of a 7 month construction season (the construction may be completed sooner)
- The cost for that results as follows: Full-time Resident Services - 150 Construction days @ 8 hours per day X $100/Hour = $120,000 Shop Drawing Review (Senior Engineer) – 160 Hours @ $125/hour = $ 20,000 Total Construction Services = $140,000 Bayside in the past has also completed Part-time Resident services with an average of 4 hours per day (noting that some days during the construction that no work is completed), that would result in the following:
Part-time Resident Services - 150 Construction days @ 4 hours per day X $100/Hour = $ 60,000 Shop Drawing Review (Senior Engineer) – 160 Hours @ $125/hour = $ 20,000 Total Construction Services = $ 80,000 Finally our most recent bridge completed in Boxford with some on-site services was done with the assistance of the Boxford DPW Director and was completed with a construction budget of $60,000. In the end, if you’re are looking for the conservative number to use for the warrant - I would recommend - $140,000. Let me know if you need anything else on this issue, I would be glad to further discuss it with you. Thanks
Daniel J. Flagg
ssgarzi
Rectangle
D F
from an application that is not licensed to print to novaP
D F
The proposed Brook Road Bridge will be this style. Note: The railings on the new Brook Road Bridge will be black.
Y ou created this P
D F
from an application that is not licensed to print to novaP
D F
ssgarzi
Callout
Brook Road Bridge will have a 5'-6" wide sidewalk on the north side
ssgarzi
The proposed Brook Road Bridge will match this style bridge
Bridge P-13-011 (9KM) Project Overview Bridge P-13-011 (9KM) is a single 11.5-foot span steel stringer/ reinforced concrete deck bridge located in the Town of Plymouth that carries Brook Road over the Beaver Dam Brook. The abutments and wingwalls are stone masonry gravity walls. The bridge clear width is 16+/- feet and carries a single lane of traffic. The bridge construction date is unknown, however, based on similar construction methods, it is estimated that the construction date is circa 1925. The bridge is currently posted at H = 3 tons; Type 3 = 5 tons; 3S2 = 8 tons. An initial routine bridge inspection was performed by Bayside Engineering on August 8, 2016.
Key Issues During our site visit, bridge deficiencies were examined and traffic operations were observed. Based on our inspection, the bridge is generally in satisfactory condition. However, current functionality of the structure are limited by the key issues identified as: bridge capacity, bridge width and channel/floodway constriction. The bridge posting precludes most commercial vehicles from using the bridge to access the residencies on Brook Road and Bulrush Lane. As such, access must be from the southerly Brook Road intersection with route 3A (State Road). Despite this restriction, Bayside observed a refuse truck, telecommunications vehicle and package delivery truck crossing the bridge during our inspection. The 16–foot clear width of the bridge and roadway approaches (45 feet in each direction) restricts roadway use to a single lane for a total of 100 feet. Additionally, the roadway approaches are constructed in the floodway of the Beaver Dam Brook. This has resulted in significant upstream flooding under all flood profiles analyzed in the Plymouth County Flood Study.
Environmental/Historic/Archaeologic Resources
Based on a review of online environmental, historic and archeological resources within or adjacent to the bridge site, with the exception of wetland, river and land under water resource areas, there are no additional jurisdictional environmental, historic or archeological resources of concern.
Proposed Bridge Replacement
Based on the site conditions, precast bridge units (box or deck beams) using a full bridge closure and detour for construction would most likely be the fastest and least expensive method of bridge replacement design and construction.
Municipal Small Bridge Program Applicability
The P-23-011 bridge conditions have been reviewed for the applicability standards for funding available under the MassDOT Municipal Small Bridge Program. Because of the key issues outlined above, the bridge is an excellent candidate for funding under this program.
OVERHEAD SIGNS
SCOUR: Pleaseexplain
ITEM 61 (This Report)
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 cracks in 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 have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.
If YES please give priority:
HIGH ( ) MEDIUM ( ) LOW ( )
Date:
A. Bridge Railing
H 3 3S2 Single
At bridge Other Advance
ITEM 61 (Dive Report):
S= Severe/Major Deficiency- D
C-S= Critical Structural Deficiency -
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 and corroded 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 pot holes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.
A defect in a structure 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 imminent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrity of 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. Examples include 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].
meterinft
SERIOUS
CRITICAL
(Y=Yes,N=No, NR=NotRequired)
2PAGE OF
I 58: I 59: I 60:
(V.C.R.)
TAPE#:
(Y/N):
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
4.
B) Type of membrane -
(107) Deck Structure Type -
(40) Navigation Horizontal Clearance
(39) Navigation Vertical Clearance
(49) Structure Length
Under -
(43) Structure Type Main:
(45) Number of spans in main unit
(44) Structure Type Appr:
Structure Type and Material
(3) County Code (4) Place code
(6) Features Intersected
(7) Facility Carried
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Left Right
(52) Deck Width Out to Out
(32) Approach Roadway Width (w/shoulders)
Code
(53) Min Vert Clear Over Bridge Rdwy
(54) Min Vert Underclear ref
(55) Min Lat Underclear RT ref
(56) Min Lat Underclear LT
(38) Navigation Control -
MIN SEC
Actual
(68) Deck Geometry
(67) Structural Evaluation
(41) Structure -
Operating
Inventory
(*) Other Inspection ()
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
SCOUR: Please explain
93B-U/W (DIVE) Insp
ITEM 59 ITEM 60
CITY/TOWN 8.-STRUCTURE NO. 41-STATUS 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
43-STRUCTURE TYPE 22-OWNER 21-MAINTAINER
G. Simpson
Town Agency
6 5 6
Wearing surface 6 M-P Stringers N - 6
Deck Condition 6 M-P Floorbeams N - Pedestals N N - Bridge Seats N H -
Stay in Place Forms N - Floor System Bracing N - Backwalls N H -
Curbs N - Girders or Beams 5 S-A Breastwalls N 6 M-P N 6 M-P
N - Trusses - General N - Wingwalls Median N N -N Slope Paving/Rip-Rap
-N - Upper Chords Sidewalks Pointing N 5 M-P
Lower Chords N - N N - Parapets N - Footings
Web Members N - Piles N N - Railing 7 M-P Scour N 7 -
Lateral Bracing N - N - Settlement N 6 M-P
Anti Missile Fence Sway Bracings N - N N -
Drainage System N - Portals N - N N -
Lighting Standards N - N End Posts N -
5 S-A N N -Utilities Pin & Hangers N Pedestals - Caps N N -
Deck Joints N - Conn Plt's, Gussets & Angles N - Columns N N -
Cover Plates N N NN - - Stems/Webs/Pierwalls - Pointing N N -
N - Bearing Devices N - Footing N N - Diaphragms/Cross Frames N - Piles N N -N -
N N NRivets & Bolts - Scour - Settlement N NN S -
Welds N - N N - N N Member Alignment 7 - N N -
Paint/Coating N N- N N -N Pile Caps
- Appr. pavement condition 5 M-P Piles N N -
Diagonal Bracing N N - Appr. Roadway Settlement 5 M-P Horizontal Bracing N N - Appr. Sidewalk Settlement N - Fasteners N N -
XN - N
N X X
X Condition of Welds N - X Condition of Bolts N - N N 6 Condition of Signs N -
N 00/00/0000
WATER BEAVER DAM BROOK
CLEARANCE POSTING
ITEM 61 (This Report):
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.
Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour. Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.
Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.
REASON:
Rating Report (Y/N):
CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROTECTION
RTB(2)04-07
ACCESSIBILITY
Lift Bucket Ladder Boat Waders Inspector 50 Rigging Staging Traffic Control RR Flagger Police Other:
(Y/N/P) DEF
ITEM 36 TRAFFIC SAFETY 36 COND
A. Bridge Railing B. Transitions C. Approach Guardrail D. Approach Guardrail Ends
ITEM 61
At bridge Other Advance
inft
S= Severe/Major Deficiency -
URGENCY OF REPAIR:
At bridge Advance
Dive Cur DEF
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 and corroded 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 pot holes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.
A defect in a structure 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 imminent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrity of 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. Examples include 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].
meterinft
SERIOUS
CRITICAL
P
C
C
3
2
1
0
EXCELLENT
Needed Used
(Y=Yes,N=No, NR=Not Required)
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.
3S2 SingleH 3
7 7 - N N N - N N 7 - N N
N 7 - 7 - Y Y N 7 - X N N
N 7 - N N N NN 8 - N N
N N - N N N N - N N N 8 -
N N - N N
0 0 0 0
00/00/0000
18
00/00/0000
PLYMOUTH AUG 10, 2020
BRIDGE ORIENTATION Brook Road is a one lane road oriented east and west over Beaver Dam Brook which flows south to north in Plymouth, Massachusetts.
GENERAL REMARKS The structure is constructed of 8 concrete encased steel I-beams with a cast-in-place reinforced concrete deck on field stone masonry abutments with a concrete cap. The beams and bays are numbered from south to north. The previous inspection numbered the beams and bays from north to south. Refer to Inventory Photos, Sketches 1-3 .
ITEM 58 - DECK
Item 58.1 - Wearing surface The bituminous wearing surface has transverse hairline cracks. Photo 1.
Item 58.2 - Deck Condition The reinforced concrete deck has areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep. Photo 2. - The fascias of the concrete deck have areas of scale up to 1/4" deep. - Beam 1 concrete encasement, north elevation, near the west abutment has a spall 4' long x 3" high x 1/2" deep. Photo 3. - Beam 5 concrete encasement, south elevation, near east abutment was not observed this inspection. - Beam 7 concrete encasement, south elevation, near east abutment has a spall 3' long x 2" high x 2 1/2" deep. Photo 4. - Beam 7 concrete encasement, south elevation, near west abtment has a spall 1' long x 2" high x 2 1/2" deep. Photo 5. - Bay 6 near the east abutment has a spall 4" long x 4" high x 1" deep with exposed rebar. photo 6.
Item 58.8 - Railing The railing consists of steel W-beams guardrails with steel posts running continuously over the bridge and into the approaches. The railing is secured to the bridge with anchor rods that run vertically through the bridge. - Both rails have minor collisions scrapes throughout. Photo 7 for typical condtions.
