Report to Committee of the Whole

Transcription

1 Report to Committee of the Whole To: Mayor Linton and Members of Council Prepared By: Adam Dickieson, Engineering Services Coordinator Report: IS Date: 24 Oct 2016 RE: By-law to Restrict the Weight of Vehicles Passing Over Certain Bridges in the Township of Centre Wellington Recommendation: THAT the Council of the Township of Centre Wellington adopt a By-law to Restrict the Weight of Vehicles Passing Over Certain Bridges in the Township of Centre Wellington. Summary: N/A Report: The Bridge Load Restriction Bylaw is presented in Attachment #1. This By-law is in keeping with both the Highway Traffic Act, and O.Reg 103/97 and it will provide a legal load restriction limit on the following structures: 2-WG Third Line between Wellington Rd 18 and Eramosa- Garafraxa Townline 3-E Sixth Line between Sideroad 30 and Wellington Rd 22 4-WG Fifth Line between Wellington Rd 18 and Eramosa - Garafraxa Townline 7-E Third Line between Sideroad 30 and Wellington Rd 22 8-WG Seventh Line between Sideroad 25 and Sideroad tonnes 8 tonnes 5 tonnes 10 tonnes 10 tonnes 9-N Irvine Street between Sideroad 10 tonnes

2 11 and Sideroad WG Fifth Line between Sideroad 15 and Wellington Rd WG First Line between Sideroad 20 and Sideroad WG First Line between Sideroad 15 and Sideroad P First Line W between Wellington Rd 17 and Sideroad 5 32-WG Third Line between Sideroad 25 and Sideroad tonnes 10 tonnes 5 tonnes 15 tonnes Closure Structure A load restriction review was conducted in 2016 on nine Centre Wellington bridges and one culvert. The K. Smart & Associates Load Restriction Reviews are provided in Attachments #2 and #3. This evaluation was conducted because of significant structural concerns identified during the 2014 biannual Ontario Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM) visual inspections. The load restriction review had been implemented as measure to ensure that the public is notified of safe limits of the load caring capacity of the structure. Three of the structures will have vehicle restriction limiters in place to ensure that heavy vehicles respect the tonne restriction limits. These structures will continue to be inspected every six months by a qualified structural engineer to ensure that no major condition changes have occurred. A culvert on the Third Line of the former Township of West Garafraxa is no longer structurally adequate for full loading. This structure is to be closed this fall as a result. The photographs in Attachment #4 illustrates the structural failure is occurring. In order to restrict the large vehicles on the 3 bridges that have less than 10 tonne load limits, height restriction limiting structures are to be constructed. The height restriction limiters will act as physical barriers to prevent over loading of the bridge to continue. A photograph in Attachment #4 illustrates an example of a height limiting structure. The location of all Township structures is presented in Attachment #5. Corporate Strategic Plan: Goal #1 - Reliable Infrastructure - The Township will manage and upgrade the community's infrastructure assets in an environmentally responsible way. Financial Implications: The proposed 2017 Township capital budget has the Bridge replacement/reconstruction Capital levy/ocif program and the timing for all the current load restricted structures by Three height restriction limiting structures are to be constructed at an estimate cost of $12,000. The required Ontario Traffic Manual signage that is required is an estimated $4,000. These items would be funded from the existing Bridge Repairs and

3 Remediation budget. There will be an increase in the snow removal operational budget given that Township's snow plow equipment will be in excess to the load restrictions. A light duty truck will be to be sent to the load restricted bridges. These costs will be monitored and are dependent on the severity on the winter. Consultation: Allan Garnham, P. Eng. and David Harsch, P.Eng. of K. Smart Associates Limited. Attachments: IS ATT1 By-law to Restrict the Weight of Vehicles IS ATT2 Load Restriction Review IS ATT3 Irvine Bridge Report Oct 2016 IS ATT4 Various Photos IS ATT5 Bridge Location Map Approved By: Colin Baker, Managing Director of Infrastructure Services Andy Goldie, Chief Administrative Officer

