Professional Documents
Culture Documents
W o o d , C o n C r e t e ,
S t o n e , a n d S t e e l
m i n n e S ota’ S h i S to r i C B r i d g e S
deNis P. gArdNer
A F T E R W O R D by E R I C D E L O N Y
For my mother, for a life well lived
There can be little doubt that in many ways the story
of bridge building is the story of civilization. By it we
can readily measure an important part of a people’s
progress.
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, “New York Speaks,” New York Times,
October 18, 1931
C o n t e n t s
Preface ix
Acknowledgments xi
Guide to Bridge Trusses xii
Wood Bridges 1
Stone Bridges 23
Iron and Steel Bridges 43
Concrete Bridges 117
Bridge Preservation 159
Minnesota’s Historic Bridges 169
Afterword Eric DeLony 199
Notes 203
Index 215
This page intentionally left blank
P r e f a c e
Hon. K. Nelson, Alexandria. advertised for the erection of a bridge within their
Sir, I beg leave to inquire of you whether there is any bridges jurisdiction. Regional bridge builders submitted bids
to be built in your county and if there is who can I write to in for the construction, and the county or township board
regard to them. almost always embraced the builder who charged the
I am prepared to build iron, combination or wood bridges of least. This must have caused at least a modicum of
any description desired and prices to defy competition, while trepidation as farmers with laden wagons eyed swiftly
satisfaction is warranted in every instance. moving spring currents and bridge after bridge built by
the lowest bidder. And with no standardization in the
Preface
ix
established by the National Park Service, the admin- road bridges that have been substantially documented
istrator of the National Register of Historic Places, a will be found in this book.
repository of buildings, structures, districts, sites, and Finally, I never intended to end this preface with a
objects considered historic because they meet federally discussion of the Interstate Highway 35W Bridge over
established criteria.3 the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, but life some-
This book was originally intended to highlight times surprises by pitching a curve that makes the
historic bridges still decorating Minnesota. It is impor- knees buckle. The draft of this book had already been
tant to showcase these structures because we are delivered to the publisher when this substantial bridge
rapidly losing them, and Minnesotans should be aware fell down, bringing death and injury to many motorists.
of the rare structural history that is disappearing almost While this book chiefly was written to document and
without the populace realizing it. Ultimately, the book celebrate Minnesota’s historic bridges, my publisher
evolved into more than just a record of extant bridges. and I recognized that we needed to acknowledge the
Several of the bridges described here have been gone Interstate Highway 35W Bridge, for its failure raises a
for some time but still deserve attention, a conclusion serious question, namely, what should we do about our
I embraced once I realized that some bridges are such aging bridges? The obvious answer might be to replace
a significant part of Minnesota’s story that I would be them, but perhaps a better solution is to replace the
banished from the state if I did not acknowledge them. system that has allowed much of our bridge infrastruc-
For instance, it is insolent to pen a book on Minnesota ture to deteriorate to the point where so much needs
bridges and not include the Hastings Spiral Bridge, a replacing. I address this issue briefly in the bridge
crossing that has been gone for several decades now. preservation section of this book, but with the recent
After considerable thought, it seemed most appro- collapse of this major bridge through Minneapolis, it
priate to organize this book according to the material seemed appropriate to pause to consider the impor-
employed for construction rather than by bridge type tance of investing in routine maintenance, which may
or geographic location. Bridge construction evolved preserve many of the notable bridges described in this
in part because of the introduction of new building book, as well as lives and money.
materials; for example, bridge building began with After perusing the pages of this work, perhaps
wood and stone and progressed to iron and steel and readers will understand why many bridge historians
then to concrete. Thus Minnesota’s arch bridges began and preservationists think as we do. In truth, we are
in stone, graduated to iron and steel, and then became practical people, realizing that it is not always neces-
some of our most prominent present-day bridge forms sary to build new if we can maintain the old. Moreover,
in concrete. Clearly, this method of parceling the book we can continue to bask in the cultural heritage of the
also has chronological appeal. Each chapter is gener- old—and that means something.
ally chronological as well—that is, bridges are mostly
featured in the order they were constructed. However,
it was impossible to be entirely chronological and main-
tain the nuance of the narrative.
Most of this book features roadway bridges, but a
number of railroad bridges are also included. Minne-
sota’s roadway bridging story has been thoroughly
studied, but almost no study has been completed on the
state’s railroad bridging history. This results from the
fact that railroads are private entities, and the public
cannot simply impose on the railroads because we
desire to know more about the history of the state’s rail-
road bridges. We need permission for such an endeavor,
and perhaps the future will bring it. Some of the rail-
x P r e fac e
Ac k n o w l e d g m e n t s
xi
TOP LATERAL BRACING
TOP CHORD
PORTAL BRACING
PORTAL
WEB CONSISTS OF
STRUT COUNTER
ENTIRE AREA BETWEEN
DIAGONAL BRACING
TOP AND BOTTOM CHORDS
(TIES)
HIP
VERTICAL
VERTICAL
POST
STRINGERS
PANEL
BOTTOM CHORD
Truss Bridges
Big Truss
xii
G u i d e t o B r i d g e T r u ss e s
xiii
Pratt
W o o d
B r i d g e S
Over 100 sleighs, it is said, were in a line, embracing between five and six hundred persons. . . . As sleigh after
sleigh in compact array passed over the wiry fabric not a muscle of that fairy-like creation moved to show that
it labored under the burden. . . . To sum it all up, there is no breach of good taste, no effort at pretension; and
the tout ensemble pleases the eye of everyone.
—“Grand Celebration,” St. Anthony Express, January 27, 1855
WoodBridges
1
N ew York engineer Thomas Musgrove Griffith’s
“fairy-like creation” was a wagon bridge over the
Mississippi River, spanning the distance from Nicollet
the government property that formed the Fort Snel-
ling Military Reservation were hardly obstacles. This
insatiable urge to squat on the west bank of the river
Island to what would become the city of Minneapolis. was fed in part by entrepreneurs like Franklin Steele,
Griffith’s bridge was special because it was a rare mid- who seemed to recognize that the geographic blessing
nineteenth-century example of a suspension span. And known as the Falls of St. Anthony (situated just below
it was notable for another reason as well: it was the first Nicollet Island) would transform Minneapolis into a
bridge to reach across the Mississippi River.1 flour-milling colossus. Steele, believing it was only a
The bridge was constructed in 1854, although the matter of time before the west bank officially opened
formal opening was not until early 1855. Minneapolis to white settlement, formed the Mississippi Bridge
was more than a decade away from incorporating as a Company with several partners in early 1852. In little
city. It would not even become a township until May more than two years, the company’s fanciful bridge was
1858, which would seem to make the crossing, located spanning the river. The toll to pass over the structure
on present-day Hennepin Avenue, somewhat prema- was five cents for pedestrians and twenty-five cents for
ture. The land on the west side of the Mississippi River, a wagon and team.2
opposite the community of St. Anthony, belonged to the It is difficult to apply a particular style to the struc-
U.S. government, which had acquired it from the local ture engineered by Griffith, but its wood suspension
American Indian population years earlier. But for those towers and arching cables exuded a kind of rustic
with manifest destiny on the mind, a wide river and elegance. If it were built today, it would fall under the
2 Wood Bridges
heading of roadside architecture, a somewhat fuzzy it was out of place. Almost all bridges in Minnesota
term for structures that are deliberately conspicuous at that time were rude timber structures, most rather
and have a certain whimsy. Sheathed in wood boarding, small. In comparison, the Mississippi River crossing
the framed suspension towers rested on stone founda- above the falls was frontier finery. Griffith’s substantial
tions near either end of the 620-foot bridge. Thick wire bridge was joined a few years later by a large timber
cables hung between the towers, spanning the river. truss over the Mississippi River at Wabasha Street in St.
The cables passed through the tops of the towers and Paul. But honestly, suspension structures almost always
then downward into limestone anchorages several reflect a stylishness that is lacking in trusses, and the
feet underground. The cables supported numerous bridge in St. Paul offered few charms. One observer
wire lines that vertically extended to the seventeen- from the period remarked that the crossing was “a most
foot-wide wood deck. In essence, the anchored cables distressingly untraditional bridge, all on the oblique and
carried the deck via the vertical wire lines. This was very awkward, like a great clumsy fire-escape propped
impressive bridge engineering for frontier Minnesota, up against a high wall.” The Wabasha Street Bridge was
but those responsible for the structure understood that rebuilt in the 1870s but remained a peculiar-looking
the bridge was more than a means to cross the river: it timber object. Later that decade, it was rebuilt again,
symbolized the promise of the future, a promise that this time as an iron bridge, which lasted until 1889,
would arrive so quickly that Griffith would return to when St. Paul once more shaped a new bridge over the
Minneapolis two decades later and engineer anew.3 Mississippi River at Wabasha Street, an interesting iron
In part, Griffith’s wood crossing was unique because structure that stood for over a century.4
Wood Bridges 3
perpendicular to a road or
trail. This type of bridge
was often used over
soft, spongy areas where
vehicles such as oxcarts
or coaches were likely
to get stuck. Sometimes
corduroy bridges were
elevated over a stream or
river. This type of cross-
ing’s major shortcoming
was the jarring ride
delivered to travelers,
many of whom probably
needed a spinal adjust-
ment upon passing over
such a bridge. Addition-
ally, corduroy bridges
became slippery during
wet weather, clearly a
hazard to horse, ox, or
human. To alleviate both
these dilemmas, corduroy
bridges were sometimes
covered with gravel or
turf. Today this bridge
This timber beam-span bridge type can occasionally
was completed over a canal near
For most of Minnesota’s early settlers, stylishness be found on hiking or bicycle trails. Measuring about
Detroit Lakes in the late 1800s
and is an example of the crude in bridge design was inconsequential as they merely a quarter-mile long, the corduroy bridge in Rhode
bridges common to Minnesota required stable crossings to carry them over the many Island’s George Washington State Park may be one of
during the period. Photograph ca.
rivers, streams, and marshy areas impeding their the longest of its type in the nation.5
1895; courtesy of the Minnesota
Historical Society. paths. Ugly or no, most timber crossings satisfactorily Although rudimentary, the corduroy bridge was not
accomplished the task. Timber bridges were popular the most common bridge type in early Minnesota. That
in mid- to late-nineteenth-century Minnesota because distinction goes to the timber beam span, a crossing
wood was a readily available building material in many type that is perhaps the oldest bridge structure known
areas. By erecting wood crossings, Minnesotans were to history. Indeed, simply felling a tree and positioning
simply repeating the bridge-building practice that it over a stream makes a timber beam-span bridge.
began on the Eastern Seaboard and moved west with As settlement in Minnesota increased, dropping tree
migration. One type of timber crossing common to trunks across streams or rivers gave way to more
many parts of early Minnesota was the corduroy bridge. refined beam spans, although most were still crude by
In fact, there were probably many corduroy bridges today’s standards. Often resting on a substructure of
on the Red River Trails, which were relatively crude timber piles driven into the earth or riverbed, many
fur-trading passageways that were established at least early beam spans presented a somewhat perilous
by the 1830s and extended from St. Paul northwest to profile. An example was located at Detroit Lakes.
the Red River Valley and Canada. A corduroy bridge History seems to recognize the structure simply as the
is a primitive construction that consists of laying logs Canal Bridge, but it is uncertain what canal it crossed
4 Wood Bridges
and when precisely it was constructed. Nevertheless,
it is a good representation of the modest timber beam
spans found in many parts of Minnesota in the mid- to
late nineteenth century.6
Timber beam spans are still constructed, but they are
often located on hiking, bicycle, and snowmobile trails.
In the first half of the twentieth century, the Minnesota
Department of Highways erected many timber beam
spans to carry automobiles as well, even though timber
was not widely embraced as a building material for
highway bridges by this time. Northern Minnesota was
the recipient of a large number of timber beam spans.
The early twentieth century found northern Minnesota
undergoing substantial settlement, and the state was
forced to rapidly complete a transportation infrastruc-
ture. In a region flush with timber, it is not surprising
that the state helped solve its construction needs by
employing timber structures. Still, timber highway
bridges were usually a second choice as the state almost
always demanded steel or reinforced-concrete cross-
ings when practicable.7
While they were never as common as in northern In the first half of the twentieth century, timber beam-span bridges were not a favorite of the Minnesota
Minnesota, timber beam-span highway bridges still Department of Highways. However, the crossing type was still occasionally built, such as this extant structure
near Maple erected in 1939. Photograph taken in 2005.
occasionally were erected in the southern part of the
state. One example is still standing just west of the Twin
Cities on a road that accommodates ever-increasing
traffic. Located immediately north of the community
of Maple in Carver County, Bridge No. 5837 carries
County State Aid Highway 10 over a former route of
the Burlington Northern Railroad (BN). Although the
design was subject to the approval of the state, engi-
neering drawings for the bridge were completed by the
Great Northern Railway, which became part of the BN
in 1970. The bridge was constructed in 1939 by Fielding
and Shepley, a St. Paul contracting company founded
by Michael F. Fielding and Louis E. Shepley in 1893.
Interestingly, it appears that this was one of the last
bridges constructed by the firm, or at least one of the
last bridges built under the founding moniker.8
Wood Bridges 5
The Minnesota landscape
featured only a handful of
covered bridges, including the
Whalan Covered Bridge, which
was completed over the Root
River in the late 1800s in the
Fillmore County community of
Whalan. The bridge was razed
about 1908. Photograph ca. 1900;
courtesy of the Fillmore County
History Center.
The timber bridge north of Maple was part of the projects, was a means of salving a nation suffering the
Railroad Grade Separation Program as established in economic wounds of the Great Depression. Numerous
the Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935. The improvement endeavors received federal dollars and
purpose of this program was to eliminate many of the millions of unemployed entered the workforce through
nation’s dangerous railroad-roadway intersections. This government initiatives like the Civilian Conservation
was usually accomplished by elevating the roadway over Corps, Civil Works Administration, National Youth
the rail line. Part of the funding for building the timber Administration, Works Progress Administration, and,
bridge over the rail line near Maple came from the of course, the PWA. Although the Great Depression
Public Works Administration (PWA). The PWA was a was one of the most economically wrenching periods in
federal relief initiative of President Franklin Roosevelt. America’s history, it was also an era of unrivaled infra-
Federal relief efforts were a staple of Roosevelt’s New structural development. 9
Deal policy for America. The farsighted chief executive The timber bridge near Maple was but one Minne-
understood that pouring federal dollars into govern- sota bridge project that received federal aid under
ment programs, including transportation infrastructure Roosevelt’s New Deal. In fact, scores of Minnesota
6 Wood Bridges
Perhaps the only railroad covered
bridge completed in Minnesota,
this bridge was erected by the
Duluth, Red Wing and Southern
Railroad over the North Fork of
the Zumbro River not far from
Zumbrota. Photograph ca. 1900;
courtesy of the Goodhue County
Historical Society, Red Wing,
Minnesota.
Wood Bridges 7
bridges erected during the 1930s and early 1940s were a support structure within a shell substantially increased
result of federal relief efforts. Many of these are espe- the useful life of the bridge.11
cially handsome, a hallmark characteristic of federal The timber support structure is a truss. A truss is
relief bridges. The timber beam span near Maple is an merely a framework of diagonal, vertical, and hori-
exception, however. Although its railings of metal pipes zontal structural members that are primarily in tension
and concrete posts hold some visual interest, the bridge or compression. The members can be of virtually any
mostly looks ordinary. material, although wood, iron, and steel are common.
This trait in no way applies to the oldest wood bridge In essence, this framework acts like a beam, similar to
remaining in Minnesota. Completed in 1869, Minne- a beam for a timber beam-span bridge. Trusses became
sota’s only extant covered bridge spans the North Fork popular because they could span greater distances
of the Zumbro River in the small town of Zumbrota in than beam-span bridges. Put another way, they could
Goodhue County. The intriguing Zumbrota Covered reach farther over a waterway, railway line, or roadway
Bridge was not always singular, however. By the 1880s, before requiring substructure support. This is impor-
Minnesota featured a handful of covered bridges. A tant when the number of piers at a bridge site must be
covered wagon bridge was situated near a mill above limited, such as a site spanning a navigable waterway.
Vermillion Falls on the Vermillion River in the commu- Most trusses are either high trusses or low trusses.
nity of Hastings. Another covered wagon bridge In Minnesota, high trusses are often referenced as
spanned the Root River in the tiny town of Whalan, through trusses and low trusses as pony trusses. With
only a few miles east of Lanesboro. Yet another covered a through-truss bridge, the members that make up the
wagon bridge was located at Waite’s Crossing, a popular truss encompass the entire roadway or railway, but with
Sauk River crossing point near St. Cloud that was a pony-truss bridge, structural members are not posi-
named for Henry Chester Waite, a prominent St. Cloud tioned overhead. There are many variations of these
personality with a large farm near the bridge site. At trusses, since early bridge designers continually sought
least some of Waite’s farm eventually became part of the to produce examples better than their competition.
community of Waite Park, adjacent to St. Cloud. Minne- Historically, one of the most common types of
sota had at least one railroad covered bridge as well. trusses employed for wood covered bridges has been
Constructed by the Duluth, Red Wing and Southern the Town lattice, named for its designer, Ithiel Town.
Railroad, it was positioned over the North Fork of the Born in 1784, Town was an architect from New Haven,
Zumbro River not far northwest of Zumbrota.10 Connecticut. He patented the Town lattice truss in
The American covered bridge finds its origins in the 1820. Town was not a bridge builder, however, prefer-
northeastern part of the country. Timothy Palmer, Ithiel ring instead to promote and sell rights to build his
Town, Squire Whipple, Theodore Burr, William Howe, design. This remarkably simple design consists of many
Stephen H. Long, and Thomas and Caleb Pratt all intersecting diagonal wood planks. In other words, the
hailed from the region. All were early designers of wood web, which is that portion of a truss between the top
bridges, many as covered structures. Interestingly, some and bottom chords, resembles a lattice. The lattice truss
of these designers would become better recognized for was relatively easy to build, but it had a tendency to
their bridge designs in iron and steel. warp because of the thinness of the web and its lack of
Wood covered bridges are often thought romantic, posts. Town solved the problem by doubling the web.
sometimes even romantically macabre, as confirmed by Basically, he created a lattice behind a lattice, for which
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow in The Golden Legend, he was awarded a patent in 1835.12
“The grave itself is but a covered bridge, leading from Not surprisingly, the 120-foot-long Zumbrota
light to light, through a brief darkness.” Romantic Covered Bridge is a Town lattice. Curiously, it features
notions were largely secondary for these early bridge vertical posts. Perhaps the posts were added at a later
designers, however. Since wood bridges rarely survive date to provide additional support. The covered bridge
for many years, Timothy Palmer, Ithiel Town, and replaced a timber beam span that was erected at the
the rest realized that encapsulating a bridge’s timber site in 1857 to facilitate stagecoach traffic between
8 Wood Bridges
Dubuque, Iowa, and St. Paul. The bridge
often required repair, however, so in
1869 a carpenter-member of the Straf-
ford Western Emigration Company, an
enterprise established by New England
immigrants that founded Zumbrota in
the mid-1850s, constructed the current
covered bridge. While the truss was
completed in 1869, it was not encapsu-
lated with a gable roof and board-and-
batten siding until 1871.13
The bridge carried stagecoach,
wagon, and eventually automobile traffic
over the river at Zumbrota until 1932,
when the state highway department
completed a new bridge at the site. The
Zumbrota Covered Bridge was moved
to the Goodhue County Fairgrounds,
serving as an exhibit and storage
building. It is possible that the vertical
posts were installed in the truss at this
time, perhaps to ensure the structure’s
cohesiveness during the move. By 1970
the bridge was looking grim, but the
Zumbrota Covered Bridge Society spear- The Zumbrota Covered Bridge
employs Ithiel Town’s lattice
headed a drive to relocate the bridge to a park near its bridge across the Mississippi River in central Minne- design. Photograph taken in 2005
original site and rehabilitate it. The unique structure sota was completed only a year after the railroad initi- by Robert W. Gardner Jr.
remained in the park until 1997, when it was moved a ated construction at Carlton. The infant community
short distance south and once again placed over the established at the bridge site was simply called The
North Fork of the Zumbro River, near its initial loca- Crossing, but it was soon rechristened Brainerd. The
tion. Now serving as a pedestrian crossing, the bridge’s bridge the NP raised at Brainerd was a large timber
appearance is largely unchanged from its original truss, but not a Town lattice. Instead, the NP erected a
construction, although today it rests atop steel girders.14 Howe truss, the most popular type of truss bridge for
In 1870, just a year after the truss was finished at railroad lines in the last half of the nineteenth century.
Zumbrota, the Northern Pacific Railway (NP) began its Many large roadway bridges erected during this period
long construction journey from Carlton, immediately were also Howe trusses, such as the bridge “all on the
southwest of Duluth, to the Pacific Coast. Minnesota oblique and very awkward” that was raised over the
had witnessed modest railroad construction during Mississippi River at Wabasha Street in St. Paul.16
the previous decade, but the NP inaugurated a period The Howe truss was named for its creator, William
of phenomenal railroad development. By the early Howe. Howe was a millwright born in Spencer, Massa-
1900s, the state would be a dense network of rail lines. chusetts, in 1803. Although he received a patent for his
With the rail lines came countless bridges. Minne- truss type in 1840, his design was almost identical in
sota’s history is filled with many interesting examples, appearance to a wood-truss design produced by Colonel
including one erected over America’s most famous river Stephen H. Long. Long’s early career was as a mathe-
by the NP.15 matics instructor at Dartmouth College, but he ulti-
It took the NP until 1883 to reach the Pacific, but its mately proved an adventuresome spirit and became a
Wood Bridges 9
The bridge the Northern Pacific Railway erected over the Mississippi River at Brainerd in 1871 was a Howe truss, America’s most
common railroad truss type in the last half of the nineteenth century. Photograph by William Henry Illingworth, ca. 1873; courtesy
of the Minnesota Historical Society.
10 Wood Bridges
topographical engineer. In 1817, under orders of the War railroad and the citizens of Brainerd suffered another
Department, he ascended the Mississippi River from St. setback. On July 27, 1875, the substantial timber bridge
Louis in search of a suitable location for a military post. over the Mississippi River collapsed, taking an engine,
He soon found the perfect site, an elevation overlooking tender, caboose, and over twenty cars with it. Sadly,
the junction of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers. several people on the train died, including the engineer
Here Fort Snelling was erected in 1819, although at that and the fireman.19 The day of the accident, the front
time it was named Fort St. Anthony. Long returned to page of the St. Paul Daily Dispatch announced, “Down
Minnesota in 1823, exploring up the Minnesota River to to the Death on Northern Pacific: Bridge over Missis-
the Red River Valley. Seven years later, he patented his sippi Gives Way at Brainerd.” The story read:
timber truss, which he subsequently improved. After
Shortly after nine o’clock this morning a dispatch was received at
Howe developed his similar truss design, Long became
the office in this city of General Manager Mead, of the N. P. R. R.
incensed and claimed patent infringement. Little seems
which stated that the west bound freight train, No. 5, which left
to have come of it.17
Brainerd at 7:45 a.m. had gone through the bridge over the Missis-
Essentially, the Howe truss was a rectangle with
sippi river and that several persons had been killed. . . . [It was] a
webs formed of a multitude of crossed diagonals in
wooden truss . . . 622 feet in length and 80 feet above the level of
compression, interrupted by vertical members in
the river. It was built in the summer of 1871 by the Northwestern
tension. While the truss designs created by Howe
Construction Company, and was supposed to be one of the cost-
and Long took up load stresses differently, it was the
liest of the structures along the line. The fact that it has played
material of the vertical members that most obviously
out in less than five years is conclusive proof that it was originally
distinguished Howe’s truss from Long’s. Long employed
either imperfectly constructed or that the material used therein
timber verticals, but Howe used iron verticals. The
was unfit for the purpose and should not have been allowed.
latter realized that iron was better than wood at
absorbing tensile stresses. Additionally, the turnbuckles The failure of the bridge at Brainerd was not alto-
and bolts that were part of the iron tension members gether extraordinary, since many Howe trusses gave way
allowed the verticals to be adjusted as the truss’s timber during the major railroad construction period of the
components seasoned. Howe’s design represents a step mid- to late 1800s. Still, it is unlikely that the material
toward all-metal truss-bridge construction, and he is employed for building these trusses was unfit for the
considered one of the prominent personalities in the purpose or that there was an inherent flaw in Howe’s
history of bridge design.18 design. In truth, most Howe trusses failed because of
The Howe truss at Brainerd was one of the first poor construction, a subject addressed by bridge histo-
structures completed during the NP’s massive construc- rian David Plowden in his popular Bridges: The Spans
tion program of the early 1870s. In effect, the railroad of North America: “The tremendous demand for new
began building the community of Brainerd by erecting [Howe] bridges placed increasing emphasis on speed of
its economic foundation, a large complex of mainte- construction. Quality often suffered, and with alarming
nance shops designed to maintain the line’s rolling frequency bridges would come tumbling down. . . . Most
stock. As operating and engineering headquarters for of these catastrophes were due to faulty construction
the entire line, Brainerd became a magnet for those rather than to any inadequacy in Howe’s design.” The
seeking employment with the NP. In turn, others NP soon replaced its crossing over the Mississippi River
established commercial enterprises to serve the rapidly with a truss made entirely of iron, a type of construction
growing town’s citizens. Regrettably, good times in that was just beginning to gain acceptance for bridge
Brainerd did not last long, as Jay Cooke and Company, building in Minnesota at that time.20
the financial muscle behind the NP, failed in 1873, A variant of the timber truss the NP built at Brainerd
leading to a national financial crisis. Work on the NP’s in summer 1871 was erected at Carver later that year.
route toward Puget Sound came to a halt, as did most Carver sits on the banks of the Minnesota River about
work at Brainerd. Eventually, the financial outlook for twenty-five miles southwest of the heart of Minne-
the country and the NP improved, but not before the apolis, although it is currently being enveloped by a
Wood Bridges 11
The Northern Pacific Railway’s
bridge at Brainerd collapsed in The timber-truss bridge across the Minnesota River
1875. Howe trusses failed at an at Carver was an arched swing span. Apparently the
alarming rate, but these bridge
M&StL concluded that an arched top chord rather than
failures had less to do with
Howe’s design than with railroad a horizontal top chord was best suited for the stresses
companies rushing bridge placed on a swing-span bridge. A swing span is a type
construction so the rail line
of movable bridge with a main span that pivots atop a
could quickly be pushed forward.
Photograph by Caswell and Davy, central pier. This type of bridge was important on the
1875; courtesy of the Minnesota Minnesota River during much of the nineteenth century
Historical Society.
because the waterway was navigable—that is, the
waterway was plied by freight-carrying vessels. To allow
ships to move from one side of the bridge to the other,
the main span was rotated, or swung, out of the way.22
Downstream of Carver, the Milwaukee and St. Paul
Railway featured a virtually identical bridge at the
foot of Fort Snelling. It was completed about four or
five years before the crossing at Carver. In 1874, the
Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway became the Chicago,
Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railway, which history has
commonly recognized as the Milwaukee Road. Its
timber bridge below Fort Snelling was eventually
replaced with a steel swing span. It is unclear precisely
how long Carver retained its arched timber-truss swing
span, but by the early 1890s it had been replaced by a
sprawling Twin Cities metropolitan area. For most of its trussed swing span formed of iron or steel. This bridge
existence, however, it was a small, rural community. The also no longer exists, but another railroad bridge pres-
timber-truss bridge over the Minnesota River at Carver ently reaches over the Minnesota River at the site.
was erected by the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Surprisingly, perhaps, two of the stone piers original to
(M&StL), a company that began as the Minnesota the 1871 bridge are still standing, adding substructure
Western Railroad in 1853. Like all of the other railroads support to the current bridge.23
incorporated in Minnesota in the 1850s, dreams were A year after the M&StL passed through Carver, the
larger than financial reality allowed, and the Minnesota Hastings and Dakota Railway (H&D) followed. This
Western never laid any trackage during the decade. railroad began its existence in 1857 as the Hastings,
Nor did it build any trackage the following decade, Minnesota River and Red River of the North Railroad,
remaining merely a paper railroad. Finally, in 1871, but ten years later it had evolved into the H&D. It was
soon after the company became the M&StL, it started as the H&D that it initiated construction of rail lines. Its
construction. One of the railroad’s principal aims was purpose was to link the agriculturally fertile areas just
to reach the southern and eastern parts of the country to the south, southwest, and west of Minneapolis and
via St. Louis. It accomplished this by building south- St. Paul with eastern markets via Hastings. Adjacent
west from Minneapolis before swinging southward to the Mississippi River, about fifteen miles southeast
over the Minnesota River at Carver. It intersected the of St. Paul, Hastings had been a major milling and
St. Paul and Sioux City Railroad at Sioux City Junction grain distribution center almost from its founding as
(renamed Merriam Junction in 1875) a few miles south- a village in 1853. Wheat arriving in Hastings by wagon
west of Shakopee in late 1871. Toward the end of the from the surrounding region was milled, stored, and
decade, the line reached Albert Lea, where it merged shipped downriver by steamboat. But the community’s
with the Burlington, Cedar Rapids and Northern livelihood was threatened in the mid-1860s with the
Railway, a line that connected to St. Louis and Chicago. 21 construction of the Minnesota Central Railway from
12 Wood Bridges
Completed over the Minnesota River by the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway in 1871, the timber bridge at Carver was an arched swing span, a movable bridge type that rotated, or swung,
open to allow steamboats to pass from one side of the bridge to the other. Photograph taken in 1871; courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Wood Bridges 13
The timber railroad bridge
erected by the Milwaukee and St.