Item 58.12 - Utilities The steel water pipe along the south side of the bridge is resting on concrete. The water pipe has no insulation. The water pipe has a moisture stain. Photo 8.
APPROACHES
Approaches a - Appr. pavement condition - The bituminous wearing surface has wheel ruts. - The southwest has moderate vegetation growth that is starting to encroach toward the roadway. Photo 9. - The east approach has sealed and unsealed cracking. Photos 10 & 11.
Approaches b - Appr. Roadway Settlement The northeast approach roadway and the west approach roadway has settlement up to 1" deep.
OF
PAGE
REM(2)10-16
ITEM 59 - SUPERSTRUCTURE
Item 59.4 - Girders or Beams The structure consists of 8 concrete encased I-beams with exposed bottom flanges. The beams are labeled 1-8 from south to north. The steel beams have light rust. Beams 1 through 7 are within the travel way. Refer to Item 58.2 - Deck for all concrete deficiencies. - Beam 1 bottom flange has heavy rust and areas of 100% section loss up to 1' long x full width. Photos 12 & 13. - Beam 8 bottom flange has areas of pitting up to full length. Photo 14.
ITEM 60 - SUBSTRUCTURE
Item 60.1 - Abutments Item 60.1.d - Breastwalls The breastwalls consists of stone masonry abutments with mortar and reinforced concrete caps. The reinforced concrete caps have areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep and up to full height vertical hairline cracks. The stone masonry has voids up to 10" deep, areas of crack mortar (+/-20% of total area) and areas of missing mortar (+/-20% of total area). West Abutment: - Below Beam 3, at west abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has honeysombing. - Below Beam 4, at west abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has full height diagonal crack up to 1/8" wide. Photo 15. - Below Beam 3, at east abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has a full height vertical crack up to 1/8" wide. Photo 16. - Below Beam 5: The reinforced concrete cap has areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep. - The North End: The stone masonry and mortar has areas of missing stones up to 10" deep and areas of missing mortar. This portion has pulled away and the mortar has fallen out leaving a 2" vertical gap. Photos 17 & 18. - The Northwest corner has multiple voids upto 22" deep. Photo 19.
Item 60.1.e - Wingwalls The wingwalls consists of stone masonry and reinforced concrete caps. The northwest wingwall is leaning outward up to 3" over 2' high. Photo 19. The wingwalls have moderate vegetation growth. Photo 20.
Item 60.1.g - Pointing Along the waterline there is cracked and missing mortar.
Item 60.1.k - Settlement Refer to Item 60.1.d - Breastwalls.
ITEM 61 - CHANNEL AND CHANNEL PROTECTION
Item 61.2 - Embankment Erosion The embankments have minor areas of undercutting. The southeast embankment has a paved drainage swale with minor erosion to the soil around it.
Item 61.3 - Debris The downstream and upstream channel have an accumulation of timber debris.
OF
PAGE
REM(2)10-16
TRAFFIC SAFETY
Item 36a - Bridge Railing Refer to Item 58.8- Railing. This is non-standard item.
Item 36c - Approach Guardrail Refer to Item 58.8 - Railing. The approach W-beam guardrails have light rust. This is non-standard item.
Item 36d - Approach Guardrail Ends Approach guardrail ends are boxing glove ends with light rust. This is non-standard item.
Sketch / Photo Log Sketch 1 : Location Map. Sketch 2 : Plan View. Sketch 3 : Elevation Views. Photo 1 : General wearing surface looking west Photo 2 : General underside looking west. Photo 3 : Beam 1 south elevation spall. Photo 4 : Beam 7 south elevation near east abutment spall. Photo 5 : Beam 7 near west abutment spall. Photo 6 : Bay 6 at east abutment minor spall. Photo 7 : South rail minor collision damage scrapes. Photo 8 : South utility looking east. Photo 9 : West approach, moderate vegetation growth. Photo 10 : East approach sealed and unsealed cracking. Photo 11 : East approach looking east sealed and unsealed longitudinal cracking. Photo 12 : Beam 1 looking west from midspan, section loss. Photo 13 : Beam 1 looking east from midspan, section loss. Photo 14 : Beam 8 looking east pitting. Photo 15 : West abutment below beam 3 & 4, honeycombing and cracking. Photo 16 : East abutment below beam 3 hairline vertical crack. Photo 17 : East breastwall overview looking south. Photo 18 : West breastwall overview voids. Photo 19 : Northwest wingwall leaning and voids in breastwall. Photo 20 : North elevation, vegetation growth.
OF
SKETCHES
PAGE
REM.(2)7-96
PAGE OF7 18
PAGE OF8 18
General underside looking west.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 9 18OF
Beam 7 south elevation near east abutment spall.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 10 18OF
Bay 6 at east abutment minor spall.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 11 18OF
South utility looking east.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 12 18OF
East approach sealed and unsealed cracking.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 13 18OF
Beam 1 looking west from midspan, section loss.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 14 18OF
Beam 8 looking east pitting.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 15 18OF
East abutment below beam 3 hairline vertical crack.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 16 18OF
West breastwall overview voids.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 17 18OF
North elevation, vegetation growth.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 18 18OF
Code
Code
Code
Classification
BDEPT#=
(35) Structure Flared
(33) Bridge Median -
B) Type of membrane -
(107) Deck Structure Type -
(40) Navigation Horizontal Clearance
(39) Navigation Vertical Clearance
(49) Structure Length
Under -
(43) Structure Type Main:
(45) Number of spans in main unit
(44) Structure Type Appr:
(8) Structure Number
(16) Latitude
(5) Inventory Route (2) State Highway Department District (3) County Code (4) Place code
(6) Features Intersected (7) Facility Carried
(9) Location
(11) Kilometerpoint
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Left Right
(52) Deck Width Out to Out
(32) Approach Roadway Width (w/shoulders)
Code
(53) Min Vert Clear Over Bridge Rdwy
(54) Min Vert Underclear ref
(55) Min Lat Underclear RT ref
(56) Min Lat Underclear LT
(38) Navigation Control - (111) Pier Protection Code
(12) Base Highway Network
MIN SEC
0.2 MI. EAST OF ST 3A 03
0000.000 03
Bridge Name
Status Posting Date 00/00/00
N / N Liftbucket N / N N / N N / N N / N Y / Y N / N
N / N
N / N
Ladder Staging Boat Traffic Control Wader RR Flagperson Inspector 50 Police
Inspection Hours: 016
MO A)
MO B)
MO C)
(36) Traffic Safety Features (72) Approach Roadway Alignment (71) Waterway adequacy (69) Underclearances, vert. and horiz. (68) Deck Geometry (67) Structural Evaluation
(41) Structure -
(58) Deck (59) Superstructure (60) Substructure (61) Channel & Channel Protection
(70) Bridge Posting
0 2
00.0 2
0 N 0 0
00/00/00
H20 Type 3 Type 3S2 Type HS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
(*) UW Special Inspection MO *)00 00/00/00
(*) Other Inspection ()
Missing Signs
On free road
N
N
N
N
Unknown
L=103.19' T=51.60'
B.O.
PROP. FULL DEPTH RECONSTRUCTION
FOR DETAILS
WETLAND REPLICATION AREA SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS
R&R
LINE OF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (TYP.)
LINE OF PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT
LIMITS OF WORK (TYP.)
LIMITS OF WORK (TYP.)
STONE FOR EROSION CONTROL
RELOCATE UP B.O.
PROP. GRAN. CURB
TOTAL SHEETS
2192599
7
HIGHWAY GUARD DETAILS STA. 3+59.97 (BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) LT STA. 3+78.82 (BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) RT
STA. 4+50.00 (END BRIDGE RAIL & BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) RT
STA. 4+51.27 (END BRIDGE RAIL & BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) LT
VA5 GRANITE CURBING STA. 3+72.91 LT TO STA. 3+88.02 LT STA. 4+09.52 LT TO STA. 4+18.71 LT
WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS SEE BELOW
DRAINAGE DETAILS SEE BRIDGE PLANS
LANDSCAPE DETAILS SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS
STONE FOR EROSION CONTROL STA. 4+50.00 RT TO STA. 4+57.45 RT STA. 4+51.27 LT TO STA. 4+58.71 LT
PLYMOUTH
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 32B N/F THOMAS F. & CYNTHIA M. KENNEDY BK:21899 PG:97
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 32A N/F THOMAS F. KENNEDY JR. BK:40714 PG:308
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 3A N/F FRANCIS J. & CAROL A. KUHN L.C. CERT No.65134
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 81A N/F BENJAMIN B. & DEBRA W. BREWSTER L.C. CERT No.82530
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 12B N/F BETH ANN & JOHN D. CLARK BK:43050 PG:36
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 30A-1 N/F RICHARD D. KING TRUST OF 2017, RICHARD D. KING, TRUSTEE BK:49123 PG:73
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 33 N/F KATHARINE F. FREELAND MARY E. BACON & DOROTHY E. WOOLEY PLYMOUTH PROBATES No. 72960
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
191.93'
L
0
10
20
PV T:
3 +7
6. 31
EL EV
: 1 3.
