CONDE B. McCULLOUGH'S OREGON BRIDGES: A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OF
THE DESIGNS AND THE PRESERVATION OF HIS LEGACY
by
ABIGAIL M. GLANVILLE
A THESIS
Presented to the Interdisciplinary Studies Program:
Historic Preservation
and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Science
June 2009
"Conde B. McCullough's Oregon Bridges: A Typological Study of the Designs and the
Preservation of His Legacy," a thesis prepared by Abigail M. Glanville in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in the Interdisciplinary
Studies Program: Historic Preservation. This thesis has been approved and accepted by:
d M. Roth, Chair of the Examining Committee
11
Committee in Charge:
Accepted by:
Leland M. Roth, Chair
Robert W. Hadlow
Dean of the Graduate School
© 2009 Abigail M. Glanville
111
Abigail M. Glanville
An Abstract of the Thesis of
for the degree of
IV
Master of Science
in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation
to be taken June 2009
Title: CONDE B. McCULLOUGH'S OREGON BRIDGES: A TYPOLOGICAL
STUDY OF THE DESIGNS AND THE PRESERVAnON OF HIS LEGACY
Approved: _
LeIaI1dMRoth
Oregon is recognized nationally for its collection of bridges designed by
innovative civil engineer Conde B. McCullough in the 1920s and 1930s. His concern for
aesthetic value fostered bridge designs that are unique in their architectural details and
enhance their natural surroundings. Unfortunately, several of McCullough's bridges have
deteriorated with age requiring the Oregon Department of Transportation to devise
solutions which keep these bridges safe for public use and at the same time retain their
historic quality. The purpose of this thesis project was to develop a typological study of
his bridge designs, investigate the results of strategies applied to maintain them, and
provide an analysis of the extent to which they sustain the historic integrity of structures
they were applied to. It is hoped this study will help inform future decisions made
regarding the effective preservation of McCullough's legacy.
vCURRICULUM VITAE
NAME OF AUTHOR: Abigail M. Glanville
PLACE OF BIRTH: Ames, Iowa
DATE OF BIRTH: December 1, 1980
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED:
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon
University ofIowa, Iowa City, Iowa
DEGREES AWARDED:
Master of Science in Historic Preservation, 2009, University of Oregon
Bachelor of Arts in Art History, 2003, University of Iowa
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST:
Preservation Design and Technology
Preservation in Transportation
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Michael Shellenbarger Intern, Visual Resource Collection, School of Architecture
and Allied Arts, University of Oregon, Spring term, 2009
Greg Hartell Intern for Historic Preservation, Crater Lake National Park, Oregon
August 2008 through September 2008
Performing Arts Coordinator, Project Art, University ofIowa Hospitals and
Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, August 2004 to June 2007
VI
GRANTS, AWARDS AND HONORS:
Italy Historic Preservation Field School Scholarship, University of Oregon, 2008
PUBLICATIONS:
Glanville, Abigail M. Preservation Guide for Stone Masonry and Dry-Laid
Resources at Crater Lake National Park. Crater Lake National Park: Summer 2008.
Glanville, Abigail M., Adrienne Donovan-Boyd, Tara Ikenouye, and Gregoor
Paschier. North Head Lighthouse Condition Assessment. University of Oregon: Spring
2008.
Glanville, Abigail M. "The 2007 Pacific Northwest Preservation Field School."
Associated Students for Historic Preservation Journal (Spring 2008): 39-42.
Vll
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My sincere thanks are extended to Leland Roth, Professor of Architectural History,
and Robert Hadlow, Senior Historian for the Oregon Department of Transportation
(ODOT), for serving on my thesis committee. Their guidance, expertise, and input greatly
contributed to the quality of the final document and enriched the research process along the
way. I would also like to thank Kingston Heath, Director of the Historic Preservation
Program, for challenging and encouraging me throughout my two years in the program.
Those experiences helped prepare me for the challenges of successfully completing a
thesis.
I would also like to thank Pat Solomon, ODOT Archivist, and Michele Christian,
Iowa State University Records Analyst, for providing access to invaluable information on
Conde McCullough; as well as Frank Nelson, former Supervisor of the ODOT Bridge
Preservation Unit, and Ray Bottenberg, Senior Corrosion Engineer for ODOT, for their
willingness to speak with me about bridge rehabilitation.
Furthermore, I never would have been able to complete this project without
encouragement from a few incredible friends, especially Chad Adams, Abby Boysen,
Sara Carlson, Jeremy Davis, Adrienne Donovan-Boyd, Kari Frerk, Jeremy Hobin, Tara
Ikenouye, Leslie Jehnings, Amy Taylor, Kathleen Welsh, and Chris Williams. And
finally, I am forever grateful to my family for the love and support they provided
throughout my time at the University of Oregon, it made all the difference.
Vlll
To my Mom and Dad, for exposing me to the experiences that have helped inspire
my dreams and goals, and for always encouraging my curiosity for "how" and
"why," essential ingredients to any research project.
IX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Background............................................................................................................ 1
Problem Statement................................................................................................. 2
Research Methodology.......................................................................................... 4
Benefits 5
Notes 6
II. THE HISTORY OF CONCRETE AND ITS APPLICATION IN
STRUCTURAL DESIGN 7
Early Uses of Cement and the Development of Concrete Blocks 8
The Development of Reinforced-Concrete............................. 9
Early Experimentation with Reinforced-Concrete in Architecture....................... 11
Early Reinforced-Concrete Bridge Design 12
Further Developments in Concrete.. 15
Notes 16
III. McCULLOUGH'S ACADEMIC TRAINING AND EARLY WORK
EXPERIENCE 18
Academic Training at Iowa State College................... 18
Early Work Experience with the Marsh Engineering Company........................... 23
Iowa State Highway Commission.......................................... 24
Teaching at Oregon Agricultural College.............................................................. 25
Oregon State Highway Department........................................ 25
Conclusion............................................................................................................. 29
Notes 29
Chapter Page
x
IV. A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OF McCULLOUGH'S OREGON BRIDGES 31
What Is a Typological Study? 32
Site Visit Selection................. 34
Stylistic Influences................................................................................................. 40
Type 1 Structures 42
Type 2 Structures................................................................................................... 46
Type 3 Structures 50
Type 4 Structures 52
Notes 58
V. THE EFFORT TO PRESERVE McCULLOUGH'S LEGACy............................ 60
Reuse of Historic Bridge Components. 63
Cathodic Protection................................................................................................ 71
Alteration to Accommodate Modem Traffic Needs and Safety Standards 73
Recommendations and Conclusions...................................................................... 77
Notes 81
APPEJ\TDICES 83
A. DISTRIBUTION MAPS OF McCULLOUGH BRIDGES SURVEYED........ 83
B. DATA PAGES FOR BRIDGES SURVEyED................................................. 88
BIBLIOGRAPHy 130
Xl
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Shepperd's Dell Bridge, 1914................................................................................ 14
2. Mosier Creek Bridge, 1920.................................................................................... 14
3. South West Vista Avenue Viaduct, 1926.............................................................. 14
4. Distribution map of McCullough bridges surveyed............................................... 35
5. Balustrade on Rogue River (Rock Point) Bridge, 1920......................................... 43
6. Balustrade on Dry Canyon Creek Bridge, 1921 43
7. Balustrade on Fifteenmile Creek (Adkisson) Bridge, 1925................................... 44
8. Balustrade on Rocky Creek (Ben F. Jones) Bridge, 1927 44
9. Dry Canyon Creek Bridge, 1921 45
10. Calapooya Creek (Oakland) Bridge, 1925............................................................. 45
11. South Umpqua River (Winston) Bridge, 1934 47
12. Wilson River Bridge, 1931 47
13. Pedestrian walkway at Cape Creek Bridge, 1932. 47
14. North Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge, 1924......................................... 47
15. Pedestrian balcony on North Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge, 1924..... 47
16. Substructure of Cape Creek Bridge, 1932 48
17. Balustrade on Deschutes River Bridge, 1929........................................................ 49
18. Rogue River (Caveman) Bridge, 1931................................................................... 49
-------------------------------------
xu
Figure Page
19. Balustrade on Rogue River (Caveman) Bridge, 1931 49
20. Egyptian-style obelisk at Willamette River (Albany) Bridge, 1925...................... 50
21. Primary entrance pylon at Siuslaw River Bridge, 1936......................................... 51
22. Secondary entrance pylon at Siuslaw River Bridge, 1936..................................... 51
23. Entrance pylon at Umpqua River Bridge, 1936..................................................... 51
24. Entrance pylon at Santiam River (Jacob Conser) Bridge, 1933............................ 52
25. West elevation of entrance tower at Rogue River (Isaac Lee Patterson)
Bridge, 1932........................................................................................................... 54
26. North elevation of entrance tower at Rogue River (Isaac Lee Patterson)
Bridge, 1932........................................................................................................... 54
27. Pedestrian Plaza at Yaquina Bay Bridge, 1936..................................................... 55
28. Pedestrian Plaza at Coos Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge, 1936 55
29. Substructure ofYaquina Bay Bridge, 1936........................................................... 55
30. Balustrade at Yaquina Bay Bridge, 1936............................................................... 55
31. Entrance tower at Yaquina Bay Bridge, 1936 56
32. Entrance spires on Coos Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge, 1936................... 56
33. North pedestrian plaza and entrance tower at Alsea Bay Bridge, 1936................. 57
34. South pedestrian plaza and entrance tower at Alsea Bay Bridge, 1936................. 57
35. New Alsea Bay Bridge at Waldport, 1991............................................................. 65
36. North wayside of new Alsea Bay Bridge at Waldport, 1991................................. 66
37. Reuse of entrance pylons, towers, and staircase at new Alsea Bay Bridge 66
38. Alsea Bay Bridge Interpretive Center at Waldport................................................ 66
Figure
X111
Page
39. Reused piers from original Eagle Creek Bridge from 1936.................................. 68
40. Crooked River (High) Bridge, 1926 69
41. New US 97 bridge over Crooked River Gorge, 2000............................................ 69
42. Oregon Trunk Railroad Bridge designed by Ralph Modjeski, 1911 70
43. Interpretive text panel at Peter Skene Ogden Scenic Viewpoint 70
44. Detail of Big Creek Bridge, 1931 72
45. Historically compatible deck widening at Depoe Bay Bridge, 1927..................... 74
46. Historically incompatible deck widening from 1983 at Sucker Creek
(Oswego) Bridge, 1920.......................................................................................... 75
47. Stealth rail at Coos Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge..................................... 76
48. Historically incompatible steel guard rail at Cape Creek Bridge 76
49. Stainless steel rope applied to balustrade at the Rogue River
(Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge.................................................................................. 76
50. Stainless steel hoops installed in arched openings of balustrade
at the North Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge.......................................... 76
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Courses McCullough enrolled in by year at Iowa State College 21
2. Bridge types McCullough employed in Oregon 33
3. Distribution of McCullough bridges surveyed by type.......................................... 39
1CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background
In the last thirty years there has been increased interest in Oregon's historic
bridges and in the prevention of their loss. This was in part initiated in the 1980s by the
perspective loss of the Alsea Bay Bridge at Waldport, one of Conde B. McCullough's
five largest spans along the coast. Local residents were disturbed by the thought of losing
the bridge that had not only defined the landscape of their town for approximately fifty
years but had also become a symbolic representation of it. After exhausting numerous
alternatives, the determination was made that deterioration of the bridge was too great
and too costly to maintain to keep it in service, and that it would have to be replaced.
Public reflections on the bridge's importance to the development of coastal transportation
and tourism, and McCullough's overall impact on the state's transportation system were
widespread. However acknowledgement of the bridge's significance had come too late, a
trend which has enabled historically incompatible alteration or replacement of historic
bridges throughout the United States.
The truth is that historic bridges are important cultural resources. Their
significance is not always a result of association with a well-known architect or engineer,
but rather the developments in technology, science, and education that they represent.
2Historic bridges symbolize progress in engineering and more specifically, the evolution
of bridge building as a trade skill to a very specialized profession that required the
development of academic training programs. I This change in education intersects with
and reflects the change in bridge building materials from traditional wood and masonry to
cast and wrought iron and the eventual development of early steel and concrete.
Furthermore, bridge building and the adaptations employed in their designs represent
reactions to developments in transportation, city planning, commerce, and education. 2
Because each of these aspects contributed to the progress of our nation, saving historic
bridges is a necessary component to preserving our cultural heritage.
Problem Statement
Current research indicates that over half of the documented historic bridges in the
United State have been destroyed in the last twenty years. 3 In general, historic bridges
are susceptible to damage or loss due to the nature of the purpose they serve. These
highly exposed structures provide crossings for large volumes of traffic, often over
waterways, making them vulnerable to collisions caused by roadway traffic, waterway
traffic, and deterioration from pollution and the elements. The responsibility of state
transportation agencies to meet current safety standards and to accommodate modem
transportation needs puts historic bridges at risk of historically incompatible repair and
alteration that lowers integrity. In extreme cases these issues are resolved by replacing
historic bridges with modem ones. Even with legislation such as the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, which was instituted to balance lack of
3funding by requiring that states spend 10 percent of program funds on "transportation
enhancements" such as the rehabilitation of historic bridges, these resources are being
lost at an alarming rate.4 This statistic reiterates the importance ofpromoting public
understanding of the significance of historic bridges so that they are maintained through
rehabilitation for continued use, and in doing so they are treated sensitively so as to retain
the original character of their designs and therefore preserve the important historical and
contextual narratives the designs convey.
Many of Oregon's highway bridges were designed and built by Conde B.
McCullough from 1919 to 1937 when he served as state bridge engineer for the Oregon
State Highway Department. McCullough's distinctive eye for design and concern for
scenic value is evident in not only the structures themselves, but also the intricate
concrete work of the railings, entrance pylons, piers, and pedestrian plazas that frame the
ends of his larger spans. Furthermore, McCullough's bridges are exceptional for their
innovative engineering, and are important to transportation history in Oregon. Their
construction allowed for the completion of several major highways throughout the state,
making them important representations of a progressive era of transportation
development which was initiated by wider availability of automobiles.
McCullough was responsible for the design and oversight of hundreds of bridges
and other transportation projects in Oregon during his tenure as state bridge engineer.
Although his accomplishments as an engineer and bridge designer are recognized
nationwide, and several of his bridges have been listed on the National Register of
Historic Places, relatively little has been written about his work. While brief acclaim is
4given to McCullough's work in a few bridge survey texts such as Eric DeLony's
Landmark American Bridges, published in 1990, and Donald C. Jackson's Great
American Bridges and Dams, published in 1988, only one comprehensive text on the
engineer's life and achievements has been formally published. McCullough's biography,
entitled Elegant Arches Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge
Builder, was written by Robert W. Hadlow and published in 2001. Two aspects
deserving of greater exploration are how McCullough's bridge design philosophy
influenced his work, and whether modem efforts employed to prevent his bridges from
being replaced uphold the design values he employed, thus preserving his important
legacy of bridge building.
The purpose of this thesis project was two-fold. This first was to establish a
typological study of McCullough's Oregon bridge designs to better understand the scope
of his work and ultimately identify themes and physical attributes which typify it. The
second purpose was to examine strategies employed by the Oregon Department of
Transportation to maintain McCullough's work as part of the transportation network, and
analyze the extent to which these strategies sustain the integrity of identified themes and
attributes of these bridges when they cannot be retained as originally designed.
Research Methodology
The Interpretive Methodological Paradigm was used to organize the framework of
this research project because of its exploratory nature and primary concern with,
" ... achieving an emphatic understanding, rather than testing law-like theories .... ,,5 The
5Interpretive Methodological Paradigm influenced the research design by centering it
around field work accomplished through the survey of forty-one Oregon bridges designed
by McCullough. In addition, architectural drawings and photographs were examined, and
a literature review of books, articles, and reports such as those generated for Section 106
compliance, and Environmental Impact Statements concerning McCullough's bridges
was conducted. Furthermore, because the Interpretive Methodological Paradigm
emphasizes understanding by addressing context, the project included investigation of
McCullough's academic training and early work, architectural trends of the period in
which he was designing bridges in Oregon, as well as the history of concrete and the
developments which allowed for its application in structural design.
Benefits
The insights presented in this document are meant to provide a new perspective
on McCullough's body of work, as well as an analysis of the efforts employed to prevent
its loss. It is hoped that the final document will be of use to the Oregon Department of
Transportation, the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, and other agencies that
deal directly with McCullough's bridges and have the responsibility of determining how
best to maintain them. It is further hoped this study provides a reference for individuals
or groups who have an interest in historic bridges, their preservation, or McCullough's
life and work, such as historical societies and tourism offices. It is my belief that
facilitating public understanding of the importance of McCullough's entire body of work,
as well as promoting continued public involvement in the effort to maintain it, offers the
best prospect for retaining these bridges as cultural resources. Because factors which
necessitate bridge alteration or replacement unfortunately can only be monitored and not
eliminated, it is hoped this document will help inform and promote decisions which
effectively preserve McCullough's important legacy of bridge building.
Notes
I Eric DeLony, "The Value of Old Bridges," Association/or Preservation Technology Bulletin 35, no. 4
(April 2004): 4.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 Joseph 1. Pullaro and Bala Sivakumar, "New Uses for Old Bridges," Civil Engineering 67, no. 10
(October 1997): 58.
