We inspected this bridge a few weeks ago. The water was very high due to heavy rains, so we could not get underneath the bridge (see photo). We are going back next week to finish the inspection.
Inspected this bridge this week. The substructures are rated 3 because the wingwalls have cracked and separated away from the abutments, but this hasn't changed over the past several inspection cycles.
This bridge is still open to traffic. It is posted at 4 tons. The trusses are still in place, but the stringers have been replaced with steel girders, and as such it is no longer considered fracture-critical.
A few photos from the inspection today.
PS means pre-stressed right?
Pre-stressed is actually the second term/phrase I thought of that PS could stand for. 8^)
This is Minnesota bridge no. L3462A. It is still on the Nobles County inventory and is open to traffic, although the road from the south is in very poor condition, and the north end terminates in a farmer's field. We are inspecting it this week.
This bridge is gone, replaced earlier this year by a 3-span PS concrete structure.
Even as old as the Eisenhower Bridge is, it still looks better than the UGLY new bridge. The new bridge will be an embarassment to the people who live around here, and who must look at it for the next 60 years or so. PLEASE ... Do NOT build this EYESORE! R-E-D-E-S-I-G-N !!
This is a curious one. Pictures are in the links section. Bridge appeared to have two pony trusses similar to ones recycled railroad spans used:
Any ideas on the main truss build date?
This bridge is gone, replaced by a single span PS concrete bridge (17535) in 2017.
My impression both from being there and from reading about it is that the area was a wetland, and the CCC dug a channel and built up the banks, then built the dam in such a way as to direct the lake outflow into the channel as a way to create a specific place that they could call the Mississippi headwaters, and tourists could visit.
Yes, you can wade across the Mississippi River there, it's knee deep. The dam is low, too much head would probably cause rushing water and unwanted erosion.
Itasca park is a great place to visit. Nature, lots of stone structures, a firetower (not sure if you can still climb it) and you can see Paul Bunyan and Babe at Bemidji (The first city on the Mississippi). 8^)
I have this 100 foot walking bridge that I would like to sell. Located in Westerm MN. Itís 9ft wide and roughly 9 foot tall. Itís in 2 halves right now for moving purposes. Can easily be hauled on a semi. It was built in 1912.
May be available for reuse per forum
We are trying to save this bridge and re-locate it to the Lac qui Parle county park. It would span the Lac qui Parle river.
I added the source James cited to the sources section.
Not much of a dam if the water level is the same on both sides. Just looks like they threw a bunch of rocks in. Oh and the water is only knee deep?
Per the article linked below, this is a CCC dam from the '30s with stepping stones on top to make a pedestrian path.
So basically a dam with pedestrian walkway.Certainly noteworthy for a couple of reasons.
I just added that log bridge, with photos. I also linked it to this bridge as being "Downstream".
Visited this a handful of times over the years; love the Minnesota and Wisconsin north woods.
I think it was actually built as a rock dam, but you could call it a low water crossing or ford, too. Depends on how much water is flowing out of the lake at any time, I guess.
It looks like a guy named Ben Svan waded out into the middle of the Mississippi and took that street view picture. The shadow of a guy holding a camera shows in the water.
Odd that nobody documented the log bridge next to it on BH yet. It's notable. 8^)
I just visited here. Not quite sure how to catagorize this structure. It appears to be part dam and part low-water crossing. The water level in the Mississippi River downstream of this structure is definitely lower than the water level of Lake Itasca, so it is certainly holding the water of Lake Itasca back. You can see that in the photos I just added. We can laugh as intrepid tourists hop barefoot from stone to stone, but this structure is actually fairly significant for controlling the water level of the lake and its flow into the river and eventually into the Gulf of Mexico.
You've got to love the "street view" which is from the river. Apparently Google put its street view camera in a canoe, and went quite a distance downstream.
Just needs funding, either to stabilize or pull. No one seems interested.
Thanks to Nathan for the update. The collapse of this bridge would be one of the worst losses of a bridge since the founding of this website - potentially THE worst.
It probably had the start of a problem for years, but the real serious developments have happened within the past year or two as I understand.
I have never seen this bridge in person. Has the abutment been crumbling for several years or is this a very recent development?
If this bridge is still standing, then it is now the longest historic bowstring span in all of North America. The 225 Foot Blackfriars Bridge in London, Ontario has been so significantly altered that it cannot be called historic anymore. Its basically 99% all-new material now. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-ontario-blackfr...
