Here is a photo of the bridge from 10/06/2019. The bridge is easily accessed by a maintained road.
I'm trying to find out the vertical draft (clearance) under the bridge at mean low/high tides for water traffic underneath if anybody can find out would be helpful I can't seem to find it anywhere.
Here is the Video
Here is a short video of this bridge taken June 2019.
The bridge seen today is modern and not historic. It completely replaced the original riveted truss. Here is the original bridge as seen in 1981.
I'm pretty sure the details in here on both this bridge and the new one are incorrect.
Here are a few videos of a driver documenting the replacement of this bridge in 1994/1995 with the current higher bridge, not built in 1920...but rather 1994
The previous bridge may have been built in the 20s or 40s I have no idea, but it was a dual lane drawbridge that was replaced
when the bridge will be open, please?
Great pictures in Mike's attached folder. I hope we can add them to the page.
Current bridge was built in 1977: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/211302968/
I'm working on this bridge would like more info from it's origination.
Built 1909, from a Railway Age article of the same year.
I wish I was at the Mulysa Bridge today. It would be fitting after this crazy fun...
I just hope that the Mulysa Bridge does not collapse. It is way cool!
Okay, thanks for letting us know that they were tourists. I'm hoping that some of them got photos of the bridge while it was parked next to the Hal Adams Bridge. I would be interested in seeing some documentary photographs of the restoration.
I'm hoping maybe one of the photographs might have caught a company vehicle. That way if we know for example that Billy Bob's Bridge Restoration was involved then we would know that they were great contractor to be able to pull something like this off.
No, thatís not what I meant.
I meant that I saw two TOURISTS from West Virginia and Idaho parked in a pull-off near the Hal W. Adams Bridge at the same time that I was there.
I am not surprised that somebody from West Virginia would be there. That is a really good item to note. West Virginia is a heavily industrial state and I could certainly see some bridge restoration companies being based there.
Local resident, did you happen to catch the name of the company from West Virginia? I'm very impressed that they could do perfect replication of the original parts and get the whole thing back on the pier so quickly.
Everyone can believe what they want to believe. Everyone can think what they want to think. Nobody can physically change someoneís opinion, even when itís wrong.
That said, I know what I saw. Other people saw it too. I really donít have any thoughts about good faith/bad faith with Amanda, but I do know that around the same time I was looking at the bridge, a man from West Virginia and a man from Idaho were also there, which says something.
As Iíve said repeatedly, just drop the stick and move on.
Flood stage = flooding.
Flooding = flood stage.
A river cannot flood without hitting flood stage.
J.P. beat me to the punch. This graph shows that through the year that the river only was 4' higher than in my pictures at the highest. In April, the river was measured at about 1 foot higher than in my pictures.
Someone is full of crap. There is no way a bridge this size is moved to a suspension bridge nearby, fixed, and then reinstalled in two weeks. The permits alone would take longer. This is obviously the same person making this prank.
Ahem... look at that chart VERY closely.
Youíll notice in the key it says that the red line is ďNational Weather Service Flood StageĒ. That doesnít mean that the river canít flood without hitting that stage. I highly doubt that the swing pier is 34-35 feet tall, although I havenít examined it closely. Regardless, I do know from experience that it doesnít take 35 feet of water to flood some of the low-lying streets near the water bank.
So just to show how high the water has been along with records here is a chart showing the current, the highest in the last 365 days and historical. This is the closest gage which is located at the Hal W Adams Bridge. I'm happy to say that this particular spot hasn't hit flood stage since 1948. Chart provided by the USGS. Link provided.
I'm curious what the true extent of the damage is. Comparing my photos to Nathan Holths, there is no distinguishing difference. However, you are correct that I am not a local. I live a 23 hour drive from the structure, and based my field report on what I found. When did these flash floods occur? I am curious to the water levels then.
I couldnít agree with that last statement more...
It might be very difficult to tell which members were replaced, since it appears that either the state and/or the counties painted over the new modern steel with the same color as the rest of the cast iron to hide the ugly new modern beams...
