COUNTY ROAD over ARGYLE CREEK
Map
Coordinates:
+39.80339, -110.3532539°48'12" N, 110°21'12" W
Facts
Source: National Bridge Inventory. Information not verified; use at your own risk.
Name: | COUNTY ROAD over ARGYLE CREEK |
Structure number: | 007023D |
Location: | 35 MI NO. SOLDIER CR. JCT |
Purpose: | Carries highway over waterway |
Route classification: | Major Collector (Rural) [07] |
Length of largest span: | 40.0 ft. [12.2 m] |
Total length: | 45.6 ft. [13.9 m] |
Roadway width between curbs: | 27.9 ft. [8.5 m] |
Deck width edge-to-edge: | 51.8 ft. [15.8 m] |
Skew angle: | 30° |
Owner: | County Highway Agency [02] |
Year built: | 1955 |
Historic significance: | Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5] |
Design load: | M 13.5 / H 15 [2] |
Main span material: | Concrete [1] |
Main span design: | Frame [07] |
Deck type: | Concrete Cast-in-Place [1] |
Wearing surface: | Bituminous [6] |
Latest Available Inspection: June 2018
Good/Fair/Poor Condition: | Good |
Status: | Open, no restriction [A] |
Average daily traffic: | 63 [as of 2010] |
Truck traffic: | 5% of total traffic |
Deck condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Superstructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Substructure condition: | Good [7 out of 9] |
Structural appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
Deck geometry appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
Water adequacy appraisal: | Better than present minimum criteria [7] |
Roadway alignment appraisal: | Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4] |
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: | 92.4 |
Previous Inspections
Date | Condition | Deck | Superstructure | Substructure | ADT | Suff. Rating |
---|
June 2018 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 92.4 |
June 2016 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 92.4 |
June 2014 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 92.4 |
June 2012 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 84.8 |
June 2010 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 84.8 |
June 2008 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 63 | 84.8 |
August 2006 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 85.0 |
August 2004 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 85.0 |
August 2002 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 85.0 |
August 2000 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 79.9 |
September 1998 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 79.9 |
August 1996 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 79.9 |
September 1994 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 86.1 |
September 1992 | Good | Good | Good | Good | 50 | 86.1 |
July 1990 | Fair | Satisfactory | Good | Good | 50 | 86.1 |
Element Data
Source: National Bridge Elements dataset, 2019 edition. This feature is experimental.
Element | Units | Quantity | 1-Good | 2-Fair | 3-Poor | 4-Serious |
---|
Substructure |
Reinforced Concrete Abutment | linear ft. | 104 | 99 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
Deck |
Reinforced Concrete Slab | sq. ft. | 2,351 | 2,351 | 0 | 0 | 0 |