NAVD 88 BASE ELEV -5.00
0
10
20
N
N
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
EXIST. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. INTEGRAL ABUTMENT
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
12" = 1'-0" VERTICAL
AutoCAD SHX Text
INDEX TO DRAWINGS
AutoCAD SHX Text
1 - KEY PLAN, PROFILES & LOCUS MAP 2 - GENERAL NOTES & HYDRAULIC DATA 3 - BORING LOGS 4 - PLAN & SOUTH ELEVATION 5 - NORTH ELEVATION 6 - ABUTMENT PLAN & ELEVATION 7 - ABUTMENT PILE LAYOUT 8 - ABUTMENT & WINGWALL DETAILS 9 - MISCELLANEOUS DETIALS 10 - WINGWALL, RIPRAP, & JOINT DETAILS 11 - FRAMING PLAN, BEAM, & DIAPHRAGM DETAILS 12 - CROSS SECTIONS & UTILITY SUPPORT DETAIL 13 - DECK DETAILS 14 - MOMENT SLAB & PREFABRICATED ENGINEERED WALL DETAILS 15 - BRIDGE RAILING DETAILS 16 - PRECAST HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITIONS 17 - TOP OF PRECAST HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITIONS
AutoCAD SHX Text
BRIDGE NO. P-13-011
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
R=200.00' Δ=35 04'20" Δ=35°04'20"L=122.43' T=63.20'
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
R=500.00' Δ=6 52'09" Δ=6°52'09"L=59.94' T=30.01'
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
CONSTRUCTION JOINT CONTINUE APPROACH SLAB REINFORCEMENT INTO MOMENT SLAB FOR DETAIL SEE SHEET 14
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
3'-0" DEEP x 2'-6" MIN. WIDE TRENCH FILLED WITH CRUSHED STONE (M2.01.6) AFTER DRIVING PILE (TYP.)
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
AutoCAD SHX Text
SCALE: " = 1'-0"14" = 1'-0"
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
3'-0" DEEP x 2'-6" MIN. WIDE TRENCH FILLED WITH CRUSHED STONE (M2.01.6) AFTER DRIVING PILE (TYP.)
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION
AutoCAD SHX Text
SCALE: " = 1'-0"14" = 1'-0"
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
DATE
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 2
Project Title and Description: Traffic Sign & Signal Asset Management Total
Project Cost: $150,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted:
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital Operations &
Maintenance
Labor and Materials FY23
Project Justification and Objective: The proposed Traffic Sign & Signal Asset Management program is a comprehensive inventory of the
Town’s existing traffic signals, school flashers and traffic signs. The data collected will be incorporated into the Town’s GIS database,
providing an accessible means to identify, evaluate and manage the Town’s traffic sign and signal infrastructure. The project will include the
inspection and evaluation of signal equipment, collection of traffic counts, signal timing modifications as well as short-, medium- and long-
term capital improvement recommendations. Additionally, traffic signs throughout Town will be inventoried, added to the Town’s GIS
database and evaluated for safety and MUTCD compliance. This proposed asset management program will complement the Town’s existing
Pavement Management Program and establish a GIS-based platform for the Town to manage its traffic signs and signals. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
FY18, FY19, FY20, FY21
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
October 20, 2020
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Plymouth 26 Court Street Plymouth, MA 02347
Re: Town-wide Traffic Signal & Sign Inventory
Dear Ms. Sgarzi:
BETA Group, Inc. (BETA) is pleased to submit this proposal to continue to provide the Town of Plymouth with GIS/Asset Management services. To date, BETA has assisted the Town with the development of its pavement management program, ADA pilot program as well as providing support services to maintain the platform. It is our understanding that the Town would like to complete a Town-wide inventory of traffic signals and signs to establish a comprehensive database and compliance program that will integrate into the Town’s existing Geographic Information System (GIS). Each of these projects will be conducted separately, but for the purpose of this proposal BETA has been asked to combine both projects into the following scope of services.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
PROJECT 1 – TOWN-WIDE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INVENTORY
BETA Group will provide Traffic Engineering Services through conducting a field inventory of existing traffic signal equipment. Field data collection will be supplemented with photos and integrated into the Town’s existing GIS as mentioned above. According to Town records, the Town has 25 Town-owned full intersection signals, 2 Town-owned Emergency Vehicle signals, 1 Town-owned Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, 5 Town-owned Flashing Beacon signals, 26 Town-owned Flashing School Zone signals and 12 State-owned full intersection signals. For the purposes of this proposal, it is anticipated that all Town-owned signals including the 25 Town-owned full intersections and 34 Flashing beacons and/or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons will be evaluated.
TASK 1 – DATABASE SETUP & FIELD INVENTORY OF EXISTING SIGNALS
The town will provide BETA with all available signal plans, permits, as-built drawings, and any prior inventory reports for review in the setup of the signal database. This information will serve as the foundation for the field work to be conducted by BETA field staff. Once all relevant data has been compiled and the signal database built to the standard of the Town BETA will have a trained field crew to conduct the actual inventory of all existing signals mentioned above.
The field inventory will consist of the following comprehensive approach:
A. Conduct an inventory of existing signals including: · Controller and cabinet, and ancillary equipment
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 2 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
· Vehicular and pedestrian signal heads (size, type, location, and number) · Signal posts, mast arms, and span wires · Pedestrian push buttons · Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) · Countdown pedestrian signals · Associate signing (“No Turn on Red”, etc.) · Signal phasing and timing · Detectors · Preemption · Interconnection
B. Check working condition of all signal hardware C. Identify Coordination Type D. Note Operation Status (fixed time, semi-actuated, fully actuated) E. Observe deficiencies at full intersection signals F. Locate and perform cursory review of existing curb ramps for APS locations
The next step in this task will be to check for compliance with MUTCD, State, and Local ordinances in order to note any deficiencies that may exist. BETA will also prepare a photo log as part of this task to highlight any of the deficiencies noted during the compliance review.
The deliverables from this task will consist of the following items: · GIS database (structured to work in conjunction with the Town’s existing Asset Management
Program) · Microsoft Access Database Inventory · Geocoded photos of existing equipment · Existing Signal Plans (where provided) and all Signal Timing Sheets
TASK 2 – TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION
In Phase I, improvement recommendations are based on an inventory of existing equipment, or the lack thereof. In this phase, BETA will carry out an assessment of existing operations that will identify further deficiencies. Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic, traffic data collection may not be appropriate at the time of Notice to Proceed. Phase 2 could be removed from scope upon Town’s request without affecting other Phases.
Traffic Counts will be conducted in the morning (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and afternoon (4:00 – 6:00 PM) during peak hour turning movement counts (TMC’s) at each of the twenty-five (25) fully operational locations. The counts will provide a basis for traffic analysis and evaluation of existing and future traffic operations. BETA does not recommend collecting traffic data at the remaining intersections since flashing operation, school crossings and emergency fire station signals do not experience intermittent, rotating movement of vehicles in a manner that can be described by analysis of traffic volumes. Traffic analysis will then be conducted for each of the twenty-five (25) fully operational locations. Analysis will be conducted during morning and afternoon peak periods for existing and future conditions.
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 3 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
TASK 3 – EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT
Recommendations will be based on the field inventory, observations, and traffic data. BETA will investigate traffic measures to improve traffic flow and safety, as well as improvements to be developed in a three staged process:
· Short term improvements are those that can result from timing and phasing modifications. (assuming completion of Phase 2 of this scope)
· Medium Term improvements are those that the Town can undertake with its own forces for a limited cost. Typical cost of improvement measures in this category will be under $2,500.
· Long Term improvements will include significant measures that can be included in the capital improvement plan.
BETA will provide a report detailing findings related to existing and future conditions of all traffic signal hardware and curb ramps. The report will include supporting graphics, a summary of findings, and cost estimates for recommended improvements at each location.
TASK 4 – IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-TERM/IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon approval from the Town, BETA will perform field adjustments limited to timing and phasing modifications, and other signal parameters that can be adjusted within the controller. No physical changes are included in this task. All field adjustments will be documented in Existing Signal Plans (where provided) or Signal Timing Sheets as appropriate.
TASK 5 – MEETINGS
This scope incudes four (4) formal meetings, including a kick-off meeting, a meeting to present findings subsequent to Task 5 to present all findings, a third meeting to review proposed improvements, and a fourth to review the Draft Report.
DELIVERABLES The scope of services will include the following deliverables:
· Geographic Information System (GIS) database · Microsoft Access Database Inventory · Geocoded photos of existing intersections · Traffic Signal Inventory Report · Copies of all field sheets, worksheets and any other material developed for this project
(provided in both hard copy and electronic format) · Photo Log of all Equipment Deficiencies
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 4 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
FEE PROPOSAL
The preceding scope of work will be completed for a not to exceed amount of $83,700 and is broken down as follows:
Project 1 – Traffic Signal Inventory Task 1: Field Inventory of Existing Signals $40,000 Task 2: Traffic Data Collection $12,000 Task 3: Evaluation and Recommendations Report $10,000 Task 4: Implementation $10,000 Task 5: Meetings $3,000 Subtotal $75,000
Direct Costs Mileage $1,200 Traffic Counts $7,500 Subtotal $8,700
Not to Exceed Amount Total $83,700
PROJECT 2 – TRAFFIC SIGN INVENTORY & COMPLIANCE PLAN
BETA will work with the Town to conduct an inventory of traffic signs that exist along Town accepted streets. The sign types to be inventoried will consist of existing regulatory, warning, parking, and school traffic signs. The level of effort for this project assumes an inventory allowance of 2,500 traffic signs to be collected.
TASK 1 – SYSTEM SETUP & DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM
The GIS base mapping will consist of orthophotography and a series of data layers. This data will facilitate the mapping of each sign within a GIS environment. Field crews will utilize field tablets (Arc Collector App) to access inventory and inspection forms. Each sign will be spatially located as a point on the GIS base map and attributed accordingly.
Attribute data to be developed will include the following:
· Sign ID · Sign Type · MUTCD Designation · Size · Sheeting Type – Engineering Grade, Diamond Grade (DG), High Intensity Prismatic (HIP) · Sign Support · Condition (Good, Damaged – Replace or Reset) · If Stop Sign, is a Stop Bar Present (Yes/No) · Picture of Sign · Plow Route or Maintenance District
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 5 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
TASK 2 – DATA ANALYSIS, REPORTING, & GIS MAPPING
A series of existing conditions reports, and GIS maps will be submitted detailing the general condition of each sign collected as mentioned above. In addition, a Retroreflectivity Testing Program will be conducted and will focus on testing priority signs or types. For this proposal, we have established an allowance of approximately 500 signs to be tested. Testing will focus on Stop and Speed limits signs and those consisting of DG and HIP sheeting.