5 W. Lawrence Neuman, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Boston:
Pearson Education, Inc., 2006), 94 and 106.
6
7CHAPTER II
THE HISTORY OF CONCRETE AND ITS APPLICATION IN
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
During the years 1919 to 1937, when McCullough was employed as the state
bridge engineer for the Oregon State Highway Department, he mastered the art of
reinforced-concrete bridge design, utilizing the material for all of his major works either
alone or in combination with steel or wood trusses. He also exploited precast concrete to
its fullest potential by taking advantage of its economical production for the creation of
unique and intricate architectural details which set his work apart from that of other
notable bridge engineers of the 20th century. It was therefore decided that concrete's rise
to prominence in building construction, and the developments of the material relevant to
McCullough's work, should be addressed prior to the typological study presented in the
fourth chapter. As will be discussed in the next chapter, McCullough's designs were
driven in part by his desire to create bridges for the Oregon State Highway Department
that were aesthetically pleasing as well as economical, two factors that also played
important roles in the material's emergence in structural design.
While the history of concrete is quite extensive, its rise to prominence was
gradual in the United States until nearly 1920. The economic advantage of concrete was
rooted in the fact that many of the materials used to produce it were, in most cases,
8locally available which cut costs relative to shipping vast amounts of materials such as
structural steel that were only produced in industrial locations. In addition, concrete was
believed to have a lower lifetime maintenance cost than other construction materials.
Both of these factors made concrete an attractive building material alternative for the
design of civic structures. 1 The economic advantages in part drove the scientific
experimentation necessary to determine how concrete would behave in different
structural applications and ultimately promoted acceptance of the material for use in a
broad range of structural applications. Furthermore, the material's plasticity, or ability to
be shaped into a variety of shapes and sizes, fostered realization of the many design
possibilities it presented, which eventually inspired use by prominent architects in Europe
around the tum of the 20th century, and in the United States in the following two decades.
Early Uses of Cement and the Development of Concrete Blocks
Concrete, which is a building material that consists of gravel, sand, cement, and
water, began with the discovery of natural cement by the Romans. Natural cement,
which is made of powders from rock deposits, was first used to produce mortars for
bonding masonry units. After that time period, it is largely agreed upon by historians that
the material was not again used until the middle of the 18th century in England. 2 In the
United States, cement mortars were first used for the construction of civic projects such
as canals and tunnels beginning in 1825. By 1840, technology had been developed to
employ cement for the production of precast concrete blocks for use in building
construction. These blocks were widely used by builders because they functioned similar
9to traditional stone masonry units and therefore, although the technology was new, did
not require a new form of skilled labor. By 1868 the popularity of concrete blocks had
led to their mass production.
The Development of Reinforced-Concrete
The development and employment of precast concrete blocks was an integral
factor in the eventual development of reinforced-concrete because their wide use
displayed concrete's most important physical properties. Its impressive performance in
compression inspired experimentation with concrete in poured form by mid 19th century
engineers for footings and walls. Wide use also illustrated concrete's major downfall, its
weakness in tension. This problem prompted further research that led to the solution to
embed metal bars into concrete to improve its tensile strength.
In 1875 mechanical engineer William Ward of Port Chester, New York was the
first to construct a building entirely of reinforced-concrete. An important innovation that
sprung from this venture was Ward's placement of reinforcing bars near the bottom of
concrete beams due to his understanding that the bottom was where concrete is least able
to absorb tensile forces. 3 Ward never attempted to secure a patent for his particular type
of reinforced beam however, so he never profited from his ingenuity as many others
would from their own developments relative to reinforced-concrete. 4
Two years after Ward constructed the first reinforced-concrete building,
American inventor Thaddeus Hyatt wrote the first book on reinforced-concrete which
described experiments leading to the formulation of the principle that, "concrete had to
10
resist enough tensile stresses to balance existing compressive stresses."s He took the
next step by developing his findings into American patent number 206, 112 which was
secured on July 16, 1878.6 Hyatt's research led to further inquiry by scientists and
engineers to gain a more thorough understanding of the behavior of reinforced-concrete
and how to exploit the material's physical properties more effectively.
At the end of the 1870s two other factors played important roles in the rise of
reinforced-concrete, the first being the decline in popularity of cast iron. Enthusiasm for
cast iron was initially a response to the material's economy due to production technique
and proclaimed fire resistance; however the massive Chicago fire of 1871 made it clear
that a major deficiency of the material was its poor performance under thermally induced
stress. This event brought issues of fireproofing to the forefront and by 1891 many cities
began establishing building codes which limited how and where exposed cast iron could
be used, essentially eliminating the material's cost-effectiveness.7 The second factor was
the emergence of steel, a material which possesses immense structural potential due to its
strength and ability to perform well in both tension and compression. The rise of
reinforced-concrete was influenced by both of these factors because concrete was
identified as a potential material for fireproofing structural cast iron and steel as it was
less expensive than traditional ceramic fireproof cladding materials such as terra cotta.8
The application of concrete cladding as fireproofing for structural steel demonstrated how
effectively the two materials worked together, in tum bolstering acceptance of the idea to
reinforce concrete with steel bars. 9
11
Builder confidence in reinforced-concrete continued to inspire experimentation
with the material by engineers throughout the last decade of the 19th century. Most
notable was a process patented by French engineer Francis Hennebique in 1892 for
bending reinforcement bars to better resist tension in concrete structural members.
Hennebique was also significant for utilizing reinforced-concrete structural systems
consistent with those used for construction in wood and steel. This orthogonal system of
overlapping members became the basis for slab-beam-column structural systems
traditionally employed for reinforced-concrete construction. 10 At this time, architects
also began investing interest in the material by attempting to establish an appropriate
design aesthetic for it. French architects largely led the way in this respect beginning
with the work of Anatole de Baudot, followed by Auguste Perret, and Toni Gamier.
Early Experimentation with Reinforced-Concrete in Architecture
Anatole de Baudot's Church of Saint Jean de Montmartre in Paris from 1894 is
considered by many to be one of the first buildings in which an architect attempted to
express the distinctive physical properties of reinforced-concrete in a building's design. II
Baudot chose to highlight the material's strength in compression through the use of
soaring vaulted ceilings, as well as its plasticity as demonstrated by the use of concrete
tracery. In the decades following, Auguste Perret expanded on his predecessor's design
philosophy by also attempting to demonstrate the physical properties of reinforced-
concrete in his own designs. 12 His perception of reinforced-concrete as a "continuous
monolith" led to highly integrated and linear structural components that reflected the
12
rigidity and linearity of the wooden formwork used in constructing them. Toni Gamier,
on the other hand, departed sharply from his contemporary Perret and instead chose to
express reinforced-concrete's mass through the use of heavy elements which often
echoed classical motifs such as monumental arched entrances. 13 While this is only a
small representation of the French architects who laid groundwork early on in the
establishment of a reinforced-concrete design aesthetic, many French architects inspired
widespread design approaches that became increasingly more expressionistic as time
progressed.
Early Reinforced-Concrete Bridge Design
Of greater significance to this study is the evolution of reinforced-concrete bridge
design in which Swiss engineer Robert Maillart played an influential role. He was just
completing his academic training at the Federal Polytechnical Institute in Zurich in 1894
when Baudot was completing his reinforced-concrete church in Paris. According to
David Billington, impeccable timing afforded Maillart the benefit of designing under
previously established acceptance of reinforced-concrete in construction, "but before
anyone had dared to invent new forms that departed radically from the aesthetic of earlier
materials."I4 This meant that although some design experimentation with the material
had taken place, Maillart was not subjected to intense influence by other designers. He
gained notoriety in the first decade of the 20th century by using reinforced-concrete to
generate modem bridge forms that departed sharply from any historic precedence. His
understanding of the material's inherent physical properties allowed him to design
13
innovative open-spandrel arch bridges that eliminated the use of excess material,
resulting in cohesive lightness of all structural elements. 15 An open-spandrel deck arch is
one in which the area between the roadway deck and the bottom of the arch supporting
the roadway is open except for the series of supporting elements which connect the
roadway deck to the arch. This type of deck arch was believed to be more aesthetically
pleasing and saved considerable amounts of material over the closed-spandrel type in
which the open space is completely filled-in with material. 16 For this reason Maillart is
credited with employing a design philosophy that was rooted in both economy and
aesthetics, much like McCullough, who would complete his academic training and enter
the engineering profession sixteen years after the Swiss engineer.
Reinforced-concrete deck arch bridges first began appearing in the Unites States
in the l890s. The first major closed-spandrel bridge of this type was the Melan Arch
Bridge in Topeka, Kansas, designed by Edwin Thacher in 1897. 17 Perhaps most
influential to McCullough's early bridge designs in Oregon were those of Charles Purcell
and Karl P. Billner who together designed several reinforced-concrete spans on the
Columbia River Highway which was constructed from 1913 to 1921. The Shepperd's
Dell Bridge from 1914 (figure 1), is a 100-foot, open-spandrel deck arch with the
exception of the solid arched curtain walls between the spandrel columns and above the
crown of the arch. IS The Mosier Creek Bridge (figure 2) and the Dry Canyon Creek
Bridge that McCullough designed for the Columbia River Highway in 1920 and 1921
respectively, echo the designs of Purcell and Billner in the treatment of the open-spandrel
wall and intricate architectural detailing of the brackets. In tum, McCullough's work
14
may have also inspired other bridge engineers in Oregon such as Portland city bridge
engineer, Fred T. Fowler, who designed the South West Vista Avenue Viaduct in 1926
(figure 3). The open-spandrel design with square columns connecting the arch ribs to the
roadway deck and decorative brackets is reminiscent of McCullough's early deck arch
bridges, as well as the work of Purcell and Billner.
Figure 1: Shepperd's Dell Bridge, 1914,
designed by Charles PurceJJ and K. P. BiJlner
Source: Dwight A. Smith, James B. Norman,
and Pieter 1. Dykman, Historic Highway
Bridges o/Oregon (Salem: Oregon
Department of Transportalion, 1986), 139.
Figure 2: Mosier Creek Bridge, 1920
Source: Author
Figure 3: South West Vista Avenue Viaduct,
1926, designed by Fred 1. Fowler,
Source: Dwight A. Smith, James B. orman,
and Pieter T. Dykman, Historic Highway
Bridges 0/Oregon (Salem: Oregon
Department of Transportation, 1986), 211.
15
Further Developments in Concrete
The development of precast concrete was another innovation which furthered the
economic advantages of concrete bridge design. The use of precast concrete for
decorative elements repeated throughout the bridge design was economical because it
eliminated a portion of expenses accrued through the use of formwork due to the cost of
the materials and the cost of erecting it. By using precast elements, a single mold could
be used to cast several identical components. McCullough made extensive use ofprecast
concrete in the production of repetitive decorative architectural details such as dentil
moldings and brackets that he employed for many of his bridge designs. 19
The final development significant to McCullough's work that will be discussed is
a method of concrete arch pre-compression developed by French bridge engineer Eugene
Freyssinet in the early 1920s. Freyssinet's technique was applied to mitigate structural
weakening caused by bending stresses in arch bridges that were a result of deformation of
the concrete. 20 In most basic terms, this method eliminated "elastic and plastic
shortening" of deck arch ribs after the falsework was removed. 21 As an alternative to
combating this problem with the costly addition of concrete and steel applied to the
arches and piers, Freyssinet's system instead inserted hydraulic jacks into the crowns of
the arch ribs to lengthen each one by an amount calculated to equal the deformation. 22
McCullough employed this technique for the first time in the United States for
construction of the Rogue River (Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge at Gold Beach in 1932 with
the hope that it would reduce the overall cost of construction materials. 23 Although
Freyssinet's system did prove useful in reducing the amount of materials needed for
16
construction of the bridge, the cost of extra labor required to employ the technique
cancelled out any savings in materials so McCullough did not attempt to employ the
technique on any of his other spans. 24
The history of concrete exemplifies not only the immense scientific
experimentation which led to its acceptance as a building material, but also the struggle
of designers and architects to determine an appropriate design aesthetic that was
independent of those established for traditional materials. As will be discussed in the
following chapter, McCullough's interest in reinforced-concrete bridge design was
fostered early in his academic training. This interest developed into a more
comprehensive understanding of the material when he was encouraged to research
reinforced-concrete bridge design during his first job post-graduation with the Marsh
Engineering Company in Des Moines, Iowa, and again while employed by the Iowa State
Highway Commission. As the state bridge engineer in Oregon, McCullough's extensive
knowledge of and experience with reinforced-concrete bridge design translated into
hundreds of structures which express the material's plasticity and strength through the
complex detailing and expansive arches that make his work recognizable.
Notes
1 John W. Snyder, Preservation Information: Preserving Historic Bridges (Washington D. c.: National
Trust for Historic Preservation, 1995), 3.
2 Amy E. Slaton, Reinforced Concrete and the Modernization ofAmerican Building (Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 2001),15.
3 Ibid., 16.
17
4 Ibid.
5 Aly Ahmed Raafat, Reinforced Concrete in America (New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation,
1958),23.
6 Ibid.
7 Donald Friedman, Historical Building Construction: Design, Materials, and Technology (New York: W.
W. Norton and Company, 1995),38.
8 Slaton, 16.
9 Ibid.
10 Raafat, 29.
11 Ibid., 43.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid., 45.
14 David P. Billington, The Art ofStructural Design: A Swiss Legacy (New Haven: Yale University Press,
2003),32.
15 Ibid.
16 Donald C. Jackson, Great American Bridges and Dams (New Yark: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1988),
37.
17 Ibid., 35.
18 Kenneth 1. Guzowski, Historic American Engineering Record: Columbia River Highway, HAER OR-56
(HABSIHAER: 1990), 8.
19 Robert W. Had1ow, "c. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building Boom, 1919-
1936," Pacific Northwest Quarterly 82, no. 1 (January 1991): 10.
20 Albin L. Gemeny and Conde B. McCullough, Application ofFreyssinet Method ofConcrete Arch
Construction to the Rogue River Bridge in Oregon (Salem: Oregon State Highway Commission, 1933), 1.
21 Robert W. Had1ow, Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder
(Coravallis: Oregon State University Press, 2001), 70.
22 Ibid.
23 Hadlow, "C. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building Boom, 1919-1936," 13.
24 Ibid., 14.
18
CHAPTER III
McCULLOUGH'S ACADEMIC TRAINING
AND EARLY WORK EXPERIENCE
As previously mentioned, McCullough's life and work was chronicled by Robert
W. Hadlow, Senior Historian for the Oregon Department of Transportation in his Ph.D.
dissertation, Washington State University, 1993 which then evolved into the bridge
designer's biography, Elegant Arches Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's
Master Bridge Builder, Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 2001. Given the
comprehensive nature of the book it seemed unnecessary to provide extensive
biographical information about the portion of McCullough's life leading up to his
employment with the Oregon State Highway Department, but more appropriate to instead
highlight the academic training, work experiences, and influential relationships formed
that impacted the bridge design philosophy he utilized as the Oregon state bridge
engineer from 1919 to 1937.
Academic Training at Iowa State College
Conde B. McCullough was born on May 20, 1887 in Redfield, Dakota Territory,
although the majority of his childhood and teenage years was spent living in Fort Dodge,
Iowa. Upon graduating from high school in 1905 McCullough took a job as a surveyor's
19
assistant for the Illinois Central Railway.! The following year he made the decision to
enroll in the civil engineering program at Iowa State College in Ames, Iowa. It was there
that McCullough became acquainted with Anson Marston, the institution's first dean of
the school of engineering. At the time, Marston was revered as a progressive educator in
the engineering profession, requiring that his students not only obtain the technical
education necessary to work in the field, but also practical experience gained through
employment prior to graduation. 2
Marston had attended college at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, from
1885 to 1889, receiving a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering. According to
Hadlow, Marston had been influenced by his instructor Estevan Anotonio Fuertes, who
began teaching at Cornell in 1873 and changed the program from a "traditional short
technical training course" into a "rigorous four-year undergraduate program.,,3 Fuertes
likely inspired Marston's belief that practical experience, in addition to classroom
learning should be the basis of preparation for entering the engineering profession. In
addition, Fuertes emphasized that an engineer's education should include study of the arts
so that knowledge from those fields of study could be applied to the practice of
engineering. 4 Marston brought these values to his teaching career when he was hired as a
faculty member at Iowa State College in 1892.
According to notes from Marston's lectures delivered to the senior engineering
students at Iowa State College, he embraced engineering as "the art of directing the great
sources of power in nature for the use and convenience of man.,,5 This definition had
originally been developed by Thomas Tredgold for the charter of the British Institution of
20
Civil Engineers, the first professional engineering society which was formed in 1818, and
whose establishment, according to Marston, "marked a decisive point in the change of
engineering from a trade to a profession.,,6 Marston incorporated this definition into his
History of Engineering course at Iowa State College using it as a springboard for
discussion of the role of the engineer in society. Marston imparted on students his
perception of the responsibilities of an engineer and the qualifications necessary to
become a respectable member of the profession. The following quote was taken from his
lecture on the fundamental qualifications of an engineer.
