Recent Minnesota Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted September 19, 2017, by Matt Lohry

Ish. I hate it. They could have at least used a replacement like the Embarrass River Bridge or the West Swan River bridge that we've just seen in the forum...this is just an eyesore. As Tony has pointed out, it would sure have been nice to keep the historic bridge in place, but the county's dead-in-the-water maintenance plan did not do it any favors--it was so deteriorated that there was no feasible way to save it.

Posted September 19, 2017, by Matt Lohry

MnDOT does have some sort of re-use program in place, but only for a finite, pre-selected group. Most of these bridges are more notable and "rare" (they're ALL extremely rare now!); they seem to have considered these Warrens "common" and not worth salvaging; I don't know of any from up there that have been re-used. It's sad to see them all being wiped out; there were tons of these bridges when I was a kid; now there are none :'(

Posted September 18, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

It's just sad that rehabilitation doesn't seem to be given higher priority in many of these cases where the ADT count is so low.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for public safety, but are these new structures significantly cheaper than at least sustaining repairs on the historic ones?

Joe, and/or Matt... Does Minnesota promote dismantling and storing any of these trusses for possible future trail or park reuse?

Posted September 18, 2017, by Matt Lohry

I agree; it's certainly not an historic truss, but it beats Jersey barriers any day of the week! St. Louis County has been using this bridge type on county roads for several decades now; presumably to fit in a little bit better with their "rustic" atmosphere. They use Jersey and steel barriers on state and federal highways though.

Posted September 18, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

The replacement bridge, 69A30, is a 3-span steel girder bridge with timber deck and rails and a bituminous overlay. At least it isn't a UCB!

Posted September 18, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge has been replaced by a single-span steel girder bridge with timber deck and rails and a bituminous overlay (Bridge No. 69A58).

Posted September 18, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is gone, replaced in 2016 by a single span prestressed concrete beam bridge (69591).

Posted August 19, 2017, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

There is a second bridge just to the north of here of similar design

Posted August 12, 2017, by Ross Brown (bluehavanaross [at] gmail [dot] com)

The bridge was closed earlier this month and will reopen as a pedestrian crossing in 2019. The lift span is still operating (don't know why), but the area is nice to have with less traffic.

Posted August 9, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

According to the St. Louis County engineer, this bridge has been removed and a replacement is being constructed. We will be in the area in September for other bridge inspections and will verify the status of this one.

Posted August 9, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

With the current demolition and replacement of the Embarrass River bridge (88773), this may be the last surviving pony truss in St. Louis County. To my knowledge it is still extant but closed. We will be up there in September for other bridge inspections and will verify the status of this one.

Posted July 1, 2017, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

The Google digitize book that supplied the photo describes the Fink trusses. So I quoted the relevant part in the description and expanded the design section.

Thanks for the additional images, Luke!

Posted June 30, 2017, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

The first image shows what may be a Fink or two as approach spans on the far shore. The lack of resolution makes it difficult to confirm. If the build date of 1880 is accurate, it seems quite late for a Fink truss.

Also, does anyone know the type of compression member used on the Whipples?

Regards,

Art S.

Posted June 30, 2017, by Anonymous

Pretty sure I'm seeing fink elements on the main span.

Posted June 30, 2017, by BS

30 June 2017

See the West Central Tribune of Willmar, MN June 29/30-

Front page article about replacement & Bidletting on this Bridge --

Sad to say - It is all but gone-

BS

Posted June 30, 2017, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is listed as having a fink deck truss approach span. But the photos does not show any fink. What little I have found on it does not mention a Fink deck truss.

Is there really a fink?

Kern Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted June 26, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

It would be a woefully neglectful loss if this one should collapse

Kern Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted June 25, 2017, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

Field visit today: this bridge is on the verge of collapse. Severe erosion is threatening the eastern stone pier. The stones under the southeast bearing shoe are barely hanging on.

Posted June 20, 2017, by Matt Lohry

I agree with Nathan's comment; however, considering the razor-thin escape from the wrecking ball that this bridge pulled off, I'm sure happy to see carriage bolts on this historic bridge over a new, ugly, MOB, which was the plan until only a couple of years ago!

Posted June 19, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Overall this is both a good and amazing outcome for a bridge of this size. The use of bolts is a disappointment being as it is something that multiple organizations reached out to them in favor of. They could have done the rivets if they had wanted to.

Posted June 18, 2017, by Matt Lohry

I went out with my family today and took photos of the newly restored bridge. Overall good restoration; most of the rivets along the bottom chords of the bridge have been replaced with bolts and the bearings have been replaced. Other than that, mainly blast and paint, and new concrete deck.