I will be interested to see which members got replaced. John Marvig always does a very thorough documentation of bridges when he visits them. Once he posts photos to his website, I will look through them to figure out which members got damaged.
It would seem like a complete waste of taxpayer money to put this bridge back on the failing pier.
I saw the bridge when it had been relocated to the Hal W. Adams Memorial Bridge, but it was fenced off with ďNo TrespassingĒ signs posted, and there happened to be a police officer running traffic traps nearby, so I didnít want to raise questions and thus I didnít take any photographs.
I made another visit about 2 weeks ago, and was shocked and surprised to discover that the bridge was no longer there. I then went down to the river and found the bridge back on its original pier. While I was not able to get up close to the bridge as I donít own a boat, I could tell from a high-zoom camera lens that a few members of the truss had been replaced, and others significantly repaired. Beyond that I was not able to make any further conclusions.
I then spoke to a large population of my neighbors, and none of them could agree on what happened after the bridge was restored, and none of them could agree on why the bridge would be placed back on the failing pier.
Thatís why Iíve suggested that we assume that the bridge sustained minimal damage from the flood, and that it was only relocated for inspection or possibly partial restoration. Look at the glass half full and drop the stick, please.
So, back to my original question. Did you see any evidence of construction on your last site visit? Do you know how the bridge would have been placed back on the pier?
My apologies. I accidentally posted the previous comment in the general forum instead of on this page.
This is all very interesting. Do you know why the Florida Department of Transportation would have been involved? This seems strange to me. It seems odd that the Florida Department of Transportation would have jurisdiction over a railroad bridge.
Have you seen any evidence of construction activity around the bridge? Do you know how the bridge was placed back on the pier without any trees being cut down?
Probably inspecting it to make sure that it wasnít damaged... or possibly (perish the thought) rehabilitation... something the neither FLDOT nor the two counties have seemed to care about.
Anonymous user, do you even know what ďdrop the stickĒ means?
So, if the truss survived the floodwaters, then what was it doing at the Hal Adams Bridge?
And I did. So did several others.
Iím not sure what part of ďdrop the stickĒ you donít understand...
Just Simply Local Resident:
In your May 19th post, you said that you saw the bridge sitting next to the Hal Adams Bridge. Can you explain why you said that? Don't tell me that you got bad information from Amanda. You yourself said that you saw the bridge next to the Hal Adams Bridge.
Does anybody know the dates for this supposed flood event? If someone can post the time frame that this flood allegedly happened, then we can access the USGS data. That data will give us a good idea for how high the water actually got on the pier, if this alleged flood even happened.
The way this nonsense is going, we are all going to be local residents to the Mulysa Bridge.
Iím only argumentative because they are trying to discredit every single thing I say, when I donít believe any of them are local residents.
John said he had to drive 3 hours to get to the bridge - thatís not a local resident. I cannot disclose where I live for privacy and security reasons, but I can say that I live within biking distance of the bridge.
Please, everyone, just DROP THE STICK. This discussion has gone on for too long. Iím surprised that everyone isnít content to assume that there was no damage from the flood, despite the floodwaters submerging the bridge pier. Thatís great news, isnít it? I think so.
Thanks Robert for letting me know about the pictures John posted.Looks to me like the bridge is still standing,huh?What I also want to know is why this "local resident" is so argumentative with everybody?
I made that claim based on the information I had available at the time. There are still some other residents who believe that the bridge was swept off the pier. As I have said repeatedly, it appears unlikely that it was swept off, despite evidence suggesting just that at the time
I agree with George regarding enough of this arguing. As Iíve also said repeatedly, flooding submerged the swing pier, but no local Resident can agree on what happened or didnít happen after that. As such, letís look at the glass half full and assume that the truss withstood the floodwaters and was not damaged, unless/until we hear otherwise.
Iím getting tired of this... why is it so difficult to make a positive assumption since we really donít know what happened? Drop the stick, please.