First, and most fundamental and important, he must have honesty, morality and
the highest character; second, he must have good judgment, good sense, energy,
persistency, confidence, ability; third, he must have the best technical training;
fourth, he must have extensive experience in the practice of his profession in
addition to technical training; fifth, he must keep up with the times by constant
reading of technical literature, by membership in technical societies, and by
intercourse with his fellow engineers; sixth, he must be a broad well rounded
man, and a good citizen.7
While the first and second points listed above are qualities that would enhance most any
individual's performance in their chosen profession, it is difficult to determine the extent
of influence Marston had on his students in obtaining those particular qualities.
However, based on McCullough's enrollment records from his four years at Iowa State
College, it is clear that Marston established an engineering program curriculum that
would foster the qualifications found in points three through six.
The Iowa State College civil engineering curriculum balanced technical courses
and labs, with courses in English, composition, foreign language, history, and literature.
In addition, fieldwork and summer surveying courses provided practical, hands-on
training. Table 1 on the following page lists the courses McCullough took during his four
21
years in the civil engineering program at Iowa State College from 1906 to 1910 and was
provided by the Iowa State University archivist. 8
Table 1: Courses McCullough enrolled in by year at Iowa State College
Source: Iowa State University Archives
Freshmen Year Sophomore Year
English 1 - Grammar Math 24 - Plan Analytic Geometry
English 2 - Rhetoric and composition Math 25 - Calculus
Math 20 - College Algebra English 12 - Argumentation
Math 21 - Plane Trigonometry Physics 303 - Mechanics and Heat
Language 5 - German Civil Engineering 308 - Surveying
English 10 - Narration and Description Civil Engineering 343 - Technical Lecture
Chemistry 41 - General Chemistry History 17 - American People
Civil Engineering 2 - Field Work Military 3
Civil Engineering 41- Technical Field Work Math 26 - Calculus
Civil Engineering 1 - C. E. Drawing Civil Engineering 409 - Surveying
Military 1 Civil Engineering 456
Math 6a- Solid and Spherical Geometry Descriptive Geometry
Math 5 - Plan Geometry Civil Engineering 444 - Technical Lecture
Literature 9 - English Classics Civil Engineering 432 - Summer Surveying
Language 6 - German History 18 - American Statesman
Mechanical Engineering 19 - Drawing Civil Engineering 349 - Descriptive Geometry
Math 22 - Plane Trigonometry Civil Engineering 305 - Drawing and Pen Topography
English 11 - Exposition Civil Engineering 407 - Drawing, Plans, and Structures
Chemistry 49 Mechanical Engineering 1a - Analytical Mechanics
Military 2
Civil Engineering 42 - Technical Lecture
Civil Engineering 3 - Field Work
Civil Engineering 4a - Descriptive Geometry
Civil Engineering 31 - Summer Surveying
Mechanical Engineering 21 a - Mechanical Drawing
Junior Year Senior Year
Physics 523 - Physical Laboratory Civil Engineering 718 - Structural Engineering
Civil Engineering 510 - Railway Engineering Civil Engineering 712 - Roads and Pavements
Math 7 - spherical Trigonometry Engineering 702 - Specifications and Contracts
Civil Engineering 514 - Engineering Laboratory Civil Engineering 721 - Sanitary Engineering
Engineering 603 Civil Engineering 716 - Engineering Laboratory
Civil Engineering 653 - Materials of Construction Civil Engineering 729 - Engineering Seminar
Economic Science - Outlines of Economics Civil Engineering 738 - Structural Engineering
Civil Engineering 628 - Engineering Seminar Civil Engineering 819 - Structural Engineering
Civil Engineering 633 - Summer Surveying Civil Engineering 839 - Structural Engineering
Civil Engineering 611 - Railway Engineering Geology 803 - Engineering Geology
Mechanical Engineering 686 - Analytic Mechanics Civil Engineering 826 - Thesis
Mechanical Engineering 502 - Analytic Mechanics Engineering 801 - History of Engineering
Electrical Engineering 503 Civil Engineering 830 - Engineering Seminar
Civil Engineering 524 - Practical Astronomy and Mechanical Engineering 784 - Steam Engines and
Geodesy Boilers
Civil Engineering 820 - Arches and Reinforced
Concrete
Civil Engineering 822 - Water Supply Engineering
Civil Engineering 723 - Masonry Structures and
Foundations
22
As noted in the table of courses, Marston also required his students to produce a
senior thesis, an assignment that was meant to expose them to the type of work they
would encounter as professional engineers. This project involved the identification of a
particular engineering problem, review of current literature relevant to that problem, and
production of research which demonstrated original thought, critical analysis, and
thorough understanding of that problem. 9 Ultimately this assignment provided Marston's
students with the opportunity to make a meaningful contribution to existing engineering
scholarship early in their professional lives.
Through this assignment McCullough explored his developing interest in the
inherent problems associated with concrete bridge design. This interest was likely
inspired by John Edward Kirkham who began teaching at Iowa State College in 1907 and
brought knowledge of current developments in reinforced-concrete arch construction to
his lectures. 10 For his project, McCullough and classmate H. B. Walker investigated the
effects of external temperature variation of concrete bridges and concluded that
expansion and contraction due to temperature variation had the potential to cause
structural failure if these changes were not accounted for in the design. II Later on while
working for the Iowa State Highway Commission McCullough would further his research
on this topic, determining that bridges could be sufficiently designed to withstand these
changes without overbuilding, and that establishment of standard specifications for
bridge types would help eliminate wasteful spending due to overbuilding. 12
McCullough's research made an important contribution to the promotion of economic
23
bridge design, and furthered his ability to apply economic principles to the design of
highway bridges during his tenure as state bridge engineer in Oregon.
Another notable influence Marston had on his students was his emphasis on the
need for overlap of the architecture profession with the engineering profession. The
following quote was delivered by Marston in a lecture on the history of engineering.
On the one hand we have the architectural student, given a comparatively
thorough training in art, but with only a smattering of engineering training. On
the other hand we have the engineer, trained almost entirely along utilitarian lines,
with no instruction in the artistic principles of design. A double misfortune has
resulted." 13
It is clear from his statement that Marston believed professionals from both disciplines
should have at least some training in the other to better exploit knowledge gained from
each. He believed architects could not make the best use of construction materials unless
they had a thorough understanding of their engineering properties, and likewise, the
engineer should have some training in the principles of design because, he stated, "there
is no reason why utilitarian structures should not be designed with some reference to their
appearance." 14
Early Work Experience with the Marsh Engineering Company
After graduating from Iowa State College in 1910 McCullough had the
opportunity to apply his interest in reinforced-concrete bridge design when he began
working for the Marsh Engineering Company in Des Moines, Iowa. During this time
McCullough gained further insight into the construction of economically and
aesthetically founded bridge designs. James Marsh, the owner of the company, would
24
eventually become well known for the design of two specific reinforced-concrete bridge
types, the "rainbow arch" bridge, and the "tied arch" bridge. Marsh promoted the former
by highlighting its economic design and low cost of maintenance saying that it was,
"frost proof, flood proof, and fire proof." 15 He eventually went on to secure a patent for
the design in 1912. 16
Iowa State Highway Commission
In 1911 McCullough left the Marsh Engineering Company to accept a position as
chief draftsman for the Iowa State Highway Commission. A short time later he was
promoted to the position of design engineer after demonstrating exceptional promise
through the creation of several standardized bridge spans. 17 In 1914 an important event
took shape that would later influence McCullough's career path. His former employer,
the Marsh Engineering Company, was being sued by Daniel B. Luten, president of the
Luten Engineering Company, for allegedly using one of Luten's patented reinforced-
concrete arch bridge designs illegally for a structure in Albert Lea, Minnesota. 18 This
was one of several federal law suits filed by Luten in an attempt to collect royalties for
his patented bridge designs. Having previously worked for Marsh, the company asked
McCullough to provide research and collect evidence to assist their case during litigation.
In 1918 the court ruled in favor of the Marsh Engineering Company, determining that
Luten's patents were invalid because, "they did not disclose new knowledge, but rather
mechanical or engineering details of the application of knowledge that is old," and further
meant that Luten was not entitled to the royalties he was demanding. 19 In 1916
25
McCullough was further promoted to assistant state highway engineer where he
continued to conduct research in bridge design and maintain interest in litigation
concerning bridge patents.
Teaching at Oregon Agricultural College
That summer McCullough left the Iowa State Highway Commission to take a
position as assistant professor of civil engineering at Oregon Agricultural College in
Corvallis (later renamed Oregon State University). While teaching at OAC, McCullough
began fostering a friendship with Charles Purcell, Oregon's first state bridge engineer.
This interaction was significant because several years earlier Purcell had been involved in
a research project with Samuel Lancaster to determine the potential for constructing a
road along the Washington side of the Columbia River Gorge. 20 Although the project
was denied funding by the Washington state legislature, it evoked interest by the Oregon
state legislature, and evolved into the construction of the Columbia River Highway for
which Charles Purcell along with Karl P. Billner designed several bridges, some of which
provided design precedence for spans McCullough would later design as the state's
bridge engineer.
Oregon State Highway Department
In the spring of 1919 McCullough was offered Charles Purcell's former job and
on April 9th of that year he officially became the second bridge engineer for the Oregon
State Highway Department,21 Two years prior to McCullough's acceptance of the
26
position, the Oregon state legislature had approved the sale of 6 million dollars in bonds
for the construction of new roads. The events leading up to the approval began in 1913
after public demand for better roads due to increased production and sale of automobiles
in the United States led to the formation of the Oregon State Highway Commission to
begin highway planning. 22 When the first automobiles arrived in Oregon the only
cOlmections between many coastal towns were beaches so one of the first undertakings of
the newly established Oregon State Highway Commission was to introduce a bill to the
state legislature establishing the entire Oregon beach as a public highway.23 In 1914
further development began to take shape as Oregon's first state highway engineer, Henry
L. Bowlby, proposed a network of five major state highways which included the Pacific
Highway (modem day Interstate 5), the Dalles-California Highway (modem day US 97),
the Columbia River Highway (which runs parallel to Interstate 84), an east-west highway
along the McKenzie River (modem day Oregon 126), and the Oregon Beach Highway
(modem day US 101). In 1919, two years after the bond approval, another 10 million
dollars in the sale of bonds was approved for highway construction. That same year,
Oregon enacted the first state gas tax in the nation, requiring that 1 cent of every gallon of
gas sold go towards the improvement of state roads.
Increased funding meant a large influx of highway design and construction
projects that could not be properly handled by the staff available so after accepting the
position as state bridge engineer, McCullough immediately recruited four of his former
classmates from Iowa State College, including William Reeves, Orrin Chase, Merle
Rosecrans, and Edward S. Thayer. 24 To further mitigate the lack of staff, he also
27
requested pennission from Oregon Agricultural College to hire four seniors from the
structural engineering department prior to their graduation. This group of young men
included Ellsworth Ricketts, A. G. Skelton, Raymond Archibald, and P. Mervyn
Stephenson, who went on to become state bridge engineer in 1955. 25 McCullough's
persistence in providing an early professional opportunity for these four men reflects the
value he was taught by Anson Marston at Iowa State College of gaining practical
engineering experience prior to completing academic training.
During his tenure as state bridge engineer McCullough supervised the design and
construction of hundreds of bridges throughout Oregon, several of which will be
discussed in the next chapter. His life's accomplishments, however, went far beyond his
work for the highway department. In 1928 his tenacity for furthering his knowledge led
him to find the time and energy to earn a law degree from Willamette University by
attending night classes, an endeavor which was likely the result of the interest he
developed while assisting with the Luten Engineering Company patent dispute in 1914.
He also received an honorary doctor of engineering degree from Oregon Agricultural
College in 1934 and wrote and co-authored several books throughout his career. Among
them were Economics ofHighway Bridge Types, published in 1929; Elastic Arch
Bridges, which he wrote with his Iowa State College colleague, Edward S. Thayer; and
The Engineer at Law: A Resume ofModern Engineering Jurisprudence, which he wrote
with his son John, who later pursued a career as a lawyer. 26
After nearly 16 years of service as Oregon's state bridge engineer McCullough
accepted an invitation by the United States Bureau of Public Roads to design several
28
bridges for the Inter-American Highway in Central America. 27 The Inter-American
Highway is the Central American portion of the Pan-American Highway, which stretches
from Alaska to the tip of South of America. United States involvement in this project
was meant to provide federal funding assistance, although limited due to the economic
effects of the Depression, as well as professional bridge engineering supervision. 28
While abroad McCullough designed three suspension bridges which again demonstrated
his sensitivity to aesthetic design through the integration of decorative themes based on
cultures from around the region.
In 1937 McCullough returned to Oregon where he was promoted to assistant state
highway engineer, a position that he is said to have found unfulfilling given that it was
limited mostly to administrative duties. 29 To combat his restlessness, McCullough took
on a variety of extra-curricular activities, including chairing Salem's Long Range
Planning Commission in the 1940s. The formation of this group was a result of the
Salem Chamber of Commerce's concern for "haphazard development due to post World
War II population growth," and McCullough eagerly guided them through the
development of plans to ensure cohesive and practically-minded expansion of the city.30
Sadly, McCullough died of a massive cerebral hemorrhage later that decade in May of
1946 at only 59 years of age. The following year his bridge at North Bend spanning
Coos Bay was renamed the Conde B. McCullough Memorial Bridge to honor his
numerous life achievements and the integral role he played in expanding Oregon's
transportation network.
29
Conclusion
As the next chapter will illustrate, McCullough's Oregon bridge designs are a
culmination of the academic training he received and the work experience he gained
while in Iowa. McCullough's work reflects his philosophy that structures should be
designed with respect to aesthetic quality, current developments in the field of
engineering, and responsible and economic use of materials, notions that were
undoubtedly inspired by Anson Marston's influential voice. Throughout Oregon, these
values are the essence of McCullough's bridges, making them easily recognizable as the
result of his incredible ingenuity and creativity, and setting them apart from the work of
other notable bridge engineers of his time.
Notes
1 Robert W. Hadlow, "c. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building Boom, 1919-
1936," Pacific Northwest Quarterly 82, no. 1 (January 1991): 8.
2 Herbert 1. Gilkey, Anson Marston: Iowa State University's First Dean ofEngineering (Ames: Iowa State
University, College of Engineering, 1968), preface.
3 Robert W. Had1ow, Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder
(Coravallis: Oregon State University Press, 2001), 11.
4 Ibid.
5 Anson Marston, The History ofEngineering: A Course ofLectures to the Senior Engineering Students of
the Iowa State College (Ames: Iowa State College, 1912), 24.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid., 35.
8 Michele Christian, personal communication with the author, February 27,2009.
9 Gilkey, 189.
30
10 Had10w, Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder, 16.
11 Ibid., 17.
12 Ibid., 31.
13 Marston, 30.
14 Ibid., 31.
15 Had10w, "c. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building Boom, 1919-1936," 8.
16 Ibid.
17 Had10w, Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder, 24.
18 Ibid., 33.
19 Ibid., 34.
20 Had10w, "C. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building Boom, 1919-1936," 9.
21 Ray Bottenberg, Images ofAmerica: Bridges ofthe Oregon Coast (Chicago: Arcadia Publishing, 2006),
7.
22 Joe R. Blakely, Lifting Oregon Out ofthe Mud: Building the Oregon Coast Highway (Wallowa: Bear
Creek Press, 2006), 8.
23 Ibid.
24 Bottenberg, 7.
25 Louis F. Pierce, C. B. McCullough, Structural Artist in Bridges, paper delivered to "A Salute to Bridge
Engineers" for the American Society of Civil Engineers sponsored conference held in San Fancisco on May
21,1987.
26 Ibid.
27 Hadlow, Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder, 112.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid., 123.
30 Ibid.
31
CHAPTER IV
A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OF McCULLOUGH'S OREGON BRIDGES
McCullough's Oregon bridges are famous for their aesthetic beauty and
sensitivity to their natural surroundings. The soaring curves of his arch spans reflect the
rise and fall of Oregon's topography and the intricate architectural details provide a
framework through which to appreciate it. Although McCullough did not have any
formal architectural design training, his profound understanding of the unique physical
properties of the materials he employed allowed him to execute structural masterpieces in
reinforced-concrete and steel that today are considered important historic resources.
Because he was not formally trained in the theory of design we cannot associate
his design philosophy with a particular school of thought. In order to better understand
McCullough's work we must instead identify influential threads that may have helped
shape his ideas. Having already examined the academic training, early work experience,
and material that he used in the two previous chapters, it is clear that aesthetics and
economy were two values he brought to his position as state bridge engineer. This
portion of the research project aims to identify further influences specific to the time
period he was working in Oregon through the establishment of a typological study of his
bridge designs.
32
What Is a Typological Study?
A typological study or analysis is one that systematically classifies types. 1 This
approach is useful for examining various forms of architecture because it can provide
insight into the designer's perceptions of the world, and how he or she manipulated them
in their designs. When establishing a typology of bridges, difficulty results in the fact
that these structures all serve the same general purpose. Bridges are first and foremost
designed to provide safe crossings for an otherwise impassable section of terrain whether
it is a small creek, large bay, or river canyon. There are many bridge types which can be
employed to satisfy particular engineering needs relative to the size of the crossing,
terrain upon which the supporting structure must be built, and even specific needs of the
roadway traffic traveling over it and, if applicable, the water or rail traffic moving under
it.
