A long but incredibly thorough and comprehensive study of the bridge, including a looks at John Williams Storrs (increasingly rare) work.
Also fascinating to find out that its immediate predecessor was a Briggs Truss
Article on the sale of the Lilac Bridge and the new bridge proposal: http://thebridgehunter.areavoices.com/2016/04/04/lilac-bridg... Bland and tasteless replacement if you ask me...... ;-P
Lots of layers to this onionskin, the spot is/was ripe with bridges, both RR and highway, with a succession of losses to highwater. The highway bridges were often owned/built by two different jurisdictions with the town line running down the middle of the island. Losses and replacement were not always concurrent - No pun intended.
Wooden RR spans were sometimes saved by leaving loaded cars in them in anticipation.
And, after giving LostBridges another look, I found a duplicate entry for the bridge, which has the type (Town), build/loss dates, and a postcard.
Royce mentions a 1920 replacement date on the entry for the successor bridge, so that's where the replacement date came from.
I've not found record of the upper being a Childs, I must have been looking at the wrong LostBridges page when adding it, considering that LostBridges doesn't have info on The Upper Bridge's type either. I'll change it to the generic "Through Truss" right away.
Have you found record that the Upper was a Childs or lost in '20?
Childs are a particular area of interest for me and I'm familiar with the Penacook village in Concord and the town of Boscowen and I've not found the whats and whens for this one.
I saw this old bridge in 1965 on a family trip and was struck by the rest of the bridge's being in place with the westernmost span missing; one doesn't see that sort of thing often. In 1992 I got to stay overnight at someone's farm not far away and checked the bridge out: yes, the spans were still there. A local told me that the westernmost span had collapsed under a too-heavy truck (I thought he told me this happened in 1949!) and the span had never been replaced and the other spans were just blocked off and left in place. The bridge was one-way, traffic in the other direction used a bridge further north. By the late 1990's the remaining spans were rather messily removed. Somewhere I have slides showing this bridge in 1992.
This stretch of track is open and occasionally used by the Conway Scenic Railroad. The bridge is also relatively modern, built as part of a track relocation/restoration project ca. 2002.
It's just a guess.
Well, there certainly was a woolen mill in Lebanon. Is that a "for sure change the bridge name' or an "it might be"?
Lebanon Woolen Mill?
Anyone have an idea of what the LWM stands for here. Was an old mill or foundry. I thought it might be LW Packard but not sure
Bus driver responsible for damage to historic bridge
CORNISH — The driver of a school bus carrying a varsity girls basketball team from southern Vermont is facing charges after the oversized bus struck and damaged the Dingleton Hill Covered Bridge Friday evening.
Police said Allan Henderson, 67, of Brandon, Vermont could be charged with conduct after an accident and violations for driving an overweight and overheight vehicle across the historic wooden span.
The 78-foot bridge, posted at 12,000 pounds and 7-foot-3 inches clearance, was struck on both ends by the bus.
Police Chief Douglas Hackett said the 2013 Freightliner school bus was carrying the Otter Valley Union High School girls basketball team when the driver became lost and crossed the bridge to turn around.
The bus has a 10-foot-4-inch clearance requirement and has a "curb weight" of 31,000 pounds, Hackett said.
"I think what bothers me here is that they knew there was damage and that they didn't report it. It was extremely well labeled and they ignored that," the chief said.
Shortly after the accident was broadcast Monday on a local television channel, Cornish police received a call from the Rutland Northeast Supervisory Union bus transportation department informing police that one of its buses most likely caused the damage to the bridge Friday evening, Hackett said.
The collision smashed through a wooden beam and caused other cosmetic damage to the bridge, built in 1880 by James Tasker of New Hampshire.
Evidence at the scene indicated the vehicle had amber warning strobe lights on it. Pieces of the lights were taken as evidence, police said.
Hackett said he did not know how many students were on the bus at the time of the accident.
He said that while there was a slight chance the overweight bus might have caused the bridge to collapse into the Mill Brook, the driver used poor judgment while crossing the bridge.
"I just don't know why they would even try it. Common sense tells you that the bridge is not meant for a school bus," Hackett said.
Hackett said the town is seeking prices quotes from two bridge repair companies and that an early damage estimate was not available.
