BENEDICT RD. over CLEARFORK RIVER

Map

Coordinates:
+40.59999, -82.40771
40°35'60" N, 82°24'28" W

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

Name:	BENEDICT RD. over CLEARFORK RIVER
Structure number:	7035462
Location:	0.4M E OF SR 95
Purpose:	Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:	Local (Rural) `[09]`
Length of largest span:	108.6 ft. `[33.1 m]`
Total length:	113.5 ft. `[34.6 m]`
Roadway width between curbs:	13.1 ft. `[4.0 m]`
Deck width edge-to-edge:	13.5 ft. `[4.1 m]`
Owner:	County Highway Agency `[02]`
Year built:	1913
Year reconstructed:	2006
Historic significance:	Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places `[5]`
Main span material:	Steel `[3]`
Main span design:	Truss - Thru `[10]`
Deck type:	Concrete Cast-in-Place `[1]`
Wearing surface:	Integral Concrete (separate non-modified layer of concrete added to structural deck) `[2]`

Good/Fair/Poor Condition:	Good
Status:	Open, no restriction `[A]`
Average daily traffic:	351 `[as of 2015]`
Truck traffic:	7% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Excellent `[9 out of 9]`
Superstructure condition:	Excellent `[9 out of 9]`
Substructure condition:	Excellent `[9 out of 9]`
Structural appraisal:	Superior to present desirable criteria `[9]`
Deck geometry appraisal:	Basically intolerable requiring high priority of replacement `[2]`
Water adequacy appraisal:	Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is `[5]`
Roadway alignment appraisal:	Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is `[5]`
Channel protection:	There are no noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies which affect the condition of the channel. `[9]`
Scour condition:	Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour condition. `[8]`
Sufficiency rating:	73.8
Recommended work:	Bridge rehabilitation because of general structure deterioration or inadequate strength. `[35]`
Estimated cost of work:	$613,000

Date	Condition	Deck	Superstructure	Substructure	ADT	Suff. Rating
September 2017	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	351	73.8
October 2016	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	351	73.8
September 2015	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
August 2014	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
November 2013	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
October 2012	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
November 2011	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
September 2010	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
March 2009	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
April 2008	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
September 2007	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
November 2006	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	70	77.0
October 2004	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
October 2002	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
November 2001	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
November 2000	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
August 1999	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
September 1998	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
November 1997	Poor	Fair	Fair	Poor	121	15.1
October 1996	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
August 1995	Poor	Fair	Poor	Poor	121	15.1
November 1994	Poor	Satisfactory	Poor	Poor	121	16.7
October 1993	Poor	Satisfactory	Poor	Poor	121	16.7
October 1991	Poor	Fair	Fair	Critical	121	15.1