Photos 

< Previous   (1 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

< Previous   (2 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

< Previous   (3 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

< Previous   (4 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

< Previous   (5 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

< Previous   (6 of 6)   Next >

Photo taken by Tom Hall

View high-res version

Map 

Vicinity Map

Vicinity map

Map links:

Facts 

Overview
Through truss bridge over Coal Creek on CR 30 East
Location
Fountain County, Indiana
Status
Open to traffic
History
Built ca. 1910
Design
Through truss
Dimensions
Length of largest span: 100.0 ft.
Total length: 102.0 ft.
Deck width: 15.4 ft.
Vertical clearance above deck: 11.5 ft.
Approximate latitude, longitude
+40.19750, -87.25694   (decimal degrees)
40°11'51" N, 87°15'25" W   (degrees°minutes'seconds")
Approximate UTM coordinates
16/478130/4449709 (zone/easting/northing)
USGS topographic map
Stone Bluff
Inventory numbers
INNBI 2300088 (Indiana bridge number on the National Bridge Inventory)
BH 16122 (Bridgehunter.com ID)
Inspection (as of 05/2006)
Deck condition rating: Satisfactory (6 out of 9)
Superstructure condition rating: Poor (4 out of 9)
Substructure condition rating: Fair (5 out of 9)
Appraisal: Structurally deficient
Sufficiency rating: 19.0 (out of 100)
Average daily traffic (as of 2006)
116

Categories 

Built during 1910s (4,414)
Fountain County, Indiana (31)
Indiana (1,607)
One-lane traffic (6,990)
Open (22,300)
Owned by county (14,359)
Span length 100-125 feet (2,310)
Structurally deficient (12,077)
Through truss (5,557)
Total length 100-125 feet (2,508)
Truss (16,274)
Wooden deck (5,164)

Sources 

Post a comment here · Contact webmaster

Comments 

Coal Creek Bridge
Posted March 26, 2007, by Tom Hall (thomas [dot] hall [at] ffni [dot] com)

This bridge is probably in the worst shape of all the bridges in this county, and is starting to show its age. It doesn’t appear that there is a lot of traffic on the road it serves and may be the reason it hasn’t been as well maintained as some of the other bridges in this county.

Webmaster's note: The photos that were here have been incorporated into the main site.