conservation management plan for the iron bridge, ironbridge, shropshire, uk
DESCRIPTION
Conservation Management Plan for the Iron Bridge, Ironbridge, Shropshire, UKTRANSCRIPT
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge,
Ironbridge, Shropshire
Prepared for English Heritage by David de Haan and others
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
1
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge, Ironbridge, Shropshire
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Coalbrookdale
Telford
Shropshire
TF8 7DX
David de Haan
Ironbridge Institute
July 2011
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
2
CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE IRON BRIDGE,
IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE
Contents
List of Figures ….…..……………………………………………………………………………..…...4 Abbreviations ….……..………………………………………………………………………………..7 Acknowledgements ….…..…………………………………………………………………………….7
Summary ….……..….………………………………………………………………………...……….8
Section 1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………….9
1.1 Scope of the Conservation Plan ….…..………..…………………..…………………….…..….9
1.2 Reasons for commissioning the Plan ..……………………………………………………….9 1.3 Approach to the Conservation Plan ………………………………………………...…………..10 1.4 Consultation …….……………………………………………………….………….………11
Section 2. Understanding the Heritage …………………………………………………………….12
2.1 Site description ……………………………………..…………………………………………12 2.2 Local historical context …………………………………………………………………….….15 2.3 Historical development of the Bridge and timeline ………………………………………….16
2.3.1 Phase 1. 1779-1800 ………………………………………………………………….18 2.3.2 Phase 2. 1801-1820 ……………………………………………………………….…20 2.3.3 Phase 3. 1821-1844 ………………………………………………………………….21 2.3.4 Phase 4. 1845-1901 ……………………………………………………………….…23 2.3.5 Phase 5. 1902-1933 ………………...…………………………………………….….25 2.3.6 Phase 6. 1934-1949 …………………………………………………………………28 2.3.7 Phase 7. 1950-1971 …………..……….…………………………………………….29 2.3.8 Phase 8. 1972-1979 …………..……..………………………………………………30 2.3.9 Phase 9. 1980-1998 ……………………………………………………………….…33 2.3.10 Phase 10. 1999-2007 …………….……….……………………………………..….34 2.3.11 Phase 11. 2008-2011 ……………..….……..…………………………………..…35
2.4 The wider historical context ……………………………………………………………………37 2.4.1 The Shropshire Coalfield ............................................................................................37 2.4.2 Spies, artists and tourists ............................................................................................37 2.4.3 Cast iron, a new material in engineering ...................................................................37 2.4.4 Construction techniques in the Bridge ......................................................................38
2.4.5 Record of cracks .........................................................................................................39 2.5 Management information ………………….………………………………………………….40 2.5.1 Guardianship area ......................................................................................................40 2.5.2 All other areas ...........................................................................................................41 2.6 Gaps in the knowledge ………………..………………………………………………………42 2.6.1 Impact of instability in the Gorge ...............................................................................42 2.6.2 Geological survey ......................................................................................................42
2.6.3 Archaeological excavations ........................................................................................42 2.6.4 Recording of the span ................................................................................................42 2.6.5 Building recording of the Tollhouse and shed ...........................................................43 2.6.6 Biodiversity survey of the river and banks ................................................................43 2.6.7 Visitor survey of footfall on and under the Bridge ....................................................43 2.6.8 Sequence of erection anomaly ...................................................................................43
Section 3. Heritage Values and Significance …………………..………………………………….44 3.1 Evidential value ………….…………………………………………………………………….44 3.2 Historical value ………………………………………………………………………………..45 3.3 Aesthetic value ……………….……………………………………………………………….48 3.4 Communal and economic value ………………………………………………………………..50
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
3
3.5 Statement of significance ………..……………………………………………………………..51
3.5.1 Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site .....................................................................52 3.6 Issues affecting the significance ………….………………………………………..……...….53
Section 4 Issues and Opportunities …………………….…………………………………………54 4.1 Conservation and maintenance of the Bridge .............................................……………………54 4.1.1 Elements on the Bridge .............................................................................................54 4.1.2 Road surface ............................................................................................................55 4.1.3 Paint colour ............................................................................................................56 4.1.4 Sufficient resources for maintenance .....................................................................56
4.1.4 Coordination of owners and partners .....................................................................56 4.2 Developments relating to the setting of the Bridge …..........…..........…………….…………....57 4.2.1 Inappropriate alterations to the setting .....................................................................57 4.3 Presentation, visitor management, community engagement and education .....……………….57 4.3.1 Floodlighting ............................................................................................................58 4.4 Environmental issues ………………………………………………………………………59 4.5 Disasters and risk preparedness ………………………………………...……………………59 4.5.1 Climate change and increased flooding .....................................................................59
4.5.2 Pollution incidents upstream ..................................................................................60 4.5.3 Instability ............................................................................................................60
Section 5. Conservation Policies ………………………….…………………………………………61 5.1 Protection of the spirit of place ………………………………………………………………..61 5.2 Basis of the approach ………………………………………………………………………….61 5.3 Retention of character …………….......................................…………………………………61 5.4 Conservation and maintenance ………………………………………………………………62 5.5 Development ………...……………………………………………………………………….63
5.6 Presentation .........................................................................................................................64 5.7 Environmental pressures ............................................................................................................64 5.8 Disaster and risk preparedness ...............................................................................................64 5.9 Setting ......................................................................................................................................65 5.10 Management, implementation and review …………………………………………………......65
Appendix 1: Gazetteer …………………………………………………………………………….66
Appendix 2: Naming the parts of the Bridge ……………………………………………….…..112
Appendix 3: Table of issues and recommended actions ………………..………………….…….118
Appendix 4: Map regression ………………………………………………………………….….128
Appendix 5: Understanding the development of the Bridge - details …..…….…….…...…......134
Appendix 6: Sequence of erection …………………………………………..................................194
Appendix 7: Visitors’ descriptions ………………………………………………………………204
Appendix 8: Consultation …………………………………………………………………………208
Appendix 9: List and location of major archives ……..………………………….….…….……..218
Appendix 10: Primary sources and bibliography .....….……………………………..………..….232
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
4
List of Figures
Page
7 Fig 1: The area covered by the Conservation Plan, centred on the Iron Bridge, Ironbridge Gorge, Telford, Shropshire, NGR: SJ 673 034. EH
11 Fig 2: Location map of Ironbridge. Google Images
11 Fig 3: Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site from the WHS Management Plan
11 Fig 4: GIS map of the Iron Bridge and immediate area. EH
11 Fig 5: Boundary from the 1975 Guardianship document. IGMT
13 Fig 6: The Conservation Plan recognises eight zones or areas which correspond to their ownership
16 Fig 7: The location of the three furnaces used for casting the pig iron, with Bedlam used for re-melting the iron into the larger castings for the Bridge. Map, after Raistrick 1953
17 Fig 8: The named parts of the Bridge are shown above and are covered in more detail in Appendix 2. D de Haan
18 Fig 9: Prichard‟s design of 1775. IGMT.1986.8609
18 Fig 10: Pritchard‟s Bringewood Forge bridge of 1772, the general arrangement and proportions of which were used for the Iron Bridge. ICE Historic Engineering Work 1278. ICE
18 Fig 11: Elias Martin‟s watercolour of July 1779. Scandia Company, Stockholm
19 Fig 12: Woodcut by J. Edmunds with the lower ends of the outer ribs missing, 1780 IGMT.1981.20
19 Fig 13: Oil painting by William Williams, 1780. IGMT.1992.12918
20 Fig 14: Demolition of the south abutment in progress, Paul Sandby Munn‟s sketch of 11th July 1802. Victoria & Albert Museum, E3112/1948
21 Fig 15: Lithograph by W Smith showing the timber land arches, 1810. Shropshire County Libraries
22 Fig 16: Watercolour by J Fidlor (attrib), 1837, showing the block of buildings on the north end of the Bridge and the iron land arches. IGMT.1978.73
23 Fig 17: Strengthening plates and spacers added to the inner land arch in 1861. D de Haan 1999
23 Fig 18: One of the 1880 I-beam girders inserted between the ribs of the inner land arch. D de Haan, 1999
24 Fig 19: Early evidence of the deck beams buckling above the inner vertical, 1897.The arrows locate the change of angle. IGMT.1981.53
25 Fig 20. The riveted water main on the downstream footpath seen here in 1962, which wasn‟t removed until 1972. IGMT.1982.1435
25 Fig 21: Repairs in progress, 1902. Wooden planks extend outside the Bridge and a temporary fence can be seen against the far railing. IGMT.1986.6322
25 Fig 22: Drawing of bolt-on ends for damaged deck plates, 1902. IGMT.1972.13
26 Fig 23: Coalbrookdale Company engineering drawing for straps and spacers, 1902. IGMT.1972.12
26 Fig 24: The straps still in situ today. D de Haan 2010
27 Fig 25: Cast iron saddles inserted in 1926. D de Haan 2000
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
5
27 Fig 26: A bolt that was identified as missing in 1926 is still missing today. D de Haan 2000
29 Fig 27: A 1949 photograph confirms the demolition of the buildings on the end of the Bridge. Aerofilms. A24217, IGMT1993.7888
29 Fig 28: The hole in the deck plate for Borehole B, seen looking up from the towpath. D de Haan 2010.
31 Fig 29: A large crack revealed in the accommodation arch. G Weaver, April 1972
31 Fig 30: Excavation of the north abutment. G Weaver, May 1972
31 Fig 31: The concrete box filling the void. G Weaver, July 1972
31 Fig 32: Tying the ashlar to the reinforcement with stainless steel rods. G Weaver, April 1972
31 Fig 33: The coffer dam looking out from the south bank. Tarmac Construction, 22nd June 1973. IGMT.1987.598
31 Fig 34: Additional bracing inside by the south abutment. Tarmac Construction, August 31st 1973. IGMT.1987.596
31 Fig 35: As well as the horizontal strut 4.5m below the base plates, a concrete facing rose up the abutments stopping four courses from the top. Tarmac Construction, 1st November 1973. IGMT.1987.593
32 Fig 36: The Tollhouse used as an Information Centre in 1972. IGMT.2010.638
32 Fig 37: The Tollhouse after restoration, summer 1975. IGMT.1981.1876
32 Fig 38: Removing the road fill, 1975. Private collection
32 Fig 39: Laying the new surface, 1975. IGMT.1981.154
34 Fig 40: The Bridge under scaffold in late September 1999. S White, IGMT
34 Fig 41: An image from the metric survey by Bill Blake of English Heritage, 2000. EH
35 Fig 42: Elias Martin‟s sketch of 1779. Scandia Company, Stockholm
35 Fig 43: The half scale model over the canal at Blists Hill Victorian Town, October 2001. The photo has been reversed for this comparison. D de Haan
36 Fig 44: June 2009 rope survey and 2011 contract to replace defective wedges
38 Fig 45: Telford‟s Buildwas Bridge of 1796, which survived until 1905. IGMT
38 Fig 46: Telford‟s Longdon-on-Tern aqueduct of 1796. Both were in cast iron by Thomas Telford to replace structures destroyed by the floods of 1795. IGMT
38 Fig 47: The 1782 engraving with its explanatory text. IGMT
38 Fig 48: The pitted surface is typical of an open mould casting. D de Haan 1999
39 Fig 49: An extra long tenon cast on the circle to reach the mortise in the deck bearer above
39 Fig 50: An iron wedge packing up the lower rib of frame B. D de Haan 2001
39 Fig 51: A wedge jacking up the rib of frame E. D de Haan 2001
40 Fig 52: The 1975 Guardianship plan. IGMT
40 Fig 53: The GIS base map does not show the bus lay-by which was installed in 1980. EH
41 Fig 54: The footpath and the railings attached to the Bridge are not part of the Guardianship area. EH Report 2008
41 Fig 55: The path through the accommodation arch, the wall with the two wooden doors, and the viewing platform above are not part of the Guardianship area. EH Report 2008
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
6
41 Fig 56: The end of the gravel marks the boundary, so some of the York flags are in the Guardianship areas and some are not. EH Report 2008
43 Fig 57: Two of the ten square holes in the base plates on the Tontine side, their purpose unknown
43 Fig 58: They are not repeated on the opposite bank. D de Haan 2010
44 Fig 59: Aerial view of Ironbridge, 1988. IGMT
44 Fig 60: Winter view from downstream. D de Haan 2011
45 Fig 61: Coalbrookdale cast iron steam engine cylinder, 1758. IGMT Elton Collection
45 Fig 62: Coalbrookdale cast iron wheels and rails. IGMT
46 Fig 63: Thomas Telford‟s wrought iron Menai Bridge of 1826. IGMT Elton Collection
47 Fig 64: The small copy of the Bridge at Wörlitz, about 50 miles southwest of Berlin. G Blake-Roberts
48 Fig 65: Rooker‟s engraving of the Bridge, first published in 1782. It is based on the oil painting by Williams shown in Fig 13 on page 19. IGMT.1983.1933
49 Fig 66: Abraham Darby‟s Upper Furnace works at Coalbrookdale, 1758, which was enlarged in 1777 to cast iron for the Bridge. IGMT, Elton Collection
49 Fig 67: A sample of companies and organisations using the Bridge in their logos
51 Fig 68: Iron Bridge lit as part of the Cultural Olympiad celebrations, 2008. IGMT
51 Fig 69: Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site branding, developed in 2008 and featuring the Iron Bridge. Ironbridge Tourism Partnership
54 Fig 70 (left): Fractures to the radials both sides of the middle rib, frame D. D de Haan 1999 54 Fig 71: Rusting between the 1902 steel band and cast iron blocks on the south bank.
D de Haan 2010
54 Fig 72: The right half of the ogee is in thin wrought iron. D de Haan 1999
55 Fig 73: A deck end that broke off in 2010 during exploratory work. P Belford
55 Fig 74: The casting in the IGMT store. D de Haan 2010
55 Fig 75: A frame from the Metric Survey of 2000. EH
58 Fig 76: The large 1960s floodlighting bins (circled). Dawley District Council 1965
58 Fig 77: the smaller 1977 bins. D de Haan 2011
58 Fig 78: A bespoke light column proposal. Candela Light 2010
58 Fig 79: The current flat orange floodlighting
59 Fig 80: Two phases of the impressive temporary light show that launched the Cultural Olympiad in the West Midlands, September 2008. IGMT
59 Fig 81: A fracture on the south bank probably caused by the 1795 flood. D de Haan 2009
60 Fig 82: Flood prediction of a 1-in-100 years event (TWC) compared to the normal situation (EH)
60 Fig 81: Flood prediction of a 1-in-1000 year event. TWC
60 Fig 83: Flood prediction of a 1-in-1000 year event. TWC
60 Fig 84: A regular flood about 1m over the base plates. The 1-in-100 year event would be 4m higher. D de Haan 2007
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
7
Abbreviations
DCMS Department of Culture, Media & Sport
EH English Heritage
HLF Heritage Lottery Fund
ICE Institution of Civil Engineers
IGMT Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
NMR National Monuments Record
SGCT Severn Gorge Countryside Trust
SRO Shropshire Record Office (now Shropshire Archives)
SS/MT Shropshire Star Morley Tonkin collection, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organisation
WHS World Heritage Site
WP Wrekin Plan
Acknowledgements
The Conservation Plan has been produced with guidance from Rob Harding and Heather
Sebire of English Heritage, and has been produced in consultation with other specialists at
English Heritage (Alan Capewell, Beth Cavanagh, William Du Croz, Bill Klemperer, Mike
Taylor, Mark Uggles and Richard Zeizer), at Telford & Wrekin Council (Vanessa Harbar,
Jonathan Lloyd, Louise Lomax, Neal Rushton and Michael Vout), at the Ironbridge Gorge
Museum Trust (Paul Belford, Carol Bowsher, Harriet Devlin, Shane Kelleher and Steve
Miller), the local Parish Councils (the Rev Keith Osmund-Smith and Ian Pickles), local
tourism and conservation organisations (Fay Easton, Katie Foster, Gillian Pope and Russell Rowley) and consultants (Bill Blake, Ian Hume, Charles Shapcott and Barrie Trinder).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
8
Summary
The Iron Bridge is a graceful single span straddling the River Severn in the heart of the
Ironbridge Gorge, Shropshire, where in 1779 for the first time cast iron was used structurally
and on a large scale. It was pioneering, functional, aesthetically pleasing and a successful
advertisement for cast iron, and the Bridge became a universally recognised symbol of the
Industrial Revolution. The main arch and the two later side arches (1823) retain their integrity
and authenticity because almost 100% of the original fabric remains, and repairs are nearly all
additions rather than replacements.
This first large scale structural use of iron was the culmination of three generations of
innovation in the technologies of iron manufacture and application by the Quaker ironmasters
of Coalbrookdale, especially the Darby family. The Bridge survived the floods that swept
away other bridges along the River Severn in 1795, establishing widespread confidence in the
new building material. It proved that iron could be used in civil engineering and opened the
way for immediate expansion of engineering in bridges, canals, steam power, railways and
ship building. The revolutionary use of iron as a structural material was copied all over
Europe and America. The Bridge became a Scheduled Ancient Monument in 1934 and was
taken into Guardianship in 1975. Because of the significance of the Bridge and the area the
Ironbridge Gorge was designated a World Heritage Site in 1986.
As the Scheduled Monument Description states: “The Iron Bridge is a fine example of a class
of monument which is rare nationally, and is often seen as a symbol of the heyday of British
bridge design, if not of the Industrial Era itself. The standing structure of the bridge increases
our understanding of the casting and assembly methods employed during this pioneering age.”
As soon as the Bridge was built the natural beauty of the area, linked to the marvels of the
industries, encouraged artists to paint and depict it in many media, and from the outset it
inspired writers and travellers to describe it. The Bridge has always been framed by hanging
woods, but today the setting is no longer industrial and it is now the destination for up to a million tourists each year.
As a focal point and also as a river crossing the Bridge is the raison d‟être of the town of
Ironbridge, and its filigree structure must be retained without unsympathetic interventions.
Because the Bridge is so heavily visited, the conservation of this unique asset is a highly
visible process. A visitor to the site in 50 years time should be able to see that all work has
been done with a long-term vision in mind.
The purpose of this Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge is to inform the future conservation
of the monument and to provide guidance on the risks, opportunities and issues. It is the first
plan of this type to be prepared for the Bridge and provides a framework that will guide the
decision-making process of English Heritage, ensuring that their decisions and resulting
actions appropriately conserve the heritage values of the Bridge. It will also inform any
subsequent Management Plan by English Heritage and its partners and support applications
for funding. While the report concentrates on the areas in Guardianship, inappropriate
interventions to areas around the Bridge will have an undue impact on the monument itself, so these are also included.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
9
Section 1 Introduction
1.1. Scope of the Conservation Plan
The Plan concentrates on the Guardianship area as defined in 1975 which covers the Bridge,
the abutments and the 1970s underwater strut that holds the banks apart. The areas which
immediately abut the Bridge do not form part of the Guardianship area and are variously
owned and managed by Telford & Wrekin Council, Severn Gorge Countryside Trust and the
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust. However, they are considered in this Conservation Plan to
allow for efficient management of all the areas and elements and so that the responsible
bodies act in harmony. The wider setting of the surrounding area (the centre of the town of
Ironbridge, the river banks immediately up- and downstream of the structure and the
woodland that creates the backdrop to the Bridge) is also considered.
The Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust (IGMT) was commissioned in 2010 to produce the Plan,
and with consultation from stakeholders that summer and more detailed contributions from
many at English Heritage (EH), Telford & Wrekin Council, IGMT and others, it has been
brought together by David de Haan who has been studying the Bridge for over 30 years, and his colleague Harriet Devlin, both of the Ironbridge Institute.
Fig 1: The area covered by the Conservation Plan, centred on the Iron Bridge, Ironbridge Gorge, Telford,
Shropshire, NGR: SJ 673 034. EH
1.2 Reasons for commissioning the Plan
This Conservation Plan was commissioned by EH in order to:
Inform EH‟s day-to-day maintenance of the Bridge;
Inform the development of proposals for periodic major campaigns of work to the Bridge;
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
10
Look at ways in which EH can work in partnership with other relevant bodies to develop
knowledge of the Bridge and realise its educational potential;
Develop awareness of the Bridge‟s significance and to allow proposals for works or other
developments to be tested against the policies set out in the Plan.
1.3 Approach to the Conservation Plan
In this report the understanding of the history of the Iron Bridge has been informed by a
detailed survey of all sources – archives, contemporary artistic evidence, photography,
engineering reports, and the views of stakeholders. Understanding the significance has been
dependent on the analysis of this material and through comments from visitors over the
centuries, and from current stakeholders, many of them involved in the management of the
monument either currently or in the recent past. The many reports commissioned in the
Bridge‟s long history – and especially those of the past five years – have been consulted to
identify both the conservation and management issues and elements that might affect the significance.
The approach to this Conservation Plan has been principally informed by James Semple
Kerr‟s The Conservation Plan: A Guide to the Preparation of Conservation Plans for Places
of European Cultural Significance (6th Edition, 2004), by EH‟s own Conservation Principles:
Policies and Guidance (2008), and by HLF‟s Conservation Management Planning (2008).
This approach takes on board core conservation principles, including:
The concept of the historic environment as a shared resource, which everyone should be
able to participate in sustaining;
Understanding the significance of places is vital, and that significant places should be
managed to sustain their values;
Sustaining these values is only possible by managing change in a reasonable, transparent and consistent manner, and learning lessons along the way.
Section 1 of the Plan (page 9) identifies the boundaries of the study area, and the aims and
structure of the report. Section 2 (page 12) provides a site description, the local historical
context, a more detailed outline of the site development, the wider historical context,
management information, and gaps in the knowledge. Section 3 (page 44) addresses heritage
values and significance. Section 4 (page 54) deals with issues and opportunities, covering
conservation management, development, presentation, environmental issues, and disaster and risk preparedness. Section 5 (page 61) deals with conservation policies.
The report is supported by:
Appendix 1, page 66: a Gazetteer of elements and sites pertinent to the future management of
the monument
Appendix 2, page 112: the component parts of the Bridge and their names
Appendix 3, page 118: a table of issues and recommended actions
Appendix 4, page 128: an historic map regression
Appendix 5, page 134: an extensive chronology covering archives, artists‟ evidence, historic
photographs and technical reports
Appendix 6, page 194: a probable sequence of erection of the Bridge based on the detailed
evidence
Appendix 7, page 204: visitors‟ descriptions from the 18th
century onwards
Appendix 8, page 208: the responses of over 40 individuals to a consultation
Appendix 9, page 218: a list of the major archives and their location
Appendix 10, page 232: primary sources and bibliography.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
11
1.4 Consultation
In 2010 a public consultation questionnaire (see Appendix 8) was sent out to a wide range of
stakeholders and replies have been incorporated from over 40 individuals and organisations,
including conservation bodies, local authorities, community and business organisations, and
heritage, environmental and historical groups. Follow-up interviews took place with key consultees and specialists.
Organisation / Function Consultee
English Heritage Project Director, West Territory
English Heritage Property Curator, West Territory
English Heritage Inspector of Ancient Monuments, West Midlands Region
English Heritage Head of Visitor Operations, West Midlands Region
English Heritage Visitor Operations Director
English Heritage Technical Manager, West Midlands Region
English Heritage M&E Technical Manager B&CE, West Midlands Region
English Heritage Head of Civil and Structural Engineering
English Heritage Estates Surveyor
English Heritage Historic Areas Advisor
Telford & Wrekin Member of Parliament
Telford & Wrekin Council World Heritage Officer
Telford & Wrekin Council World Heritage Site Co-ordinator (retired)
Telford & Wrekin Council Cabinet Member for Economic Regeneration & Housing
Telford & Wrekin Council Team Leader, Engineering Services
Telford & Wrekin Council Ironbridge Ward Councillor
Telford & Wrekin Council Senior Engineering Ecologist
Telford & Wrekin Council Urban Designer
Gorge Parish Council Chair
Broseley Town Council Chair
Severn Gorge Countryside Trust Manager
Ironbridge & Telford Tourism Chair
Shropshire & Telford Tourism Chair
Shropshire Enterprises Chair, Ironbridge Regeneration Partnership
Broseley Local History Society Chair
Ironbridge Institute Programme Director, Heritage Management
Ironbridge Institute Programme Director, Historic Environment Conservation
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Chief Executive
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Deputy Chief Executive
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Vice President and descendent of the Darby family
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Chairman
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Vice Chairman
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Archaeologist (retired)
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Archaeologist
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Visitor Information Centre Manager
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Librarian & Information Officer
Heritage Lottery Fund West Midland Panel member
Consultant Structural Engineer (ex English Heritage)
Consultant Writer on Industrial and Social History
Consultant Metric Survey and Documentation (ex English Heritage)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
12
Section 2 Understanding the Heritage
Fig 2 (left): Location map of Ironbridge. Google Images. Fig 3 (right): Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site
from the WHS Management Plan, with the area of Fig 4 in red.
Fig 4 (left): GIS map of the Iron Bridge and immediate area. Fig 5 (right): Guardianship boundary from the
1975 document.
2.1 Site Description
The Iron Bridge is located at NGR SJ 673 034 crossing the River Severn between Ironbridge
and Broseley and is situated within the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site. The
designation was inscribed by UNESCO in November 1986, which notes that the Bridge is “a
masterpiece of man‟s creative genius... [which] ...exerted great influence on developments in
the fields of technology and architecture.”
It was designated a Scheduled Ancient Monument in 1934 (SAM 27558, previously SA106),
with the description revised and adopted on 7th
February 1997, and it had been Grade I listed
by 1983. In the early 19th
Century the settlement that grew around it became Ironbridge (one
word) named after the Iron Bridge (two words).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
13
The Bridge was taken into Guardianship on 29th
October 1975, the realisation of a proposal
made on 15th
March four years earlier by the Secretary of State for the Environment in
relation to the work to stabilise the Bridge – by lightening the north abutment, inserting an
underwater strut between the banks, and lightening the road deck asphalt. The previous
owners, Shropshire County Council, had acquired it on 12th
October 1950 from the Bridge
trustees. Ownership has since passed to Telford & Wrekin Council, who acquired it on 31st
March 1998. Guardianship now rests with DCMS, whose duties in this respect are delegated to English Heritage.
Fig 6: The Conservation Plan recognises eight zones or areas marked on the above plan, which correspond to
their ownership. EH
While the Plan concentrates on the Bridge, it recognises that the adjacent zones or areas are of
material consideration (see Gazetteer, Appendix 1). They are briefly described below. Their grouping mostly corresponds to their ownership:
1. The area or Guardianship (EH)
The Guardianship (1) covers the Bridge, its road deck, railings and tollgate, the abutments
and the 1970s underwater strut that holds the banks apart. Running almost due north-
south, there is one main arch of about 30m span in cast iron, comprising five similar ribs,
and with decorative radials, circles and ogees. An inscription on the outer ribs says that
the Bridge was cast at Coalbrookdale and erected in 1779. The road deck is lined with
iron railings which meet at a decorative central roundel, and there is an iron tollgate at the
southern end and a staggered row of iron bollards at the northern end. The north abutment
(Tontine side) is sandstone faced which was sourced from quarries in the immediate
vicinity, and it has an accommodation arch passing through it. There are two side arches
6
3b
3c
3a
5
5
5
1
5 2a 2b 2c
2c 2c
2d
2e
2f
4a
c 4b
8a
2g
7a
8b 8c
7b
3c
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
14
on the south bank, also in cast iron, but with none of the decorative features on the main
arch. They are separated by two slender sandstone piers. Behind the arch furthest from the
river is the truncated abutment which originally mirrored the one on the north bank.
2. Areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council (TWC)
These are on the north bank adjacent to the Guardianship area. The north end of the road
across the Bridge ends in a straight row of iron bollards (2a) near the kerb and next to a
bus stop bay. On one side of this bus stop is a war memorial (2b) and on the other a
viewing area with seating (2c), which has been built on the remains of the Tontine vaults.
Planted banks (2c) on either side of the Bridge slope down from the road with steps
leading to a lower viewing area (2d) which has been built on the remains of the Tontine
stables. A further fight of steps leads from viewing platform down again to the towpath.
A footpath (2e) passes under the accommodation arch, and another footpath passes
through the ironwork of the Bridge (2f) on the towpath. The only land on the south bank owned by TWC is the flight of steps (2g) and the car park (see below, 8a).
3. Areas owned by the Severn Gorge Countryside Trust (SGCT)
These are on the south bank and include all the land abutting and under the Bridge apart
from those identified in 4 and 5 below. This includes the unadopted road of Bower Yard
(3a), the triangle of land within the access roads (3b), and the road on the upstream side of
the Bridge leading down to the riverside properties and passing through the inner land
arch. The river banks (3c) below this road are also owned by SGCT.
4. The Tollhouse and shed owned by Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust (IGMT)
The brick tollhouse is two rooms wide and two storeys above road level, continuing a
further storey below down to ground level (4a). The upper storeys serve as an exhibition
space about the Bridge; the lower storey is an apartment accessed down a flight of brick
steps and through a small garden. The small brick shed on the opposite side of the road
has a sloping roof (4b). The iron tollgate forms the southern boundary of the Guardianship
area and is in the care of EH (1).
5. Adjacent private properties
On the north bank downstream of the Bridge is a group of buildings of which the one
nearest the Bridge is owned by the landmark Trust (with the Museum shop on the ground
floor). On the south bank there are two houses close to the upstream side of the Bridge
and two more on the downstream side. A further group of private buildings are accessed
beyond these on the downstream side, but are considered to be outside the area of this
Plan.
6. The River Severn (Environment Agency)
At most times of the year the river stays within the 30m gap between the piers of the
Bridge, but at flood times it rises considerably and covers the towpath on the north bank and even the road on the south bank.
7. The setting, north
This area covers the wider backdrop of the town of Ironbridge (7a), especially the Tontine
and the Square. It also considers the upstream long view to and from the Rotunda on the top of Lincoln Hill (7b).
8. The setting, south
The car park (8a) is owned by TWC and is on the site of the former Ironbridge & Broseley
railway station and sidings. On the approach roads are private properties along Bower
Yard, Ironbridge Road and Bridge Road (8b). The woodland on the banks above the Bridge form the SSSI areas of Benthall Edge, Workhouse Coppice and Ladywood (8c).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
15
2.2 Local historical context
The area is rich in minerals – coal, iron ore, limestone and clay – laid down in the
Carboniferous era some 50 million years ago, forming what became known as the Shropshire
Coalfield. Over time some of these layers have been brought near to the surface by the
buckling of the strata, and the area is riddled with fault lines. In the last Ice Age the ice cap
approached to within a few miles of the area, blocking the northwards flow of the River
Severn from the Welsh mountains to its original outlet to the sea near Chester. Fifteen
thousand years ago as the ice melted a large lake was formed, blocked to the north by the
receding ice, and to the south by a ridge of hills, Wenlock Edge. The water found a weakness
in a fault in this ridge and drained southwards, cutting a new channel that became the Gorge.
With the previously buried layers of minerals exposed on the valley sides and a transport
route at the bottom, the valley saw the early exploitation of the minerals and their export by
river. Limestone has been extracted in early medieval times, coal mined since the 1330s and
iron smelted since the 1530s. In the 17th
Century the Severn was the second busiest river in
Europe after the Rhine, but although enormous trade was carried up and down the Severn,
crossing it remained hazardous. Routes along the banks were no better than tracks and there was no towpath until 1800.
The hillsides of the Gorge were heavily wooded and were coppiced to provide the source of
charcoal for the furnace industries. Artists‟ evidence show that even at its industrial peak
around 1800 the woods remained a key feature, with only the 100m on either side of the river
banks given over to buildings. Until the development of coke as an alternative fuel the
furnaces and forges were small and scattered, but once the dependency on large areas of
woodland was removed the furnaces could be built close together and productivity rose exponentially.
Easy access to all the raw materials of iron-making, water power to drive bellows and
hammers, plus a river to transport the products to market – these factors had made the Severn
Gorge industrialised by the early 17th
century, long before other parts of the country. When
the Quaker ironmaster Abraham Darby I introduced coke to smelt iron in 1709, the floodgates
were opened for a century of innovation. Three successive generations were involved at the
start, the eldest son always being called Abraham. Each of them pioneered new products in
cast iron – including steam engine cylinders, rails and wheels – setting in train an era of development we have come to call the Industrial Revolution.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
16
2.3 Historical development of the Bridge and timeline
It was Abraham Darby III (1750-89) who led the project to build a bridge in iron. The idea
came from Shrewsbury architect Thomas Pritchard which he had put to the ironmaster John
Wilkinson, who in turn spurred Darby on to make it happen. It was a private venture so shares
were raised to pay for the Bridge, but in the event they only covered half the cost and Abraham made good the rest out of his own pocket.
An Act of Parliament to build a bridge was passed in 1776 and included the rates for tolls,
which remained unchanged until the Bridge closed to vehicles in 1934 and to pedestrians in
1950. It did not stipulate that the Bridge had to be of iron, though Pritchard had suggested this
material to John Wilkinson in 1773. Pritchard died in December 1777 and the resulting
structure owes more to Abraham Darby and his foreman patternmaker Thomas Gregory.
However, the proportions and shape of the Iron Bridge closely resemble one of Pritchard‟s stone bridges of 1772.
The main structural elements were probably cast at the nearest furnace – Bedlam – a belief
that stems from the need to raise the castings from boats below, and tested in a half scale
model in 2001. Three different furnaces provided the pig iron, much of it re-melted at
Bedlam. The smaller decorative castings (radials, circles, ogees, swan-neck brackets for the
railings) came from three different furnaces – The Old Furnace in Coalbrookdale a mile away,
Lightmoor Furnace two miles away, and Bedlam Furnaces a quarter of a mile downstream
from the Bridge site. All were either owned or leased by Abraham Darby. His Old Furnace
was enlarged in 1777, but it would have been very difficult to bring the large castings down
the valley from there on the unmade road. The ten largest weigh 5.8 tonnes each and when
laid flat would measure 21.3m long by 4.5m across at the widest point of the curve. Ten more
castings weigh around 5 tonnes and another twenty weigh around 3 tonnes each. It is likely a
temporary furnace was built on the land now occupied by the Square to make small one-off castings as required.
Fig 7: The location of the three furnaces used for casting the pig iron, with Bedlam used for re-melting the iron
into the larger castings for the Bridge. Map, after Raistrick 1953
LIGHTMOOR
FURNACE
BEDLAM
FURNACES
OLD FURNACE, COALBROOKDALE
BRIDGE SITE
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
17
By the time the Bridge was built the area now known as the Ironbridge Gorge was called
Coalbrookdale, and with raw materials and workers on both banks the need for a safe crossing
became increasingly important. There was a medieval bridge two miles upstream at Buildwas
and six ferries within the Gorge, but the Severn can be treacherous when swollen with flood
water so the ferries were not always safe. One of the ferries was owned by Abraham Darby,
linking the wagon roads of Broseley on the south side with Madeley Wood on the north, and
it was this site that he chose for the Bridge. Ironbridge as a settlement did not exist, but many
of the Bridge Proprietors funded the development of the Tontine Hotel and the Square, and
long distance coaching routes were diverted to cross the Bridge so tourism was inherent in the
project from the outset. Industrial spies, artists and writers came to see this incredible place,
where the skies were alight day and night with the glow of furnaces. The name Coalbrook
Dale (in two words) was cast on the Bridge so from the moment the first rib was erected it acted as an advertisement. See map regression, Appendix 4.
For a fuller account, see The Iron Bridge by Neil Cossons and Barrie Trinder, 1979; the
revised edition of 2002 also considers the global consequences. Another key source is The
Iron Bridge: Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis, 2001 by David de Haan.
Timeline
The following section presents an overview of the known chronology of the Bridge, together
with an analysis of any gaps in our understanding and potential areas for future research. For
the purposes of this report, the historical development of the Bridge has been divided into ten
Phases. These are based on a combination of archaeological, historical and documentary
evidence, and represent periods of change or activity ranging from 7 to 57 years. The changes
between phases may be associated with main structural events, such as the beginning of Phase
2 with the construction of wooden land arches, or the beginning of Phase 3 with the erection
of iron land arches; other phases relate to changes in ownership or management, such as the
Scheduling of the Bridge in 1934 which marks the beginning of Phase 6, or the beginning of
Phase 7 with the transfer of ownership to Shropshire County Council. Comprehensive supplementary details are to be found in Appendix 5.
Fig 8: The named parts of the Bridge are shown above and are covered in more detail in Appendix 2. Author
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
18
2.3.1 Phase 1. 1779-1800
1779: Single free-standing cast iron arch with masonry abutments added the same year.
1783: Tollhouse added.
1792-9: Cracks to the abutments repaired.
Although the erection of the ironwork of the Bridge itself took place in 1779, there were
several years of preparation and planning before this. The first discussions took place in the
early 1770s, and the first design was drawn up in 1775 (Fig 9, below) by Shrewsbury architect
Thomas Farnolls Pritchard. 1 As Pritchard died in December 1777 the detailed design of the
ironwork of the Bridge actually owes more to the Quaker ironmaster Abraham Darby III and
his foreman patternmaker Thomas Gregory, but the general arrangement closely resembles
Pritchard‟s 1772 Bringewood Forge Bridge near Ludlow (Fig 10).
Fig 9 (left): Prichard‟s design of 1775. IGMT. Fig 10 (right): Pritchard‟s Bringewood Forge Bridge of 1772, the
general arrangement and proportions of which were used for the Iron Bridge. ICE.
Darby took a lease on Bedlam Furnace in 1776 and the Old Furnace at Coalbrookdale was
enlarged in 1777, so there was capacity to cast the iron. Site work began in 1777 and the footings for the new bridge had been built up to base plate level by October 1778.
The Bridge was erected in three months during
the summer of 1779, the ironwork being
essentially a free-standing structure anchored
into, but not braced by the abutments. This is
most clearly shown on the watercolour sketch
(Fig 11) by Elias Martin, looking upstream,
undated but evidently painted in July 1779, as
the first arch went up on 1st and 2
nd July.
2
Fig 11: Elias Martin‟s watercolour of July 1779. Scandia Company, Stockholm
The painting shows a flimsy scaffold
downstream of the ironwork, with three of the
five ribs in place, the inner verticals, and a few timber struts to keep the castings in their
relative positions. Most importantly, there is no sign of the abutments above the base plates at this stage. This is still the only known image of the Bridge under construction.
3
The uprights were built perpendicular on the Tontine (north) side of the river, but on the
Broseley (south) side they settled at an angle. The rest of the abutments and the road
connections took longer to complete so the Bridge was not opened to traffic until New Years‟
Day in 1781.
1 IGMT 1986.8609
2 Shrewsbury Chronicle, 10
th July 1779
3 Skandia Company Collection, Stockholm.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
19
A woodcut by J. Edmunds of Madeley of 1780 (Fig 12, below), shows the lowest section of
the outer ribs missing, 4 also recorded in an aquatint by E. Edgcombe, published 1
st May
1782. 5 Abraham Darby commissioned William Williams to produce an oil painting of the
Bridge in 1780. 6 This was conceived as a promotional image (Fig 13), and was issued as an
engraving by Michael Angelo Rooker in 1782 together with an engineering drawing. It shows
the Bridge already in use and the missing rib sections in place, although in fact these were not added until 1791.
7
Fig 12 (left): Woodcut by J. Edmunds with the lower ends of the outer ribs missing, 1780. IGMT
Fig 13 (right): Oil painting by William Williams, 1780. IGMT.
The Toll House was not built until 1783. In December 1784 cracks were recorded on the
south abutment and the trustees “ordered that the Cracks in the Arch on the Benthall Side be
gaged and examined if it goes any worse.” 8 This was presumably the accommodation arch
that was within the south abutment. These cracks continued to worsen, but it was not until 1798 that tie bars were added to both abutments to remedy the problem.
In 1786 the trustees “...ordered that Lamps be put up ... Two on the Centre of the Bridge...” 9
Earlier paintings and prints already show two lamps, but this is assumed to be artistic licence.
Photographs only ever show a single lamp, and on the upstream parapet
In 1787 the iron railings were painted a “deep Lead Colour”, 10
the first evidence of the
Bridge being painted. In the same year a mahogany model of the Bridge, 1/24 scale, was
presented to the Royal Society of Arts. The model is now in the collection of the Science
Museum. 11
It is interesting that it shows the Bridge with the completed ribs despite the fact
they had not yet been built (see below). This suggests it was made from the engineering drawing of 1782.
12
In 1791 the missing lowest sections of the outer ribs were added, finally completing the
Bridge to its original specification, when the trustees “ordered that the Ironwork at the Bridge
be improved by finishing out the back Iron Ribs to support the Crosspieces and strengthen the
Bridge.” 13
There are 10 castings, one for each of the five frames on each quadrant, and they
4 IGMT 1981.20
5 British Library, Map Library, Kings Topography. BL/ML.KT.36/26d
6 IGMT 1992.12918
7 Abraham Darby‟s cash book 1771-81 (IGMT 1993.3374); IGMT 1992.12918
8 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 3rd December 1784, SRO.3689-98
9 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th December 1786, SRO.3689-98
10 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th June 1787, SRO.3689-98
11 Science Museum, Photo 31936
12 IGMT 1984.6134.1
13 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 3rd June 1791, SRO.3689-98
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
20
are the only hollow castings on the Bridge. 14
Two other views had been published before
1791, based on the 1782 Rooker engraving and its accompanying engineering drawing, and
both incorrectly showing theses missing ribs in place (Thomas Frederick Burney of 1784, and J Baker of c1795).
From 1792 to 1799 a series of repairs were undertaken to the abutments, starting with the
south abutment in December 1792. 15
Further repairs were ordered in 1798, both to “the
Abutments of Bridge & Ironwork”. 16
Theses included iron tie bars through the abutments,
which were noted by Simon Goodrich on 8th
December 1799, 17
and by the Swedish industrialist Svedenstierna, who visited in 1802-3.
18
2.3.2 Phase 2. 1801-1820
1802: The south abutment demolished and replaced by two timber arches.
The abutment on the south side continued to cause problems and it was decided to remove it
and build two land arches in its place. In December 1800 the trustees ordered 2,000 ft of
3-inch oak planks for a temporary bridge to be erected once the south abutment had been
demolished, 19
which was started the following March. The contractor, Mr Thomas Thomas,
removed the whole of the south abutment from the outer vertical right back to a line with the
far wall of the accommodation arch.
In early May 1801 the Trustees urgently investigated a scheme proposed by Henry Williams
to hold the abutments apart by an underwater strut of timber, but rejected it a week later on
12th May, when they ordered “40 Tons of Good Tim
r.”
20 This was in addition to the 2,000 ft
of oak planks ordered in December the previous year. They also ordered substantial
foundations to be made in order to turn the back wall of the accommodation arch into the new
end of the south abutment. On 11th
July 1802 Paul Sandby Munn drew the Bridge (Fig 14)
while the south abutment was being demolished. 21
The temporary wooden way can be seen
on the left of the sketch; this was before the stone piers were built and more substantial timber installed in 1803.
Fig 14: Demolition of the south abutment in progress, Paul Sandby Munn‟s sketch of 11th
July 1802.
Victoria & Albert Museum
14
Ultrasound test undertaken for the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, 1st July 1996
15 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 7th December 1792, SRO.3689-98
16 Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th June 1798, SRO.3689-98
17 Science Museum: Goodrich Collection.
18 Svedenstierna (trans. Dellow) 1973, 71
19 Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828, December 5th 1800, SRO.6001.3697
20 Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697
21 Victoria & Albert Museum, E3112/1948
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
21
A „temporary‟ wrought iron brace was added above the upper cross stay, though it was never
removed and can still be seen today. In August 1803 the trustees ordered that two piers be
built as quickly as possible and the temporary wooden bridge over the gap be secured, though
the work was not finished until the summer of 1804 (Fig 15). The wooden deck of the new
side arches was covered with 6 inches of clay topped with ashes, while the rest of the timber
was coated with coal tar. Once the job was completed, the spare timber was sold off at auction
on 17th
August 1804. 22
The timber had been supplied by the Coalbrookdale Company, who also supplied “2 Lots [of] Slabs”, which were iron plates to cap the inner pier.
Fig 15: Lithograph by W Smith showing the timber land arches, 1810. Shropshire County Libraries.
The ironwork of the Bridge must have already been noticeably out of plumb (built that way
rather than the result of movement), but the masonry of the new inner pier was built vertical,
requiring considerable cutting of the upper stonework to minimise the effect. The difference
was halved, with the upper portions of the ironwork being recessed into the stone blocks and
the lower parts standing proud, as they are to this day.
On 3rd
June 1808 the Trustees ordered a new oak tollgate and posts 23
, which lasted until
1852. In 1812 they ordered “that a Table of Tolls be put up at the Iron Bridge gate.” 24
The
painted cast iron tollboard listed the charges set out in the original 1776 Act of Parliament and
remained in place until 1950, until being re-sited in its original location in 1974 when the Tollhouse was restored. In the early 1980s it was moved inside the Tollhouse.
25
2.3.3 Phase 3. 1821-1844
1821-3: The timber arches replaced with cast iron arches.
1835-6: Tollhouse enlarged.
c1836: Block of buildings erected on the upstream side of the north abutment.
The wooden land arches had only been intended as a temporary measure, and in April 1819
the Coalbrookdale Company provided an estimate for replacing the timber side arches with
cast iron. However, their price was higher than expected and the work was not approved until December 1820. Work began in the summer of 1821, and was completed when the new iron
22
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697 23
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828. SRO.6001.3697 24
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828. December 4th
1812, SRO.6001.3697 25
IGMT 1981.1881
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
22
arches were painted in 1823. 26
Though restricted to half the width of the carriageway, the
Bridge had remained open to traffic throughout the work.”27
The survey of 1999-2000 noted
columns of small stones next to the ironwork in the upper levels, which is the infill of the spaces left by the removal of the wider timber struts.
On 17th
July 1835 the Trustees of the Iron Bridge ordered that the Tollhouse should be
enlarged, doubling its length and adding an extra storey. The work was completed by June
1836. 28
A substantial group of buildings was also in place by 1837 at the northern end of the
Bridge. A watercolour (Fig 16, below) looking downstream from the Wharfage shows these
buildings. 29
The removal of this block in 1946 resulted in a series of changes to the walls by
using different materials, which were later altered again to improve the setting.
Fig 16: The block of buildings on the north end of the Bridge and the iron land arches, 1837.
Watercolour by J Fidlor (attrib). IGMT
On 6th
December 1839 the Trustees ordered that gas lamps be added to the Bridge, one on
either side of the toll gate and one on the centre of the upstream parapet. Apart from paintings
and engravings done before 1800, there are no images showing lamps on the Bridge before
1856. 30
These early views may all have copied the lamp from the 1782 engineering drawing 31
, which had included lamps because their cost was allowed for in the original estimate of
1775, though it was not until 1786 that the records first include the instruction to install two
lamps at the crown of the Bridge. In the 1839 order there is no mention of a lamp on the
downstream parapet, nor any later photographic evidence of there ever having been a lamp on
this side. However, the overhanging deck plates at the crown were made with a hole for a lamp support. Gas bills appeared in the Bridge account books from 1841 at six-monthly
26
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1800-1828. SRO.6001.3697 27
Transactions of the Newcomen Society, VI (1925-6), 3 28
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698 29
IGMT 1978.73 30
see below IGMT.SSMT/36 for 1856 31
IGMT SS/MT.43
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
23
intervals, starting at £4/10/0. 32
A photograph of c.1900 confirms there was a gas lamp at the crown of the Bridge, on the upstream parapet.
33
2.3.4 Phase 4. 1845-1901
1845, 1861 and 1879: Repairs to the two iron land arches.
1880: Girders added to the inner land arch.
By 1890: Tilting of the inner uprights on the north side and deck bearers no longer in a
straight line, changing angle above the inner uprights.
Phase 4 is characterised by further substantial repairs to the iron land arches, and some minor
repairs to the main arch itself. Particularly during the later part of this Phase there is good
photographic evidence. There is also increasing evidence of movement and other changes to the structure.
The Trustees‟ Minute Book for 5th
December 1845 reports that “... considerable repairs have
been needed to the Land Arches which have been done by the Coalbrookdale Company, the
Surveyor be ordered to pay the amount of their a/c £95/17/2.” This must have been for the
first series of the many bolted-on plates. 34
Almost exactly a year later, a further bill from the
Coalbrookdale Company was settled at £9/16/5 “for repairing the Bridge”. The exact work is
unspecified, but will have been for ironwork. 35
In 1852 new wooden tollgates and posts were installed at a cost of £11/3/0,
36 this tollgate surviving until at least 1896.
On April 19th
1861 the Trustees agreed to further repairs to the land arches “provided the
estimate cost thereof do not exceed the sum of £100.” 37
This involved the addition of further
plates, plus the horizontal spacers between the ribs on the inner land arch (Fig 17, below left).