Paul Railway over the Minnesota Minneapolis and St. Paul south toward the Iowa border. westward from Hastings, it quickly reached the Vermil-
River below Fort Snelling was
This line absorbed much of the agricultural largesse lion River. The bridge the H&D completed over the
almost identical to the bridge
completed at Carver some years once destined for Hastings. As a result, leaders in Hast- rocky gorge was a timber pony truss. A pony truss
later. Note the open swing span. ings founded the H&D as a competitor to the Minnesota was acceptable at the site because the H&D erected
Photograph ca. 1885; courtesy of
Central, ensuring the agricultural relevancy of the river a substantial substructure at either end of the bridge.
the Minnesota Historical Society.
town.24 A simple crossing, the Vermillion River Bridge was
Between 1867 and 1872, the H&D built its line from nevertheless pleasing sitting atop this towering founda-
Hastings to Carver to Glencoe. As construction moved tion formed of a timber framework. It was completed
14 Wood Bridges
The Hastings and Dakota Railway
built a timber pony truss across the
bluffs of the Vermillion River in
Hastings in 1868. The train in the
photograph may be the John B.
Alley, the railroad’s first engine.
Photograph by Benjamin F. Upton,
ca. 1870; courtesy of the Minnesota
Historical Society.
Wood Bridges 15
in 1868, a short time before the company’s first railroad then, a deck truss is the reverse of a through truss. A
engine was placed in service. In mid-October 1868, the deck truss is only practical at sites with substantial
John B. Alley made its maiden run of roughly one mile vertical clearance between the lower chord of the truss
from Hastings to the Vermillion River Bridge, where and the high-water mark of a river; if a deck truss will
it met a host of local children waiting excitedly for a obstruct a river, there is little point in erecting this type
promised ride back into town.25 of bridge. Because there was considerable clearance
Although the H&D opted for a pony truss with at the Vermillion River at Hastings, the timber pony
a substantial timber-frame substructure, the rail- truss erected by the H&D was eventually replaced with
road could have completed a through-truss bridge a timber deck truss. It appears that the change came
that would have reached farther over the Vermillion around 1880, but well before this the H&D had sold
River and may have required a less extensive founda- its Hastings–Glencoe route to the Milwaukee Road.
tion. Even more, the H&D could have erected a deck The Milwaukee Road sheathed the bridge’s webs in a
truss, a truss type less common than pony or through wood covering, ostensibly to help protect the timber
trusses, yet suited to site conditions like those found truss from the elements. The curious-looking bridge
at the Vermillion River at Hastings. A deck truss is was gone by the turn of the twentieth century, when a
much like a through truss, except the truss is below metal-girder crossing occupied the site.26
the bridge’s deck rather than above it. In appearance, A timber deck truss without the jacket was
completed across the gorge of the Pigeon River in Cook
County in 1917. As with the timber bridge at Brainerd,
the Pigeon River Bridge linking northeastern Minne-
sota with Ontario, Canada, reflected William Howe’s
design. Built to carry automobile traffic, the roughly
110-foot-long Pigeon River Bridge was an especially late
Howe truss, for by the early twentieth century, bridge
designs in steel were already commonplace. A Howe
truss was likely adopted because the bridge site was
located within timber country. Moreover, the crossing
was not sanctioned by either Minnesota or Ontario, so
it is unlikely that government specifications ruled the
design process. The bridge was born out of frustra-
tion, as exasperated citizens and commercial interests
on either side of the border grew weary of waiting for
Minnesota and Ontario to erect a bridge to join the two
sides. A partnership that included the Lakehead Rotar-
ians on the Canadian side and the Duluth Rotary Club
on the American side, as well as Cook County, pooled
funds for constructing the bridge.27
Locally known as the Outlaw Bridge, apparently
because the structure was not officially authorized, the
The crossing that replaced the crossing’s formal opening on August 18, 1917, was a gala
pony truss at the Vermillion River affair. The bridge was festooned with flags and bunting
was probably completed by the
Milwaukee Road about 1880. It as more than 250 Canadians, including a band of pipers,
was a deck truss sheathed in traversed the structure en route to celebrations in
timber siding. Photograph by Grand Marais. The cavalcade paused to mingle with
Henry Hamilton Bennett, ca.
1880; courtesy of the Minnesota Americans at the bridge site and survey what everyone’s
Historical Society. efforts wrought. Surely anxious glances were cast at the
16 Wood Bridges
The Pigeon River Bridge (Outlaw Bridge) was not officially sanctioned
by either the American or Canadian governments. Nevertheless, in 1917,
steeply-inclined ramps at either end of the crossing, as local groups on both sides of the border pooled resources to build a
revelers contemplated the coming adventure of winter bridge joining Minnesota with Ontario. Photograph ca. 1920; courtesy of
travel over the Pigeon River. Bridge-building funds the Minnesota Historical Society.
Wood Bridges 17
the [North Fork of ] the Zumbro River north of town. . . . A cheer
went up from the crowd and men waved their hats. It was an
exciting and historic moment. The first passenger train to arrive
in Kenyon pulled up to the station. . . . A new day had dawned for
the little hamlet.30
The large timber-trestle bridge at Kenyon was built over the North Fork
of the Zumbro River by the Minnesota and North Western Railroad
about 1885, but the structure was buried in earth fill in 1898 by the
Chicago Great Western Railway. Photograph by George P. Nelson, ca.
1890; courtesy of the Goodhue County Historical Society, Red Wing,
Minnesota.
18 Wood Bridges
The extant timber trestle at
the east side of Kenyon was
constructed by the Milwaukee
Road during the first decade of
the twentieth century. Photo-
graph taken in 2006.
it remains one of the few visual reminders of the days a timber truss, although it was a covered bridge. Even
when large timber trestles were once commonplace in today, wood bridges are common to park settings, and
parts of Minnesota.31 the crossing erected by John Busha was hosted by
Perhaps timber trestles are unique wood bridges just such a venue. Completed in 1898, Busha’s pedes-
because the railroads never allowed them to fall entirely trian bridge decorated Duluth’s Lester Park northeast
from fashion. Sure, the large ones are mostly gone, or of downtown. Resembling a pagoda, the structure is
have been replaced piece by piece with metal members, identified in history annals as the Lester Park Rustic
but perusing railroad tracks today often leads to the Bridge. It replaced a footbridge over some Lester River
small ones. These, too, have largely been replaced piece rapids that washed out about 1896 or 1897. Part French
by piece over the years, but with timber members. The and part Ojibwe, Busha was a Civil War veteran who
route of the current Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern recruited his sons, Abraham and George, to help him
Railroad across southern Minnesota, a line originally build the picturesque structure. Formed of peeled cedar,
constructed by the Winona and St. Peter Railroad in the Busha erected the bridge with two levels. The bottom
late 1800s, is an example of a rail line that continues to level carried foot traffic over the river, but it also held
feature many minor timber trestles. picnic tables. The top level was a promenade punctu-
The most fantastic-looking timber bridge to ever ated at its center by a pavilion with a flagpole. On warm
punctuate Minnesota was not a timber trestle or even days, Duluthians would lounge atop the bridge or peek
20 Wood Bridges
John Busha’s incredible pedes-
trian crossing in Duluth’s Lester
Park spanned the Lester River.
Completed in 1898, the top
section was removed in 1916
and the remainder was razed
in 1931. Photograph ca. 1897;
courtesy of the Northeast Minne-
sota Historical Center, Duluth,
S3020b165f16.
over its railings at the rapids below. The bridge was been welcoming metal crossings as early as the 1840s.
especially busy on summer holidays. Busha, drawing on Minnesotans were not naïve, however, and many under-
his Indian heritage, formed numerous Ojibwe designs stood that wood could not match metal as a bridge-
in the bridge’s railings, dramatically enhancing the building material. It simply required a little time for the
crossing’s aesthetic allure. Regrettably, the top portion engineering and construction conventions in the East
of the bridge was in such poor condition by the second to move west. But when it finally arrived, Minnesotan’s
decade of the twentieth century that it was removed. embraced the new convention and filled the state with
The remainder of the crossing was razed in 1931. almost every manner of bridge that could be raised in
Minnesota has yet to witness another wood bridge that iron or steel.33
matches the artistic sophistication of Busha’s structure
in Lester Park.32
The heyday of wood bridge construction in Minne-
sota was exceedingly brief. Minnesota became a state
in 1858, and when settlement exploded in the 1870s
and 1880s, demanding numerous bridges, many were
formed entirely of metal. Even so, this development
was more than two decades behind the East, which had
Wood Bridges 21
S t o n e
B r i d g e S
Yesterday . . . [Thomas M. Griffith] gave satisfaction to crowds in Minneapolis, now become a city numbering
forty thousand inhabitants, by opening for travel a magnificent suspension bridge more glorious than the first,
whose place it has taken by aid of what Milton calls the “wondrous art pontifical.” From this time forward
the structure becomes historic, and the prominent object in the city. It will be associated with all the varying
emotions of humanity. The commercial man will recall it with its long line of wagons bearing the products
of our various manufactories. Some will have it photographed upon their brain in connection with the slow-
moving funeral cortege, bearing parent or child to the last earthly resting places. The placid man of a midsum-
mer’s night will hear ascending from its footwalks the whisper of a true lover’s heart in some gentle maiden’s
ear, and see her shy, drooped, modest face. Not many years will roll by before it will become a “Bridge of
Sighs,” and in a whirl of passion or despair some poor unfortunate, unwilling to fade and rot . . . will plunge
from its parapets into the roaring waters of the Falls of Saint Anthony.
—“Griffith, Pontifex,” Minneapolis Tribune, February 23, 1877
StoneBridges
23
N ewspapers in late-nineteenth-century
Minnesota, as in many places, welcomed florid
prose. Even while describing transportation infrastruc-
Costing about $200,000, the finished bridge looked
like something out of a fairy tale. Raised well above
the river, it measured about 670 feet in length, with a
ture, journalists longed for the romantic. Perhaps the width of 20 feet. The 111-foot-high limestone towers,
poetic voice of the Minneapolis Tribune passage quoted roughly twice as high as the towers erected for the
as the epigraph of this section is understandable, for wood suspension bridge, resembled castle battlements.
by 1877, Minneapolis had traded its frontier fortress Indeed, an observer may almost have expected King
spanning the Mississippi River for a quixotic medieval Arthur and his knights to ride through the arched
castle. opening of either tower. The crossing, larger than its
At least by 1873, Minneapolis, a community with a forerunner, operated in the same manner as the wood
fading memory of its squatter origins, wanted a new suspension bridge: large cables draped between the
bridge over the Mississippi River at Hennepin Avenue. towers held smaller cables that supported the wood
Two years later, the city awarded construction of the deck. Again, the larger cables were buried into anchor-
crossing to George McMullen, a contractor based in the ages at either end of the bridge.3
Twin Cities whom the Minneapolis Tribune referred An incredible structure to behold, the second
to as a “master mason.” McMullen agreed to erect a suspension bridge at Minneapolis, like the first, was an
stone suspension bridge designed by Thomas Griffith, exception in Minnesota. Furthermore, the vast majority
the same New York engineer responsible for the wood of stone bridges in Minnesota, as elsewhere, sprung
suspension bridge completed in 1854. Perhaps it seems from an arch, a graceful structural form common to the
odd that only two decades after it opened the wood ancient world. The Romans erected countless semi-
suspension bridge was thought obsolete, but Minne- circular arches, which explains why this arch type is
apolis was growing quickly by the mid-1870s and had also known as a Roman arch. An arch works through
recently swallowed the community of St. Anthony as arch action: The vertical forces of a load moving over
proof of this maturation. Traffic between St. Anthony an arch bridge are transferred through the arch and
and Minneapolis was hindered by the modest dimen- into the abutments at either end of the arch. The arch
sions of the wood crossing, and the wood bridge, barely is resisting the forces of the load moving over it by
above flood stage, was annually threatened by spring pressing against its abutments—that is, the arch is
flows.1 pushing back. The arch is found in other structures
George McMullen had just begun to quarry stone besides bridges, of course; numerous buildings incor-
for the new bridge when the city council halted the porate arches of one kind or another. Dams are also
work. Minneapolis paused to reconsider the structure’s sometimes formed from an arch. The Lanesboro Stone
design: did the community need another suspension Dam in southern Minnesota, for instance, is an arch
bridge? The city pondered erecting an arch bridge made that has been resisting the hydrostatic forces of the
of iron, but the pondering eventually gave way to the South Branch of the Root River for almost a century
original stone suspension bridge design. The crossing and a half.4
was completed in early 1877, although not before the Generally, stone arch bridges, both highway and rail-
bridge was almost lost to fire in January of that year. road, have been thought somewhat rare in America; not
The roadway surface was made of pine blocks set on as rare as stone-towered suspension bridges, certainly,
end within a sludge-like coating of oil that had been but infrequent nevertheless. Prominent historian Carl
smeared over the deck substructure while warm. As a W. Condit provides the reasoning for this view: “The
kettle of boiling oil was carried onto the deck to cool, it arch bridge of stone has always been a costly type, with
was upset and spread over several feet of the untreated the consequence that in the United States, where wages
wood deck, igniting a blaze. Fortunately, a workman are high and materials abundant, the form has never
managed to push the kettle over the edge of the bridge been as popular as it has been in Europe.”5 This argu-
onto the ice, while other laborers smothered the fire ment is reinforced by bridge historian David Plowden:
with their coats.2
24 Stone Bridges
One of the most visually impressive bridges ever raised in Minnesota,
the second crossing at Hennepin Avenue in Minneapolis was a suspen-
sion span harkening to the medieval. Completed in 1877, the bridge
was engineered by Thomas Musgrove Griffith, the same engineer who
designed the first suspension bridge at the site. Photograph by William
H. Jacoby, ca. 1887; courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Stone Bridges 25
Psychologically Americans were as temperamentally unsuited at least in certain regions of the country, the erection
to build with stone as it was economically unfeasible for them of a surprising number of stone arch roadway bridges
to do so. Stone bridges are by nature strong and require little or has been found to antedate the turn of the twentieth
no maintenance. Their disadvantage is the time it takes to build century. Historian Jeffrey A. Hess explains, “[The]
them, piece by piece, each stone needing to be quarried, dressed traditional view of American masonry-arch bridge
and individually fitted. . . . With few exceptions, impatient construction has been challenged . . . by statewide,
America [did not] take the time to lay up a stone bridge where an historic, highway bridge surveys in Pennsylvania and
Erected over Garvin Brook near alternative was available.6 Wisconsin. . . . The authors of the Pennsylvania report
Stockton in Winona County in declare: ‘Although both nineteenth- and twentieth-
1882, the Arches, a double arch The stone arch bridge has not only been thought
century bridge historians have stated that early stone
completed by the Winona and rare in this country, but its construction is believed
St. Peter Railroad, is one of the masonry structures are poorly represented in America,
to have mostly ceased by the end of the nineteenth
finest stone arches remaining this survey revealed a large number of early stone arch
in Minnesota. Photograph ca. century. Interestingly, it now appears that stone arch
[roadway] bridges.’” Hess also notes that the studies in
1905; courtesy of the Minnesota bridge building was not as rare as initially believed and,
Historical Society.
26 Stone Bridges
Wisconsin and Pennsylvania demonstrated that many
of the bridges surveyed were built early in the twentieth
century. In fact, subsequent study of Minnesota’s stone
arch roadway bridges also revealed that many were
raised during the first part of the 1900s. Still, this is not
to say that most stone arch roadway bridges in America
were built after the turn of the twentieth century. More-
over, stone arch roadway bridges never dotted the land-
scape like the metal bridges and reinforced-concrete
crossings that followed. Even so, some findings suggest
that historians may wish to revisit commonly accepted
notions about stone arch bridge building in America. 7
Our understanding of stone arch bridge history is
shaped, at least in part, by the railroads. Without doubt,
the majority of stone arch bridges were erected by
railroads. In large measure, this came about because the
railroads often had more money than the local govern-
ments responsible for erecting wagon or automobile
bridges; as both Condit and Plowden observed, stone
arches are not cheap. Further, the railroads needed
bridges that could support the weight of a railroad
engine and train, and stone arches are quite strong. The
railroads were practical, however, often completing
relatively strong bridges out of cheaper building
material like wood or metal. Still, the practical rail- Although foliage has grown up
around it, the Arches looks as if it
road recognized the cost-benefit of discovering stone most picturesque parts of the state. The bridge replaced could stand for another century
building material in the vicinity of a bridge site.8 a timber railroad trestle that was built on the site several or more, but its future may be
As with stone arches built on roadways, it seems years earlier by the W&StP. The W&StP was formed in threatened by redevelopment of
the rail line. Photograph taken in
most of the railroad stone arches were likely completed 1862 to connect the fertile lands of southern Minnesota 2005 by Robert W. Gardner Jr.
before the twentieth century. But, again, it is somewhat and South Dakota to Winona, thus opening western
surprising to discover that a significant number of markets for the Mississippi River community. By the
stone arches were also erected in the early part of the time the limestone crossing was built, however, the
1900s. For example, the Winona and St. Peter Rail- W&StP was owned by the Chicago and North Western
road (W&StP) completed many stone arches on its line Railway (C&NW). Although the C&NW acquired the
bisecting southern Minnesota en route to South Dakota. W&StP in 1867, the W&StP continued to operate under
By the beginning of the twentieth-first century, seven- its own corporate name into the early 1900s. 10
teen of these bridges were extant, and just over half had The Arches blends harmoniously into a verdant
been built during the first two decades of the twentieth landscape framed by limestone bluffs and outcroppings.
century. While many of these twentieth-century bridges The bridge was part of a larger improvement project
are quite handsome, such as the finely-crafted Bridge the W&StP initiated in the 1880s, replacing a number
No. 540 at Lamberton in Redwood County, the most of its faltering timber trestles with stone arches.
impressive stone arch crossing on the line remains the Facilitating this effort was Stockton Quarry, which
Arches, a nineteenth-century double arch spanning was located a short distance west of the Arches bridge
Garvin Brook.9 site. Stone harvested from the quarry was delivered to
The Arches was constructed in 1882 near Stockton the construction site by a railroad engine and flatcar.
in southeastern Minnesota’s Winona County, one of the Masons carved the stone into wedge-shaped blocks,
Stone Bridges 27
commonly known as voussoirs. Wedged together, the Avenue Bridge, and it is the only stone arch bridge
voussoirs formed the barrel of each arch. The keystone to span any part of the Mississippi River. The two
at the crown of the arch ring on the south side of the impressive crossings must have wowed visitors to
westernmost arch was embellished with the date 1882. late-nineteenth-century Minneapolis, a city that was
The spandrel, which is the space above and between not yet far removed from its humble frontier days.
the arches, was filled with earth and other materials. In Chiefly associated with the GN, the Stone Arch Bridge
essence, the tops of the arches and the stone sidewalls, was actually constructed by the Minneapolis Union
or spandrel walls, served as a basin, within which earth Railway. Established in late 1881, the railroad was one
was poured. Atop this fill material, the railroad laid its of Hill’s interests. At the time, the railroading tycoon
tracks. Historically, this filled-spandrel construction has was managing the St. Paul, Minneapolis and Manitoba
been the most common way to build an arch bridge.11 Railway (StPM&M), a company incorporated in 1879 to
Regrettably, the Arches, having decorated the land- assume the routes of the floundering St. Paul and Pacific
scape of southeastern Minnesota for more than 120 Railroad. The StPM&M became the principal compo-
years, is now threatened with demolition, as are some of nent of the GN when the latter was organized in late
the other arches on the old W&StP line across southern 1889. Along with numerous other rail lines, the Minne-
Minnesota. Recent interests wishing to rehabilitate the apolis Union Railway officially became part of the GN
railroad route apparently do not believe that many of in 1907.14
the arch bridges are important to the continuation of The primary purpose of the Minneapolis Union
the line.12 Railway was to establish a link between St. Paul and
While potential demolition looms for one of Winona that portion of Minneapolis on the west side of the
County’s structural icons, there is no such threat to a Mississippi River. By the early 1880s, the population of
stone arch crossing in Minneapolis that was completed Minneapolis was about forty-five thousand and growing
only one year after the Arches. Simply known as the quickly. The major portion of the town was on the west
Stone Arch Bridge, the structure is one of the most side of the river, but the main railroad links were on
fantastic stone arches in America. Along with the the east side of the waterway. Hill realized Minneapolis
immense Richardsonian Romanesque–style mansion on needed a rail line to carry passengers to a railroad depot
Summit Avenue in St. Paul, the Stone Arch Bridge serves near the city’s core. At that time, the core of Minne-
as a monument to James J. Hill and his Great Northern apolis was Bridge Square, a site near the Hennepin
Railway (GN). Plowden acknowledges the magnificence Avenue Bridge. The Stone Arch Bridge served as the
of what Hill accomplished in the Stone Arch Bridge: line’s final leg into Bridge Square.15
Work on the crossing began in January 1882, soon
With the crossing of the Mississippi River just below St. Anthony’s
after the formation of the Minneapolis Union Railway.
Falls . . . Hill built a bridge in the manner of a triumphal arch.
Hill had a problem, however. The site for the bridge’s
This is the Great Stone Bridge [Stone Arch Bridge], a tour de
east approach was below the Falls of St. Anthony,
force in every sense of the word. For the last 817 feet of its
while the site for the bridge’s west approach was just
western end, the bridge is constructed on a sweeping six-degree
above the falls. Hill could not simply erect a diagonal
curve. The problem of building a masonry bridge on such a curve
bridge connecting the two points, for the falls blocked
was almost without precedents. . . . Doubtful engineers tried
the way. And although Hill could have designed the
to dissuade Hill from attempting it. A bridge like that would
bridge to span the river just above the falls, making
never sustain the required load, they said. But Hill, encour-
the connection from one bank to the next simpler, the
aged by Colonel Charles C. Smith, who was to direct the work
weight of the structure may have undermined the falls.
. . . remained adamant. Years later, the man whose life was filled
Since Minneapolis was becoming the milling capital of
with achievements, admitted “the hardest undertaking I ever
the world by the early 1880s, due in a large degree to
had to face was the building of the Great Stone Arch Bridge.”13
the Falls of St. Anthony, Hill had little desire to erect
Hill’s crossing was completed a short distance a bridge with the potential to destroy the geographic
downriver of Thomas Griffith’s second Hennepin cash cow. Hill’s engineer, Charles C. Smith, solved the
28 Stone Bridges
Completed in 1883 by the Minneapolis Union Railway, an interest of James J. Hill’s, the Stone Arch Bridge was designed to skirt the downstream
edge of the Falls of St. Anthony and then sweep northward into the Union Depot near the Hennepin Avenue Bridge. Photograph ca. 1890; courtesy
of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Stone Bridges 29
These two photographs show
how timber forms were fash-
ioned to shape the arches
of the Stone Arch Bridge.
Photographs by Elmer &
Tenney and Henry R. Farr,
ca. 1882; courtesy of the
Minnesota Historical Society.
30 Stone Bridges
problem by building a roughly $700,000 bridge that a pedestrian and bicycle bridge. Thankfully, Minne-
skirted the southern edge of the falls at a diagonal, but apolis—indeed, Minnesota—had comprehended the
near the river’s west bank swept northwest, paralleling historic significance of the bridge and rehabilitated it
the river and leading Hill’s rail line directly into his for the pleasure of future generations.18
Union Depot, which he erected just below the west end While it is not surprising that Hill and his railroad
of the Hennepin Avenue Bridge in 1885, two years after contemporaries erected the majority of stone arch
the Stone Arch Bridge was finished.16 crossings in Minnesota, it may be surprising to learn
The monumentality of the Stone Arch Bridge is that the state’s oldest known stone arch bridge is not
extraordinary. Rising about eighty feet above the a railroad structure. Upon reflection, however, this
riverbed, it is an astounding 2,100 feet long. The bridge should not be surprising in the least. Completed in
was originally formed of twenty-three arches varying 1863, five years before Lanesboro erected its remarkably
from forty to one hundred feet in span. The stone used durable arched dam, and two decades ahead of Hill’s
to build the structure was quarried from various loca- stone arcade across our nation’s grandest river, the
tions, including Sauk Rapids and Mankato, Minnesota, Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge was erected
as well as Stone City, Iowa, and Bridgeport, Wisconsin. over Brown’s Creek, at the northern edge of the St.
Limestone for the bridge was also quarried near the Croix River community of Stillwater.19
construction site. Soon after it was completed, the state The Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge is a
railroad commissioner gushed, “One of the finest stone remnant of one of Minnesota’s earliest road-building
viaducts in the world . . . [the bridge] is constructed for a programs. By 1850, Minnesota, freshly christened a
thousand years, and with its massive masonry and lofty territory of the United States but still eight years from
arches recalls the solidity of Roman antiquity.” The rail- statehood, featured few land transportation corridors. This present-day view of the
road commissioner would not be the only gusher. More The railroads were two decades away from concerted Stone Arch Bridge shows the
steel deck-truss section that
than a century later, Daniel L. Schodek, in his book construction of rail lines. The main land routes through was incorporated in the original
Landmarks in American Civil Engineering, remarked, bridge in the 1960s.
“Although it seemed extravagant at the time, James
Hill’s insistence on hand-laid solid stone and an artful
curve, like his vision of American expansion westward,
seems to have paid off. A marvel when constructed
in 1882–1883, the Stone Arch Bridge with its massive
masonry and graceful arches is a wonderful survivor of
an ambitious era.”17
Hill’s epic bridge has undergone some change over
the years. During the first decade of the twentieth
century, the bridge was reinforced with concrete
fill and metal anchor rods. The most obvious altera-
tion occurred in the early 1960s, when two of the
arches near the structure’s west end were cut away
and replaced with a section of steel deck truss. The
modification came about to allow boats to reach the
government lock at the foot of the Falls of St. Anthony.
Although the bridge remains one of the country’s most
impressive stone arches, the 1960s alteration is a wound
that will never mend. Additional modification came in
the 1990s. By this time the GN was a distant memory,
and Hill’s landmark crossing, no longer servant to
passenger trains rolling toward Minneapolis, became
Stone Bridges 31
sota Territory, the House Committee
on Roads wrote, “That same fostering
care which has always been extended to
the new Territories of the country may,
in the opinion of the committee, well
be manifested towards Minnesota, in
opening and improving thoroughfares as
may be necessary for her protection . . .”
But the committee finished its thought
when it continued, “. . . and useful in
advancing her settlements.”21
The appropriation from the govern-
ment was initial funds for construction
of five military roads in Minnesota Terri-
tory. One road was to run along the east
bank of the Mississippi River from Point
Douglas, at the mouth of the St. Croix
River, to Fort Ripley. Another route
would traverse the distance from the
mouth of the Swan River, near present-
day Little Falls, to Long Prairie, while a
third route would parallel the west bank
of the Mississippi River from Mendota
to Wabasha. A fourth military road was
Built as a component of one of to run from Mendota to the mouth of the
Minnesota’s military roads, the
the territory were the Red River Trails. Put plainly, Big Sioux River, near Sioux City, Iowa. The last route
Point Douglas–St. Louis River
Road Bridge spanning Brown’s the small settlement population in Minnesota was not was planned to span the distance from Point Douglas
Creek at the northern edge of cohesively linked, stunting travel, communication, north to the Falls of the St. Louis River, near Lake Supe-
Stillwater is probably the oldest
and commerce. Henry Hastings Sibley, a fur trader rior. Later the ending point for the road was changed to
bridge still standing in the state.
