Share:

BLOOMINGTON AVENUE over TH 62

Map 

Coordinates:
+44.89356, -93.25277
44°53'37" N, 93°15'10" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.

Facts 

Name:BLOOMINGTON AVENUE over TH 62
Structure number:27525
Location:0.3 MI W OF JCT TH 77
Purpose:Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over highway
Route classification:Collector (Urban) [17]
Length of largest span:90.2 ft. [27.5 m]
Total length:154.9 ft. [47.2 m]
Roadway width between curbs:29.9 ft. [9.1 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:42.3 ft. [12.9 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:14.8 ft. [4.5 m]
Skew angle:16°
Owner:State Highway Agency [01]
Year built:1966
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:3
Main spans material:Prestressed concrete [5]
Main spans design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Low slump Concrete [4]

Latest Available Inspection: August 2014 

Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:3,300 [as of 2005]
Deck condition:Good [7 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Good [7 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
Deck geometry appraisal:Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4]
Underclearances appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of replacement [2]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Scour condition:Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:62.0 tons [56.4 metric tons]
Inventory rating:40.9 tons [37.2 metric tons]
Evaluation:Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:78.0
Recommended work:Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31]
Estimated cost of work:$949,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
August 201478.0Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood3300
August 201278.0Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood3300
August 201077.5Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood3300
October 200877.5Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood3300
August 200777.5Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood3300
June 200666.5Functionally obsoleteGoodFairGood3300
July 200566.5Functionally obsoleteGoodFairGood2900
November 200466.5Functionally obsoleteGoodFairGood2900
June 200372.7Functionally obsoleteGoodFairGood2400
December 200256.7Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor2400
November 200156.7Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor2400
December 200056.6Structurally deficientGoodPoorPoor2400
November 199956.6Structurally deficientGoodPoorPoor2400
May 199856.6Structurally deficientGoodPoorPoor2400
November 199755.8Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor2300
October 199655.8Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor2300
October 199557.0Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor1750
October 199457.0Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor1750
May 199357.0Structurally deficientSatisfactoryPoorPoor1750
August 199283.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory2375
December 199183.9Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactoryGood2020