A faded pink ribbon on a flagpole marks the proposed future height of the 15th Avenue/12th Avenue bridge across the Red River. (Photo/Nancy Hanson.)
Nancy Edmonds Hanson
The cities of Moorhead and Fargo have entered into an agreement to move forward on early steps toward raising the flood-prone 15th Avenue/12th Avenue bridge.
The bridge, which crosses the Red River at the western terminus of Moorhead’s 15th Avenue, opened in 1989. After well over a decade of controversy, private investors financed the structure charging tolls for crossing the river. The two cities purchased it in 2015.
From the very first, says Moorhead assistant city engineer Tom Trowbridge, the bridge has been a trouble spot during floods. “It floods at a river level of 28 feet, so that bridge has been closed in every single flood event since the beginning,” he observes. “Now, with completion of the FM Diversion within sight, we’d like to improve that situation.”
Collaborating with the city of Fargo, the engineer reports the two cities envision raising the low-lying bridge. The proposed revision is not-insignificant:18 feet above its current level. Since last fall, the departments have been marked that goal with a pink ribbon tied high above the bridge deck on a streetlight on the west side.
“The top of the bridge is at 28 feet right now,” he explains. “We’d like to raise it to 40. That’s 12 feet higher. But, then, the entire under-structure of the bridge also has to come up. That’s six more feet.” The goal is for the bridge to top off at 40 feet.
Preparatory work is in the early stages, he reports, with an environmental study and initial design underway this spring.
At its Jan. 12 meeting, the Moorhead City Council authorized a cost-sharing agreement with the city of Fargo submitted by Moorhead’s engineers. No price tag is attached. All work up to this point has been done in-house by the two cities. The agreement covers as-yet-unanticipated costs that may occur as the process moves forward. “It’s strictly for the design phase,” Trowbridge points out.
The new bridge’s feasibility depends on available funding, he adds. The cities will probably secure the services of consultants with expertise in writing Federal Highway Administration grant applications when the project reaches that stage. “We’ll be looking for something like 80 to 90% federal funding,” he reports, with bonding by the two states making up the balance.
Trowbridge emphasizes, “We don’t anticipate looking for local assessments to fund it.”
But he’s concerned that residents don’t assume that raising the bridge will end all inconvenient closures, even after the bridge is raised and F-M Diversion is complete.
“We’ll still have floods,” he points out. “Here, 37 feet is major flood level. The Diversion is designed to keep waters at that level going through town.” In other words, during a 500-year flood like the one in 2009, when the Red crested at 40.8 feet, the huge flood-control project would have maintained the water level at 37 feet through town. “That’s still significant. Roads beside the river will still be closed, and the bridge will still close, too.”
Known to Fargoans as the “12th Avenue bridge,” the river crossing has been controversial since it was first considered in the 1970s. An established neighborhood lined its bank on the west side. The area of Moorhead adjacent to the river was open at that time. While Moorhead supported the proposal, stiff opposition by the site’s Fargo neighbors led to the defeat of a measure designed to fund construction. That bonding bill received 55% of the vote to pass – a majority, but well under the 60% required by North Dakota law.
When the city provided access to the adjacent land, private developers stepped forward to fund and build the bridge. They recouped their investment by charging tolls – at first 25 cents, then 50, and by 2015, 75 cents. At that point, the two cities stepped in to purchase it and dropped the tolls.
“We’re trying to get ahead of the project with this collaborative agreement in place,” Trowbridge says of the cost-sharing measure. “Nothing will be happening as soon as this year, I’ll tell you that, and I can’t believe we’ll be ready to go in 2027. If we get funding for the construction, though, the schedule could change very fast.”
