Author Message

<  Advocacy  ~  Cedar Bridge update from STrib

PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:02 am
User avatarHas entire BMX Bandits catalogJoined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:36 amPosts: 4252Location: Hopkins
Original article here.

Mary Jane Smetanka wrote:
The cost of rehabbing even part of the original span of the bridge could prove prohibitive. Still ...

By MARY JANE SMETANKA, Star Tribune

Last update: December 5, 2008 - 5:33 AM

Renovating three of the five spans of the historic Old Cedar Avenue bridge and replacing the other two could cost $7 million or more, the city of Bloomington has learned.

That's twice the estimated cost of building a new bridge to handle pedestrian and bike traffic as well as the occasional emergency vehicle. And it's way beyond the $3.3 million the city has secured so far in state and federal funds to replace the old bridge.

While preservationists would like to save as much of the unusual 1920 bridge as possible, cost will be a major issue for the city.

Rep. Ann Lenczewski, a Bloomington DFLer who this year played a key role in getting $2 million in state bonding money for replacement of the bridge, said the preliminary cost estimates to save all or part of the bridge appear too costly to be practical.

"I anticipate that the decisionmakers ... will return to the original plan and the goal of my bill, which is to remove the bridge and replace it with a new span," she wrote in an e-mail.

The camel-back steel truss bridge, which has been closed since 2002, is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Bridge historians say that the loss of similar structures in the state has made the Old Cedar Avenue bridge a Minnesota rarity, unusual for its 865-foot length and five arched spans.

Engineers and historians are evaluating the structure's condition and historical importance, as required by the federal appropriation. This week, Bloomington was the host of an information session to update the public on the evaluations of the bridge.

Once part of a heavily used crossing over the Minnesota River, the bridge was closed to vehicle traffic in 1993, and now crosses only Long Meadow Lake in the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Before it was totally closed because of safety concerns, the bridge was used mostly by bird watchers and hikers enjoying the refuge and by recreational and commuting bicyclists.

While final engineering and historical analyses may not be ready until after the new year -- along with firm estimates of the cost of renovating all or part of the bridge -- a clearer picture of the bridge's condition is emerging.

In general, much of the interlocking steel that forms the arching spans above the decking is in fair condition, though it is covered with rust and some beams would need to be straightened, according to the engineering firm of Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc., whose findings were detailed in displays at the meeting this week.

But the concrete piers supporting the bridge are visibly crumbling. Bearings on the entire bridge are classified as in "critical" condition, one step up from imminent failure. Some of the decking is missing. And the floor beams are at risk of failing at any time, engineers said.

Robert Frame, senior historian with Mead & Hunt Architecture of Minneapolis, said rehabilitation is often a way to keep old bridges. "It would not be a museum restoration," he said, "but a lot of it could be reused."

While the costs associated with rehabilitating all or part of the bridge have not been firmly established, Bloomington Deputy Director of Public Works Jim Gates said estimates for rehabbing the bridge's middle three spans and replacing the two at either end are hovering between $7 million to $8 million.

"Rehabbing the total bridge is significantly more expensive," he said.

Hybrid option

That so-called hybrid option between rehabilitation and replacement would preserve the soundest parts of the old bridge while sacrificing the two end spans, one of which is in especially rough condition. But it would still be twice as expensive as replacing the entire bridge with a new structure.

Bloomington City Council Member Steve Elkins stopped by the meeting to talk with the experts.

"It would be nice if some portion of the original structure could be retained for historic preservation," he said in an e-mail afterward. "However, if it's not financially feasible to do so, we're not going to let that stand in the way of building a new structure that meets the practical needs of the users of the bridge."

History buffs are still hoping that all or part of the bridge can be preserved. DFL Sen. Jim Carlson of Eagan said that while he doesn't favor spending an exorbitant amount of money to save the bridge, he thinks more economical alternatives can be found to save parts of it.

Vonda Kelly, president of the Bloomington Historical Society, also would love to see the bridge saved. But she's a realist, too.

"In the final analysis, different things will dictate what happens -- the cost, for one thing." She said the estimates that are emerging "don't surprise me much. But I think we need to take a closer look at them."