Photograph taken in 2006. who became Minnesota’s first territorial delegate to the mouth of the St. Louis River on Superior Bay, at the
Congress, aided transportation links by convincing the head of Lake Superior. It was this last road that neces-
federal government to fund a series of military roads sitated the Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge
in Minnesota Territory. Congress passed the Minne- over Brown’s Creek at Stillwater.22
sota Road Act in July 1850, providing $40,000 for road Little is known of the bridge. Its completion date
construction.20 implies that it was not the first bridge at the site, for
As the term implies, military roads were ostensibly the bridge was erected thirteen years after Sibley began
for military purposes, such as moving the army from acquiring funds for the military roads. It would seem
one point to the next quickly: forcing the army to beat that a cohesive road, including bridges, would have
its way through wood and brush during periods of been in place sooner than 1863. In truth, however, the
crisis was unacceptable. Truthfully, though, military Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road was never finished
roads were more often used by settlers traveling from as a military road. In large part, this was because of
one population center to the next, or for helping settle the stinginess of Congress, which seemed to believe
previously unsettled areas. Politicians understood this, that $10,000, $15,000, or $20,000 toward one road or
even though they often couched their approval of mili- another was enough to complete the road. It wasn’t, of
tary roads in national security language. For example, course, and Sibley, as well as the representative who
in 1850, as Sibley lobbied for military roads in Minne- succeeded him, had to go back to a tightfisted Congress
32 Stone Bridges
The Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge was eventually incorporated into a milling operation, but the mill had been gone a decade or so by
the time this photograph was taken. Photograph ca. 1940; courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Stone Bridges 33
year after year and ask for more money, which was the double-arched Seventh Street Improvement Arches
not always forthcoming. In any event, two-thirds of is an extremely rare crossing. Featuring a strange
the Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road was largely moniker, the Seventh Street Improvement Arches
complete by 1858, one year after government appro- was named for the improvement of St. Paul’s Seventh
priations for military roads ceased, and the same year Street in the 1880s. The bridge spans the former line
Minnesota became a state. And even though this is of the St. Paul and Duluth Railroad just east of a busy
five years before the bridge was finished over Brown’s downtown, but most automobile drivers have no idea
Creek, the historical evidence seems to indicate that the that they are passing over an exceptional bridge as
Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge was the first they motor to and from the Dayton’s Bluff area. The
crossing at its site.23 Seventh Street Improvement Arches is special because
What is known about the Point Douglas–St. Louis of its helicoid design. Standing beneath the bridge
River Road Bridge is that it is a small stone arch that peering through either arch, an observer immediately
was erected using locally quarried limestone. The notices that the stone courses forming the barrels of
builders were local men Fredrick Curtis and Michael the arches spiral. In other words, the stone courses
Hanly. It appears, however, that the Board of County create a helix. Whereas the barrels of most stone arches
Commissioners for Washington County was not are made of wedge-shaped voussoirs—stones that, in a
entirely satisfied with the work of Curtis and Hanly, way, resemble the pieces of a pie—the stone voussoirs
for it refused to accept the duo’s effort. Eventually for a helicoid arch look something like slightly twisted
the bridge was used, implying that the board and the rectangles. Put another way, the roughly rectangular
two builders resolved the issue. Not so, according to stone voussoirs are slightly warped. Placing rectangular,
Tom Curtis, grandson of Fredrick. In 1974, eighty-two- slightly warped stone voussoirs of the same dimensions
year-old Tom Curtis, a retired stonemason and local end to end creates a spiraling stone course. By forming
historian, argued that his grandfather and Michael many parallel spiraling stone courses, engineers can
Hanly were never paid for their work. Curtis concluded erect a substantially skewed stone arch bridge. Since
that costs for the bridge probably totaled about $500. Seventh Street passed over the tracks of the St. Paul and
More than a century later, after compounding interest, Duluth Railroad at a sixty-three-degree angle, a skewed
Curtis believed that the relatives of the two bridge bridge was precisely what was needed when engineer
builders were owed about $200,000. The historian William Albert Truesdell began improving Seventh
made the argument tongue-in-cheek, though, as he Street in the 1880s.26
never submitted a bill to local officials. And even In his 1909 obituary, Truesdell was described by
though he protested to a journalist that he was serious the Association of Engineering Societies as a “bluff,
about collecting the fee, that journalist observed that undiplomatic, outspoken man of rigid standards [who]
the “twinkle” in the elderly gentleman’s eye belied his seldom smiled, and yet had a kindly manner, revealing
intentions.24 a character which commanded respect, admiration,
The Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge was and affection.” He was remarkably intelligent as well,
used at least until 1891, when a wider, wood bridge was for the Seventh Street Improvement Arches is major
built about two hundred feet to the east and the road engineering. The bridge is so exceptional, in fact, that
adjusted to pass over it. In 1905, a man named John it is the only bridge of its type ever built in Minnesota.
Kaplan incorporated the bridge into a three-story mill Even more noteworthy, it is one of only a handful of
he erected on the site. But the mill did not succeed, such bridges known to exist in America. One reason for
and it was removed in 1927, leaving only the bridge. An this is that few engineers in late-nineteenth-century
artifact of the government road network of the mid- America knew how to build a helicoid arch, a bridge
1800s, the Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge is type pioneered in Europe by English architect Peter
now part of private property. It may be the oldest extant Nicholson. The fact that the skewed bridge is still
bridge of any type in Minnesota.25 standing, and obviously supporting far more traffic than
Like the Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road Bridge, Truesdell ever imagined when he completed the struc-
34 Stone Bridges
One segment of the Seventh Street Improvement Arches appears here. Photograph ca. 1900; courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Stone Bridges 35
neering sophistication of Truesdell’s effort, is neverthe-
less an impressive stone arch bridge. The crossing’s
dull appellation is the result of Minnesota’s numbering
system for bridges. Many bridges, perhaps most, have a
locally common, or historic, name—such as the Arches.
Regrettably, the historic name often does not make it
into the written record, and so bridges are frequently
referenced by a state number, a designation bereft of
charm, distinctiveness, and description.
Situated in a hilly, somewhat isolated area a few
miles west of Winona, Bridge No. L1409 passes over
Garvin Brook, the same stream spanned by the Arches,
which is only about five miles southwest. Unlike the
Arches, however, Bridge No. L1409 is not a railroad
structure. Instead, it is a highway bridge carrying a
gravel roadway. The rather narrow, forty-five-foot-
long crossing is formed of a single, segmental arch. A
segmental arch differs from a semicircular arch because
its intrados (the lower surface of the voussoirs forming
the curve of the arch) is less than half a circle. In other
words, the rise of a segmental arch is less than the rise
of a semicircular arch. Completed in 1895, roughly a
dozen years after the Seventh Street Improvement
Arches, the segmental-arched Bridge No. L1409 is
Minnesota’s best remaining example of a country stone
arch bridge.28
Most stone arch highway bridges in Minnesota can
be placed in one of three broad categories: country,
city, or park. Country stone arches are defined as those
masonry-arch bridges “built by either unincorporated
towns or small rural villages on remote farm roads.”
City stone arch bridges were built mainly in Minne-
apolis, St. Paul, Duluth, and Carver. When these city
Designed by William Albert Truesdell and completed in 1884 as part of bridges were erected in the late nineteenth and early
St. Paul’s Seventh Street improvement, the Seventh Street Improvement
Arches is a singular bridge in Minnesota. This view illustrates how the
twentieth centuries, each community was a regional
stone courses of each arch spiral. Photograph taken in 2006. trade center. With the exception of Carver, they remain
so. Obviously, park stone arch bridges were raised in
parks. Since country stone arches supported less traffic
than city stone arches, their construction was often less
ture in 1884, is testament to the engineering acumen robust. Moreover, many country stone arches crossed
of the man who seldom smiled. The Seventh Street narrow waterways, such as brooks that ran dry in
Improvement Arches, a structural marvel declared a summer months, and so necessitated relatively petite
national historic civil engineering landmark by the bridges. Additionally, the aesthetics of most country
American Society of Civil Engineers, is the only bridge stone arches did not match that of city stone arches,
known to have been designed by Truesdell. Odd.27 where bridges frequently reflected civic pride. Park
Bridge No. L1409, although unable to match the engi- stone arch bridges, often found within parks inside
36 Stone Bridges
municipal boundaries, were usually designed to be drel walls and the earth fill that supported the roadway.
especially fetching.29 Even so, its arch was so strong that it remained in place.
Not surprisingly, the majority of country stone arch What will happen to this principal part of the bridge
highway bridges were built in southeastern Minne- is uncertain. Perhaps it can be incorporated into a new
sota, one of the state’s most geographically stony bridge at the site, but it will not be surprising if it is
regions. Many crossings built in this part of the state removed to make way for a less-distinct crossing.
about the time of Bridge No. L1409 were a result of The country stone arch trend in southeastern
the Good Roads Movement, a late-nineteenth- and Minnesota continued into the early twentieth century.
early-twentieth-century coalition of politicians, motor- Twenty years after Bridge No. L1409 was built, Houston
ists, bicyclists, and farmers who advocated improved County, immediately south of Winona County, erected
rural roadways and bridges. Minnesota’s Good Roads Bridge No. L4013, a stone arch over Riceford Creek in
Movement officially began in St. Paul in January Black Hammer Township, about eight miles west of the
1893, when more than four hundred delegates from county seat, Caledonia. Situated in a wooded area, the
throughout the state gathered for a two-day conven- bridge’s length is typical of most country stone arches;
tion. The state’s civil engineers threw their support it measures only about twelve feet long. Nevertheless,
behind the movement two years later. The Good Roads the modest-dimensioned bridge is distinctive.32
Movement claimed a significant victory
in 1898, when a state tax for county
bridge construction under the guid-
ance of a state highway commission was
approved, although the commission was
not formally organized until 1905.30
The uniqueness of Bridge No. L1409
is derived from its size. Whereas most
country stone arches rarely exceeded
fifteen feet in length, Bridge No. L1409
was three times longer, rivaling some
stone arches constructed in urban
centers. Furthermore, while most
country stone arches were formed of
rubble masonry, Bridge No. L1409 was
crafted with rough-faced ashlar (dressed
stone). This aesthetic clearly trumped
that of most country stone arches.
The crossing was designed by Fred H.
Pickles, the county surveyor for Winona
County in 1895 and 1896, and it was built
for $1,340 by local stonemason Charles
Bridge No. L1409 was erected over Garvin Brook in
Butler. Other architectural and engi- Winona County in 1895. The bridge was substantially
neering works in Minnesota by either Pickles or Butler damaged by severe flooding in 2007, yet its prin-
have yet to be discovered.31 cipal structural component, the arch ring, defiantly
resisted the onslaught. Large photograph taken in
Sadly, Bridge No. L1409 was forced to demonstrate 2005 by Robert W. Gardner Jr. Inset photograph
the strength of its arch in summer 2007, when extreme taken in 2007 by David F. Kramer, Winona County
flooding in southeastern Minnesota punished many Highway Department.
Stone Bridges 37
In the early twentieth century, the newly-formed approved was a short-span stone arch with well-defined
Minnesota Highway Commission (MHC) created a impost ledges (the support point, such as the top of a
series of standard plans for bridges, including designs wall or column, from whence an arch springs). The
for beam spans, plate girders, reinforced-concrete impost ledges, although aesthetically pleasing, were
slabs, and concrete girders, as well as standard draw- likely practical features intended solely to support the
ings for through trusses and pony trusses. MHC reports centering (temporary framework) used to form the
reveal little evidence of standard plans for stone arches, bridge’s arch.33
however. Since stone arches have been a somewhat rare Although archives have been loath to give up a
bridge type in America, this is probably not surprising. hard copy of a standard stone arch plan, one existed
But a standard plan did exist and likely was created because the bridge built in Black Hammer Township
specifically for stone-rich southeastern Minnesota. In was essentially replicated in other counties in south-
1915, the plan was employed by Alfred J. Rasmussen, eastern Minnesota. Clearly, engineers in the south-
the local MHC field engineer, when Houston County eastern corner of the state had a standard stone arch
requested he design a bridge to span Riceford Creek design that they shared. Whether the MHC officially
in Black Hammer Township. The bridge that was developed it or it was created by the commission’s
field engineers operating in southeastern Minnesota is
uncertain, however. In the late 1980s, during his study
Houston County’s Bridge No. L4013 is a small stone arch built over
of the state’s stone arch highway bridges, historian
Riceford Creek in Black Hammer Township in 1915. Although discovering
a standard plan for stone arch bridges in Minnesota would be a surprise, Jeffrey A. Hess summed up the historic significance
this crossing apparently had one, for the bridge design was repeated of Bridge No. L4013, “The structure is important as
several times in various locations in southeastern Minnesota. Photo-
the only surviving, authenticated example of an early
graph taken in 2005 by Robert W. Gardner Jr.
twentieth-century, state-designed, stone arch bridge.”
Unfortunately, the historically significant crossing has
received minimal maintenance over the years, evident
by the joints around the voussoirs, which are largely
absent of mortar. Still, the ninety-year-old bridge was
well constructed, and so exhibits little settling.34
Almost at the other end of Minnesota, the Stewart
Creek Stone Arch Bridge is better known and better
cared for than the largely unseen crossing in Black
Hammer Township. Erected over Stewart Creek on
Duluth’s Skyline Parkway, a scenic thoroughfare
overlooking much of Duluth and Lake Superior, the
bridge is part of the city’s park system. Little building
information exists for this structure, however, for both
the engineer and the contractor are unknown. One of
only a few park stone arch bridges in Minnesota, the
Stewart Creek Stone Arch Bridge was erected around
1925, about the time Skyline Parkway was extended in
the southwestern part of the city, thus implying that the
crossing was part of boulevard construction.35
As with other park stone arches, the Stewart Creek
Stone Arch Bridge was designed to be especially hand-
some. The bridge’s attractiveness is derived from its
rawness, a kind of crudity that makes it one of the most
visually appealing stone arches in Minnesota. Hess
38 Stone Bridges
One of the few park stone arches
in Minnesota, the Stewart Creek
Stone Arch Bridge was erected
around 1925 over Duluth’s
Stewart Creek. The bridge exudes
a rawness uncommon to many
stone arches—an appealing
aesthetic. Photograph taken in
2006.
Stone Bridges 39
Finished by the Works Progress
Administration in 1938, Split Rock
Bridge over Split Rock Creek
south of Pipestone may be the
most beautiful of Minnesota’s
stone arch bridges. Photograph
taken in 2005.
wing walls, the lines of the fifty-foot-long bridge are it was not unusual for federal relief bridge projects to
broken only by the graceful curve of its segmental arch. incorporate stone, usually the building material was
Lamentably, the crossing’s appearance is marred some- intended only as a facing. But since Pipestone County
what by efflorescence, as water-soluble salts leach from had a rich stone tradition, Split Rock Bridge was meant
the stone at different points on the bridge.39 to showcase the local masonry heritage. At a time in
This wonderful bridge exists because it was part America when load-bearing stone arch bridges were
of a federal relief effort. It was erected by the Works mostly memory, the WPA opted for such a structure
Progress Administration (WPA), which came into over Split Rock Creek.40
existence in 1935 and was renamed the Work Projects Pipestone County highway engineer Elmer Keeler
Administration in 1939. Its primary purpose was to put prepared the plans for the $46,000 bridge. He was
the employable, yet unemployed, to work in relatively aided by Albert G. Plagens, a consulting architect from
modest projects benefiting society. The bridge the New Ulm, Minnesota. Work began in 1937, about the
WPA finished over Split Rock Creek was but a piece time the dam was completed, and was finished one year
of a larger project. In the mid-1930s, the WPA built a later. As a final touch, the stone parapet in the south-
masonry dam across Split Rock Creek, an obstruction east wing wall featured a stone commemorative plaque
that created a modest lake that formed the core of Split inscribed Split Rock Bridge, Works Progress Adminis-
Rock Creek State Recreational Reserve. The bridge was tration Project, 1938.41
erected just downstream of the dam and lake. While One of the notable masonry structures in Minne-
40 Stone Bridges
An especially late version of a
sota, Split Rock Bridge was probably the last stone arch stone arch bridge, Split Rock
Bridge likely employed stone
bridge to be built in the state. Although other bridges because of the rich stone-carving
resembling stone arches were erected, mainly by federal tradition of Pipestone County.
relief entities like the WPA, these attractive crossings Photograph taken in 1938; cour-
tesy of the Minnesota Historical
featured arches formed of metal or reinforced concrete. Society.
As Minnesota’s last hurrah at stone arch bridge
building, Split Rock Bridge is an exquisite nod to one of
America’s most endearing bridge types.
Stone Bridges 41
i r o n a n d S t e e l
B r i d g e S
And I think how many thousands
Of care encumbered men,
Each bearing his burden of sorrows,
Have crossed the bridge since then.
Mr. Longfellow was not thinking of our steel arch bridge when he wrote his somber poem. If he had taken
this as a point of view, he would have sung a different song. The thousands who crossed the bridge would not
all have been loaded up to the muzzle with care and sorrows. There are several sad persons in Minneapolis
and some of them go across the bridge occasionally, but the majority of Minneapolitans are light hearted and
happy, especially just at the time they cross this bridge, which is in itself a source of pleasure and pride.
—“A Bridge Count,” Minneapolis Tribune, February 7, 1891
ironandSteelBridges
43
F ew newspaper articles today begin with
verse. Perhaps present-day journalists are more
objective, less apt to interject emotion into a story. But
of infrastructural art that, maybe, traversing it actually
made some feel rather cheery.
The bridge came about because the second
in Minneapolis in the early 1890s, the city’s population Hennepin Avenue Bridge, engineer Thomas Griffith’s
was bursting in all directions, as was the built environ- stone-towered suspension span, was a bust. Most
The first longitudinal section ment necessary to support the population. It was a time agreed that Griffith’s structure was an amazing-looking
of the third bridge at Hennepin when the community was morphing so quickly into a bridge, but, sadly, it was unable to support a city flour-
Avenue in Minneapolis was sophisticated, major metropolitan city that excitement, ishing much faster than most could have imagined
completed adjacent to the
second Hennepin Avenue Bridge pride, and partiality ruled. In truth, the third Hennepin when it was built. In 1885, midway through a decade
in 1888. Photograph ca. 1889; Avenue Bridge at Minneapolis was such a lovely piece that would see the city’s population increase fourfold,
courtesy of the Minnesota
Historical Society.
renown chiefly for his reinforced-concrete, flat-slab although uncommon, are almost always highway
framing efforts, a construction method used for multi- bridges. Rarely did railroads build such structures,
story buildings that employed supporting columns for the crossing type’s uncommon plasticity is largely
surmounted with flared capitals, sometimes called unsuitable for the heavy weight of a train.10 Turner’s
mushroom capitals. This type of engineering was also nimble, three-hinged arch bridge is special, however, as
incorporated into some reinforced-concrete bridges, noted by Carl W. Condit:
the first of which was Turner’s Lafayette Avenue Bridge
The light traffic of the Soo Line and the smaller axle loading
completed over the Soo Line tracks in St. Paul in 1909.
of its locomotives allowed Turner to reduce the arch spans to
It no longer exists.8
essentials of remarkable purity and delicacy—slender three-
The Soo Line High Bridge took the place of another
hinged arch ribs identical in span and rise, and an extremely
huge structure that was situated a short distance down-
light and open pattern of spandrel bracing. The central hinge is a
river. The earlier bridge was a mix of various truss types
curious sliding joint designed to lock into a rigid unit under the
and was built by the Wisconsin Central Railway (WC)
weight of the train and thus intermittently to transform the rib
in 1884. The Soo Line gained controlling interest of the
into a two-hinged arch.11
WC in 1909, rerouting the rail line’s route from Chip-
pewa Falls, Wisconsin, to St. Paul, which necessitated In other words, as a live load passes over the graceful
the new bridge. The original WC bridge was removed a bridge, the structure becomes stiffer, easily supporting
few years after completion of the steel arch.9 the train.
is elevated, a geography that practically compelled apolis and St. Paul, allowing Milwaukee Road trains to
late-nineteenth-century bridge engineers to raise deck avoid the rail line’s circuitous route between the cities
trusses over the waterway. For instance, the Milwaukee via the bridge over the Minnesota River at Mendota.
Road constructed a deck-truss bridge a short distance Five years later, the Minneapolis Western Railway, a
downriver, below Franklin Avenue, several years before railroad incorporated by several prominent milling
NP Bridge No. 9 was finished. Completed in 1880, this industrialists to serve the Minneapolis mills on the
extant crossing provided a direct link between Minne- west bank of the Mississippi River, erected a wrought
The Sorlie Memorial Bridge is situated just south Arthur Gustav Sorlie, a
of a lonely remnant of NP Bridge No. 95, a solitary former governor of North
stone pier that appears to be wading the river, perhaps Dakota who died one year
seeking its steel superstructure, which was removed a before the bridge was
few years ago after officials concluded the old railroad completed. At the time
bridge turned pedestrian bridge contributed to area of his death, Governor
flooding. It was unnecessary for the MHD to design Sorlie was also a high-
the Sorlie Memorial Bridge because the North Dakota ranking official within
State Highway Department took up the task. Even so, the highway department
each state was responsible for $75,000 of the bridge’s and a tireless promoter
roughly $316,000 cost. The remaining dollars came of well-constructed roads
from the federal government.65 and bridges. In fact,
The roller bearings of the Sorlie
The Minneapolis Bridge Company erected the Sorlie the bronze name plate Memorial Bridge allow the bridge
Memorial Bridge, completing a steel, rigid-connected honoring the governor that is mounted to the Sorlie to shift with the plastic river
Parker through truss of two spans, each roughly 280 Memorial Bridge carries the epitaph “A True Friend of banks. Photograph taken in 2006.
feet long. The builder was not the Minneapolis Bridge Roads and Bridges.”66
Company begun by Commadore Jones that evolved into At first glance, the bridge may not seem unusual for
the Minneapolis Bridge and Iron Company, however. a late-1920s Parker through truss. But closer inspec-
Neither of those firms existed by the 1910s. Instead, tion reveals that the bridge is resting on bearings that
a new Minneapolis Bridge Company was established resemble wheels. Typically, bearings for truss bridges
about 1914 by Alexander Bayne, who was, as noted are not wheels, but rockers or some other support that
previously, a disciple of Commadore Jones and Seth allows slight movement. The Sorlie Memorial Bridge’s
Hewett. The Sorlie Memorial Bridge is named for circular bearings are the result of site conditions. The
carry a roadway, making the construction similar to Zumbro Falls. With the
that of a stone arch bridge. Actually, many multiplate exception of locals, most
arch bridges resemble stone arch bridges because their automobile drivers on
facades have been decorated with stone. Unless the the highway probably
corrugated-metal arch beneath the roadway is visible, it have no idea a bridge
is not uncommon for some to assume that a multiplate exists at the site, for there
crossing is a stone arch.84 are no bridge railings
This type of bridge was popular as part of the road- to reveal the structure’s
building programs under President Roosevelt’s New location. An unusually
Deal. Cheaper than stone arch bridges, multiplate high multiplate arch,
crossings clothed in stone appealed to the aesthetic Bridge No. 5827 exhibits
sensibilities inherent in many transportation infrastruc- finely crafted rough-
ture projects of the time; there may never be another faced ashlar and stepped
period in American history where roadside beautifica- and flared wing walls.
tion is so paramount. Many of Minnesota’s picturesque The bridge must have
multiplate bridges are located in rural places. As a looked stunning when
result, few ever see these wonderful masqueraders that completed in 1938. Today
represent a time when America believed that even the the structure would
road less traveled deserved visual enrichment.85 benefit from a thorough
One such road is Minnesota Highway 60 in cleaning, as much of the
rural Wabasha County. The roadway passes over an stone is blemished with
outstanding multiplate arch that spans a minor coulee the grime of almost sixty
not far from the eastern edge of the small town of years. Costing only about
ConcreteBridges
117
I n the late twentieth century, Minneapolis
built a new bridge across the Mississippi River at
Hennepin Avenue. For a century, the steel ribbed
when political powers demanded that a bridge over the
Mississippi River at Hennepin Avenue must accommo-
date six lanes—a stipulation that made some eyes roll—
arch completed by Horace E. Horton of Rochester, the four-lane, ribbed arch bridge was doomed.1
Minnesota, and the Wrought Iron Bridge Company of Whether the steel ribbed arch needed to go is
Canton, Ohio, faithfully carried citizens of Minneapolis debatable, but at least the city erected a handsome
across America’s grandest river. By the 1980s, some replacement. Since the site had hosted two previous
in city government believed the bridge had outlived suspension bridges, Minneapolis thought it appro-
its usefulness and pushed hard for a new crossing. priate to honor that heritage with another suspension
Others pushed back. Some politicians and engineers structure. Although the site did not require a modern-
argued that the bridge was in such poor shape that even day suspension span, city leaders understood—as
rehabilitation would not allow it to support modern city leaders before them understood—that this was a
traffic loads. Not so, claimed one engineer and others gateway site: a location compelling a special bridge
desiring to preserve the bridge. Opponents believed because it would shepherd citizens into the city’s
the arch bridge could be rehabilitated to handle traffic core. Of all the bridge designs submitted for Hennepin
loads common to downtown at a cost substantially less Avenue at the Mississippi River, the city chose, in the
than building a new suspension bridge. Perhaps, but words of one local journalist, the “Cadillac version.”
1 22 Concrete Bridges
1907, the sixty-four-foot-long Bridge No. L2162 is no
longer used, as the gravel roadway that once passed
over it has been shifted slightly to the east. The new
thoroughfare goes over a new bridge, a concrete-girder
crossing that deserves little attention.12
Bridge No. L2162 no longer carries vehicles; it has
been allowed to drift back to nature. While the sod and
grass sprouting across the deck make for an interesting
visual, it also spurs disenchantment and an obvious
question, Will this be the fate of many historic bridges?
The answer to that question continues to be debated
among those who work within the preservation field,
as well as those governmental agencies responsible for
the various historic crossings marking Minnesota. The
public has a voice in this debate as well, although that
voice is often silent.
At the same time Gillham was finishing his modest-
sized reinforced-concrete arch structure in Beaver
Creek, the Marsh Engineering Company was erecting
the Marsh Concrete Rainbow Arch Bridge in Cambria The Marsh Concrete Rainbow
Township in Blue Earth County, the same county Arch Bridge in Cambria Township
hosting the Kern Bridge. Alas, the Marsh Concrete The bridge type differs from most arched crossings in Blue Earth County was erected
across the Little Cottonwood
Rainbow Arch Bridge is reminiscent of Gillham’s because the arches carrying the deck are not below River in 1911; it no longer serves
Bridge No. L2162—not in design, but in fate. Again, the the roadway but rise above it; verticals descending traffic. Designed by the Marsh
roadway has been shifted to the east slightly, requiring a from the arches hold the floor beams that support the Engineering Company of Des
Moines, Iowa, the bridge is one of
new, undistinguished bridge. The small Marsh Concrete deck. This type of arch bridge is sometimes called a the oldest Marsh arch crossings
Rainbow Arch Bridge decays, and its deck sprouts turf. through arch, because drivers pass through the arches. still in existence. Photograph
The Marsh Engineering Company of Des Moines, Travelers negotiating a Marsh rainbow arch see the taken in 2005.
Iowa, was founded by James Barney Marsh as the arch crowns at either side. This is similar to passing
Marsh Bridge Company in 1904. Marsh was a native over a pony-truss bridge and viewing the trusses to left
of Wisconsin who moved to Iowa in 1877 to attend and right. Marsh rainbow arches ultimately suffered
the Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic the same lot as many truss bridges, since they could
Arts (now Iowa State University). He remained in Des not be easily widened to support greater traffic flow
Moines for the rest of his life, working as an agent for a or the ever-increasing size of farm machinery. When
few bridge companies before establishing his own. The Blue Earth County’s Marsh Concrete Rainbow Arch
Marsh Bridge Company was renamed the Marsh Engi- Bridge was added to the National Register of Historic
neering Company in 1909, two years before Marsh filed Places in 1980, Minnesota had but a half dozen of these
a patent for a reinforced-concrete rainbow arch design. modest-sized structures. Some of these have now been
The same year he received the patent for the unique lost, including Bridge No. 944, which was constructed
bridge type, he completed the sixty-foot-long crossing in Blue Earth County’s Danville Township in 1914 and
in Cambria Township over the Little Cottonwood River spanned the Big Cobb River. It was replaced in the early
in northwest Blue Earth County. Clearly, then, this is 1980s. The Alvarado Bridge was erected across the
one of the oldest Marsh rainbow arches in the country, Snake River immediately west of Alvarado in Marshall
and it is definitely the oldest Marsh rainbow arch County in 1925. Removed in 1969, this crossing may
remaining in Minnesota.13 have been the most striking Marsh Arch ever raised on
A Marsh rainbow arch is formed of two arched ribs. a Minnesota roadway.14
Duluth’s Seven Bridges Road receives its name from seven handsome
concrete arches marking the thoroughfare. Designed by the Minneapolis
firm of Morrell and Nichols, the bridges were constructed along the
two-mile stretch of roadway in 1910 and 1911. Three of the seven bridges
are shown here. Photographs taken in 2006.
