HistoricBridges.org Menu: HistoricBridges.org Menu:


We Recommend These Resources:
Bach Steel - Experts at historic truss bridge restoration.

HistoricBridges.org: Bridge Browser

Rose Cottage Bridge

Rose Cottage Bridge

Primary Photographer(s): Elaine Deutsch

Bridge Documented: 2008

View Photos
and Videos
View Maps
and Links

Key Facts

Facility Carried / Feature Intersected
Creek Road (PA-4029) Over Branch Brandywine Creek
Location
Rural: Chester County, Pennsylvania: United States
Structure Type
Stone Segmental Deck Arch, Fixed
Construction Date and Builder / Engineer
1914 By Builder/Contractor: Unknown

Technical Facts

Rehabilitation Date
2009
Main Span Length
20 Feet (6 Meters)
Structure Length
22 Feet (7 Meters)
Roadway Width
20.7 Feet (6.31 Meters)
Spans
1 Main Span(s)
NBI Number
15402900200294

Historic Significance Rating (HSR)

Bridge Documentation

View Archived National Bridge Inventory Report - Has Additional Details and Evaluation

This bridge is a small single span stone arch bridge that appears to be in good condition.

Information and Findings From Pennsylvania's Historic Bridge Inventory

Discussion of Bridge

The one-span, 22'-long, stone arch bridge has voussoirs, fieldstone spandrel walls and parapets with replacement concrete coping. The intrados has been pargetted. It is an example of a bridge type that is common from the first two decades of the 20th century in Chester County. The traditional stone arch bridges were favored by the county engineer, and at least 19 similar bridges from 1908 to 1919 have been identified. Stone arch bridges have been in use in Pennsylvania since the late 17th century, and over 350 examples have been identified statewide, with more than two-thirds dating to before 1900. Early 20th century examples in Chester County are considered individually significant in the local context only when they are complete and large or particularly well detailed. This example is not historically or technologically distinguished within its population or by its setting and context. It postdates the adjacent Rose Cottage, a remodeled ca. 1820-60 school building, and does not have a significant historic association with the development of the school or the Isabella Iron Furnace, which closed by the 1890s.

Discussion of Surrounding Area

The bridge carries a 2 lane road over a stream in a rural setting. Three of the bridge's four quadrants are wooded. At the southwest quadrant is a one-story stone building with two sections connected by a hyphen. After laying vacant for many years, it has been recently remodeled as a residence (ca. 1985) with replacement windows, doors and an addition. According to PHMC survey files, the building was the Rose Cottage, a school started by the wife of a local ironmaster ca. 1820-60. The school building does not have integrity of original design. The Isabella Iron Furnace, which operated until the 1890s, is in ruins and located more than 1/2 mile to the north.

Bridge Considered Historic By Survey: No

Information and Findings From Pennsylvania's Stone Arch Bridge Management Plan

Discussion of Bridge

This bridge is not recommended for long-term preservation. It ranks in the lowest third of all stone arch bridges under study in this plan. Its condition code is moderate, a result of some scour and some cracks. Its transportation code is moderate, bordering on low, a result of high traffic volumes and a relatively narrow roadway width. The bridge stands in an area of moderate potential for development, and may have difficulty handling even a minor increase in traffic; this will exacerbate its already inadequate transportation code. Its waterway is adequate. The bridge is not listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places individually or as part of a historic district, and it is not in a park, natural area, or greenway, resulting in a very low values code. The public input code is also very low; the bridge has not received any public support.

Ratings

The West Nantmeal, Creek Road Bridge is owned by PennDOT and is ranked 90th.
Condition Code = 48 - moderate
Transportation Code = 45 - moderate
Waterway Adequacy Code = 53 - moderate
Cost to Rehabilitate or Replace Code = 61 - very high
Anticipated Development Code = 48 - moderate
Recreational, Historical, and Cultural Values Code = 43 - low
Public Input Code = 35 - very low

Recommendation: Not recommended for long-term preservation.

Divider

Photo Galleries and Videos: Rose Cottage Bridge

 
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
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
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
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

Divider

Maps and Links: Rose Cottage Bridge

Coordinates (Latitude, Longitude):

View Bridge Location In:

Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within a half mile of this bridge.

Bridgehunter.com: View listed bridges within 10 miles of this bridge.

Google Maps

Google Streetview (If Available)

Bing Maps

OpenStreetMap

Apple Maps (Via DuckDuckGo Search)

Apple Maps (Apple devices only)

MapQuest

HERE We Go Maps

ACME Mapper

Waze Map

Android: Open Location In Your Map or GPS App

Flickr Gallery (Find Nearby Photos)

Wikimedia Commons (Find Nearby Photos)

Directions Via Sygic For Android

Directions Via Sygic For iOS and Android Dolphin Browser

USGS National Map (United States Only)

Historical USGS Topo Maps (United States Only)

CalTopo Maps (United States Only)


Divider
 
Home Top

Divider

About - Contact

© Copyright 2003-2020, 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.

Divider