Donora-Webster Bridge

Bridge Documented: July 3, 2006

Primary Photographer(s): Nathan Holth

Key Facts

	Bridge Name	Facility Carried / Feature Intersected	Location	Structure Type	Construction Date and Builder/Engineer
!	Donora-Webster Bridge	10th Street (PA-1022) Over Monongahela River	Donora and Website: Washington County, Pennsylvania and Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania	Metal Pinned Pennsylvania Through Truss, Fixed	1908 By Builder/Contractor: Toledo-Massillon Bridge Company of Toledo, Ohio (W. Wylie)

Technical Facts

Rehabilitation Date	Main Span Length	Structure Length	Roadway Width	Main Spans	Approach Spans
1986	518 Feet (157.9 Meters)	1547 Feet (471.5 Meters)	22.6 Feet (6.9 Meters)	5	9

View National Bridge Inventory PDF Sheet - Has Additional Details and Evaluation

This historic bridge is at risk for demolition and replacement by PennDOT with support by PA Senator Barry Stout!

About The Bridge

This spectacular historic bridge sits on stone piers and has pinned connections. The largest main span is a Pennsylvania truss configuration, while the others are Parker truss spans. The main Pennsylvania span is 515 feet which is among the longest simply spanning truss span lengths in Pennsylvania. The bridge is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is historically and technologically significant for its span length, rare Pennsylvania truss configuration, use of pinned connections, as well as its large, multi-span configuration. Given the age of the bridge and use for many years of its history functioning as an important and busy busy crossing for the area, the number of alterations on the bridge are small and the bridge should be considered to have excellent historic integrity.

 Beyond historic and technological significance, the bridge is an extremely beautiful bridge that is a unique and distinguishing landmark for the communities of Donora and Webster which it serves. The riveted connections and riveted, built-up beams on the bridge which contain attractive v-lacing and lattice are not only historically significant of historical methods of construction no longer used today, they also contribute strongly to the aesthetic value of the bridge and the interpretation of the bridge as a beautifully complex geometric art form.

The bridge is one of the three last pre-1915 multi-span large river bridges in western Pennsylvania. All three bridges are slated for demolition.

A Sacrifice That Deserves To Be Remembered

People usually think about the 1948 smog disaster in this town from the that killed dozens of people quickly, and has haunted countless others years after the event. Obviously, this bridge was around during that disaster, and many decades before, but the Donora disaster also is an example of one of my many reasons for suggesting that bridges such as the Donora-Webster Bridge should be preserved rather than demolished. While the factories in Donora were not making bridges, the uncontrolled pollutants that they were emitting was really nothing that hadn't been going on elsewhere, in other factories for decades before, including steel mills back at the turn of the century that were providing the materials to build bridges such as the Donora-Webster Bridge. Without safety regulations in place during this time, workers who manufactured the steel for these bridges faced environmental hazards from their workplace that workers today no longer face. The disaster at Donora shows that these workers may have continued to face environmental hazards even after the work day ended and they returned home. Many of these workers may have gotten sick and/or died as a result of these hazards. The conclusion is blunt: people died to build these metal truss bridges. They sacrificed so much more than what today's workers sacrifice when a bridge is built or steel is manufactured here in the U.S. It makes sense to preserve these bridges as a memorial to the people who gave so much of themselves to help this country build up and develop into the great nation it is today. It does not make sense to simply dynamite these bridges and melt them down to be turned into foreign cars etc, when so much went into building these structures.

HistoricBridges.org: Happy To Stand By PennDOT If They Commit To Preservation

The following narrative/editorial presents a strongly negative review of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). This review is based on past experience and observations with PennDOT regarding historic bridges, particularly metal truss bridges on the larger rivers of the Commonwealth. However, HistoricBridges.org wishes it to be known that nobody in the historic bridge community is "out to get" PennDOT or any of PennDOT's staff. In reality, HistoricBridges.org would prefer (and would be happy) to work with PennDOT and offer strong support for a decision to rehabilitate this historic bridge.

HistoricBridges.org encourages PennDOT to prove the below review wrong and take the first step toward change in the Commonwealth by choosing to preserve the Donora-Webster Bridge. Further, if any at PennDOT wishes to discuss potential preservation solutions for this bridge with the HistoricBridges.org team, please send an email.

Pennsylvania's Heritage Under Assault

Despite that fact it has (or had) perhaps one of the largest and most diverse collection of historic bridges in the country, Pennsylvania currently has the poorest track record for historic preservation in the country. Pennsylvania's preservation of covered bridges is absolutely irrelevant because covered bridges are preserved across the board in all states and these activities are vigorously funded through federal grant programs. An assessment of preservation commitment requires a look at all other bridge types, of which Pennsylvania has preserved very few.