Repairs to the land arches were undertaken again in 1879, during which plates were cut to fit around the horizontal spacers inserted in the 1860s.
Fig 17: Strengthening plates and spacers added to the inner land arch in 1861.
Fig 18: One of the 1880 I-beam girders inserted between the ribs of the inner land arch.
In 1880 further repairs were made, comprising the addition of girders to the inner land arch
(Fig 18, above). Four girders were provided and installed by the Coalbrookdale Company,
one between each of the ribs of the inner land arch, for £125/10/-. The ironwork comprised “4 Cast Iron Girders 32ft long; 2 cast Iron distance Pieces; 22 Heads for Railings; 3 Brackets,
32
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698 33
IGMT 1981.1569 34
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698 35
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698 36
Bridge Proprietors Minute Book, 1841-1861, SRO.6001.3694 37
Bridge Trustees‟ Minute Book, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
24
1 cast Iron Plate; also wrought iron Plates; glands, Cramps ties; Railings, Brass and lead for
fixing the whole; Delivered and fixed in position.” 38
Messrs Nevitts undertook the associated
work repairing and replacing masonry as necessary for a further £126/15/3. An engineer‟s
report of 1923 by Mott, Hay & Anderson refers to these large beams being 1ft 9in at the
centre and 1ft 6in at their ends. 39
This was confirmed by survey in 1999-2000, which showed
that the bottom of each beam is straight, while the top is curved, accounting for the difference
in the dimensions. The profile must have followed the arching of the road deck, though
buckling has continued as the beams no longer come into direct contact with the deck plates.
Each beam is individually identified using a numeral cast on to the vertical face; these run
from 1 to 4, starting from the downstream end, unlike the ribs of the main arch which by convention are described as running from A to E starting from upstream.
1880s and 1890s photographs confirm the slight buckling of the road deck over the inner land
arch, 40
the tilting back of the outer verticals of the main arch on the south quadrant, and the
fractured base plate on the south side between frames D and E (for example in the Francis
Frith photograph No.13017, taken before 1886). By 1895 one could see in photographs that
land instability on the Tontine side was thrusting against the centre of the abutment, causing
the inner verticals to snap just above the upper horizontal cross stays. This in turn caused the
main deck bearers to fracture at the top of the inner verticals resulting in a slight buckle of the
previously straight beams. 41
Many of the decorative radials were also fractured by this thrust, but only on the north quadrant.
An earthquake on 17th
December 1896 allowed trapped tension to be released and the base
plates dipped, possibly due to compacting strata. As a result the deck beams above the inner
verticals have a more pronounced kink than before and the upper sections of the verticals
begin to lean back. This can be seen in photographs of 1897, one of which (Fig 19) clearly shows that the deck beams are no longer in a straight line.
42
Fig 19: Early evidence of the deck beams buckling above the inner vertical, 1897. The arrows locate the change
of angle. IGMT.1981.53
38
Expenditure for the repair of the Iron Bridge, 1861-1881, SRO.6001.3695 39
IGMT 1991.2606 40
IGMT 1982.2199 41
IGMT.1986.11909 42
IGMT.1981.53
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
25
2.3.5 Phase 5. 1902-1933
1902: Water main installed next to the downstream railing; deck end repairs, and lower
horizontal and diagonal straps added to the main arch.
1923: Footpaths installed on the road deck to limit large vehicles passing.
1926-7: Brackets added to the top of the inner verticals, extra straps applied to the
horizontal braces on the lower ribs, 12 brackets added and two ogee brackets replaced.
This phase involved an intensive series of sometimes
quite substantial repairs to the main arch, as well as the installation of services across the Bridge.
In 1902 a large rectangular water main was installed
running across the Bridge on the downstream footpath
(Fig 20, left). Soon after, on Sunday 24th
August, about
30ft of palisading on the downstream side of the north
quadrant fell into the river, taking many of the deck
plate ends with it, probably caused by vibrations during
the laying of a water main. 43
An earthquake in 1896 may also have been a contributing factor.
Fig 20. The riveted water main on the downstream footpath seen
here in 1962, which wasn‟t removed until 1972. IGMT
In a detail of a much wider view, temporary wooden fencing can be seen during the repairs of
1902 (Fig 21, below). 44
The damaged deck plates were repaired with new ends that could be
bolted on (Fig 22). Several other ends were repaired at the same time, all identifiable by three bolts underneath each repaired deck plate just inside frames E and A.
Fig 21 (left): Repairs in progress, 1902. Wooden planks extend outside the Bridge and a temporary fence can be
seen against the far railing. IGMT.1978.6322. Fig 22 (right): Drawing of bolt-on ends for damaged deck plates,
1902. IGMT.1972.13 (detail)
43
Wellington Journal, 30th August 1902 44
IGMT.1986.6322
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
26
As a result of a report by Sir Benjamin Baker submitted on 8th
October 1902, the
Coalbrookdale Company made the new ends for the damaged deck plates, fitted straps above
the base plates, and also sleeving for the diagonal brace. 45
No copy of Baker‟s report has yet
been found, but engineering drawings of the repairs survive in the IGMT archives and have
been identified with the historic fabric, such as the one above showing the deck-end repair,
and (Figs 23 and 24 below) showing the massive horizontal straps installed near the base plates. The outer straps are of steel retaining cast iron spacer blocks.
Fig 23 (left): Coalbrookdale Company engineering drawing for straps and spacers, 1902. IGMT.1972.12
Fig 24 (right): The straps still in situ in 2010. Author
The old gas lamp and bracket on the Tollhouse were replaced in 1921 by a new one, and that
same year the wooden gate was replaced with the iron one that survives today. Raised kerbs
were installed for the first time in 1923. This followed an engineering survey in March that
year by Basil Mott, which advised that “there was some risk in using the bridge for vehicular
traffic”. 46
As a result the roadway width was reduced to 14ft by the insertion of two 5ft-wide
footpaths on either side. Later photographs confirm that the footpath on the downstream side
was laid around the existing water main, thus partly burying it. The report says there was a
gas main within the road deck alongside the water main. This must have been a second gas
main, as the gas lamp on the upstream balustrade had a supply which was installed soon after
December 1839. The 1923 report also provides a great deal of information about the survival of the 1902 repairs and ongoing issues with the stability of the abutments.
A proposal of 27th
August 1923 to the Bridge Trustees from Stuart Thompson of
Peterborough suggested “a thorough consolidation of the piers [i.e. abutments] by driving
liquid cement grout under pressure into the core of the piers”. Thompson identified the north
abutment as being the most urgent. Borehole tests drilled horizontally into the south abutment
in November 1999 confirmed the existence of cement, though there is no evidence in the archives that the 1923 recommendation was carried out.
47
The newly-formed Newcomen Society visited the Bridge on Thursday 19th
June 1924 and
“great anxiety was expressed for the fate of the bridge when it was learnt that it had been proposed to pull it down and replace it by a modern structure in reinforced concrete.”
48
45
IGMT.1972.11, 13 and 15, Coalbrookdale Company order No 4388 46
Basil Mott (Mott, Hay & Anderson), 19th March 1923. IGMT.1991.2606 (page 12) 47
Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701 48
Transactions of the Newcomen Society, IV (1923-4), 110
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
27
In 1926-7, brackets were added to the top of the inner verticals (Fig 25), extra straps were
added to the horizontal braces on the lower ribs, and two ogee brackets were replaced. This
followed a report by Luther Griffiths who also discovered “at least ninety fractures …
excluding those that had been repaired previously.” 49
Though the road deck had been
narrowed by the insertion of footpaths, the increasing weight of motor traffic on the Bridge
required the fractured deck beams to be reinforced with bolted-on cast-iron saddles in 1927.
A collection of reports and engineering drawings by the Brymbo Steel Company (at this time
part of the Coalbrookdale Company) in the Shropshire Archives cover repairs which were
carried out over the winter of 1926-7 and completed by mid-January. The content of these
drawings 50
is as follows:
a. 11th August 1926, showing new steel straps to be added just above each of the upper
horizontal straps of the main arch. Made in two halves and joined at the centre by a bolt,
the drawing notes that six sets were required. They were supplied by Wright‟s Forge in
Tipton and were erected 6th
to 9th
October 1926 by two men from Brymbo, Wrexham.
b. Also 11th
August 1926, showing a simple pair of plates to be joined by two 14½” bolts for
the upstream diagonal on the south quadrant, and also a detail for a new bolt at the top of the diagonals of the north quadrant. These were fixed on site by Messrs J E Green.
c. 28th January 1927, showing a light-weight replacement for two of the ogee brackets, to be
made in wrought iron. The flat bar has a cross section of 5” x ¾” instead of the original
section of 5” x 2¾” cast iron. This proved to be too thin and they have since buckled. The
brackets, bolts and clamps were made at Brymbo, and erected between 3rd
and 15th
January 1927.
d. 8th November 1926, showing cast iron seating cleats or brackets for the tops of the inner
verticals (see Fig 25, below). The instruction is for 10 pairs, with 60 hexagonal bolts to fix
them. Griffiths also suggested that “struts of 4” x 4” oak be fixed between the main
girders and resting on the brackets recently put in, to prevent any movement of the girders
sideways.” These timbers can still be seen at the level of the brackets. The order also includes a sketch for a clamp to fix the circles to be “put in 12 positions”.
Fig 25 (left): Cast iron brackets inserted in 1926. Fig 26 (right): A bolt that was identified as missing in 1926
is still missing today. Author 2000
49
Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701 50
Included with SRO.6001.3701
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
28
In a letter of 12th
October 1926 Luther Griffiths noted that the upper bolt (Fig 26 above,
arrowed) from the crown joint of frame C was missing. Griffiths also recorded that the inner
verticals were out of plumb: “... the downstream column „town end‟ is 11” out of plumb; the
upstream column 7½”; the downstream column „station‟ end 6”, and the upstream column 7”.
This suggests there is a thrust from both sides of the River, and also settlement on the „town‟
side.” 51
The upstream columns were measured again in 1948 and 1980, and showed this
tendency was continuing – the town side in 1948 was 9½” and had increased to 11¾” by 1980; the station side had reduced to 6½” in 1948, and further still to 5¼” in 1980.
52
Between April 1927 and March 1934, the span of the Bridge was measured at approximately
6-month intervals. This was undertaken by Luther Griffiths, who made seven measurements
showing a shrinking over that time of the upstream span by ½”, and by ¼” to the downstream
span.” 53
In 1932 one of the diagonal members (south quadrant, downstream half and low
down) broke away from the vertical, although this was not a new fracture. 54
2.3.6 Phase 6. 1934-1949
1934: The Bridge designated an Ancient Monument and closed to vehicular traffic.
1937: Repairs to the ogee bottoms carried out.
1946: By February the lamp bracket on the upstream parapet had gone. Buildings on the
north end of the Bridge demolished in May in preparation for a replacement bridge.
This phase covers the Bridge being closed to vehicular traffic in 1934 and designated as a
Scheduled Ancient Monument (SA106), though pedestrian tolls continued until 1950. A
replacement bridge was proposed in 1937 to run alongside the original and associated
boreholes were drilled, but the war intervened and apart from the demolition of the buildings
on the north bank in 1946 nothing came of this proposal.
In 1937 repairs were carried out to the ogee bottoms. 55
These included the addition of various straps that have been added near the circles and at the bottom of the ogees.
By February 1946 the lamp bracket on the upstream parapet had gone. 56
In May that year the
buildings on the north end of the Bridge were demolished. This was intended to make way for
a new bridge, “plans for which had to be shelved on account of the war.” 57
The plan for the
new bridge shows it starting from the land occupied by the buildings next to the north
abutment and crossing at an angle so the south end meets the road just south of the Tollhouse.
This would have required the demolition of the Tollhouse and of the property below the
Tollhouse known as Station House or 67 Bower Yard, the latter being purchased by
Shropshire County Council on 10th
June 1947. 58
An aerial photograph of 1949 59
shows the
bare plot of land where the Chemist and other buildings were demolished in May 1946
(arrowed in Fig 27, overleaf). The two masonry arches of the Tontine vaults within this area cannot be seen. From later rebuilding work it seems the stones were simply left and buried.
51
Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701 52
IGMT Archives, DOE 1980, and IGMT.1981.119 53
Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701; correspondence 8th
and 16th
May
1931 54
Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701; correspondence 19th April 1932
55 IGMT.1980.447
56 IGMT.1982.2209
57 Wellington Journal, 18
th May 1946
58 SRO.4437.10
59 Aerofilms photograph No.A24217, IGMT.1993.7888
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
29
Boreholes were taken in 1947 as part of the new bridge proposals, 60
and in 1948 Shropshire County Council began to take yearly measurements of the span.
61
Fig 27: A 1949 photograph confirms the demolition of the buildings on the end of the Bridge. Aerofilms
2.3.7 Phase 7. 1950-1971
1950: Bridge repainted prior to ownership passing from the Trustees to Shropshire County
Council. Pedestrian tolls removed October.
1966: Report suggesting instability.
On 12th
October 1950 the trustees handed over the Bridge to Shropshire County Council and
it became free to pedestrians. A manuscript note in the Shropshire Archives, not dated, says
“In a reply to British Iron & Steel Research Association, 25 Feb 53, GCC writes: Ironbridge
last painted 1950. 3 coats of bituminous paint, each of a different shade finish with black.”
Plus a footnote: “Other correspondence from Davey refers to Red Lead, supplied by ICI;
Undercoat Melanoid Heavy Brown; Final Melanoid No 1 Black.” 62
A measured drawing (undated but filed between other items dated 26th
April and 21st May
1962, so assumed to be from that year) is annotated “at midspan deck is 5¾” lower at the
upstream side / at the two quarter spans the deck is almost balanced from parapet to
parapet”. 63
In January 1968 boreholes were undertaken by the
Cementation Company for Shropshire County Council.
Borehole A was made on 12th
January from the back of
the north abutment starting from road level. Borehole B
was made on 18th
January from deck level, through the
frames and then through the base plate of the north
abutment 40ft below (which accounts for the circular
hole in the deck plate, seen at the top of Fig 28).
Borehole C was made on 23rd
January from deck level
down through the south abutment.
Fig 28: The hole in the deck plate for Borehole B, seen looking up from the towpath. Author, 2010
60
SRO.4437.9-10 61
Blackwell 1985, 102 62
SRO.4437.9 63
SRO.4437.9
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
30
The results from boreholes B and C showed “that the abutments consist mainly of sandstone
boulders with concrete infilling. The proportions of rock and concrete vary, but the cores
indicate that the sandstone boulders are the major constituent.” 64
A report by J. A. Williams in October 1969 noted the effect of the “inward squeezing of the
abutments” and recommended lightening the north abutment and anchoring each of the
abutments to the underlying rock by stressed cables. The alternative solution of using a
reinforced concrete underwater strut was explored but at the time dismissed as being less
effective and more expensive than the cables. In the event, the lightening of the north
abutment and the construction of the underwater strut was approved on 15th
March 1971 in a
letter from Julian Amery, Minister for Housing and Construction, with the agreement that on
completion of the repairs the Bridge would be taken into the Department of the
Environment‟s care. The Tollhouse was purchased by the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust for
a nominal sum from Shropshire County Council and opened for sale of souvenirs.
2.3.8 Phase 8. 1972-1979
1972: Laying of new services within the footpaths; lightening the north abutment.
Photogrammetric survey.
1973: South half of the reinforced concrete strut cast below the water line.
1974. North half of the strut cast below the water line; Tollhouse restored.
1975. Tollhouse re-opened; Bridge road deck material renewed, selected masonry blocks
replaced and the stonework re-pointed.
In the late 1960s it had been recognised that the Bridge was close to collapse as the banks
were being pushed ever closer to each other. The agreed solution was to hold the abutments
apart by the insertion of a reinforced concrete strut below the water, with work beginning in
1972. Some of the work was done by Shropshire County Council‟s own labour but the below-
water work was done by Tarmac Construction Ltd. The north abutment was first emptied of
its rubble infill and strengthened with a hollow concrete box. In 1973 and 1974 the
underwater strut was cast in coffer dams, a third at a time, and a concrete facing rose up to
within a metre of the base plates. A BBC film recorded much of this work. 65
The Tollhouse
was used as an information point about the works. The final stage, in 1975, was to strip off
the asphalt road material down to the iron deck plates and replace it with a lighter material.
On completion in November 1975 the Bridge was taken into guardianship by the Directorate
of Ancient Monuments & Historic Buildings, precursors of English Heritage.
In April 1972 Shropshire County Council began Stage 1 of the repairs, burying water, gas
electricity and telephone services within the footpaths, and excavating the fill out of the north
abutment to reduce the pressures on the ironwork (Fig 30, overleaf). The accommodation arch
was repaired and strengthened (Figs 29 and 32, overleaf). The larger space between this arch
and the towpath face of the abutment was emptied of its rubble fill and reinforced with a
hollow concrete box to reduce the pressures on the ironwork (Fig 31, overleaf). This stage
was completed by mid October. A ladder was fixed inside, though the manhole providing
access has not been located despite a „cat scan‟ by Ironbridge Archaeology in January 2000.
In September 1972 the Department of the Environment commissioned Plowman Craven of
Harpenden to take photogrammetry images and generate a drawing of the upstream elevation
from them. No other drawings are known to have come from this survey, though the
photographs survive in IGMT‟s archives.
64
SRO.4437.9 65
IGMT Archives 1995.661
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
31
Fig 29 (top left): A large crack revealed in the accommodation arch, April. Fig 30 (top right): Excavation of the
north abutment, May. Fig 31 (bottom left): the concrete box filling the void, June. Fig 32 (bottom right): Tying
the ashlar to the reinforcement with stainless steel rods, April. G Weaver 1972
Under Stage 2 a reinforced concrete strut was cast about 4.5m (15ft) below water level,
beginning with the southern side in 1973. The centre of the strut was pinned to bedrock with
stressed anchor rods that penetrated a further 13.5m (45ft). 66
The work was done over two
summer seasons from within separate coffer dams – one each year, the metal sheet piling
being cut off at the base once the work was completed. The scheme was designed by
consultants Sandford, Fawcett, Wilton & Bell and executed by Tarmac Construction Ltd.
Contractor‟s photographs (Figs 33 to 35 below) show the southern half in June, August and
November 1973. 67
Fig 33 (left): The coffer dam looking out from the south bank, June 1973. Fig 34 (centre): Additional bracing
inside by the south abutment, August 1973. Fig 35 (right): As well as the horizontal strut 4.5m below the base
plates, a concrete facing rose up the abutments stopping four courses from the top, November 1973. Tarmac
Construction
66
SRO.4437/11 67
IGMT.1987.598, 596 and 593
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
32
The remaining section of the reinforced concrete strut was fabricated across the north half of
the river bed, beginning in April and being completed in late August 1974. A number of
railings were found in the river bed – the ones that had fallen off in 1902 – as well as the
broken-off deck plate ends, one of which was presented to the Ironbridge Gorge Museum. At
the author‟s request a sample was cut off from a corner of this plate for metallurgical analysis
in May 1988, undertaken by Monitor of Stonehouse, Gloucester.
Ownership of the Tollhouse was transferred from Shropshire County Council to the
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, who had opened it from 1972 (Fig 36, below) prior to a
major restoration in time for 1975. The work involved realigning the railing to allow a
window to become a door; remounting the original tollboard in its previous location; inserting
new windows into the previously bricked-up openings; putting tie rods either side of the
central chimney which had been lowered to the roof line; and taking down and re-erecting
brickwork around the original door (Fig 37). Inside was an exhibition about the history of the Bridge, including the BBC film directed by Ray Sutcliff.
68 A copy is in the IGMT archives.
Fig 36 (left): The Tollhouse used as an Information Centre in 1972. Private collection
Fig 37 (right): After restoration, summer 1975. IGMT
In September 1975 Shropshire County Council‟s staff removed the asphalt and waterproofed
the gaps between the deck plates (Figs 38 and 39, below). The waterproofing was done with a
mixture of “two parts pitch extended polyurethane or polysulphide applied by gun. Nitroseal
PX220 polyurethane or Evode Polysulphide”. 69
Fig 38 (left): Removing the
road fill. Private collection
Fig 39 (right): Laying the
new surface. IGMT
68
IGMT.1993.736 and IGMT.1995.661 69
SRO.4437/9
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
33
In October the pavements were edged in cast iron using a pattern from IGMT‟s collection and
cast at Glynwed Foundries in Coalbrookdale.70
The final element of the 1975 work was the
re-pointing and selective replacement of masonry to the south piers and abutment and in
November the Department of the Environment took the Bridge into Guardianship.71
Stages 1
and 2 had cost a total of £148,068.18. 72
The arches of the Tontine vaults were rebuilt in 1976
using the original stones recovered from the rubble of the 1946 demolition and the new
viewing area that was created above was edged with a brick wall. In 1977 on the Tollhouse side the concrete steps down to the river were rebuilt in brick.
It had been intended that Stage 3 would include the repainting of the Bridge, but as this might
run into the Bicentenary year of 1979 and would cover the Bridge in sheeted scaffolding, in
1978 it was decided to postpone this phase until after the Bicentenary (see below). Work
undertaken early in 1979 included the replacement of missing arrow-head dogbars on the
Bridge balustrades, a top dressing to the road surface, and the replacement of the original,
though realigned, railings by the Tollhouse in mild steel on a stone capping course, removing
the railings that survived since the 1823 alterations.73
Prince Charles as Patron of the Museum
celebrated the Bicentenary on 1st July 1979, paying a symbolic halfpenny toll before crossing
the Bridge. The last work of the year was to replace the brick walls in stone that had been erected in late 1976 on the parapet at the north end of the Bridge.
74
2.3.9 Phase 9. 1980-1998
1980: Bridge repainted after sandblasting off old paint down to bare metal.
Survey of fractures.
It was 30 years since the last time the Bridge was painted. Scaffolding was erected beginning
on 9th
April 1980 for Stage 3, the final element of the repairs programme that had started eight
years earlier. The contract was let to JD Tighe & Co (Midlands) Ltd with Ian Hume as the
engineer for the Department of the Environment 75
and work was completed by mid-
December. The paint was blasted off to bare metal with pressurised water jets and treated with
five coats of paint: 1st, an Epoxy Wet steel primer coat (colour, red oxide); 2nd, a zinc
phosphate Epoxy Ester undercoat (yellow); 3rd, a zinc phosphate Epoxy Ester undercoat
(green); 4th, a Micaceous Iron Oxide, Pure Phenolic Tung Oil (grey); and 5th, a Micaceous
Iron Oxide, Pure Phenolic Tung Oil (black).” 76
In fact the final coat was a metallic dark grey with many variations in shade, giving the finished Bridge a blotched effect.
A full record of the fractures was made, 80 being identified and photographed by Ian Hume‟s
team. No repairs were done to the main arch other than to replace one broken clamp. The
repair work to the two land arches involved the removal and replacement of a number of steel
plates put on as repairs many years ago and which had corroded sufficiently to fracture the
bolts holding them. Also replaced for cosmetic reasons were 235 dogbars (the small
spearheads between railings), four finials to main railing uprights, two broken sections of the
centre railing embellishment on the upstream side and all of the railing stabilisers on the two
land arches. One broken railing on the downstream side which had been replaced earlier with
2 steel flats welded together was replaced with a square steel bar.77
70
SRO.4437/10 71
IGMT.IB 72-89 72
IGMT. IB (R) 73
IGMT. B/2/2 and IB 72-89 74
IGMT. B/2/2 75
IGMT.B/2/2 76
Hume, I, 1980 „Report on the Repairs and Repainting of the Iron Bridge‟, DOE 77
ibid
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
34
In February 1990 Wrekin Council carried out landscaping improvements to the area around
the war memorial, adding a low brick wall topped by railings, and resurfacing the path
through the accommodation arch with cobbled sets.
When Telford became a new Unitary Authority in 1998 Shropshire County Council handed
the Bridge over to Telford & Wrekin Council on 31st March. A small inspection scaffold was
erected in November to investigate claims of new fractures, though none were found.
2.3.10 Phase 10. 1999-2007
1999-2000: Bridge repainted, packing added to support deck plates, selected masonry
blocks replaced; full historic building survey and analysis done.
2001: Railing posts strengthened with carbon fibre sheets; bolts on swan-necks replaced.
Over the winter of 1999-2000 a restoration programme was implemented to prepare the
Bridge for the new millennium. It was fully recorded for the first time and the ironwork was
repainted. Towards the end of the decade a further series of reports were commissioned by
English Heritage, leading up to this Conservation Plan.
In May 1999 a temporary though substantial scaffold was erected to determine future work,
which was to include selective replacement of masonry blocks, the replacement of missing
packing below the deck beams, and an application of two coats of paint to the entire structure.
A photogrammetry survey was done in early September by Plowman Craven Associates of
Harpenden, which was then enhanced by English Heritage‟s Metric Survey Team (Fig 40).
An associated Historic Building Survey, Record and Analysis programme was commissioned
from IGMT, which included a confirmation that the original colour was dark grey (see entry
for 1787). The core elements of this record are included within Appendix 5. In late September
a complete scaffold was erected (Fig 41) for the repainting programme under the direction of
Ian Wilson of Firmingers, Worcester. Ironbridge Archaeology produced a detailed record of
the structure. Painting was almost completed by the end of the year, in most cases having been limited to the application of a new undercoat and top coat.
Fig 40 (left): An image from the metric survey by Bill Blake of English Heritage, 2000.
Fig 41 (right): The Bridge under scaffold in late September 1999. Author
On 15th
January 2000 new nylon packing (Polyethelene PE300) was inserted between the
deck bearers and deck plates, wherever thought necessary. In March Derbyshire masonry
contractors Dimbylow Crump extracted sandstone from the original quarry in Ladywood
some 200m up the hillside above the south bank and replaced weakened blocks on the top
courses of the main arch abutment and piers. The scaffold was removed by Easter, after which
minor repairs were done to the railings, which included the casting of two new swan necks for
the main arch to replace those that were badly corroded at the bottom. Two bays of railings
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
35
were replicated and subject to destructive testing off site. Failure occurred at the points where the fixing bolts passed through the uprights and the swan neck supports.
In 2001 the fixings of the swan necks to the railings were investigated by EH revealing a history
of repairs, and an associated record was made by Ironbridge Archaeology 78
. The railings
themselves proved to be stronger than previously thought, but many of the swan neck supports at
the base of the balustrades were corroded and allowed too much play so failed the tests. Railing
posts were strengthened with carbon fibre sheets on the footpath side and all bolts fixing the swan
necks to the railing uprights were renewed. Sand and sweepings were added to the paint to give a
rough finish and resemble cast iron, so the smooth carbon fibre strips are virtually invisible.
Worn swan necks were replaced.
In October 2001 in a programme directed by Deborah Perkin, BBC2 Timewatch recorded the
construction of a half-scale model of the „large scaffold‟ shown in Elias Martin‟s watercolour
of 1779 to test its validity (Fig 42, below). Built over the canal at Blists Hill open air museum
(Fig 43) the arrangement provided the ideal lifting points for the ribs when they were
delivered by boat and lifted from below. The experiment supported the theory that in 1779 the
major castings must have been brought by river and therefore poured at Bedlam Furnaces on
the river bank 500m downstream from the Bridge, rather than at the Old Furnace in
Coalbrookdale. The „Mystery of the Iron Bridge‟ programme was broadcast on 11th
January
2002 and the „temporary‟ half-scale model remained in situ until February 2010.
Fig 42 (left): Elias Martin‟s sketch of 1779. Fig 43 (right): The half scale model over the canal at Blists Hill
Victorian Town, October 2001. The photo has been reversed for this comparison. Author
2.3.10 Phase 10. 2008-2011
2008: Rope survey of fractures. Underwater strut surveyed.
2009: Rope survey of wedges. Inclinometers installed to record land movement.
2011: Deck plate wedges renewed within upstream footpath.
On 8th
and 9th
September 2008 an underwater inspection was done by Hemsley Orrell
Partnership of Hove to assess the condition of the reinforced concrete strut and review the
possibility of re-routing water mains in an underwater crossing. 79
The concrete appeared to
be in good condition with no signs of damage due to corrosion of the reinforcing rods. Scour
was noted under the concrete slab jutting out from the bank just downstream of the south
abutment, which they recommended be addressed within five years. However, this slab is not
78
2002. Ironbridge Archaeology Report 110. The Iron Bridge Railing Survey, Record and Analysis 79
HOP Report No 12735/1
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
36
part of the strut, being the remains of an equipment access route for the 1973-4 work. A crossing point for the water mains was identified about 50m upstream.
On 28th
and 29th
September 2008 the Bridge was floodlit as part of the launch of the Cultural
Olympiad in the West Midlands. The event had been approved by English Heritage and no light fittings were attached to the structure.
In October 2008 a rope survey was done by Vertical Technology Ltd of Emsworth to
ascertain the existence and condition of cracks in the main arch, and their findings were
further analysed in a report of December 2009 by Conisbee Consulting Structural Engineers
of London. They put netting round one fractured radial on frame C to stop it falling into the
river. Comparing a photographic survey of 80 fractures identified in 1980, in Vertical
Technology‟s report they concluded there were 38 additional defects. Though the record is
valuable as a condition statement for 2008, a comparison with a detailed photographic survey
of 1999/2000 by IGMT would have shown that none of these are new fractures (apart from
one possible crack on frame C), being mostly original joints between castings where there is
now some slight evidence of rusting. They also mistakenly report „heavy pitting‟ to all metal
elements, a feature of the air surface of all open sand castings and not a new defect. Conisbee
recommended filling all the cracks either with and epoxy resin or an elastomeric polymer such as Belzona 2111 prior to repainting.
Vertical Technology undertook a further rope survey in May 2009 to inspect the restraint
wedges protruding below the deck plates (Fig 44, below). They reported in June and the results
were analysed by Conisbee in September. Though not recognised in the above reports, the
original purpose of the wedges was to align the deck plates, and while every deck plate was
cast with 16 holes for possible wedges many of them did not need to be used. Many do not
engage directly with the deck bearer and it is likely they never did. However, the engineers
believe the wedges provide a lateral restraint for the main frames of the Bridge at the upper
level, and that their absence creates a threat for the stability, particularly of fame A in the event
of the structure being hit by flood debris. Given this premise, English Heritage agreed it would
be prudent to replace all the „defective‟ wedges relating to frame A, the work beginning in
January 2011 for completion by April. Work was done from a trench in the footpath over frame
A and the wedges were replaced in pure iron supplied by Legg Bros of Ettingshall. The
contract was directed by Treasure & Son of Ludlow and the wedges installed by Barr & Grosvenor of Wolverhampton.
Fig 44: May 2009 rope survey, and the 2011 contract to replace defective wedges. Author
In 2009 Telford & Wrekin Council installed six inclinometers in boreholes, three on each bank
around the Bridge. Monitoring since then shows small but continuing land movement on both
banks towards the river of around 2-3mm in 18 months at a depth approximately level with the
base plates. The results are so far unpublished but elements have been made available by Neal
Rushton for this report. The 1972 concrete box within the north abutment does not stop the
movement – in fact the whole box is subject to this pressure which will continue to be exerted on
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
37
the main arch through the horizontal stays. It was this pressure that caused most of the historical fractures on the north quadrant.
2.4 The wider historical context
2.4.1 The Shropshire Coalfield
It was fortuitous that the raw materials of the Shropshire Coalfield combined to make such
good cast iron. The ironmasters of the 18th
Century were not aware of the chemistry, but their
empirical knowledge and experience allowed them to succeed where others could not. Trying
to smelt iron 30 miles away with a different coal that produced a more sulphurous coke
simply did not work. The clod coal found in abundance near the surface around the Gorge
gave the region a virtual monopoly until about 1760. However, the coke iron was not initially
suitable to converting to wrought iron, which was where the big demand lay. It took many
more years of experimenting in Coalbrookdale by Abraham Darby I‟s successors, particularly
Richard Ford and Abraham Darby II, until the process became reliable and cheaper than
charcoal smelting. Once successful the new demand led to the building of nine new coke blast
furnaces in the region between 1750 and 60, including Bedlam Furnaces where the large
elements of the Bridge were cast.
However, once the easily-won minerals along the banks of the Gorge were worked out, the
seams were followed northwards in the Shropshire Coalfield, where they became deeper and
required steam pumping and winding machinery to be profitable. Coalbrookdale reached its
zenith around 1820, after which it began to be eclipsed by South Wales, Birmingham and the Black County, and the Northeast of England.
2.4.2 Spies, artists and tourists
By 1800 the Gorge was the most industrialised area in the world and proved fascinating for
industrial spies (including the Rochefoucault brothers and Svedensternia) commissioned to
learn the secrets, and artists eager to capture the theatre of the fire and smoke that filled the
skies (among them Turner, de Loutherbourg and Cotman). Tourists flocked to the area. They
all saw drama, power and excitement, positive terms that describe what we would recognise
today more negatively as pollution, but that is a much more recent concept and not one they
would have recognised. (See Appendix 7 for a fuller description). In reality life expectancy in
this polluting environment was low. Abraham Darby I died at 39, his son Abraham II fared better at 52, but his grandson Abraham III the builder of the Iron Bridge died at 38.
2.4.3 Cast iron, a new material in engineering
The Bridge survived a major flood in 1795 (8.9m above summer level and so far never
exceeded), which damaged or destroyed all the other bridges in the county and caused a rush
in new orders. Cast iron as a structural material entered a new phase and demand soared. It
had initially been viewed with some suspicion as a building material, but the Bridge
withstood the 1795 flood unharmed. Many of the County‟s smaller bridges were replaced by
Thomas Telford in iron in 1795 and 1796 with ribs cast in a single piece, though for wider
spans such as Buildwas at 39.6m (Fig 45, overleaf) a new assembly system was developed
using much smaller components. In the absence of any predecessor the castings for the Iron
Bridge were over-weight and those that followed soon after were already lighter and in larger spans.
The masonry aqueduct at Longdon-on-Tern had also been swept away in the flood, to be
replaced by Telford in cast iron (Fig 46, overleaf), serving as a test bed for his work on the
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
38
Chirk and Pontcycyllte aqueducts of 1805. Larger furnaces were developed to meet the need
for bigger castings and experimentation led to the introduction of iron in a structural role for
buildings, starting with Ditherington Flax Mill in 1797, the first fireproof factory and
arguably the forerunner of the skyscraper. The Sunderland Bridge of 1796 was 236ft span
compared with Darby‟s 100ft, and Thomas Telford had enough confidence in the material to
propose a 600ft clear span for London Bridge in 1801.
Fig 45 (left): Buildwas Bridge, which survived until 1905. Fig 46 (right): Longdon-on-Tern aqueduct. IGMT.
Both were in cast iron by Thomas Telford in 1796 to replace structures destroyed by the floods of 1795.
2.4.4 Construction techniques in the Bridge
1779 was the first time cast iron was used structurally and on a large scale. The exposed joints
use the techniques of the carpenter, but this had been the standard technology for iron
structures for several centuries – Salisbury Cathedral spire has a partial wrought iron frame;
church turret clocks also used wrought iron frames – all with the same kind of joints we see
on the Bridge. The difference here is that one can see the joints and get close to them. The
various castings all link into each other, some passing through oversize slots in the ironwork
and fixed in position by a combination of cast-iron wedges and lead packing, by bolted blind
dovetails, or by pinned mortise and tenons. All the joints are of the types commonly found in
timber, such as dovetails, halving joints, wedges, and mortise and tenons; and every tenon is
pinned with an iron „trenail‟, similar to traditional timber-framing. However, there are also
over 200 original screw-bolts used on the Bridge, a practice rare for the time because every
screw thread and its matching nut had to be cut by hand. They can be found at the crown
joints and also on the radials where they hold each end of the blind dovetails together.
Fig 47 (left): The 1782 engraving with its explanatory text. IGMT. Fig 48 (right): The pitted surface is typical of
an open mould casting. Author 1999
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
39
The 1782 contemporary account on the Phillips drawing80
(Fig 47, above left) states that all
the parts were cast in open sand moulds, which is confirmed by the pitted holes visible on
what must have been the top of each casting where the gas bubbles had risen to the surface
and burst (Fig 44, above right). Some surfaces on the inner arches are very poor, which
suggests the need for parts to be made in a hurry and that Abraham Darby was trying to
contain costs by accepting castings his Company normally would have rejected. The quality
of the castings is mixed, the better ones being reserved for the two outer frames which carry the recessed wording about the Bridge being cast in Coalbrookdale.
Site investigation in 1999 revealed that while the smaller castings were made using patterns,
all the large castings were „swept up‟ (i.e. using depressions modelled straight in the sand on
the casting floor and filling them with molten iron). Trowel marks can be seen, as well as
variations in width and depth, which would not have occurred had a wooden pattern been
used. Detailed recording confirmed that each casting is slightly different, the most obvious
example being the lower rib of frame D on the north quadrant. This has been cast at a radius
slightly larger than the others, causing it to fall short at the upper levels and requiring the
difference to be compensated for by extensions to the tops of the radials and by an extra long
tenon on the circle (Fig 49, below left). Castings that were too short were packed with iron
blocks, most noticeable at the bottom of the lower ribs on the Tontine side where they sit on
the base plates (Figs 50 and 51, below centre and right).
Fig 49 (left): An extra long tenon cast on the circle to reach the mortise in the deck bearer above.
Fig 50 (centre): An iron wedge packing up the lower rib of frame B. Fig 51 (right): A wedge jacking up the rib
of frame E. All by the author, 2001
2.4.5 Record of cracks
The report on cracks in the ironwork produced by Conisbee Consulting Structural Engineers
in 2009 provides a valuable record at that date and a useful datum for future comparison.
However, the authors ignored the detailed photographic survey of 1999/2000 by IGMT taken
from the scaffold during the repainting programme, which provides multiple views of joints
and fractures and should be consulted as part of any repair programme. Of the 118 defects
Consibee identified all but one had been recorded in the latter survey. In fact the majority of
the defects are areas where the paint application was thin and rusting is now evident.
Conisbee recommend filling all the cracks either with and epoxy resin or an elastomeric
polymer such as Belzona 2111 prior to repainting. Ian Hume is sceptical of this approach,
feeling it might trap water in a space where it currently runs away freely (Hume pers com, 2011).
80
IGMT.SSMT.43
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
40
2.5 Management information
The ownership of the areas around the Bridge is complex (see Section 2.1 and Fig 6 on page 13), but the overall coordination is now via the World Heritage Site Steering Group.
2.5.1 Guardianship area
1975: Bridge taken into Guardianship
1976-9: The town of Ironbridge restored
The Bridge was taken into Guardianship on 29th
October
1975, the realisation of a proposal made on 15th
March four
years earlier by the Secretary of State in relation to the work
to stabilise the Bridge – by lightening the north abutment,
inserting an underwater strut between the banks, and
lightening the road deck asphalt. Between 1976 and 1979
Telford Development Corporation restored the town of
Ironbridge, including making a viewing platform opposite the
Tontine Inn. The road and pavements were re-aligned in
1978 and a bus pull-in was created in 1980. These elements
are therefore not shown on the 1975 Guardianship plan (Fig
52, left), and the bus lay-by is not shown in the GIS map used by English Heritage (Fig 53, below).
Fig 52 (left): The 1975 Guardianship plan. Fig 53 (right): The GIS base map does not show the bus lay-by
which was installed in 1980.
An EH Report on Boundary of Guardianship Area 2008 by Jonathan Lloyd of TWC and
William Du Croz of EH identified the ownership of each area though 19 captioned
photographs. However, the report incorrectly assigns all the areas on the south bank to TWC,
which are actually owned and cared for by SGCT – see page 14, paragraph 3. It also wrongly
assigns ownership of the Tollhouse (Grade II listed) and shed to TWC rather than IGMT, who
purchased it in 1971 from the owners of the time, Shropshire County Council – see page 14, paragraph 4.
The structure of the Bridge is in Guardianship (page 13), but paths that pass under or next to it
are not (see page 14, paragraph 2), including the towpath (Fig 54, overleaf), and the path
through the north abutment archway (Fig 55, overleaf), which are owned by TWC. The area
under the two land arches on the south bank are owned by SGCT. Surprisingly the railings on
the towpath that are fixed directly to the Bridge are therefore in the care of TWC, and the
shallow stores in the Tontine Vaults are owned by TWC yet they contain an exhibition about
the Bridge and the key is held by EH. More recent work to the pavement and viewing area
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
41
facing the Tontine has blurred the logic of the original Guardianship boundary between EH and TWC and it is recommended the situation be reviewed.
Fig 54 (left): The footpath and the railings attached to the Bridge are not part of the Guardianship area.
Fig 55 (centre): The path through the accommodation arch, the wall with the two wooden doors, and the viewing
platform above are not part of the Guardianship area. Author, 2011
Fig 56 (right): The end of the gravel marks the boundary, so some of the York flags are in the Guardianship areas and some are not. EH Report, 2008
All partners should be consulted regarding any proposed repairs, alterations and interventions
(including temporary fixtures) on the Iron Bridge itself and for any work on adjacent areas
which may affect the setting. Early pre-application discussion with EH and TWC is best
practice when proposing any works, in order to determine appropriate approaches, and
required consents and conditions. All partners (EH, TWC, SGCT and IGMT) should
communicate and be informed of proposals through the World Heritage Officer, who will
ensure that substantive issues are discussed by the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site
Steering Group.
2.5.2 All other areas
Completed in December 2010 by TWC, a draft Public Realm Design Guide deals with all
highway and hard surfaces spaces which are freely available to the public. It endorses the use
of York stone flags near the Bridge, but criticises the laying of brick paviours in pavement
bond (as they have been in the adjacent lay by), recommending instead they be laid in running
bond. It also recommends the removal of unnecessary clutter such as bollards, which is
relevant to this report because the north end of the Bridge has two rows of such bollards
which could be rationalised. However, their removal should only be considered if an
alternative method of preventing vehicles accessing the Bridge is maintained. See Appendix
1, Gazetteer. Relevant guidance is contained within the DCLG DCMS Circular on the
protection of World Heritage Sites, 2009, and in the Statement of Outstanding Value
contained within the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Management Plan, 2001, though the latter is currently under review.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
42
2.6 Gaps in the knowledge
2.6.1 Impact of instability in the Gorge
It was believed the Bridge is structurally safe thanks to the concrete strut below the water line,
the hollow north abutment, and the fact that the ironwork is essentially free-standing. This
may not be true. Instability of the Gorge has resulted in lateral thrusts to both sides, most
evident on the north quadrant, and inclinometer records taken since 2009 show there is still
some movement (see 2.6.2 below). If an accurate computer model could be produced and then
enhanced to remove all the fractures, it could replicate the original configuration. This could
be tested by introducing a variety of thrusts to see if the existing fractures do in fact emerge at
the present locations. Other scenarios could be tested to identify potential weaknesses and the
conditions that would result in the failure of the Bridge. The existing EH Metric Survey of
2000 could be used to develop a brief, though it is not considered to be accurate enough to be
used for the structural testing scenarios above. Current borehole logs from TWC‟s
geotechnical engineering department should be added to the information base to improve the
reliability of the predictions. There are earlier borehole records from 1947 and 1968,81
but
these only deal with the geology, not any movement.
The computer model might be done by a University with a Civil Engineering School or by a
specialist civil engineering contractor, and an interactive database outlined in Section 4
should be developed.
2.6.2 Geological survey
There are six inclinometers in boreholes around the Bridge installed in 2009 by TWC‟s
geotechnical engineering department, which confirm a small but continuing land movement
towards the river on both banks. This has been around 2-3mm in 18 months and at a depth
approximately level with or slightly below the base plates. Continuous accurate monitoring of the
movement is essential, but to understand the bigger picture of movement further up the hillsides
the use of LiDAR recording will be a significant addition. The Council have a base survey
against which to make future comparisons.
2.6.3 Archaeological excavations
A longitudinal excavation trench within the land arches on the south bank should reveal
evidence of the 1801 work when a substantial foundation was made for the new south
abutment. The adjoining abutment façades were surveyed and drawn in 1999 so can provide a context for this work.
On the north bank stables and storehouses were built against the abutments and retaining
walls, which were demolished in 1946. Some evidence remains in the form of beam holes in
the wall below the war memorial and excavations could reveal more information.
2.6.4 Recording the span
An agreed method for recording the span is required and the results should be integrated with
the inclinometer readings from the six boreholes drilled in 2009. Historical records82
do not
all use the same point of reference or technology. In the 1930s these were done from the inner
81
de Haan, D. 2001. The Iron Bridge, Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis. Appendix K 82
Ibid, Appendix G
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
43
verticals, some 30cm back from the outer edge of the base plates, and only at the upstream
and downstream edges. However, from 1961 onwards the two diagonals were included, but
measurements were taken from the outer corners of the base plates. This latter location is
recommended for all future measurements to maintain consistency.
2.6.5 Building recording of the Tollhouse and shed
The Tollhouse was restored in 1974 though this included alterations to the façade and the
removal of a central chimney. No drawings have survived and it is recommended a full survey
of these buildings be made.
2.6.6 Biodiversity survey of the river and banks
Relevant details from biodiversity databases held by Shropshire Wildlife Trust, the
Environment Agency and Natural England need to be identified that might affect any works
relating to the banks.
2.6.7 Visitor survey of footfall on and under the Bridge
Surveys by IGMT since the mid 1990s have shown figures varying between ¾ and 1 million
visitors come to the Ironbridge Gorge, with half of them entering a museum where they are
counted accurately. There is insufficient detail in the surveys to apply the figures just to the
Bridge, so it is recommended a new one is done, perhaps by an Ironbridge Institute student.
2.6.8 Sequence of erection anomaly
No contemporary record of the original order of erection has yet come to light, though a
conjectural sequence was been produced by the author in 2003, based on over 30 years of
observation and study (Appendix 6). However, a new anomaly was discovered in 2010 which
deserves further consideration: on the base plates of the Tontine side (Fig 57) there are some
square holes which may have been for temporary timber supports. Curiously, they are not
replicated on the Tollhouse side (Fig 58). Which set of base plates were installed first and
which arrangement proved to be the most effective? If we assume the south side plates and
the associated verticals went in first, did they discover the need for extra anchor points and so
remedied that on the north side base plates? If in fact the north bank‟s plates were first
perhaps they found they didn‟t use the holes and so omitted them from the next set of castings.
Fig 57 (left): Two of the ten square holes in the base plates on the Tontine side, their purpose unknown.
Fig 58 (right): They are not repeated on the opposite bank. Author, 2010
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
44
3 Heritage Values and Significance
Heritage values can be ascribed to different aspects of the Bridge, its role in the wider historic
and natural environment, and its place in society. Experience shows that judgements about
heritage values, especially those relating to the recent past, tend to grow in strength and
complexity over time as people‟s perceptions of a place evolve. These heritage values are
interlinked, and can be divided into four groups, as described in Conservation Principles
(English Heritage, 2008):
Evidential value
Historical value
Aesthetic value
Communal and economic value.
3.1 Evidential value
The primary source of such evidence is the physical remains – in this case the Iron Bridge and
its surrounding built and natural environment. The wider setting of the Iron Bridge includes
the Tollhouse and associated structures, the approach from the former Station yard, the
Tontine Inn and its surrounds, the Market Square, and views from up and down the river
(see Appendix 1, Gazetteer, Sections 2-8).
Fig 59 (left): Aerial view, 1988. IGMT. Fig 60 (right): Winter view from downstream. Author 2011
The Iron Bridge is the first single span bridge built entirely of iron in the world in 1779.
It was constructed using cast and a very small amount of wrought iron, with a span of 100
feet (30.5m). Although there have been repairs to the fabric and alterations to the
abutments, the Bridge retains integrity and authenticity because almost 100% of the original fabric remains. The repairs are nearly all additions rather than replacements.
There was some pioneering technical development within the structure of the Bridge,
particularly in the nature of the scarfing joint at the crown. However, its detail remained hidden until the survey of 1999.
The name of the settlement of Ironbridge that swiftly grew up on the north bank of the
river takes its name from the Bridge, as does the Gorge which was previously known as Coalbrookdale and later as the Severn Gorge.
In recognition of the outstanding importance of the structure, the Iron Bridge was
designated a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM 27558) in 1934, and is also a Grade I
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
45
listed building. It was taken into guardianship in October 1975. The Toll House and shed
are listed Grade II.
The setting of the Iron Bridge is also designated and protected. The settlement of
Ironbridge was designated a Conservation Area in 1971 and extended in 1980. The
woodlands to the south of the river and the woods on Lincoln Hill on the north bank are
both designated SSSIs.
In recognition of the unique contribution to the industrialisation of the world the
surrounding areas of Coalbrookdale, Ironbridge, Hay Brook Valley, Jackfield and
Coalport were inscribed as a World Heritage Site in 1986, at a time when only four other
industrial World Heritage Sites had been designated in the world. The World Heritage Site
Management Plan and Statement of Outstanding Value are currently under review.
