SEATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY DEPARTMET OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE INVESTIGATIONS 100 South Main Street, 3rd Floor LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 -- 1' NE (213) 897-2004 Flex your power! (213) 897-2033 Be energy e?icient! EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor January 20, 2015 Mr. Jorge Biagioni Director of Engineering/ City Engineer City of Hemet 510 E. Florida Ave. Hemet, CA 92543 Dear Mr. Biagioni: In accordance with Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (Federal Highway Act) and the National Bridge Inspection Standards BIS), Caltrans Structure Maintenance and Investigations performed a Routine inspection of 1 bridge(s) under your jurisdiction. The bridges have been rated to indicate their de?ciencies, structural adequacy, safe load carrying capacity and overall general condition. Enclosed are copies of the Bridge Inspection Reports for the structures noted on the attached transmittal sheet. These reports contain descriptions of physical changes to the structures since the last inspection, recommendations for work to be done, and additional information not recorded in the previous Bridge Reports. Your attention is directed to the requirements of Title 23, Part 650 of the Code of Federal Regulations, where newly completed structures or any modi?cation of existing structures shall be entered in the inventory within 90 days. Please notify this of?ce of any newly constructed bridge or culvert within your jurisdiction, more than 20 feet measured along the center of the roadway and carrying public vehicular traf?c or over a public roadway, in order that it may be entered in the inventory of bridge structures in compliance with Federal requirements. Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed Bridge Inspection Report(s), please contact Gedion Werrede (213) 897-2018. Sincerely, CHING CHAO, Of?ce Chief Structure Maintenance Investigations (Investigations South) x. Enclosures For NAME and/or ADDRESS CHANGES, please E-mail "Cattrans im roves mobili across Cali ornia? STATE OF - CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION AGENCHL EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT 0?1? TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE INVESTIGATIONS 100 South Main Street, 3rd Floor LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 1? (213) 897-2004 Flex your power! 1 (213) 897-2033 Be energy e?icient! Bridge Report Transmittal Sheet Batch 30788 Inspection Outstanding Br. Number Bridge Name Date Type Work 56C0262 HEMET CHANNEL 12/11/2014 Routine Bridge(s) in this Transmittal For NAME and/or ADDRESS CHANGES, please E-mail smi.office@dot.ca.gov "Caltrans improves mobility across California" STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF MAINTENANCE l' STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE INVESTIGATIONS 100 South Main Street, 3rd Floor LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 - TB (213) 897-2004 Flex your power! I (213) 897-2033 Be energy e??icient! EDMUND G. BROWN JR Governor WEB SITES: The National Bridge Inspection Standards (N BIS) Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges, Element Level Inspection, Structure Maintenance and Investigations Manuals, Local Assistance Program Guidelines and other related information are posted on Division of Maintenance, Structure Maintenance and Investigations; Division of Local Assistance, Local Highway Bridge Program (HBP) and FHWA websites. The websites can be accessed at: l. "Caltrans Structure Maintenance and Investigations" 2. "Caltrans Division of Local Assistance" 3. Inspection Type De?nitions Routine Inspection: Routine Inspections consist of both the initial Inventory Inspection (the ?rst inspection of the bridge that places it in the bridge inventory or when there has been a change in the con?guration of the structure) and subsequent regularly scheduled