How Would You Fix This Bridge?

[bdhsfz6]

Perhaps consider improving that "road" out the back of your property enough that your truck(?) can get out that way if needed. Then keep band-aiding the bridge until its no longer your problem or it washes out completely.

It would be expensive to create a passable road on my property.

This access would only be available on a temporary basis during an emergency. Permission to cross adjacent property is required and the land owner won't permit a permanent ROW.

 

[EarPlug]

Our lawyer says this is not true. It has been tried in court twice and the cases were thrown out by the judge.

On what basis was it thrown out? Is there a different Judge now?

Out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT about this. Bottom line is, depending on the Deeds, it appears this should be a Shared Cost.

if a deeded private bridge fails who is responsible for repairs in Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, responsibility for a deeded private bridge isn’t handled by one simple rule—it depends heavily on ownership, the deed language, and any agreements. But there are clear legal principles that usually apply:

---

1. Default rule: the owner (or benefiting owners) pays​

Pennsylvania law treats private infrastructure (like private roads—and by extension bridges serving them) as the responsibility of the property owners who benefit from or own it.

• State law says a private road must be “kept in repair… at the expense of the property owner… and heirs and assigns”
• If multiple properties use it, each user shares costs proportionally

A private bridge that is part of that access generally follows the same logic:

• If it serves your parcel → you (or all users) are responsible
• If multiple parcels rely on it → costs are shared

---

2. The deed or easement can override everything​

The most important document is your deed (and any easement/maintenance agreement).
It may:

• Assign sole responsibility to one property owner
• Require shared maintenance among multiple properties
• Put responsibility on an HOA or private association
• Be silent (in which case default shared-use rules apply)

Courts in PA will look first at what the deed actually says.

---

3. Government usually is NOT responsible​

• The state or township is only responsible for public bridges/roads
• If it’s truly private/deeded, PennDOT or the municipality typically has no duty to repair it

Exception:

• If the bridge is later accepted as a public bridge, then a county/municipality may take over costs

---

4. If the bridge fails​

If a deeded private bridge collapses or becomes unsafe:

• Responsible party = whoever owns or is assigned maintenance in the deed/easement
• If shared access: all benefiting owners may be legally obligated to contribute
• Any owner can potentially sue others to force contribution if they refuse

---

Bottom line​

• ✔ Private bridge → not the government’s problem
• ✔ Responsibility usually falls on:
  • The owner, OR
  • All properties that rely on it
• ✔ The deed/easement language controls if it says anything specific

---

If you want a precise answer​

These situations can get very fact-specific. If you want, you can paste:

• The deed language, or
• Describe who uses the bridge

…and I can help you interpret who likely pays in your exact situation.

 

[EarPlug]

Even if you can get the other owners legally assessed the cost, getting them to pay up to get the cash for repairs could take years!

 

[paulsharvey]

Our lawyer says this is not true. It has been tried in court twice and the cases were thrown out by the judge.

Yeah, thats generally the case; you have the legal right to access your property across the "road", however, the right doesnt grant the ability, if that makes sense.

My assumption, maybe wrong, there was a "entity" created at the time of the subdivision that "sunset" and dissolved without anything to replace it.

Last home, our HOA, sunset, and dissolved, although the roads were county maintained; there was a weird situation with the paved runway; and they started a voluntary airport cooperation, that you had to join to use those facilities. Ours, there was only a couple community assets; but the big one was a 3500LF asphalt and like 1200 LF grass runway, and some outdoor tie down points. That "asset" has value, but also, whats the cost to repave that runway at say, 25 years, 50 years, 75 years, ect.

Infrastructure... lots of these threads really do tie back to it; and every single Infrastructure item has a lifespan.

Major culverts generally have a design life of 50 years, and minor ones, 25 years, bridges generally 50 years, with a rehab able to extend to about 75 years. However, those lifespan assume routine maintenance. Heck, asphalt roadway, 15-25 years, thats the design life span, if all goes well, and its done well. Poor quality installation, maintenance, or design, reduces those lifespans.

