Recent Tennessee Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted March 25, 2017, by Albert Pope (popealbert [at] bellsouth [dot] net)

This bridge used to lead to a parking lot for Alcoa workers at the South Plant. Alcoa has changed the parking situation for it's workers and torn down the approach to this bridge. The bridge actually crosses 2 railroads: NS and the Alcoa Terminal RR (ATRR). Several trains a day pass under it. There was a time when Alcoa had landscaping and lights on the bridge, it was an attractive setting.

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

Thank you as always Mr. Baslee!

Posted March 22, 2017, by Calvin Sneed

This elegant bridge is no longer with us. Blown into the water on Monday, March 20, 2017. RIP.

Posted March 19, 2017, by Linda Smith (smithsrus [at] gmail [dot] com)

Aerial photos of Hannah Ward Bridge taken March 2017

Posted March 13, 2017, by Dan (1992sentrase [at] gmail [dot] com)

About a mile, give or take, down the CSX mainline is another wooden bridge on South Springview Road. You can see it from the Binfield Road railroad overpass. I do know of a wooden bridge built in the 1940's on East Harper Avenue in Maryville, Tennessee. It is over the Norfolk Southern right-of-way.

Posted February 28, 2017, by Don Morrison

It's categorized as both preserved and lost. Time to clean up the categories.

Posted February 28, 2017, by Timothy (timdaugherty1980 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I finally found this old gem!!! Any idea when it was built? I walked down the old road and saw it before my eyes! Was amazing!!

Posted February 10, 2017, by George Hollingsworth (geohollingsworth [at] msn [dot] com)

Glad you found it. In addition to the bridges built after the Smokies became a national park there a lot of smaller bridges deep inside the park. Most of the campgrounds in the park were originally lumber mill sites that were serviced by narrow-gage rail lines going back into the mountains. After the park was formed the rails were removed and hiking paths formed. Several of the old truss bridges remain and were converted for pedestrian use. Here are two N35.607323, W-083.332968 and N35.610552, W-083.254940. These are the coordinates of the Google Earth photos of the bridges. Enjoy.

Posted February 9, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Got it.

Posted January 31, 2017, by Gerald Gabriel (drivewaydreams [at] gmail [dot] com)

I was at the Mount Olive bridge today and snapped a neat picture. Just wanted to share.

Posted January 7, 2017, by Mary Noel

We have done some research on the bridge - it's still in place (2017) but showing deterioration of the concrete deck.

The Bridge's name was changed by the County early in the 1900's to Smith Bridge (a Glaze daughter who lived near the bridge married a Smith). Originally bridge had a wood deck that was replaced by concrete in the 1960's. It was painted a bright silver when open - traces of paint still visible in protected corners. The bridge was decommissioned in the mid-1980's.

E.N. Matthews, one of the principal bridge engineers, ended up marrying a gal who lived in the brick foursquare adjacent to the bridge (our house) and lived the rest of his life here in Limestone, TN - building a farm about a mile up the road from the bridge.

Posted January 2, 2017, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Historic bridges [dot] org)

We'll be able to see the eclipse from this one!

Posted December 28, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

This bridge appears to have an NBI listing implying it is owned by the city (ie the public, taxpayers, etc). However site visit reveals numerous No Trespassing signs posted BEFORE the bridge. Maybe the road after the bridge is private, but it is not appropriate for anyone to post such signs if, as the NBI suggests, this bridge is owned, inspected, and maintained by a public agency using taxpayer dollars. The signs mislead visitors into believing that it is unlawful to visit this bridge, which is not true if its owned by a public agency.

Posted December 2, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Historic bridges [dot] org)

I live in town and I have seen this bridge many times. Once a barge hit it, causing one of the pillars to become encased in concrete and preserved. It is a beautiful bridge and is one of the lucky few that survived the flood of 2010. This is one tough bridge. Oh, and you're right, those approaches are insane! They are so freakin long it's weird but true!

