RTE I95 over RTE I95


+40.85429, -73.82556
40°51'15" N, 73°49'32" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.


Name:RTE I95 over RTE I95
Structure number:000000001075800
Location:1.3 MI N I295+I95
Purpose:Carries highway over highway
Route classification:Principal Arterial - Interstate (Urban) [11]
Length of largest span:59.7 ft. [18.2 m]
Total length:65.9 ft. [20.1 m]
Roadway width between curbs:28.9 ft. [8.8 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:36.1 ft. [11.0 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:14.8 ft. [4.5 m]
Skew angle:45°
Owner:State Highway Agency [01]
Year built:1961
Year reconstructed:1995
Historic significance:Bridge is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [5]
Design load:MS 18 / HS 20 [5]
Main span material:Steel [3]
Main span design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Integral Concrete (separate non-modified layer of concrete added to structural deck) [2]

Latest Available Inspection: August 2015 

Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Truck traffic:10% of total traffic
Deck condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Very Good [8 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Satisfactory [6 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 corrrective action [3]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as is [4]
Scour condition:Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:73.8 tons [67.1 metric tons]
Inventory rating:43.9 tons [39.9 metric tons]
Evaluation:Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:89.0
Recommended work:Widening of existing bridge with deck rehabilitation or replacement. [34]
Estimated cost of work:$1,468,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
August 201589.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodSatisfactory-
August 201374.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodSatisfactory6570
September 201174.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodGood6570
September 200974.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodGood6570
August 200774.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodGood6570
August 200574.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryVery GoodGood6570
July 200374.0Not deficientGoodVery GoodGood6570
August 200174.0Functionally obsoleteGoodVery GoodGood4977
September 199976.0Functionally obsoleteGoodVery GoodGood4977
February 199876.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory4977
February 199670.9Functionally obsoleteFairSatisfactorySatisfactory4977
January 199444.9Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryPoor3000
March 199244.9Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryPoor3000
February 199044.9Structurally deficientFairSatisfactoryPoor3000