Public advocacy for a bridge at Third Avenue in bridge erected on a slightly different line from what
Minneapolis began in 1912, one year before Cappelen was planned for the concrete arch, thus avoiding the
returned to the prominent municipal engineering posi- delicate stratum. This time the public was unhappy, for
tion. A bridge was necessary for the same reason each its growing aesthetic sophistication demanded that an
Hennepin Avenue Bridge was erected: the population artistic-looking crossing span the greatest of all Amer-
continued to flourish. Minneapolis asked the Concrete ican rivers inside the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
Steel Engineering Company of New York to complete Despite the public criticism, the city council endorsed
a design for a concrete-arch bridge, but power and Cappelen’s truss bridge design. Interestingly, Cappelen
milling businesses along the river that were dependent did not.33
on the Falls of St. Anthony were not enthused, fearing Even as he was planning the large truss bridge,
that a heavy bridge above the falls might destroy the Cappelen was reworking the problem of building an
natural resource. As Hill realized so many years earlier aesthetically pleasing concrete arch just above the
when seeking a location for his stone crossing, much of falls. He concluded that such a bridge could be built by
the river foundation at this point is weak. After some of curving it around weaker stratum areas and creating a
the enterprises that used the power of the falls threat- number of spans of more than two hundred feet to leap
ened a lawsuit against Minneapolis, Cappelen opted over other weak foundation sites. After laying his plan
for an unusually long-span parabolic through-truss before city officials and others, Cappelen’s concept was
navigation channel is a 264-foot-long through arch, channel with large vessels would be impossible because
also called a rainbow arch. It is similar to the Marsh the ribs would obstruct the watercourse. It appears that
Concrete Rainbow Arch Bridge in Cambria Township barrel arches rather than ribbed arches were employed
in Blue Earth County, except it reflects a much larger at the northwest end of the bridge because extra
scale. The three arch spans at the northwest side of the headroom was required at that point as well; the barrel
river are barrels and together total about 291 feet. These arches have a higher springing line than the ribbed
spans resemble concrete slabs that have been bent into arches. With the construction of the new Robert Street
arches.43 Bridge, the line of the Chicago Great Western Railway
The engineering firm designed a through-arch main was rerouted beneath one of the barrel arches rather
span because it allowed considerable vertical clearance than below the main span. This made the intersec-
between the navigation channel and the deck of the tion of the bridges less convoluted looking than previ-
bridge. A through arch is essentially a ribbed arch, but ously, although the junction of the two still appears a
it is a nontraditional ribbed arch because a single rib bit odd. By the time the railroad line over the river had
passes through either side of the bridge deck, each rib been rerouted, the Chicago Great Western Railway
crowning well above the roadway. If the arches of the had replaced its original swing span with the current
Robert Street Bridge’s main span had been traditional vertical-lift span. The Robert Street Bridge’s other
ribs peaking beneath the deck, plying the navigation barrel arches were designed to span additional railroad
14 0 Concrete Bridges
No concrete arch built in the Minneapolis–St. Paul burne County and educated at the University of Minne-
region after the Fort Snelling–Mendota Bridge equaled sota, Babcock became so well-known in the 1920s and
its “articulated quality,” but then none had a similar site early 1930s for his Babcock Plan for major transporta-
demanding such an extraordinarily long crossing.52 tion arterials that Minnesotans could scarcely peruse
The next large reinforced-concrete arch was raised their local newspapers and not read his name. Interest-
over the Mississippi River at Ford Parkway, connecting ingly, the constitutional amendment named for Babcock
the southern neighborhoods of Minneapolis and St. and adopted by public vote in 1920 is so detailed that
Paul. The Intercity Bridge, also known as the Ford its length is greater than all previous amendments
Bridge, is only a spirited hike northwest from the Fort combined. Minneapolis and St. Paul could not have
Snelling–Mendota Bridge. The Intercity Bridge was chosen a more qualified individual to chair the Joint
built because civic leaders in Minneapolis and St. Paul Bridge Committee.54
desired residential development near the Ford Motor Construction of the 1,500-foot-long Intercity Bridge
Company plant, a complex completed in 1924 on the began in August 1925. It finished in June 1927. Costing The deck has been widened to
east side of the Mississippi River, adjacent to Edsel Minneapolis and St. Paul roughly $1.4 million, the accommodate modern traffic
loads, but the Fort Snelling–
Avenue (renamed Ford Parkway in 1928). The plant’s bridge is formed of five ribbed arches, two that are Mendota Bridge still features that
construction included a hydroelectric facility, which 139 feet long and three measuring 300 feet in length. “articulated quality” that brought
was erected at the east end of Upper Mississippi River Of all the grand open-spandrel, reinforced-concrete it national renown. Photograph
taken in 2006.
Lock and Dam No. 1, a
structure situated imme-
diately downriver of the
bridge site.53
A joint committee of
public officials and engi-
neers from Minneapolis
and St. Paul was created
to bring the bridge to frui-
tion. The committee was
chaired by none other
than Charles Merritt
Babcock, an official so
important to Minnesota’s
transportation heritage
that he is deserving of a
comprehensive biography.
Minnesota’s first commis-
sioner of highways when
the MHD replaced the
MHC, Babcock merits
much credit for bringing
about the state’s trunk
highway system. In fact,
the legislation inau-
gurating the roadway
network is titled the
Babcock Amendment.
Born in Minnesota’s Sher-
Concrete Bridges 14 1
arches decorating the Twin Cities area, the Intercity until after World War II did robust construction begin
Bridge is the most classical in appearance, although the near the automobile plant.58
Anoka–Champlin Mississippi River Bridge evokes the Like the other huge reinforced-concrete arches,
style as well. The classicism of the Intercity Bridge is the Intercity Bridge has endured time’s toll well. Not
derived from the paired spandrel columns with defined surprisingly, its deck has been rebuilt and widened,
pedestals and capitals rising from the ribbed arches to a rehabilitation project that is largely inevitable in a
support the deck. Additionally, the structure bridging region with a continually expanding population. When
the space between each set of paired columns is semi- the deck was rebuilt in the early 1970s, the original
circular in form, a pleasing aesthetic for a monumental railings were replaced with bland horizontal, metal
bridge that received no artistic recommendations from pipe railings that were common at the time, replace-
architects, a fact that angered some local architects.55 ment railings similar to those currently detracting from
The bridge’s principal designer, Martin Sigvart Grytbak, the otherwise splendid profile of the Cappelen Memo-
an engineer who emigrated from Norway about 1905, rial Bridge. Thankfully, when the deck of the Intercity
voiced displeasure with other design professionals who Bridge again was rehabilitated at the turn of the twenty-
felt spurned because they were not consulted on the first century, aesthetic notions had rebooted and attrac-
bridge’s final appearance: tive new railings appropriate to the bridge’s period of
construction were installed.59
Certain factions in St. Paul were anxious to postpone the project
The Intercity Bridge was followed by the Cedar
indefinitely, and for awhile had the newspapers and a number of
Avenue Bridge and the Anoka–Champlin Missis-
city organizations attacking the committee and engineers which
sippi River Bridge, the last two monumental arches in
had the bridge in charge, and the architects especially were
the Twin Cities region built during this prolific era of
incensed over not having been consulted in the design of the
reinforced-concrete arches. The Cedar Avenue Bridge
structure. The plans when completed were severely criticized by
spans the Mississippi River at Cedar Avenue, near the
the architects. . . .56
west bank campus of the University of Minnesota, and
It appears, however, that once this bridge designed immediately downriver of the site of the former Inter-
by committee was finished, criticism faded and acco- state Highway 35W Bridge, the interesting-looking steel
lades began, clearly a credit to the efforts of Grytbak deck truss with a curved lower chord that collapsed
and the others on the team. Grytbak, who worked for on August 1, 2007, killing thirteen people and injuring
the Northern Pacific Railway before becoming the dozens of others. In the northwest metropolitan area,
bridge engineer for St. Paul in 1913, designed other the arch bridge over the Mississippi River that links
notable structures as well, including the Kellogg Boule- Anoka in Anoka County with Champlin in Hennepin
vard Viaduct, which was erected in 1930. He remained County carries U.S. Highway 169. Both open-spandrel,
in his municipal engineering position until after the ribbed-arch bridges were completed in 1929. Even
Second World War. Eventually, his 2,100-foot-long though some of the I beam approaches for the Cedar
viaduct was demolished.57 Avenue Bridge were built beginning in 1923, work on the
Regrettably, the Intercity Bridge did not have the arches did not start until 1926. Erection of the Anoka–
desired effect on development around the Ford plant, Champlin Mississippi River Bridge started in 1928.60
at least initially. Not long after St. Paul built and paved The Cedar Avenue Bridge, which was especially
new roadways near the complex, the stock market welcomed by those living in South Minneapolis yet
tumbled, taking livelihoods with it. As occurred just working in the industrial areas of Northeast Minne-
about everywhere, the Great Depression tempered apolis, is the most reserved of all the grand arches,
residential and commercial development around the implying that it too was a construction project with
Ford plant. Further, growth increased somewhat in little architectural input. As with the other arch bridges,
already developed areas across the river in Minneapolis, its visual appeal is derived chiefly from the arches
since many who worked at the Ford facility now had themselves, and with the exception of simple, narrow,
easy access across the river via the Intercity Bridge. Not vertical recessions in the piers, detailing is mostly
14 2 Concrete Bridges
The most classical looking of
the monumental arches in the
Twin Cities, the Intercity Bridge
evolved out of a joint design
committee; Martin Sigvart
Grytbak, the St. Paul city engi-
neer, was the principal designer
on the committee. The bridge
over the Mississippi River at Ford
Parkway was finished in 1927.
Photograph taken in 2006 by
Robert W. Gardner Jr.
Concrete Bridges 14 3
With the completion of the Cedar Avenue Bridge
and the Anoka–Champlin Mississippi River Bridge in
1929, the age of building grand reinforced-concrete arch
bridges in the Minneapolis–St. Paul region came to a
close—well, mostly. Six decades after the bridges were
built, the Twin Cities reflected on its past monumental
concrete-arches when planning a new bridge over the
Mississippi River linking Lake Street in Minneapolis
with Marshall Avenue in St. Paul. Designed by HNTB,
the same engineering enterprise responsible for the
Father Louis Hennepin Bridge, the open-spandrel,
reinforced-concrete ribbed arch structure completed
in the early 1990s replaced an elegant, yet faltering,
wrought iron arch bridge that was erected in 1888.
Losing the wrought iron arch, one of the oldest bridges
to span any part of the Mississippi River, was regrettable,
but its successor is nevertheless impressive. In part, the
present crossing is so fine because its two main arches
are each 555 feet long, by far the longest concrete arch
spans of any bridge in Minnesota. As with the wrought
iron crossing, the current bridge vaults the river in but
two leaps. With a total length of nearly 1,500 feet, the
The Cedar Avenue Bridge was
built across the Mississippi River
MHD changed its design is unclear, but perhaps the bridge is a rare build in modern America and clearly
just upstream of Northern Pacific agency felt it should continue the precedent of building contributes to its geographic and built surroundings.65
Bridge No. 9 in 1929. The product concrete arches at major roadway-river junctions in the Other Minnesota examples of open-spandrel,
of municipal engineer Kristoffer
Olsen Oustad, the bridge became
Twin Cities area.63 reinforced-concrete ribbed arches similar to those in
an important link between the Almost a thousand feet long, the $500,000 Anoka– the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area have been built.
residential areas of South Minne- Champlin Mississippi River Bridge is formed of eight For example, both Brainerd in central Minnesota and
apolis and the industrial areas of
Northeast Minneapolis. Photo-
main spans and two approaches. The main spans Faribault in southeastern Minnesota erected substan-
graph taken in 2005. are open-spandrel ribbed arches, each measuring a tial open-spandrel concrete arches in the first half of
little more than one hundred feet in length, while the the twentieth century. The city of Oronoco in south-
approaches are thirty-nine-foot-long, closed-spandrel eastern Minnesota also completed an impressive
arches. Abutments and piers are ornamented with open-spandrel concrete arch. While its length of 275
either recessed panels or fluting, and the railings feet is large compared with many nearby bridges, it is
exhibit a subtle classicism, all of which augment the small in contrast to the Cedar Avenue Bridge in Minne-
bridge’s attractiveness. Noticeably, the Anoka–Cham- apolis, and it is tiny when measured against the Fort
plin Mississippi River Bridge is not nearly as high as Snelling–Mendota Bridge in Mendota.66 Still, relatively
the other arches, a result of relatively low riverbanks at large open-spandrel ribbed arches are almost always
this point on the Mississippi River. In August 1998, after eye-catching. One that is especially fetching is Bridge
the Anoka–Champlin Mississippi River Bridge was No. 5557 on picturesque Minnesota Trunk Highway 11
rehabilitated with a new deck, patching, strengthened in Lake of the Woods County in northern Minnesota.
arches, and new railings matching the look of the old, Completed in 1950, the bridge leaps the Rapid River
Anoka and Champlin came together in celebration of flowing through the small community of Clementson.
their landmark. The gathering included city and state At this point, the Rapid River drains into the Rainy
officials, with entertainment by the Anoka Senior High River, the waterway linking Lake of the Woods and
School Brass Quintet.64 Rainy Lake and serving as a natural boundary between
14 4 Concrete Bridges
Minnesota and Ontario. The striking bridge within its on a low concrete base, similar to those on the Cappelen
striking setting of lush greenery and rocky outcrops— Memorial Bridge, almost always look worse from the
the kind of scene for which postcards are made—is roadway than they do from the side. But although it is
described by historian Jeffrey A. Hess: difficult to wreck the appearance of an arch, it has been
tried. It seemed as though it might happen with Bridge
Bridge No. 5557 seem[s] an almost ethereal ornament for its
No. 5557, when the highway department planned to
wilderness-like setting. Airiness and lightness rule the design,
erect a heavy, solid-concrete parapet as replacement to
from the double-ribbed, open-spandrel configuration of the
the original balustrade railings. This raised the ire of
126-foot concrete arch, to the graceful scalloping of the arch
local citizens who demanded something better. While Completed in 1884 by Horace E.
curtain wall, to the elegant cambering of the concrete, deck- Horton, the first bridge linking
the current railings deserve little praise, they are more
girder approach spans.67 Anoka and Champlin across the
acceptable than plain, cumbersome-looking concrete Mississippi River consisted of four
An appropriate description, surely, but before the parapets.68 wrought iron through trusses.
The main span was a swing span
bridge’s original railings were altered to the current Bridge No. 5557 replaced a through-truss with a supported atop a circular stone
metal pipe railings in the 1980s, the crossing was even pony-truss approach that was placed over the Rapid pier. Photograph ca. 1905; cour-
more handsome. In fairness, these metal pipe railings River at Clementson in 1915. The new bridge did not tesy of the Minnesota Historical
Society.
Concrete Bridges 14 5
come soon enough for
some, including Leonard
R. Dickinson, a state
legislator from the
Clementson district who
sought an explanation
from the MHD, noting
that “[the] bridge at
Clementson apparently
is one of the worst from
a traffic angle. There
have been some very
serious accidents and
some deaths.” The Second
World War had stalled
bridge construction in the
state, as well as other civil
works projects, but the
MHD had continued to
develop plans for future
crossings during this
period, including plans
Although not as high as the other large concrete arches in the Twin Cities region, the Anoka–Champlin Missis-
for a new bridge spanning sippi River Bridge is nevertheless a handsome structure. Designed by the Minnesota Department of Highways,
the Rapid River at Clem- the bridge was completed in 1929, replacing Horton’s wrought iron structure. Photograph taken in 2007.
entson. By 1948, however,
Dickinson wanted to
know what was taking so
long, Why had construc-
tion not started on a new
bridge? The highway
department responded
that it was having diffi-
culty acquiring materials
and placing “bridge work
under contract . . . at
14 6 Concrete Bridges
reasonable prices or with any assurances that the work arches, instead building simpler, almost mass-produced,
could be completed without considerable delay.” By crossings. The result was roadways strewn mostly with
spring 1949, the state had found a contractor to erect cost-effective, yawn-inducing bridges, almost all of
the bridge at a reasonable price. L. M. Feller Company which followed a standard design.70
of Rochester, Minnesota, finished the delightful bridge Yet, some of Minnesota’s early examples of concrete
in 1950 for about $114,000.69 girders, slabs, and culverts deserve attention. In Prince-
By the time Bridge No. 5557 was constructed, the ton, in the east-central part of the state, the MHD
most common types of bridges being built in Minnesota designed a reinforced-concrete deck girder on County
were reinforced-concrete slabs, reinforced-concrete State Aid Highway 29 spanning the West Branch of the
culverts, reinforced-concrete girders, and steel girders. Rum River near the city’s downtown. A deck girder
Truthfully, by World War II the age of the reinforced- is simply a bridge with its deck resting atop girders.
concrete arch, like the age of the truss bridge, had Erected in 1931, the nearly 165-foot-long Dunn Memo-
largely passed. With exploding highway construction rial Bridge was named in honor of Robert C. Dunn, the
The original Lake Street–Marshall
after the war, most evident in the creation of the Inter- state legislator and Good Roads Movement advocate Avenue Bridge was an elegant
state Highway System, the demand for roadway bridges from Princeton who pushed forward the 1913 law that wrought iron arch erected in
was so great that the country moved away from costly made almost all highway bridge design in Minnesota 1888. It lasted a century. Photo-
graph ca. 1888; courtesy of the
Minnesota Historical Society.
Concrete Bridges 14 7
The roadway over the Rapid River at Clementson in Lake of the Woods
County essentially begged for a concrete-arch crossing. The state
obliged in 1950 with Bridge No. 5557. Photograph taken in 2006.
14 8 Concrete Bridges
The Dunn Memorial Bridge across
the West Branch of the Rum
River in Princeton resembles an
arch. Designed by the Minnesota
Department of Highways and
completed in 1931, the bridge is
a concrete girder dressed to look
like an arch. Photograph taken
in 2005.
what surprising since time has ravaged so many orna- crossings over State Highway 100 in the northwest
mental concrete-girder bridges developed by the MHD. metro as part of a road-widening project, it replaced the
Historian Jeffrey A. Hess provides details: attractive bridges with attractive bridges. These new
structures are concrete deck girders decorated with
Although the state highway department applied its ornamental
ornamental railings and lighting. Additionally, the piers
urban bridge design to numerous trunk highway crossings before
have an Art Deco flair, while the abutments appear to be
World War II, it is now rare to find good surviving examples of the
made of stone. The abutments are concrete, of course,
type. In the post-war decades, road-widening projects eliminated
since stone is an expensive proposition in modern
sidewalks and railings, obsolescence (and vandalism) claimed
times, but the flourishes once more prove that it does
lighting fixtures, and bridge-replacement projects did away with
not take much to create a smart-looking bridge.
entire crossings. Bridge No. 5083 and Bridge No. 5151 in Marshall
Smart looking is an inappropriate description for
are among the few surviving, intact examples of the design.74
Bridge No. 1238. Perhaps unassuming is apt. While the
Concrete deck girders are built virtually every- crossing attracts little attention, in part because of its
where today. We hardly notice them because most are rather remote setting, the concrete girder is still a rare
not worth noticing. Recently, however, the Minnesota bridge type. Completed in 1918, the four-span, 142-foot-
Department of Transportation, the successor to the long structure is located on a gravel road at the outskirts
MHD, has drawn from its past, building many orna- of Sanborn, a tiny community cradled into the southeast
mental concrete deck girders in urban areas. Minne- corner of Redwood County in southwestern Minnesota,
apolis has number of them. For example, when the less than an hour’s drive southeast of Marshall. The
highway department removed some federal relief bridge was built as part of a roadway project connecting
razed, including Bridge No. 5699, one of Minnesota’s state Highway 35W Bridge. The design is modern and
few examples of a concrete rigid-frame bridge. A new features a slightly arched concrete superstructure
roadway will be laid atop the fill. carried by elegantly curved piers embracing either side
The concrete rigid-frame bridge was one of the of the river. But although it is an attractive design for a
last bridge types introduced to America’s roadways. major bridge over a storied river, innovation is largely
By the time the rigid frame gained adherents, the absent. The bridge is a precast concrete box girder with
reinforced-concrete girder was quickly becoming the embellishment. That is better than a precast concrete
crossing of choice at many bridge sites. Concrete slabs box girder without embellishment, but the design
and concrete culverts also had their place. All of these explains much about our approach to bridges: we rarely
bridge types became favorites of the MHC and then the create edifices that truly stand out. When some of our
MHD because each had proven its practical worth in older bridges were constructed, they did not exactly
the first couple of decades of the twentieth century. In stand out either, but now they do, chiefly because so
truth, many of the major advances in basic reinforced- many of their brethren have been lost.
concrete bridge design came about during this period.
The ensuing decades have been marked largely by tech-
nological improvements to the existing designs.97
Some of the concrete bridges built today are a nod
to the past; the new bridges over State Highway 100,
for instance. Making concrete abutments look like
BridgePreservation 159
A number of years
ago, I was in leafy
northern Wisconsin
researching and surveying
the Taylor Bridge, a tiny
crossing named for a local
man who helped build it.
The bridge was a timber
queen post, an especially
rare type of truss bridge.
The Taylor Bridge was so
rare that it was the only
known example of its type
on Wisconsin’s roadways
(Minnesota has none).
I spent an hour photo-
graphing the delightful
structure, taking notes
on its construction and
admiring its prodigious
hornet’s nest, a magnifi-
cent goiter of humming
activity drooping like The Taylor Bridge in northern Wisconsin was so rare that it was the only
a teardrop from a floor beam. During that time, known automobile bridge of its type in the state. The timber queen-
perhaps two cars passed over the bridge. This was not post bridge was removed in favor of a new crossing. Photograph taken
in 1998; courtesy of Hess, Roise and Company.
surprising, for the crossing was on a low-volume gravel
road somewhat removed from the area’s principal
thoroughfare. But even though the bridge received
light traffic, its days were numbered, which was why replace the entire bridge rather than replace only the
I was there: I was completing a Historic American deck. I have not journeyed to the bridge site since that
Engineering Record (HAER) documentation for the visit a decade ago, although I have passed near. In truth,
bridge. In preservation parlance, a HAER is a mitigation I do not wish to see what has taken the place of the
effort, a study undertaken on an engineering-related Taylor Bridge.
work (such as a mill, dam, or bridge) that has been About the time I was completing the HAER for the
determined historic under National Register of Historic Taylor Bridge, I was also part of a statewide bridge
Places (NRHP) standards but slated for removal or study in Minnesota, the latest in a handful of Minnesota
significant alteration nonetheless. Containing historical bridge studies.2 The first study began in the mid-1980s,
information, photographs, and measured drawings, a and the next culminated in the completion of three
HAER study is viewed by some as an elaborate obit- historic bridge contexts covering masonry bridges, iron
uary.1 After talking with a local township official, as well and steel bridges, and reinforced-concrete bridges.
as a county highway official, I learned that the Taylor These three contextual pieces proved immensely valu-
Bridge was to be replaced because it had a faltering able, for they provided an analytical framework for
deck, which certainly was true. Peering at the deck, I assessing the historic merit of most highway bridges
realized that an engineering degree was unnecessary in Minnesota. A few additional studies followed these
to conclude that the timber platform was suffering. earliest efforts, but all of the studies inexorably led to
Still, it seemed so wasteful, financially and culturally, to the state’s most substantial bridge study to that time,
16 0 B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n
Erected in 1883 over the Le Sueur
the “Minnesota Historic Highway River in Blue Earth County, the
Bridge Inventory,” a project that began Kennedy Bridge is one of the
oldest crossings in Minnesota.
in the mid-1990s. This study was more
Recently it was removed from its
in-depth than previous projects and abutments and plopped down
required considerable time on the on one of its gravel approaches.
Photograph taken in 2006.
road researching and surveying 856
bridges believed to have potential for
listing on the NRHP. The study was
funded by the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (Mn/DOT), which
wanted to discover which potentially
historic roadway bridges in the survey
sample were indeed historic. Mn/DOT
needed to know which bridges in the
study met the criteria for a historic
structure as defined by the National
Park Service (NPS), the federal agency
within the Department of the Interior
that administrators the NRHP. This
was important, because the results of
the survey provided Mn/DOT a trans-
portation planning tool. Instead of
commissioning a historic bridge study
every time Mn/DOT wished to replace
or alter a particular bridge, the agency
could now consult the conclusions of the
“Minnesota Historic Highway Bridge
Inventory” to learn whether the bridge
in question met the federal definition of
a historic structure. The agency could
then plan accordingly.
During one six-month period, I
spent every other week on the road
researching bridges throughout Minne-
sota. I visited so many municipal
libraries, college libraries, regional
libraries, county historical societies,
county courthouses, city halls, and Mn/
DOT district offices that much of this
mad, wonderful experience is a blur.
One repository I always visited was the local county sometimes irritation stewed just beneath the smile. This
highway department, as most roadway bridges are not annoyance seemed to grow from a fear that a historic
maintained by Mn/DOT, but by counties and cities. designation for any bridge was a potential headache for
Often this visit was a unique experience, for those at local government, for it could prove an obstacle to the
the county highway departments, while always civil and replacement or removal of the bridge. But as preser-
helpful, were not always pleased I was there. Indeed, vationists understand, the designation is rarely the
B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n 16 1
obstacle some envision and governments frequently get have been more cost efficient to replace the deck of the
their way. For example, at the time of this writing, the Taylor Bridge rather than replace the whole bridge.
historic Kennedy Bridge, a pin-connected Pratt through Of course, we must not forget that substantial traffic
truss erected over the Le Sueur River in Blue Earth increases are often a primary reason why an old bridge
County in 1883, not far from the bowstring-arched Kern needs to be replaced by a new one. This is a very legiti-
Bridge, has been sold by the Mankato Township Board. mate argument, but it is hardly an argument that is true
Apparently believing the 140-foot-long, wrought iron in every instance.
crossing a liability, the township passed ownership of Soon after the Interstate Highway 35W Bridge
one of the oldest bridges in Minnesota to a contractor collapsed, Samuel I. Schwartz wrote an opinion piece
who has lifted the structure from its stone abutments for the New York Times titled “Catch Me, I’m Falling.”4
and plopped it down on the approach to the Le Sueur The article highlighted some failings in how we think
River. What will become of the crossing is uncer- about our transportation infrastructure. Schwartz’s
tain, but even if it survives, it will almost certainly be thoughts should be taken to heart because of his
removed from the National Register.3 background. A longtime engineer with the New York
The memory of a visit I made to one central Minne- City Department of Transportation, Schwartz argues
sota county highway department is rather vivid. As I that we have a peculiar penchant for stifling common
sat at a table perusing a stack of bridge files, a perfectly sense when it comes to our bridge infrastructure. For
social gentleman perched just over my right shoulder, example, Schwartz observes, “The typical federal
perusing what I was perusing. About every third file I and state response to a bridge collapse is to throw a
opened, he proceeded to tell me what was wrong with bucket of money at the problem but then attach strings.
the bridge represented by the file. In other words, he Usually, the money can primarily be used on expensive
would tell me why the bridge needed to go. I suppose capital improvements or new bridges but not for the
he believed I had more influence than I actually had ‘mop and pail’ work the bridges really need. It’s like
and with persistence he would win me to his view. But not doing basic maintenance on your car, letting the
after several files of this, the irritation began stewing oil run out, waiting for the engine to seize up and then
behind my own smile. Finally, upon opening a file and replacing the car. The cure of routine maintenance
being told that this bridge had to be replaced because would have cost much less.”
the abutments were crumbling, I turned in my seat, As a Minnesota historian, I do not mean to imply
looked up, and, in an exasperated tone, asked, “Can’t that this curious approach to our bridge infrastructure
you just repair the abutments?” “Well,” he said, “some is more rampant in Minnesota than anywhere else. No,
beams beneath the bridge are rusting badly.” “Can’t it appears endemic to the nation as a whole. Frankly,
you replace the beams?” I asked. “The railings are also it is simply our accepted practice, even though to the
in poor shape,” he responded. I quickly realized the layman it does not always make sense. For the bridge
circular pattern to the conversation and resumed my historian and preservationist, it is especially perplexing,
perusing. My attendant resumed his task as well. for we have the fortune (some may argue misfortune)
This occurrence is representative of a flaw in our to frequently contemplate the cultural value of older
thinking regarding bridge infrastructure. Although structures. Perhaps it is a kind of arrogance, but bridge
I am not an engineer, I am puzzled by our seeming historians and preservationists have difficulty under-
propensity to allow bridges to become faulty to the standing why more people do not think as we do. If a
point that replacement becomes the chief—and perhaps structure can be safely maintained at reasonable costs
only—option. Instead of waiting for a bridge to become and yet continue to contribute cultural value to society,
substandard to a degree that it must be replaced, why is that not a good thing?
could we not continually maintain and occasionally In the late 1990s, at the completion of the “Minne-
rehabilitate the bridge? Would that not be more cost sota Historic Highway Bridge Inventory,” 84 highway
efficient than tearing down the bridge and building an bridges were determined eligible for listing on the
entirely new one every few decades? It certainly would NRHP. Of these 84, only 15 were in fact placed on the
162 B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n
Bridge No. L8471 was an exceptionally rare combination king-post
National Register. More specifically, 15 bridges out of bridge over railroad tracks in Crookston. The railroad tore the bridge
down a few years ago. Photograph by Cynthia de Miranda, 1995; cour-
a survey sample of 856 highway bridges were placed tesy of Hess, Roise and Company.
on the National Register. But even more specifically,
15 bridges within a state containing roughly 19,500
highway bridges were added to the National Register, tained by Mn/DOT. The remaining bridge was owned
or about 0.0008 percent of the state’s total highway by one of the counties; it has subsequently been razed.
bridges. Interestingly, 14 of the 15 bridges are main- With the exception of that one county, no other local
B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n 16 3
governments (county or city) responsible for bridges sions of Section 106 apply to some bridges in the state.
determined eligible for the NRHP through the “Minne- Section 4(f ) of the U.S. Department of Transportation
sota Historic Highway Bridge Inventory” sought formal Act of 1966 also affects some of the state’s bridges,
listing.5 because it requires highway projects to avoid historic
Historic or not, preserving bridges is not common to sites unless there is no “prudent or feasible alterna-
our mindset, but then, preservation of other structure tive.” Section 144(o) of the Surface Transportation and
types does not seem common either. We so regularly Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 encourages
replace old things with new things that even rarity preservation and reuse of historic bridges since it is
rarely triggers second thoughts. Only a few years ago, in the country’s national interest. The Act prompted
Bridge No. L8471 carried a city road over railroad tracks many statewide bridge inventories, permitting states to
in a residential area of Crookston in northwestern discover their historically significant bridges. It also has
Minnesota. The bridge was a king-post truss made of allowed the federal government to aid states for costs
wood and metal, commonly known as a combination incurred for preserving historic crossings or mitigating
truss. Like the Taylor Bridge, Bridge No. L8471 was so damage to them. Additionally, the Intermodal Surface
rare it was the only one of its kind in the state. Singu- Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 features provi-
larity was not a special enough quality, however, and it sions encouraging historic preservation of bridges.7
was razed by the Burlington Northern Railroad.6 Despite these laws, over the past two decades it is
To an extent, our affinity for the new is understand- estimated that the nation has lost roughly half of its
able. Architects and engineers attend school primarily historic bridges. In part, this results from conflicting
to learn how to design and build new things, not to legislation, such as the Federal-Aid Highway Act
preserve old things, although, thankfully, courses in of 1987, which brought about the Highway Bridge
historic preservation are more common than they used Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP).
to be. Moreover, historically, we have been a forward- The HBRRP requires that each bridge receive a suffi-
looking people, fixed on the promises of tomorrow. ciency rating based on various criteria, including safety
There is nobility in this because each generation must and serviceability. Safety will always be a primary
consider its contribution to those that follow. Regret- concern, certainly, but by applying modern standards
tably, however, all too often that contribution ignores to historic bridges it is not surprising that many of
heritage that has already been inherited. While each the crossings receive a low sufficiency rating. The low
generation longs to leave its imprint on society—and score pushes them to the front of the line for replace-
should leave its imprint on society—we often act as if ment. Still, we are forced to admit that the legislation
history begins anew with each new generation. This is designed to encourage bridge preservation simply has
silly, naturally, for we are but links in a chain, and while not encouraged as hoped.8
today we build heritage for tomorrow, we shoulder In 2005, the National Trust for Historic Preserva-
responsibility for passing on heritage that was passed tion (NTHP), a prominent nonprofit preservation
to us. organization that was chartered by Congress in 1949,
Nevertheless, we cannot rely on moral obligation presented a National Preservation Honor Award to
alone to ensure preservation of structural compo- the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT).
nents of our past. Sometimes we need a bit of nudging, This prestigious award was recognition of the state
which is why the National Historic Preservation Act agency’s commitment to historic bridge preservation.
of 1966 came about. It was this law that gave us the As with the Vermont Agency for Transportation, which
NRHP, as well as Section 106. Under Section 106 of the received a similar award in 1997, ODOT discovered that
National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies embracing its bridging heritage rather than rapidly
are compelled to consider impacts to historic proper- whittling it away was the right thing to do. Writing
ties due to federal undertakings or federally assisted of ODOT’s honor, Eric DeLony, the longtime Chief of
undertakings. Since highway-improvement projects HAER, observed, “It was time to recognize the other
in Minnesota often receive federal assistance, provi- state transportation agency that has demonstrated
16 4 B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n
exemplary, sustained, national leadership in protecting State Highway and Transportation Officials, the SRI
historic bridges and, by extension, the scenic roads and Foundation (Statistical Research, Inc., is a nonprofit
highways of which bridges are the most visible icon.”9 historic preservation organization), the NTHP, and
ODOT’s path to well-deserved recognition by the the HAER of the NPS planned the workshop, which
National Trust began in the early 1990s after Oregon included individuals from the sponsoring organizations
lost the large and handsome Alsea Bay Bridge in as well as bridge scholars, civil engineering educa-
Waldport to corrosion. With public support, ODOT tors, and various transportation, environmental, and
developed preservation techniques for the remaining preservation professionals from the pubic sector.12 The
Depression-era bridges on the Oregon Coast Highway resultant report detailed the workshop’s goals:
that were designed by state bridge engineer Conde B.