The following deliverables will be submitted upon completing the field investigation as described above:
· Tabular Inventory Reports (MS Access-based) · Sign Inventory Database (ESRI Geo-Database) · Large format GIS Maps as directed
TASK 3 –COMPLIANCE REVIEW & CIP DEVELOPMENT
Based on the data collected a review of each sign will be conducted by BETA to confirm that each sign collected meets the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) compliance, as well as recent amendments to the MUTCD regulations. This task will also look to review compliance based on the retroreflectivity testing outlined in Task 2, sheeting type, size, color, mounting height, and legend. However, advisory speed signs will not be checked for MUTCD compliance.
BETA will also work with the Town to develop a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) based on designated priority areas or corridors. This CIP will also look to achieve compliance within a given timeframe based on the priority areas, as well as available funding. This plan will serve as the foundation of a replacement program for non- compliant signs and include the areas where potential signs could exist per local ordinance. The recommendations garnered from this CIP will provide support to the Town for effective and efficient use of available funds.
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 6 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
FEE PROPOSAL
The preceding scope of work will be completed for a not to exceed amount of $54,250 and is broken down as follows:
Project 2 – Traffic Sign Inventory & Compliance Plan
Task 1 – System Setup & Sign Inventory Program (2,500 Traffic Signs) $32,000*
Task 2 – Analysis, Reporting, & GIS Mapping $9,500
Task 3 – Compliance Review & CIP Development $12,750 Not to Exceed Amount Total $54,250
*Street Name signs can be collected for an additional $10,000.
Overall Project Fee Project 1 – Traffic Signal Inventory $83,700 Project 2 – Traffic Sign Inventory & Compliance Plan $54,250 Total Project Amount $137,950
Thank you for the opportunity to continue assisting the Town of Plymouth with the further development of its Asset Management Program. If you have any questions or require additional information on this proposal, please feel free to contact me at (508) 769-2807.
Sincerely, BETA Group, Inc.
Anthony J. Garro Senior Vice President GIS & Asset Management Services
Your signature on a copy of this correspondence, returned to this office, will be considered acceptance of the scope of work and fee contained herein, and as authorization to proceed. …………………………………………………………………………
_______________________________________________ Signature
_______________________________________________ Name
_______________________________________________ Title
___________________________________________ Date
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 3
Project Title and Description: Manomet Avenue Wicking Wells Total
Project Cost: $450,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted:
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital Operations &
Maintenance
Planning and Design Design will be done by in-house Engineering staff
FY22
Administration FY24
Project Justification and Objective: Stormwater discharge along Manomet Avenue has been exacerbating erosion issues along the bluff
that runs parallel to the street. There is a confining clay layer located approximately 30 to 40 feet below the surface of the road. This clay
layer intercepts subsurface stormwater infiltration and redirects it toward the adjacent cliff face, which contributes to erosion of the cliff. The
proposed wicking wells are intended to direct stormwater below the clay layer, which will allow the stormwater to infiltrate into the deeper,
permeable subsurface materials. The design and construction of a wicking well is very similar to a traditional groundwater well. But instead
of pumping water out of the ground, the wicking well directs water into the ground. The proposed project will involve the installation of three
of wicking wells, each approximately 80 to 90 feet deep. The project will also include drainage upgrades and final asphalt restoration along
approximately 1,500 linear feet of Manomet Avenue. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
FY21
COST ESTIMATE WICK WELL INSTALLTION AND ASSOCIATED WORK 3 WICK WELLS - DRAINAGE STRUCTURES - RE-PAVE 1,500 L.F. OF MANOMET AVE ITEM # DESCRIPTION EST. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST COST
1 DOUBLE CATCH BASIN 5' DIA. 6 EACH $3,400.00 $20,400.00 2 CATCH BASIN 5' DIA. 2 EACH $3,200.00 $6,400.00 3 4' DIA DRAIN MANHOLE W/ SUMP 4 EACH $3,100.00 $12,400.00 4 12" HDPE PIPE 300 L.F. $55.00 $16,500.00 5 6' DIA DRAIN MANHOLE 3 EACH $5,000.00 $15,000.00 6 RECLAIMED ASPHALT BASE - FOR TEMP/DRAIN INSTALL 150 TON $22.00 $3,300.00 7 ASPHALT FOR TRENCH PATCHES 60 TON $250.00 $15,000.00 8 CRUSHED STONE - PIPE BEDDING 75 TON $20.00 $1,500.00 9 SAWCUTTING 700 L.F. $2.00 $1,400.00 10 12" SILT SOCK 200 L.F. $9.00 $1,800.00 11 LOAM 110 CY $15.00 $1,650.00 12 CLEAN FILL 150 CY $22.00 $3,300.00 13 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 150 C.Y. $10.00 $1,500.00 14 SEEDING 1,000 S.Y. $1.00 $1,000.00 15 WATER GATE ADJUST 10 EACH $100.00 $1,000.00 16 WELL CAPS 7 EACH $500.00 $3,500.00 17 WELL CLEANING 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 18 TEST BORINGS 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 19 WICK WELLS 3 EACH $40,000.00 $120,000.00 20 ASPHALT DRIVEWAY APRONS 30 TONS $100.00 $3,000.00 21 MILL 3,400 S.Y. $2.50 $8,500.00 22 OVERLAY 4" (SHIM & 2" OVERLAY) 750 TON $77.25 $57,937.50
Plymouth Enginering Division 10/29/2020 $335,087.50
$50,263.13
$57,802.59
$443,153.22
TOTAL
S:\Capital Improvement Plan\FY22 Capital Improvment Plan - Spring 2021\Capital Requests\#3 Wicking Wells - Manomet Avenue\Backup Info\PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 10-29-2020
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL
PROPOSED WICK WELL #1
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED WICK WELL #1 LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MANOMET AVENUE & BREWSTER AVENUE
AutoCAD SHX Text
FUTURE DRAIN MANOLE
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL #2
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED WICK WELL #2 LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MANOMET AVENUE & BRADFORD AVENUE
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL #3
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
FUTURE DRAIN MANOLE
AutoCAD SHX Text
Five Year Plan
#3 Manomet Avenue Wicking Wells
2,875,000.00$ 4,125,000.00$ 1,925,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ 2,500,000.00$ 13,425,000.00$
Person Submitting: Sheila Sgarzi
FISCAL YEAR 2022 - 2026
Department: DPW, Engineering Division
11/19/2020 Page 1 FY22 5-yr Plan - Engineering 11-19-2020
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 1
Project Title and Description: Brook Road Bridge Design & Construction Total
Project Cost: $2,275,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted: $511,454.60 in grants
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital
Operations & Maintenance
FY22
FY23
FY24
Total Capital $1,765,000.00 Rounded up from $1,763,545.40
Project Justification and Objective: The proposed Brook Road Bridge project will replace the existing one-lane bridge with a 30’-6” wide
steel and concrete structure, two 11’ wide travel lanes, a 5’-6” wide sidewalk and a new 8” ductile iron water main. The Brook Road Bridge
dates back to the 19th century. Improvements were made to the bridge in 1926 when the wooden floor was replaced with steel I beams. Bridge
inspection reports over the past ten years have rated the deck and superstructure in the range of fair to satisfactory condition and the
substructure in the range of poor to satisfactory condition. The posted weight limit precludes school buses, fire engines and garbage trucks
from crossing the bridge. The 1937 cast iron water main that crosses the bridge is hydraulically restricted due to tuberculation and is in need
of replacement. The roadway approaches are constructed within the floodway of Beaver Dam Brook; this alignment exacerbates the potential
for upstream flooding. The proposed bridge replacement project will address the current deficiencies and will enable two-way traffic to safely
cross the bridge. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: > 75 years, MassDOT standard Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
Item Cost Estimate Use Cost Estimate Basis
Design & Permitting 124,900.00$ 124,900.00$ Existing contract with Bayside Engineering
Land Acquisition 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$ Estimated 28,191 SF of proposed permanent easements
Construction 1,485,809.44$ 1,485,100.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/15/2020 cost estimate.
