+38.86469, -94.48154
38°51'53" N, 94°28'54" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.


Structure number:25528
Old structure number:S229B21 048 (from 1992 edition)
Location:S 29 T 47 N R 32 W
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Local (Urban) [19]
Length of largest span:48.9 ft. [14.9 m]
Total length:98.1 ft. [29.9 m]
Roadway width between curbs:20.0 ft. [6.1 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:23.6 ft. [7.2 m]
Skew angle:30°
Owner:City or Municipal Highway Agency [04]
Year built:1932
Historic significance:Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5]
Number of main spans:2
Main spans material:Concrete [1]
Main spans design:Tee beam [04]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Bituminous [6]

Latest Available Inspection: March 2016 

Status:Posted for load [P]
Average daily traffic:1,890 [as of 2014]
Truck traffic:5% of total traffic
Deck condition:Serious [3 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Serious [3 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Poor [4 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of replacement [2]
Deck geometry appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of replacement [2]
Water adequacy appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
Channel protection:Bank and embankment protection is severely undermined. River control devices have severe damage. Large deposits of debris are in the channel. [4]
Scour condition:Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour conditions; field review indicates action is required. [4]
Operating rating:16.8 tons [15.3 metric tons]
Inventory rating:9.9 tons [9.0 metric tons]
Evaluation:Structurally deficient [1]
Sufficiency rating:29.8
Recommended work:Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31]
Estimated cost of work:$633,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
March 201629.8Structurally deficientSeriousSeriousPoor1890
April 201429.8Structurally deficientSeriousSeriousPoor1890
May 201229.8Structurally deficientSeriousPoorPoor1890
June 20102.0Structurally deficientSeriousPoorPoor1890
April 20082.0Structurally deficientSeriousPoorPoor1890
March 200614.1Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
March 200414.1Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
June 200235.5Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
July 200035.5Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
June 199835.5Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
September 199435.6Structurally deficientPoorPoorPoor1000
October 199255.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryFairFair1000