In the spirit of stewardship, streamlining, and sound environ-
McCullough. This preservation effort has convinced
mental and historic bridge management, the goal of the work-
many Oregonians of the worthiness of such tasks. Here
shop was to provide federal and state transportation agencies,
is DeLony again:
the Congress, and the interested public with recommendations
Turning adversity to advantage, ODOT has made significant and solutions on how to preserve this heritage at risk. Specifi-
progress . . . in instilling a sense of awareness, appreciation, and cally, the purpose of the workshop was to articulate and define
responsibility within the transportation community and the efficient and economical strategies for historic bridge preserva-
public that historic bridges offer significant value to the built tion and management.13
environment. Bridges not only are the most visible expression
The participants ultimately fashioned ten recom-
of the engineer’s art, often serving as monumental gateways to
mendations, which included mandating historic bridge
cities as well as symbols of engineering prowess, but the more
management plans for each state, creating a national
modest spans provide a harmonious scale and tranquility to
historic bridge task force composed of preservation offi-
country roads.10
cials in the public and private sectors, and developing
ODOT has preserved many other bridges besides a National Cooperative Highway Research Program
those on the Oregon Coast Highway, including the synthesis to guide transportation departments through
Willamette River bridges in Portland. Additional inland the regulatory process surrounding historic bridges
bridges are being preserved by the state highway while aiding the agencies when making decisions
department as well. ODOT is aided in the endeavor regarding historic bridge rehabilitation or replace-
by its Bridge Preservation Unit, a group charged with ment. Further recommendations included employing
developing bridge rehabilitation practices. The methods the national historic bridge task force to seek additional
and solutions produced by this team are frequently funding for historic bridge management, creating a
more cost effective than new construction. ODOT has Web site holding a national historic bridge glossary
also benefited from the labors of far-sighted private providing terms and nomenclature that would aid
citizens, people who see value in heritage and add their electronic database searches, and completing a national
knowledge and enthusiasm to the mission of preserving historic bridge context. Organizing the copious amount
Oregon’s historic crossings.11 of bridge data that has been collected through the
Oregon has demonstrated that historic bridge pres- various statewide historic bridge surveys, developing
ervation can be a regular part of bridge management a Web site dedicated to the preservation and manage-
within state transportation agencies. Now perhaps ment of historic bridges, improving knowledge of the
other state highway departments will follow Oregon’s status of historic bridges, and collecting and dissemi-
lead. If so, a preservation ethic may filter to county nating technical information covering the maintenance
and city public works agencies, since these are respon- and rehabilitation of historic bridges completed the
sible for much of the nation’s bridge care. To help recommendations.14
things along, a group of professionals came together in It will take time for all of the recommendations to be
Washington, D.C., in early December 2003. The Federal implemented, certainly, but hopefully they will make
Highway Administration, the American Association of historic bridge rehabilitation and maintenance prefer-
B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n 16 5
The physically suffering Long
Meadow Bridge in Bloomington
has been sealed from visitors for
several years as the city wrestles
with how to fund its rehabilita-
tion. Photograph taken in 2007.
able to replacement, preserving important structural management plan will spur local governments to more
components of our past that help foster our sense of deeply consider the worthiness of preserving historic
community heritage and our sense of place. bridges rather than removing them.15
To this end, Minnesota recently took a giant stride The management plan consists of several useful
forward. Mn/DOT has now formulated a “Management parts, including a section highlighting the laws and
Plan for Historic Bridges in Minnesota.” The plan is an standards applicable to the maintenance and manage-
extensive document detailing the state agency’s current ment of historic bridges. Another section provides
and future efforts regarding historic bridges in Minne- background and analysis, essentially explaining how
sota. The plan is also intended for those responsible for Mn/DOT got from there to here—that is, how the state
historic bridges not maintained by the state. In other agency’s experience working with historic bridges
words, counties and cities and towns that own bridges over the last couple of decades has culminated in the
that are either on the NRHP or are eligible for listing “Management Plan for Historic Bridges in Minnesota.”
on the NRHP now have a document of guidelines that An especially useful section of the document focuses
will help them manage these bridges. This is a big deal, on preparing individual bridge management plans. The
because for many years there was no core tool that local Mn/DOT has prepared several individual management
governments could turn to for aid in addressing their plans for several historic bridges owned by the state.
historically significant bridges. The hope also is that the Each plan details how the historic bridge represented
16 6 B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n
The Stone Arch Bridge is a
popular pedestrian and bicycle
crossing. People often gather
here to enjoy views of the
Mississippi River near downtown
Minneapolis. Photograph taken
in 2007.
by the plan will be stabilized, preserved, and main- ning the Mississippi River in Minneapolis was aided
tained. This section also explains how local govern- with $2 million in Transportation Enhancement funds.
ments can initiate similar plans for bridges in their Finally, the bridge management plan highlights several
cities or counties. The section on technical assistance state and national agencies and organizations that
will also prove helpful, as it will offer local governments are dedicated to providing information and expertise
guidance detailing how particular bridge types should surrounding historic preservation issues, including the
be maintained, what techniques and materials should preservation of bridges.17
be employed, and so on.16 It is impractical to save every historic bridge, of
Funding for bridge preservation is always a primary course, and attempting to do so is silly. Still, we can
concern. This is a problem exemplified by the city of preserve and reuse more than we currently do. Tools
Bloomington as it ponders how to acquire the dollars like the bridge management plan help us along, but we
necessary to bring the closed Long Meadow Bridge need more—we need private individuals, professionals,
back from the depths of decay. The bridge manage- and organizations with a powerful sense of the role
ment plan presents potential funding sources, providing heritage plays in contemporary life to help alter the
detailed information on each organization that may long-held societal belief that newer is always better. My
have monies available for the care of historic bridges. grandmother disputes that, and so do I.
For instance, restoration of the Stone Arch Bridge span-
B r i d g e P r e s e r vat i o n 16 7
m i n n e S o t a’S h i S t o r i C
B r i d g e S
All of Minnesota’s extant historic bridges as of this writing are included here. These bridges are either listed in
the National Register of Historic Places or have been determined eligible for listing. The National Register, the
official list of the nation’s historic places that reflect our history and are worthy of preservation, is adminis-
tered by the National Park Service under the Secretary of the Interior. The photographs in this section appear
courtesy of the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society.
minnesota’shistoricBridges
16 9
Anoka County Kennedy Bridge (Bridge No. L5665)
Resting on Township Road 167 approach to Le Sueur River,
Anoka–Champlin Mississippi River Bridge (Bridge No. 4380) Mankato Township
U.S. Highway 169 over Mississippi River, Anoka One of the oldest bridges in the state, this pin-connected,
This monumental reinforced-concrete, open-spandrel ribbed wrought iron, Pratt through truss was erected by the Wrought
arch was designed by the Minnesota Department of Highways Iron Bridge Company of Canton, Ohio, in 1883. It has recently
(MHD) and completed by the Minneapolis Bridge Company in been pulled from its abutments. A photograph of this bridge is
1929. A photograph of this bridge is on page 146. on page 161.
Beltrami County Marsh Concrete Rainbow Arch Bridge (Bridge No. 90554)
Abandoned route of County Road 101 over the former course of
Nymore Bridge (Bridge No. 2366) Little Cottonwood River, Cambria Township
First Street over Mississippi River, Bemidji Erected in 1911, this is one of the earliest examples of a rare
This Classical Revival–style, reinforced-concrete arch was reinforced-concrete Marsh rainbow arch designed by the Marsh
designed by the Standard Reinforced Concrete Company of Indi- Engineering Company of Des Moines, Iowa. A photograph of this
anapolis, Indiana, and built by the Illinois Steel Bridge Company bridge is on page 123.
of Illinois in 1917. A photograph of this bridge is on page 129.
170 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Zieglers Ford Bridge (Bridge No. L5659) Carver County
Township Road 96 over Big Cobb River, Decoria Township
This steel, pin-connected, Pratt through truss was erected Bridge No. 5837
in 1904 by Mayer Brothers of Mankato. (Photograph by Dale County State Aid Highway 10 over abandoned line of the
Martin) Burlington Northern Railroad, immediately north of Maple
This wood stringer was designed by the Great Northern Railway
and completed by Fielding and Shepley of St. Paul in 1939.
A photograph of this bridge is on page 5.
Brown County
Stone Bridge
Roadway over stream, Flandreau State Park
This tiny metal culvert, which is faced in stone, was constructed
by the state in 1935.
Carlton County
Swinging Bridge
Pedestrian trail over St. Louis River, Jay Cooke State Park
Supported by reinforced-concrete pylons faced in native stone,
this attractive structure constructed by the state in 1934 is a rare
Minnesota example of a suspension span. (Photograph by the
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office)
Swinging Bridge
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 171
Bridge No. L2526
Fourth Street over Carver Spring, Carver
Part of the Carver Historic District, this small stone arch was
completed circa 1885.
Cass County
Steamboat Bridge
Abandoned line of the Great Northern Railway over Steamboat
River, adjacent to State Highway 371, twelve miles north of Walker
In 1914, the Great Northern Railway built this plate girder as a
swing span so steamboats could float cut timber from Steamboat
Lake to Steamboat Bay on Leech Lake. It is now a pedestrian and Bridge No. L8850
bicycle crossing. A photograph of this bridge is on page 100. Bridge No. L8850
Unpaved access road over Chippewa River, Lagoon Park,
Montevideo
Chippewa County Completed by the WPA in 1938, this bridge is one of two
exceptionally pleasing stone-faced, reinforced-concrete arches
Bridge No. 5380 designed by city engineer M. E. Chamberlin. (Photograph by
Minnesota Trunk Highway 40 over Lac Qui Parle Lake, near Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and Company)
Milan
A component of the Lac Qui Parle Project (a substantial water
conservation and flood control effort initiated in the mid-1930s), Clay County
this steel Parker through truss was designed by the MHD and
built in 1938 by Theodore Jensen Company of St. Cloud, Minne- Bridge No. 0961
sota. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and Company) Unpaved township road over the Buffalo River, Oakport Township
Constructed by Fargo Bridge and Iron Company of Fargo, North
Dakota, in 1913, this bridge is an early example of a steel Warren
pony truss designed by the Minnesota Highway Commission
(MHC). (Photograph by Cynthia de Miranda; Hess, Roise and
Company)
172 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. 90818 Crow Wing County
County Road 96 over Buffalo River, Moland Township
Fargo Bridge and Iron Company of Fargo, North Dakota, fabri- Bridge No. 5265
cated and erected this steel, pin-connected, half-hip Pratt pony U.S. Highway 169 over a dry run, Garrison
truss in 1907. Engineered by the National Park Service and built by the CCC
near a picnic grounds in 1938, this handsome multiplate arch
faced in stone edges Mille Lacs Lake and once served as a pedes-
Cook County trian underpass. (Photograph by Shawn Rounds; Hess, Roise and
Company)
Bridge No. 5132
Minnesota Trunk Highway 61 over Cascade River, Cascade River
Wayside
Completed in 1932, this reinforced-concrete arch designed and
built by the MHD is part of the striking Cascade River Wayside
edging Lake Superior. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise
and Company)
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 173
Bridge No. L3942 Waterford Bridge (Bridge No. L3275)
Abandoned township road Township road over Cannon River, two miles northwest of
over Nokasippi River, near Northfield
St. Mathias This Camelback through truss with bolted connections was
Although no longer designed by county surveyor Charles A. Forbes and built by the
supporting a deck, the struc- Hennepin Bridge Company of Minneapolis in 1909. A photo-
ture of this bridge remains. graph of this bridge is on page 63.
This rare example of a steel,
pin-connected, half-hip Pratt
pony truss was built by the Faribault County
Security Bridge Company in
1908. (Photograph by Shawn
Rounds; Hess, Roise and
Company)
Dakota County
1 74 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. 6662
Minnesota Trunk Highway 16 over Johnson Creek, near Peterson
This modernist-inspired steel stringer was designed by the MHD
and completed in 1948. (Photograph by Shawn Rounds; Hess,
Roise and Company)
Fillmore County
Bridge No. 7979
Bridge No. 5722 County Highway 15 over stream, Carimona Township
U.S. Highway 63 over Spring Valley Creek, Spring Valley This double-span country stone arch was erected circa 1904.
This unique reinforced-concrete triple box culvert was designed Bridge No. 7980
and completed by the MHD in 1936. County Highway 15 over stream, Carimona Township
Bridge No. 6263 This double-span country stone arch was erected circa 1904.
County Road 118 over Root River, Forestville Township Bridge No. 9940
This steel pin-connected, Pratt through truss was fabricated and County Highway 29 over Riceford Creek, Newburg Township
erected by Gillette-Herzog Manufacturing Company of Minne- Resting on stone abutments, this skewed steel stringer was
apolis in 1899. (Photograph by Michael Koop) completed in 1940 and is a fine example of WPA construction.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 175
Bridge No. L4885 Bridge No. 6992
Township Road 354 over Bear Creek, Fillmore Township Washington Avenue over line of the Burlington Northern Railroad,
Alexander Y. Bayne and Company of Minneapolis erected this Minneapolis
steel pin-connected, Pratt through truss in 1906. This steel Pratt through truss, erected in 1891, was recently
substantially altered.
Goodhue County Bridge No. 90437
Cedar Avenue over former line of Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul
Bridge No. 3481 Railway (CM&StP), Minneapolis
Unpaved city road over Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced-
Cannon River, western concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa-
outskirts of Red Wing tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This
Incorporating open-balus- corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
trade railings, this rein- Greenway.
forced-concrete deck girder
completed by the MHD in Bridge No. 90448
1921 is a fine example of the Pedestrian trail over Excelsior Boulevard, Minneapolis
state agency’s aesthetic shift Located within a potential historic district, this slightly arched,
away from heavy-looking rail- steel stringer was constructed in 1936. (Photograph by Chad
ings to lighter, more visually Perkins; Hess, Roise and Company)
pleasing railings for many
concrete bridges. (Photograph
by Denis P. Gardner; Hess,
Roise and Company)
Hennepin County
1 76 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. 90608
Minnetonka Boulevard over
St. Albans Bay, Excelsior
This Art Deco–style rein-
forced-concrete deck girder
was constructed by the WPA
in 1941. (Photograph by Chad
Perkins; Hess, Roise and
Company)
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 177
Bridge No. 92321 Bridge No. 92347
Bloomington Avenue over Minnehaha Creek, Minneapolis First Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis
Erected in 1921, this Classical Revival–style reinforced-concrete Constructed in 1914, this Classical Revival–style reinforced-
deck girder was designed by Minneapolis municipal engineer concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa-
Kristoffer Olsen Oustad. tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway.
178 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. L8901
Fremont Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis
Constructed in 1913, this Classical Revival–style reinforced-
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa-
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 179
Bridge No. L8908
Pleasant Avenue South over former line of
CM&StP, Minneapolis
Constructed in 1913, this Classical Revival–
style reinforced-concrete girder is part of
the substantial CM&StP grade separation
project completed in south Minneapolis
in the 1910s. This corridor now serves
bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway.
180 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. L8919 Cappelen Memorial Bridge (Bridge No. 2441)
Fourteenth Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis Franklin Avenue over the Mississippi River, Minneapolis
Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced- Finished in 1923, the monumental reinforced-concrete, open-
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa- spandrel ribbed arch was designed by Minneapolis municipal
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This engineers Frederick William Cappelen and Kristoffer Olsen
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown Oustad. A photograph of this bridge is on page 133.
Greenway.
Cedar Avenue Bridge (Bridge No. 2796)
Bridge No. L8920 Cedar Avenue over the Mississippi River, Minneapolis
Fifteenth Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis This monumental reinforced-concrete, open-spandrel ribbed
Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced- arch was designed by Minneapolis municipal engineer Kristoffer
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa- Olsen Oustad and completed in 1929. A photograph of this bridge
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This is on page 144.
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway. Columbia Park Bridge
(Bridge No. 93844)
Bridge No. L8921 Pedestrian trail over
Sixteenth Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis trackage of Soo Line
Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced- Railway, Columbia Park,
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa- Minneapolis
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This Gillette-Herzog Manu-
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown facturing Company of
Greenway. Minneapolis constructed
this steel ribbed, lattice
Bridge No. L8922 arch in 1896. (Photograph
Seventeenth Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis by Chad Perkins; Hess,
Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced- Roise and Company)
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa-
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway.
Bridge No. 93844
Bridge No. L8923
Eighteenth Avenue South over former line of CM&StP, Minneapolis
Constructed in 1916, this Classical Revival–style reinforced-
concrete girder is part of the substantial CM&StP grade separa-
tion project completed in south Minneapolis in the 1910s. This
corridor now serves bicyclists and pedestrians as the Midtown
Greenway.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 181
Electric Short Line Bridge No. 14.51 (Bridge No. 27136) Northern Pacific Railway Bridge No. 9 (Bridge No. 94246)
Luce Line Trail over line of the Burlington Northern Railroad, Pedestrian trail over the Mississippi River, University of Minnesota,
Orono Minneapolis
The wrought iron, pin-connected Pratt through truss was Engineered and erected by the Northern Pacific Railway in 1887,
completed by the Chicago and Alton Railroad over the Illinois this large, steel deck truss was greatly strengthened in 1923 but
River near Pearl, Illinois, in 1885. It was disassembled and then eventually evolved into a pedestrian and bicycle crossing. A
reinstalled at its current location in 1914. photograph of this bridge is on page 76.
Hanover Bridge (Bridge No. 92366) Queen Avenue Bridge (Bridge No. L9329)
Pedestrian trail over the Crow River, Hanover West Lake Harriet Boulevard over former Como-Interurban-
Erected by the Morse Bridge Company of Youngstown, Ohio, in Harriet trolley line, Minneapolis
1885, this pin-connected Pratt through truss is one of Minne- Designed by Charles R. Shepley of Minneapolis and built by the
sota’s few remaining wrought iron bridges. A photograph of this Minneapolis Street Railway Company in 1905, this early example
bridge is on page 52. of a reinforced-concrete arch exhibits Classical Revival–style
detailing. (Photograph by Robert M. Frame III)
Intercity Bridge (Ford Bridge, Bridge No. 3575)
Ford Parkway over Mississippi River, Minneapolis and St. Paul
This monumental reinforced-concrete, open-spandrel ribbed
arch was designed by St. Paul municipal engineer Martin Sigvart
Grytbak and completed in 1927. A photograph of this bridge is on
page 143.
182 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Houston County Jackson County
Kittson County
Itasca County
kennedy bridge
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 183
Lake County
184 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Broadway Bridge (Bridge No. 4930)
Minnesota Trunk Highway 99 over Minnesota River, St. Peter
One of Minnesota’s most handsome trusses, this skewed, steel
Pennsylvania through truss was designed by the MHD and built
by the Minneapolis Bridge Company in 1931. A photograph of
this bridge is on page 79.
Lyon County
Le Sueur County
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 185
Marshall County Meeker County
Mower County
186 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Olmsted County
a transportation corridor now known as the Austin Underpass constructed in 1934, features a
Historic District. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and shallow-arched concrete fascia.
Company)
Frank’s Ford Bridge
Bridge No. 5699 (Bridge No. L6322)
Southeast Second Street over Oakland Avenue, Austin County Road 121 over South
A rare bridge type in Minnesota, this Art Deco–style reinforced- Branch of the Zumbro River,
concrete rigid frame was designed by the MHD and erected Oronoco Township
in 1937 as part of a transportation corridor now known as the One of the state’s oldest
Austin Underpass Historic District. A photograph of this bridge truss bridges, this steel, pin-
is on page 157. connected Pratt through truss
was erected in 1895 by Horace
Bridge No. 5700
E. Horton of Chicago Bridge
Southeast Third Street over Oakland Avenue, Austin
and Iron of Chicago, Illinois.
This Art Deco–style steel deck girder was designed by the
(Photograph by Robert M.
Chicago Great Western Railway and erected in 1937 as part of
Frame III)
a transportation corridor now known as the Austin Underpass
Historic District. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and
Company) Otter Tail County
Constructed in 1939 by L. M.
Feller Company of Rochester, Minnesota, this skewed concrete
slab was designed by the MHD and the Great Northern Railway.
A photograph of this bridge is on page 155.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 187
Waterstreet Bridge (Bridge No. L0884) Ramsey County
Gravel roadway over Otter Tail River, West Lost Lake,
Maine Township Bridge No. 62075
One of the state’s oldest truss bridges, this steel, pin-connected Pedestrian trail over Montreal Avenue, St. Paul
Pratt through truss was constructed in 1895, possibly by Milwau This Art Moderne–style reinforced-concrete arch was completed
kee Bridge and Iron Works of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It has an in 1927.
unpromising future. A photograph of this bridge is on page 56.
Bridge No. 92247
Lexington Avenue over Como Park path, St. Paul
Pine County Featuring the pioneering reinforcing system developed by Vien-
nese engineer Josef Melan, this early example of a reinforced-
Kettle River Bridge (Bridge No. 5718) concrete arch was designed and built by William S. Hewett and
Minnesota Trunk Highway 123 over Kettle River, Sandstone Company in 1904. (Photograph by Robert M. Frame III)
This cantilevered, steel Pratt deck truss with an arched lower
chord was designed by the MHD and constructed by A. Guthrie
and Company of St. Paul in 1948. A photograph of this bridge is
on page 90.
Pipestone County
Polk County
Bridge No. 92247
Sorlie Memorial Bridge (Bridge No. 4700)
DeMers Avenue over Red River of the North, East Grand Forks, Bridge No. L5852
Minnesota, and Grand Forks, North Dakota Sterk Road over Como Park Lagoon, St. Paul
Designed by the North Dakota State Highway Department and Constructed in 1894, this small stone arch with Classical
constructed by the Minneapolis Bridge Company in 1929, this Revival–style detailing was designed by the St. Paul city engi-
steel Parker through truss rests on circular bearings that allow it neer’s office.
to compensate for the shifting river banks. A photograph of this
bridge is on page 77.
Pope County
188 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. L5853
Bridge No. L5853
Pedestrian trail over Como Park path, St. Paul
Featuring the pioneering reinforcing system developed by Vien-
nese engineer Josef Melan, this early example of a reinforced-
concrete arch was designed and built by William S. Hewett and
Company in 1904. (Photograph by Robert M. Frame III) colorado street bridge
Colorado Street Bridge (Bridge No. L8803)
Bridge No. L8560 East side of South Wabasha Street, near Terrace Park, St. Paul
Phalen Drive over South Canal, Phalen Park, St. Paul Completed in 1888, this decorative stone arch is formed of
This reinforced-concrete arch was constructed in 1923 and various stone types. It was built by O’Brien Brothers of St. Paul
features Classical Revival–style and Medieval Revival–style employing an innovative construction method devised by St. Paul
detailing. municipal engineer Andreas W. Munster, the bridge’s designer.
(Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and Company)
Bridge No. L8789
Pedestrian trail over Phalen Park Channel, St. Paul Intercity Bridge (Ford Bridge, Bridge No. 3575)
Featuring vertical end posts embedded in a foundation, this rare Ford Parkway over Mississippi River, Minneapolis and St. Paul
Pratt bedstead pony truss was fabricated by the St. Paul Foundry This monumental reinforced-concrete, open-spandrel ribbed
Company and erected in 1906. arch was designed by St. Paul municipal engineer Martin Sigvart
Grytbak and completed in 1927. A photograph of this bridge is on
Bridge No. L8804 page 143.
Edgecumbe Road over ravine, St. Paul
This reinforced-concrete deck girder was designed by St. Paul
municipal engineer Martin Sigvart Grytbak and constructed in
1916.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 189
Mendota Road Bridge Ramsey Park Swayback Bridge (Bridge No. 89859)
(Bridge No. 90401) Park road over Redwood River, Ramsey Park, Redwood Falls
Water Street over Pickerel Constructed by the WPA in 1938, this reinforced-concrete slab
Lake outlet, St. Paul is embellished with granite sidewalls and railings and exhibits
Designed by the St. Paul the unique swayback design. A photograph of this bridge is on
city engineer’s office and page 153.
constructed in 1894, this
small, modestly orna-
mented stone arch is Rice County
formed of gray limestone,
Bridge No. 8096
a material that was often
Minnesota Trunk Highway 19 over Spring Creek, Northfield
used for foundations for
Built in 1918, this reinforced-concrete arch was enlarged by the
nineteenth-century St.
MHD in 1947, at which time it was also dressed in stone and
Paul buildings. (Photo-
given Gothic Revival–style detailing. (Photograph by Jeffrey A.
graph by Jeffrey A. Hess;
Hess; Hess, Roise and Company)
Hess, Roise and Company)
190 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Rock County St. Louis County
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 191
Bridge No. 7753
Unpaved county road over unnamed stream, about eight miles east
of Chisholm
Designed by the St. Louis County Highway Department, this
steel stringer erected by the Great Northern Bridge Company of
Minneapolis nevertheless adhered to a standard plan developed
by the MHD. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and
Company)
facility on St. Louis Bay, this steel deck plate girder was designed
by the Duluth, Missabe and Northern Railway and completed Bridge No. 88557
circa 1925. (Photograph by Jeffrey A. Hess; Hess, Roise and Wallace Avenue over Tischers Creek, Duluth
Company) This stone-faced reinforced-concrete arch was designed and
built by the city of Duluth in 1932. (Photograph by Shawn Rounds;
Bridge No. 7627 Hess, Roise and Company)
Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway (DM&IR) line over
Minnesota Trunk Highway 23, Duluth
A component of a large rail viaduct reaching to an ore-handling
facility on St. Louis Bay, this steel deck plate girder was designed
by the Duluth, Missabe and Northern Railway and completed
circa 1904.