Posted June 9, 2017, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Yea! It's nice to see a Minnesota bridge not slated for demolition.

Unlike the Eisenhower bridge http://bridgehunter.com/mn/goodhue/9040/ that I went across recently and could see that ground work is beginning for the new bridge.

Posted June 9, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Inspected this bridge 6/7/17. Bridge was completely repainted to a battleship gray color in 2016. Looks good!

Posted June 9, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Not shocking that this bridge is doomed. Carver County (my home county) hasn't had a truss to show for itself in decades; and is working on eradicating the remaining historic bridges.

Posted May 29, 2017, by Don Morrison
Posted May 29, 2017, by Jacob Lennington (simpspin [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Close call with boat that went up in flames beneath it:

http://www.fox9.com/news/257672536-story

Channel Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted May 22, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Just noticed there was no photo on file for this bridge. This was taken in August 2016.

Posted May 22, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

They try and try to give these replacement UCEB's character... And it just doesn't work.

Posted May 22, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is gone, replaced by a single span PCB bridge (23028). Another one bites the dust.

Posted May 22, 2017, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Bridge is gone, replaced by a 2-barrel concrete box culvert.

Posted May 11, 2017, by Butch Viitala (viiala [at] hotmail [dot] com)

The demolition of the bridge will begin on May 22nd. This past week the phone company laid a temporary cable from East to West through the woods over the river. Lake Country Power had crews move two power poles installing temporary poles that will remain until the bridge work is completed. The detour signs are standing by ready to barricade the highway from CR22 with the detour routes marked.

Posted April 5, 2017, by Butch Viitala (viitala [at] hotmail [dot] com)

The rights of way on both sides of the river were cleared in February. Lake Country Power staked the right of way for the power line and where one power pole near the river will be moved toward the woods line about 25 -30 feet. Bridge removal and new construction will begin in May if not before. Culvert replacement may precede the bridge work to the east.

Posted March 20, 2017, by Nathan Holth (nathan [at] historicbridges [dot] org)
Posted March 12, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

duplicate

Posted March 12, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

duplicate

Posted February 15, 2017, by Douglas Butler

This former lift bridge is similar to the Lake Ewauna rail bridge in Klamath Falls OR.

Posted February 7, 2017, by Sherril Gautreaux (cityofranier [at] frontiernet [dot] net)

The bridge does not raise automatically to marine traffic. The height of the bridge from water fluctuates depending on the level of the Rainy River. If a boat needs to have the bridge raised to pass under the bridge, a bridge tender in Chicago must be called, who in turn relays information to CN workers onsite. The bridge is supposed to be raised in a timely fashion. Due to the increased traffic on the bridge, marine traffic often has to wait significant amounts of time. The port of entry is currently the busiest US Customs rail of port of entry in the US.

Posted February 4, 2017, by Jacob Lennington (simpspin [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Some photos of the Rehabilitation.

Winona Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted January 30, 2017, by Roger Deschner (rogerdeschner [at] gmail [dot] com)

Apparently good news here. After some uncertainty over cost, MNDOT will rehab the main steel truss spans of the old bridge after all, but they'll completely replace the approach spans in what appears to be a compromise to keep the overall project within budget. They will be replaced one at a time to maintain contractor access for rehabbing the main steel truss spans at the same time. First Minnesota end, then Wisconsin. So it will indeed wind up as an old/new couplet of 1-way bridges.

I was just through Winona, and I drove across the new westbound bridge. It has opened to 2-way traffic until work on the old bridge is completed and it's reopened for eastbound traffic in 2019. Demolition work has begun on the west (Minnesota) approach spans.

http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/fixing-the-winona-bri...

Posted January 29, 2017, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

Details on the bridge project: http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/oakland-place-bridge-... New bridge is scheduled to be open by May 2017.

Posted January 4, 2017, by Jerry L Brooks (jerrylbrooks [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This is a nice looking train bridge.Impressive that it was built in 1897 and still in regular use.

US 71 Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted January 3, 2017, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

Here's an article about the new replacement span being open. It is much wider than the previous one, yet the lanes have now been restricted to three lane instead of four lane. Whether that will be effective in the long term remains to be seen. Yet the new span is nearly identical to the State and Ashley Street Crossings. Rather boring when you look at them..... http://www.exploreokoboji.com/news/news-stories/highway-71-b...

Posted December 19, 2016, by Anonymous

By pass make great Canoe put in, fishing platform and picnic area. Lack of maintenance does not indicate replacement, indicates need for maintenance...

