Recent California Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted November 12, 2018, by Matt Lohry

The deck also has longitudinal runner planks, which is indicative of a road bridge. Also, the portal bracing is not high enough to accommodate rail traffic.

Posted November 12, 2018, by Luke

Too light to be RR

Posted November 12, 2018, by Daniel

I had considered railroad bridge being the most likely scenario, but none of the topo maps show a rail crossing of the river here either.

It could be one, I guess a short spur from the rail line (which appears to always have been SE of the river here) to town or something.

Posted November 12, 2018, by George Oakley (Georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

How many tunnels are there on the UP rail system in this area and/or in this county?I was baffled just trying to locate them.Seems they're everywhere you look!

Posted November 12, 2018, by Daniel

does "deck burned off" qualify as "lost"?

Posted November 12, 2018, by Daniel

Looking at old topo maps...

1962 doesn't show a road, nor do 1955, 1950

1980 shows a road, including crossing the river

but going much farther back...

1893 shows a road crossing the river at about the right place

1891 shows a significantly different route for the river, which surprises me (it doesn't make it's jog to the south)

It seems unlikely that the river changed it's course that much. Looking at the contour lines there's no other reasonable path.

Am I missing something?

Any thoughts on age? 1893 seems possible, but I'd be surprised at topo missing a bridge like this.

Posted November 11, 2018, by Craig Philpott (craigphilpott63 [at] gmail [dot] com)
Posted November 9, 2018, by Daniel I tried to post this as a link but couldn't get it to work

Posted November 8, 2018, by Daniel
Posted November 3, 2018, by Dick Morris

A correction to my previous comment - the bridge in 1927 was of wooden Howe truss construction. This was apparently a standard design for this area around 1900. A better photo of a similar bridge during the same flood exists of the Center Street, now Alondra, bridge three to four miles down river.

Posted November 3, 2018, by Dick Morris

Two photos show the Center Street (now Alondra) bridge during flooding in 1927. Judging by the water flow, Norwalk is on the left (east side of the river) and Bellflower on the right.

Photos from LA Times photographic archives, UCLA, Library Special Collections, Charles E. Young Research Library.

Posted November 3, 2018, by Dick Morris

A correction to my previous comment - the bridge in 1927 was of wooden Howe truss construction. This was apparently a standard design for this area around 1900. A better photo of a similar bridge during the same flood exists of the Center Street, now Alondra, bridge three to four miles down river.

Posted November 2, 2018, by Elizabeth (abbiespamemail [at] gmail [dot] com)

love the arches

Posted October 26, 2018, by Luke
Posted October 26, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Daniel I added the replacement bridge next to this private bridge, cant seem to find what was here previously if anything. Looks like well made private suspension bridge, probably not historic, Notable is up to individual.

Posted October 26, 2018, by Dick Morris

Although this site considers the Firestone Blvd. bridge to be a replacement for the Washburn Crossing bridge on Downey-Norwalk Road, the later was about 1500 feet downstream from Firestone Blvd. Firestone was the new, more direct road between the two cities. Most traffic probably moved to the new road, but the Washburn Crossing bridge appears to have remained in use until 1938.

I couldn't determine when the first bridge was build at this location, but plans and specifications submitted for the bridge at Washburn’s crossing were adopted by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors in mid-1876. In 1884 it was damaged or destroyed during a flood. It appears that a contract for its repair/replacement wasn't let until 1887. It was damaged or destroyed several other times, usually by floods. In 1904 it failed when being crossed by a carriage.

This 1924 photo shows that it had six A-frame spans with trestles at each end. Each span appears to have been about 24 feet long. The photo appears to be looking south.

The bridge was apparently in use until March 4, 1938. The L.A. Times reporting on a major flood described widespread road and bridge outages in L.A. and Orange Counties and said that one side of the bridge over San Gabriel River on Norwalk Road had dropped six feet. The Firestone Blvd bridge was 1500 feet upstream and the Imperial Hwy. bridge was .6 miles downstream. This probably resulted in it being permanently removed from service.

