|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any stone structure requires some maintenance to keep it from crumbling back into the earth from which it came. In the case of this bridge I see a short list of types of deterioration that call out for some maintenance action. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some stones appear a small but significant distance off their correct alignment. In one case, not on a top row of the baluster, the stones appear to have been forced out from the interior of the bridge structure. The agent at work here could be freezing and thawing, or perhaps some plant is the culprit. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
A century of the Cottonwood flowing against the bridge foundation appears to have displaced a number of stones. It looks like the stones just fell away. The condition of the foundation below the waterline is unknowable without major work, but is unlikely to be better than the part visible in this image. This image also shows discoloration of the limestone on the arch, most likely due to moisture seeping from the road bed, through the interior fill material. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
One very large stone has taken leave from its position in the southeast wing wall, as though it just fell out. The large stone above where the missing one should be is a mystery in its own right. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
The soft, gumbo bottom land of the Cottonwood River valley could hardly be expected to support a heavy structure like the stone bridge, unless the builders found some bedrock beneath the riverbed. I see signs of serious subsidence in both sides of the northern approach. It has allowed large gaps to open between some of the stones, large enough for a small tree to take root! If you look carefully at this image of the NE wing wall you can see the cut-off stump. |
|
||||
 Subsidence: NE wing wall
|
|
 Subsidence: NW wing wall
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
 Deep rill in road surface
|
We may think of a gravel
roadbed as permanently
pounded down, stationary, and not going
anywhere. However, if a roadbed is made of soils
that are naturally somewhat plastic, the normal
wetting and drying, freezing and thawing, etc., will
cause the road to heave up a bit in a somewhat
irregular way. Combine that with the normal
surface erosion that happens to all gravel roads
and you eventually get a rough, uneven surface
that invites further erosion. |
|||||
|
In the higher parts of the roadbed the material has washed away to the point that arch stones are exposed. You can observe a light band on the balusters just above the road showing that the road material was much higher on the balusters so that it protected the stone from exposure to daylight. It is obvious that a very large amount of road material needs to be replaced. |
 Exposed arch stones
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance needs are well known. |
||||||
|
|
The President of the Chase County Historical Society, Mr. W. E. Laughridge, corresponded with the Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas State Historical Society about the condition of the bridge. He received a reply in June of 1996 to the effect that: ►the Kansas Preservation Alliance, a nonprofit preservation organization, had placed the Clements Stone Arch Bridge on its list of most endangered historic properties in Kansas, and►the Cultural Resources Division intended to send a staff member to ascertain the condition of the bridge. The staff inspection was made and the report was sent to Mr. Laughridge in July of 1996. Some excerpts from the letter follow: |
|||||
|
|
"Visual inspection of the
bridge indicates that some of the
mortar joints between stones have deteriorated and will now
allow moisture to enter the structure. The freeze-thaw cycle
of moisture will continue to erode the joints and could
eventually cause the displacement of stones.
"Some cracking was also evident
in the structure. While the
cracks did not appear to threaten the structural stability, at
this time, continued neglect will only allow the deterioration
to increase. A few stones appear to have shifted and the face
of one stone appears to have split off the arch and rests on
the ground.
"When any property, historic or
not, is left unused, it
becomes forgotten and maintenance is neglected. This bridge
gives the appearance of being abandoned. In this age of
concrete and steel bridge construction, the beauty and
construction of the stone arch bridge is not likely to be built
again. The deterioration that is occurring will only increase
with time and it would be a great loss to the state's cultural
resources to loose this bridge to neglect."
|
|||||
|
|
I say bravo!
But now what? This letter came from the: |
|||||
|
Return to Main Page. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|