Posted December 19, 2016, by Butch Viitala (viitala [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I realize there is historic sensitivity involved with this old bridge. However Highway 5 itself is in poor driving condition and has been for many years. People that wish to visit the McCarthy State Park coming in from the N.W. on Highway 1 usually bypass Highway 5 because it is so rough. There comes a time when replacement is necessary. At today's prices one can only imagine how much it would cost to replace this bridge 10 years from now, along with upgrading the highway itself. There are issues with the culverts that direct water drainage sometimes with flows crossing from one side of the highway to the other a few times if not several times before drainage is guided well. Culvert replacement has been undertaken this past summer and will continue. There are many culverts along the approximate 8 mile stretch between CR22 and Hwy 1 in need of replacement or relocation. This is a monumental project. But it is clear that it requires attention now.

Posted November 25, 2016, by Dana and Kay Klein

A Nod is as good as a wink to a blind man! Not sure view from Hazel street IS this. Cant tell so will leave street view off.Looks like under pass for something else...Pontist Mystery. Thanks for your usual keen Eye

Posted November 25, 2016, by Luke

Dana, the bridge in the picture looks old enough to be added to the site... (nudge nudge)

Posted November 25, 2016, by Dana and Kay Klein

Thanks Luke!

Posted November 25, 2016, by Ronald Skwier (rskwier [at] msn [dot] com)

The original Warren truss was removed, but was replaced by what appears to be a lighter bridge some years(?) ago. Old electrical insulators are evident to one side of the upper portion. The right of way was converted to a trail, but this replacement bridge was there previously.

Posted November 9, 2016, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)
Posted November 7, 2016, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Had a very nice chat with the gentleman who owns this bridge. He would like to preserve it at all costs, and does his best to maintain it currently. The world needs more bridge lovers like this!

Posted November 7, 2016, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Heard from a couple of gentlemen in Good Thunder that this bridge has been reopened

Posted November 5, 2016, by Brian J. Patterson (pattersonbj [at] earthlink [dot] net)

As part of the Long Meadow Bridge, the previous and NOT original wooden deck was replaced with a "lightweight" reinforced concrete deck with no wear layer. The ORIGINAL deck was 1920 era reinforced concrete with an asphalt wear layer. The original deck was failing and replaced with the wooden deck some time in the late 1940s to early 1950s.

The contractors used modern "lightweight" reinforced concrete without a wear layer to provide long life, reduce the dead weight of the bridge, and retain most of the design capacity of the bridge. They also used that material because the ORIGINAL deck was reinforce concrete, and not wood. Since this was a NRHP Bridge Restoration, they also used pine boards for forms rather than modern steel forms to get the "board texture" that would have been present on the curbing of the original deck.

Posted October 26, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is not long for this world. Fillmore County has funding to replace it with a 2-barrel concrete box culvert. The project will occur later this year or early in 2017.

Posted October 26, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge recently underwent a 2-year rehab which included a new deck, replacement of severely corroded floorbeams over Pier 3 (due to many years of leakage through the deck joint), new bearings and a complete repaint. It is now brown in color and looks very nice.

Posted October 20, 2016, by Matthew Hill (mattcintosh [at] gmail [dot] com)

10/20/16 update. Concrete railings have been removed sometime and replaced with black metal railings. Appears that the width of bridge was narrowed by about 16" on each side and the railings put at the new edge.

Posted October 19, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Great to see... Especially for one that once appeared to be a goner!

Posted October 19, 2016, by Matt Lohry

Outstanding!! After a 14-year wait, it will be nice to have public access to this bridge once again! The pipe-and-cable railings appear to be similar to those used on the Gateway Trail Bridge over Manning Avenue in Washington County--minimal visual intrusion to the truss portions of the bridge should allow for easy viewing. I will be sure to make it a point to visit once I'm in the area again.

Posted October 19, 2016, by Brian J. Patterson (pattersonbj [at] earthlink [dot] net)

The Long Meadow Bridge restoration is complete. The bridge is now open to pedestrian and bicyclist traffic. The bridge is scheduled to close during the Spring of 2017 to allow unhindered access to lightweight paving equipment, which will be paving the path between the south end of the Long Meadow Bridge and the north end of the pedestrian/bicyclist portion of the Cedar Avenue Bridge. This low-resolution picture is courtesy of the City of Bloomington, MN.

Posted October 4, 2016, by Matt Lohry

Well, so much for this one--the tee-beam is the last one. I'm sure it will be pointlessly and wastefully demolished soon as well.