Construction Contingency (20%) 297,161.89$ 300,000.00$ Standard practice is to use a 20 - 25% contingency
Temporary and Permanent Utility Pole Relocation 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/28/2020 estimate
Police Details 132,000.00$ 135,000.00$ 150 days x 2 details x $55/hour x 8 hr/day
Construction Administration & Inspection 140,000.00$ 140,000.00$ Bayside Engineering 10/28/2020 estimate
TOTAL: 2,269,871.33$ 2,275,000.00$
ITEM NO. UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANT. UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED COST
*115.1 LS DEMOLITION OF BRIDGE NO. P-13-011 1 $26,000.00 $26,000.00
120.1 CY UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 640 $40.00 $25,600.00
140. CY BRIDGE EXCAVATION 730 $50.00 $36,500.00
141. CY CLASS A TRENCH EXCAVATION 475 $40.00 $19,000.00
143. CY CHANNEL EXCAVATION 95 $165.00 $15,675.00
144. CY CLASS B ROCK EXCAVATION 48 $150.00 $7,125.00
151.01 CY GRAVEL BORROW - TYPE C 505 $55.00 $27,775.00
151.2 CY GRAVEL BORROW FOR BACKFILLING STRUCTURES AND PIPES 420 $50.00 $21,000.00
156. TON CRUSHED STONE 310 $50.00 $15,500.00
156.1 TON CRUSHED STONE FOR BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS 35 $50.00 $1,750.00
170. SY FINE GRADING AND COMPACTING 1,240 $5.00 $6,200.00
450.22 TON SUPERPAVE SURFACE COURSE – 9.5 (SSC – 9.5) 105 $150.00 $15,750.00
450.31 TON SUPERPAVE INTERMEDIATE COURSE – 12.5 (SIC – 12.5) 125 $125.00 $15,625.00
450.42 TON SUPERPAVE BASE COURSE – 37.5 (SBC – 37.5) 230 $110.00 $25,300.00
450.6 TON SUPERPAVE BRIDGE SURFACE COURSE - 9.5 (SSC-B-9.5) 6 $500.00 $3,000.00
450.71 TON SUPERPAVE BRIDGE PROTECTIVE COURSE - 12.5 (SPC-B-12.5) 15 $410.00 $6,150.00
452. GAL ASPHALT EMULSION FORO TACK COAT 130 $8.50 $1,105.00
*482.2 FT HOT POURED JOINT SEALER 530 $3.00 $1,590.00
482.3 FT SAWCUTTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT 50 $35.00 $1,750.00
627.1 EA TRAILING ANCHORAGE 2 $1,825.00 $3,650.00
627.82 EA GUARDRAIL TANGENT END TREATMENT, TL-2 2 $4,100.00 $8,200.00
*698.4 SY GEOTEXTILE FABRIC FORPERMANENT EROSION CONTROL 75 $6.00 $450.00
701. SY CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK 177 $65.00 $11,519.44
751. CY LOAM BORROW 40 $60.00 $2,400.00
*754. CY WETLAND SOIL REHANDLED AND SPREAD 40 $100.00 $4,000.00
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Contract No. __________
ITEM NO. UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANT. UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED COST
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
*767.121 FT SEDIMENT CONTROL BARRIER 400 $10.00 $4,000.00
904.3 CY 5000 PSI, 3/4 INCH, 685 HP CEMENT CONCRETE 40 $1,880.00 $75,200.00
942.102 FT STEEL PILE HP 10 X 57 1,200 $190.00 $228,000.00
948.41 EA DYNAMIC LOAD TEST BY CONTRACTOR 2 $7,250.00 $14,500.00
948.5 EA PILE SHOES 12 $200.00 $2,400.00
983.1 TON RIPRAP 125 $60.00 $7,500.00
*991.1 LS CONTROL OF WATER-STRUCTURE NO. P-13-011 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00
995.01 LS BRIDGE STRUCTURE, BRIDGE NO. P-13-011 1 $760,000.00 $760,000.00
*996.3 SF PREFABRICATED ENGINEERED WALL SYSTEM 442 $35.00 $15,470.00
*999.99 LS WATER LINE PROTECTION/RELOCATION 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00
SUBTOTAL $1,485,809.44
2 of 2 Brook Road Const Estimate.xlsm
From: Daniel Flagg To: Sheila Sgarzi Cc: Brian A. Boucher; Norman H. Brown Subject: RE: Brook Road Bridge - Capital Request Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 10:22:50 AM Attachments: image001.png
Hi Sheila, After discussion with Brian we came up with the following:
- We assumed that the construction work on the project would be restricted to 7 AM to 5 PM Monday – Friday.
- Based on that restriction we are assuming a conservative estimate of a 7 month construction season (the construction may be completed sooner)
- The cost for that results as follows: Full-time Resident Services - 150 Construction days @ 8 hours per day X $100/Hour = $120,000 Shop Drawing Review (Senior Engineer) – 160 Hours @ $125/hour = $ 20,000 Total Construction Services = $140,000 Bayside in the past has also completed Part-time Resident services with an average of 4 hours per day (noting that some days during the construction that no work is completed), that would result in the following:
Part-time Resident Services - 150 Construction days @ 4 hours per day X $100/Hour = $ 60,000 Shop Drawing Review (Senior Engineer) – 160 Hours @ $125/hour = $ 20,000 Total Construction Services = $ 80,000 Finally our most recent bridge completed in Boxford with some on-site services was done with the assistance of the Boxford DPW Director and was completed with a construction budget of $60,000. In the end, if you’re are looking for the conservative number to use for the warrant - I would recommend - $140,000. Let me know if you need anything else on this issue, I would be glad to further discuss it with you. Thanks
Daniel J. Flagg
ssgarzi
Rectangle
D F
from an application that is not licensed to print to novaP
D F
The proposed Brook Road Bridge will be this style. Note: The railings on the new Brook Road Bridge will be black.
Y ou created this P
D F
from an application that is not licensed to print to novaP
D F
ssgarzi
Callout
Brook Road Bridge will have a 5'-6" wide sidewalk on the north side
ssgarzi
The proposed Brook Road Bridge will match this style bridge
Bridge P-13-011 (9KM) Project Overview Bridge P-13-011 (9KM) is a single 11.5-foot span steel stringer/ reinforced concrete deck bridge located in the Town of Plymouth that carries Brook Road over the Beaver Dam Brook. The abutments and wingwalls are stone masonry gravity walls. The bridge clear width is 16+/- feet and carries a single lane of traffic. The bridge construction date is unknown, however, based on similar construction methods, it is estimated that the construction date is circa 1925. The bridge is currently posted at H = 3 tons; Type 3 = 5 tons; 3S2 = 8 tons. An initial routine bridge inspection was performed by Bayside Engineering on August 8, 2016.
Key Issues During our site visit, bridge deficiencies were examined and traffic operations were observed. Based on our inspection, the bridge is generally in satisfactory condition. However, current functionality of the structure are limited by the key issues identified as: bridge capacity, bridge width and channel/floodway constriction. The bridge posting precludes most commercial vehicles from using the bridge to access the residencies on Brook Road and Bulrush Lane. As such, access must be from the southerly Brook Road intersection with route 3A (State Road). Despite this restriction, Bayside observed a refuse truck, telecommunications vehicle and package delivery truck crossing the bridge during our inspection. The 16–foot clear width of the bridge and roadway approaches (45 feet in each direction) restricts roadway use to a single lane for a total of 100 feet. Additionally, the roadway approaches are constructed in the floodway of the Beaver Dam Brook. This has resulted in significant upstream flooding under all flood profiles analyzed in the Plymouth County Flood Study.
Environmental/Historic/Archaeologic Resources
Based on a review of online environmental, historic and archeological resources within or adjacent to the bridge site, with the exception of wetland, river and land under water resource areas, there are no additional jurisdictional environmental, historic or archeological resources of concern.
Proposed Bridge Replacement
Based on the site conditions, precast bridge units (box or deck beams) using a full bridge closure and detour for construction would most likely be the fastest and least expensive method of bridge replacement design and construction.
Municipal Small Bridge Program Applicability
The P-23-011 bridge conditions have been reviewed for the applicability standards for funding available under the MassDOT Municipal Small Bridge Program. Because of the key issues outlined above, the bridge is an excellent candidate for funding under this program.
OVERHEAD SIGNS
SCOUR: Pleaseexplain
ITEM 61 (This Report)
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 cracks in 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 have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.
If YES please give priority:
HIGH ( ) MEDIUM ( ) LOW ( )
Date:
A. Bridge Railing
H 3 3S2 Single
At bridge Other Advance
ITEM 61 (Dive Report):
S= Severe/Major Deficiency- D
C-S= Critical Structural Deficiency -
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 and corroded 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 pot holes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.
A defect in a structure 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 imminent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrity of 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. Examples include 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].
meterinft
SERIOUS
CRITICAL
(Y=Yes,N=No, NR=NotRequired)
2PAGE OF
I 58: I 59: I 60:
(V.C.R.)
TAPE#:
(Y/N):
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
4.
B) Type of membrane -
(107) Deck Structure Type -
(40) Navigation Horizontal Clearance
(39) Navigation Vertical Clearance
(49) Structure Length
Under -
(43) Structure Type Main:
(45) Number of spans in main unit
(44) Structure Type Appr:
Structure Type and Material
(3) County Code (4) Place code
(6) Features Intersected
(7) Facility Carried
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Left Right
(52) Deck Width Out to Out
(32) Approach Roadway Width (w/shoulders)
Code
(53) Min Vert Clear Over Bridge Rdwy
(54) Min Vert Underclear ref
(55) Min Lat Underclear RT ref
(56) Min Lat Underclear LT
(38) Navigation Control -
MIN SEC
Actual
(68) Deck Geometry
(67) Structural Evaluation
(41) Structure -
Operating
Inventory
(*) Other Inspection ()
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
SCOUR: Please explain
93B-U/W (DIVE) Insp
ITEM 59 ITEM 60
CITY/TOWN 8.-STRUCTURE NO. 41-STATUS 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
43-STRUCTURE TYPE 22-OWNER 21-MAINTAINER
G. Simpson
Town Agency
6 5 6
Wearing surface 6 M-P Stringers N - 6
Deck Condition 6 M-P Floorbeams N - Pedestals N N - Bridge Seats N H -
Stay in Place Forms N - Floor System Bracing N - Backwalls N H -
Curbs N - Girders or Beams 5 S-A Breastwalls N 6 M-P N 6 M-P
N - Trusses - General N - Wingwalls Median N N -N Slope Paving/Rip-Rap
-N - Upper Chords Sidewalks Pointing N 5 M-P
Lower Chords N - N N - Parapets N - Footings
Web Members N - Piles N N - Railing 7 M-P Scour N 7 -
Lateral Bracing N - N - Settlement N 6 M-P
Anti Missile Fence Sway Bracings N - N N -
Drainage System N - Portals N - N N -
Lighting Standards N - N End Posts N -
5 S-A N N -Utilities Pin & Hangers N Pedestals - Caps N N -
Deck Joints N - Conn Plt's, Gussets & Angles N - Columns N N -
Cover Plates N N NN - - Stems/Webs/Pierwalls - Pointing N N -
N - Bearing Devices N - Footing N N - Diaphragms/Cross Frames N - Piles N N -N -
N N NRivets & Bolts - Scour - Settlement N NN S -
Welds N - N N - N N Member Alignment 7 - N N -
Paint/Coating N N- N N -N Pile Caps
- Appr. pavement condition 5 M-P Piles N N -
Diagonal Bracing N N - Appr. Roadway Settlement 5 M-P Horizontal Bracing N N - Appr. Sidewalk Settlement N - Fasteners N N -
XN - N
N X X
X Condition of Welds N - X Condition of Bolts N - N N 6 Condition of Signs N -
N 00/00/0000
WATER BEAVER DAM BROOK
CLEARANCE POSTING
ITEM 61 (This Report):
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.
Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour. Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.
Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.