inspections. The initial inspection provides all the Structural Inventory Appraisal data required by federal and state regulations, determines the baseline structural conditions, lists any existing problems, and establishes the load capacity of the structure. Subsequent inspections consist of observations, measurements needed to determine the physical and functional condition of the bridge, to identify any changes from the previously recorded conditions, and veri?cation of its load capacity. These inspections are generally conducted from the deck, ground and] or water level, and from permanent work platforms and walkways, if present. Inspection of underwater portions of the substructure is limited to observations during low-?ow periods and/or probing for signs of undermining. Special equipment should be utilized in circumstances where its use provides the only practical access to areas of the structure. Fracture Critical, Special Feature Underwater Inspections: Fracture Critical, Special Feature, and Underwater Inspections are up close, hands?on inspections of one or more members above or below the water level to identify any de?ciencies not readily detectable using Routine Inspection procedures. These inspections generally require special equipment such as under?bridge inspection equipment, manlifts, boats, traf?c control, and railroad ?agging. Personnel with Special skills such as divers or structural steel inspectors trained in non-destructive testing techniques may be required. Other Inspections: Other Inspections are conducted on damaged structures, structures that have developed speci?c problems, or structures suspected of developing problems. The scope of these investigations should be suf?cient to determine the need for emergency load restrictions or closure of the structure, monitor a changing condition, and to assess the level of effort necessary to effect a repair. For NAME and/or ADDRESS CHANGES, please E-mail "Caltrans improves mobility across California Page 1 of 6 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 56C0262 Structure Maintenance 8: InvestigatiOns Facility Carried: STETSON AVENUE Location 0.4 MI. CAWSTON AVE. (El/buns CitY HEMET Inspection Date 12/11/2014 Inspection Type Bridge Report Routine FC Underwater Special Other STRUCTURE NAME: HEMET CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION Year Built 1940 Skew (degrees): 45 Year widened: 1981 No. of Joints 0 Length 13.7 No. of Hinges 0 Structure Description:Simply supported 2?span timber stringers (20) and timber plank deck with an RC pier wall and RC open end seat abutments, all supported upon spread footings. Span Configuration 2 6.7 (E) c/c Design?Live Load: UNKNOWN Inventory Rating: metric tons Calculation Method: ALLOWABLE STRESS Operating Rating: metric tons Calculation Method: ALLOWABLE STRESS Permit Rating Posting Load Type 3: :1 U.S. Tons Type 382: 11 U.S. Tons Type 3-3: 1; U.S. Tons DESCRIPTIQN QN STRUCTURE Deck X?Section(S) Total Width: 8.51m Net Width: 8.4 No. of Lanes: 2 Speed: Min. Vertical Clearance: Unimpaired Rail Code: 0000 IRail Type? Locatign;_ Miscelland Right/Left_ ous DESCRIPTION UNDER STRUCTURE Channel Description: Natural earth trapezoidal, RC trapezoidal through the site. Length (ft)@ai1 Modifications 92 The bridge inspection condition assessment used for this inspection is based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Bridge Element Inspection Manual 2013 as defined in Moving Ahead for Progress in the let Century federal law. The new element inspection methodology may result in changes to related condition and appraisal ratings on the bridge without significant physical changes at the bridge. The element condition information contained in this report represents the current condition of the bridge based on the most recent routine and special inspections. Some of the notes presented below may be from an inspection that occurred prior to the date noted in this report. Refer to the Scope