Fort Atkinson Bridge

Good to hear it might have a chance. If the county is planning to install a new bridge here, then they should offer the cost of the demolition towards the fee to move it. Not that they will, but I think it would be a great incentive!

The future is looking a bit brighter for this bridge. It may live on on a trail in Lawler area just a short trip from it's current site. Not ideal but better than ending up scrap like to many have!

https://decorahnews.com/news/5286/the-closed-fort-atkinson-b...

Well, I hesitated to post this, but here it is, awaiting Nathan's further input.

https://decorahnews.com/news/4597/the-future-of-the-fort-atk...

They apparently want to get rid of the liability. I'll mark it closed, future uncertain.

Sometimes I cannot stand news reporters. They always get the facts wrong. Some newspaper must have showed up at a county board meeting where the county engineer simply asked the question of the board members: If the Fort Atkinson Bridge MIGHT be available for a POSSIBLE project in Arizona. However it was made clear that by no means was there any intent to move this bridge away from its home if there was a plan to preserve within Iowa. Everyone involved is in full support of preservation in Iowa if the funds and interest is there! Reportedly, Fort Atkinson has considered preservation of this bridge under city ownership and NONE of these inquiries were intended to obstruct the preferred outcome of this bridge being preserved for public use in Iowa. As such this project is still under investigation is my understanding. Also, the statement that the Arizona resident learned of the bridge via BridgeHunter is 100% incorrect, they contacted Bach Steel and through them I approached the county engineer to ask this question. Many other bridges are being considered for this project, which is not even a for-sure thing yet! Reporters need to get their facts straight. Lastly, the cost of "moving" this bridge is NOT considerable, the considerable cost comes from disassembly and reassembly. Shipping is dirt cheap compared to that. Now would someone please explain why I shouldn't get the reporter's salary for writing this paragraph, I clearly wrote a better "article" here than the paid reporter did.

Fort Atkinson bridge may get a new home?in Arizona!

https://decorahnews.com/news/3959/fort-atkinson-bridge-may-g...

One dollar.

At least it would be preserved.

In other decorahnews, dry run trail is getting a modern bridge.

Unfortunately this bridge has been closed. It is still standing.

It's perma-closed.

Did anyone else notice that in Nathan's photos, someone had vandalized the weight limit sign to read "20300 tons"? Hopefully that didn't convince any truckers from driving over it and collapsing it

FYI,

The Fort Atkinson Bridge is one of the bridges we'll be visiting during the 5th annual Historic Bridge Conference which takes place August 9-11. We'll be visiting the bridge while on the first day of the three-day event. If interested in joining us, please contact me at flensburg.bridgehunter.av@areavoices.com.

I believe the bridge will be standing together with the Giliecie Bridge when the tour through Winneshiek County on that day will take place....

JS

Those are cool. I will try to get there.

Ft. Atkinson wants there bridge but you never know.

Julie;

Good to hear that the bridge won't be torn down for replacement. I saw in a previous post of yours that you'd like to find portal decorations like this bridge.

The portal decorations from the Foreston bridge are similar and on display inside Lidtke Mill north of Lime Springs, Iowa, on the Upper Iowa river. Foreston bridge was also built by D.H. Young.

I recommend that any interested bridgehunters visit and take the tour this summer. The tour is inexpensive and proceeds go into upkeep of the historic mill.

See my photo of the portal decorations on this page:

http://bridgehunter.com/ia/howard/forseton/

Don

Section 106 will kick in but they are planning the replacement upstream in order to leave the structure. It is the columns that need the top 8' replaced on all. Talked with the engineer last week. Of course it is always one person that objects to a structure that was there.

Bad news:

http://www.decorahnews.com/news-stories/2013/03/4991.html

WINNESHIEK COUNTY CLOSES TWO MORE BRIDGES

Posted: Tue, Mar 19, 2013 11:43 AM

Two more bridges in Winneshiek County have been closed to traffic because of structural problems.

