TPS graphic header with link to ParkNet
Relocated Stillwater Road Bridge from the side

PRESERVATION
Tech Notes


METALS
NUMBER 4

Rehabilitating a Historic Iron Bridge

Joseph P. Saldibar, III

THE STILLWATER ROAD (SHEA) BRIDGE
Cumberland, Rhode Island

The Stillwater Road Bridge or Shea Bridge, as it is also known, was built in July, 1886 by the Berlin Iron Bridge Company of East Berlin, Connecticut. It features a parabolic, lenticular truss system, a design patented and used exclusively by that company. Of the several thousand bridges with this design that were constructed nationwide between 1870 and 1900, fewer than 5 percent remain standing today.

In Rhode Island, the Stillwater Road Bridge is one of only two remaining lenticular truss bridges, and the only one built as a highway truss. For more than a century the bridge was an integral part of the textile mill village of Georgiaville, in the town of Smithfield, Rhode Island (see figure 1 above). The bridge was determined to be individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in 1984. A year later, the Georgiaville Historic District was listed. Finally, in November 1989, Stillwater Bridge was documented according to Historic American Engineering Records (HAER) standards after it had been marked for demolition and replacement.

Problem

The almost predictable physical threats to historic bridges --deferred maintenance, harmful deicing salts, and overloading--have accelerated their rate of deterioration in recent years. In addition, many do not meet current loading and safety requirements. The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 calls for the preservation, rehabilitation, and re-use of historic bridges and makes such projects eligible for federal funding. The Intermodel Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 acknowledges the urgent need to upgrade our nation's aging highway infrastructure. Together, the laws create a momentum for positive action.

Preservation projects for historic bridges have the highest success rate--within existing law--when partnerships are forged among transportation planners, preservationists, engineers, state and local governments and the interested public. Creative planning, innovative design solutions, modem technologies, and possible financial savings over new construction, offer the best hope to ensure that historic bridges remain in active use. In the case of the aging Stillwater Road Bridge, the town of Smithfield began searching for ways to replace it in the1960s. The relatively light construction of the span, coupled with the deteriorated condition of its structural members, were the primary reasons for its slated removal. In 1984 the town recommended that the Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT) assume management of the bridge project. Although retaining the bridge on its original site was possible, RIDOT concluded this was not a viable option; an engineering analysis determined that bringing the structure up to current load requirements would have required replacement of most of the supporting truss members.

After a century of use, the bridge showed signs of major deterioration. Three of the four upright posts were bent from automobile collisions. The U-bolt floorbeam hangers had rusted, the result of moisture and dirt collecting on the flange. The lattice girder stiffeners (zero-force members which serve to prevent "racking" or lateral movement) had lost their latticework and were severely corroded, In addition, the endposts of the bridge showed signs of serious decay (see figures 2 and 3).

While moving a historic resource into a new context is generally not a recommended preservation solution, in the case of historic bridges, moving is frequently the only way to assure their physical protection as well as continued use. In addition, making certain structural alterations so that a historic bridge can fit the new site is parallel to altering a building for a new use--if done with sensitivity so that the historic character is not jeopardized in the process, the work meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.


Solution

Solution Link

METALS 4

Contents


Print Version (42k)

navigation bar

Links to the Past E-Mail Search NPS Metals 4 HPS homepage

CK

ParkNet

Privacy & Disclaimer