Posted November 27, 2016, by Dennis G. Massey

Still standing today.

Frisco Bridge (Tennessee)
Posted November 17, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Rich,

Thanks for the background, so I gather the new approach will have a lesser grade... and also that the main spans are not to be replaced as part of this project?

Frisco Bridge (Tennessee)
Posted November 7, 2016, by Rich

BNSF did a major rebuild of the main spans of this bridge in the mid-2000s due to deterioration. The Arkansas approach to the channel crossing is the steepest grade on the main line between Memphis and Thayer, Mo. There were very prohibitive operating rules that governed speed and how much power the engineer could use along certain points of the bridge--in fact it was possible to stall out on the approach which required being pushed over. Because of the low speed limit, single track and being near Tennessee Yard, it became a major bottleneck for the railroad between Kansas City and Birmingham.

Posted November 7, 2016, by Glyn Robinson (contactbluebird [at] hotmail [dot] com)

why is the house built so close to approach? great pics!

Frisco Bridge (Tennessee)
Posted November 6, 2016, by Nathan Holth (Webmaster [at] HistoricBridges [dot] org)

This is one of the most significant historic bridges in the country due to age, design, size, and engineer. Some or all spans are currently being demolished and replaced... currently it's just the western approach spans. The fate of the main spans is unknown. Even loss of the approach spans is an atrocity against history given the bridge's significance. But of coursE big railroad corporations couldn't care less about history. This bridge belongs in a museum if it could fit, it deserves better than to be ruined by money hungry railroad corporations

Posted October 30, 2016, by Thad Osborne (tgo1330 [at] comcast [dot] net)

This bridge is on an old section of Washington Pike that was re-located due to construction of I-640 in the 1980's. It is just slightly west of its replacement.

Posted October 19, 2016, by Alan Walker (awalker1829 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Actually, there's a bit of misinformation here. The freestanding bridge piers are what remains of the East Tennessee and Georgia Railway bridge. The Western and Atlantic Railroad of the State of Georgia crossed the creek a little further upstream of the ET&G on a bridge that was at a lower elevation. That bridge had stone abutments, which are still in use with the current W&A Bridge.

The bridge in the foreground is the CSXT Tyner Spur that connects to Enterprise South.

The bridge that is currently used by Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum dates to 1912 and was modified in the 1950s when the main line was rerouted. One set of bridge spans was removed when the line was downgraded from a main line to an industrial lead.

Posted October 18, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Historic bridges [dot] org)

I take that back. No spray paint

Posted October 18, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Historic bridges [dot] org)

That lil' caboose is a cutie! Did you notice the spray paint?

Posted September 25, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Outlook [dot] com)

I also had a weird dream about it a couple nights ago. I live near the park and I was raised going there. one day I noticed the pillars and was fascinated, so I researched the bridge. For many months I searched the internet until there was nothing else to read. I wrote a report and took it to school. The teacher loved it and gave me a LYNDOR chocolate.

Posted September 25, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Outlook [dot] com)

My fascination with bridges began here

Posted September 25, 2016, by Echo Anderson (Echo Anderson [at] Outlook [dot] com)

Ive tied to do research on this bridge nothing popped up. there is a gate. I am currently writing a fiction story with this bridge, even though I do not live in Knoxville and have never seen it in person.It does have a wonderful street view though.

Posted September 11, 2016, by K (kaykat9676 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is no longer here. I visited the location on 9-10-16.

Posted September 9, 2016, by Leo York (K9luv [dot] ly [at] gmail [dot] com)

Not sure the built date 1940 is correct. I have a 1927 photo of a school bus crossing on this bridge.

Posted September 8, 2016, by Peyton Gupton (cardinalgupton [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Not abandoned, still active. NS serves the coal loadout in Newcomb several times a week which requires they go thru this tunnel. NS also makes occasional runs onto the CSX mainline, averaging about 1 every 2 weeks or so.