Some of the most unique bridges in Pennsylvania are (or were) the bridges on the largest rivers within the state, particularly the Allegheny River, Monongahela River, and the Susquehanna River. Unfortunately, this is also where the least amount of preservation takes place. Historic bridges have been being demolished steadily on the Allegheny and Susquehanna Rivers for the past 20-30 years. Demolition has also taken place on the Monongahela River as well. However with the Monongahela River, a fair number of bridges had escaped attention until around 2005. Since that time, a very large percentage of the historic bridges on the river have all been either demolished or are planned for demolition, including the Point Marion Bridge, Charleroi-Monessen Bridge, Masontown Bridge, and the Donora-Webster Bridge. Outside of Pittsburgh, the only noteworthy preservation commitment on both the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers has been with the Brownsville Bridge.

PennDOT has thus far shown little to no interest in seriously working with historic bridge historians and engineers to develop common-sense, feasible preservation solutions for these bridges. In many cases, PennDOT appears to have already decided that preservation is not worthwhile before even dealing with the public and Section 106 consulting parties. PennDOT often uses rehabilitation proposals that appear to be poorly designed and overly expensive to shoot down any suggestions on the part of the public and consulting parties that the bridge should be preserved. Further ammunition to shoot down any cries for preservation comes in the form of claims that replacement bridges will have a 100 year bridge life. The concept of "bridge life" is extremely misleading, especially to the general public which is not an expert in bridges. A 100 year bridge life is only going to be achieved in a new bridge if the bridge is fully maintained and repaired when needed. Indeed, these historic metal truss bridges could have even longer bridge lives well beyond 100 years if they were fully maintained and rehabilitated. Current transportation funding, particularly at the federal level, encourages agencies to defer maintenance, and rewards agencies who allow their bridges to deteriorate with money to demolish and replace bridges.

It is most unfortunate that PennDOT will not enter public meetings, consulting party meetings, or even view this website with an open mind for considering preservation. The reality is that often a solution can be developed which is cost-effective, safe, and functional that also preserves the historic bridge. However, PennDOT has been unwilling to even make a compromise. With the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge, HistoricBridges.org and other preservationists were willing to support a compromise preservation solution in which the worst span on the bridge, the Parker truss span over the railroad would be demolished and replaced, while the two main spans over the river which were in better condition would be preserved. This idea was never even seriously considered. With the Masontown Bridge, the bridge was conveniently (for PennDOT) found to be ineligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, an assessment that from day one was questionable, and today  given the bridges which have been demolished since that assessment is clearly outdated and inappropriate. With the Point Marion Bridge, the new bridge was constructed on a slightly new alignment and as such the historic bridge was not in the way of its replacement. HistoricBridges.org suggested that the historic bridge be left standing in its final condition next to its replacement as an abandoned historic relic, or even better that the bridge could be restored to carry a non-motorized trailway that passes through the area. However, PennDOT demolished the bridge.

Preservationists are even more frustrated with PennDOT with the Donora-Webster Bridge, and the project has hardly even got started into the study phase. A number of people involved with the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge had been under the impression that PennDOT had suggested that they might seriously consider preserving the Donora-Webster Bridge as a compromise for demolishing the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge. However recent news articles appear to show that the Donora-Webster Bridge project is going to get the same treatment that Charleroi-Monessen Bridge got.

Pennsylvania Senator Barry Stout's Personal Grudge Against Historic Bridges

As if the traditional threat of demolition from PennDOT was not bad enough, Pennsylvania State Senator Barry Stout (D) has already declared that rehabilitating the bridge is not worthwhile and that the bridge should be demolished, before any of the appropriate studies, public meetings, and other traditional processes take place. This is exactly the same thing he did with the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge. Stout appears to have a personal grudge against historic bridges and he has chosen to take that grudge out on the bridges and the American people. Stout's position is very alarming since although a Democrat, Stout's action's go directly against President Obama's initiatives to transform the United States into a government of transparency, fiscal responsibility, and sustainability. With the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge, both PennDOT and Barry Stout both demanded the demolition and replacement of the bridge before all alternatives to demolition were analyzed, considered, and evaluated  by the public as required by Section 106 and Section 4(f), they effectively were bypassing and mocking the logical and democratic process that Section 106/4(f) lays out.

Indeed, Senator Barry Stout is perhaps the only person more against the preservation of these historic bridges than even PennDOT itself. PennDOT often does not make any genuine move to preserve historic bridges, and they may not be willing to listen or seriously consider alternatives to demolition. However, they at least have enough respect and decency to at least say that it would be nice to preserve historic bridges, even if 99% of the time they believe and decide that it isn't possible. In contrast, Senator Barry Stout has gone beyond simply expressing support for a  demolition and replacement project, but he as also attacked the very heart and concept of historic bridge preservation. His despicable comments are cruel and insulting to the efforts of the historic bridge community, nor do they reflect the reality of the world in which he lives. Stout has said this of the Charleroi-Monessen Bridge "The bridge was meant for commerce" and "It's not meant to be a museum." This comment is obscene because it implies that history and function cannot coexist with bridges, which is clearly untrue. What does he think Pittsburgh's Smithfield Street Bridge is? The Brooklyn Bridge? The Golden Gate Bridge? Or even the many lesser-known bridges such as the Bridge Street Bridge in Portland, Michigan? As any New Yorker or Californian knows, the Golden Gate Bridge or Brooklyn Bridge is still being used for commerce today and indeed these historic bridges are also functional and essential crossings. The volume of traffic on these bridges is incomprehensible. Yet, ask the citizens of these communities if the bridge is a museum at the same time. Bridges can be both museums and functional crossings. The question is do DOTs, legislatures, and the public have the backbone to rehabilitate the bridge and breath new life into it? Apparently, in Donora and Webster, and indeed most of the Monongahela River valley, the answer is no.

