Closer look
New federal regulations could close some truss bridges
By Brandy Nance
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Lyon County will likely have to make some hard decisions on some of the county’s eight truss bridges.
Because of the Aug. 1 bridge collapse in Minneapolis, truss bridge inspection standards will likely get tighter in the near future. The bridge in Minneapolis was an eight-lane 1,907-foot steel truss arch bridge that carried traffic across the Mississippi River. It was completed in 1967. When the bridge collapsed on the evening of Aug. 1, 13 people died and about 100 people were injured, according to Wikipedia, a Web-based encyclopedia.
Lyon County has eight of the same type of bridge — the truss bridge. Lyon County Engineer Chip Woods spoke about the bridges Monday afternoon saying that a truss bridge has a pair of trusses that make up the rest of the structure. Each part of the bridge is interconnected. Woods said if one part of the bridge fails, the entire bridge comes down. This is what happened with the bridge in Minneapolis.
“Like every bridge disaster it always gets the federal legislature all excited,” Woods said. “They want to come up with more regulations to make us safer.”
Woods said more regulations means tighter inspections, which likely will include ultrasonic testing. Such inspections could cost between $1,000 and $10,000 per bridge depending on the size of the bridge. The bridges most critical in Lyon County include the Warren truss bridge on Road 145 at the west edge of Neosho Rapids over the Neosho River; the overhead truss bridge on Road P north on of Road 140, also known as “Bird Bridge” over the Cottonwood River; a pony truss bridge on Road Y3 south of Road 290 over the Marais des Cygnes River; and a pony truss bridge on Road 335 east of Road A over Bluff Creek.
Woods said three of the four bridges were looked at as candidates for replacement in the last bridge bond issue in 1997. There was a lot of public reluctance to replace “Bird Bridge.” The alternative to leave the bridge in place and relocate the road with a new bridge would cost too much. Replacement of the bridge alone would have cost more than $700,000 in 1997. It would be more than that today, Woods said. Woods said even with federal funds, to replace a bridge like “Bird Bridge” would cost more than $200,000 of county money.
Woods said if a truss bridge is in poor condition counties could be forced to have them inspected every year rather than on a two-year cycle, which might force the closure of some bridges. Saline County did just that recently by closing 22 bridges, 16 of which were truss bridges.
Lyon County Commission Chairman Marshall Miller said the county will have some of the same hard choices to make when it comes to the county’s truss bridges. Three of Lyon County’s truss bridges could cost $10,000 to inspect.
“We’re gonna have to make some hard decisions on bridges,” Miller said. “It’s gonna be very expensive.”
Woods said tighter inspections are in the talking stage at the moment, but that will change. He said one thing that is being kicked around is the possibility of letting counties use federal funds to help cover the cost of bridge inspections. That is not allowed under current law, he said.
“With this increased cost, the (Kansas Department of Transportation) is looking at making a one-time inspection exception,” Woods said.
Woods said Lyon County keeps current on all their bridge inspections. Bridges are inspected during the odd-numbered years. Lyon County has a total of 395 bridges.
“There’s a good number of counties that are not current on their bridge inspections,” Woods said. “But we are.”
glarson (anonymous) says...
County officials have begun referring to the bridge as "Bird Bridge" in official documents. That is the language we picked up.
Gwen Larson
Managing Editor
December 11, 2007 at 12:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weltha (anonymous) says...
I hate to say this but.... I have to agree with greenday. Why would the "County officals" call it the bird bridge? Its really quite embarrassing. That was a horrible and tragic thing that happened there years ago.
December 11, 2007 at 1 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
explorer07 (anonymous) says...
I don't think it matters what we call "The Rocky Ford Bridge", I personally refer to it as "Bird Bridge" because when I say that people from around here know what bridge I'm talking about. I don't think that "shame on county officials" is very appropriate since they probably call it bird bridge for the same reason alot of people do (including myself) !
December 11, 2007 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weltha (anonymous) says...
Doesn't matter its still WRONG!
"I don't think that "shame on county officials" is very appropriate since they probably call it bird bridge for the same reason alot of people do (including myself) !"
If people would call it by the CORRECT name this wouldn't be an issue.
"Calling this bridge by that name is the same as idolizing "Rev" Bird and Lorna Andersen. Personally I would be ashamed to tell a new comer to town why we changed the name of that bridge from a much more deserving one."
TRUE!
Sorry! If the "county officials" said "lets all go jump off that bridge." Would you? Lets all be sheep and follow suite. Bad name, bad memory.