3.2 Historical value
The historical values associated with the Iron Bridge, from a local, national and international
perspective:
The importance of the iron industry
Civil engineering, national and international
Personalities behind the Bridge
Cost
Development of communications in the Coalbrookdale area
Development of the town of Ironbridge
Coach services
Tourism.
The importance of the iron industry
The manufacture and construction of the Iron Bridge demonstrated the importance of
mass production of and technology of coke-smelted iron. The Quaker Ironmasters of the
Darby and Reynolds families from Coalbrookdale had been innovators in the manufacture
and use of iron, from sand casting hollow pots, to coke smelting of cast iron in 1709;
casting of cylinders for steam engines in 1723, iron wheels in 1729 and iron rails in 1767
(Figs 61 and 62). “The Iron Bridge can be seen to be the logical outcome of the evolution
of technology in the Coalbrookdale Coalfield over the previous 70 years” (Cossons &
Trinder 2002). It demonstrated that iron could be used as a construction material and paved the way for break through in civil engineering.
Fig 61 (left): Coalbrookdale cast iron steam engine cylinder, 1758. IGMT Elton Collection (detail).
Fig 62 (right): Coalbrookdale cast iron wheels and rails. IGMT.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
46
Civil engineering – national
Prior to the Iron Bridge, bridges were either multi span masonry bridges e.g. John Gwynn
Atcham Bridge near Shrewsbury1769-76, or wooden such as Preens Eddy Bridge (Severn Gorge), or beams and trestles e.g. Selby Bridge over the River Ouse.
The Iron Bridge has high technological value as the first large span iron bridge in the
world, creating a role for cast iron in civil engineering which continued up until the late
1850s, when cheap steel made by the Bessemer process began to replace it. All histories of modern bridges cite Coalbrookdale as the starting point.
It was acknowledged at the time as being a development of real significance; the Royal
Society considered “the magnitude and originality of the undertaking” worthy enough to present their Gold Medal in 1788 to “Mr Darby the Builder of the Iron Bridge”.
83
Thomas Tredgold (1788- 1829) reflected in 1824 “one of the boldest attempts with new materials was the application of cast iron to bridges” (Cossons & Trinder 2002).
Cossons & Trinder have identified
over 130 iron bridges built in the
British Isles between 1779 and
1830 when engineers came to
appreciate the advantages and
disadvantages of iron as a
constructional material. Pioneering
use of iron followed for bridges,
aqueducts, building construction
and railways, utilising the
compressive strength of cast iron as
well as the tensile strength of wrought iron.
Fig 63: Thomas Telford‟s wrought iron Menai Bridge of 1826. IGMT Elton Collection
Those involved with iron construction in the next few decades include:
John „Iron Mad‟ Wilkinson (1728-1808). Industrialist; boring accurate cast iron
cylinders for steam engines, and inventor of the first iron boat.
William Jessop (1745-1814). Bridge and canal engineer, jointly responsible for
Pontcysyllte aqueduct 1805.
Charles Bage (1751-1825). Innovative design for the first cast iron fireproof textile
mill in the world, Ditherington Flax Mill 1797
John Nash (1752-1835). Architect using cast iron for the Picture Gallery roof at
Attingham Park.
Thomas Telford (1757-1834). Civil engineer for Pontcysyllte aqueduct 1805 and the
Menai Suspension Bridge 1826.
William Reynolds (1758-1803). Coalbrookdale ironmaster.
John Rennie (1761-1821). Bridge engineer.
Isambard Kingdom Brunel (1806-1859). Iron ship SS Great Britain 1843, with plates rolled by the Coalbrookdale Company at Horsehay.
83
Minutes of the Royal Society, 6th
February 1788
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
47
Civil engineering – international
The technology was immediately
copied by the aristocracy in Western
Europe to ornament their parks and
palaces with 10 iron bridges being
built in the park at Tsakoe Selo by
Catherine the Great within the next
decade. By 1788 there was an iron
bridge in the park of the Duke of
Orleans at Raincy north east of
Paris, and a quarter scale replica of
the Iron Bridge at Wörlitz near
Dessau, Prussia in 1791 (Cossons &
Trinder 2002).
Fig 64: The small copy of the Bridge at Wörlitz, about 50 miles southwest of Berlin. G Blake-Roberts
Personalities behind the Bridge
“The Iron Bridge was the brainchild of the architect Thomas Farnolls Pritchard (1723-77).
The scheme to launch it was realised through the encouragement of John Wilkinson and
the legal and political skills of Thomas Addenbrooke. It became a reality as a result of
Abraham Darby III‟s personal commitment to the project” (Cossons & Trinder 2002).
Costs
Abraham Darby III (1750-89) was remembered by subsequent generations of his family as
„failed in business‟ (Cossons & Trinder 2002). At his death he owed £60,000 to his
brother in law, Joseph Rathbone, and to other kinsmen, though mostly relating to land
acquisition to secure mineral rights. Within this was a sum relating to the Bridge, the
original estimate for which was £3,250. However, according to Lord Torrington in 1784,
(see Appendix 7) the cost of the Bridge exceeded £6,000, the overspend being borne
personally by Darby, and in 1785 the brothers La Rochefoucauld thought Darby on the
brink of bankruptcy.
Development of communications in the Coalbrookdale area
Before 1780 the Severn was not bridged between Buildwas and Bridgnorth, coracles and
ferries serving instead. Though the Severn was a great transport corridor from the upper
reaches of the Severn Navigation beyond Shrewsbury down to the Bristol Channel, it was
a barrier to communication and trade between the north and south banks. The building of
the Iron Bridge changed both patterns of communication and settlement within the Gorge.
Terrestrial communication within the Gorge had been extremely limited prior to the
building of the Bridge, with the turnpike road from Madeley to Buildwas Bridge over
Lincoln Hill and a tramway from the Old Furnace in Coalbrookdale to Dale End and the
Wharfage. New roads were built from the Wharfage to the Tontine and eventually to
Madeley which was completed in 1810. A new road was built from the southern end of
the Bridge towards Broseley and the Wenlock Turnpike.
Development of town of Ironbridge
“The Bridge stimulated the growth of the new town of Ironbridge and, as one of the
wonders of the age, drew countless travellers to be equally gratified by the
neighbourhood‟s spectacular blast furnaces, coking hearths, limestone mines and kilns, tunnels, and inclined planes” (Baugh & Elrington 1985).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
48
Central to the development was the building of the Tontine Hotel designed by John Hiram
Haycock (1759-1830) and completed in 1784. The market of Madeley was transferred to
the Square in Ironbridge in the 1780s and in 1799 a short-lived cattle market was
proposed. By the 1830s the growing town that perched on the precipitous sides of the
Gorge was serving the needs of the local population as well as the increasing number of
tourists that came to view Coalbrookdale and the Bridge.
Coach services
The first stagecoach to run a regular
service over the Bridge was the
Diligence, the Shrewsbury to London
service commencing in 1781. The
Bridge, the roads and the Tontine
Hotel opened up the possibility of
tourism, encouraged by the marketing
of the engraving of the Bridge (Fig 65)
commissioned by Abraham Darby in
1780 from Michael Angelo Rooker,
which did much to advertise the
Bridge and encourage curious travellers to visit.
Fig 65: Rooker‟s engraving of the Bridge, first published in 1782. It is based on the oil painting by Williams
shown in Fig 13 on page 19. IGMT.1983.1933
Development of tourism
Many industrialists, engineers and travellers flocked to view “one of the wonders of the
world” as described by Viscount Torrington in 1784 (see Appendix 7). Its impact did not
pall, with charabancs visiting as works outings from the Black Country in the later 19th
century. By the early 20th
century the area was polluted, full of the waste of furnaces,
forges and brick works and it no longer excited admiration. James John Hissey (1847-
1921) wrote in 1913 “It was an unwelcome change from the rural pleasantness of the
country about Buildwas, coming to the squalid and smoky town of Ironbridge in
Coalbrookdale ... Ironbridge gains its name of course, from the bridge of iron that spans
the Severn there in one bold arch. At the time of the building of the bridge in 1779, it was
considered a great engineering feat, even a thing of beauty, tho I saw no beauty in it
except the curve of the arch. Its black colour is out of tune with the landscape, it seems to have no part in it”. (Trinder 2005).
Yet, following the creation of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust in 1967, almost every
child in the West Midlands will have been brought on a school visit to the Iron Bridge in their study of the Industrial Revolution.
The inscription as a World Heritage Site in 1986 has brought increased foreign tourists to the Bridge as one of the „must sees‟ whilst visiting Britain.
3.3 Aesthetic value
The Iron Bridge is one of many places which combine both intellectual and sensory
stimulation. Design value is particularly important element in the Bridge, embracing
composition (form, proportions, massing, silhouette, views and vistas, circulation), materials,
detailing and craftsmanship. Strong indicators of importance are quality of design and execution, and innovation; clearly this overlaps closely with historical and evidential value.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
49
The whole area of Coalbrookdale, the Gorge and its many industries excited artists and
travellers and writers before the Bridge was built. Indeed the drama of the iron industry with
skies lit up at night with flames and plumes of smoke, the mines, quarries, canals and general
activity, had been the subject of
several artist before 1779, such as
Thomas Smith of Derby and his
engraver François Vivares (Fig 66)
who had painted two views of
Coalbrookdale in 1758
encapsulating the intrusion of
industry onto the picturesque
heavily-wooded landscape, and
William Williams‟ two paintings
from 1777 depict travellers
marvelling at the forges and furnaces.
Fig 66: Abraham Darby‟s Upper Furnace works at Coalbrookdale in 1758, which was enlarged in 1777 to cast
iron for the Bridge. IGMT. Elton Collection
But the Iron Bridge was so novel and extraordinary that it spawned a plethora of images.
According to Cossons & Trinder “Much of the interest was created by conscious promotion
first by the Trustees, then by the hotel keepers and coach operators who stood to benefit from
the interest of tourists” (see Appendix 7). Images of the Bridge were used on Coalport china,
on fireplaces and on advertising as the symbol was so potent.
Branding
Aesthetically the Bridge is widely used as a symbol or logo for a wide range of businesses
and organisations in a variety of sectors, both in the UK and overseas. A selection of these is shown below:
Ironbridge Brewery
(Ironbridge)
Investment management
(Chicago)
Morris dancers
(Ironbridge)
Rowing Club (Ironbridge)
Copper cylinder manufacturer (Telford)
Shopping mall (Telford)
Fig 67: A sample of companies and organisations using the Bridge in their logos.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
50
The history of using the Bridge as a marketing device can be traced to the late 1770s when
William Williams was commissioned to produce a painting, subsequently copied by Michael
Angelo Rooker and widely distributed as an engraving84
(Fig 65, p48). Today businesses
clearly value the Bridge as an easily-recognisable symbol which represents several aspects,
the most obvious being location, identifying the business with the immediate area. Some are
within sight of the Iron Bridge, such as the „Bird in Hand‟ public house which has a large
painted mural of the Iron Bridge and proudly proclaims itself as „Older Than The Ironbridge‟
[Ironbridge as one word, which is nowadays only used for the name of the town]. Others,
including some of those depicted above, and firms such as Elcock‟s coaches, QA Kitchens of Wellington are not in Ironbridge, but use the Bridge as a shorthand symbol for Telford.
3.4 Communal and economic value
The Bridge has had enduring communal values since its erection in 1779 which link with
Section 3.2 Historic values above:
As a thoroughfare across the river
As a tourist attraction from the 18th
century till the present day
As a source of academic study, by engineers, artist and scholars throughout the world,
both in the past and still today through the educational work of the Ironbridge Institute and the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
The Iron Bridge is also a lasting component in the economy of the West Midlands.
The major economic value of the Bridge is in its role as part of the wider tourism economy of
the local area and of the West Midlands region. The Iron Bridge is the iconic symbol of the
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site, which is in itself recognised as one of the three
tourism gateways to the West Midlands (West Midlands‟ Visitor Economy Strategy) along with Birmingham and Stratford-Upon-Avon.
Visitor research conducted by the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust and by independent
market research companies in terms of visitor profiling, has consistently shown that the Iron
Bridge itself is a significant draw for visitors to the area and that most visitors who travel to
the Gorge make the time to include the Bridge on their itinerary. The most recent study of the
economic contribution of visitors to the Ironbridge Gorge suggests a very conservative
contribution of over £17m per annum to the local economy (Volume & Value Assessment
commissioned by Telford & Wrekin Council, 2008). Given the large increase in visitor
numbers to the Gorge in 2009 and 2010, the current economic value of tourism to the
Ironbridge Gorge is likely to be significantly higher.
Looking ahead to the economic potential of tourism generated by the London 2012 Olympic
Games, the Iron Bridge has already been used as a symbol of the Cultural Olympiad by
LOCOG (London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games) following Ironbridge‟s role
as the launch venue for the West Midlands‟ Cultural Olympiad in 2008 (Fig 68, overleaf).
Ironbridge as a World Heritage Site has been confirmed as a venue for the Torch Relay in
2012, and its close proximity to the nearby Shropshire town of Much Wenlock, the spiritual
birthplace of the modern Olympic movement, offers a great opportunity for increasing visitors
to the region over the coming years.
84
IGMT 1983.1932; IGMT 1983.1933
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
51
Fig 68 (left): Iron Bridge lit as part of the Cultural Olympiad celebrations, 2008. Fig 69 (right): Ironbridge
Gorge World Heritage Site branding, developed in 2008 and featuring the Iron Bridge
The value of the Iron Bridge in terms of the wider economy and especially in relation to
helping create a strong sense of place is more difficult to quantify, but it is undoubtedly
significant. The Iron Bridge features on much of the gateway signage and many of the visitor
guides relating to the region, including as one of a range of icons or brands identified with the
region in both the arrivals and departure terminals at Birmingham International Airport. In
the arrivals lounge of the airport, a sunset image of the Iron Bridge is used, sitting alongside
other West Midlands‟ icons including Land Rover, Wedgwood, JCB and Shakespeare, on an
interactive digital information board welcoming both domestic and international visitors.
Market research undertaken in August 2010 showed that 10% of those passing the
information board were able to spontaneously recall that the Iron Bridge was part of the
display following their exit from the Airport (McCann Erickson).
During the live General Election debates hosted in Birmingham by the BBC in the spring of
2010, the Iron Bridge was one of three featured images used in the backdrop behind the
speakers. In this context, the Iron Bridge clearly fulfils the role of a symbol of the wider West
Midlands‟ region as a whole to a national viewing audience. As a further illustration of the
position of the Bridge in the nation‟s psyche, a recent independent poll conducted by the BBC
showed that the Iron Bridge was viewed as one of the top 20 icons of Britain, an example of
the enduring power of the Bridge as a unique symbol of the Industrial Revolution and Britain‟s role in this world-changing story.
As an icon the Iron Bridge is a powerful and emotive symbol of local identity/ies – social
values which define distinctiveness, social interaction and coherence.
3.5 Statement of significance
The Iron Bridge built across the Severn Gorge in Shropshire in 1779, is the first structural
use of cast iron, creating a bridge of a single span of 100 feet.
It is the culmination of 70 years of innovation in the technologies of iron manufacture and
use by the Quaker ironmasters of Coalbrookdale, especially the Darby family and their close relatives.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
52
It retains its integrity and authenticity, surviving the floods that swept away other bridges
along the River Severn in 1795.
It proved that iron could be used in civil engineering and opened the way for immediate expansion of engineering in bridges, canals, steam, railways and ship building.
The revolutionary use of iron as a structural material was copied all over Europe and
America.
The building of the Iron Bridge created the new community and settlement of Ironbridge
and extended the communication networks around Shropshire.
Its form is intrinsically beautiful in itself, but it is also situated magnificently against the
heavily wooded backdrop of the Gorge.
Despite decline in the early 20th
century, the far sightedness of the Telford Development
Corporation in the 1960s and 1970s ensured the preservation of the setting of the town of
Ironbridge. It has proved to be a lasting tourist attraction, and is on the „must see‟ list for visitors to the area.
The natural beauty of the area linked to the marvels of the industries encouraged artists to
paint and depict the Bridge in many media. It also inspired writers and travellers to describe the Bridge.
An image of the Bridge has been used as a brand for businesses, and indeed to symbolise
the West Midlands.
The Bridge and the visible remains of the areas industrial past have fostered scholarship
and protection, which started with the creation of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust in
1967.
The Bridge is one of the two key monuments which underpin the designation of the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site, the other being Abraham Darby‟s Old Furnace.
The Iron Bridge is an iconic structure that is recognised throughout the world as potent
symbol of the Industrial Revolution.
3.5.1 Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site
In recognition of all the above the area was inscribed as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO
in 1986. The Ironbridge Gorge was amongst the first six sites in the United Kingdom to be
inscribed and was one of the first industrial World Heritage Sites globally. Drawn from the
Statement of Universal Value, the UNESCO website describes Ironbridge‟s 1986 inscription as follows:
Ironbridge is known throughout the world as the symbol of the Industrial Revolution. It
contains all the elements of progress that contributed to the rapid development of this
industrial region in the 18th century, from the mines themselves to the railway lines. Nearby,
the blast furnace of Coalbrookdale, built in 1708, is a reminder of the discovery of coke.
The bridge at Ironbridge, the world's first bridge constructed of iron, had a considerable influence on developments in the fields of technology and architecture.
It falls under key criteria i, ii, iv and vi for inscription:
Criterion (i): The Coalbrookdale blast furnace perpetuates in situ the creative effort of
Abraham Darby I who discovered coke iron in 1709. It is a masterpiece of man's creative
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
53
genius in the same way as the Iron Bridge, which is the first known metal bridge. It was built in 1779 by Abraham Darby III from the drawings of the architect Thomas Farnolls Pritchard.
Criterion (ii): The Coalbrookdale blast furnace and the Iron Bridge exerted great influence
on the development of techniques and architecture.
Criterion (iv): Ironbridge Gorge provides a fascinating summary of the development of an
industrial region in modern times. Mining centres, transformation industries, manufacturing
plants, workers' quarters, and transport networks are sufficiently well preserved to make up a
coherent ensemble whose educational potential is considerable.
Criterion (vi): Ironbridge Gorge, which opens its doors to in excess of 600,000 visitors yearly, is a world renowned symbol of the 18th century Industrial Revolution.
The geographic area of the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site covers 5.5 km² and includes
7 scheduled ancient monuments, over 250 listed buildings and 2 SSSIs, as well as residential
and commercial areas. Ironbridge is rightly viewed as a complex mix of unique heritage
landscape, international tourism destination and living community. The Iron Bridge sits at the
centre of the World Heritage Site and these three interlocking roles, both literally and
metaphorically.
3.6 Issues affecting the significance of the Bridge
The Bridge‟s significance is in large part due to its authenticity and integrity. There are a
number of present and future issues which may affect the significance of the Bridge. These are explored further in Section 4.
Lack of conservation and inappropriate maintenance to the Bridge itself.
The design and management of buildings, surfaces and street furniture: both in Ironbridge
town (the Market Place and the area in front of the Tontine and around the War Memorial)
and on the Broseley side (the car park – former Station Yard – and paths through Benthall
and up to Broseley, the Station Hotel and approaches).
Geological issues. There is a long history of geological instability in the Ironbridge Gorge, and indeed remediation work has in the past been undertaken to the Bridge itself.
Environmental issues. The management of woodland areas and other landscape elements,
including flooding and water run-off.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
54
Section 4 Issues and opportunities
The main issues, threats and thus opportunities fall into five major categories:
1. Conservation and maintenance of the Bridge
2. Development
3. Presentation – visitor management, community engagement and education
4. Environmental pressures 5. Disasters and risk preparedness.
4.1 Conservation and maintenance of the Bridge
4.1.1 Elements on the Bridge
Most of the original 1779 ironwork is in a good condition and although there are many
fractures in the north quadrant radials (for example Fig 70, below left), they contribute
relatively little to the structural integrity. The radials function more as spacers than load-
bearing members and enough of them are intact to keep the upper, middle and lower ribs the
correct distance apart. Their replacement on purely cosmetic grounds should be avoided.
The record of cracks (see 2.4.5, Conisbee 2009) provides a base line for future comparisons
and should be used as part of routine monitoring.
However, many of the major repairs are now over 100 years old and while most of them
appear to be in sound condition, the 1902 horizontal straps and braces above the base plates
(Fig 71: below right) are a cause for concern. There is rust expanding between the cast iron
spacer blocks and the steel band that ties it all together. Removing the rust will necessitate taking off the band, which may have to be replaced with a new one (see Appendix 1, 1.5.M).
Fig 70 (left): Fractures to the radials both sides of the middle rib, frame D. Author 1999
Fig 71 (right): Rusting between the 1902 steel band and cast iron blocks on the south bank. Author 2010
Less critical are the two decorative ogees. They were replaced in
1927 in thin wrought iron a third of the thickness of the cast iron
member alongside (Fig 72) and have since buckled. This is an
example of an inappropriate past repair and they could be
replaced with new castings in the original section (see Appendix 1, 1.13.M).
Fig 72: The right half of the ogee is in thin wrought iron. Author 1999
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
55
The deck ends are an area of concern, the photo (Fig 73, below left) showing one that fell off
in February 2010. This is not a new problem, first occurring in 1902 (see p25). The cause is
rust expansion in the narrow space between the scalloped flanges and the adjacent deck
bearer, and it is likely more such failures will occur unless this rust is dealt with. It should be
noted that any of the original parts of the Bridge which have had to be replaced are kept in the
Museum‟s archaeology store behind the Ironbridge Institute in Coalbrookdale (Fig 74).
Fig 73 (left): A deck end that broke off in 2010 during exploratory work. Fig 74 (right): The casting in the
IGMT store. Author
A list has been made of all of the key archive holdings and reports including EH, NMR,
IGMT, TWC and Shropshire Records (Appendix 9), much of which has already been
incorporated within Appendix 5. However, there
is a key tool in the metric survey of the Bridge
undertaken by EH in 2000 (Fig 75, left) which
could be used to aid management. This digital
record could be enhanced by the inclusion of an
interactive database, whereby all of the past
interventions to any element of the structure can
be summoned by the clicking of the mouse on
the casting under investigation. Site photographs
of the element should also be included in this
record. It is not known whether the software
exits to do this, but it should be explored.
Fig 75: A frame from the Metric Survey of 2000. EH
4.1.2 Road surface
It is recommended that EH pursue the option of removing the services from within the road
deck. The original road surface was slag mixed with clay, which was replaced with tarmac
once motor vehicles started using the Bridge. The „peanut brittle‟ top dressing currently on
the Bridge was first laid in 1979, resin-bonded to the asphalt layer over the light-weight
aggregate beneath which had been laid in 1975. Given that vehicles no longer use the Bridge
it would be possible to replicate the slag and clay appearance, albeit in a lower-maintenance
material. Samples dating from the time of the Bridge from Bedlam Furnace where the main
elements were cast were provided by the author to EH in 2003 to explore sustainable sources
that might match in appearance. A 20m trial length with different compaction characteristics
should be laid on the existing footpath by the Tollhouse and exposed to use for 18-24 months
before the final mix is agreed. When the new surface is laid the footpaths should not be
reinstated, which would return the Bridge to its pre-1923 configuration. The cast iron kerbs are a 1979 cosmetic addition of no historical validity.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
56
The removal of the old surface must be carried out with care, avoiding vibrations which could
cause more deck end failures. Charles Shapcott (previously EH) recommended a maximum
weight of 800kg of equipment used in this process, which will make the removal of the old
material and replacement of the new labour-intensive – a small dumper and its load will
exceed this limit. Equally, the new surface will need mechanical compacting (Highways Act
Road Note 29), and here again the weight limit will be a problem. There is no indication that any such restrictions were applied in 1975 so the 800kg limit may be unnecessarily severe.
Gaps between deck plates were sealed with flash bands in 1975 and they should be re-opened
to aid free drainage of water. As part of this work consideration should be given to diverting
all services off the Bridge, which will remove the ducts that currently funnel water from the
Benthall side up and into the Bridge deck. Richard Zeizer (EH) recommends a French drain
be inserted just uphill from the tollgate to divert rainwater run-off before it reaches the
Bridge, whether or not the services are removed.
4.1.3 Paint colour
Unfortunately the severe sand-blasting back to bare metal in 1980 robbed us of the
opportunity to take paint samples to identify the original colour, though it is claimed that at
the time a small area of original colour was discovered and retained (Hume, pers com 2011).
If so, it appears to have been lost in the 1999 repainting. Nevertheless, almost all of the
contemporary pictures of the Bridge show it to have been black or grey, which is confirmed
by documentary evidence in the Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book for 1787.85
This evidence
was used to guide the choice of paint colour for the 1999 repainting programme.86
Rather than
adding colour through a new creative paint scheme, it is recommended the original dark grey
be used and any colour achieved by the use of floodlighting.
4.1.4 Sufficient resources for maintenance
Regular monitoring is an important element of maintenance and management regimes, but in
the current economic climate of government funding restraint the availability of funding for
maintenance could be an issue. This applies equally to work that is the responsibility of TWC
SGCT, and IGMT, as well as that managed by EH. An example is vegetation management.
As recently as the 1960s the tree cover on the south bank only started on the far side of the
railway line. The banks had been used for industry and until around 1900 clear access for
boats was required. Vistas from upstream on the south bank are being lost. Young tree growth is attractive but needs managing, as do the plants that cling to the river edge.
4.1.5 Coordination of owners and partners
There are numerous stakeholders and not all of them are made aware of interventions to the
Bridge and its immediate area. A system for improving this is recommended, ideally
coordinated by the World Heritage Officer.
85
Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1755-98, 8th June 1787, SRO.3689-98
86 de Haan, D. 2001. The Iron Bridge, Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis, Appendix J, provides a
record of this and all known previous paint schemes
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
57
4.2. Developments relating to the setting of the Bridge
4.2.1 Inappropriate alterations to the setting
Alterations and additions to adjacent properties and setting could adversely affect the
presentation of the Bridge. Owners need to be aware of Scheduled Monument legislation,
listings, conservation area and World Heritage Site guidance. Loss of features due to land use
change (e.g. forestry work) fall into this area, and demolition of listed buildings within the
Conservation Area and specifically within the setting of the Bridge should be resisted. The
siting of information panels and advertisements within the setting needs careful control.
Consideration should also be given to planting trees to mask the visual intrusion of vehicles in
the south car park.
4.3 Presentation, visitor management, community engagement and
education
There are interpretation panels behind the doors of the Tontine Vaults, but they are only
opened on Heritage Days. Keys are held by EH staff at Much Wenlock and by the Gorge
Parish Council in Ironbridge. A much fuller display is in the Tollhouse, though currently this
is only open at key weekends during the local school summer holidays and also by prior
arrangement for groups and school parties on application to IGMT. It is staffed by volunteers.
A management solution to increase the frequency of opening should be explored, which
should include the local community, especially during the annual World Heritage Site festival in September.
Other external interpretation needs updating, but to be implemented as part of an
interpretation strategy for the World Heritage Site. A considerable amount of information is
on the IGMT website at http://www.ironbridge.org.uk/about_us/the_iron_bridge/ and links to
this could be mentioned in interpretation panels. The Bridge features strongly in the work of
IGMT‟s Education Department, but is dependent on staff resources which are currently under threat as Renaissance in the Regions grants are being cut.
There is adequate long stay car parking on the south bank, but there are no toilets here.
Parking in the Square is short stay and spaces are limited. There is a long term aspiration to
revert the Square to pedestrian use and this started in March 2011 with the Farmers‟ Markets the first Saturday of the month. This would greatly improve the setting.
The true number of visitors walking on and under the Bridge is unknown and should be
addressed by a survey. Since the infamous „duck races‟ of 1985 and 1986 there is now a
loading limit on the Bridge of 200 people during any event, controlled by the erection of
crowd control barriers that limit the accessibility down to a 2m wide pathway. This is
managed by TWC. However, there is no such control on the towpath, so measures need to be
considered to ensure long term sustainable access without erosion, damage or overcrowding.
Litter control is managed effectively by TWC and graffiti is rare. The setting could be greatly
improved by better planting and management of the sloping banks at the north end of the
Bridge.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
58
4.3.1 Floodlighting
The Bridge was lit for a festival in 1933, but it was not until the mid 1960s that permanent
brick lighting bins (Fig 76 below) were installed upstream of the structure.87
The bins were
over 3m long and were removed during the 1973-4 work on the underwater strut. They were
replaced by much smaller ones in 1977, but only after a scheme was tested in March that year
(without permission from the Department of the Environment) which used lights within the
ironwork above the upper horizontal cross stays. The current brick bins (Fig 77) are regularly
covered during floods and are at the end of their life. A scheme was explored by TWC in
2001 and again in 2005, but the consultants proposed fixing the luminaires directly to the
Bridge which was unacceptable. More recently Alan Capewell (EH) has investigated
alternative arrangements using light stands (Fig 78) that would bring the fittings 2m higher
than the present bins, though these too would be covered in extreme river levels such as those
that occurred in 1999. Even higher positions are available on the north bank below the
Tontine Vaults which would keep light fittings above any water level, while on the south bank
the light would have to be fixed on a column at the existing location. There is a scale model in
the Ironbridge Institute which could be used to test the positions and effects of lighting. Light pollution needs to be controlled, particularly where it might affect adjacent private properties.
Fig 76 (left): The large 1960s floodlighting bins (circled). Dawley DC 1965. Fig 77 (centre): the smaller 1977
bins. Author, 2011. Fig 78 (right): A bespoke light column proposal. Candela Light
It is recommended that the main light sources remain on the upstream side because of the
sight lines. However, there may be the case for an infill light from downstream to reduce the
flatness of the effect. It could be sited on or near the lower
viewing platform, again well above flood levels. The orange
sodium vapour lights (Fig 79, left) are unsympathetic while
coloured lights proved to be very effective during the
Cultural Olympiad scheme of September 2008 (Fig 80,
below). That display was unnecessarily complicated for any
permanent installation but experience from the Ruhr in
Germany shows the value of a cycle of very slowly
changing white and coloured lighting.
Fig 79: The current flat orange floodlighting.
87
Visible on Aerofilms photo of 6th
April 1965. NMR.MAL/65024.193
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
59
Fig 80: Two phases of the impressive temporary light show that launched the Cultural Olympiad in the West
Midlands, September 2008. IGMT
4.4 Environmental issues
The key pressures inevitably stem from land instability and climate change impacts. An
agreed monitoring regime needs to be established that coordinates span measurements,
inclinometer recordings, flood records and information from the wider Lidar survey (see 2.6.1
and 2.6.2). While the Bridge will flex and move with temperature changes and river pressure,
the rigid underwater strut needs to be monitored as part of this process. These aspects should be fed into any periodic review.
River users in the form of canoes, rowing boats and fishermen present little threat, though a
system for addressing possible conflicts should be developed. More critical is the scouring of
the southern bank just below the Bridge where the remnants of the 1973 access platform is
being seriously undercut.
4.5 Disasters and risk preparedness
4.5.1 Climate change and increased flooding
Fig 81: A fracture on the south bank probably caused by the 1795
flood. Author
There are records of floods back to 1634, the worst
being 12th
February 1795, which was 8.9m above
summer level – over 4m above the base plates. The
medieval Buildwas Bridge was swept away and all other
Shropshire bridges were either badly damaged or
destroyed. Remarkably the Iron Bridge stood unharmed,
though one fracture to the base plate on the Tollhouse
side probably dates from this flood (Fig 81, left). Major
floods over 7m occurred in 1946 (7.49m), 1947 (7.5m) and 2000 (7.04m). But even at slightly
lower levels, floods over 5m are an increasing phenomenon and have occurred in 1990
(5.49m), 1995 (5.53m), 1998 (5.66m) and 1999 (5.4m) – the latter about 2.8m above the base
plates. The Environment Agency and TWC coordinate the erection of flood barriers along the
Wharfage based on information from the Buildwas river gauges. As an extension to this
scheme it would be prudent to consider the design of demountable barriers, which would
deflect large floating debris towards the middle of the river and away from the ironwork of
the Bridge. The mountings need to be designed in such a way so as not to detract from the
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
60
aesthetic appearance of the Bridge. The tops of the barriers would need to be a minimum of
4m above the level of the base plates.
Global warming may have been the main cause of the increased frequency of floods, though
building in the flood plain further upstream is a major contributory factor. Flood barriers
progressively installed since 2004 – temporary or permanent – have had a tendency to
exacerbate the problem downstream of their location. Historically floods were caused in
winter by the combined effect of a rapid thaw of snowmelt that covered already saturated
ground in the Welsh mountains. The catchment of the Severn covers about 3,900 sq km
(1,500 sq miles), all of which feeds down into the 30m-wide gap between the Bridge
abutments. The Welsh dams do not stop floods once they are full and overflowing, and in
these conditions the flow regulation effect in Ironbridge is less than 5cm. For many years
since the opening of Clewedog dam in 1968 there were no floods in Ironbridge, but this was
merely a coincidence. The effect of the 1795 flood is shown below (Fig 82) compared with
the normal summer levels. It would be unreasonable to plan for the 1-in-1000 year event that is shown below (Fig 83). The river regularly tops the base plates (Fig 84).
Fig 82 (left): Flood prediction of a 1-in-100 year event (TWC), compared to the normal situation (EH).
Fig 83 (left): Flood prediction of a 1-in-1000 year event. TWC. Fig 84 (right): A regular flood about 1m over
the base plates. The 1-in-100 year event would be 4m higher. Author
4.5.2 Pollution incidents upstream
The Environment Agency is well prepared to deal with pollution incidents, whether from farming or potentially from the Ironbridge Power Station.
4.5.3 Instability
Failure of the underwater strut and of land slippage within the Gorge might be addressed by piling, similar to the recent work below the Jackfield Bridge, but the cost is enormous.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
61
Section 5 Conservation policies
5.1 Protect the spirit of the place
The small town of Ironbridge climbing the north bank (and facing the sun), and the hanging
woods rising up the south bank play a major role in the setting of the Bridge. Inappropriate
piecemeal interventions to the town or the woods could destroy this magical setting.
Recommended Policy: Adhere to established national conservation policies relating to
built and natural heritage.
Because the town accommodates a living community it should not be fossilised as an
eighteenth century pastiche. There is the need for a correct balance between conservation and
renewal, erring on the side of the former. The limits of acceptable change are narrow in this setting.
Recommended Policy: Establish agreed limits of acceptable change.
5.2 The basis of the approach
All work should be guided by conservation standards as set out in the Venice Charter of 1964,
with guidance from EH‟s „Principles of Conservation‟ 2008, PPS 5 2010, and BS 7913 for
building control. Associated local reports include the Public Realm Design Guide for the
World Heritage Site (2010) and the WHS Interpretation Strategy (2008), which provide guidance that has been endorsed by members of the WHS Steering Group.
In terms of conservation of the Bridge this means minimum intervention, like-for-like repairs,
all repairs should be reversible and repairs should be sympathetic. If major repairs are
required to castings they should be in „grey iron‟, a modern standard that almost exactly
matches the original metallurgical composition of the Bridge based on the analysis of a 1779
deck plate. It is not necessary to use „pure iron‟. Wrought iron, not steel, must be used for any
repairs to elements in this material (obtainable from the Ironbridge Gorge Museum‟s Blists
Hill ironworks). Continued maintenance to defined standards is essential. However, a rigid
adherence to SPAB philosophy of keeping all past interventions irrespective of their quality and suitability is not recommended.
Recommended Policy: The conservation approach will be guided by EH’s ‘Conservation
Principles’ 2008, rather than a rigid adherence to the SPAB Manifesto.
5.3 Retention of character
The Bridge as a focal point and also as a river crossing is the raison d‟être of Ironbridge, and
its filigree structure must be retained without unsympathetic interventions. While this report
concentrates on the areas in Guardianship, inappropriate interventions to areas around the Bridge will have an undue impact on the monument itself.
Because the Bridge is at the heart of a local community, sits within a World Heritage Site and
is also visited by up to a million visitors a year, the conservation of this unique asset is a
highly visible process. A visitor to the site in 50 years time should be able to see that all work has been done with a long-term vision in mind.
Recommended Policy: Interventions should be carried out with a 50-year vision in mind.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
62
5.4 Conservation and Maintenance of the Bridge
Agreed parameters for regular monitoring must be established – of the span dimensions
(2.6.4), the underwater strut (2.3.8 and 2.3.10), land movement through inclinometer readings
and LiDAR (2.6.2), checking for the presence of water in the north abutment concrete box
(2.3.8), and of any changes to the 2009 crack record (2.3.10). Particularly attention must be
given to the effect any of this may have on the fractured inner verticals of frame A, north quadrant (4.1 and Appendix 1, 1.14.M).
Recommended Policy: Establish agreed parameters for regular monitoring.
To maintain structural integrity:
Treat rusting of the two 1902 braces just above the base plates (4.1.1, CM1 and
Appendix 1, 1.5.M).
Treat rusting at the interface of the deck plate scallop flanges with the outer deck bearers
(4.1.1, CM1 and Appendix 1, 1.6.M).
Treat any rusting within joints and fractures (Appendix 1, 1.0.M). Take professional
advice before filling the cracks either with an epoxy resin or an elastomeric polymer
such as Belzona 2111, prior to repainting (2.4.5).
Insert packing between deck bearers and deck plates where the two are not in contact, on
both the main arch and the inner land arch.
Recommended Policy: Undertake repairs where they are necessary to maintain structural
integrity.
Other possible interventions to the structure:
Check the central bolts of all six of the 1926 steel cross ties and replace if necessary
(CM1 and Appendix 1, 1.9.M). These cross ties are vital to keep the original horizontal
cast iron spacers in place.
Avoid replacing the fractured radials on the north quadrant on purely cosmetic grounds
unless they become essential for stability or safety (4.1.1). The Bridge flexes with
temperature changes and river flow pressures and new stiffening could divert loads to
other areas.
Review whether to leave or replace the two thin 1927 wrought iron ogees which have
buckled (4.1.1 and Appendix 1, 1.13.M).
Recommended Policy: Use experienced staff to advise, and use suitably qualified
contractors with an understanding of conservation criteria to undertake repairs.
Explore whether the EH 2000 Metric Survey can be enhanced by the inclusion of an
interactive database to include records of past interventions, photographs, archives, etc (4.1.1 and CM1). This could be used in the office or in the field.
Recommended Policy: Use appropriate technology to aid the work of Inspectors and other
relevant staff.
The static load on the Bridge needs to be lightened. The 1975 road deck material is at the end
of its life and is breaking up. It acts as a sponge, partly seeping through the broken surface
and partly percolating into service channels, thus retaining rain water which adds to the static
load on the Bridge. Because the gaps between the deck plates were sealed, there is no
opportunity for this water to escape.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
63
The road deck needs to be replaced, but should be re-laid without pavements (4.1.2) to return
the Bridge to its pre-1923 configuration. Once the old material has been removed the
condition of the deck plates can be reviewed, any gaps between the plates can be opened up to
allow drainage, and if possible all services diverted off the Bridge. If this is not possible, the
cross-section of the water and gas service pipes should be reduced by the use of plastic
ducting.
While the road material is up, the manhole that provided access to the hollow concrete box
within the north abutment can be located and made accessible. It will allow future monitoring of its condition and whether it is holding undesirable amounts of water.
The replacement material should mimic the original 1779 appearance of “clay mixed with
slag”, but using sustainable materials.
A new French drain should be installed across the road to the south of the Tollgate to intercept water coming down from Benthall Edge.
Recommended Policy: Undertake repairs where they are necessary to maintain structural
integrity.
Once the repairs above have been done and the road deck renewed, the Bridge should be
repainted. The historically correct colour is dark grey (CM1 and 4.1.3).
Recommended Policy: Maintain historical accuracy by painting the Bridge dark grey.
In times of reduced financial allocation to EH, TWC, SGCT, ensure funding is in place to monitor and maintain the Bridge and ancillary structures.
Recommended Policy: Ensure prioritisation and allocation of resources.
Management arrangements between stakeholders and partners need to be maintained to ensure
effective application of statutory designations, local planning designations and
implementation of work (4.1.5, CM9 and CM10). Communication should be coordinated by the World Heritage Officer.
Recommended Policy: Coordinate awareness of stakeholders through the Steering Group.
5.5 Development
Alterations and additions to adjacent properties and to the setting could adversely affect the
presentation of the Bridge. Demolition of listed buildings within the Conservation Area
should be resisted. Owners need to be aware of the Scheduled Monument legislation, listings, conservation area and World Heritage guidance (D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 and D6).
Recommended Policy: Control inappropriate alterations to the setting.
Install new lighting units higher than their current level to aid maintenance reduce flood damage. Demolish the exiting brick „bins‟ (4.3.1 and D7).
Recommended Policy: Improve awareness of the Bridge beyond daylight hours.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
64
5.6 Presentation, visitor management, community engagement and education
EH‟s presence is surprisingly low key. Outdoors, a simple EH-branded panel is needed at
each end of the Bridge, plus a fuller EH-branded interpretive panel on the downstream
viewing platform. Include the IGMT website URL on these panels where one can find a lot of
information about the Bridge. External panels need to be designed as part of the wider
interpretation strategy for the World Heritage Site, and should be limited in number and not
be intrusive (P2, P3, and P4). Better access to the existing interpretation in the Tollhouse is required.
Recommended Policy: Improve intellectual access to the Bridge.
Relocate the pedestrian exit from the main car park further to the south so it is level with the approach road, thus avoiding the steep slope.
Recommended Policy: Improve disabled access to the Bridge.
Ascertain more accurate statistics about visitor footfall through surveys, both on the Bridge
and the towpath. Use the information to inform management decisions about carrying capacity and routine maintenance (P5, P6 and P8).
Recommended Policy: Improve knowledge base to aid management.
EH to work with IGMT, TWC, SGCT and other agencies to maximise the benefit of
educational programmes (P4). Educational facilities exist at Coalbrookdale and Blists Hill,
and do not need duplicating in Ironbridge. Through IGMT programmes are available from pre-school right up to postgraduate level, but require support for resourcing.
Recommended Policy: Maximise the educational potential of the Bridge.
5.7 Environmental pressures
Agree a programme of regular maintenance, including the removal of vegetation from outside
the parapets. A similar programme of maintenance of tree growth along the upstream south bank needs to be agreed with SGCT. (2.6.1, 2.6.2, 4.4 and E1).
Recommended Policy: Manage the day-to-day maintenance of the Bridge and its setting.
Repair damage from river scour to the south bank immediately downstream of the Bridge.
Recommended Policy: Undertake repairs where they are necessary to maintain structural
integrity.
5.8 Disasters and risk preparedness
Consider the design of demountable flood barriers to deflect floating debris towards the centre
of the river and away from the ironwork. Like the road barriers, these would only be erected
in times of need. (4.5.1, E2, E3, E4, E5, DR1, DR2, DR3, DR4 and DR5).
Recommended Policy: Manage the day-to-day maintenance of the Bridge and its setting.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
65
Land stability programme. Design and cost a programme of piling to resist the slippage of the banks (4.5.3 and DR6).
Recommended Policy: Undertake repairs where they are necessary to maintain structural
integrity.
5.9 Setting
Protect the setting by the use of planning control (CM10, CM13, D3, D4, D5 and E7).
Manage the natural setting (CM8, CM12, E8 and E9). Protect the archaeological sites (CM2). Retain and manage the views from the immediate surroundings (CM8, D5 and P7).
Recommended Policy: Liaison and ongoing dialogue between EH and SGCT, and other
agencies as appropriate.
Tree planting would help mask the visual intrusion of vehicles in views from the north bank
(4.2.1 and P7). The effect of root damage to the retaining wall and the car park surface must be considered in the selection of trees.
Repair damaged railings within the Bridge section of the towpath. Repair other railings and
footpaths on the north bank. Repair damage to steps near the upper viewing platform. Remove the staggered row of cast iron bollards at the north end of the Bridge.
Recommended Policy: Improve public safety and the setting of the Bridge.
5.10 Management, implementation and review
Review the Guardianship area boundaries in agreement with EH and TWC, especially at the
Tontine end (2.5.1).
Update the land ownership details on the GIS record.
Revise the 1997 SAM description, correcting minor inaccuracies.
Use the World Heritage Site Steering Group to inform and coordinate stakeholders in all
actions relating to the Bridge and its immediate surroundings. This should be coordinated by
the World Heritage Officer (2.5.1).
Review this Conservation Plan within five years.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 66
Appendix 1
Gazetteer
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 67
Appendix 1 Gazetteer
The Gazetteer describes the individual elements within the confines of the designated plan
area and provides an assessment of their significance, condition together with a statement of
issues and recommendations. In order to measure levels of significance, a consistent guideline
has been adopted as detailed below.
Level of
significance
Description
High The element is relatively intact, has special interest, and makes an important
contribution to the wider significance of the site.
Medium The element has been altered, has less interest, and its contribution to the
wider significance is less important
Low The element has been significantly altered, has a low level of integrity, the
special interest has been lost and it makes little contribution to the wider
significance of the site
Neutral The element is historically unimportant, but does not have a negative visual
impact on the surrounding site
Negative The element is historically unimportant or has a negative visual impact on
the surrounding site
See overleaf and Appendix 7 for the nomenclature used for the ironwork.
6
3b
3c
3a
5
5 5
1
5 2a 2b 2c
2c 2c
2d
2e
2f
4ac 4b
8a
2g
7a
8b 8c
7b
3c
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 68
Summary of nomenclature for the iron components
Lettering conventions for the Bridge used in the Gazetteer:
M is the Main Arch; S1 is the Inner Land Arch (the one nearest the river); S2 is the Outer
Land Arch, nearest the south abutment.
A, B, C, D and E identifies the frame of an arch (‘A’ being the furthest upstream); this
applies to all 3 arches.
Nq and Sq are respectively ‘north’ or ‘south quadrants’ either side of the crown of an arch.
u and d signify ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ elevations, where relevant.
Ra to Rn - with a capital ‘R’ - signify Radials of the Main arch, numbered consecutively
from the Tontine side to the Tollhouse side, starting at ‘a’ with the lower horizontal brace.
ra to rf - with a lower-case ‘r’ - are the Radials of the Side Arches; ra to rc are on the north
quadrant, and rd to rf on the south quadrant
M
S1 S2
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 69
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship
Location The main arch. 99% of the original ironwork
is still in situ.
One exception (arrowed) is included below.
Code 1.0. M. The original arch, 1779 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
The arch is almost all original The oval hoop on the left is in place;
the one on the right is missing. D/E/Sq.
There are two others also missing.
Significance High. The main arch is the most important element of the Bridge. All of the
original 1779 iron components survive in situ, except for three wrought-iron
oval hoops which are missing, two decorative ogees which were replaced in
1927, some packing between the deck bearers and deck plates, and some
swan neck supports to the balustrades that were replaced in 1980 and 2001. Condition The ironwork is sound but there are areas of rusting within some joints and
the 1999-2000 paint is beginning to fail. Issues & Recommendations
Clean Bridge back to bare metal, taking especial care within the joints and
cracks. Fill cracks with an elastomeric polymer prior to repainting.
The missing oval hoops do not pose a problem because straps added in 1926
replace their function. Consideration should be given to adding additional
deck plate packing and to removing any badly rusting original packing.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 70
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship
Location On the main arch, rising from the base
plates to the lower cross stays on both
banks. M/A to E/Nq, and M/A to E/Sq.
Code 1.1. M. The so-called ‘missing’ ribs, 1791. Outer ribs. Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
(Left) Location of the ‘missing’ ribs on Nq. (Right) A pre-1791 sketch
This 1780 woodcut shows the ribs missing on both sides
Significance High. Datable historic interventions that must be retained. From 1779 to
1791 the bottom sections of the outer ribs below the lower cross stays were
missing. There are five on each bank. While the upper and middle ribs are
continuous castings, the outer ribs are made in two sections. Its bottom
sections were added in 1791 and are the only hollow castings on the Bridge,
the earliest of all datable hollow castings anywhere. Two of them have
incised numbers (a ‘2’ and a ‘7’), suggesting these two are non-standard sizes. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations Ultrasound tests in 1996 confirmed these castings are hollow, not in tension.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 71
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location On the main arch, south quadrant,
against the inner pier, above the upper
cross stays (Rm), M/Sq
Code 1.2. M. Wrought iron brace against the pier on the south bank, 1802 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
1802 wrought iron brace against the stonework, which spans the entire pier
Significance High. This is the only large wrought iron component in the Bridge, the rest
being cast iron. When the original south abutment was demolished in 1802 a
temporary brace was erected to maintain the spacing of the frames. It was
never removed. Condition Good, though some delaminating. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic intervention that must be retained. Its function was made
redundant by the new 1803 pier so the delaminating is not critical, but this
component is a historically important element.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 72
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, above inner pier,
south quadrant, M/Sq
Code 1.3. M. Two deck plates of 1803 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Deck plates revealed in 1975. The two within the box are from 1803.