Simply Just Local Resident:
On May 19th, you yourself posted on here claiming that the bridge collapsed. You did indeed make this claim. Now you are trying to walk it back after you got called out. I hope that the webmaster blocks you.
John Marvig did get out to the bridge and he photographed it. He has confirmed that the bridge is still standing on the pylon.
Several weeks ago, somebody by the name of Amanda was posting on here and claiming that the bridge had been knocked into the river by a flood. Her comments got removed because she was deliberately posting disinformation and also posting copyrighted materials.
John was able to field visit this bridge and confirm that Amanda was a liar.
I have a great idea which nobody has thought of.Maybe someone can get out to this bridge and document it instead of just arguing and guessing what's going on with the bridge.Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Also, for the record, my name isnít Amanda, but Iím pretty sure that if Amanda was reading this now, she would not be pleased with the insults.
Please stop insulting me.
Again, I never said that the bridge was knocked off the pier. In fact, I disagree with that given the tree in the middle.
For the last time, letís close this discussion with what we know. There was a flash flood. The river overflowed its banks. The water submerged the bridge pier. Beyond that, we donít have definite answers and so we need to stop speculating. Look at the glass half full and assume the best case scenario: the truss was able to withstand the flood and therefore was unharmed.
Just a final note that the ďholeĒ visible in the swing span during Johnís visit (photo #22) proves that there was some flood damage to the swing pier.
Iím not so sure about that. I think it mightíve been possible for the floodwaters to eat away at the hinges on the swing pier enough that the pier would no longer give the truss any support, and therefore it would slide into the river, while leaving the tree (mostly) intact.
However, until either the majority of local residents can agree on a definite answer, and/or until FLDOT can give a definite answer (which theyíre not good at doing), letís just assume that the truss superstructure was strong enough to withstand the floodwaters, and any damage was repaired quickly (as in before Johnís visit). I think thatís the best way to look at it - with the glass half full.
I see no need to discuss this further until and unless we get definite answers. All this speculation as to what did or dindít happen is getting unconstructive IMHO.
That's not how physics works. If the bridge was moved off the pier, the tree would've gone with it.
No, Iím afraid thatís not what happened. It wouldíve been great if it was, but itís not.
The Suwannee River flooded and overflowed its banks on both sides. There was moderate flooding on many local roads that run along the river. The bridgeís swing pier was submerged in water for a time.
What needs to be sorted out is what happened or didnít happen after the floodwaters submerged the bridgeís pier. Was the truss superstructure able to withstand the floodwaters being within feet of it, and therefore was unharmed? Did the waters slide (but not yank, knock, or pull) the bridge off the pier, so that the tree remained intact, but the bridge was in the river? Did the bridge get pulled off and the tree was strong enough to withstand it? We donít know, and no local resident that Iíve spoken with can agree.
However, we do know with certainty that during a flash flood, water was covering the pier.
I can tell you exactly what happened. The bridge stood firm on the pillar while the water flowed underneath. Nothing more nothing less.
I have not and will not disclose my name. Please refer to me as "Local Resident" or simply just "Resident" if you will.
Also, I never said that the bridge was knocked off its pier. In fact, I agreed with John below that the chances of that having happened were low given the tree in the middle of it.
However, what I do know, and what many locals know, is that the Suwanee River did seriously flood, and the floodwaters rose above the height of the bridge pier, to the point that the swing span was sitting on the water. What happened, or didn't happen, after that is what nobody in the area can agree on, and FLDOT refuses to provide details about.
Addis Ababa, or whatever your name is...
You are posting information that has been disproven multiple times. All of us know damn well that this bridge was not knocked off its pier.
Excuse me, but please do not insult me. I am offended by your recent comments.
My name isnít Amanda, nor am I a ďtrollĒ (whatever that means). Please stop.
For the benefit of anybody visiting this website, I would like to say that Local Resident is a troll. Her real name is Amanda and she posts blatantly false information.
She is fake news.
You are fake news.
Because Nathan received an email, probably from the exact same IP address as "Amanda".