REASON:
Rating Report (Y/N):
CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROTECTION
RTB(2)04-07
ACCESSIBILITY
Lift Bucket Ladder Boat Waders Inspector 50 Rigging Staging Traffic Control RR Flagger Police Other:
(Y/N/P) DEF
ITEM 36 TRAFFIC SAFETY 36 COND
A. Bridge Railing B. Transitions C. Approach Guardrail D. Approach Guardrail Ends
ITEM 61
At bridge Other Advance
inft
S= Severe/Major Deficiency -
URGENCY OF REPAIR:
At bridge Advance
Dive Cur DEF
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 and corroded 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 pot holes, Minor corrosion of steel, Minor scouring, Clogged drainage, etc.
A defect in a structure 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 imminent failure of the element which will affect the structural integrity of 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. Examples include 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].
meterinft
SERIOUS
CRITICAL
P
C
C
3
2
1
0
EXCELLENT
Needed Used
(Y=Yes,N=No, NR=Not Required)
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.
3S2 SingleH 3
7 7 - N N N - N N 7 - N N
N 7 - 7 - Y Y N 7 - X N N
N 7 - N N N NN 8 - N N
N N - N N N N - N N N 8 -
N N - N N
0 0 0 0
00/00/0000
18
00/00/0000
PLYMOUTH AUG 10, 2020
BRIDGE ORIENTATION Brook Road is a one lane road oriented east and west over Beaver Dam Brook which flows south to north in Plymouth, Massachusetts.
GENERAL REMARKS The structure is constructed of 8 concrete encased steel I-beams with a cast-in-place reinforced concrete deck on field stone masonry abutments with a concrete cap. The beams and bays are numbered from south to north. The previous inspection numbered the beams and bays from north to south. Refer to Inventory Photos, Sketches 1-3 .
ITEM 58 - DECK
Item 58.1 - Wearing surface The bituminous wearing surface has transverse hairline cracks. Photo 1.
Item 58.2 - Deck Condition The reinforced concrete deck has areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep. Photo 2. - The fascias of the concrete deck have areas of scale up to 1/4" deep. - Beam 1 concrete encasement, north elevation, near the west abutment has a spall 4' long x 3" high x 1/2" deep. Photo 3. - Beam 5 concrete encasement, south elevation, near east abutment was not observed this inspection. - Beam 7 concrete encasement, south elevation, near east abutment has a spall 3' long x 2" high x 2 1/2" deep. Photo 4. - Beam 7 concrete encasement, south elevation, near west abtment has a spall 1' long x 2" high x 2 1/2" deep. Photo 5. - Bay 6 near the east abutment has a spall 4" long x 4" high x 1" deep with exposed rebar. photo 6.
Item 58.8 - Railing The railing consists of steel W-beams guardrails with steel posts running continuously over the bridge and into the approaches. The railing is secured to the bridge with anchor rods that run vertically through the bridge. - Both rails have minor collisions scrapes throughout. Photo 7 for typical condtions.
Item 58.12 - Utilities The steel water pipe along the south side of the bridge is resting on concrete. The water pipe has no insulation. The water pipe has a moisture stain. Photo 8.
APPROACHES
Approaches a - Appr. pavement condition - The bituminous wearing surface has wheel ruts. - The southwest has moderate vegetation growth that is starting to encroach toward the roadway. Photo 9. - The east approach has sealed and unsealed cracking. Photos 10 & 11.
Approaches b - Appr. Roadway Settlement The northeast approach roadway and the west approach roadway has settlement up to 1" deep.
OF
PAGE
REM(2)10-16
ITEM 59 - SUPERSTRUCTURE
Item 59.4 - Girders or Beams The structure consists of 8 concrete encased I-beams with exposed bottom flanges. The beams are labeled 1-8 from south to north. The steel beams have light rust. Beams 1 through 7 are within the travel way. Refer to Item 58.2 - Deck for all concrete deficiencies. - Beam 1 bottom flange has heavy rust and areas of 100% section loss up to 1' long x full width. Photos 12 & 13. - Beam 8 bottom flange has areas of pitting up to full length. Photo 14.
ITEM 60 - SUBSTRUCTURE
Item 60.1 - Abutments Item 60.1.d - Breastwalls The breastwalls consists of stone masonry abutments with mortar and reinforced concrete caps. The reinforced concrete caps have areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep and up to full height vertical hairline cracks. The stone masonry has voids up to 10" deep, areas of crack mortar (+/-20% of total area) and areas of missing mortar (+/-20% of total area). West Abutment: - Below Beam 3, at west abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has honeysombing. - Below Beam 4, at west abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has full height diagonal crack up to 1/8" wide. Photo 15. - Below Beam 3, at east abutment: The reinforced concrete cap has a full height vertical crack up to 1/8" wide. Photo 16. - Below Beam 5: The reinforced concrete cap has areas of honeycomb up to 1/4" deep. - The North End: The stone masonry and mortar has areas of missing stones up to 10" deep and areas of missing mortar. This portion has pulled away and the mortar has fallen out leaving a 2" vertical gap. Photos 17 & 18. - The Northwest corner has multiple voids upto 22" deep. Photo 19.
Item 60.1.e - Wingwalls The wingwalls consists of stone masonry and reinforced concrete caps. The northwest wingwall is leaning outward up to 3" over 2' high. Photo 19. The wingwalls have moderate vegetation growth. Photo 20.
Item 60.1.g - Pointing Along the waterline there is cracked and missing mortar.
Item 60.1.k - Settlement Refer to Item 60.1.d - Breastwalls.
ITEM 61 - CHANNEL AND CHANNEL PROTECTION
Item 61.2 - Embankment Erosion The embankments have minor areas of undercutting. The southeast embankment has a paved drainage swale with minor erosion to the soil around it.
Item 61.3 - Debris The downstream and upstream channel have an accumulation of timber debris.
OF
PAGE
REM(2)10-16
TRAFFIC SAFETY
Item 36a - Bridge Railing Refer to Item 58.8- Railing. This is non-standard item.
Item 36c - Approach Guardrail Refer to Item 58.8 - Railing. The approach W-beam guardrails have light rust. This is non-standard item.
Item 36d - Approach Guardrail Ends Approach guardrail ends are boxing glove ends with light rust. This is non-standard item.
Sketch / Photo Log Sketch 1 : Location Map. Sketch 2 : Plan View. Sketch 3 : Elevation Views. Photo 1 : General wearing surface looking west Photo 2 : General underside looking west. Photo 3 : Beam 1 south elevation spall. Photo 4 : Beam 7 south elevation near east abutment spall. Photo 5 : Beam 7 near west abutment spall. Photo 6 : Bay 6 at east abutment minor spall. Photo 7 : South rail minor collision damage scrapes. Photo 8 : South utility looking east. Photo 9 : West approach, moderate vegetation growth. Photo 10 : East approach sealed and unsealed cracking. Photo 11 : East approach looking east sealed and unsealed longitudinal cracking. Photo 12 : Beam 1 looking west from midspan, section loss. Photo 13 : Beam 1 looking east from midspan, section loss. Photo 14 : Beam 8 looking east pitting. Photo 15 : West abutment below beam 3 & 4, honeycombing and cracking. Photo 16 : East abutment below beam 3 hairline vertical crack. Photo 17 : East breastwall overview looking south. Photo 18 : West breastwall overview voids. Photo 19 : Northwest wingwall leaning and voids in breastwall. Photo 20 : North elevation, vegetation growth.
OF
SKETCHES
PAGE
REM.(2)7-96
PAGE OF7 18
PAGE OF8 18
General underside looking west.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 9 18OF
Beam 7 south elevation near east abutment spall.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 10 18OF
Bay 6 at east abutment minor spall.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 11 18OF
South utility looking east.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 12 18OF
East approach sealed and unsealed cracking.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 13 18OF
Beam 1 looking west from midspan, section loss.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 14 18OF
Beam 8 looking east pitting.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 15 18OF
East abutment below beam 3 hairline vertical crack.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 16 18OF
West breastwall overview voids.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 17 18OF
North elevation, vegetation growth.
AUG 10, 2020PLYMOUTH P-13-011
PAGE 18 18OF
Code
Code
Code
Classification
BDEPT#=
(35) Structure Flared
(33) Bridge Median -
B) Type of membrane -
(107) Deck Structure Type -
(40) Navigation Horizontal Clearance
(39) Navigation Vertical Clearance
(49) Structure Length
Under -
(43) Structure Type Main:
(45) Number of spans in main unit
(44) Structure Type Appr:
(8) Structure Number
(16) Latitude
(5) Inventory Route (2) State Highway Department District (3) County Code (4) Place code
(6) Features Intersected (7) Facility Carried
(9) Location
(11) Kilometerpoint
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Code
Left Right
(52) Deck Width Out to Out
(32) Approach Roadway Width (w/shoulders)
Code
(53) Min Vert Clear Over Bridge Rdwy
(54) Min Vert Underclear ref
(55) Min Lat Underclear RT ref
(56) Min Lat Underclear LT
(38) Navigation Control - (111) Pier Protection Code
(12) Base Highway Network
MIN SEC
0.2 MI. EAST OF ST 3A 03
0000.000 03
Bridge Name
Status Posting Date 00/00/00
N / N Liftbucket N / N N / N N / N N / N Y / Y N / N
N / N
N / N
Ladder Staging Boat Traffic Control Wader RR Flagperson Inspector 50 Police
Inspection Hours: 016
MO A)
MO B)
MO C)
(36) Traffic Safety Features (72) Approach Roadway Alignment (71) Waterway adequacy (69) Underclearances, vert. and horiz. (68) Deck Geometry (67) Structural Evaluation
(41) Structure -
(58) Deck (59) Superstructure (60) Substructure (61) Channel & Channel Protection
(70) Bridge Posting
0 2
00.0 2
0 N 0 0
00/00/00
H20 Type 3 Type 3S2 Type HS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
(*) UW Special Inspection MO *)00 00/00/00
(*) Other Inspection ()
Missing Signs
On free road
N
N
N
N
Unknown
L=103.19' T=51.60'
B.O.
PROP. FULL DEPTH RECONSTRUCTION
FOR DETAILS
WETLAND REPLICATION AREA SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS
R&R
LINE OF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (TYP.)
LINE OF PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT
LIMITS OF WORK (TYP.)