This bridge was replaced in 2017 by a single-span PS concrete bridge.
According to the Milwaukee Road Archives, this bridge was built in 1913 reusing a railroad span from bridge Z-1154 along the Iowa division.
The more miles I log, the more oddities like this I seem to find. The railroad had their standardized designs, and probably just called it whatever the chief engineer felt like calling it. I will relist this bridge as a stringer, as that seems to be the agreed upon how it functions.
Looking at Photo 8, it's not clear whether there are perpendicular diaphragms between the two middle stringers...if there are not, this could almost be classified as two narrow side-by-side deck plate girder bridges. Either way, when they're spaced evenly like this, they basically act like stringers.
It is a stringer (aka multi-beam bridge) composed of built-up beams. The steel you see perpendicular in between beams are diaphragms. Its possible the railroad loosely classified these as plate girders, but using modern terminology it is a multi-beam bridge.
I was wondering about it. A track chart and a bridge report called this a deck girder, so I assumed that was the proper design.
Looking at photo 8 I'd classify it as a steel stringer. The I-beams appear to be assembled like a plate girder but to me girder suggests two parallel main components with load being transferred to them by beams running perpendicular to the girders.
I'm not used to seeing shallow built-up I-beams like these.
There is a Ghost town not far from Lester Prairie. The town was once called St. George Village MN (Henkeltown).. Garden Ave once lead to St. George and all that remains today is the bridge. Located at 44į50'44.3"N 94į09'05.5"W.. The town disappeared in 1930's. There is no road that leads to the bridge anymore, but once connected Garden Ave as one road. South west to the St. George bridge is the old Koniska Bridge, Koniska is another lost city.
Took a best guess on design
Back in the 90's, the original bridge was in use on the east side of the newer bridge, I think, as part of a cross country ski trail. I'm not sure when the original bridge was removed, though.
One of only a few railroad trusses remaining in this area. Beautiful as is, but even better with it's original twin span:
My wife and I frequently walk our dog along the Dakota Rail and we noticed this bridge. It stands out as there is no embankment around it, looks so odd standing all alone like that. If anyone has any history on it I would love to hear it.
Here are some pics.
The bridge is now open for pedestrian use.
However, it is clear that more work needs to be done to the bridge to restore it to the quality that is advertised on a bulletin board near the bridge... so thatís probably where the 2019 date comes from.
The bridge is currently preserved for pedestrian use as of February 2018.
The railroad bridge at this location was a massive deck Truss structure approximately half a mile long. Possibly was one of the largest railroad bridges in Minnesota. Iím pretty familiar with this structure as my hometown is about half an hour away.
It's a sad sad story. Even when you think you have a lead and some hope, then that hope dies too.
FOLKS, THIS ONE IS JUST WAITING TO COLLAPSE.
The longest bowstring in the US.
Issue: Dollars, always the dollars, probably $250,000 to get it off it's crumbling abutments. We are just waiting for gravity and hydrology to take the span down.
There are no mechanisms at DOTs or SHPO to step in when there is no more time.
It really will take a miracle, or we'll be pulling another one out of the river.
Any and All ideas are welcome.
New Money - Instant Cachet -
RARE RARE RARE - Own a piece of functioning history.
Does anyone know if this bridge is in storage still?
Looks like this bridge took some serious damage from the collision earlier this fall...
Finally got to this rare example of a deck truss in Southern Minnesota. What a unique bridge!
Dana, your pics are of the CNW bridge.
So, what's my deal with all these bridges in Winona MN? I've passed through three times in the past year, and each time I find another fascinating current or historical bridge. This bridge is one of the most interesting, with a complicated history and good written and photographic records. I'm sure there's yet more to find when I make it back to this picturesque old river town. Which I plan to do when the rehab of the 1942 highway bridge is complete in 2018.
According to an article in the Minneapolis StarTribune (11/01/2017), MN DOT is trying to give away half of this bridge. The other half belongs to Canada and isn't available.
MN DOT reserves the right to approve the use of the bridge, and the recipient will need to pay for it to be moved.
The last time we inspected this bridge, in 2011, there were some very large through holes in the concrete deck, 2-3 feet in diameter. It was closed with barricades by the county, but people kept driving around them and across the bridge. Newer, more robust barricades were installed later, which seemed to be effective.