Posted October 25, 2018, by Daniel another suspension footbridge with "swinging" in it's name in CA - I'd forgotten I added this one

Posted October 25, 2018, by Luke
Posted October 25, 2018, by Anonymous
Posted October 25, 2018, by Daniel

The description states that "it is the only swinging bridge in California". What definition of "swinging bridge" does that use? There are certainly other bridges with slack lateral bracing cables - Mosquito Bridge, for example.

Posted October 15, 2018, by Brianna Tarness (briannatarness82 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The new bridge is open to traffic. The original through truss lift span has been disassembled and floated downstream. The truss approach spans, piers/abutments, and towers remain, although tower demolition is in progress.

Posted October 15, 2018, by Daniel

I stopped by on a ride yesterday. Holy crap the bridge moves a lot when cars/trucks drive over it, I sure wouldn't be willing to drive something that weighed 5 tons (the limit) over it.

People are also dumb and drive over it before the previous vehicle is off. I don't think there are signs saying not to, but still...

Posted October 15, 2018, by Brianna Tarness (briannatarness82 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Well, it would appear that the bridge status was never changed to “closed” since I posted my previous comment on August 20th.

However, I am pleased to announce that the bridge has been reopened to traffic, although the swing span reportedly is not currently operational.

Posted October 13, 2018, by melissa marsh (mo_marsh22 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

The original bridge was blown up in the late 80's or early 90's, and a new one was built next to the original location. The new one is the one in need of replacement, not the one built in 1949, which no longer exists.. Maybe it was meant to say 1994. My parent's lived at the mobile home park right there and we watched it all happen.

Posted October 11, 2018, by MFT (matsutwo [at] gmail [dot] com)

From, the southern hill portion is still in use on their 1968 photo. The next available image is in 1993, where it looks like the northern road is in place. Unfortunately that's a 25 year window, at least that narrows it down a little.

Posted October 9, 2018, by Daniel does it qualify as "lost" if they're replacing girders? I imagine so, and that's why this is already marked as "lost". Should a date of 2018 be added?

Hauser Bridge (California)
Posted October 2, 2018, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Daniel, You got it right - use "related" to link the new and old bridge. And as I found out, it is only necessary to do it from one side. That is, from the new bridge page, set a link to the old bridge and there will now be a matching link on the old page.

The first one I linked I had to removed a duplicate 'cause I did it from both sides manually.

I vote this bridge as "noteworthy" - if only because it shows that a modern replacement can have some style.

Hauser Bridge (California)
Posted October 2, 2018, by Daniel

Sonoma County rather than CalTrans, but you're correct in that it isn't your average replacement.


Posted October 1, 2018, by Luke

I found it in the waybackmachine, so the link should work again.

And that's definitely the predecessor bridge built by the Northern Electric Railway, which is shown here covered:

Posted October 1, 2018, by Dana

1906 postcard Feather RIVER. Could this be interurban?

Posted October 1, 2018, by Dana

Luke photo link no longer active.

Posted October 1, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Not qualified to say if bridge is noteworthy or not but did enjoy the photos. # 9 very artistic quality to it. Thanks for sharing

Hauser Bridge (California)
Posted October 1, 2018, by Luke

The new bridge is a modern arch, but doesn't appear to be the usual Corten MOB fare.

I say the new page stays up. Yeah its modern and replaced a truss, but Caltrans could've easily put a concrete eyesore here and didn't.

Posted September 30, 2018, by Tom

The 1885 Firebaugh Drawbridge has standing ruins on the west bank of the San Joanquin River and the spindle in the river itself:

Hauser Bridge (California)
Posted September 30, 2018, by Daniel

What's the proper procedure for uploading info about the replacement bridge? Do I create a new page for it? It has nothing in common with the old bridge (other than location).

