Rating:
8 votes

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11x

Photos 

Bartonsville Covered Bridge

Photo taken by C Hanchey in October 2009

Enlarge

BH Photo #147618

Map 

Videos 

Bartonsville Covered Bridge found downstream

Bartonsville Covered Bridge, spanned the Williams River in Lower Baronsville, Vermont. Built in 1870. Destroyed by Hurricane Irene flood 8/28/11. Washed downstream one-quarter mile.

Video From Youtube

Play video on YouTube

Caught on tape: Irene's flooding takes out bridge

Amateur footage provided by Susan Hammond shows flooding from Irene's torrential rain taking out a covered bridge in lower Bartonsville, Vermont.

Video From Youtube

Play video on YouTube

Description 

In 1869, the Williams River flooded and changed it's course. This bridge was built in 1870 to span the new channel.

Tropical storm Irene in caused the river to flood an on 2011 Aug 28 the bridge was washed 0.5 miles downstream. On November 1, 2011 the Rockingham select board agreed to build a new covered bridge at the site. The new bridge opened 2013 Jan 26

Facts 

Overview
Lost covered bridge over Williams River on C3008 (Lower Bartonsville Rd) in Rockingham
Location
Windham County, Vermont
Status
Destroyed by flooding from Hurricane Irene on Aug 28, 2011
History
Built 1870; rehabilitated 1982; destroyed 2011; Replace with a new bridge 2013 Jan 26
Builder
- Sanford Granger of Chesterfield, Cheshire, New Hampshire
Design
Covered Through truss
Town Lattice Truss
Dimensions
Length of largest span: 142.1 ft.
Total length: 157.2 ft.
Deck width: 14.4 ft.
Vertical clearance above deck: 8.5 ft.
Recognition
Posted to the National Register of Historic Places on July 2, 1973
Approximate latitude, longitude
+43.22333, -72.53667   (decimal degrees)
43°13'24" N, 72°32'12" W   (degrees°minutes'seconds")
Approximate UTM coordinates
18/700057/4788562 (zone/easting/northing)
Quadrangle map:
Saxtons River
Average daily traffic (as of 2008)
450
Inventory numbers
NRHP 73000201 (National Register of Historic Places reference number)
WGCB 45-13-11x (World Guide to Covered Bridges number)
BH 34069 (Bridgehunter.com ID)
Inspection report (as of October 2018)
Overall condition: Good
Superstructure condition rating: Very Good (8 out of 9)
Substructure condition rating: Very Good (8 out of 9)
Deck condition rating: Very Good (8 out of 9)
Sufficiency rating: 31 (out of 100)
View more at BridgeReports.com

Update Log 

  • April 4, 2018: New photos from Richard Doody
  • February 17, 2014: New photos from Jack Schmidt
  • November 9, 2013: Updated by Luke Harden: Added builder
  • January 28, 2013: Updated by Fmiser: Expanded description, updated history to mention the new replacement.
  • January 28, 2013: New photos from Robert Myers
  • November 6, 2011: Updated by John Borthwick securevermont.com: Plans to replace with new covered bridge
  • August 30, 2011: New video from Nathan Holth
  • August 28, 2011: Updated by Tony Dillon: Destroyed by flooding from Hurricane Irene
  • October 14, 2009: Updated by C Hanchey: Bridge is known as the Bartonsville Covered Bridge; added NRHP info

Sources 

  • C Hanchey - cmh2315fl [at] yahoo [dot] com
  • Brian McKee - bjmckee51 [at] yahoo [dot] com
  • Tony Dillon - spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com
  • Nathan Holth
  • John Borthwick
  • Dale Travis Covered Bridge List
  • Robert Myers - bob [dot] jeeper [at] yahoo [dot] com
  • Fmiser - fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com
  • Luke
  • Jack Schmidt - jjturtle [at] earthlink [dot] net
  • Richard Doody

Comments 

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11x
Posted September 23, 2020, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