Also, that sounds like a long time; but that means many many subdivisions, communities, condos, ecr built in the 1980s, are rapidly approaching the need for major overhauls, without any real plan, reserves for replacement, ect

On those bridge rehabs; I Dont mean patch and paint; i mean scour repairs, structural rehab; as in spending Real money, often greater then the original price to build it 35-50 years prior.

 

[paulsharvey]

Even if you can get the other owners legally assessed the cost, getting them to pay up to get the cash for repairs could take years!

Thats why I pointed out a actual entity needs to be formed to handle that. Otherwise, one person has to front the money, then sue everyone else to recoup, which could take many years. Likely putting liens on legally homesteaded properties that can't be forced to sell. Meaning the lien just sits there until the property sells, and liens are cleaned up/paid off from the sellers proceeds.

With our OPs age, and the fight, and time involved in that fight; the best option IMO, is try to get a county/city/township to assume maintenance, and they can put a special assessment on each property to bring the crossing upto current standards.

As a note; that $50,000 as a private job, that equals $3.5k/property, will likely Ballon to about $250k or about $18k per property. Not cause im bad mouthing goverment; just there are costs associated with design, environmental, permitting, inspection, ect, that rhe private contractor isnt handling in their bid. They are very unlikely to close the road for the 5 days i mentioned somewhere, which means, temporary detour, pump around, temporary construction easements, utility coordination and or relocation, ect

 

[paulsharvey]

Sorry for the rant; im involved in infrastructure every day, so, I have a couple opinions...

 

[paulsharvey]

Down here in my part of the world; many subdivisions where platted in the 1970s; with virtually no regulation, and now, they exist, but are only now starting to build out. The original developer platted, subdivided, and sold the properties; and closed down. with zero throught to the future, and the local goverment agencies just didnt do anything. Leaving "orphan" roads, easements, deed restrictions, ect.

Large, Large subdivision, Interlachen Lake Estates, literally Thousands of parcels, are like 50x110 ft lots, some smaller; that can't legally build a single family home (meeting well-septic separation, property line set backs, ect), and the roads, although platted, and given to the county as right of way, dont exist.

"Short answer: there isn’t a single clean “official” stat sheet published for Interlachen Lakes Estates—it’s an old, multi-unit platted subdivision from the 1960s–70s, and the data is scattered across county plats. But we can bracket it pretty tightly from plats, lot sizes, and development patterns.
Here’s the most accurate real-world estimate range based on Putnam County plats and typical lot dimensions:
Overall size & parcel count
Total parcels (lots)
≈ 15,000 – 20,000 individual lots
Built in multiple “Units” (Unit 1, Unit 2… Unit 16, etc.), each with hundreds to thousands of lots
Typical lot: ~75 × 125 ft (~0.22 acres) �
Compass
Why the range:
Some units were only partially developed or re-platted
Some parcels have been combined into larger tracts over time
Total land area
Using typical lot size + road/ROW overhead:
Raw lot math:
15,000–20,000 lots × 0.22 acres ≈ 3,300 – 4,400 acres
Add roads, drainage, lakes, rights-of-way:
≈ 5,000 – 7,000 acres total subdivision footprint
That’s roughly 8–11 square miles
Development level (homes vs vacant)
Lots with homes
Estimated 10% – 25% built
So roughly:
1,500 – 5,000 lots developed
Majority are mobile homes or modest site-built homes
Vacant lots
Estimated 75% – 90% still vacant
That’s why you see:
Extremely low land prices
Large amounts of wooded, untouched parcels
Supporting indicators:
Typical listings emphasize vacant land dominance and availability �
islandhomestoday.com
Realtor inventory shows very few homes relative to total lots �
Realtor
Key characteristics driving those numbers
Platted as a mass land-sale subdivision (1970s era)
Designed for:
Vacation lots
Future development (much of which never fully happened)
Infrastructure was minimal → slowed build-out
Bottom line
Metric
Estimate
Total parcels
~15,000–20,000
Total land area
~5,000–7,000 acres
Lots with homes
~10–25%
Vacant lots
~75–90%
Important nuance
These are aggregate subdivision-wide estimates
Individual “units” (like Unit 16, etc.) can vary a lot:
Some pockets are ~50% built
Others are almost entirely vacant
If you want, I can get much more precise by:
�⁠Pulling Putnam County parcel GIS counts
�⁠Breaking it down unit-by-unit
Or �⁠analyzing a specific street/block to see actual build density (useful if you're buying)"

 

[paulsharvey]

As an example, here is where they laid a piece if graph paper across that map, and subdivided into individual residential parcels, and roads straight through a sand-clay pit. Not one big parcel encompassing the existing pit, not a community parcel, not water retention; nope, individual lots, sold to out of state people, for homesites in the bottom of a pit, without any actual road.