RNSU officials could not be reached for comment Thursday.
Truck attack (well, actually a school bus!):
A school bus carrying a girls’ basketball team struck and damaged a historic covered bridge in New Hampshire, police said. Cornish Police Chief Doug Hackett said 67-year-old bus driver Allan Henderson of Brandon, Vt., got lost last weekend trying to find Windsor High School in Vermont. The bus carrying the Otter Valley Girls Basketball Team crossed the bridge and tried to turn around. The bridge, posted at 6 tons and 7-foot-3 clearance, was struck on both ends by the bus, which has a 10-by-4 clearance requirement and a curb weight of up to 15 tons. Police said they are investigating a misdemeanor charge of conduct after an accident and two violations. The bridge is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It was originally constructed in 1882. (AP)
It appears that this section of rail and bridge currently belongs to the New Hampshire Central Railroad. It also appears abandoned, as you can see from this picture of the rail east of the bridge across Dalton Road.
The name of this bridge is actually The Samuel Morey Memorial Bridge.
Thanks luke.I thought you would say that.I saw a deck cover in some of the pictures underneath the rails and ties.Is this from when it was a covered bridge?
It was suspected to be arson: https://www.nh.gov/nhdhr/bridges/p103.html
Thanks guys for all of your responses on the bridge and especially the rail being bent.Was the fire on this bridge naturally caused by a lightning strike or was it arson?Because if it was either it could cause the rail to actually warp because I worked in the metals industry and do know at very high heat steel will do that.I just never expected to see pictures like that.
The rails are bent due to the fire in all probability. Railroaders call this a "sun kink"--in the summertime heat, rails will expand lengthwise, and with no room to expand will cause a bend in the rail. This is an extreme example of such a kink--the fire was pretty hot. Looking closely at photo #6 we can see that spikes and tie plates are missing--pulled out when the rails bent. Remaining spikes are loose. The wheels of a train could never negotiate a bend in the rails like this without derailment.
I am by no means an expert but I have visited that bridge a couple of times and I don't think the bends in those rails were cause by the fire. There doesn't appear to be a sign of fire, severe heat or soot on the top of the ties or rails. The rails are to neatly bent to be an accident. And I doubt the fire moved the spikes over on the ties to correspond with the curves. As well no other parts of the rails over the bridge are bent.
P.S. as stated earlier in the thread this is a duplicate page. I saw a duplicate page alert in the forum last year for this bridge as well.
The cladding was lost to a fire in 1980, the heat from that event also kinked the rails.
I have a couple of questions on this bridge.First,i noticed it is described as a covered bridge which by looking at the pictures it is not.Second in pictures of the bridge the railroad track is bent.doesn't look like normal track.What i'm wondering is how that track got bent like that.Any answers would be greatly appreciated.
This entry is a duplicate of this one: http://bridgehunter.com/nh/merrimack/bh50592/
Your observation is correct Steve, the inset and protruding stones in the fourth and fifth tiers of stonework are coincident with the encased arches in the Woods built double Town which was removed to build the Storrs designed Pratt we know and love. And with the stonework being raised in height for that previous incarnation, these are almost without doubt "Springstones" for those arches.
I wonder if you might be open to my adding your photo (with accreditation) to my history of the crossing? With it being as much about the stonework and its concurrent loss with the removal of the Sewell's Falls and the predecessor bridges that granite carried.
Bridge being removed and no plans for adaptive re-use.
I seriously doubt a lenticular truss like this would be built on a public road in 1910. Also consider details like the composition of the top chord... not using channel and instead angle and plate... thats basically unheard of for such a small top chord in 1910.
I've struggled with the build date myself, but I had opted not to change it due to complications with identifying the bridges date based on my site visits and the lack of any other concrete dates about this bridge. I'm *hoping* at some point someone at the NBI had some sort of fact to base the 1910 number off of, hence my reluctant acceptance of its use.
Chester, I've also seen the suggestion that this bridge was built in 1889 put forth elsewhere, and I disagree with it due to the design elements of the bridge. Essentially, the construction method of this bridge does not fit a '89 model. The additional problem is that the methods do not fit any period from '78-1900 either, hence my hesitation to even try and estimate its fabrication date.
