Milwaukee Journal Sentinel / October 25, 2004
Milwaukee needs bridges to its past, too
By Whitney Gould
There it sits, a lonely sentinel in the Milwaukee River.
So, what to do with this old railroad bridge west of the Summerfest grounds? Its lattice trusswork is rusting; the gray metal bridgehouse perched on top is forlorn and empty; and the bridge itself, which swivels on a turntable mechanism to keep the channel open for boat and barge traffic, is seldom used any longer. Hence some people in the rejuvenating Third Ward and Walker's Point neighborhoods, which the 89-year-old old bridge spans, would just as soon junk it.
Here's hoping it survives.
A story in a 1915 issue of Engineering Record (which I am indebted to railroad buff John Gruber of Madison for digging up) tells how, in March of that year, the Chicago and North Western Railway "with clocklike precision" replaced an old, 500-ton drawbridge with this 800-ton marvel.
Now owned by Union Pacific Corp., the bridge for many years served industries in this once-thriving manufacturing district, which is today booming with condo development. The span also carried huge rolls of newsprint for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and its predecessor newspapers before the company built a new production plant in West Milwaukee. And it ferried wagons for the Great Circus Parade from Baraboo to the former Coachyards site near Summerfest.
These days, the bridge is mostly idle. But it's one of those noble ruins that lends texture and a sense of place to a rapidly changing urban landscape. It's the real deal, with the authentic patina of history, as opposed to those fake-old objects in the tidy, make-believe city that too many Disneyfiers are still trying to concoct here.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to Charles Birnbaum, coordinator of the Historic Landscape Initiative for the National Park Service. Birnbaum spoke fondly of the bridge and other vanishing cultural artifacts in a recent speech here to a conference on waterfront revitalization.
"Where is the continuity of culture" that reflects "the whole visible world in all its rich, messy, beautiful complexity?" Birnbaum asked in an eloquent plea for integrating the weathered past into new development. In an interview after his speech, he told me: "If I were a developer, (the bridge) would be a marketing strategy for me. It's what distinguishes this community from any other."
Developer Barry Mandel, who is building condos nearby, agrees. "It's terrific," he says. "You could refurbish it and light it at night. And even if it's not fixed up, it's a wonderful memory of a time gone by. I think of it as a piece of art, a landmark. The river would be missing something if it were gone."
Still, Mandel concedes that buyers of his condos are split in their opinions of the bridge. About half like it; the other half think it's an eyesore and would like to see it removed. Another developer of riverfront property, Peter Renner, says his buyers are similarly divided. Renner, who is also an architect, offered his own blunt take: "Either fix it up or rip it out."
The choice may not be that stark. As part of a $7.4 million tax-incremental financing district that would underwrite public improvements in the Erie St. area, the Department of City Development wanted to include $1 million for possible renovation of the bridge. The Common Council last month approved the TIF but included only $1 for the bridge, reasoning that primary responsibility for maintenance or removal should fall to the railroad, said Ald. Mike D'Amato.
DCD's senior economic development specialist, Mike Wisniewski, says the council's action still leaves open the possibility of future uses for the bridge, if funding becomes available. These could include a pedestrian and bike link or even a light-rail connection to destinations such as Summerfest, the Hank Aaron State Trail and Miller Park.
Restaurateur Mike Eitel thinks the bridge could be a "really cool destination" for an eatery, although I suspect the Public Trust Doctrine, the state constitutional provision that safeguards public access to waterways, might put the damper on that otherwise intriguing idea. There is also the challenge of getting people out to a bridge that must be kept open most of the time - and thus cut off from the mainland - for navigation.
Even if there's no immediate way to re-use the bridge, I'd vote for leaving it where it is. Rust and all, it has a dignity and grit rooted in our industrial past. And it's a living embodiment of transportation history. As Einar Tangen, head of the Historic Third Ward's business improvement district, put it: "It's a reminder of how form and function can come together to make something really interesting."
Instead of wiping the slate clean, and erasing a chance to experience the passage of time, let's cherish such relics. They are a part of who we are as a city, in all its rich, messy, beautiful complexity.
This article was reprinted with the permission of the author.