Most of these old trusses are on the local system, so it is up to the individual county or township to decide what happens to them. I am not aware of any official re-use program, although I have heard that a couple have been purchased and moved to a private location.
Ish. I hate it. They could have at least used a replacement like the Embarrass River Bridge or the West Swan River bridge that we've just seen in the forum...this is just an eyesore. As Tony has pointed out, it would sure have been nice to keep the historic bridge in place, but the county's dead-in-the-water maintenance plan did not do it any favors--it was so deteriorated that there was no feasible way to save it.
MnDOT does have some sort of re-use program in place, but only for a finite, pre-selected group. Most of these bridges are more notable and "rare" (they're ALL extremely rare now!); they seem to have considered these Warrens "common" and not worth salvaging; I don't know of any from up there that have been re-used. It's sad to see them all being wiped out; there were tons of these bridges when I was a kid; now there are none :'(
It's just sad that rehabilitation doesn't seem to be given higher priority in many of these cases where the ADT count is so low.
Don't get me wrong I'm all for public safety, but are these new structures significantly cheaper than at least sustaining repairs on the historic ones?
Joe, and/or Matt... Does Minnesota promote dismantling and storing any of these trusses for possible future trail or park reuse?
I agree; it's certainly not an historic truss, but it beats Jersey barriers any day of the week! St. Louis County has been using this bridge type on county roads for several decades now; presumably to fit in a little bit better with their "rustic" atmosphere. They use Jersey and steel barriers on state and federal highways though.
The replacement bridge, 69A30, is a 3-span steel girder bridge with timber deck and rails and a bituminous overlay. At least it isn't a UCB!
This bridge has been replaced by a single-span steel girder bridge with timber deck and rails and a bituminous overlay (Bridge No. 69A58).
This bridge is gone, replaced in 2016 by a single span prestressed concrete beam bridge (69591).
There is a second bridge just to the north of here of similar design
The bridge was closed earlier this month and will reopen as a pedestrian crossing in 2019. The lift span is still operating (don't know why), but the area is nice to have with less traffic.
According to the St. Louis County engineer, this bridge has been removed and a replacement is being constructed. We will be in the area in September for other bridge inspections and will verify the status of this one.
With the current demolition and replacement of the Embarrass River bridge (88773), this may be the last surviving pony truss in St. Louis County. To my knowledge it is still extant but closed. We will be up there in September for other bridge inspections and will verify the status of this one.
The Google digitize book that supplied the photo describes the Fink trusses. So I quoted the relevant part in the description and expanded the design section.
Thanks for the additional images, Luke!
The first image shows what may be a Fink or two as approach spans on the far shore. The lack of resolution makes it difficult to confirm. If the build date of 1880 is accurate, it seems quite late for a Fink truss.
Also, does anyone know the type of compression member used on the Whipples?
Pretty sure I'm seeing fink elements on the main span.
30 June 2017
See the West Central Tribune of Willmar, MN June 29/30-
Front page article about replacement & Bidletting on this Bridge --
Sad to say - It is all but gone-
This is listed as having a fink deck truss approach span. But the photos does not show any fink. What little I have found on it does not mention a Fink deck truss.
Is there really a fink?
It would be a woefully neglectful loss if this one should collapse
Field visit today: this bridge is on the verge of collapse. Severe erosion is threatening the eastern stone pier. The stones under the southeast bearing shoe are barely hanging on.
I agree with Nathan's comment; however, considering the razor-thin escape from the wrecking ball that this bridge pulled off, I'm sure happy to see carriage bolts on this historic bridge over a new, ugly, MOB, which was the plan until only a couple of years ago!
Overall this is both a good and amazing outcome for a bridge of this size. The use of bolts is a disappointment being as it is something that multiple organizations reached out to them in favor of. They could have done the rivets if they had wanted to.
I went out with my family today and took photos of the newly restored bridge. Overall good restoration; most of the rivets along the bottom chords of the bridge have been replaced with bolts and the bearings have been replaced. Other than that, mainly blast and paint, and new concrete deck.
Yea! It's nice to see a Minnesota bridge not slated for demolition.
Unlike the Eisenhower bridge http://bridgehunter.com/mn/goodhue/9040/ that I went across recently and could see that ground work is beginning for the new bridge.
