adma
Superstar
As per the plaque above, the Crawford bridge already underwent a deck-and-sidewalks "renewal" in 2004, so I presume that what lay underneath was deemed safe and sound enough--albeit along the lines of wooden rail trestles that still exist under subsequent fill.The bridge is definitely still there, it was just backfilled, like Crawford. Now, what condition either is really in, if you removed the soil is a bit of a question mark. Both would doubtless require restoration.
The interesting thing is that because of that conspicuous railing, the Harbord bridge had a more "palpable" presence post-burial than the Crawford bridge, which (pre-2004) one wouldn't have sensed was there beneath the fill because all surface evidence was obliterated...