Forum

Page 1 of 394 Next >

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted December 14, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

So, it appears to have bottom chords but no floor beams if I am seeing this right.

I would like to do a field visit to this bridge, but I probably won't be in the area in the immediate future.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nathan:

I was noticing that there are not multiple beams underneath the bridge. This was why I suspected it might have been a rigid frame but I had not thought about concrete deck girder.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Its either a rigid-frame or a concrete deck girder. If it were a t-beam we would see more than two longitudinal beams.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I second Clark, the floorbeams appear to be missing. They put transverse timbers on top of the bottom chord (like a bowstring) in place of the steel floorbeams.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

So how would the concrete bridge experts classify this one? Rigid frame? Curved Tee beam?

Posted December 14, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I believe that the apparent lack of bottom chords is actually an optical illusion. From what I can tell, the bridge appears to have bottom chords but it appears to be missing its deck stringers.

I cannot say for certain that the bottom chords are the original bottom chords, but I am operating under the assumption that they are original.

I am very interested to know what the plaque says. It might give us more information that could be useful in interpreting the Dinner Creek Bridge that I linked in the previous comment.

The loss of deck stringers might reduce the historic integrity slightly but it is certainly not devastating by any means. Bridges did occasionally have deck stringers replaced. Even transverse floor beams get replaced on occasion. On some bridges that get exposed to salt, even the bottom chords have to be replaced. The nice thing about this bridge, is it appears to me the all of the important stuff is there. Overall, this bridge appears to have good historic integrity. I am very glad to see that Coffey County made the effort to save this one.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

It has a builder plate but seems to be missing the floor beams and lower chords.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Hey, does anybody on here like bridges? Good, because a Pratt pony truss has surfaced at the Coffey County Historical Museum in Burlington, Kansas. You can see a photograph of it here:

https://www.facebook.com/coffeymuseum/photos/a.2005272466243...

The bridge is very similar to this one:

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/coffey/160977505646/

Further research is needed...

Hats off to Coffey County for saving this bridge! They deserve recognition for a job well done!

Posted December 14, 2017, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I really hope that this bridge was really built by Vikings as its name implies. It certainly looks old enough that it could be true.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Erik Baldwin (chinacat1966 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

My apologies to Mike for claiming this was not the bridge he said it was. I mistook this bridge for a different PC RR one over Duck Creek-same abandoned right of way though. The one I was talking about is north of Whipple OH.

It is in the middle of a farmer's field near the intersection of T 16 and T 315 roads. Here is a picture I took from Google earth of it.

Attachment #1 (application/msword; 4,141,120 bytes)

Posted December 14, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The three spans that are collapsing will be removed in early 2018. However, the swing span will remain in place.

Information from the Milwaukee Road Archives at the Milwaukee Central Library provided some information on this unique structure. The two pony truss spans were relocated from other locations. The 112' span demolished in 2002 was originally located in Oxford Junction, Iowa and built in 1899; while the 96' Span was originally located somewhere else.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Barry (bllauver [at] toad [dot] net)

There might be an interesting story behind this bridge. It appears to have been intentionally half-buried.

Arlington Memorial Bridge (District of Columbia)
Posted December 14, 2017, by Ed Hollowell (erhollowell [at] aol [dot] com)

Another thought.

The 1986 "rehabilitation" was likely when the machinery to open the bridge was disabled. An interesting use of the word rehabilitation, don't you think?

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 14, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

10.) Slippin’ Slab ( 4-27-2017)

11.)

12.)

13.) Bent Piling ( 9-01-2017)

14.) Pumping Iron Bridge ( 1-01-2017)

15.)

16.)

17.) Smoot Ass (10-11-2017)

18.) Economy Guardrail ((1-01-2017)

Posted December 14, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Bridge remains in place as of 2017 aerial imagery..

Posted December 13, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Looks like a late 1880s or early 1890s truss to me..

Arlington Memorial Bridge (District of Columbia)
Posted December 13, 2017, by Ed Hollowell (erhollowell [at] aol [dot] com)

I read the Washington Post story and now understand why such strange language is used. Editing is a lost art in todays news papers. The author said "inoperable" when 'non-operated' or unoperated would have been more correct. So sometime following the closure of the Potomac to high profile craft, the draw bridge was rendered inoperable.

Sloppy writing.

Posted December 13, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I read the article about this bridge being possibly renamed.Seems A lot of people are against the Cuomo name on this bridge.We will see what happens,won't we?