Senator Stout has made other deplorable comments directed at preservationists. One of the most infamous is his statement "This ongoing hassle to preserve the bridge: I'm  just frustrated at the people dragging out the process," said State Sen. J. Barry Stout." What Stout refuses to admit is that if he had embraced a repair project, the bridge could have been reopened to traffic in under a year. If anybody has dragged the process out, it was Stout himself.

HistoricBridges.org urges anyone who cares for historic bridges to contact those involved with the demolition plans including Senator Stout and PennDOT District 12 and expressing support for the preservation of this important historic bridge and historic bridges elsewhere in the area. HistoricBridges.org also urges Senator Stout to remain committed to retirement.

About The Donora Smog Disaster Except from: Doc Heritage of the State Archives of Pennsylvania On October 30 and 31, 1948, atmospheric conditions [specifically, an inversion] in the vicinity of Donora, Pennsylvania, contributed to the deaths of nineteen people within a 24-hour period. Of the fatalities, two had active pulmonary tuberculosis. The other seventeen were known to have had chronic heart disease or asthma. All were between 52 and 85 years of age. In addition, approximately five hundred residents of the area became ill, reporting symptoms of respiratory problems. No doubt, countless others suffered in silence. Donora is located on the western bank of the Monongahela River in Washington County. During the late Colonial period (1760s and 1770s), the area was known as "Horseshoe Bottom, because there the river curved into that shape. Nearby hills rise approximately 400 feet above the river's surface, and their peaks are approximately one mile apart. Early settlers grew grain in the fertile valley which led two of them to build a grain mill and lay out streets around it. By 1815, the village, then known as Columbia, contained twenty houses. In 1819, the postal authorities changed the name to West Columbia. Other small communities developed in the area including Bisselltown, Sunnyside, Bakertown, and Webster, which emerged on the other side of the river. These places remained little more than villages throughout the nineteenth century. Modern Donora began in 1900 with the development of heavy industry in the area. The town was incorporated in 1901. Its name is a combination of Nora Mellon, wife of R. B. Mellon, and W. H. Donner, the purchasers of the land along the river on which their Union Steel Company constructed a rod mill that later became the American Steel and Wire Works. In 1902, the Carnegie Steel Company completed a facility that consisted of two blast furnaces, twelve open hearth furnaces, and a forty foot blooming mill furnace. At the same time, the Matthew Woven Wire Fence Company erected a facility. A third rod mill was constructed in 1916. A year earlier the Donora Zinc Works began production. Such industrial expansion required more effective transportation facilities than the river barges and short-line railroads could provide. The Pennsylvania Railroad bought what had been the Monongahela Valley Company and expanded rail service. By 1908, the Donora station had the largest volume of freight in the "Mon Valley." Of course, these industries needed workers, and job-seekers flocked to the area, especially recently arrived immigrants. In 1948, 14,000 people resided in Donora, and additional thousands lived in towns in the immediate vicinity. The causes of the incident are difficult to identify conclusively, nevertheless, there are several obvious possibilities. Residents, such as Mrs. Lois Bainbridge, who wrote to Governor James T. Duff about the situation, stated that people in the area had complained for years abut the industrial pollutants that "eats the paint off your houses" and prevents fish from living in the river. Indeed, an investigation supervised by the director of the state government's Bureau of Industrial Hygiene revealed an extraordinarily high level of sulfur dioxide, soluble sulphants, and fluorides in the air on October 30 and 31. According to the agency's report and complaints by residents, such contamination of the atmosphere was caused by the zinc smelting plant, steel mills' open hearth furnaces, a sulphuric acid plant, with slag dumps, coal burning steam locomotives, and river boats also contributing to the problem. An unusually dense fog, the likes of which even long-time residents could not remember, may have been held in the valley by the surrounding hills. The fog probably kept the pollutants close to the earth's surface where the residents inhaled them. The Donora Smog Disaster attracted attention to this problem. Although smog's effect on the people in and around Donora on October 30 and 31, 1948 was extreme, residents of other communities also suffered from environmental contaminants. Consequently in 1949, the state government established the Division of Air Pollution Control to study the matter. Eventually, members of Pennsylvania's General Assembly felt the pressure to cleanse Pennsylvania's atmosphere of harmful substances. Consequently, the legislature passed the clean streams law in 1965 and began to enact state wide clean air regulations in 1966. In 1970, the legislature passed an "Environmental Bill of Rights" which stated that "the people have a right to clean air, [and] pure water." Simultaneously, the national government established the Environmental Protection Agency, and Congress passed the Clean Air Act. A few years later, Pennsylvania established the Department of Environmental Resources, one of the prominent objectives of which was "to ensure future generations of Commonwealth residents a quality environment." This function is carried on today by the Department of Environmental Protection.