Recent Indiana Comments
Post a comment Contact webmasterluckily i had gotten a part that had fallen off this Big Bridge to have something to remember it by
When someone tears down a Big ridge without the plans of putting it to use where traffic can use it , it gives me the same feeling as if some one were to do something to take advantage of me because they are both nonsense and unfair . That Big Bridge Needed to Be Rehabilitated and Painted , Not torn Down. now if there was nothing fancy about it , then it would not make me any difference if it got torn down or left where it was . But that Big Bridge was so beautiful and fancy that it should have stayed put where it was , or moved to another area where it can still be used .i just hope no one tears down the Big Briges across the WhiteWater River on HWY 46 where it starts at the Ohio / Ind state line. There are 5 Big Bridges there in a row which is the most I had ever seen in one place. second most i have seen is four Big Bridges is on HWY 50 in Brownstown across White River and on HWY 52 in Franklin County by Brookville across the Whitewater River third most I have seen in a Row is just 2 which is how many there was where the Flat Rock River crossed HWY 9 and where Sand Creek crosses HWY 31 at the Bartholomew and Jackson County Line in IND and where Clifty Crek Crossed HWY 7 where there was 2 Big Bridges , these beautiful Big Bridges need to NOT betorn down and just keep them beautiful nd nice looking - they are a magnificent work of art and i get such an excited and thrilling feeling like i am on a roller coaster when i go through a Big Bridge- i get a tingling feeling when i go across one and i feel like i should scream for joy like people do when they ride on a roller coaster when i go across a Big Bridge but i am like ( blah ) and ( this is not right) and ( this is totally unfair ) whenever i see that a big Bridge has been replaced with one of those eyesore concrete bridges
THINK - THINK - THINK!!! before destroying a beautiful steel / iron big bridge if it is going to get torn down because it is too narrow --- then it just only simply needs widened ( not torn down ) tearing it down is going waaay too far - they need to instead widen it by 1st building a temporary bridge next to it - then bring / haul in more steel and then split the Big Bridge in 1/2 an then weld the big bridg together an then have it double in size and go from double lane to a Quad lane big bridge --- then re-open it when it is completed - so in otherwords length wise , it would be the same length side to side or right to left ad the Big Bridges down on the Ohio River ( only not nearly as long mile wise - i don't want one of those eyesore concrete bridges there where I cannot see the river when I cross it , now when they do senselessly get this Big Bridge torn down - thre will not be any Big Bridges on HWY 9 going from Bartholomew County to Lagrange County which covers more than 1/2 of the state, i think people need to either start making more Big Bridges an make them Quad Lanes when they are made thn they wont be so crowded - but when we would drive across the Big Bridge - It was not ever crowded since it was not in town ut i would not be so irritated when a Big Bridge gets torn down if the country and state would build more at the same speed as they get torn down and replace it with a better and nicer Big Bridge instead of replacing it with one of those eyesore Concrete bridges ( what i call a Big Bridge is if it is a Steel / Iron / Covered Bridge that is alot taller than a car, but the only thing i saw that the big bridge needed across Flat Rock River on HWY 9 in Shelby County was it just needed painted -but it was not even in te Columbus Republic Newspaper that it was going to get torn down and people drive everyday from Shelbyville to Columbus IND on HWY 9 to and from work so as far as i knew of - i didn't know that the Big Bridge was going to get torn down until I was going on U.S HWY 31 and saw the detour signs for the Big Bridge being torn down. I dont know why people don't restore these Big Brdges since people are not building them anymore . i cannot stand it when i see an Iron, Steel and a covered Bridge torn down unless it is going to be built somewhere else just like they did the Big Bridge across Clifty Creek on 850E in Bartholomew County and moved it to Haw Creek to use as a walking Bridge
The contractor is in the process of removing the decking and stringers.
This bridge was closed in the last two weeks. Unsure if there are plans to restore it at this time.
Photo of the bridge in new location.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/946526_10151412191636519_1627260580_n.jpg
This bridge is currently closed due a failed arch. I've uploaded photos of the damage.
