Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County approves Bridge 542 programming request; consultant recommends keeping Glasco’s historic bridge closed to vehicles

Cloud County Board of Commissioners · September 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Cloud County approved a $1.23 million programming request to replace Bridge 542; a consultant reported Bridge 8522 (Glasco historic bridge) needs about $440,000 in repairs but should remain closed to vehicular traffic and could be converted for pedestrians with ongoing inspections.

Cloud County commissioners approved a programming request to replace Bridge 542 and heard a consultant’s recommendation about the Glasco historic bridge.

Rod Michaud, Highway/Weed Administrator, presented the Bridge 542 project programming request, describing a $1,231,630 total project with a county share of $85,000 to replace the bridge located 2.8 miles north and 6 miles east of Jamestown on Wagon. Michaud said the replacement would restore access for farmers and landowners and improve safety by increasing the structure’s load capacity and roadway width. The Board approved the request on a motion by Commissioner Ron Copple, seconded by Chairman Michael Cleveland; the minutes record the vote as unanimous.

John Markel of engineering firm Kirkham Michael presented a feasibility study for Bridge 8522 (the Glasco historic bridge), outlining necessary repairs with an estimated cost of $440,000. Markel said the repairs are feasible but that the structure would remain “structurally deficient and in poor condition” and stated, “the bridge should remain closed to vehicular traffic.” He advised that the county could repair the span for pedestrian use, but that annual inspections should continue to ensure it can safely carry pedestrian loads.

The items before the Board were presented as safety and access improvements for rural residents. No timetable for construction or funding sources beyond the county’s $85,000 share for Bridge 542 were specified in the minutes. The consultant’s recommendation to prohibit vehicular traffic on Bridge 8522 is advisory; the minutes do not record a formal vote to change the bridge’s posted status. The Board’s action on Bridge 542 moves the project forward to programming; further steps, including final design and funding authorizations, were not detailed in the meeting record.

The Board’s next scheduled meeting is Oct. 2, 2025.