Posted December 13, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This page is going to be a work in progress...this mystery bridge appears to be a straight concrete through girder that was built for pedestrians.

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 13, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

2.)

3.)

4.)

5.)

6.) Egro (therefore) (10-25-2017)

7.)

8.)

9.)

10.) Slippin’ Slab ( 4-27-2017)

11.)

Posted December 12, 2017, by Jeremy (jeremyjhill [at] gmail [dot] com)

Ok, here are a bunch of pictures of both the bridge (from different angles) and the pile of "stuff" that is nearby, being overtaken by vines, rose bushes, and trees. I hope you all find this interesting. Thanks!

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 12, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

6.) Egro (therefore) (10-25-2017)

7.)

8.)

9.)

10.) Slippin’ Slab ( 4-27-2017)

11.)

Posted December 11, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Looks like a Groton Bridge Company bridge to me.

Posted December 11, 2017, by jen (jennyleewh0 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Bridge damaged by hurricane Matthew and is still unrepaired.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Anonymous

While part of the Cedar River Rail Trail, this is actually a former highway bridge. When Washington highway SR-169 was realigned and widened in the early 1990s, 2 railroad bridges were removed, one a through truss bridge similar to Cedar River Trail Bridges #1 and #3 and a through plate girder rail bridge just to the west where the former 2 lane highway passed under the railroad line at an angle. During the road widening project the railroad grade/trail was realigned to allow for the wider highway. To cross the highway, the trail alignment now crosses over this former highway bridge, then loops back under it and the newer wider highway bridge.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The AHR-KC report in sources refers to a court record giving ca.1870 for the build date. We have another nearby: http://bridgehunter.com/mo/cass/camp-branch/

Posted December 11, 2017, by Luke

For posterity, my backing of John's splitting entries argument is based off this https://books.google.com/books?id=BXNJAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA252&dq=e... which shows that only the substructure dates to 1875, and we date by superstructure, not substructure.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Dan Schoenherr (htis2008 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Very recent imagery of the 2nd and 3rd (or 3rd and 4th) bridges here.

http://www.niknaganephotography.com/Rochester-and-friends/i-...

(Posted on Rochester reddit two days ago by the photographer himself.)

My understanding is that this replacement became necessary as a direct result of the shale oil boom in the southern tier and that the NYS/Letchworth State Park officials were not the least bit interested in preserving the old span as a pedestrian walkway at any point in the process.

If you are familiar with this area you just might want to go sniffing around the internet for pictures of it during Hurricane Agnes in 1972; particularly the Middle Falls.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Luke

Historic media refers to the current iteration as the third and mentions it was a reconstruction.: https://books.google.com/books?id=X1E0AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1184&lpg...

Posted December 11, 2017, by Anonymous

Not convinced it was replaced as added to. Not sure though, 4 bridges with additions makes logical progression.

Posted December 11, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I actually think there should be a fourth, the 1903-present structure. If the entire superstructure was replaced in 1903, I would consider it a separate bridge from the 1875 structure. I'm not quite sure why everyone calls the existing bridge an 1875 structure.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

This really should now be split into 3 bridges.

1) Erie RR wood trestle built 1851-2. Burned May 6th 1875

2) Current bridge as of two days ago! opened July 31st 1875 closed December 10th

3) New NS Arch

Posted December 11, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

If the iron was replaced by steel in 1903, wouldn't that indicate the bridge was replaced at this time?

Posted December 11, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Finally visited here, 12-08-17; very well maintained, two track gravel road from MO Rt M south to it. Bridge has new bolts installed. Wing walls & deck are in decent shape.

Posted December 11, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Robert,

This is exactly what I was thinking. these alterations would make sense to reduce a bridge from double to single track.

Posted December 11, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is not far from my dentist in Shelbina, so I visit here somewhat frequently. Shot some video here this visit, bridge is very unique with its' tall sides and picturesque setting.

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 11, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

19.) Bwahahaha tee heee heeeee. Hoo hoo hoooooo (snort!) Bwahahahaha hahaha! (11-28-17)

20.)

21.) Le Herp Derp (1-06-2017)

22.)

23.)

24.) Movie Railing ( 1-15-2017)

25.)

26.)

27.)

28.)

29.)

30.) ASSHTO (4-28-2017)

Posted December 11, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The vertical members are lightweight built-up members which I would anticipate seeing on an 1883 Bridge. The sway bracing is composed of large rolled beams which I would not anticipate on an 1883 bridge.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

For a bridge that was constructed in 1883, this one is very heavy even by railroad bridge standards.