Bridge #185 on 107th Street in MIlitary Township has been closed due to problems with the bridge's concrete abutments.

Bridge #192 in Fort Atkinson on 150th Street has been closed because of corrosion of bridge materials.

The Winneshiek County Engineer's Office says the two bridges will remain closed until they can be replaced.

Thanks for that input. I should try to research those catalog pages.

D.H. Young went to Iowa State for one year and then started constructing bridges before he became a senator. This is one that is left from what I can tell, and deserves to remain inplace.

The caissons are bad where water got in and expanded and rusted etc, in the top 8 feet. Those portions can be replaced.. The top chord looks good. Would like to find some of those portal decorations.

Yes, towns did just buy bridges and assembled what showed up. Pieces were all numbered. The factories built the bridge then took it apart and shipped it. That's one reason that the pin-connected truss did so well for so long: these bridges did not need highly skilled workers to put them together.

So yes, there would be a catalog too, probably with extra cost options like decorations and so forth.

One bridge down my way got put together wrong because the wrong parts showed up ... in 1885!

Questions: the bridge says D.H. Young was builder. The other similar bridges are WIBCo. Did they just buy parts and put them together here in Iowa? Was there a catalog?

This bridge is a near twin to the Rockafellows Mills bridge in NJ - http://www.bridgehunter.com/nj/hunterdon/10RQ164/, which is nearly identical to the Fryer's Ford bridge that collapsed - http://bridgehunter.com/ar/conway/fry/; both built by the same company even, and very close in length to this one.

I hope you county engineer can take a hint from the Rockafellows Mills rehab, because that project took a rusty old 3 ton limit bridge and gave back a usable 15 ton limit beauty.

Much discussion going on about the future of this bridge on the Historic Sites of Decorah on Facebook. There is a group of very committed folks up there and they are working on all kinds of projects. It's good to get them engaged in their own projects before they meet the wrecking ball when there is a chance for rehabilitative success. This bridge meets the criteria of Texas, low daily traffic and an alternative route for heavier equipment. There is some rust, section loss, bent eye-bars and rusting on the caissons, plus some scour around them, but those can all be addressed for a fraction of the cost. The engineers sites age of the truss as a reason, Texas engineers say that is never a reason, and that each issue can be addressed.

More will be revealed here.

The letter I sent to the Supervisors today.

Supervisors,

On behalf of the N. Skunk River Greenbelt Association and Workin’ Bridges, we would like to formally announce our interest in procuring the Gilliece Bowstring Bridge (Daley’s Bridge) located in Winneshiek County when it comes up for removal in the next year. We would buy the structure and be responsible during the construction for working with the contractor to remove and dismantle. This bridge requires restoration by completely taking it apart, but it is a rare bowstring and we don’t want another one destroyed.

Although this does not save the county from the expense of removal which should be added to the estimate, it does help the county with not scrapping a resource and provides a public relations win with history buffs, preservationists and historic truss bridge lovers across the nation. They looked with horror at the fact that you allowed another bowstring to be scrapped a few years ago, which is one of the reasons we stepped in on the Upper Bluffton bridge. Allowing Workin’ Bridges into the process sooner, while it goes through the Section 106 process, will allow us to keep the bridge on the National Register of Historic Places, allowing it some potential for grant writing and fund raising. Those were issues that hindered our organization’s progress in working with the Upper Bluffton Bridge. Those issues were addressed in a meeting with the DNR on October 4th. The DNR is going to be working with Conservation Boards across the state to help us help them save their historic resources for other uses. You should be hearing about that soon, if you haven’t already. We are very excited about the prospect that Iowa will be a leader in utilizing our historic resources in a better fashion.

