HomeMy WebLinkAboutHK - Victoria Park Heritage Pedestrian Bridge UpgrapesDate:February 18, 2011
To:Members, Heritage Kitchener Committee
From:William Sleeth, Landscape Architect, Operations Division
cc:L. Bensason
Subject:Victoria Park Heritage Pedestrian Bridge
For Discussion Only
The City of Kitchener, Infrastructure Services Department is proceeding with the design and
construction of a new railing and guard on the historic bridge in Victoria Park to address an
immediate public safety issue.
All bridges in the city are inspected annually to ensure that they are safe for public use.
Kitchener Bridge # 877, located in Victoria Park, was inspected in 2010 and checked for
compliance to CAN/CSA-S6-06, Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code Section-14 Evaluation.
It was found that the railings do not comply with the current design code.
The attached report, Victoria ParkBridge Railing Capacity Report, City of Kitchener Bridge #
877, prepared by MuirTec Inc., December 2010 details the findings of the engineering
inspection and the recommendations of the inspecting engineer.
City staff have contracted a professional engineer to design a new railing which would comply
with the code and preserve the heritage value and appearance of the heritage bridge structure.
A preliminary design has been prepared and is attached to this memo for your information.
Drawings # S02 and # S03, MuirTec Inc., dated Feb. 2011.
City staff and the consulting professional engineer, Bob Muir, are attending the March 8, 2011
meeting of Heritage Kitchener to discuss this project and the preliminary design and request the
committee’s assistance and direction in the preparation of a final design which meets their
objectives. This final design would be presented as part of a formal Heritage Permit Application
for review and approval at a later meeting of Heritage Kitchener.
William Sleeth
Landscape Architect
Operations, Design and Development
Infrastructure Services
City of Kitchener
519-741-2401
william.sleeth@kitchener.ca
ï ó ï
VICTORIA PARK BRIDGE
RAILING CAPACITY REPORT
City of Kitchener Bridge Number 877
for
City of Kitchener
Prepared by: MuirTec Inc.
December, 2010 ï ó î
ï ó í
VICTORIA PARK BRIDGE
RAILING CAPACITY REPORT
City of Kitchener Bridge Number 877
for
City of Kitchener
Prepared by: MuirTec Inc.
37 Allen Street West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 1C9
File Number: M1-1050
December, 2010
ï ó ì
This report provides information on the City of Kitchener Bridge number 877. The bridge is
located in Victoria Park just off Jubilee Drive in the City of Kitchener. Original construction of
the bridge was approximately 1910.
The railings on this bridge were checked for compliance to CAN/CSA-S6-06, Canadian
Highway Bridge Design Code Section-14 Evaluation.
It was found that the railings do not comply with the current design code.
We recommend that the bridge be equipped with new railings that are anchored to the timber
deck. This would provide a railing that would comply with the code and still preserve the
heritage value and appearance of the structure.
The budget cost for this work is estimated to be approximately $ 43,000.00.
A detailed description can be found in the body of this report.
(i)
ï ó ë
Letter of Transmittal
Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................i
Table of Contents .........................................................................................................................ii
General .........................................................................................................................................1
Work Performed ...........................................................................................................................2
Observations and Discussion .......................................................................................................3
General Overall Condition ...............................................................................................3
Railings ............................................................................................................................3
Structural Analysis ...........................................................................................................4
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................5
Construction Budget ....................................................................................................................
Appendices
Appendix 1: Reference Photos
Appendix 2: OSIM Report
Appendix 3: Drawings and Sketches
(ii)
ï ó ê
This bridge is located in Victoria Park near Jubilee Drive in the City of Kitchener and crosses
over Victoria Lake to the island. It was constructed in approximately 1910 and is number 877 in
the City of Kitchener bridge inventory.
The structure is approximately 3.6 meters wide with three spans for a total length of 28.0 meters.
The deck is a timber deck supported by structural steel resting on concrete abutments at each end
and two piers in the water.
A new timber deck was installed in 2003 along with a fresh coat of paint.
Site
- 1 -
ï ó é
The following work was performed on the structure.
1.Obtain geometry of existing railing;
2.Perform structural analysis on existing railing;
3.Provide recommendations; and
4.Provide a construction budget for any recommended repairs.
Ù»²»®¿´Ñª»®¿´´Ý±²¼·¬·±²
In general the bridge components are in fair to good condition. The piers are beginning to
deteriorate and should be rehabilitated soon. The timber deck is in good condition as it is only
seven years old.
