Fayetteville, N.C. — Crews using hydraulic jacks are raising about a dozen bridges over Interstate 95 to reduce the chance of over-sized tractor-trailers hitting them.
Much of I-95 in North Carolina was part of the initial construction of the nation's interstate highway system and is now about 50 years old. The longtime standard height for transfer trucks was 13.5 feet, and overpasses along I-95 were built between 14 and 15 feet high.
Clearance standards have changed through the years, but state Department of Transportation officials maintain that a growing number of truck drivers exceed their height permits and collide with – and sometimes get stuck under – I-95 bridges.
Last week, for example, a truck hit an overpass in Smithfield. As with other such cases, highway traffic was snarled for hours to extricate the truck or repair the damage.
The DOT hired contractor Kevin Holladay and his crew to jack up each bridge in sections by more than a foot and insert galvanized steel blocks between the top of the supports and the bottom of the bridge.
"This is actually a first for me," Holladay said, noting he usually demolishes and rebuilds bridges.
In Robeson County, crews are building a new overpass after an over-sized truck damaged the old one, which stood at 14 feet, 5 inches.
When the project is completed in November, each bridge will stand at least 16 feet above the highway, which is the new standard for interstate overpasses.
Lifting the old bridges is cheaper than building new spans, and the process doesn't require closing any lanes on I-95, officials said.



WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.
This story is closed for comments.
And if you raise the bridge, you have to raise the approaches, which may extend for over a thousand feet. Still cheaper than a new bridge, but the bridge is still too narrow according to modern design and too short for I-95 widening.
January 23, 2009 7:07 a.m.
I know in recent years they ground the asphalt down, but i bet this wasn't always the case. Adding that cost to a paving job would surely add a ton of extra money.
As long as the bridges are structurally sound - this sounds like it saved a chunk of money.
January 22, 2009 5:29 p.m.
The 16' clearance requirement is a Federal standard; if a bridge has more than that, the Feds often refuse to pay for part of the bridge design since a higher clearance means a longer and more expensive bridge.
Besides, jacking a bridge up a foot or so is a LOT cheaper than building a new one. A new bridge can cost over a million dollars very easily, while raising one costs a few thousand dollars. Unless the bridge needs to be replaced due to age or wear and tear, this is a good cost effective measure to get the needed clearance.
January 22, 2009 1:24 p.m.
NCDOT should be commended for finding a cheaper solution than replacing the low bridges. And to streach the highway budjet DOT builds to the standard. Roads were not cheap to build in 1955 either. Maybe the builders didn't think the bridge would have to last so long and that the state would not steal highway funds for other projects.
Trucks were shorter (lenght and height) when the bridges were designed and built.
I-95 could certianly use an extra lane. But if you built it to handle the holiday traffic it would be underutilized the rest of the time. I know it is a pain. I drive it every weekend. But when gas is over $3.00 a gallon it seems to be better.
Maybe the new Obama stimulus package will fix the problem. Be nice to see my tax money going to something useful rather down some fiscal rat hole.
AtALost
The engine problem on FL1549 was reported and delt with.
January 22, 2009 1:24 p.m.
True, but that will likely not happen in our lifetime.
I have read online forums that call NC's part of I-95 the worst section of the highway south of DC. It really does need to be modernized.
January 22, 2009 11:54 a.m.