McCullough designed a variety of bridge types throughout his career in Oregon
including deck arches, through arches, trusses, and moveable spans, decisions that were
.,
logically based on specific engineering needs for particular crossings. Table 2 on the
following page illustrates the main bridge types McCullough employed in Oregon and is
meant to provide the reader with a basic understanding of each one as the terminology
will be used throughout Chapters IV and V. It should be noted, however, that the
typology developed during this project looks beyond McCullough's selection of bridge
type, and instead focuses on why he included particular elements in his bridge designs
that were not necessarily a result of specific engineering needs, as well as how he chose
to treat them with different architectural styles.
Table 2: Bridge types McCullough employed in Oregon
Source: Illustrations and descriptions from Dwight A. Smith, James B. Norman, and Pieter T. Dykman,
Historic Highway Bridges ofOregon (Salem: Oregon Department of Transportation, 1986),86,57,121,
114.
33
Elevation
Through Arch
Elev"ion
Deck Arch
Arch bridges are comprised of convexly curved structural members that span openings and carry the roadway.
Loads are transferred to piers or abutments at the end of the span through compression.
Elevation
Through Truss
Elev'tion
Deck Truss
Truss bridges are those which are supported by a rigid structural frame whose geometry is based on that of a
triangle.
~]
Transverse Section
Elevation
Concrete Girder (T·Beaml
In a girder bridge the deck is supported by one or more longitudinal structural members. Girder bridges may be
constructed of timber, steel, or reinforced-concrete.
Elevation Elevation
Swing span
B••cula
In a bascule bridge the leaf of the bridge lifts upward to allow for clearance of large water vessels. In a swing
span the bridge deck rotates so that it is perpendicular to the roadway to allow for water vessels to pass on either
side of the central pivot point.
34
Site Visit Selection
To develop a typological study of McCullough's Oregon bridges, it was first
necessary to investigate his range of work. For this purpose, site visits were made to
forty-one of McCullough's bridges in Oregon. Bridges chosen for site visits were
selected on the basis that individual design and construction dates covered the eighteen
years that he was employed as bridge engineer for the Oregon State Highway
Department. They were also selected on the basis that they covered the range of bridge
types, materials used, and span sizes he employed, as well as the variety of locations he
built them. Visiting such a broad range of bridges allowed for the investigation of the
entire scope of McCullough's work in Oregon, rather than just a few designs that may
have been the result of isolated conditions, such as terrain or crossing size.
Of the forty-one bridges visited, locations ranged from larger cities such as Grants
Pass and Oregon City, to smaller communities such as Rock Point and Scottsburg, to
rural locations on highways outside of cities and towns. The primary construction
material used by McCullough was reinforced-concrete; however several spans visited
were constructed with a combination of reinforced-concrete and steel through arches,
through trusses, or deck trusses. In addition, three bridges surveyed were constructed of
reinforced-concrete combined with wood. Span lengths of bridges surveyed ranged from
approximately 100 feet to approximately 5,300 feet. The map in figure 4 on the
following page illustrates the locations of all forty-one bridges surveyed. Additional
maps with labeled bridge locations can be found in Appendix A, and specific data for
each bridge surveyed is provided in Appendix B.
V-)
Vl
:Oil-yhC'C'
Weiser
".' ~,
Council.
Caldwell
o
iPayetie
~
.bntario
Vale'
Nezper
,
...... . Grange "
_95
.Enterprise
,Baker City
McDe(mitt... :
.., .
N E V A D A
78
Fields
W",IIt)·~'..·a-\}Yhilm5n:
N,,1ICin~ .
F(lreS~
11
"'M ilton-F Ie ewate r
~~
La Grande
\IIi~lIa 12 °Dayton
\,1'111.1111.1 -
D
MoiI)",'1
-'~e
395
Bums,.
Urn,,,tiIL,,
r~,,,lional Fore,!
Pendleton
Hermiston
c·
Riley
-(0
Heppner
26 Prairie Cit!"
·Canyon City
M81rlfur
Nallc'''''ll F}re~,'
140
....~.ii~id;jn ~-jvitp .. "Denio
.I~:
·~·f:
S TAT E S
20
395
<-
Condon
c "
~
~
0 Fossil
til Q
""-
T E 0
Prineville
Fremont
National
Fo,'?':~
)
Lakeview
OREGON
Madras
•
',''jk~ma SunnyS~
1.1dl~'" ' ...
PeservatiCJil Grandview-"-
U N I
C:e"chUlt. ,
r··).;;tionai
Fixe.,!
Goldendale.
26
'lI.larrn
Spfiflg~
lfi
-i
"Redmond'
Bend
o
WASHINGTON
Chemult(,
s'O'if91le
Klamath
Falls
o
~I. ... .......
flA-)lJfr\ Hood
N,,,tlOlllll FCi;"~".t
.?-rtto"" PtnGh"t
N,'jliof,,,j Ford
22
58
Oakridge
rd
'1I\JIIif,(TIette
iT6 ~Ta]ofl."i
. - FOt"s!
dmpquil
N«tion"i
ForeSl
C"aier
L"r-e NP
'>.SJQUf<i
Central
Point
o
Salem
Grants
Pass
140
Mediorcf '. Ashland
o
Hillsboro
D
AlohaD
26
Eugene
MCMinnville~
18
- Dallas
Albany
20 D
-Corvallis
199
OAstoria: ...... ·.. longview
Seaside
o
101.
•
cfeedsport
.38
Florence
•
I
TillamOOk·
i1futherlin
"Coquille ~oseburg
Gree
Lincoln City~
Pacific •
Ocean Newpo~
North Bend,
101
Gold Beacne -
:~.::,.':"::' :',.,':": .'?~':..~):r '.~ :-::.:'": 2;:-:c::c =.".,: C'~: :.:.: ;-;; .:., .: 0:: "::,;"','8':
V)~<::> _.
!:::(J(:l
..., C
" ..
'" ~
'. -i'o.
s:-
O
...,
~o'"d _.
en
(JQ =t(1) _.
::s r:r
(1) C
~. =.
- 0(1) ::s
~g
"''"d5' 0
()Q >-+,
~~
>-t ()an
en C
~ ::::::
::s 0
a.C
>-:IC§..
::::. r:r
'"d >-t
en 0..:
C/)()Q
o (1)
>-+'en~ en
PJ ~
..., <
(1) (1)
.~ ~
_. a.
s~r:r _.
~. s:-
a._
()Q 0
(1) ()
- PJo :::.() 0
§.. ~
o _.
::s ::s
en a.
PJ o'
C PJ
()Q -a ~
(1) r:r
s,«
~;;;
r:r a.
« a.
s-s
(1) en
PJ
C
36
As discussed in the previous two chapters, McCullough invested much time and
interest in economizing bridge construction while at the same time creating aesthetically
pleasing designs. These interests were initially imparted on him by his former instructor
and mentor, Anson Marston, but his work experience after graduating from Iowa State
College undoubtedly refined his individual approach to bridge design. The following
excerpt from McCullough's book, Economics ofHighway Bridge Types, published in
1929, reflects his be1iefthat an appropriate bridge type for a particular crossing should in
part be determined by taking aesthetics into account, as well as the viewpoint of those
using the bridge.
In (bridge) type selection for architectural effect, consideration should be given to
the degree to which the structure will be exposed to view. If the alignment is such
that the structure is plainly visible in side elevation from the approaching
highway, more attention should naturally be paid to a type selection which gives a
pleasing side elevation outline than if only the roadway were visible.2
Although this particular passage discusses only one aspect of McCullough's approach to
bridge design, it exemplifies his concern for creating aesthetically pleasing bridges not
only because it was instilled in him early in his academic training that utilitarian
structures should be designed with artistry, but that doing so would enhance the
experience of those who used them.
During the survey of McCullough's bridges it therefore seemed logical to find
embellishments on his bridges that could be viewed by passing motorists from the
roadway, however, it was discovered that nearly all of his bridges and all of the elements,
regardless of whether they could be seen from the roadway, were highly embellished, and
could only truly be appreciated when one stopped and got out of the car. For this reason,
37
it is proposed that McCullough created bridge designs to provide for a broader range of
use as a response to changing social values.
As wider availability of automobiles led to the construction of more roads, and in
tum increased accessibility to recreational pursuits it is believed that McCullough began
to envision bridges not simply as utilitarian structures for motorized traffic to get from
point A to point B, but rather as destinations in themselves, places in which to get out of
the car, enjoy the view, or even spend an afternoon. He was perceptive of this potential
in the 1920s and 1930s, given that the arrival of the automobile allowed more people than
ever to get out and enjoy Oregon's natural landscape. 3 Furthermore, technological
innovations of that time period promoted an increase in free time and therefore a drive to
the ocean or along a scenic highway became a valuable and enjoyable way to spend it. 4
Even today many of McCullough's bridges serve as stopping points along scenic
highways, and their elaborate railings and entrance pylons or towers invite further
investigation on foot. Those who venture beyond the roadway to explore the
substructures of his bridges are provided views of scenic vistas framed by the outlines of
his dramatic designs. The typological study of his bridges found in the following pages
therefore highlights the architectural devices McCullough employed to create bridges as
destinations for recreation, as well as the architectural styles he used to design these
features.
After the survey was complete, bridges were divided into groups based on
whether they had the following characteristics: no pedestrian walkways, identified as
type 1; pedestrian walkways only, identified as type 2; pedestrian walkways and entrance
38
pylons, identified as type 3; and pedestrian walkways and entrance towers or pedestrian
plazas, identified as type 4. It was concluded that these features most aggressively
promote bridges as destinations because they invite pedestrian use, which assumes that
one must stop and get out of the car. Pedestrian walkways were defined as raised
sidewalks on one or both sides of the bridge. Entrance pylons were defined as vertical
decorative elements that extend above the height of railings, and entrance towers were
defined as small decorative structures that one could enter. Pedestrian plazas were
identified as areas at the ends of spans characterized by balustrades that extend beyond
the width of the bridge on either side to define a scenic overlook or resting place for
pedestrians, and have staircases which lead up to the pedestrian walkways. Table 3 on
the following page illustrates the distribution of bridges surveyed into these types.
It should be noted that division of bridges into these four types for the most part
indicated a chronological progression of McCullough's work, meaning that those
classified as type I were the earliest bridge designs of the forty-one surveyed and those
classified as type 4 were the latest, however there were several exceptions which seemed
to be affected by location. In some cases, bridges that were constructed over crossings in
larger cities or towns along the coast where there is a higher volume of traffic tended to
have one or more of these features, even early on in his career. A good example of this
trend is the Old Young's Bay Bridge in Astoria, Oregon, which was completed during the
second year of McCullough's tenure as state bridge engineer in 1921. Although it was
designed early in his career it has pedestrian walkways and especially unique entrance
pylons so it was classified as a type 3 structure. It should also be noted that the Eagle
39
Creek Bridge was not classified into a type because all that remains from this bridge are
the piers. The location of this bridge is however noted on the map in figure 4, and more
information about this bridge is included in Appendix B.
Table 3: Distribution of McCullough bridges surveyed by type. Type I: no pedestrian walkways; Type 2:
pedestrian walkways only; Type 3: pedestrian walkways and entrance pylons; Type 4: pedestrian
walkways and entrance towers or pedestrian plazas
Source: Author
Type 1: No pedestrian Type 2: Pedestrian Type 3: Pedestrian Type 4: Pedestrian
walkways walkways only walkways and walkways and entrance
entrance pylons towers or pedestrian
plazas
Rogue River (Rock Oswego Creek (Sucker Old Young's Bay Bridge Rogue River (Gold Beach)
Point) Bridge Creek) Bridge Bridge
Fifteenmile Creek Mill Creek Bridge Willamette River Yaquina Bay Bridge
(Seufert) Viaduce (Oregon City) Bridge
Mosier Creek Bridge North Yamhill River Bridge Willamette River Alsea Bay Bridge
(Albany) Bridge
Dry Canyon Creek North Umpqua (Robert A. Crooked River (High) Coos Bay (McCullough
Bridge Booth) Bridge Bridge Memorial) Bridge
South Umpqua River Depoe Bay Bridge Willamette River
(Myrtle Creek) Bridge (Springfield) Bridge
Lewis and Clark Bridge Santiam River (Cascadia Clackamas River
State Park) Bridge (McLaughlin) Bridge
Fifteenmile Creek Deschutes River (Maupin) Santiam River (Jacob
(Adkisson) Bridge Bridge Conser) Bridge
Calapooya Creek Rogue River (Caveman) Umpqua River
(Oakland) Bridge Bridge (Reedsport) Bridge
Rogue River (Gold Hill) Big Creek Bridge Siuslaw River (Florence)
Bridge Bridge
Rocky Creek (Ben F. Cummins Creek Bridge
Jones) Bridge
Soapstone Creek Bridge Ten Mile Creek Bridge
Umpqua River Wilson River Bridge
(Scottsburg) Bridge
Hood River (Tucker) Cape Creek Bridge
Bridge
South Umpqua River
(Winston) Bridge
40
Stylistic Influences
As will become obvious throughout the explanation of data gleaned from the
typological study, McCullough tended to design using two architectural styles. Work
from approximately the first half of his career, 1919 to 1930, incorporated architectural
styles based on classical influences, and in one instance Tudor style influence. During
the last decade of the 19th century eclectic references to classicism were made popular by
American architects trained at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts Academy in Paris for the
construction of large civic buildings in the United States. 5 One of the most widely
recognized illustrations of this style was in buildings constructed for the Chicago Worlds
Fair in 1893, an event which grew out of the influential City Beautiful Movement. The
intent of the City Beautiful Movement was to use beautification as a tool for promoting
more harmonious social existence among populations in increasingly over-crowded
North American cities, a problem which had tended to foster hostility and violence as a
means for survival. 6 Equally important is that the idea of city planning also grew out of
this movement and emphasized the integration of public green space and open plazas that
provided opportunities for recreation and an escape from the discomforts caused by over-
crowding. Although McCullough was likely too young to attend the Chicago World's
Fair, he may have been influenced by other illustrations of the Beaux-Arts style that were
found at events such as the Panama-Pacific Exposition of 1915 held in San Francisco,
and in the design of numerous civic buildings and monuments constructed throughout the
country into the beginning of the 1920s. This may be one of the reasons McCullough
believed that it was appropriate to make use of these styles in his own work since it is
41
clear that he intended his bridges to create ease of travel, as well as enjoyment through
outdoor recreation.
Around 1930 there was a prominent shift in McCullough's work as he began
incorporating the geometric shapes, hard-lined scoring, vibrant textures, and stylized
floral motifs of the progressive Art Deco style, which drew inspiration from a variety of
cultural sources from such places as Japan, Russia, Assyria, and Egypt. The Art Deco
style grew out of the European Art Nouveau movement, which was highly ornamental
and applied mostly to interior architecture and decorative furnishings. Applied to
architecture this style was meant to generate optimism in a nation on the brink of an
economic depression through its energy and vibrancy.7 Moreover, this style was
evidently viewed as immensely versatile as it was applied for a variety ofbuilding types
from the soaring skyscrapers of New York City to small diners and even hotels and
residential architecture. The Streamline Moderne style, which he also used at this time,
was a smoother variation of the Art Deco style that was heavily influenced by industrial
designers intending to reduce turbulence around moving objects by creating rounded
surfaces. 8 Although it is not certain why McCullough chose to move away from his
established practice of incorporating more traditional architectural styles we can
speculate that he may have believed this modem style was appropriate for his bridges
because they were symbolic of the technological developments that had allowed the
nation to move forward in transportation through the wider production and availability of
cars.
42
Type 1 Structures
Bridges identified as type 1 are those which do not have any pedestrian features
other than ornate balustrades, which also serve as safety features for vehicular traffic.
Because employment of features such as pedestrian walkways and plazas naturally
suggests higher traffic areas, it is not surprising that bridges in the first group are all
located in smaller communities or on rural highways where there were lower volumes of
traffic and therefore fewer pedestrians. The only two exceptions in this group are the
Lewis and Clark Bridge located in Astoria, and the Fifteenmile Creek (Seufert) Viaduct
located in The Dalles. Construction dates of bridges in this group represent work
completed in the first half of McCullough's career as state bridge engineer, with the
exception of the Hood River (Tucker) Bridge, which was built in 1932. Of the thirteen
spans in this group, eight of them were constructed prior to 1925, and nine of these are
reinforced-concrete deck arch spans. The exceptions were the Calapooya Creek
(Oakland) Bridge classified as a reinforced-concrete deck girder span with a steel Warren
deck truss; the Umpqua River (Scottsburg) Bridge classified as a continuous steel through
truss span; the Lewis and Clark Bridge classified as a steel central bascule span with pile
trestle and stringer spans; and the Fifteenmile Creek (Seufert) Viaduct classified as a
reinforced-concrete deck girder span.
