State Bridge Profile Arizona 2016

Home/State Bridge Profile Arizona 2016
State Bridge Profile Arizona 2016 2016-02-29T09:46:07+00:00
[et_pb_section admin_label=”Section” fullwidth=”off” specialty=”on” transparent_background=”off” allow_player_pause=”off” inner_shadow=”off” parallax=”off” parallax_method=”off” custom_padding=”0px||0px|” padding_mobile=”off” make_fullwidth=”off” use_custom_width=”off” width_unit=”on” make_equal=”off” use_custom_gutter=”off” parallax_1=”off” parallax_method_1=”off” parallax_2=”off” parallax_method_2=”off”][et_pb_column type=”3_4″ specialty_columns=”3″][et_pb_row_inner admin_label=”Row” custom_padding=”||0px|” padding_mobile=”off” use_custom_gutter=”off” column_padding_mobile=”on” make_equal=”off” parallax_1=”off” parallax_method_1=”off”][et_pb_column_inner type=”4_4″ saved_specialty_column_type=”3_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Main Header” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”center” text_font=”|on|||” text_font_size=”28″ text_text_color=”#004064″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_margin=”15px||0px|” custom_padding=”||10px|” text_line_height=”1.8em”]

Arizona Highlights from FHWA’s
2015 National Bridge Inventory Data:

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text admin_label=”Bullet Points” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]
  • Of the 8,056 bridges in the state, 246, or 3%, are classified as structurally deficient. This means one or more of the key bridge elements, such as the deck, superstructure or substructure, is considered to be in “poor” or worse condition.1
  • 673 bridges, or 8%, are classified as functionally obsolete. This means the bridge does not meet design standards in line with current practice.
  • Federal investment in Arizona has supported $1.0 billion for capital improvements on 433 bridge projects between 2005 and 2014.2
  • Since 2004, 627 new bridges have been constructed in the state; 231 have undergone major reconstruction.
[/et_pb_text][et_pb_code admin_label=”Shareaholic” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19055″]<center>[shareaholic app="share_buttons" id="5471712"]</center>[/et_pb_code][/et_pb_column_inner][/et_pb_row_inner][et_pb_row_inner admin_label=”Row” padding_mobile=”off” use_custom_gutter=”off” column_padding_mobile=”on” make_equal=”on” parallax_1=”off” parallax_method_1=”off” parallax_2=”off” parallax_method_2=”off” parallax_3=”off” parallax_method_3=”off” gutter_width=”4″][et_pb_column_inner type=”1_3″ saved_specialty_column_type=”3_4″][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Bridge Inventory Data Button” button_url=”#inventory” url_new_window=”off” button_text=”View Bridge Inventory Data” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#004064″ background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”center” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_text_size=”17″ button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#002a3f” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”default” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″]

 

[/et_pb_cta][/et_pb_column_inner][et_pb_column_inner type=”1_3″ saved_specialty_column_type=”3_4″][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Proposed Bridge Work Button” button_url=”#proposed” url_new_window=”off” button_text=”View Proposed Bridge Work Data” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#004064″ background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”center” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_text_size=”17″ button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#002a3f” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”default” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″]

 

[/et_pb_cta][/et_pb_column_inner][et_pb_column_inner type=”1_3″ saved_specialty_column_type=”3_4″][et_pb_cta admin_label=”Download PDF Button” button_url=”http://www.artba.org/statepdf/ARTBA%20Arizona%20Bridge%20Profile%202016.pdf” url_new_window=”on” button_text=”Download Report” use_background_color=”off” background_color=”#004064″ background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”center” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_button=”on” button_text_size=”17″ button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_bg_color=”#002a3f” button_letter_spacing=”0″ button_use_icon=”default” button_icon_placement=”right” button_on_hover=”on” button_letter_spacing_hover=”0″ custom_margin=”0px|||” custom_padding=”0px|||” custom_css_promo_button=”min-height:70px;||min-width:95%;”]

 

[/et_pb_cta][/et_pb_column_inner][/et_pb_row_inner][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Ranking Header” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”center” text_font=”|on|||” text_font_size=”28″ text_text_color=”#004064″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_css_main_element=”font-size: 30px;” custom_margin=”15px|||” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19053″]