and Access section of this inspection report for a description of which portions of the bridge were inspected on this date. INSPECTION COMMENTARY SCOPE AND ACCESS Visual inspection was used. The channel was dry at inspection time. All elements have been inspected. NUMBERING CONVENTION The spans are counted from West to East. Printed on:Monday 01/05/2015 01:05 PM Page 2 of 6 INSPECTION COMMENTARY The stringers are counted from North to South. REVISIONS The structure is now posted according to CALTRANS recommendations. MISCELLANEOUS As per phone conversation (11/17/2014) with the City Engineer, Mr. Jorge Biagioni, This bridge is scheduled to be replaced within 1 year. SAFE LOAD CAPACITY A Load Rating Summary Sheet dated 1/03/2013 is on file for this structure. While this report does not include a check of that analysis, it does verify that the structural conditions observed during this inspection are consistent with those assumed in that analysis. The current rating is based on the spreadsheet output dated 1/03/2013. These calculations indicated that the structure will be capable of carrying the loads noted under The capacity is controlled by stringers in bending for all the legal trucks. This was calculated using an allowable operating shear stress of 102 psi and an allowable operating bending stress of 1,497 psi. No permit loads are aCCeptable. This capacity was determined with 3 inches of AC on the bridge deCk. The girder spacing was considered 36 (double than the actual spacing), accounting for the many damaged stringers. OPERATIONAL SIGNS The following signs are present at each approach to the bridge: 7 TONS PER TRUCK ll TONS PER COMBINATION l3 TONS PER TRUCK AND FULL TRAILER EXISTING POSTING 7 TONS PER TRUCK ll TONS PER SEMI-TRAILER COMBINATION l3 TONS PER TRUCK AND FULL TRAILER RECOMMENDED POSTING 7 TONS PER TRUCK ll TONS PER COMBINATION l3 TONS PER TRUCK AND FULL TRAILER WATERWAY Pierwall #2 has a pile of debris at the upstream (northerly) nose, 1.5 wide. ELEMENT INSPECTION RATINGS AND COMMENTARY Elem Defect Defect Element Description Env Total Units Qty in each Condition State No. [Prot Qty StDeck-Timber 2 110 sq.m 50 3B 4 18 1020 Connection 2 16 0 16 1140 Decay/Section Loss (Timber1150 Check/Shake (Timber) 2 80 50 30 0 510 Deck Wearing Surface-Asphalt 2 110 sq.m 90 20 0 0 3220 Cracking?AC (WS(31-1020) As a consequence of failure of stringer #15, span #2 (had loss of section in 2009), as well as the rotten deck planks a potential "punch hole" developed at the SE corner of the bridge. The gap between - Printed on:Monday 01/05/2015 01:05 PM Page 3 of 6 ELEMENT INSPECTION RATINGS AHD COMMENTARY Elem Dafect-Defect Element Description Env Total Units Qty in each Condition State No. /Prot Qty Stthe deck?and this str1nger is 1/2" to_1_1/2 Under heavy load, the deflection at this location may reach On 11/2/2010, the ABME team called the City of Hemet and left a message or the Acting City Engineer Mr. Jorge Biagioni describing the condition and the urgency of action. (31:1140)_ The timber deck on the soffit side shows signs of decay and inset infestation. (The deck is covered with AC.) The deck planks in Span 1 between stringers #6 and #7 are rotten and ready to fail. (31?1150) The timber planks have shakes. (31:516-3220) 4 transverse cracks, 2 mm to 5 mm wide several random cracks, 2 mm to 4 mm wide 111 Girder/Beam-Timber 2 280 0 133 100 47 1140 Decay/Section Loss (Timber1150 Check/Shake (Timber1160 Crack (Timber) 2 47 0 0 47 1111) The superstructure has an excessive vertical flexibility under vertical loading. (111?1146) Girders in Condition State 3 (Crushing): Span 1: #12 (also shear). Span 2: #11, #13, #20. Girders in Condition State 3 (Loss of section): Span 1: #17 (bad repair: supplement is not supported). Span 2: (111-1150) The following girders have horizontal shakes Span 1: #13, #14, #15, #18. (111-1160) Girders in Condition State 4 (Shear failure): Span 1: #4 (shear split), Span 2: #3 (supplement) Girders in Condition State 4 (Flexural failure): Span l: #10, #11. Span 2: #15. 