Posted September 28, 2018, by Daniel

Looks like a truss rather than a timber stringer bridge

Posted September 27, 2018, by Ee (Lbdougher [at] gmail [dot] com)

Tell when the struts were switched out. It appears to have 3 different presentations/looks Thur the years

Posted September 2, 2018, by Don Morrison

The old aquaduct AKA "the secret sidewalk" is being demolished. No word on the bridge's fate, but it will likely be demolished with the aquaduct.

Posted August 30, 2018, by Luke

Nice find!

Posted August 27, 2018, by Daniel

Regarding the ADT of 549, I know that's from NBI but that's WAY more than I'd expect. I saw a total of 1 other vehicle on the dirt section that extends ~3.5mi East of the bridge. It's VERY narrow in places due to slides. I doubt it sees much traffic, given the condition.

West of the bridge I saw a few vehicles, but I doubt many (if any) were going past the bridge - they were most likely going to the bridge to hang out on the river, and the parking is mostly on the West side.

If they did their traffic survey at one of the ends of Yankee Jims Road I could see the ADT claim being reasonable (still higher than I'd expect though), but across the bridge? Not really.

Posted August 26, 2018, by Tony Arioli (Califtony707 [at] aol [dot] com)

I believe the photo entitled "Bridge circa 1967" was actually taken in the spring of 1968 - this image was used as a cover illustration for the San Mateo phone directory that year.

Posted August 26, 2018, by Daniel

I rode over it today (motorcycle), took a few pictures but nothing has changed. While there were signs indicating it was a fee area, if you just want to check out the bridge I can't imagine it being a problem.

There were several cars parked there, and people hanging out down by the river, I suspect if you want to do that it's a good idea to pay.

Posted August 20, 2018, by Joseph (mlgquickscopez295 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I just wanted to say that you guys need to add a build date to this bridge. If you look closely on photo number 1 you can see on the top of the bridge it says 1901. Perhaps this is the year it was built. Just a suggestion. Thanks!

Posted August 20, 2018, by Brianna Tarness (briannatarness82 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge has been closed indefinitely to all traffic including pedestrians, with the swing span locked in the open position. A recent maintenance report found that several superstructure elements had become unstable, and therefore recommended the immediate closure of the bridge. CalTrans reportedly wants to reopen the bridge, although it is unclear when or if that will happen.

Posted August 16, 2018, by Daniel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Bill (Bmwsson [at] yahoo [dot] com)

An absolute beautiful bridge if it’s not historic does not make any difference because it certainly needs to be preserved very special place they created with this bridge my opinion

Posted August 11, 2018, by Dan (schleusenmeister [at] gmail [dot] com)

The Puerto Suello Tunnel is in use as of August 2018. SMART commuter trains have been using it since August 2017 to reach their (for now) southernmost station at San Rafael. I don't know if NWP freight trains use the tunnel.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Luke

Additionally, the NBI gives "Winding Road" as the generic name for several roads in the Sierra National Forest.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

I imported NBI from pin location. May not be correct.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Luke

A two-span bridge will have a gap between spans to allow for thermal expansion.

There's no gap, so it's more than likely a single span with additional support.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Daniel

I'd have considered that 2 span, do you consider it single span because it's continuous at the pier rather than pinned?

I agree that it at least resembles a Bailey.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Luke

Looks more like a single-span Bailey-pattern truss with a support pier at the midpoint.

Posted August 3, 2018, by Daniel

The NBI data doesn't seem to match this bridge.

This is a 2 span bridge, while the NBI info has span length and total length within a foot of each other.

NBI states that it has a wooden wearing surface, the pictures show a wooden deck with steel wearing surface on top.

NBI states that it's on Winding Road/05S01, google maps shows Edison Lake Road.

Are you sure that's the right bridge?

Posted July 28, 2018, by Tim (Bridgebuilder1 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I worked on this bridge in 2000. My hand print is in printed in the wall of hands that we made for the local school. One of the first graduates of Roberts Ferry School also was able to put his hand print in.

