SP 240 E over MONITEAU CREEK

Map

Coordinates:
+38.98133, -92.56647
38°58'53" N, 92°33'59" W

Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.

Name:	SP 240 E over MONITEAU CREEK
Structure number:	5969
Old structure number:	K 857R 1 `(from 1992 edition)`
Location:	S 1 T 48 N R 15 W
Purpose:	Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:	Major Collector (Rural) `[07]`
Length of largest span:	85.0 ft. `[25.9 m]`
Total length:	272.0 ft. `[82.9 m]`
Roadway width between curbs:	25.9 ft. `[7.9 m]`
Deck width edge-to-edge:	29.5 ft. `[9.0 m]`
Skew angle:	26°
Owner:	State Highway Agency `[01]`
Year built:	1963
Year reconstructed:	1968
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:	3
Main spans material:	Steel continuous `[4]`
Main spans design:	Stringer/Multi-beam or girder `[02]`
Deck type:	Concrete Cast-in-Place `[1]`
Wearing surface:	Monolithic Concrete (concurrently placed with structural deck) `[1]`

Good/Fair/Poor Condition:	Poor
Status:	Open, no restriction `[A]`
Average daily traffic:	308 `[as of 2016]`
Truck traffic:	19% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Poor `[4 out of 9]`
Superstructure condition:	Poor `[4 out of 9]`
Substructure condition:	Fair `[5 out of 9]`
Structural appraisal:	Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is `[4]`
Deck geometry appraisal:	Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is `[5]`
Water adequacy appraisal:	Equal to present desirable criteria `[8]`
Roadway alignment appraisal:	Equal to present desirable criteria `[8]`
Channel protection:	Bank protection is in need of minor repairs. River control devices and embankment protection have a little minor damage. Banks and/or channel have minor amounts of drift. `[7]`
Scour condition:	Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. `[8]`
Sufficiency rating:	48.0
Recommended work:	Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. `[31]`
Estimated cost of work:	$1,427,000

Date	Condition	Deck	Superstructure	Substructure	ADT	Suff. Rating
September 2017	Poor	Poor	Poor	Fair	308	48.0
September 2015	Poor	Poor	Good	Fair	370	48.4
September 2013	Fair	Fair	Good	Fair	368	50.4
September 2011	Fair	Fair	Good	Satisfactory	372	60.5
November 2009	Fair	Fair	Good	Satisfactory	402	61.4
October 2007	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	384	63.4
January 2007	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	382	63.4
October 2005	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	382	63.4
December 2004	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	574	63.2
October 2003	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	576	63.2
February 2003	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	3796	47.0
October 2001	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	3815	47.0
November 1999	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	1886	53.3
November 1998	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Good	1886	53.3
September 1997	Fair	Satisfactory	Very Good	Good	1886	51.3
November 1995	Fair	Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Good	1764	51.4
March 1995	Fair	Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Good	1696	51.5
November 1993	Fair	Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Good	1640	51.6
October 1992	Fair	Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Good	1640	52.6
October 1991	Fair	Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Good	1586	52.6