View Information About HSR Ratings
This bridge is one of only three known examples of continuous trusses in Maine that display the appearance of a very long simple span truss supported by piers. In this design, the truss has no "cantilever truss shape." Continuous trusses of this design are also extremely rare nationwide. Each of Maine's three examples of this design are distinctly unique, each employing different truss arrangements. Despite that fact, all three were built at around the same time. It is unknown why there is such a variance in design. The other two bridges are the West Buxton Bridge and the Bar Mills Bridge. Because each bridge is rare, both in Maine and nationwide, and given the unique appearance of each, the preservation of each example should be given a high priority. The Lisbon Falls Bridge is perhaps the most unusual of these three continuous truss bridges.
The Lisbon Falls Bridge has two truss spans (as opposed to the West Buxton and Bar Mills Bridges which have three spans). What is most unusual about the Lisbon Falls Bridge is that it is asymmetrical. The single pier is not located at the center of the bridge; the southern truss span is significantly shorter than the northern truss span. Another unusual feature is the stringer approach span at the northern end. East of the bridge, the road makes an immediate 90 degree turn to the west. To accommodate this sharp turn, the stringer span is flared, being noticeably wider at the northern end than the southern end. This is visible just by looking at the roadway, but is also vivid when viewing the stringers under the bridge. The stringer span passes over an enormous boulder or rock outcropping along the river bank.
The previous bridge at this location is documented in postcards. It consisted of two simple truss spans. Each span rested on an extremely large stone pier that was long enough that is separated the spans, making them look like two bridges. One span was a double-intersection Warren through truss, while the other was a smaller Warren truss. The bridge was destroyed in a flood, and the bridge seen today was the replacement bridge.
Information and Findings From Maine's Historic Bridge InventoryDiscussion of Bridge The 1936, continuous, riveted, Warren thru truss bridge is technologically significant as an early application of the continuous design. The first examples in Maine were for replacements of bridges lost in the
flood of March, 1936. This is one of 25 bridges built by MSHC to replace lost bridges, and it is one of three continuous-design Warren truss bridges built by the commission in 1936-37 as flood replacement bridges. All three early
examples, including #3340 and #3333, are historically and technologically significant. The significance of the bridge is linked to the continuous design. The bridge crosses the river at a 90-degree angle to the highways that
parallel the river. Bridge Considered Historic By Survey: Yes |
This historic bridge has been demolished. This map is shown for reference purposes only.
Coordinates (Latitude, Longitude):
Search For Additional Bridge Listings:
Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within 0.5 miles (0.8 kilometers) of this bridge.
Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within 10 miles (16 kilometers) of this bridge.
Additional Maps:
Google Streetview (If Available)
GeoHack (Additional Links and Coordinates)
Apple Maps (Via DuckDuckGo Search)
Apple Maps (Apple devices only)
Android: Open Location In Your Map or GPS App
Flickr Gallery (Find Nearby Photos)
Wikimedia Commons (Find Nearby Photos)
Directions Via Sygic For Android
Directions Via Sygic For iOS and Android Dolphin Browser
USGS National Map (United States Only)
Historical USGS Topo Maps (United States Only)
Historic Aerials (United States Only)
CalTopo Maps (United States Only)
© Copyright 2003-2024, 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.