4 Report No. IS Attachment #1 TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON BY-LAW NUMBER 2016-XXX A BY-LAW TO RESTRICT THE WEIGHT OF VEHICLES PASSING OVER CERTAIN BRIDGES IN THE TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON AND TO REPEAL BY-LAW WHEREAS Subsections 123(1) and 123(2) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.H 8, as amended, provide that: 123(1) The Minister may make regulations limiting the gross vehicle weight of any vehicle or any class thereof passing over a bridge forming part of the King s Highway or a highway in territory without municipal organization and notice of the limit of the weights fixed by such regulation, legible printed, shall be posted up in a conspicuous place at each end of the bridge. 123(2) The municipality or other authority having jurisdiction over a bridge may by By-law limit the gross vehicle weight of any vehicle or any class thereof passing over such bridge, and the requirement of sub-section (1) with respect to the posting up of notice apply thereto. AND WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Township of Centre Wellington deems it expedient to limit the weight of vehicles passing over certain bridges in the Township of Centre Wellington. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That no vehicle or combination of vehicles or any class thereof, whether empty or loaded, shall be operated over the bridges as detailed in Schedule A attached to this By-Law. 2. That the penalties provided in Section 125 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O C.H.8, shall apply to offenses against this By-Law. 3. This By-law shall come into force and effect on the date of passage and when a notice of the limit of weight permitted, legibly printed, has been posted in a conspicuous place at each end of the bridge. Read a first, second and third time and finally passed this the XX day of XXXX, 2016 Kelly Linton Mayor Kerri O Kane Clerk

5 2 Report No. IS SCHEDULE A BY-LAW NUMBER 2016-XXX Schedule of Heavy Truck Prohibitions on Bridge Structures Structure ID Road Name Location Posting 3-N Beatty Line between Sideroad 10 (east to Hwy#6) and Sideroad 10 (west to Gerrie Road) tonnes (former Township of Nichol) Previously Adopted: December 15, WG Third Line between Wellington Road 18 and 15 tonnes Eramosa-Garafraxa Townline 3-E Sixth Line between Sideroad 30 and 8 tonnes Wellington Road 22 4-WG Fifth Line between Wellington Road 18 and 5 tonnes Eramosa-Garafraxa Townline 7-E Third Line between Sideroad 30 and 10 tonnes Wellington Road 22 8-WG Seventh Line between Sideroad 25 and 10 tonnes Sideroad 20 9-N Irvine Street between Sideroad 11 and 10 tonnes Sideroad WG Fifth Line between Sideroad 15 and 10 tonnes Wellington Road WG First Line between Sideroad 20 and 10 tonnes Sideroad WG First Line between Sideroad 15 and 5 tonnes Sideroad P First Line West between Wellington Road 17 and 15 tonnes Sideroad 5 32-WG Third Line between Sideroad 25 and close Sideroad 20 structure

6 LOAD RESTRICTION REVIEW MULTIPLE LOCATIONS Prepared For: THE TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE-WELLINGTON by K. SMART ASSOCIATES LIMITED 85 McIntyre Drive Kitchener ON N2R 1H6 September 2016

7 I N D E X Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION EVALUATION METHODOLOGY STRUCTURE 2-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 3-E Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 4-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 7-E Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 8-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 16-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 21-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 24-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 26-P Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations STRUCTURE 32-WG Description of Structure Evaluation Findings and Recommendations CLOSING 10

8 September 2016 File No LOAD RESTRICTION REVIEW MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TOWNSHIP OF CENTRE WELLINGTON 1.0 INTRODUCTION K. Smart Associates Limited (KSA) was retained by the Township of Centre Wellington to complete a structural evaluation and provide recommendations for gross weight limits on each of the following bridges: 1. Structure 2-WG 2. Structure 3-E 3. Structure 4-WG 4. Structure 7-E 5. Structure 8-WG 6. Structure 16-WG 7. Structure 21-WG 8. Structure 24-WG 9. Structure 26-P 10. Structure 32-WG Field measurements and visual inspection of structural members were carried out on the ten (10) structures on April 27, 2016 by Allan Garnham, P. Eng. and Darryl Schwartzentruber, C. Tech. Recommendations for load postings were made in accordance with Section 14 of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code EVALUATION METHODOLOGY Reference is made to Section 14 of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code 2014 (CHBDC) to establish the load rating and subsequent load posting for each structure. It is important to note that a full structural analysis for the structures identified in this report is not possible as no drawings were made available to identify the size, quantity and grade of the reinforcing steel. Should drawings become available for the structures identified above, a complete structural evaluation could be undertaken to determine the specific load carrying capacity for a given structure. Reference is made to Clause of CHBDC which allows an engineer to assign a single posting load based on engineering judgement and experience. Clause C14.17 of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code Commentary further clarifies that a single posting based solely on engineering judgement and experience should not exceed 18 tonnes.