Posted September 23, 2016, by Don Morrison

The linked article in Bluff Country News says the bridge is to become a fishing pier. So monumented it is.

Much better than the awful ACoE suggestion to mount it's upper truss structure as decoration on a new bridge as mentioned in the article.

Just about every river up here in the northeast Iowa

/southeast Minnesota area is approaching flood stage right now, so I hope the bridge is ok.

Posted September 22, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Nathan just has a quicker trigger finger than you Matt!! ;-)

Posted September 22, 2016, by Nathan Holth (Webmaster [at] HistoricBridges [dot] org)

Matt... Great minds think alike... And apparently at the same time as well! As an afterthought I also wonder if this bridge's fate was part of a management plan, I think the state made those for some bridges although I haven't looked at this for a while.

Posted September 22, 2016, by Matt Lohry

Nathan,

Jinx!! Looks like we posted very similar comments at the same time :>)

Posted September 22, 2016, by Matt Lohry

It looks like they put new permanent concrete posts in to keep heavy traffic off, so I would say that they plan to keep it around for pedestrians and bicycles; maybe a trail will eventually be placed across.

Posted September 22, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is gone. A new single-span PS concrete bridge is under construction in its place.

Posted September 22, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Joe,

It looks like the contractor is no longer on-site, and it also looks like new bollards were installed at the ends of the bridge. That being the case, I would guess the bridge has been "monumented" meaning it has been bypassed and abandoned with no restoration work undertaken.

Posted September 22, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is still standing but no longer carries traffic. A new bridge is in place on a new parallel alignment. At this point I don't know if the old bridge will be demolished or kept in place for a trail.

Posted August 30, 2016, by george oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Thanks Don.Good to know there is history on both these bridges.

Posted August 30, 2016, by Don Morrison

Apparently they also removed one farther south.

Here is an interesting web page with dates, bridge numbers, and modern pictures:

http://www.deadpioneer.com/routes/US61/historicus61se/wabash...

Posted August 29, 2016, by george oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Noticed something looking at google maps.If you follow the roadway there is what looks like a pier in the Zumbro River for a bridge.Looks like they removed 2 bridges,not 1.Also i noticed this roadway hooks up with what i think is a rte. 30.Just a couple of observations.

Posted August 28, 2016, by Luke

According to the internet, the bridge lasted into the late 90s.

Posted August 28, 2016, by Jake Lennington (simpspin [at] gmail [dot] com)

Does anyone have any info on when this was removed, or any pics from when it was operation? Thanks.

Posted August 23, 2016, by Matt Lohry

I'm from up there as well; this is very similar to what they did about 25 years ago a few miles north of there, where the Sturgeon River passes under State Hwy. 1...there was a small, 2-span Warren pony truss bridge there, and they replaced it with a very long UCEB, presumably to control some flooding issues there.

Posted August 23, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Interesting... thats a rather elaborate project to replace a 70 foot span on a quiet county-owned road...

Posted August 23, 2016, by Butch Viitala (viitala [at] hotmail [dot] com)

A new bridge is scheduled for 2017-2018. The new bridge will be about 400 + feet long. Entire bridge construction with approaches will be about 1,050 feet. I own the land on the East side of the river, North plat. Construction is estimated to be 2 years. Highway 5 will be resurfaced with parts reconstructed. I signed the easements in May 2016. Right of way on each side of the bridge is 50 feet permanent, and another 50 feet temporary. Detoured traffic will be routed on the Airport Road to the West of the river. The bridge will be elevated only a few feet. The rights of way are staked.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Made tons of sense to replace an historic bridge located in a state preserve for those 7 park vehicles that crossed it a day. The old structure could have been renovated for far less.

Posted August 17, 2016, by CHAD ROBERSON (mrtazwrench [at] juno [dot] com)

I remember going across this with my parents when I was 6 or younger, seemed flimsy then. MN DNR replaced it and only they can drive on the new bridge, open to foot traffic, not sure about ATV'S.

Posted August 11, 2016, by Matt Lohry

The Google Earth satellite view from March shows one span removed, and one in the process of being removed. It's likely gone by now.

Posted July 26, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

We inspected these bridges in early July 2016. The arch spans were repainted and had new deck joints installed in 2015, and are in very good condition.

Posted July 15, 2016, by Francis Drouillard (fdrouillard [at] opacengineers [dot] com)

That's a tied arch, not a through arch. The tie is just below the deck. It is comprised of a wide flange section and 4 prestressing tendons enclosed in pipes. The ties are anchored at the ends of the arch and the arch midspan.

