Recent Iowa Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted October 20, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Luke and Nathan,

Writing patents is a pain, I remember sitting with a rather pricy patent attorney and discussing more accurate words to replace 'at' in a draft claim. After about hour we settled on 'proximate' - it's now my most expensive word :^)

That being said, figuring out patents isn't that bad if you put yourself in the right state of mind. Start with the claims. At the end of the day, these are relatively easy to read. The independent claim is the basic and broadest idea with each dependant claim adding a tidbit or feature.

If what is taught in the independent claim is observed in the product (in our case the bridge) then it conforms to the patent. If it conforms to the dependant claims, that's a bonus.

The text and figures (drawings) support the claims and 'teach' how to use them. While they should be correct, they don't have to be clear (and the texts often aren't). The drawings are usually quite useful.

Looking at Linvilles 1865 patent, and the drawing Luke posted, you can go tihrougkh the details like how the cast panel point blocks are used. Such as the 'fingers' on the bottom panel points which are used to connect and space apart the lower chord components. Many of the details are unique to Linvilles bridges.

It's interesting to learn this stuff looking back 100 - 150 years as what is quaint today was intense back in the day! Keystone fought Phoenix all the way to the Supreme Court! Lowthrop defended the use of cast compression members with some pretty strong language but lost anyway. These were some pretty sharp guys pushing the bounds of state of the art technology in their day and they really did transform the county'.

Regards,

Art S.

Posted October 18, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I haven't the time to research this in the detail that Art and Jim Stewart have been, however in my understandings, I have always been guided by the idea that while we often refer to many bridges (like a Wrought Iron Bridge Company bowstring) as "conforming" to a particular patent, one must also remember that patents were NOT engineering documents, they were LEGAL documents intended to defend the interests and profits of the company. The actual designed and constructed bridges might vary from the patent, yet the companies that built them would nevertheless aggressively defend their bridges as patented designs. The actual design constructed in the field apparently did not need to 100% exactly replicate the patent to be defensible, only some features needed to be present.

Posted October 18, 2018, by Luke

According to this: https://books.google.com/books?id=IzsjAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA619&dq=p...

Reeves/Phoenix sued Linville/Keystone in 1872 over the truss patent. The writing is full of technical jargon, but does make mention of columns (Among other things.)

People like Art and Nathan are more in tune to decipher it, while it looks like cuneiform mixed with hieroglyphs to me.

Posted October 18, 2018, by Luke

Thanks, Clark!

Posted October 18, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

That's some good hunting Luke.

Posted October 17, 2018, by Luke

Unfortunately, I do not.

Posted October 17, 2018, by Art S.

Thanks Luke, any thoughts on its correct location?

Posted October 17, 2018, by Luke

Art, the bridge this entry is for was built in 1928.

Posted October 15, 2018, by Luke

I'd misread the source that mentioned Linville & Bollmann in the same breath.

Linville was the designer/engineer for the PRR (Not the B&O) starting in 1862, and stopping in 1865 when Keystone formed.

It's very unlikely that any of the spans in question came from the PRR.

Posted October 15, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Also,

Patent 34183 with its cast iron upper chord is pre civil war; 50723 is post civil war with Keystone Columns. This one and possibly one other govern the first generation of bridges across the Ohio and Mississippi rivers that Keystone did.

Regards,

Art S.

PS. When was Linville with the B&O? Could these recycled spans come from a B&O based bridge?

Posted October 15, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Luke,

The original bridges - yes. What is the evidence that these sections were from that bridge?

Regards,

Art S.

Posted October 15, 2018, by Luke

Here are two patents awarded to Linville.

This appears to be the original Linville Patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US34183A/en?oq=USNNo.+34%2... ()

This appears to be the early/basic Linville & Piper varaint patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US50723A/en?oq=US50%2c723

Posted October 15, 2018, by Luke

And you'd be wrong that Keystone didn't make it:

https://books.google.com/books?id=SC8jAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA33&dq=du...

And this Structuremag article says that Linville himself designed it, so I'm fairly certain that it's a further evolution of his own truss design, as Linville, like Wendell Bollman (Whom he replaced at B&O) he was fond of using his own designs over any other design:

https://www.structuremag.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/D-Gr...