Harahan Bridge (Tennessee)
Posted August 31, 2016, by Alexander D. Mitchell IV (LNER4472 [at] verizon [dot] net)

Website changed to http://www.bigrivercrossing.com/

Opens to public Oct. 22nd, 2016.

Posted August 19, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Luke, The diagram you posted is the bridge in Mr. Hoobler's book, with photo's made about 1884. If that is not a Fink truss, then there are two possibilities. They decided against the Fink design, or there was another bridge in between the 1867 and the 1897 bridge.

The attached images are from - Nashville, from the Collection of Carl and Otto Giers, page 31. By James A. Hoobler. Arcadia Publishing, 1999.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I found three articles in the Tennessean showing that the current bridge was under construction, in 1931. You are welcome to go to the blog and see the update and the articles. You may download them, of course. If you use them I hope you will give credit to my blog as well as the Tennessean. I have not yet found a date of completion, but I am looking through 1932 newspapers. I will update the blog again when I find the completion date.

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

Seems like the RR bridge erectors got into the riveting a decade or so quicker than the firms building ones on roadways. I've wondered if perhaps they had a rail car with a field riveting setup in it that they could pull right up to the work site.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks Luke for sharing this photo from my blog post. This image appeared in the Tennessean on July 4, 1909. It is a photo of the Woodland Street Bridge. In the background you can see the railroad bridge. Although the newspaper image is not very good you can see the tender's house on the railroad bridge. The caption on the image says, "Woodland-Street Bridge, L&N Railway Bridge Beyond." http://nashvillehistory.blogspot.com/2016/08/louisville-nash...

Posted August 18, 2016, by Luke

Fair point.

Posted August 18, 2016, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

Luke,

Not all 1890s bridges were pin-connected. I've seen riveted examples, such as this bridge on the Katy Trail in Missouri built in 1896:

http://bridgehunter.com/mo/callaway/rivaux-katy/

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks Luke for sharing this photo from my blog post. This image appeared in the Tennessean on July 4, 1909. It is a photo of the Woodland Street Bridge. In the background you can see the railroad bridge. Although the newspaper image is not very good you can see the tender's house on the railroad bridge. The caption on the image says, "Woodland-Street Bridge, L&N Railway Bridge Beyond." http://nashvillehistory.blogspot.com/2016/08/louisville-nash...

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiec [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks, y'all. I am going to keep searching to see if I can find anything on a later bridge. If I do I will get back to you.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Luke

Debie, that's what is referred to as a "shoe" or "pedestal".

It is used to connect bridges to their abutments/piers.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I see there are bolts at the bottom and rivets at the top but what about the middle, is that a pin?

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks, and what that photo I posted before, is this some kind of connection?

Posted August 18, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Hi Debie:

See photographs 3,9,10,14,16 for examples of pinned connections:

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/cloud/republican-uprr/ This bridge is located in a rural area, as opposed to an urban environment, but it is an example of an 1890s railroad bridge, as is its neighbor just downstream:

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/cloud/pegram/ This bridge has both pinned and riveted connections, as it was built during a time of transition.

This bridge has newer bolted and welded connections: http://bridgehunter.com/ks/brown/71025803360/ It was built in 1940, which was just about the end of the truss era.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I second Luke's comment. It can take years to learn all the details. All of us are still learning.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Luke

Debie, don't sweat not understanding all the engineering tidbits.

This is a riveted connection on the present bridge: https://bridgehunter.com/photos/18/50/185053-L.jpg

This is a pin connected bridge built in the 1890s by the same company that built the 1897 Cumberland bridge: https://bridgehunter.com/ar/yell/danville-rr/

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Sorry, I don't know enough about railroad bridge construction to carry on a conversation. The intent was to share some documented information. I hope some of you will enjoy the blog post. If you enjoy Nashville history you might find other posts on the blog to be of interest. There is an index near the top left under the little photo of the Shelby Street bridge. Like I said railroad bridges are not my thing, but I hope I gave someone something to think about.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Help me out here. Is this an example of a pinned connection or a riveted connection? And how do I spot the differences?