The commissioners in Shelby County want to remove this bridge, which is on a one-lane road with but four or five houses on it. Preservationists are rallying to try to save it.
There appears to be remnants of another corridor down through there. I wonder if it's not from a former rail line as it seems a bit close to the old highway bridge, and with it being concrete we know it's pretty much post 1900 circa.
Found this incomplete bridge in the middle of the woods in charlestown state forestry down creek from the abandoned pony truss. Anyone happens to know anything please leave a comment.
The new bridge opened at 9:30pm on June 3, 2013. Demolition of the previous bridge will begin soon.
One of the North South line's is the former Cloverleaf division of the Nickel Plate Road, later Norfolk Southern and abandoned about 20 years ago. The other North South line was the Chicago Attica and Southern(former C&EI), but it runs near or close to the NKP line through town and was abandoned about 1948.
This Bridge is along the former Peoria and Eastern Railroad, later part of the Big Four aka New York Central properties, and later Penn Central. It made it into Conrail until about 1982 when abandoned here, and line today doesn't run West of Crawfordsville despite many of the bridges remaining intact. Interesting enough some of the original bricks for the Indianapolis Motor Speedway came from Veedersburg in 1909 via the P&E Railroad's customer "Wabash Clay Company" and would have crossed this bridge en route to the famous "Brickyard" track.
Mindi, you would need to locate the commissioners minutes book for that year. Check with the county auditors office and they might be able to direct you. This information might also be available in the Muncie library.
Do you know the name of the county commissioners at that time in 1905 that built the bridge?
The new bridge will be opened to traffic on Monday June 3rd 2013.While still being supported by the temporary peers. It will be accessed via the permanent approach ramps. The slide onto the permanent peers is scheduled for August.
this bridge is still in use. it's railroad bridge that connects to a factory. we wish it was not in use by the railroad since it blocks access from town to a recreational trail built on the track bed beyond the bridge.
please fix this big bridge up and re-open it!!!!
Dont scrap this beautiful steel trus bridge , rebuild it across aother creek / river and re-use it ( we dont want to see these beautiful Iron / Steel bridges destroyed )
1967 topo shows RR as Penn Central and N-S as Norfolk and Western.
1958 topo shows RR as New York Central.
New York, Chicago, and St. Louis runs through town N-S.
I'm thinking that this bridge was on the former Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway (Big Four). The Chicago, Attica, and Southern was further west, and ran north-south.
I found the photo in the Indiana Historical Photo index at http://igs.indiana.edu/IHAPI/
The direct link is:
http://129.79.145.7/arcims/IHAPI/viewer.htm
You will need Java to use this service. The oldest photos they have are the 1936. They are also the best of the oldest photos. 1941, 1952 and 1956 were not very good at all. The quality gets better after 1962.
1936 was good enough to see the piers and that the bridge was not there.
Remember that these photos are a mosaic and other parts of the state may be of better quality, if you are going to look for other bridges.
Wow, you found an aerial of this area of the county online? Would love to see that! I'm planning on getting over to our county museum to see if I can dig up more photography or information sometime soon. I agree, the piers look very much like the ones on the Williams covered bridge, although perhaps shorter. They also look somewhat like the ones on the Ft Ritner bridge. With there having been several covered bridges in my area,(Medora, Tunnelton, Rivervale, Stumphole, Williams)...I can't help but wonder if it was another JJ Daniels bridge.
Is it my imagination or do these piers bare a resemblance to the piers on the Williams covered bridge?
I've been doing some Internet research and found aerial photo from 1936 that shows the bridge was gone even then. A 1909 map shows "Mitchell Pike" crossing at that point.
Beautiful set of piers that look to be in great condition still. Satellite also shows that both abutments appear to be intact as well.
I would agree that this almost certainly represents a much older (and possibly original) crossing perhaps from an old turnpike... ie. Bedford to Paoli. It's pretty close to the current crossing and I don't think the piers look substantial enough to be from a railroad.
