Bridge modification Bridges may need modification to accomodate widened motorways; to prevent deterioration from the environment; to distribute

secondary (traction and brakin g) traffic and seismic forces, or strengthened in order to carry an increased volume and ma ss of traffic. In some cases a bridge may have to be completely replaced. (Strengtheni ng has been dealt with in Chapter 7; this chapter deals with the other issues). The worldwide economic growth that has taken place in the last 20 years or so ha s brought with it a concomitant growth in all forms of transportation (road, rail and air). This increase in mobility generally, and road traffic in particular, has been no toriously difficult to forecast and the increased traffic has put existing transport syste ms under an intolerable strain. Where trunk roads pass through city centres the problem is v ery acute, causing long delays and a build up of exhaust emissions. The only resort is to p rovide a by-pass. However, the environmental impact of new road schemes is generally seen to be negative, and the obstacles placed in front of relatively straightforward by-pas s schemes can be both frustrating and expensive. The recent construction of the Newbury by -pass in the UK is a case in point (Cole 1996). Between cities, on the other hand, one way of supplying the extra capacity on motorways without causing so much of an outcry is to widen the carriageway in re gions of congestion thereby relieving the pressure. However, unless a thorough assessm ent has been made to establish the location and reasons for the pressure points, then su ch measures will only provide a temporary solution locally, and simply push the con gestion further on down the road. In the UK at the moment (2001) the current Road Progra mme includes a substantial amount of new and widened roads. Widening options There are three basic procedures for widening a carriageway, namely: symmetrical ; asymmetrical and parallel. They reflect, in part, the way in which the traffic i s managed and can be illustrated by an example of the conversion of a dual 3 lane carriage way to a dual 4 lane carriageway.Symmetrical In this option each of the carriageways is widened equally as in Figure 8.1. The amount of extra land required (land-take) is minimal and could even be zero. The existi ng hard shoulders are upgraded and new hard shoulders built alongside. To avoid demolition of the existing abutments of an over bridge it may be possib le to make the new hard shoulder discontinuous (or pinched) at the bridge site. This c an, however, compromise user safety because a vehicle breakdown would cause a seriou s obstruction and reduce the four lane flow to a three lane one. Unless there is a

margin of about 1 m between the edge of the new running lane and the abutment then it woul d be better to demolish the bridge and rebuild, even though that means a higher initi al build cost. The existing central pier could remain in service for construction of a ne w over bridge on-line. The existing abutments could also remain in service provided tha t the pinched hard shoulder solution is feasible. Construction could prove difficult where the hard shoulder is continuous as ther e are essentially two very narrow sites one each side of the carriageway. Traffic mana gement is straightforward and only one arrangement is necessary for constructing both s ides simultaneously in both the over bridge and under bridge situations. For separate construction each end, the traffic can be arranged in a 2 + 2 contraflow using t hree lanes of one carriageway plus the hard shoulder. The (simultaneous) construction seque nce would be: Construct new hard shoulders. Convert existing hard shoulders to running lanes. Build abutments. Demolish and rebuild bridge. At an under bridge site where the hard shoulders are discontinuous, the innermos t lanes are very close to the edge of the deck and may need to be checked for strength. Where the hard shoulders are continuous, then each side of the bridge will need to be wide ned.