Significance High. Datable historic intervention that must be retained. The last two flat
deck plates on the south quadrants were installed in 1803 to cap the new inner
pier. All the other flat deck plates are from 1779. Those in the foreground
with flanges are from 1822. Condition Good when last uncovered (1975). Issues &
Recommendations Gaps between plates were sealed with flashing in 1975. Review when next
the plates are revealed.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 73
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, frame A, radials Re and Rf.
M/A/Nq/Re, and M/A/Nq/Rf
Code 1.4. M. Wrought iron rods added to radials Re and Rf, by 1897 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
(Left) Rods added to the top of radial Re, and (right) to radial Rf, frame A.
Significance High. On frame A, north quadrant, wrought iron rods were added to tie two
of the radials to the deck bearer above them. These two minor repairs were
undertaken following an earthquake of 1896. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic repairs that should be retained. These two radials act as
spacers between the upper rib and the deck bearer.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 74
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch just above the base plates
on both banks.
M/A to E/Nq, and M/A to E/Sq.
Code 1.5. M. Braces with cast iron spacers and steel band, at knee-height
above the base plates, 1902 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
On the north quadrant On the south quadrant
Rust expansion between the The original 1902 drawing from the
iron blocks and the steel strap. IGMT archives. IGMT.1972.12.
Significance High. This is a major structural addition to the Bridge. It was made in 1902
by the Coalbrookdale Company, order no 4388, drawing n
o 2516.
Condition Considerable rusting at the interface between the cast iron blocks and the
enclosing steel strap, especially on the south quadrant. However, the iron
blocks are sound. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. Dismantle the straps,
remove the rust, and if necessary replace the steel straps. Details are available
from the original drawings which survive in the IGMT archives.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 75
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, selective deck plate ends
over and outside frames A and E,
M/A/Nq, M/E/Nq, M/A/Sq and M/E/Sq
Code 1.6. M. Deck plate end repairs, 1902 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Where there are three bolt heads visible on the underside (above left), that
deck plate end has been repaired. This applies in 39 cases. The original
drawing (right) from the IGMT archives. IGMT.1972.13.
An original 1779 broken-off deck A new failure in 2010
plate ends, Museum of Iron Significance High. The repairs were done by the Coalbrookdale Company in 1902, both to
those damaged by a railing on the downstream side of the north quadrant that
fell into the river, and to any others that were considered unsafe. The
downward flange sits so close to the outer deck bearers A and E that a build-
up of rust is possible, and when it expands the deck plates can break off at
this point. One fell off in 2010. Condition Good. The 1902 interventions can also be identified from above by a square
end, unlike the 1779 originals which have a cavetto moulded end. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. The narrow space
between the flange and the deck bearer needs special care to remove rust and
inhibit its return. Any work on the Bridge deck that causes vibrations could
cause more deck ends to fail. Repair 2010 break.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 76
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, south quadrant, downstream
diagonal stay. M/D/Sq
Code 1.7. M. Sleeving repair to diagonal stay, 1902 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
The original drawing (left) and the repair in situ (right)
Significance High. A significant and datable intervention of riveted and bolted steel
sleeve. It was made in 1902 by the Coalbrookdale Company, order no 4388,
drawing no 2612. The original drawing is in the IGMT archives,
IGMT.1972.15. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations This is a fairly intrusive repair, but a datable historic intervention that should
be retained.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 77
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, north quadrant, below
the ogee. M/E/Nq.
Code 1.8. M. Ogee bracket support, 1903 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Significance High. Movement of the abutment must have broken off the tenon that locates
the bottom of the ogee in the inner upright, which was solved by this
substantial repair. [For interventions to the other half of the ogee, see 1.13.] Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations A datable historic intervention that should be retained.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 78
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, upper, middle and lower horizontal
braces. Steel straps added at three locations on
both quadrants. M/Nq and M/Sq.
Code 1.9. M. Steel cross ties, 1926 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
(Left) One of the 1926 steel straps next to the 1779 cast iron braces.
(Right) The original drawing.
Significance High. There are cast iron spacers of 1779 between each frame, located at
three levels on both quadrants. Wrought iron ties originally held these spacers
in position, many of which were failing by 1926 when these steel straps were
installed. Made by the Brymbo Steel Company (then part of the
Coalbrookdale Company) and installed 6th
to 9th
October 1926. The original
drawing is in the Shropshire archives, SRO.6001.3701. Condition Good. All six sets continue to serve their purpose well and show no signs of
rusting. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. The central tensioning
bolts are vital to their function and they should be replaced if necessary.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 79
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship
Location Main arch, south quadrant,
diagonal stay. M/Sq
Also north quadrant, fixing bolt to
top of diagonal stay. M/Nq
Code 1.10. M. Strap repair to upstream diagonal brace, 1926 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Two simple straps to the diagonal on the Sq. The original drawing (left) also
shows a bolt repair to the top of the Nq diagonal.
Significance High. A simple but honest repair, strapping a new strut to the fractured
diagonal. Made by the Brymbo Steel Company. The original drawing is in the
Shropshire archives, SRO.6001.3701. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. Routine checking of the
bolts is advised.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 80
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, one on top of each inner vertical.
M/A to E/Nq, and M/A to E/Sq
Code 1.11. M. Bracket repairs at the top of all ten inner vertical, 1926 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
The original drawing (left), and one of the ten brackets in situ (right). This is
the one on frame A on the north quadrant, marked A1.
Significance High. Pressure from land movement through the north abutment caused
fractures to the inner verticals at the upper cross stay (Rb) and to some of the
deck bearers where they sit on the verticals. These large cast iron saddle
brackets tie the verticals to the near horizontal bearers and were essential on
the north quadrant, but were also added on the south as a precautionary
measure. Each is individually numbered: A1 to A5 on the Nq and R1 to R5 on
the Sq. Made by the Brymbo Steel Company. The original drawing is in the
Shropshire archives, SRO.6001.3701.
When the saddles were installed the engineers also inserted 4in by 4in oak
struts between each frame, which are still in situ. Condition Good. The oak struts also seem to be in sound condition. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. Routine checking of the
bolts is advised. The oak struts should be retained if they are sound, and
replaced if not, though a cast iron equivalent would be acceptable.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 81
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, the circles in the spandrels
of each frame, M/A to E/Nq,
and M/A to E/Sq
Code 1.12. M. Clamps added to the circles, 1926 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
These simple clamps have been fitted to every circle.
Significance High. The original drawing for the saddle brackets (1.10 above) included an
instruction for these clamps to be put in 12 positions. It is in the Shropshire
archives, SRO.6001.3701. Made by the Brymbo Steel Company. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations Datable simple and honest historic interventions that should be retained.
If required the bolts could be renewed.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 82
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, two of the ogee elements
on the north quadrant on frames A and E.
M/A/Nq and M/E/Nq.
Code 1.13. M. Two wrought iron replacement ogees, 1927 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
The left half of the ogee is a 1779 casting; the right half is the lightweight
replacement. This is the one on frame E. The original drawing is on the right.
Significance Medium. Made by the Brymbo Steel Company to replace ogee elements that
had fallen off from frame A and E on the north quadrant. The original cast
iron sections are 5in by 2¾in but the two missing ones were replaced with 5in
by ¾in wrought iron sections. The contractor’s drawing is in the Shropshire
archives, SRO.6001.3701. Condition Good but buckled. Issues &
Recommendations The two ogees were lighter than the ones they replaced and between 1927 and
1972 had buckled badly as the abutment slipped towards the river. They serve
no structural purpose and could be left, or replaced in the correct cross
section.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 83
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Main arch, repair to the inner upright
M/A/Nq
Code 1.14. M. Plating of the inner upright, c1950 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
The inner vertical leans back at the fracture covered by the plate. All the other
inner verticals on the north quadrant are fractured at this point (frames A and
B can be seen on the right), but only frame A has the plating repair.
Significance High. This plating repair was done after 1946 and before 1952; the exact date
is so far unknown. A horizontal thrust through the upper cross stay was
responsible, also causing fractures to many of the decorative radials on the
north quadrant. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations An honest and functional repair which should be retained.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 84
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location North abutment, south elevation Code 1.15. M Tie bars inserted, probably 1798 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Tie bars in the north abutment
Significance High. In June 1798 tie bars were inserted into both abutments. The south
abutment was demolished three years later. It is not known whether both of
the tie bars visible in the photograph are from this date, but they are visible on
the earliest photographs. Condition Good. This abutment was emptied of its rubble fill in 1972 and a hollow
concrete box was created in its place. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 85
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Below water underneath the main arch,
about 4m below the base plates.
Code 1.16. M. Underwater concrete strut, 1973-4 Ownership English Heritage Designation Included in the Guardianship, but not part of the scheduling Description
Coffer dam for the first (south) half of the strut in 1973. Right: section.
On completion the sheet piling was cut off level with the top of the strut.
Significance Neutral. A reinforced concrete strut the width of the Bridge cast in coffer
dams over two summers in 1973 and 1974. The centre is anchored by 15m-
long stressed rods drilled down to the shale. The strut is only visible where
the concrete facing rises up the footings, stopping three courses short of the
base plates. Condition Good. An underwater survey was done in September 2008 and the strut
appeared to be in good condition with no sign of damage due to corrosion of
the rods. Issues &
Recommendations Scour on the south bank just downstream of the strut should be addressed.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 86
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Inner land arch, S1. 100% of the original
ironwork is still in situ.
Code 1.0. S1. The inner iron side arch of 1823 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Significance High. All the original components of this 1823 cast iron side arch remain in
situ, though many later interventions have been added to repair the castings.
These were required because of land movement at Bridge deck level, causing
fracturing of the frames and buckling of the road deck. There is no obvious
sign of land movement in the piers or at the lower road level. Condition Mainly good, though there is rusting between some of the bolted-on plates
and the frames beneath them. Issues &
Recommendations Clean the ironwork back to bare metal, repair the rust damage and if
necessary replace defective plates, and repaint.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 87
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Inner land arch, inner pier
Code 1.1. S1. Evidence of the earlier wooden side arch of 1802 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Next to the 1823 iron frames of the outer pier there are columns of small
stones, evidence of the larger 1802 wooden elements they replaced.
Significance High. The only surviving evidence of the 1802 timber side arches are the
columns of smaller stones next to the ironwork at the upper levels. They in-
filled the spaces left behind by the removal of the timber struts. Condition Good. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 88
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Inner land arch.
Code 1.2. S1. Bolted on plates of 1845 and 1846 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
1840s bolted-on repair plates
Significance High. A considerable number of plates were bolted on to repair fractures to
the frames, costing £96 in 1845 and £10 in 1846. Condition Most of them are sound, but a few of the later ones (see 1.3. S1) have rust
between the wrought iron plates and the cast iron frames. Issues &
Recommendations Where possible datable historic interventions should be retained. Clean the
ironwork back to bare metal, repair any rust damage and only if necessary for
structural reasons replace defective plates, and repaint.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 89
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Inner land arch.
Code 1.3. S1. Bolted on plates and horizontal spacers of 1861, and plates of
1879 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Repair plates on frame E (left), frame D (centre) and the horizontal spacers
(right).
Significance High. £100-worth of repairs was done in 1861 to the inner arch. The
horizontal spacers are in the form of Tuscan columns. Further plates were
added in 1879 which fit round the 1861 horizontal spacers. Condition Some of the wrought iron plates are in poor condition, distorted by rusting
between the plates and the frames. The horizontal spacers are sound. Issues &
Recommendations Where possible datable historic interventions should be retained. Clean the
ironwork back to bare metal, repair any rust damage and where necessary
replace defective plates, and repaint.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 90
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Inner land arch.
Code 1.4. S1. Cast iron girders added between the frames Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Significance High. £252-worth of repairs was done by the Coalbrookdale Company in
1880 to the inner arch, inserting 4 cast iron girders, one between each frame.
They have a flat bottom and a curved top, cast to match the already buckled
deck. Condition The girders are sound, but their curved upper surfaces no longer touch the
deck plates above because of subsequent land movement. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic interventions that should be retained. Insert new packing.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 91
1. The Iron Bridge - areas in Guardianship Location Outer land arch
Code 1.0 S2. Buckling of frame A on the outer land arch, 1823 Ownership English Heritage Designation Scheduled Ancient Monument, Grade 1 Listed Description
Significance High. Condition Good. Only frame A shows this buckling, caused by pressure from the
abutment. Issues &
Recommendations Datable historic element that should be retained. The distortion should be
recorded and monitored for any future movement.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 92
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location North end of the Iron Bridge Code 2a. Bollards to the north of the Bridge, parking bay to NE and stepped
pavement to NW with viewing platform Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
View towards the Tontine Car parking lay by and the Square
Planter at the foot of the steps Damaged brickwork
Significance Medium. This has little historic integrity, as there were previously buildings
to both sides, removed by 1946, but it is very important for visitor
appreciation of and access to the Bridge. There are three rows of bollards, too
many in a small area. A number of modern cast iron plaques are located here,
including the WHS plaque. Condition Some brickwork damage around steps caused by rust expansion of the railing
posts. Paved area largely good, however planters unkempt and in poor
condition. Issues &
Recommendations Differing surfaces, bollard clutter, unkempt planters. This area is very often
thronged with pedestrians who cross the road at will. Repair brickwork.
Remove the row of staggered bollards. Remove planters except when
flowering. Improve traffic management.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 93
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location North east of the Bridge Code 2b. War memorial and viewing platform Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area. War Memorial listed Description
War memorial Viewing platform, benches & planters
Significance High. This area was the site of previous buildings and the War Memorial has
been moved from the Square in 1965. Nevertheless, it is very important for
visitor access, relaxation and appreciation of the Bridge Condition All in good condition. Metal planters filled with seasonal planting Issues &
Recommendations Area of considerable pedestrian footfall, especially for Remembrance Day
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 94
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location To the NE & NW of the Bridge Code 2c. Planted slopes Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area Description
Slope to NE below War Memorial Slope to NW below Tontine Vaults
Significance Negative. These are both areas of former buildings, including housing,
warehouses and shops Condition The planting is poor, degraded and unattractive. There is gullying due to
water run-off/children Issues &
Recommendations Unattractive, poorly maintained amenity planting. This are has large numbers
of visitors and should be upgraded
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 95
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location NE of the Bridge at lower level Code 2d. Lower viewing platform over former Tontine Stables + electricity
substation Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area Description
Lower viewing platform Electricity substation
Vaulted cellars of former stable building
Significance Low. The viewing platform is a construct.
Negative. The electricity substation is visually intrusive, though necessary,
High. However, the vaults underneath are of significance, being the former
stables of the Tontine Inn, originally built in 1784. Condition The viewing platform is in good condition.
The Substation needs wood preservative.
The former Tontine stables are in poor condition, with cracks, spalling
brickwork and ingress of water. Issues &
Recommendations Access to substation- path to be kept clear for maintenance
Surfaces to be maintained
Remove vegetation from the vaults, replace bricks where necessary and re-
point using lime mortar
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 96
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location Under the North abutment
Code 2e. Path under the arch and former cellars
Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council; former cellars English Heritage
Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Stone sett path and broken railing View to the former Tontine cellars.
This area was the site of previous buildings on both sides, including a five storey
building to the west and the Tontine Stables to the east, and it is currently very
important for visitor access and appreciation of the Bridge.
Significance Medium. The path under the north abutment has considerable historic
importance. However, the stone setts were only introduced in 1990
Condition Most of the path itself is in good condition apart from the area circled, however
as noted in 2c above, the planted slopes are in poor condition. Part of the railing
is broken (circled). The façade of the former cellars – the Tontine Vaults – was
rebuilt in 1976 and shallow openings are behind the double doors.
Issues &
Recommenda
tions
Repair footpath and railing. Difficulty of wheel chair access over stone setts –
resurface, in time, with same surface as the Bridge. Ensure adequate maintenance
of the paths. There is no visible interpretation explaining the significance of the
cellars or the history of the previous buildings – dating from c1784
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 97
2. The north abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location Under the arch of the Bridge Code 2f. The Tow path Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council/Environment Agency?? Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Tow path looking west Tow path looking east. towards
Eustace Rogers’ coracle shed
Damaged footpath edge .................Damaged railings under the Bridge
Significance High Condition The tow path is of packed hoggin, the post and railings are in moderate
condition, though there are some areas in need of repair.
The river bank below in poor condition of scrubby willow, brambles and
scrub.
The wooden shed is in poor condition Issues &
Recommendations Public safety. Repair railings under the Bridge. Repair footpath edge at the
top of the upstream slope.
Flooding. This area floods on an annual basis and requires frequent
maintenance
Eustace Roger’s coracle shed. This wooden shed is a significant reminder of
the former coracle building craft of the river. It is currently for sale and a
decision must be made as to its future.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 98
2. The south abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location SE abutment of the Bridge Code 2g. The steps Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council/Environment Agency?? Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Brick steps to SE of Bridge
Significance Medium Condition Adequate, but handrail poor Issues &
Recommendations Important access to lower tow path, abutment and Bower Yard.
Slip hazard due to overhanging trees – keep swept
Handrail disappears half way down the steps (originally a gas pipe) – install
new handrail
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 99
3. The south abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Severn Gorge Countryside
Trust Location Bower Yard leading upstream along the Severn Code 3a. Un-adopted road Bower Yard leading to properties to E & W of the
Bridge Ownership Severn Gorge Countryside Trust? Private owners? Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Un-adopted road Condition of the road
Significance Low – from a visitor point of view, but high for the private owners who live
along the track Condition Poor, rutted and full of potholes Issues &
Recommendations This road is un-surfaced and takes heavy traffic dealing with repairs to the
south abutment of the Bridge. Stretches of it are liable to annual flooding.
Maintain the road
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 100
3. The south abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Severn Gorge Countryside
Trust
Location To the west of the Bridge, just upstream of the Tollhouse Code 3b. Area of rough ground on Bower Yard Ownership Severn Gorge Countryside Trust Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Rough ground along Bower Yard
Significance Negative Condition Unkempt and unsightly Issues &
Recommendations This area is clearly visible form the Bridge, and whilst it would be
inappropriate to formally plant it, it should be kept under control
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 101
3. The south abutment and surrounds – areas owned by Severn Gorge Countryside
Trust
Location Southern river bank Code 3c. Wooded river banks to W & E Ownership Severn Gorge Countryside Trust? Dawley Angling club? Environment
Agency? Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Dawley Angling Club stations along the south bank of Bower Yard
Significance Negative Condition Currently the fishing stations are in poor condition detracting from the views
from the Bridge, yet they are important for the recreation of local inhabitants Issues & Recommendations
Flooding. The bank is liable to annual flooding, with much destruction both to
vegetation and structures, yet there should be a programme of annual
maintenance.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 102
4. The Tollhouse & shed – areas owned by Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Location To the south west end of the Bridge Code 4a. The Tollhouse Ownership Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Listed building grade II Description
Tollhouse from the Bridge ( 2 storeys) Table of Tolls (copy)
Tollhouse from the rear (4 storeys).
The Tollhouse formerly functioned as the Tourist Information Centre at deck
level until 2010 with an exhibition about the construction on the upper floor.
Originally constructed in 1783, it was restored in 1974. The lower two floors
are leased as a flat by IGMT Significance High Condition Currently closed, but in good condition. The Tollhouse housed the Tourist
Information Centre at bridge level until 2010 and an exhibition about the
construction on the upper floor. It is currently open on holiday weekends and
on demand to IGMT. Originally constructed in 1783. Issues &
Recommendations Need to keep the Tollhouse maintained and in sustainable use.
Need for all weather interpretation exhibition about the construction of the
Bridge
Need for IGMT to lease the lower part of the building for income generation.
Toll House to reopen and interpretive centre for the Bridge and the town of
Ironbridge.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 103
4. The Tollhouse & shed – areas owned by Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Location To the south east end of the Bridge Code 4b. The shed Ownership Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Brick ‘shed’. The angle of lean can be seen against the upright of the tollgate.
Historic images (l to r: 1952, 1969, 2011) suggest the lean was less severe in
the past.
Significance High. There has been a shed on this spot since 1783, and at one time it was a
weighbridge. Condition The structure has a pronounced lean. One opening bricked up. Issues &
Recommendations Review cause of increased lean and stabilise if necessary. Maintenance by
IGMT.
The structure is enigmatic and unexplained to visitors.
The structure should be given some form of sustainable use (as a store for
cleaning materials or crash barriers for events?).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 104
5. Adjacent private properties
Location To the north and south, but immediately adjacent to the Bridge Code 5a. Adjacent private properties Ownership Private owners, The Landmark Trust Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
68 Bower Yard Listed building 69 Bower Yard Listed building
70 Bower Yard Listed building 70 Bower Yard Listed building
34 High Street – Listed building Owned by the Landmark Trust, ground floor
used as the Museum Shop leased by IGMT
Significance High. These buildings have intrinsic historic significance themselves, but are
also highly significant to the setting of the Bridge Condition Private ownership , but all in good condition Issues &
Recommendations Visually important to the setting of the Bridge, therefore owners should be
encouraged to maintain them using appropriate materials and skills.
Bower Yard is liable to annual flooding
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 105
6. The River Severn
Location Running through the Gorge Code 6. The River Severn Ownership The Environment Agency Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
North east bank North east bank from the south bank
Erosion on south east bank
Significance High Condition The condition of the river banks is poor in some places, especially the erosion
under the concrete slab on the SE bank. Issues &
Recommendations Flooding – the river is increasingly liable to annual flooding. Erosion scour
just below the Bridge is serious and needs attention.
Biodiversity – a female otter and cubs has been spotted on the south bank.
Possible major pollution incident from upstream, especially from Ironbridge
Power Station should there be a 100 year incident of flooding, the fly ash and
coal tips are potentially vulnerable.
The Environment Agency to monitor the river quality and condition and liaise
with TWC over flood prevention issues
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 106
7a.The wider setting north – the Tontine, the Square and the town of Ironbridge Location To the North of the Bridge Code 7a Ownership Private Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area. Many buildings are
listed.
Description
View of Tontine Hill to St Luke’s Church The Square and Market Hall
Both residential and commercial properties
The town of Ironbridge forms the immediate setting for the Bridge. Most of
the buildings in the Square date to the 1780s. The town expanded greatly
from the 1790s onwards, servicing the tourist industry and travellers
Significance High Condition Private ownership. Several shops and restaurants have closed due to the
recession, giving a negative impression Issues &
Recommendations To avoid incremental negative change e.g. loss of features such as traditional
fenestration. This will be controlled though designation and Article 4
Directions and good liaison with the public.
Desire for owners to cut emissions and install renewable energy appliances.
This will be controlled though designation and Article 4 Directions and good
liaison with the public.
Street clutter – to be controlled by Design Guidance
Car parking – to be controlled by provision of additional parking/park and
ride/cycles/engineered solutions
Flooding – the areas along the Wharfage are liable to annual flooding –
deployment of flood prevention barriers by TWC
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 107
7b.The wider setting north Location Views towards and from Lincoln Hill Code 7b. The view towards Lincoln Hill along the Wharfage Ownership Private owners / Severn Gorge Countryside Trust Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
View from the Bridge towards the Wharfage and Lincoln Hill
Significance High. Very important for the setting of the Bridge Condition Issues &
Recommendations To avoid incremental negative change e.g. loss of features such as traditional
fenestration. This will be controlled though designation and Article 4
Directions and good liaison with the public.
Desire for owners to cut emissions and install renewable energy appliances.
This will be controlled though designation and Article 4 Directions and good
liaison with the public.
Street clutter – to be controlled by Design Guidance
Car parking – to be controlled by provision of additional parking/park and
ride/cycles/ engineered solutions
Vegetation coverage at Lincoln Hill – to be maintained by SGCT.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 108
8. The wider setting south – areas owned by Telford & Wrekin Council
Location Steps to the SW of the Bridge, Car park in the former station yard Code 8a Ownership Telford & Wrekin Council Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
Entry to Car Park. Tree roots have caused damage; tree recently felled.
View of Car Park Interpretation panels
Significance Low – in heritage terms, but important as the major car park for visitors to
both the Town and the Bridge. The Severn Valley Railway closed in 1963,
track taken up by 1965, station demolished The curved wall by the pedestrian
exit is all that remains. Condition The Car Park is in good condition. However there is a crack in the boundary
wall next to the steps and distorted tarmac due to tree roots, though the tree
(top left) has since been felled (top right). Issues &
Recommendations Maintenance of facilities.
Adequate provision of car parks, but at peak visitor times e.g. Bank Holidays,
WHS Festival, the car parking is not adequate.
Provision of Interpretation/orientation – improved visitor information
required.
Provision of public toilets / currently situated on the Square.
Consider a new pedestrian exit level with the car park surface to improve
disabled access.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 109
8. The wider setting south – private properties along Bower Yard, Ironbridge Road and
Bridge Road
Location Bower Yard, Ironbridge Road and Bridge Road Code 8b. Private properties along Bower Yard, Ironbridge Road and Bridge
Road Ownership Private owners Designation Within the WHS and Ironbridge Conservation Area. Listed buildings
Description
Significance High. Important historic views from the Bridge Condition Largely in good condition Issues &
Recommendations To avoid incremental negative change e.g. loss of features such as traditional
fenestration. This will be controlled though designation and Article 4
Directions and good liaison with the public.
Desire for owners to cut emissions and install renewable energy appliances.
This will be controlled though designation and Article 4 Directions and good
liaison with the public.
Bower Yard is liable to annual flooding – Liaison with the Environment
Agency and TWC over flood prevention measures
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 110
8. The wider setting south – areas owned by Severn Gorge Countryside Trust
Location Woodland along Benthall Edge, Ladywood and Workhouse coppice Code 8c Ownership Severn Gorge Countryside Trust Designation Within the WHS, and Ironbridge Conservation Area
Description
View to Benthall Edge View towards Workhouse Coppice
and Ladywood
The views from the Bridge towards the steep wooded southern slopes of the
Gorge are extremely important. SGCT are responsible for all the woods in
this area, from Benthall Edge (SSSI) and Patten’s Rock Quarry in the west,
through Workhouse Coppice to the ancient woods of Ladywood in the East.
Stone quarried from Ladywood was used for the abutments on the southern
side of the Iron Bridge at the time of its construction in the late 1770s .The
slopes rise 100metres from the Severn forming a spectacular backdrop to the
Bridge.
Significance High. The natural setting of the Gorge is extremely important historically,
archaeologically, environmentally and aesthetically. Condition Woodland, paths and steps all well maintained by SGCT. Management plans
written and adopted Issues &
Recommendations Continued management of the woodland – continue with excellent
maintenance undertaken by SGCT.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 1 111
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
112
Appendix 2
Naming the parts
of the Iron Bridge
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
113
Main Arch (M)
Appendix 2 Naming the parts of the Iron Bridge
Summary of nomenclature
Lettering conventions used in the annotation of drawings and record photographs:
M is the Main Arch; S1 is the Inner Land Arch, the one nearest the river; S2 is the Outer
Land Arch, nearest the south abutment. S1 and S2 are substantially the same.
Nq and Sq are respectively ‘north’ or ‘south quadrants’ either side of the crown of an arch
(the Tollhouse is on the south bank).
Ra to Rn - with a capital ‘R’ - signify Radials of the Main arch, numbered consecutively
from the north (Tontine side) to the south (Tollhouse side), starting at ‘a’ with the lower
horizontal brace. Ra to Rg are on the north quadrant, and Rh to Rn are on the south
quadrant, as in the diagram above.
ra to rf - with a lower-case ‘r’ - are the Radials of the Side Arches; ra to rc are on the north
quadrant, and rd to rf on the south quadrant.
There are 5 parallel sets of frames making up each arch. A, B, C, D and E identifies the
frame of the arch (‘A’ being the furthest upstream).
u and d signify ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ elevations, where relevant.
Ironwork of the side arches (S1 and S2)
Like the Main Arch, each side arch also has five frames, identified as A to E following the
same convention.
The elements are:
ribs lower rib, and upper rib
radials ra to rf – with ra to rc on the north quadrant, and rd to rf on the south
quadrant
beams Four ‘I’ beams inserted between but parallel to the frames in S1, but
not in S2. The castings are numbered 1, 2, 3 and 4, but with 4
upstream and 1downstream
braces spacers between the frames in S1, but not in S2; they are in the form
of Doric columns
deck plates
nuts and bolts
Inner Land Arch (S1)
Outer Land Arch (S2)
Nq Sq
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
114
Ironwork of the Main Arch (M) – all in cast iron unless otherwise stated
Base Plate Each plate is made up of 5 interlocking castings
Verticals Rising from the Base Plates to the Bearers
inner vertical nearest the water
outer vertical against the abutments
Ribs The 3 concentric castings:
lower rib the one nearest the water, a single casting for each quadrant, meeting at
the Crown Joint (see below)
middle rib a single casting on each quadrant
upper rib known to be cast in 2 parts, above and below the lower cross stay Ra
and Rn (see ‘Radials’ below)
Radials Individual Radials are identified as Ra to Rn, running consecutively
from the north (Tontine) side to the south side, starting at ‘a’ with the
north quadrant (Nq) lower Cross Stay. Ra to Rg are on the north
quadrant, and Rh to Rn are on the south quadrant (see diagram below).
upper radials between the middle and upper ribs
lower radials between the middle and lower ribs
Cross Stays The 2 horizontal stays at right angles to the flow of the river
upper cross stay labeled as part of the Radials Rb and Rm
lower cross stay labeled as Ra and Rn
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
115
Deck Bearer The beams supporting the Deck Plates, cast in two pieces per quadrant,
stopping 2m short of the centre where they meet the Crown Bearer
Crown Bearer A short curved length of deck bearer extending about 2m either side of
the crown
Crown Joint The interlocking joint at the crown resembling a key stone
Deck plates Carrying the road deck, they have decorative flanges on the underside
Diagonal Stay Inverted ‘V’ brace rising from the base plates and joining at frame C
just below the upper cross stay
Horizontal Brace Horizontal spacers and ties parallel to the flow of the river; steel straps
& Strap were added in 1926 to strengthen the original cast iron braces across
the lower ribs. These castings are between the lower ribs, held in place
by wedges and wrought iron oval rings
upper horizontal brace & strap
middle horizontal brace & strap
lower horizontal brace & strap
Horizontal Brace One on each quadrant, a single casting crossing all five frames high up
on the Inner Verticals above the junction of the Outer Rib and the
Inner Vertical; best seen on the cross section of the diagram
Steel Strap (1902) Steel straps and cast iron blocks about 50cm above the base plates
‘Temporary’ A brace in three pieces across the outer verticals of the south quadrant,
Wrought Iron Brace added in 1802 to maintain stability while the original south abutment
was being demolished, but never removed. This is the only substantial
wrought iron element on the Bridge; only on the on south quadrant
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
116
Circle The decorative circle
Ogee bracket The ogee brackets high up between the Inner and Outer Verticals,
made in two pieces
Deck fascia Confining the road surface
Balustrade
base rail On the top of the Deck Fascia
posts
uprights
top rail
finials on top of the posts
dogbars the small ‘spear heads’ between each upright
swan necks supporting the posts from the overhanging base plates
lower brackets underneath the deck plates below the swan necks, linking to the
decorative flanges
Other elements:
mortise & tenon joints
dovetails actually ‘blind’ dovetails
wedges these are of cast iron
packing usually lead, but sometimes iron strips
screw bolts holding the dovetails in their housings, and also fastening the Crown
Joint; the original ones are square-headed and individually hand-made;
(any later nuts and bolts ones are hexagonal-headed)
nuts and bolts later additions, post- 1901
pins many joints, especially into the Deck Bearers, are pinned with iron
‘trenails’
Masonry
Abutments
north abutment Tontine side (sandstone)
south abutment Tollhouse side (sandstone)
Piers
inner pier nearest the river and against the main arch (sandstone)
outer pier between the 2 side arches (sandstone)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 2
117
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
118
Appendix 3
Table of issues and
recommended actions
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
119
Appendix 3 Table of issues and recommended actions
The following table of issues and actions relates to the areas of curtilage and setting described
in the Gazetteer (Appendix 1). The Planning context relates to the Wrekin Plan 1995-2006
(WP), many of the policies being still current, and to the Telford & Wrekin Core Strategy
Development Plan Document adopted December 2007. The Agency and Area refers to Fig 6
on page 13, also available on page 67.
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
1. CONSERVATION & MAINTENANCE
CM1 Conservation of the Bridge Treat rust in the 1902
braces
SAM EH
Remove rust from
between the fragile
scallop flanges and
deck bearers
SAM EH
Check bolts of 1926
steel cross ties and
renew if necessary
SAM EH
Remove road fill to
uncover deck plates,
open any gaps to aid
drainage. Apply new
road fill, but without
replacing pavements,
and cover with an
asphalt road surface
resembling clay mixed
with slag
SAM EH
Clean Bridge back to
bare metal, fill cracks.
Repaint with the final
coat in dark grey
SAM EH
Maintenance of the fabric of
the Bridge
Develop an interactive
database based on the
2000 EH Metric Survey
as a site tool to the
history of any element
EH
CM2 Protection of potential
archaeological sites within
the curtilage of the Bridge
WP 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d,
2e, 2f
3a, 3b, 3c
4a, 4b
8a
(EH & TWC) CM3 Prevention of decay: need for
ongoing maintenance of the
Bridge and tollhouse
Continued maintenance
by EH and other
property owners to
defined standards
All areas
(EH, TWC,
IGMT, private
owners)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
120
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
CM3
cont. Continued monitoring
of heritage condition
and plan maintenance /
improvement
accordingly
All areas
(EH, TWC,
IGMT, SGCT,
private
owners)
Assess the maintenance
requirements of areas
that are poor / fair
All areas
(EH, TWC,
IGMT, SGCT,
private
owners) CM4 Ongoing maintenance of the
footpaths and roads adjacent
to the abutments
Continued monitoring
of heritage condition
and plan maintenance /
improvement
accordingly
2a, 2b, 2d, 2e,
2f
3a, 3c
8a
CM5 Ongoing monitoring and
maintenance of concrete strut
under the Bridge
Continued monitoring
of heritage condition
and plan maintenance /
improvement
accordingly
EH, TWC,
EA, SGCT
CM6 Inappropriate methods or
materials for repairs through
lack of understanding, skills
or materials, or changing
modern standards
Use appropriate
materials in accordance
with best practice
All structures
and properties
Future maintenance to
be based on
Conservation
Principles (EH 2008)
Develop a training plan
to integrate skills of
different owners of the
site e.g. EH and TWC.
Ensure correct design
guidance is used
EH, TWC
CM7 Ensure prioritisation and
allocation of resources
In times of reduced
financial allocation to
EH ensure funding is in
place to continue to
monitor and maintain
the Bridge and
ancillary structures
1 (EH)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
121
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
CM7 cont
In times of reduced
financial allocation to
TWC to ensure funding
is in place to continue
to monitor and
maintain the ancillary
structures
2a-f (TWC)
7a, 7b
8a
CM8 Vegetation growth on the
Bridge, abutments and
affecting the views of the
Bridge
Undertake maintenance
on north abutment:
NW planning;
NW river bank
vegetation
management;
NE removal of ivy and
vegetation from
viewing platform;
control of vegetation on
river bank
WP
2c, 2d, 2e, 2f
(TWC)
3 (SGCT)
6 (EA)
Ensure agreed strategy
with SGCT for
management of
adjacent woodland on
the south bank and
wider setting of the
Bridge
WP 8c (TWC,
IGMT, SGCT)
CM9 Maintenance of
management of
arrangements between
partners to ensure effective
implementation
Steering Group to be
maintained to ensure
co-operation of all
stakeholders
All partners
CM10 Maintenance of effective
protection of the Bridge
through designations &
local planning designations
Ensure regular
meetings of Steering
Group
EH, TWC
CM11 Effects of previous
inappropriate repairs or
alterations
Develop a training plan
based on works so that
all partner staff,
volunteers and
contractors develop and
maintain appropriate
skills
EH, TWC,
IGMT
CM12 Ensure correct conservation
of the river banks
EA 3 (SGCT)
6 (EA)
CM13 Prevention of demolition in
the Conservation Area
WP 2 (TWC)
5 (TWC)
7a, 7b (TWC)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
122
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
2. DEVELOPMENT
D1 Protect the scheduled ancient
monument and its setting
WP 1 (EH, TWC)
D2 Potential inappropriate
alteration or addition to
Listed Buildings adjacent to
the Iron Bridge
Ensure owners are
aware of Listed
Building, Conservation
Area and WHS
guidance
WP 4 (TWC)
5 (TWC)
7a, 7b (TWC)
8a, 8b (TWC)
D3 Resist demolition of listed
buildings within the
Ironbridge CA and
specifically within the setting
of the Bridge
WP
4 (&WC)
5 (TWC)
7a, 7b (TWC)
8a, 8b (TWC)
D3 Protect and enhance
buildings of local interest
within the setting of the SAM
WP
4 (TWC)
5 (TWC)
7a, 7b (TWC)
8a, 8b (TWC)
D4 Control number and siting of
advertisements within the
setting of the Bridge
WP
4 (TWC)
5 (TWC)
7a, 7b (TWC)
8a, 8b (TWC)
D5 Changes of land use within
proximity to the Bridge,
affecting views, including
forestry or redevelopment
Work with Natural
England, SGCT and
Shropshire Wildlife
Trust to comply with
characterisation and
designations
WP All areas
(TWC, IGMT,
SGCT, private
owners)
Work with all
stakeholders and
partners to ensure any
proposed development
is appropriate, e.g.
increased car parking
All partners
and
stakeholders
D6 Loss of undesignated features
to development / land use
change
WP 3a, 3b, 3c
(TWC)
8a, 8b (TWC)
D7 Installation of permanent
lighting scheme
Be aware of light
pollution
WP 1 (EH, TWC)
D8 Removal of services Seek to remove gas,
water, electricity, etc
from within the Bridge
road material
SAM 1 (EH) and
service
providers
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
123
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
3. PRESENTATION, VISITOR/TOURISM PRESSURES, EDUCATION &
LEARNING P1 Tourism/car parking WP 2a,7a,7b
(TWC)
8a (TWC)
P2 Need to develop & enhance
the presentation of the Iron
Bridge
Develop an
interpretation strategy
for the WHS, including
directional signage and
interpretation panels /
media
WP and
IGWHS
Design guidance
All partners
Collaborate with TWC
and IGMT to enhance
visitor knowledge of
the site – e.g. website,
Tourist Information
Centres, etc
EH, IGMT,
TWC
P3 Use of the Tollhouse Discuss between
partners
WP 4a, 4b (IGMT)
EH
P4 Need to engage the local
community
Increase education
programme and
resources of IGMT and
EH for the Iron Bridge
All
stakeholders
Encourage the Friends
of the Museum to take
a greater interest in the
Bridge
IGMT
P5 Need to maintain Health &
Safety of visitors
Undertake visitor
survey of the site and to
check on maximum
load number for the
railings
All partners
Railings on paths under
abutments
TWC, SGCT
P6 Need to ensure long term
sustainable access without
erosion, damage or
overcrowding
TWC, EH,
IGMT
P7 Need to improve physical and
non-physical access to the
site
Kerbs in the square
TWC, EH,
IGMT
Information panels or
interpretation
TWC, EH,
IGMT
Improve viewpoints
e.g. from the Rotunda
site on Lincoln Hill
SGCT
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
124
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
P7 cont.
Improve car parking on
N and S side of river
TWC
P8 Antisocial behaviour
resulting in litter and graffiti
Community
engagement to help
education, deterrent
and remediation
All partners
and
stakeholders
Standards of
maintenance to be
agreed by WHS
Steering Group
P9 Improve physical access Renew the Bridge road
surface, but do not
reinstate the footpaths
and kerbs
SAM 1 (EH)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
125
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
4. ENVIRONMENT
E1 Need to address possible
conflicts with amenity users
of the river: fishermen,
canoeists, rowers, power
craft, etc
Environment Agency,
as the works would
relate to the river and
its banks
SGCT, EA,
TWC and
stakeholders
E2 Land instability Potential land
movement, distorting
the Bridge and the raft
leading to collapse
WP T&WC
E3 Climate change impacts 1.
Hotter summers, colder
winters
All partners
E4 Climate change impacts 2.
Impact of increased intensity
of rainfall, increased flood
risk
Increased liaison with
Environment Agency,
TWC
TWC, SGCT,
EA
E5 Need to protect the River
Severn from pollution
Increased liaison with
Environment Agency
over possible pollution
incidents
EA
E6 Need to protect the setting of
the Bridge
Liaison with
stakeholders and
owners TWC and
SGCT
WP
All partners
E7 Need to inhibit riverside
development that might
affect the setting of the
Bridge
WP TWC
E8 Need to protect and enhance
the biodiversity of the river
bank
Shropshire Biodiversity
Partnership
WP SGCT, EA,
Shropshire
Wildlife Trust E9 Renewable energy Renewable energy
development
WLP TWC
Wind turbines WP TWC
Energy use – private
owners
WP TWC
E10 Noisy outdoor sports WP TWC
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
126
Issue Recommended Action Planning
Context
Area and
Agency
5. DISASTER AND RISK PREPAREDNESS
DR1 Flooding TWC to liaise with EA
and EH over a Disaster
Plan
WP TWC, EA, EH
DR2 Major flooding-related
accident, e.g. damage caused
by flood-borne debris
Liaison with
Emergency Services
All partners
DR3 Pollution events 1.
Major Potential incident at E-
ON Power Station – either to
coal tips or in the
decommissioning process
Liaison with
Environment Agency,
Power Station and
Emergency Services
EA, TWC
Pollution events 2.
Major Potential incident
upstream
Liaison with
Environment Agency
and Emergency
Services
EA, TWC
Pollution events 3.
Local
Publicise Environment
Agency pollution
control advice to
adjoining landowners
and businesses
EA, TWC
DR4 Storm damage and tree fall Liaison with EA, TWC
and SGCT
EA, TWC,
SGCT
DR5 Instability resulting in
fracture of the concrete raft
under water or members of
the Bridge
Constant monitoring of
the Bridge and slopes
of the Gorge
EA, TWC,
SGCT
DR6 Instability resulting in
slipping of sides of the Gorge
Liaison with TWC, EA
and SGCT
EA, TWC,
SGCT
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 3
127
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
128
Appendix 4
Map regression
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
129
Appendix 4 Map regression
1808, Robert Baugh
1847 Tithe map. Nothing on the south side of the river was within the Madeley Tithe, so it was not included on
the map. Here it has been rotated through 90 degrees. IGMT
The only road towards
Madeley is Church Hill,
opened in 1781 as part of the
Bridge access works
Group of buildings erected
by 1837, including two
shops with doors onto the
Bridge. A warehouse was
by the river bank.
Tontine stables
against the road,
built 1817
Tontine Hotel, 1784
Market buildings,
1793
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
130
1883. Edina Digimap
1902. IGMT
Ironbridge & Broseley station,
Severn Valley Railway, opened
1862
The lowest building of
this group blocked the
accommodation arch
The White Brick
& Tile Works
A domestic property next
door to the Tollhouse,
built by1855
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
131
1927. IGMT
c1967. Edina Digimap
Tontine stables
were demolished
between 1949 and
1952
Severn Valley Railway
closed 1963
World War I war memorial
erected in the Square
Brick & Tile
Works gone
Group of buildings that were
against the Bridge were
demolished in May 1946
War memorial
re-sited 1965
Domestic property
next to the Tollhouse
demolished by 1965
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
132
1990s map. Edina Digimap
2011 GIS map. EH
Road realigned.
Viewing platforms
built 1976
Underwater
concrete strut
built 1973-4
Site of railway sidings
turned into a car park, 1975
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 4
133
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 134
Appendix 5
Understanding the
development of the
Bridge: details
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 135
Appendix 5 Understanding the development of the Bridge - details
Single iron arch, between masonry abutments, 1779-1801
The original design was for a 120ft arch in cast iron without any towpaths, conceived by Shrewsbury
architect Thomas Farnolls Pritchard in 1775, but the final shape strongly echoes his earlier 50ft-span
masonry bridge built near Ludlow in 1772. The footings for the new Bridge were built up to base
plate level by October 1778, but Pritchard‟s death the previous December meant that the detailed
design of the ironwork owes more to the Quaker ironmaster Abraham Darby III and his foreman
patternmaker Thomas Gregory. The Bridge was erected in three short months in the summer of 1779,
the ironwork being essentially a free-standing structure anchored into, but not braced by the
abutments. The uprights were built perpendicular on the Tontine side, but on the Broseley side they
settled at an angle. The rest of the abutments and the road connections took longer to complete so the
Bridge was not opened to traffic until 1st January 1781. The Tollhouse was built in 1783 and already
in the following year cracks were recorded in the south abutment. They continued to worsen until
1798 when tie bars were added to both abutments. The lowest sections of the upper ribs were not
added until 1791.
1772
Bringewood Forge Bridge, 6km west of Ludlow
over the River Teme, designed by Thomas
Farnolls Pritchard in 1772 and erected the same
year. 50 ft span. The general arrangement and
proportions were repeated in the Iron Bridge,
including abutments with accommodation arches.
ICE Historic Engineering Work No 1278.
1775
Thomas Farnolls Pritchard‟s design of 1775 for a
cast iron bridge „between Madeley and Broseley‟
differs from the final arrangement in that the
ironwork was altered to allow for a towpath. [from
„On Cementitious Architecture...‟ by John White,
Philosophical Magazine & Annals, Vol XI, p183,
1832]. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
IGMT.1986.8609.1
c1777
Pencil and wash sketch by William Williams
looking upstream, annotated “A View on the
River Severn at Madley (sic) near Coalbrook
Dale and where the iron bridge is to be built”. The
road coming down to the river clearly shows the
Bridge would replace a ferry crossing, jointly
owned by Edward Harries and Abraham Darby.
Aberdeen Art Gallery, 70515-1. IGMT.1985.197.
1 Negative or accession number; those prefixed IGMT are from the collections of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 136
Pencil sketch by Joseph Farington from near Hay
Farm about a mile downstream. Though this was
actually drawn on 25th September 1789 and
therefore already shows the Bridge in place, its
viewpoint high up on the hillside allows the
structure to be clearly seen in its setting. It is
possible to locate the sandstone quarries for the
abutments, the one on the Broseley side being re-
discovered in 1999. The site is marked by a small
shelf where the stone outcrops and its quarrying
produces a wider working platform. On the opposite bank is a matching platform where the same
strata outcrops again (the latter shelf was wider then, but is no longer accessible as it has since
been built over). This is one of two sketches of the area by Farington done within a day of each
other, and his powers of observation have proved to be very accurate. IGMT.CBD.59.129.
1779
Watercolour sketch by Elias Martin, looking
upstream, undated but July 1779, as the first arch
went up on 1st and 2nd July according to a
newspaper account in the Shrewsbury Chronicle,
10th July. It shows a flimsy scaffold downstream of
the ironwork, with three of the five ribs in place,
the inner verticals, and a few timber struts to keep
the castings in their relative positions. Most
importantly, there is no sign of the abutments
above the base plates at this stage. This is still the
only known image of the Bridge under
construction. Skandia Company collection,
Stockholm.
1780
Oil painting by William Williams, looking
upstream. It was done before the Bridge was
finished, having been commissioned by Abraham
Darby III for 10 guineas and paid for in October
1780 [Abraham Darby‟s personal cash book for
1771-81, IGMT.1993.3374]. It is essentially an
engineering drawing (see below SSMT.34 of
1782) superimposed on the 1777 sketch above. As
this showed a front elevation of the ironwork, the
artist chose a viewpoint that was the least
complicated regarding the perspective. Conceived
as a promotional image, it shows the Bridge
already in use and the „missing ribs‟ in place.
However, the Bridge did not open till 1st January
1781 and the missing ribs were not added until
after June 1791. IGMT.1992.12918.
Watercolour by Michael Angelo Rooker, based
on the Williams oil painting above which he
simplified for engraving; Rooker‟s picture was
commissioned by Abraham Darby III at £29 and
paid for in January 1781 [Abraham Darby‟s
personal cash book, IGMT.1993.3374]. Aberdeen
Art Gallery. IGMT.1983.1932.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 137
Woodcut by J Edmunds of Madeley, correctly
showing the lowest section of the upper (outer)
ribs missing. The text below the picture says the
Bridge was cast in 1778, and erected in 1779 and
1780. IGMT.1981.20.
1781
On 1st January the Bridge was opened to traffic. There was no Tollhouse when the Bridge first
opened, but one had been built by the time the tolls were auctioned in October 1783 [Bridge
Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 9th Feb 1781, SRO.3689-982]. The first image to include the
Tollhouse is by Burney in 1784 (see below, IGMT.1973.202).
c1781
Souvenir snuff or patch box, captioned
„A Present from the Iron Bridge‟, based on the
Edmunds woodcut above of 1780
(IGMT.1973.132), and showing the missing ribs
(see P115‟51.E29 of c1790). Ironbridge Gorge
Museum Trust, IGMT.L198.