Posted August 18, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Yes, the overall shape of the bridge in the newspaper photo is similar, but that bridge appears to be a Parker truss. This bridge is a Polygonal Warren truss.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Luke

It would be even more odd for an 1890s bridge to feature riveted connections, which didn't come into engineering prominence until the 1910s.

The current bridge has riveted connections, not pinned connections like an 1890s bridge would.

So that's proof enough that the bridge isn't from 1897.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

If anyone can find documentation of a later bridge, please post it or send it to me. I will be happy to update the blog post. I do want to mention that from 1913, through 1920, I could find no mention of a new bridge being built at this site. I don't dispute one may have been built at a later date. But unless I have documentation, I will stick the 1897-98 date. Please take time to read the blog. Read about the reasons a new bridge was built. Some of you obviously believed that a wooden bridge from 1859, stood there until 1916. I didn't see how a wooden bridge have carried the increased weight. That didn't make sense to me and that is part of why I started researching the subject. I don't know much about reailroads, but I have been researching Nashville's history for more than 40 years and I do my best to be accurate. (Image is from the Tennessean Feb. 11, 1898.)

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This image appeared in the Tennessean on July 4, 1909. It is a photo of the Woodland Street Bridge. In the background you can see the railroad bridge. Although the newspaper image is not very good you can see the tender's house on the railroad bridge. The shape of the bridge looks to be same as the current bridge. It would be very odd for a newspaper to report in 1897-98 that a new had been built and completed if that had not happened. The caption on the image says, "Woodland-Street Bridge, L&N Railway Bridge Beyond." Are you aware that the Fort Pitt 1916 plaque is not on the railway bridge that is over the river?

Posted August 18, 2016, by Justin

If the bridge shown in that book is pre-1897, then your timeline is confirmed as incorrect.

According your timeline, the 1897 bridge was preceded by an 1860s Fink truss.

The bridge in those images is not a Fink truss, rather a Pratt truss.

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

My research was not confined to newspapers. Both of these clips for example are from The Railway Age, volume 24, 1897. The book is available online - https://books.google.com/books?id=v3RCAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA743&dq=%...

Posted August 18, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiec [at] gmail [dot] com)

The photos in the book in the book referenced by anonymous were taken in 1884-1885. The photos in this section of the book, of Gier photos, published by Jim Hoobler has this comment. "In 1884 Otto Giers began a personal photographic project. He set out to document his hometown, and he did so in several hundred views. All of the subsequent views were made by him in 1884-85". - https://books.google.com/books?id=cxVrG042w6wC&pg=PA31&dq=na...

Posted August 18, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

One has to be at bit careful when looking through news articles concerning early railroad bridges. The very earliest railroad bridges, primarily those from the 1860s-1880s, have frequently been replaced two or three times. It is not unusual to find that the original bridge may have been in place for a mere 10-15 years before heavier railroad traffic, or in some cases flood damage, required its replacement. Thus, an 1870s bridge might have been replaced in the 1890s and again in the 1920s. In some instances, the replacement projects might not have received as much media coverage as the initial construction project.

To complicate matters a bit, the newer trusses often reused pylons from old bridges. Likewise, some very old trusses may have had their pylons replaced. Thus, the dates on the trusses and the pylons may be mismatched. In the case of this bridge, the pylons look much older than the trusses to me.

The best way to determine the age of a bridge (aside from plaques of course) is to look at details of construction. Generally, lighter weight bridges are older than heavier ones. Pinned connections with eyebars are generally older than riveted connections with gusset plates. In turn riveted connections are usually older than bolted or welded connections. In addition, bridges with lots of lacing tend to be older that those with little or no lacing.

If I had to take a wild guess at a construction date for this one, I would say the current bridge was built sometime between 1910-1930. If the bridge was in fact built in 1897-1898, it would have been an extremely heavy bridge for its time. If so, it would have been a very early, and noteworthy, example of such a heavy bridge.