Posted July 7, 2016, by Matt Lohry

Another deserving recipient of the infamous filthy toilet award; nice work, Tony! I swear, St. Louis County probably has "truss bridges suck" stenciled across the front of their wrecking ball. There is still one truss bridge (a Pratt through truss) left outside of Duluth that is still in service, and it's only a few miles from my childhood home (where my folks still live). Since it's in this county, I don't expect that it will be around for too much longer, however...

http://bridgehunter.com/mn/st-louis/88796/

Posted July 6, 2016, by Nathan Holth (nathan [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

On the bright side, it helps create an entire area I don't have to ever bother visiting. I can drive straight from Duluth to Thunder Bay and not miss anything. Saves on time. Too bad the county can't just demolish itself from the space-time continuum then I could save even more time.

On a more serious note, being as this website doesn't do Canada, I should give you folks the heads up if you ever do make the ridiculously long drive to see the magnificent Duluth Lift Bridge (and other Duluth bridges), you might as well continue on up to Thunder Bay, which has three extremely unusual movable bridges. A Strauss bascule, Scherzer bascule, and swing. All three were originally built as RR/HWY combos, two/three continue to function in this way.

Posted July 6, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Well Matt, at 5 ADT I figure that new ugly will pay for itself in about... NEVER!

Here... I think you might need this...

Todd Baslee photo

Posted July 6, 2016, by Matt Lohry

Kudos to St. Louis County, the most truss bridge-hating county in the state, this is the last remaining pony truss bridge in service in the county and it is currently being replaced!

Posted June 17, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)
US 71 Bridge (Minnesota)
Posted May 29, 2016, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

Update on the US 71 Bridge in Jackson, MN (USA): The 1954 concrete cantilever span is currently being dismantled in segments. The southern half has long since been removed and workers are working on a cassion to remove the water from the Des Moines River so that they can install a new steel pier and wingwall on the south end. Once that is completed, the northern half will be removed so that the same procedure is done on that end as well. For those who are in the Jackson area this summer, there is still a chance to photograph the northern half of the bridge before that is gone by August. The bridge was built in 1954 by Feller Construction in Rochester, MN replacing a 1924 through truss bridge, which was relocated to a crossing at State Street and served traffic until its demolition and replacement in 1985. When the 1954 bridge is gone, then the history in connection with this bridge will be a memory. More on the construction to come. JS

Posted May 24, 2016, by Matt Lohry

What is it with Fillmore County's sudden assault on its historic bridge collection?? I thought they respected their bridges; turns out they were just tardy to the demolition party!

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Bridge is still extant. Built 1910, abandoned 1976 and removed from MnDOT inventory 1995. Bridge and land are privately owned, but a sign on the road indicates people are welcome to visit, have a picnic, etc. Pony truss approach span was likely added after flooding washed out the south approach; photos from 1955 show the added span already in place. Take dirt road from TH 16, a couple miles west of Peterson, to access bridge.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/43%C2%B046'53.1%22N+91%C2%...

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is expected to be closed and demolished in June 2016.

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Grading has begun on the new alignment for the replacement bridge. It is currently open to traffic, but will probably be demolished in August or September 2016.

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is gone, replaced by a 3-span concrete slab (MN bridge 25613).

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Photo of the old bridge.

Posted May 24, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is gone, replaced by a 3-span curved concrete slab (MN bridge 23591). The nameplate still had protective duct tape over it when I visited on 5/19/16, so the new bridge was built very recently.

Posted May 13, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Inspected this bridge on 5/9/16. There is not much change from the previous inspection. The only real issue is bowing of some lower chord members, indicating possible inward movement of the abutments putting the chords into compression. There is also some scour behind the northeast wingwall.

Posted May 13, 2016, by Joe Fishbein (jmfmando [at] gmail [dot] com)

Inspected this bridge this week, for the last time. It is coming out later this year, to be replaced by a single span PS concrete bridge.

Posted May 6, 2016, by Jake Lennington (simpspin [at] gmail [dot] com)

Here's a pic from 2015.

Posted April 27, 2016, by Anonymous

Four

Posted April 27, 2016, by Barry (bllauver [at] toad [dot] net)

The north bridge seems to have been much wider than the south bridge. How many tracks did it handle?

Posted April 26, 2016, by Steve M (steve55426 [at] msn [dot] com)

New bridge opened last fall

Posted April 26, 2016, by Steve M (steve55426 [at] msn [dot] com)

Bridge was removed a few weeks ago, construct started on replacement.