Further supporting that idea is this historic article, which mentions Linville & Piper trusses as an option, so I think these may be smaller scale versions of the L-P truss, which I've yet to find a patent diagram for (And the article with the most info is locked behind the ASCE's paywall.

https://books.google.com/books?id=xY0yAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA23&dq=du...

Posted October 15, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Luke,

While I highly doubt Keystone made this bridge, it definitely does not conform to the Linville patents. The design details are different. The way the bridge, especially the lower cord is connected and rigged is very different than Linville.

To me this looks like Phoenix's version of a bridge designed to PRR's spec.

Regards,

Art S.

Posted September 23, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge bears a resemblance to a bridge in my hometown:

http://bridgehunter.com/mn/carver/mcknight-road/

The Minnesota bridge was built using girders that were rebuilt for road use. It would not surprise me if that was the case here as well.

Posted September 18, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Does anyone have a status update on this bridge? Have the remains been secured?

Sincerely,

Art S.

Posted September 13, 2018, by Jackie Neighbors (sagebird [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge was demolished last winter and another is being built in its place as we speak.

Posted August 21, 2018, by Don Morrison

It kind of looks like rumors of this bridge's demise may have been mistaken. It looks like a truss in satellite imagery.

it's on my list to visit.

At any rate, one of the bridges in this area is closed and two are doomed.

From

http://www.crescotimes.com/news/howard-county-bridge-road-pr...

"Bigalk Bridge

One of the two bridges near the Bigalks trout stream was closed last fall due to not meeting national bridge inspection standards. Both bridges are on the list to be replaced, just not in 2018. Rissman said it typically takes two years to design a bridge, which will put the replacement into 2019 or later. "

Posted August 18, 2018, by Ich Sage dir

Bruckentroll

Posted August 18, 2018, by Don Morrison

Bah. Progress sucks.

Blackhawk Bridge is perfect in this rural area.

How about they route the big trucks and RVs and motorcycles to Prairie Du Chien.

Emergency vehicles can serve their respective sides of the river. It's just lonely scenic roads through the bottoms leading to small river towns in the region anyway.

Hell, for all I care, they could even dredge a straighter channel from DeSoto to Lansing. That would remove the bend in the river to ease shipping.

Just don't take that bridge! It's been rough the last few years for my favorites list:

1. Blackhawk Bridge

2. Gilliece Bridge lost 2017

3. Wagon Wheel Bridge lost 2016

Posted August 17, 2018, by Luke

The bridge, while not officially slated for demolition, is having its replacement planned:

https://www.waukonstandard.com/articles/2017/08/16/public-le...

Posted August 11, 2018, by Dixie west (Jansen) (dixiewest76 [at] gmail [dot] com)

We lived in the house on the corner of 1st Street and 2nd ave. until 1942. The old RR trestle was visible from our yard. I have pics of my sisters and I having a tea party with the trestle in the background.my grandparents, Frank and Becky Smith moved into that house after we moved out. I guess they bought it from my parents.

Also, I went to 1st grade at Lincoln grammar school until we moved to Milford. I used to walk across the swinging footbridge every day going to and from school.

There was a park (Riverside Park) on the other side of hwy 9 where we used to go for picnics and there was a band shell there at that time.

Posted August 11, 2018, by Dixie west (Jansen) (dixiewest76 [at] gmail [dot] com)

We lived in the house on the corner of 1st Street and 2nd ave. until 1942. The old RR trestle was visible from our yard. I have pics of my sisters and I having a tea party with the trestle in the background.my grandparents, Frank and Becky Smith moved into that house after we moved out. I guess they bought it from my parents.

Also, I went to 1st grade at Lincoln grammar school until we moved to Milford. I used to walk across the swinging footbridge every day going to and from school.

There was a park (Riverside Park) on the other side of hwy 9 where we used to go for picnics and there was a band shell there at that time.

Posted August 10, 2018, by Luke

Based on this aerial image from 1963, it was usable up until 1965.

Posted August 10, 2018, by Nancy R Andresen (NRANDRESEN [at] msn [dot] com)

Was the bridge usabable until 1965 or was part of it washed out about 1947 and the remains destroyed in 1965?

