View Information About HSR Ratings
Until 2007, this bridge was the longest bridge in the state. The recent completion of the cable-stayed bridge in Toledo, which is 8800 feet is now the longest. However, this bridge can still be considered the longest historic bridge in Ohio. The total structure length of this historic bridge including ramps is 8000 Feet / 1.5 Miles (2438.4 Meters / 2.4 Kilometers). The main structure alone is listed as 6580 Feet / 1.25 Miles (2005.6 Meters / 2 Kilometers). The bridge's clearance over the river is 100 Feet (30.5 Meters).
This bridge is a significant example of a deck cantilever structure, and represents a significant engineering achievement of the time. Five people were killed during the construction of this bridge.
This bridge is also significant for association with Federal Depression public works funding programs, something shared by a number of Cleveland bridges.
In 2007, the bridge was undergoing a repainting project, which suggests that the future for this historic bridge is bright. Previous projects dated to 1992 and 1978.
The bridge consists of the following spans from east to west. Plate girders, continuous over four spans, for the lakefront ramp, length 859.6 feet. Eight "continuous cantilever" riveted rigid frames for the eastern approach from West 3rd street to West 9th street, length 1200.8 feet. Continuous beams on rigid frame bents plus one simply supported truss for the eastern approach from West 9th street to "Pier 1O," length 698.8 feet. Ten "continuous cantilever" trusses, length 2519.7 feet. Four spans of continuous reinforced concrete beams on concrete rigid frames, length 180.4 feet. Riveted plate girder for the West 25th street overpass, length 88.6 feet. Continuous riveted rigid frames for a "subway ramp" overpass, length 226.4 feet. Continuous barrel-type concrete rigid frames for the West 28th street subway ramp overpass, length 55.7 feet. Three-span welded rigid frame bridges for the West 28th street overpasses, length 120 feet.
The bridge's complex design features at least five horizontal curves and severa vertical curves. The bridge cost $7,200,000 including $1,600,000 in land acquisition.
At the time, the use of v-lacing and lattice was common. While today these elements of historic bridges may be seen as intricate, beautiful geometry dissimilar to the simplicity of modern bridge design, at the time this bridge was built, lacing was seen as "old fashioned" and in the interest of making the bridge look modern, its designers eliminated the use of v-lacing and lattice in bridge members.
Above: View beside bridge. The far span visible to the left is the river span.
Above: View east of the river showing brick street under bridge.
Above: Far eastern spans showing unusual steel rigid frame spans.
Above: Historical photo showing bridge construction. Source: Cleveland Memory.
Above: Historical photo showing bridge construction. Source: Cleveland Memory.
Above: Historical photo showing bridge construction. Source: Cleveland Memory.
Above: Historical photo showing bridge construction. Source: Cleveland Memory.
Above: Historical photo showing bridge construction. Source: Cleveland Memory.
Information and Findings From Ohio's Historic Bridge InventorySetting/Context The bridge was constructed as part of the Memorial Shoreway. It carries 6 lanes of traffic over the river and valley and is one of the major viaducts in the city. Physical Description The bridge's main spans are 10 continuous-cantilever deck trusses ranging in span length from 200' to 400'. The approach spans are continuous steel girder-floorbeam spans. One of the girder-floorbeam spans at the west end is over 270' long, which was then the longest span girder built in America. Integrity Has integrity. Summary of Significance The 1940 cantilever truss bridge was determined eligible in 2002 as part of rehabilitation planning. The Main Avenue bridge, which was built under the auspices of the WPA, is significant as the central feature of
Cleveland's urban regional traffic plan, one of the earliest in the nation adopted in the early 1930s. The route was intended to relieve city streets of cross-town and through traffic. The truss itself is in the tradition of
cantilever trusses dating to the early 20th century and followed on the heels of Wilbur Watson's successful 1932 Lorain-Carnegie Bridge. Justification The bridge is one of 11 remaining examples of the design used for long, major crossings of both deck and thru trusses. They date from 1922 through the interstate era. This is not the most significant example. The bridge has moderate significance. Bridge Considered Historic By Survey: Yes |
This bridge is tagged with the following special condition(s): Unorganized Photos
Coordinates (Latitude, Longitude):
Search For Additional Bridge Listings:
Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within 0.5 miles (0.8 kilometers) of this bridge.
Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within 10 miles (16 kilometers) of this bridge.
Additional Maps:
Google Streetview (If Available)
GeoHack (Additional Links and Coordinates)
Apple Maps (Via DuckDuckGo Search)
Apple Maps (Apple devices only)
Android: Open Location In Your Map or GPS App
Flickr Gallery (Find Nearby Photos)
Wikimedia Commons (Find Nearby Photos)
Directions Via Sygic For Android
Directions Via Sygic For iOS and Android Dolphin Browser
USGS National Map (United States Only)
Historical USGS Topo Maps (United States Only)
Historic Aerials (United States Only)
CalTopo Maps (United States Only)
© Copyright 2003-2024, HistoricBridges.org. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer: HistoricBridges.org is a volunteer group of private citizens. HistoricBridges.org is NOT a government agency, does not represent or work with any governmental agencies, nor is it in any way associated with any government agency or any non-profit organization. While we strive for accuracy in our factual content, HistoricBridges.org offers no guarantee of accuracy. Information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. Information could include technical inaccuracies or errors of omission. Opinions and commentary are the opinions of the respective HistoricBridges.org member who made them and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone else, including any outside photographers whose images may appear on the page in which the commentary appears. HistoricBridges.org does not bear any responsibility for any consequences resulting from the use of this or any other HistoricBridges.org information. Owners and users of bridges have the responsibility of correctly following all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, regardless of any HistoricBridges.org information.
