Long Meadow Lake Bridge originally uploaded by bolobillyI posted before that during this year’s legislative session, $2 million was set aside to finally get a pedestrian/biking bridge to replace the currently condemned truss bridge that spans the Minnesota river between Burnsville and Bloomington. The bridge was closed to all traffic, including foot, in 2002 and there has been no pedestrian/bike route from the South of the River to North of the River on this side of town since. At this time, the only option is to ride your ass all the way down to Shakopee and cross near 169.
According to the Star Tribune, because federal money was set aside for this bridge, there is a clause that requires it be evaluated by historians to determine if renovation should occur rather than outright replacement. The bridge is apparently eligible to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places and several people who have a vested interest in seeing it remain as a historic place are fighting to do just that. Denis Gardner, author of a book about historic bridges in Minnesota, Larry Granger of the Bloomington Historical Society, and Sen. Jim Carlson DFL-Eagan are all interested in keeping the bridge as is but only if it’s financially feasible. The other side of the coin is that during its most recent tests, the bridge just wasn’t structurally sound. Jim Gates, Bloomington’s deputy director of public works, said that repairing the bridge would be more expensive than just replacing it.
Estimates including road repair, trail building and bridge costs total about $4.5 million and, at this time, will come from federal funding, Met Council dollars, and Bloomington taxpayers. The city hopes that they will be able to get additional dollars from Hennepin and Dakota counties, Burnsville and Eagan who will hook their hike/bike trails to this bridge. While costs for replacement have been considered, no one is quite sure what the cost would be for renovations. A historical assessment will begin in August and will take approximately two months. Once that is complete it will give everyone a better idea of just how much historical preservation would run but I really wonder what the decision makers consider “financially feasible”.
dgbrong, a commenter on the Star Tribune said:
It’s a bridge. It’s old and worn out. Replace it already.
What do you think? Should the bridge be replaced or should it be renovated, possibly adding a larger tax burden on Dakota and Hennepin taxpayers along with Bloomington, Burnsville and Eagan residents?
Related posts:
Posts via RSS
Loading ...
July 12th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
There’s another way across besides 169 — there’s a bike/pedestrian path on the 494 bridge. Now that I think about it, it would also be doable to cross the river on the existing cement bike/pedestrian bridge south of the truss bridge (the part that’s actually closed is the part that crosses Long Meadow Lake), and then head northeast through the wildlife refuge up to the trailhead at the interpretive center. But, these are pretty out of the way compared to the truss bridge across Long Meadow.
I’ve seen that bridge up close, and considering how fatigued the metal bridge structure itself looks (not just the road surface), I have a hard time believing it’s worth renovating. I think it would be best to just replace it altogether.
July 12th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Tim, you’re right and I just passed the entrance to the 494 bridge crossover today in Eagan, I’m dumb as hell. Thanks for pointing that one out.
July 13th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
It’s kind of tricky, since there’s no obvious signs that the bridge is closed (until you get right up to it). I was biking on the trails and wanted to see if the bridge could get me across the river. Until I got practically on the bridge to see a “Bridge Closed” sign and massive holes in the surface of the bridge, I had no idea.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
I ended up working my way down to that bridge from the South side earlier this summer only to find out that I had no way of crossing and ended up climbing back to 13 so I could cross 169 on my bike (I took the highway since it also wasn’t obvious to me how to get on the pedestrian crossing). There are a lot of people living on both sides of the river who would like to be able to create bike and run routes where an additional bridge at that spot would be an ideal crossing.
Replace or repair? I’m not particularly knowledgeable about the historical significance of the bridge that’s there now. What about a new bridge along with a tribute to the previous bridge?
July 13th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Ed, ouch!
July 14th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Replace it. While they are at it, build another crossing under the 35W bridge.
July 15th, 2008 at 11:55 am
[...] Lightning and commentors discuss replacing vs renovating the currently-condemned Meadow Lake Bridge which carried bikers across the Minnesota River between Bloomington and [...]
October 19th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Miss that bridge. Have done the 494 route but then need to double back. Lke the 35W bridge idea as well. Anybody know where this process is right now 10/20/2008?
October 20th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Isn’t there a bike/pedestrian crossing under the new Cedar Ave bridge? I know I’ve been on it. But I don’t remember where it comes out on the north side.
If you’ve ever been under the old bridge there should be no doubt that it needs to go. And BTW the way, the old bridge is still being used quite frequently, albeit illegally.
October 20th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
bf, no, there’s not.
October 21st, 2008 at 10:32 am
Send you an email and a pic of the new bridge. Tell me what I am looking at if it isn’t a bike river crossing.
October 21st, 2008 at 11:02 am
bf, You are most likely looking at the ped bridge that gets you halfway across the river. The old bridge is what got you across the other half.
October 21st, 2008 at 11:06 am
Dave, according to the picture I received that would be the case, yes.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Bloomington may not do anything with the bridge.
http://snipurl.com/h2yyy