BEET DUMP ROAD over GRAND VIEW IRRG.DIST.CNL
Map
Coordinates:
+43.00861, -116.1563943°00'31" N, 116°09'23" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name: | BEET DUMP ROAD over GRAND VIEW IRRG.DIST.CNL |
Structure number: | 000000000028200 |
Location: | 1.8 N. 3.0 W. GRAND VIEW |
Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
Route classification: | Local (Rural) [09] |
Length of largest span: | 21.0 ft. [6.4 m] |
Total length: | 23.0 ft. [7.0 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 17.4 ft. [5.3 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 19.0 ft. [5.8 m] |
Skew angle: | 10° |
Owner: | County Highway Agency [02] |
Year built: | 1930 |
Year reconstructed: | 1981 |
Historic significance: | Bridge is possibly eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [3] |
Design load: | MS 18 / HS 20 [5] |
Main span material: | Steel [3] |
Main span design: | Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02] |
Deck type: | Concrete Cast-in-Place [1] |
Wearing surface: | Bituminous [6] |
Latest Available Inspection: February 2018
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Fair |
Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
Average daily traffic: | 65 [as of 2015] |
Truck traffic: | 10% of total traffic |
Deck condition: | Satisfactory [6 out of 9] |
Superstructure condition: | Satisfactory [6 out of 9] |
Substructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Structural appraisal: | Equal to present minimum criteria [6] |
Deck geometry appraisal: | Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrrective action [3] |
Water adequacy appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
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] |
Sufficiency rating: | 89.1 |
Previous Inspections
Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
---|
February 2018 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.1 |
February 2016 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.1 |
February 2014 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.1 |
March 2012 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2010 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2008 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2006 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2004 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2002 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 2000 | Fair | Good | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 1998 | Fair | Good | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 1996 | Fair | Good | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.0 |
March 1994 | Fair | Good | Satisfactory | Good | 65 | 89.7 |
March 1992 | Fair | Good | Satisfactory | Very Good | 65 | 89.7 |
March 1990 | Fair | Very Good | Satisfactory | Very Good | 50 | 89.7 |
Element Data
Source: National Bridge Elements dataset, 2019 edition. This feature is experimental.
Element | Units | Quantity | 1-Good | 2-Fair | 3-Poor | 4-Serious |
---|
Superstructure |
Steel Girder/Beam | linear ft. | 43 | 0 | 43 | 0 | 0 |
Steel Protective Coating | sq. ft. | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 |
Deck |
Reinforced Concrete Deck | sq. ft. | 431 | 200 | 231 | 0 | 0 |
Wearing Surfaces | sq. ft. | 403 | 403 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Substructure |
Reinforced Concrete Abutment | linear ft. | 59 | 53 | 5 | 1 | 0 |