Posted July 22, 2018, by Jeff Wieland (jjwieland [at] gmail [dot] com)

The "unknown missing bridge" appears to have been the "SP - Felton Trestle", a Pratt through truss that was added a few months ago.

Posted July 19, 2018, by Luke


Posted July 19, 2018, by Daniel

Is this an old railroad bridge, or was it a road bridge?

Posted July 10, 2018, by Daniel has a photo that I'm uploading that I believe is this bridge. It's on photobucket, so I don't trust it to stay visible there, hence the upload.

Posted July 4, 2018, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

The 99th mystery bridge takes us to California and the Springs. There, a through truss bridge, having been submerged since 1975, has revealed itself presenting a possibility to save it before the drought ends. Details here:

Posted July 1, 2018, by Pete Williams

400 feet sounds like the replacement bridge, yet the article also seems to indicate the current bridge is 150 years old. Sounds like sloppy reporting

Posted July 1, 2018, by Ed Hollowell (erhollowell [at] aol [dot] com)

Two thoughts"

1)Now someone can make an entry for the Old Mosquito Road Bridge.

2) The Mt. Democrat story said the new bridge was 400 feet above the river. The bridge in this entry is nothing like that high.

Posted June 29, 2018, by Christopher Finigan

This bridge deserves to be preserved, restored, and reopened for pedestrian usage in Lake County, as she may well be its only surviving pin-connected through truss bridge.

Posted June 28, 2018, by Matt Lohry

The bridge in the postcard photo is probably the pre-1939 bridge. It looks markedly different than the current one.

Posted June 28, 2018, by Daniel has info about a replacement, including:

"Located 400 feet above the river, it will replace the existing Mosquito Road Bridge that was built 150 years ago." states that it was built in the 1800s, possibly 1859. It also states that there was a new bridge built in 1939, so I suppose 1939 might be accurate - I guess it depends on whether it was rebuilt or fully replaced. has more info on the replacement.

Posted June 28, 2018, by Daniel

Is 1939 accurate? I found a photo (credit there was to the California State Library) claiming to be from 1914. I'm sure it's been rebuilt at some point since then.

Posted June 21, 2018, by Daniel
Posted May 14, 2018, by Anonymous

Regularly traversed on Jay Leno's Garage -- and increasingly featured in "teaser" clips of featured cars, etc.

Posted May 12, 2018, by Jeff Wieland (jjwieland [at] gmail [dot] com)

Not sure why Hercules has the "M/V" applied -- she still has her triple-expansion engine and Scotch boiler, so she's not a "motor vessel".

Posted May 11, 2018, by Leslie R trick

Here is Joseph Strauss's proposed design for the Golden Gate bridge the reason this design did not work is because the the public thought it was ugly.

Posted May 8, 2018, by Luke

Also mentions that the old bridge was scooped up by Nevada City to become a footbridge.

Posted May 8, 2018, by Daniel
Posted May 6, 2018, by Leslie R Trick

okay I will remember that.

Posted May 5, 2018, by Luke

Leslie, please add the flickr page's link and note the creative commons on your image:

Posted May 5, 2018, by Luke

Leslie, please add the flickr page's link and note the creative commons on your image

Posted April 30, 2018, by Anonymous

Postcard is of the 1898 one.

Posted April 28, 2018, by Luke

After further research, it appears that your image IS of Webster Street... just not the 1898 one this entry is for. It's of the 1871 iteration that was relocated to Bay Farm Island after it was replaced by this one.

Posted April 28, 2018, by Douglas Butler

You can move the last photo to the Webster Street Drawbridge Luke

Posted April 28, 2018, by Luke

Yes, as your image matches up more with


than it does with any image of Webster Street.

