+36.02983, -96.73206
36°01'47" N, 96°43'55" W


Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Structure number:010160000000000
Location:HARMONY RD68TH ST .9S
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Local (Rural) [09]
Length of largest span:58.1 ft. [17.7 m]
Total length:62.0 ft. [18.9 m]
Roadway width between curbs:25.3 ft. [7.7 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:25.9 ft. [7.9 m]
Owner:County Highway Agency [02]
Year built:1920
Year reconstructed:2011
Historic significance:Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5]
Design load:M 18 / H 20 [4]
Main span material:Steel [3]
Main span design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Monolithic Concrete (concurrently placed with structural deck) [1]

Latest Available Inspection: October 2017

Good/Fair/Poor Condition:Fair
Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:100 [as of 2016]
Truck traffic:10% of total traffic
Deck condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
Deck geometry appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
Water adequacy appraisal:Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
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 the assessed or calculated scour condition. [8]
Sufficiency rating:96.0
Recommended work:Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31]
Estimated cost of work:$393,000

Previous Inspections

DateConditionDeckSuperstructureSubstructureADTSuff. Rating
October 2017FairSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory10096.0
November 2015GoodGoodGoodGood10096.0
October 2013GoodGoodGoodGood10040.0
November 2011GoodGoodGoodGood10096.0
January 2011GoodGoodGoodGood10023.4
February 2009PoorPoorSeriousPoor10020.3
October 2007PoorPoorSeriousFair10020.3
July 2005PoorPoorSeriousFair10020.3
May 2004PoorPoorSeriousSatisfactory10021.3
February 2003PoorSatisfactorySeriousSatisfactory10024.4
March 2002PoorPoorSeriousSatisfactory10021.3
January 2001PoorPoorPoorSatisfactory10021.3
December 1999PoorPoorPoorGood7523.4
January 1999PoorPoorPoorGood10023.4
March 1996PoorFairPoorGood10025.4
February 1994FairFairSatisfactorySatisfactory10046.7
January 1993FairFairSatisfactorySatisfactory10046.7
January 1992PoorPoorSatisfactorySatisfactory10044.7