Iíve been trying to gather more information on this so-called collapse over the past few weeks. Johnís findings regarding the tree in the middle of the pier do seem to suggest that at least some portion of the truss superstructure was not affected, or, at the most, was not ďyankedĒ off the pier.
I contacted both the county DOT and FLDOT, both of which declined to comment on the situation, basically saying ďThe Bridge is back where it belongs now. Go look at it if you want toĒ ó something that is unfortunately not surprising of Florida Highway agencies.
I have since been speaking to several of my neighbors and several residents from the other side of the river (across the Hal W. Adams Memorial Bridge), and many agree that the flash floods of the Suwannee River definitely did *something* to this precious bridge, although nobody can agree on exactly what.
My question now is, if this bridge did not actually collapse, why is Nathan Holth from HistoricBridges.org, a website I trust and that appears reliable, confirming the claims made by Amanda or whoever that the bridge is/was gone?
According to https://www.floridagofishing.com/reefs/nw-reefs-bay-county.h... several (Perhaps all?) spans from this bridge were dumped in the ocean to become reefs.
Sad that they didn't get reused on the surface, but them being used propagate marine life (As well as becoming diving attractions.) is still better than being smelted down.
Now that Angie has been blocked, I wonder how many other anonymii will disappear.
Yet another occasion this Futurama clip has been apropos regarding "Amanda" and their BS:
Iím not even sure who Amanda is but if the extent of copyright violations and potentially incorrect information is as bad as James makes it sound, then yeah, either ban the user, or at least, prevent them from editing anything until they learn what ďcopyrightĒ and ďverifiabilityĒ mean. Those are the two most important concepts when contributing information to any public website or database: make sure the info is not copyright infringement, and make sure itís verifiable.
I find it unfortunate that FLDOT doesnít appear to care for this bridge, because if they did, they wouldíve placed it in storage in a safe place, rather than placing it back on the pier where it will only be a matter of time before it falls again.
P.S. addressing messages to Amanda, whoever they may be, is probably pointless if they are blocked or banned.
Thanks for doing the investigation. I have no doubt than Adnama will create a new website with copyrighted material again. We must be vigilant.
Well, well, well. I did some forensic analysis on the IP number used by both "Local Resident" and "Amanda".
And what did I find? This little beauty of a link:
Wikipedia has banned a particular user, "I Love Bridges", for the "Creation of hoax bridge articles, and meddling with existing ones."
The same IP number used by Amanda is mentioned on that page. It has been banned from Wikipedia for a year because of long-term abuse.
Good riddance, Amanda. Wikipedia was right to ban you, but I'm not willing to settle for a one year ban. You and your hoaxes and copyright violations are not welcome here ever again.
President Trump explains what happened here.
Iím using a VPN server, which obfuscates my IP data for privacy. Therefore, it doesnít locate to my actual location. In fact, I donít even know where it locates to.
I AM A LOCAL RESIDENT and I do not appreciate being attacked or harassed.
I was shocked, shocked to discover that the first comment from "Local Resident" was posted from the same IP number used by Amanda in the past, and that this IP number is registered to an internet provider that is 1,200 miles away from the Drew Bridge.
I've tried to follow the advice of "Don't feed the trolls" but this is getting ridiculous.
I believe there may be a few pictures of the bridge while it was located next to the Hal W. Adams Bridge. However, FLDOT is notorious for refusing to make their documentations public, and therefore very rarely will you find pictures like this on Google Images or whatever.
The bridge originally collapsed due to flash flooding of the Suwannee River submerging the swing pier underwater. It was initially thought that the swing pier was destroyed, but fortunately that was not the case.
The superstructure did sustain some damage. I saw the bridge while it was next to the Hal W. Adams Bridge, and some of the members were definitely falling apart and bent out of shape. However, for some strange reason, a police officer who just happened to be driving by claimed that it was illegal to take photos of the bridge, which I know in theory is a 1st amendment violation, but I didnít want to get arrested... so yeah.
As to why it was placed back on the same pier, your guess is as good as mine. As I noted, some of the cast iron appears to have been replaced, but I have no clue why they would put a bridge already damaged back on a pier that was in danger of complete failure. My guess is that FLDOT is too busy and is spending too much money on widening short little freeways in the Miami area, and adding astronomical toll rates on said freeways, when they really donít serve a functional purpose.
It must have taken some clever logistics and engineering to set an historic swing truss back up on it's precarious perch in the middle of the ol' Swannee river where it sat unused for half a century. Some might suggest that the necessary resources would be better used to put the truss on display somewhere more accessible to the public, but I say "poo on that".
Thanks to local resident for filling us in on the details. Surely there are pictures of the move?
At least we now know for sure that Andrea wasn't just bullshitting about the near loss of this span.
'Scuze me - I gotta get some popcorn for this discussion.
Are there any pictures of the restoration and resetting process? I've not seen a bridge like this survive a fall into a river without sustaining some damage. What apparently caused the bridge to fall in? And if it fell in once, why was the decision made to have a structure in danger of imminent failure placed back on the same pier?
Ahem... local resident speaking.
There is no ďtrollingĒ going on here. This bridge was indeed swept off its pier by flash flooding of the Suwannee River during a large patch of severe thunderstorms, and as Nathan Holth mentions, the superstructure was temporarily relocated next to the Hal W. Adams Memorial Bridge.
The good news was that, unlike what was originally thought, the bridge did not suffer serious structural damage, and the best part was that the swing pier did not completely give way under the floodwaters, as it had appeared to. Once the floodwaters receded, myself and a few other residents went down to the river and discovered the pier was still there.
As such, the bridge superstructure was moved back and placed back on the pier a few days before Johnís visit. The bridge was essentially bolted on to the pier, so thatís a major alteration, and I gather that one or two of the cast iron members had to be replaced. Despite this, I can confirm that the bridge is indeed currently intact, albeit considered at risk for ďimminent failureĒ in any future flash flooding event, however it was not intact for a period of time and therefore no ďtrollingĒ was occurring here.
What a nice surprise sadly we can not say the same for Matt and the Auburn Bridge.
Whatís better than driving 3 hours to find a collapsed bridge? Driving three hours to find the bridge intact. It looks like it was just a ruse by a troll somewhere that reported it...
Regarding the Drew Bridge:
Unfortunetly the Drew Bridge collapsed under heavy floodwaters about 2 weeks ago.
The swing pier was destroyed, although I gather that the truss superstructure, despite severely damaged, was not a complete loss and has been relocated, fenced off next to the Hal W. Adams Bridge.
So, now that this incident is down to lawsuits and NTSB investigations, what next? There is clearly a need for a bridge at this location. FIU students are being killed crossing busy US 41.
I assume they will not simply try again to build this failed design. That would be a travesty, and a dishonor to the 6 who lost their lives here.
I do like Nathan Holth's idea of moving and rehabilitating the remains of the historic Drew Bridge. It might actually fit into this space with its big center pier, which could be located between the road and the canal. Or there may be another historic bridge available for reuse, such as Indiana's 9-span Bridge. Such an historic bridge could be an interesting classroom for FIU engineering students.
Or simply build a more conventional steel through truss bridge. The requirements of the site dictate a through truss, those being clearance requirements above the road, along with a desire to minimize how many stairs pedestrians would have to climb. This part of the original design was correct - it was to have been a through truss to meet these basic requirements. However, successful concrete truss bridges are rare, perhaps for a reason.
If no available historic bridge can be found, build a new steel through truss, but build it deliberately to be a classroom, with ready connectors and power outlets for stress monitors and other instrumentation, so the engineering students could learn how to use these tools on a real bridge. Make the deck to be inside the truss webs, so that the bottom chord is easily visible. (Example: rehabbed Chatham Street Bridge in Blue Island IL.) If they would like to make it a bit fancier than a simple Warren truss, it could be a Baltimore, Pennsylvania, or Lattice truss with their interesting geometry. Those are designs intended to carry heavy trains, which could minimize sway from people walking across. A conventional steel truss bridge would be easy and safe to build using "accelerated bridge construction" techniques. Such a replacement bridge could be both a memorial to the 6 fatalities, and a classroom for the future bridge builders at FIU.