The first clue is the web posts, which are of a parallel configuration and connect to the upper chord on the outside. You'll find these only on models up until 1885. At this point they became tapered with the top narrowing and fitting inside the upper chord, and every example I have seen from 1886 onward to the latest extant example, the 1896 model we have in storage up here in VT, have these. The Delage farm bridge has these, as it should.
The railing also doesn't match that time frame either, and is more reminiscent of an earlier type used. Around '85 these too changed (I'm seems like they did a all around retooling at this time which coincided with the awarding of the 2nd patent on the design) with the box/cross type railing which can be seen in use on examples from the '86 Lenticular Warren truss in Grantville NY through the '99 Pennsylvania truss in Stuyvesant Falls NY. Up through '85 was the larger lattice type railing which we have here, which can be found on remaining examples like the '83 Aiken Street Bridge and, although long gone, the nearby '85 Livermore Falls Bridge had these.
So it’s an early model? Well that doesn’t fit either as there are caveats against that argument. The pins, like most components, also got a change around 1885. Prior to then, the bolt heads themselves were tiny and had a cast iron fitting behind them (I think my best detail shot for one of those can be found on the '82 Bardwells Ferry Bridge page). '85 onward had a large hexagonal nut, and these are found all the way through '99 examples. This bridge, like the Delage Farm uses the later models, and thus does not fit with this being an early example
The upper chord is built up with V lacing, which doesn't necessarily rule out an early production model, but narrows the time frame. Battens were used from the earliest known models until 1882-84 during which time V lacing took dominance (Compare the Bardwell’s Ferry Bridge with the Aiken Street Bridge for instance). An example of how this combination works is the HAER documented, and currently disassembled, Golden Hill Road Bridge, which has both the newer style pins, v lacing on its upper chord, but still has the older parallel web posts
The Endpost is completely foreign and I have no idea what to make of it. It’s not built up like standard ones, being made from I beam sections and containing X lacing (of which there are no other examples). I'm guessing it was a much later fabrication.
The location and size of the Builders plate is a curiosity. It had two, one of opposite ends of the bridge, and was a rectangular form secured by 3 bolts. This doesn’t appear on any other of the remaining examples…those having builders plate being the slightly more stylized ones seen on the Delage Farm Bridge or the older examples from Corrugated Metal Co. which, while rectangular, weren’t in this position.
So as to when this bridge was built…I can only give a few possibilities based on the fact It’s a completely unique and odd juxtaposition of styles and components. While there are no confirmed examples, I have noted that Berlin Steel Construction Co. (The successor to Berlin Iron Bridge Co.) company history states that only around 1911 did they move away from production of Lenticular truss bridges. It might just be a typo, as we have no confirmed examples of these being built by Berlin Construction Co. or even after 1896, but it still opens up the question of whether this could this have been a product of Berlin Construction. The size of the builders plates would match their standard one, as would the date (and that might explain why it doesn’t match anything from the earlier era). Or perhaps this was moved/reconstructed around the time given by NBI, at which point the plates could have been replaced and it was given a fresh set of pins. We do know that Berlin Iron Bridge Co. also resold used bridges during their time, so perhaps this was a the case here and it also received a rehab at that point.
Of course there are several caveats to all of this…the Bridge was rehabbed in 1999 and we have no idea what was changed during that process. And I’ll be the first to admit that we have nowhere near a comprehensive picture of the building practices for these bridges, as we only have a small fraction remaining today of the total output of BIBCo. Perhaps reuse of older components was more common, or certain styles persisted beyond what we can tell from extant examples. However from the evidence available, I think it’s pretty clear that this bridge is not an 1889 production, nor can it be specifically pinned to any date. So thats my rational for letting the 1910 date sit....its a guess on their part, but its just as good as mine on this one.
It looks like the 1910 date came from the NBI and nobody has caught the error. Thanks for catching it. I removed the bad date.
I believe the build date of 1910 is incorrect. While it was almost definitely built by the Berlin Iron Bridge Co., it was more likely built around the same time as the Delage Bridge located a short distance away, in 1889. At any rate, Berlin stopped building lenticulars around 1895; and ceased being in existence in 1900, when it was bought out by the American Bridge Co. Unfortunately the builder's plaque is missing to clear up the mystery.
