CliffordK

Hmmm...
I'm rather dismayed to see a row of concrete pillars where a majestic train trestle once stood.

https://2wheeltrails.wordpress.com/2...plateau-trail/


26InchSlicks: Crossing Washington On The JWPT - Cow Creek Revisit

And, it looks like a steel structure. I can imagine the wooden decking could have been badly decaying, but I can't imagine the steel structure was in imminent danger of collapse.

No doubt re-decking it would have been expensive, but now that is no longer an option.

How long would that steel and iron stand, even with minimal upkeep? It is mostly desert, afterall.

I just hope that one trestle isn't symbolic of the fate of the rest of the trail.

Next year will be a new year, but I may put that trail on my list of bike tours.

woodway

If the bridge over the Columbia could ever be repaired and reopened, it alone would become quite a draw for the trail. The Cow Creek trestle would be a big bonus.

I've ridden the trail from Rattlesnake Lake down to the Columbia. Next year I am planning the full cross-state trip.

toddles

You did that with balloon tires, right? And it's the Wanapum Dam you cross over now? I'd love to hear/read a first hand report of what that's like.

toddles

Actually this is a great overview of the experience here:

John Wayne Pioneer Trail/Iron Horse State Park Cross-State Tour- Mtbr.com

Black wallnut 

The closest crossing is Interstate 90 bridge, with no shoulder, at Vantage. A few miles to the north. Although I've not been on the trail from Boylston Rd east of Kittitas to the river, I have been across the Vantage bridge on a bike three times. It is a bit sketchy but the traffic has been safe and courteous each time.

toddles

woodway

Mountain Bike with 2.5" tires. I did not cross the Columbia but as mentioned above you cross at Vantage.

CliffordK

Anybody have some good photos of the Columbia RR Trestle?

Any possibility of getting the government to pay for materials, and perhaps some engineering support.

Does the trail cross into Idaho? Perhaps one could push for Federal Highway funds

Maybe one could organize a work crew for a couple of weeks, or maybe a month or so next spring/summer. Oh, is it free flowing water, or dam water?

Certainly one has the catch 22. Nobody uses it since it is not passable. If it was passable, then people might use it. Still, how many people need to use it every year? 365 (one a day)? 1000+ (3 a day)?

CliffordK

This is the Nimrod bride in Oregon (not Washington). A few years ago, it was a popular boating launch site. Recently, I've been looking for good bypass bike routes along HWY 126 from Eugene to HWY 242 (McKenzie HWY). And, this bridge would knock off 5 to 10 miles of highway riding. Unfortunately, I was forced to backtrack a bit.

Apparently someone really didn't want people crossing the bridge.



I suppose, like the Columbia, it wouldn't take that much to do a simple rebuild of this bridge for non-motorized use, but I'm a little stuck with trying to figure out funding (plus, this may be owned by Roseboro Lumber Co). Actually, one might not need the bridge, if two roads that come within about a mile of each other actually connected.

Sorry for being a bit off topic, but the problem is to justify funds specifically for limited recreation activity use, perhaps initially only by a few hundred people a year (until more hopefully find it).

woodway

You can see a photo of the trestle here:

RailPictures.Net Photo: Milwaukee Road Trusses at Beverly, Washington by David Honan

I think it would take more than a couple weeks to get this bridge rehabilitated.

CliffordK

Ahh, Thanks,

I needed the Beaverly Washington link.

It looks like the bridge would be mostly passable, but the western end is in very rough shape for some reason. Almost like 2 different bridges.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Be...d19fa0f99f73b3

Eastern End (Google)


Western End (Google)


Has somebody been stealing wood?

So, if one could get away with just re-decking the western approach for bicycles and pedestrians, then yes, it could probably be done on a budget.

Doing a complete restoration, railings (with bars like prison walls), stripping & painting, then the restoration could cost millions, and take years.

Perhaps one could re-open the bridge, with a long-term rebuild plan.

woodway

I saw a blog post someplace from someone who got past the fence and crossed the bridge. He said that it was a scary experience because all the decking is rotted and he never knew when his next step was going to send him into the river. I'll have to see if I can find it again.

I think that the west end caught on fire two summers ago when wildfire swept through that area. Same fire burned a lot of the small bridges in the Army section of the trail. The bridges have been rebuilt apparently, I've not been through that section for a few years myself. Hope to change that next summer with an end-to-end ride.


In today's litigious environment, there is no way that bridge is opening without a full rehab.

It would be so cool to be able to ride across it...

toddles

If and when they ever open that bridge -- we gonna ride up the mountain on the other side too??

CliffordK

Are MOUNTAIN BIKES designed for the Utah Salt Flats?

Black wallnut 

As noted the bridge suffered damage in a wildfire 2 years ago. I find it interesting that Idaho with a much smaller population than Washington 1.6 v 7.0 million people found the resources to not just rehabilitate a bridge across Lake Coeur d'Alene but also all the bridges on the Trail of the Hiawatha. It's not that Washington doesn't have the funds to do this it is that it is not a priority. Possibly because the trail as it is now gets much more use by horseback riders than hikers or cyclists. I would guess to make the bridge safe for horses would be much more costly and involved.

White_birch

For what it's worth, here's what I wrote to Representative Schmick:

Dear Representative Schmick,

I thought I’d briefly share my story, for what it’s worth. I’m planning a cross-country bicycle ride with my wife and 10-year old daughter in 2017. We’ll go from Delaware to Seattle, trying to hit as many trails as possible. We’ll do the C&W Towpath and GAP from DC to Pittsburgh, the Ohio to Erie Trail across Ohio, the Katy Trail across most of Missouri, parts of the Mickelson Trail in South Dakota, and the Coeur d’ Alene Trail to Plummer, Idaho.