9 It should be noted that when engineering judgement and experience is used to assign a single posting load such an evaluation should only be used for short periods of time (less than 2 years) and inspections must continue on a regular basis. Concrete structures which have been carrying normal traffic without signs of excessive material cracking, deformation, or degradation need not be posted as per Section of CHBDC. 3.0 STRUCTURE 2-WG 3.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on Third Line between Wellington County Road 18 and Eramosa- Garafraxa Townline. The structure was constructed in approximately The structure consists of an 11.6m± single span cast-in-place concrete beam bridge with a gravel wearing surface. This style of bridge uses the barrier walls as the main structural support. The overall structure width is 6.4m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - There is no approach guide rail - Approach barriers are severely spalled and delaminated - Barriers on top of structure are in good to fair condition; small isolated spalls and some abrasion from vehicles are evident. - Abutments are in fair condition; small isolated spalls; scour is significant at north abutment along waterline; possible undermining at the southwest abutment - Soffit exhibits isolated spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement - Floor beams are in fair condition with isolated small spalls and delaminations. - Bottom of girders are in poor condition; bottom 100mm ± of concrete is gone and bottom row of reinforcing is completely exposed The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes 3.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the condition of the girders. We recommend that the existing 15 tonne single posting remain in place. Although removal of fill overtop the structure will increase the load carrying capacity of this structure, we recommend against increasing the existing load posting due to the poor condition of the load carrying components of this bridge. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Complete replacement of this structure is recommended. 4.0 STRUCTURE 3-E 4.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on Sixth Line between Sideroad 30 and Wellington County Road 22. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 14.5m± single span concrete bow string arch bridge with an exposed concrete deck. The overall width of the structure is 5.8m±.

10 Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - Approach barriers have been removed from south. One missing post and 2 rails at northwest - Railing panels are generally in poor condition; numerous spalls and exposed corroded reinforcement bars throughout - Concrete arches are in good condition; there is a spalled area at the northwest which could have been caused by impact in the past. There is no exposed reinforcement bar as a result of the spall. - Concrete arches show evidence of numerous abrasions, likely from snow plow. - Hangers are in general poor condition; several spalls with exposed corroded reinforcement bar but no section loss evident. - Fascias are in good to fair condition; one isolated spall and delaminated location at southwest. - Floor beams are in fair condition; evidence of previous rehabilitation/repairs to concrete. Most patches are cracked and delaminated. Second floor beam from north is externally post tensioned. - Soffit is in fair condition; numerous isolated spalls and exposed corroded reinforcement throughout. - Deck is in poor condition; severe scaling with numerous spalls and potholes, some with exposed reinforcement bar. Outsides of deck were covered in sand and gravel. The structure is presently load posted for 10 tonnes. 4.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the condition of the hangers. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 8 tonnes. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Complete replacement of this structure is recommended. 5.0 STRUCTURE 4-WG 5.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on Fifth Line between Wellington County Road 18 and Eramosa-Garafraxa Townline. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 7.3m± single span concrete bow string arch bridge with an asphalt wearing surface. The overall width of the structure is 5.3m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - No approach guide rail - Approach barriers and structure barriers exhibit numerous spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement; missing rail at northeast approach barrier - Concrete arches exhibit numerous abrasion scars and some spalls; long, wide crack on inside face of east arch - Floor beam at east end exhibits large crack with spall and exposed corroded reinforcement; rest of beam is in fair condition - Soffit exhibits numerous cracks and spalls with exposed corroded reinforcement. - Severe cracking and deep spalls at southeast wingwall - Wide crack in both abutments from top to bottom; displacement along each crack is minimal.