Have always been curious about what was standing here in the past. I think I'll do some research and see what I can learn and hopefully we can get more info on this one up here.
Rode the bikes down with my brothers and took a stroll across this one today...one of my favorites. All the planks are there still, and several more appear to have been replaced since my last visit about a year ago. Someone has tried to drive over the concrete road blocks on the south (Washington Co.) side of the bridge.
I went to check on the status of the bridge yesterday with a friend, and it now can be confirmed that the bridge has been removed. I've included photos for confirmation below. The last photo is the sign from the county about the pending status of the bridge, which was seemingly just thrown on to the bank of the creek during the removal. Classy.
Kudos to the local folks who balked at the idea of their historic bridge being replaced by a concrete ugly... AND more kudos to the Boone County Commissioners who actually listened!
The only thing that distracts from the beauty of this location is the constant traffic noise from I-65 that is just to the West of here. But it may just be the Interstate that saved the bridge from already being removed.
A couple of INDOT photos of the demo. :-(
So tired of seeing these bridges taken down.
INDOT did a complete about-face on this one. After deciding to rehabilitate instead of replace, a certain district chief with way too much power decided to raise a stink. Apparently he had an issue with the vertical clearance being just a couple inches under guidelines...DESPITE the fact that said clearance had already been deemed acceptable.
So another completely serviceable state highway Parker truss bites the dust. And although I won't give this award to INDOT as a whole, to that one gentleman who thinks he knows more than the rest of us... Here's to you!
Todd Baslee photo
A friend sent me demolition pictures of this bridge; apparently it's being taken down right now.
I visited this bridge for the first time today and posted some of my cell phone photos on Facebook here.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10200796634055092.1073741825.1140380576&type=1¬if_t=like
This is a correction of my last comment, which after I reread it was ridiculous. I meant to say that this trestle was about 100 ft. longer than Shuffle Creek Trestle, not Tulip. There is an extensive article on the Laughery Creek Viaduct at http://www.borhs.org/sentinel/sentinel2010Q20510.pdf .
I canoed under this bridge last Sunday (April 14th). It is three concrete arches and similar to the railroad bridge just downstream (south) of this one. It has a poured "ledge" or drop off at the south end which kind of adds a falls effect.
I canoed under this bridge last Sunday (April 14th) it is three concrete arches and quite wide (aprox. 40 feet). It probably carried multi- lanes of tracks. Very similar to the U.S. 40 bridge just north (upstream) of this one.
This bridge just went through a renovation process but not near as bad as the Otter Creek Bridge just east of here. This bridge is located aprox. 1000 ft. East of the 1837 Vernon Underpass. A person could easily walk the distance (less than a half-mile) to both the two railroad trestles and the underpass in one trip.
This bridge is aprox. 50 feet above the river below.
I canoed under this bridge last Saturday (April 13th) in very high water. The bridge has gone through a complete restoration to a UCEB type bridge. It doesn't even look the same anymore. It appears new, tall concrete columns have been poured to support its weight load. This was planned for awhile but didn't know they (Madison Railroad Co.) were going to change the looks of the bridge. They also renovated the Vernon Railroad Bridge 1/4 mile NW of here over the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River but not to the same degree. Sorry didn't take any pictures as the creek was flowing extremely fast.
Planning a Carole Lombard trip in June 2013, came across this while researching places in regard to Carole. Very helpful. Thanks for posting.
This is awesome! I have searched high and low for a photo of this bridge and it is great to find one here.
I'm president of the Historic Michigan Road Association, which won historic byway status from the state for the road.
There has been talk of wanting to make this into a trail bridge and if it is officially abandoned this would be the time to do so. There is already a trail that runs along the North end of the bridge. I will notify Indiana Landmarks Foundation about this possibility and see what they can find out.
If you travel approx. 1 mile past Crooked Creek to Clifty Creek traveling west there are abundment's to another former bridge on the old SR56 alignment.
This bridge will probably be abandoned soon. The last customer on this track moved to Lebanon and CSX wants to rid itself of this spur. The bridge itself has a weight restriction (meaning that standard 286,000lb railcars cannot cross).
