+32.25658, -90.21429
32°15'24" N, 90°12'51" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.


Structure number:SA2500000000147
Location:SEC 20 T 5N R 1E
Purpose:Carries highway over waterway
Route classification:Collector (Urban) [17]
Length of largest span:20.0 ft. [6.1 m]
Total length:59.1 ft. [18.0 m]
Roadway width between curbs:24.0 ft. [7.3 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:25.9 ft. [7.9 m]
Skew angle:10°
Owner:City or Municipal Highway Agency [04]
Year built:1985
Historic significance:Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5]
Design load:M 9 / H 10 [1]
Number of main spans:3
Main spans material:Wood or timber [7]
Main spans design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Wood or Timber [8]
Wearing surface:Bituminous [6]

Latest Available Inspection: February 2017 

Status:Posted for load [P]
Average daily traffic:780 [as of 2015]
Truck traffic:8% of total traffic
Deck condition:Fair [5 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Fair [5 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of replacement [2]
Deck geometry appraisal:Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4]
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 with "unknown" foundation that has not been evaluated for scour. [U]
Operating rating:12.2 tons [11.1 metric tons]
Inventory rating:8.5 tons [7.7 metric tons]
Evaluation:Structurally deficient [1]
Sufficiency rating:27.6
Recommended work:Replacement of bridge or other structure because of substandard load carrying capacity or substantial bridge roadway geometry. [31]
Estimated cost of work:$208,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
February 201727.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201627.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201527.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201427.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201325.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201225.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201125.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
February 201025.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
January 200925.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
November 200725.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
January 200725.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
December 200525.3Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryFair780
January 200535.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactorySatisfactory780
February 200435.6Structurally deficientFairSatisfactorySatisfactory780
January 200236.6Structurally deficientSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory780
December 200036.3Structurally deficientSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory1400
February 200036.4Structurally deficientSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory1260
February 199936.4Structurally deficientSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory1260
March 199841.8Structurally deficientSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory1260
April 199641.8Structurally deficientGoodGoodSatisfactory1260