Knox Township resident upset with bridge decision (11/16/06)

To the editor:

I'm writing concerning the article in the Nov. 9, 2006 edition of The Star Press (Muncie), entitled "Old truss bridge gets new home, unites Portland parks."

Jay County Engineer Dan Watson stated, "I doubt that we'll replace it (the Division Road bridge) down the road. There aren't that many houses on that road, and it's not a major route."

Well Mr. Watson evidently didn't check that out as there are six homes on (Division) road. Two homes on each end and four homes in between.

They first told us the bridge wasn't safe and would be replaced. Now there are no plans to replace it. When they pulled the truss bridge out and set it in the field there were no visible signs that it was unsafe. For 36 years we have used Division Road and that bridge. The other residents of homes on this road also used it regularly.

Now we have to detour a mile or more to get to Ind. 1. People on the west side of Ind. 1 also used it regularly. When there was work done on Ind. 26 traffic was detoured down Division Road.

The real reason they took the bridge was because they wanted it. I'm sure the families who live on our section of Division Road used it much more than it will be used for bicycles and pedestrians to move from one park to another. It wasn't unsafe where it was.

It's bad enough that our road seems to be at the bottom of the list to get paved with all the money our county is to receive from the leasing of the toll road, let alone we can no longer use the stretch of road that we had before the bridge was closed and taken out.

The only consolation we have is that three families living on this road are named Hudson.

J.L. Hudson

Portland[[In-content Ad]]