Luzerne County’s outside engineer recently briefed the council on bridges as part of a broader plan to catalog and prioritize work on all 300-plus county-owned spans.
Tom Reilly, president of Reilly Associates in Pittston — the county’s outside engineer — told council during last week’s work session the first phase now completed was categorizing them by length.
Only four crossings exceed 100 feet. These bridges and status updates he provided:
• Nanticoke/West Nanticoke Bridge over the Susquehanna River (2,072 feet)
The county is in the process of selecting an engineer who must come up with three options to address the bridge, which was reduced to a 5-ton weight limit prohibiting access by fire trucks and emergency rescue vehicles.
In addition to $10 million in federal funding allocated through the state for this project, the county has access to a $55 million casino gambling fund established for county infrastructure.
Until a solution is selected and designed, the span must be inspected every six months, Reilly said.
• Water Street (Firefighters’ Memorial Bridge) linking Pittston and West Pittston (1,500 feet)
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation had agreed to assume responsibility for replacing the closed Water Street Bridge because it is part of a bridge bundling that also will replace the nearby state-owned Spc. Dale J. Kridlo Bridge (Fort Jenkins) Bridge.
Reilly said the Water Street project is expected to be bid out in late 2026, so work can commence at the end of that year. This is a hard deadline due to $18 million in federal grant funding earmarked for the project, he said.
• Stephenson Street Bridge, Duryea (268 feet)
This bridge is gated to block public usage because it had been primarily intended to access a private quarry and swampland on the north side of the Lackawanna River, Reilly said. This private property has been purchased by the borough for recreational purposes, prompting interest in keeping a bridge. However, county officials have been advocating the demolition of the bridge because its support abutment has deteriorated and conflicts with a levee-raising project that will protect properties that flooded in 2011. An alternative could be the pursuit of recreational funding for the borough to erect a pedestrian bridge, he said.
Council Vice Chairman Brian Thornton said bridge demolition is the only feasible option because the county does not have funds for a new bridge there and cannot jeopardize the most pressing and urgent need — a public safety levee-raising project.
• “T-336” Bridge over Nescopeck Creek in Nescopeck Township (103 feet)
No issues were raised with this span because it was replaced in 2013, Reilly said.
20- TO 100 FEET
Seventy-five bridges fall in this category.
Bridges longer than 20 feet fall under the state’s bridge management system and must be inspected every six months to two years, depending on their condition, Reilly said.
Reilly said he is rounding up the latest inspection reports to identify those needing moderate and serious repairs as part of the master plan. Maintenance schedules also must be established for all.
His most serious concern in this size grouping involves an unknown number of bridges common throughout the state that were constructed between the late 1950s and 1970s made with precast beams shaped like a box and hollow in the middle. They are “non-composite,” which means they were not structurally connected to the deck poured on top, he said.
When the decks crack, water and salt seep into the boxes, causing the beams to “deteriorate in a way you can’t see when it’s happening,” Reilly said, describing this no-longer-used method as a future liability.
SMALLEST SPANS
The county has 127 bridges with spans ranging from 8 to 19 feet and 93 drainage culverts, Reilly said.
These do not require inspections and are not eligible for federal inspection or repair funding assistance, he added.
Because there is no mandated tracking and inspection schedule, the county has not had a small bridge inspection program in recent years as it did in the past, Reilly said.
Instead, the county has primarily responded on an emergency basis when a hole, blockage or other problem is reported, he said.
“But the right way to do it is to have a regular inspection,” Reilly said.
The upcoming inspection of all small bridges and culverts will set the baseline conditions and document repair and replacement needs, he said.
Those requiring more immediate repairs or replacement will then be inspected every six months, while those in good condition can be inspected less often, he said.
Reilly pointed to the Miller Road Bridge in Exeter Township as an example of one that will have to be addressed when money becomes available.
PRESENTATION FEEDBACK
County Manager Romilda Crocamo told council an ongoing maintenance program also must be established for both bridges and roads.
Work will be performed in five districts.
“We have to commit to it. Otherwise it’s just going to get worse,” Crocamo said.
Reilly said he will return to council with a progress report, which will include a list and priority ranking of all bridges as requested by Councilman Jimmy Sabatino.
Most of the bridges are on municipal roads in rural areas, Reilly noted.
Council Chairman John Lombardo said 300 bridges is a “daunting number,” and the presentation shows progress delineating the spans by type.
“The reality is only a small fraction are large. For the rest, as long as we have a better maintenance schedule, we should be able to manage and address them a little more aggressively and appropriately than we have in the past,” Lombardo said.
When the bridge inspections and assessments are complete, rankings can be made based on a range of factors, including traffic counts and which spans are essential access routes, he said.
“We really have put a lot of emphasis on addressing and repairing this infrastructure,” Lombardo said. “We need a master plan. That’s what it comes down to.”
The post Luzerne County bridge assessment underway appeared first on Times Leader.