Is it possible to find the location now?

Posted August 7, 2018, by Luke

Based on the 70s/80s GIS views, my I agree that the bridge was relocated here in the late 70s/early 80s

70s GIS: http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/client.cgi?zoom=1&x0=439722&y0=...

80s GIS: http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/client.cgi?zoom=1&x0=439722&y0=...

Posted July 28, 2018, by Daniel Barnes

I have travelled this road for years. There is no pony truss bridge here.

Posted July 28, 2018, by Daniel Barnes

I'm Glad you visited this bridge John. I hadn't gotten the chance to do more closeup shots of the other plaques last September. I was attacked by hornets just North of the bridge when taking the South-facing shots through the trees!

Posted July 23, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Cool bridge!

Posted July 21, 2018, by Don Morrison

You're gonna need one of those amphibious bikes. Bridge has been down for 3 days now.

http://www.kimt.com/content/news/Demolition-of-historic-Char...

...and yes, I bet it will be a MOB. The old bridge was 255 feet long. (45.6716 Smoot)

Posted July 21, 2018, by Julie Bowers

It can take awhile

Was it worth it in the end

Only you can tell

Posted July 21, 2018, by David Yates (david_y [at] bellsouth [dot] net)

While not being bravest man, I would still cross this bridge with my bike

Posted July 21, 2018, by Luke

It could very well be that Wapello opted not to cover their spans.

Posted July 21, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Luke,

Nice research! Everything makes sense but the 'timber' bowstrings. The Morrisons (CBW) did timber bridges but I think they were covered. These are clearly not.

Any thoughts?

Regards,

Art S.

Posted July 21, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Better an MOB than a UCEB

Posted July 20, 2018, by Luke

Alright, thanks to info from both "Portrait & Biographical Album of Louisa County" and "USACE Iowa River, Iowa and Minnesota", the timeline is a lot clearer.

The 1873 DH/CC Morrison spans (Which were apparently timber bowstrings) were replaced in stages beginning in with the Westernmost span being replaced in 1884 and the Easternmost span being replaced the following year along with an additional span being added. The middle 3 spans (Visible in picture 4) were replaced in 1903.

Posted July 20, 2018, by Don Morrison

I hope it's not replaced with a MOB.

Posted July 19, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

https://kchanews.com/2018/07/18/demolition-of-historic-landmark-beginning-this-week

Demolition underway

Posted July 17, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Luke, I pulled the photo as it was of North Bridge.

Posted July 17, 2018, by Luke
Posted July 10, 2018, by Luke

The restoration support group's Facebook page hasn't posted about the bridge failing, and a commentor on the flooding picture on the group said its "been through worse", FWIW.

Posted July 10, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

This article shows the bridge nearly washed away by floods. Not sure if it survived. http://www.newtondailynews.com/2018/07/03/high-waters-threat...

Posted July 9, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

It appears that this bridge was rebuilt from a railroad pony truss. The Chicago & North Western reused many older railroad pony trusses of this design as road overpasses. Most of them were extensively rebuilt.

Posted July 9, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Originally built as a truss, and truss replaced ca. 1980 by the current I-Beam approaches.

Posted July 9, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The pier of the bridge makes me think that this bridge was assembled using at least one relocated piece. This historic aerial image shows a much smaller bridge here:

http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/client.cgi?zoom=1&x0=563463&y0=...

During the 1940s, the Rock Island was upgrading many bridges on mainlines, and relocating the old spans to less used routes.

Posted July 6, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Should we add Rezner to the builders? BTW - impressive bridge!

Posted June 27, 2018, by Daniel Barnes (barnes [dot] daniel34 [at] gmail [dot] com)

According to the Des Moines Register the bridge has now been added to the National Register of Historic Places. Story Here: https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2018/06/26/ceda...

Posted June 25, 2018, by Nathan Holth (nathan [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Great work! I have been wondering about this one for a long time, thanks for sharing these excellent research results!

Posted June 25, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I was able to confirm that the main Whipple Through Truss span was located at Chicago, Illinois over the now filled in I&M Canal. It was built in 1888 as an original double track structure on that line. This was the only 254'10" Whipple Through Truss in the entire Santa Fe system. In 1934, it was filled in and relocated and reused as an overpass in Shopton (Fort Madison.)