Posted August 17, 2016, by Anonymous

I believe that this book shows two photographs of the bridge the newspaper clipping is referring to.

https://books.google.com/books?id=cxVrG042w6wC&pg=PA31&dq=na...

Posted August 17, 2016, by Justin

This bridge is far too heavily constructed to have been built 1897.

Posted August 17, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

After doing further research, I can find no source that the bridge was built in 1916. The date seems to be based on the photo of a plaque posted by Calvin Sneed. But that plaque is on a different bridge, adjacent to this one. The plaque is on the CSX, 1st Ave. North Overpass. The bridge was built in 1897 and 1898, as documented in my blog post. The image is from the Tennessean, Feb. 11, 1898. The references in the article make it clear that this is the bridge across the Cumberland from East Nashville to downtown Nashville. The blog contains further documentation on the bridge. http://nashvillehistory.blogspot.com/2016/08/louisville-nash...

Posted August 17, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Mike Page, are there plaques on both sides of this bridge? The photo you made does say 1916, but I was there yesterday and saw a plaque that said 1918. I am going back to take another look.

Posted August 17, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The plaque on this bridge says - 1918 Built By Fort Pitt Bridge Works Pittsburg Pa. The photo is not great but if you click to enlarge you can see that it says 1918.

Posted August 15, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I have done some research on the railroad bridge. Plan to do more, but went ahead with the blog post about what I found. Looking for feedback. http://nashvillehistory.blogspot.com/2016/08/louisville-nash...

Posted August 14, 2016, by Debie Oeser Cox (debiecox1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I researched and wrote a blog post about the L & N Railroad Bridge across the Cumberland at Nashville. You can read the post here - http://nashvillehistory.blogspot.com/2016/08/louisville-nash...

Posted July 25, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Photo 21... looks like something blue under the bearing, maybe an i-beam. Might be some sort of substructure. Photos #8 and #9 are rather alarming. Almost looks like the nuts are missing and someone welded... something... a bolt maybe... to the pin. If my interpretation is correct that is one of the most comical repairs I have ever seen. What did that repair play out like? "Hey Joe, the nut's missing!" "Let me see... yep... I can fix it... hold my beer I think I can fix that with the bolt rolling around in the back of the truck!"

Posted July 25, 2016, by Calvin Sneed (us43137415 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Historic Marion County bridge and its 2 K-hybrid camelbacks demolished, 2016

Posted July 23, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

This is a beauty!

I could be wrong but it totally looks like it is just sitting on the ground with no foundation. If so, this is not a good thing!

Posted July 23, 2016, by Glyn Robinson (contactbluebird [at] hotmail [dot] com)

nice find!

Posted July 23, 2016, by Glyn Robinson (contactbluebird [at] hotmail [dot] com)

driving down hwy 31 yesterday and saw this jewel.wish i had stopped.

Posted July 22, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This one is way too heavy to have been built in 1859. There might have been an older bridge at this location that got replaced. The 1916 date listed here seems reasonable for this one.

Posted July 22, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Pure speculation, but ca. 1900-1910 would seem reasonable based on overall appearance.

Posted July 22, 2016, by daniel medlin (runtmed [at] hotmail [dot] com)

WHAT YEAR WAS THIS ONE BUILT

Posted July 22, 2016, by daniel medlin (runtmed [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Rock island swing bridge built 1859

Rome Ferry (Tennessee)
Posted July 18, 2016, by george oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Does anybody have any information on what might be done with the ferry?

Rome Ferry (Tennessee)
Posted July 17, 2016, by Lewis Napier (damsurdid [at] aol [dot] com)

This is aa disgrace for the old Ferry. Mitchell Family had Ferry built in honor of their son that got killed in the service. At the time the ferry was donated to Smith County Tennessee there was an agreement in writing Between Mitchell Family and Smith County if Ferry was ever closed there would be a bridge built across Cumberland River. Wonder what happen

Posted July 16, 2016, by Anthony Wallace (Toughant_89 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Updated photos: 07/16/2016

Posted May 29, 2016, by William gray (shayandwilliam [at] gmail [dot] com)

Fist bridge was build like 1830s for 10,000$ i think. Was burnt durning civil war by New Orleans Confederate soilders in 1861 or 1862.