LIMITS OF WORK (TYP.)
STONE FOR EROSION CONTROL
RELOCATE UP B.O.
PROP. GRAN. CURB
TOTAL SHEETS
2192599
7
HIGHWAY GUARD DETAILS STA. 3+59.97 (BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) LT STA. 3+78.82 (BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) RT
STA. 4+50.00 (END BRIDGE RAIL & BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) RT
STA. 4+51.27 (END BRIDGE RAIL & BEGIN HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITION) LT
VA5 GRANITE CURBING STA. 3+72.91 LT TO STA. 3+88.02 LT STA. 4+09.52 LT TO STA. 4+18.71 LT
WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS SEE BELOW
DRAINAGE DETAILS SEE BRIDGE PLANS
LANDSCAPE DETAILS SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS
STONE FOR EROSION CONTROL STA. 4+50.00 RT TO STA. 4+57.45 RT STA. 4+51.27 LT TO STA. 4+58.71 LT
PLYMOUTH
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 32B N/F THOMAS F. & CYNTHIA M. KENNEDY BK:21899 PG:97
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 32A N/F THOMAS F. KENNEDY JR. BK:40714 PG:308
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 3A N/F FRANCIS J. & CAROL A. KUHN L.C. CERT No.65134
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 81A N/F BENJAMIN B. & DEBRA W. BREWSTER L.C. CERT No.82530
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 12B N/F BETH ANN & JOHN D. CLARK BK:43050 PG:36
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 30A-1 N/F RICHARD D. KING TRUST OF 2017, RICHARD D. KING, TRUSTEE BK:49123 PG:73
AutoCAD SHX Text
MAP 45 LOT 33 N/F KATHARINE F. FREELAND MARY E. BACON & DOROTHY E. WOOLEY PLYMOUTH PROBATES No. 72960
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
191.93'
L
0
10
20
PV T:
3 +7
6. 31
EL EV
: 1 3.
NAVD 88 BASE ELEV -5.00
0
10
20
N
N
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
EXIST. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. INTEGRAL ABUTMENT
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
12" = 1'-0" VERTICAL
AutoCAD SHX Text
INDEX TO DRAWINGS
AutoCAD SHX Text
1 - KEY PLAN, PROFILES & LOCUS MAP 2 - GENERAL NOTES & HYDRAULIC DATA 3 - BORING LOGS 4 - PLAN & SOUTH ELEVATION 5 - NORTH ELEVATION 6 - ABUTMENT PLAN & ELEVATION 7 - ABUTMENT PILE LAYOUT 8 - ABUTMENT & WINGWALL DETAILS 9 - MISCELLANEOUS DETIALS 10 - WINGWALL, RIPRAP, & JOINT DETAILS 11 - FRAMING PLAN, BEAM, & DIAPHRAGM DETAILS 12 - CROSS SECTIONS & UTILITY SUPPORT DETAIL 13 - DECK DETAILS 14 - MOMENT SLAB & PREFABRICATED ENGINEERED WALL DETAILS 15 - BRIDGE RAILING DETAILS 16 - PRECAST HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITIONS 17 - TOP OF PRECAST HIGHWAY GUARDRAIL TRANSITIONS
AutoCAD SHX Text
BRIDGE NO. P-13-011
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
R=200.00' Δ=35 04'20" Δ=35°04'20"L=122.43' T=63.20'
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
R=500.00' Δ=6 52'09" Δ=6°52'09"L=59.94' T=30.01'
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROP. WATER LINE
AutoCAD SHX Text
CONSTRUCTION JOINT CONTINUE APPROACH SLAB REINFORCEMENT INTO MOMENT SLAB FOR DETAIL SEE SHEET 14
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
3'-0" DEEP x 2'-6" MIN. WIDE TRENCH FILLED WITH CRUSHED STONE (M2.01.6) AFTER DRIVING PILE (TYP.)
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
AutoCAD SHX Text
SCALE: " = 1'-0"14" = 1'-0"
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOTAL SHEETS
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
3'-0" DEEP x 2'-6" MIN. WIDE TRENCH FILLED WITH CRUSHED STONE (M2.01.6) AFTER DRIVING PILE (TYP.)
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION
AutoCAD SHX Text
SCALE: " = 1'-0"14" = 1'-0"
AutoCAD SHX Text
APPROVED UNDER PROVISIONS OF MASS. GEN. LAWS CH 85 S 35
AutoCAD SHX Text
STATE BRIDGE ENGINEER
AutoCAD SHX Text
DATE
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 2
Project Title and Description: Traffic Sign & Signal Asset Management Total
Project Cost: $150,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted:
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital Operations &
Maintenance
Labor and Materials FY23
Project Justification and Objective: The proposed Traffic Sign & Signal Asset Management program is a comprehensive inventory of the
Town’s existing traffic signals, school flashers and traffic signs. The data collected will be incorporated into the Town’s GIS database,
providing an accessible means to identify, evaluate and manage the Town’s traffic sign and signal infrastructure. The project will include the
inspection and evaluation of signal equipment, collection of traffic counts, signal timing modifications as well as short-, medium- and long-
term capital improvement recommendations. Additionally, traffic signs throughout Town will be inventoried, added to the Town’s GIS
database and evaluated for safety and MUTCD compliance. This proposed asset management program will complement the Town’s existing
Pavement Management Program and establish a GIS-based platform for the Town to manage its traffic signs and signals. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
FY18, FY19, FY20, FY21
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
October 20, 2020
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Plymouth 26 Court Street Plymouth, MA 02347
Re: Town-wide Traffic Signal & Sign Inventory
Dear Ms. Sgarzi:
BETA Group, Inc. (BETA) is pleased to submit this proposal to continue to provide the Town of Plymouth with GIS/Asset Management services. To date, BETA has assisted the Town with the development of its pavement management program, ADA pilot program as well as providing support services to maintain the platform. It is our understanding that the Town would like to complete a Town-wide inventory of traffic signals and signs to establish a comprehensive database and compliance program that will integrate into the Town’s existing Geographic Information System (GIS). Each of these projects will be conducted separately, but for the purpose of this proposal BETA has been asked to combine both projects into the following scope of services.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
PROJECT 1 – TOWN-WIDE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INVENTORY
BETA Group will provide Traffic Engineering Services through conducting a field inventory of existing traffic signal equipment. Field data collection will be supplemented with photos and integrated into the Town’s existing GIS as mentioned above. According to Town records, the Town has 25 Town-owned full intersection signals, 2 Town-owned Emergency Vehicle signals, 1 Town-owned Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, 5 Town-owned Flashing Beacon signals, 26 Town-owned Flashing School Zone signals and 12 State-owned full intersection signals. For the purposes of this proposal, it is anticipated that all Town-owned signals including the 25 Town-owned full intersections and 34 Flashing beacons and/or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons will be evaluated.
TASK 1 – DATABASE SETUP & FIELD INVENTORY OF EXISTING SIGNALS
The town will provide BETA with all available signal plans, permits, as-built drawings, and any prior inventory reports for review in the setup of the signal database. This information will serve as the foundation for the field work to be conducted by BETA field staff. Once all relevant data has been compiled and the signal database built to the standard of the Town BETA will have a trained field crew to conduct the actual inventory of all existing signals mentioned above.
The field inventory will consist of the following comprehensive approach:
A. Conduct an inventory of existing signals including: · Controller and cabinet, and ancillary equipment
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 2 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
· Vehicular and pedestrian signal heads (size, type, location, and number) · Signal posts, mast arms, and span wires · Pedestrian push buttons · Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) · Countdown pedestrian signals · Associate signing (“No Turn on Red”, etc.) · Signal phasing and timing · Detectors · Preemption · Interconnection
B. Check working condition of all signal hardware C. Identify Coordination Type D. Note Operation Status (fixed time, semi-actuated, fully actuated) E. Observe deficiencies at full intersection signals F. Locate and perform cursory review of existing curb ramps for APS locations
The next step in this task will be to check for compliance with MUTCD, State, and Local ordinances in order to note any deficiencies that may exist. BETA will also prepare a photo log as part of this task to highlight any of the deficiencies noted during the compliance review.
The deliverables from this task will consist of the following items: · GIS database (structured to work in conjunction with the Town’s existing Asset Management
Program) · Microsoft Access Database Inventory · Geocoded photos of existing equipment · Existing Signal Plans (where provided) and all Signal Timing Sheets
TASK 2 – TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION
In Phase I, improvement recommendations are based on an inventory of existing equipment, or the lack thereof. In this phase, BETA will carry out an assessment of existing operations that will identify further deficiencies. Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic, traffic data collection may not be appropriate at the time of Notice to Proceed. Phase 2 could be removed from scope upon Town’s request without affecting other Phases.
Traffic Counts will be conducted in the morning (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and afternoon (4:00 – 6:00 PM) during peak hour turning movement counts (TMC’s) at each of the twenty-five (25) fully operational locations. The counts will provide a basis for traffic analysis and evaluation of existing and future traffic operations. BETA does not recommend collecting traffic data at the remaining intersections since flashing operation, school crossings and emergency fire station signals do not experience intermittent, rotating movement of vehicles in a manner that can be described by analysis of traffic volumes. Traffic analysis will then be conducted for each of the twenty-five (25) fully operational locations. Analysis will be conducted during morning and afternoon peak periods for existing and future conditions.
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 3 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
TASK 3 – EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT
Recommendations will be based on the field inventory, observations, and traffic data. BETA will investigate traffic measures to improve traffic flow and safety, as well as improvements to be developed in a three staged process:
· Short term improvements are those that can result from timing and phasing modifications. (assuming completion of Phase 2 of this scope)
· Medium Term improvements are those that the Town can undertake with its own forces for a limited cost. Typical cost of improvement measures in this category will be under $2,500.
· Long Term improvements will include significant measures that can be included in the capital improvement plan.
BETA will provide a report detailing findings related to existing and future conditions of all traffic signal hardware and curb ramps. The report will include supporting graphics, a summary of findings, and cost estimates for recommended improvements at each location.
