OLYMPIC BOULEVARD over BNSF RY, LA RIVER, UP RR
Map
Coordinates:
+34.02500, -118.2233334°01'30" N, 118°13'24" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.
Facts
Name: | OLYMPIC BOULEVARD over BNSF RY, LA RIVER, UP RR |
Structure number: | 53C0163 |
Location: | 0.3 MI W/O SOTO STREET |
Purpose: | Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over railroad and waterway |
Route classification: | Other Principal Arterial (Urban) [14] |
Length of largest span: | 99.7 ft. [30.4 m] |
Total length: | 1422.0 ft. [433.4 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 56.4 ft. [17.2 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 69.9 ft. [21.3 m] |
Vertical clearance below bridge: | 21.0 ft. [6.4 m] |
Skew angle: | 11° |
Owner: | City or Municipal Highway Agency [04] |
Year built: | 1925 |
Historic significance: | Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [2] |
Design load: | M 18 / H 20 [4] |
Number of main spans: | 3 |
Main spans material: | Concrete [1] |
Main spans design: | Arch - Deck [11] |
Deck type: | Concrete Cast-in-Place [1] |
Wearing surface: | Bituminous [6] |
Latest Available Inspection: July 2016
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Fair |
Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
Average daily traffic: | 27,728 [as of 2008] |
Truck traffic: | 2% of total traffic |
Deck condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Superstructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Substructure condition: | Fair [5 out of 9] |
Structural appraisal: | Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5] |
Deck geometry appraisal: | Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5] |
Underclearances appraisal: | Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrrective action [3] |
Water adequacy appraisal: | Equal to present desirable criteria [8] |
Roadway alignment appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
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] |
Scour condition: | Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. [8] |
Operating rating: | 71.3 tons [64.8 metric tons] |
Inventory rating: | 43.1 tons [39.2 metric tons] |
Sufficiency rating: | 70.8 |
Recommended work: | Bridge rehabilitation because of general structure deterioration or inadequate strength. [35] |
Estimated cost of work: | $15,534,000 |
Previous Inspections
Date | Suff. Rating | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | SD/FO | ADT |
---|
July 2016 | 70.8 | Fair | Good | Good | Fair | FO | 27728 |
July 2014 | 82.6 | Good | Good | Good | Good | FO | 27728 |
July 2012 | 82.6 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | FO | 27728 |
October 2010 | 81.5 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | FO | 27728 |
July 2008 | 81.5 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | FO | 27728 |
October 2006 | 81.5 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | FO | 27728 |
December 2004 | 81.5 | Fair | Fair | Good | Good | FO | 27728 |
June 2001 | 88.4 | Good | Good | Good | Good | FO | 23900 |
June 1999 | 88.4 | Good | Good | Good | Good | FO | 23900 |
November 1997 | 88.4 | Good | Good | Good | Good | FO | 23900 |
June 1996 | 88.4 | Good | Good | Good | Good | FO | 23900 |
April 1994 | 87.1 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | FO | 23900 |
May 1992 | 87.1 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | FO | 23900 |
March 1990 | 87.1 | Fair | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | FO | 23900 |