State Bridge Profile Texas 2016

Home/State Bridge Profile Texas 2016
State Bridge Profile Texas 2016 2016-02-29T10:56:45+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”]

Texas 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 53,209 bridges in the state, 1,008, or 2%, 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
  • 8,928 bridges, or 17%, are classified as functionally obsolete. This means the bridge does not meet design standards in line with current practice.
  • Federal investment in Texas has supported $8.0 billion for capital improvements on 4,639 bridge projects between 2005 and 2014.2
  • Since 2004, 6,362 new bridges have been constructed in the state; 1,313 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%20Texas%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=”50″ 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=”23″ 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
Harris1961124,280Urban InterstateIH 45 NB over White Oak Bayou at 0.10 mi N of IH 10
Montgomery1991121,760Urban InterstateIH 45 SB over Rayford/Sawdust Rd. at 1.2 mi N of Harris C/L
Harris196478,320Urban InterstateIH 610S EB over Holmes Rd, UPRR, Theresa at 0.9 mi E of SH 288
Harris196478,320Urban InterstateIH 610S WB over Holmes Rd,UPRR & Theresa at 0.9 mi E of SH 288
Denton196075,357Urban local roadS Denton Dr over IH 35E at 6.40 mi NW of SH 121 Bus
Orange195273,490Urban InterstateIH 10 over Neches River at 0. mi E Jefferson C/L
Tarrant196170,850Urban InterstateIH 35W NB over Nixon St at 0.25 mi S of Northside Dr
Harris195870,740Urban InterstateIH 10 WB over Mccarty St/US 90A at 1.25 mi W of IH 610
McLennan193165,030Rural InterstateIH 35 over Cottonwood Creek at 1.10 mi N of FM 308
McLennan195061,700Rural InterstateIH 35 over Little Tehuacana Creek at 1.9 mi N of FM 3149
McLennan195061,700Rural InterstateIH 35 over Little Tehuacana Creek at 2.8 mi N of FM 3149
Tarrant196657,220Urban InterstateIH 35W SB over Uprr/Fwwr/Dart & 36th St at 1.1 mi N of SH 183
Potter196448,050Urban InterstateIH 40 EB over Arthur St at 0.6 mi E of IH 27
Potter196448,050Urban InterstateIH 40 WB over Arthur St at 0.6 mi E of IH 27
Harris197044,730Urban local roadS Braeswood Blvd over Hcfcd ditch at 0.15 MI E of Fondren Rd
Dallas195538,900Urban freeway/expresswayGalloway Ave over US 80 at 0.80 mi E of IH 635
Potter196436,430Urban InterstateIH 40 EB over Ross St at 1.1 mi E of IH 27
Potter195836,430Urban InterstateIH 40 WB over Ross St at 1.1 mi E of IH 27
McLennan196134,700Urban InterstateIH 35 NB over FM 308 at 4.4 mi N of Lp 340 N
Bexar197333,020Urban minor arterialStarcrest Dr over Lorence Creek at 1.1 mi W of Wetmore Rd.
Galveston193932,580Urban InterstateIH 45 NB over BNSF RR at 2.20 mi SE of SH 146
Dallas197132,545Urban InterstateIH 345 SB over IH 30, US 75 & Dart Rail at Ih345 & Ih30 Interchange
Dallas197132,545Urban InterstateIH 345 NB over IH 30, US 75 & Dart, Etc at Ih30/Ih345 Interchange
Denton195830,360Urban InterstateIH 35E NBml over FM 1515 (Bonnie Brae Rd) at 1.60 mi NW of US 377
Denton195830,360Urban InterstateIH 35E SBml over FM 1515 (Bonnie Brae Rd) at 1.60 mi NW of US 377
[/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 Interstate2,3111,740,97031,721,00461,787220,350
Rural arterial4,2303,625,12330,861,4641436,33891,558
Rural minor arterial4,0412,883,47514,638,8161886,14477,700
Rural major collector8,2083,540,31112,864,7137337,34892,060
Rural minor collector2,999781,2481,666,264235,53610,415
Rural local road10,2312,027,6793,816,69970973,21690,833
Urban Interstate3,2348,081,395176,722,73624229,4661,149,660
Urban freeway/expressway4,20511,674,824135,708,33654,458100,813
Urban other principal arterial3,6865,003,17358,721,6361121,509134,640
Urban minor arterial2,7132,463,38428,897,8803077,613274,001
Urban collector2,5422,029,67717,929,6082234,949113,785
Urban local road4,8092,568,16817,904,2487322,406277,763
Total53,20946,419,428531,453,4081,008630,7702,633,578
[/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 replacement3,442$3,542.011,508,2951,394,885
Widening & rehabilitation82$67.81,579,24942,768
Rehabilitation265$285.51,189,063127,118
Deck rehabilitation/replacement9$861.61,7501,583
Other structural work8,572$2,990.582,500,6806,785,268
[/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