20071491 Ver 1_Meeting Minutes_20000508

~ ~~-'
~~~o
~ .,,.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
R 5.~,~ 8 2~~~
NOS r~:~+:?
"~rATER (~UrALIYY';'
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 2~?O1, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 4, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: File
FROM: John L. Williams
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: SR 11 ~~, Rutherford County, Replacement of Bridge No. 270
over Broad River, State Project 8.2890801, F. A. Project
BRZ-1155(2), B-3697
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held in the Transportation Building
on March 7, 2000.
The following people were in attendance:
Lanette Ingham Programming & TIP April Alperin SHPO
Andrew Nottingham Hydraulics Lei Lani Paugh Natural Systems
Ramesh Fofaria Structure Design Gary Covering Roadway Design
Art McMillan Roadway Design
Current Schedule
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Plan-Design, Document Due: December 2001
Right of Way: April 2002
Construction: Apri12003
Bridge No. 270
[Built in 1917] [256 feet long] [12-foot wide deck] [11 feet clear deck width]
[Crown of Bridge to bed of river/stream: [32 feet] [Posted 17 tons for SV and 17 tons for
TTST's] [Sufficiency Rating 24.8] [7 years estimated remaining useful life]
Traffic Information
SR 1155 is a Rural Local Route with no posted speed limit in the vicinity.
Land use is primarily agricultural, with scattered residential and undeveloped.
Current ADT is 300 VPD
Projected 2025 ADT is 500 VPD
(1% Duals, 2% TTST)

SLOPING COMMENTS
April Alperin of SHPO stated that the bridge is eligible for the National Register.
She also pointed out the "Twitty farm" just north of SR 11~~ that should be evaluated.
An archaeological survey will be required if anything other than replace in place road
closure is evaluated.
Rutherford County Emergency Services wrote in to state that temporary road
closure would not create a significant burden for their agency.
John Taylor of Location Surveys indicated that the project could affect an
underground telephone line along the south side of SR 11 ». The line goes aerial
crossing the stream. Utility impacts should be low.
Andrew Nottingham of Hydraulics recommended replacing the existing bridge
with a new bridge approximately 100 feet east of the existing structure. The new bridge
should be 270 feet long.
David Cox of the Wildlife Resource Commission indicated that there are no
special concerns for this project.
Max Phillips, Division Construction Engineer, stated that either existing location
with road closure or new location were both good options. Mr. Phillips ran into a Mr.
Bell who owns property on both sides of the bridge. Mr. Bell is interested in having the
old bridge removed because it draws young people who hold '`wild parties" on the rocks
under the old bridge.
ALTERNATE FOR EVALUATION
Replace in place road closure is not a good option due to the very poor alignment
of the existing structure and approaches.
The new bridge will be placed on new location to the east of the existing structure.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
Roadway Engineer: McMillan/Lovering
Date of Estimate & Sketch: December 1, 2000