Contracted issued last week for removal and replacement. Sad to see the historic bridge go but it's time was here. She was dangerous and a traffic impediment.
These are pictures I took of the Tobias Bridge in Jefferson Co, In. just prior to the restoration. Jim Barker put me onto the trail of this bridge. I haven't been back to see the restoration of the bridge.
It is indeed a wonderful restoration that Anderson did to save the old bridge from destruction Scott! I live in New Castle and love to stop by there whenever I get the chance to!
You can visit the new page I made for it here:
Hibbs/Cole Creek Bridge,is still alive and doing well. The people of Anderson, Indiana. are proud to have a part of Indiana history come to our town, it's not often that we have the chance to save a piece of beautiful history such as Hibbs Bridge. Hibbs Bridge is now located in down town Anderson, Indiana, on the White River Trail crossing White River with the city of Anderson looking over.
You and John Prine:
I Grew Up As A Teenager In Osgood, IN Just West Of This And It Was A Right Of Passage To Walk Across This, And In Some Places Whole Wooden Cross Ties Where Gone And You Had To Jump Over The Span... Some Friends Have Even Been Caught In The Middle And Had To Ride It Out Laying Down On The Service Platforms On The Sides... They Turned A Little White Afterwards...
One Of The Two Bridges In The Area I Would Want My Ashes Spread From...
Where I Want My Friends To Spread My Ashes...
This bridge was closed to traffic today (3-24-13). There is lots of heavy construction equipment in place and that usually means only one thing = a new concrete bridge. The Shelhorn Bridge just two miles downstream has also been replaced after being closed for several years. Sad to see Decatur County losing some of its old iron structures recently especially over the Flatrock River.
This bridge is sometimes referred to as Union Bridge named after the church and cemetery located about 300 ft. west of the bridge.
The railroads were notorious for moving spans from here to there and that may well have happened in this case.
I don't think the extant truss is from the original bridge, as the portal design of both of the trusses in the flickr link is different from the portal design of the extant truss.
the bridge is restored and in downtown rensselaer indiana. Stevens Iron Works did the referbishing I have pictures and some video of the restoration process
Bridge is now gone.
I noticed a large excavator sitting next to the West approach today as I passed in the dark. I couldn't see if the bridge was still there. I will check it out within the next couple of days and report back.
Doomed:
CALL 541 CONTRACT B -33184-A BRIDGE REPLACEMENT CRAWFORDSVILLE DISTRICT PG. 36
PROJECT CONTROL NUMBER | FED/STATE NUMBER LOCATION
------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------------
0800716 | 0800716 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, STR NO PARKE 00072, PRESTRESSED
CONC, BULB-T, 2 SPANS, TOTAL LENGTH 303 LFT
PARKE COUNTY - ON CR 600W OVER BIG RACOON CREEK, 1.5 MILES
SOUTHEAST OF MONTEZUMA
COMPLETION DATE: November 10, 2013 DBE GOAL: 14.00 QUALIFICATIONS: D(A)
Oh. My bad. Sorry.
Oh. My bad. Sorry.
The inspection numbers are for the replacement.
The last inspection stats look really good; why was this bridge replaced?
Great question. Did Cambria change thwir mark over that time? Or any of the steel makers?
Rebecca Burrows, were you studying that?
Wouldn't the BSCO Cambria stamp on the metal in picture 36 narrow the time of construction for this bridge?
I was looking at a piece of Cambria Steel the other day and decided to see what other bridges here had steel from that company. After 1923, per Wikipedia, it was a wholly owned subsidiary of Bethlehem Steel.
The updates say that J.P added year built and builders, but only the likely steel provider is here?
I found those to be a bit much as well Matt. Not sure if the idea here was to protect the endposts...or if the designer was attempting to match the mailbox post.
It is nice to see it preserved and put to good re-use...however, I'm not a fan of Newell posts at the ends; these are large and overwhelm the actual structure, IMHO...
