This bridge is one of a fair number of similar bridges in Chester County that are of unusual design. While not highly significant in terms of beauty or heritage value, they are unusual because they combine a traditional stone substructure with a cutting edge (for the period) reinforced concrete and steel superstructure. They appear to be confined to Chester County, having been designed by the county. The superstructure is a steel stringer bridge with a concrete deck. Stringers are encased in concrete using the jack-arch method, which was a method used briefly in the early 20th Century. The outside of the superstructure is also faced in concrete, which extends above the deck to hold the pipe railing system.
The contractor is identified on the marble plaque as simply "Kennedy Crossan". This is presumed to refer to Kennedy Crossan who owned the Crossan Construction Company of Philadelphia and Brownsville, Pennsylvania. Kennedy Crossan the man died in 1912, but his company lived on and was still in operation when this bridge was built. Kennedy Crossan was born in Chester County so it is perhaps not surprising to see him and his company involved with construction in the county. The only mystery is, assuming this theory is correct, why the contractor is listed as Kennedy Crossan and not Crossan Construction Company, unless this was an effort to honor the legacy of the deceased man who was born in Chester County.
Information and Findings From Pennsylvania's Historic Bridge Inventory
Discussion of Bridge
The skewed, one span, 33'-long, steel stringer bridge, built in 1915, has a concrete jack arch deck, pipe railings, stone abutments, and stone wingwalls with stone parapets. Over 110 examples of steel stringer with concrete jack arch deck bridges have been identified statewide from 1905 to 1956, with approximately 20 dating to before 1915. They enjoyed a period of popularity during the mid 1910s in Chester County under the direction of County Engineer Nathan R. Rambo, who favored the design because of its simplicity, compactness, and economy. The county has 14 identified examples from 1913 to 1918, more than any other county in the state. Complete, prototypical examples from before 1915 are considered significant in the Chester County context, reflecting the local application of national thinking about bridge technology and design. This 1915 example is not historically or technologically distinguished by its setting or context.
Discussion of Surrounding Area
The bridge carries a 2 lane road over a stream in a rural setting with a scattered mix of 19th to late-20th-century residences and farms. A large residential subdivision was being constructed to the east of the bridge in 1997. Approximately 500' to the north of the bridge is an older farm complex with a vernacular ca. 1790-1830 stone residence and several generations of later additions. The setting does not have the cohesiveness or integrity of a potential historic district.
Bridge Considered Historic By Survey: No
Original / Full Size Photos
|A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery offers photos in the highest available resolution and file size in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer|
Mobile Optimized Photos
|A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery features data-friendly, fast-loading photos in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer|
Coordinates (Latitude, Longitude):
View Bridge Location In:
© Copyright 2003-2021, HistoricBridges.org. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer: HistoricBridges.org is a volunteer group of private citizens. HistoricBridges.org is NOT a government agency, does not represent or work with any governmental agencies, nor is it in any way associated with any government agency or any non-profit organization. While we strive for accuracy in our factual content, HistoricBridges.org offers no guarantee of accuracy. Information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. Information could include technical inaccuracies or errors of omission. Opinions and commentary are the opinions of the respective HistoricBridges.org member who made them and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone else, including any outside photographers whose images may appear on the page in which the commentary appears. HistoricBridges.org does not bear any responsibility for any consequences resulting from the use of this or any other HistoricBridges.org information. Owners and users of bridges have the responsibility of correctly following all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, regardless of any HistoricBridges.org information.