210 Pier Wall-1080 Delamination/Spell/Patched Area 2 1 0 0 1 0 1130 Cracking (RC and Other) 2 3 0 3 0 6000 Scour 2 8 8 0 0 (210?1080) A wedge shape spall 150 south end of the pier wall- (210?1130) The pier wall has one 6.5 mm wide vertical crack penetrating through the wall section and other two 2 mm wide cracks. (210-6000) Printed on:Monday 01/05/2015 01:05 PM Page 4 of 6 ELEMENT INSPECTION RATINGS AND COMMENTARY Elem Defect Defect Element Description Env Total Units Qty in each Condition'State No. /Prot Qty StThe pierwall foundation is eroded by water: There are holes all along the westerly faceiof the foundation. 215 Abutment?1130 Cracking (RC and Other(215-1130f The west abutment has a 2.5 mm wide vertical crack. The east abutment has: a 2.5 mm wide vertical crack; a 1.52mm wide vertical crack; a failed blocking. 256 Slope Protection 2 2 ea. 2 0 0 (256) There were no significant defects noted. 333 Railing-Other 2 28 3 24 0 1000 Corrosion 2 8 0 8 0 0 1010 Cracking 2 0 0 1 0 1220 Deterioration (Other) 2 16 0 16 0 515 Steel Coating-Paint 2 10 sq.m 5 5 0 0 3420 Peel/Bub/Crack(8teel PC) 2 5 0 5 0 There is freckled rust on the outside of rails. (333?1010) Timber post #2 at North rail is broken. (333?1220) Most timber posts are tilted to the outside. The paint is peeling on the outside of rails. WORK RECOMMENDATIONS RecDate: 12/05/2013 EstCost: Supplement stringer #4 at Span Action Super?Rehab StrTarget: 6 MONTHS Work By: LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: Status PROPOSED EA: RecDate: 11/29/2012 EstCost: Supplement stringer #13 at Span Action Super?Rehab StrTarget: 6 MONTHS Work By: LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: Status PROPOSED EA: RecDate: 11/29/2012 EstCost: Replace the sign "No over 7 tons" with Action Bridge?Install Sign StrTarget: EMERGENCY the following sign: Work By: LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: Status PROPOSED EA: 7 TONS PER TRUCK 11 TONS PER COMBINATION 13 TONS PER TRUCK AND FULL TRAILER Printed onzMonday 01/05/2015 01:05 PM WORK RECOMMENDATIONS RecDate: Action Work By: Status RecDate: Action Work By: Status Re cDat Action Work By: Status RecDate: Action Work By: Status RecDate: Action Work By: Status Team Leader Report Author Inspected By Page 5 of 6 Replace the sign "No over 7 tons" with the legal sign that existed on 11/2/2010: 17 TONS PER TRUCK 28 TONS PER SEMI-TRAILER COMBINATION 34 TONS PER TRUCK AND FULL TRAILER Supplement stringer #11 at Span Supplement stringer #15, span #2 and replace the rotten deck planks above it to avoid a potential "punch hole" at the SE corner of the bridge. Replace or supplement stringers #9 and #10 at Span 1. The City should consider removing and replacing the existing bridge. Funding might be available for the replacement bridge. 11/16/2011 EstCost: Bridge?Install Sign StrTarget: EMERGENCY LOCAL AGENCY Di stTarget: PROPOSED EA: 11/16/2011 Super?Rehab StrTarget: 6 MONTHS LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: PROPOSED EA: 11/02/2010 Deck?Rehab StrTarget: EMERGENCY LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: PROPOSED EA: 12/28/2005 Super-Strengthen(per StrTarget: 6 MONTHS LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: PROPOSED EA: 03/20/2000 EStCost: Bridge?Replace StrTarget: 2 YEARS LOCAL AGENCY DistTarget: PROPOSED EA: George T. Zorapapel George T. Zorapapel GT.Zorapapel/M.Z01faghar George T. Zorapa pel 0 f, George T. Zorapapel (Registered Civil Engineer) u? Printed on:Monday 01/05/2015 No. 46916 far-'1 a; .5 (.5 06/30/2015 (Date) 01:05 PM Page 6 of 6 STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL REPORT IDENTIFICATION (1) STATE NAMEA CALIFORNIA 069 (8) STRUCTURE NUMBER 56C0262 (5) INVENTORY ON 150000000 (2) HIGHWAY AGENCY DISTRICT 08 (3) COUNTY CODE 065 (4) PLACE CODE 33182 (6) FEATURE INTERSECTED- HEMET CHANNEL (7) FACILITY CARRIED- STETSON AVENUE (9) LOCATION- 