192 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Bridge No. L8501
Snively Boulevard over Amity Creek, Duluth
This Classical Revival–style, stone-faced reinforced-concrete
arch was constructed circa 1911.
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 193
Scott County
Railroad Bridge
Rail line over Skyline Parkway, Duluth
This is a reinforced-concrete-faced bridge.
Bridge No.
1 94 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Stearns County Bridge No. L7075
Township Road 411 over Turtle Creek, Hartford Township
Great Northern Railway Bridge Addressing Classical Revival style in a rudimentary fashion, this
South Main Street at South Eighth Street, Sauk Centre multiplate arch faced in fieldstone was designed by the Todd
This site held a railroad bridge as early as 1878, but by 1924 the County Highway Department and constructed by the WPA in
Great Northern Railway reengineered the site as a grade separa- 1940. A photograph of this bridge is on page 83.
tion (a depressed automobile roadway beneath the bridge). In
1931, the railroad company rebuilt the steel girder crossing.
Wabasha County
Todd County
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 195
Washington County
Wadena County
196 M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s
Watonwan County
Winona County
M i n n e s o t a ’ s H i s t o r i c B r i d g e s 197
This page intentionally left blank
A f t e r w o r d
eric d e lony
afterword 199
permitted that guidelines developed at the national Minnesota began working on statewide historic
level could be interpreted and executed by the states. bridge surveys in 1985, and in 2006 Mn/DOT completed
More outstanding historic bridges designed by state its new “Management Plan for Historic Bridges in
bridge engineers will continue to be identified, since Minnesota.”3 Though “intended to aid owners of
the exemption likely omitted some important bridges. historic bridges, including the state, counties, cities,
Bridge scholarship in Minnesota, exemplified by and towns,” the report also declares that “Mn/DOT
Jeff Hess, Charlene Roise, Bob Frame, Fred Quivik, is committed to preserving and performing a higher
and Denis Gardner, is reinforced by a rich collection of level of maintenance on selected state-owned historic
historic photographs and a sampling of bridge artifacts, bridges and working to encourage preservation efforts
as demonstrated in this book. There have been signifi- for bridges controlled by local agencies.” The state is
cant preservation successes in the state: the Seventh responsible for twenty-six state-owned historic bridges,
Street Improvement Arches, a helicoid arch built in 15 percent of the historic bridges in Minnesota; it is not
1884, was declared a National Historic Civil Engi- responsible for the remaining 85 percent, which include
neering Landmark in 2000 by the American Society of many one-of-a-kind potentially nationally or region-
Civil Engineers; the Hanover Bridge, from 1885, was ally significant bridges. This restriction to only state-
converted to pedestrian use; Rock County Bridge No. owned historic bridges is common to other states: state
1482, a rare king-post pony truss near Luverne, was DOTs have relieved themselves of responsibility for
moved and protected; and the Stillwater Bridge span- the majority of historic bridges owned by municipali-
ning the St. Croix National Scenic River was the subject ties or on secondary farm-to-market roads. Though the
of a national preservation effort that involved local Minnesota management plan is designed (through the
residents, the departments of transportation of Minne- twenty-six case studies) to provide guidance and direc-
sota and Wisconsin, and the National Park Service. But tion to local communities, I question its effectiveness in
why hasn’t Minnesota—and the rest of the country— dealing with the other historic bridges in the state.
been more successful in saving its bridges? A funda- The authors of the management plan, engineer Steve
mental flaw of historic bridge legislation, management, Olson and historian Bob Frame, addressed my criti-
and preservation plans is that most states, including cism with blunt reality of the actual situation regarding
Minnesota, do not assume responsibility for non-state- historic bridges not only in Minnesota but throughout
owned or federally owned bridges, leaving this to local the country. Olson said, “I believe Mn/DOT has made
communities, which rarely have the funds to care for old a good faith effort and will preserve the couple dozen
bridges; a seminal rule of historic bridge rehabilitation is historic bridges on the Trunk Highway system that
involvement by local citizen groups and interested local were part of our earlier project. Beyond the Mn/DOT-
governments. What is the relationship between local, owned bridges, I’m afraid the results will not be positive
state, and federal authorities regarding historic bridges? for at least the next five years. There is nothing more
Primary reasons for replacement of historic bridges than a hope that local community groups will stand up
are new technologies and materials, poor maintenance, and lobby to protect their local resources.” Hope is not a
and an apathetic public. The risk extends beyond the strategy, but that seems to be our current resource.
bridge to the larger context: road, village, country- Frame, now actively working for historic bridges
side, cityscape (both urban and rural) threatened with in Indiana, concurred with Olson on the lack of avail-
suburbanization, congestion, and subsequent develop- able funding. He responded, “I’d probably call funding
ment. All of these changes require increased infrastruc- the carrot instead of the stick. When it comes to sticks,
ture, which includes preservation of historic bridges. Indiana has a pretty big one in its citizen advocacy
Recent statistics suggest that more than half the historic organizations lobbying for historic bridge preserva-
bridges in America have been destroyed during the past tion. Few states have such a well-organized, well-
twenty-five years—a period when preservation aware- funded cadre of bridge-savvy citizens.” Indiana is an
ness about all types of historic structures has been at its outstanding example of the power of public advocacy
highest and most sophisticated level.2 to create change, and the results of statewide advo-
200 afterword
cacy are demonstrated in its “Programmatic Agree- on the federal or state aid systems. Strengthening the
ment Regarding the Management and Preservation of national Historic Bridge Program, Title 23, Section
Indiana’s Historic Bridges.”4 One item of note is the 144(o), may offer a partial solution.
designation of “select” and “non-select” bridges, estab- It is pitiful to watch some local bridges disappear,
lishing a new category of bridge preservation beyond such as the Kern Bridge spanning the Le Sueur River
the National Register for state funding from FHWA. south of Mankato, now impossible to access through
This is the focus of county highway departments, dense foliage along the river. The local section of the
which own two-thirds of the state’s historic bridges, American Society of Civil Engineers is becoming more
when reviewing the Indiana Historic Bridge Inventory. astute with respect to history and heritage efforts, and
Funding remains an issue, but dollars are more likely our committee continues to grow and generate interest
to flow to the squeaky wheel, backed up by organized among the civil engineering community. We have a
citizens who know what they want. Indiana’s Historic long way to go, but we’ve begun our journey. Minne-
Spans Task Force received a National Trust Preserva- sota’s historic bridge management plan is premised
tion Honor Award in October 2007. on integrating the engineer and the historian, but
Charlene Roise, a Minneapolis consultant who has suggests that further interdisciplinary collaboration
worked on many historic bridges, emphasizes the lack among local leaders, preservationists, and the public
of funding and the challenge to create political advo- is sorely needed. As three of the state’s bridge experts
cacy and a public constituency for historic bridges: “It have reiterated, without further incentives of funding,
is hard to get people really worked up about any pres- appreciation, and awareness, historic bridges remain an
ervation issue, and bridges are often a much harder sell endangered heritage. Despite heroic efforts in all parts
than buildings. No advocates, no money.” It is difficult of the country, more than half the historic bridges in the
to change policy and increase funding with little public United States were destroyed during the past twenty-
support. five years. Ignorance and lack of interest coupled
Preservation has not permeated our local culture with ineffective laws and regulations and insufficient
as much as I’d like. The only incentive to encourage funding at all levels of government render these bridges
preservation is federal project dollars, but federal at extreme risk.
support for projects in Minnesota is becoming increas-
ingly scarce. The Minnesota preservation community
tried unsuccessfully in 2007 to secure a state tax credit
for historic buildings, and to my knowledge there are
no additional state laws pertaining to the preservation
of historic bridges on a local level. Some counties have
given up their efforts to obtain federal dollars for their
projects: no federal dollars, no preservation stick.
A national historic bridge funding program for local
governments similar to what is available for covered
bridges would be ideal. We have only one historic
covered bridge of note in Minnesota, in Zumbrota, and
there were never many in the state, so we are ineligible
for that source of funding.
Most statewide historic bridge survey and manage-
ment plans are limited to bridges currently in service
on public roads for which state DOTs have management
responsibility, so some of the best and most significant
non-DOT bridges never get preservation consideration
because they are abandoned, privately owned, or not
afterword 201
This page intentionally left blank
N o t e s
Preface York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1974), 33; Demian Hess,
1. Charles Filteau, letter to K. Nelson, likely a county official “Minnesota Military Roads,” July 1989, National Register
in Alexandria, Minnesota, May 1, 1876, copy in the posses- of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form,
sion of the author. available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, E.7; Fredric L. Quivik and
2. The first part of this introduction is drawn primarily Dale L. Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges in Minnesota,” July
from two sources: Fredric L. Quivik and Dale L. Martin’s 1988, National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property
“Iron and Steel Bridges in Minnesota,” July 1988, National Documentation Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul,
Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documenta- E.0; Denis P. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures: Stories Behind
tion Form, available at the State Historic Preservation Office the State’s Historic Places (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical
(hereafter SHPO), Minnesota Historical Society (hereafter Society Press, 2004), 23; “George Washington Campground,”
MHS), St. Paul; and Robert M. Frame III’s “Historic Bridge in “New England Mountain Bike Association,” May 10, 2004,
Project,” March 31, 1985, prepared for the SHPO and the www.nemba.org/ridingzone/GeorgeWashingtonRI.html.
Minnesota Department of Transportation, available at the 6. “Canal Bridge at Detroit Lakes,” 1895, photo available in
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul. library photographic file, MHS, St. Paul; Frame, “Historic
3. The federally established criteria for determining that a Bridge Project,” 7; Plowden, Bridges, 33.
property—any property—is historic can be found in U.S. 7. Jeffrey A. Hess and Chad Perkins, “Historic Highway
Department of Interior, National Register Bulletin: How to Bridge Inventory: The Survey Sample,” 1995, copy of study
Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, rev. ed. available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 15, 34.
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1997), 2. 8. Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 74; Gardner, Minnesota
Treasures, 64; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5837,” in “Minne-
Wood Bridges sota Historic Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
1. “The First Suspension Bridge,” Hennepin History (July
1952): 2. 9. The best history of federal relief efforts in Minnesota is Rolf
T. Anderson’s, “Federal Relief Construction in Minnesota,
2. “Grand Celebration,” St. Anthony Express, January 27, 1855; 1933-1941,” August 30, 1993, National Register of Historic
Penny A. Petersen, Hiding in Plain Sight (Minneapolis: Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, available at
Marcy-Holmes Neighborhood Association/NRP, 1999), SHPO, MHS, St. Paul; Hess, “Bridge No. 5837.”
10–13, 18–19; Warren Upham, Minnesota Place Names: A
Geographical Encyclopedia (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical 10. R. H. Nelson, “The Story of Goodhue County: Part IV,”
Society Press, 2001), 229–30. Goodhue County News, June 1977, 1–2; “Waite’s Crossing on
the Red River Trail,” Crossings, December 1987, 5–6; “Mill
3. “Grand Celebration”; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Final Report of the on Vermillion Falls, Covered Bridge in Background, Hast-
Minnesota Historic Bridge Survey: Part 1,” August 1988, ings,” ca. 1869, photo available in library photographic file,
prepared for the MHS and the Minnesota Department of MHS, St. Paul.
Transportation (hereafter Mn/DOT), available at SHPO,
MHS, St. Paul, 77. 11. Fred Kniffen, “The American Covered Bridge,” Geographical
Review 41 (January 1951): 114, 118–119; Robert Fletcher
4. Robert M. Frame III, “Historic Bridge Project,” March 31, and J. P. Snow, “A History of the Development of Wooden
1985, prepared for the SHPO and the Mn/DOT, available Bridges,” Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engi-
at the SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8–9; Nicholas Westbrook, ed., neers (October 1934): 335.
A Guide to the Industrial Archeology of the Twin Cities (St.
Paul and Minneapolis: Society for Industrial Archeology, 12. William H. Shank, Historic Bridges of Pennsylvania (York,
1983), 16; “Background and History of the Wabasha Street Penn.: American Canal and Transportation Center, 1966), 17;
Bridge River Crossing,” in “Wabasha Street Bridge Project Plowden, Bridges, 37; Fletcher and Snow, “Wooden Bridges,”
Information,” August 2002, Division of Bridges, Department 333.
of Public Works, City of St. Paul, http://bridges.ci.stpaul. 13. Zumbrota Valley Historical Society, Centennial Book
mn.us/Construct/WABASHA/wabasha.html. Committee, Zumbrota: The First 100 Years (Zumbrota,
5. David Plowden, Bridges: The Spans of North America (New Minn.: Zumbrota Valley Historical Society, 1956), 247–249;
notes
203
David Nystuen, “Zumbrota Covered Bridge,” October 1974, County,” circa 1900, photo available in library photographic
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, file, MHS, St. Paul; Prosser, Rails, 21, 137.
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; “The Only Zumbrota 27. Pioneer Faces and Places (Grand Marais, Minn.: Cook
in the World,” n.d., pamphlet sponsored by the city of County Historical Society, 1979), 54; Rotary Club of Fort
Zumbrota and various promotional agencies and printed William, The Outlaw Bridge: A Record of Rotary Achieve-
by Sommers Printing, Inc., Zumbrota, available at MHS, St. ment, 1917–1987 (Thunder Bay, Ont.: Rotary Club of Fort
Paul, n.p. William, 1987), n.p.
14. “Historic Bridge Is Moved,” Zumbrota Covered Bridge 28. Ibid.
Society, September 1970, n.p.; “Homecoming for Zumbrota’s
History-spanning Bridge,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, 29. Harold Severson, We Give You Kenyon: A Bicentennial
March 4, 1997; Nystuen, “Zumbrota Covered Bridge,” n.p.; History of a Minnesota Community (Kenyon, Minn.: Security
Zumbrota Valley Historical Society, 249. Bank of Kenyon, 1976), 18.
16. Ibid., 45, 47–48; Carl Zapffe, Brainerd, Minnesota, 1871–1946 31. Ibid., 18, 20; Prosser, Rails, 123, 125, 149; “Chicago,
(Brainerd, Minn.: Brainerd Civic Association, 1946), 3–4. Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway,” 1978, Minnesota Archi-
tecture-History Inventory Form, available at SHPO, MHS,
17. Theodore C. Blegen, Minnesota: A History of the State St. Paul, n.p.; Christian A. Rasmussen, A History of Goodhue
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1963), 97–98, County, Minnesota (n.p., 1935), 166.
110–114; Shank, Bridges of Pennsylvania, 17–18; Plowden,
Bridges, 38–39. 32. “Duluthian Recalls Building Lester Park Rustic Bridge,”
Duluth News Tribune, October 14, 1931. Additional informa-
18. Carl W. Condit, American Building: Materials and Tech- tion can be found in “Lester Park Trail” on the Web site of
niques from the First Colonial Settlements to the Present the City of Duluth Parks and Recreation Department, www.
(Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1982), ci.duluth.mn.us/city/parksandrecreation/Secondarypages/
59–61; Plowden, Bridges, 38–39. lesterparktrail.htm.
19. Ingolf Dillan, Brainerd’s Half Century (Brainerd, Minn.: 33. Plowden, Bridges, 57.
self-published, 1923), 18–20; Gardner, Minnesota Treasures,
47–48.
20. Plowden, Bridges, 39. Stone Bridges
21. Richard S. Prosser, Rails to the North Star (Minneapolis: 1. “The New Bridge,” Minneapolis Tribune, March 12, 1875;
Dillon Press, 1966), 20–21, 142–143; George E. Warner “The Second Suspension Bridge,” Hennepin History (April
and Charles M. Foote, comp., History of the Minnesota 1953): 2; untitled typescript of newspaper article in St. Paul
Valley: Carver County (Minneapolis: North Star Publishing Daily Press, November 20, 1873; Lucile M. Kane, “Minneap-
Company, 1882), i, 6; Lucie K. Hartley, The Carver Story olis’ Wire Suspension Bridge: First Bridge over the Missis-
(n.p., 1971), 151; Upham, Minnesota Place Names, 552. sippi,” Gopher Historian (Spring 1964): 16; Hess, “Final
Report,” 77, 86; Upham, Minnesota Place Names, 233.
22. “View of Carver, Minnesota,” October 1893, photo available
in library photographic file, MHS, St. Paul. 2. “The Bridge Question,” Minneapolis Tribune, April 7, 1875;
“Bridge on Fire,” Minneapolis Tribune, January 29, 1877.
23. Don L. Hofsommer, Minneapolis and the Age of Railways
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005), 11, 3. “Condensed History,” Minneapolis Tribune, October 6, 1876;
85–86; Peter L. Wilson, Senior Engineering Specialist, “Bridge on Fire.”
Bridge Inspection Unit, e-mail to Denis P. Gardner, January 4. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 34–35.
19, 2007, in possession of Denis P. Gardner, n.p.; “Fort Snel- 5. Condit, American Building, 71.
ling at Junction of the Mississippi and Minnesota,” ca. 1867,
photograph by Rodolph W. Ransom, photo available in 6. As quoted in Jeffrey A. Hess, “Minnesota Masonry-Arch
library photographic file, MHS, St. Paul; Prosser, Rails, 140. Highway Bridges,” July 1988, National Register of Historic
Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, available at
24. Hazel M. Jacobson, Hastings from River to Rails on the H&D SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, E.1.
(n.p., 1975), 3–5; Warner and Foote, Minnesota Valley, 6;
Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 40; Upham, Minnesota Place 7. Hess, “Minnesota Masonry-Arch Highway Bridges,” E.1–E.2;
Names, 168; Prosser, Rails, 137. Plowden, Bridges, 9.
25. Prosser, Rails, 137; Jacobson, Hastings, 5, 7–8; “Hastings and 8. Plowden, Bridges, 9; Charles K. Hyde, Historic Highway
Dakota Railway Company Train on Bridge over the Dalles Bridges of Michigan (Detroit: Wayne State University Press,
of the Vermillion River, Dakota County,” circa 1870, photo 1993), 50.
available in library photographic file, MHS, St. Paul. 9. Architectural and Historical Research, LLC, and Hess, Roise
26. “Railroad Bridge, Undine’s Basin, Vermillion River, Dakota and Company, “Section 106 Evaluation of Architectural and
204 notes
Structural Resources: The Existing Rail Line of the Dakota, 28. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L1409,” August 1988, National
Minnesota and Eastern Railroad Powder River Basin Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at
Expansion Project in Minnesota,” June 2000, prepared for SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.0, 8.0.
the Surface Transportation Board and Burns and McDon- 29. Ibid., 8.1; Hess, “Minnesota Masonry-Arch Highway
nell, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 22–23; Condit, Bridges,” E.3, E.7–E.9, E.11.
American Building, 75.
30. Hess, “Minnesota Masonry-Arch Highway Bridges,” E.5–E.6.
10. Prosser, Rails, 13, 169; Mary Garder, “Century Old: The
Arches,” Winona Daily News, November 29, 1982; Architec- 31. Ibid., E.3; Hess, “Bridge No. L1409,” 8.0.
tural and Historical Research, LLC, and Hess, Roise and 32. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L4013,” August 1988, National
Company, “Section 106,” 10, 12, 23. Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at
11. Garder, “Century Old”; Architectural and Historical SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.0, 8.0.
Research, LLC, and Hess, Roise and Company, “Section 106 33. Ibid.; Hess, “Minnesota Masonry-Arch Highway Bridges,”
Evaluation,” 23–24. E.7.
12. “Series of Stone Arch Railroad Bridges in Southern Minne- 34. Ibid.
sota,” Minnesota Preservationist 4 (May/June 2001): n.p. 35. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L6007 (Stewart Creek Stone
13. Plowden, Bridges, 31–32. Arch Bridge),” August 1988, National Register of Historic
14. St. Anthony Falls Heritage Board et al., Historic Stone Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul,
Arch Bridge: The Reopening of a Landmark (Minneapolis: 8.1.
St. Anthony Falls Heritage Board, ca. 1995), 1; Gardner, 36. Ibid.
Minnesota Treasures, 46, 61–62; Prosser, Rails, 135–136, 146, 37. Ibid.
161–162.
38. Ibid., 7.1.
15. Ray Lowry, “‘Hill’s Folly’: The Building of the Stone Arch
39. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Split Rock Bridge,” August, 1988, National
Bridge,” Hennepin County History 47 (Winter 1988): 8;
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at
Petersen, Hiding in Plain Sight, 92; Prosser, Rails, 146.
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1.
16. “The Stone Arch Bridge,” Gopher Historian (Spring 1971):
40. Anderson, “Federal Relief Construction,” E.48; Hess, “Split
n.p.; Lowry, “Hill’s Folly,” 20–21, 24; Petersen, Hiding in
Rock Bridge,” 7.1, 8.1.
Plain Sight, 92, 94.
41. Hess, “Split Rock Bridge,” 7.1, 8.1.
17. The state railroad commissioner is quoted in St. Anthony
Falls Heritage Board et al., 3. The length of the arch spans
is found in the same source, 2. For other sources see Daniel Iron and Steel Bridges
L. Schodek, Landmarks in American Civil Engineering
1. Kenneth Broas, “Steel Arch Bridge (Hennepin Avenue
(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987), 144, as well as “The Stone
Bridge),” February 1987, Historic American Engineering
Arch Bridge.”
Record, available at Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.,
18. St. Anthony Falls Heritage Board et al., 4, 6–8. 2–4.
19. John J. Hackett, “Point Douglas–St. Louis River Road 2. Ibid., 4–5.
Bridge,” September 30, 1974, National Register of Historic
3. Ibid., 5; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 79.
Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul,
7.1. 4. Broas, “Steel Arch Bridge,” 13, 15; Frame, “Historic Bridge
Project,” 102; Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 70.
20. Demian Hess, “Minnesota Military Roads,” E.1–E.3.
5. Broas, “Steel Arch Bridge,” 1, 14, 16–17.
21. Ibid., E.2–E.3.
6. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.0.
22. Ibid., E.3–E.4.
7. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 67–70.
23. Ibid., E.3–E.4; Hackett, Registration Form, 8.0.
8. Ibid.; Robert M. Frame III, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway
24. Linda Picone, “Town Board Gets a Bill for 110-Year-Old
Bridges in Minnesota,” August 15, 1988, National Register
Bridge,” Minneapolis Tribune, November 11, 1974; Hackett,
of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form,
Registration Form, 8.0–8.1.
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, E.7–E.8; Frame, “Historic
25. Hackett, Registration Form, 8.0–8.1. Bridge Project,” 99; Plowden, Bridges, 177.
26. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 81–84. 9. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 68–69.
27. Ibid.; “William Albert Truesdell,” Association of Engineering 10. Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial
Societies 28 (June 1909): 371; Karl J. Karlson, “Bridge a Heritage, “A Context for Common Historic Bridge Types,”
Marvel of Engineering,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 28, 2001. October 2005, prepared for the National Cooperative
notes 205
Highway Research Program, the Transportation Research 27. Ibid., 164.
Council, and the National Research Council, 3.73; Gardner, 28. “New Highway 61 Bridge Opened Wednesday,” Hastings
Minnesota Treasures, 69. Gazette, February 23, 1951; “Time Draws Near for Disposal
11. Condit, American Building, 229. of Spiral Approach,” Hastings Gazette, February 16, 1951;
12. Plowden, Bridges, 177. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5895,” in “Minnesota Historic
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
13. J. A. L. Waddell, Bridge Engineering, vol. 1 (New York: John St. Paul, n.p.; Ibid., 165.
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1916), 409–410; Architectural and
Historical Research, LLC, and Hess, Roise and Company, 29. Denis P. Gardner, “People’s Union Church,” May 2004,
“Bridge No. M 31,” in “Section 106 Evaluation,” n.p.; Jeffrey National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
A. Hess, “Bridge No. L1393,” in “Minnesota Historic available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1.
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, 30. “Waterstreet Bridge: Its Past, Present, and Its Future,” in
St. Paul, n.p. “Otter Chapter, Izaak Walton League of America,” June
14. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 0523,” in “Minnesota Historic 5, 1979, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; “Historical
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, Information Concerning the Waterstreet Bridge and
St. Paul, n.p. Surrounding Area in Maine Township, Otter Tail County,
MN,” n.d., typescript available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.;
15. Plowden, Bridges, 171. untitled newspaper and untitled article concerning Water-
16. Ibid., 57; Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” street Bridge, July 15, 1895, clipping available at SHPO,
E.6–E.8. MHS, St. Paul; Darnell, American Bridge Companies, 74.
17. Ibid.; Dennis Gimmestad, “Kern Bridge,” January 1980, 31. Interview with Peter L. Wilson, Senior Engineering
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Specialist, Mn/DOT Bridge Division, by the author, January
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. 18, 2007; “Waterstreet Bridge,” n.p.; “Historical Information
18. Gimmestad, “Kern Bridge,” n.p.; Condit, American Building, Concerning the Waterstreet Bridge,” n.p.
98; Schodek, American Civil Engineering 101, 103; Quivik 32. David C. Anderson, “Bridge No. 90980 (Salisbury Bridge),”
and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.7. July 31, 1995, National Register of Historic Places Registra-
19. Condit, American Building, 96; Quivik and Martin, “Iron and tion Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1–8.3; Meeker
Steel Bridges,” E.7. County Historical Society, Meeker County Memories (Litch-
field, Minn.: Meeker County Historical Society, 1987), 17–18.
20. A good description of Pratt bridges is located in American
Association for State and Local History (AASLH), technical 33. Fredric L. Quivik, “Montana’s Minneapolis Bridge Builders,”
leaflet 95, “Bridge Truss Types: A Guide to Dating and Iden- The Journal of the Society for Industrial Archeology 10
tifying,” History News 32 (May 1977): n.p. (1984): 38–39; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 67, 75,
78–79, 88; Anderson, “Bridge No. 90980,” 8.3.
21. Victor C. Darnell, Directory of American Bridge Compa-
nies, 1840–1900 (Washington, D.C.: Society for Industrial 34. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L5245,” in “Minnesota Historic
Archeology, 1984), 56; John J. Hackett, “Hanover Bridge,” Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
April 1978, National Register of Historic Places Registra- St. Paul, n.p.
tion Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Upham, 35. Rosanne Bergantine, Phelps: A Peek into Its Past (n.p.,
Minnesota Place Names, 640. 1970), 3; John J. Hackett, “Phelps Mill,” November 20, 1974,
22. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5721,” September 1997, National National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1; AASLH, “Bridge Truss Types,” n.p. 36. Ibid.
23. Hess, “Bridge No. 5721,” 8.1–8.2. 37. Maurice W. Hewett, “William Sherman Hewett: A Biog-
24. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.6; Condit, raphy,” unpublished typescript available in the William
American Building, 125; Ruth Schwartz Cowan, A Social S. Hewett file at the Northwest Architectural Archives,
History of American Technology (New York: Oxford Anderson Library, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
University Press, 1997), 132–133; Jack El-Hai, Lost Minne- 38. Ibid; Eric Kudalis, “Harry Wild Jones,” in “Historic
sota: Stories of Vanished Places (Minneapolis: University of Profiles through the Decades,” Architecture Minnesota 18
Minnesota Press, 2000), 164–165. (November-December 1992): 40; Thomas W. Balcom, “A
25. “Hastings Bridge Has Fallen Down,” Minnesota Highways Tale of Two Water Towers: Washburn Park and Its Water
1 (January 1952): 3; Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering Supply,” Minnesota History 49 (Spring 1984): 21; Camille
and Industrial Heritage, 3.34; AASLH, “Bridge Truss Types,” Kudzia, “Washburn Park Water Tower,” August 1981,
n.p.; El-Hai, Lost Minnesota, 164–165. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.0, 8.0.
26. El-Hai, Lost Minnesota, 164–165.
206 notes
39. Charlene K. Roise and Robert M. Hybben, “Bridge No. 56. Frances P. Alexander and Andrew J. Schmidt, The 106
1482,” September 1991, National Register of Historic Places Group Ltd., “Determination of Eligibility for Bridge Number
Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1. 3145, Long Meadow Bridge, Bloomington, Hennepin County
40. Ibid.; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L7560,” in “Minnesota (Draft),” September 1994, architecture-history study com-
Historic Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, pleted for the Mn/DOT, copy available at the SHPO, MHS,
MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 22–24. St. Paul, 6, 8, 10–12; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 80.
41. Susan Granger, “Bridge No. 6527,” Minnesota Architecture- 57. Darril and Timothy Wegscheid, longtime residents near
History Inventory Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, the Long Meadow Bridge, e-mails to Denis P. Gardner,
n.p.; Gerald A. Engstrom, highway engineer, letter to Susan May 22–23, 2007, in possession of Denis P. Gardner, n.p.;
Roth, Minnesota National Register Historian, October 20, Alexander and Schmidt, “Bridge Number 3145,” 6, 8, 10–12.
1987, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 2; Upham, Minne- 58. Mary Lynn Smith, “For Trail Users, Old Bridge Is a Missed
sota Place Names, 624. Link,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, April 16, 2005.
42. Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 87–88; Condit, 100. 59. Marcia Ohlhausen, “Northern Pacific Bridge Number 9,”
43. Perhaps the best general discussion of the Minnesota June 24, 1994, Minnesota Architecture-History Inventory
Highway Commission is found in Frame’s “Historic Bridge Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.2; El-Hai, Lost
Project,” 22–28. Minnesota, 4.
