ARDLEY AVE over INTERSTATE 580

Map 

Facts 

Name:	ARDLEY AVE over INTERSTATE 580
Structure number:	33 0308
Location:	04-ALA-580-R41.93-OAK
Purpose:	Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over highway
Route classification:	Local (Urban) [19]
Length of largest span:	79.1 ft. [24.1 m]
Total length:	212.9 ft. [64.9 m]
Roadway width between curbs:	40.0 ft. [12.2 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:	52.2 ft. [15.9 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:	15.1 ft. [4.6 m]
Skew angle:	11°
Owner:	State Highway Agency [01]
Year built:	1963
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:	4
Main spans material:	Concrete continuous [2]
Main spans design:	Box beam or girders - Multiple [05]
Deck type:	Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]

2010 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	4,000 [as of 1998]
Truck traffic:	2% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Substructure condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Scour condition:	Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:	86.6 tons [78.7 metric tons]
Inventory rating:	52.0 tons [47.3 metric tons]
Sufficiency rating:	96.0

2000 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	4,000 [as of 1998]
Truck traffic:	2% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Serious [3 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:	Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Substructure condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Scour condition:	Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:	85.8 tons [78.0 metric tons]
Inventory rating:	51.8 tons [47.1 metric tons]
Evaluation:	Structurally deficient [1]
Sufficiency rating:	89.0

1992 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	4,000 [as of 1990]
Deck condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Substructure condition:	Very Good [8 out of 9]
Scour condition:	Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:	85.1 tons [77.4 metric tons]
Inventory rating:	51.5 tons [46.8 metric tons]
Evaluation:	Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:	94.0

Comments