Share:

CR 29 over STEWART HEAD CRK

Map

Coordinates:
+33.61699, -86.31565
33°37'01" N, 86°18'56" W

Facts

Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name:CR 29 over STEWART HEAD CRK
Structure number:020097
Location:1.4 MI S JCT AL 174
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Major Collector (Rural) [07]
Length of largest span:14.1 ft. [4.3 m]
Total length:44.0 ft. [13.4 m]
Roadway width between curbs:43.0 ft. [13.1 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:44.6 ft. [13.6 m]
Skew angle:45°
Owner:County Highway Agency [02]
Year built:2007
Historic significance:Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5]
Design load:MS 18 / HS 20 [5]
Main span material:Concrete continuous [2]
Main span design:Culvert [19]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]

Latest Available Inspection: January 2017

Good/Fair/Poor Condition:Good
Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:2,812 [as of 2008]
Truck traffic:1% of total traffic
Structural appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Deck geometry appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
Water adequacy appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
Channel protection:Banks are protected or well vegetated. River control devices such as spur dikes and embankment protection are not required or are in a stable condition. [8]
Culvert condition:Shrinkage cracks, light scaling and insignificant spalling which does not expose reinforcing steel. Insignificant damage caused by drift with no misalignment and not requiring corrective action. Some minor scouring has occured near curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have a smooth symmetrical curvature with superficial corrosion and no pitting. [7]
Scour condition:Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. [8]
Sufficiency rating:98.2
Estimated cost of work:$803,000

Previous Inspections

DateConditionCulvert ConditionADTSuff. Rating
January 2017Good7 out of 10281298.2
January 2015Good7 out of 10281298.2
March 2013Good7 out of 10281298.2
March 2011Good7 out of 10281298.2
March 2009Good8 out of 10281298.2
March 2008Good8 out of 10281295.2