Posted April 13, 2016, by Duston McCreary (dustonmccreary [at] gmail [dot] com)

Someone stated that the towers were built as guard towers, guarding a factory during WWI. However the bridge was built a decade later.

http://oldhickory.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Na...

Posted April 5, 2016, by Nancy Barlow (nancybarlow [at] outlook [dot] com)

I loved this old bridge and was so sad to see TDOT tearing it down. And now the new bridge is closed due to faulty cement, from what I understand. They should have just "fixed" the old bridge - it was so beautiful!! The new bridge is so blasť with no character whatsoever. Thank you, Calvin Sneed, for sharing all the wonderful pictures.

Posted March 28, 2016, by Billie (ceruleanaestival [at] gmail [dot] com)
Posted March 20, 2016, by gail (loletabell [at] icloud [dot] com)

Searching information regarding my great great grandfather... found that he was a Civil War Union Soldier... On June 4 1864 there was a battle at Duck River Bridge, Tenn. which I figure is the same site. Although I'm sure there are other numerous battle sites in your state..

Posted March 16, 2016, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Yeah about that one in Amnicon Falls Wisconsin... its not a modern covered bridge there are no timber trusses of any kind there... the IRON BOWSTRING TRUSS is doing ALL the work including carrying the load of the parasitic timbers that do not simulate a covered bridge (note that a covered bridge is a timber truss with covering on it). This one in Tennessee may be one of the most profoundly silly looking things I have ever seen, but you can see the attempt to simulate timber trusses in this design in addition to grafting non-functional steel trusses inside of the package as decorative elements.

The Amnicon Falls one is far more irritating to me because it is a public bridge and the timber obstructs the view of a very rare and unusual bowstring. Moreover, the timber also obstructs the view of the stunning natural scenery around the bridge.

Posted March 16, 2016, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Here is a historic bowstring that has been incorporated into a modern covered bridge: http://bridgehunter.com/wi/douglas/amnicon-falls/

Posted March 16, 2016, by Ben Tate (benji5221 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Here's a wooden pony truss that has been covered in sheet metal. http://bridgehunter.com/tn/lawrence/50017610001/

Posted March 16, 2016, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This bridge seems similar to what was done to this bridge: http://bridgehunter.com/al/monroe/bh56455/

Anyways, I have to give kudos to the guy who did this for several reasons:

1. He saved a historic pony truss. Its not a prefab truss, but a historic one from the 1900's that could have otherwise gone to scrap.

2. He could have just built a modern covered bridge, but instead, went the extra mile and used a historic bridge in its design.

3. He went out of his way to obtain a historic bridge where as he did not have to.

4. He is a private citizen using his own money and not tax payer's money to build the thing.

5. The bridge, which could have gone to scrap, will find many more years of use.

Yes, it may be hidden under the covering, but he has achieved miles above what others would have done with same bridge.

Posted March 15, 2016, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Yeah sorry but I'm not feelin' it!

Go ahead and make a "Romantic Shelter" bridge if ya want to... But don't hide a real gem under it's wraps.

Sure... It does preserve an historic bridge, but the vast majority would drive through and say "Oh, look at the covered bridge!"... While only us few would really know about the Pearl inside the shell.

Posted March 15, 2016, by ArtS (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Nah, this is a riveted pony bought on Ebay that has been placed 'in doors' but stands free of the rest of the structure. A not overly significant bridge saved from the scrap heap and well repurposed. Now if it was a bowstring, we might hear a thing or two about it from Nathan... :^)

Regards,

Art S.