Mary Jane Smetanka • 612-673-7380


Offline Profile
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:05 am
User avatarEngages in bitter arguments over 165 vs 170 cranksJoined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:10 amPosts: 3020Location: Longfellow/Minneapolis
Tear it down and build a new one already. It's not like the old one was picturesque or anything (although the wetlands it runs through are interesting and carp-filled).


Offline Profile
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:06 am
User avatarHas entire BMX Bandits catalogJoined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:36 amPosts: 4252Location: Hopkins
My feelings exactly. I'm all for preserving history, but the the beauty of this place is the landscape, not the bridge. The utility of the bridge is too important. Save a section off to the side or something. The budget is about to get hammered which might mean no bridge at all and that is the worst possible outcome possible.


Offline Profile
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 4:46 pm
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
I wish the old bridge had just fallen into the water already. Then removal cost wouldnt be an issue, lol. And then nobody would be concerned about rehabbing it and wasting tons of money to do so. One could build 2 great bike bridges for the cost of rehabbing this one.



_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 11:58 pm
User avatarSaw Greg Lemond once at a restaurantJoined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:01 pmPosts: 1975Location: Lake Calhoun
freals, just build a new one.

Or build something where 35W crosses.



_________________
I'll procrastinate later.
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:13 am
User avatarHas recurring nightmare of descending Ramsey Hill no-handedJoined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 12:00 amPosts: 4390Location: Whipping Cult Central
I predict much talk and no action on this issue until either federal funds show up (such as Obama pushing a Work Corps program) or the current budget crisis passes.



_________________
Things are rarely just crazy enough to work, but they're frequently just crazy enough to fail hilariously.
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Wed May 27, 2009 1:32 am
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
It's not looking much better folks:


http://www.startribune.com/local/west/44030097.html
Old Cedar Av. bridge is Bloomington's albatross

Bloomington officials are near giving up on the structure. Its historic status means it probably will have to be restored rather than replaced, a much more expensive task.

By MARY JANE SMETANKA, Star Tribune
Last update: April 30, 2009 - 12:11 AM


As the debate over what to do with the Old Cedar Avenue bridge in Bloomington drags on, frustrated city officials are threatening to drop the project entirely.

They say they may just let the bridge rot.

"This was a bridge that was foisted on us ... so there's a definite limit in what the city is willing to invest," said Karl Keel, the city's director of public works. If there is no solution soon that city officials feel they can afford -- and so far project costs are only escalating as outside parties try to require preservation of the old span -- "it is likely the city will do nothing," Keel said.

Bloomington has owned the bridge since 1981, when the state Department of Transportation (MnDOT) gave it to the city. City officials have regretted accepting the gift ever since.

While the city has gathered $4.5 million from various sources to replace the span, the structure's historic status and strings attached to federal money committed to the project mean it probably will have to be restored rather than replaced. And that could more than double the cost of construction and add greatly to long-term maintenance expenses.

Stretching 865 feet from the end of Old Cedar Avenue across Long Meadow Lake in the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the 1920 bridge was closed to vehicle traffic in 1993. It remained open for almost another decade as a connector between Hennepin and Dakota counties for bicyclists as well as for hikers and bird watchers. But because of its deteriorating condition it was closed in 2002.

Seeking restoration money

Separate efforts by Bloomington and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to get federal stimulus money for the bridge have failed. At the state Legislature, Sen. Jim Carlson, of Eagan, is trying to change language tied to $2 million in bonding authority approved last year for a replacement bridge so the money can be used for restoration, too.

Last month, Keel and Bloomington City Council Member Steve Elkins visited with federal authorities in Washington, as well as staff in Rep. Jim Oberstar's office to discuss the bridge. Elkins said that while he sensed "sympathy and open-mindedness" among people there, the city is effectively paralyzed because it doesn't have the money to carry out the restoration.

"I wouldn't expect my City Council to go forward unless we have a new owner" for the bridge, Elkins said. "We want a partner or partners to take that on."

While the $4.5 million the city has cobbled together is enough to tear down and replace the bridge, the steel "camelback-through-truss" bridge is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

About $1.1 million of the money the city has to fix the bridge is from the federal government, so the city also has run up against federal rules that may require the money to be used to renovate rather than replace the span.

The cost of a full bridge restoration is estimated at $9.9 million. A less ambitious renovation that would replace floor beams and timber decking and repair piers would cost $5.8 million.