 

[WinterDeere]

OP: It may be worth PM'ing your address to someone working in this field, like @paulsharvey, or to an ambitious searcher like @EarPlug, to see what specifics they can dig up in your or neighboring deeds. Not that I mean to sign them up for extra work, but they might be able to figure an angle on this that you have not.

Is your county one of the few in PA who hosts all deeds online? Mine does, which can be enormously helpful in situations like this.

 

[airbiscuit]

Yes, I can access a township road through my back property with a tractor or ATV. Very hard to get a vehicle through though. It would require cooperation from an adjacent property owner, but that shouldn't be a problem.

Am I to understand that your property doesn't extend all the way back to the township road?

 

[dodge man]

One thing you quickly learn when it comes to the law it’s often what you can afford. Yes a judge ruled against getting owners to pitch in and pay. Is that the correct decision? Maybe or maybe not. Is it worth appealing, and if you lose that appeal do you keep going? Sometimes it gets to expensive to get the correct decision.

 

[paulsharvey]

Not a fight for today, but... let say the culvert crossing collapses. OK, DEP (or water management district, or the county, drainage district, ecr), comes are reopens the creek i assume, and goes after the original permittee of the crossing (and their heirs, assignees, ect). Who are they going after? Is it a bankrupt and dissolved development? Or does the creek agency, whatever they are called there, just take it on the chin, and eat the cost?

Down here, pre 1986, either A: it was just wild west, do whatever; or B: there are no real records. So, in FLa, I would have Zero way to look up that original permit. Dont know when Penn started, what their retainment period of those records would be, or where to start.

Point being; it collapses, Someone is reopening the water way, I assume. That someone, if DEP, water management, ect (or their emergency contractor), would come after the responsible party, right. So, who is that responsible party?

Edit; based on some ChatGPT, if the crossing collapsed, and caused sediment, blockage, or erosion issues (it likely would do all 3), under Chapter 105, DEP would likely force the creation of a road authority or force township to take authority. Yes, at that point, it sounds like that agency/commision/township/authority would like do a special assessment on all properties with access rights, make the repair, and charge everyone their 1/14th of probably about $250k.

So, that doesnt sound that bad...

 

[paulsharvey]

Also, in that quick reading, it looks like 1978 is when chapter 105 started, although enforcement was limited early. So, 1978 is Pennsylvania's version of our 1986 FS-14-86 (and its associated other statues). There was also some 1984 stuff here, I believe the forming of the water management districts.

 

[paulsharvey]

And yes... while Chat was open, I did search what the heck a township is... We have nothing similar. We have state, county, and possible city; but not a township. Kinda a weird concept to me. The county is the local goverment for not incorporated areas; but some areas have MSTU/MSBU, Municipal Service Taxing Units/Municipal Service Benefit Units. Basically an area, not incorporated in a city, wants higher level of services, paved internal roads the dont benefit the general population, extra fire stations, ect, the county can give those extra services, but charge a special tax for them. They are pretty limited in their scope, and are a special unit of the county; not seperate.

 

[WinterDeere]

Dont know when Penn started, what their retainment period of those records would be, or where to start.

Given that just about every damn bridge I cross has a date in the 1890's on it, I'd guess sometime about then. I don't know who got a bug up their butt that decade, or if there was just some massive slew of state or federal funding to be spent, but it really does appear our state built more bridges in one decade than they've been able to replicate in the 130 years since.

What's amusing is that, when one of these old bridges is condemned, today it takes us 3 years just to replace the most insignificant creek crossing.

 

[airbiscuit]

Is it possible that if the culvert collapses, the Water Management Agency either clears or orders that the obstruction be cleared?

