So it looks like they transposed the last two digits as 227 instead of the correct 272, then fixed it by changing the second 2 to a 7, making it 277.
Good thing it's not cast in bronze. Oh, wait.
136 + 136 = 277 - 5?
That center pier must be 5 feet wide.
Maybe there's a 5 foot expansion joint.
Could 5 just be a fudge factor?
This was done by PennDOT?
lol. Please explain.
I contacted PennDOT and they are going to look into this issue with the plaque. Kara Russell said this was the first she had seen the plaque and agrees that this needs to be fixed.
It’s also technically a Columbia Bridge Co. product (successors to CBW) but I think that would be splitting hairs as none of the plaques actually said Columbia Bridge Co. The upper plaques are standard CBW like most CBCo. bridges. But both lower plaques are commissioner plaques! Neither are the ‘Successor to...’ plaque.
Just an interesting tidbit to ponder while contemplating math errors,
Regards,
Art S.
Tony,
That’s funny! Sad but funny. I never bothered reading it. I just posted it for completeness.
Regards,
Art S.
I just love it that even with PennDot's feeble attempt to "Memorialize" this bridge by placing a historical marker at the site they screwed it up.
136+136=227?🤔
New bridge open:
http://www.meadvilletribune.com/news/local_news/mercer-count...
Thought this PENNDOT article may be of interest. It is my understanding that Nels Raynor advised both the contractor and PENNDOT how to remove the trusses. Fortunately, the engineer remembered when the contractor forgot...
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/district1.nsf/7...
Thanks for the photosPatrick! Did you introduce yourself to Nels Raynor?
Regards,
Art S.
Coming down soon...
http://m.meadvilletribune.com/meadville/pm_112781/contentdet...
The is a uinque and ornate bridge, I don't know off any others off this style. If the could restore it in 1990 I think they could restore it again. America's future generations need to have beautiful bridges preserved so the can see what the 18 and 1900s were like!!
Don,
Its always been listed as 277. I never measured it but kind of wondered. Wouldn't it be funny if the listed length was wrong... :^)
For me, the big thing was figuring out the build date. When I got started it was listed as 1898. Not only did it seem late, I was pretty sure the company didn't exist by then. Based on the commissioners listed I narrowed it down to an 18 month window during 1888-1889 where they overlapped. I think Nathan, someone on bridgehunter or PENNDOT then found a document that confirmed 1888.
Regards,
Art S.