1782
Engraving by William Ellis after Michael Angelo
Rooker, from the watercolour of 1780 in the
Aberdeen Art Gallery (which in turn was based on
the 1780 Williams oil above). Subscribers also
received an engineering drawing (see below).
IGMT.1983.1933.
Engineering drawing published by James
Phillips, 1782, issued with the Rooker
engraving. The original must have been made
available to Williams in 1780, which allowed
him to copy the detailed arrangement of the
ironwork. The text confirms that “All the
principal parts were erected in three Months
without any accident either to the work or the
workmen.” IGMT.SS/MT.43.
2 SRO, Shropshire Record Office reference (since re-named Shropshire Records and Research).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 138
Aquatint by E Edgcombe, published 1st May
1872, 1st edition, looking upstream and showing
the upper ribs missing below the lower cross
stays. A 2nd edition with minor changes was
published in 1786. British Library, Map Library,
King‟s Topography. BL/ML.KT.36/26d.
1784
By July 1784 the Tontine hotel had opened as a building of 3 bays wide, designed by Shrewsbury
architect John Hiram Haycock. The name „Tontine‟ was not adopted until October that year. In
December cracks were recorded on the south abutment.
The trustees “Ordered that the Cracks in the Arch on the Benthall Side be gaged and examined if
it goes any worse.” [Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 3rd December 1784, SRO.3689-
98]. This is presumably the accommodation arch that was within the south abutment. (See also
entries for 1792, 1798, 1799 and 1801).
Engraving by Thomas Frederick Burney, looking
downstream, after an original watercolour now in
the Mellon Collection, Connecticut. This is the
earliest image to include the Tollhouse, which
had not been built when the Bridge first opened in
January 1781. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
IGMT.SSMT/33.
1786
Aquatint by E Edgcombe, 2nd edition, l786, looking upstream and showing the missing ribs.
The 1st edition with minor differences was published in 1782. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
IGMT.SS/MT 40.
The trustees “...Ordered that Lamps be put up ... Two on the Centre of the Bridge...” [Bridge
Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th December 1786, SRO.3689-98]. Shropshire Record
Office. Earlier paintings and prints already show two lamps, but this is assumed to be artistic
licence. Later photographs only ever show a single lamp, placed on the upstream parapet.
Pencil sketch of c1786 by Sir Richard Colt Hoare,
looking upstream, the earliest view to include the
Tontine Inn, which had opened in 1784 as a
building of 3 bays wide and was extended 1786-7
to 5 bays. Hoare shows two pilasters by the
accommodation arch on the south abutment. Like
many other artists, he had trouble drawing the
Bridge and made a second attempt near the top of
the page. Cardiff Public Library, IGMT.A1833.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 139
1786-7
The Tontine hotel was enlarged from 3 to 5 bays and the stable block built, the work being directed
by Samuel Wright of Kidderminster.
1787
The trustees “Ordered that the Iron Railings be painted a deep Lead Colour for Iron” [Bridge
Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th June 1787, SRO.3689-98].
A mahogany model of the Bridge, 1/24 scale, was
presented to the Royal Society of Arts in 1787,
for which Darby received the Gold Medal the
following year. The model is in the collection of
the Science Museum. It is interesting that it shows
the Bridge with the completed upper ribs despite
the fact they had not yet been built (see 1791
entries below). This suggests it was made from the Phillips engineering drawing of 1782. Science
Museum photo 31936. IGMT.1984.6134.1.
1788
(above, left) Oil painting by George Robertson, looking downstream from the north bank. The
massive south abutment can be seen with its accommodation arch flanked by pilasters.
IGMT.1978.82.
(above, right) Engraving by Francis Chesham after George Robertson, looking downstream.
It shows that the pilasters on either side of the accommodation arch were repeated on the
downstream side as well. The depth of the Gorge is exaggerated. Elton Collection,
IGMT.AE185.765.
1789
The trustees “...Ordered that a Bar of Iron be fixed on each Side of the Bridge to the Iron Work
and to communicate with the River as a Conductor in case of Lightening ...” [Bridge Proprietors‟
Minute Book, 1775-98, 5th June 1789, SRO.3689-98]. Given that the Bridge was of iron this was
entirely unnecessary.
before 1791
Architect‟s drawing, artist unknown but from a
folder that belonged to Thomas Sandby. It shows
the missing rib (the lowest section of the upper rib
from the base plate up to the first horizontal stay),
fitted in 1791. The left quadrant is annotated with
dimensions that are the cross sections of the
castings. Royal Library Windsor Castle,
RL.17929B (IGMT.1993.743).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 140
Pencil sketch by John Russell, showing the
underside of an unfinished joint where one of the
missing ribs will fit. Birmingham Museum & Art
Gallery, P115‟51.E29 (IGMT.1993.744).
1791
The trustees “Ordered that the Ironwork at the
Bridge be improved by finishing out the back Iron
Ribs to support the Crofspieces and strenthen [sic]
the Bridge ...” [Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book,
1775-98, 3rd June 1791, SRO.3689-98. ]. This
was for the lowest sections of the upper ribs, and
their installation completed the Bridge as
originally shown in the engineering drawing of 1782. There are 10 castings, one for each of the
five frames on each quadrant, and they are the only hollow castings on the Bridge (proved by an
ultrasound test made for the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust on 1st July 1996).
1792
The trustees “...Ordered that the butment [sic] of the Bridge on the Benthall side be put into
repair.” [Bridge Proprietors‟ Minute Book, 1775-98, 7th December 1792, SRO.3689-98]
c1795
Aquatint by J Baker, looking downstream. This is
the earliest image of the completed Bridge which
correctly includes the previously „missing‟ ribs.
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
IGMT.SSMT/34.
1798
The trustees “Ordered the Abutments of Bridge & Ironwork be repaired”. [Bridge Proprietors‟
Minute Book, 1775-98, 8th June 1798, SRO.3689-98]. This included iron tie bars through the
abutments (see 1799 below).
The Coalbrookdale Company did the work, whose bill is recorded at £118/8/6 on 10th October
1789, suggesting that the job was a considerable one [Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal,
1789-1808, p14, IGMT.CBD.59.82.4. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive].
„Svedenstierna‟s Tour of Great Britain 1802-3‟ (translated by EL Dellow, 1973, p71) refers to the
above repair: “Some time earlier, before I came there, the ground at one end had yielded, and yet
people drove over the bridge without noticing it, until some bolts had either broken or bent, and it
was clearly seen, that certain parts of the structure began to separate. These parts were screwed
together, the arch was tightened up as well as possible, and meanwhile the displaced abutment was
strengthened, without the bridge having once been unusable on this account.” IGMT.1975.111.
1799
In a letter from Simon Goodrich of 8th December 1799 there is evidence of iron tie rods having
been inserted in the (south) abutment: “... the Abutments have suffered from the violence of some
high floods [especially the one of 12th February 1795, the highest on record] and the one that has
been the longest has been perforated with iron bars clamped at the ends with other flat bars in
order to keep the Stones together.” Goodrich Collection, Science Museum.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 141
The south abutment demolished and replaced by two timber land arches, 1802-4
Tie bars had been added to both abutments in 1798, but on the south side proved inadequate as the
bank continued to move so the abutment was demolished in 1802. A temporary wooden bridge was
built to straddle the gap while masonry was removed and two stone piers were built, and from 1803 a
pair of more permanent timber lattice spans provided the road deck from the Tollhouse up to the main
arch. These remained in place until 1823 when they were replaced by cast-iron arches. The Tollhouse
building was doubled in size in 1835 and a group of buildings were erected against the north
abutment in 1837, surviving until 1946.
1800
Lithograph by F Calvert after Samuel Ireland,
looking upstream. Ireland had died in 1800 and
the picture first appeared in Thomas Harral‟s
„Picturesque Views of the Severn‟ of 1824. It
shows the south abutment in its original form. It
also shows the stable block below the Tontine with
its cupola vent on the roof, built 1786-7 when the
Tontine hotel was enlarged from 3 to 5 bays, the
work being directed by Samuel Wright of
Kidderminster. IGMT.1836.
The Bridge trustees order 2,000 ft of 3 inch oak
planks for a temporary bridge over the south abutment. [Minute Book of the Bridge Trustees,
1800-1828, December 5th 1800, SRO.6001.3697].
1801
On 6th March 1801 the Bridge trustees ordered “there to be a Temporary Bridge made over the
abutment on the Benthall side ... according to a plan shown by Mr Thos Thomas... and as soon as
the said Bridge is compleated [sic] that all the soil be taken from under the sd Bridge from the Iron
work to the dry arch ...” – This was effectively an instruction to remove the whole of the south
abutment from the outer vertical right back to a line with the far wall of the accommodation arch.
Thomas was also requested (on 15th April 1801) to measure the span “to ascertain if the said
abutment moves.” He reported back on 29th April that both abutments did move, though how he
measured this is not recorded. More importantly, he noted “that part of the Iron work on each side
is Broke from the pressure of the abutments.”
Judging by the instruction to entirely remove one of the abutments, it is safe to assume that the
fractures were low down. They may have been at the junction where the ribs pass through the
horizontal stays as there are fractures here on both sides, but these breaks have little effect on the
integrity of the structure. However, it is more likely that the part that was „Broke‟ on the south
side is the fracture to the base plate between frames D and E, which was visible in a late
nineteenth century photograph (see IGMT.1982.2199 of c1890).
In early May 1801 the Trustees urgently investigated a scheme proposed by Henry Williams to
hold the abutments apart by an underwater strut of timber, but rejected it a week later on 12 th May,
when they ordered “40 Tons of Good Timr ...”. This is in addition to the 2,000 ft of oak planks
ordered in December the previous year, and must be the material billed by the Coalbrookdale
Company in 1803 (see below). They also ordered substantial foundations to be made in order to
turn the back wall of the accommodation arch into the new end of the south abutment (though the
Secretary mistakenly entered the word „Madeley‟ instead of „Benthall‟ in the minutes). The entry
ordered “that a platform of timber be prepared and made and plancks [sic] prepared to cover from
the Iron work of the Bridge to the back wall of the Dry arch to be built by Saml and William
Smith...” [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 142
1802
Pencil sketch by Paul Sandby Munn‟s of 11th July
1802, looking upstream, showing the demolition
of the south abutment in progress. A temporary
wooden way was built which can be seen on the
left of the sketch, but this was before the stone
piers were built and more substantial timber
installed in 1803. A „temporary‟ wrought iron
brace was added above the upper cross stay,
though was never removed. The work was started by James Parry [Bridge Trustees Minute Book,
1800-1828, 1st July 1803, SRO.6001.3697], but he was later dismissed and it was completed by
Shrewsbury architect John Simpson. Victoria & Albert Museum, E3112/1948.
Another pencil sketch by Paul Sandby Munn of
11th July 1802, also looking upstream but a more
distant view. It shows the stable block below the
Tontine with its cupola vent on the roof. Victoria
& Albert Museum, E214-1939.
1803-4
In August 1803 the trustees ordered that two piers be built as quickly as possible and the
temporary wooden bridge over the gap left by the removal of the south abutment be secured. The
work was done under the direction of Shrewsbury architect John Simpson and was not finished
until the summer of 1804. The wooden deck of the new side arches was covered with 6 inches of
clay topped with ashes, while the rest of the timber was coated with coal tar. Once the job was
completed, the spare timber was sold off at auction on 17 th August 1804. [Minute Book of the
Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697].
The timber had been supplied by the Coalbrookdale Company and consisted of “2 Lots slabs, 55
planks, 117 Rafters, 8 Deal and 9 Oak Planks, 200 ft Oak Scantlings, 366 ft Elm Boards”. The
total cost was £16/11/1 and was billed on 4th August 1804. The entry for „2 Lots slabs‟ was for the
iron plates that capped the inner pier. A later photograph (see below under 1975,
IGMT.1981.154) revealed that the masonry of this pier was covered by iron plain deck plates
matching those on the main arch, while deck plates spanning the later iron side arches (of 1821)
had rising flanges. [Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808, p271,
IGMT.CBD.59.82.4]. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive.
The ironwork of the Bridge must have already been noticeably out of plumb (built that way rather
than the result of movement), but the masonry of the new inner pier was built vertical, requiring
considerable cutting of the upper stonework to minimise the effect. The difference was halved,
with the upper portions of the ironwork being recessed into the stone blocks and the lower parts
standing proud – as they are to this day.
The building opposite the Tollhouse dates as far back as 1804, when the Trustees “ordered that
the shed near the Bridge Gate be tiled.” [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-
1828. December 7th 1804, SRO.6001.3697].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 143
Between 1804-21
Anonymous pencil sketch looking downstream,
showing the timber side arches. The artist has
drawn the main beam and the railings as two tiers
of the same arrangement, but other artists clearly
show the railings to be half the proportion of the
beam (see W Smith, and AH Howe of 1810,
below). The railings at bridge deck level were
probably cast iron, as a section of them looking
just like this survived next to the Tollhouse until
1979. The rest of the structure was timber.
National Library of Wales, p38vol90.
1808
On 3rd June 1808 the Trustees ordered “that a New Oak Toll Gate & Posts be put up on the
Bridge. [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697]. These
were replaced in 1852 (see below).
1810
Lithograph by W Smith looking upstream, which
clearly shows the string courses on the masonry
piers from which the timber arches rise. A
substantial timber lattice beam is supported on
diagonal struts that rest on the string courses.
Above this beam is an iron railing mimicking the
timber, but half the proportion. The Tontine
stables are shown as a 2-storey building with a
cupola. Shropshire County Library collection.
c1810
Detail of a pen and wash drawing by Arthur
Holdsworth Howe c1810, looking upstream from
the north bank. The bridge deck is supported on a
lattice timber beam, stiffened in turn by raking
struts which rest on the string courses of the new
piers. The railings mimic the lattice arrangement
of the timber, but at a smaller scale. These were
probably of iron, as railings of this design
survived near the Tollhouse until 1979. Ironbridge
Gorge Museum Trust, IGMT.1978.225.3.
1812
The Trustees ordered “that a Table of Tolls be put up at the Iron Bridge gate (December 4 th 1812).
[Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697].
The painted cast iron tollboard listed the charges
laid out in the original 1776 Act of Parliament
and remained in place until 1950, being re-sited in
its original location in 1975 when the Tollhouse
was restored. In the 1980s it was removed inside
the Tollhouse and a more legible modern copy
placed outside. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
IGMT.1981.1881.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 144
1817-18
Pencil and sepia wash sketch by Joseph Powell
looking upstream, drawn after the Tontine stables
burnt down in 1817, but before 1821 when the
timber arches were replaced in iron. This is the
earliest-known view of the new stable block,
which was built further back than its predecessor.
Powell‟s sketch book of 1816-18, Victoria &
Albert Museum E1857-1946.
The timber arches on the south abutment replaced with iron arches, 1821-3
The Coalbrookdale Company were asked in December 1818 to estimate for replacing the timber side
arches in iron, which they did on April 15th 1819. However, the price proved “to be more than was
expected” and the work was not approved until December 1820. Work began in the summer of 1821,
and was completed when the new iron arches were painted in 1823 [Minute Book of the Trustees of
the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828, SRO.6001.3697].
1821
A diary entry by Joshua Field
for 25th August on his tour of
1821 stated “The great arch
only was of iron and 2 side
arches of wood which are now
so decay‟d that iron arches are
putting up in their place. The
ribs of one ½ the bridge are
up, and the road contracted to
½ the width.” [Transactions of
the Newcomen Society, Vol
VI (1925-6) p31]. In the
detail from the survey
drawing of 1999 (left) it can
be seen that there are columns
of small stones next to the
ironwork in the upper levels,
which were used to infill the spaces left by the removal of the wider timber struts. Ironbridge
Archaeology.
1823
Coalport china cup with hand-painted view of the
Bridge from downstream. The source was the W Smith
lithograph (of 1810 above), but with the land arch re-
drawn. As a result, it shows the original stable block,
even though this had burnt down in 1817. Made at the
nearby Coalport factory, the cup was probably
commissioned to commemorate the completion of the
new side arches. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Elton
Collection, IGMT.AE185.1806.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 145
Tollhouse enlarged, 1835/6
On 17th July 1835 the Trustees of the Iron Bridge ordered that the Tollhouse should be enlarged
under the direction of Samuel Smith and Surveyor William Smith. At a final cost of £145/18/6, the
bill was settled in two parts, on 4th December 1835 and 3rd June 1836. The building was doubled in
length, so now had two rooms side by side above the deck level. [Minute Book of the Trustees of the
Iron Bridge, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698].
1835
Lithograph by William Westwood looking
downstream. Published early in 1835, this image still
shows the building in its original form before being
enlarged. The railings on the stretch right next to the
Tollhouse are a survival from the ones seen on views
of 1804-1821 with the timber arches. The earliest-
known artist‟s view to include the enlarged
Tollhouse is 1856. IGMT.1973.37.1.
Block of buildings on the upstream side of the north abutment, c1836
1837
Watercolour attributed to J Fidlor, looking
downstream from the Wharfage, showing the
substantial block of buildings grouped around the
north-west end of the Bridge. A bill head of 1841
(see A743 below) confirms this block was there, and
a companion painting by Fidlor in the Shrewsbury
Museum collection includes St Luke‟s church, which
was completed in 1837. The exact date the block
was erected is still unknown, but is assumed to be
1836. IGMT.1978.73.
1839
On 6th December 1839 the Trustees ordered that gas
lamps be added to the Bridge, one on either side of
the toll gate and one on the centre of the upstream
parapet. Apart from paintings and engravings done
before 1800 (Williams, Rooker, Edmunds,
Edgcombe, Burney, Robertson and Baker), there are
no images showing lamps on the Bridge before 1856
(see below IGMT.SSMT/36 for 1856). These early
views may all have copied the lamp from the 1782
engineering drawing (IGMT.SS/MT 43), which had
included lamps because their cost was allowed for in
the original estimate of 1775, though it was not until
1786 that the records first include the instruction to
install two lamps at the crown of the Bridge. In the
1839 order there is no mention of a lamp on the
downstream parapet, nor any later photographic
evidence of there ever having been a lamp on this side. However, a site survey in 1999 [Ironbridge
Institute photograph 30.24, of 23rd December 1999] showed that the overhanging deck plates at
the crown were made with a hole for a lamp support. Gas bills appeared in the Bridge account
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 146
books from 1841 at six-monthly intervals, starting at £4/10/0. [Minute Book of the Trustees of the
Iron Bridge, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698].
Photograph (left, one of a stereo pair of c1900, IGMT.1981.1569) showing the gas lamp at the
crown of the Bridge on the upstream parapet.
1841
Bill head by W Bangham for Edward Edwards, linen
and woollen draper, provides the earliest dated view of
the buildings on the north abutment, later occupied by
Bates & Hunt, chemist. It was demolished in 1946. The
view is looking upstream from the square. SRO,
Labouchère Collection, IGMT.A743.
Repairs to the ironwork of the land arches, 1845, 1846, 1861 and 1879
Repairs in the 19th century were all concerned with the iron land arches – reinforcing plates being
added on at least four occasions. The 1861 work included horizontal spacers between the iron frames
of the inner of the two arches (the one nearest the river).
1845
The Trustees‟ Minute Book for 5th December 1845 reports that “... considerable repairs have been
needed to the Land Arches which have been done by the Coalbrookdale Company, the Surveyor
be ordered to pay the amount of their a/c £95/17/2.” This must have been for the first series of the
many bolted-on plates. [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1830-1861,
SRO.6001.3698].
1846
On 4th December 1846 a further Coalbrookdale Company bill “for repairing the Bridge” was
settled at £9/16/5. The exact work is unspecified, but will have been for ironwork. [Bridge
Proprietors Minute Book, 1841-1861, SRO.6001.3694].
1852
New wooden gates and posts were installed by John Griffiths of Coalport. The order came from
the Trustees 4th June 1852 and was paid on 2nd December, at £11/3/0. [Bridge Proprietors Minute
Book, 1841-1861, SRO. 6001.3694].
Photograph (detail). The enlarged Tollhouse is
evident, plus a new dwelling abutting it in the
foreground. The wooden tollgate survived until at
least 1896. IGMT.1988.274.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 147
c1856
Chromolithograph by John Cox Bayliss, a distant
view from downstream on the south bank. The
base of the burnt down Tontine stable block is
still evident and its new replacement can be seen
further back. The Tollhouse is in its enlarged
form, having been extended 1835/6.
IGMT.SS/MT.36.
1861
On April 19th 1861 the Trustees of the Iron Bridge
agreed “to have the necessary repairs as suggested
[by Mr Darby] made to the Bridge provided the
estimate cost thereof do not exceed the sum of
£100.” [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron
Bridge, 1830-1861, SRO.6001.3698]. Further
plates were added, plus the horizontal spacers
between the ribs on the inner land arch (photo left,
November 1999).
1862
Drinking fountain obelisk erected in the Square near the Tontine. The Severn Valley Railway opens,
with Ironbridge station on the south bank of the river right by the Bridge (renamed Ironbridge &
Broseley in 1895). Both these landmarks allow the more accurate dating of photographs.
by 1866
A „Machinery House‟ is used for a weighbridge mechanism opposite the Tollhouse. [Madeley
Board of Guardians‟ Minute Book, 4th January 1867, confirms the building‟s use at that date]. The
building is still standing today, the sloping of the front wall already being evident by 1921 (see
IGMT.1982.2807). The building dates as far back as 1804, when the Trustees “ordered that the
shed near the Bridge Gate be tiled.” [Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828.
December 7th 1804, SRO.6001.3697].
1879
Further repairs to the land arches. Some plates are cut to fit round the horizontal spacers referred to
above (1860s), showing they were added later.
Girders added to the inner land arch, 1880
The Coalbrookdale Company provide and install 4 cast iron girders, one between each of the ribs of
the inner land arch, for £125/10/-. Messrs Nevitts do the associated work repairing and replacing
masonry as necessary, for a further £126/15/3. The former bill is settled in November, the latter in
two parts, on 24th September 1880 and 26th March 1881. The ironwork comprised “4 Cast Iron
Girders 32ft long; 2 cast Iron distance Pieces [why there are only 2 and exactly what they are for is
unknown, though they might have been replacement horizontal spacers for ones originally added
in 1861]; 22 Heads for Railings; 3 Brackets, 1 cast Iron Plate; also wrought iron Plates; glands,
Cramps ties; Railings, Brass and lead for fixing the whole; Delivered and fixed in position.” The
masonry work was described as being “...for repairs to Stone Walling, Cutting holes for Girders and
taking down and rebuilding Piers and cutting out and replacing decayed Stone and repointing the
stone work including finding and erecting all scaffolding.” The bill included some Grinshill stone
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 148
(limestone), undoubtedly the capping stones of the piers above deck level. [Expenditure for the repair
of the Iron Bridge, 1861-1881, SRO.6001.3695].
An engineer‟s report of 1923 by Mott, Hay &
Anderson refers to the large beams being 1ft 9in at
the centre and 1ft 6in at their ends [IGMT
1991.2606]. Site investigation in December 1999
confirmed that the bottom of each beam is straight,
while the top is curved, accounting for the
difference in the dimensions. The profile follows
the arching of the road deck, though the beams no
longer come into direct contact with the deck
plates. Each beam is individually numbered using
a numeral cast on to the vertical face; these run
from 1 to 4, starting from the downstream end, unlike the ribs of the main arch which by
convention are described as running from A to E starting from the upstream end. [Ironbridge
Institute record photograph 2.10, (left) 18th November 1999].
c1880
A photographic postcard (Francis Frith No 13017;
numbers lower than 18521 are before 1886)
looking upstream from the north tow path. The tilt
of the outer vertical of frame E on the south
quadrant is clearly visible, a discrepancy that
already existed when the piers were built in 1803.
The fractured base plate on the south side
(between frames D and E) is visible, which is
probably the one recorded as early as 1801. The
inner vertical on the north quadrant frame E is
still straight, though will later be seen to bend over from near the mid point. There are no railings
on the south bank towpath, but a rough timber one on the north bank. Three chimneys stacks are on
the Tollhouse; the section of railings opposite the Tollhouse survives as a legacy from the earlier
timber side arches. Plating and horizontal spacers are visible on the inner side arch, but no plating
is visible on the outer side arch. The decorative top of the brickworks chimney is there, but will be
blown off in a storm in March 1895. IGMT.1982.2199.
A slight buckling of the bridge deck over the inner
land arch is evident (detail of photograph
IGMT.1982.2199).
1888
The parapet wall by the Chemist was taken down and rebuilt, the bill for £12/0/0 paid on 16 th
April 1888. [Expenditure for the repair of the Iron Bridge, 1861-1881, SRO.6001.3695].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 149
Deck bearers no longer in a straight line, visible above the inner verticals, c1890
Pressure from land movement on the north bank (town side) acted on the middle of the abutment and
so was concentrated through the upper horizontal cross stays, causing the inner verticals to snap just
above them. This in turn caused the main deck bearers to fracture at the top of the inner verticals
resulting in a slight buckle of the previously straight beams. Many of the decorative radials were also
fractured by this thrust, but only on the north quadrant.
c1890
Photograph from a field above Bower Yard,
looking downstream. A storage building is right
against the north abutment next to the tow path,
the first time this building appears in photographs.
There is a Severn trow on the south bank (the last
boat sailed in 1895). There are no trees near the
water because of the towpath. The chimney of the
White Brick Works, known as the „White
Brickle‟, can be seen on the left, still with its
decorative top (which was later blown off in a
gale of 24th March 1895). There is evidence of
the deck bearers being slightly out of line where
they cross the inner uprights, visible for the first time in this photograph. IGMT.1986.11909
The photograph (left) taken in February 2010 shows that the
movement continued. Repairs addressed the weakness of the
deck beams in 1927 through the addition of bolted-on
saddles at the junction of the verticals and the beams
(circled in white).
1892
(above right) Detail of photograph from just above the towpath on the south bank, looking
downstream. Storage building against the north abutment next to the tow path. The trow in the
foreground is the same one as in a dated Frith postcard of 1892 (IGMT.1986.10996 above). No
railings along the north tow path. A substantial brick wall along the Wharfage. IGMT.1984.6350.
1895
On Sunday 24th March 1895 a gale blew the top of the White Brick Works chimney stack off, which
had been built in 1871. Wellington Journal & Shrewsbury News, 30 th March 1895, p7. The presence
or absence of its distinctive decorative top (see IGMT.1982.2199 of c1880) acts as a useful
benchmark for dating photographs.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 150
1896
Photograph of 1896 from a bound set by Frith,
wrongly titled „Ironbridge from East‟ (Francis
Frith No 38106) as it is looking downstream and
therefore from the west. The Tollhouse has three
chimneys (it was enlarged in 1835). There are no
trees along the Wharfage, confirming this image
is before June 1897 when they were planted as
part of Queen Victoria‟s Jubilee,
IGMT.1981.145.1.
Photograph (Francis Frith No 38110) showing
buildings on either side of the north abutment. The
wooden tollgate installed in 1852 is still there. No
footpaths on the Bridge (what can be seen on the
left is the shadow of the railing).
IGMT.1999.1115.
Tilting of the verticals on the main arch, 1896
Pressure from the south abutment had already caused thrusts against the ironwork, but an earthquake
on 17th December 1896 allowed trapped tension to be released and the base plates dipped, possibly
due to compacting strata. As a result the deck beams above the inner verticals have a more
pronounced kink and the upper sections of the verticals lean back.
1897
A view from Benthall Edge looking downstream.
Newly planted trees along the Wharfage to
commemorate Queen Victoria‟s Diamond Jubilee,
a useful reference date for images (planted June
1897, the decision being reported in the
Wellington Journal of 8th May 1897). The
brickworks chimney had lost its top, blown down
in the gale of 24th March 1895. IGMT.1999.1116.
c1897
Photograph looking downstream from the towpath
on the south bank. Very slight tilting back of the
top section of the inner vertical, north quadrant,
frame A, due mainly to pressure from the north
abutment and probably exacerbated by the
earthquake of 17th December 1896. The tilting of
the outer uprights on the south quadrant is just
visible. The deck plates of the main arch are not
in a straight line (both north and south quadrants),
which was already visible in 1890, and the deck
of the inner land arch is buckled. Plating of the
ribs on frame A of the inner land arch is visible. No railings along the towpath on the north bank.
IGMT.1981.53. Wrought iron rods are visible linking upper radial Re and Rf to the north quadrant
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 151
deck bearer, which were still there in March 2010 (below, photographs of radial Re and Rf, 1999).
c1897-1900
Photograph looking north east from the south
towpath. Due to low water, the change in alignment
of the north abutment can be seen 8 courses below
the base plates (arrowed). This correction must date
from 1778. Rib D on the north quadrant is out of
alignment with the other ribs, and was built like
this (the dipping of the upper horizontal brace
between frames E and D shows the change of line).
The horizontal braces and straps are the original
configuration, without the later additions. There are
no obvious signs of fractures to the radials apart
from the repairs to the tops of radials Re and Rf on
the north quadrant of frame A. The deck plates are
not in a perfect line; they begin to rise again on the
north quadrant near the circle, marking the
fractures above the inner uprights. There are
reinforcing straps on the lamp (see IGMT.1981.150
of 1972). The storage building upstream of the
Bridge comes close to the edge of the abutment and
there is a low stone wall on the downstream side of the abutment. IGMT.1981.67.
Water main next to the downstream railing; deck end repairs, and lower horizontal and diagonal
straps added to the main arch, 1902
On Sunday 24th August “about 30 ft of palisading [on the downstream side of the north quadrant] had
fallen into the Severn below... It is conjectured that foundations have been shaken through the recent
pipe laying.” [Wellington Journal, 30th August 1902]. The earthquake of 1896 may have been a
contributing factor. It took the deck plate ends with it and required the manufacture of new ends that
could be bolted on. Several other ends were repaired at the same time, identifiable by three bolts
underneath the deck plate just inside frame E or A. The “pipe laying” was the rectangular iron water
main that sat on the Bridge road deck next to the downstream railings. Ironbridge Gorge Museum
Trust, Library & Archive.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 152
1902
Detail of a photographic postcard looking from
the south, undated but 1902. It shows a
temporary wooden fence running parallel with
the downstream parapet of the Bridge, where a
water main is being installed (see below). It also
shows a protruding platform outside the upstream
parapet on the south quadrant. IGMT.1986.6322.
As a result of a report by Sir Benjamin Baker
submitted on 8th October 1902 [Chrimes, pers
com, 2000], the Coalbrookdale Company make
new ends for the damaged deck plates which
broke off on Sunday 24th August 1902, supply
and fit straps between the inner uprights about
1ft 6in above the base plates and sleeving for the
diagonal brace, their Order No 4388. No copy of
Baker‟s report has yet been found, but the
drawings relating to Order 4388 survive in the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library &
Archive. IGMT.1972.12, 13 and 15.
Coalbrookdale Company engineering drawing of 1902 (left), which shows the repair to the ends of
the deck plates, though when executed square bolts were used (right) rather than the hexagonal
ones shown on the drawing. Many more plates were repaired than just the 30ft length mentioned in
the newspaper. IGMT.1972.13.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 153
Coalbrookdale Company engineering drawing of 1902, which shows details of the horizontal
braces; CBD drawing no 2516, part of Order No 4388, is for these steel straps and cast iron
blocks, which were installed on both banks around the inner uprights, about 1ft 6in above the deck
plates. IGMT.1972.11.
The photographs below are of the 1902 horizontal brace on the north bank, March 2010.
Coalbrookdale Company engineering drawing of 1902 (below), which shows details of the sleeve
for the diagonal brace on the south quadrant; CBD drawing no 2612, part of Order No 4388.
IGMT.1972.15.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 154
1904
Photograph of 1904 captioned „The Bridge‟
from a bound set by Francis Frith, looking
upstream (Frith No 51376). The horizontal brace
is visible. The tilting of the outer verticals
against the pier (south quadrant of the main arch)
is also visible. The inner vertical on the north
quadrant, frame E, tilts back from the upper
horizontal cross stay – the earliest photographic
evidence of this. There is a bolted-on fish plate
repair to the inner upright of frame E, north
quadrant, near the centre line of the circle.
Buckling of the inner land arch is visible at deck
level. The stonework of the south abutment below the base plates extends well downstream of the
Bridge. The outer ogee bracket on the north quadrant frame D appears to be missing. There are no
railings on the south bank, but new railings along the north towpath. IGMT.1981.145.2.
1921
Photograph of 1921 from the Bridge deck near
the tollgate, looking south. The old gas lamp and
bracket is still on the Tollhouse, which was
replaced later in 1921 by a new one (confirmed in
later correspondence by the then Toll-keeper‟s
wife, Monica Jones in a letter of 16th April 1991
to IGMT Director Stuart Smith). The wooden gate
has been replaced with a new iron one, though the
post at the left end will later be replaced with
something similar to, but even thicker than, the
one at the other end (see 1981.1879 of 1975). The road surface outside the Tollhouse has been
reinforced with brick paviours. There is a pavement at this point, but without a raised kerb.
IGMT.1982.2807.
Footpaths installed, and the possible effects of a recent landslip investigated, 1923
An engineering survey of March 1923 by Basil Mott advised “there was some risk in using the bridge
for vehicular traffic”, and as a result the roadway width was reduced to 14ft by the insertion of two
5ft-wide footpaths. Later photographs confirm that the footpath on the downstream side was laid
around the existing water main, thus partly burying it. The report says there was a gas main within the
road deck alongside the water main. This must have been a second gas main, as the gas lamp on the
upstream balustrade had a supply which was installed soon after December 1839. It also describes the
„I‟ beams inserted into the inner land arch in 1880 as curved, being 1ft 9in at the centre and 1ft 6in at
their ends. Engineering survey by Basil Mott of Mott, Hay & Anderson (M,H&A) of 19 th March
1923. „The Iron Bridge, Shropshire‟, pp12. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives,
IGMT.1991.2606.
1923
“It is understood that a large buried revetment wall has been built at the foot of the hill ...” to
resist the slipping of the south abutment (presumably located against the abutment itself, though no
other reference to this has yet been discovered). The accommodation tunnel in the north abutment
“is now used for storage purposes.” The face of this abutment “... is slightly concave, vertically, to
the extent of about 4” at the centre ... there is a vertical crack between the first and the second
[outer] vertical pillars from the East, between the second and centre, and just inside the
Westernmost ... the lower abutment at the south end is some 4” higher than at the North end.”
M,H&A, p3.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 155
There are no footpaths “but there is a gutter on each side ... water and gas mains run through the
roadway on the Eastern side of the Bridge.” M,H&A, p4.
“On both sides the inner vertical pillars have been braced and connected 1 ’6” from the ground by
the wrought (sic) iron straps recommended in the 1902 Report.” M,H&A, p8. [In fact the straps
are steel with cast iron spacer blocks; see 1902 drawing Coalbrookdale Co No 2516: „Steel Straps
& Cast Iron Blocks for staying Bridge over River Severn at Ironbridge‟ IGMT.1971.12].
Of the diagonal brace “On the South side this diagonal brace has fractured ... and has been
repaired by fishing, as recommended in the 1902 Report.” M,H&A, p9. [See 1902 Coalbrookdale
drawing No 2612: „Details of Brace for Diagonal Stay for C.I. Bridge Over River Severn‟,
IGMT.1972.15].
The consultants asserted that the thickness of the road material at the southern end was adding
unnecessary weight, and recommended reducing “the thickness of the roadway to one foot
wherever it is more than that.” They also recommended constructing “... footways 5 feet wide on
either side so as to keep the vehicular traffic to the centre of the roadway.” A margin note in
manuscript referring to both of these says “done”. M,H&A, p11.
A letter of 27th August 1923 to the Bridge Trustees from Stuart Thompson of Peterborough reports
on the absence of any noticeable effects “that could definitely be attributed to the effect of the
landslip”, though he does refer to cracks in the stonework. He also says “there are cracks in the
Gatekeeper‟s Cottage ... of recent origin.” He proposes “a thorough consolidation of the piers by
driving liquid cement grout under pressure into the core of the piers” [Thompson uses „piers‟ to
refer to the abutments as well], and identifies the north abutment as being the most urgent.
Estimates are included at £850 for the north abutment, £500 for the inner pier, £400 for the outer
pier and £800 for the south abutment. Borehole tests drilled horizontally into the south abutment
in November 1999 (the black holes in the wall, left)
confirmed the existence of cement, though there was
no evidence in the papers that the recommendation
was carried out at this time. [Report of Repairs to the
Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701].
1920s
Photograph on the Bridge of an elephant advertising
Chapman‟s Circus. The southern end of the water
main can be seen disappearing into the pavement (so
after 1923), and from the height of the dogbars it can
be seen that the surface has been raised by the
thickness of the pavement. IGMT.1975.77.
Photographic postcard showing the building on the
end of the Bridge, the walls recently painted white
and with no signwriting. The war memorial is in the
Square facing the Bridge (so after 1923). It was re-
sited on the other side of the road in 1965.
IGMT.1982.2202.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 156
1924
When the recently-formed Newcomen Society visited the Bridge on Thursday 19 th June 1924
“Great anxiety was expressed for the fate of the bridge when it was learnt that it had been
proposed to pull it down and replace it by a modern structure in reinforced concrete.” Newcomen
Society Transactions, Vol IV, p110, 1923-4.
Photograph of September 1924 looking
downstream and south east towards the Bridge
from near the railway line. The additional
horizontal straps of 1902 can be seen just above
the base plates. The building against the upstream
side of the north abutment has been reduced to a
wall. Various brick walls top the south abutment
next to the Tollhouse. The tilting back of the
verticals on the south quadrant of the main arch
by the inner pier is evident. IGMT.1984.6628.
Saddles added to the top of the inner verticals, extra straps added to the horizontal braces on the
lower ribs, two ogee brackets replaced, 1926-7
The Bridge Trustees‟ surveyor, Luther Griffiths had used a scaffold in August and again in October
1926 to make a close inspection of the Bridge, and “at least ninety fractures were noted, excluding
those that had been repaired previously.” Thirty-one of the fractures were to the lugs on the upper
horizontal braces, and eight were in the radials. Though the road deck had been narrowed by the
insertion of footpaths, the increasing weight of motor traffic on the Bridge required the fractured deck
beams to be reinforced with bolted-on cast-iron saddles in 1927. As a precaution they were applied to
both sides of the river even though the damage was limited to the northern end. The same contract
included 12 small clamps and a pair of decorative ogees. [Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts,
etc, SRO.6001.3701].
1926
A collection of reports about repairs includes 4 engineering drawings annotated as A, B, C and D.
Though not marked as such, they were produced by Brymbo Steel Company, associated letters
confirming this (Brymbo Steel Co was part of the Coalbrookdale Company). The work was carried
out over the winter of 1926-7 and completed by mid January. A drawing of 11th August 1926 is
marked „A‟ and titled „Repairs to Ironbridge - New Cross Ties‟, showing the new steel straps to be
added just above each of the upper horizontal straps of the main arch. They were made in two
halves and joined at the centre by a bolt, being installed October 6th to 9th 1926. The drawing
notes that six sets were required. [Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc,
SRO.6001.3701].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 157
Drawing „B‟ (left), also of 11th August 1926, is titled „Repairs to
Diagonal Member‟ and shows a simple pair of plates to be joined
by two 14½” bolts for the upstream diagonal on the south
quadrant (photograph of March 2010 below), and also a detail for
a new bolt at the top of the diagonals of the north quadrant. A
letter of 19th April 1932 says this particular repair had been fixed
on site by Messrs J E Green. [Report of Repairs to the Bridge,
Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701].
Drawing „D‟ of 8th November 1926 is titled „Bracket Supports in Cast Iron to Main Girders,
Iron Bridge‟. The instruction is for 10 pairs, with 60 hexagonal bolts to fix them (below right,
photograph of December 1999). Site investigation in January 2000 revealed that each of the
cast iron saddles was individually identified with a letter and number cast onto it - A1 to A5
and R1 to R5 (Ironbridge Institute survey). Griffiths also suggested that “struts of 4” x 4”
oak be fixed between the main girders and resting on the brackets recently put in, to prevent
any movement of the girders sideways.” This was evidently done as timbers of that size can
still be seen at the level of the saddles.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 158
The order also includes a sketch for a clamp to fix the circles to be “put in 12 positions” (circled
below and photograph, right, of December 1999). SRO.6001.3701.
1927
Drawing „C‟ (below) is dated 28th January 1927 but untitled, and shows a light-weight
replacement for two of the ogee brackets to be made in wrought iron. The flat bar has a cross
section of 5” x ¾” instead of the original section of 5” x 2¾” cast iron. This proved to be too thin
and has since buckled (observed 1999). “The brackets, bolts and clamps were made at Brymbo,
and erected January 3rd 1927 to January 15th 1927.” Details of all the above repairs were
described in the „Final Report on condition and of repairs carried out on THE IRON BRIDGE -
SALOP‟ by Luther Griffiths, Brymbo, dated 28th January 1927. Griffiths noted “at least ninety
fractures”, 31 of them within the upper horizontal
braces, and 8 in the radials. As a result, the last
major additions to the main arch were installed
between October 1926 and January 1927, supplied
by the Brymbo Steel Company and Wright‟s Forge of
Tipton. The six sets of horizontal straps and braces
(Drawing A) “were supplied by Wright‟s Forge in
Tipton and were erected October 6th to 9th 1926 by
two men from Brymbo.” [Report of Repairs to the
Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701].
Luther Griffiths‟ letter of 12th October 1926
confirms that the bolt from the crown joint of frame
C was already missing (arrowed in the 1999
photograph, left, and still missing then). Griffiths
also recorded that the inner verticals were out of
plumb: “... the downstream column „town end‟ is 11” out of plumb; the upstream column 7½”; the
downstream column „station‟ end 6”, and the
upstream column 7”. This suggests there is a thrust
from both sides of the River, and also settlement on
the „town‟ side.” [SRO.6001.3701]. The upstream
columns were measured again in 1948 and 1980, and
showed this tendency was continuing – the town side
in 1948 was 9½” and had increased to 11¾” by
1980; the station side had reduced to 6½” in 1948,
and further still to 5¼” in 1980 [IGMT Archives,
DOE 1980, and IGMT.1981.119].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 159
c1928
Detail of a photograph from Bridge Road looking
north across the Bridge. The date of c1928 is
based on various factors: including the motorbike
parked opposite the Tollhouse; the new lamp on
the Tollhouse (installed 1921); the war memorial
is in the Square (erected 1923); there are
footpaths on both sides of the Bridge (installed in
1923); the tollgate has a new post independent of
the leaning wall of the weighbridge building;
there is a brick coping around the roof; and the
Tontine stable block has a roof repair.
IGMT.1988.2445.
1931
Correspondence of 8th and 16th May 1931 from the Trustees‟ surveyor Luther Griffiths to
Ironbridge solicitors Thorn, Pudsey & Derry reported how the span is measured at approximately
6-month intervals. This file includes 7 measurements dating from April 1927 to March 1934,
which show a shrinking over that time of the upstream span by ½”, and by ¼” to the downstream
span. “... the span is checked with a steel „CHESTERMAN‟ tape, 100 feet long; this is supported
in a straight line by suspenders from a catenary cord above, so that sag is avoided.” [Report of
Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701].
1932
A letter of 19th April 1932 from the Trustees‟ surveyor Luther Griffiths to Ironbridge solicitors
Thorn, Pudsey & Derry reported that “one of the diagonal members [south quadrant, downstream
half and low down] has broken away from the vertical. It is not a new fracture. A similar fracture
on the town end was repaired with two bolts and a pair of clamp plates by Messrs JE Green in
1926/1927.” The middle of this diagonal brace was subject to a large fishing repair in 1902 (see
IGMT.1972.15). [Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc, SRO.6001.3701].
1933
In the SRO there is a small sketch locating a portion of the retaining wall which has collapsed
upstream of the Bridge on the south bank, and “masonry leaning out over tow path” on the north
abutment where it splays outwards. It is undated, but a note says “see letter of April 22nd 1933”,
which is not included in this bundle. [Report of Repairs to the Bridge, Signposts, etc,
SRO.6001.3701].
Photograph looking downstream from the
southern towpath. The Bridge is floodlit for the
Ironbridge Carnival, carried out by a Mr Lloyd of
Shrewsbury [IGMT Archive file B/2/2]. The brick
housing for these lights is visible on some
photographs (esp c1950) and on a 1:500 Survey
drawing of 1965. IGMT.1985.183.
The Bridge designated an Ancient Monument and closed to vehicular traffic 1934
In 1934 the Bridge was closed to vehicular traffic and designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument,
County No 106, though pedestrian tolls continued until 1950. A replacement bridge was proposed in
1937 to run alongside the original and associated boreholes were drilled, but the War intervened and
apart from the demolition of the buildings on the north bank in 1946 nothing came of this proposal. In
fact it had been proposed as early as 1924 that the Bridge should be demolished and replaced in
reinforced concrete.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 160
1934
Aerofilms photograph 46398, 1934, looking west.
Pedestrians still had to pay the halfpenny toll, so
the tollboard is still in place on the Tollhouse
(gone by 1952, presumably taken down in 1950
when the Bridge was freed from tolls).
IGMT.1991.2294.
1935
Watercolour by Vera Louise Temple, dated 1935,
from the towpath on the south bank looking
downstream. The group of buildings on the end of
the Bridge includes one block of 5 storeys,
occupied by the Chemist at Bridge deck level.
Next to it is a pair of cottages with dormer
windows, and a substantial brick wall with gate
piers. Temple was the Senior English Mistress of
Coalbrookdale High School. IGMT.1976.28.
Repairs to the ogee bottoms carried out, 1937
1937
Photograph of 28th April 1937 from the north
towpath looking upstream. Some work has only
just been completed because scaffold boards are
still on the Bridge (lying on the upper cross stays
on both sides). The repairs of 1927 can be seen:
saddles added to the tops of the inner verticals;
replacement thin ogees on frames E and A on the
north quadrant; and straps on the lower end of the
ogees (visible on frame E) and on various places
on the circles. The original lamp bracket is still
on the upstream railing, but the lamp itself is
missing. IGMT.1980.447.
Various straps have been added near the circles
and at the bottom of the ogees, which most likely
date from this work. (left, frame D, Tontine side,
December 1999)
In late 1937 a scheme was considered for a new
bridge to be built alongside the Iron Bridge on the
upstream side. Buildings in the way were acquired by
compulsory purchase: a Grocer‟s shop with dwelling
and florist, a Chemist with dwelling, a Confectioners
shop with flat over, and cottages. Wellington Journal,
13th November 1937.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 161
By February 1946 the lamp bracket on the upstream parapet had gone; buildings on the north
end of the Bridge were demolished in May 1946
On 18th May 1946 the Wellington Journal reported the start of the demolition of the buildings on the
upstream end of the north abutment. This was to make way for a new bridge, “plans for which had to
be shelved on account of the war.” A plan in the SRO (see below, 1950) shows the new bridge faintly
drawn alongside the original (which would be retained for pedestrian use) starting from the land
occupied by the buildings next to the north abutment and crossing at an angle so the south end meets
the south bank road just south of the Tollhouse. This would require the demolition of the Tollhouse
and of the property below the Tollhouse known as Station House or 67 Bower Yard, the latter
purchased by Shropshire County Council on 10th June 1947, Deed packet RB40 [SRO.4437.10].
1946
Photograph of 10th February 1946 looking
downstream from the Wharfage. The river is in
full flood and is about 9 ft above the base plates
having topped the lower cross stays, this being
the second highest flood on record (the highest
was 12th February 1795). The lamp at the crown
has been cut off above the railing finials.
IGMT.1982.2209.
Photograph of 1946 looking downstream. The
buildings on the end of the Bridge have been
recently demolished and the site is fenced by
chestnut paling. The lamp on the Bridge has
been cut off above the railings. The inner
verticals on the north quadrant can be seen to
lean back from about half way up.
IGMT.1981.76.
1947
Boreholes were taken on the site of the demolished chemist block on the north bank. These relate
to the location of the abutment for a new bridge, for which an undated plan survives (see 1950,
SRO.4437.10). No 1 is within the building block area, 2 and 3 are near the water‟s edge, and
No 4 is on the south bank near the water‟s edge. SRO.4437.9.
Boreholes were taken on the south bank near to and upstream of the Tollhouse, numbered 1A to
4A. 1A is near the southern edge of the cottage that is upstream of the inner land arch; 2A and 3A
are in the Tollhouse garden about level with the north and south ends of the building; 4A is in the
garden of the house that stood immediately to the south of the Tollhouse. Undated plan No 16408,
B/3/1. SRO.4437.10.