I suspect that it might have had some parts replaced when it was moved. The portal bracing and much of the lateral bracing looks a little heavy for 1883 even though this is a railroad bridge. Railroad bridges often had portal bracing replaced as trains got taller so this would not be a surprising alteration.

Posted December 11, 2017, by Aaron

There was a google maps street view attached to this bridge listing that I just removed. This listing is for a BNSF railroad bridge that’s a bit east of the 2nd street bridge.

Posted December 10, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

According to an annual report from 1883, the bridge was built double track. It appears that it was cut down in 1902 to a single track, including rebuilt portals.

Posted December 10, 2017, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Just added this one. On the view on Google Earth you can see where the abandoned alignment of US 40-National Road crosses a creek with a bridge. Now the old alignments of Nationl Road in this area are usually original arch bridges. So can one figure this out? Is this one of those?

Posted December 10, 2017, by Ryan Hanson (hansonlandscape [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge was demolished and replaced this past summer.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

They look like cruciform outriggers to me. I am curious as to whether the date of Circa 1870 has been confirmed or not. I would expect a Circa 1870 iron bridge in this area to have been a Bowstring. I am not saying that a Pratt truss would not have been built in 1870, but the Bowstring was still the bridge of choice at that time.

In addition, I am not seeing any cast-iron members or cast-iron assemblies that would suggest a Circa 1870 construction date. Overall, this bridge looks more like an 1880s or 1890s bridge to me. It just happens to have some cruciform members which were popular in the 1870s.

If this bridge was in fact built in the 1870s then it would have been extremely significant, but even in 1890s bridge with cruciform outriggers is highly significant and worthy of preservation. Either way, it is too bad that this bridge was demolished.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This looks like an 1880s Wrought Iron Bridge Company product. I am thinking that the date of 1908 is way off. Perhaps that was a rehab date or a move date.

Posted December 10, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Thanks luke.There are composite metals that are used in all kinds of applications.I forgot about wood and metal as in bridges.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Not as noteworthy as some but was intrigued by name Lake Chaubunagungamaug

Posted December 10, 2017, by Luke

Dana is correct. When trusses are referred to as "combination" or "composite", they're referring to the mixed use of timber and metal parts.

Posted December 10, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

You have a good point there,Dana and Kay.Didn't look at it that way.Thanks.

Posted December 10, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

You are right,Dana and Kay.Being from Bucks County I am familiar with Lehigh County.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Believe it may refer defer to composite of wood and metal probably Iron. Will defer to more knowledgeable pontists for definitive answer.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Clark, Lehigh PA county appears to be FULL of small span Tee Beems. Added just a few that I liked. I know they can be debated as to inclusion. PA Concrete workers seem to have put a touch of art into their work 1910s to 1920s.

Posted December 10, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I have a question.I see the word composite used in the pictures of this bridge.I've dealt with composite metals in the past.Is this bridge made out of composite materials?From what I remember composite metals are more than one metal.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Upvote for the unusual railing.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Does photo six show a cruciform outrigger?

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 10, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

31.) MADK (8-23-2017)

32.)

33.) Corrugated Multi Plate (5-08-2017)

34.) Dummy Line (10-18-2017)

35.) Movable up, removeable down (4-10-2017)

36.) Skee-Jawed (10-24-2017)

37.)

38.)

39.) Headache Bar (5-08-2017)

40.)

41.)

42.)

43.)

44.) Poop Quake (1-03-2017)

45.)

46.)

47.)

Posted December 9, 2017, by Anonymous

It seems like this railroad built multiple wooden truss bridges- there is another that is abandoned farther down the line. Who knows, there may have been even more than these two! https://bridgehunter.com/va/cumberland/cartersville/

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

Is this a rare wooden railroad truss? It certainly seems to to me!

Posted December 9, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

'Scuse me, sir. We need the space occupied by your body. We'll make a great digital record of you then dispose of your actual body. You may start speaking....

Posted December 9, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Never can tell. I suggest leaving it up so that someone may be inspired to make a visit and see what it is.

Posted December 9, 2017, by Mike Lasater (mtlasater [at] gmail [dot] com)

The Davis Street Ferry went from Carondelet in St. Louis City to East Carondelet, IL. St. Louis County was not part of the equation.

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 9, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

31.) MADK (8-23-2017)

32.)

33.) Corrugated Multi Plate (5-08-2017)

34.) Dummy Line (10-18-2017)

Posted December 8, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Probably just aprivate frankenbridge then. Delete?