More information about the planning and construction of this beautiful little bridge can be found here:
I just uploaded some pictures of this beautiful bridge that my wife and I took when we visited New Hampshire from Oregon recently. These were taken on the 18th of July, 2015. We didn't know that it was going to be demolished, there were no signs stating this at the bridge. I'm glad we got to see it, it's a shame that this piece of history is now gone forever.
I have visited this bridge twice this summer of 2015. Work has begun on the approaches. This has brought tree removal that offers a great viewing point from the east side.
My revisit was to get pictures of a feature that I noticed on my last visit but needed a telephoto lens to capture. The center pier looks to have landings for the previous structures arch trusses.
Yes the abutments and pier carried a Childs Brothers built McCallum truss bridge which was lost to high water in '07
Photos of The Rainbow clearly show braces fit to those Spring-stones.
Picture from the East abutment August 23, 2015. Note the pier has pockets near the top than may have been for the trusses of a previous covered bridge span.
Well its scrap metal now. Typical NH approach. Nearly all the Storrs truss bridges have been demolished in a 1-2 year period. So much for local significance!
Very interesting design. Think about how they put the camber in it - especially in 1858... I would think all of those bolted/riveted bars must be slightly different lengths.
Until I see them I can't make an educated guess, it is possible they could have served a brief pedestrian crossing, the reason Moore's Crossing had a sidewalk was because there was no room on the Goff's Falls side for a train to stop at the station, passengers would disembark on the Bedford side and walk to the station - Placed to serve Pine Island Park.
The person tp ask would be Dick Roy, (you linked to some of his photos recently) his knowledge and photo library are extensive, and he lives right there in the city.
This atlas from 1877 appears to show a bridge there. It also shows the railroad nearby to be Concord Railroad.
I don't remember the fire, but I remember this bridge.
This would be categorized both locally and in the trade as a Town with Supplemental Arches (to signify their being added and not original equipment)
Here's what I could find:
Looks like a two-span through truss that became obsolete when the first US 4 bridge opened upstream in 1959 (that bridge was later replaced in 2005). It likely never carried US 4, as that route stayed west of the river through Penacook prior to I-93's construction. However "Hannah Dustin Drive" is likely a newer street name and likely wouldn't have been applicable to this bridge. More likely, it might have served as an extension of Commercial Street from Penacook into Boyce. It appears that the western span was demolished after the new bridge opened in 1959, but the eastern span remained through the 1990s.
I don't know, I think I'm stumped for the moment. Oldest aerial I can find is 1947, and it shows the same concrete remnants in the current photos. It also doesn't show up on any topo maps going back to 1900, but given the concrete construction on the abutments I would say that it's likely a 20th-century construction. If I had to guess, I would say it was a short-lived pedestrian bridge (connecting Pine Island Park to Bedford?) that was either too small to chart on a topo or was created and destroyed before it could ever be mapped by USGS.
I should know, I have deep connections to Goffs Falls, the no longer really existing borough of the city, (a city with many sets of empty piers and abutments) but it's been thirty years since I walked this part of the riverbank.
DS of the RR bridge? Separated by what distance?
I have to respectfully disagree; Photo #5 clearly shows a Howe configuration. Queen post bridges have only 3 panels total; this bridge has 4.
Looks like the Concord Railroad controlled this line from its construction until its 1889 merger with the Boston, Concord & Montreal, after which it was known as the Concord & Montreal RR. The C&M was in turn absorbed by the Boston & Maine in 1895.
Concord Railroad according to
Same railroad as the 1868 successor.
Aeriel view via Bing Maps
Jason, please provide citation and elaboration on your update. What safety reasons? What time schedule? I am curious to know more because this appears to be a pointless demolition and loss of a bridge that is important in New Hampshire Context.
Thanks for the message agreeing with my opinion on this location. I don't remember adding the comment, but at least we finally got the location correct.
Did you arrive at this bridge via the to-do list? I sometimes look for bridges on the list and may have been doing some to-dos when I wrote that message.
Sometimes you find something really interesting on the to-do list. Here is one I was looking to correct (the location information of) two years ago. 8^)
Just saw this from last year-U.S. Route 4 Bridge
Posted March 23, 2014, by Don Morrison
Does anyone agree that this bridge was probably located at 43.643513,-72.112888 instead of where it's presently shown?