Although this group of bridges lacks the pedestrian utilities oflater designs, most
are still quite elaborate in the treatment of their railings and substructures. The exception
is the Lewis and Clark Bridge in Astoria, which is void of decorative details, aside from
the segmental arch openings and clean stucco finish of the operator houses on either side
43
of the south end of the single leaf bascule draw span. For the rest of these bridges,
McCullough employed a variety of different balustrade designs. The earliest design,
which is found at the Rogue River (Rock Point) Bridge, echoes a typical stair railing with
its urn-shaped balusters (figure 5). McCullough's balustrade designs eventually evolved
into that which is illustrated in figure 6 by replacing individual balusters with segmental
arch panels reminiscent of tiny colonnades. With the exception of the later Hood River
(Tucker) Bridge, this balustrade design was employed for the rest of the bridges in this
group with only slight variation found in the solid vertical divisions spaced at equal
intervals to break up the monotony of the design.
Figure 5: Balustrade on Rogue River
(Rock Point) Bridge, J920, iJJustrating urn-
shaped balusters
Source: Author
Figure 6: Balustrade on Dry Canyon Creek
Bridge, 1921, illustrating segmental arch
design
Source: Author
44
Figures 7 and 8 illustrate the variation in designs that McCullough employed for this
balustrade. It should be noted that this segmental arch design was employed for several
bridges classified as type 2 as well.
Figure 7: Balustrad on Fifteenmile
Creek (Akdisson) Bridge, 1925,
illustrating variation in design
Source: Author
Figure 8: Balustrade on Rocky Creek (Ben F.
Jones) Bridge, 1927, illustrating variation in
design
Source: Author
Although there are no other decorative features on the roadway decks of bridges
classified as type I, the balustrades allude to the elaborate substructures found below the
roadway, especially in his deck arch bridges. The Dry Canyon Creek Bridge, constmcted
in 1921 as part of the Columbia River Highway with its reinforced-concrete open-
spandrel deck arch, is an excellent example of this idea (figure 9 on the following page).
Viewed in elevation from the side of the road, the lightness of the deck arch is amplified
by the arched openings in the spandrel wall which spring from thin square colunms.
Aligned with the columns are large brackets which provide a visual connection between
the roadway deck and the spandrel wall.
45
Figure 9: Dry Canyon Creek Bridge,
1921, illustrating open-spandrel deck arch
design
Source: Author
Deck girders and truss spans in this group are not quite as elaborate early in
McCullough's career as deck arches tended to be, although he relied on some of the same
classical treatment strategies. One of the best examples from this group is the Calapooya
Creek (Oakland) Bridge built in 1925. The intricate segmental arch panel balustrade on
the roadway and brackets supporting the deck are nearly identical to those found at the
Dry Canyon Creek Bridge, however the substructure below consisting of a steel Warren
deck truss and nine reinforced-concrete deck girder approach spans is quite utilitarian in
comparison. The only decorative details to be found are in the piers which consist of two
round columns connected by a solid curtain/spandrel wall (figure 10).
Figure 10: Calapooya Creek
(Oakland) Bridge, 1925, illustrating
mild decoration in the lreatment of
the piers
Source: Author
46
Type 2 Structures
The bridges classified as type 2 are characterized by the inclusion of pedestrian
walkways, or in the case of the North Umpqua (Robert A. Booth) Bridge at Winchester,
pedestrian balconies. The fourteen bridges in this group range in date from 1920 to 1934
and tend to be located in larger communities or on US 101 in or around coastal
communities. This group also includes new structural types of bridges that were not seen
in type 1, including a reinforced-concrete through tied arch, which represents the first
time this span type was employed in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States, as
well as steel through tied arches, and a timber Howe deck truss. Bridges in this group
also exemplify greater complexity in their detailing and inventiveness in the designs of
their substructures.
The inclusion of pedestrian walkways was the next step in promoting bridges as
destinations rather than vehicular crossings. For his through arch spans, whether they
were constructed of reinforced concrete or steel, McCullough integrated walkways into
the designs by widening the roadway deck at the location where the arch begins to extend
above it, allowing the pedestrian to walk along the outside of the superstructure (figure
11). For shorter spans of this type, as well as for reinforced-concrete deck arch spans, he
was simply able to add a sidewalk on either side of the roadway without extending the
width of the roadway deck (figures 12 and 13).
47
Figure 11: South
Umpqua River (Winston)
Bridge, 1934, illustrating
deck widening for
inclusion of pedestrian
walkway
Source: Author
Figure 12: Wilson River
Bridge, 1931, illustrating
pedestrian walkway
Source: Author
Figure 13: Pedestrian
walkway at Cape Creek
Bridge, 1932
Source: Author
Two particularly innovative designs classified as type 2 are the North Umpqua
(Robert A. Booth) Bridge at Winchester, and the Cape Creek Bridge along US 101 in
Lane County. At Winchester pedestrian access was employed through the integration of
four balconies which are embellished with inset panels dressed with red ceramic tile
(figures 14 and 15). The sidewalks that are there today were added when the bridge was
widened in 2007.
Figure 14: North Umpqua River (Robert
A. Booth) Bridge, 1924, illustrating
elevation of pedestrian balcony
Source: Author
Figure 15: Pedestrian balcony on North
Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge,
J 924, illustrating view from the road deck
Source: Author
48
As mentioned previously, this is the only bridge surveyed where McCullough
incorporated Tudor style detailing. His use of this style came at a time when architects
throughout the United States were designing buildings, especially residential architecture,
that incorporated historical references and therefore exhibited their knowledge of historic
sources as a result of academic training and extensive travel. 9
The Cape Creek Bridge constructed in 1932 is equally unique in that the
substructure integrates a deck arch with two tiers of columns reminiscent of a Roman
aqueduct (figure 16). Like the bridge at Winchester, the design used for Cape Creek was
unique to this site and was never used again by McCullough.
Figure t6: Substructure of
Cape Creek Bridge, 1932,
illustrating parabolic deck arch
and tiers of columns
Source: Author
Bridges classified as type 2 also illustrate a second balustrade type used by
McCullough. The segmental arch railing panel used previously in the balustrades of the
earliest bridges in this group eventually evolved into a round arch panel. This type of
balustrade was utilized for many of his later bridges from 1929 on, again with variation in
the vertical divisions (figure 17).
49
Figure 17: Balustrade on Deschutes River
Bridge, 1929, illustrating round arch railing
panel
Source: Author
As discussed earlier in the chapter, around 1930 McCullough began moving away
from eclectic variations of classical styles and his designs began to show influence of a
new national trend in architecture. He began employing architecturaJ details inspired by
the Art Deco and Streamline Moderne movements which were believed to be particularly
suitable for concrete structures. 10 These styles are apparent in the vertical and horizontal
scoring he employed on the abutments, balusters, and through arches of this group (figure
18). He also began employing stylized floral motifs in the railing panels of the balusters,
which was another common design used during these two artistic movements (figure 19).
Figure 18: Rogue River (Caveman)
Bridge, 1931, illustrating vertical and
horizontal scoring in the concrete
Source: Author
Figure 19: BaJ ustrade on Rogue River
(Caveman) Bridge, ]93], illustrating
flora] motif
Source: Author
so
Type 3 Structures
Bridges in this group are characterized by their highly elaborate entrance pylons.
While they also serve as a safety device for alerting drivers to the fact that they are going
over a bridge, these pylons create monumental entrances to these spans. With the
exception of the Crooked River (High) Bridge, all the bridges in this group are located in
larger cities and coastal towns. The earliest bridge in this group is the Old Young's Bay
Bridge built in J921 in Astoria. The two latest bridges in this group are the Siuslaw
River Bridge and the Umpqua River Bridge, both on US 101. While a few of the early
bridges in this group again show evidence of historic reference in their architectural
details, many illustrate McCullough's continued exploration of the Art Deco and
Streamline Moderne styles.
The Willamette River Bridge in Oregon City from 1922 and the Willamette River
Bridge in Albany from 1925 (figure 20) are both unique examples from this category in
that McCullough employed Egyptian-style obelisk designs for the entry pylons. These
are the only two bridges surveyed that used this style of architecture and may have been a
result of the popular interest in Egyptian architecture which was initiated by the
discovery of King Tutankhamen's burial chamber by Howard Carter in 1922. II
Figure 20: Egyptian-style obelisk at
Willametle River (Albany) Bridge, 1925
Source: Author
51
Most notably this interest was seen in the design of highly decorative movie palaces such
as the Egyptian Theater in Coos Bay, Oregon, designed by Lee Arden Thomas in 1925.
Later entrance pylon designs, much like the railings McCullough employed,
evolved into the Art Deco style with combinations of reinforced-concrete and metal as
found at the Siuslaw River Bridge in Florence. Also characteristic of this style was the
integration of setbacks in the pylons, piers, and railings, as well as sunburst and floral
motifs (figures 21, 22, 23).
Figure 21: Primary entrance
pylon at Siuslaw River Bridge,
1936, illustrating metal grate
and sunburst motif
Source: Author
Figure 22: Secondary
entrance pylon at Siuslaw
River Bridge, 1936,
illustrating incorporation of
setbacks
Source: Author
Figure 23: Entrance pylon
at Umpqua River Bridge,
1936, illustrating scored
concrete and floral motif
Source: Author
52
The Santiam River (Jacob Conser) Bridge in Jefferson has a particularly unusual style of
pylon which has the eclectic classicism of McCullough's early work in the triangular
pediments, combined with Egyptian style (in the obelisk) and hard-line scoring typical of
Streamline Moderne styles (figure 24).
Figure 24: Entrance pylon at Santiam
River (Jacob Conser) Bridge, 1933,
illustrating eclectic style
Source: Author
Type 4 Structures
The bridges classified as type 4 exemplify the pinnacle McCullough's career with
regard to emphasizing their monumentality and status as destinations. There are only
four bridges in this group and all are characterized by having elaborate pedestrian plazas,
entrance towers, or both. The entrance towers provide a space to enjoy the view in
inclement weather and the pedestrian plazas direct the public to outstanding views of
Oregon's landscape. The four bridges in this group represent the largest spans
McCullough designed in Oregon and also provided some of the most complex
engineering challenges. In addition, three of these bridges were completed during the
53
final years of McCullough's career as state bridge engineer for the Oregon State Highway
Department in 1936, and were a result of work financed by the Public Works
Administration, a program created by the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933.
Initiated by the Roosevelt Administration, this program was meant to stabilize the
devastating economic effects of the Depression by putting people back to work through
the funding of public construction projects all over the country. 12 It was estimated that
the construction of all five bridges for this project would require nearly 2.1 million man-
hours of labor and increase tourism along the coast by 72 percent in only one year. 13 It
is not surprising that McCullough again employed progressive designs for these bridges
using Art Deco and Streamline Modeme motifs which were viewed as representations of
optimism in the trying times of the Great Depression. 14
Construction of monumental entrance towers at the Rogue River (Isaac Lee
Patterson) Bridge at Gold Beach in 1932 continued McCullough's effort to provide
recreation for pedestrians. The rectangular structures have a stucco finish which
contrasts with the horizontal and vertical scoring and Palladian style openings. Each
structure is capped with three incremental set-backs, emulating skyscrapers constructed
during that time period (figures 25 and 26). The use of set-backs in high rise architecture
was a result of zoning requirements imposed in 1916 by officials in large cities such as
Chicago and Manhattan to prevent tall buildings from casting imposing shadows onto
city streets, "robbing the public of light and air." 15
54
FigUl'e 25: West elevation of
entrance tower at Rogue River
(Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge, 1932
Source: Author
Figure 26: NOlth elevation of
entrance tower at Rogue River
(Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge, 1932
Source: Author
At the Coos Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge at North Bend and the Yaquina
Bay Bridge at Newport, McCullough framed the ends with elaborate pedestrian plazas
and elegant stairways, almost Baroque in form, which lead up to the pedestrian walkways
on the bridges (figures 27 and 28). They were both executed in the Streamline Moderne
style with grooved and scored surfaces that cast light and shadows on the plaza walls.
The curved staircases also provided pedestrian access to the dramatic substructures of
these bridges. The suppOlting bents at both bridges were fashioned with stylized Gothic
arch openings and diagonal lines radiating out in sunburst patterns similarto those found
on the entrance towers of the Rogue River Bridge at Gold Beach (figure 29). He framed
the bents with column-like devices which again utilized the set-back motifs he employed
55
for the pylons and entrance towers of earlier bridge designs. This design is repeated in
the balustrade railing panels of these two bridges (figure 30).
Figure 27: Pedestrian plaza at Yaquina Bay
Bridge, 1936
Source: Author
Figure 29: Substructure ofYaquina Bay
Bridge, 1936, illustrating Gothic arch
opening in the supporting bents framed by
Art Deco setbacks
Source: Author
Figure 28: Pedestrian plaza at Coos Bay
(McCullough Memorial) Bridge, 1936
Source: Author
Figure 30: Balustrade at Yaquina Bay
Bridge, 1936, illustrating Gothic arch
opening framed by Art Deco setbacks
Source: Author
56
The Yaquina Bay Bridge also has pylons as well as entrance towers (figure 31)
positioned at the ends of the through arch span just as the Coos Bay Bridge has spires
positioned at the ends of the cantilever truss span, again repeating the set-back motif that
is characteristic of the Art Deco style (figure 32).
Figure 31: Entrance tower at Yaquina Bay
Bridge, 1936
Source: Author
Figure 32: Entrance spires at Coos Bay
(McCullough Memorial) Bridge, 1936
Source: Author
The final bridge classified as type 4 is the former Alsea Bay Bridge.
Unfortunately the original bridge was lost to extensive deterioration and was demolished
after construction of the new span was completed in 1991. The original entrance towers
57
remain, however, along with the pedestrian plazas and pylons. These features were also
designed in the Art Deco style with set backs and arched openings, as well as an elegant
flared staircase (figures 33 and 34).
Figure 33: North pedestrian plaza
and entrance tower at Alsea Bay
Bridge, 1936
Source: Author
Figure 34: South pedestrian plaza and
entrance tower at Alsea Bay Bridge,
1936
Source: Author
Although McCullough's bridges have a distinctly historic quality to them today,
his work was innovative in both its engineering and appearance at the time it was
constructed. As mentioned previously, he did not have any formal architectural design
training but had been advised early during his academic training that utilitarian structures
should be designed with some reference to artistic lines. 16 It is clear that he took that
advice to heart and paid close attention to architectural styles developed during the 1920s
and 1930s, and applied them in ways that gave his bridges symbolic meaning. Besides
creating safe crossings for vehicular traffic, McCullough's bridges were meant to provide
58
viewing platforms for those who wanted to enjoy the scenic beauty that Oregon has to
offer, a recreational activity that was made possible by wider availability of automobiles.
Today the unique decorative features of McCullough's bridges can still be enjoyed at
bridges throughout Oregon. They are the elements that announce to motorists and
pedestrians that crossing a bridge is a unique experience. An artistic rhythm is reflected
in the decorative pylons, railings, and spires he designed that allows one the ability to
read the beginning and end of his spans, as well as points of major support in the
substructure below. Modem bridges tend to lack the artistic quality that McCullough
employed and are often only designed with respect to utilitarian value so that at times it is
not even clear where the road ends and the bridge begins. It is hoped that the balustrades,
entrance pylons, pedestrian plazas, and other unique features which set McCullough's
work apart from that of many others will be retained when the effort to modernize these
structures challenges the effort to preserve his legacy of bridge building.
Notes
1 Webster's Universal College Dictionary, s.v. "Typology."
2 Conde B. McCullough, Economics ofHighway Bridge Types (Chicago: Gillette Publishing Company,
1929),23.
3 Joe R. Blakely, Lifting Oregon Out of the Mud: Building the Oregon Coast Highway (Wallowa: Bear
Creek Press, 2006), 15.
4 Wayne Craven, American Art: History and Culture (Boston: McGraw Hill, 1994),408.
5 Ibid., 394
6 Ibid.
59
7 Patricia Bayer, Art Deco Architecture: Design, Decoration, and Detailfrom the Twenties and Thirties
(New York: HanyN. Abrams, Inc., 1992),8.
8 Leland M. Roth, American Architecture: A History (Boulder: Westview Press, 2001), 374.
9 Roth, 350.
10 Bayer, 7.
11 Ibid., 15.
12 Ray Bottenberg, Images ofAmerica: Bridges ofthe Oregon Coast (Chicago: Arcadia Publishing, 2006),
7.
13 Ibid.
14 Bayer, 8.
15 Ibid.
16 Anson Marston, The History ofEngineering: A Course ofLectures to the Senior Engineering Students of
the Iowa State College (Ames: Iowa State College, 1912), 31.
_._---_.__._----- --------
60
CHAPTER V
THE EFFORT TO PRESERVE McCULLOUGH'S LEGACY
The effort to maintain McCullough's work is a difficult task given that it often
must be altered to remain a safe and efficient part of Oregon's transportation network. In
some cases his bridges have had to be entirely replaced due to extensive deterioration
resulting in difficult decisions on how best to preserve his legacy without insulting it.
This task is the responsibility of the Oregon Department of Transportation given that they
oversee the network of highways and city streets upon which his bridges were
constructed. The formation of the Oregon Department of Transportation Bridge
Preservation Team was largely a result of the discovery of corrosion of the steel
reinforcements in the pier foundations of the Alsea Bay Bridge in 1972, which resulted in
the realization that traditional treatments would not eliminate the problem. 1 Although
attempts were made to mitigate the situation, the corrosion was far too extensive to be
solved with traditional treatments. By the mid-1980s continued deterioration of the
bridge led to ODOT's determination that a new bridge would have to be constructed to
ensure safe crossing over the expansive bay. Although this was not an ideal solution, the
situation at Alsea Bay prompted a statewide survey of historic bridges in an effort to gain
better understanding of potential problems and to identify those which were eligible for
61
listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 2 This project marked the development
of an engineering unit within ODOT's Bridge Section dedicated to the rehabilitation of
historic bridges throughout the state.