Then they:

• Declare that a new/repaired crossing is not allowed - the creek must run free
• Allow a new crossing to be constructed after all designs and permits are approved and money is escrowed
• They or some governmental agency takes possession of the road, and builds a crossing
• Or ???

 

[Renze]

Cant you throw an old Bailey bridge on top, and wait for the culvert to collapse from underneath ?

 

[paulsharvey]

Is it possible that if the culvert collapses, the Water Management Agency either clears or orders that the obstruction be cleared?

Then they:

• Declare that a new/repaired crossing is not allowed - the creek must run free
• Allow a new crossing to be constructed after all designs and permits are approved and money is escrowed
• They or some governmental agency takes possession of the road, and builds a crossing
• Or ???

This is pretty much what I read, those 3 options, or force the creation of a road authority, that pays.

So, again, state laws very, but you can't land lock people, and they have to allow "Reasonable access". Reasonable gets a bit, umm, touchy. So, it sounds like there is in theory another way that an access Can be created, that would require easements (or ROW by taking, or a couple options to force), but the creek is not the sole way a road could be built. So, it is Possible they deny the crossing, but I highly doubt it, unless there are "high quality wetlands", endangered species, ect. Creeks, rivers, wetlands are crossed all the time, through a pretty standard permitting process. "pretty standard" likely involves, A an engineered design with PE stamp, a complete storm work up including upto atleast the 100 year storm for the entire basin, erosion controls, diversion plan, and at the end, as-built survey, engineers signed and sealed certificate, and maybe inspection oversight.

Also yes, a new crossing would like be Significantly more expensive if designed, constructed, and inspected to current standards. Probably around $250k; and probably 90 days+ once the design is approved and contract awarded; but like a "fast response" contract to get across temporarily would be issued. I'm "guessing" double 5x5 or 5x6 double box culverts would be the modern solution, with end walls, maybe either riprap or fabriform bank protection, and all that.

 

[WinterDeere]

...force the creation of a road authority, that pays.

...state laws very, but you can't land lock people, and they have to allow "Reasonable access". Reasonable gets a bit, umm, touchy. So, it sounds like there is in theory another way that an access Can be created, that would require easements (or ROW by taking, or a couple options to force), but the creek is not the sole way a road could be built.

This is exactly what I'd been thinking after the last few posts. Letting the current system just fail until it is unuseable might be the OP's best option. He already said there's an alternate path around the creek, which would require an easement onto a neighbor's land. If the bridge fails and 14 properties end up land-locked, believe me... the easement will be forced by the county. Done.

 

[bdhsfz6]

Not a fight for today, but... let say the culvert crossing collapses. OK, DEP (or water management district, or the county, drainage district, ecr), comes are reopens the creek i assume, and goes after the original permittee of the crossing (and their heirs, assignees, ect). Who are they going after? Is it a bankrupt and dissolved development? Or does the creek agency, whatever they are called there, just take it on the chin, and eat the cost?

Down here, pre 1986, either A: it was just wild west, do whatever; or B: there are no real records. So, in FLa, I would have Zero way to look up that original permit. Dont know when Penn started, what their retainment period of those records would be, or where to start.

Point being; it collapses, Someone is reopening the water way, I assume. That someone, if DEP, water management, ect (or their emergency contractor), would come after the responsible party, right. So, who is that responsible party?

Edit; based on some ChatGPT, if the crossing collapsed, and caused sediment, blockage, or erosion issues (it likely would do all 3), under Chapter 105, DEP would likely force the creation of a road authority or force township to take authority. Yes, at that point, it sounds like that agency/commision/township/authority would like do a special assessment on all properties with access rights, make the repair, and charge everyone their 1/14th of probably about $250k.

So, that doesnt sound that bad...

In 1913, when the bridge was built, there was no permit process. When the bridge was widened in 1974, it was done by the farmer, without a permit, when he subdivided the property. The farmer has since passed away and the property changed hands twice since then.

Not sure what would happen if the bridge fails and blocks the stream, or who would be on the hook for a remedy. No question it would take a considerable amount of time to get resolved though. Not something I'm prepared for anyway.