Although this bridge had a very low degree of historic significance and aesthetic value, it was more interesting than its replacement structure. Although the date given for this bridge in the inventory is 1950, the concrete pier, and apparent remnants of metal pole railings suggest that this bridge might have been older, or was built to a non-standard plan. This old steel stringer bridge was noted for very large and unusual piers. However the loss of the original railings was a serious detriment to the beauty and historic significance of the structure. However, new bridge/slab, that replaced this bridge also has ugly guardrails, and it has only concrete to form a support system, rather than impressive large steel i-beams. Moreover, the new bridge lacks the large and unusual concrete piers that once distinguished the previous bridge. Considering the condition of this bridge prior to replacement, I see know reason why it could not have been restored, if only to save taxpayer money. The evaluation of the bridge prior to demolition had found the condition of the superstructure and deck to be "fair" and the substructure to be in "satisfactory" condition. These sorts of conditions suggest repair might have been the wiser course of action, and in fact less costly.
|A collection of overview and detail photos. This photo gallery contains a combination of Original Size photos and Mobile Optimized photos in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer|
© Copyright 2003-2019, HistoricBridges.org. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer: HistoricBridges.org is a volunteer group of private citizens. HistoricBridges.org is NOT a government agency, does not represent or work with any governmental agencies, nor is it in any way associated with any government agency or any non-profit organization. While we strive for accuracy in our factual content, HistoricBridges.org offers no guarantee of accuracy. Information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. Information could include technical inaccuracies or errors of omission. Opinions and commentary are the opinions of the respective HistoricBridges.org member who made them and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone else, including any outside photographers whose images may appear on the page in which the commentary appears. HistoricBridges.org does not bear any responsibility for any consequences resulting from the use of this or any other HistoricBridges.org information. Owners and users of bridges have the responsibility of correctly following all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, regardless of any HistoricBridges.org information.