The identification of eligible bridges was an important step in the effort to
preserve McCullough's legacy of bridge building because it encouraged recognition of
the significance of these historic resources. Of the forty-one bridges surveyed for this
project, eleven are now individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places and
two more are listed as contributing resources on the Columbia River Highway
nomination from 1983.3 In addition, McCullough's Rogue River Bridge at Gold Beach
and the Columbia River Highway were each designated National Historic Civil
Engineering Landmarks by the American Society of Civil Engineers in 1982 and 1984
respectively.4 Listing ofa historic resource on the National Register of Historic Places
requires evaluation of its historic integrity. Iflisted, the structure is provided with
insurance against alterations as a result of issues such as deterioration or negative impact
on the resource, without first undergoing evaluation, discussion, and review of
alternatives to minimize that impact. s Many of McCullough's bridges have already
undergone rehabilitative treatment to halt deterioration or to accommodate modern
transportation needs and satisfy safety standards. The purpose of this chapter is to
analyze the result of treatments employed to maintain McCullough's bridges as part of
Oregon's transportation network, and discuss the extent to which they serve as strategies
for sustaining each structure's integrity, therefore preserving his priceless legacy of work.
62
Integrity is defined by the United States Department of the Interior as a historic
structure's ability to convey its significance. 6 In other words, a structure's historic
integrity is its ability to tell the story it symbolizes. In the case of McCullough's Oregon
bridges, this translates to whether or not they retain their essential character defining
features which are attributes that convey McCullough's design philosophy. These
attributes include his attention to economy and aesthetic value which has been discussed
several times throughout this paper, as well as his intent to design bridges as destinations
as discussed in the previous chapter.
For nomination of a historic resource to the National Register of Historic Places,
its integrity is evaluated according to seven aspects: location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association. 7 The following definitions of these terms were
developed by the United States Department of the Interior and are used in the discussion
of treatments applied to McCullough's bridges. 8
Location: Location is defined as the place where the historic structure was constructed.
Complemented by its setting, the location is particularly important to recapturing the
sense of historic events and persons associated with the structure as well as understanding
why it was constructed.
Design: Design is defined as the combination of elements that create the form, plan,
space, structure, and style of a historic resource. It results from conscious decisions made
during the original conception and planning of the design and includes such elements as
organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials.
Setting: Setting is defined as the physical environment of a historic property. It refers to
the character of the place in which the structure was built, and involves the relationship to
surrounding features and open space.
Materials: Materials are defined as the physical elements that were combined during a
particular period of time and the particular patterns used to configure a historic structure.
The choice and combination of materials reveals the preference of those who created the
structure and indicates the availability of particular types of materials and technologies.
63
Workmanship: Workmanship is defined as the physical evidence of the crafts of a
particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the
evidence of labor and skill in constructing a structure and can apply to the structure as a
whole or to its individual components.
Feeling: Feeling is defined as a structure's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense
of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken
together, convey the structure's historic character.
Association: Association is defined as the link between an important historic event or
person and a historic structure. A structure retains association if it is in the place where
the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an
observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey
a structure's historic character.
Reuse of Historic Bridge Components
The controversial decision to construct a new bridge at Waldport required
extensive discussion and evaluation of how best to design a new bridge that was sensitive
to the cultural importance of the old bridge. While retaining the old bridge as a
pedestrian and bicycle bridge alongside the new one was taken into consideration, the
decision to remove it was a result of the high cost of maintaining the old bridge, the
inability to insure the safety of those using it, and aesthetic concerns. It was determined
that even with initial substantial maintenance of the old bridge, corrosion of the structure
would continue, requiring frequent maintenance at a high expense. Furthermore, the
structure would eventually be unable to support the snooper crane used to suspend
inspection crews below the structure, and ongoing deterioration and spalling of the
concrete would expose those using the bridge, as well as the area around the bridge, to
hazardous conditions. 9 It was further decided that retention of the old bridge next to a
64
new bridge would compromise the natural setting by obscuring views of the bay, as well
as limit designs of the new bridge to those which mirror the old bridge. 10
Because of these determinations, the need for a new bridge was imminent,
requiring that negative impacts to the historic bridge be mitigated through the Section
106 process. As part of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Section 106
process requires federal agencies that identify the need for alteration of a historic
structure to "take into account the effects of their actions on historic properties, and
afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to
comment on their actions." 11 This process further ensures a forum for public feedback
and the discussion of alternatives ultimately leads to a memorandum of agreement
between, in this case, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation and Oregon State Historic Preservation Office.
The memorandum of agreement for the Alsea Bay Bridge replacement project
included two major stipulations that allowed the project to move forward. This first
required the Federal Highway Administration to request documentation of the bridge
through photographs and measured drawings by the Historic American Engineering
Record prior to demolition. 12 The second stipulation required selection and salvage of
architectural elements from the old bridge by the State Historic Preservation Office for
use in interpretive and memorial displays in the vicinity of the new bridge, as well as in
an information and visitors center in Waldport. 13
Several designs for the new bridge were reviewed including a variety of cable-
stayed spans, a deck arch span, a girder span, and different types of steel through tied-
65
arch spans. The design selected is a steel through-tied arch which echoes the form of the
previous bridge and others designed throughout McCullough's career. Construction of
the new bridge began in 1988 and was completed by 1991 (figure 35).
Figure 35: New Alsea Bay Bridge at
Waldport, 199 I
Source: Author
In accordance with Section 106 stipulations, two of the original entrance pylons
were incorporated into the north wayside of the new bridge along with the spires which
originally marked each end of the three consecutive arch spans (figure 36). Pylons from
the south end of the bridge were reused by integrating them into the south entrance of the
new bridge and the pedestrian plazas and entrance towers were retained on either side of
both ends of the bridge (figure 37). An Interpretive Center constructed on the west side
of the south approach contains interactive exhibits, several photographs and drawings of
historic bridges, a large display containing information about McCullough's career as
state bridge engineer, a model of the old Alsea Bay Bridge, as well as other exhibits
illustrating Oregon's transportation history (figure 38). A tile mural of the original Alsea
Bay Bridge stretches across the back wall of the Interpretive Center.
66
Figure 36: North wayside of the
new Alsea Bay Bridge at Waldport,
1991, illustrating reuse of entrance
pylons and spires
Source: Author
FigUl'e 37: Reuse of entrance
pylons, towers, and staircase at new
Alsea Bay Bridge at Waldport, 1991
Source: Author
Figure 38: Alsea Bay Bridge
Interpretive Center on west side of
the south entrance to the new Alsea
Bay Bridge at Waldport, 1991
Source: Author
67
Preserving McCullough's legacy at this particular site is difficult because the
bridge is completely gone. Although the location and setting are the same and the
materials used in construction of the new bridge are similar to those in the old structure,
the design, workmanship, feeling and association with respect to integrity are lost in the
new design. However, retaining the entrance spires, pylons, and towers was an important
step. As discussed in the previous chapter, McCullough employed these types of
architectural features to create bridges as destinations. Given that these architectural
features were reused in locations similar to their original placement, their integration into
the new design echoes that part ofMcCullough's design philosophy.
Feeling and association are partially retained at the new bridge because
pedestrians can still access it in the same way they would have in the 1930s. The elegant
staircases at each end of the bridge are intact and lead to the pedestrian walkways. In
addition, one can still take shelter in the large towers or stop there to absorb the breath
taking views of the bay. In addition, the Interpretive Center provides an excellent
informational resource for those who are curious about what happened to the old bridge
and why some of the old portions were retained. Exhibits there provide an explanation of
what went on, how solutions were resolved, and why decisions were made. The
wonderful model of the bridge also provides a more in depth view of the form of the old
bridge, and because it is viewed in three dimensions rather than two, visitors are offered a
better sense of the scale of the bridge relative to its surroundings.
68
The reuse of old bridge parts was also discovered where the Eagle Creek Bridge
was originally located on Interstate 84 in Multnomah County. Concrete piers from the
original bridge McCullough designed were retained for use on a new bridge after the
original structure was dismantled in 1969 (figure 39). Unfortunately none of the aspects
of integrity are retained here. The intricacy of the old piers contrasts heavily with the
modern concrete and steel deck girder bridge it supports. Furthermore, although the
interstate exit for the Eagle Creek Overlook directs visitors underneath this bridge
affording them a close-up view of McCullough's piers, there is no indication of their
significance through the use of interpretive text panels or plaques.
Figure 39: Reused piers from
the original Eagle Creek Bridge
constructed in 1936
Source: Author
Although these particular bridge elements may not be the most significant of his
body of work, they still deserve acknowledgement through a simple interpretive device
such as a sign. One of the reasons the reuse of bridge parts works well at the Alsea Bay
Bridge is the fact that there is some explanation for why these obviously historic
architectural elements are juxtaposed with an overtly modern-looking structure. While it
69
is realized that interpretive centers cannot be constructed everywhere that historic
structures exist, a simple text panel could provide some insight for curious visitors, as
well as a reference for obtaining further information.
A third example of adaptive reuse is found at the Crooked River (High) Bridge in
Jefferson County near TelTebonne (figure 40). This steel deck arch bridge was designed
by McCullough in 1926, however in the 1990s OOOT made the decision to replace the
narrow, 26-foot wide, two-lane structure with a more efficient 79-foot wide, four-lane,
reinforced-concrete deck arch structure to better handle the ever increasing size of
vehicular traffic on US 97 (figure 41).14 Although construction on the new bridge began
in 1997 and was completed in 2000, the old bridge remains completely intact to the west
of the new bridge in the Peter Skene Ogden State Scenic Viewpoint. 15
Figure 40: Crooked River (High) Bridge, 1926
Source: Author
Figure 41: New US 97 bridge over the Crooked
River Gorge, 2000
Source: Author
70
The old bridge is now open only to pedestrian and bicycle traffic and serves as an
observation deck for enjoying views of the 300-foot deep Crooked River gorge. The
bridge also offers excellent views of the new highway bridge to the east and an older steel
arch bridge built for the Oregon Tnmk Railroad and designed by Ralph Modjeski in 1911
(figure 42). In retaining the entire bridge as a pedestrian and bicycle crossing, all aspects
of historic integrity are retained. Although feeling is slightly affected by the rush of
traffic on the new bridge to the east, the juxtaposition of all three bridges in one location
provides an intriguing time line of technological developments that have shaped bridge
building. Furthermore, interpretive text panels are used to describe the events which led
to construction of the three bridges (figure 43).
Figure 42: Oregon
Trunk Railroad Bridge
designed by Ralph
Modjeski, 1911
Source: Author
Figure 43: Interpretive text panel allhe
Peter Skene Ogden Scenic Viewpoint
Source: Author
71
Cathodic Protection
The next strategy to be examined is a treatment called cathodic protection, which
is implemented to prevent corrosion of the steel in reinforced-concrete structures and
ultimately increase their lifespan. Structures in coastal environments are particularly
vulnerable to accelerated deterioration due to chlorides in the air and sea spray which
penetrate the concrete. 16 When chlorides from the environment and oxides from the
reinforcing steel combine they create rust which expands and creates internal pressure in
the concrete causing it to crack, spall, and delaminate. 17 This not only weakens the
structure but allows for more rapid penetration of chlorides to the reinforcing steeL In a
cathodic protection system, all of the damaged concrete and reinforcing steel must first be
removed and replaced and then a coat of zinc is applied to the structure. Cathodic
protection works by placing a more chemically active metal, zinc, at the surface of the
concrete and then applying low voltages to it and the reinforcing steel within the
structure. 18 The voltage causes the reinforcing steel to act as the cathode releasing a
negative ion, and the zinc to act as the anode releasing a positive one. The negative ion,
which normally causes the reinforcing steel to rust, is instead attracted to the zinc causing
it to corrode rather than the reinforcing steeL Although this is not a permanent fix, as the
zinc is eventually used up and requires another coating, ODOT officials can closely
monitor this system through computer modems attached to the structures. The other
advantage lies in the fact that zinc can be sprayed on the structure, which provides ease in
application to the intricate details of McCullough's bridges. 19
72
When it was discovered that the Cape Creek Bridge on US 101 was in need of
repair, preventing entire loss of this unique stmcture was a major priority. The Cape
Creek Bridge was the first in Oregon where this method of treatment was used on the
entire stmcture. Cathodic protection is a strategy that has fairly low impact on the
integrity of the resource. It does not affect the location or setting of the bridge; however
it does have minimal impact on the design, workmanship, feeling, and association of the
structure. Most notable is that this treatment results in a change in coloration and texture
of the structure's fabric. This change is not as apparent if the treatment is applied to the
entire structure, however on bridges where it is only used on the substlUcture, there is an
obvious difference in coloration and texture between the zinc coated section and the
untreated concrete (figure 44).
Figure 44: Detail of Big Creek Bridge on US 101, 1931, illustrating difference in
coloration and texture of bridge fabric where cathodic protection was applied
Source: Author
73
In the larger scheme of things this is not a major issue because the bridge itself
has been retained with all of its character defining features in tact, a far superior
alternative to bridge replacement. The result is a more modem look due to the grayish
tint that is reminiscent of unpainted steel. This treatment has been applied to eleven of
McCullough's coastal bridges since its first implementation on the Cape Creek Bridge in
1993.
Alteration to Accommodate Modern Traffic Needs and Safety Standards
Over the years, several of McCullough's bridges have required alteration to
accommodate modem traffic needs and safety standards, rather than deterioration. This
has resulted in the widening of several of his bridges which has required ODOT to either
replicate the existing substructure of the bridge or utilize another type of span to support
additional traffic lanes. While decorative features on the roadway deck can either be
moved or replicated with precast concrete, the substructures can pose problems due to
funding or limitations caused by the surrounding terrain.
The bridge at Depoe Bay was widened only thirteen years after its construction in
1927.20 This project set precedence for historically compatible widening projects as the
deck arch of the new portion on the seaward side mirrors that of the older portion almost
exactly (figure 45). This allows the two portions of the structure to conceal one another
when viewed from the side on either elevation. Furthermore it eliminates competition
between the original fabric and that of the new construction.
74
Figure 45: Historically compatible 1940 deck widening at Depoe
Bay Bridge on US 101, 1927
Source: Author
This was unfortunately not the case with the Sucker (Oswego) Creek Bridge
which was originally constructed in 1920 and widened in 1983 to provide additional
traffic lanes and safer conditions. 21 The new portion, which was constructed on the
downstream side of the original structure, is a concrete deck girder span. The angular
lines of the new bridge contrast sharply with the graceful arch of the historic bridge and
the new piers conceal part of the historic deck arch making it appear much heavier than it
did prior to alteration (figure 46). Although the substructure is not visible from the
approach as site lines are concealed by trees, a path leading below the bridge affords a
clear view of the alteration. It changes the design, feeling, and association of the bridge
because of the stark contrast of the historic structure with that of the modem structure.
75
Moreover the addition changes the aesthetic quality of the bridge because the new
structure not only detracts from the old, but conceals the design of the original deck arch.
Figure 46: Historically incompatible deck widening from 1983 at
Sucker Creek (Oswego) Bridge in Lake Oswego, J920
Source: Author
Incompatible alteration was also discovered in the balustrades of several of
McCullough's bridges. Modern safety standards require that railings be able to withstand
specific crash ratings and meet minimum requirements for height and size of openings.
The Oregon Depaltment of Transportation has developed innovative solutions over the
years that meet these requirements and at the same time respect the historic character of
McCullough's bridges. Figure 47 illustrates a stealth railing currently being installed at
the Coos Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge at North Bend. A stealth railing is one
designed with much more reinforcing steel than the original railing, and can be bolted to
the bridge deck at multiple points so that it can withstand the impact of a vehicle if
necessary. The style of the old railing was replicated, however it was made taller and the
76
openings were made narrower. The installation of a stealth railing is a much better
alternative than the installation of a steel guard rail (figure 48) which conceals the historic
fabric of the bridge, and in reality will do little to protect it if the steel guard rail is hit.
Figure 47: Stealth rail at Coos Bay
(McCullough Memorial) Bridge
Source: Author
Figure 48: Historically incompatible guard rail
at Cape Creek Bridge
Source: Author
Figures 49 and 50 demonstrate two other strategies ODOT has used to meet requirements
for minimum opening sizes in balustrades. Figure 49 illustrates application of stainless
steel rope on the exterior of the balustrade, and figure 50 illustrates the integration of
stainless steel hoops which echo the form of the arched openings. Both solutions are
ideal in that they retain the original fabric of the balustrades, but can also be removed if
necessary without causing damage.
Figure 49: Stainless steel rope applied to
balustrade at the Rogue River (Isaac Lee
Patterson) Bridge
Source: Author
" '\'" ".. . .' . . ". . '",. "i\'l\~ '1/;#
\.
~ . I r. , I j V"< •
. . ,... f. l t·'~l • \" .