44. Ruth Anderson, Watonwan County Historical Society 60. F. B. Maltby, “The Mississippi River Bridges,” Journal of
Museum Director, letter to Susan Roth, Minnesota National the Western Society of Engineers 8 (July-August 1903):
Register Historian, n.d., available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 425–427; Albert W. Morse, “N.P. Bridge Nearing Comple-
n.p. tion,” Minnesota Techno-Log 3 (January 1923): 5; Ohlhausen,
“Bridge Number 9,” 8.4; Hofsommer, Age of Railways, 80,
45. Dale Martin and Fredric Quivik, “Third Street Bridge,” 123, 149–151; Lucile M. Kane and Alan Ominsky, Twin Cities:
July 1988, National Register of Historic Places Registra- A Pictorial History of Saint Paul and Minneapolis (St. Paul:
tion Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.0; Parsons Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1983), 73; Prosser, Rails,
Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage, 3–37; 29, 146.
AASLH, “Bridge Truss Types,” n.p.
61. Westbrook, Industrial Archeology of the Twin Cities, 16,
46. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 168; Frame, “Historic Bridge 26–27; Denis P. Gardner, “A History of the Southeast
Project,” 85. Heating Plant,” March 2002, architectural-historical study
47. The quote from the Dakota County Board of Commis- prepared for the University of Minnesota, copy in posses-
sioners, as well as additional information in this paragraph, sion of the author, 13; Prosser, Rails, 146; “Background and
is found in Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L3275,” in “Minne- History of the Wabasha Street Bridge River Crossing.”
sota Historic Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at 62. Morse, “N.P. Bridge Nearing Completion,” 32; Ohlhausen,
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. “Bridge Number 9,” 8.4; Maltby, “The Mississippi River
48. The quote from the Waterford Township resident, as well Bridges,” 427.
as additional information in this paragraph is found in Hess, 63. Ohlhausen, “Bridge Number 9,” 8.4.
“Bridge No. L3275,” n.p.; Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel
Bridges,” E.11; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 78. 64. Souvenir Historical Program: The Sorlie Memorial Bridge,
1929 (Grand Forks: Page Printing Company, 1929), n.p.
49. The quote from the Granite Falls Journal is found in
Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L7969,” in “Minnesota Historic 65. Ibid.; Denis P. Gardner and Charlene K. Roise, “Northern
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, Pacific Bridge No. 95,” July 2000, Historic American Engi-
St. Paul, n.p. neering Record documentation completed for United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), available at USACOE,
50. “Milo A. Adams, Pioneer Bridge Builder, Dies,” Minneapolis St. Paul, 26.
Tribune, June 12, 1922.
66. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.10; Frame,
51. Hess, “Bridge No. L7969,” n.p. “Historic Bridge Project,” 87–88; Sorlie Memorial Bridge, n.p.
52. Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 24–26; Hess, “Bridge No. 67. The quotation concerning the roller bearings for the Sorlie
L7969,” n.p.; Hess and Perkins, “Bridge Inventory,” 22. Memorial Bridge is found in E. J. Budge, “The Grand Forks
53. Hess and Perkins, “Bridge Inventory,” 12–13; Frame, Bridge,” North Dakota Highway Bulletin (December 1928): 7.
“Historic Bridge Project,” 27. For other source see Sorlie Memorial Bridge, n.p.
54. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 2110,” in “Minnesota Historic 68. Sorlie Memorial Bridge, n.p.
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, 69. Warren H. Strandell, Polk County Commissioner, District 2,
St. Paul, n.p.; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 100. letter to Susan Roth, Minnesota National Register Historian,
55. Hess, “Bridge No. 2110.” October 16, 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
notes 207
70. Ibid. Either Friday or Saturday,” Wabasha County Herald-
71. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Broadway Bridge,” September 1997, Standard, January 1, 1931; “New Wabasha-Nelson Bridge
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Opened to Traffic Jan. 1; Ferry Ceases Operation,” Wabasha
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1. County Herald-Standard, January 8, 1931; Frame, “Historic
Bridge Project,” 80.
72. Ibid, 8.1–8.2; “Babcock to Open St. Peter Bridge Bids
October 14,” St. Peter Herald, September 26, 1930. 92. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Evaluation of National Register Eligibility:
Winona Highway Crossing (Bridge Nos. 5900 and 5930),”
73. Hess, “Broadway Bridge,” 7.1. September 1996, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 1, 5.
74. “Broadway Bridge to Be Opened to Traffic at Once,” St. 93. Ibid., 1–2.
Peter Herald, June 26, 1931.
94. Ibid., 2–3; George A. Hool and W. S. Kinne, Movable and
75. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5388,” September 1997, National Long-Span Steel Bridges (New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at Company, Inc., 1923), 288.
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1–8.2.
95. Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 80; Ibid., 5–6, 8.
76. Ibid.
96. Hess, “Winona Highway Crossing,” 7–8.
77. Ibid.
97. Kachelmyer, Clement P., Mn/DOT, letter to Leslie D.
78. “County to Receive $118,250 in Highway and Bridge Aid,” Peterson, trunk highway archaeologist, MHS, June 13, 1983,
International Falls Press, May 13, 1937; Jeffrey A. Hess, copy available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
“Bridge No. 5804,” in “Minnesota Historic Highway Bridge
Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. 98. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Kettle River Bridge,” September 1997,
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
79. Upham, Minnesota Place Names, 299; Hess, “Bridge No. available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1–8.3.
5804.”
99. Ibid.
80. The quotation from the Engineering News-Record is found
in Hess, “Bridge No. 5804.” 100. Ibid.; Steven R. Brown, “Substructure Movement at Bridge
5718: A Case History,” September 1983, study completed
81. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.19–E.20; for a civil engineering internship through the University of
Plowden, Bridges, 296. Minnesota, Minneapolis, copy available at SHPO, MHS, St.
82. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 7645,” in “Minnesota Historic Paul, 5; Mn/DOT, “Bridge No. 5718: General Plan and Eleva-
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, tion,” January 13, 1984, drawing created for deck recon-
St. Paul, n.p. struction of Kettle River Bridge, available at Mn/DOT,
83. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 6779,” in “Minnesota Historic St. Paul, n.p.
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, 101. Brown, “Substructure Movement at Bridge 5718,” 5.
St. Paul, n.p. 102. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 6690,” in “Minnesota Historic
84. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.19–E.20. Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
85. Ibid. St. Paul, n.p.; Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 255–258.
86. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5827,” National Register of 103. Hess, “Bridge No. 6690.”
Historic Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, 104. “New Drayton Bridge Open to Traffic Monday,” Kittson
St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1–8.2. County Enterprise, November 24, 1954; Ibid.
87. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. L7075,” in “Minnesota Historic 105. “Bridge No. 6690: General Plan and Elevation,” November
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, 19, 1991, drawing created for repair of Drayton Bridge, avail-
St. Paul. able at Mn/DOT, St. Paul, n.p.; Hess, “Bridge No. 6690.”
88. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 7614,” in “Minnesota Historic 106. “River Bridge Floats on a Sea of Plastic,” Engineering News-
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, Record 171 (October 3, 1963): 26; Frame, “Historic Bridge
St. Paul, n.p. Project,” 78; Hess, “Bridge No. 6690.”
89. Gardner, “People’s Union Church,” 8.12; Quivik and Martin, 107. Quivik and Martin, “Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.19–E.20;
“Iron and Steel Bridges,” E.19. Plowden, Bridges, 296.
90. “Survey Report: History/Architecture: Minnesota Trunk 108. David C. Anderson, “Redstone Bridge,” July 31, 1995,
Highway Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey,” January National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
17, 1992, copy of study available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, (Draft), available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1; Gardner,
1–4; Larry Oakes, “Spanning the Years,” Minneapolis Star Minnesota Treasures, 168–170.
Tribune, June 24, 1994. 109. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Stillwater Bridge,” August 1988, National
91. “New Wabasha-Nelson Bridge Will Be Opened to Traffic Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at
208 notes
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1; Anderson, “Redstone Bridge,” Resources Study,” August 1976, authorized by the Depart-
7.1–7.3, 8.7. ment of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District,
110. Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heri- available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 41; Pete Mohs, “Disas-
tage, 3.43. sembled Lift-bridge Was Part of Man’s Life,” Grand Rapids
Herald-Review, October 2, 1983; Hess, “Stillwater Bridge,”
111. Ibid., 8.5. 8.1–8.2.
112. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 6544,” in “Minnesota Historic 129. Considerable information on Scherzer movable bridges
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, is found in Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridges: Their Inception,
St. Paul, n.p. Development and Use (Chicago: Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridge
113. Frank A. King, The Missabe Road (San Marino, CA: Golden Company, ca. 1915).
West Books, 1972), 92; Ibid. 130. Ted Hall, Drumbeat: A Report from the Northland (Ranier,
114. Blegen, Minnesota: A History of the State, 369; Ibid. Minn.: Rainy Lake Chronicle, 1974), 37.
115. Hess, “Bridge No. 6544.” 131. Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridges, 36–38; Prosser, Rails, 43, 131;
116. Robert M. Frame III, “Great Northern Railway Company Upham, Minnesota Place Names, 300.
Bridge,” April 1980, National Register of Historic Places
Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.;
Concrete Bridges
Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 61–64.
1. Mike Kaszuba, “It’s a Beauty of a Bridge, with a Beauty of a
117. Ibid.
Price,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, September 19, 1989; Don
118. Hess, “Stillwater Bridge,” 8.5. Nelson, “Critics Hope to Sink Plans to Replace Hennepin
119. Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 107–110. Av. Bridge,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, July 19, 1982; Joe
120. Tom Lutz, “Aerial Lift Bridge,” March 1973, National Kimball, “Panel Approves Bridge Funds,” Minneapolis Star
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at Tribune, July 1, 1984; Martha S. Allen, “Hennepin Av. Bridge
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Ibid. Design Evokes an Older Time Span,” Minneapolis Star
Tribune, March 23, 1984.
121. Dwight E. Woodbridge and John S. Pardee, eds., History
of Duluth and St. Louis County: Past and Present, vol. 2 2. Joe Kimball, “County Board Chooses ‘Cadillac’ Bridge
(Chicago: C. F. Cooper and Company, 1910), 507–508. Design,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, April 6, 1984; Kaszuba,
“Beauty of a Bridge.”
122. Richard M. Johnson, “Transporter to Vertical Lift: Duluth’s
Aerial Lift Bridge,” in Proceedings of the Seventh Historic 3. Steve Olson, HNTB engineer, e-mail to Denis P. Gardner,
Bridges Conference (Cleveland: Cleveland State University, June 22, 2006, in possession of Denis P. Gardner, n.p.; Father
2001), 135; Gardner, Minnesota Treasures, 107–110. Louis Hennepin Bridge: Dedication, September 12, 1990,
pamphlet produced for dedication of Hennepin Avenue
123. Hess, “Stillwater Bridge,” 8.6. Bridge, available at Hennepin County History Museum,
124. E. J. Miller, MHD Bridge Engineer, letter to C. M. Babcock, Minneapolis, n.p.; “New Bridge Gets First-class Plaques,”
Commissioner of Highways, April 13, 1926, copy available at Minneapolis Star Tribune, January 5, 1991; “Later a Bridge,
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. Now a Catwalk,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, February 1, 1989;
125. Interview with Dennis Gimmestad, Government Compli- George Monaghan, “Maestro of Suspension has gotten Hang
ance Officer, SHPO, November 29, 2006, by the author. of Hennepin Bridge Just Right,” Minneapolis Star Tribune,
Several photos of the predecessor to the Stillwater Bridge October 17, 1989; Kaszuba, “Beauty of a Bridge”; Blegen,
are available in the photographic collection of the MHS, St. Minnesota: A history of the State, 50.
Paul. For other sources see Britta L. Bloomberg, “Future is 4. Condit, American Building, 155–156; Plowden, Bridges, 297.
brighter for Historic Stillwater Lift Bridge,” Minnesota Pres- 5. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.2–E.3;
ervation Planner 16 (Spring 2005): 1, 3, and Hess, “Stillwater Robert M. Frame III, “Interlachen Bridge,” August 15, 1988,
Bridge,” 8.6. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
126. Gimmestad interview; Bloomberg, “Historic Stillwater Lift available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1; Parsons Brincker-
Bridge,” 1, 3. hoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage, 2.17; Condit,
127. Ibid. American Building, 174–175; Plowden, Bridges, 297.
128. Charles Birnstiel, “Popular Obsolete Movable Bridges,” 6. Maria Elena Baca, “Retro Rail,” Minneapolis Star Tribune,
in Proceedings of the Seventh Historic Bridges Conference, July 7, 2006; Frame, “Interlachen Bridge,” 7.1, 8.1–8.2;
142–143; interview with Peter L. Wilson, Senior Engineering Plowden, Bridges, 298.
Specialist, Mn/DOT Bridge Division, by the author, January 7. Plowden, Bridges, 300–303, 317.
18, 2007; Stephen P. Hall, “Duluth-Superior Harbor Cultural 8. Ibid., 318.
notes 209
9. Robert M. Frame III, “Bridge No. L2162,” August 15, 1988, 27. Robert M. Frame III, “Nymore Bridge,” August 15, 1989,
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1–8.2; Robert M. Frame available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1.
III, “Bridge No. L4646,” August 15, 1988, National Register of 28. Ibid., 7.1, 8.1.
Historic Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS,
St. Paul, 8.1–8.2; The 106 Group, “Evaluation of 27 Bridges 29. George M. Cheney, “Concrete Bridge Reinforcement,”
in Rock County, Minnesota, for the National Register of Patent Number 820,921, filed with United States Patent
Historic Places,” August 1994, study completed for the Mn/ Office February 26, 1906, approved May 15, 1906, n.p.; Ibid.
DOT, copy available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 14–16. 30. Cheney patent application.
10. Arthur P. Rose, An Illustrated History of the Counties of Rock 31. “New Bridge over Mississippi River Inlet to Cost $22,772;
and Pipestone, Minnesota (Luverne, Minn.: Northern History Work Will Commence Soon,” Bemidji Pioneer, August 22,
Publishers Company, 1911), 112; The 106 Group, 14–16. 1916; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 80; Frame, “Nymore
11. This quote is found in Frame, “Bridge No. L4646,” 8.2. Bridge,” 8.1.
12. Ibid., 8.1–8.2; Frame, “Bridge No. L2162,” 8.1–8.2. 32. Robert M. Frame III, “Cappelen Memorial Bridge,” May
12, 1978, National Register of Historic Places Registra-
13. Dennis Gimmestad, “Marsh Concrete Rainbow Arch tion Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Frame,
Bridge,” January 1980, National Register of Historic Places “Historic Bridge Project,” 69.
Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.;
James B. Marsh, “Reinforced Arch Bridge,” Patent Number 33. Kenneth Bjork, Saga in Steel and Concrete: Norwegian Engi-
1,035,026, filed with United States Patent Office November neers in America (Northfield, Minn.: Norwegian-American
1, 1911, approved August 6, 1912, n.p; James C. Hippen, Historical Association, 1947), 148–149.
Marsh Rainbow Arch Bridges in Iowa (Boone County, Iowa: 34. Westbrook, Industrial Archeology of the Twin Cities, 23; Ibid.
Boone, Iowa, 1997), 5. 35. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.12–E.13.
14. Peter L. Wilson, Senior Engineering Specialist, Mn/DOT 36. Ibid., E.13–E.14; Plowden, Bridges, 299.
Bridge Division, e-mail to Denis P. Gardner, January 19,
37. Frame, “Cappelen Memorial Bridge,” n.p.
2006, in possession of Denis P. Gardner, n.p.
38. Bjork, Saga in Steel and Concrete, 150.
15. URS Corporation et al., “Skyline Parkway Corridor Manage-
ment Plant (Draft),” February 2003, study available at 39. “Design of 400-Ft. Concrete Arch of the Cappelen Memo-
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 1. rial Bridge,” Engineering News-Record (January 25, 1923):
148–152; Frame, “Cappelen Memorial Bridge,” n.p.
16. Mark Ryan, “Snively’s Road,” Minnesota History (Winter
1994): 147, 149–152, 159; Ibid., 4–5. 40. “Design of 400-Ft. Concrete Arch,” 148–149, 151; Plowden,
Bridges, 299.
17. Chuck Frederick, “Two of the Seven Bridges to get Summer
Makeover,” Duluth News Tribune, May 31, 2002; Ryan, 41. Robert M. Frame III, “Robert Street Bridge,” August 15,
150–151. 1988, National Register of Historic Places Registration
Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1; “Robert
18. Mary Ann Nord, comp., The National Register of Historic
Street Bridge—1896,” photograph available in photographic
Places in Minnesota: A Guide (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical
collection of the MHS, St. Paul; “Heavy Traffic Made First
Society, 2003), 222; Ryan, 152–153; URS Corporation et al.,
Robert Street Span Obsolete,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, August
“Skyline Parkway,” 5, 9, 15, 18.
1, 1926; Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 90.
19. Frederick, “Summer Makeover”; Ryan, “Snively’s Road,” 163.
42. Frame, “Robert Street Bridge,” 8.1–8.2; Frame, “Historic
20. Susan Granger, Scott Kelly, and Kay Grossman, “Lester Bridge Project,” 99, 142.
River Bridge,” January 17, 2002, National Register of
43. W. E. King and Roy Childs Jones, “Engineering and Archi-
Historic Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS,
tectural Design of a Long Concrete Bridge,” Engineering
St. Paul, 7.1–7.2.
News-Record (November 4, 1925): 732–733; Frame, “Robert
21. Ibid. Street Bridge,” 7.1–7.2.
22. Ibid., 8.1–8.7. 44. Westbrook, Industrial Archeology of the Twin Cities, 27–28;
23. The quote from Shawn Perich is found in Granger, Kelly, King and Jones, “Long Concrete Bridge,” 732–733; Frame,
and Grossman, “Lester River Bridge,” 8.5. “Robert Street Bridge,” 8.1–8.2.
24. This quote is found in Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 3589,” 45. Frame, “Robert Street Bridge,” 7.1; King and Jones, “Long
September 1997, National Register of Historic Places Regis- Concrete Bridge,” 737.
tration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1. 46. “Artistry and Utility Combined in Magnificent New Bridge,”
25. Ibid., 7.1, 8.1–8.3. St. Paul Pioneer Press, August 1, 1926; Ibid., 7.1–7.2.
26. Ibid. 47. Walter H. Wheeler, “Long Concrete-Arch Road Bridge
210 notes
Over Minnesota River,” Engineering News-Record (March SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Minnesota Department of High-
31, 1927): 514–519; Robert M. Frame III, “Fort Snelling- ways, “Proposal for Bridge No. 4380 on State Project 3-49,”
Mendota Bridge,” May 12, 1978, National Register of 1928, proposal copy available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 1.
Historic Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, 61. “Cedar Bridge to be Finished by January 1,” circa 1929
St. Paul, n.p.; Plowden, Bridges, 299; Frame, “Historic Bridge newspaper clipping in the Cedar Avenue Bridge file, avail-
Project,” 101. able at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul; Frame, “Cedar Avenue Bridge,”
48. Elizabeth A. Gales, “Cream of Wheat Building,” n.d., City of 7.1, 8.1–8.2.
Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission Registra- 62. R. B. Johnson, “History on the Mississippi,” July 1998,
tion Form, available at Minneapolis Heritage Preservation unpublished brief history in the Anoka–Champlin Missis-
Commission, Minneapolis, 7.1–7.2; John Mecum and Muriel sippi River file, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 3; Dennis
Nord, “Minneapolis Armory,” May 1985, National Register of A. Gimmestad, Government Compliance Officer, SHPO,
Historic Places Registration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, letter to Clement P. Kachelmyer, Mn/DOT, February 12,
St. Paul, 8.2; Design Center for American Urban Landscape 1991, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul; Frame, “Cedar
and College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Avenue Bridge,” 8.2.
University of Minnesota, “The Minneapolis Armory Reuse
Study,” March 1990, copy available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 63. Edith A. Dunn, “A History of the Anoka–Champlin Bridge
25, 27. 4380,” January 1997, cultural resource study prepared for
Mn/DOT, copy available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 1–2; MHD,
49. Don Spavin, “Ferry Good Enough, Bridge’s Critics Said,” Biennial Report of the Minnesota Commissioner of Highways,
St. Paul Pioneer Press, September 10, 1978; Wheeler, “Long 1929–1930 (St. Paul: MHD, 1930), 6; Robert M. Frame III,
Concrete-Arch Road Bridge,” 514–515. memorandum to SHPO regarding the Anoka–Champlin
50. Undated typescript research notes in Fort Snelling– Mississippi River Bridge, October 25, 1984, available at
Mendota Bridge file, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
Spavin, “Bridge’s Critics”; Frame, “Fort Snelling–Mendota 64. “Anoka–Champlin Bridge Dedication Ceremony Program,”
Bridge,” n.p. August 1, 1998, copy of dedication program available at
51. Don Ahern, “Bridge Reopening Cheered,” St. Paul Pioneer SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; “Bridge No. 4380,” October
Press, October 15, 1994. 1971, engineering drawing of elevation of Anoka–Champlin
52. Condit, American Building, 255. Mississippi River Bridge, copy available at SHPO, MHS,
St. Paul; Johnson, “History on the Mississippi,” 3; Dunn,
53. Robert M. Frame III, “Intercity Bridge,” August 15, 1988, “Bridge 4380,” 3; Spaeth and Frame, “Anoka–Champlin
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Bridge,” n.p.
available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1–8.2.
65. Kristen Zschomler, Historian-Archaeologist, and Peter L.
54. Frame, “Historic Bridge Project,” 30, 66; Ibid., 8.1. Wilson, Senior Engineering Specialist, both of Mn/DOT,
55. Martin S. Grytbak, “Concrete Arch Bridge over the Missis- e-mail to Denis P. Gardner, September 19, 2006, in posses-
sippi,” Engineering News-Record (November 10, 1927): 756, sion of Denis P. Gardner, n.p.
758; Bjork, Saga in Steel and Concrete, 153–154. 66. Michael T. Sheehan, “Oronoco Bridge,” May 5, 1982,
56. Grytbak’s quote is found in Bjork, Saga in Steel and National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
Concrete, 153–154. (draft), available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
57. Ibid., 154; Frame, “Intercity Bridge,” 8.2; Frame, “Historic 67. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5557,” in “Minnesota Historic
Bridge Project,” 77. Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
58. Frame, “Intercity Bridge,” 8.2. St. Paul, n.p.
59. Virginia Rybin, “Panel Makes Recommendation on Ford 68. Lloyd Larson, Engineering Coordinator, Mn/DOT, letter to
Bridge Repair,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, November 15, R. E. Wolfe, District Engineer, Mn/DOT, June 14, 1983, copy
1998; Jackie Sluss, Historian, Mn/DOT, letter to Dennis available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; Hess, “Bridge No.
Gimmestad, Government Compliance Officer, SHPO, 5557,” n.p.
October 8, 1999, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul; Frame, 69. Leonard R. Dickinson, State Representative, letter to
“Intercity Bridge,” 7.1. M. J. Hoffman, MHD, February 23, 1948, copy available at
60. Robert M. Frame III, “Cedar Avenue Bridge,” August 15, SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.; the date for the erection of the
1988, National Register of Historic Places Registration truss bridge over the Rapid River is drawn from labeling
Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1–8.2; Lynne on an undated photograph of the bridge in the possession
VanBrocklin Spaeth and Robert M. Frame III, “Anoka– of SHPO, MHS, St. Paul; the highway department quote is
Champlin Mississippi River Bridge,” May 1979, National found in Hess, “Bridge No. 5557,” n.p.
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at 70. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.6.
notes 211
71. Robert M. Frame III, “Dunn Memorial Bridge,” November Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5699,” in “Minnesota Historic
22, 1987, Statewide Bridge Survey Inventory Form, available Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. St. Paul, n.p.; Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway
72. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5083” and “Bridge No. 5151,” Bridges,” E.10.
September 1997, National Register of Historic Places Regis- 94. Condit, American Building, 259; Plowden, Bridges, 320;
tration Forms, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 8.1–8.2; Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.10; Hess,
“Business Men Hear Report on Highway Status,” Marshall “Bridge No. 5699,” n.p.
News-Messenger, January 9, 1931; Upham, 337. 95. Hess, “Bridge No. 5699,” n.p.
73. “Pavement Fete Draws Crowd of Over 10,000,” Marshall 96. Ibid.
News-Messenger, October 30, 1931.
97. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.12.
74. The comments of Hess are found in “Bridge No. 5083,” 8.2.
75. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 1238,” in “Minnesota Historic
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, Bridge Preservation
St. Paul, n.p. 1. A companion to the HAER is the HABS, or Historic
76. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.9. American Buildings Survey, a study, or historical record,
for a building determined historic but facing demolition or
77. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 1238A,” in “Minnesota Historic substantial alteration.
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS,
St. Paul, n.p. 2. For discussion of all major Minnesota bridge studies up
to 1995, see Hess and Perkins, “Historic Highway Bridge
78. Frame, “Reinforced-Concrete Highway Bridges,” E.7. Inventory,” 2–7.
79. Hess, “Bridge No. 1238A,” n.p. 3. Fredric L. Quivik, “Kennedy Bridge,” July 1988, National
80. The quote of the state highway commission, as well as addi- Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at
tional information, is found in Hess, “Bridge No. 1238A,” n.p. SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
81. Hess, “Bridge No. 1238,” n.p. 4. Samuel I. Schwartz, “Catch Me, I’m Falling,” New York Times,
82. Dennis Gimmestad, “Ramsey Park Swayback Bridge,” August 13, 2007. A study commissioned for the New York
September 1978, National Register of Historic Places Regis- City Department of Transportation in 1989 concluded that
tration Form, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p. the city’s 840 bridges could be “maintained in near pristine
condition” for an annual cost of $150 million. In contrast, the
83. Albert H. Good, Park and Recreation Structures (n.p.: United
city at that time was completing little routine maintenance
States Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
on bridges and was spending roughly $400 million to replace
1938), 175.
sections of bridges and often entire bridges.
84. Ibid., 175.
5. The approximate number of highway bridges in Minnesota
85. Gimmestad, “Ramsey Park Swayback Bridge”; Good, Park is drawn from Hess, Roise and Company, “The Preserva-
and Recreation Structures, 200. tion of Historic Bridges in Minnesota: Preparation of a List
86. Good, Park and Recreation Structures, 200. of Bridges for Field Survey Final Project Report,” August
87. Anderson, “Federal Relief Construction,” E.11–E.12, 1991, study prepared for the SHPO and the Mn/DOT, copy
E.23–E.24; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 3355,” National available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 6. The final number of
Register of Historic Places Registration Form, available at bridges determined eligible for the National Register of
SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 7.1, 8.1. Historic Places through the Minnesota Historic Highway
Bridge Inventory, as well as the number actually added to
88. Hess, “Bridge No. 3355,” 7.1, 8.1. the historic listing, can be found in Charlene K. Roise and
89. Ibid. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Management Plan for Minnesota’s Historic
90. Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No. 5453,” in “Minnesota Historic Bridges,” November 1997, prepared for the Mn/DOT, copy
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, 3.
St. Paul, n.p. 6. Interview with Dave Killdahl, Crookston City Engineer,
91. Waddell, Bridge Engineering, 1043; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge summer 2005, by the author; Jeffrey A. Hess, “Bridge No.
No. L7897,” and “Bridge No. L7898,” in “Minnesota Historic L8471,” in “Minnesota Historic Highway Bridge Inventory,”
Highway Bridge Inventory,” 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, 1997, available at SHPO, MHS, St. Paul, n.p.
St. Paul, n.p. 7. A good source for regulations related to historic resources
92. Hess, “Bridge No. L7897,” and “Bridge No. L7898.” is Thomas F. King’s Cultural Resource Laws and Practice:
An Introductory Guide (New York: AltaMira Press, 2004).
93. Arthur G. Hayden and Maurice Barron, The Rigid-Frame For other source see Roise and Hess, “Management Plan,” 1.
Bridge (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1950), 1–2;
212 notes
8. Eric DeLony and Terry H. Klein, “Historic Bridges: A Heri-
tage at Risk: A Report on a Workshop on the Preservation
and Management of Historic Bridges,” June 2004, report
of bridge preservation workshop held December 3–4, 2003,
funded by the Federal Highway Administration’s Office of
Project Development and Environmental Review, 1; Roise
and Hess, “Management Plan,” 1.
9. DeLony’s quote, as well as information on Oregon’s Historic
Bridge Preservation Program, is found in Eric DeLony,
“Oregon DOT Receives National Honor for Historic Bridge
Program,” in Society for Industrial Archeology Newsletter 35
(Spring 2006): 16–17.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid.
12. DeLony and Klein, “A Heritage at Risk,” 1.
13. Ibid.
14. Considerably more detailed information concerning these
recommendations is found in DeLony and Klein, “A Heri-
tage at Risk,” 3–9.