ο·´·²¹
The railings on the side of the structure are pipe railings spaced 241mm to 267mm centre to
centre. The top rail is approximately 1,062mm above the walking surface. The CAN/CSA-S6-
06, Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code Section-14 Evaluation (CHBDC) requires pedestrian
railings to be 1.05m above the walking surface and spaced so that the least dimension between
them does not exceed 150mm. Based on our field measurements the geometry of the existing
railings does not meet the requirements of the current CHBDC.
ͬ®«½¬«®¿´ß²¿´§·
Using information collected in the field, the railing structure was considered to be a simply
supported horizontal rails supported at posts along the sides of the bridge. For the purposes of
member resistance the material yield strength was taken as 210 MPa. The vertical post was a
102x64 American standard beam manufactured around 1910. The outside diameter and the wall
thickness of the horizontals were measured and they were found to be 42.2mm and 33.4mm
diameter schedule 40 pipe. There were three different spans of the horizontal rails, 2.74m,
6.20m and 6.40m.
- 2 -
ï ó è
Our analysis of the post indicates that the post has adequate capacity to resist the loads required
to be applied by the current CHBDC. Anchorage of the post is by four 13mm diameter rivets at
the base of the post. The anchorage is adequate to resist the loads required to be applied by the
current CHBDC.
The top and bottom horizontal rails are 42.2mm diameter x 3.56mm thick wall pipe. Under the
loading required by the CHBDC these rails are overloaded by up to 20.6 times their capacity
depending on the span. The two middle horizontal rails are 33.4mm diameter x 3.38mm thick
wall pipe. Under the loading required by the CHBDC these rails are overloaded by 36.1 times
their capacity depending on the span.
The following are recommendations resulting from our investigation.
1.A new railing system that complies with the CHBDC should be constructed for this
bridge. The new railing should be anchored to the timber deck so that the historical
quality of the bridge is not changed.
- 3 -
ï ó ç
ï ó ïð
Appendix 1
Reference Photos
ï ó ïï
Photo Appendix
Photo 1:
Elevation view of structure.
Photo 2:
Elevation view of typical railing
geometry.
ï ó ïî
Photo 3:
View of end post as railing
elements come through.
Photo 4:
Top of end post.
ï ó ïí
Photo 5:
Side view of one of the main
support frames with railings
passing through.
Photo 6:
View of railings along side of
structure.
ï ó ïì
Photo 7:
Photo shows railing elements
passing through posts near centre
of span.
ï ó ïë
Appendix 2
OSIM Report
ï ó ïê
Ontario Structural Inspection Manual - Inspection Form
MTO Site Number:
City Site No.:
877
Inventory Data:
Structure NamePedestrian Bridge
CrossingNavig. WaterNon-Navig. Water
Main Hwy/Road #OnUnder
Type:RailRoadPed. Other
Hwy/Road Name
Structure LocationOver Victoria Lake, Victoria Park, Island to Jubilee Drive
Latitude Longitude--
Heritage.
Not Cons.Cons./not AppList/not Desig.
Owner(s) City of Kitchener
Designation:Desig./not List Desig. & List
MTO Region Road Class: Waterloo
FreewayArterialCollectorLocal
-No. of Lanes
MTO District Posted Speed--
-% Trucks
Old County AADT--
-
Geographic Twp. Inspection Route Sequence-
-
Structure Type Interchange NumberSteel Truss
28.0
Total Deck Length (m) Interchange Structure Number-
3.6-
Overall Str. Width (m) Min. Vertical Clearance (m)
Transit Truck School Bicycle
Total Deck Area (sq.m) Special Routes:
oaway.meourengrounrge-m
RoadwayWidth36(m)DetourLengthAroundBridge(km)
RdWidth36()DtLthAdBid(k)
o
Skew Angle0 (Degrees) Direction of StructureN / S
No. of Spans3 Fill on Structure- (m)
Span Lengths (m)
Historical Data:
Year Built Last Evaluation1910 approx.2010
Last Biennial Inspection Current Load Limit (tonnes)2004 / /
Last BridgeMaster Inspection Load Limit By-Law #-
Last Condition Survey By-Law Expiry Date-
Last Underwater Inspection-
Rehab History: (Date/description)
Page 1
2-49Oct. 2000
ï ó ïé
Ontario Structural Inspection Manual - Inspection Form
MTO Site Number:
City Site No.:
877
Scheduled Improvements:
Regional Priority NumberProgrammed Work Year
Nature of Program Work:
Comments
Appraisal Indices:
Fatigue--
Seismic--
Scour--
Flood--
Geometrics--
Barrier--
ur--
Curb
Cb
--
Load Capacity
Page 2
2-50 Oct. 2000
ï ó ïè
Ontario Structural Inspection Manual - Inspection FormMTO Site Number:
City Site No.:
877
Field Inspection Information
Date of Inspection:
December 9, 2010
Inspector:
R. Muir
Others in Party:
Equipment Used:
Weather:
Overcast
Temperature:
0
0C
Priority
Additional Investigation Required
NoneNormalUrgent
Detailed Deck Condition Survey:
Non-destructive Delamination Survey of Asphalt-Covered Deck:
Substructure Condition Survey:
Detailed Coating Condition Survey:
Underwater Investigation:
Fatigue Investigation:
Seismic Investigation:
Structure Evaluation:
Monitoring of Deformations, Settlements and Movements:
Special Notes:
- Conduct investigation and evaluation of severe erosion and cracking on northeast pier and north abutment wall.