A later report by B W Huntsman of the Ministry of Works, Engineering Division, (of 20 th
December 1961) refers to the findings: “trial borings taken in 1947 on the right bank, west of the
bridge approach, about 75ft to 170ft south of the river ... soft clay to about 26ft, and about 9ft of
stiff clay overlying shale at a depth of about 35ft below ground level. The slope of the strata is
about 7° to the horizontal.” As a result, he recommends preparing a scheme to relieve the pressure
of the north abutment and also suggests strutting in the river bed to hold the abutments apart.
SRO.4437.9.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 162
1948
Shropshire County Council begin to take yearly measurements of the span (see „Historic Bridges of
Shropshire‟, 1985 p102 by Anthony „Sam‟ Blackwell). Measurements had also been taken from April
1927 to March 1934 by the Bridge trustees‟ surveyor (see SRO.6001.3701 of 1927).
1949
Aerofilms photograph No A24217 of 1949 of the
Bridge, with the Ironbridge & Broseley station in the
foreground. The bare plot of land is evident where
the Chemist and other buildings were demolished in
May 1946; the lower Tontine stable building has
gone, though a section of sloping end wall can still be
seen. The two masonry arches of the Tontine vaults
cannot be seen (on the upstream side of the Bridge).
IGMT.1993.7888.
Pedestrian tolls removed; ownership passed to Shropshire County Council, 1950
On 12th October 1950 the trustees handed over the Bridge to Shropshire County Council and it
became free to pedestrians.
1950
A manuscript note, not dated, says “In a reply to British Iron & Steel Research Association, 25
Feb 53, GCC writes:- Ironbridge last painted 1950. 3 coats of bituminous paint, each of a different
shade finish with black.” ... plus a footnote: “Other correspondence from Davey refers to Red
Lead, supplied by ICI; Undercoat Melanoid Heavy Brown; Final Melanoid No 1 Black.”
SRO.4437.9. It is assumed this work was done by the County Council because Michael Darby, son
of Roger Sorton Darby, said the Trustees could not afford to have it repainted (pers com, 11 th May
2002).
Undated conveyance of the Bridge to Shropshire County Council, listing the 37 Bridge
Proprietors who are party to the agreement, starting with Henry Basil Darby and Mark Philip
Rathbone (descendants of Abraham Darby III and Joseph Rathbone who were among the original
trustees). The 1950 list also included Roger Sorton Darby. The conveyance is accompanied by a
plan dated 29th October 1975. SRO.4437.9.
Undated plan 1:500 for a “New Bridge at Ironbridge”,
but including the Bridge and Tollhouse in blue, with a
note that “land coloured blue is already owned by the
County Council.” The Bridge had been handed over to
SCC by the Trustees on 12th October 1950 and under
this proposal was to be retained as a pedestrian route,
but the new bridge would require the demolition of the
Tollhouse. On the north bank the new bridge would start
75ft upstream of the Iron Bridge, while on the south
bank both bridges would meet at a point about 30ft
south of the Tollhouse. Borehole locations numbered 1-
4 and 1A to 4A are identified on another copy of the
same plan, No 16408 B/3/1. SRO.4437.10.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 163
1952
Photograph dated 1952 from the footbridge
across the railway, looking north. A notice on the
tollgate says „traffic diversion ahead‟, and a sign
on the weighbridge building says something about
it being closed, presumably closed to all vehicles.
The footpath over the Bridge has a concrete kerb;
the lamp is still on the Tollhouse; there is a scar
on the brickwork where the tollboard was once
fixed. A section of original railing (dating from
1803 when the timber side arches were there)
runs up to and in front of the window of the
Tollhouse (see below IGMT.1981.1880 of
c1964). This will be altered in 1974 when the
window becomes a door and the railings are
realigned IGMT.1982.357 (see IGMT.1981.1879
of 1975).
Photograph dated 1952 from near the station,
looking north. The Tontine stable block site has
become overgrown; one of its original walls with
sloping roof line can still be seen (already seen in
the 1949 aerial photo above). The stone parapet
in front of the Tontine has horizontal coursing;
this will be altered in 1972. Plants are growing
out of the masonry at bridge deck level.
IGMT.1982.358.
Photograph of c1952 looking north from the path
leading down to Bower Yard. The site of the
chemist block has become overgrown and bushes
are growing out of the upstream parapet on the
north abutment, but a section of the Tontine vaults
arch can be seen abutting the Bridge. This will be
rebuilt in 1976. IGMT.1982.359.
1961
A report by B W Huntsman of the Ministry of Works, Engineering Division, (of 20 th December
1961) refers to the findings of “trial borings taken in 1947 on the right bank, west of the bridge
approach, about 75ft to 170ft south of the river”. SRO.4437.9.
1962
A measured drawing (undated but filed between other items dated 26 th April and 21st May 1962)
is annotated “at midspan deck is 5¾” lower at the upstream side / at the two quarter spans the deck
is almost balanced from parapet to parapet”. SRO.4437.9.
A river depth survey was done (exact date unspecified) to determine the cross section of the river
bed under the Bridge. A drawing shows the profile of this and a later 1970 survey. SRO.4437.10.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 164
c1964
Photograph of the Tollhouse c1964. The gate width has been limited by the insertion of a central
post, probably done in 1950. The windows and door above Bridge deck level are bricked up
(though the flat below this level was occupied in
1964). The central chimney is still in place, but the
ridge tiles have shifted; the uneven roof tiles show
that the rafters are in bad condition. The railings
extend beyond the edge of the building and
terminate just past the right hand window. This
window will become a door when the building is
restored in 1974 (compare IGMT.1981.1879 of
1974). The scar between the upper windows where
the tollboard once hung is visible (it was probably
removed in 1950 when tolls were withdrawn). The
gas lamp has gone. IGMT.1981.1880.
1965
Detail of an Aerofilms photograph of 6th April 1965. The house just south of the Tollhouse has
gone. The middle chimney of the Tollhouse can still be seen. Floodlight housings can be seen on
both upstream banks. The railway station buildings
and the level crossing gates are still there, but the
rails have been taken up and the footbridge
removed as the first stage of demolition (the line
closed in 1963). Though rapidly falling into ruin,
the station buildings were still standing in 1966
(1966/45 National Railway Museum, Selwyn
Pearce Higgins photo). The remnant of the Tontine
stable wall has gone; little evidence of the cellar
wall on the upstream side apart from the first few
feet right against the Bridge. National Monuments
Record, Swindon. English Partnerships.
NMR.MAL/65024.193.
c1965
Photograph from just over the crown of the Bridge looking north. The obelisk can still be seen in
the Square and but was re-sited by November 1965. The water main can be seen partially buried
into the downstream footpath. The kerbs are of
concrete. There is a brick wall at the far end of the
Bridge where the chemist used to be, with framed
timetables on it as this is a bus stop (see
IGMT.1981.161 of 1972). The Bridge is closed to
vehicles by 13 wooden posts, 12 of which can be
seen in this photograph (see 1965 Survey, Sheet
0711 below). They were probably first installed in
1950. IGMT.1999.1114.
War memorial re-sited (between April and November) 1965
1:500 Survey, Sheet 0711. Survey plans from aerial photography made for Dawley Development
Corporation, shot in November 1965. The housings for floodlights are shown on both banks
upstream of the Bridge. 13 posts are shown on the north abutment to stop traffic crossing the
Bridge. The war memorial has been re-sited on the opposite side of the road and the obelisk
drinking fountain has been moved (to Waterloo Street); the low wall in front of the Square has
been moved back to line up with the end of the Tontine. The survey shows the retaining wall by
the downstream pilaster of the north abutment, which related to the land in front of the Tontine
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 165
stable. The short section of wall relating to the Tontine vaults is also shown on the survey.
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
1966
Adams, Haddon C. 1966, for Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell, 1966 (Adams, SF,W&B). „Report
on the Condition of the Bridge and Proposed Remedial Works‟. June 1966, pp19.
IGMT.1989.4662. Adams‟ report concludes that the locked up tensions in the ironwork could give
way to cause sudden release and collapse, a view refuted by later analysis, especially in SF,W&B
1969 (below).
Adams, SF,W&B, para 14 – The fracture to the bed plate on the south abutment may have been
caused by “the impact of a vessel or by massive flotsam in time of flood.” In fact this fracture
probably dates back to before 1801, when fractures were noted on both sides and attributed at the
time to movements in the abutments.
Adams, SF,W&B, para 18 – Arthur Raistrick (author of „Dynasty of Ironfounders‟, a history of the
Coalbrookdale Company, published 1953) had suggested to the consultant that the abutment tilt
on the south side of the main arch was there before the ironwork was erected. Adams notes,
however, that “it would have been physically impossible for the chases to have been cut so neatly
for the housing of the verticals subsequent to erection.” Neither Raistrick nor Adams was aware of
the sketch by Paul Sandby Munn of 11th July 1802 (Victoria & Albert Museum, E3112/1948),
which shows that the entire south abutment adjacent to the ironwork had been removed. It was
replaced by the two side arches and their piers, the inner one being cut to fit the ironwork. The
thesis remains that Raistrick was right and that the ironwork was erected at an angle on this side,
with the original riverside abutment wall sloping to match it.
Adams, SF,W&B, para 31 – The consultant concludes that the fractures in the ironwork were
caused “by movement of the masonry initiated by earth movement.” IGMT.1989.4662.
1967
Notes of a meeting of 7th November 1967 agree the location of new boreholes, one of which would
require cutting “through the Cast Iron deck plate”. In fact two such holes were cut, one above each
base plate, because the drilling equipment was too bulky to be erected down on the base plates.
For the results of the boreholes, see 1968 entry below. SRO.4437.9.
1968
Boreholes were made by the Cementation Company for Shropshire County Council in January
1968. Borehole A was made on 12th January from the back of the north abutment starting from
road level; borehole B was made on 18th January from deck level, through the frames and then
through the base plate of the north abutment 40ft below (which accounts for the circular hole in
the deck plate); borehole C was made on 23rd January from deck level down through the south
abutment. The results from B and C showed “that the abutments consist mainly of sandstone
boulders with concrete infilling. The proportions of rock and concrete vary, but the cores indicate
that the sandstone boulders are the major constituent.” SRO.4437.9.
Blackwell, Anthony. 1968. „The Iron Bridge - Note on the deformation of the structure‟. pp2 plus
1p of diagrams (internal SCC manuscript). 30th January 1968. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust.
Blackwell‟s manuscript report confirmed that boreholes had been drilled, and, in the light of
Adams‟ view that the ironwork could suddenly give way, he takes a closer look at the
deformation. This is the most realistic interpretation of the problem, reached by the engineer in the
light of many years observation of the Bridge. The diagram was included in SF,W&B‟s 1969
report (see below), duly acknowledged.„Sam‟ Blackwell wrongly states that there are no fractures
at all on the south quadrant (despite the 1902 repairs to the diagonal brace and the fractured base
plate), but identifies the reason for the fractures being concentrated in the north quadrant being
due to “local pressure about half-way up the masonry abutment.” This explains the tilting and
fracture of the inner verticals about half way up, plus a fracture on the inner rib close to the
junction of radial Rb. These have released the locked-up stresses. He concludes that the most
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 166
effective treatment would be to relieve any further pressures at this point by lightening the north
abutment. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives. IGMT.2203.
A File note of 7th May 1968 record that there were two gas mains in the downstream footpath, the
one nearest the parapet being defunct. The water main was distorted and was pushing out two
coping stones on the north east wing wall. SRO.4437.9.
Memo of 23rd September 1968 reported that approximately 6 ft of parapet on the north west side
of the abutment (upstream on the Tontine side) had been damaged by a Morris car. An attached
drawing dated 22nd September 1968 shows this to be on the curved wall immediately north of the
iron parapet. SRO.4437.9.
1969
Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell, 1969 (SF,W&B). „Report on the Iron Bridge at
Coalbrookdale‟. J A Williams, October 1969. pp41 and 9 diagrams. IGMT.1989.4670.
Sections 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 conclude that the main ironwork “has every appearance of fulfilling its
present function satisfactorily” and that the physical condition of the abutments “does not give rise
to any immediate alarm”. It incorrectly states (2.3.4) that both the side arches had been reinforced
by girders, whereas in fact only the inner arch had been treated in this way. However, he notes the
effect of the “inward squeezing of the abutments” and the report recommends lightening the north
abutment and anchoring each of the abutments to the underlying rock by stressed cables. The
alternative solution of using a reinforced concrete underwater strut is explored but dismissed as
being less effective and more expensive than the cables. In the event, the lightening of the north
abutment and the construction of the underwater strut went ahead in 1972-4 (see below).
The report quotes from the above 1968 memorandum by Sam Blackwell (p13), which states that
“there can be no doubt that the crown has lifted. ... The vertical abutment frame members [on the
south quadrant] are out of plumb, having moved forwards at the bottom, while the base plate they
stand on is tilting backwards.” All the fractures in the north quadrant are “related to local pressure
about half-way up the [north] masonry abutment.” Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
IGMT.1989.4670.
Photograph of 1969 from near the crown of the
Bridge looking south. The Tollhouse windows are
bricked up. The tollgate has been reinforced at its
centre, and two uprights are missing at the
Tollhouse end. A post restricts the pedestrian
gate. Alongside the water main on the left hand
footpath is a new gas pipe and evidence of the
tarmac being dug up prior to its burial; an earlier
gas pipe had been buried in the new footpaths of
1923. The gutter is laid with stone sets. The
curving of the inner land arch is evident from the
railings. IGMT.1982.1435.
1970
A trial cleaning and repainting was done within the area reachable directly above the base plates
of the main arch. The process involved removing rust and applying a phosphoric acid, followed by
an acid remover, a metallic lead primer, a black micaceous finish (Ferrodor) and finally a
bituminous finish (Melanoid Bit Black No 1). SRO.4437.10.
Reg Morton (Honorary Curator, IGMT) and Alf Moseley publish „An Examination of Fractures in
the First Iron Bridge at Coalbrookdale‟, a paper illustrated with 20 figures, in the Journal of West
Midlands Studies, 1970, No 2, Wolverhampton Polytechnic. “There are at least 53 observable
fractures in the ironwork of the bridge and, of this number, 42 are concentrated in the members on
the Ironbridge side.” Fractures were observed using a telephoto lens and included ones in the
abutments and piers as well as the ironwork, the latter amounting to 23 on the radials, 4 on the
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 167
inner ribs, 4 on the verticals, 9 on the horizontal braces, 1 on the diagonal cross brace, and 1 near
the crown on frame A (though this last one is in fact a misreading of the joint rather than a
fracture). The fractures on the masonry included a crack on the inner pier (between the two land
arches) just below the string course on the downstream face, and a vertical crack in the masonry on
the north abutment between frames D and E below the upper horizontal stay. The broken dovetail
of the bed plate to frame D on the south abutment was also noted. All the fractures on the Benthall
side were in the upper horizontal braces (7), or on the diagonal braces (3). One illustration (fig 9)
confirms that the fish plates added to the inner vertical of frame A at the junction of the outer rib,
north quadrant, was there by this time. IGMT Library.
1971
Based largely on their report of 1969, Consultant Engineers Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell are
commissioned to prepare details of major works to stabilise the Bridge, which will involve
excavating the fill out of the north abutment to relieve the pressures and inserting an underwater
strut between the abutments to hold them apart. (The idea of a strut was first suggested in 1801).
The cost is estimated at £150,000. IGMT spearhead a fundraising campaign for the work and raise
£50,000 in the first year, rising to a total of £65,000 by the following year. The Department of the
Environment agree to match this and Shropshire County Council agree to fund up to £20,000, a
figure equivalent to what it would have cost the Council to demolish the Bridge. IGMT Archive
File IB (R). IGMT Library & Archives. IGMT Archive Files „Iron Bridge (Reconstruction)‟ and
„Ironbridge 72-89‟ [hereafter IB (R), and IB 72-89] IGMT Library & Archive.
15/1/71, IB(R) - Letter from WRN Jones (Clerk to SCC) to E Bruce Ball, confirming “the method
to be employed to stabilise the abutments of the Ironbridge.” It stated that SCC and DOE would
fund the initial £7,500 “to commission the design drawing work from the Consulting Engineers”
SF,W&B.
15/3/71, IB(R) - Letter from Julian Amery at DOE to Viscount Bridgeman (the first President of
IGMT), which sets out the proposed restoration work in outline and the associated costs, and offers
help in directing fund raising appeals.
29/3/71, IB(R) - Minutes of a meeting at Shropshire County Council, stating that Stage 1 has
already started and SCC‟s „gang‟ will start on 17 th April, though in fact work did not start until
1972 - see below, 10/12/71 IB(R). The cost was estimated at £27,000, to be split 3 ways between
DOE, SCC and IGMT; that Stage 2 (the underwater strut) would be carried out in 1973; that DOE
“might consider taking over the guardianship of the bridge upon completion of Stage 1, ie on or
before 1st April 1973.”
26/5/71, IB(R) - Letter from Emyr Thomas to Bruce Ball which sets out the restoration costs at
£150,000, with the Museum‟s fundraising target of £50,000 a year in 1972 and 73.
16/11/71 - Handwritten note by John Smith (banker and founder of the Manifold Trust and of the
Landmark Trust) to Bruce Ball offering a donation of £50,000 towards the restoration, subject to
certain conditions, including his anonymity. This is confirmed and used by IGMT to persuade
DOE and SCC to contribute £50,000 and £20,000 respectively.
17/11/71 - DOE agree to assign £50,000.
10/12/71 - Letter from Bruce Ball to John Smith confirming work will start 1st April 1972 on
lightening the north abutment (Stage 1), and the underwater strutting (Stage 2) will start on 1 st
April 1973. A 3rd Stage would be repair and repainting. Costs were estimated at £20,000 for Stage
1, £90,000 for Stage 2 and £20,000 for Stage 3; plus fees for design and supervision at £15,000.
Total £145,000.
8/12/71 - At a meeting it is reported (without naming her) that Lady Labouchère, 8 th generation
direct descendant of Abraham Darby I, covenants £3,200 towards the project, which was Abraham
Darby III‟s original estimated cost of the Bridge. At this meeting, Sam Blackwell (Bridge
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 168
Engineer for SCC) said measurements of the span had been taken since 1948 “at the same time
each year, in as near still conditions as could be achieved.” IGMT Archives.
Laying new services within the footpaths; lightening the north abutment, 1972
In April 1972 Shropshire County Council began Stage 1 of the repair programme, burying water, gas
electricity and telephone services within the footpaths, and excavating the fill out of the north
abutment to reduce the pressures on the ironwork. In September the DOE commission Plowman
Craven of Harpenden to take photogrammetry images and a drawing of the upstream elevation is
generated from them. No other drawings are known to have been generated from this survey.
1972
Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell (SF,W&B), 1972. „The Iron Bridge - Estimate of Cost of
Remedial Works to North Abutment‟. February 1972, pp10. Part of Archive File IB (R).
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
IGMT Archive Files „IB (R)‟ and „IB 72-89‟. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library &
Archive.
IB(R). 17/1/72 – Department of Employment say the trade unions object to the Royal Engineers
doing Stage 1.
February 1972 – SF,W&B provide detailed estimate of costs for Stage 1 (the relief of the north
abutment), which they put at £14,579.
26/2/72 – SCC confirm a contribution of £20,000.
29/2/72 – Handwritten note by E Bruce Ball that John Smith came through Ironbridge and saw
that No 34 High Street was for sale and that it might be suitable for a Landmark Trust property.
9/3/72 – A letter from Ball to Smith states that all the utility companies agreed to do their work
for nothing, as a contribution to the project (gas, water, electricity and telephone lines were all
laid either in or on the footpaths at this stage), and that the Water Board had already started
moving their 7 inch water main and were substituting it for two 4 inch mains (though the
dimensions are described as 6 inch mains in report for week ending 22/4/72).
Photograph c1972, before April, from near the crown of the Bridge looking north. The Bridge is
closed to vehicles by 8 wooden posts, where previously there had been 13 (see 1965 Survey, Sheet
0711). This may be at the start of the repair programme. IGMT.1999.1113.
IB 72-89. Shropshire County Council‟s Direct Labour organisation undertake the work in 1972
under the direction of G F Weaver, to the design by consultants SF,W&B [note by J M Earle of
SF,W&B in IB 72-89 September 1974].
w/e 22/4/72, - SCC progress report: “contractors for East Shropshire Water Board have full
occupation of the site for the week laying the first alternative 6 inch water main over the bridge,
under the upstream footpath.” The dimension does not agree with Bruce Ball‟s letter of 9/3/72, but
is more likely to be correct.
Photograph taken from an upper window of the
Tontine hotel looking south across the Bridge. A
temporary electricity cable has been strung across the
river on poles; the upper windows of the Tollhouse are
still bricked up. There is a brick wall abutting the
upstream parapet where the Chemist stood until 1946;
the downstream stone parapet has been partially
dismantled since 1965. IGMT.1981.161.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 169
Photograph from the north abutment looking south
at the pipelaying for a new water main, week
ending 22nd April 1972 (IGMT Archive File IB
72-89). Many of the dogbars are missing or broken
off. IGMT.1981.160.
Photograph from near the crown along the
upstream pavement looking north at the pipe-
laying for a new water main, week ending 22nd
April 1972 (IGMT Archive File IB 72-89). The
inner faces of the deck fascias have been
revealed and show they are fixed by a single bolt
to the main railing uprights. Many of the dogbars
are missing or broken off. IGMT.1981.159.
Photograph of the crown on the upstream
pavement looking west, week ending 22nd April
1972. There are plain replacement bars on the
upper and lower right corners of the central
casting where the original scrolls have broken off
(these will be restored to their original
configuration in 1979). Evidence of an earlier
horizontal strap can be seen just below the top
rail, which was reinforcement for the lamp, and
holes in the central upright remain from the
fixings for this lamp. The strap can be seen in
IGMT.1981.22.2 of c1897. IGMT.1981.150.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 170
Photograph along the upstream pavement looking
north at the pipelaying for a new water main, week
ending 22nd April 1972 (IGMT Archive File IB 72-
89). The buckling of the inner land arch is evident
from the upper rail of the parapet.
The deck fascia plates are fixed by bolts to the main
railing uprights, but there are more bolts than on the
main Bridge fascias (see above IGMT.1981.159 of
1972). The kerbs are concrete and there is a cobbled
gutter. The sloping of the deck down towards the west
is evident at the crown when measured against the
windows of the Tontine. IGMT.1981.157.
The Tollhouse was opened as an information point.
IB 72-89. w/e 28/4/72 - Alternative water main undergone pressure tests; SCC “preparing invert
of old brick arch to receive reinforced concrete base and drilling masonry abutments of this arch to
receive „Stafix‟ [stainless steel rods, seen here, below left] bars to connect with external concrete.
Two composite deck beams cast at Longden Road Depot; formwork set up for two further beams.”
Photo, below right, by GF Weaver, April 1972.
w/e 6/5/72 - SCC: water diverted to alternative main; old main to be removed; drilling in arch
complete; high voltage cable uncovered for re-routing; casting of deck beams completed.
IB 72-89. Shropshire County Council‟s report for
week ending 13th May 1972 stated that repairs to the
brickwork of the accommodation arch were complete
and that the old water main had been uncovered ready
for removal. The north abutment was being excavated
and work on the main beam seatings proceeding. There
will be four precast concrete beams to carry the road
deck over the emptied abutment. “Excavation for the
settings of the deck beams in the back of the top of the
main abutment show that the latter and the main wing
walls are not constructed of dressed ashlar masonry, as believed, but of ashlar masonry dressed on
the outside face only and backed with random rubble, set in mortar.”
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 171
A drainage hole visible on the east elevation of the ashlar is close to the bottom of the concrete
box and prevents it from filling with water. However, it is still well above base plate level. Mr
Weaver reported that a square exploratory hole was dug horizontally to the north of the
accommodation arch (below) in the direction of the Tontine. There is no record of how far it went.
Photographs of 5th and 6th May 1972, GF Weaver.
IB 72-89. w/e 20/5/72 - Old gas and water mains removed and GPO duct uncovered and
removed. SCC: “The rubble backing to the main abutment was carefully exposed and cleaned and
enclosed in concrete as a base for the beam seating.”
w/e 27/5/72 - SCC: transverse beam to be cast
continuously over entire width and so to extend
under the water mains. (left, at SCC‟s Longden Road
Depot. Weaver).
w/e 2/6/72 - SCC: beam completed; excavation
down the back of the south side of the arch
completed to within 3ft of final depth.
w/e 9/6/72 - SCC: excavations down back of south
abutment of brick arch completed showing the extent
of the cracks discovered in the arch.
w/e 16/6/72 - IB 72-89 - SCC: concreting sealed the
large cracks in the brick arch.
w/e 24/6/72 - SCC: Stafix bars set into extrados of brick arch; concrete placed to level of crown of
arch; reinforcement fixed for top slab and north beam setting.
w/e 1/7/72 - SCC: concreting over downstream half of arch completed; full excavation from
between brick arch and main abutment. (The „corset‟ over the accommodation arch has a flat top.
Weaver, pers com, 12th July 2001).
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 172
w/e 8/7/72 - SCC: four composite beams
delivered to site; two set in position (above
right, Weaver).
(above left) Section of the top of the north
abutment by Blackwell, c1974.
IGMT.2007.1229.
w/e 15/7/72 - SCC: further excavation at rear
of main abutment; inside of downstream wall
shaped for concrete lining, and lining
completed; deck slab of service duct cast
(right, Weaver).
Photograph of 14th July 1972 when Prince Philip
visited the Bridge to see the restoration work in
progress of lightening the north abutment. The
Prince is being introduced to
R J Mare, County Surveyor for Shropshire County
Council. Others in the picture include G R
Fletcher, Chairman of the County Roads and
Bridges Committee (far left), and D F Evans from
DOE (far right). IGMT.1993.697.
Photograph of 14th July 1972 when Prince Philip visited the Bridge. The line-up being introduced
to the Prince are, from left to right, Anthony „Sam‟ Blackwell (Roads and Bridges Engineer,
SCC), J A Williams (consultant engineer from SF,W&B), Miss Gladys Newton (from the DOE,
whose name appears on most of the correspondence from the goverment department to the County
Council and the Museum Trust during the works), D F Evans (DOE), R J Mare (County Surveyor,
SCC), Prince Philip, and G R Fletcher (Chairman of the County Roads and Bridges Committee,
SCC). IGMT.1993.704.
IB 72-89. w/e 22/7/72 - SCC: service duct completed.
w/e 28/7/72 - Water Board laying main in downstream service duct.
w/e 4/8/72 - Upstream water main removed.
w/e 11/8/72 - SCC: excavation completed for upstream south quarter of arch corset.
w/e 18/8/72 - SCC: excavation completed for upstream north quarter of arch corset; some
difficulty with large slabs of sandstone; unexpected live electrical cable encountered and dealt
with.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 173
w/e 25/8/72 - SCC: concrete poured for arch corset.
w/e 1/9/72 - SCC: excavation continuing between wing walls, but not at rear of abutment due to
poor quality of rubble backing at lower levels.
w/e 9/9/72 - SCC: lining to spandrel wall on the west side constructed; concreted first section of
abutment wall.
w/e 16/9/72 - SCC: concrete lining to back of main abutment completed.
w/e 23/9/72 - SCC: encountered stone pitched bed at deeper end of the main abutment (probably
left from when the deck plates were positioned before the abutment was built).
w/e 30/9/72 - SCC: all reinforced concrete lining to main abutment and wing walls completed;
remaining two deck beams placed; internal access ladder fixed in place.
Image No 13 of the DOE‟s photogrammetry
survey by Plowman Craven, taken in September
1972, looking at the north abutment from the
upstream accommodation arch path. The debris
can be seen from the demolition of the buildings
on the end of the Bridge. A small section of the
first arch of the Tontine vaults is all that remains,
though these will be rebuilt in 1976. It is believed
that the stonework was recovered from the rubble.
English Heritage Photogrammetric Unit, York.
DOE 1972. The photographs (below left) are of
the same location by GF Weaver in 1973, and (right) in March 2010 by D de Haan.
IB (R). 4/10/72 - letter from John Smith to Bruce Ball confirming the Landmark Trust have
purchased the building by the Iron Bridge (north bank, downstream). The ground floor will be let
to IGMT to become the Shop in The Square, which opened 3/4/73.
IB 72-89. w/e 7/10/72, - SCC: remaining section of deck slab cast.
w/e 14/10/72 - SCC: asphalt waterproofing to deck completed; stone kerbs laid for upstream
footpath.
Manuscript text by Sam Blackwell dated 1st May 1973 referring to the fractures of the radials and
to metallurgical tests on the balustrade brace (cantilever strut). “No member has failed for any
reason other than earth movement ... During living memory only two other pieces of metal, both
sides or cheek pieces from mortices, forced off by the swelling of corrosion under them. Both were
used as metallurgical test pieces, one by Aston University and the other by Mr H C Adams.” Of
the 1972 work he states “The brick arch was uncovered and enclosed in a reinforced concrete
„corset‟ backing down to footing level on both sides...and the rubble backing to the masonry
facing contained in reinforced concrete [ie a concrete skin to the inner wall of the north
abutment].
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 174
A 6” water main within each footpath, plus an old 3” gas main in the downstream footpath were
cut off and later restored. An 11kV electricity cable ran down past the wing wall in a metal duct –
which was moved into the new service duct on the d/s footpath, coming out low down in the wing
wall and so doing away with the metal duct.” SRO.4437/10.
Photograph looking upstream from the south east.
The retaining wall against the pilaster on the
north abutment is still there, but landscaping of
the bank has taken place which has re-opened a
route through the accommodation arch. A build
up of silt against the north abutment is visible due
to the low river level. The stone parapet in front
of the Tontine has been lowered down to the
original parallel coursing. IGMT.1981.72.
South half of the concrete strut below the water line cast, 1973
1973
Under Phase II of the restoration programme, a reinforced concrete strut was cast below water level,
beginning with the south half. The work was done from within two coffer dams, which were cut off at
their base once the work was completed. The scheme was designed by consultants Sandford, Fawcett,
Wilton & Bell and executed by Tarmac Construction Ltd.
IB (R). 25/1/73 - Tarmac submit the lowest valid tender for Stage 2 at £104,000. A lower one by
Peter Lind for £97,000 was conditional that a penalty clause was not applied, and on 30/1/73 they
withdrew their tender. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s
photograph of 22nd June 1973 (left), looking
downstream from mid river. It shows excavation
work in progress in the smaller of two coffer
dams (the in the middle of the river), which had
been constructed to allow a reinforced concrete
beam to be cast below water level. The
reinforced concrete of this middle section was
tied down to bed rock by stressed anchor rods.
IGMT.1987.598.
IB 72-89. Resident engineer for SF,W&B for
Stage 2 was A R Kemp [J M Earle for
SF,W&B, in IB 72-89, September 1974].
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
IB (R). 12/2/73 - Funding raised by IGMT:
£50,000 from John Smith, £5,000 from the
Pilgrim Trust, £5,000 from Lady Labouchère
(direct descendant from Abraham Darby III who
built the Bridge; actually her £5,000 was a tax-
effective covenant for £3,200, being the
original estimate for the cost of the Bridge in
1777), and up to a maximum of £50,000 from
DOE, and £20,000 from SCC.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 175
6/8/73 - Letter from Bruce Ball to John Smith “last
week we had the most serious floods which the
Severn has experienced for ten years. The coffer dam
was flooded and most of the temporary works were
washed away.” The flood was from 6th to 12th August
1973.
27/8/73 - Report in the Shropshire Star that the cause
of the bank being washed away was “due to fierce
currents being diverted by the coffer dam into the
wall”. The wall in question was just downstream of the north abutment and can be seen in
photograph IGMT.1987.595 (bottom left).
5/10/73 - Memo by Bruce Ball of a phone conversation with Sam Blackwall who confirmed that
some of the cost of the repair to the wall will be covered by insurance, and the rest will come from
the Bridge project. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
1:500 Survey Sheet 0710. Telford Development Corporation, from aerial photography in April
1973. The contractor‟s huts for the Bridge work were located on the site of the railway station, the
buildings having been demolished. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive.
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s photograph
of 7th August 1973, looking downstream from the
Wharfage. Flooding from 6th to 12th August
inundated the coffer dam; temporary gantries
erected up- and downstream of the coffer dam are
under water and debris is building up. The
Tollhouse windows are bricked up; a brick wall
stands on the edge of the south abutment.
IGMT.1987.592.
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s photograph
of 13th August 1973, looking north from the south
towpath at damage caused by the floods. The
coffer dam in the south half of the river can be
seen; the decking of the access gantry was partly
washed away by the flood water. The river was
forced through the narrowed gap and washed
away much of the far bank. IGMT.1987.595.
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s photograph
of 31st August 1973, looking downstream from
the temporary gantry. The picture shows the larger
compartment of the south coffer dam. The poor
condition of the south abutment can be seen.
Everything from the 4th masonry course
downwards was later covered by the rising side of
the reinforced concrete invert slab.
IGMT.1987.596.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 176
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s
photograph of 26th September 1973, showing
concrete being pumped into the coffer dam to
cast the invert slab. The last stage of pile driving
is taking place in the smaller compartment.
Temporary roads have been made to access the
gantries, which ended in concrete pads (the
downstream one was still there in February 2000,
but has since been trimmed back level with the
bank). The Tollhouse upper windows are still
bricked up. IGMT.1987.597.
Letter of 22nd September 1973 from County Surveyor SCC to Mrs Gladys Newton, DOE, listing
Phase 1 work still to be done, which included “Fit manhole cover and access ladder ... Bore 3” diameter holes through masonry for drainage pipes and re-route H.V. cable ... Complete
waterproofing roadway and footway surface over deck and reinstatement of service trenches.”
SRO.4437/10. In the larger excavation of the hollowed-out north abutment a ladder was fixed
against the river wall, probably towards the downstream side, though the manhole cover at the top
of this ladder installed by Mr Weaver in 1973 has yet to be located. Site checks in January 2000
were unsuccessful. He thought it was about 3 or 4ft in from the downstream side (Weaver, pers
com, 12th July 2001).
25/10/73 - Letter from Neil Cossons “a number of
sections of railing were found in the bed of the
river.” These are the ones that fell off in 1902,
reported in the Wellington Journal of 24th August
1902. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Archives.
IB 72-89. A broken-off deck end was also
recovered and is now in the Museum of Iron (left).
A sample was cut off from a corner for
metallurgical analysis in May 1998, undertaken
for IGMT by Monitor of Stonehouse,
Gloucestershire.
19/11/73 - Letter from SF,W&B to R J Mare, County Surveyor about the sheet piling for the
coffer dams: “Adjacent to the South Abutment ... driving was very hard for the final few feet, even
to gain the minimum penetration practicable for watertight conditions, while at midstream the
driving became soft and necessitated the lengthening of the piles for stability reasons; also the bed
was lower at midstream than anticipated.” Stage 1 of the contract had cost £13,524 (estimate
£20,000), Stage 2a £103,992 (estimated at £104,000 for the whole contract), plus £12,000 fees -
total £129,516. The estimate for the remaining half of the underwater strut was £12,000. IGMT,
Archives. IB (R).
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s photograph
of 29th October 1973, showing formwork and
shuttering for the concrete to be poured against
the south abutment wall. It also wraps round the
wing walls. The top course of the masonry on the
downstream end has a curved profile.
IGMT.1987.594.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 177
Tarmac Construction Ltd contractor‟s photograph
of 1st November 1973 (left), showing the
completed concrete facing wall against the south
abutment before the removal of the coffer dam.
IGMT.1987.593.
„Ground Engineering Aspects of the Preservation
of the Iron Bridge‟, a typewritten report dated 4 th
August 1973 and signed as „Bridge Engineer‟
(Anthony Blackwell). It argues that the
diminishing span is due to “earth movement” and
that “the means of countering it must be the basis of any preservation scheme.” He says there is
overwhelming support for local movement rather than the entire hillside being on the move.
SRO.4437/10.
North half of the concrete strut cast below the water line; Tollhouse restored, 1974
1974
Works recommence in April when Tarmac Construction Ltd cast the reinforced concrete strut below
water level across the remaining (north) half of the river. Ownership of the Tollhouse is transferred to
the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust who restore it during the year. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
Library & Archive.
An undated drawing showing how the lower courses of the north abutment are out of alignment, a
feature normally only visible at low summer river levels as in the photograph below of c1900, but
this time observed and recorded from within the coffer dam. This file also includes drawings by
SF,W&B of 20th November 1973 giving details of the misaligned abutment, ranging from 9in at
frame A to 18in at frame E. The level is recorded as 10.6 ft below the base plates, based on
soundings taken on 15th November 1973.
SRO.4437/9. Later, in a letter of 22nd March
1974 (IGMT.2007.1229) SF,W&B state that the
8th course projects 3in at the upstream end and by
the downstream end it is 2ft 3in out. These
revised measurements were taken from within the
coffer dam, while the earlier one had been done by
a diver. SRO. This actually meant redesigning the
steel reinforcement for the concrete, for which
drawings survive in IGMT archive.
Resident engineer for SF,W&B was L M Gardiner. “... the function of the slab being to strut the
abutments apart and prevent further movement, while the monolithic walls resisting any tendency
for the abutments to tilt forward above their bases.” [J M Earle for SF,W&B, in IB 72-89,
September 1974]. IB 72-89.
15/7/74 - Letter from Richard Sawtell, County Secretary SCC, to Percy Bullock, Hon Treasurer of
IGMT, that SCC were bearing the cost of repairing the damage to the river wall adjoining the
north abutment (caused during the flood of August 2003 and exacerbated by the narrowing of the
river by the coffer dam) “which is likely to be at least £5,000.” IB (R).
5/9/74 - Tarmac claim for extra costs of £22,110.93 on top of the expected £96,182.49, bringing
the total to £118,239.42. “The contract period for the execution of the Works was from 5 th March
1973 to 4th November 1973. In practice work continued on until 30 th November 1973, was
suspended during the winter months in accordance with the requirements of the Severn River
Authority, was resumed on 1st April 1974 and ended on 23rd August 1974. (The Works were
certified as substantially completed on 9th August 1974).” The full details of the claim are to be
found in SRO.4437/11.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 178
„Restoration of the Bridge – Contract Documents‟. The file includes the five original tender
bids, plus the settlement of the winning bidder Tarmac Construction‟s claims for 1973, 1974
and for extra payment due to loss of time in deeper pile driving and loss of equipment during
floods. They argued in August 1974 that the nature of the river bed was not accurately
described in the tender documents. The file includes a diagram, listed as Appendix A, which is
a plan of the coffer dam framework against the south abutment. Another diagram, Appendix M,
is the piling record as installed, the deepest pile being driven down to 92.94 ft AOD (most
went to around 97 ft) with a crest level of 124 ft AOD. The dam was nominally 15 ft deep with
the river bed varying in depth between 105 and 117 ft AOD. Shropshire Record Office. The
piles were cut off at river bed level once the concrete strut was completed. SRO.4437/11.
Film of Iron Bridge Restoration 1972-4
16mm Colour Film with narration by Neil Cossons (apart from first paragraph voice-over by
Magnus Magnussen), BBC 1974, Producer Ray Sutcliffe. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
Archives. IGMT.1995.661.
Brief introduction by Neil Cossons about cracks in the Bridge and work “due to start in Spring of
1972” to lighten the north abutment. Cuts to later when in April 1972 work began. Shows the
lower courses of the walls inside the towpath arch being drilled through for the insertion of
stainless steel „Stafix‟ rods. These are to anchor the masonry to the concrete lining which is as yet
un-poured. Excavation from above to remove the fill, revealing the top of the towpath arch;
drilling of the arch from the inside for more rods; reinforcing rods in place and pouring of concrete
over this arch and down the side nearest the river; craning in of concrete deck beams to carry the
road over this hollowed-out abutment. Appears to show little or no concrete on the river face of the
masonry (see IGMT archive file IB 72-89 for contractor‟s reports about this work).
The next sequence starts in April 1973 with resident engineer Alan Kemp describing the
underwater strut from his site office, the Tollhouse. Digging out the coffer dam for the central
block and craning in RSJs to stiffen it; drilling through the block to anchor it to the bedrock with
45ft rods; coffer dam overcome by summer floods on 17th July and again on 6th August (“the worst
summer floods on record” – NC); concrete rising up the south abutment. Final sequence (much
shorter than for 1973), starts in April 1974, when work began again on the north abutment. NC
notes that the stonework low down was out of alignment and then corrected. Ironbridge Gorge
Museum Trust, Archives. IGMT.1995.661.
Tollhouse re-opened; Bridge road deck material renewed and cast iron kerbs added to the
footpaths, selected masonry blocks replaced and the stonework re-pointed, 1975
1975
The Tollhouse opened in Spring, but was formally opened as a Tourist Information Centre 25 th
November 1975 by Ironbridge-born footballer Billy Wright. The road deck material was renewed by
Shropshire County Council. Some masonry blocks in the south abutment and piers were replaced and
the stonework re-pointed.
27/3/75 - Financial Statement to IGMT Board notes that the cost of Stages 1 and 2 was
£147,898.31, of which IGMT had paid £64,799.22. Further funds had been received including a
gift of £2,000 from British Steel and a promise of £5,000 from Tarmac Ltd. (see 4/8/77 for final
figure). IB (R).
Photograph (right) of the restored Tollhouse looking south,
shortly after its informal opening in Spring 1975. The
railings nearest the Tollhouse survive from the period of the
wooden land arches of 1803, but have been realigned
(compare IGMT.1981.1880 of c1964). The ground floor
window has been opened up to provide a second door, and
the tollboard re-mounted in its original location. New
windows have been inserted into the
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 179
previously bricked-up openings. Tie rods have been put either side of the central chimney, which
has been lowered to the roof line. The brickwork around the original door was taken down and re-
erected as part of the programme of restoration; it is now 2½ bricks deep, where originally it had
been only 1½ brick deep (see IGMT.1982.2807 of 1921). This re-laying of the bricks also
extended round a considerable part of the south elevation of the building. Virtually the entire east
elevation was re-pointed. The architect for this phase was Lance Smith. The post that had
obstructed the pedestrian gate has been removed and there are two steps down by the gate,
mirrored by two steps up at the far end of the Tollhouse (see IGMT.1981.1878 below). The gate
has two uprights missing and a reinforcing pole at the mid point. The pavement in front of the
Tollhouse is of brick paviours, though these were not evident in the 1964 view and no longer
survive. IGMT.1981.1879.
Photograph of the restored Tollhouse looking
north, shortly after its informal opening (see
IGMT.1981.1879 above for the companion view
looking south). New gutters and downpipes have
been installed. The two steps up at the far end of
the Tollhouse can be seen. The water main
installed in 1972 was located tight against the
railings, but there are signs within this pavement
of another trench having been dug along the
centre line of the footpath for the telephone and
electricity cables. IGMT.1981.1878.
20/6/75 - Report by AB (Anthony „Sam‟ Blackwell): „The Ironbridge - Phase III, Situation - June
1975‟ that the road deck will be removed in 3 separate operations “to maintain arch stability” -
each footpath, and the roadway. However, a photograph in the Museum‟s archive of the work in
progress (see below, IGMT.1981.154) suggests it was done in one go. SRO.4437.9.
24/7/75 - Letter from Gladys Newton, DOE to Bruce Ball that the road deck will be lowered by a
few inches but still had to contain water, gas, electricity and PO ducting. “There is now no hope of
getting Stage 3 finished this year. The County Council are dealing with the road surface, services,
levels and upper surface of the deck plates and we [DOE] will erect the scaffolding and carry out
the cleaning, repair and painting of the ironwork. We have been pressing for completion of the
County‟s part by the end of September this year.” IB (R).
1/8/75 - Drawing by Sam Blackwell of a cast iron
kerb from IGMT‟s collection at Blists Hill
Museum. The casting was used as a pattern for an
order of 242 units @ £5 each, placed in October
1975 with Glynwed Foundries of Coalbrookdale.
It was also used for kerbing around the Square and
along the Wharfage in Ironbridge in 1979.
SRO.4437/10.
4/8/75 - Letter from Bruce Ball to John Smith,
IGMT have completed the restoration of the
Tollhouse; it is open and houses an exhibition
about the history of the Bridge “including a video
tape projection of the film made by the BBC
throughout the first two stages of restoration work.” IB (R).
15/8/75 - Letter from Mr Earle of SF,W&B referring to a site inspection of 7/8/75, which included
an underwater inspection that “revealed a thick deposit of several feet of silt over most of the
surface of the concrete invert.”
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 180
25/8/75 - Manuscript note by Sam Blackwell
(Bridge Engineer, SCC), reporting that “the deck
is being uncovered and waterproofed. County
Council staff … are carrying out this operation ...
It involves gaining access under the many services
which make use of the bridge as well as providing
new kerbing and surfacing. The restoration of the
Toll House is now complete and the Department
of the Environment have agreed to restore the
level of the road and footpath in front of the Toll
House to its original level as it was before the
railway was built – below the Toll House door-
step levels.” [This was a condition of John Smith‟s
£50,000 donation. However, a flood caused by rain water run-off entered the Tollhouse in 2000,
suggesting that the footpath had been lowered some time in the past to remedy a similar problem].
The waterproofing of the gaps was done with a mixture of “two parts pitch extended polyurethane
or polysulphide applied by gun. Nitroseal PX220 polyurethane or Evode Polysulphide”.
SRO.4437.9. [Photo: private collection].
On the land arches, the rising flanges of the deck
plates were cleaned back to bare metal, primed
and covered with a 150mm wide flashing strip
before being painted with two coats of
waterproofing. On the main arch, the same
treatment was applied to the butt joints of the deck
plates, but with a flashing strip 200mm wide.
Undated manuscript note in Sam Blackwell‟s
hand, SRO.4437/9, and associated sketch,
SRO.4473.10.
Photograph looking north showing the laying of a
new surface to the Bridge deck. The layer on the
upstream side is done, while on the downstream
half the upper surface of the iron deck plates can
be seen. Furthest from the camera, the wedges that
run either side of each main bearer can be seen
(these also protrude below the plates). The flat
deck plates continue across the top of the inner
pier, beyond which (nearest to the camera) can be
seen the flanged plates of the side arch. They are
bolted together at the flanges and because of the
slope of the deck are holding puddles of water on
the lower side. The repeated freezing and thawing
of this water over the decades has caused the bolt
holes to rust, allowing water to seep through the
joints and drip from the underside of this arch,
often several days after any rainfall. A gas pipe
can be seen on the right, which will be buried
under the downstream footpath. IGMT.1981.154.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 181
Photograph (detail) from the north bank looking
south east during the latter stages of the 1975
restoration programme. Scaffolding is around the
outer pier and south abutment for re-pointing and
selective replacing of the masonry. Some of the
old stonework can be seen near the abutment wall.
A trench has been dug behind the outer pier to
provide access to the lower courses of masonry.
The extended abutment on the downstream side is
no longer visible (see IGMT.1982.2199 of
c1897). The concrete facing of the 1973 work is
evident. IGMT.1982.2839.
Photograph from the north bank looking west
during the latter stages of the 1975 restoration
programme. Scaffolding is around the outer pier
and south abutment for re-pointing and selective
replacing of the masonry. IGMT.1982.2175.
19/11/75 - Letter from Richard Sawtell, County
Secretary of SCC, to Bruce Ball: “the Deed of
Guardianship has been completed and
responsibility for the maintenance of the bridge
has therefore passed to the Department of the
Environment.” IB 72-89.
1976
The arches of the Tontine vaults are rebuilt and topped by a brick wall.
Letter of 12/1/76 from Miss Gerry of DOE to Emyr Thomas (in his role as General Manager of
Telford Development Corporation) refers to payment “... towards the cost of restoration of the
vaults adjacent to the Iron Bridge.” The arches of the Tontine vaults were rebuilt and topped with
a viewing area edged with a brick wall, which drew some complaints (see 18/2/77 below).
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive. IB 72-89.
Aerofilms.319351.Y76.UF10. (IGMT.A2781) Aerial photograph, which shows work in progress
rebuilding the Tontine vaults. The structure extends about 15 ft back from the facade and shows a
central wall dividing two spaces. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust.
1977
18/2/77 - Letter from Miss G M Newton (DOE) to Fred Clamp (Secretary, IGMT) referring to
complaints from the public “about the new brickwork which the Department has put up by the
bridge abutments ... the brickwork was deliberately not matched as it was erected where there had
been none previously. Its purpose is for safety. By not matching it there can be no doubt that it is
of a later date and not part of the original structure.” This is the wall where the Chemist block
used to be, and continuing along the edge of the new viewing area built on the re-assembled
stonework of the Tontine vaults. It survived until 1979, when it was replaced (see 24/8/78,
20/9/78, 17/1/79 and 21/2/79 below). Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive. B/2/2.
Drawing No T/GEN/800 drawn by SES, March 1977 (Telford Development Corporation) shows
the temporary position of floodlights located on the wall of each abutment a few feet above the
upper horizontal cross stays. This arrangement was tested but had been installed without
permission and DOE insisted it was removed. SRO.4437/10.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 182
22/7/77 - Letter from Keith Hadley (Telford Development Corporation) to Mrs Johnson, resident
of 9 Ladywood, confirming the steps down from the weighbridge house to the towpath would be
rebuilt in brick “replacing the existing precast concrete”. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust,
Archives. B/2/2.
4/8/77 - Chart from SCC showing final cost of Stages 1 and 2, including design costs and fees:
SCC total £25,375.88, DOE £57,814.68, IGMT £64,877.62 – total £148,068.18. Ironbridge
Gorge Museum Trust, Library & Archive. IB (R).
1978
Based on a scheme of 1974 by architect Tom
Ralph of Shrewsbury, Tontine Hill was realigned,
removing the „kink‟ left after the demolition of
the buildings on the corner (see 1946); the
pavements were laid in York stone slabs and
edged with cast iron kerbing made by the
Coalbrookdale Company. Electric cables were
relocated underground and new street lighting
was installed using flat box-like fittings attached
to the buildings. Drawing No 270/5a, Ironbridge
Centre Feasibility Study for the Ironbridge &
Coalbrookdale Society.
24/8/78 - Letter from Simon Ridley, Ancient Monuments Secretariat, DOE, to County Surveyor,
SCC, saying that Stage 3 of the repairs (repainting) would be postponed until after the Bicentenary
in 1979, and that they had decided to do something “...about the brick walls adjacent to the Iron
Bridge which were erected quickly above the [Tontine] vaults for safety reasons during earlier
repairs.” IB 72-89.
20/9/78 - Letter from RJ Mare, County Surveyor, SCC, to Miss GM Newton, DOE, reporting on
the site meeting of 12/8/78. “It was agreed that the new brick parapet over the archway through
the north abutment should be replaced by matching masonry in courses following the rake of the
bridge deck. The same construction but with level courses would apply to the walls of the viewing
platform on the re-constructed stone arches (the Tontine vaults). The conjunction at right angles of
these two walls would involve a pilaster. ... At the Toll House end of the bridge are two newly
paved areas outside the footways. The one adjoining the Toll House was once a small garden
divided from the back of the footway by railings. Here there is now a new brick parapet round the
outside of the area ... It was agreed to erect new railings at the back of the footway and do away
with the parapet. The similar area on the other side of the road would remain enclosed with the
footway but the brick parapet would be replaced by railings.” B/2/2.
12/1/79 - Letter from Fred Clamp (Secretary, IGMT) to Mr Swift, DOE, refers to a trial of the
new floodlighting of the Bridge done on 6th December 1978, which was approved in this letter,
thus dating the new brick housings which replaced a scheme dating back to 1933. The formal
switch on took place on 21st April as part of the Bicentenary of the Bridge. 1979. B/2/2
1979
Brickwork of the parapet on the north west corner was replaced in stone by SCC and the old iron
railings near the Tollhouse were replaced in steel. The viewing platform was completed above the
arches of the Tontine vaults with iron railings replacing the earlier brick wall.
17/1/79 - Letter from RJ Mare, County Surveyor, SCC, to Mrs G Newton, DOE, stating that the
new railings to replace the brick wall (above the Tontine vaults) would be of mild steel. B/2/2.
21/2/79 - Internal memo confirms the replacement of brick walls with stone to a scheme by
architect David Percival. A letter of 3/10/79 confirms that this work had been completed (see
below). IB 72-89.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 183
1/3/79 - Letter from CJA Thompson of DOE to Neil Cossons confirming that the
“replacement of missing uprights [dogbars] and railings on the bridge balustrades, are
expected to be completed on or before the Spring Bank Holiday.” IB 72-89.
7/3/79 - A letter from the resident of the house on the towpath upstream of the Tollhouse, Mrs
Jacqueline Morton, makes it clear that the original railings and brick wall on the abutment by
the Tollhouse had been removed, allowing access right up to the edge of the abutment. As a
result, new railings were erected in line with those on the inner land arch, the ones that are
there now (March 2010). B/2/2.
21/3/79 - Telford Development Corporation memo proposing to re-surfacing the road south of
the Tollgate, from Bridge Road down to the Tollhouse, and to put in a pavement. IB 72-89.
18/9.79 - Letter from Les Sparks (conservation architect, Telford Development Corporation)
to SCC County Surveyor confirms the gas pipe running down the steps next to the
weighbridge house and used as a handrail, was going to be dealt with. A further letter of
17/10/79 confirms that a new gas pipe has been laid under the new brick steps, but that the old
pipe was left for use as a handrail. B/2/2.
3/10/79 - TDC memo from Les Sparks to Emyr Thomas, General Manager, “All the
brickwork was removed and a new viewing platform was built at the northern end ... The
Ancient Monuments Directorate now wish to complete the project by constructing a new stone
wall to continue the north-eastern parapet round to a position close to the War Memorial .
Photograph Spring 1979 from upstream on the southern towpath looking north. The work on
the top of the Tontine vaults arches is in progress, the brick wall having been removed prior to
replacement with a stone capping course and mild steel railings. Chestnut palings fence off the
site at upper and lower levels. The new viewing platform and steps downstream of the Bridge
have been completed. IGMT.1981.134.
The Bridge is repainted after sandblasting off old paint down to bare metal, 1980
1980
The Department of the Environment have the Bridge scaffolded for minor repairs and complete
repainting. Work commenced on 9th April and all scaffolding was removed and the site cleared by
mid-December 1980. See IGMT.1981.115, Report
by Ian Hume, DOE, on the Repairs and Repainting.
IGMT.1981.115.
4/1/80 - Letter from Chris Thompson, DOE, to
Fred Clamp, Secretary, IGMT, “The
scaffolding is expected to be erected some
time in March and to be removed in August”.
The programme was described as 4 weeks
erection, 18 weeks cleaning etc, and 4 weeks
dismantling. B/2/2.
6/3/80 - Letter from Chris Thompson, DOE, to Lawrie
Buckthorpe, Director of Engineering Services, TDC,
confirming that the repair and repainting contract had
been awarded to JD Tighe & Co (Midlands) Ltd, with
Ian Hume as engineer for DOE.
26/3/80 - Letter from Ian Hume, DOE, to Fred Clamp, IGMT, confirming site work will begin 9 th
April “with scaffolding commencing the following week.”
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 184
13/6/80 - Letter from Ian Hume of DOE to Tony Herbert of IGMT with text for an information
leaflet, which states: “The bridge has been completely scaffolded ... cleaning is achieved by ...
pumping water at considerable pressure, mixing it with a small quantity of fine sand and then
blasting the surface of the ironwork with the resulting jet ... The cost of the work will be about
£100,000. Work commenced on 9 April 1980 and it is hoped to have the bridge completed by
October 1980. Structural Engineers; Directorate of Ancient Monuments & Historic Buildings,
Department of the Environment.” IB 72-89.
Report by Ian Hume, DOE, on the Repairs and Repainting, p8. “The bridge was blast cleaned
using a water/sand blasting technique to clean the cast iron to bare metal.” Five coats of paint
were used, each a different colour: 1st, an Epoxy Wet steel primer coat (colour, red oxide); 2nd,
a zinc phosphate Epoxy Ester undercoat (yellow); 3rd, a zinc phosphate Epoxy Ester undercoat
(green); 4th, a Micaceous Iron Oxide, Pure Phenolic Tung Oil (grey); and 5th, a Micaceous Iron
Oxide, Pure Phenolic Tung Oil (black). p8. [In fact the „black‟ top coat was a metallic dark grey,
as can be seen in the photograph, left. It shows a
previously un-recorded anomaly – an unused
dovetail housing high up on the central frame].
“All scaffolding was removed and the site
cleared by mid-December 1980.” p10. “There
are many cracks in the main span of the bridge
only a few of which have been repaired. It was
decided after much consideration to do no such
repairs to the main span other than to replace
one broken clamp. The repair work to the 2
subsidiary spans on the south bank involved the
removal and replacement of a number of steel
plates put on as repairs many years ago and
which had corroded sufficiently to fracture the
bolts holding them. Also replaced for cosmetic
reasons were 235 dogbars (small spearheads between railings), 4 finials to main railing uprights, 2
broken sections of the centre railing embellishment upstream side and all of the railing stabilisers
on the 2 subsidiary spans. One broken railing on the downstream side which had been replaced
earlier with 2 steel flats welded together was replaced with a square steel bar.” p11,
IGMT.1981.115.
1985
8/8/85 - Letter from English Heritage to SCC Bridge Engineer, which confirms that two bolts were
fractured and have been replaced on the side span (the inner land arch, S1); also agrees to the
limit of 200 people proposed in June 1985 and for the Police to close the bridge to pedestrians at
their discretion. IB 72-89.
October 1985, report by Ian Hume, English Heritage. „Report on Structural Condition of the
Bridge‟, based on surveys done on 22nd and 23rd April, and 17th July 1985, using binoculars for the
main arch and hydraulic hoists for the side arches. Only one new fracture was observed – on the
circle of frame E, north quadrant; and two bolts had come out of one of the side arches plates after
considerable crowds stood on the Bridge for a Duck race on 6 th May 1985. These were replaced,
along with several dogbars and a finial on the balustrade. IB 72-89.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 185
1986
Crowds on the Bridge watching the second Duck
Race, 5th May 1986 (12,000 numbered plastic
ducks were dropped from the Albert Edwards
bridge a mile upstream, the first one to reach the
Iron Bridge winning its „owner‟ a handsome prize
of a Mini car). Though clearly very popular, the
Museum Trust felt the event was undignified and
refused requests for its repetition.
IGMT.1986.7552.
1990
February 1990 Wrekin Council carry out
landscaping improvements to the area around the
war memorial, adding a low brick wall topped by
railings, and resurface the path through the
accommodation arch with cobbled sets.
IGMT.1990.4276.
1998
The Bridge was handed over to Telford & Wrekin Council, the new Unitary Authority, on 31 st March
1998. A small inspection scaffold is erected in November to investigate claims of new fractures,
though none were found. More numbered joints were discovered by David de Haan, then Deputy
Director of IGMT.
1999
The Bridge is repainted, packing added to support deck plates, selected masonry blocks replaced;
first full Historic Building Survey & Analysis done, 1999/2000
In May a partial scaffold was erected to determine future work, which was to include selective
replacement of masonry blocks, replacement of missing packing below the deck beams, and an
application of two coats of paint to the entire structure. A photogrammetry survey was done in early
September by Plowman Craven Associates of Harpenden, which was then enhanced by English
Heritage‟s Metric Survey Team (above right). An associated historic building survey, record and
analysis programme was commissioned from the Ironbridge Institute, which included a confirmation
that the original colour was dark grey (see entry for 1787). In late September a complete scaffold was
erected (above left) for the repainting programme under the direction of Project Manager Ian Wilson
of Firmingers, Worcester. Ironbridge Archaeology produced a detailed record of the structure.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 186
Painting was almost completed by the end of the year, in most cases having been limited to the
application of a new undercoat and top coat.
Record photographs from the scaffold, winter
1999/2000:
(top) An elongated tenon on the circle of frame D,
north quadrant;
(below) mortice boxes on the deck beams of
frames C to A, north quadrant. The variance of the
spacing between each box shows that each beam
was cast individually to meet the needs of its
location.
2000
On 15th January 2000 new nylon packing (Polyethelene PE300) was inserted between the deck
bearers and deck plates, wherever thought necessary. Masonry was selectively replaced and re-
pointed (above right). In March masonry contractors Dimbylow Crump extracted sandstone from the
original quarry in Ladywood some 200m up the hillside above the south bank and replaced weakened
blocks on the top courses of the main arch abutment and piers (above left). The scaffold was removed
by Easter, after which repairs were done to the railings, which included the casting of some new swan
necks for the main arch. The Bridge was „re-opened‟ on 13th May by Sir Neil Cossons, Chairman of
English Heritage.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 187
(top left) One of the many numbered joint recorded, Rc on the south quadrant of fame A;
(top right) the 1926 steel brace wrapping round lower rib E, north quadrant, alongside the original
wrought iron brace anchor;
(bottom left) inner verticals of frames D and E on the north quadrant, the tilt clearly measurable
against the scaffold poles;
(bottom right) numbers 1 and 1 on each half of the upstream crown joint.
2001
The fixings of the swan necks to the railings were investigated and recorded by Ironbridge Archaeology,
revealing a history of repairs. The railings themselves proved to be stronger than previously thought, but
the swan neck supports at the base of the balustrades were corroded and allowed too much play so failed
the tests. Railing posts are strengthened with carbon fibre sheets on the footpath side and all bolts fixing
the swan necks to the railing uprights were renewed. Worn swan necks were replaced. Protective barriers
remained in place until late April, causing criticism from visitors (Shropshire Star 26 th April 2001).
In October in a programme directed by Deborah Perkin, BBC2 Timewatch recorded the construction of a
half-scale model of the „large scaffold‟ shown in Elias Martin‟s watercolour of 1779 to test its validity
(below). Eighteenth century technology was used – ropes, block-and-tackle, and muscle power. Built
over the canal at Blists Hill, the arrangement provided the ideal lifting points for the ribs when they were
delivered by boat and lifted from below. The experiment supported the theory that in 1779 the major
castings must have been brought by river and therefore poured at Bedlam Furnaces on the river bank
500m downstream from the Bridge, rather than at the Old Furnace in Coalbrookdale. The „temporary‟
half-scale model remained in situ until February 2010.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 188
2002
BBC2 Timewatch programme „The Mystery of the Iron Bridge‟ was broadcast 11 th January. The rushes
were deposited in the IGMT Archive.
2006
In October 12 small holes were dug in the footpaths down to the
deck plates, the locations identified on the English Heritage
plan of July 2006 (left). Rods were inserted to allow future any
movement to be measured. The undersides of these areas were
observed from a cherry picker.
2008
On 8th and 9th September 2008 an underwater inspection was done by Hemsley Orrell Partnership of
Hove to assess the condition of the reinforced concrete strut and review the possibility of re-routing
water mains that are currently under the footpaths in an underwater crossing. 3 The concrete appeared
to be in good condition with no signs of damage due to corrosion of the reinforcing rods. Scour was
noted under the concrete slab jutting out from the bank just downstream of the south abutment, which
they recommended be addressed within five years. However, this slab is not part of the strut, being
the remains of an equipment access route for the 1973-4 work. A crossing point for the water mains
was identified about 50m upstream.
3 HOP Report No 12735/1
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 189
In October 2008 a rope survey was done by Vertical Technology Ltd of Emsworth, to ascertain the
existence and condition of cracks in the main arch, and their findings were further analysed in a
report of December 2009 by Conisbee Consulting Structural Engineers of London. They put netting
round one fractured radial on frame C to stop it falling into the river. Comparing a photographic
survey of 80 fractures identified in 1980, in Vertical Technology‟s report they concluded there were
38 additional defects. Though the record is valuable as a condition statement for 2008, a comparison
with a detailed photographic survey of 1999/2000 by IGMT shows that none of these are new
fractures (apart from one possible crack on frame C), being mostly original joints between castings
where there is now some slight evidence of rusting. They also mistakenly report „heavy pitting‟ to all
metal elements, but this is feature of the air surface of all open sand castings and not a new defect.
Conisbee recommended filling all the cracks either with and epoxy resin or an elastomeric polymer
such as Belzona 2111 prior to repainting.
On September 28th and 29th 2008 the Bridge was floodlit as part of the launch of the Cultural
Olympiad in the West Midlands. The scheme had been approved by English Heritage and no light
fittings were attached to the Bridge for this event.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 190
2009
On 25th May a rope survey was done. Vertical Technology reported on this survey in June 2009 having
inspected the restraint wedges protruding below the deck plates, and the results were analysed by
Conisbee in September. In February 2010 two trenches were dug in the pavement against the upstream
railing to investigate the wedges – one at the crown and one almost above the south base plate. At the
latter location a portion of deck plate fell off during the work at the junction of the scallop flange and a
temporary repair was made by Treasures of Ludlow. The broken portion was added to the collection in
the Museum.
Though not recognised in the above reports, the original purpose of the wedges was to align the deck
plates, and while every deck plate was cast with 20 holes for possible wedges many of them did not
need to be used. Many do not engage directly with the deck bearer and it is likely they never did.
However, the engineers believe the wedges provide a lateral restraint for the main frames of the
Bridge at the upper level, and that their absence creates a threat for the stability, particularly of fame
A in the event of the structure being hit by flood debris. Given this premise, English Heritage agreed
it would be prudent to replace all the „defective‟ wedges relating to frame A, the work beginning in
January 2011 for completion by April. Work was done from a trench in the footpath over frame A and
the wedges were replaced in pure iron supplied by Legg Bros of Ettingshall. The contract was
directed by Treasure & Son of Ludlow and the wedges installed by Barr & Grosvenor of
Wolverhampton.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 191
In 2009 Telford & Wrekin Council installed six
inclinometers in boreholes, three on each bank around the
Bridge. Monitoring since then shows small but continuing
land movement on both banks towards the river of around
2-3mm in 18 months at a depth approximately level with
the base plates. The results are so far unpublished but
elements have been made available by Neal Rushton for
this report. The 1972 concrete box within the north
abutment does not stop the movement – in fact the whole
box is subject to this pressure which will continue to be
exerted on the main arch through the horizontal stays. It
was this pressure that caused most of the historical
fractures on the north quadrant.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 192
References
B/2/2. Archive file held by IGMT, identified as „Iron Bridge (1977-81)‟, the Severn Gorge Project
Group file of the Telford Development Corporation (TDC) team based at the Wharfage in Ironbridge
for the restoration of the town
Baugh, CG, and Elrington, CR (eds). 1985. Victoria County History. „A History of the County
of Shropshire: Volume 11: Telford‟
Blackwell, A. 1985. Historic Bridges of Shropshire
BL/ML.KT. British Library, Map Library, King‟s Topography
CBD.59.82.4. Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808. IGMT Archives (also referred
to below as „Horsehay and ...‟)
Cossons, N. & Trinder, B. 1979. „The Iron Bridge‟, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Darby, A. 1771-81. The personal cash book of Abraham Darby III spanning 1771-81. This was in the
Shropshire Record Office, Shrewsbury (Labouchere Archive SRO 2448/1) until July 1993, when it
was transferred to the archives of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust (IGMT.1993.3374)
Dawley Development Corporation. 1965. 1:500 Survey Sheet 0711. IGMT Archives
DOE, 1972. Photogrammetry survey for DOE by Plowman Craven, taken in September. IGMT
Library & Archive
DOE, 1980. Five Elevations of the 1972 photogrammetry survey of the upstream arch, to show
location of fractures recorded in 1948, 1961 and 1980; records out of plumb of the inner verticals.
Scale 1:100. IGMT.1981.119. IGMT Library
de Haan, D. 2001. „Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis‟, begun in September 1999 and
undertaken by the Ironbridge Institute for Anthony Fleming, Inspector of Ancient Monuments for
English Heritage’s West Midlands Region. A parallel site recording report was done largely by
Shelley White
E214-1939. Joseph Powell pencil and sepia wash sketch. Victoria & Albert Museum
E1857-1946, and E3112/1948. Paul Sandby Munn‟s pencil sketches of 11th July 1802. Victoria &
Albert Museum
Field, J. 1821. Diary of Joshua Field‟s tour of 1821, in Transactions of the Newcomen Society, vol
VI (1925-6) pp30-32
Goodrich Collection. Science Museum, London
Horsehay and Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808. IGMT.CBD.59.82.4, IGMT
Archives
Hume. I. 1985. „Report on Structural Condition of the Bridge‟. English Heritage
Hume, I. 1980. „Report on the Repairs and Repainting of the Iron Bridge‟, DOE
IB 78-79. Archive file held by IGMT, „The Iron Bridge‟
IB (R). Archive file held by IGMT, identified as „Iron Bridge (Reconstruction)‟, being mostly E
Bruce Ball‟s correspondence 1971-77. IGMT.1993.736
IGMT. A number prefixed with IGMT relates to an item in the collections of the Ironbridge Gorge
Museum Trust
Madeley. Board of Guardians‟ Minute Book, 1867
Morton, R & Moseley, A. 1970. „An Examination of Fractures in the First Iron Bridge at
Coalbrookdale‟, Journal of West Midlands Studies, 1970, No 2, Wolverhampton Polytechnic
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 5 193
Mott, B. 1923. Mott, Hay & Anderson. „The Iron Bridge, Shropshire‟. 19 March 1923, pp12.
IGMT.1991.2606
NMR.MAL/65024.193. Aerial photograph. National Monuments Record, Swindon
p38vol90. Anonymous pencil sketch from the National Library of Wales
RL.17929B. Royal Library Windsor Castle. Sketch, nd, included in a collection of drawings
belonging to Thomas Sandby
Russell, J. (nd). Birmingham City Museum & Art Gallery, Fine Art Collection, P115‟51.E29
Sandby, T (attrib). (nd). Royal Library Print Room, Windsor Castle, ref 17929B
Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell. 1972. „The Iron Bridge - Estimate of Cost of Remedial Works to
North Abutment‟. February 1972, pp10. IGMT Archive File IB (R)
Shropshire Record Office:
SRO.3689-98. Minute Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1775-98. Mss 337A, Shropshire
Local Studies Library
SRO. 6001.3697. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828
SRO. 6001.3693. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1831-41
SRO. 6001.3694. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1841-61
SRO.6001.3695. Accounts for expenditure for repair of the Iron Bridge and the roads leading thereto
from 1861 to 1881
SRO.6001.3698. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1830-61
SRO.6001.3701. Final Report on condition and of repairs carried out on THE IRON BRIDGE -
SALOP, by Luther Griffiths, 1927
Telford Development Corporation. 1973, April. 1:500 Survey Sheet 0710. IGMT Archives
Wellington Journal. 30 August 1902, and 13 November 1937. IGMT Library
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
194
Appendix 6
Sequence of erection
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
195
Appendix 6 Sequence of erection
Summary
Install all the base plates, then erect the lower ribs
and inner verticals for all five frames, starting
with A, then B, and C (as shown in the Elias
Martin watercolour, left), followed by E, and
lastly D. This is all done with the Martin scaffold
erected just downstream of frame C, which is then
tilted as required up- or downstream to allow each
set of lower ribs to be erected. The footprint of the
two derrick poles remains in the same position.
Stages 1 to 10 below were rehearsed using a half
scale model in October 2001, which proved that
apart from the deck bearers and deck plates, all the large castings were easiest to manoeuvre
if lifted from a barge in the River. [This suggests they were cast on the River bank, probably
at Bedlam Furnaces which was owned by Darby. The deck bearers and deck plates would
have been easier to place if cast in a furnace in the Square.]
The Martin scaffold plus timber cross-bracing allows the middle and upper ribs of frame C to
be erected to test the detail of the upper design, and modifications are made as a result. The
last element to go in place before the outer rib is the outer vertical of frame C. Little of the
stone abutments behind the ironwork is erected during this initial phase. Apply the lessons
learnt to frames B and D, but with temporary timber cross- and diagonal bracing, and at this
stage complete the middle of the abutment apart from the corner ashlar facings where the
outer vertical for frames A and E will be inserted. Bring all 3 inner frames up to just below
deck bearer level. With scaffolding supported from the 5 lower ribs, repeat the process for A
and E, having at some time previously laid each complete frame out on dry land (presumably
at Bedlam) and marked all the castings. Complete the abutments up to deck level. Install the
ogees, circles, crown bearers, deck bearers and deck plates. Install deck plates, parapets, and
lay road metal of clay and slag. Celebrate with ale. Erection time 3 months.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
196
Sequence
1. Abutments. Build lower part of both sandstone
abutments up to base plate level, both where the
ironwork stands and for some way behind that. This
requires coffer dams by each bank that allow working
below water level to a depth of 23ft below the base
plates. Setting out is critical because the base plates
must be parallel and accurately in line. [A correction
had to be made to the north abutment stonework to
realign the top 8 courses because the setting out had not been accurate enough]. The
sandstone is sourced from nearby quarries on both banks of the River within the Little
Flint Coal Measures, each side being used for its respective abutment.
2. Base Plates. Install all 5 base plates on each abutment. Only the central ones (frame C)
have a large shoe for the middle rib, though its function remains unclear. Erect a couple
of courses of masonry overlapping 6 inches of the back of the base plates to trap them
and resist any slipping outwards. This will also counter any tendency of the plates to tip
forwards once loading from the inner vertical is exerted on the riverside edge. Use the
small post holes to the rear edge of each inner upright to erect temporary supports,
learning from experience on the south side where these holes had not been provided.
3. Scaffold. Erect a scaffold frame just to the downstream side of frame C, in the form
shown in the Martin picture. It has two derrick poles about 70ft long standing on the river
bed about 10 feet out from the abutments, and is tied together by a horizontal brace
(made of more than one piece in order to straddle about 120 feet). A block and tackle is
provided at four points – one at the top of each derrick and one on each of the main
diagonal struts at the height of the horizontal brace. Tip the entire frame upstream about
13o until the horizontal brace is over the line of frame A.
4. Inner Verticals, Frame A. Erect the inner verticals
of frame A on both banks, lifting them in turn from
a barge by block and tackle on the pole derricks.
They have a protruding tenon which passes through
an over-size slot in each base plate. The tenon has
an extension on one side, which will key the inner
vertical into the baseplate once pushed along (in the
downstream direction for the north quadrant, and
upstream for the south quadrant). There is an
indentation on the front of the vertical which will
receive the lower rib. Raise the castings into position by teams of men hauling on ropes,
aided by capstans and temporary anchors. Temporarily prop the verticals with ropes and
drive wooden wedges into the base plate slots to push them into their final positions, both
from one side and from behind. By this means the verticals are locked into the base
plates and are pushed as far as they can go towards the river, controlling the requisite
span dimension.
5. Lower Ribs, Frame A. Erect lower ribs of frame A, starting with the female half, ie the
north quadrant in this case. Each half rib is brought by barge on a frame that supports it
in an inverted U position. It will be lifted from the boat using the block and tackle fixed
to the diagonal strut of the scaffold, and the foot will be swung round to rest on the base
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
197
plate, its tendency to slip backwards resisted by the indentation in the inner vertical.
A rope from the derrick block and tackle is used to elevate the rib to the correct height.
When the north half of the rib is in place and its upper end is resting on the extended
diagonal scaffold spar (as shown in the Martin picture supporting frame C), the south
quadrant male half can be lowered onto it to close the halving joint. [This resting point
allows for the work to be completed the following day if required, and in fact the
Shrewsbury Chronicle confirmed that the procedure extended over two days – the 1st and
2nd July 1779]. This rib carries the lettering facing upstream, which acts as a prominent
advertisement for Coalbrookdale.
6. The decorative crown detail of this frame also faces upstream. Its 3 bolts are closed up
finger tight by two men standing on the gantry, but tightened further once a plumb line
has been used to check the verticality of the crown joint. The complete rib is made
vertical by its relation to the scaffold gantry across the river and stayed in that position
with guy ropes.
7. Lower Cross Stays of Frame A. Insert the lower cross stays (Ra and Rn) from each bank
side (there is no outer vertical or abutment in the way yet), passing the dovetail at a slight
angle through the over-size slot in the vertical member, and pushing the dovetail into the
housing on the lower rib. Fix them in place with a nut and bolt through the blind dovetail,
plus with temporary blocks and wedges in the aperture of the inner vertical. These will
later be replaced with iron blocks and lead packing once any corrections are made. The
cross stays stiffen the lower ends of the ribs against the verticals. The landward end of
each cross stay is propped up at the correct height on temporary timber struts.
8. Frame B. Tip the Martin gantry back 7o, about 6 feet in
the downstream direction, until it is over the line of
frame B. Repeat the process above (4 to 6) for the inner
verticals, lower ribs and lower cross stays of frame B.
Its decorative crown joint also faces upstream, so the
first quadrant to go up will be the north half, though
there is no lettering on this arch. Secure with guy ropes
and add temporary timber struts to maintain the parallel
space between frames A and B.
9. Frame C. Tip the Martin gantry back a further 6 feet
downstream until it is almost in the vertical position and
over the line of frame C. Repeat the process above (4 to
6) for the inner verticals, lower ribs and cross stays of
frame C, starting with the north quadrant so that the
decorative crown joint faces upstream to match frames
A and B. At this stage we have the inner verticals and
three ribs erected to match the Martin picture.
Temporary bracing and ropes keep them correctly
juxtaposed and vertical, but the structure is increasingly
rigid.
10. Frame E. Tip the scaffold frame back 13o, about 12
feet downstream, so that it is over the line of frame E.
Repeat the process above (4 to 6) for the inner verticals,
lower ribs and lower cross stays of frame E, but this
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
198
time placing the female rib on the south quadrant so that the decorative crown joint and
lettering faces downstream.
11. Frame D. Tip the scaffold frame back 7o upstream, about 6 feet, so that it is over the
line of frame D. Repeat the process above (4 to 6) for the inner verticals, lower ribs and
cross stays, placing the female rib on the south quadrant so that the decorative crown
joint faces downstream to match frame E. All five lower ribs have now been erected by
the use of the same scaffold frame, which has completed this phase without having to
dismantle it or move the feet positions.
12. Continue erecting Frame C. The gantry has to be tipped back into the vertical position to
stand alongside frame C, in order to steady many of the castings during the next phase of
erection. Further temporary decking is lashed to the five rib frames to allow smaller
auxiliary single pole derricks to be erected where required. The sequence is described
below from 12 to 19. [Most of this frame was completed before doing any more work on
B and D, because lessons were learnt regarding weights and strengths of radials, and the
need or otherwise for the extra dovetail housings on the outside of the outer rib. It was
also decided not to use the extra housing on the base plate (paragraph 2 above) designed
to receive the foot of the middle rib].
13. Add the Middle Rib to Frame C. A middle rib is lifted
from a barge and slotted through the inner vertical and
lower cross stay, to sit in the large shoe on the middle
deck plate, and braced temporarily to the Martin
gantry while the vertical and circumferential
alignment is checked. Blocks and wedges then fix the
position (later to be replaced with iron wedges and
lead packing). This is done on both quadrants. Its
passage down through the deck plate is halted and
adjusted by driving a wedge through a slot at the
bottom just above the shoe.
14. Add Bracing between the Inner and Middle Ribs of Frame C. After using temporary
timber braces to maintain the 2 arcs parallel with each other, radials Rb, Re, Rj and Rm
are replaced in cast iron and bolted tight. These both hold the ribs the correct distance
apart and also pull them together because of the dovetail. Cast iron ribs of this length can
be bent slightly to allow such adjustment.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
199
15. Add the Upper Cross Stays to Frame C. Like the lower cross stays, the upper ones
(Rb and Rm) will require temporary timber supports for the outer ends because the outer
vertical is not yet there.
16. Insert the Outer Vertical into Frame C. Each one is brought in from behind and slotted
down into the deck plate and over the ends of the upper and lower cross stays. The earlier
temporary timber props can now be dispensed with. Both cross stays extend beyond the
vertical member and a wedge is inserted on either side to trap them in position. There is
no obvious reason why more of the abutment cannot be built up behind this centre
vertical member to give some stronger points of anchorage.
17. Build up the Abutments to Upper Cross Stay level behind Frame C. The lower cross stay
has to have a firm foundation before the outer rib can rest on it, so at this point the lower
part of the abutment has to have the final ashlar course inserted. It makes sense to add it
right up to upper cross stay level so it is rigid enough for the next stage.
18. Insert the Outer Rib on Frame C. Add upper radials
Rd and Rk between the middle and upper ribs of this
frame to maintain the correct radii. The rib sits on
the cross stay at a height controlled by a wedge
passing through a slot in the rib just above the stay.
This rib does not come down to the base plate,
stopping at the lower cross stay, probably to provide
a wider working space for the bow hauliers or horses
that will have to pull boats upstream (see paragraph
30 for the final completion of this rib).
19. All remaining Iron Radials are added to Frame C. These replace any temporary timber
braces, but diagonal braces of timber are left in place. Some radials had already been cast
to standard sizes, but any special ones are cast from a temporary furnace (probably in the
Square) so that different length ones can be called for and fitted rapidly. Frame C is now
complete apart from the ogees, circle, deck bearers and crown bearer.
[It must have been evident at this stage that although the structure was vertical on the
north base plates, it was tilting over on the south. Nevertheless, they decided to proceed
with the other frames as they could align the final abutment facing courses to match the
slope. This also explains why there is one extra short deck plate on the south side next to
the abutment.
Lessons learnt from this trial frame prove that the extra dovetail housings on the outer
rib are superfluous. The outer vertical is assumed to be unnecessarily thin at the upper
level, so ones for the other frames were not reduced in cross section. The whole assembly
does not appear to need the large shoes added onto the middle deck plate. It must have
been a surface-mounted box rather than being cast integrally with the deck plates. The
suggestion that it is a correction to accommodate a rib casting that is too short has little
credence, because this shoe is used on both sides of the river.]
20. Erect the rest of Frames B and D. Follow the sequence above from 12 to 18, probably
with a dedicated team working on each frame. (This explains the increase of the wages
bill at this stage). Temporary timber diagonal and lateral bracing will now add greater
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
200
rigidity and allow more timber scaffolding within the lattice work to allow access.
The entire structure is free-standing and rigid, captured only at the base plates and at the
ends of the cross stays.
21. Circles are inserted to Frames B, C and D. They have 2 protruding tenons that locate in
the inner rib and inner vertical, with a 3rd
tenon cast on the top long enough to meet the
deck bearer. The circles are individually cast to diameters to meet the need. The
abutments are completed to the top over this central area.
22. Deck Beams and Crown Bearers are installed to Frames B, C and D. The mortise boxes
are set in each deck beam to meet the rising tenons of all castings below. Each one is cast
for the exact arrangement of each half frame. They are not interchangeable. Assuming
that about 12 inches of deck bearer sits on the abutments, the deck beams are 52ft long
and weigh about 3 tons each. The bearers are probably cast in the Square rather than at
Bedlam, as this is at the level where they are needed and from where they can be largely
slid into position. However, the lifting points for the deck bearers and crown bearer are
higher than anything done earlier, so need derricks supported from the 5 arches below.
23. The Sequence of Erection for Frames A and E follows that of the other Frames. The
pairs of lower ribs had been carefully matched and numbered 1-1 for A, and 2-2 for E,
and the best quality castings were used on these frames. The 3 concentric ribs of frame A
have carpenter’s marks so they cannot be confused with those for frame E. The north
quadrant of frame A goes up first, followed by its matching half, and the south quadrant
of frame E precedes its matching half. [This ‘handed’ arrangement would suggest that
the sequence of the incised numbers on the radials should start from the north quadrant
on frame A, and from the south quadrant for frame E. Unfortunately this is not the case,
as both sets of numbers start from the south side and climb in sequence over to the north
side.] Once the middle and outer ribs are in place, the outer vertical can be located, and
the abutments can now be completed.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
201
24. All Previous Temporary Packing is Replaced in Iron. All intersections are made rigid to
hold the castings tightly against each other, the final gaps being packed with lead. All
dovetails are also packed with lead and all bolts given a final tightening.
25. Add Final Horizontal Braces, Braces and Straps, and Diagonal Braces. The one-piece
horizontal brace is inserted across all 5 inner verticals, with the one for the north
quadrant fitting well, but that for the south quadrant being too short. Part of the inner
vertical of frame A (south quadrant) has to be chiselled away to allow this strap to fit.
The exact method of its fixing into the aperture of the verticals remains unclear, but
undoubtedly depends on wedges. The actual casting used is not the same as the one
shown on the Phillips engraving, or that as used in the contemporary models. Though it
was intended to use similar braces at three positions along the lower ribs [as shown in the
Phillips engraving], the plan was changed and separate braces were inserted between
each rib, the whole being tied by wedges and wrought iron fixings. This reflected the fact
that the space between each main arch was slightly different. These horizontal braces
replace any remaining temporary timber bracing.
The 4 horizontal I-beam braces between each frame are inserted first on the north
quadrant, starting with the lowest set, and are numbered with carpenter’s marks I, II, III
and IIII. Oval wrought-iron O-rings are shrunk onto protruding lugs and straddle the
lower rib above and below the casting. The outer ends are captured by a wrought-iron
loop, and the braces are all tightened by driving in iron wedges on either side of each rib.
The middle and upper sets of braces follow the same sequence, though on the middle set
only III and IIII are clearly marked. On the upper set only I, III and IIII are clearly
marked. There are no corresponding marks on the south quadrant sets, suggesting that the
packing had been done well enough to allow a standard size to be employed. However,
the braces on the south quadrant are of a slightly lighter design, which is the cause of
later fractures. [There is only one of theses lighter braces on the north quadrant, and one
corresponding heavier one on the south quadrant – evidence of a mistake in the erection
and suggesting they happened soon after each other.] The iron diagonal braces are
installed, replacing a temporary timber alternative.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
202
26. Deck Plates are Installed on all 5 Frames. All the deck plates are cast in an air furnace
constructed in the Square near the top of the abutments, rather than at Bedlam, so that
they can be dragged on the level instead of having to be lowed down the bank and then
lifted back up from below. They are 28 feet long, 3 feet wide and 1¾ inches thick,
weighing nearly 3 tons each. There are fragile flanges that protrude downwards near each
end, which makes this a delicate operation. There are 21 plates, with 10 on the north side,
but the south quadrant was 9 inches longer than the north and so required an extra plate,
which extends over the abutment (though later over the inner pier). Each plate is levelled
by packing it up at its outer edges with thin iron plates, as none of the deck plates sit
directly on the deck bearers. Holes left in each deck plate allow for attaching ropes and
give access for crowbars. 6-inch long cast iron wedges are driven into the holes as
required to align the deck plates accurately and resist any sideways movement.
27. Install Deck Fascias, Railing Posts, Swan Necks and Railings. The swan necks support
the railing posts via a single fixing to the upright and another one to the deck plate. The
triangle is completed below the over-hanging deck plate ends via a small decorative
bracket. Gaps between the railing bars are filled with short decorative dog bars, which
are slotted and splined into position.
28. Top out with Slag and Clay to provide a Road Surface. This deck is about 12 inches
deep and will require continual resurfacing with ash and slag.
29. Celebrate with ale. Total erection time of the ironwork - 3 months, July to September
1779. No castings were rejected and no breakages or injuries were sustained.
30. Continue to build Approach Roads. This work runs through 1780 and into late summer
of 1781, despite the Bridge opening to traffic on 1 January 1781.
31. Add the ‘Missing Ribs. The lower section of each outer rib from the lower horizontal
stay to the base plate is not added until June 1791, despite being in the original scheme as
shown on the Phillips engraving. Unlike all other parts of the Bridge, these are hollow
castings. They are inserted from below and bolted back to the outer verticals and capped
with a decorative foot.
Illustration Sources
Page 1. Title image: 1779 Watercolour sketch by Elias Martin (1739-1818), © Skandia
Company, Stockholm.
Engraving by William Ellis, published by James Phillips in 1782, with nomenclature annotations added by the author. Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust (IGMT) 1999.
Paragraphs 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12: Computer images by Bill Blake, English Heritage, 2002.
Para 13: Numbering convention for the decorative radials. IGMT 2000.
Para 17: Sketch by John Russell, not dated but c1790, showing the Middle Rib only coming down as far as the lower cross stay. Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery.
Para 22: Numbered castings on Frame A recorded from the site by the author. IGMT 2000.
Para 24: Numbered casting on Frames other than A or E, recorded from the site by the
author. IGMT, 2000.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 6
203
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 7
204
Appendix 7
Visitors’ descriptions
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 7
205
Appendix 7 Visitors’ descriptions
A selection of extracts from Trinder, B 2005 (3rd
edition) The most extraordinary
district in the world: Ironbridge & Coalbrookdale, Phillimore, demonstrating the effect
of the Bridge on Travellers to the area.
1. Arthur Young June 1776, Tours in England & Wales
“Crossed the Severn ferry at Lincoln Hill, in the midst of a most noble scenery of exceeding
bold mountainous tracts, with the river rolling at the bottom. The opposite shore is one
immense steep hanging wood. Mounted through that wood, thickly scattered with cottages,
the inhabitants busily employed in the vast works of various kinds carried on in this
neighbourhood.”
“Crossing the ferry where Mr Darby has undertaken to build a bridge of one arch of 120 ’ of
cast iron.” (Trinder 2005)
2. 1776 A Pennsylvania Quaker Jabez Maude Fisher (1750-79)
“… a far greater and more wonderful piece of Architecture is now in agitation by the
enterprising Owners of these works, a fabric which England or the whole Globe cannot equal.
This is an Iron bridge to cross the river Severn to consist of one arch only. This will be a
regular circle. The span from side to side is near 196 feet … the whole will be made of cast
iron without an ounce of any sort of material about it. It may be taken to pieces at any time.
And should it ever become out of order it will very easily be rectified.” (Trinder 2005)
3. The diary of Samuel Butler, 14th
March 1782
“The bridge itself makes a light & elegant appearance tho’ apparently no way deficient in
strength. In viewing it either up or down water it resembles an elegant arch in some ancient
cathedral … whilst viewing the Bridge a loaded vessel passed under it and tho’ they said the
river was then 4’ higher than low water mark, yet the bridge appeared to be many feet above
the top of the mast” (Trinder 2005)
4. John Byng, later 5th
Viscount Torrington, July 20 1784
“But of the iron bridge over the Severn … what shall I say? That it must be the admiration as
it is one of the wonders of the world. It was cast in the year 1778: the arch is 100 feet wide
and 55 feet from the top of the water and the whole length is 100 yards: the county agreed
with the founder to finish it for £6,000and have meanly made him suffer for his noble
undertaking.” (Trinder 2005)
5. Francois & Alexandre de la Rochefoucauld, 13 March 1785
Long description of the bridge. “The iron bridge over the River Severn in Coalbrookdale is a
work unique of its kind: not only is the arch made entirely of iron, but so are all the parts of
the bridge ... As we left I looked again at the Iron Bridge. Its elegance and simplicity pleased
me extremely.” (Trinder 2005)
6. An Italian aristocrat visiting in 1787
“In the midst of the gloom I descended to the Severn which runs slowly between two high
mountains, and after leaving which passes under a bridge constructed entirely of iron. It
appears as a gate of mystery”. (Trinder 2005)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 7
206
7. An American paper maker, Joshua Gilpin, 8 Nov 1796
“… the iron bridge has a beautiful appearance on both sides – has proved very strong”
(Trinder 2005).
8. Henry Skrine, travel writer, 1798
“We made a precipitate decent to the Romantic scene of Coalbrook Dale, where the river,
winding between a variety of high wooded hills, opposite to the forges of Broseley, is crossed
by a bridge of one arch, 100ft in length, and formed entirely of cast iron, with strong stone
abutments, which present at once a striking effect in landscape & a stupendous specimen of
the powers of mechanism.” (Trinder 2005)
9. Charles Dibdin the Elder, 1745-1814, who visited Coalbrookdale in 1787
“The Iron Bridge I think is the most beautiful of the three (Bridgewater & Sunderland) ... for
though it seems like a network wrought in iron, it will apparently lay uninjured for ages.
Coalbrookdale wants nothing but Cerberus to give you the idea of a heathen hell. The Severn
may pass for the Styx, with this difference, that Charon, turned turnpike man, ushers you over
the bridge instead of rowing in his crazy boat; the men and women might easily be mistaken
for devils and fairies, and the entrance of any of these blazing caverns where they polish the
cylinders, for Tartarus”. (Trinder 2005)
10. Dr Samuel Heinrich Spiker (1786-1858), librarian to the King of Prussia, visited in 1816
and published in 1820
“The little village of Iron bridge is a very agreeable place. The tontine Inn, of the best and
cheapest inns in England, close to the Bridge, of which we had a view from our bed-room
windows, with the hills beyond it and of the banks of the river, with furnaces on it to the left.
From the bridge itself there is a beautiful view down the river and of the works on both banks,
which by night are doubly picturesque: the whole of the adjoining country being then strongly
illuminated by means of the flames from the furnaces … [mentions a bridge just cast for Mr
Brewing of Carlow in Ireland of 40 foot span and another one for the Liffey in Ireland –the
Halfpenny Bridge – “of 140 feet span and twelve feet in height, was also in hand, the cost of
which was to be one thousand pounds sterling.”] (Trinder 2005)
11. James Naysmith (1808-90), mechanical engineer, visited Coalbrookdale in 1830
“I saw the first iron bridge constructed in England, an object of historical interest in that class
of structures. It was because of the superb quality of the castings produced in Coalbrookdale
that the ironmasters were able to accomplish the building of a bridge of that material which
before had baffled all projectors both at home and abroad.” (Trinder 2005)
12. Charles Hulbert (1837), History & Description of the County of Salop
“From Coalport to Ironbridge, two miles, the river passes through the most extraordinary
district in the world : the banks on each side are elevated to the height of from 3 to 400 feet,
studded with Iron Works, Brickworks, Boat Building Establishments, Retail Stores, Inns, and
Houses; perhaps 150 vessels on the river, actively employed or waiting for cargoes; while
hundreds and hundreds of busy mortals are assiduously engaged, melting with the heat of the
roaring furnace; and though enveloped in the thickest smoke and incessant dust are cheerful
and happy.
Ironbridge. Here we may say is the mercantile part of Madeley … Navigation being also
carried on to a very considerable extent, gives to Ironbridge the character and appearance of
an inland port.” (Trinder 2005)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 7
207
13. 1877 Victorian excursions
“… staying at the Crown Inn on Hodge Bower … we visited Buildwas Abbey, the Iron
Bridge, Wrekin, Messer’s Maws works, Mr Southorn’s Pipe works, Benthall Edge, the
rotunda, Limestone cavers etc etc...” (Trinder 2005)
14. James John Hissey (1847-1921), travel writer in 1913
“It was an unwelcome change from the rural pleasantness of the country about Buildwas,
coming to the squalid and smoky town of Ironbridge in Coalbrookdale ... Ironbridge gains
its name of course, from the bridge of iron that spans the Severn there in one bold arch. At
the time of the building of the bridge in 1779, it was considered a great engineering feat,
even a thing of beauty, tho I saw no beauty in it except the curve of the arch. Its black
colour is out of tune with the landscape, it seems to have no part in it. ….
I believe that this structure at Ironbridge was the first of the kind of any size built in
England and was thought a wonder in its day. How distant seems that day! Now people
have ceased to wonder at it or at anything else.” (Trinder 2005)
15. LTC Rolt (1910-74), engineer and appreciator of industry visited in 1942 or 3
“… I explored the Dale and the Ironbridge Gorge on foot, I came fully to share the feelings of
those bygone artists. Although the famous bridge still spans the severn, and men cast iron in
the foundry at Coalbrookdale, the blast furnaces are dead … Yet the whole area seemed to me
to be haunted. Everywhere I was reminded of the fierce activity of former days, and every
stick and stone of the place seemed to have absorbed something of its white hot violence. It
was here that Abraham Darby the First succeeded in smelting iron with coke instead of
charcoal; here that the first iron hull was made and launched; the first iron steam engine
cylinders, and the first iron rails were cast; here that the first steam locomotive was built to
the design of Richard Trevithick. Yet I needed no such recital of historical facts to tell me that
it was here that it had all begun. I could feel it on my pulses; and if I needed any reminder, the
great black semicircle of Darby’s iron bridge, springing over the Severn, spoke to me more
eloquently than any history book.” (Trinder 2005)
Cruickshank, D. 2010 Bridges: Heroic designs that changed the world, Collins
“… the boisterous and precocious child of the industrial revolution. Not the first bridge to use
iron, nor revolutionary design as much like a masonry bridge & cast iron members disposed
as a in contemporary timber bridges – but first all – iron bridge …
New Industrial age of mass production yet possesses a Georgian elegance and regard for
ornament. It is made of iron but elements are mortised, wedged & screwed as if timber. Darby
knew the material must be used in compression not in tension which is its weakness –
therefore all loads transmitted vertically down and individual elements in compression …
bridges define places. Their ability to inspire, transform, and unite is unique and their
structural working is nothing short of incredible”. (Cruickshank 2010.50)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 208
Appendix 8
Public consultation
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 209
Appendix 8 Public consultation
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge – Consultation August 2010
A public consultation questionnaire (a copy is to be found at the end of the Appendix) was sent out to a wide range of individuals and bodies with a view to building an understanding of the significance of the Iron Bridge in terms of heritage and community values, as well as seeking views relating to its current and future conservation and management. This consultation gives some early indication of views relating to the care and future development of the Iron Bridge and will form the basis for further work.
Respondent feedback has been structured in such a way as to group comments by theme, including the management and conservation of the Iron Bridge and its immediate surroundings, commentary relating to the Bridge‟s interpretive and educational values and suggested improvements in these key areas.