15. “Management Plan for Historic Bridges in Minnesota,” June
2006, study prepared by Mead and Hunt and HNTB for the
Mn/DOT, copy available at the Mn/DOT, St. Paul.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
Afterword
1. For a list of nationally and exceptionally significant features
of the interstate highway system, see www.environment.
fhwa.dot.gov/histpres/highways_list.asp.
2. Eric DeLony and Terry H. Klein, Historic Bridges: A Heri-
tage at Risk. A Report on a Workshop on the Preservation
and Management of Historic Bridges, Washington, D.C.,
December 3–4, 2003, SRI Preservation Conference Series 1
(June 2004), 18; see www.srifoundation.org/index.html.
3. Report prepared by Mead and Hunt and HNTB for the
Minnesota Department of Transportation, June 2006.
4. This report can be accessed from the Web sites www.in.gov/
dot/programs/bridges/inventory/index.html and www.
in.gov/indot/files/HistoricBridgePA.pdf.
notes 213
This page intentionally left blank
i n d e x
Note: Page numbers in italic refer to pages A-shaped trusses, 60 4654, 196
with illustrations. Austin Underpass Historic District, 187 4700, 188
4846, 185, 185
A b 4930, 185
4936, 186
abutments, stone, 175 Babcock, Charles M., 109, 141, 148
4969, 186
Adams, Milo A., 64, 150, 190, 197 Babcock Plan, 141
5083, 148, 185
Adams Construction Company, 184 Bayne, Alexander Y., 57, 63, 64, 77, 176, 182
5132, 173, 173
Aerial Lift Bridge (Duluth), 102–6, 105–6, Bayne (A. Y.) and Company, 57
5151, 148, 150, 185
191 Bjork, Kenneth, 132
5265, 173, 173
Alvarado Bridge (Alvarado), 123–24, 124 Blatnik, John A., 87
5368, 186
American Bridge Company, 46, 53, 56, 57 Blatnik Bridge (Duluth), 86, 86–87, 191
5370, 190, 190
American Society of Civil Engineers, 36 Blegen, Theodore C., 98
5374, 156–57, 187, 187
Anoka–Champlin Mississippi River Bodin (A. A.) and Son, 191
5388, 79–80, 80, 186
Bridge (Anoka), 132, 142–44, 145–46, Bong Memorial Bridge (Duluth), 114
5453, 154, 155, 187
170 bowstring arch-trusses, xiii, 51
5557, 144–45, 148, 185
arched trusses: steel, 174, 191 bracings, xii
5600, 196, 196
arches bridge numbers, 36
5669, 170
barrel, 131, 132 448, 187
5699, 155–56, 157, 187
concrete, 132, 170, 183 661, 186, 186
5700, 156–57, 187, 187
double span, 175 944, 123
5704, 194, 194
elliptical, 39, 191 0961, 172, 172
5718, 188
hinged, 182, 196 1238, 149, 150, 190
5721, 53, 53, 184
lattice, 181 1238A, 150, 152, 190
5722, 175
Marsh, 123, 170 1461, 170
5728, 183, 183
Melan, 120, 121, 132 1482, 60, 60–61, 191
5744, 188
multiplate, 82–84, 173, 177, 183, 191, 1816, 188
5756, 182, 182
195, 196 2110, 171
5772, 194
open-spandrel, 131, 170, 174, 181, 182, 2366, 170
5804, 80–81, 81, 184
185, 187, 189, 190, 196 2440, 182
5827, 83, 83–84, 119–20, 195
rainbow, 123, 170 2441, 181
5837, 5, 5, 171
reinforced-concrete, 121, 123–26, 132, 2628, 183, 183
5882, 171, 171
137, 141–44, 147, 170, 174, 177, 178, 2796, 181
5900, 197
179, 181, 182, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 2878, 173, 173
6009, 134
189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194 3130, 174, 174
6247, 176, 176
ribbed, 118, 119, 170, 174, 181, 182, 185, 3145, 182
6263, 175, 175
187, 189, 190, 194 3219, 196, 196
6391, 184, 184
rubble-faced, 183 3355, 153, 154, 186
6527, 61, 197
steel, 118, 119, 182, 196 3398, 170
6544, 194
stone, 24–31, 34, 36–41, 172, 173, 175, 3459, 184, 184
6662, 175, 175
178, 183, 186, 188, 189, 190, 194, 197 3481, 176, 176
6679, 82, 82, 183
stone-faced, 177, 182, 186, 191, 192, 193, 3575, 182, 188
6690, 183
195, 196 3589, 127–28, 128, 184
6992, 176
Arches (Warren Township), 26, 27, 27–28, 3673, 82
7423, 183
197 3858, 195, 195
7498, 184, 184
Armco Culvert Manufacturers Associa- 4175, 194, 194
7614, 120, 173
tion, 82 4190, 174
7626, 192, 192
Arrowhead Bridge (Duluth), 112, 114 4380, 170
7627, 192
index 215
7631, 192 L1394, 197 L8803, 188
7632, 192 L1409, 37, 37, 197 L8804, 189
7645, 81, 81, 192 L2162, 122, 122–23, 191 L8850, 172, 172
7753, 192, 192 L2194, 191 L8898, 179
7890, 175 L2210, 191 L8901, 179
7897, 154–55 L2257, 191 L8902, 179
7898, 154–55 L2340, 191 L8903, 179
7979, 175 L2526, 172 L8904, 179
8096, 190, 190 L2783, 172 L8906, 179
8292, 173 L3275, 174 L8907, 179, 179
8849, 172 L3942, 174, 174 L8908, 180
9036, 190 L4005, 183, 183 L8909, 180
9940, 175 L4013, 37, 38, 183 L8910, 180
25580, 176 L4646, 121–22, 121–22, 191 L8911, 180
27004, 182 L4770, 175, 175 L8913, 180
27136, 182 L4885, 176 L8914, 180
27664, 181 L5245, 58, 58–59, 76, 183 L8915, 180, 180
62075, 188 L5380, 172, 172 L8916, 180
88557, 192, 192 L5391, 176 L8917, 180
89026, 175 L5573, 195 L8918, 180
89182, 187 L5658, 170, 170 L8919, 181
89451, 192 L5659, 171, 171 L8920, 181
89850, 190 L5665, 170 L8921, 181
89859, 190 L5722, 178 L8922, 181
90386, 190 L5729, 178 L8923, 181
90401, 190, 190 L5735, 178, 178 L8927, 181
90437, 176 L5736, 179, 179 L9030, 191
90448, 176, 176 L5757, 191, 191 L9218, 189, 189
90449, 176 L5773, 174, 174 L9328, 182
90482, 177, 177 L5852, 188 L9329, 182, 182
90490, 177 L5853, 189, 189 L9372, 186, 186
90494, 177 L5860, 189 NP 9, 67–68, 68–69, 75, 76
90554, 170 L6007, 194 R0412, 195, 195
90590, 177 L6113, 193 R0437, 188
90591, 177 L6116, 191 R7069, 195
90608, 177 L6137, 193, 193 R7075, 195
90646, 177, 177 L6138, 193 bridges. See specific bridges; specific bridge
90664, 177, 177 L6322, 187, 187 types
90818, 173 L6393, 179 Broadway Bridge (Minneapolis), 181
90980, 186 L7069, 195, 195 Broadway Bridge (St. Peter), 78–79, 79,
90990, 186 L7075, 83, 85, 120, 195 185
92247, 188, 188 L7120, 196, 196 Brown, Steven R., 91
92321, 178 L7897, 197 Burr, Theodore, 8
92322, 178, 178 L7898, 156, 197 Busha, John, 20–21
92324, 178, 178 L7969, 197 Butler, Charles, 37, 197
92347, 178 L8471, 163
92350, 178 L8477, 193 c
92366, 182 L8501, 193
92643, 178 L8503, 193 Caldwell, B. D., 55
93844, 181, 181 L8505, 193 Camden State Park Bridge (Camden State
94246, 182 L8506, 193 Park), 185
L0077, 170 L8507, 193 Camden State Park Historic District, 185
L0884, 188 L8515, 193, 193 Camelback trusses, xiii, 53, 66, 170, 174,
L0885, 187 L8789, 189 182, 184
L1393, 50, 50, 120, 197 L8796, 194, 194 Camp Ripley Bridge (Camp Ripley), 186
2 16 index
Canadian National North American, 115 decks Fort SnellingMendota Bridge (Mendota),
Canal Bridge (Detroit Lakes), 4 cavitated, 190 132, 137–41, 138, 140, 174
Cappelen, Frederick William, 129–30, 143, lower, 99–100 Frame, Robert M., III, 121, 132, 155
181, 182 suspended, 174, 191 frames. See rigid frames
Cappelen Memorial Bridge (Minneap- deck trusses, xii Franklin Avenue Bridge (Minneapolis),
olis), 132–33, 133, 142, 181 cantilevered, 179, 188 134
Carroll, Howard, 98 Pratt, 179, 188 Frank’s Ford Bridge (Oronoco Township),
Cedar Avenue Bridge (Minneapolis), 132, steel, 179, 182, 184 187, 187
142–44, 144, 181 Warren, 194
Chamberlin, M. E., 172 wood, 16 g
Chapman, Cecil B., 178 DeLony, Eric, 164–65
Geist, John, 55
Chicago and Alton Railroad, 182 Dickenson, Leonard R., 146
Gillette-Herzog Manufacturing Company,
Chicago Bridge and Iron, 46, 187 double intersection trusses, xiii
57, 175, 181
Chicago Great Western Railway, 187, 189 Downing, Andrew J., 39
Gillham, Perley N., 120–23, 191
Chicago Great Western Railway Aerial Drayton Bridge (Drayton, North Dakota),
girders
Lift Bridge (St. Paul), 189 91–92, 91–93, 183
deck, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 184,
Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railway, Duluth, Missabe and Northern Railway,
185, 186, 187, 189
12 192
deck plate, 192, 193, 194, 197
chords, xii Duluth, Rainy Lake and Winnipeg Rolling
plate, 50, 172
arched lower, 179, 188 Lift Bridge (Ranier), 109, 114, 114–15
reinforced-concrete, 176, 178, 179, 180,
polygonal top, 184, 186 Duluth Rotary Club, 16
181, 186, 189
Civilian Conservation Corps, 6, 173, 186 Dunn, Robert C., 65, 147, 186
steel, 9, 186, 187, 192, 194, 196, 197
Civil Works Administration, 6, 186 Dunn Law, 65
through, 183, 190, 196
Claussen, Oscar, 55 Dunn Memorial Bridge (Princeton),
gondolas, 104, 106
Cleft Ridge Park Bridge (Brooklyn Park), 147–48, 149
Good, Albert H., 152–53
119
Good Roads Movement, 65
Clinton Falls Bridge (Clinton Falls Town-
e Gould (O. C.) and Sons, 186
ship), 195
Eden Bridge (Eden Township), 66, 66, 171 Great Northern Bridge Company, 192
collapses, 11, 37, 142, 162
Eisenhower Memorial Bridge (Red Great Northern Railway, 5, 171, 176, 187,
Colorado Street Bridge (St. Paul), 189, 189
Wing), 84–85, 86 195
Columbia Park Bridge (Minneapolis), 181,
Electric Short Line Bridge No. 14.51 Great Northern Railway Bridge (Sauk
181
(Orono), 182 Centre), 195
concrete, 119
El-Hai, Jack, 55 Griffith, Thomas Musgrove, 2–3, 23, 24,
arches, 183, 187
Ellsberg, N. W., 177 25, 28, 44
bridges, 118–57
Emperger, Fritz von, 119, 120 Grytbak, Martin Sigvart, 129, 142, 182, 189
slabs, 187
Encampment Forest Association, 185 Guaranty Construction Company, 185
See also reinforced concrete
Encampment Forest Association Bridge Guthrie (A.) and Company, Inc., 91, 188
Condit, Carl W., 24, 27, 47, 140
Cooke (Jay) and Company, 11 (Two Harbors), 185, 185
h
Coons, E. W., 81, 192 end posts, xii, 189
corduroy bridges, 4 Evans, J. M., 196 HAER. See Historic American Engi-
covered bridges, 5, 7, 8, 20, 176 neering Record
Cowles, William Pierce, 178, 186 f Hanly, Michael, 34
crossings. See specific bridge types Hanover Bridge (Hanover), 53, 182
Fargo Bridge and Iron Company, 172, 173 Harrington, Howard, and Ash, 108, 191
culverts, 154–55, 171, 173, 175, 191, 197
Faribault Viaduct (Faribault), 190, 190 Harrington, John Lyle, 108
Curtis, Fredrick, 34
Feller (L. M.) Company, 147, 185, 187 Hartshorn, Madeline, 61
Curtis, Tom, 34
Fielding, Michael F., 5 Hartshorn, Philander, 61
Fielding and Shepley, 5, 171
d Hastings High Bridge (Hastings), 55, 56,
floor beams, xii 174
Dam and Footbridge (Whitewater State Footbridge (Whitewater State Park), 197, Hastings Spiral Bridge (Hastings), 54,
Park), 197, 197 197 54–55
dams, 184, 197 Forbes, Charles A., 63, 174 helicoid design, 190
deck girders. See under girders Ford, Henry, 80 Helseth Engineering Company, 93, 183
Ford Bridge (Minneapolis–St. Paul), 182,
189
index 217
Hennepin Avenue Bridges (Minneapolis), k Mendota Bridge. See Fort Snelling–
25, 28, 29, 44–45, 44–46, 117, 118–19 Mendota Bridge (Mendota)
Kachelmyer, Clement P., 90
Hennepin Bridge Company, 63, 174 Mendota Road Bridge (St. Paul), 190, 190
Kansas City Bridge and Iron Company, 46
Hess, Jeffrey A., 26, 38, 79, 90, 145, 149 MHD. See Minnesota Department of
Kaplan, John, 34
Hewett, Arthur, 59 Highways
Keeler, Elmer, 40, 188
Hewett, Seth M., 57, 58, 63, 77, 121 military roads, 32
Kellogg Boulevard Viaduct (St. Paul), 142
Hewett, William S., 59, 114, 119, 121, 182, Miller, E. J., 109
Kennedy Bridge (Kennedy), 161, 162, 183,
188, 189, 195 Milwaukee Bridge and Iron Works, 56,
183
Hewett Bridge Company, 57, 58, 60, 61, 188
Kennedy Bridge (Mankato Township),
121, 186, 191 Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway, 12
170
High Bridge (St. Paul), 73, 134 Minneapolis Bridge and Iron Company,
Kern Bridge (South Bend Township), 51,
High Wagon Bridge (Winona), 88–90, 90 61, 77, 197
51
Hill, James J., 28, 29, 31, 46, 73 Minneapolis Bridge Company, 61, 63, 77,
Kettle River Bridge (Sandstone), 90,
Hilton, Charles, 98 79, 170, 185, 188
90–91, 188
hips, xii Minneapolis Park Board, 181
King (George E.) Bridge Company, 195
Historic American Engineering Record Minneapolis Steel and Machinery
King Iron Bridge Company, 181
(HAER), 160 Company, 179, 182
king post trusses, xiii, 185
historic bridge preservation. See preser- Minneapolis Street Railway Company, 182
vation Minneapolis Union Railway, 182
Horton, Horace E., 44–46, 187 l Minneapolis Western Railway Bridge
Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergen- Lac Qui Parle Project, 184 (Minneapolis), 71–73, 72
dorff, 119 Laine, August, 184 Minnesota Central, 14
Howe, William, 8, 9, 11, 16 Lake Bronson Dam (Lake Bronson State Minnesota Department of Conservation,
Howe trusses, 9–12, 10, 16 Park), 184, 184 173
Hunter, Hugh, 56 Lake Street–Marshall Avenue Bridge Minnesota Department of Highways
(Minneapolis–St. Paul), 146–47 (MDH), 5, 61, 64, 66, 79, 81, 108, 111,
Lanesboro Stone Dam (Lanesboro), 24 170
i
Leighton, Thomas, 94 Minnesota Department of Transporta-
I beams, 81, 119, 122, 183, 192 Leighton Bridge and Iron Works, 94, 95 tion, 90, 113
Illinois Steel Bridge Company, 66, 170 Lester River Bridge (Duluth), 127, 127, 194 Minnesota Highway Commission (MHC),
Industrial Contracting Company, 87, 89, Lindvall, Andrew L., 80 38, 50, 60, 172
197 Lofberg Cement Company, 183 Minnesota Historic Highway Bridge
Intercity Bridge (Minneapolis–St. Paul), Long, Stephen H., 8, 9–10, 11 Inventory, 161, 164
142, 143, 182, 189 Long Meadow Bridge (Bloomington), Minnesota Slip Bridge (Duluth), 113
Interlachen Bridge (Minneapolis), 119, 66–67, 67, 166, 182 Minnesota Soldiers Home Bridge (Minne-
120, 122, 182 Loweth, Charles F., 177, 196 apolis), 182
Interstate Highway 35W Bridge (Minne- Loweth and Wolff, 62, 176 Minnesota State Historic Preservation
apolis), 142, 157 Lyndale Avenue Bridge (Bloomington), Office (SHPO), 78
Interstate Transfer Railway, 194 110–11 Minnesota State Review Board, 78
iron Minnesota Steel Company, 98, 100
bridges, 3, 44–115 m Modern Steel Structural Company, 107,
verticals, 11 191
See also wrought iron Main Channel Bridge (Winona), 88, Monzani, Willoughby, 61
88–90, 197 Morell, Anthony, 126
j Marsh, James Barney, 123 Morell and Nichols, 126, 194
Marsh arches, 170 Morse Bridge Company, 53, 182
Johnson, Clifford, 93, 183 Marsh Concrete Rainbow Arch Bridge
Johnson, Lawrence, H., 63 Mower Country Highway Department,
(Cambria Township), 123, 123 186
Johnson, Lawrence Henry, 190 Marsh Engineering Company, 123–24,
Johnson Brothers, 119 Munster, Andreas W., 74, 129, 134, 189
170, 183
Joliet Bridge and Iron Company, 66, 183 McGilvray, Thomas F., 105, 191
Jones, Harry Wild, 60 McLean, Charles Russell, 194 n
Jones and Hewett, 57 McMullen, George, 24
Jordan Fair Grounds Bridge (Jordan), National Bridge and Iron Works, 55
Melan, Josef, 119, 182, 188, 189 National Park Service, 113, 186
194, 194
Joyce, Leon, 82, 183
218 index
National Register of Historic Places, 78, Pratt, Caleb, 8, 52 s
113 Pratt, Thomas, 8, 52
Salisbury, Jonathan Burnett, 57
National Trust for Historic Preservation Pratt trusses, xiii, 51–53, 62, 171, 173, 174,
Salisbury Bridge (Kingston), 57, 57–58,
(NTHP), 164 176, 179, 181, 183, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189,
186
National Youth Administration, 6 195, 197
Salo and Wiinamaki, 193
Nichols, Arthur, 126 preservation, 160–67
Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridge Company,
Nichols, Arthur R., 173 Prestegard, John, 64
114–15
Nicholson, Peter, 34 Prestegard Bridge (Minnesota Falls
Schodek, Daniel L., 31
North Channel Bridge (Winona), 89–90 Township), 62, 64, 65, 150, 197
Schwartz, Samuel I., 162
Northern Pacific No. 95 (Grand Forks), 95 Public Works Administration (PWA), 6
Security Bridge Company, 59, 60, 174, 187
Northern Pacific Railway, 9, 177, 182 pylons
Seven Bridges Road (Duluth), 124–26,
Northern Pacific Railway Bridge No. 9 reinforced-concrete, 171
125, 152
(Minneapolis), 182 stone, 171, 185
Seventh Street Improvement Arches (St.
Northern States Power Company, 174
Paul), 34–36, 35–36, 36, 190
NTHP. See National Trust for Historic q Shepley, Charles R., 182
Preservation
Queen Avenue Bridge (Minneapolis), 182 Shepley, Louis E., 5
Nymore Bridge (Bemidji), 127–29, 129, 170
queen posts, 160 Sibley, Henry Hastings, 32
slabs
o Quivik, Fredric L., 50–51, 57
concrete, 187
Okes Construction Company, 190 r reinforced-concrete, 185, 190, 194
Oliver, Henry W., 98 stone-faced, 185, 186
Oliver Bridge (Duluth), 95–97, 98, 194 Railings, open-ballustrade, 176 Smith, Charles C., 28
Oliver Mining Company, 98 Railroad Bridge (Duluth), 194 Smith Avenue Bridge (St. Paul), 73, 75, 134
Oustad, Kristoffer Olsen, 129, 132, 143, 177, Railroad Grade Separation Program, 6 Snively, Margaret, 125
178, 181 Ramsey Park Swayback Bridge (Redwood Snively, Samuel Frisby, 124
Outlaw Bridge (Minn.-Ont.), 17 Falls), 152–53, 153, 190 Soo Line High Bridge (Washington
Rasmussen, Alfred J., 38 County), 46–50, 47–49, 120, 196
p Redstone Bridge (New Ulm), 94–95, Sorlie, Arthur Gustav, 77–78
94–98, 120 Sorlie Memorial Bridge (Grand Forks),
Palmer, Timothy, 8 Red Wing High Bridge (Red Wing), 86 76–78, 77, 188
panels, xii reinforced concrete Souther, M. E., 194
Parker, Charles H., 55 arches, 121, 123–26, 132, 137, 141–44, South Halsted Street Bridge (Chicago),
Parker trusses, xiii, 55, 172, 188, 190 147, 170, 172, 173, 174, 176, 179, 181, 105
Pennsylvania trusses, xiii, 78, 176, 184 182, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, South St. Paul Belt Railway Bridge (St.
Phelps, Ray, 59 193, 194 Paul Park), 196, 196
Phelps Mill Bridge (Maine Township), 59, bridges, 27, 120–21, 124, 126–28, 132, spans
59–60, 119, 187 134, 138, 142–44, 147, 154, 157 concrete beam, 121
Pickles, Fred H., 37, 197 culverts, 154–55, 173, 175, 191, 197 suspension, 2, 171
Pigeon River Bridge (Minnesota– dams, 184, 197 swing, 13, 100–104, 133, 172, 196
Ontario), 17 deck girders, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 184, timber beam, 4–5, 8
Pioneer Service Engineering Company, 174 185, 186, 189 Spirit Lake Transfer Railway, 194
Pittsburgh Bridge Company, 196 footbridges, 197 Split Rock Bridge (Eden Township),
Plagens, Albert G., 40, 188 girders, 174, 176, 180, 181 39–41, 40–41, 151, 188
Plowden, David, 11, 24–25, 27, 28, 47, 132 pylons, 171 Stafford Western Immigration Company,
Point Douglas-St. Louis River Road rigid frames, 174, 187 176
Bridge (Stillwater), 31–34, 32, 33, 196 slabs, 185, 186, 190, 194 standard designs, 38
pony trusses, xii, 8 through girders, 183, 190 Standard Reinforced Concrete Company,
bedstead, 189 See also concrete 170
half-hip Pratt, 173, 174 rigid frames, 174, 187 Stark, N. M., 187
king post, 191 riveted bridges, 179 Steamboat Bridge (Milan), 100–101, 172
pin-connected, 174, 183, 187, 191 Robert Street Bridge (St. Paul), 132–37,
Pratt, 62, 173, 183, 187, 189, 197 135–37, 190
steel, 173, 174, 184, 186, 187, 191, 197 Rogers, H. Lincoln, 176
Warren, 66, 80, 171, 172, 179, 184, 186 Roosevelt, Franklin D., 6
wood, 14, 15 Ryan, Mark, 125
index 219
steel t w
arched trusses, 191
Taylor Bridge (Wisconsin), 160 Wabasha-Nelson Bridge (Wabasha), 87
arches, 118, 182, 196
Teberg and Berg, 184, 186 Wabasha Street Bridge (St. Paul), 3, 73, 74
bridges, 44–115
tensile strength, 119 Waddell, Alan D., 66
deck girders, 186, 187
Tenth Avenue Bridge (Minneapolis), 71, Waddell, John Alexander Low, 105, 108
deck plate girders, 192, 193, 194, 197
75 Waddell and Harrington, 108, 119
deck trusses, 179, 182, 184, 188
Terrance Mill Historic District, 188 Waddell and Hohle, 66, 171
I beams, 81, 122, 183
Theodore Jensen Company, 171, 172 Waite, Henry Chester, 8
I beams, rolled, 192
Third Avenue Bridge (Minneapolis), 120, Walnut Street Bridge (Mazeppa), 195, 195
pony trusses, 62, 172, 173, 174, 191, 1917
130–31, 130–32, 182 War Department, 99
stringers, 170, 171, 173, 175, 176, 187,
Third Street Bridge (Cannon Falls), 63 Warren, James, 61
188, 192
Thomas, William E., 59 Warren trusses, xiii, 61–62, 66, 80, 91–93,
through girders, 196
through girders. See under girders 171, 172, 177, 179, 183, 186, 194, 197
through trusses, 171, 175, 176, 184, 185,
through trusses, xii, 8 Washington Avenue Bridge (Minne-
187, 188, 197
bowstring-arch, 170 apolis), 68, 73
vertical lifts, 189, 191
Camelback, 53, 170, 174, 182, 184 Waterford Bridge (Northfield), 63, 63–64,
Stewart Creek Stone Arch Bridge
cantilevered, 197 174
(Duluth), 38–39, 39, 194
parabolic, 130 Waterstreet, Joe, 56
Stillwater Bridge (Stillwater), 106–8,
Parker, 55, 172, 188, 190 Waterstreet Bridge (Maine Township),
107–13, 196
Pennsylvania, 78, 176, 184, 185 56, 56, 188
stone
pin-connected, 51–53, 170, 171, 175, Wegscheid, Timothy, 67
abutments, 175
176, 182, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 190, Whalen Covered Bridge (Whalen), 6
arches, 24–31, 34, 36–41, 172, 173, 177,
195, 196 Wheeler, Walter H., 137, 174
178, 182, 183, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191,
Pratt, 51–53, 170, 171, 175, 176, 182, 185, Wheeler Shear Head, 137
192, 194, 195, 196, 197
186, 187, 188, 195 Whipple, Squire, 8, 51, 61
bridges, 24–41
steel, 171, 175, 176, 177, 185, 187, 188, White, Alvin C., 186
culverts, 173
190, 195, 196, 197 Whitewater State Park Historic District,
pylons, 171, 186
Warren, 61–62, 91–93, 177, 183, 194, 197 197
slabs, 185, 186
wood, 16 Widell Company, 194
towers, 24–25
wrought iron, 170, 182, 184, 185 Winona and St. Peter Railroad, 20, 197
Stone Arch Bridge (Chippewa Falls
timber. See wood Wisconsin Bridge and Iron Works
Township), 188, 188
tolls, 2 Company, 54, 55
Stone Arch Bridge (Minneapolis), 28–31,
Toltz, King, and Day, 134, 190 Wisconsin Department of Transporta-
29–31, 167, 167, 182
Town, Ithiel, 8 tion, 113
Stone Bridge (Flandreau State Park), 171
Town lattice, 8 Wisconsin State Highway Commission,
St. Paul Foundry Company, 189
town lattice trusses, xiii 197
Strafford Western Emigration Company, 9
trestle bridges, 17–20, 18, 20 Wolff, Louis P., 62, 63, 176
stringers
Truesdell, William Albert, 34, 36, 190 wood
steel, 170, 171, 173, 175, 176, 187, 188, 192
trusses, 8, 50. See also specific truss types beam spans, 4–5, 8
wood, 171, 197
Turner, C. A. P., 47, 137, 138, 174, 196 bridges, 2–21
struts, xii
Tyrie and Chapman, 126 covered bridges, 5, 7, 8, 20
styles
king posts, 185
Art Deco, 131, 137, 149, 157, 177, 187
Art Moderne, 137, 188 u queen posts, 160
stringers, 171, 197
Classical Revival, 85, 120–21, 127–28, United States Steel Corporation, 46, 98 trestle bridges, 17–18
170, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182,
trusses, 3, 12, 176
184, 186, 188, 189, 191, 192, 193, 194, v Works Progress Administration, 6, 40,
195
vertical-lift bridges, 101–5, 189, 191, 196 83, 172
Gothic Revival, 196
vertical posts, xii, 9, 11, 186, 189, 194, 197 wrought iron
Medieval Revival, 189
viaducts, 192 bridges, 50–54
Second Egyptian Revival, 179
voussoirs, 28 trusses, 73, 133, 170, 182, 184, 185
suspension bridges, 3, 24, 46, 118, 185
Vroman, Guy, 176 Wrought Iron Bridge Company, 46, 51,
Sverdrup and Parcel, 174, 190
170
swayback design, 190
Swinging Bridge (Jay Cooke State Park),
171, 171
22 0 index
y
Yellow Medicine Country Highway
Department, 197
Youngstown Bridge Company, 53
z
Zieglers Ford Fridge (Decoria Township),
171, 171
Zumbro Parkway Bridge (Hyde Park
Township), 196, 196
Zumbrota Covered Bridge (Zumbrota), 5,
8–9, 176
Zumbrota Covered Bridge Society, 9
index 22 1
Denis P. Gardner is a historical consultant and writer. Eric DeLony, former chief of the Historic American Engineer-
He is author of Minnesota’s Treasures: Stories Behind the State’s ing Record (HAER), is a consultant and activist working for the
Historic Places. preservation of historic bridges.
222 index