Historic bridges:Can the past support the future?

For 80 years, the 10th Street Bridge, joining Great Falls and Black Rock, Mont., has spanned the Missouri River. On a clear day, the distinctive arched span is reflected magnificently in the waters that run beneath it.

Until recently, the bridge was dangerously close to existing only in photographs and paintings. Its singular arches remained intact, but its deck had deteriorated, and state transportation officials were loath to invest the resources necessary for repair. The bridge was closed to traffic and even disappeared from state maps, as officials prepared to demolish the historic structure and replace it with a new bridge one block downriver. That is, until local residents banded together to save what they regarded as part of their heritage.

“There was no reason to demolish this bridge except that it was old,” says Arlyne Reichert, a local activist and former state legislator, who has led the campaign to save the bridge. “The DOT has not maintained it. The large amounts of salt laid down over many winters contributed to the deterioration of the bridge, and the sides appeared to be crumbling. The arches have always been just perfect.”

The campaign for the 10th Street Bridge ultimately involved federal agencies and judges. In the end, residents won a new life for the bridge, and its restoration is now under way.

The story is not uncommon. Across the country, citizens are squaring off against local, state and even national agencies in an effort to preserve historic bridges. For local governments, the drama often pits intrinsic value against public safety, transportation needs and budgets.

The preservation debate

According to Eric DeLony, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Historic American Engineering Record, nearly 250,000 U.S. bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Many of those are historically significant not only for their ages but for their architecture and engineering as well. “Generally, we’re finding from the statewide historic bridge inventories that 7 to 10 percent of the bridges in any given state are National Register-eligible,” DeLony says.

They run the gamut from wooden covered, stone arched and reinforced concrete bridges to steel span and suspension bridges. Most of those being considered for rehabilitation — particularly those in the eastern United States — are metal truss bridges, which were the popular solution for crossing rivers and streams in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The question of whether to restore an historic bridge can stir acrimonious debate between those persons eager to preserve and those who regard replacement as a more cost-effective alternative. “These bridges tend to be very controversial because there is a portion of the community that feels it’s important to save the money (set aside for new bridge construction) and keep the older bridges,” DeLony explains. “There are others who see them as a liability and a drain on taxpayer dollars. Out with the old and in with the new, you might say.”

Money is not the only consideration, however. Even if renovation of a bridge is financially feasible, transportation officials must decide whether the renewed structure can support modern traffic loads or aid future transportation strategies. To what extent will a renovation need to include expansion or reconstruction? Is the structure better suited for pedestrian use? How would either of those options serve the community?

Those were some of the questions that Great Falls’ officials and residents weighed in their fight to save the 10th Street Bridge. The idea of renovation gained backing when preservationists pushed for inclusion of the bridge in Montana’s Rivers Edge Trail system.

“The 10th Street Bridge [preservation effort] was aided by the fact that the state was developing an extensive system of trails along the Missouri River that would allow [visitors] to hike across the width of Montana,” DeLony explains. “Your argument (for preservation) grows legs when you can link it to a larger riverfront development, bikeway or trailway.” When it is completed next September, the renovated bridge will be part of the walking and biking trails in the Rivers Edge system.

The public safety pull

More often than not, however, governments do not opt for restoration. “In only 20 percent of the cases do you have the community, politicians and business leaders behind the effort,” DeLony says. “In 75 percent of the cases you have a preservation issue and a preservation battle on your hands.” That is the case in St. Augustine, Fla., where the battle surrounding the Bridge of Lions has divided communities, government agencies and local council members for years.

Built in 1927 to connect St. Augustine to Anastasia Island, the Mediterranean Revival draw bridge was designed to complement the historic and architectural ambience of the nation’s oldest city. At the time construction began, the bridge was the largest construction project ever undertaken by a U.S. city; when it was completed, it became known as “Dixie’s Most Handsome Span.”

Pictured on postcards and promotional brochures, the Bridge of Lions is one of the most recognized landmarks in St. Augustine. The life-size, marble lions that guard its western entrance have given the structure, which is included on the National Register of Historic Places, its name.

Although the bridge originally belonged to the city, ownership has since transferred to the state. The Florida DOT discovered in 1981 that the bridge was structurally impaired, but, in the face of widespread public opposition to a new bridge, the department undertook what became a continuous round of repairs.

Additionally, the bridge has been the site of several marine accidents. Its horizontal clearance is 76 feet, as opposed to the 125 feet required for new bridges. According to the U.S. Coast Guard, 30 barges have hit the bridge’s fenders — more than have hit any other bridge on the Intracoastal Waterway.

The Bridge of Lions debate re-opened in 1989, when St. Augustine’s council members passed a resolution requesting that the DOT report on the bridge’s condition. The DOT recommended complete rehabilitation of the bridge or replacement with a new, two-lane draw bridge.

Residents and even council members took to opposite corners. The preservationists formed the “Save Our Bridge” group, while those in favor of new construction gathered into “Citizens for a Safe New Bridge.” Those supporting preservation are doing so, in part, because of the Bridge of Lions’ visibility and long-standing status as part of St. Augustine’s identity.

