Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bridge Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grant County commissioners approve plan to replace Heart River bridge while keeping existing span open
Summary
On April 1, 2026, Grant County Commissioners voted 2–1 to approve alternative B2 for replacing the Heart River bridge about nine miles north of Carson, a plan that keeps the existing bridge open during construction to avoid extended closures and additional right-of-way costs.
Grant County Commissioners voted 2–1 on April 1, 2026, to approve alternative B2 for replacing the bridge over the Heart River, a decision that keeps the current bridge open during construction. The motion was made by Commissioner Marty Meyer and seconded by Commissioner Al Roy Hochhalter; Chairman Alton Zenker voted no.
The vote followed a presentation by John Sauber of Sauber Engineering, who said constructing the new bridge adjacent to the existing span would add about $400,000 in construction costs for road bed work and require acquisition of roughly 3.5 to 4.0 acres of permanent easement. Sauber outlined the engineering and right-of-way trade-offs facing the board as it weighed whether to close the bridge during construction or stage the new work to maintain traffic.
Commissioner Meyer said constructing the bridge to the west and keeping the existing structure open was “the most logical choice,” arguing it would reduce disruption for residents. Chairman Zenker said he would prefer to close the bridge rather than move a new alignment onto private property and require additional right-of-way, saying he would vote accordingly. Riley Dahl of GS Publishing noted that a full closure “would cause additional response times for emergency personnel,” a concern also referenced by the county auditor, who said the area is served by several different response units and mutual aid would need to be used.
The motion to adopt alternative B2 carried with Meyer and Hochhalter voting yes and Zenker voting no. The minutes record no specific construction schedule in this meeting; Sauber Engineering provided the alternatives and cost estimates and will proceed with next steps consistent with the board’s chosen alternative.
The board’s decision balances higher immediate costs and right-of-way acquisition against service disruption during construction; the county did not record a final construction start date in the minutes. The meeting adjourned at 12:45 p.m.
