Meeting held to discuss bridge replacement

Construction is still several years away, but the engineers and Montana Department of Transportation officials working on the plan to replace Sportsman’s Bridge have already begun accepting public input on the project.

As part of the pre-construction process, the planning group held an informational meeting in Bigfork on the evening of July 14.

The project — which is tentatively set to begin in 2016 — involves replacing the existing bridge spanning the Flathead River on Montana Highway 82. That structure has long been a safety concern for many Flathead Valley residents due to its narrow width.

The road supported by the current bridge is only 24 feet wide with two 12-foot-wide traffic lanes.

“There’s not much you can squeeze into there,” said Shane Stack, who is an MDT pre-construction engineer for the Missoula district. “If you’re a pedestrian, you’re going to have a difficult time getting across comfortably.”

But according to Stack, problems with the existing bridge extend far beyond its lack of space for traffic.

Built in 1955, the 686-foot-long bridge is held up by just two steel girders.

“If we have a failure there, there is no redundant structure,” Stack said. “Any type of failure in one steel girder is more like a complete failure.”

The bridge, last inspected in October 2010, has also been deemed functionally obsolete, meaning it was built to standards that are no longer used.

Still, Stack emphasized that even with its flaws, the current bridge isn’t an imminent threat to public safety.

“It doesn’t mean it’s falling in the river tomorrow,” Stack said. “It’s a perfectly safe bridge.”

During the public meeting, Stack presented three preliminary design options for the project, which will take about two years to complete once construction has started. All three plans include the addition of an 8-foot shoulder on either side of the road, which would increase the overall width to 40 feet.

The first and second options place the new bridge slightly north of the existing bridge. The third option places the new structure to the south of the existing one.

Stack said it would be virtually impossible to build the new bridge in the same place as the old one.

“With this system of beaming, there is no center beam. So we can’t cut it in half and do half at a time,” Stack said. “The only other option is you close the bridge down for two years.”

The project will most likely involve the relocation of utilities such as natural gas lines, Stack said.

“If any utilities are impacted, we will have to relocate them,” Stack said. “It’s actually very normal for us to have to relocate utilities in a construction project. It’s pretty common.”

Citizens who attended the meeting expressed a variety of concerns about the project.

Henry Oldenburg, who lives near the bridge, was worried about the road curves that would be created at both ends of the new bridge due to its position either slightly north or slightly south of the highway.

“I think that deviation will accentuate the danger of an accident,” Oldenburg said.

Oldenburg also suggested the installation of culverts on both sides of the bridge to aid with potential flooding events.

Stack said he and other MDT officials would consider all public suggestions as they continue the pre-construction process, but he also pointed out that the project is still in its very beginning stages.

“Maybe there’s stuff out there that we’re missing, and we want to make sure we’re getting all of the information,” Stack said. “We’re really just getting started on this project.”