This bridge is similar in appearance to bridges seen in Chatham in terms of bascule superstructure, but lacks the plate girder approach spans and has a larger main bascule span. This bridge in Wallaceburg does have approach spans, but they are stringer spans, with the unusual detail being that they are supported by timber bents, which is strange given the rest of the bridge is built of concrete and steel. Also, this bridge is a fixed trunnion bridge whereas Chatham is noted for its rolling lift bascules. The Lord Selkirk fixed trunnion design places the motor and pinion on the bascule leaf in the vicinity of the counterweight, while engaging the rack which is placed on the wall of the tail pit. This is the opposite of the more common Chicago design where the motor is located beside the leaf, with the pinion engaging a rack mounted on the leaf.
This bridge is still in operation, as Wallaceburg is visited by recreational boats and such. The bridge is similar to some bascule bridges seen in Chicago, IL that have the trusses (or in this case plate girders) slightly above the road deck, where they also act as guardrails for vehicles, while the remainder of the girder or truss is located below the deck. Among the contractors listed on the bridge's plaque, the prolific Dominion Bridge Company is most notable. The plaque also mentions an A. Sedgwick, referring to the noted Ontario Department of Highways engineer. No consulting engineer is listed on the plaque, suggesting this might have been an in-house design, perhaps under Sedgwick's direction. Given the complexity of designing movable bridges, if this were true, it would add to the heritage significance of this bridge.
Coordinates (Latitude, Longitude):
Search For Additional Bridge Listings:
© Copyright 2003-2022, 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.