Share:

71st Street over AMTRAK (NE Corridor)

Map 

Coordinates:
+39.91793, -75.24110
39°55'05" N, 75°14'28" W
Source: National Bridge Inventory
Information not verified. Use at your own risk.

Facts 

Name:71st Street over AMTRAK (NE Corridor)
Structure number:000000000039178
Old structure number:677301007102360 (from 1992 edition)
Location:S. PASCHALL AVE. 36E05
Purpose:Carries highway and pedestrian walkway over railroad
Route classification:Local (Urban) [19]
Length of largest span:56.1 ft. [17.1 m]
Total length:122.1 ft. [37.2 m]
Roadway width between curbs:40.0 ft. [12.2 m]
Deck width edge-to-edge:64.3 ft. [19.6 m]
Vertical clearance above deck:26.2 ft. [8.0 m]
Vertical clearance below bridge:19.7 ft. [6.0 m]
Owner:City or Municipal Highway Agency [04]
Year built:1901
Year reconstructed:1915
Historic significance:Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places [2]
Main span material:Concrete continuous [2]
Main span design:Stringer/Multi-beam or girder [02]
Deck type:Not applicable [N]
Wearing surface:Bituminous [6]

Latest Available Inspection: February 2014 

Status:Posted for load [P]
Average daily traffic:40,000 [as of 1980]
Deck condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Superstructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Substructure condition:Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Structural appraisal:Basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrrective action [3]
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:Somewhat better than minimum adequacy to tolerate being left in place as is [5]
Scour condition:Bridge not over waterway. [N]
Operating rating:80.7 tons [73.4 metric tons]
Inventory rating:5.0 tons [4.5 metric tons]
Evaluation:Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating:36.2
Recommended work:Bridge rehabilitation because of general structure deterioration or inadequate strength. [35]

Previous Inspections 

DateSuff. ratingEvaluationDeckSuper.Sub.ADT
February 201436.2Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 201236.2Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 201036.2Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 200834.9Functionally obsoleteFairSatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 20069.1Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 20049.1Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 200213.1Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 200013.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 199813.0Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 199630.3Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 199432.6Functionally obsoleteSatisfactorySatisfactorySatisfactory40000
February 199245.6Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood40000
February 199045.6Functionally obsoleteGoodSatisfactoryGood40000