0.4 MI. CAWSTON AVE. (11) (12) BASE HIGHWAY NOT ON NET 0 (13) LRS INVENTORY ROUTE SUBROUTE (l6) LATITUDE 33 DEG 43 MIN 45.31 SEC (17) LONGITUDE 117 DEG 01 MIN 13.92 SEC (98) BORDER BRIDGE STATE CODE SHARE (99) BORDER BRIDGE STRUCTURE NUMBER STRUCTURE TYPE AND MATERIAL (43) STRUCTURE TYPE WOOD OR TIMBER OR GDR CODE 702 (44) STRUCTURE TYPE CODE 000 (45) NUMBER OF SPANS IN MAIN UNIT 2 (46) NUMBER OF APPROACH SPANS 0 (107) DECK STRUCTURE TIMBER CODE 8 (108) WEARING SURFACE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM: A) TYPE OF WEARING SURFACE- BITUMINOUS CODE 6 8) TYPE OF NONE CODE 0 C) TYPE OF DECK PROTECTION- NONE CODE 0 AGE AND SERVICE (27) YEAR BUILT 1940 (106) YEAR RECONSTRUCTED 1981 (42) TYPE OF SERVICE: HIGHWAY 1 WATERWAY 5 (28) STRUCTURE 02 UNDER STRUCTURE 00 (29) AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 11400 (30) YEAR OF ADT 2006 (109) TRUCK ADT 2 (19) BYPASS, DETOUR LENGTH 3 KM GEOMETRIC DATA (48) LENGTH OF MAXIMUM SPAN 6.7 (49) STRUCTURE LENGTH 13.7 (50) CURB OR SIDEWALK: LEFT 0.0 RIGHT 0.0 (51) BRIDGE ROADWAY WIDTH CURB TO CURB 8.4 (52) DECK WIDTH OUT TO OUT 8.5 (32) APPROACH ROADWAY WIDTH 7.3 (33) BRIDGE No MEDIAN 0 (34) SKEW 45 DEG (35) STRUCTURE FLARED NO (10) INVENTORY ROUTE MIN VERT CLEAR 99.99 (47) INVENTORY ROUTE TOTAL HORIZ CLEAR 8.4 (53) MIN VERT CLEAR OVER BRIDGE RDWY 99.99 (54) MIN VERT UNDERCLEAR NOT 0.00 (55) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR RT REF- NOT 0.0 (56) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR LT 0.0 NAVIGATION DATA (38) NAVIGATION NOT APPLICABLE CODE (111) PIER PROTECTION- CODE (39) NAVIGATION VERTICAL CLEARANCE 0_0 (116) BRIDGE NAV MIN VERT CLEAR (40) NAVIGATION HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE 0.0 Printed on:Monday 01/05/2015 01:05 PM SUFFICIENCY RATING 7.0 STATUS STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT HEALTH INDEX 51.5 PAINT CONDITION INDEX 33_5 CLASSIFICATION CODE (112) NBIS BRIDGE LENGTH- YES (104) HIGHWAY SYSTEM- NOT ON NHS 0 (26) FUNCTIONAL CLASS- MINOR ARTERIAL URBAN 16 (100) DEFENSE HIGHWAY- NOT STRAHNET 0 (101) PARALLEL STRUCTURE- NONE EXISTS (102) DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC- 2 WAY 2 (103) TEMPORARY (105) FED.LANDS NOT APPLICABLE (110) DESIGNATED NATIONAL NETWORK - NOT ON NET 0 (20) TOLL- ON FREE ROAD 3 (21) CITY OR MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 04 (22) OWNER- CITY 0R MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 04 (37) HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE- NOT ELIGIBLE 5 CONDITION CODE (58) DECK 6 (59) SUPERSTRUCTURE 4 (60) SUBSTRUCTURE 6 (61) CHANNEL CHANNEL PROTECTION 5 (62) CULVERTS LOAD RATING AND POSTING CODE (70) BRIDGE POSTING- 39.9% BELOW (41) STRUCTURE OPEN, POSTED OR CLOSED- POSTED FOR LOAD (31) DESIGN LOAD- UNKNOWN 0 (63) OPERATING RATING METHOD- ALLOWABLE STRESS 2 (64) OPERATING RATING- 8.1 (65) INVENTORY RATING METHOD- ALLOWABLE STRESS 2 (66) INVENTORY 4.5 0 APPRAISAL CODE (67) STRUCTURAL EVALUATION 2 (68) DECK GEOMETRY 2 (69) UNDERCLEARANCES, VERTICAL HORIZONTAL (71) WATER ADEQUACY 8 (72) APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMENT 8 (36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES 0000 (113) SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES a PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS (75) TYPE OF REPLACE FOR DEFICIENC CODE 31 (76) LENGTH OF STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 13.7 (94) BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT COST $262,200 (95) ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT COST $52,440 (96) TOTAL PROJECT COST $440,496 (97) YEAR OF IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE 2010 (114) FUTURE ADT 18609 (115) YEAR OF FUTURE ADT 2032 INSPECTIONS (90) INSPECTION DATE 12/14 (91) FREQUENCY 12 MO (92) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION: (93) CFI DATE A) FRACTURE CRIT DETAIL- N0 M0 A) B) UNDERWATER N0 M0 B) C) OTHER SPECIAL N0 M0 C)