County awaits word on pair of closed bridges

Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Having failed inspections last week, Bridge 45 in Jackson Township (left) and Bridge 71 in Floyd Township are both closed indefinitely. County officials are awaiting the full inspection report to learn the extent of repairs needed for each structure. Both bridges were built in 1915.
Banner Graphic/JARED JERNAGAN

Two northern Putnam County bridges have been closed indefinitely after failing inspections last week.

County Highway Supervisor Mike Ricketts reported that engineers had inspected Bridge 45 in Jackson Township and Bridge 71 in Floyd Township on Thursday and decided it was best to close both.

No report is currently available on what it will take to replace either structure.

Built in 1915, Bridge 45 carries County Road 900 East over Big Walnut Creek, a little more than one mile south of State Road 236.

Though they are situated on the Putnam-Hendricks county line, the bridge and road are Putnam County's responsibility to fix, as counties are responsible for roads on their eastern and southern border.

Prior to the closure, the through-truss iron bridge had a 12-ton rating.

Also built in 1915, Bridge 71 is another through-truss iron structure. It carries County Road 500 East over Clear Creek downstream of Heritage Lake. The affected stretch of road runs between 300 North and 375 North.

Prior to the closure, the bridge had a three-ton rating.

It's unclear what course of action the county will take on fixing or replacing either structure until the full report is available.

In the spring of 2017, the county got a similar report on Bridge 187 in Warren Township. However, rather than having to replace the structure or close the bridge permanently, the county was able to fix the 127-year-old structure for less than $50,000.

"We might as well wait and see what the report says," Ricketts said.

Another old bridge, long since closed but still in place, could wind up being a big cost for the county.

Ricketts said he had been contacted by CSX Railroad about Bridge 279 in Madison Township, which at one time carried County Road 600 West over the railroad.

Built in 1909 and closed permanently in 2003, the structure was deemed sound enough to leave in place, but the railroad has other ideas.

Nearby Bridge 278 on County Road 275 South has been handling the traffic for the last 16 years. Ricketts said that bridge will need to be rehabilitated in a few years and plans to apply for it to be a federal aid project.

As part of that project, Ricketts had hoped to procure funding to remove the abandoned bridge. However, federal aid projects take years and CSX may not be willing to wait.

"If they push for us to remove that bridge, there's going to be an extra cost," Ricketts said.

In what should be a much smaller project, part of Bainbridge-Roachdale Road will be closed for a culvert replacement next week.

With North Putnam Schools on spring break, Ricketts said the aim is to have the road closed between 1000 North and 1100 North from March 25-April 1.

Ricketts said Conexco from Brazil will perform the work.

Comments
View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • So if the bridge is sound to stay in place and CSX wants it removed why doesn’t CSX pay for it?

    -- Posted by hometownboy on Tue, Mar 19, 2019, at 8:06 PM
    Response by Jared Jernagan, Assistant Editor, Greencastle Banner-Graphic:
    That is a good question and my short, cynical answer is, railroad companies pretty much do what they want and it's been my observation that localities have no power to argue with them.

    However, I would say that the bridge was deemed sound enough to stay in place 16 years ago. Even with no traffic, the simple process of aging could have changed things a lot. Also, off the top of my head I don't know the date of the most recent inspection of the abandoned bridge, but the most recent I have record of is 2011. Again, that's eight years ago.

  • *

    I love these old iron bridges. How much does it cost to move one? I have some space in my back yard. :)

    I would love for these old bridges to be given new life in community parks. Plainfield, Avon, and even the Amo/Coatesville trail have all kept some of their old bridges for foot/bicycle traffic.

    I don't believe its a matter of the railroad (they are pretty much all govt owned/controlled now) simply doing what they want (in a "what are you going to do about it" attitude) so much as it is old Federal law (still on the books) that gave railroads a lot of authority when it comes to their right-of-ways mostly due to the fact that they were the prevalent mode of transportation of goods (and people) back in the day.

    And Jared is probably right in that simple deterioration by age could cause the railroad to claim that the potential for it collapsing onto their tracks is enough to force the county (who is responsible for the road) to move it. Then the county can either close the road, build a new bridge, or grade it out in such as way as to create a regular crossing (if that would even be possible).

    Railroad history and lore, even locally, is pretty fascinating.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Wed, Mar 20, 2019, at 2:54 PM
  • Jared,bridges are inspected every 3 years. INDOT requirement to stay in Federal Aid (FA) program on bridge replacement. They also pay percentage of costs of inspections. You can find latest results at County Highway.

    -- Posted by kubotafan on Wed, Mar 20, 2019, at 3:09 PM
  • The railroad bridge (279) passes over the railroad and if it collapses, it's a big problem for them. At some point the north half of the concrete bridge was torn down and replaced with timbers. It's in bad shape and needs torn down, if the railroad offers to tear in down the county should accept.

    -- Posted by Ben Dover on Wed, Mar 20, 2019, at 8:13 PM
  • Thanks for the details. My only point is that if the bridge is still passing inspections then the RR shouldn't have any say on if it stays or goes (unless they want to pay for it). If it is a safety issue then I agree that it is the county's responsibility. I just don't want the county getting steamrolled by the RR to spend money if it's not necessary.

    -- Posted by hometownboy on Thu, Mar 21, 2019, at 7:55 AM
  • It's been over a decade but I do remember quite a bit about #45 bridge because I lived by it for a dozen years and my sister and I fought to save this beauty. By the time we got involved the county had already applied for grants on replacing it with a concrete span, and they lied about it. They had also paid approx $120k of tax payers money (not grants) to Beam, Longest & Neff (their 3 amigos) to do the surveys and pre-plan, illegally since they had not gone through the 106 process. They then got caught lying to the EPA and INDOT on the grade of bridge condition and traffic counts etc. The reason for all of this illegal and unethical (common in county politics) conduct it that they wanted to raise the road, span it with a ugly concrete bridge and widen all of Hend/Put county line road. Why? so that semis can zip down the straight road from SR 236 to 36. We got the bridge put on the historic span registry but were warned by Historic Landmarks rep that the county would NOT do upkeep, let it fall into ruin and then replace it. By law they now have to save it but "saving" it means many things like selling it or dismantling and leaving it to rust away in some county owned field, of COURSE they want to sell it, they have listed it before and it probably is again. This road is very short, has maybe a dozen homes, little traffic, no industry and the bridge did not significantly shorten emergency response times. It does however add a beauty and history that compliments the iron bridge at McCloud Nature Park next to #45. Two 100 yr old iron beauties within a few hundred yards of each other is worth saving and for the folks still living out there...the properties next to the bridge will loose significant land and be covered by the lovely riprap rock that adorns our interstate ramps & bridges, car and semi traffic will boom and the intersections at 236 & 36 will become more hazardous. All this bridge needs is to be rehabbed and then have reg maintenance to last another century. Last, that all those millions of people that flock to Parke county says we love all our historic bridges and if they don't need to be taken, esp for politics, then lets take care of them.

    -- Posted by ladyinthewoods on Thu, Mar 21, 2019, at 11:28 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: