The Stillwater BridgeStillwater, MinnesotaStillwaterStillwater BridgeHistoryWhat was constructed?Repair historyNew traffic demands higher capacityOther affected townsStillwater vs. HoultonMain purposes of a new bridgeSlide 12No buildBuild alternativesSlide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19[video clip]Money, it’s a crime. Share it fairly but don’t take a slice of my pie. –Pink FloydU.S. Institute for Conflict Resolution: Key IssuesWhat to do with the lift bridgeSlide 24Who should lead the effort for preservation of the lift bridge?What’s happened so farPros and cons for the new bridgeStillwater residents weigh inWhat about the Cheeseheads?Slide 30QuestionsThe Stillwater BridgeMarlena Shudy, Derek Newbauer, Charla Rae Heutinck , David KmiecStillwater, Minnesota•Birthplace of Minnesota•22 Miles from Downtown St. Paul•27 Miles from Downtown Minneapolis•Home of the Stillwater Bridge•Located in the St. Croix River Valley on the WI and MN Border•September 29th, 1837: Treaty Signed by the US Government & Objibwa Nation allowing settlementStillwaterStillwater is on the eastern border of the Twin Cities 7 county metro area.Stillwater Bridge•Built in 1931•1,050 Feet Long•23 Feet Wide•2 Lane Highway connecting MN State Highway 36 and WI State Highway 64•Waddell and Harrington Type Vertical-Lift Highway Bridge•1989: National Register of Historic PlacesHistory1910 Stillwater Bridge built as a pontoon swing bridge1925 City of Stillwater (original owners) switched ownership to Minnesota Department of Highways1928 New bridge design needed due to heavy traffic on the bridge and St. Croix River1929 Design Contract of $3,150 granted to Ash, Howard, Needles, and Tammen of Kansas City, Missouri1930 Construction began with General Contractor as Peppard and Fulton and the Fabricator as the American Bridge Company1931 Construction completedTotal Cost: $460,174.00Ownership of the new bridge was Minnesota and WisconsinWhat was constructed?•Repair concrete slabs•Steel truss spans•Single vertical-lift Span–Waddell and Harrington type–Concept from Duluth, MN vertical-lift spanRepair history1973 Concrete deck rebuilt1979 Concrete approach span rebuilt2005 Bridge closed for repairs (source: Mn/DOT)2006 Bridge reopens for car traffic (foot traffic expected in 2007)New traffic demands higher capacity•Traffic volumes have increased 2.2% per year (on average) from 1988 – 2000 •Today 16,000 cars use the bridge each day•During peak hours, queues extend almost a mile along STH-64 in WI and TH-36 in MNCommuters and some planners suggest congestion warrants a higher capacity or second bridgeOther affected townsRed Star Indicates Location of Houlton.Oak Park Heights and Bayport will Possibly be Affected by Approach RoadsMap from MapquestStillwater vs. Houlton•Population: 1,421•Median Age: 37.9•Average Household Size: 2.68•Total Housing Units: 552•Mean Travel To Work Time: 29.5 Minutes•Median Household Income: $75,000•Single-Family Owner-Occupied Homes: 362 (about 65%)•Median Value: $174,600Some data from Brainyzip.com•Population: 16,000•Median Age: 38.1•Average Household Size: 2.67•Total Housing Units: 11,325•Mean Travel to Work Time: 23 Minutes•Median Household Income: $67,776•Single-Family Owner-Occupied Homes: 7,909•Median Value: $174,600Main purposes of a new bridge•Reduce congestion in Stillwater•Enable vessels to pass under bridge at anytime without need to raise or lower part of the bridge•Improve transportation connections between Western Wisconsin and Minneapolis/ Saint Paul area•Accommodate expected traffic increases produced by future development, primarily in WisconsinOptions•Advantages–Avoidance of the impacts of the Build Alternatives.•DisadvantagesNo build–Existing congestion in the project corridor would not be addressed; congestion would increase and corresponding delays would lengthen as traffic in the project area increased–The Lift Bridge would remain as the sole river crossing in the area. Repeated closures for repairs and continued maintenance or rehabilitation work would be required, and the Lift Bridge would be closed for substantial periods of time to make these repairs. Traffic detours would be necessary during these closures.–Poor traffic operations and roadway geometrics would continue with greater delays and decreased safety as traffic volumes increaseBuild alternatives•Disadvantages–Acquisition and relocation of residences and businesses.–Adverse visual impacts on the Riverway.–Adverse impacts on historic properties in the area, including (among others) the National Register-listed Lift Bridge, the Stillwater Commercial Historic District, and the Stillwater Cultural Landscape District.–Floodplains and wetlands would be filled in.–Some residential properties would experience noise pollution.•Advantages–Decreased congestion and associated delay in downtown Stillwater.–Improved interregional corridor connections between Somerset, New Richmond, and the Twin Cities metro area.–Improved geometrics and traffic operations which will result in increased safety and decreased delay.–Improved treatment of storm water runoff.Alternative B-1 consists of a new four-lane bridge with a bicycle/pedestrian trail on the north side of the bridge. The bridge would be located approximately 6,500 feet south of the Lift Bridge.Alternative C includes a new four-lane bridge (two through-traffic lanes in each direction) with a bicycle/pedestrian trail on the north side of the bridge. The bridge would be located approximately 3,900 feet south of the Lift Bridge.Alternative D includes a new four-lane bridge south of the Lift Bridge. The new bridge would be located approximately 1,940 feet south of the Lift Bridge.Alternative E includes a new one-way bridge approximately 2,010 feet south of the Lift Bridge for two lanes of eastbound traffic, and use of the Lift Bridge as a two-lane one-way roadway for westbound traffic.[video clip]Money, it’s a crime.Share it fairly but don’t take a slice of my pie. –Pink Floyd•Both State DOTs, given many other highway priorities, do not want to use regular highway allocation to increase cost beyond what it already is.•FHWA finds no discretionary money for this purpose.•Neither the National Park Service nor state DNRs consider it appropriate to tap their funds. They fear it could set a precedent requiring park agencies to pay for mitigation to
View Full Document
Unlocking...