Ranking

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_number_counter admin_label=”Based on the # Percentage of Structurally Deficient Bridges” title=”Based on % of Structurally Deficient Bridges” number=”48″ percent_sign=”off” counter_color=”#004064″ background_layout=”light” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#d8d8d8″ border_style=”solid” custom_padding=”10px||10px|” custom_css_main_element=”border: 0px solid #ededed;||border-radius: 8px;” background_color=”#f7f7f7″]

 

[/et_pb_number_counter][et_pb_number_counter admin_label=”Based on # of Structurally Deficient Bridges” title=”Based on # of Structurally Deficient Bridges” number=”43″ percent_sign=”off” counter_color=”#004064″ background_layout=”light” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#d8d8d8″ border_style=”solid” custom_padding=”10px||10px|” custom_css_main_element=”border: 0px solid #ededed;||border-radius: 8px;” background_color=”#f7f7f7″]

 

[/et_pb_number_counter][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section admin_label=”section” transparent_background=”off” allow_player_pause=”off” inner_shadow=”off” parallax=”off” parallax_method=”off” custom_padding=”0px|||” padding_mobile=”off” make_fullwidth=”off” use_custom_width=”off” width_unit=”on” make_equal=”off” use_custom_gutter=”off” gutter_width=”3″][et_pb_row admin_label=”row”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=” Top Traveled Header” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font=”|on|||” text_font_size=”28″ text_text_color=”#004064″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19050″]

Top Most Traveled Structurally Deficient Bridges in the State

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_code admin_label=”Table 1 – Top Traveled”]
CountyYear BuiltDaily CrossingsType of Bridge3Location
Maricopa1962112,652Urban InterstateI 17; NB-SB over Central Avenue at 2.6 mi W Jct I 10
Maricopa1961105,803Urban InterstateI 17 over 19th Avenue at 4.0 mi W Jct I 10
Pima196576,500Urban InterstateI 10; EB over Ruthrauff Rd at 8.0 mi north Jct I 19
Maricopa197648,700Urban other principal arterialShea Blvd over Indian Bend Wash at Shea Blvd E of 52nd St
Pima196539,000Urban InterstateI 10; WB over Ina Road at 11.7 mi north Jct I 19
Pima196538,500Urban InterstateI 10; EB over Ajo Way at 2.0 mi east Jct I 19
Pima196538,500Urban InterstateI 10; WB over Ajo Way; FAU 8173 at 2.0 mi E Jct I 19
Coconino193437,286Urban other principal arterialSB 40 over Rio De Flag at 0.3 mi W Jct US 180
Pima196537,000Urban InterstateI 10; EB over Ina Road at 11.7 mi north Jct I 19
Pima196637,000Urban other principal arterial22nd Street over SPRR; Aviation Hwy at 22nd St@ Campbell Av
Pima197035,500Rural InterstateI 19; NB & SB over Wash at 2.4 mi N Jct B 19
Mohave196629,400Rural InterstateI 40 over Colorado River at 9.80 mi W of Jct SR 95
Pima196729,250Rural InterstateIrr I 19; NB over Santa Cruz River at 6.3 mi south of Jct I10
Pima196729,250Rural InterstateIrr I 19; SB over Santa Cruz River at 6.3 mi South Jct I10
Pima196628,750Urban InterstateI 10; EB over Country Club Road at 3.5 MI E Jct I 19
Gila194227,452Urban other principal arterialUS 60 over Pinal Creek at 2.6 mi E Jct SR 188
Pima196027,000Rural InterstateI-10 EB over Craycroft Rd at 7.7 MI E Jct I-19
Pima196027,000Rural InterstateI-10 WB over Craycroft Rd at 7.7 MI E Jct I-19
Pima195827,000Rural InterstateI-10 EB over Earp Wash Trib at 7.3 MI E Jct I-19
Pima195827,000Rural InterstateI-10 WB over Earp Wash Trib at 7.3 MI E Jct I-19
Pima196024,500Rural InterstateI-10 EB over Wilmot Rd at 9.0 MI E Jct I-19
Pima196024,500Rural InterstateI-10 WB over Wilmot Rd at 9.0 MI E Jct I-19
Pinal196423,000Rural InterstateI 10; EB over Gila River at 26.0 mi N of Jct I 8
Pinal196422,500Rural InterstateI 10; WB over Gila River at 26.0 mi N of Jct I 8
Mohave196719,627Rural InterstateI 15 over Virgin River at 22.6 mi E of Nevada
[/et_pb_code][et_pb_text admin_label=”Bridge Inventory Header” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font=”|on|||” text_font_size=”28″ text_text_color=”#004064″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” module_id=”inventory” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19051″]

