I wonder if this free bridge is long enough to use as the new Four Mile Run Bridge?
Maryland Highway officials hope to sell the Maryland Route 545 bridge over Little Elk Creek in Childs in Cecil County.
The steel pony truss bridge was built in 1932. According to federal highway regulations, bridges that handle 5,000 vehicles or more daily have to be at least 32 feet wide. That's the problem. This one's only 27 feet wide.
It's apparently cheaper and less complicated to just take the bridge apart and sell it than try to widen it.
The span is available for purchase by any city or county government, historic preservation organization, bicycle/trail group, non-profit organization, corporation or individual for reuse at a new location.
Seriously, any suggestions on where in the DC area this bridge could be re-purposed for cyclists? Here's the bridge (and yes, it is on Blue Ball Road - don't be childish...)
View Larger Map


There are several spots along the Glen Echo trolley ROW where there once were bridges that are missing now.
Posted by: Contrarian | January 25, 2010 at 09:06 AM
I thought MD had a budget deficit! The bridge is perfectly good, and is very close to another perfectly good bridge (I-95). The only problem is it is "too narrow." The state never seems to lack money when it comes to cars.
Posted by: Bike curmudgeon | January 25, 2010 at 11:16 AM
The other problem is that it is out of compliance with federal regulations, and that may limit maintenance funding or have some other financial impact. I can imagine the liability the state would have if a fatal crash happened and people sued the state for having an out of compliance bridge in service. Heck, maybe they're replacing it with stimulus funds as a shovel ready project.
Posted by: Washcycle | January 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Another thing with bridges...they may LOOK "perfectly good". But underneath, that may not be the case.
That said...the fact that SHA is offering the bridge for sale suggests that it's not structurally deficient.
Wash: a bridge being "functionally obsolete" (what you suggested was 'out of compliance') does not limit Federal funds. But it does allow for Federal bridge funding to be used for replacement, especially if the bridges sufficiency rating is at or below 50 (where replacement becomes eligible).
Posted by: Froggie | January 25, 2010 at 01:25 PM
Doing a little quick measuring on Google Earth, the length of the bridge appears to be ~101 ft long (measured along the center stripe in the road, where the road surface changes materials).
To cross Four Mile Run is closer to 350 ft, so it doesn't work there unfortunately. But hopefully that measurement helps other realistic ideas take shape...
Posted by: jgabby | January 25, 2010 at 03:36 PM
How free is "free" if we don't know how to move it to our area at a reasonable cost? At 27' wide, this bridge would have to be taken apart and moved in pieces.
When the CCT Rock Creek Trestle was rehablilitated with prefabricated sections in 2002, the sections were limited to be no more than 12' wide because the cost and difficulty of moving started to go up fast for wider sections. So, 12' wide sections were used and a wider "observation deck" was built into the center in place to address concerns that 12' would not be wide enough if it were not broken up with a wider section at midspan.
See http://home.comcast.net/~phyilla1/sstrails/tresstat.html for a photo history of moving those prefab sections into place.
Posted by: Wayne Phyillaier | January 25, 2010 at 04:11 PM
Wayne, I guess it's like they say "there's no such thing as a free bridge." It's not even really free. They're offering to sell it. Then you have to move and reinstall it. So it's more like a discounted bridge.
Posted by: Washcycle | January 25, 2010 at 05:07 PM
see I have this bridge for sale... no really I do!
this is a beautiful bridge for cyclists, I understand the reasoning behind the closure for sure, and bravo to them for not just blowing the thing up.
I hope it gets a nice new home
Posted by: john in nh | January 25, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Does anyone else have the problem that when you open The WashCycle the page automatically jumps down to this Google map image? And it does not load to the correct location anyway?
I don't suppose the webmaster could do something to stop this (the first problem), like getting rid of the image and just providing a link.
Posted by: rdhd | January 27, 2010 at 08:11 AM
I don't see that when I open it. If others do, let me know. I have no idea how to fix it, but I can take the image out.
Posted by: washcycle | January 27, 2010 at 09:40 AM
Interesting. In Firefox and Chrome it behaves properly. But when I open it in IE it does go to the map, though in mine it is on the right place. Weird.
Posted by: washcycle | January 27, 2010 at 09:44 AM