11 - Overall observations indicate that there might be an issue with founding soils at this structure, specifically at the east; the east side seems to have settled more when compared to the west side of the structure. The structure is presently load posted for 14, 22 and 32 tonnes. 5.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the geotechnical bearing capacity of the founding soils. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 5 tonnes. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Complete replacement of this structure is recommended. 6.0 STRUCTURE 7-E 6.1 Description of Structure This structure is located on Third Line between Sideroad 30 and Wellington County Road 22. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of an 10.0m± single span cast-in-place concrete beam bridge with a gravel wearing surface. This style of bridge uses the barrier walls as the main structural support. The overall structure width is 5.8m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - The east concrete girder has lost at least 10 inches of its top concrete throughout, more at the ends. Reinforcement bars are exposed and corroded; one longitudinal bar has completely detached from the concrete beam - The west concrete girder is severely spalled and scaled with exposed corroded reinforcement bar. - There is a very large and deep delaminated area in the soffit at the first bay from the south that is completely separated from the deck. Reinforcement bar is exposed and corroded. - There are cracks with efflorescence at other areas of the soffit; typically at all four corners of the bridge. - Southeast corner of bridge is bearing only on remains of deteriorated concrete (rocks with no cement remaining). - Disintegration of bearing seat at northeast corner of bridge. - The floor beams are in fair to poor condition, with cracking and spalling. - Bottom two feet of abutments have been refaced several years ago. - Bottom of exterior concrete barriers are severely spalled with exposed corroded reinforcement. - Severe erosion of the embankments at all four corners of the structure. - Granular shoulders are higher than the roadway itself, therefore water cannot drain off of the roadway The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes.

12 6.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the overall poor condition of the structure. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 10 tonnes. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Complete replacement of this structure is recommended. 7.0 STRUCTURE 8-WG 7.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on Seventh Line between Sideroad 25 and Sideroad 20. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 14.2m± single span cast-in-place concrete beam bridge with a gravel wearing surface. This style of bridge uses the barrier walls as the main structural support. The overall structure width is 6.4m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - Above the structure, the girders (barriers) are in good to fair condition. - The underside of the girders are in poor condition. There are numerous areas of large spalls with exposed corroded reinforcement bar. - The barriers on the wingwalls have been removed at the east. - There are no approach barriers. - The wearing surface is in good condition except for the pothole at the north end of the deck. - Floor beams are in fair to poor condition; numerous spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement bar. - Soffit is in fair to poor condition; numerous isolated spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement bar. - Abutments and wingwalls have been refaced in the past 20± years; good condition overall The bridge is currently load posted for 15 tonnes. 7.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the exposed corroded reinforcement bar in key structural members. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 10 tonnes. Although removal of fill overtop the structure will increase the load carrying capacity of this structure, increasing the load posting is not recommended due to the poor condition of the load carrying components of this bridge. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. A superstructure replacement or replacement of the entire structure is recommended.

13 8.0 STRUCTURE 16-WG 8.1 Description of Structure This structure is located on Fifth Line between Wellington County Road 19 and Sideroad 15. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 16.1m single cell concrete spandrel arch with a granular wearing surface. The overall width of the structure is 5.3m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following - There are a few spalls on the spandrel arch and as a result reinforcement bar has been exposed and is corroded. - The guiderail posts are bolted onto the barrier walls of the bridge; curve in the guiderail posts at the north end indicates that the wingwalls are moving away from each other. - One guiderail post is now twisted as a bolt has separated from concrete. - Deterioration of the west fascia is severe, almost exposing the road backfill. No reinforcing steel is visible that would connect the arch to the wingwall. - Erosion of soil and concrete occurring at corners; very severe at the northeast. - Erosion at the northeast quadrant has left the footing exposed - Concrete at the bottom of the spandrel arch/abutments is severely scaled. - There is a wide vertical crack at the northeast abutment approximately 600mm long, and a wide vertical crack at the southeast abutment full height. - There is an excess amount of granular material on the bridge deck. Granular material is approximately 150mm higher than the curb at the south end, and approximately 300mm higher than the curb at the north end. The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes. 8.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited by the deterioration of the connection between the headwalls and the arch. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 10 tonnes. Although removal of fill overtop the structure will increase the load carrying capacity of this structure, we recommend against increasing the existing load posting due to the poor condition of the load carrying components of this bridge. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Replacement of the entire structure is recommended. 9.0 STRUCTURE 21-WG 9.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on First Line between Sideroad 20 and Sideroad 15. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 19.2m± single span concrete bow string arch bridge with an exposed concrete deck. The overall width of the structure is 5.7m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following