For the record, while iron, steel, concrete, and stone will always interest me more than wood, I would not take the hard line I do with covered bridges if they received equal treatment. Yet after 17 years of running HistoricBridges.org, Indiana may be the ONLY state that has offers a decent balance of preservation (with some exceptions, like Parke County). But then again, Indiana is generally considered one of the top states for bridge preservation in general, and is home to engineers who have a passion for preservation of a variety of historic bridge types, so that's perhaps not a major revelation.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11x
Posted September 23, 2020, by Art S. (Asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Michael & Tony,

Covered bridges should be saved (except for those that offend Nathan :^) ). The reason they are being saved is there is adequate support to do so.

Presently, Nels/Bach is the only full service shop that does metal trusses at reasonable rates. Also, truss bridges look sharp with a fresh coat of paint but are an eyesore to most when they are rusty with pealing paint.

If it becomes more widely known that restoring historic metal bridges can be a viable alternative to replacement, then the rescue/restoration rate will improve.

Regards,

Art S.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11x
Posted September 22, 2020, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Michael,

While I couldn't agree more that metal truss bridges are neglected and mostly disrespected by the vast majority, that's where my agreement ends. Blaming covered bridges for being what they are is like blaming a horse for being a horse. ALL historic bridges deserve equal respect. Unfortunately, it has been more of a battle for equality than what it should be. I was enamored with covered bridges as a teen, when there were so many rusty and unmaintained metal spans around me that I took for granted. After being away for 9 years and returning to find those trusses mostly obliterated, my perspective changed and I felt regret. I have been working for the past 27 years to help promote the preservation of our metal spans. We still don't win them all, but I've definitely witnessed a change here in Indiana. I just wish other states had some of the resources we have been blessed with. Having the largest preservation group in the US, along with a dear friend that has championed their cause for the past 40 years has made a difference. I still visit covered bridges from time to time, and I still respect them for what they are. But my real passion lies with those beautiful iron and steel spans that have survived against much greater odds. And I lament those states that have failed to see just what they are throwing away!

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11x
Posted September 22, 2020, by Michael Taylor (battlebotguy2 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

To be honest, why do we even care about the preservation of covered bridges when the publics focus on them leads them to neglect the beauty of historic steel & iron bridges ultimately leading to demolition of said bridges? I personally despise covored bridges for this exact reason.

The work and money gone into rebuilding this run of the mill covered bridge could have gone into saving a more significant metal span.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted January 29, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

It seems the signs are made from boards recovered from the old bridge. :)

Like Art said, web navigation is easier if the new is on the same page as the old.

But I have been digging some more. The new bridge is longer, wider, higher, and uses laminated lumber for some of the high load components. The abutments are fully modern construction with steel piles to bedrock. So the new one clearly is not an 1870 bridge.

I'm glad they choose to build a timber bridge with the same type truss and similar construction technics - but I'm beginning to think the new one can't be on the same listing as the old one - except as a related bridge.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted January 29, 2013, by Art S (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

An accurate recreation of a bridge recently washed away by a storm is about as good as it gets given the circumstances. If they took a few planks off the old bridge and incorporated them into this bridge, would it be considered a 'restoration' of the original? - that's what the do with old planes. Thus, my first argument is to keep it with the original because it is a bridge built to the original's specs in the original location so there is continuity.

My second argument is keep it together for ease of website navigation.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted January 29, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Why are there five photos of other covered bridges located in other states on this page???

Anyway - since it seems the new bridge at this location is new construction, I'm thinking it should not be a part of this page, bug get it's own new page - if it gets a page at all as it's certainly not historic now!

Thoughts?

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted January 28, 2013, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

On a positive note:

The Bartonsville Bridge was replicated and has reopened:

http://www.wcax.com/story/20714972/historic-bridge-back-open

http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33952

Regards,

Art S.

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted August 29, 2011, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Video footage of the actual washout available here:

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2095508065389&comm...

Bartonsville Covered Bridge 45-13-11
Posted August 28, 2011, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

This one was also lost to Irene