Posted June 22, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Known as the Shopton Overpass, this bridge was built in 1930 using recycled railroad pieces (according to ATSF bridge records), however no original erection date or location were provided. I have acquired complete 1916 steel bridge records for the ATSF system, so I should be able to find the original location and date of at least the truss span.

Posted June 15, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Richard,

I apologize. Upon my first visit several years back it looked like the stonework dated to the early 1880s, and I believe I got 1882 from the construction of the second rail line at this location. However, after closer inspection it appears that the bridge is similar in design to structures constructed later between 1895-1900. Iíve changed the date to Ca. 1900 for the meantime, but I believe there may be blueprints for the structure at the Chicago & North Western Historical Society. I apologize about the mixup.

Posted June 15, 2018, by Richard Steffen (rsteffen [at] globalccs [dot] net)

What specifically did the author use to date the twin arch bridge? A dated stone? What? I've been trying for years to set a date on this bridge. The track came into Jewell in late 1880, so that meant IF 1882 is correct, this stone bridge is the second over the water.

Posted June 13, 2018, by Luke

It's a common theme for Google Maps to mis-name streams when they get close to their confluences.

On the subject of the NBI, is anyone opposed to merging the 96 NBI data?

It seems fairly spot-on to me.

Posted June 13, 2018, by Don Morrison

It looks like Google maps has misnamed this waterway.

USGS calls it Big Creek:

https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/?q=40.962377,...

So this is probably the bridge Luke found in the 96 NBI.

Looking at Bing maps, it appears there are other former crossings on this stream, the bridges long gone, except for what appears to be a pipeline? bridge at 40.926256, -91.550704.

Posted June 12, 2018, by Luke

The 1996 NBI lists a closed bridge dating to 1903 over Big Creek:

https://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=190...

Span length seems to match IMO.

Posted June 12, 2018, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

This one's for you, esp. those residing in Henry County. Can you help crack this case? The 97th mystery bridge takes us to Iowa, to Henry County, to a historic bridge over Skunk River that is unknown- no history, no record and no photos. Can you help solve this case? More here: https://bridgehunterschronicles.wordpress.com/2018/06/12/mys...

Posted June 6, 2018, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

They have done some work on this bridge since my last visit. They built up the south rail but left the north as was.

Posted June 4, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Came upon this bridge yesterday, and replacement is under way. It looks like the structure was built with secondhand materials. Does anyone have any more photos?

Posted May 23, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

To me, this is pretty clearly a railroad bridge recycled from a previous location. Does anyone else have any input?

Posted May 21, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is actually an interesting rehabilitation. It did not eliminate any significant historical components, while strengthening the bridge for years to come:

http://bridgehunter.com/photos/42/83/428308-L.jpg

Posted May 17, 2018, by Luke

Given the fact that imagery from 1905 shows no bridge at Park Road, I'm going to categorize this one as a mystery bridge.

Aforementioned imagery: https://books.google.com/books?id=5xBjpPdExPIC&pg=PT100&dq=C...

There are several bridges in the region this imagery could be of, such as the old iterations of the Butler or Dupont bridges.

Posted May 9, 2018, by Don Morrison

Plan to get some photos soon.

The Iowa historic Bridges site is kind of weak on the details, with incorrect photo captions and, in the construction types section, incorrect titles (Baltimore for Bowstring, Camelback for Cantilever).

Hopefully the info on this bridge is correct.

Posted May 4, 2018, by Luke

According to the updated Iowa Historic Bridge Inventory, the relocation attempt failed and the bridge has been placed into storage.

Posted May 4, 2018, by Luke

According to the updated Iowa Historic Bridge Inventory, the bridge has been placed into storage.

Posted May 4, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The round rebar makes me think it's after 1915. I don't really know how early round rebar came into use.

Posted May 4, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I put in a request for the bridge. The only thing confirmed was the concrete design, while the 1909 date was not confirmed. In my opinion, the age of the bridge seems to match up. Thoughts?

