Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Colorado Springs, CO

    Default Doublewide vs Bridge

    Does anyone know the weight limit for this bridge?

    I am guessing it is less than the weight of a doublewide.

    Similar Threads:
    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    Inspection Referral
    "Baseball is like church. Many attend but few understand." Leo Durocher
    Bruce Breedlove

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Santa Rosa, CA

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    I have never seen a double-wide with an attached garage.

    That must have been the worst feeling. "oh, man"

    Department of Redundancy Department

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Charlotte NC

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    If they can get a CO it would be a great location. Sound of running water to lull you to sleep at night and fresh caught trout for breakfast.

    The beatings will continue until morale has improved. mgt.

  4. #4
    Bode Cavallaro's Avatar
    Bode Cavallaro Guest

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    Wow. It would be interesting to know the outcome/methods used to get that house over the river.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    This is a four-years-old RTM incident, not a "double-wide", and was in Alberta, CN.

    The pilings were rotted away at waterline, even if bridge had been designed to handle weight and movement at 4 kMpH - it was not maintained or able to perform at design with rotted pilings.

    The permited approval of the route was initially issued in error by the District's authority (an outsourced privatized contractor).

    Permits and authorities work differently in Canada. The whole debacle was a CF of communications failures for a end-of-week permit issued and a beginning-of-week structure move.; and not verifying and controlling the move, (safety managment) by the SM.

    If anything its another agrument against outsourcing government functions to private for-profit companies; a reminder that reliance on government or its contractors for safety responsibility, liability or enforcement, is at one's own peril; there is no substitute for common sense; and stupid is as stupid does (borrowing from Forest Gump's mother). Check, double check, and triple check. On that same note, thousands if not more operations still in the country on the wrong part of the body - because nobody "takes a moment" and triple checks before the operation begins. Ultimately the SM's resp.).

    You may read (and see much more interesting pictures) more here:

    This was poorly covered in the news, keeps showing up in emails, blogs, etc.; and was better covered by the trade. See International Association of Structural Mover's (IASM) magazine "Structural Mover" December 2007. The clickable link above will provide access to the first part of the article & more photographs.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 07-05-2011 at 11:46 AM.

  6. #6
    James Duffin's Avatar
    James Duffin Guest

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    It looks like it needed a few more wheels on the ground. Looks like it has a well built chassis though.

  7. #7
    Ted Menelly's Avatar
    Ted Menelly Guest

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    A little structural work on that home and it could be a covered bridge.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    St Paul, MN

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    Reminds me of a Frank Lloyd Wright design.
    Minnesota Home Inspectors LLC
    ASHI #242887

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Southern Vancouver Island

    Default Re: Doublewide vs Bridge

    Thanks, HG for the background info.
    It is not a double wide mobile home. If it was, it would have been split in half for the move.
    The house movers supplied the frame and wheels and I'm sure they calculated the weight per axle and would have been fine if the bridge had been up to snuff.

    The driver's first reaction could have been "Ouch, my poor truck!". And it would make a fine covered bridge, but they would need a permit to park it there. I'm sure it was a real headache for a few days before they got it rolling again.

    John Kogel, RHI, BC HI Lic #47455


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts