Share: 
TIL ROAD NORTH over SUGAR DITCH
Map
Coordinates:
+34.68190, -90.38553
34°40'55" N, 90°23'08" W
+34.68190, -90.38553
34°40'55" N, 90°23'08" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
| Name: | TIL ROAD NORTH over SUGAR DITCH |
| Structure number: | SA7200000000018 |
| Location: | SEC 32 T 4S R11W |
| Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
| Route classification: | Local (Rural) [09] |
| Length of largest span: | 12.1 ft. [3.7 m] |
| Total length: | 26.2 ft. [8.0 m] |
| Owner: | County Highway Agency [02] |
| Year built: | 2005 |
| Historic significance: | Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5] |
| Design load: | MS 18 / HS 20 [5] |
| Number of main spans: | 2 |
| Main spans material: | Concrete [1] |
| Main spans design: | Culvert [19] |
| Deck type: | Not applicable [N] |
Latest Available Inspection: December 2016
| Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Good |
| Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
| Average daily traffic: | 400 [as of 2011] |
| Truck traffic: | 8% of total traffic |
| Structural appraisal: | Equal to present desirable criteria [8] |
| Water adequacy appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
| Roadway alignment appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
| 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] |
| Culvert condition: | No noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies which affect the condition of the culvert. Insignificant scrape marks caused by drift. [8] |
| Scour condition: | Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. [8] |
| Sufficiency rating: | 99.9 |
Previous Inspections
| Date | Condition | Culvert Condition | ADT | Suff. Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 2016 | Good | 8 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| December 2014 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| December 2012 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| January 2011 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| December 2009 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| December 2007 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| December 2005 | Good | 9 out of 10 | 400 | 99.9 |
| January 2004 | Fair | N out of 10 | 400 | 52.4 |
| December 2001 | Fair | N out of 10 | 400 | 52.4 |
| December 1999 | Fair | N out of 10 | 400 | 52.4 |
| January 1998 | Fair | N out of 10 | 400 | 62.4 |
| December 1995 | Fair | N out of 10 | 400 | 62.4 |
© Copyright 2012-20, James Baughn
Disclaimer: All data is taken from the National Bridge Inventory and has not been verified.
This page's URL is http://bridgereports.com/1312615
Disclaimer: All data is taken from the National Bridge Inventory and has not been verified.
This page's URL is http://bridgereports.com/1312615