Posted May 2, 2018, by Matt Lohry

I believe theyíre ďFrenchĒ drains, likely installed because the road surface under the bridge is at a low point. A French drain is just a grate with gravel or other soil underneath that water can pass through to the ground water table. This drain type doesnít require any plumbing to carry water away.

Posted May 2, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Yeah I believe they are. The Mississippi River is rather close to this location, and I assume a lot of runoff water makes itís way to the bridge. It might be possible this was originally built to cross a creek, but a road was built underneath?

Posted May 2, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Are those drains along the sides of the roadway?

Posted May 2, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think part of it too was the breakup of the Rock island Technical Society. I suspect somewhere the documents were donated. I know another railroad that Iíve done research with has literally hundreds of banker boxes of bridge documents. Iím hoping I can find them somewhere, as itís always really cool to know the exact history of these structures. So if anyone reading this has any Rock Island Railroad bridge documents, please send them this way!

Posted May 2, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

It's frustrating that something seemingly simple and relatively recent may be totally lost history. It's nice that people here and elsewhere are working to collect and save what's left to be found.

Posted May 2, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Clark,

I Believe the line dates to the early or mid 1860s. This is the same route that crosses the Mississippi River on the famed bridge at Rock Island.

I found an article in a Railroad Gazette or similar publication that stated that that at one point, the Rock Island was reusing nearly 4/5 of spans it replaced on main lines. This railroad company is exceptionally difficult to find information on as well, as it seems a lot of records were destroyed, while a lot of bridges were moved around, even into the 40s.

Posted May 2, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Does the date match with when the line was built? It could be original stone piers were replaced later.

Posted May 1, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Judging by the concrete substructures, I would be shocked if this bridge was assembled at this location in 1888. Instead, I'm thinking that it was likely moved from another location or locations.

Posted May 1, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Wow! A ceramic builder plaque! Great Find! I normally only ever see those in Canada (not sure why several builders in Canada used them), where they are extremely rare. Even more rare in the states.

Posted May 1, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I've seen a couple of spans along this line with the same Wisconsin Bridge & Iron Company tag as Daniel found in photo 12, most notably one in adjacent Story County:

http://bridgehunter.com/ia/story/bh49288/

I've speculated before that they likely did a rehabilitation within the last 50 years, and left the tag. It seems to me that if they actually built the structure, they would have left a plaque instead. The Ames bridge has a Lassig Bridge & Iron Works plaque, the true builder of at least that span. I would suspect this span dates to a similar time frame, when the route was double tracked. According to a Union Pacific chart, this route was double tracked at this location between 1901 and 1902.

Posted April 30, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

There appears to be a missing plaque outline on the main span. It looks to me like it might be an American Bridge plaque, but it is hard to tell. It would certainly add up though, as Ambridge was a favorite of RI, the plaque matches the 1901-1910 shape of the ambridge plaques and the bridge appears to date from this time period.

Posted April 29, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Bridge appears to have been scrapped..

Posted April 25, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Clark,

I believe this date came from the NBI. I also know there are other bridges along this line built at this time. I can put in an adchices request though, and perhaps I could find some blueprints.

Posted April 25, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Looking at the rebar in picture 11 it looks more modern than the 1909 date. I would expect a twisted square section. How solid is the date on this one?

Definitely an unusual structure if it's anywhere close to a century old.

Posted April 24, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks for the input. I imagine this was probably an expirmental design, as I havenít seen anything like it anywhere else along the Milwaukee Road system. I wonder why a design like this wouldíve been chosen for this location over a standard bridge..

Posted April 23, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

That being the case (exposed rebar) and the visible floorbeams this would be an early/rare example of a reinforced concrete deck girder.

Posted April 23, 2018, by Matt Lohry

It looks like there actually is some exposed rebar at the very top of Photo #11, indicating a concrete bridge.

Posted April 23, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Just speculation, I think steel plate girder spans would be longer. These short spans might be some early reinforced concrete girders. I'd want to look for exposed rebar as a clue to what the concrete covers.

Posted April 20, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Curious bridge here. Looking at picture 11, it appears that the bridge may be a steel deck girder, later encased in concrete. Thoughts?