In Texas, where we are restoring an 1885 Pratt truss back to vehicular traffic, the engineers are leading the way to save these bridges. They feel that it makes economic sense when there is a low daily traffic and an alternative route for the heavy farming equipment that is reasonable. We think that the counties in Iowa need to look at bridges this way. For instance, the Ft. Atkinson truss comes up soon for replacement as well, and I would like your county engineer to take another look at the possibilty of saving this truss. The farms in that neighborhood have alternative routes and the City Park could be enhanced with the bridge staying in place and open.

I would like to request that the conversation start on both of these bridges, and I will keep you all up to date with where the Upper Bluffton Bridge, when we will disassemble and where it might go. I have found many concerned citizens in your county who don’t feel they are being heard when it comes to their history and I have told them that NSRGA would step in and try to help, at least with the bridges that we find very historic and very restorable.

Regards,

Julie Bowers

Executive Director

NSRGA / Workin’ Bridges

641.260.1262

jbowerz1@gmail.com

Here's an update from the county engineer: The bridge is not scheduled to come down for another 3 years unless inspections prove otherwise. That means the bridge will be up for awhile however it also indicates that some action will be needed to preserve it for another 50-100 years. If the piers were the problem, they should look at the Kirby-Flynn Bridge in Palo Alto County as it was reconstructed on new piers and was reopened to traffic last year after being closed and sitting abandoned for a decade prior to that. But that's my two cents' worth on this topic. Other examples on how to preserve the bridge should be made open to the public. :-)

JS

This bridge is very similar to a Root River bridge in Forestville, MN, which, ironically, is facing the same substructure issue-even the ornate details are similar to each other.

http://www.bridgehunter.com/mn/fillmore/6263/

Hopefully, the Forestville bridge doesn't meet the same fate...

So if the Caissons are that bad and unable to be repaired.... why don't they jack up the bridge and replace them?

Sure seems a whole lot cheaper than replacing the entire bridge......and I could live with replacing the substructure to save the superstructure.....

Of course the consulting engineers and contractor buddies don't make as much loot........but hey!

I received email from a website visitor who indicated that the county engineer plans to demolish this bridge. He went to the bridge site with the county engineer who indicated that the caissons are failing and need replacement. The county does not plan to relocate or preserve this bridge in any way because they believe the costs are too high.

My on-site observation of this bridge suggested that regardless of caisson deterioration, the bridge's trusses are in a condition comparable to that which they were in when first fabricated. The bottom chord eyebars, typically one of the locations where there is the greatest level of deterioration are in such pristine condition that I could observe groove marks on the eyebar that were a result of the fabrication process, and there are also clearly visible numbers stamped on these eyebars.

http://www.historicbridges.org/iowa/fortatkinson/dscf5992.jp...

http://www.historicbridges.org/iowa/fortatkinson/dscf5968.jp...

Nearly all the cast iron finials, plaques, and portal cresting remains on this bridge.

Here is my page with further photos: http://www.historicbridges.org/iowa/fortatkinson/

I am anonymous from the previous comment.

The interesting factor is that Winneshiek County appears to have done a respectable job preserving most of its truss bridges - until the demolition of the Turkey River Bridge that is.

To list a couple examples: The Freeport Bridge was re-located to Decorah and the Moneek Bridge was placed in the Castalia city park. While these bridges were not preserved at their original location, the moving of these bridges can be thought of a reasonable means of preservation as northeastern Iowa has seen some disastrous floods in recent years.

Furthermore, many truss bridges in the county remain open to traffic and are likely receiving at least some maintenance. This makes the demolition of the Turkey River Bridge, and the uncertain future of the Fort Atkinson and Upper Bluffton Bridges particularly surprising.

Let's see.........we have a beautifully ornate span that is possibly the last example remaining from an obscure regional builder. And to top it off, it is located at the fringe of a city park where it could be easily incorporated and a new span built nearby.

The loss of the Turkey River Bowstring was criminal....hopefully the people of this town will step up so it doesn't happen again.

Just as a heads-up, the county engineer reports this bridge is deteriorating based on recent inspection and will likely come up for replacement soon.