Share: 
MINOR F-22.9 over BUFFALO CREEK
Map
Coordinates:
+39.63956, -98.08403
39°38'22" N, 98°05'03" W
+39.63956, -98.08403
39°38'22" N, 98°05'03" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
| Name: | MINOR F-22.9 over BUFFALO CREEK |
| Structure number: | 000450739903500 |
| Location: | 2.1W OF RANDALL |
| Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
| Route classification: | Minor Collector (Rural) [08] |
| Length of largest span: | 46.9 ft. [14.3 m] |
| Total length: | 97.1 ft. [29.6 m] |
| Roadway width between curbs: | 26.6 ft. [8.1 m] |
| Deck width edge-to-edge: | 26.6 ft. [8.1 m] |
| Owner: | County Highway Agency [02] |
| Year built: | 2001 |
| Historic significance: | Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5] |
| Number of main spans: | 3 |
| Main spans material: | Steel continuous [4] |
| Main spans design: | Girder and floorbeam system [03] |
| Deck type: | Concrete Cast-in-Place [1] |
Latest Available Inspection: June 2018
| Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Good |
| Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
| Average daily traffic: | 20 [as of 2018] |
| Deck condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
| Superstructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
| Substructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
| Structural appraisal: | Equal to present minimum criteria [6] |
| Deck geometry appraisal: | Equal to present minimum criteria [6] |
| Water adequacy appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
| Roadway alignment appraisal: | Equal to present desirable criteria [8] |
| Channel protection: | Bank is beginning to slump. River control devices and embankment protection have widespread minor damage. There is minor stream bed movement evident. Debris is restricting the channel slightly. [6] |
| Scour condition: | Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour condition. [5] |
| Sufficiency rating: | 92.1 |
Previous Inspections
| Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 2018 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| October 2016 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| July 2014 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| May 2012 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| June 2010 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| July 2008 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| May 2006 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 20 | 92.1 |
| November 2004 | Good | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | 20 | 92.1 |
| August 2002 | Good | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | 20 | 92.1 |
| March 2000 | Poor | Satisfactory | Fair | Poor | 20 | 27.2 |
| April 1998 | Poor | Satisfactory | Fair | Poor | 20 | 27.2 |
| May 1996 | Poor | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Poor | 20 | 27.2 |
| August 1994 | Poor | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Poor | 20 | 27.0 |
| April 1992 | Poor | Good | Satisfactory | Serious | 20 | 27.0 |
| March 1990 | Poor | Good | Satisfactory | Serious | 20 | 18.9 |
© 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/1192060
Disclaimer: All data is taken from the National Bridge Inventory and has not been verified.
This page's URL is http://bridgereports.com/1192060