To each his own I guess.
December 11, 2007 at 6:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
midnight_rider (anonymous) says...
This is very interesting to see woods and miller concerned about how much is would cost to even inspect bridges. Makes me wonder if they were that concerned about the cost of adding 3 feet of gravel along road s from the "wonderful" westar plant north to highway 170. Especially when there are rural residents in other parts of the county that can't get a load of gravel for anything. There are roads south of town that have need help for years and woods and virgil morris won't do crap to work on those roads. Makes you wonder who westar is paying under the table on this one. I know this will go pulled for that comment. Oh Well. no one ever said the truth was nice.
December 11, 2007 at 8:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
b3bill (anonymous) says...
Lyon County bridges need inspection like any other bridge. If bridges are in bad shape, they need to be replaced. There is no other choice unless you want to shut down a good part of the county. Just closing a bridge and walking away from it is not acceptable.
Lyon County has reputation from past decades of doing just that, and you don't want to go return to it. "The Schaefer Bridge" over the Cottonwood River west of Neosho Rapids was damaged by a logging truck in the mid/late 60's and it was closed for about 5 years, until the present bridge was built on Road 150 over the Cottonwood. There were many years that "The Lockerman Bridge" and "The Poor Farm Bridge" (also called "The Flatrocks Bridge", I think), both over the Cottonwood, were closed and finally were replaced some years back (mid-1980's?). I think 1 of those bridges was damaged by the '51 flood and never reopened until the '80's. There were also many other bridges back then of various types that became in bad repair and were just closed. It was a terrible inconvenience to all who depended on them.
Lyon County does have a lot of bridges, but has lots of road crossing rivers, creeks, etc. That's the lay of the land and it has to be dealt with, or else just shut most of the rural areas down and move away. That isn't acceptable. Leadership of the County has to understand the bridges are needed, and if inspection is required, it simply has to be done. The bridges were there when any of the Leadership were elected or hired. By taking their positions, they also took on the responsibility of taking care of the bridges. If requirements for bridge inspection is there, they have no choice except to do it. It would set a good example and help the longevity of the bridges if the County gravel trucks weren't overloaded beyond the posted bridge limits.
December 11, 2007 at 9:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bobhornet (anonymous) says...
First, I think Chip Woods has it right--this is another unfunded government mandate that's going to make for headaches in places like Lyon County. So we have eight of these truss bridges--I can guarantee that none of them are almost 2,000 feet long and none of them carry an interstate over a major river! Hopefully saner heads will prevail and we can work out some sort of compromise that will let these bridges stay in operation and keep safely serving the county as they have for so many years.
Second, I have to laugh at some of the people on these message boards, but it must have been a full moon in cyberspace yesterday! I can't believe that people are debating slang names for an old bridge on here. I think we've proven Darwin wrong with this particular message board debate; we aren't evolving--we're "de-volving"!
December 12, 2007 at 8:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
emporian (anonymous) says...
Bob
They may not carry an interstate, but they carry multi ton farm equipment day in and day out. When many of these bridges were built, farm equipment wasnt nearly as big, and the bridges werent designed to carry that kind of load. Can they carry that load...probably.
I am very familar with the bridge on the West side of Rapids. I lived in Rapids all my life. We used to ride our bikes to fish off of it starting at the age of ten. You should be on it when just a pickup gets on it and feel it tremble. Many times in the summer during harvest, a combine or tractor would cross. The motion was so great we would get off the bridge until after it passed. I hope that it isnt closed and is replaced. It is the lifeline that allows many farmers to access teh rich bottomland fields. Can you imagine living in Rapids and having to make a 20 mile trip just to get across the river to your field which is only 2 miles away as the crow flies? It would make it even less feasible for your farming to pay off.
December 12, 2007 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pewter (anonymous) says...
I believe many of you are missing the point here. The bridges need to be inspected, by modern methods, and it may cost $10,000 to do one inspection. Exposure to the elements, floods, and age all contribute to the life span of a bridge. Which would be the lesser cost, $10,000 to find a faulty bridge plus the cost to replace it, or $10,000 to pay for a funeral and still have to pay to replace the bridge? The murder of Sandra Bird was many years ago. The bridge did not cause her death nor is it a dwelling place for her spirit. If you want a memorial to her, a monument company would be happy to put a marker there (for a fee, of course) but I am sure that Sandra Bird would have wanted that consideration instead as a memorial to the church or to a women's shelter which could have saved her from her murderer's hands.
December 12, 2007 at 11:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )