CESAR E. CHAVEZ AV over ROUTE 5

Map 

Facts 

Name:	CESAR E. CHAVEZ AV over ROUTE 5
Structure number:	53 1314
Location:	07-LA-005-18.06-LA
Purpose:	Carries highway overpass over highway
Route classification:	Local (Urban) [19]
Length of largest span:	76.1 ft. [23.2 m]
Total length:	155.8 ft. [47.5 m]
Roadway width between curbs:	62.0 ft. [18.9 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:	78.1 ft. [23.8 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:	15.4 ft. [4.7 m]
Skew angle:	22°
Owner:	State Highway Agency [01]
Year built:	1959
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 continuous [2]
Main spans design:	Box beam or girders - Multiple [05]
Deck type:	Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:	Monolithic Concrete (concurrently placed with structural deck) [1]

2010 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	26,160 [as of 1998]
Truck traffic:	1% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Satisfactory [6 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:	100.3 tons [91.2 metric tons]
Inventory rating:	60.8 tons [55.3 metric tons]
Sufficiency rating:	90.4

2000 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	26,160 [as of 1998]
Truck traffic:	1% 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]
Inventory rating:	60.8 tons [55.3 metric tons]
Sufficiency rating:	90.4

1992 Inspection 

Status:	Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:	26,160 [as of 1991]
Truck traffic:	1% of total traffic
Deck condition:	Good [7 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:	Very Good [8 out of 9]
Substructure condition:	Very Good [8 out of 9]
Scour condition:	Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Inventory rating:	60.4 tons [54.9 metric tons]
Evaluation:	Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:	88.9

Comments