The first photo here is incorrect and needs to be deleted.
The great picture is also shown as Branch Tilley Ditch Bridge...which one is it?
The first photo is also seen under the Deshee Bridge entry...wtf?
I hope it looks as good in its new setting as it did in its old one.
When I was in grade school in Lagro we raised money to save the bridge. My name was on a plaque in side the bridge.
This bridge finally found a home near Houston Texas. Including a pic of the bridge before being shipped to Texas. It is narrowed to a width of about 9' inside.
This bridge is on private property in Vigo county Indiana, north of Terre Haute.
that looks great. what a great use and nice design. more saves like this.
This bridge is now located in Indianapolis, just off of I-65 on 86th st. at a private residence.
I have included a picture of the bridge in it's new location.
It can be fixed, we repaired it enough that it could be picked up in one piece and set along the road, to be taken apart
I am glad to see the discussion that this bridge has sparked. It is interesting to see all of the different opinions among us Bridgehunters.
Can we save every bridge over 50 years old? No, and I do not think we should try to. Replacing a 50 year old UCEB with a new UCEB is fine by me.
In recent years, we have seen a large number of UCEBS with nice features. Ie, decorative railings, fake stone plyons, statues, bas-reliefs, decorative lamp posts, light shows, etc. I don't mind UCEBs with "UCEB makeup". They really do not bother me. In fact, such UCEB makeup can add a little interest to an otherwise mundane structure. The nice railings on the new bridge in this instance serve such a purpose. I just don't think that UCEB makeup should be portrayed as an in-kind replacement.
At least the bridge still exists, even if someone that may never use it has it at the moment...there is a chance he may do something with it...if he hadn't "conned" the old bridge out of the county, they would have just sentenced it straight to the dumpster.
Damnit. Just...dammit.
WOW!, I certainly would have never guessed that the ruins of this little span I decided to add to BH would create such a maelstrom!
The bottom line here is that we can debate the issue til the cows come home...and it will still come down to a matter of opinion. The vast majority of visitors to this park would never understand what we are disagreeing about...nor probably would they care. They would simply see an old footbridge that was removed for whatever reason, only to later be replaced with a new one. They likely wouldn't understand the historic significance of the original structure, or why some of us think it should have been replaced with a more authentic looking replica. Indeed, some of us bridge enthusiasts are a passionate bunch that think NO historic spans should ever be replaced. However, we have to be realistic about it and understand that bridges will be lost. So when a situation like this occurs where an attempt is made to replace with a "aesthetic likeness", we expect nothing less than a near carbon copy.
So is a vastly different looking replacement span a demon seed? Although I would personally like to see more effort taken to replicate "in-kind", I pull up short of saying the new bridge is totally bad. The historic bridge is gone, and not even an exact replica can change that fact.
It's that fact which makes me want to focus more energy on trying to keep the historic bridges standing...and less on what they are replaced with.
I agree with Roberts comments. And regarding cost if they were short of money they should have went with a more simple railing. In my view the railings they used almost insult the historic bridge, the way they sort of look like the old ones yet are so different and simple. My view is that an exact or at least very close replica is ok if preservation its not possible. But if that is not possible please do not insult the craftsmanship of those who built the historic bridge with a cheap knock off and create a false sense of history.
Guess that is where a subset happens, the pictures of the What Happened? But not as the main picture of a new bridge where the original doesn't exist anymore. Same applies to all of these.
Its a design issue James.
Parks Rec notwithstanding, they could have done some research and asked some questions,...
I wouldn't classify it as architecturally significant, but I also wouldn't classify it as "the most fugly bridge on the planet" either.
I'm willingly to make the conjecture that this was the best that they could do under their circumstances.
Parks and Rec departments typically get the short end of the budgetary stick, so the replica was likely the BEST that they could do.
(Who knows, maybe the original parts are locked in a shed somewhere until they have the funds to get a legit replica made.)
Is the replica an architectural novel? Hardly? Is it historic? No, it's new. Is it /REALLY/ as bad as it seems some of you are making it out to be? Not at all.
