Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Springfield, MO
The Jefferson Avenue Footbridge was built in 1902 and is on the National Register of
Historic Places. This structure is a cantilever truss structure and is one of the only
structures of its kind that is a pedestrian bridge. The structure underwent a thorough
structural inspection and numerous areas were identified for requiring rehabilitation. In
the report, it was stated that, One of every three primary members (36.4%) do not have
adequate capacity and need repaired or strengthened. Original plan exist, but extensive
repairs over the past 115 years are undocumented.
Recent tests by the Federal Highway Administration have attempted, with some
apparent success, to identify paint systems that are superior, in terms of cost per decade
of protection, to the standard urethane on epoxy mastic on organic zinc system. It is
suggested that these be investigated to potentially use a more effective and lower cost
paint system. Regardless of the paint system, removing the lead-based paint entirely
would reduce costs of all future repairs and painting. Also, by applying the new
protective system to the freshly cleaned and roughened steel, instead of rust and old
paint, a more protective and longer lasting paint system can be observed.
This report, prepared by Great River Engineering, outlines the cost of several options
that include removing the structure completely. In general, the rehabilitation options were
listed as a roughly $2.8 million initial investment with $8-$17 million in in cumulative
costs over the next 80 years. The replaced structure was listed as costing $3 million in
initial investment totaling to $8 million in cumulative cost.
On May 2, 2017, VS Engineering met with Great River Engineering to discuss the
structure and methodology of work to date. In this meeting, VS Engineering made
several recommendations to Great River Engineering that have been successful
alternatives in the past:
1. Steel Strength Do not use the default strengths of steel outlined in the design
specifications. Instead, take several (at least 3; however, 4 or 5 recommended)
pieces of steel and have them structurally tested. In VSs experience, testing the
actual bridge material has always shown a higher strength than the default
values in the AASHTO specifications. By using these expected higher strength
values, fewer members will be rated as deficient.
Several general requirements were discussed to lengthen the life the structure as well:
1. It is good practice to ensure the foundations are not buried in soil. When the soil
gets wet, it holds water against the steel and deteriorates the members at an
exponential rate. VS recommends excavating down to expose the foundations
and allow them to remain dry.
Added value that VS Engineering could provide with our extensive depth of knowledge
and experience with these types of historic structures such as:
1. VS has developed many specialized details over the years that are both
economical and effective. Building this experience to know what works and what
is less effective takes many years.
2. Using carefully designed retrofits to stop the lateral bowing that has occurred in
one of the piers and resist future bowing as well.
The following page includes a detailed cost estimate of the anticipated costs to reopen
the structure. This was prepared using Great River Engineerings report and making
assumptions as previously mentioned to reduce costs. The repair costs here are based
on VS Engineering experience with steel bridge rehabilitation, our May 2 inspection, and
on the expectation that metal testing, potentially minor narrowing of walkway
(approximately 4) can reduce the 36.4% of deficient members to about half of that
number.
Given the uniqueness of this structure and its great character, VS Engineering and the
personnel involved feel fortunate to be a part of this project and would welcome the
opportunity to be continually involved in the restoration of this historic structure.
Sincerely,