Bridge Inventory

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_code admin_label=”Table 2 – Bridge Inventory Table”]
Type of Bridge3Number of BridgesArea of All Bridges (sq. meters)Daily Crossings on All BridgesNumber of Structurally Deficient BridgesArea of Structurally Deficient Bridges (sq. meters)Daily Crossings on Structurally Deficient Bridges
Rural Interstate1,241413,06718,488,6963762,112595,709
Rural arterial939516,4027,082,1681211,45570,631
Rural minor arterial708222,6282,471,0022613,32034,149
Rural major collector1,140458,5372,791,4883522,38653,202
Rural minor collector30993,020327,372246,7799,421
Rural local road658195,628444,9985314,02025,110
Urban Interstate307590,77514,755,8741623,169557,755
Urban freeway/expressway385904,45621,997,096311,25128,500
Urban other principal arterial818843,22318,933,664717,066172,038
Urban minor arterial523425,2246,391,34154,93330,780
Urban collector412206,7172,965,67083,82626,157
Urban local road616178,6251,306,333203,69714,525
Total8,0565,048,30297,955,704246194,0141,617,977
[/et_pb_code][et_pb_text admin_label=”Proposed Bridge Work Header” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font=”|on|||” text_font_size=”28″ text_text_color=”#004064″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” module_id=”proposed” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19052″]

Proposed Bridge Work

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_code admin_label=”Table 3 – Proposed Bridge Work”]
Type of WorkNumber of BridgesCost to Repair (in millions)Daily CrossingsArea of Bridges (sq. meters)
Bridge replacement2,089$13,102.334,010,1601,246,250
Widening & rehabilitation154$3,211.33,257,69269,893
Rehabilitation71$1,280.6688,818101,986
Deck rehabilitation/replacement12$509.3127,3555,092
Other structural work179$1,331.25,843,016157,113
[/et_pb_code][et_pb_text admin_label=”Footnotes” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19048″ background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font_size=”10″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]

1 According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), a bridge is classified as structurally deficient if the condition rating for the deck, superstructure, substructure or culvert and retaining walls is rated 4 or below or if the bridge receives an appraisal rating of 2 or less for structural condition or waterway adequacy. During inspections, the condition of a variety of bridge elements are rated on a scale of 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent condition). A rating of 4 is considered “poor” condition and the individual element displays signs of advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

2 ARTBA analysis of FHWA data, includes all bridge construction-related spending on projects approved by FHWA between 2005 and 2014.

3 Bridges are classified by FHWA into types based on the functional classification of the roadway on the bridge. Interstates comprise routes officially designated by the Secretary of Transportation, and the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Other principal arterials serve major centers of urban areas or provide mobility through rural areas. Freeways and expressways are similar to interstates, with directional lanes generally separated by a physical barrier, and access/egress points generally limited to on- and off-ramps. Minor arterials are used for trips of moderate length, serve smaller geographic areas and connect to the higher arterial system. Collectors funnel traffic from local roads to the arterial network; major collectors have higher speed limits and traffic volumes, and are longer in length and spaced at greater intervals, while minor collectors are shorter and provide service to smaller communities. Local roads do not carry through traffic, and are intended for short distance travel.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text admin_label=”Sources” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19049″ background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font_size=”10″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]

Source: Bridge data is from the 2015 National Bridge Inventory ASCII files, released by the Federal Highway Administration in January 2016. Note that specific conditions on bridges may have changed as a result of recent work.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]
X