Posted April 27, 2018, by Luke

Doug, your Caltrans image matches up with the old Bay Farm Island Bridge:

Posted April 12, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Verified Butte Creek is the streaam from Google satellite view and made correction. Surprising as I seem to recall the World Guide to Covered Bridges said "Honey Run" and "run" is a southernism for creek. Go figure

Posted April 12, 2018, by David Houghton (emdgp9 [at] sbcglobal [dot] net)

Overview is incorrect. Bridge is over Butte Creek, not honey run. Needs correcting by someone who has edit capabilities

Posted March 29, 2018, by Craig Philpott (craigphilpott63 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Added three pictures from overhead drone camera

Posted March 29, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Flagged as duplicate

Posted March 29, 2018, by Craig Philpott (craigphilpott63 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Bridge has been rehabilitated and new photos submitted by friend of site.

Posted March 29, 2018, by Craig Philpott (cphilpott [at] puc [dot] edu)

This is a duplicate posting of bridge: Oregon Creek Covered Bridge 05-58-01

Lotus Bridge (California)
Posted March 23, 2018, by Jeri Lee Hicks (jl_riverdays_09 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

The new bridge being built is now experiencing high water and the supports used to assist the folks working on it are unstable and in danger of floating down stream.

Posted March 22, 2018, by Rodi Lee (rodi1918 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The name of the creek is Hancock (no 'd')

The stone aqueduct/flume in not a vehicle bridge but part of the Negro Hill ditch.

Posted March 18, 2018, by Macalister Clyde Crowl (mac [dot] crowl [at] gmail [dot] com)

Closed until 9/18.

Posted March 12, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

The overhead bracing is not original. At first, I thought it was a replacement for original bracing. Then I noticed the bridge is configured as a Half-Hip Pratt. Then I found the NRHP Nomination... If the NRHP nomination (attached) is accurate, this bridge was originally a pony truss! Never heard of a half-hip pin connected pony truss of this span length.

Posted March 9, 2018, by John Fahey (jtfftj [at] gmail [dot] com)

I can share a memory from this bridge. My parents and I took a rare family vacation from home in Los Angeles to northern California. The course of our travels brought us to an overnight in Redding. It was 1962 and I was 16. I should add that the last description anyone would have used for me was athletic. We stayed at a motel on Market Street after a day's driving and I took a walk towards the river. And from that street I saw the railroad bridge in the distance. And for some unknown and unexpected reason, I started to run across the open field to the bridge. It felt good to reach the bridge without stopping. I was not on to take any joy from running, but I was happy in that moment. I see now on the map the distance was about 3 tenths of a mile. Certainly not very far by any standard, but far enough to make a memory that stays with me to this day.

Posted February 27, 2018, by Anonymous

Under new research by the City, it has been determined that this bridge was "built by 1928". Not 1940, which cal-trans has assumed for years.

Honeydew Bridge (California)
Posted February 26, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)
Posted February 24, 2018, by Christopher Finigan

The reason why the Eastern Span was replaced was primarily due to its foundations. The Western Span is constructed on caissons going all the way down to the bedrock underneath the bay. The Eastern span, however, was constructed on timber pilings that went only 100-150 ft into the soil beneath the bay. In an earthquake, the soil, which is mostly clay, will shake like a bowl of jello in what is known as amplification. The wooden pilings would have collapsed and the bridge would have plunged into the bay.

Posted February 20, 2018, by Anonymous

Name is *Ruck-a-Chucky

Posted February 19, 2018, by Luke

Love the pics of the Key System's Bay Bridge motors.

(For those who don't know, the lower level of the Bay Bridge was half road, half trolley until 1959.)

Posted February 19, 2018, by Raul (Raul [dot] suarez [at] wavestream [dot] com)

This bridge has seen a major facelift that is not reflected in your indicators

Posted February 15, 2018, by Anonymous

This bridge has been unused since 1976, and was operated by the SP.

Posted February 14, 2018, by Bob Genova (rgeno [at] earthlink [dot] net)

This bridge brings back memories of growing up in Burbank in the Fifties and Sixties.

Those old SP logos, in brass I believe, would be a treasure. I think all four are still intact.

Posted February 10, 2018, by Nina

Thanks, Don :)

Posted February 10, 2018, by Don Morrison

Pretty good chance that this is the bridge you're looking for, Nina.