L. • '. _ I' .....
Figure 50: Stainless steel hoops installed in
arched openings of balustrade at the North
Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge
Source: Author
77
Recommendations and Conclusions
The maintenance of historic bridges poses difficult challenges because of cost,
issues of safety, and logistical problems relative to traffic. In these cases it often makes
more sense to apply rehabilitative treatments than preservative treatments because they
solve the problem, rather than work with it through expensive and time consuming
periodic maintenance that mayor may not work. Furthermore, the catastrophic collapse
of the Interstate 35 bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on August 1,2007 reiterates the
importance of addressing safety issues to prevent the tragedy that occurs when bridges
fail. Due to these reasons there is always the risk of historically incompatible alteration
that lowers the integrity of historic bridges. Several of McCullough's spans have
succumbed to that fate over the years so it is wise to periodically review what has worked
well and determine what could be done differently. It seems that only in rare cases it is
economically feasible for a bridge to be retained as originally designed and reused as a
pedestrian bridge along side a replacement bridge, as was the case with the Crooked
River (High) Bridge, so it is advisable that every effort be made to try and preserve
McCullough's overall legacy so that even when his bridges are changed over time, the
approach he applied to bridge design is not misinterpreted or forgotten. The following
recommendations were formulated to assist in this effort.
1. Greater Promotion of the Scope of McCullough's Work
It is first suggested that greater effort be made to promote broader understanding of the
scope of McCullough's work. Most are aware ofthe five major bridges he designed
78
along the coast in the mid 1930s, but few are aware that he was responsible for the design
of hundreds of bridges both large and small throughout Oregon, several of which are still
intact and which collectively provide one of the richest collections of 1920s and 1930s
reinforced-concrete bridges in the nation. This situation could be remedied through the
expansion of previously constructed websites to include maps that identify the locations
of McCullough's bridges and have links to current photographs. Another solution is to
work with local tourism offices and visitor information agencies in specific cities which
have McCullough bridges located in or around them. This could potentially spark
interest in these bridges as destinations for heritage tourism, as well as promote local
pride in these resources. Greater community awareness of these bridges may also lead to
increased public feedback when these resources are in need of maintenance, and could
also have the potential to help reduce vandalism.
2. Greater Accessibility to Information on McCullough's Work
One of the problems encountered in the effort to survey these bridges was the lack of
information available on them. While it was again quite easy to obtain information on
McCullough's larger spans through various websites and investigation of Historic
American Engineering Record documentation and National Register Listings, it was quite
difficult to locate basic information on some of his smaller spans that are located in rural
areas. The Oregon Department of Transportation bridge log proved useful in tracking
down the locations of many of the bridges surveyed, however the document is not easily
navigated or understood by first time users, and therefore should not be the primary
79
resource for those trying to locate some of the more obscure McCullough Bridges.
During the survey of these bridges their locations were scrupulously tracked and recorded
by mile marker as well as with GPS coordinates so that this information will be available
to those who are interested in visiting some of the lesser-known bridges he designed. It
would also be possible to link bridge location information to a website map as discussed
in the previous recommendation. Future documentation by the Historic American
Engineering Record is also suggested for those bridges that have not already been
recorded.
3. Increased Use of Interpretive Devices at Bridge Sites
Another useful tool for preserving McCullough's legacy is the inclusion of interpretive
devices such as text panels or plaques at bridge sites. Although this was discussed
previously, it should be reiterated that a brief sign which discusses aspects of
McCullough's work or alterations that have been made to a particular bridge can spark
further interest in those who read them. While it is understood that many of
McCullough's bridges along the coast have these types of interpretive devices installed
near them, it is felt that installation of panels or plaques near some of the lesser-known
bridges would assist in bolstering public interest in them.
4. Greater Accessibility at Bridge Sites
Finally, it was also discovered during the survey that several of these bridges did not
allow for easily accessible investigation. For example, several of the bridges on US 101
80
do not offer a convenient place to pull over and view the bridge up close. Although this
may not be a desire for everyone, these bridges have pedestrian walkways that are going
unused because heavy traffic prevents safe access to them. While it is understood that it
is not economically feasible to install parking lots near everyone of his bridges, it is
suggested that in the future, if a bridge maintenance project permits, scenic overlooks be
created at bridge sites in conjunction with maintenance projects so that more people will
be encouraged to stop and enjoy McCullough's work. The author observed while making
this survey that turnouts at the Cummins Creek and Rocky Creek Bridges along US I0 I
appeared to be quite popular as destinations for sightseers.
In sum, greater access to information about McCullough's work, as well as
greater accessibility to it, will provide broader understanding of its significance and has
the potential to increase interest in retaining it through rehabilitative efforts. When
alteration of his bridges are necessary to maintain them as part of Oregon's transportation
network, they should still be able to reflect their significant role in Oregon's
transportation history, recreation history, and how in five instances, their construction
was part of a revolutionary plan to help stimulate the failing economy in the 1930s.
Furthermore, McCullough's work should be used to tell the often overlooked evolution of
reinforced-concrete in structural design. Experience has been such that courses in the
history of building technology and architecture often jump from the demise of cast-iron
to the rise of steel, often implying that the former was partially the result of the latter.
While this is not a false statement, it omits discussion of the fascinating experimentation
81
and development that took place in both the scientific and academic worlds, as well as the
design world that contributed to reinforced-concrete's extensive history.
It is probable that future advancements in transportation, development of cities
and towns, and growing populations will continue to affect McCullough's Oregon
bridges, and that alteration or loss will always pose a risk. As preservationists it is our
job to ensure that McCullough's work is understood so that his legacy is not lost even
when his bridges are. His designs were driven by economy to reduce the strain of
pub1ically funded construction projects, and by aesthetics to enhance the experience of
those who use his bridges. Furthermore, McCullough's numerous life achievements
demonstrate his commitment to furthering his knowledge so that he was better able to
incorporate these ideals into his designs. In my opinion, that is the essence of
McCullough's work. If at some point in the future a bridge cannot be retained, those are
the ideals that should be preserved.
Notes
1 Robert W. Hadlow, Elegant Arches Soaring Spans: C. B. McCullough, Oregon's Master Bridge Builder
(Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 200 I), 130.
2 Ibid., 132.
3 National Park Service, "National Register of Historic Places," National Park Service,
http://www.nps.govlhistory/nR/ (accessed Spring 2009).
4 American Society of Civil Engineers, "History and Heritage: Designated Historic Civil Engineering
Landmarks," American Society of Civil Engineers, http://www.asce.orglhistory/landmark/search.cfm
(accessed Spring 2009).
5 National Park Service, "National Register of Historic Places," National Park Service,
http://www.nps.govlhistory/nR/ (accessed Spring 2009).
82
6 United States Department of the Interior, National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register
Criteria/or Evaluation (Washington D. c.: Department of the Interior, 1997),44.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid., 44-45.
9 Oregon Department of Transportation, Alesa Bay Bridge: Final Environmental Impact Statement
(Washingon D. c.: Federal Highway Administration, 1986), 6f.
10 Ibid.
II Thomas F. King, Cultural Resource Laws and Practice: An Introductory Guide (Lanham: AltaMira
Press, 2004),81.
12 Oregon Department of Transportation, Appendix D: Memorandum of Agreement.
13 Ibid.
14 Gordon Gregory, "Building the Crooked River Highway," The Oregonian, September 17, 2000.
15 Ibid.
16 H. M. Laylor, Demonstration Project: Soffit Cathodic Protection System in a Coastal Environment,
(Salem: Oregon Department of Transportation, 1987), 1.
17 Ibid.
18 Hadlow, 133.
19 Ibid.
20 Dwight A. Smith, James B. Nonnan, and Pieter T. Dykman, Historic Highway Bridges o/Oregon
(Salem: Oregon Department of Transportation, 1986), 101.
21 Ibid., 210.
APPENDIX A
DISTRIBUTION MAPS OF McCULLOUGH BRIDGES SURVEYED
83
C()
+:>.
Gran
.. ,: Coun
Weiser
...... :
..f'ayett
., 'ionlari
Vale'
:;)!ly,
Caldvvell
c
95
.,.Eote rp rise
"!'I,,1I0A ",I/'jr'drrr~n;
'.aMr"'l
Feres!
Baker City
McDermitt.... :
••Cj_ •••••.
N E V A D A
Milton·Freewater
78.
Denio
Fields
11
Walla 12 Da\<ton
Walla .
1:1
Molnr:ill
Uke
Burns
UlTlal11i-;
~hllor&l F'XEd
La Grande'
Hermiston
o
Pendleton
Riley
,.
.,Heppner
395
26 Prairie City•.
Canyon City
Malhe'jl
Natlo'la Fure:,'!
till
.::'-
S TAT E S
..•=:...~
20
Condon
3~
Fossilo
':I>
"'"
0-
=>~
/rineville
Lakeview"
Fremocll
MCiHOnf-1
Forest
OREGON
•
D~::;chl.rte:·
NotIOnal
Forbt
"'Madras
V\t6rlil
S(.rlC",g~
F
UNITED
26
WASHINGTON
Spref;llJe
Klamath
Falls
Goldendale,
Hood River .'"". _
St~t~Cio"l...i.-~·' --,
The Dalle~ Moro. .,
Mc"'ll.lfltHood
l~tiol)al For~:,1
97
22
d
VlJfI1amette Redmond'
126 Na~orlaJ Bend
-- Fore~ 0
.Oakridge
58
.~, - .ij
Umpt,lI" Chemult
Nalional (
Fore.s1
C,alel
La~e N P
~.
.~~
~
~
Ashland
c
~<;\\l.<J
Central
Point
o
Salem
Medlor!
,utherlin
Hillsboroc dr-$
Aloha
Grants
Pass
26
~
Dallas
McMinnville~
Albany
20 c
Corvanis
199
~oria: · cLongview
.Seaside "'1"
<; ~. J
101
jeedsp':'!
.. 38
J
Florence <=t
• Eugene .
Tillamooke
"Coquille ~osebur9
Gree.
North 8en~
Ocean
Newpo
•
Lincoln City
Pacific •
101
Gold 8eachg'
I--:: l:;~ : 1~_:1}:-:- \ :~~ .:,;;-x~c- i~O' ::. :.~""::.:" .~.-:: 1'H'''I.'?:'
g;u
s:: (ii'
;::s 5".
~ g-
$: g.
t>l ::s
"1:l 3
()Q t>lg"1:l
3 S,
~$:
o..n
c (")
en C
5' =()Q 0C
(/)()Q
:=;:;-
cti 0-(1) ...,
&To.:
t>l()Q
::s (1)
0.. en
....,~
..., =
-6' <
en (1)
(/)'<
o (1)
....,Cl.
~ 5'
1:; 0(1) ...,(1)
:;::()Q
_. 0
&::s
0-:;::
5;§:
()Q -(1) 0
_n
o t>l
n :=.
t>l 0
=:. ::s
o en
::l _.
en ::l
t>l Cl.C (S.
()Q t>l
3 ~
(1) c..
::l _.
~ ::l
~3.;:;-
(1)
t>l
C
5"-
o
...,
85
Mosier Creek Bridge
Hood River
(Tucker) Bridge
Eagle Creek
Bridge
.,iftord Pind-Iot
,Jational Forest
WA
rl,l'OI nt Hood
National Fnrest
26
V\larm
Springs
I.R.
Redmond'·
Bend
Dry Canyon
Creek Bridge
India I
Co - - - t"· .-,t,- rI\e::..:e ,.::1 U
Mill Creek (West Sixth
Street) Bridge
Fifteenmile Creek
(Seufert) Viaduct
Mo
O---CL---!-__Fifteerunile Creek
(Adkisson) Bridge
6---~-!----DeschutesRiver
(Maupin) Bridge
I
Madras
Crooked River
(High) Bridge
Prine
c·
Detail of distribution map of McCullough bridges surveyed in central and north central Oregon
Source: Map generated using Streets and Trips Software with bridge locations augmented by the author
86
Rogue River
(Rock Point) Bridge
Rogue River
(Gold Hill) Bridge
Santiam River
(Cascadia Park) Bridge
Willamette River
(Springfield) Bridge
Santiam River
(Jacob Conser) Bridge
Sucker Creek
(Oswego) Bridge
Willamelte River
(Oregon City) Bridge
North Umpqua River
(Roberl A. Booth) Bridge
'22.
Oakridg
\1\1111
,126 r'·Ja
Umpqua
r··Jational
Fore::::t
(-:1' at
Lak J t·
Ashland
o
26North Yamhill
River Bridge
Willametle River
(AJb,my) Bridge
Calapooya Creek
(Oakland) Bridge
Rogue River
(Caveman) Bridge
South Umpqua River ----J,:~"'_(Myrtle Creek) Bridge
South Umpqua River
(Winston) Bridge
Detail of distribution map of McCullough bridges surveyed in westem Oregon
Source: Map generated using Streets and Trips Software with bridge locations augmented by the author
87
Soapstone Creek
Bridge
Wilson River
Bridge
Old Young's
Bay Bridge
Lewis and Clark
____River Bridge
101 1--1-- _
Tillamook
Met
----III-----------r~Fllorence
120,
C
Big Creek
Bridge
Umpqua River
(Scottsburg) Bridge
J 18 I Depoe Bay
[________ Bridge
Cummins Creek
Bridge
Rocky Creek
(Ben F. Jones) Bridge
Alsea Bay
Bridge
Ten Mile Creek
Bridge -ir--------Jit
Yaquina Bay
Bridge
Umpqua River
Bridge
Cape Creek
Bridge
Siuslaw River
Bridge
Coos Bay --------
(McCullough Memorial)
Bridge
Coquille
.)
Gre
1011
Gold Beac,__-
Rogue River
(Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge
Detail of distribution map of McCullough bridges surveyed along the Oregon coast
Source: Map generated using Streets and Trips Software with bridge locations augmented by the author
APPENDIXB
DATA PAGES FOR BRIDGES SURVEYED
88
89
Bridge Name
Rogue River (Rock Point) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Numbet'
1920 No 00332A
Location Description
Near Gold Hill, Oregon. Take exit #43 off of Interstate 5 and follow Oregon 99 east
for approximately 0.5 miles.
CPS Coordinates
N 42.43193°
W 123.09037°
Bridge Type
One 113-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major alterations
Modern deck railings installed on north approach. Rehabilitation scheduled for Fall
2009.
90
Bridge Name
Sucker Creek (Oswego Creek) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1920 No 00409
Location Description
Lake Oswego, Oregon. Oregon 43 at mile post 6.76.
GPS Coordinates
N 45.41071 0
W 122.664280
Bridge Type
One 130-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major AJtel'ations
Bridge was widened on downstream side in 1983
91
Bridge Name
Mosier Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1920 Yes 00498
Location Description
Mosier, Oregon. Take exit #69 off ofInterstate 84 and follow US 30 east for 2.7 miles.
Bridge is located at mile post 57.84.
CPS Coordinates
N 45.68457°
W 121.39494°
Bridge Type
One 11 O-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
None
92
. ,
Bridge Name
Fifteenmile Creek (Seufert) Viaduct
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1920 No 00308
Location Description
The Dalles, Oregon. Take exit #87 of off Interstate 84. Tum right at US 197IUS 30,
then hIm right at East 2nd Street, then turn right at Columbia View Drive, and then take
a slight left at Viewpoint road and drive approximately 1 mile.
GPS Coordinates
N 45.61132°
W 121.12247°
Bridge Tyoe
One 22-foot reinforced-concrete deck girder span and five 40-foot spans
Major Alterations
None
93
Bridge Name
Mill Creek (West Sixth Street) Bridge
Date of Completion National RCl!ister Listing ODOT Number
1920 No 00464
Location Description
The Dalles, Oregon. US 30 (West Sixth Street) at mile post 84.49
CPS Coo.·dinates
N 45.60339°
W 121. 19418°
Bridge Type
One 124-foot reinforced-concrete deck girder span
Major Alterations
Rehabilitation completed in 2001
94
Bridge Name
Dry Canyon Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Registel' Listing ODOTNumber
InI Yes 00524
Location Description
Wasco County, Oregon. Take exit #69 off of Interstate 84. Follow US 30 for
approximately 8.9 miles, bridge is located at mile post 63.79.