I’d never even heard of the John Wayne Trail until I’d started researching the final leg of my route. I was overjoyed to see that there was this trail that ran all the way from the Idaho border to near Seattle! Then my joy was cut in half when I realized that the eastern part of the trail (east of Ellensburg, I’m told) is only suitable for mountain bikes. I’m still excited about the western part through Iron Horse State Park, but was disappointed to learn that the eastern half is not well maintained for touring cyclists. If it were better maintained, we’d love to travel it!

I was very disheartened to see your attempt to eliminate the JWT altogether. If better maintained, it could be a real destination for families like mine.

Rob Levin

enigmaT120

That's a good letter. I wonder if he'll answer you.

carbonguy1

Note that this is a temporal impossibility: The first picture was taken in April 2015, the second in March 2015. Unless WA Parks is building old trestle bridges The real story is that the first bridge is along the Columbia Plateau trail, the second was along the JWT.

CliffordK

Thanks for correcting me.
Two bridges over the same creek?

FYI: There was an article about the fate of the trail in the Tri Cities Herald a couple of days ago. Interesting to read about current developments.

Rail trail on trial: John Wayne Trail irreplaceable asset for Eastern Washington, advocates say | Tri-City Herald

fettsvenska 

I would like to chime in on this. I live in Spokane and so I hope that my local point of view is worth something. I'm a fairly avid cyclist and own more bikes than a person should. Generally I am very much in favor of extending cycling opportunities. However, in this case I actually agree with Reps. Schmick and Dye (although I don't agree with their methods). The section of the trail that is under consideration is the section that extends east from the Columbia River. The State of Washington has had ample opportunity to maintain the trail and has failed to do so. I also believe that it isn't just as simple as restoring a rail line to a usable hike/bike path. For example, consider the missing bridge over Crow Creek. It is likely that the state only has the rights to rebuild that bridge and may not have the rights to actually build a trail where the bridge once existed. The cost for that bridge alone would be prohibitive. Even if they can build a trail through that stretch, the original end points of the bridge where the bridge abutments are would be very expensive to construct into usable trail. Those areas are almost sheer cliffs and it would be nearly impossible to build any trail there without encroaching on private land. This would imply the state having to invoke eminent domain, which would be highly unlikely for a recreational path. That is just one example of what it would take to do a rail-to-trail conversion for the JWPT.

I wonder if there is some middle ground that could be found. Maybe the segments of the trail that are easier and less costly to maintain could be converted to usable trail and the more difficult segments could be sold to the adjacent land owners. I suspect that the reason that the Iron Horse State Park doesn't include this eastern section is because of the immense cost of both converting it to usable trail and also the amount of maintenance.

toddles

Aye. And don't forget about the exchange for the buck. It's fair to question the amount of money necessary to invest in this infrastructure versus the amount of folks that actually use it?

indyfabz

Not to hijack the thread, but which parts? I rode nearly the entire Mickelson this past June.

CliffordK

I believe Missouri did, in fact, exercise eminent domain to convert the railroad right of way to create a park for trail use. I have no doubt it could be used to revise a few bridge approaches.

Assuming the state owns the land, which it appears to be true, then what I would suggest is giving the landowners indefinate rights to use the land as they see fit, but to forever maintain a road/trail right-of-way and legal ownership of the land, as well as building setback requirements. So, in a century, if one chose to rebuild the trail, then it would already be owned by the government, and one would only have to grade and surface it. In fact, if the base was also maintained as part of the deal with the landowners, then redevelopment would be relatively straight forward. Or, if they wish, offer a 50 year transferable land lease agreement with limitations of redevelopment.

Fortunately I believe that overgrowth would be less of a problem in Eastern Washington than here in western Oregon, but there are still issues with things like river crossings. Not that sage encroachment wouldn't be an issue.

Bridges are a bit of a problem. What is the cow creek plain like? I have troubles imagining anything in Eastern Washington would be a marsh. Does it flood? It probably is a sign that the demands of a bike trail and those of a railroad may be different. The cyclist can live with the occasional 100 foot slope down to grade, and a short bridge across the river. The railroad benefits by keeping elevations uniform. Even in maintaining the bridge, the train trestle would be nice for historical relevance, but impractical on a cost basis.

LesterOfPuppets

Of course, it could be one of those "if you build it, they will come" situations. We'll never know how many people would use it until it's made rideable on anything less than 3" tires. Most of Seattle-Ellensburg is easy with 32mm. I'm not sure how much it would cost to spread a 6' swath of fine gravel and run a steamroller over it, and I'm just guessing that that's all it would take to make most of the Ellensburg-Idaho state line rideable.

I dunno how many people like to ride a long ways on gravel or dirt but I sure do. I'd ride the PCT if it was legal. Sure would be nice to have a network of carfree gravel around the state.

Coolest thing ever would be to have rail-trail all the way to Chicago, but I imagine there are lots of still operational rail on the line, owned my other companies now.

Black wallnut 

Compared to our neighbors I really don't want to hear excuses why our government has not at least maintained the trail, and they have not. North Idaho found the money for both the trail of the Coeur d'Alenes and the Route of the Hiawatha. Traveling through Oregon, granted not broadly, it seems they have made bicycle infrastructure a priority. It is not a matter of can't but a matter of won't or more accurately didn't.

At last night's public meeting everyone with the exception of three landowners, one of which claims ownership for the part that crosses her land, were in support of the state retaining ownership of the trail and all sides working together to make a public space. That said the landowners seem at least willing to talk about the public addressing their concerns as far as litter, weeds and trespass. IMHO the cost is not the issue. In time it will become a non-issue. The state due to their own decisions, which IMHO, have created this problem by mismanaging the valuable resource. Restricting access to by permit only was a dumb way to do it.