Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

County staff to pursue rail‑car repair option for washed Smoky Valley bridge; $15,000 approved for separate low‑water crossing

September 08, 2025 | McPherson County, Kansas


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

County staff to pursue rail‑car repair option for washed Smoky Valley bridge; $15,000 approved for separate low‑water crossing
McPHERSON — County public works staff told the Board of Commissioners on Thursday they will pursue a rail‑car replacement option for a washed bridge on Smoky Valley Road while moving forward with a separate low‑water crossing repair after the board approved a materials purchase.

Dave Montbliss, director of county public works, told the board the county’s active bridge program covers about $89 million in projects and that three federal grant applications were rejected “Friday,” leaving roughly $34 million that would need to be funded from county sources.

Montbliss said heavy rains recently washed out the Smoky Valley bridge and that repairing the existing timber structure would create public‑safety and liability risks — for example, the structure would have to be derated so heavy equipment and emergency vehicles could not safely cross. He outlined four options: a temporary repair (which he advised against), a rail‑car solution, a concrete box culvert, or pursuing alternate access via township roads. He described the rail‑car approach as cutting a tank car and using it as the span and estimated a preliminary design effort would take “a month or two” and cost “probably $40,000 to $60,000,” while a concrete box would likely cost “$90,000 to $100,000” and take longer to design and build.

Montbliss said the county has used rail cars in other locations and that tank cars were available in inventory, but that they are in demand. After questions from commissioners about access for a semi to deliver a tank car and the longevity of a steel rail car versus a concrete structure, the board gave staff a consensus to proceed with studying the rail‑car option and to begin design work until staff “run into a roadblock,” at which point they will report back to the board.

Separately, the board approved a motion to purchase materials not to exceed $15,000 for a low‑water crossing at the location listed in county records as Bridge 257250 (20th and Sioux Road). Montbliss told the commissioners the timber elements at that low‑water crossing washed downstream in the high water and that staff plan to install concrete blocks and a concrete floor, then clear remaining timbers from the drainage path. Montbliss estimated that, if blocks are available, the county crew would need roughly two weeks to complete the work.

During public comment earlier in the meeting, a resident who identified herself as living on Shaw Sioux Road asked the county to address an Eighth and Shawnee Road bridge with limited sight lines and overgrown trees. County staff said they would look at the site and attempt to contact landowners to obtain permission for trimming, noting the county right‑of‑way is limited and past efforts to clear the area had met resistance.

Montbliss repeated that the county will continue to reapply for federal bridge funding when grant rounds are open and that the department is balancing immediate repairs with a long list of aging structures countywide.

The board recorded the purchase of low‑water crossing materials as a formal action (motion approved; vote recorded “Aye” by the commissioners present). The decision to pursue the rail‑car option on Smoky Valley was recorded as a staff direction by consensus rather than a binding appropriation; Montbliss said he would begin design work and return if he encounters constraints or a need for additional funding.

Montbliss also reminded commissioners that bridge program shortfalls and other infrastructure needs are part of the county’s broader capital pressures discussed later in the meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Kansas articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI