urbanMSP

Touché.

I would have been happy with the Braun design if it had been built in that location, but I do like the current design and think it was the right choice (assuming it's going to be a river spanning design) to split the difference visually. It's no Golden Gate Bridge, but I'd personally term it as "bold engineering with subtle beauty", likewise the I-35W bridge. It's hard to separate the people that don't like the entire project from the people that don't like that particular bridge design, but I understand why some people might not like it since it's so nontraditional. It has changed a bit from the original renderings- the final paint will me a more muted buff color instead of the stark white, and all the central supports and one entire set of piers were eliminated when they got engineers involved familiar with that type and soil samples back. They'll be no lights on the cables but they'll be lit somewhat with spill from the roadway lights, and a standard color LED light will be inside the piers.

Big Box opportunities- maybe in Sommerset or New Richmond. The current zoning in St. Joseph's towship doesn't show commercial anywhere near the existing or under construction freeway.

Farms- some of the farmers were not amused at having their farms split up, and I wish they were given the option to be bought out entirely (with the land either resold to neighbors or converted to prairie, but they should eventually be able to cash out handsomely to housing developers. The ROW north of County E is locked into place because after it was bought anticipating the Braun alignment, the Settlers Glen housing development went in, precluding shifting the entire freeway a short distance to the east to line up with farm borders. I also wish they'd use the Braun ROW south of E to route the loop trail away from the freeway rather than just sell it when the project is done.

From my understanding most of the planned development will be residential. When asking a person (neighbor) in the know, he states there will be little commercialization as most of everything is just across the river in Stillwater. Mdcastle is correct that Somerset and New Richmond will see some added commercial and warehouse types of building which will also increase the demand for housing in both of those towns.

IMG_5989 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5981 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5976 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5968 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5966 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5951 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5922 by North Star Highways, on Flickr
IMG_5924 by North Star Highways, on Flickr

Went on one of the bridge cruises. Mn/DOT and WisDOT representatives were on hand providing narration and answering questions. A few notes:

*Question was asked why it was design-bid-build instead of design-build. The answer was basically they didn't trust a single contractor for a unique design of this magnitude, they didn't mention that design-build is illegal under Wisconsin law.

*There's a $5 million incentive for the contractor for "on time, no claims, no excuses". A question was asked what a claim was, and the example was the Wakota bridge design flaw was a major one. A current example of what may become a claim is a lot of the forms are being built by a small company in Tennessee. The company owner died and the chief engineer quit, so getting the forms in a timely manner is obviously becoming an issue.

*Everything is right on schedule, they hope to start installing deck pieces this fall. All piers will be built to the full height, and work on the towers will start. The river span deck pieces are being cast in a climate controlled facility at Grey Cloud Island and will continue through the winter, the pieces for the Minnesota approach are being cast outdoors on site and will cease when it gets too cold to pour concrete.

*The metal crossbeams are temporary, 3 of the 5 are installed, and the first two will be dismantled and reused for the final two piers.

*It was pointed out that it looks like nothing is being done on the Wisconsin side, you have to drive over there to see it, from the Minnesota side it just looks like a thin spot in the trees.

*Several questions about if the bridge could be expanded to more lanes (no widening, but they could possibly narrow the lanes and take over the shoulder) and why there are still stoplights on the Minnesota side (quick to blame Oak Park Heights).

*Question why the piers were hollow- it was part of the aesthetic design and supposed to look like reeds (although my sister thought they looked like tuning forks). Question about ornamental lighting- I think I heard that per the aesthetic design only lights inside the piers are being included, but empty conduits are being run for more lights if they're desired in the future.

Thanks for the photos. I was wondering about the crossbeams.

Monte, how did you like the bridge cruise? Looks like it's worth $10. Hopefully they'll have them back next summer.
http://www.stillwaterriverboats.com/Riv ... 0Dates.pdf

Monte, how did you like the bridge cruise? Looks like it's worth $10. Hopefully they'll have them back next summer.
http://www.stillwaterriverboats.com/Riv ... 0Dates.pdf

It was mostly older people (some of who might be old enough to remember the original 1950s "high bridge" proposal) and as far as I could tell almost unanimous support of the project. Questions ran towards "why are they only building four lanes" and "why is it taking so long", not "why are they spending all that money". The boat (it was the yacht rather than a paddleboat) went out by the old bridge, than downriver and weaved around the support pillars a few times. I don't know how long exactly, but it seemed like about an hour. Tickets sold out almost immediately last spring when the Pioneer Press ran a story, three days later only one date in August and two dates in September had any opening. All the outdoor seats were taken by the time I boarded so I had to stand up by the railing to get pictures. No refreshments, food and drink available for purchase. But yes, it was worth ten bucks.

Drove by last week. It appears decking or what ever it's called to connect piers has begun on the Minnesota side.

Went to a wedding on a boat around this area tonight. Found it hard to enjoy with this constantly at the corner of my eye! :p

mdcastle has the first in a series of very extensive posts about the bridge up: https://streets.mn/2015/02/07/the-stillw ... dge-story/

The Strib has an article up on the bridge because it has reached the 50% complete mark.
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/299463491.html

From last month, the Stillwater Gazette looked at the process for making the precast sections which will be lifted into place once the supports are complete.
http://stillwatergazette.com/2015/03/21 ... -facility/

Horizontal construction over the river starts as vertical construction continues. The first precast segment has been placed.

First tower reaches it's full height.
IMG_7769 by North Star Highways, on Flickr

Went on a dinner cruise on the St. Croix last night, snapped these images of the new bridge.

The bridge's opening will be delayed until sometime in 2017, rather than fall 2016 as previously planned.

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stcroixcross ... 90415.html

A follow-up article on some of the issues leading to the construction slowdown. Subcontractor J&L Steel and Electrical Services says that the design documents for the bridge's rebar weren't adequate for them to fully interpret, while main contractor Lunda-Ames Joint Venture says that the problem is with J&L. The dispute is leading J&L to close up shop soon, once work is done on the I-90 bridge near La Crosse (although the electrical division is expected to be sold off).

http://www.startribune.com/hudson-wis-s ... 327142321/

Probably worth reading in context of the April reporting when J&L workers walked off the job due to contract issues between the two companies:

http://www.twincities.com/transportatio ... ver-bridge

Also may be worth considering the bizarro world relationships that exist between certified woman and minority owned businesses and the GC's that are required to employ them.

I assume Lunda/Ames isn't going to get their $5 Million bonus now.

Also may be worth considering the bizarro world relationships that exist between certified woman and minority owned businesses and the GC's that are required to employ them.

I'm curious about this. I only know a very small amount about how this works. How do you see the DBE status of subcontractors playing into this or other disputes? What's "bizarro" about the relationship?

The requirements to have women and minority owned subcontractors on public projects creates some really strange dynamics and incentives. A lot of these companies end up being sort of shell companies that don't bid on any work except for these types of projects, and may have very few permanent employees. Often, there aren't a lot of these companies out there with the sophistication to undertake a large project, so the bidding climate can get distorted. Work which the prime contractor might rather self-perform instead gets broken off into weird little chunks. Etc.

I obviously don't know how much of that is going on in this case, but some of the details in the story suggest this is a part of the situation.