SH 27 Searcy Co. over BEAVER CREEK
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name: | SH 27 Searcy Co. over BEAVER CREEK |
Structure number: | 0000000000M0674 |
Location: | 2.18 M N OF US 65 |
Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
Route classification: | Minor Arterial (Rural) [06] |
Length of largest span: | 11.2 ft. [3.4 m] |
Total length: | 22.0 ft. [6.7 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 34.5 ft. [10.5 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 36.1 ft. [11.0 m] |
Owner: | State Highway Agency [01] |
Year built: | 1952 |
Historic significance: | Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5] |
Design load: | M 13.5 / H 15 [2] |
Number of main spans: | 2 |
Main spans material: | Concrete [1] |
Main spans design: | Slab [01] |
Deck type: | Concrete Cast-in-Place [1] |
Latest Available Inspection: November 2018
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Fair |
Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
Average daily traffic: | 1,200 [as of 2014] |
Truck traffic: | 1% of total traffic |
Deck condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Superstructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Substructure condition: | Satisfactory [6 out of 9] |
Structural appraisal: | Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5] |
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: | Bank is beginning to slump. River control devices and embankment protection have widespread minor damage. There is minor stream bed movement evident. Debris is restricting the channel slightly. [6] |
Pier/abutment protection: | Navigation protection not required [1] |
Scour condition: | Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. [8] |
Sufficiency rating: | 80.9 |
Previous Inspections
Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
---|
November 2018 | Fair | Good | Good | Satisfactory | 1200 | 80.9 |
November 2016 | Fair | Good | Good | Satisfactory | 1000 | 78.0 |
November 2014 | Good | - | - | - | 1000 | 75.1 |
November 2012 | Good | - | - | - | 1100 | 74.8 |
November 2010 | Good | - | - | - | 1100 | 74.8 |
November 2008 | Good | - | - | - | 1100 | 74.8 |
November 2006 | Good | - | - | - | 1500 | 73.4 |
November 2004 | Good | - | - | - | 1400 | 73.7 |
November 2002 | Good | - | - | - | 1500 | 73.2 |
December 2000 | Good | - | - | - | 1300 | 73.9 |
December 1998 | Good | - | - | - | 1300 | 73.9 |
December 1996 | Good | - | - | - | 500 | 77.7 |
October 1994 | Good | - | - | - | 500 | 77.7 |
October 1992 | Good | - | - | - | 500 | 77.7 |
October 1990 | Good | - | - | - | 1617 | 72.8 |
Element Data
Source: National Bridge Elements dataset, 2019 edition. This feature is experimental.
Element | Units | Quantity | 1-Good | 2-Fair | 3-Poor | 4-Serious |
---|
Substructure |
Reinforced Concrete Pier Wall | linear ft. | 36 | 34 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Reinforced Concrete Abutment | linear ft. | 72 | 67 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
Reinforced Concrete Pier Cap | linear ft. | 36 | 33 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
Deck |
Reinforced Concrete Slab | sq. ft. | 792 | 791 | 1 | 0 | 0 |