| Key Facts |
| Bridge Name | Facility Carried / Feature Intersected | Location | Structure Type | Construction Date / Builder or Contractor |
| CR-241 Bridge | CR-241 Over Blanchard River | Rural: Hancock County, Ohio | Metal Pinned Pratt Through Truss, Stationary | 1895 By: Canton Bridge Company of Canton, Ohio |
| Technical Facts |
| Rehabilitation Date | Structure Length | Roadway Width | Main Spans | Approach Spans |
| 1972 | 124 Feet (37.8 Meters) | 15.4 Feet (4.7 Meters) | 1 | None |
This bridge retains excellent historic integrity, including builder plaques, decorative finials, and original railings. The few alterations present on the bridge are minimal and could be corrected as part of a restoration project. For this reason, the CR-241 Bridge is a significant example of the bridge type that was the standard for the late 19th century, the pin-connected truss bridge.
This bridge is having its fate decided in two stages. One stage is a story that highlights the central problem with historic bridge policy and public perception in the United States. The other stage is a story of hope, and sensible efforts on the part of those who are able to see the value of this historic bridge.
The first story revolves around when Hancock County decided that the CR-241 Bridge was in poor condition and something needed to be done to address the problem. Options considered would likely have been rehabilitation, restoration, or demolition and replacement. As many road agencies often do, they quickly shut out the idea of repairing the historic bridge for continued vehicular use, and jumped right to the idea of replacement. However, they were aware that the bridge was historic and people might protest the loss of the bridge. Therefore, they decided the bridge would not be replaced with the normal modern bridge, but instead a modern wooden covered bridge. Replacing historic bridges with modern versions of historic bridges is done often in Ohio. Most often, historic metal truss bridges are replaced with pre-fabricated welded truss bridges that bear little similarity in appearance to the historic bridges. Such actions may represent a forward step in designing modern bridges that actually have an element of aesthetics, but it does not excuse the demolition of historic bridges. However, Hancock County's decision to choose a covered bridge is even worse, because it highlights the corrupted ideas people have on what makes a bridge historic. This nation's historic bridge population has suffered for decades because the average citizen believes that the only kind of historic bridge is a wooden covered bridge. Nothing could be further from the truth, but the fact that agencies like Hancock County see replacing a historic truss bridge with a modern covered bridge as a fair trade only work to make the problem worse.
There is a second part to the story. There may still be hope for the CR-241 Bridge, however, thanks to Vern Mesler, the man behind the restorations of the truss bridges in Michigan's Historic Bridge Park. Vern is working to get the historic truss bridge relocated and preserved in a nearby park setting for non-motorized use. If his efforts are successful, such a project would offset the loss caused by Hancock County's decision to replace the CR-241 Bridge.