"All of those alternatives would meet the historic requirements and would have no adverse effect on the historical integrity of the bridge," said Beth Kunkel, project manager for Kimley Horn and Associates engineering in St. Paul, which prepared a draft feasibility study on rehabbing the bridge.

It is up to the Federal Highway Administration to determine whether renovating the bridge is "feasible and prudent." Since the bridge has historic status and their office is legally charged with protecting such structures, they may have little choice in advocating renovation rather than replacement. Officials in the administration's St. Paul office referred questions to Doug Hecox, a spokesperson in Washington. Hecox said officials in St. Paul say "it is reasonable and prudent to repair it and rehab it. But it's an ongoing thing. We're continuing to work with all the parties."

Mary Jane Smetanka • 612-673-7380



_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Wed May 27, 2009 1:55 am
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
We need to email some important people about this:

Representative Ann Lenczewski (Main Representive behind this project) rep.ann.lenczewski@house.mn

Karl Keel (Bloomington Public Works)
kkeel@ci.bloomington.mn.us

7/10/09 Update: Actually, the Federal Highway Administration is even more important to contact since they are the ones that are holding this up.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/mndiv/


Last edited by pannierpacker on Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:20 am, edited 1 time in total.


_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:13 am
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
Here is Karl's response to my inquiry about the bridge:

Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 8:51 AM
To: Steven
Subject: Fwd: RE: Old Cedar Ave Bridge>>
>>
Steve:>>
>>
Thanks for your e-mail regarding the Old Cedar Avenue Bridge. The City of Bloomington has been trying to re-establish this important regional ped/bike link since the old bridge was closed in 2002. After significant effort, we have been able to cobble together approximately $4.5 Million for the project -- enough to replace the bridge with a new structure. Because part of the funding is from a federal grant and because the lands adjacent to the bridge are owned by the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service, the project must undergo a federal environmental review. In addition to wetlands, wildlife, etc, this review includes a look at the historic impacts of the proposed project. Because the bridge is eligible to be placed on the Historic Register (it is not currently listed), there are a number of agencies that would like to see the bridge restored rather than replaced. As such, the City has developed a series of renovation options in addition to the original replacement option. >>
>>
From the City's point of view, the high cost to restore the bridge as well as the very high cost anticipated to maintain the bridge make the renovation option unaffordable. To date, the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) has said that it will only support the renovation option. So, unless something changes, it is likely that the City of Bloomington will not be able to proceed with the project.>>
>>
Thanks again for your note.>>



_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:16 am
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
Here is some more correspondence with him. The regular text is mine, and the italicized parts are his responses:


I think it is silly that the Federal Highway Administration is what is holding this up at this point. This is a major connection and decisions like this which fail to happen is why our country doesn’t take non-motorized transportation seriously. There has been a lot of momentum in the last couple of years for getting a connection built here. My concern is that if this bridge doesn’t get built soon, we’ll lose momentum and it won’t happen until 80 years from now when the Hwy 77 bridge needs to get replaced again. That is too long to wait. I know someone who lives in Eagan, and he said that the only way he’d consider bicycle commuting to his job in Bloomington is if this ped/bike bridge were built (he is an avid cyclist that biked all the way from Duluth to the cities once). >>
>>
I would like to help make this connection happen in whatever way possible. Is there anyone at the Federal Highway Administration that I can contact about this? What role do they place in this? Maybe if enough people were upset about this and communicated this frustration to them something would change.

FHWA is responsible for making sure that all federal rules are followed when federal transportation dollars are spent -- including rules for historical preservation. This project is being reviewed by the Minnesota Division Office of the FHWA (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/mndiv/). Their approval of the Project Memorandum (environmental document) for this project is needed in order for the project to proceed.


>>
Also, what if some property were acquired and a new bridge were simply built parallel to the old one? Then the old one could be left alone and the historians could be happy that it wasn’t disturbed. I realize that if this solution were chosen, the groups that oversee the Minnesota River would have to be convinced that having another bridge in that location is acceptable and won’t disturb the natural feel of the area or the wildlife, etc. I also realize that eventually something would have to happen to the old bridge. It would either rot into the river (which could cause contamination) or it would have to get repaired. Ironically by the time all the repairs occurred, I’m sure not much of the bridge would be “original”. That brings up another option: couldn’t a new bridge just be built with the same design as the old one, and then have it replace the old one? What is trying to be preserved, the piers or the rusted metal beams?