Posted April 19, 2018, by Anonymous

http://www.kcrg.com/content/news/Friends-of-Bunker-Mill-Bridge-now-owners-of-bridge-and-easements-478409193.html

Posted April 18, 2018, by Dylan VanAntwerp (dylan_vanantwerp [at] live [dot] com)

Actually, it's Dylan and I am not the one who took the construction photos, but thanks for your response!

Posted April 17, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Dan,

You were lucky because you actually got to see the pre-stressed box beams before they were installed... you can see in your photos how they are hollow inside (hence the "box" designation). You can also see in your photos that before they are erected, they are individual beams, although if they are lined up on the bridge right beside each other (called Adjacent Box Beams) they have the appearance of a slab after being erected. This type of bridge is often called a Pre-Stressed Concrete Adjacent Box Beam (or girder) bridge. In dealing with historic bridges as those seen on this website, "concrete slab" typically refers to a traditional reinforced concrete structure with rebar inside, which is a poured concrete slab, rather than precast beams arranged to form a slab-like structure.

Posted April 17, 2018, by Dylan VanAntwerp (dylan_vanantwerp [at] live [dot] com)

What is the correct terminology for the precast concrete structure that replaced the west approach trestle on this bridge? I have seen these referred to as concrete box girders. Is this the correct designation? What is the difference between these and a concrete slab bridge or a concrete stringer?

Posted April 15, 2018, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

love it !! very nice

Posted April 14, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Luke,

This achievement in RR covered bridge building was later surpassed by this one at Marcus, WA.

The Washington & Great Northern crossed the Columbia on an eight span Howe truss bridge constructed by Porter Brothers Construction Company of Portland. The timber bridge was only the third to cross the American portion of the river and the first to be constructed in a single season. It opened in May 1902. Its construction was the last project that John F. Stevens would oversee before leaving Hill to become chief engineer of the Panama Canal. Its trusses were encased in vertical siding in 1914 making it, at 1200 feet in length, the longest covered bridge ever constructed west of the Mississippi. The railroad planked the deck in 1926 and opened the bridge as a toll crossing for automobiles.It was torn down in 1941 after Grand Coulee Dam closed.

I've only see one picture of it a museum in Colville, WA and scouring the internet has failed to yield any result.

Posted April 14, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Trussed floor beams!

Posted April 13, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nice set of photos. Looks like Union County has the potential to cash in on the tourism potential of old iron bridges like a certain neighboring county has with covered bridges. Somebody needs to suggest that the local authorities invest in some paint and repairs.These spans may never be able to support a truckload of hogs or soybeans but they definitely could serve as bike or pedestrian spans. Rusty gold as the Hawkeyes say on cable tv.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)
Posted April 13, 2018, by Don Morrison

Bridge #354 made the news. It is not good news. Again.

Closed due to advanced deterioration.

https://www.decorahnews.com/news-stories/2018/04/19057.html

Posted April 11, 2018, by Luke

Most likely expanding the Hoover Nature Trail. Sad, but understandable that they're not re-using the substructure.

Posted April 11, 2018, by Anonymous

Bridge abutments and piers demolished early April 2018. Possibly being replaced by hike/bike trail bridge?

Posted March 27, 2018, by Luke

If you trace the ROW westward from this spot using the GIS link below or historicaerials.com, you'll see that the trestle is indeed on the CD&W's ROW. as you'll see it crossing the Rock Island's Stockton-West Davenport line on the CD&M's overpass at what is now West Lake Park.

The trestle became an industrial spur on the DRI-Line at some point after the CD&M folded.

Posted March 27, 2018, by Miles W. Rich (mileswrich [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge, if it was used by the DRI line, is not from the Interurban Clinton, Davenport and Muscatine Railway. It is from the Burlington, Cedar Rapids, and Northern line from Stockton to West Davenport that also followed Blackhawk Creek toward Westlake Park, also known as railroad Lake. This line was abandoned by The Rock Island lines in about 1928 as being unnecessary as there was little or no local traffic generated in Blue Grass, and the main line already ran from Stockton into Davenport.

Posted March 19, 2018, by richard stimmel (richardstimmel [at] yahoo [dot] com)

did this bridge carry us 61 in the 30rds