Some of the HAER photos were obviously taken from a nearby bridge, and these coordinates are where Rte. 4 crosses the Mascoma in close proximity to one of the many rail to trail bridges in this area.
You are correct with those Coordinates-Royce
Bing maps shows it as Jackson Pond Road, and the Bing imagery has less dense foliage.
Pin was in a weird spot; I moved it to the correct location. The road doesn't show up on Google Maps but does show up on topo maps prior to the 1980s. It does look like the bridge is still there if you really look closely at the satellite imagery.
Seriously?! In the photos, it looks like the counterweight is submerged in the water when raised. Designer of this bridge would be a laughingstock for early 20th Century bridge engineers for failing to provide the basic feature of a counterweight pit for this type of counterweight positioning.
No worries, I think we're both on the same page and working to expand on and accurize the database...
Do know there are existing photos of the multiple incarnations of the Granite Street lost to high water, the challenge is finding one someone has not watermarked or falsely claimed as being copyright protected.
Here's a link to a watermarked shot > https://intownmanch.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/granitestbri...
Now which bridge are we discussing here?
In these two images the Granite Street is barely discernible though can be seen in the extreme distance.
Oh,apologies - It was unclear to me that the listing is for the second bridge in the photographed grouping.
This is a duplicate listing - And I do not know this bridge to have ever been known as the Steam Bridge.
See The McGregor for more photos and background. information.
Here is a higher resolution copy of the photo. And the source material is here http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/hh/item/nh0041/
Now that there are photos, (I live but twenty away and never made it over to shoot any - Thanks R&B) can we maybe move the rendering to the rear, and have an actual image appear when the data page is opened?
My understanding is that Acrow modular bridges are essentially Bailey truss bridges, updated and simplified. They call them the "Third Generation" which I assume means an improvement over the original Bailey M2 Model. Basically Bailey 3.0. From BridgeWeb.com:
The 700XS Acrow Panel Bridging system is the third generation of improvements beyond the original, world-renowned Bailey Bridge. Briefly, the design of the new 700XS System has produced a lighter bridge comprised of fewer components with a truss that is 50% taller than alternate panel bridges and, as a result, 50% stronger in bending and 20% stronger in shear.
Does anyone else thing this looks like an Acrow bridge rather than Bailey?
Unless someone is oppsoed, I'm going to change the RR bridges between Plymouth & Lincoln to PLRR titles instead of NEGS (New England Southern). NEGS has rights to Lincoln but hasn't operated north of the Laconia/Tilton area in many years; the only trains to regularly use these bridges are PLRR tourist trains.
I am in complete agreement with Micheal as to categorizing truss type -
The Bath features an unpatented truss type which was once found in greater numbers in this immediate area.
Though often misidentified as Burr or Haupt variants, the truss is not a variant of either, nor does it share any similarities with a Paddleford other than the curious irony that both share the same home range and both are unpatented.
Would better be described as a Moron Attack.
Work slated for the coming Summer...
This is a fixed-span bridge; the drawbridge in the drawings is further north. I've created an entry for it here: http://bridgehunter.com/nh/belknap/bh66787/
I somehow missed this, (The Banner is a free weekly handed out at Hooksett area markets) or I would've shared it here. I lived in town as a boy, and this bridge is among my earliest memories.
It's been a bad run of news for the remaining Storrs spans of late.
That's nuts! That thing is newer and probably stronger than the Lambertville - New Hope bridge.
Can Nels fix it less than the scrap and replace price?
$11.5 million to rehab this noteworthy historic bridge and only $3.3 million to reduce it to scrap metal and replace it? Were they planning on painting the rehabilitated bridge in 24 carat gold?!
Town council voted to remove it and replace it with a pedestrian / utility bridge. It is in danger of collapsing into the Merrimack River.
I came across a bit of information which had me editing an older blog entry. It also led to the collection of enough information to recently add The McGregor here.
The Blog piece, while more about the history of the crossing than that of The McGregor, it does hold additional information, not seen here on the data page.