Posted December 8, 2017, by Luke

Historicaerials shows a junkyard on the east bank in the 1960s

Posted December 8, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Mystery Bridge

Posted December 8, 2017, by Matt Lohry

They’re all high-fiving themselves because they “preserved it digitally”!! EPIC FAIL

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Good to know Clark - looked a little off limits, and was essentially told as so, will head up to check out old trail path

Bayonne Bridge (New Jersey)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The Nov 13, 2017 edition of The New Yorker has a nice article on the project.

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

West end leads to Minor Park where you can still see the path worn by wagons heading up the hill after coming through the ford as they moved along the Santa Fe Trail. Not private at all--enjoy.

Posted December 8, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

So, the age old question:

Is it a Kingpost or a Waddell Wannabe? Either way, it is another bizarre paired angle bridge.

Posted December 8, 2017, by Anonymous

New bridge opened to traffic 9-1-17.

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Visited today posted photos of the new urban walkway that has been created along the bridge, the west end quickly dead ends into private land now. Love locks have taken over the railings and other miscellaneous spots all over the bridge there must be thousands of them now. Fresh coat of paint, looking good, great attraction for the county and Minor Park.....Mr. Truman would be proud still

Posted December 8, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

This is a real tragedy. Utah has very few historic bridges, and I never knew (nor apparently did anyone on BridgeHunter) that this forest service land had a rare Kingpost pony truss, and I only found out about it because of a news article about its demolition. This is shameful on the part of the Forest Service. A bridge this small and rare should at least have restored and been preserved in a new location.

Posted December 8, 2017, by Jeremy (jeremyjhill [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks for the comments and the information/education. I'll try to get some pictures this weekend and I'll post them back here.

Posted December 8, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The broken plaque on this bridge indicates a post-1910 American Bridge Company structure

Posted December 8, 2017, by Michael Quiet (mquiet [at] gmail [dot] com)

The bridge might already have been removed before '36. It looks like the preferred crossing for the MEC became the current bridge at Fairfield when that was built in 1916, making the crossing in question redundant. I haven't been able to find any info on its fate though

Posted December 8, 2017, by Patrick Schmit

I was unable to find the dimensions online

Posted December 8, 2017, by Anonymous

There seems to have been a bridge upriver, behind the Maine central RR car shops. This photo was taken after the 1936 flood. No mention of the bridge being destroyed by the flood on the website I found it on.

The supports still stand.

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 8, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

31.) MADK (8-23-2017)

32.)

33.) Corrugated Multi Plate (5-08-2017)

Posted December 7, 2017, by Chris Bigham (thebigham69 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Former Wellsvile, Addison & Galeton RR bridge. The railroad was abandoned in 1972.

Posted December 7, 2017, by Chris Bigham (thebigham69 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This bridge has been rebuilt and is now part of the WAG rail trail

Built by the Buffalo & Susquehanna RR circa 1905.

Posted December 7, 2017, by Luke

After finding out about the loss of this bridge, I sought out any info on any other bridges that may have built by this shipbuilder-turned-bridge-builder, and turned up the following:

"Decorah - The contract for constructing 10 I-beam bridges with reinforced concrete abutments was awarded to the Dubuque Boat & Boiler Works, Dubuque, at $14,269"

https://books.google.com/books?id=mONHAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA120&...

Sadly the NBI shows no steel stringers built in 1916, so it seems these disappeared as well.

Posted December 7, 2017, by Luke

"Repairing the bridge could cost somewhere between $80,000 and $190,000 depending on the scale of repairs. Moon said if everything goes perfectly, the repair work could begin in about six months. If not, it could take a year or so.

Replacing the bridge could cost $1.5 million or more. In the best case scenario, it would be 18 months before construction starts on a new bridge, Moon said."

"To Sanders, the county has four options: repair the bridge; start the process of replacing it; acquire the land the bridge is on, which is slightly more expensive than replacing the bridge; or find a way to work with the city of Ames to turn its private road near the water plant back into a public road the county would maintain.

“I don’t particularly like any of those options, but that’s the only four options that I see,” he said"

ttp://www.amestrib.com/news/20171128/supervisors-get-cost-timeline...

Posted December 7, 2017, by smokye joe Frank (smokyejoe [at] hotmail [dot] com)

This bridge is the old bridge to Washington, MS. Never a rr brige. Have deed map of 1848 showing two locations. let me know if you are interested in the deed map.

Posted December 7, 2017, by Anonymous

This bridge, even though it is located where present-day I-195 goes, it did not carry I-195, mostly for the reason that interstates didn't exist until the 1950's, over 60 years after this bridge's demise. If it did once carry an interstate, that would be highly illogical and dangerous!

Top 44 list 2017
Posted December 7, 2017, by Knowa little (Seenalot)

38.)

39.) Headache Bar (5-08-2017)

40.)

41.)

42.)

43.)

44.) Poop Quake (1-03-2017)

45.)

Posted December 7, 2017, by Matt Lohry

Robert,

Very well put; I couldn’t agree more. People from every political affiliation are contributors to this site, but despite those differences, we all have the same thing in common—we love and treasure our historic bridges, and that will never change. Political comments create division, no matter what side you’re on. As I’ve said before, whining about political stuff is what Facebook is for (which I ignore completely, so it doesn’t affect me!); Bridgehunter is not the place for it.

Enon RR Bridge
Posted December 6, 2017, by Just sayin (Grover)

............Rename it Grover Cleveland Bridge!

Posted December 6, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

In some respects I am almost glad when these bridges get closed. Closure is almost a relief given the string of oversized vehicle attacks we've had in the last few years.

This bridge is still public apparently, but in Kansas many bridges like this get transferred to private ownership. Ironically, being transferred to private ownership has probably saved several bridges from demolition and replacement (looking at you Clarks Creek Whipple Truss).

Although these private bridges will eventually collapse, at least the transfer of ownership might buy them a few years or if were lucky a few decades.

The only downside to closure of course is a lack of maintenance. Yet, how many of these old iron bridges are really getting maintained?

Posted December 6, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Status on this one also does need to be changed to "closed"....bit of a rough road approaching from east, and impossible from west, large mound and cave-in as mentioned preventing any possible vehicle crossing, sketchy at best on foot or bike

Posted December 6, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Status does need to changed to "closed" - If you didn't know better you would head in that direction and look at the map and like to cross there, which is very much not possible with road closed on both ends

Posted December 6, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

aaah....good stuff. Love the story.

Posted December 6, 2017, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

The county GIS website doesn't show this road, suggesting that it is private:

https://map.sccmo.org/Main/viewers/desktop/

The old series MoDOT map of St. Charles County does show this road, but uses the dotted line symbol for a private road.

The new series MoDOT map does not show this road:

http://modot.org/newsandinfo/CountyMaps.htm

This bridge is not listed in the National Bridge Inventory.

The Census Bureau's TIGER dataset does not show this road -- which is rather odd since it includes both public and private roads.

Google Maps does label this road as Bastean Road, but I believe that's a mistake. The county GIS map shows another Bastean Road to the east leading to a subdivision, and that is a public road. It appears that Google Map is confused, which is not that unusual.

All signs point to this being a private drive.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Mike Daffron (daffmikron [at] gmail [dot] com)

Agree!!!

Posted December 6, 2017, by George oakley (georgeoakley49 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

As per an article printed in the Reading Eagle cracks were found along with crumbling concrete with exposed rebar.I did report in a prior post about seeing cracks in the bridge.Now comes the fun part.An engineering company will inject penetrating sealant into the cracks.I didn't know this but the cost for this bridge project went over budget by $3.2 million.Luckily PennDOT picked up the cost.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Hey folks. I hate to be critical of edits and contributions on here, but I really think we should keep politicians names out of status updates unless a politician is directly involved with the bridge.

I know there are people on here who don't like president Trump. Likewise, I know there are people on here who are proud supporters of President Trump. That aside, unless president Trump has a bridge named after him, swings a wrecking ball at a bridge, or makes a bridge great again, I really think we should not make comments about him in status updates.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)

Au contraire: This bridge is scheduled to be replaced with another faux pax arch bridge similar to the Grand Avenue Bridge. The old structure will be demolished in 2018 and completion of new bridge is scheduled for 2020. More here: https://urbandsm.com/downtown/locust-street-bridge-replaceme...

Posted December 6, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Last time I was here the sign at Rt P entrance claimed it was a private drive. I have a fellow rail fan who said owner has called county sheriff on anyone on this road. That was 10 yrs ago. Dead end road but pretty sure it is maintained by county. At the north end of this road was a 2nd bridge (at one time) over Big Creek StL&HRR Bridge No. 116, from there the RR went to Owen. Big Creek was a 62' Thru girder w a 13 pile approach on one end and a 12 pile approach on the other.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Private property per the county GIS. Owner contact info can be found there as well.


Page 1 of 394 Next >