State Bridge Profile Mississippi 2016

Home/State Bridge Profile Mississippi 2016
State Bridge Profile Mississippi 2016 2016-02-29T10:38:19+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”]

Mississippi 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 17,057 bridges in the state, 2,184, or 13%, 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
  • 1,263 bridges, or 7%, are classified as functionally obsolete. This means the bridge does not meet design standards in line with current practice.
  • Federal investment in Mississippi has supported $1.8 billion for capital improvements on 632 bridge projects between 2005 and 2014.2
  • Since 2004, 1,640 new bridges have been constructed in the state; 115 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%20Mississippi%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=”12″ 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=”8″ 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
Jackson197739,000Rural InterstateI 10 over stream at 1.4 mi E SR 63
Warren197325,000Urban InterstateVicksburg Bridge
Harrison197518,000Urban collectorFas 139 over Biloxi River at Sec 8 T 7S R10W B
Harrison193817,500Urban other principal arterialUS 49 over Flat Branch at 3.2 mi N I 10
Forrest195016,500Urban minor arterialEast Hardy Street over Leaf River at Sec 11 T 4N R13W
Pearl River194815,000Urban other principal arterialUS 11 over Hobolochitto Creek at 0.3 mi S SR 43 North
Hinds192014,000Urban minor arterialMonument St over Town Creek at Sec 4 T 5N R 1E
Tate195913,500Rural InterstateI 55 over SR 306 at I 55 over SR 306
Rankin193812,000Urban other principal arterialUS 80 over KCS RR at 0.2 mi W I 20
Harrison193811,000Rural arterialUS 49 over Big Biloxi River at 9.0 mi N I 10
Coahoma193611,000Urban other principal arterialSecond Street over Sunflower River at Sec 23 T27N R 4W
Lowndes195311,000Urban other principal arterialSR 69 over Mccary Creek at 0.7 mi S SR 182
Hinds199411,000Urban collectorM. L. King Jr. Dr. over Tributary Town Cr at Sec 33 T 6N R 1E
Harrison193811,000Rural arterialUS 49 over Little Biloxi River at 6.4 mi N I 10
Pontotoc195511,000Rural minor arterialSR 15 over Lapatubby Creek at 1.2 mi N SR 76
Jones192910,000Urban other principal arterialUS 11 over Country Club Trib #1 at 0.3 mi N I 59
Forrest19609,750Rural local roadHattiesburg-G-Dale over Bouie River at Sec 33 T 5N R13W B
Hinds19909,700Urban minor arterialBeasley Road over Branch Hanging Moss Ck at Sec 2 T 6N R 1E
Alcorn19709,500Rural local roadOld 145 Tate St. over Elam Creek at Sec 2 T 2S R 7E
Sunflower19339,000Rural arterialUS 82 over Sunflower River at 3.9 mi E US 49W
Harrison19599,000Rural arterialUS 49 over Little Biloxi River at 6.4 mi N I 10
Hinds19878,800Urban other principal arterialHanging Moss Rd over Trib Hanging Moss Creek at Sec 10 T 6N R 1E
Pontotoc19528,700Rural minor arterialUS 278 over Mubby Creek at 2.7 MI W Lee Cl
Leflore19258,500Urban other principal arterialGrand Blvd 9504 over Yazoo River at Sec 10 T19N R 1E
DeSoto19358,200Urban other principal arterialUS 51 over stream at 6.8 MI N SR 304
[/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 Interstate482659,3066,751,340249452,500
Rural arterial1,4161,667,8338,276,3902116,586115,900
Rural minor arterial1,375905,8014,266,0504527,135108,000
Rural major collector3,8871,576,6894,389,541397127,188337,380
Rural minor collector847311,461708,0905412,74116,611
Rural local road7,3491,681,0981,533,5591,556226,986176,169
Urban Interstate298671,9458,507,190166,69825,000
Urban freeway/expressway108199,9501,463,250000
Urban other principal arterial394922,4444,984,4041611,214142,000
Urban minor arterial217183,5431,616,257177,117103,735
Urban collector292124,3791,000,832236,31379,553
Urban local road392101,308437,562527,82632,539
Total17,0579,005,75743,934,4642,184510,2981,189,387
[/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 replacement5,520$3,111.36,441,9021,576,956
Widening & rehabilitation1,091$395.37,616,440749,536
Rehabilitation407$69.7429,11098,414
Deck rehabilitation/replacement79$18.2233,38726,456
Other structural work279$59.1421,847113,877
[/et_pb_code][et_pb_text admin_label=”Footnotes” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” text_font_size=”10″ use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” saved_tabs=”all” global_module=”19048″]

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 This data is provided by bridge owners as part of the FHWA data and is required for any bridge eligible for the Highway Bridge Replacement

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

Sources: All data is from the 2014 National Bridge Inventory, released by the Federal Highway Administration in January 2015. Note that specific conditions on bridge may have changed as a result of recent work. Cost estimates of bridge work provided as part of the data and have been adjusted to 2014$ for inflation and estimated project costs. Contract awards data is for state and local government awards and comes from McGraw Hill. Note that additional bridge investment may be a part of other contract awards if a smaller bridge project is included with a highway project, and that would not be accounted for in the total in this profile.

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