Kellogg Avenue Bridge

From the Mt. Washington Press, Sept 23, 1971.

From the Cincinnati Post and Times Star, July 30 and Sept 16, 1971.

From the Clermont County Review, Sept. 22, 1971.

Yeah Paul you know how it is when you're a little kid, everything seems bigger. When I came across this picture and compared the two old cars to the end posts I realized it wasn't just a child's imagination!

Nice! Good to finally nail down the size--no wonder it looked massive! I imagine it was built even stronger than a typical 400' span would be since they planned to put a trolley line across it--even though it would seem this never actually happened based on the photos you posted. Still awed by the size of those end posts!

Hey Paul,

Some time ago I came across an article from the Cincinnati Enquirer where they were musing about altering the river channel, but I do not remember the date of the article. One of the benefits they spoke of was some type of relief it would offer to the bridge abutments.

I DID find the Enquirer article with the bridge's design specifications, along with another primitive photo.

Rick,

I was wondering about the river channel myself, because comparing older maps with current ones it is plainly visible that the river follows a different path than it used to. I just assumed that the river channel was altered naturally in one of the big floods over the years. More great photos, by the way!

Also, I created a new page for the Water Works RR Bridge: https://bridgehunter.com/oh/hamilton/bh94807/. Feel free to add your photos of the rail span to that page if you wish.

Hey Paul,

I could not have said it better, it was an imposing figure to approach as a little kid. The picture below from when the new bridge opened shows how great this old " hulk " would look coming out of the trees now, what a waste. You know, I'm really testing my memory here, but it seems to me there was a stop light set up that prevented the need to cram the 4 lane road onto the 2 lane bridge. As I recall each revolution would allow west bound then east bound traffic to cross.

As for the Water Works Bridge, as you can see it was gone by '45. The pic said to be taken from the rail bridge is a great view of the Kellogg bridge, I wonder if this when they supposedly altered the river channel?

Rick,

Great photos! That bridge certainly was a massive old hulk of a span. The pre-1923 photo that you posted appears to show a parallel-chord truss of some sort, possibly a Pratt but more likely a Whipple considering the size of the river.

I also noticed that there is what appears to be a railroad bridge with a rather interesting design on the right side of the photo. It appears to be a two-span Camelback but with four slopes in the top chord instead of the usual five. An early Pennsylvania truss maybe? It doesn't appear to be listed on Bridgehunter but this old map from 1903 does show a crossing on the Cincinnati, Georgetown, and Portsmouth Railroad at that approximate location about half a mile upstream of Kellogg Avenue: https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~3...

Paul,

There is quite the disparity between 400 and 270 feet. If you stand at the spot now the distance seems immense, but I would not want to try to estimate it. The view in my picture is from the same spot as the demolition photo, strangely unchanged after 50 years other than some trees.

I have no idea if the bridge was reinforced after the washout disaster, I've never found anything about it---certainly would have liked to have seen a photo.

These Highway Department shots back up your notion of it being sturdy. The abutments seem huge, the beams as large as my childhood memories. I will presume the pier was left in place to aid in construction? It does not touch the bridge in any of the pictures I've found---and oddly enough, I don't remember it. So much for the memory of a 5 year old.

Paul,

I remember coming across an article on newspapers.com that spoke of the specifics for the bridge that was being considered. I've never been able to find it again, but it seems to me it spoke of the dual sidewalks the bridge had, a length of 400 feet and a width of 30 feet, part of which was to allow for a center track ( supposedly for the IR&T ? ). In my earlier posting there is a pic from 1926 that shows no evidence of any type of track just 3 years after the bridge opened.

The primary beams on the bridge seemed huge but I thought these were just the memories of a little kid until I finally found some pics as an adult--and realized the bridge WAS built quite sturdy. As I recall, nobody liked the bridge, it was a traffic snarl and quite dangerous when wet. Back in those days it was notorious enough that when you referenced the Singing Bridge everybody knew which bridge you were talking about, I guess it kind of became my Charlie Brown Christmas tree.

This picture represents the only thing I've ever found pre-1923. It is difficult to make out in the upper left corner but it appears to maybe be a large Whipple?

Rick,

I did a little digging but failed to find out anything about the iron bridge immediately preceding the 1923 span. I did find that a covered bridge once stood on Kellogg Avenue, probably preceding the iron bridge: http://www.lostbridges.org/details.aspx?id=OH/35-31-08x&loc=.... I'm kind of surprised that there isn't more back information readily available being that this was a major highway that we are talking about here. Judging from how the site seems to flood, there were probably several bridges built and rebuilt on Kellogg Avenue in the years before 1923.

Wow....the 1923 Kellogg Bridge sure did take a pounding in its lifetime! I'm amazed it survived all the floods that it did....but it was obviously built sturdy. The photos even remind me somewhat of Blue Rock Road, the truss details are a little different but it has the same look of mass and strength.

The first newspaper article photo on this page mentions that the bridge was to have a span length of 270 feet before the flood washed it away in 1922. Do you have any idea if this was the span length of the 1923 bridge or did they build it longer after it got washed out?

So the scene in 1926 shows no sign of the rail line the bridge was supposed to carry, and I have never found any evidence it ever did--but it was built rather wide for the times. The same scene in 1937 shows the bridge completely compromised. I can only assume with the roadway trashed that is why the Singing Bridge was born.

The Singing Bridge under siege----floods from 1937,1948,1949,1952, and 1964.

Here are some shots of this thing receiving it's steel floor post '37 flood, early 70's by-pass and subsequent inglorious finale.

Glad to see this majestic old beast make the pages here. After 45 years, the Singing Bridge lives again. The utter heartbreak I felt as a 5 year old upon finding the broken form of this thing in the river led me to a lifelong hobby.