I-95 RAMP over HARDIG BROOK
Map
Coordinates:
+41.69685, -71.4788341°41'49" N, 71°28'44" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name: | I-95 RAMP over HARDIG BROOK |
Structure number: | 000000000008060 |
Location: | 0.1 Mi S of JCT RI 117 |
Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
Route classification: | Principal Arterial - Interstate (Urban) [11] |
Length of largest span: | 9.8 ft. [3.0 m] |
Total length: | 21.0 ft. [6.4 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 49.9 ft. [15.2 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 49.9 ft. [15.2 m] |
Skew angle: | 99° |
Owner: | State Highway Agency [01] |
Year built: | 1965 |
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: | 2 |
Main spans material: | Concrete [1] |
Main spans design: | Culvert [19] |
Deck type: | Not applicable [N] |
Latest Available Inspection: May 2017
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Good |
Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
Average daily traffic: | 11,000 [as of 1992] |
Truck traffic: | 10% of total traffic |
Structural appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
Deck geometry appraisal: | Superior to present desirable criteria [9] |
Water adequacy appraisal: | Superior to present desirable criteria [9] |
Roadway alignment appraisal: | Equal to present minimum criteria [6] |
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] |
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 (including piles) on dry land well above flood water elevations. [9] |
Sufficiency rating: | 96.4 |
Recommended work: | Bridge rehabilitation because of general structure deterioration or inadequate strength. [35] |
Estimated cost of work: | $478,000 |
Previous Inspections
Date | Condition | Culvert Condition | ADT | Suff. Rating |
---|
May 2017 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 96.4 |
May 2015 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 85.9 |
May 2013 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 85.9 |
May 2011 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 11000 | 96.9 |
May 2009 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
January 2008 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
June 2005 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
November 2003 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
November 2001 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
September 1999 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
July 1997 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 11000 | 94.9 |
August 1995 | Fair | 6 out of 10 | 29000 | 95.8 |
June 1993 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 29000 | 95.8 |
May 1991 | Good | 7 out of 10 | 2900 | 98.0 |
Element Data
Source: National Bridge Elements dataset, 2019 edition. This feature is experimental.
Element | Units | Quantity | 1-Good | 2-Fair | 3-Poor | 4-Serious |
---|
Culvert |
Reinforced Concrete Culvert | linear ft. | 100 | 0 | 99 | 1 | 0 |
Wearing Surfaces | sq. ft. | 1,050 | 849 | 101 | 100 | 0 |