CPS Coordinates
N 45.68181°
W 121.30289°
Bridge Type
One 75-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
None
95
Bridge Name
North Yamhill River Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1921 No 00441
Location Description
McMinnville, Oregon. Located at mile post 34.96 on Oregon 99W, southbound only
CPS Coordinates
N 45.23221 0
W 123.160330
Bridge Type
One 80-foot steel Wan-en deck truss and seven 40-foot reinforced-concrete deck girder
spans
Major Alterations
None
96
Bridge Name
Old Young's Bay Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1921 No 00330
Location Description
Astoria, Oregon. US 101 Business Loop at mile post 6.89
GPS Coordinates
N 46.17081°
W 123.83817°
Bridge Type
Two 75-foot steel central bascule spans, fifty-eight pile trestle secondary spans, and ten
timber stringer spans
Major Alterations
None
97
Bridge Name
South Umpqua River (Myrtle Creek) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1922 No 00490A
Location Description
Myrtle Creek, Oregon. Take exit #108 off oflnterstate 5, bridge is adjacent to
interstate
CPS Coordinates
N 43.02507°
W 123.29618
Bridge Type
Three l30-foot reinforced-concrete deck arches
Major Alterations
Twin structure built adjacent to the original bridge in 2007 to widen the roadway deck
98
Bridge Name
WilJamette River (Oregon City) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1922 Yes 00357
Location Description
Oregon City, Oregon. Oregon 99 at mile post 11.43
CPS Coordinates
N 45.35841 0
W 122.608890
Bridge Type
One 360-foot steel half-through arch
Major Alterations
Rehabilitation in progress
99
Bridge Name
Lewis and Clark River Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1924 No 00711
Location Description
Astoria, Oregon. US 101 Business Loop at mile post 4.78
CPS Coordinates
N 46.15273°
W 123.86174°
Bridge Type
One 1I2-foot steel central bascule span and forty-eight pile trestle and stringer spans
Major Alterations
None
100
Bridge Namc
North Umpqua River (Robert A. Booth) Bridge
Dllte of Completion National Registe.o Listing ODOT Numbcr
1924 No 00839
Location Description
Winchester, Oregon. Take exit #129 off ofInterstate 5, bridge is adjacent to the
interstate
CPS Coordinates
N 43.28150°
W 123.35540°
Bridge Type
Seven 112-foot reinforced-concrete deck arches
Major Altc.-ations
Rehabilitation completed in 2007 and included deck widening to allow for pedestrian
walkways
101
Bridge Name
Fifteenmile Creek (Adkisson) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1925 No 01095
Location Description
South of Boyd, Oregon. Bridge is located approximately 3.20 miles from the southern
junction of Boyd Loop Road and US 197
CPS Coordinates
N 45.47960°
W 121.08143°
Bridge Type
One 120-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
None
102
Bridge Name
Willamette River (Albany) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1925 No 01025
Location Description
Albany, Oregon. Take exit #233 off of Interstate 5, turn west and follow US 20 for
approximately 2.60 miles. Bridge carries eastbound traffic only.
CPS Coordinates
N 44.64026°
W 123.10770°
Bridge Type
Four 200-foot steel Parker through trusses, 290 feet of reinforced-concrete deck girder
approach spans
Major Alterations
None
103
Bridge Name
Calapooya Creek (Oakland) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number"
1925 No 00603
Location Description
Oakland, Oregon. Take exit #140 off ofInterstate 5 and follow Oregon 99 for
approximately 1.0 mile
GPS Coordinates
N 43.42536°
W 123.30196°
Bridge Type
One 100-foot steel Warren deck truss, nine reinforced-concrete deck girder approach
spans
Major Alterations
None
104
Bridge Name
Crooked River (High) Bridge
Date of Completion National Rcgister Listing ODOT Nllmbcl'
1926 No 00600
Location Description
Jefferson County, Oregon. US 97 at mile post 112.64. Bridge is accessible from the
Peter Skene Ogden State Scenic Viewpoint on the west side of the highway
GPS Coordinates
N 44.39267°
W 121.19391°
Bridge Type
One 330-foot steel deck arch
Major Alterations
Adapted as a pedestrian and bicycle bridge after completion of the new US 97 bridge in
2000.
105
Bridge Name
Rogue River (Gold Hill) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register' Listing ODOT Nllmber
1927 No 00576
Location Description
Gold Hill, Oregon. Take exit #43 off oflnterstate 5 and follow Oregon 99 east for
approximately 3.0 miles
GPS Coordinates
N 42.43083°
W 123.04231°
Bridge Type
One 143-foot reinforced-concrete barrel arch
Major Alterations
None
106
Bridge Name
Depoe Bay Bridge
Date of Completion National Registe.- Listing ODOT Number
1927 Yes 02459
Location Description
Depoe Bay, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 127.61
GPS Coordinates
N 44.81054°
W 124.06215°
Bridge Type
One 150-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
Second deck arch added to seaward side of the bridge in 1940. Cathodic protection
system installed to treat corrosion.
t07
Bridge Name
Rocky Creek (Ben F. Jones) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1927 Yes 01089
Location Description
Lincoln County, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 130.0
GPS Coordinates
N 44.77902°
W 124.07169°
Bddge Type
One 160-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
108
Bridge Name
Soapstone Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1928 No 01319
Location Description
Clatsop County, Oregon. Oregon 53 at mile post 6.5
GPS Coordinates
N 45.82653°
W 123.78056°
Bridge Type
One 108-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
None
109
Bridge Name
Santiam River (Cascadia Park) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1928 No 01356
Location Description
Linn County, Oregon. US 20, 14.5 miles west of junction with Oregon 228 in Sweet
Home
CPS Coordinates
N 44.39778°
W 122.48113°
Bridge Type
One 120-foot timber and steel Howe deck truss
Major Alterations
CUiTent bridge was built in 1994 and is a replica of the original 1928 design
110
Bridge Name
Willamette River (Springfield) Bridge
Date of Completion National Registe.· Listing ODOT Number
1929 No 01223
Location Description
Springfield, Oregon. Oregon 126 Business Loop at mile post 1.34, westbound only
GPS Coordinates
N 44.04600°
W 123.02657°
Bridge Type
One 550-foot steel continuous through truss with reinforced-concrete deck girder
approach spans
Major Alterations
None
III
Bridge Name
Deschutes River (Maupin) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1929 No 00966
Location Description
Maupin, Oregon. US 197 at mile post 45.84
GPS Coordinates
N 45.17277°
W 121.07662°
Bridge Type
One 200-foot steel Warren deck truss and thirteen reinforced-concrete deck girder
approach spans
Major Alterations
None
112
Bridge Name
Umpqua River (Scottsburg) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1929 No 01318
Location Description
Scottsburg, Oregon. Oregon 38 at mile post 16.43
CPS Coordinates
N 43.65439°
W 123.82490°
Bridge Type
Three-span, 643-foot continuous steel through truss
Major Alterations
None
It3
Bridge Name
Wilson River Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1931 Yes 01499
Location Description
Tillamook, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 64.23
CPS Coordinates
N 45.47870u
W 123.84459
Bridge Type
One 120-foot reinforced-concrete tied arch
Major Alterations
None
114
Bridge Name
Ten Mile Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1931 Yes 01181
Location Description
Lane County, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 171.44
GPS Coo."djnates
N 44.22380°
W 124.10974°
Bridge Type
One 120-foot reinforced-concrete through tied arch
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
115
Bridge Name
Big Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOTNumber
1931 Yes 01180
!Location Description
Lane County, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 175.02
CPS Coordinates
N 44.17516°
W 124.11491°
Bridge Type
One 120-foot reinforced-concrete through tied arch
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
116
Bridge Name
Rogue River (Caveman) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1931 No 01418
Location Description
Grants Pass, Oregon. Oregon 99 at Riverside Park
GPS Coordinates
N 42.42938°
W 123.33083°
Bridge Type
Three ISO-foot reinforced-concrete half-through arches
Major Alterations
None
117
Bridge Name
Cummins Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1931 No 01182
Location Description
Lane County, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 168.44
CPS Coordinates
N 44.26498°
W 124.10683°
Bridge Type
One lIS-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch with reinforced-concrete deck girder
approach spans
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
118
Bridge Name
Rogue River (Isaac Lee Patterson) Bridge
Date of Completion National Registel' Listing ODOTNumber
1932 Yes 01172
Location Description
Gold Beach, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 327.70
GPS Coordinates
N 42.42970°
W 124.41312°
Bridge Type
Seven 230-foot reinforced-concrete deck arches
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
119
Bridge Name
Hood River (Tucker) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1932 No 01600
Location Description
Hood River, Oregon. Tucker Road at mile post 4.95
GPS Coordinates
N 45.65450°
W 121.54897°
Bridge Type
One 100-foot reinforced-concrete deck arch
Major Alterations
None
120
Bridge Name
Cape Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1932 Yes 01113
Location Description
Lane County, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 178.35
GPS Coordinates
N 44.13399°
W 124.12222°
Bridge Type
One 220-foot parabolic reinforced-concrete deck arch, 399 feet of reinforced-concrete
deck girder spans on concrete columns
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
[21
Bridge Name
Santiam River (Jacob Conser) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1933 No 01582
Location Description
Jefferson, Oregon. Take exit #238 off of Interstate 5 and follow Oregon 99E east for
1.8 miles
GPS Coordinates
N 44.71443°
W 123.01599°
Bridge Type
Three 220-foot reinforced-concrete through arches
Major Alterations
None
122
Bridge Name
Clackamas River (McLoughlin) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1933 No 01617
Location Description
Oregon City, Oregon. Take exit #9 off of Interstate 205 and follow Oregon 99£ to mile
post 11.20
GPS Coordinates
N 45.37428°
W 122.60185°
Bridge Type
Two 140-foot and one 240-foot steel through tied arches, and four 50-foot reinforced-
concrete deck girder spans
Major Alterations
None
123
Bridge Name
South Umpqua River (Winston) Bridge
Date of Construction National Register Listing ODOT Number
1934 No 01923
Location Descrintion
Winston, Oregon. Oregon 99 at mile post 74.47, eastbound only
CPS Coordinates
N 43.13355°
W 123.39925°
Bridge Type
Three 180-foot steel through tied arches
Major Alterations
None
124
Bridge Name
Umpqua River Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1936 No 01822
Location Description
Reedsport, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 211.21
CPS Coordinates
N 43.71112°
W 124.10021°
Bridge Type
One 430-foot steel through truss tied arch swing span, four 154-foot reinforced-
concrete through tied arches
Major Alterations
None
[25
Bridge Name
Siuslaw River Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1936 Yes 01821
Location Description
Florence, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 190.98
GPS Coordinates
N 43.96206°
W 124.10885°
Bridge TvDe
One 140-foot double-leafbascule steel draw span, two 154-foot reinforced-concrete
through tied arches
Major Alterations
None
126
Bridge Name
Yaquina Bay Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing anaT Number
1936 Yes 01820
Location Description
Newport, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 141.67
CPS Coordinates
N 44.62432°
W 124.05886°
Bridge Type
One 600-foot steel though arch, two 350-foot steel deck arches, five 265-foot
reinforced-concrete deck arches
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
127
Bridge Name
Eagle Creek Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listjng ODOT Number
1936 No 02063
Location Description
Multnomah County, Oregon. Take exit #41 (eastbound access only) off ofInterstate 84
and follow road for approximately 0.25 miles
GPS Coordinates
N 45.64042°
W 121.93033°
Bridge Type
Original bridge was two 142-foot and one 182-foot steel through tied arches. Current
bridge is a steel deck girder structure supported by original piers
Major Alterations
Original bridge was dismantled in 1969, only the original piers remain
128
Bridge Name
COOS Bay (McCullough Memorial) Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1936 Yes 01823
Location Description
North Bend, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 233.99
CPS Coordinates
N 43.43433°
W 124.22076°
Bl"idge Type
One 793-foot and two 457-foot steel cantilever truss spans, thirteen 265-foot
reinforced-concrete deck arches
Major Alterations
Cathodic protection system installed to treat corrosion.
129
Bridge Name
New Alsea Bay Bridge
Date of Completion National Register Listing ODOT Number
1991 No 01746B
Location Description
Waldport, Oregon. US 101 at mile post 155.52
CPS Coordinates
N 44.42791°
W 124.06774°
Bridge Type
Original bridge was one 21 O-foot and two 154-foot reinforced-concrete through tied
arches and six 150-foot reinforced-concrete deck arches. Current bridge is a steel
through tied arch with reinforced-concrete box girder approach spans
Major Alterations
Original bridge replaced by current bridge in 1991 due to extensive corrosion. Only
decorative entrance pylons, spires, and pedestrian plazas and towers remain.
130
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Society of Civil Engineers. "History and Heritage: Designated Historic Civil
Engineering Landmarks." American Society of Civil Engineers.
http://www.asce.orglhistory/landmark/search.cfm (accessed Spring 2009).
Bayer, Patricia. Art Deco Architecture: Design, Decoration, and Detail from the
Twenties and Thirties. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1992.
Billington, David P. The Art ofStructural Design: A Swiss Legacy. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2003.
Blakely, Joe R. Lifting Oregon Out ofthe Mud: Building the Oregon Coast Highway.
Wallowa: Bear Creek Press, 2006.
Bottenberg, Ray. Images ofAmerica: Bridges ofthe Oregon Coast. Chicago: Arcadia
Publishing, 2006.
Brindley, Maia C. "Fantasy Preserved: Three Movie Palaces in Oregon."
Master's thesis, University of Oregon, 1998.
Burney, Ted. "Spanning Oregon: McCullough and his Bridges." VHS. Salem, OR:
Oregon Department of Transportation, 2002.
Craven, Wayne. American Art: History and Culture. Boston: McGraw Hill, 1994.
Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc., 2009.
DeLony, Eric. Landmark American Bridges. New York: American Society of Civil
Engineers, 1990.
DeLony, Eric. "The Value of Old Bridges." Association for Preservation Technology
Bulletin 35, no. 4 (April 2004): 3-10.
Dykman, Pieter T., James B. Norman, and Dwight A. Smith. Historic Highway Bridges
ofOregon. Salem: Oregon Department of Transportation, 1986.
131
Fischetti, David C. "Conservation Case Study of the Cornish-Windsor Covered Bridge."
Associationfor Preservation Technology Journal 23, no. 1 (1991): 22-28.
Freedman, Sidney, and Alan R. Kenney, ed. Architectural Precast Concrete. Chicago:
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, 1989.
Friedman, Donald. Historical Building Construction: Design, Materials, and
Technology. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1995.
Gemeny, Albin M. and Conde B. McCullough. Application ofFreyssinet Method of
Concrete Arch Construction to the Rogue River Bridge in Oregon. Salem:
Oregon State Highway Commission, 1933.
Gilkey, Herbert J. Anson Marston: Iowa State University's First Dean ofEngineering.
Ames: Iowa State University, College of Engineering, 1968.
Gregory, Gordon. "Building the Crooked River Highway." The Oregonian, September
17,2000.
Guzowski, Kenneth J. Historic American Engineering Record: Columbia River
Highway, HAER OR-56. Washignton D. C.: HABS/HAER: 1990.
Had1ow, Robert W. "C. B. McCullough: The Engineer and Oregon's Bridge-Building
Boom, 1919-1936." Pac~fzc Northwest Quarterly 82, no. 1 (January 1991): 8-19.
Had1ow, Robert W. "Conde B. McCullough: Oregon Bridge Builder, a Presentation by
Robert Had1ow, Ph. D." VHS. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of
Transportation, 1994.
Had1ow, Robert W. Elegant Arches, Soaring Spans: C.B. McCullough, Oregon's Master
Bridge Builder. Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 2001.
Jackson, Donald C. Great American Bridges and Dams. Washington D.C.: The
Preservation Press, 1988.
Kassler, Elizabeth B. The Architecture ofBridges. New York: The Museum of Modem
Art, 1949.
King, Thomas F. Cultural Resource Laws and Practice: An Introductory Guide.
Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2004.
Lay1or, H. M. Demonstration Project: Soffit Cathodic Protection System in a Coastal
Environment. Salem: Oregon Department ofTransportation, 1987.
132
MacKenzie, Alistair. "Case Study in Engineering History Education: Robert
Stephenson's 'Last Great Work' -the Victoria Bridge in Montreal." Journal of
Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 131, no. 1
(January 2005): 32-40.
Marston, Anson. The History ofEngineering: A Course ofLectures to the Senior
Engineering Students ofthe Iowa State College. Ames: Iowa State College,
1912.
McCullough, Conde B. Economics ofHighway Bridge Types. Chicago: Gillette
Publishing Company, 1929.
National Park Service. "National Register of Historic Places." National Park Service.
http://www.nps.gov/history/nR/ (accessed Spring 2009).
Neuman, W. Lawrence. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc., 2006.
Oregon Department of Transportation. Alesa Bay Bridge: Final Environmental Impact
Statement. Washingon D. C.: Federal Highway Administration, 1986.
Oregon Department of Transportation. "Historic Bridge Preservation Plan."
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/GEOENVIRONMENTAL/culturalJesourc
es.shtml (accessed May, 2008).
Petroski, Henry. Engineers ofDreams: Great Bridge Builders and the Spanning of
America. New Yark: Alfred A. Knopf, 1995.
Pierce, Louis F. "C. B. McCullough, Structural Artist in Bridges," paper delivered to "A
Salute to Bridge Engineers" for the American Society of Civil Engineers
sponsored conference held in San Fancisco, CA, May 21, 1987.
Pullaro, Joseph J., and Bala Sivakumar. "New Uses for Old Bridges." Civil Engineering
67, no. 10 (October 1997): 58-63.
Raafat, Aly Ahmed. Reinforced Concrete in Architecture. New York: Reinhold
Publishing Corporation, 1958.
Roth, Leland M. American Architecture: A History. Boulder: Westview Press, 2001.
Slaton, Amy E. Reinforced Concrete and the Modernization ofAmerican Building.
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001.
133
Snyder, John W. "Preserving Historic Bridges." Preservation Information
(1995): 1-28.
United States Department of the Interior. National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the
National Register Criteriafor Evaluation. Washington D. C.: Department of the
Interior, 1997.
Yin, Robert K. Applications ofCase Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications, Inc., 2003.
Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications, Inc., 1994.