HistoricBridges.org Menu: HistoricBridges.org Menu:


We Recommend These Resources:
Bach Steel - Experts at historic truss bridge restoration.
Historic Bridge Finder App: Find Nearby Bridges

HistoricBridges.org: Bridge Browser

Birdsall Bridge

Birdsall Bridge

Primary Photographer(s): Nathan Holth and Rick McOmber

Bridge Documented: July 22, 2012

View Photos
and Videos
View Maps
and Links

Key Facts

Facility Carried / Feature Intersected
River Road Over Ouse River
Location
Rural: Peterborough County, Ontario: Canada
Construction Date and Builder / Engineer
By Builder/Contractor: Unknown

Technical Facts

Rehabilitation Date
1950
Main Span Length
62 Feet (18.9 Meters)
Structure Length
73.5 Feet (22.4 Meters)
Roadway Width
14.4 Feet (4.39 Meters)
Spans
1 Main Span(s)
NBI Number
Not Applicable

Historic Significance Rating (HSR)

Bridge Documentation

This bridge no longer exists!

Bridge Status: Demolished and replaced.

View The Environmental Assessment For This Bridge

View The Statement Indicating Demolition Is Planned For This Bridge

The Birdsall Bridge is an unaltered example of a riveted Warren pony truss. It includes original curbs composed of rolled channels riveted to the truss webs. The bridge's railings are pipe. The Birdsall Bridge crossing dates to at least the 1870s. The existing substructure (abutments) dates to 1930. However, in the 1950s, for unknown reasons, the superstructure of this 1930 bridge was replaced. The replacement superstructure was the existing truss seen today, which was relocated from County Road 2. As such, the original construction date of the truss is not known.

This bridge is apparently slated for demolition and replacement. During the environmental assessment, a "rehabilitation" option was considered for this bridge. However the word "rehabilitation" was used rather loosely in the assessment and the proposed work would only extend the bridge's service life by 10 years. A bridge of the type and in the condition of the Birdsall Bridge should, if the recipient of a proper comprehensive rehabilitation, provide at least 50 additional years of service life. The "rehabilitation" considered in the environmental assessment was in reality only a basic maintenance and repair project. The other alternative considered, demolition and replacement was estimated to cost six times the cost of the "rehabilitation alternative." Had this so-called rehabilitation alternative been properly classified as a "repair" alternative, and a comprehensive rehabilitation alternative considered as well, the comprehensive rehabilitation would likely cost less than replacement but more than repair. Given that this bridge's Average Daily Traffic is a mere 36 vehicles, a less costly comprehensive rehabilitation that would greatly extend the service life, while retaining the heritage bridge (which has a design sufficient for this low volume traffic road) would have been a feasible and prudent alternative.

Divider

Photo Galleries and Videos: Birdsall Bridge

 
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
Original / Full Size Photos
A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery offers photos in the highest available resolution and file size in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
Mobile Optimized Photos
A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery features data-friendly, fast-loading photos in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer
View Video
Westbound Crossing
Full Motion Video
Streaming video of the bridge. Also includes a higher quality downloadable video for greater clarity or offline viewing.

View Maps
and Links

Divider
 
Home Top

Divider

About - Contact

© 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.

Divider