|Bridge Name||Facility Carried / Feature Intersected||Location||Structure Type||Construction Date and Builder/Engineer|
Auburn Street Bridge
||Auburn Street (PA-267) Over Meshoppen Creek||Meshoppen: Wyoming County, Pennsylvania||Metal 7 Panel Rivet-Connected Parker Through Truss, Fixed and Approach Spans: Concrete T-Beam, Fixed||1934 By Builder/Contractor: Unknown and Engineer/Design: Pennsylvania State Highway Department|
|Main Span Length||Structure Length||Roadway Width||Main Spans||Approach Spans||NBI Number|
|144 Feet (43.9 Meters)||214 Feet (65.2 Meters)||23 Feet (7 Meters)||1||2||650267001001810|
This is a good example of a standard plan truss bridge in Pennsylvania. While it might not currently be rare and significant compared to other bridges in the state, it is worth noting that these bridges are being demolished and the time to pick those that are most feasible to preserve is now, not ten years from now when only a few are left in the whole state. These bridges will become rare if current pro-demolition transportation policies continue to waste taxpayer dollars with the replacement of bridges that could otherwise be rehabilitated. It is also worth noting that this bridge's location in a quaint, small town makes it further worth preserving, since this bridge contributes greatly to the charm of the area.
Information and Findings From Pennsylvania's Historic Bridge Inventory
Discussion of Bridge
The 3-span, 214'-long bridge built in 1934 consists of a 150'-long, rivet-connected, Parker thru truss span flanked by two 32'-long T beam spans. It is supported on concrete piers and abutments. The truss is composed of built-up members for the chords and rolled beams for the verticals and diagonals. The cantilevered sidewalks are finished with standard metal railings. The concrete deck with parapets inside of the trusses was placed ca. 1985. The Parker truss design was developed in the 1870s. Rivet-connected examples have been in common use on Pennsylvania roads since 1900. The design with rolled beam diagonals and verticals was a frequently used state standard from the 1920s to the 1940s. This 1934 example has no unusual or noteworthy features, and it is not historically or technologically distinguished. Neither is it significant for its setting or context.
Discussion of Surrounding Area
The bridge carries a 2 lane state highway with sidewalks over a stream in an area dominated by a mix of late-19th to late-20th century residential and commercial development in Meshoppen borough. At the bridge's southern quadrants are undistinguished 20th-century commercial buildings with replacement siding, windows, and additions. At the northeast quadrant is a late-19th-century vernacular residence that has been converted to a grocery store. At the northwest quadrant is a brick bank building (1929) with replacement doors and windows. The area does not have the cohesiveness or integrity of a potential historic district.
Bridge Considered Historic By Survey: No
Click on a thumbnail or gallery name below to visit that particular photo gallery. If videos are available, click on a video name to view and/or download that particular video.
||A collection of overview and detail photos. This photo gallery contains a combination of Original / Full Sized photos and Mobile/Smartphone Optimized (Reduced Size) photos. Alternatively, view this photo gallery using a popup slideshow viewer by clicking the link below.
Browse Gallery With Popup Viewer
© Copyright 2003-2013, 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 of bridges have the responsibility of correctly following all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, regardless of any HistoricBridges.org information.