+38.28759, -90.49782
38°17'15" N, 90°29'52" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.


Structure number:19407
Old structure number:J- 89 050 (from 1992 edition)
Location:S 907 T 41 N R 5 E
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Local (Rural) [09]
Length of largest span:40.0 ft. [12.2 m]
Total length:81.0 ft. [24.7 m]
Roadway width between curbs:26.2 ft. [8.0 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:28.2 ft. [8.6 m]
Owner:County Highway Agency [02]
Historic significance:Historical significance is not determinable at this time [4]
Number of main spans:2
Main spans material:Steel [3]
Main spans design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Monolithic Concrete (concurrently placed with structural deck) [1]

Latest Available Inspection: January 2015 

Status:Posted for load [P]
Average daily traffic:200 [as of 2014]
Truck traffic:10% of total traffic
Deck condition:Fair [5 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Poor [4 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Fair [5 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4]
Deck geometry appraisal:Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5]
Water adequacy appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present minimum criteria [6]
Channel protection:Bank protection is being eroded. River control devices and/or embankment have major damage. Trees and rush restrict the channel. [5]
Scour condition:Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour condition. [5]
Operating rating:43.6 tons [39.6 metric tons]
Inventory rating:25.7 tons [23.4 metric tons]
Evaluation:Structurally deficient [1]
Sufficiency rating:62.1
Recommended work:Bridge rehabilitation because of general structure deterioration or inadequate strength. [35]
Estimated cost of work:$244,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
January 201562.1Structurally deficientFairPoorFair200
January 201370.9Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryPoor200
February 201187.9Not deficientGoodSatisfactoryFair200
February 200987.9Not deficientGoodSatisfactoryFair200
February 200787.9Not deficientGoodSatisfactoryFair200
February 200587.9Not deficientGoodGoodFair200
February 200398.9Not deficientGoodGoodGood200
February 200198.9Not deficientGoodVery GoodVery Good200
December 199898.9Not deficientVery GoodVery GoodVery Good200
February 199198.0Not deficientVery GoodVery GoodVery Good100