41 questionnaires were sent out to a range of individuals and organisations including conservation establishments, local authorities and heritage, environmental, historical, community and business
organisations. 19 questionnaire returns were made, giving a good representative sample, including all key stakeholders. Further comment following the consultation was made by Telford & Wrekin Council Engineering Services and the Severn Gorge Countryside Trust.
Significance and Value
Being asked to prioritise the historical, evidential, aesthetic and communal value of the Iron Bridge,
the majority of respondents prioritised historical value highest, with the fabric of the Bridge (evidential) and aesthetic also being given significant weighting. This is perhaps not surprising in that without ensuring the ongoing conservation of the Bridge, its use to users would be restricted.
Question 1: Please rank the following considerations in order of priority for you (1 being most important, 4 being least important):
Historical value: the historical significance and associations of the Iron Bridge
Evidential value: the importance of the fabric of the Iron Bridge itself
Aesthetic value: the appearance of the Iron Bridge and the surrounding environment
Communal value: the significance of the Iron Bridge to users Respondent
number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Historical 4 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Evidential 1 2 4 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 1 4 2 3 2
Aesthetic 2 4 1 3 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 3 2 2
Communal 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 2 2 3 2 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 2
In terms of historical and evidential value, the Iron Bridge was seen by respondents as an internationally recognised symbol of the Industrial Revolution, of innovation and an integral part of our national history, which in turn had shaped the wider world.
The Iron Bridge was also valued by some respondents as a source of inspiration for new technologies and entrepreneurship - „Design leads innovation and manufacturing, which in turn creates jobs and wealth‟. It was seen as the „centrepiece‟ of the World Heritage Site and the core driver for attracting tourism and stimulating the commercial life of both the local community and the wider borough. Care of the Iron Bridge, therefore, impacted on first impressions for both visitors and members of the local community.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 210
„The aesthetic appearance of the Bridge is, of course, timeless within the Severn Gorge; it is iconic, with the communal value of the Bridge to users modest in comparison‟.
„The Iron Bridge is central to a living and working community and is symbolic of an age of innovation that still inspires us today‟.
„The Properties & Education Department seek to promote understanding and enjoyment of the historic properties in English Heritage‟s care, whilst ensuring their preservation for future generations‟.
In terms of the fabric of the Iron Bridge and its maintenance and conservation and whether it should be
returned to its original condition /appearance or whether later repairs be noted as part of its ongoing history, the majority of respondents considered it was best to clearly show later repairs and alterations as it formed part of the Iron Bridge‟s ongoing history. In terms of specifics, one respondent considered the Bridge deck road surface should be returned to its configuration of around 1900, i.e. without pavements and kerbing and that the surface should resemble in appearance the original covering of clay mixed with blast furnace slag. However, recognition of the impracticality of returning the Bridge to its original 18th century condition was highlighted by one respondent as it would require demolition of the land arches of the south bank of the River Severn.
The Bridge Setting – Approach and Surrounding Areas
In terms of prioritisation of setting, the approach to the Iron Bridge at road level was prioritised most highly by respondents, with the appearance of the Tollhouse also being prioritised highly by many. The importance of the Ironbridge Town Square and the river level approach to the Iron Bridge was also noted, whilst car parking was prioritised lowest overall.
Question 2:
Please rank the following aspects of the setting of the Bridge in order of priority for you (from 1 being
the most important to 6 being the least important):
The Tollhouse
The car park
The Tontine Inn
The approaches to the Iron Bridge at river level
The approaches to the Iron Bridge at road level
Ironbridge town square
Respondent
number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Toll House 1 4 4 1 4 3 5 3 4 4 2 5 1 4 1 5 3 5 1
Car Park 2 5 5 3 5 6 6 5 5 5 2 6 2 6 2 3 4 3 6
Tontine Inn 4 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 4 5 6 5
Approach, River Level 1 6 6 4 3 5 2 6 6 2 2 1 4 1 5 5 6 1 1
Approach, Road Level 1 3 1 5 6 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 5 5 4 1 1 4 4
Town Square 3 1 2 6 1 4 4 4 1 4 2 3 6 3 6 2 2 2 3
There were a number of specific points raised within questions 1 and 2 relating to the immediate surroundings of the Iron Bridge. In terms of the approach to the Iron Bridge at river and road level, there were some concerns expressed regarding the health & safety of visitors and of areas which crossed Guardianship.
The Town Square was seen by several respondents as the prime focus after crossing the Iron Bridge. Several references were made relating to the Square, one respondent saw it as being highly congested and dysfunctional as a Square and meeting place, one that it was detached from the spatial context of
other features and others referred to a need for a serious upgrade (especially the Central Café property). Reference to the impact on first impressions for visitors to Ironbridge was also made.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 211
Broader issues were raised by respondents that whilst the restoration of the Iron Bridge and its surroundings had created a „tourism honey pot‟, a sense of ownership amongst newer residents of the town was questioned.
Some respondents expressed concerns over the level to which the Gorge had reverted to being a heavily wooded landscape. The value of the north bank towpath to enable visitors to get close to the Iron Bridge structure was cited as a positive feature, while the south bank offered a more natural aspect. Another respondent ranked the north bank setting of the Iron Bridge as being a higher priority
than the south bank setting due to its close relationship to the townscape of the north bank, including the Square and the Tontine Hotel, stating that „this is the most important aspect of the various settings of the Bridge. This is also probably the aspect most people will view the Bridge from‟.
The pedestrian approach to the north bank arch was considered poor with no vernacular integrity. The Iron Bridge car park provided the best first impression of the Bridge and, as such, required appropriate visitor and aesthetic management.
The changing face of the river was considered an important factor in strengthening the river level approach. One respondent suggested a boardwalk along the Wharfage, as an improvement to safety and one which would support a greater appreciation of the river. There was an identified need to look at the Iron Bridge setting as a whole, including the quality of the built environment, interpretation and physical access, together with looking at ways in which the quality of the retail offer could be improved in the town itself.
The importance of the 18th century Tontine Hotel and the Square and its former role as a destination for tourists to view the Iron Bridge in the 1780s was also highlighted and referenced by more than one respondent.
Improvements to the Public Realm of the Iron Bridge
Most aspects of the public realm (e.g. pavements, bollards, lighting) were considered of value. Suggested priorities for improvement are summarised as follows:
- Need for a clear design guide to be in place so that improvements form a cohesive whole – taking into account pavements, bollards, lighting, etc., but also landscaping around the Iron Bridge
- Implementation of a coordinated, high-quality scheme for street furniture and public areas (road and pavement surfaces, hard and soft landscaping, etc.)
- The refurbishment of the Iron Bridge itself
- Lighting of the Iron Bridge - illumination at night, lighting along the river Wharfage. It was stated, however, that flood lighting should not destroy the simple integrity of the structure
- Use of high quality materials in keeping with the Iron Bridge and what it represents in terms of quality
- Improved quality of the painting of street furniture
- Improvement to the Square
- Review of the number of bollards, including whether the total number could be reduced, and concerns with the future siting of them
- Regular cleaning of graffiti
- Improved historical accuracy of detailing, e.g. cast iron curbs with no historical validity.
Improvements to the Management of the Woodland of the Gorge and the wider
Environment
General comments were made about the good work of the Severn Gorge Countryside Trust. Specific suggestions included:
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 212
- Improvement of woodland trails to the south of the River for walkers
- Reduction of tree cover to open up vistas and expose important structures e.g. the Severn Valley Railway viaduct between the Ironbridge picnic site and the Power Station, and the vistas visible from the Rotunda
- Removal of excess vegetation to expose Wharfage walls
- Opening up the railway line to the south of the River
- Guarding of the railway as an alternate form of transportation for the future
- Improvement to the east-west footpath running along the old railway line, general vigilance of footpath conditions
- Importance of design and management to achieve an effective interplay between the natural and the man-made environments
- Improvements to signage, including consistency of branding and de-cluttering of local signage
- Need for a joined up management approach and the important role of the World Heritage Site Steering Group in helping to ensure effective coordination
- Interpretation to show how the Wharfage has changed
- The woodland of the Gorge is an important aspect which should be effectively managed to ensure the integrity of the Iron Bridge and surrounding area.
Future Facilities
In terms of facilities that would improve Ironbridge town and enhance the experience of the Iron Bridge, suggestions included:
- Change the Square from being a car dominated space to being a people dominated space – the car park in the Square would make a wonderful public space for people if the cars were removed
- Implement a coordinated scheme for street furniture and the treatment of the hard surfaces
- Tidy up the River banks
- Expose and restore the Wharfage walls to recreate the sense of Ironbridge being a river port
- Close the Wharfage to all but essential traffic
- Introduce period style seating
- Control signage outside commercial premises
- Establish a World Heritage Site Interpretation Centre at the heart of the World Heritage Site (the Museum of the Gorge?)
- New use of the Museum of the Gorge for all players in the Ironbridge story to contribute to all experiences of the Iron Bridge – wildlife, archaeology, river life, engineering past and present
- Museum of the Gorge - multi-lingual interpretation would be desirable
- Improved toilet facilities – even after significant investment in 2008, the facilities are still not up to the standard one would expect at the heart of a World Heritage Site. Relocate them to within a new visitor centre within the Museum of the Gorge
- Railway connectivity
- 24 hour ATM
- Easier transport around museum sites, fewer cars
- Better use of the Museum Gift Shop (more relevant books)
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 213
- Attraction of business and the reduction in vacant shop premises, better shops, addition of a convenience store
- Information in the Tollhouse, the Tollhouse open more often
- Improvements to the Tontine Inn
- Most week days: no parking in the Square and plenty of pavement seating
- Frequent bus services
- Cast iron kerbing is good and in keeping with the area. Litter bins of cast iron
- A local market – a vibrant trading heart of the town with local services restored.
Interpretation and information improvements relating to the Iron Bridge
Comments and suggestions relating to the Iron Bridge in terms of interpretation and the improvement of information included the following:
- There is very limited interpretation about the Iron Bridge in close proximity to the Bridge itself
apart from the display in the Tollhouse, which is not always open to the public. The storage areas below the Bridge (with wooden doors) offer potential to house a display, though this would require someone to open and close them on a daily basis
- More interpretation covering the elements of design, manufacturing and its construction as well as making the link with Coalbrookdale. The social dimension of the community of the 18 th century, who conceived it, patterns of usage of the Bridge.
- Use of the Buttermarket to enhance the history of the Gorge
- Addition of more interpretation boards for visitor information
- Care with design and location of additional interpretation to prevent distraction
- Interpretation on both north and south sides of the Iron Bridge and the role of the Museum of the Gorge in understanding the bigger picture
- Use of Ironbridge World Heritage Site branding
- Mobile downloads or podcasts to avoid heavy signage use
- Local awareness of the need to apply to English Heritage for permission to use the Iron Bridge for third party events is low, a better means of disseminating this information and reasons for this procedure could be improved
- Interpretation in the Tollhouse is good
- Tollhouse is not open enough
- Role of the Tollhouse as a source of information from people rather than boards
- Changing display in the Tollhouse (every 2 years)
- Improved accessibility of interpretation (panels behind the barn doors of the Tontine Inn)
- Use of the Interpretation Strategy created for the Ironbridge Gorge by consultants PLB and funded by ERDF grant. Move towards more integrated interpretation as per this Strategy
Earliest Memory of the Iron Bridge
- „As a boy visiting Ironbridge with my parents on a Saturday afternoon drive out. It was a very popular venue from Wolverhampton where I grew up and running across it and throwing sticks into the river from the top was always a delight‟.
- „My first visit to the Iron Bridge was in 1970 as a student on a field trip to Telford as part of my University town planning course‟.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 214
- „1981 – I opened a restaurant on the Wharfage and my apartment overlooked the Iron Bridge – in spite of the most challenging trading three years of my business life, I never tired of looking at that wonderful structure from my sitting room window - it lifted my heart every night that I lived in the town. It‟s a magical place – left forlorn and neglected and it‟s heartbreaking to see the detritus gathering around this inspiring monument right now‟.
- „Moving into the area in 1978, coming down Jiggers Bank – a scary experience! Then driving through Ironbridge and seeing the Bridge. It felt like coming into something really special and different‟.
- „Learning about it at school and University in the 70s/80s, but first visiting it in about 2005 and being very impressed by the span‟.
- „1971, when I came to meet Neil Cossons and prepare a promotional exhibition at the Science Museum where I worked‟.
Educational value of the Iron Bridge
- „The educational value of the Iron Bridge is immense – it has relevance to many aspects of academic study and the curriculum, including history, science and maths, economics (e.g. tourism), art and design, etc. It is also relevant to teaching at all levels from primary school to Higher Education‟.
- „The Iron Bridge is the “epicentre” of the World Heritage Site and is also an icon of the Industrial Revolution. The Bridge and the wider World Heritage Site have considerable educational
potential, some of which is not yet tapped into. For example, UNESCO‟s “World Heritage in Small Hands” is a useful teaching resource which demonstrates the relevance of World Heritage to a range of educational topics for children. The Bridge can be viewed as an important symbol which can be a focus for such teaching‟.
- „The Iron Bridge symbolises the optimistic aspects of those profound changes in British society that are often called the Industrial Revolution. Crossing the bridge, going underneath it, or seeing it from the river remain profound experiences. How the Bridge is interpreted will change as historical understanding and education practices develop. The essentials are that it remains accessible, and that, particularly in Higher Education, the Bridge (and fieldwork generally) remains part of the agenda‟.
- „The educational value is huge, and underused. I would like to see the schools throughout Telford & Wrekin be encouraged to look at the history of their own area and relate it to the Ironbridge
Gorge. For example, the pools at Horsehay, the furnaces at Granville Park. Very often Ironbridge is seen as the only place where the Industrial Revolution happened, rather than see the importance of the whole area. I feel it would give more of a sense of place‟.
- „Considerable educational value (history, culture, engineering, visual). Note that there is little information about how it „works‟ visually‟.
- „As a well recognised symbol of the Industrial Revolution; technological history; social and economic history. Continue to build on existing good practice for young generations‟.
- „I think this is fully covered in both the original World Heritage Site submission in the 1980s and
in the various World Heritage Site management plans, together with the Leverhulme study by Davies in the 1980s and the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust‟s own education work. I don‟t think I could add much to all that! Other than to ensure broader educational opportunities are maximised (adult education, arts and culture, modern social history, overseas development of skills ...)‟.
- „Clearly it has a lively and strong story to tell in the history of the Industrial Revolution and also engineering. The Bridge could be used to tell a number of stories and demonstrate a great deal across the curriculum. A number of methods could be used to develop the educational value: on-line resources, teachers‟ packs, guided tours, DVD/CD Roms, downloads/podcasts, etc. all of which have their place depending on the resources available‟.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 215
- „It carries a huge educational value as it is the iconic symbol of the Industrial Revolution and the design, technology and innovation that resulted from that time have shaped the world we live in today‟.
- „An example of the start of modern engineering. The interpretation of the Bridge MUST be kept for the instruction of study and admiration of the visitors, old and young. Conferences, study days, etc. Should be held at Coalbrookdale to cater for all types of visitors and interested groups it should become a venue for prize giving for civil engineers‟.
- „High for the local area and should be used as a tool for education around the history /beginning of the Industrial Revolution, but also recognise the „modern‟ role it plays today – links to entrepreneurship and enterprise, etc.‟
- „I would like to see the old market hall in the Square taken back to its original (more or less) condition and used as a formal education centre, particularly for students and tourists. There is
enough space to equip a state of the art facility and do even better that Blaenavon have done for their World Heritage Site‟.
Many respondents concluded by expressing a continuing desire to play an active part in the future development of the Iron Bridge.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 216
Consultees
The public consultation questionnaire was sent out to over 40 individuals and organisations, including conservation bodies, local authorities, community and business organisations, and heritage, environmental and historical groups. Responses were received from:
Michael Barker, Telford & Wrekin Council Bill Blake, consultant but previously English Heritage Anna Brennand, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Alan Capewell, English Heritage Eric Carter, Telford & Wrekin Council Beth Cavanagh, English Heritage Claire Critchell, Telford & Wrekin Council Michael Darby, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust David de Haan, Ironbridge Institute Harriet Devlin, Ironbridge Institute
Fay Easton, Shropshire Enterprises Katie Foster, Heritage and Tourism consultant Rebecca Gutierrez, Telford & Wrekin Council Vanesa Harbar, World Heritage Site Manager from 2010, Telford & Wrekin Council Rob Harding, English Heritage Kath Hardman, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Ian Hume, consultant but previously English Heritage
Simon Kenyon-Slaney, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Bill Klemperer, English Heritage Lorraine Knowles, English Heritage Louise Lomax, Gorge Parish Council Jonathan Lloyd, World Heritage Site Manager until 2010, Telford & Wrekin Council Steve Miller, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Ian Pickles, Broseley Town Council Colin Pitcher, Telford & Wrekin Council
Gillian Pope, Broseley Local History Society Russell Rowley, Severn Gorge Countryside Trust Neal Rushton, Telford & Wrekin Council Heather Sebire, English Heritage Keith Smith, Telford & Wrekin Council Michael Taylor, English Heritage Barrie Trinder, historian
Michael Vout, Telford & Wrekin Council Barrie Williams, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Richard Zeizer, English Heritage.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 8 217
A Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge, Shropshire
Public Consultation Questionnaire
Understanding heritage and community values, and planning for current and future conservation
management of the Iron Bridge – we welcome your views.
Name: ...................................................................................................................... ...................
Position & Organisation: ............................................................................................................
Contact details (telephone no. & email) .................................................................................... .
Questions
1. Please rank the following considerations in order of priority for you:
Historical value: the historical significance and associations of the Iron Bridge
Evidential value: the importance of the fabric of the Iron Bridge itself
Aesthetic value: the appearance of the Iron Bridge and the surrounding environment
Communal value: the significance of the Iron Bridge to users. Please state reasoning for selection.
2. Please rank the following aspects of the setting of the Bridge in order of priority for you:
The Tollhouse
The car park
The Tontine Inn
The approaches to the Iron Bridge at river level
The approaches to the Iron Bridge at road level
Ironbridge town square Please state reasoning for selection
3. Do you consider that the „public realm‟ elements enhance the setting of the Bridge, if so what
improvements would you like to see such as paving, bollards, lighting or similar aspects?
4. Is there sufficient interpretation and information about the Iron Bridge? If not, what would
you like to see improved?
5. What are your views relating to the management of surrounding woodland and
environment? (i.e. re-creation of Historic vistas, maintenance of pathways and trails,
woodland /wildlife conservation, environmental concerns).
6. What facilities in Ironbridge town would enhance your experience of the Iron Bridge?
7. Should the programme of maintenance and conservation seek to return the Iron Bridge to
its original condition /appearance or should later repairs and alterations be recognised as
part of its history?
8. What is your earliest memory of the Iron Bridge?
9. What is the educational value of the Iron Bridge and how would you like to see this
developed?
10. Would you be willing to be involved in activities associated with the interpretation of the
Iron Bridge and its history and ongoing conservation, and if so what sort of activities
would appeal to you?
PLEASE RETURN QUESTIONNAIRES BY: 9 AUGUST 2010
Where possible we would prefer questionnaires to be returned electronically, to [email protected], or if you are returning by post please send to: Carol Bowsher, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, Coalbrookdale, Telford, Shropshire TF8 7DQ.
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 218
Appendix 9
List and location of
major archives
Appendix 9
List and location
of major archives
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 219
Appendix 9 List and location of major archives
English Heritage
Record Number Title First Paper Last Paper Status Location
AA090655/1 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - SCHEDULING - CO MON N0. 106
22 July 1933 08 June 1998 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/1/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL MONUMENT N0. 27558
13 September 1996 Not Set Wansdyke Security
AA090655/13 THE IRON BRIDGE - SALOP - DAMAGE, THEFT ETC
13 November 1984 13 March 1985 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/14 THE IRONBRIDGE - BI-CENTENARY EXHIBITION 1979 - & 1976 EXHIBITION
21 January 1976 Not Set NO MOVEMENT SINCE
AA090655/2 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP - WKS /14/2011
01 January 1945 31 December 1955
THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES
AA090655/2-1 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE -
SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - SMCC 6 - SCHEDULED MONUMENT CONSENT
01 May 1999 18 July 2001 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/2-1/3290 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - HISTORIC MIANTENANCE - SMCC VI
28 March 1994 16 November 2000
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2-1/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO 27558 - SCHEDULED MONUMENT CONSENT
01 July 2006 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/2-3 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RECORDING - CO MON NO 106 ( PAPERS NOW ON AA 92274/2-3)
19 June 1991 Not Set NO MOVEMENT SINCE
AA090655/2/PT11 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP
14 December 1979 18 December 1984
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2/PT12 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SALOP - WORKS
11 January 1985 28 July 1988 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2/PT13 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SALOP - WORKS
27 November 1991 21 July 1993 CLOSED PA 93
AA090655/2/PT14 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAIR AND REPAINTING 1979-85 - CONTRACT DOCUMENTS INC REPORTS - AND PLANS - (RETAINED
FOR EH ARCHIVE)
01 January 1979 31 December 1985
Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 220
AA090655/2/PT15 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL
MONUMENT NO 27558 - GENERAL WORKS
01 October 2006 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/2/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP - WKS 14/2574
10 August 1955 31 December 1967
THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES
AA090655/22 IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM TRUST - MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS
- INCLUDING IRONBRIDGE QUARTERLY
15 April 1971 Not Set Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2200/3A IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - PRE-CONTRACT
07 October 1999 Not Set CANCELLED
AA090655/2200/3B1 IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - RESOURCE
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden, Jackie
AA090655/2200/3B2 IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS -
RESOURCE PAYMENTS
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden, Jackie
AA090655/2200/3C IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
01 July 1999 17 August 1999 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2200/3D IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE -
TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - CONTRACT
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden,
Jackie
AA090655/2200/3E IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - MINUTES
12 August 1999 01 March 2000 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2200/3F IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - PAYMENTS
07 October 1999 Not Set CANCELLED
AA090655/2200/3G IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE -
REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - RECORD
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden, Jackie
AA090655/2200/3H IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - CDM
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden, Jackie
AA090655/2200/3J IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE -
REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - CONSENTS
07 October 1999 Not Set Missenden, Jackie
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 221
AA090655/2200/3K IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - OFFICERS INSTRUCTIONS
07 October 1999 Not Set CANCELLED
AA090655/22A IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM
TRUST - REQUEST FOR DOE GRANT - AID FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS
11 December 1973 Not Set NO
MOVEMENT SINCE
AA090655/25 THE IRON BRIDGE - FLOODLIGHTING BY - TELFORD NEWTOWN CORPORATION.
18 February 1977 Not Set Wansdyke Security
AA090655/25/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE,
SHROPSHIRE - FLOODLIGHTING BY - TELFORD NEWTOWN CORPORATION
18 February 1991 18 February 1991 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/27 THE IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM - WORKING GROUP
03 October 1988 14 April 1989 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/27/PC1 THE IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM -
WORKING GROUP
16 November 1992 Not Set Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/27/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM - WORKING GROUP
30 March 1989 07 November 1989
CLOSED Bravo, Sam
AA090655/27/PT3 THE IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM - WORKING GROUP
17 January 1990 19 July 1990 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/27/PT4 THE IRONBRIDGE GORGE MUSEUM - WORKING GROUP
09 October 1990 13 October 1992 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/27/PT5 THE IRONBRIDGE GEORGE MUSEUM - WORKING GROUP
27 October 1992 24 May 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/27/PT6 THE IRONBRIDGE GEORGE MUSEUM
- WORKING GROUP
03 June 1996 Not Set Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/28 TREE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR PIC SITES - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - MONUMENT NO.326
22 February 1991 Not Set Georgiou, Ari
AA090655/29 P.I.C. GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
REVIEW. - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - MONUMENT NO.326 <FILE CANCELLED>
30 April 1991 Not Set DESTROYED
AA090655/2C THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - WARDEN'S BUILDING
17 August 1989 03 December 1991
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2D THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - IRONBRIDGE GORGE TRANSPORTATION STUDY
17 August 1989 03 October 1991 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/2E THE IRONBRIDGE - SALOP - PROPOSED NEW BRIDGE AT LADYWOOD
15 January 1990 18 February 1991 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 222
AA090655/2F THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE,
SHROPSHIRE - TOLL HOUSE DEVELOPMENT
Not Set 27 October 1992 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/3 THE IRONBRIDGE - SALOP - GUARDIANSHIP
05 April 1972 07 March 1995 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/30 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - EVENTS
24 March 1995 01 February 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/30/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO 27558 - EVENTS
01 November 2006 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/31 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - WORLD HERITAGE SITE
06 July 1993 21 July 2001 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/31/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO 27558 - WORLD HERITAGE SITE
01 October 2006 Not Set CANCELLED
AA090655/32 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - PLANNING
PROPOSALS
09 February 1996 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/33 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ENGINEERS' INSPECTIONS
13 February 1996 15 October 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/34 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE GORGE - IRONBRIDGE -
SHROPSHIRE - APPROVAL / BOARD / APPRAISALS
01 June 1999 Not Set Zeizer, Richard
AA090655/35 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - MANAGEMENT MEETINGS
09 April 1999 24 November 1999
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/A THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - PHOTOGRAMMETRIC SURVEY
20 May 1999 05 January 2001 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/A/PC1 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT -
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC SURVEY
Not Set Not Set CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/B THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - SURVEY RECORD AND ANALYSIS
14 June 1999 19 June 2002 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/B/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL
MONUMENT NO. 27558 - REPAINING AND REPAIR PROJECT - SURVEY RECORD AND ANALYSIS
01 September 1999 29 February 2000
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 223
AA090655/35/B/PT3 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - REPAINING AND REPAIR PROJECT - SURVEY RECORD AND ANALYSIS
Not Set 30 May 2002 CLOSED Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/35/C THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - PAINT RESEARCH
23 March 1999 03 November 2004
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/D THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - GEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
28 September 1999 30 May 2000 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/E THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT - UNDERWATER SURVEY
02 November 1998 Not Set Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/F THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND
REPAIR PROJECT - VIDEO RECORDING
29 February 2000 Not Set Wansdyke Security
AA090655/35/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO 27558 - REPAINTING AND REPAIR PROJECT -
MANAGEMENT MEETINGS
23 November 1999 26 March 2001 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/36 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE. NATIONAL NO 27558 - SETTING OF IRON BRIDGE - AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION OF - LANDING STAGE
23 July 2001 18 October 2002 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/37 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - TOLL HOUSE - INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT
13 January 2003 20 February 2003
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/38 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL
MONUMENT NO. 27558 - BBC TIMEWATCH - MYSTERY OF THE IRON BRIDGE
27 June 2001 07 January 2002 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/39 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - REPAIRS TO BALUSTRADE 2003
07 July 2003 Not Set Fleming, Tony
AA090655/4 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - SITE MANAGEMENT
10 May 1995 Not Set Cole, Sue
AA090655/40 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - METALLURGY
15 May 1998 Not Set Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 224
AA090655/41 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - RECORD
AND ANALYSIS - SURVEY DRAWINGS
01 May 2002 01 May 2002 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/42 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - SURVEY RECORD AND ANALYSIS - RECORD DRAWINGS
01 February 2002 01 May 2002 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/43 THE IRON BRIDGE - TELFORD - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - CONSERVATRION WORKS 2006-2008 - (INC. DECK AND RESURFACING)
06 June 2005 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/43/PC1 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD + WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE -
NAT MON NO 27558 - CONSERVATION WORKS (INCL. DESK RESURFACING)
Not Set Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/43/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD + WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NAT MON NO 27558 - CONSERVATION WORKS (INCL.
DESK RESURFACING)
Not Set Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/44 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. 27558 - BRIDGE LIGHTING SCHEME
20 December 2005 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/45 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - SHROPSHIRE - NATIONAL MONUMENT NO 27558 - SURVEYS/ANALSIS - GENERAL FILE
01 July 2004 Not Set Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/46 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE
WORK - FEB 1999 - AUG 1999
08 February 1999 10 August 1999 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/47 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - AUG 1999 - DEC 1999
12 August 1999 09 December 1999
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/48 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - DEC 1999 - SEPT 2001
19 April 1999 27 September
2001
CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/49 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - 2003 - 2006
04 June 2003 17 October 2005 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/50 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - 2006 PT1
29 March 2006 06 September 2006
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 225
AA090655/50/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - 2006 PT2
18 September 2006 24 November 2006
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/51 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE -
TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - 2006 - 2007
23 May 2006 21 February 2007 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/52 THE IRONBRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD AND WREKIN - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE WORK - 2007
13 February 2007 27 September 2007
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/53 THE IRON BRIDGE - THE GORGE - TELFORD + WREKIN - CONSERVATION PLAN 2010
01 September 2010 Not Set Hayes, Natalie
AA090655/8 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, - SHROPSHIRE - ADMISSIONS
25 August 1992 01 September 1992
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/8A THE IRON BRIDGE - SALOP, SHROPSHIRE - SPECIAL ADMISSIONS
04 June 1987 05 December 1990
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/9 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE, SHROPSHIRE - PRESENTATION - CO MON NO 106
03 August 1989 18 July 1990 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/9/PT2 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE - PRESENTATION
15 February 1994 Not Set GRAY R J H
AA090655/9A THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE - EDUCATION SERVICE
22 December 1993 Not Set Missing From: HANNAN AUDREY
AA090655/AMP001 ASSET MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME
- CONDITION SURVEY - IRON BRIDGE - 2009
20 August 2009 08 January 2010 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA090655/INF THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE - HISTORICAL RESEARCH INFORMATION
14 October 1997 14 March 2007 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA090655/SOP IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE -
SHROPSHIRE - SITE OPERATIONAL PLAN
01 March 1997 Not Set Wansdyke
Security
AA092274/2-3/PC1 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING -- INCLS PAPERS FROM AA 90655/2-3 –
Not Set Not Set Missing From: RA 326 SR
AZ090655/2/PT4 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP WORKS
21 September 1970 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ090655/2/PT8 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SALOP WORKS
16 August 1974 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 226
WS76035/S/PT1 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
11 December 1975 08 December 1978
CLOSED HOPKINS DON
WS76035/S/PT5 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS - THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
01 January 1991 23 July 1991 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING --INCLUDES PAPERS FROM - AA 90655/2-3-
13 August 1991 01 September 1992
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PC8 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER -
IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
24 September 1996 27 September
1996
CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
APE090655/009/001 THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - NO: 01021
Not Set Not Set Lincoln University
AA092274/2-3/PC9 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE -
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
24 September 1996 01 October 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PC9 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
24 September 1996 01 October 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY
TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING -- INCLS PAPERS FROM AA 90655/2-3-
01 December 1992 12 January 1994 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
WS30291/S/PT2 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS - THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE. GENERAL FILE
20 November 1991 05 March 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
WS76035/S/PT4 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
01 July 1980 26 September 1980
CLOSED HOPKINS DON
AA092274/2-3/PC11 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
03 September 1996 01 February 1997 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PC2 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY
TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
Not Set 01 March 1995 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AZ090655/2/PT10 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP WORKS
22 February 1979 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
LM090655/0001 LANDSCAPE MONUMENTS - THE
IRON BRIDGE IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE - ADMINISTRATIVE
28 April 1994 03 April 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
COEN018913 IRONBRIDGE REPAIRS 2010 - REPLACE WEDGES ON FRAME A AND WATER MAIN
01 January 2010 Not Set Sturgess, Lynne (Ms)
AA092274/2-3/PC10 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE -
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
30 January 1998 28 July 1998 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 227
AA092274/2-3/PC6 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAELOGICAL RECORDING
15 August 1996 22 August 1996 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PT4 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE -
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDINGS
23 November 1994 18 June 1998 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AZ090655/2 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SALOP WORKS
26 October 1971 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ090655/2/PT3 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY
INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SALOP WORKS
12 June 1967 Not Set Accidentally
Destroyed
C100663/M/001 IRON BRIDGE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - PLANNING SUPERVISOR - CONSULTANT
CONTRACT - WORKS
01 May 1999 Not Set Zeizer, Richard
COEN018914 IRONBRIDGE - DECKING WEDGES - WEDGE REPLACEMENT TRIALS
01 December 2009 Not Set Sturgess, Lynne (Ms)
AZ090655/2/PT7 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - THE
IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SALOP WORKS
20 June 1973 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ091781/3 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - IRONBRIDGE TOLL HOUSE IRONBRIDGE - SALOP - OFFER OF GUARDIANSHIP - X-REF AR 91781/3
21 April 1972 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
WS76035/S/PT2 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
08 January 1979 28 December 1979
CLOSED HOPKINS DON
WS76035/S/PT3 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
04 January 1980 25 June 1980 CLOSED HOPKINS DON
C101944/W/001 IRONBRIDGE - WORK TO REPLACE
DEFECTIVE WEDGES - CONTRACT FILE
Not Set Not Set Dixon, Alexis
(Ms)
AA092274/2-3/PC3 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDINGS
16 July 1993 25 August 1995 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PC4 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY
TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDINGS
23 November 1994 24 November
1997
CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
AA092274/2-3/PC7 IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
15 August 1996 28 January 1997 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AA092274/2-3/PT3 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY
RANSFER - TRANSFER SHROPSHIRE - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
31 August 1993 21 November
1994
CLOSED Wansdyke
Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 228
AZ090655/2B ANCIENT MONUMENTS - THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP PAYMENTS
03 July 1964 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
C100679/M/001 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE GORGE - IRONBRIDGE -
SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIRS - WORKS CONTRACT
01 June 1999 Not Set Zeizer, Richard
COEN012838/PT3 THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE
11 May 2000 Not Set Wansdyke Security
ST090655/000/01 IRONBRIDGE - 99/131/2P - SURVEY TEAM - PHOTOGRAMMETRIC
PHOTOGRAPHY
01 March 2000 Not Set Dyer (see address), Kathy
WS30291/S THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - GENERAL FILE - STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
09 April 1976 14 November 1991
CLOSED HOPKINS DON
AA092274/2-3/PC5 THE IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY TRANSFER - SHROPSHIRE -
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING
03 January 1996 16 February 1999 CLOSED Wansdyke Security
AZ090655/21 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE SALOP PRESS NOTICES
19 January 1972 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ090655/23 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - EARLY INDUSTRIAL MONUMENTS - IRONBRIDGE GORGE LANDSCHPING AND ENVIRONS - PROPOSED WORKING PARTY
30 December 1974 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ090655/24 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - THE IRON BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - SALOP
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC SURVEY
24 June 1975 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ092048/2 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - STONE VAULTS ADJACENT TO IRON - BRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE - WREKIN,SALOP WORKS
13 October 1975 Not Set Accidentally Destroyed
AZ092048/3 ANCIENT MONUMENTS - STONE
ARCHES - ADJACENT TO THE IRONBRIDGE - IRONBRIDGE,WREKIN,SALOP. GUARDIANSHIP
01 August 1975 Not Set Accidentally
Destroyed
WS76035/S/PC1 THE IRONBRIDGE - SHROPSHIRE - REPAINTING AND REPAIR
Not Set 01 December 1980
CLOSED Wansdyke Security
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 229
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust Library and Archives
B/2/2. 1977-1981. Archive file identified as ‘Iron Bridge (1977-81)’. The Severn Gorge
Project Group file of the Telford Development Corporation (TDC) team, then based at the Wharfage in Ironbridge for the restoration of the town
de Haan, D. 2001. Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis, begun in September 1999
and undertaken by the Ironbridge Institute for Anthony Fleming, then Inspector of Ancient
Monuments for the West Midlands Region. The site recording in a companion volume was largely done by Shelley White
DOE. 1972. Photogrammetry survey for DOE by Plowman Craven, taken in September. This is the photograph record from which the elevation was drawn
Hume, I. 1985. Report on Structural Condition of the Bridge, English Heritage
Hume, I. 1980. Report on the Repairs and Repainting of the Iron Bridge, DOE
IB 72-89. ‘The Iron Bridge’, archive file or correspondence held by IGMT
IB (R). Archive file held by IGMT, identified as ‘Iron Bridge (Reconstruction)’, being mostly
E Bruce Ball’s correspondence 1971-77. IGMT.1993.736
IGMT.CBD.59.82.4 Horsehay and Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808
IGMT.1981.119. DOE. 1980. Five Elevations of the 1972 photogrammetry survey of the
upstream arch, to show location of fractures recorded in 1948, 1961 and 1980; and records out of plumb of the inner verticals. Scale 1:100.
IGMT.1991.2606. Mott, B. 1923. Mott, Hay & Anderson. The Iron Bridge, Shropshire.
19 March 1923, pp12
IGMT.1993.3374. Darby, A. 1771-81. The personal cash book of Abraham Darby III. This is
in the archives of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust, having previously been in the Shropshire Record Office, Shrewsbury (Labouchere Archive SRO 2448/1) until July 1993
Ironbridge Archaeology. 2002. The Iron Bridge Railing Survey, Record & Analysis.
Ironbridge Archaeology Series 110
Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell. 1972. The Iron Bridge – Estimate of Cost of Remedial Works to North Abutment. February 1972, pp10. In IGMT Archive File IB (R)
Survey Sheet 0710 Telford Development Corporation. 1973, April. 1:500
Survey Sheet 0711 Dawley Development Corporation. 1965. 1:500
Wellington Journal. 13 November 1937
Wellington Journal. 30 August 1902
Shropshire Records and Research, Shrewsbury
Shrewsbury Chronicle. 10th
July 1779
SRO.3689-98. Minute Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1775-98. Mss 337A
SRO. 6001.3697. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828
SRO. 6001.3693. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1831-41
SRO. 6001.3694. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1841-61
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 230
SRO.6001.3695. Accounts for expenditure for repair of the Iron Bridge and the roads leading thereto from 1861 to 1881
SRO.6001.3698. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1830-61
SRO.6001.3701. Final Report on condition and of repairs carried out on THE IRON
BRIDGE, by Luther Griffiths, 1927
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 9 231
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 232
Appendix 10
Primary sources and
bibliography
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 233
Appendix 10 Primary sources and bibliography
Primary Sources
B/2/2. 1977-1981. Archive file held by IGMT, identified as ‘Iron Bridge (1977-81)’. This is
the Severn Gorge Project Group file of the Telford Development Corporation (TDC) team,
then based at the Wharfage in Ironbridge for the restoration of the town
BL/ML.KT. British Library, Map Library, King’s Topography
CBD.59.82.4. 1789-1808. Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808. IGMT Archives (also referred to below as Horsehay and ...)
Colin Davis Associates. 2010. Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site: Public Realm Design Guide, (draft) Telford & Wrekin Council, English Heritage and Shropshire Council
Conisbee Consulting Engineers. 2009. The Iron Bridge: Report on the Cracks, for English
Heritage. This is based on the roped access inspection by Vertical Technologies
Conisbee Consulting Engineers. 2009. The Iron Bridge: Comparison of 1980 and 2009 Crack Surveys, for English Heritage. Based on the roped access inspection by Vertical Technologies
Conisbee Consulting Engineers. 2009. The Iron Bridge: Risk Assessment due to Restraint Wedge Defects, for English Heritage
Darby, A. 1771-81. The personal cash book of Abraham Darby III. This is in the archives of
the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust (IGMT.1993.3374), having previously been in the Shropshire Record Office, Shrewsbury (Labouchere Archive SRO 2448/1) until July 1993
Dawley Development Corporation. 1965. 1:500 Survey Sheet 0711. IGMT Archives
DOE. 1972. Photogrammetry survey for DOE by Plowman Craven, taken in September. IGMT Library & Archive. This is the photograph record from which the elevation was drawn
DOE. 1980. Five Elevations of the 1972 photogrammetry survey of the upstream arch, to
show location of fractures recorded in 1948, 1961 and 1980; and records out of plumb of the inner verticals. Scale 1:100. IGMT.1981.119. IGMT Library
de Haan, D. 2001. Historic Building Survey, Record & Analysis, begun in September 1999
and undertaken by the Ironbridge Institute for Anthony Fleming, Inspector of Ancient
Monuments for the West Midlands Region. The site recording was largely done by Shelley White, while the survey of historic information was carried out by David de Haan
E214-1939. Victoria & Albert Museum. Pencil and sepia wash sketch by Joseph Powell
E1857-1946, and E3112/1948. Victoria & Albert Museum. Paul Sandby Munn’s pencil sketches of 11
th July 1802
English Heritage. 2010. Iron Bridge. Periodic Condition Survey Report, and Defects. This is
heavily based on Ian Hume’s report of 2008.
English Heritage. 2008. Report on Boundary of Guardianship Area. By William Du Croz (EH) and Jonathan Lloyd (TWC), some of the ownership assignments are innacurate
Goodrich Collection. Science Museum, London
High-Point Rendel. 2005. Ironbridge Gorge Landslides: Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale Ground Behaviour Study, for Telford & Wrekin Council
Hemsley Orrell Partnership. 2008. Underwater Inspection Between Abutments
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 234
Horsehay and Coalbrookdale Company Settling Journal, 1789-1808. IGMT.CBD.59.82.4. IGMT Archives
Hume, I. 2008. The Ironbridge, Ironbridge, Shropshire – A review of future works to be
carried out by English Heritage
Hume, I. 1985. Report on Structural Condition of the Bridge, English Heritage
Hume, I. 1980. Report on the Repairs and Repainting of the Iron Bridge, DOE
IB 72-89. ‘The Iron Bridge’, archive file or correspondence held by IGMT
IB (R). Archive file held by IGMT, identified as ‘Iron Bridge (Reconstruction)’, being mostly E Bruce Ball’s correspondence 1971-77. IGMT.1993.736
IGMT. Items with this prefixed relate to archives, pictures or photographs in the collection of the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Ironbridge Archaeology. 2002. The Iron Bridge Railing Survey, Record & Analysis.
Ironbridge Archaeology Series 110
Madeley. 1867. Board of Guardians’ Minute Book
Mott, B. 1923. Mott, Hay & Anderson. The Iron Bridge, Shropshire. 19 March 1923, pp12. IGMT.1991.2606
NMR.MAL/65024.193. 1965. Aerial photograph. National Monuments Record, Swindon
p38vol90. National Library of Wales. Anonymous pencil sketch
RL.17929B. Royal Library Windsor Castle. Sketch, (nd), included in a collection of drawings belonging to Thomas Sandby
Russell, J. (nd). Birmingham City Museum & Art Gallery, Fine Art Collection. Sketch by
John Russell. P115’51.E29
Sandby, T. (nd). Royal Library Print Room, Windsor Castle, ref 17929B. Elevation of the Bridge attributed to Thomas Sandby
Sandford Fawcett, Wilton & Bell. 1972. The Iron Bridge – Estimate of Cost of Remedial Works to North Abutment. February 1972, pp10. IGMT Archive File IB (R)
Scandia Company, Stockholm, owners of the only known watercolour of the Bridge under
construction in 1779
Shrewsbury Chronicle, 10th
July 1779. Shropshire Record Office
SRO.3689-98. Minute Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1775-98. Mss 337A, Shropshire Record Office
SRO. 6001.3697. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1800-1828. Shropshire Record Office
SRO. 6001.3693. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1831-41. Shropshire
Record Office
SRO. 6001.3694. Account Book of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 1841-61. Shropshire
Record Office
SRO.6001.3695. Accounts for expenditure for repair of the Iron Bridge and the roads leading thereto from 1861 to 1881, Shropshire Record Office
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 235
SRO.6001.3698. Minute Book of the Trustees of the Iron Bridge, 1830-61, Shropshire Record Office
SRO.6001.3701. Final Report on condition and of repairs carried out on THE IRON
BRIDGE, by Luther Griffiths, 1927. Shropshire Record Office
Svedenstierna, 1973. (trans Dellow), IGMT Library
Telford Development Corporation. 1973, April. 1:500 Survey Sheet 0710. IGMT Archives
Vertical Technology Ltd. 2009. Iron Bridge, Shropshire: Roped Access Inspection, October 2008 and May 2009, for English Heritage
Vertical Technology Ltd. 2009. Iron Bridge, Shropshire: Roped Access Inspection of the Deck Plate Restraint Wedges, June 2009, for English Heritage
Wellington Journal. 13 November 1937. IGMT Library
Wellington Journal. 30 August 1902. IGMT Library
Policies and Plans – National
DCMS, DCLG & English Heritage. 2010. Planning Policy Statement 5, Planning for the Historic Environment
DCLG. 2009. Circular 07/09: Protection of World Heritage Sites
English Heritage. 2009. The Protection and Management of World Heritage Sites in England
DCLG, DCMS, English Heritage
English Heritage. 2008. Conservation Principles, Policies & Guidance for the sustainable management of the Historic Environment
Policies and Plans – Local
Broseley District Council. Broseley Parish Plan
Environment Agency. Local Environment Action Plan (Middle Severn)
Gorge Parish Council. 2008. The Gorge Parish Plan 2008-2013
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust. Strategic Plan 2010-2014
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group. 2008. Building on the past, investing in the future. IG 2020 Vision
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group. 2009. Ironbridge Gorge World
Heritage Site Business Plan, 2009-2014
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group. 2001. Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Management Plan, 2001-2010
Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site Strategy Group. 2008. Ironbridge Gorge WHS Overarching Interpretation Strategy
Madeley Parish Council. Madeley Parish Plan
Shropshire Council and Telford & Wrekin Council. 2009. Evolution, Revolution &
Innovation – A Cultural Strategy for Shropshire and Telford & Wrekin 2009-2014
Shropshire County Council. Shropshire Local Transport Plan
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 236
Shropshire County Council. Shropshire Structure Plan
Severn Gorge Countryside Trust. 2006. Development Strategy, 2006-2011
Severn Gorge Countryside Trust. 1998. Severn Gorge Landscape Assessment Ashmead Price and Steven Warnock
Severn Gorge Countryside Trust. Management Plans for all sites [see also SGCT list of
relevant countryside reports]
Telford & Wrekin Council. Draft statement of Outstanding Universal Value – Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site. 2011
Telford & Wrekin Council. 2010. Land instability in the Gorge
Telford & Wrekin Council. 2008. Volume & Value Assessment
Telford & Wrekin Council. 2006. Local Development Framework: Core Strategy 2006-2016
Telford & Wrekin Local. Transport Plan
Telford & Wrekin Council. January 2010. Shop Fronts and Signage Design. Guidance in Conservation Areas SPG [draft]
Telford & Wrekin Council. Wrekin Local Plan 1995-2006 [many policies are still current]
West Midlands’ Visitor Economy Strategy
Bibliography
Baugh, CG, and Elrington, CR (eds). 1985. Victoria County History. ‘A History of the County of Shropshire: Volume 11: Telford
Blackwell, A. 1985. Historic Bridges of Shropshire
Briggs, A. 1979. Iron Bridge to Crystal Palace: impact and images of the Industrial Revolution, Thames & Hudson
Cossons, N & Trinder, B. 2002. The Iron Bridge: symbol of the Industrial Revolution,
Phillimore
Cossons, N & Trinder, B. 1979. The Iron Bridge, IGMT
Cossons, N & Trinder, B. 2002. The Iron Bridge, Phillimore
Cruickshank, D. 2010. Bridges: Heroic designs that changed the world, Collins
English Heritage. 2008. Conservation Principles, Policies & Guidance for the sustainable management of the Historic Environment
Field, J. 1821. Diary of Joshua Field’s tour of 1821. Transactions of the Newcomen Society, vol VI (1925-6) pp30-32
Heritage Lottery Fund. 2008. Conservation Management Planning
Hooke, D. 2006. England’s Landscape: The West Midlands, English Heritage, Collins
Morton, R & Moseley, A. 1970. ‘An Examination of Fractures in the First Iron Bridge at
Coalbrookdale’, Journal of West Midlands Studies, 1970, No 2, Wolverhampton Polytechnic
Newcomen Society. 1924. Visit to Coalbrookdale on Thursday 19th
July 1924. Transactions of the Newcomen Society, Vol IV, 1923-24, 110
Conservation Plan for the Iron Bridge - Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Appendix 10 237
Powell, J. 2009. Ironbridge Gorge through time, Amberley Publishing
Raistrick, A. 1989. Dynasty of Ironfounders: The Darbys and Coalbrookdale, a facsimile reprint of the book first published 1953
RCHAMW. 2008. Pontcysyllte Aqueduct & canal nomination as a World Heritage Site,
Management Plan 2007-12, Wrexham County Borough Council
Semple Kerr, J. 2004. The Conservation Plan: A Guide to the Preparation of Conservation Plans for Places of European Cultural Significance, 6
th edition
Smith, SB. 1979. A view from the Bridge, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Trinder, B. 2005. The most extraordinary district in the world: Ironbridge & Coalbrookdale (3
rd edition), Phillimore
Trinder, B. 2005. Barges and bargemen: A social history of the Upper Severn Navigation
1660-1900, Phillimore
Trinder, B. 1996. The Industrial archaeology of Shropshire, Phillimore
Trinder, B. 1983. A History of Shropshire, Phillimore