Pomeroy-Mason Bridge

Gotta agree. The bridge has a nice look from a distance, but I like the old cantilevers much better.

Judging by the name of the ODOT presentation, they learned some lessons, so the next bridge here will be better. ;-)

As a bridgehunter, I am not fond of cable-stayed bridges (there is a plethora of them on the Ohio River now), I can see the elegance and grace in them. They do have a place in the skyline of bridge majestry that I can appreciate. I tend to agree with Luke and Nathan on this particular one.

But I will have to admit, the historic cantilever that this one replaced, was the more elegant, more magnificient structure. Sorry to see it go, and sorry I did not get to see it before it was summarily dismissed and pulled down.

I think Stephen Fry put it best: " 'Because it's ugly,' whinge the pedants. It's only ugly because it's new and you don't like it. Ugly in the way Picasso, Stravinsky and Eliot were once thought ugly and before them Monet, Mahler and Baudelaire."

It seems that cheap pot-shots are taken at the new bridge because someone has a strong dislike for all bridges new and/or concrete that may cause the replacement of an existing old truss. Get over it already. The new bridge has a lower rating mostly because of the type of construction method used, partially detailed at http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineering/OTEC/2008%20Presentat...

Someone at another forum mentioned cracking, which is is superficial hairline concrete cracking that is completely normal on newly poured concrete surfaces and supports. There are no indications of cracks over 1/16", moisture intrusion or rust stains on the bridge, which would otherwise indicate delamination.

This cable-stayed bridge, little more than an ugly slab of concrete held up by cables, was built in 2008. The 2009 inspection (the initial inspection, done during the demolition of the historic bridge) has the deck rating at 6/9 and the super and sub structures both at 7/9. The sufficiency is at 76.9%. I also happen to know that even before the bridge was completely built, hairline cracks with efflorescence were forming in the concrete.

A newly constructed bridge today, even with the typical lack of quality in today's bridges, should be expected to at least give a 9/9 rating on all three areas at least for the initial inspection before the bridge has even been completed!

Forget the beauty and heritage value of historic bridges. I don't think we can afford to demolish historic bridges because we cannot afford the consequences of replacing them with bridges that will be falling apart after 10 years.

The Streetview of this bridge would have to have come to us from early 2008 as the old bridge came down in April 2009. I don't know how long Google Streetview will maintain these images.