Photos 

< Previous   (1 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (2 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (3 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (4 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (5 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (6 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (7 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (8 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (9 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (10 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (11 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (12 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (13 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (14 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (15 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (16 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (17 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (18 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (19 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (20 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (21 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (22 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (23 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (24 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (25 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (26 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (27 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

View high-res version

< Previous   (28 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (29 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (30 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (31 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (32 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (33 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (34 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (35 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (36 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

< Previous   (37 of 37)   Next >

Photo taken by Historic American Engineering Record

Map 

Vicinity Map

Vicinity map

Map links:

Facts 

Overview
Through truss bridge over Mississippi River on MN 43 in Winona
Status
Open to restricted traffic
History
Built 1941; rehabilitated 1985
Design
Cantilevered through truss
Dimensions
Length of largest span: 450.2 ft.
Total length: 2,288.5 ft.
Deck width: 30.8 ft.
Vertical clearance above deck: 18.0 ft.
Approximate latitude, longitude
+44.05361, -91.64167   (decimal degrees)
44°03'13" N, 91°38'30" W   (degrees°minutes'seconds")
Approximate UTM coordinates
15/608805/4878724 (zone/easting/northing)
USGS topographic map
Winona West
Inventory numbers
MN 5900 (Minnesota bridge number)
BH 20674 (Bridgehunter.com ID)
Inspection (as of 04/2007)
Deck condition rating: Satisfactory (6 out of 9)
Superstructure condition rating: Fair (5 out of 9)
Substructure condition rating: Satisfactory (6 out of 9)
Sufficiency rating: 49.8 (out of 100)
Average daily traffic (as of 2004)
11,900

Update Log 

  • June 6, 2008: New photos from Historic American Engineering Record
  • June 4, 2008: Bridge failed inspection on June 3

Sources 

  • James Baughn - webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com
  • Historic American Engineering Record