“There’s a core of people here who have put a lot of energy into working to restore and maintain the structures that we have,” says Nancy Sikes-Cline, one of the leaders in the Save Our Bridge group. “One of the key structures is the Bridge of Lions. It’s very visible, and it’s one of the most photographed structures we have.”

Following numerous public meetings and a lengthy environmental impact study, the DOT concluded that the existing bridge should be updated to modern standards. The project, which is pending Coast Guard approval, will involve replacing the 1,545-foot deck and superstructure. “We’ll leave the towers intact, but we’ll widen the lanes a little bit and bring it up to [present] safety standards,” says Bill Henderson, DOT manager for the project.

Henderson estimates that the job will cost in excess of $27 million. That is less than the initial costs of building a new bridge, but long-term expenses may exceed those of a new structure, he says. “When you start talking about long-term cost you’re getting into fuzzy territory,” he explains. “It’s difficult to say when the older bridge might need to be rehabbed again vs. when a new bridge might need the same kind of work.”

A rarity in Pittsburgh

Of course, all bridge restoration projects are not contentious. For a lucky few cities and counties, the projects actually solidify communities rather than dividing them. Crossing Pennsylvania’s Monongahela River, the Smithfield Street Bridge has been a familiar part of the Pittsburgh cityscape since 1883. The lenticular steel span is recognized as one of the nation’s oldest bridges, and it is decorated with plaques celebrating its historic and engineering significance.

By the early 1990s, the bridge was in need of a makeover, says Mike Eversmeyer, a local architect and former member of the Pittsburgh Historic Review Commission. “It was definitely an overdue project,” he says. “The bridge had been shut down to bus traffic for a while because the deck — which had been replaced [several decades earlier] — was wearing out.”

The city and its residents were uniformly in favor of restoration, Eversmeyer says. “Everyone understood that the work needed to be done to it, and PennDOT never proposed doing anything that was really wrong,” he notes. There were some concerns about aesthetics for the project (i.e., paint color, railing design), but those were resolved, he adds.

The restoration of the Smithfield Street Bridge is often cited by bridge preservationists as one of the nation’s great success stories. Although built more than a century ago, it has adapted gracefully to the demands of modern life while retaining its original form and character.

Sink or swim?

Even with steadfast support, bridge projects — of any kind — will sink without money. In addition to being affected by the availability of funds, the decision to preserve an historic bridge carries a burden of proof: Is it best to spend money on something old; or is it best to spend money on something new?

Preservation advocates claim that saving a bridge can be cost-effective and sometimes even less expensive than building a new one. DeLony notes that demolition and new construction can have far more environmental impact (e.g., on the river bed, shore and wetlands) than rehabilitation of existing structures. “If you deal with an existing structure, the likelihood of those environmental impacts is going to be less,” he says.

Where will the money come from? Some states, such as Oregon and Vermont, have invested heavily in bridges, but most of the funding in other states comes from TEA-21. States receiving TEA-21 funds must set aside 3 percent of those funds for transportation enhancements. “That can range from planting wildflowers on median strips along interstates to developing visitor centers, but it is also clearly dedicated to restoring and rehabbing historic bridges,” DeLony says. “That’s the single largest source of funding.”

Funds set aside for the demolition of old bridges can be used for their restoration instead. For example, $450,000 of the funds earmarked for saving Great Falls’ 10th Street Bridge came from the state DOT. The amount was based on the estimated cost of the bridge’s demolition.

In addition to public funding, many bridge rehabilitation efforts have benefited from private contributions. For example, fundraising for the 10th Street Bridge was aided by T-shirt sales, while Save Our Bridge in St. Augustine began selling postcards depicting the Bridge of Lions.

Private grants also are available, as demonstrated in Great Falls. Locally based Preservation Cascade Inc., the citizen-based preservation group that has spearheaded the 10th Street Bridge restoration, received a $5,000 grant from the Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C.

Deserving of another look

Often, of course, local governments are not the decision-makers when determining the fate of historic bridges. That responsibility usually remains with the state DOT. However, local governments are increasingly being asked to lend their support to pro-preservation residents, and that has placed many officials in tough spots. As illustrated by the division in St. Augustine, a preservation debate can divide a council just as it can divide a community.

Despite the sometimes hostile nature of a preservation debate, the number of bridges being restored in the United States has risen in the last five to 15 years, DeLony says. Still, the new tends to find favor more often than the old.

That is a choice that deserves a second look, says Frank Nelson, managing engineer for the Bridge Preservation Department of the Oregon DOT. (Oregon has more than 200 bridges that are included on — or are eligible for inclusion on — the National Register of Historic Places. Nelson heads a unit of electrical, mechanical, structural and chemical engineers who are charged with maintaining the structures.) “The preferred approach in many states is to say, ‘Well, rats. This thing can’t carry the load anymore, and it’s already too narrow and has bad alignment and all these other problems, so just take it down and put in a nice, new, wide bridge,” he says. “If it were just an old bridge from the ’50s, [replacing it] makes sense. But if it’s a one-of-a-kind, beautiful bridge, replacing it would seem to be damaging to the value that the public places on living and visiting beautiful areas. In that case, it doesn’t make any sense to destroy it.

Randy Southerland is an Atlanta-based freelance writer.