Share:

CR NW 1050 over Cobb Jones Creek

Map

Coordinates:
+33.30727, -95.23909
33°18'26" N, 95°14'21" W

Facts

Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name:CR NW 1050 over Cobb Jones Creek
Structure number:010810AA0130004
Location:2.7 MI S OF FM 71
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Local (Rural) [09]
Length of largest span:9.8 ft. [3.0 m]
Total length:38.1 ft. [11.6 m]
Roadway width between curbs:23.6 ft. [7.2 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:26.2 ft. [8.0 m]
Skew angle:30°
Owner:County Highway Agency [02]
Year built:2001
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:3
Main spans material:Concrete [1]
Main spans design:Culvert [19]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Bituminous [6]

Latest Available Inspection: January 2016

Good/Fair/Poor Condition:Good
Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:140 [as of 2012]
Structural appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Deck geometry appraisal:Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4]
Water adequacy appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
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]
Culvert condition:Shrinkage cracks, light scaling and insignificant spalling which does not expose reinforcing steel. Insignificant damage caused by drift with no misalignment and not requiring corrective action. Some minor scouring has occured near curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have a smooth symmetrical curvature with superficial corrosion and no pitting. [7]
Scour condition:Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour condition. [5]
Sufficiency rating:90.9

Previous Inspections

DateConditionCulvert ConditionADTSuff. Rating
January 2016Good7 out of 1014090.9
February 2014Good7 out of 1014090.9
May 2012Fair6 out of 1014091.9
April 2010Fair6 out of 1014091.9
March 2008Fair6 out of 1014091.9
April 2006Fair6 out of 1014091.9
April 2004Good7 out of 1014091.9
March 2002Good7 out of 1014091.9
May 2000PoorN out of 1011028.0
March 1998PoorN out of 1011026.7
March 1996PoorN out of 1011028.7
April 1994PoorN out of 1010026.6
November 1991FairN out of 1010059.2