Share:

RTE I278 over WB LAUREL HILL BD

Map 

Coordinates:
+40.73848, -73.90370
40°44'19" N, 73°54'13" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.

Facts 

Name:RTE I278 over WB LAUREL HILL BD
Structure number:000000001075910
Location:1.1 MI NE JCT I278 & I495
Purpose:Carries highway over highway
Route classification:Principal Arterial - Interstate (Urban) [11]
Length of largest span:121.7 ft. [37.1 m]
Total length:554.8 ft. [169.1 m]
Roadway width between curbs:24.9 ft. [7.6 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:27.9 ft. [8.5 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:15.7 ft. [4.8 m]
Skew angle:99°
Owner:State Highway Agency [01]
Year built:1969
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:7
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: June 2015 

Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Truck traffic:10% of total traffic
Deck condition:Good [7 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Good [7 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Fair [5 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5]
Deck geometry appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Underclearances appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrrective action [3]
Roadway alignment appraisal:Equal to present desirable criteria [8]
Scour condition:Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:74.8 tons [68.0 metric tons]
Inventory rating:38.9 tons [35.4 metric tons]
Evaluation:Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:83.0
Recommended work:Widening of existing bridge with deck rehabilitation or replacement. [34]
Estimated cost of work:$2,658,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
June 201583.0Functionally obsoleteGoodGoodFair-
June 201483.0Functionally obsoleteGoodGoodFair796
June 201383.0Functionally obsoleteGoodGoodFair796
July 201196.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory796
July 200996.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory796
July 200796.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory796
June 200585.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactoryFair796
April 200468.9Structurally deficientSatisfactorySatisfactoryPoor796
May 200384.0Functionally obsoleteGoodGoodFair796
June 200195.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory796
March 199993.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory796
June 199793.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactoryGoodSatisfactory796
July 199561.6Structurally deficientFairFairPoor10400
July 199361.6Structurally deficientFairFairPoor10400
September 199161.6Structurally deficientFairFairPoor10400