14 - There are no approach barriers - Deck is in fair condition; no major spalls observed - Concrete arches are in good condition; some cracking with efflorescence on the east arch. Abrasion from snow plow on both arches is evident. - Hangers are in good to fair condition; some verticals have spalled concrete with exposed corroded reinforcement bar. - Overhead brace connecting the tops of the arches together has been replaced in the recent past; minimal surface rust evident. - Most floor beam ends are spalled with exposed corroded reinforcement bars; rest of each beam is in fair condition - Soffit exhibits isolated cracks and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement bars; overall fair condition - Tension tie at east exhibits large spall near mid span with exposed corroded reinforcement - Tension tie at west exhibits two large spalls near mid span with exposed corroded reinforcement; rest of member exhibits cracking and delamination. - Compared to the north abutment, the south abutment appears to be rotating about the toe of the footing (i.e. movement of the top of the abutment towards the river). The structure is currently load posted for 10 tonnes 9.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited due to exposed corroded reinforcement bar in key structural members. Previous correspondence with the Township recommended the following: Option 1: Close the bridge to all traffic and schedule a replacement structure as soon as possible. Option 2: Load post the structure for 10 Tonnes and increase the frequency of inspections to 3 month intervals. A monitoring program to determine the extent of movement of the south abutment should also be started. We recommend the monitoring program include both digital tilt meters and manual measurements. If further movement is found, the structure must be closed immediately to all traffic. Option 2 is the recommended alternative and should be pursued by the Township as soon as possible. Complete replacement of this structure is also recommended STRUCTURE 24-WG 10.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on First Line between Sideroad 15 and Sideroad 10. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 24.3m± single span concrete bow string arch bridge with an exposed concrete deck. The overall width of the structure is 5.5m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following

15 - No approach guide rail - Broken post and two missing rails at northwest approach barrier - Missing post leaving two exposed rails at southwest approach barrier - One steel beam guide rail element at southeast approach barrier, however not attached to structure - Cementitious compound has been applied to the concrete deck and provides a rough riding surface. Compound remains adhered to the concrete deck with no delaminations observed. - Some concrete barrier rails are missing; remaining rails exhibit spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement bars. - Concrete arches are in overall good condition; abrasion from snow plow is evident; some small isolated spalls on underside of arches - Hangers exhibit large spalls with exposed corroded reinforcement and are in fair to poor condition. - Floor beams are in fair to poor condition; beam ends have spalls with exposed corroded reinforcement, rest of beams exhibit cracking and delaminations throughout. - Soffit is in fair to poor condition; spalls and delaminations with exposed corroded reinforcement throughout - Tension tie and fascia at west is in poor condition; large area at north end consists of deep disintegration with exposed corroded reinforcement with section loss. - Tension tie and fascia at east is in fair condition; some spalled areas. - Erosion/scour of the northwest streambed. The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes 10.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited due to overall deterioration of the key structural elements. We recommend that this structure be load posted for 5 tonnes. The frequency of inspections should remain at 6 month intervals until this structure is replaced. Complete replacement of this structure is recommended STRUCTURE 26-P 11.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on First Line West between Sideroad 5 and Sideroad 11. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 10.2m± single span concrete slab on concrete t girder bridge with a gravel wearing surface. The overall width of the structure is 6.3m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following - Bridge is in overall good to fair condition. - Current barrier does not conform to current safety standards but is functional. - No approach guide rail. - Some isolated spalls with exposed rebar throughout structure - Abrasion damage of the concrete curb. - New mass concrete placed at all four abutment corners is in excellent condition The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes

16 11.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited due to the age of the structure itself. We recommend that the existing load posting of 15 tonnes remain in place. The frequency of inspections can be increased to 2 year intervals STRUCTURE 32-WG 12.1 Description of Structure The structure is located on Third Line between Sideroad 25 and Sideroad 20. The bridge was constructed in approximately The structure consists of a 3.73 x 2.29m single cell multi-plate CSP culvert with a gravel wearing surface. The overall length of the culvert barrel is 22m±. Visual inspection of the structure noted the following: - There is no barrier at this structure. - Embankment at west above culvert is unstable, however road surface is not compromised - Some erosion at northwest corner of culvert - Fatigue cracks are evident along bolt line at south side of culvert; near center of culvert, these cracks are almost continuous. The structure is currently load posted for 15 tonnes 12.2 Evaluation Findings and Recommendations The structure is not adequate to support full Ontario Highway Truck Loading. The load-carrying capacity is limited due to the fatigue cracking along the bolt line at the south side of the culvert. In previous correspondence, we advised the Township of 2 alternatives which could be pursued. Alternative 1 would be to reinforce the structure by welding rebar dowels across the fatigue cracks at regular spacings. If this alternative were followed, the structure could remain load posted for 15 tonnes. Alternative 2 is to replace the structure with an equivalent size multi-plate culvert. If this alternative were followed, the structure would not require load posting. Either Alternative 1 or 2 should be implemented in summer If Alternative 1 is implemented, the structure should continue to be inspected every six months. The frequency of inspections could be reduced to every 2 years if the structure is replaced.

17

18

19 32- WG Third Line Culvert Structural Failure Photos Structural Bolt Tears 2013 Structural Bolt Tears 2016 Height Limiting Structure Example Vehicle Height Limiting Structure (Woolwich Township)

20 Wellington Rd 29 Second Line Third Line Fourth Line Third Line Third Line Wellington Rd 16 Fourth Line Fifth Line Fifth Line Fifth Line Sixth Line Sixth Line Seventh Line East-west Garafraxa Tl Weisenberg Rd 36-P " 32-P Sr 5 Sr 11 Noah Rd " 5-P 4-P 23-P 33-P Eighth Line W 20-P Eighth Line E 21-P 22-P 19-P 38-P Sr 12 3-P Sr 14 " Wellington Rd 17 " Sr 10 6-P 1-P 28-P 18-P " Grand Inverhaugh 8-P 7-P Sixth Line E Third Line W Sr 5 Middlebrook Rd 9-P 31-P Wellington Rd P 34-P 10-P 24-P " 11-P Wellington Rd 18 Fourth Line E 25-P 15-P 39-P 12-P 2-P Second Line E î í First Line W 29-P 17-P 37-P 35-P 13-P 26-P(15) Salem 16-P Alma 30-P " 1-EL Sr 4 Wellington Rd 7 7-N " 4-N 2016 Rehab 12-N " Elora 13-N Irvine St Ponsonby Sr 5 Gerrie Rd 8-N 6-N 2-EL # Fourth Line 18-N 21-N 9-N(10) 10-N 11-N 20-N Sr 6 N Wellington Rd 17 5-N Sr 10 Fergus Ennotville Cumnock 3-N( ) Sr 15 Highway 6 Beatty Line N South River Rd Second Line Sixth Line 19-N 17-N Beatty Line N Guelph St 2-N Sr 18 Highway 6 4-F 1-F 14-N 16-N 15-N 1-N 22-N Jones Baseline 25-WG Sr 10 2-F 3-F Scotland St Jones Baseline 21-WG(10) Sr 10 First Line 24-WG(15) Living Springs 22-WG 23-WG 29-WG River 9-E 31-WG 6-E 7-E(15) G Speedside Sr WG Metz Sr 20 Sr 15 1-WG 8-E î í Sr 30 " 26-WG 32-WG(15) 28-WG 2-WG(15) Belwood Lake 5-E 3-WG 4-E Oustic 19-WG 18-WG 17-WG 16-WG(15) G 3-E(10) " 27-WG 30-WG " Shiloh Sixth Line Wellington Rd 19 5-WG 4-WG( ) 12-WG 15-WG 14-WG Sr 9 î í " Wellington Rd 18 Eramosa-garafraxa Tl 2-E 13-WG 1-E Seventh Line Belwood 6-WG 6B-WG Wellington Rd WG 8-WG 9-WG SR 10 Mimosa East-west Garafraxa Tl 7-WG 10-WG Bridge Condition Open (91) " 12-WG Closed (14) G Potential Closures 2016 Centre Wellington Structure Locations & Condition Updated: January, 2016 # Designated Heritage î í Bridge ID Former Municipality Code Bridge Number Narrow Structure Narrow Structure With One Lane Only Environmental Assessment Complete Proposed Repairs 2014 The Township of Centre Wellington 1:85, km (3) (10) Load Restricted (1) (10) Recommended Tonne Limit (10)