California Congressional District 4


  • Of the 2,259 bridges in the counties of this district, 154, or 6.8 percent, are classified as structurally deficient. This means one of the key elements is in poor or worse condition.
  • This is down from 158 bridges classified as structurally deficient in 2020.
  • Repairs are needed on 187 bridges in the district, which will cost an estimated $307.1 million.
  • This compares to 192 bridges that needed work in 2020.
  • The state has committed $90.0 million in IIJA bridge formula funds to support 11 projects in the District.

Top Most Traveled Structurally Deficient Bridges in California

County Year Built Daily Crossings Type of Bridge Location
Fresno 1974 76,000 Urban freeway/expressway State Route 41 over O Street
El Dorado 2008 60,000 Rural minor arterial Missouri Flat Road over US Highway 50
Fresno 1980 49,500 Urban freeway/expressway State Route 180 EB over BNSF Ry & Amtrak
Placer 2000 44,970 Urban other principal arterial Roseville Parkway over Antelope Creek
Madera 1967 32,500 Rural arterial State Route 99 SB over Cottonwood Creek
Fresno 1972 31,600 Urban other principal arterial Jensen Ave over State Route 41
Placer 1961 29,000 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 over UP RR, BNSF Ry, & Amtrak
Placer 1958 29,000 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 over Carpenter Road
Fresno 1962 27,039 Urban other principal arterial E Shields Ave over Dry Creek Canal
Placer 1964 27,000 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 WB over East Cisco Road
Placer 1963 27,000 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 EB over Hampshire Rocks,S Yuba R
Tuolumne 1991 25,060 Rural minor arterial Mono Way over Sullivan Creek
El Dorado 1957 20,300 Rural arterial U.S. Highway 50 over Snow Road
Tuolumne 2004 17,450 Rural minor arterial SR 108 over Mono Way
Fresno 1967 16,500 Rural Interstate Interstate 5 SB over Tumey Gulch
Fresno 1967 16,500 Rural Interstate Interstate 5 NB over Tumey Gulch
Madera 2000 15,000 Rural arterial State Route 152 EB over Ash Slough
Placer 1959 13,500 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 EB over Troy Road
Placer 1959 13,500 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 EB over Blue Canyon Road
Placer 1959 13,500 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 EB over Kingvale Road
Placer 1959 13,250 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 WB over Blue Canyon Road
El Dorado 1990 13,100 Rural arterial U.S. Highway 50 over South Fork American Riv
Fresno 1999 13,000 Urban freeway/expressway W180-S41 Connector over SR 41, SR 180
Nevada 1962 12,400 Rural Interstate Interstate 80 WB over South Yuba River
Placer 1928 11,100 Rural arterial State Route 89 over Truckee River

Bridge Inventory: California

Type of Bridge Number of Bridges Area of All Bridges
(sq. meters)
Daily Crossings on All Bridges Number of Structurally Deficient Bridges Area of Structurally Deficient Bridges
(sq. meters)
Daily Crossings on Structurally Deficient Bridges
Rural Interstate 81 64,695 1,573,350 13 12,342 222,900
Rural arterial 135 93,422 1,895,510 11 7,819 106,400
Rural minor arterial 192 140,857 1,169,955 9 6,460 120,101
Rural major collector 282 140,177 718,665 18 9,657 33,880
Rural minor collector 250 81,749 275,532 16 5,882 13,186
Rural local road 654 168,618 401,401 62 10,029 17,086
Urban Interstate 26 50,015 1,221,100 0 0 0
Urban freeway/expressway 226 357,393 7,851,881 3 7,134 138,500
Urban other principal arterial 97 119,896 1,705,374 4 6,843 113,424
Urban minor arterial 128 113,008 1,414,009 7 2,084 43,497
Urban collector 101 63,806 703,902 4 1,681 12,096
Urban local road 87 36,747 249,802 7 1,433 14,021
Total 2,259 1,430,384 19,180,481 154 71,366 835,091

Proposed Bridge Work

Type of Work Number of Bridges Cost to Repair
(in millions)
Daily Crossings Area of Bridges
(sq. meters)
Bridge replacement 61 $63 152,299 12,252
Widening & rehabilitation 1 $0 50 47
Rehabilitation 97 $211 683,618 60,344
Deck rehabilitation/replacement 1 $0 5 30
Other structural work 27 $33 41,286 9,768
Total 187 $307 877,258 82,440

About the data:

Data includes information for the following area(s): Alpine County, Amador County, Calaveras County, El Dorado County, Fresno County, Madera County, Mariposa County, Nevada County, Placer County, Tuolumne County

Data and cost estimates are from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Bridge Inventory (NBI), downloaded on August 20, 2024. Note that specific conditions on bridges may have changed as a result of recent work or updated inspections.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHWA changed the definition of structurally deficient as part of the final rule on highway and bridge performance measures, published May 20, 2017 pursuant to the 2012 federal aid highway bill Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Two measures that were previously used to classify bridges as structurally deficient are no longer used. This includes bridges where the overall structural evaluation was rated in poor or worse condition, or where the adequacy of waterway openings was insufficient.

The new definition limits the classification to bridges where one of the key structural elements—the deck, superstructure, substructure or culverts, are rated in poor or worse condition. During inspection, the conditions 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.

Cost estimates have been derived by ARTBA, based on 2023 average bridge replacement costs for structures on and off the National Highway System, published by FHWA. Bridge rehabilitation costs are estimated to be 68 percent of replacement costs. A bridge is considered to need repair if the structure has identified repairs as part of the NBI, a repair cost estimate is supplied by the bridge owner or the bridge is classified as structurally deficient. Please note that for a few states, the number of bridges needing to be repaired can vary significantly from year to year, and reflects the data entered by the state.

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. Other principal arterials serve major centers of urban areas or provide mobility through rural areas. Freeways and expressways have directional lanes generally separated by a physical barrier, and access/egress points generally limited to on- and off-ramps. Minor arterials serve smaller areas and are used for trips of moderate length. 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.

28
Compared to 27 in 2023

in the nation in % of structurally deficient bridges

1. Iowa 19.0%
27. New Jersey 6.0%
28. California 6.0%
29. Washington 6.0%

7
Compared to 6 in 2023

in the nation in # of structurally deficient bridges

1. Iowa 4,544
6. New York 1,664
7. California 1,527
8. Louisiana 1,458

15
Compared to 16 in 2023

in the nation in % of structurally deficient bridge deck area

1. Rhode Island 14.0%
14. Pennsylvania 7.0%
15. California 7.0%
16. New Hampshire 6.0%
Full State Ranking

Advertisement


  • Source: Data is from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Bridge Inventory (NBI), downloaded on August 20, 2024. Note that specific conditions on bridges may have changed as a result of recent work or updated inspections.

    ARTBA is a non-partisan federation whose primary goal is to aggressively grow and protect transportation infrastructure investment to meet the public and business demand for safe and efficient travel.

  • Privacy & Cookies Policy
Connect With Us

Copyright © 2025 American Road & Transportation Builders Association