(also: Sorry anon that complained about these sort of things happening.)
Luke:
I never claimed that you called the bridge historic. If we consider the replacement to be architecturally significant, then the next logical step is to consider a MOB to be an appropriate replacement for a pin-connected truss.
I actually have no problem with new bridges. They are necessary and functional. I just cringe when I see one that is built under the guise of being a form of mitigation for the destruction of a significant bridge. This includes bridges with fake stone pylons, etc.
Just my $0.02. Peace.
So what quite a few of you are saying is essentially you saying is along the lines of "UGH THEY DIDN'T DO 100000% WHY DID THEY EVEN BOTHER?"
That is /not/ a healthy nor a logical reaction to be having.
Also, in case you've misread it, I did not call the new bridge historic.
If they had to demolish the old bridge, I would just as soon see a UCEB with New Jersey barriers, than the current structure.
This replacement is not historic, and in my opinion should not be portrayed as such.
After Soldier Field in Chicago was redone, I fully supported its removal from the NRHP (sorry Bears fans). The new Soldier Field has been redone so heavily, that it bears little resemblance to the old structure. It is no longer historically significant, save for being a war memorial.
I feel the same way about this bridge. The substructure was the most structurally significant part of the old bridge, and it is gone now. The replacement is just a plain stringer with a couple layers of makeup.
Can not be called Cast Iron anymore....How about Glen Miller Park Modern Footbridge.
I don't agree that trying is enough. Not anymore.
Rather like Sutliff only it cost way less to us taxpayers.
The fact that they at least made SOME effort to replicate the bridge AT ALL is good, in my opinion, because I'd rather have had them build an "At least they TRIED" "replica" span than just built a 2X4 bridge, or even worse, just left the space bare.
It's not exactly a win, but it's not exactly a loss either.
I had seen this little bridge many times and had crossed it as well. I'm not sure what was behind it's demise but it was definitely unfortunate.
The replacement is a mixed bag. It's obvious that no effort was made to replicate the original structure, and the railings look like something that could be ordered out of a catalog.
Yes, they could have simply left a gaping hole there and perhaps they were working on a limited budget... But I have seen way too many good replications to be completely satisfied here.
Like I said, a replica span (even though it's not a "100000%" true to original replica) is still ∞ better than no bridge at all, considering they very well could have just taken out what was left and scrapped it and not built anything in its place at all.
Take a real close look at the new bridge. I would hardly call this a replica and its certainly not historic, and I am not impressed in the least bit. They failed to properly copy the railing design, and the decorative arch is omitted. Its just a steel stringer on old abutments with modern railing vaguely looking like the historic bridge. Worse, they destroyed the couple beautiful cast iron railing posts that remained and replaced them with modern posts that are much more plain looking.
Replicating cast iron elements and ornate railing panels is all too easy. Indiana has many replicated truss bridge plaques. Chicago has replicated ornate railing panels.
I wouldn't say it's historic, considering it's new/a replica, but still neat.
Is that replica then historic?
A pretty replica span is at least better than no bridge at all.
I really like the decorative railings.
This bridge has been replaced (February 2013) with a replica. View a photo here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/waynet/8468340515/in/pool-waynecountyindiana
SORRY TO HEARE ABOUT THIS BRIDGE, I THINK THE NUT WHO CAME UP WITH DESTROYING OUR BRIDGES IS ABSOLUTELY NOT INTRESTED IN AMERICAS FUTURE, DESTROY TRUSS BRIGE AN FEPLACE WITH CONCRETE SLABS IS LUDICROUS. SAVE AMERICA SAVE OUT OLD BRIDGES ESPECIALLY THE OLD HALETOWN TN BRIDGE. jackwooten37@yahoo.com
A tricky categorization here as I changed the bridge from not being lost...just relocated. Hopefully, I can eventually find out more info and update it further.
Would have liked to have seen it stay in state...especially given all of the historic bridges that are available in Texas. But in the end better saved than demolished!
This page's URL is http://bridgehunter.com/in/forum/