TASK 4 – IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-TERM/IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon approval from the Town, BETA will perform field adjustments limited to timing and phasing modifications, and other signal parameters that can be adjusted within the controller. No physical changes are included in this task. All field adjustments will be documented in Existing Signal Plans (where provided) or Signal Timing Sheets as appropriate.
TASK 5 – MEETINGS
This scope incudes four (4) formal meetings, including a kick-off meeting, a meeting to present findings subsequent to Task 5 to present all findings, a third meeting to review proposed improvements, and a fourth to review the Draft Report.
DELIVERABLES The scope of services will include the following deliverables:
· Geographic Information System (GIS) database · Microsoft Access Database Inventory · Geocoded photos of existing intersections · Traffic Signal Inventory Report · Copies of all field sheets, worksheets and any other material developed for this project
(provided in both hard copy and electronic format) · Photo Log of all Equipment Deficiencies
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 4 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
FEE PROPOSAL
The preceding scope of work will be completed for a not to exceed amount of $83,700 and is broken down as follows:
Project 1 – Traffic Signal Inventory Task 1: Field Inventory of Existing Signals $40,000 Task 2: Traffic Data Collection $12,000 Task 3: Evaluation and Recommendations Report $10,000 Task 4: Implementation $10,000 Task 5: Meetings $3,000 Subtotal $75,000
Direct Costs Mileage $1,200 Traffic Counts $7,500 Subtotal $8,700
Not to Exceed Amount Total $83,700
PROJECT 2 – TRAFFIC SIGN INVENTORY & COMPLIANCE PLAN
BETA will work with the Town to conduct an inventory of traffic signs that exist along Town accepted streets. The sign types to be inventoried will consist of existing regulatory, warning, parking, and school traffic signs. The level of effort for this project assumes an inventory allowance of 2,500 traffic signs to be collected.
TASK 1 – SYSTEM SETUP & DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM
The GIS base mapping will consist of orthophotography and a series of data layers. This data will facilitate the mapping of each sign within a GIS environment. Field crews will utilize field tablets (Arc Collector App) to access inventory and inspection forms. Each sign will be spatially located as a point on the GIS base map and attributed accordingly.
Attribute data to be developed will include the following:
· Sign ID · Sign Type · MUTCD Designation · Size · Sheeting Type – Engineering Grade, Diamond Grade (DG), High Intensity Prismatic (HIP) · Sign Support · Condition (Good, Damaged – Replace or Reset) · If Stop Sign, is a Stop Bar Present (Yes/No) · Picture of Sign · Plow Route or Maintenance District
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 5 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
TASK 2 – DATA ANALYSIS, REPORTING, & GIS MAPPING
A series of existing conditions reports, and GIS maps will be submitted detailing the general condition of each sign collected as mentioned above. In addition, a Retroreflectivity Testing Program will be conducted and will focus on testing priority signs or types. For this proposal, we have established an allowance of approximately 500 signs to be tested. Testing will focus on Stop and Speed limits signs and those consisting of DG and HIP sheeting.
The following deliverables will be submitted upon completing the field investigation as described above:
· Tabular Inventory Reports (MS Access-based) · Sign Inventory Database (ESRI Geo-Database) · Large format GIS Maps as directed
TASK 3 –COMPLIANCE REVIEW & CIP DEVELOPMENT
Based on the data collected a review of each sign will be conducted by BETA to confirm that each sign collected meets the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) compliance, as well as recent amendments to the MUTCD regulations. This task will also look to review compliance based on the retroreflectivity testing outlined in Task 2, sheeting type, size, color, mounting height, and legend. However, advisory speed signs will not be checked for MUTCD compliance.
BETA will also work with the Town to develop a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) based on designated priority areas or corridors. This CIP will also look to achieve compliance within a given timeframe based on the priority areas, as well as available funding. This plan will serve as the foundation of a replacement program for non- compliant signs and include the areas where potential signs could exist per local ordinance. The recommendations garnered from this CIP will provide support to the Town for effective and efficient use of available funds.
Ms. Shelia Sgarzi, P.E. October 20, 2020 Page 6 of 6
BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com
FEE PROPOSAL
The preceding scope of work will be completed for a not to exceed amount of $54,250 and is broken down as follows:
Project 2 – Traffic Sign Inventory & Compliance Plan
Task 1 – System Setup & Sign Inventory Program (2,500 Traffic Signs) $32,000*
Task 2 – Analysis, Reporting, & GIS Mapping $9,500
Task 3 – Compliance Review & CIP Development $12,750 Not to Exceed Amount Total $54,250
*Street Name signs can be collected for an additional $10,000.
Overall Project Fee Project 1 – Traffic Signal Inventory $83,700 Project 2 – Traffic Sign Inventory & Compliance Plan $54,250 Total Project Amount $137,950
Thank you for the opportunity to continue assisting the Town of Plymouth with the further development of its Asset Management Program. If you have any questions or require additional information on this proposal, please feel free to contact me at (508) 769-2807.
Sincerely, BETA Group, Inc.
Anthony J. Garro Senior Vice President GIS & Asset Management Services
Your signature on a copy of this correspondence, returned to this office, will be considered acceptance of the scope of work and fee contained herein, and as authorization to proceed. …………………………………………………………………………
_______________________________________________ Signature
_______________________________________________ Name
_______________________________________________ Title
___________________________________________ Date
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN REQUEST FORM FY22 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING REQUEST FORM
Department: DPW, Engineering Division Priority #: 3
Project Title and Description: Manomet Avenue Wicking Wells Total
Project Cost: $450,000 Department/Division Head: Check if project is: New Resubmitted Cost estimate was developed: Internally Externally For project re-submittals, list prior year(s): List any funding sources and amounts already granted:
Basis of Estimated Costs (attach additional information if available)
If project has impact on 5 Year Plan and future operating budgets, insert estimated amounts.
Capital: Cost Comments Fiscal Year: Capital Operations &
Maintenance
Planning and Design Design will be done by in-house Engineering staff
FY22
Administration FY24
Project Justification and Objective: Stormwater discharge along Manomet Avenue has been exacerbating erosion issues along the bluff
that runs parallel to the street. There is a confining clay layer located approximately 30 to 40 feet below the surface of the road. This clay
layer intercepts subsurface stormwater infiltration and redirects it toward the adjacent cliff face, which contributes to erosion of the cliff. The
proposed wicking wells are intended to direct stormwater below the clay layer, which will allow the stormwater to infiltrate into the deeper,
permeable subsurface materials. The design and construction of a wicking well is very similar to a traditional groundwater well. But instead
of pumping water out of the ground, the wicking well directs water into the ground. The proposed project will involve the installation of three
of wicking wells, each approximately 80 to 90 feet deep. The project will also include drainage upgrades and final asphalt restoration along
approximately 1,500 linear feet of Manomet Avenue. For Capital Project Requests: Will this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? If yes, enter it on the 5 Year Plan Yes No Can this project be phased over more than one fiscal year? Yes No For Capital Equipment Requests:
Check if equipment requested is replacement and enter the year, make & model, VIN and present condition of existing equipment What is the expected lifespan of this new/replacement equipment: Attach backup information, estimates, or justification to support this request.
Sheila Sgarzi, Town Engineer
FY21
COST ESTIMATE WICK WELL INSTALLTION AND ASSOCIATED WORK 3 WICK WELLS - DRAINAGE STRUCTURES - RE-PAVE 1,500 L.F. OF MANOMET AVE ITEM # DESCRIPTION EST. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST COST
1 DOUBLE CATCH BASIN 5' DIA. 6 EACH $3,400.00 $20,400.00 2 CATCH BASIN 5' DIA. 2 EACH $3,200.00 $6,400.00 3 4' DIA DRAIN MANHOLE W/ SUMP 4 EACH $3,100.00 $12,400.00 4 12" HDPE PIPE 300 L.F. $55.00 $16,500.00 5 6' DIA DRAIN MANHOLE 3 EACH $5,000.00 $15,000.00 6 RECLAIMED ASPHALT BASE - FOR TEMP/DRAIN INSTALL 150 TON $22.00 $3,300.00 7 ASPHALT FOR TRENCH PATCHES 60 TON $250.00 $15,000.00 8 CRUSHED STONE - PIPE BEDDING 75 TON $20.00 $1,500.00 9 SAWCUTTING 700 L.F. $2.00 $1,400.00 10 12" SILT SOCK 200 L.F. $9.00 $1,800.00 11 LOAM 110 CY $15.00 $1,650.00 12 CLEAN FILL 150 CY $22.00 $3,300.00 13 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 150 C.Y. $10.00 $1,500.00 14 SEEDING 1,000 S.Y. $1.00 $1,000.00 15 WATER GATE ADJUST 10 EACH $100.00 $1,000.00 16 WELL CAPS 7 EACH $500.00 $3,500.00 17 WELL CLEANING 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 18 TEST BORINGS 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 19 WICK WELLS 3 EACH $40,000.00 $120,000.00 20 ASPHALT DRIVEWAY APRONS 30 TONS $100.00 $3,000.00 21 MILL 3,400 S.Y. $2.50 $8,500.00 22 OVERLAY 4" (SHIM & 2" OVERLAY) 750 TON $77.25 $57,937.50
Plymouth Enginering Division 10/29/2020 $335,087.50
$50,263.13
$57,802.59
$443,153.22
TOTAL
S:\Capital Improvement Plan\FY22 Capital Improvment Plan - Spring 2021\Capital Requests\#3 Wicking Wells - Manomet Avenue\Backup Info\PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 10-29-2020
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL
PROPOSED WICK WELL #1
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED WICK WELL #1 LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MANOMET AVENUE & BREWSTER AVENUE
AutoCAD SHX Text
FUTURE DRAIN MANOLE
AutoCAD SHX Text
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL #2
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
PROPOSED WICK WELL #2 LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MANOMET AVENUE & BRADFORD AVENUE
TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
PROPOSED WICK WELL #3
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
AutoCAD SHX Text
FUTURE DRAIN MANOLE
AutoCAD SHX Text
Five Year Plan
#3 Manomet Avenue Wicking Wells