A bridge is clearly needed here. The lawsuits and NTSB investigations are "water under the bridge". It's time to start thinking about the new bridge.
If it sustained heavy damage, best thing Florida could do is keep the remains preserved as a landmark, with a sign that says ďthis is what happens when you ignore historyĒ. Another bridge from the ďhit listĒ to the ďshit listĒ. Itís a damn shame...
The bridge has indeed reportedly collapsed but as I understand was salvaged and is in a fenced off area near the Mayo suspension bridge.
It means the span is removable via crane in case someone with a craft exceeding the height of the bridge needs to pass.
Usually built when there's not enough traffic of that sort to warrant expensive mechanisms.
I'm not the one removing it, but it's not a bascule, it's a "removable" span: https://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=6401...
Latest updates about the bridge collapse (in short, we still don't know much):
As near as I can tell the cables were supplemental intended to reduce oscillations from pedestrian usage. I was hoping to find a definitive answer of "what type of bridge was this" but its not clear. It might be loosely called an "extradosed concrete truss bridge" but I am not sure if that is appropriate, although extradosed bridges rely less on the cables for support than a full-blown cable-stayed bridge. The spans were definitely concrete trusses, and were definitely supposed to be self-supporting after moved into position over the roadway before the tower cables were installed. I selected some sheets from the Design/Build proposal that has renderings and prelim drawings (including showing the erection sequence) and attached them here. Currently a lot of the project documentation can be found here: http://facilities.fiu.edu/projects/BT-904.htm
This historic bridge, a Miami-Dade landmark, could become redundant after the completion of the FIU-Sweetwater University City Bridge, on the other side of 109th Avenue from this bridge. However the collapse of that new bridge during construction will prolong the need for this bridge, likely for quite a while.
I am at a bit of a loss to categorize this bridge type from the artist's rendering of the completed bridge. (Regardless of its collapse.) I think it may be primarily a truss bridge, with the cable stays there only for reinforcement in case of a Category 5 hurricane, which it had been designed to withstand. If so, what kind of truss is it? I guessed "Warren with all verticals" but I could be wrong on that. It's kind of half of a Pratt. Each panel is different.
This bridge (commonly referred to as 3 Mile Bridge) is in operation while its replacement is being built alongside, scheduled to open in 2021. Current bridge will be demolished in 2019 after one leg of new bridge opens.
This is a quite unique bridge.
What us the latest update on when the bridge will reopen. It was scheduled to reopen today. Dec 1 2017
If this bridge no longer operates, then I think itís time to replace this bridge with a non movable span.
The bridge being used as a footbridge will no longer be operating as a swinging drawbridge.
This bridge no longer operates.
Not anymore. This bridge is gone.
Looks like this could have been an older road use bridge, relocated here in 1999?
Updated artcle says "Islamorada Fire Chief has said the bridge is ďdriveable.Ē"
This bridge has reportedly been damaged by Hurricane Irma. http://keysweekly.com/42/snake-creek-bridge-reported-as-out/
This bridge no longer operates, but the bascule span is gone.
Photos should be updated because there is now a pedestrian walkway and bicycle trail under Span 1 next to Bent 2.
seaboard airline when it was around never used that bridge.
Atlantic coast line built it to gain access to port of Tampa, that's it.
This one is hand-operated as well.
Whats the deal with this bridge? When did it get taken out of service and how come it just sits there, couldn't there be a good use for a walking path or something?
I highly doubt Douglas paid to use the stock image from 123RF, judging by the fact it's both watermarked AND a low-quality cellphone pic.
Have this old bridge on the right moved to the park yet?
What times does this open or contact information for a call
This is my drawing of a skewed bascule bridge in Boca Raton FL