Share: 
CR 25 over LITTLE CHAZY RVR
Map
Coordinates:
+44.82044, -73.51011
44°49'14" N, 73°30'36" W
+44.82044, -73.51011
44°49'14" N, 73°30'36" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
| Name: | CR 25 over LITTLE CHAZY RVR |
| Structure number: | 000000003336190 |
| Location: | .7 MI W OF WEST CHAZY |
| Purpose: | Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over waterway |
| Route classification: | Minor Collector (Rural) [08] |
| Length of largest span: | 29.9 ft. [9.1 m] |
| Total length: | 33.1 ft. [10.1 m] |
| Roadway width between curbs: | 32.2 ft. [9.8 m] |
| Deck width edge-to-edge: | 58.4 ft. [17.8 m] |
| Owner: | County Highway Agency [02] |
| Year built: | 1909 |
| Historic significance: | Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [2] |
| Main span material: | Concrete [1] |
| Main span design: | Arch - Deck [11] |
| Deck type: | Not applicable [N] |
| Wearing surface: | Bituminous [6] |
Latest Available Inspection: September 2018
| Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Fair |
| Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
| Average daily traffic: | 1,192 [as of 2016] |
| Truck traffic: | 5% of total traffic |
| Superstructure condition: | Fair [5 out of 9] |
| Substructure condition: | Fair [5 out of 9] |
| Structural appraisal: | Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5] |
| Deck geometry appraisal: | Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5] |
| Water adequacy appraisal: | Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4] |
| Roadway alignment appraisal: | Equal to present desirable criteria [8] |
| Channel protection: | Bank protection is being eroded. River control devices and/or embankment have major damage. Trees and rush restrict the channel. [5] |
| Scour condition: | Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour conditions; field review indicates action is required. [4] |
| Sufficiency rating: | 67.2 |
| Recommended work: | Widening of existing bridge with deck rehabilitation or replacement. [34] |
| Estimated cost of work: | $477,000 |
Previous Inspections
| Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| September 2018 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1192 | 67.2 |
| August 2016 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1199 | 71.0 |
| August 2014 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 962 | 68.4 |
| July 2012 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 960 | 68.4 |
| June 2010 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 962 | 68.4 |
| July 2008 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 962 | 68.4 |
| August 2006 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1000 | 68.4 |
| July 2004 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1000 | 68.4 |
| July 2002 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1000 | 66.4 |
| June 2000 | Fair | - | Fair | Fair | 1000 | 66.4 |
| August 1999 | Poor | - | Fair | Poor | 1000 | 50.0 |
| June 1998 | Poor | Fair | Fair | Poor | 1000 | 48.9 |
| June 1996 | Poor | - | Poor | Poor | 650 | 52.3 |
| June 1994 | Poor | - | Poor | Poor | 650 | 51.3 |
| June 1992 | Poor | - | Fair | Poor | 650 | 56.1 |
| July 1990 | Poor | - | Fair | Poor | 650 | 55.7 |
Element Data
Source: National Bridge Elements dataset, 2019 edition. This feature is experimental.
| Element | Units | Quantity | 1-Good | 2-Fair | 3-Poor | 4-Serious |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Superstructure | ||||||
| Reinforced Concrete Arch | linear ft. | 29 | 0 | 24 | 5 | 0 |
| Substructure | ||||||
| Reinforced Concrete Pile Cap/Footing | linear ft. | 118 | 0 | 106 | 7 | 5 |
| Bridge Rail | ||||||
| Reinforced Concrete Bridge Rail | linear ft. | 64 | 0 | 47 | 17 | 0 |
© 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/1389731
Disclaimer: All data is taken from the National Bridge Inventory and has not been verified.
This page's URL is http://bridgereports.com/1389731