- report completed on railing capacity and code compliance in 2010
Next Detailed Visual Inspection:
2012
Suspected Performance Deficiencies
00None06 Bearing not uniformly loaded/unstable 12 Slippery surfaces
01Load carrying capacity07 Jammed expansion joint 13 Flodding/channel blockage
02Excessive deformations (deflections & rotations)08 Pedestrian/vehicular hazard 14 Undermining of foundation
03Continuing settlement09 Rough riding surface 15 Unstable embankments
04Continuing movements10 Surface ponding 16 Other
05Seized bearings11 Deck drainage
Maintenance Needs
01Lift and Swing Bridge Maintenance07 Repair to Structural Steel 13 Erosion Control at Bridges
02Bridge Cleaning08 Repair of Bridge Concrete 14 Concrete Sealing
03Bridge Handrail Maintenance09 Repair of Bridge Timber 15 Rout and Seal
04Painting Steel Bridge Structures10 Bailey bridges - Maintenance 16 Bridge Deck Drainage
05Bridge Deck Joint Repair11 Animal/Pest Control 17 Other
06Bridge Bearing Maintenance12 Bridge Surface Repair
Page 3
2-51 Oct. 2000
ï ó ïç
Ontario Structural Inspection Manual - Inspection FormMTO Site Number:
City Site No.:
877
Element Data
Element Group:
Decks Length:28
Element Name:
Width:
Deck3.6
Location:
Height:0.05
Material:
Wood (2x8) Count:
Element Type:
PrimaryTotal Quality:
Environment:
Severe Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.Maint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
Deficiencies
UnitsNeeds
all
Data:
00
Comments:
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Element Group:
Main Longitudinal Elements14 Length:
Element Name:
Suspended Frame- Width:
Location:
Height:
3
Material:
Steel Count:4
Element Type:
PrimaryTotal Quality:
Environment:
Severe Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.
CoatingMaint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
UnitsDeficienciesNeeds
all
Data:
00
Comments:
- do not comply to bridge code
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Element Group:
Length:
Piers
Element Name:
Piers Width:
Location:
- Height:
Material:
Concrete4 Count:
Element Type:
PrimaryTotal Quality:
Environment:
Severe Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.
Maint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
UnitsDeficienciesNeeds
each
Data:
20108
Comments:
- Severe erosion on northeast pier
- Delamination of concrete patching and cracking on base plate grout on southeast pier.
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Page 4
2
* A quantity must be estimated using the appropriate unit (e.g. m). Percent should not be used.
2-52Oct. 2000
ï ó îð
Ontario Structural Inspection Manual - Inspection FormMTO Site Number:
City Site No.:
877
Element Data
Element Group:
Abutments Length:
Element Name:
Width:
Abutment Wall4.0
Location:
Height:
Material:
Concrete Count:2
Element Type:
PrimaryTotal Quality:
Environment:
Severe Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.Maint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
Deficiencies
UnitsNeeds
each
Data:
101
08
Comments:
- Wide crack and severe erosion on north abutment wall.
- Minor erosion and medium cracks on south abutment wall.
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Element Group:
Length:
Barriers28
Element Name:
Railing Width:
Location:
Height:
1.2
Material:
Steel Count:2
Element Type:
SecondaryTotal Quality:
Environment:
Moderate Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.
Maint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
UnitsDeficienciesNeeds
all
Data:
01
Comments:
- Minor erosion on steel tube seams.
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Element Group:
Length:
Element Name:
Width:
Location:
Height:
Material:
Count:
Element Type:
Total Quality:
Environment:
Benign / Moderate / Severe Not Inspected
Protection System:
Perform.Maint.
Good
ConditionExc.FairPoor*
UnitsDeficienciesNeeds
2
Data:
m/ m / each / % / all
Comments:
Recommended Work:
None 1 - 5 years < 1 year Urgent
Page 5
2
* A quantity must be estimated using the appropriate unit (e.g. m). Percent should not be used.
2-52Oct. 2000
ï ó îï
Appendix 3
Drawings and Sketches
ï ó îî
ï ó îí
ï ó îì
ï ó îë