The existing Right-of-way for the bridge is too narrow to allow both the existing bridge and a new one. The lands adjacent to the Right-of-way is owned by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. So, the same federal regulations would be triggered if we encroached on federal lands as are triggered to use federal transportation dollars. With regard to "What is being preserved", I would say the answer is "As much as possible". Ideally, the entire bridge would be restored. Short of that, the minimum amount of replacement would be desirable. As far as building a new bridge with the same design as the original, that would be very costly -- probably more costly than the renovation option considered.>>>>


Another option I thought of, which isn’t as good
as a working bridge, would be if the dirt/rock path around Long Meadow Lake were paved. Right now, that is the shortest way through this area, but the rough trail is very difficult to navigate on any bike. This way, at least people wouldn’t have to go all the way up to the 494 bridge just to get across the river and around the lake. This would make a huge difference, and should be done anyway because it’s very scenic to go through this area and the path is also very wide and road-like but it’s just very rough to ride on.

I am not aware of any discussions with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to pave their access roadway. This may be possible, however, I would note that our experience has been that the US Fish and Wildlife Service is generally reluctant to pave trails and tries to leave there properties in as natural a condition as possible.
>>

Looking back on this, I think it would have made sense for MN-DOT to build a ped/bike facility along the entire length of the new Hwy 77 bridge. If their reason for not doing this was for them to save cost, then I feel like they should chip in for part of the cost for a new ped/bike bridge as well to get people across Long Meadow Lake. I don’t think it was fair of them to offload the responsibility of a major connection like this to the city of Bloomington. Perhaps MN-DOT’s structure could be changed in the future so that they provide funding for these sort of projects as well, but that is more of a long term solution that I don’t see happening tomorrow. In the mean time, we need to work within the situation that we have to make the best possible outcome occur.

While not as much as we would have liked, MnDOT has pledged $175K toward the project from their Cooperative Agreements Program. Like many organizations, MnDOT's resources are tight and they have been able to pledge more to this project.

>>
Hopefully, in the short term, some solution can happen which will make it easier for people to get completely across from one side of the bodies of water to the other side without the aid of an energy guzzling freeway-capable vehicle or detouring to the 494 or Bloomington Ferry (169) bike/ped bridges. >>
>>
--Steve >>



_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 7:49 am
User avatarPretends the bricks at St. Anthony Main are the PaveJoined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:35 pmPosts: 2924Location: So.MPLS
Sorry for bringing this thread back from the dead, but we were talking about Old Cedar Ave bridge yesterday and I was wondering if there was any more recent news on this? I searched around a bit this morning and all I dredged up was this old thread. We speculate it's on-hold due to budget problems, but I don't recall seeing any recent discussion of this.

Thanks!



_________________
blog
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 10:36 am
User avatarDoesn't like shants but wants to fit inJoined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:16 pmPosts: 3155Location: St. Paul
I think it's still infrastructure hot potato, where no one wants to take responsibility for long term maintenance of it, even though there is support to restore/rebuild it (depending on historic designations).

You can probably contact DNR and City of Bloomington to tell them that you support making this project a priority.


Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 10:45 am
User avatarPretends the bricks at St. Anthony Main are the PaveJoined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:35 pmPosts: 2924Location: So.MPLS
That's what I thought. Do you remember who actually owns that thing now? City of Bloomington was interested in re-opening it but passed on up keep, as I recall. It's all so foggy...



_________________
blog
Offline Profile
PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 10:57 am
User avatarDoesn't like shants but wants to fit inJoined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:16 pmPosts: 3155Location: St. Paul
Pretty sure City of Bloomington owns it currently


Offline Profile
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 10:34 pm
Chronic PinchflatterJoined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 amPosts: 853
That is correct, Bloomington owns it. I exchanged emails with their City Council staff and they explained to me that there is no possible way that they can come up with the funding for it. By law, this bridge can't be replaced but it must be restored to it's historical beginning status and that will cost something to the tune of $10 million.



_________________
irc.umn.edu
#mplsbikelove the joy of idling
Offline Profile

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Page 1 of 2
18 posts
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Search for:
Reply to topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


 

Featured Sponsor

Twitter Feed

Twitter: mplsbikelove

Flickr Photos

Flickr

More Sponsor