SR1629 over FORK CREEK
Map
Coordinates:
+36.14640, -78.5422836°08'47" N, 78°32'32" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name: | SR1629 over FORK CREEK |
Structure number: | 000000000770199 |
Location: | 1.7 MI.N. OF SR1625 |
Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
Route classification: | Local (Rural) [09] |
Length of largest span: | 17.1 ft. [5.2 m] |
Total length: | 51.8 ft. [15.8 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 19.4 ft. [5.9 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 20.3 ft. [6.2 m] |
Skew angle: | 37° |
Owner: | State Highway Agency [01] |
Year built: | 1957 |
Historic significance: | Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5] |
Design load: | M 9 / H 10 [1] |
Number of main spans: | 3 |
Main spans material: | Wood or timber [7] |
Main spans design: | Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02] |
Deck type: | Wood or Timber [8] |
Wearing surface: | Bituminous [6] |
Latest Available Inspection: June 2018
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Poor |
Status: | Posted for load [P] |
Average daily traffic: | 120 [as of 2000] |
Truck traffic: | 6% of total traffic |
Deck condition: | Fair [5 out of 9] |
Superstructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Substructure condition: | Poor [4 out of 9] |
Structural appraisal: | Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4] |
Deck geometry appraisal: | Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrrective action [3] |
Water adequacy appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
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] |
Pier/abutment protection: | Navigation protection not required [1] |
Scour condition: | Bridge with "unknown" foundation that has not been evaluated for scour. [U] |
Sufficiency rating: | 28.0 |
Recommended work: | Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31] |
Previous Inspections
Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
---|
June 2018 | Poor | Fair | Good | Poor | 120 | 28.0 |
June 2016 | Poor | Fair | Good | Poor | 120 | 20.1 |
June 2014 | Poor | Fair | Good | Poor | 120 | 20.1 |
June 2012 | Poor | Fair | Good | Poor | 120 | 20.1 |
June 2010 | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | Good | 120 | 51.0 |
July 2008 | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | Good | 120 | 51.0 |
August 2006 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Fair | 120 | 44.0 |
July 2004 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Fair | 120 | 44.0 |
July 2002 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Fair | 120 | 44.0 |
November 1999 | Fair | Satisfactory | Satisfactory | Fair | 120 | 44.0 |
August 1991 | Fair | Good | Good | Satisfactory | 80 | 72.7 |