Posted March 15, 2016, by Anonymous

Cue comment from Nathan in 3, 2, 1.

Posted March 15, 2016, by J.P. (wildcatjon2000 [at] gmail [dot] com)

believe its a half hip pony

Posted March 15, 2016, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Very cool. A historic pony truss bridge is incorporated into a modern covered bridge.

Posted March 15, 2016, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Just found this: Pony truss. But actually what kind is it? I put warren, but seems to be a little strange. It also has inner lacings.

Posted March 14, 2016, by Ben Tate (benji5221 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Thanks, Nathan. This one had me confused.

Posted March 14, 2016, by Nathan Holth (nathan [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I checked with Nels Raynor at Bach Steel he says this is most definitely a former roof truss.

Posted February 15, 2016, by Rachel (ms_key23 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Just wanted to add a view from the bridge on Powerhouse road looking into this bridge

Posted February 15, 2016, by Rachel (ms_key23 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I visited this bridge from all angles. Didn't get a real good photo. My question is from the dead end street, is that private property belonging to the last house? Is it ok to walk along the river and get that side photo shot? I added the pictures I got today.

Posted February 15, 2016, by Rachel (ms_key23 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I went today to photograph this bridge. The best view is from there st area ramp. However, I was told by the guy working the rest area that all the property surrounding it was private and there is no way to the bridge. I wanted to confirm this with you. Obviously you went into the bridge itself to photograph. Is this ok for the public to do? I don't want to go to jail for trespassing. Thanks!!

Posted February 15, 2016, by Rachel (ms_key23 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I went today to photograph this bridge. The best view is from there st area ramp. However, I was told by the guy working the rest area that all the property surrounding it was private and there is no way to the bridge. I wanted to confirm this with you. Obviously you went into the bridge itself to photograph. Is this ok for the public to do? I don't want to go to jail for trespassing. Thanks!!

Posted February 1, 2016, by Thad Osborne (tgo1330 [at] comcast [dot] net)

I visited the site in early January 2016. The new bridge will probably be complete and open to traffic late this year. Charles Blalock & Sons of Sevierville, TN, is the contractor. Another great old landmark soon to go, so we can move house trailers more conveniently.

Posted January 31, 2016, by Garland Fitzpatrick (Oxford, Michigan)

Thank you for the photos and history of this little country bridge. It brought back good memories. I remember that back in the 1950's - 1960's, this bridge was the closest way to get to my grandmother's house when we visited from Michigan. I remember being about 7-8 years old when we drove over it. It was rickity and would make noise. When I grew up, I visited my folks who lived back in the "holler". It was about 1966. I decided to use the bridge. I came up to it, it looked pretty bad, so I decided to test it by walking it before driving over it. It was pretty scary, the wooden boards were coming loose, but I drove over it anyway like everyone else did. Whew! My family, the Kelley's, called it the Hannawah bridge. Today, I was thinking about it and looked it up on the internet spelled Hannawah and I found it even with the wrong spelling! Thank You! It's sad to see that it's gone. Too bad the govt. didn't repair it before it fell into ruins, but I guess bridges are expensive to build and there's probably too many regulations today. No more wooden/steel bridges, just steel bridges.

Posted January 28, 2016, by Rock Island State Park

We are again seeking help to support this bridge. There has been some more recent interest in repairing and stabilizing for a pedestrian walkway. We hope to bring in the unique history of the structure as well. If you have a support in any form related to this idea, please let it be known and/or contact us.

931-686-2471

Posted January 19, 2016, by Calvin Sneed (us43137415 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I just couldn't let this grand ole gentleman disappear without paying homage to it.

Posted January 17, 2016, by Robert Elder

Hats of to Calvin Sneed for getting some great photos of this one as it was being dismantled.

Posted January 14, 2016, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Updated information:

http://www.newschannel5.com/news/structural-damage-closes-sm...

Apparently some hairline cracks were found in the pier caps. TDOT is hoping to have the new bridge re-opened in 90 days.