Inspected this bridge 6/7/17. Bridge was completely repainted to a battleship gray color in 2016. Looks good!
Not shocking that this bridge is doomed. Carver County (my home county) hasn't had a truss to show for itself in decades; and is working on eradicating the remaining historic bridges.
More info and video from KARE:
Close call with boat that went up in flames beneath it:
Just noticed there was no photo on file for this bridge. This was taken in August 2016.
They try and try to give these replacement UCEB's character... And it just doesn't work.
This bridge is gone, replaced by a single span PCB bridge (23028). Another one bites the dust.
Bridge is gone, replaced by a 2-barrel concrete box culvert.
The demolition of the bridge will begin on May 22nd. This past week the phone company laid a temporary cable from East to West through the woods over the river. Lake Country Power had crews move two power poles installing temporary poles that will remain until the bridge work is completed. The detour signs are standing by ready to barricade the highway from CR22 with the detour routes marked.
The rights of way on both sides of the river were cleared in February. Lake Country Power staked the right of way for the power line and where one power pole near the river will be moved toward the woods line about 25 -30 feet. Bridge removal and new construction will begin in May if not before. Culvert replacement may precede the bridge work to the east.
Doesn't work too well https://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/03/20/duluth-blue-bridge-...
This former lift bridge is similar to the Lake Ewauna rail bridge in Klamath Falls OR.
The bridge does not raise automatically to marine traffic. The height of the bridge from water fluctuates depending on the level of the Rainy River. If a boat needs to have the bridge raised to pass under the bridge, a bridge tender in Chicago must be called, who in turn relays information to CN workers onsite. The bridge is supposed to be raised in a timely fashion. Due to the increased traffic on the bridge, marine traffic often has to wait significant amounts of time. The port of entry is currently the busiest US Customs rail of port of entry in the US.
Some photos of the Rehabilitation.
Apparently good news here. After some uncertainty over cost, MNDOT will rehab the main steel truss spans of the old bridge after all, but they'll completely replace the approach spans in what appears to be a compromise to keep the overall project within budget. They will be replaced one at a time to maintain contractor access for rehabbing the main steel truss spans at the same time. First Minnesota end, then Wisconsin. So it will indeed wind up as an old/new couplet of 1-way bridges.
I was just through Winona, and I drove across the new westbound bridge. It has opened to 2-way traffic until work on the old bridge is completed and it's reopened for eastbound traffic in 2019. Demolition work has begun on the west (Minnesota) approach spans.
Details on the bridge project: http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/oakland-place-bridge-... New bridge is scheduled to be open by May 2017.
This is a nice looking train bridge.Impressive that it was built in 1897 and still in regular use.
Here's an article about the new replacement span being open. It is much wider than the previous one, yet the lanes have now been restricted to three lane instead of four lane. Whether that will be effective in the long term remains to be seen. Yet the new span is nearly identical to the State and Ashley Street Crossings. Rather boring when you look at them..... http://www.exploreokoboji.com/news/news-stories/highway-71-b...
By pass make great Canoe put in, fishing platform and picnic area. Lack of maintenance does not indicate replacement, indicates need for maintenance...
I realize there is historic sensitivity involved with this old bridge. However Highway 5 itself is in poor driving condition and has been for many years. People that wish to visit the McCarthy State Park coming in from the N.W. on Highway 1 usually bypass Highway 5 because it is so rough. There comes a time when replacement is necessary. At today's prices one can only imagine how much it would cost to replace this bridge 10 years from now, along with upgrading the highway itself. There are issues with the culverts that direct water drainage sometimes with flows crossing from one side of the highway to the other a few times if not several times before drainage is guided well. Culvert replacement has been undertaken this past summer and will continue. There are many culverts along the approximate 8 mile stretch between CR22 and Hwy 1 in need of replacement or relocation. This is a monumental project. But it is clear that it requires attention now.
A Nod is as good as a wink to a blind man! Not sure view from Hazel street IS this. Cant tell so will leave street view off.Looks like under pass for something else...Pontist Mystery. Thanks for your usual keen Eye
Dana, the bridge in the picture looks old enough to be added to the site... (nudge nudge)
The original Warren truss was removed, but was replaced by what appears to be a lighter bridge some years(?) ago. Old electrical insulators are evident to one side of the upper portion. The right of way was converted to a trail, but this replacement bridge was there previously.