Comments on: Crouch Needs A Covered Bridge, Not Super Span

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:43:18 +0000

I can see it now. A load limit not adhered to (steele bridge in Caldwell) abused routinely and a set of doubles along with a load of logs and splinters in the river.

Next we would have a lawsuit because the load limit signage was not properly placed or of the right color or ???

Build a bridge to witstand modern loads and vehicles or don’t bother.

EDITOR NOTE–We agree. But then dress it up with a cover and lower the 6 foot cement side walls.

By: Muck Raker

Muck Raker — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:03:28 +0000

Because the Guardian so seldom makes a mis-statement, there are precious few nits to pick. However, is it not the MIDDLE fork Payette River that flows under the existing bridge in Crouch?

If not, please accept my most abject apology.

EDITOR NOTE–Muck, you need to get in line. You were the third reader to catch the mistake. We fixed it after #1 called from Crouch.

By: mountain town

mountain town — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:46:34 +0000

A covered bridge is what some folks in Crouch and Garden Valley wanted and proposed in the early phases of the design. It would be a novelty and a point of interest for the community and visitors. Instead the design came back as something you would expect to see on HW 55. As designed, the bridge would have cement walls standing nearly six feet high; making it an eye sore and doing nothing to maintain the look and feel of this rustic mountain town. The design is all about functionality.

This youtube video that was posted on the gvdailynews blog site must have been made with the Crouch bridge project in mind: http://www.strongtowns.org/strong-towns-videos/