Share:

BEDFORD PARK BLVD over NYCTA IND YARDS

Map 

Coordinates:
+40.87426, -73.89104
40°52'27" N, 73°53'28" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.

Facts 

Name:BEDFORD PARK BLVD over NYCTA IND YARDS
Structure number:000000002241930
Location:AT KINGSBRIDGE
Purpose:Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over railroad
Route classification:Collector (Urban) [17]
Length of largest span:140.8 ft. [42.9 m]
Total length:464.9 ft. [141.7 m]
Roadway width between curbs:60.0 ft. [18.3 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:85.0 ft. [25.9 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:13.1 ft. [4.0 m]
Owner:Other Local Agencies [25]
Year built:1936
Year reconstructed:2000
Historic significance:Historical significance is not determinable at this time [4]
Design load:MS 22.5 / HS 25 [9]
Number of main spans:4
Main spans material:Steel [3]
Main spans design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Concrete Cast-in-Place [1]
Wearing surface:Latex Concrete or similar additive [3]

Latest Available Inspection: October 2014 

Status:Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic:6,000 [as of 1972]
Truck traffic:10% of total traffic
Deck condition:Very Good [8 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Very Good [8 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Good [7 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Better than present minimum criteria [7]
Deck geometry appraisal:Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5]
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:97.8 tons [88.9 metric tons]
Inventory rating:47.9 tons [43.5 metric tons]
Evaluation:Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:91.7
Recommended work:Widening of existing bridge with deck rehabilitation or replacement. [34]
Estimated cost of work:$308,000

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
October 201491.7Functionally obsoleteVery GoodVery GoodGood6000
November 201291.7Functionally obsoleteVery GoodVery GoodGood6000
November 201091.7Functionally obsoleteVery GoodVery GoodGood6000
August 200890.7Functionally obsoleteVery GoodVery GoodGood6000
September 200690.7Not deficientVery GoodVery GoodGood6000
September 200490.7Functionally obsoleteVery GoodExcellentGood6000
July 200290.7Functionally obsoleteExcellentExcellentVery Good6000
August 200037.0Structurally deficientExcellentExcellentVery Good6000
March 20005.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
March 19995.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
May 19985.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
October 19962.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
December 19952.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
December 19942.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
December 19932.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
December 19922.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000
September 19912.0Structurally deficientSerious--6000