For those interested in the history of BIBCO, it also pictures a company advertisement which seems to be the only image of this bridge where its structure can be seen in its entirety.
Of course, since it's a covered bridge, the word "renovations" is appropriate...if it were a metal truss bridge, the word "replacement" would be used instead.
Renovations under way!:
Meaningless inane letters to the editor aside...
There was unfortunate news here today that holds a bit more meaning than the words of someone who cancels out their own opinion by dismissing an entire class of bridges >
Nice work Will! I was unaware of the Briggs truss. Thanks for bringing it to light.
A slideshow of A PP presentation documenting the replication of the Moose Brook given by the parties involved in making this happen at last years 2nd National, has recently been uploaded to the net.
Both photos of the process of recreating the trusswork, (many of them mine) and Vern's work in repairing damaged castings included >
I recently corrected multiple errors on this data page.
Some may have interest in this bridge in that it is the sole recorded example of a no longer existing patent truss type.
Background information including a link to the patent office records can be found here >
Also referred as The shuttle car bridge as it carried heavily laden shuttle cars between industrial sites hence its heavy construction.
Unless it has been recently renovated, I do not believe it is passable for pedestrians.
Very interesting pictures! There used to be a lot of covered railroad bridges on railroads here in the Willamette Valley of Oregon, most of them built between the 1880s and the 1900s, but none of them survive.
Nice work Will.
For those interested in this Wooden Howe Pony, I just shared / embedded a video of the temp removal crane pick on the bridges data page.
The Snyder Brook has been closed for some months, as scour has destabilized one of the abutments. It will be swung off the abutments Friday to await stonework repair and eventual re-emplacement in the coming summer.
Closed to traffic as of December 1st
The city has put up a project website > http://www.sewallsfallsbridge.com/project-overview.html
Not owned by Corps of Engineers, state-owned bridge.
blog post with picture and historic marker description:
I added and corrected some information, and embedded an eighty six year old video clip to the data page, and thought I'd also add a link to this background piece >
Truck attack update:
Another truck attack:
Doesn't sound too bad this time.
FYI - this is over the Amonoosuc, not the Connecticut.
Also, it's great that the NHDOT and the MDOT are making it available for reuse. Both decks(the upper road and the lower railroad) would make great bike paths.
Hmmm... can anyone tell me how that lower raildeck drawbridge works?
BTW just added a street view of it.
Available for adaptive reuse in a new location...
REGARDING BRIDGE AVAILABLE FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE The
REGARDING BRIDGE AVAILABLE FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE The Sarah Mildred Long Bridge on U.S. Route 1 Bypass and Railroad over the Piscataqua River in Kittery, York County, Maine and Portsmouth, Rockingham County, New Hampshire is available for adaptive reuse at a new location. Prior to dismantling, Federal law requires MaineDOT, New Hampshire DOT, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to first offer the bridge to any group that could legally take possession of the bridge and maintain it, provided the group assumes all future legal and financial liability (see 23 USC 144 (5 and 6)). Costs to induce acceptance of the offer of donation may not exceed the cost to dismantle the bridge. FHWA, MaineDOT and New Hampshire DOT will work jointly to determine the most appropriate use of the existing bridge from any proposals received. The National Register-eligible 1940 Sarah Mildred Long Bridge designed by Harrington and Cortelyou is a 27 span, 2804 foot long bridge consisting of a 243 foot long vertical lift span flanked at each end by two 227 foot long warren with vertical deck truss spans. There are seven north approach spans ranging from 70 feet to 90 feet long and riveted Parker thru truss main span and a 96 foot long riveted camelback pony truss approach span. The south approach spans consist of 15 deck girder spans. If the bridge is transferred to another party, the transfer deed may include preservation covenants that require the new owner to preserve and maintain the bridge in accordance with established standards for historic bridges. Interested parties may contact David Gardner at the following address by September 1, 2014: Maine Department of Transportation, Environmental Office 16 State House Station Augusta, ME 04333PUBLIC Notice PUBLIC Notice PUBLIC Notice5103218
Appeared in: Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram on Thursday, 07/17/2014
Concord solicits proposals to reuse Sewalls Falls Bridge elsewhere.
Wood plank sidewalk replaced on this bridge.
Wood plank sidewalk replaced on this span.