CENTRE WELLINGTON - After a lengthy deliberation on whether to save or remove the Middlebrook Place Bridge, council voted 4-2 to remove the bridge without replacement.
During its committee of the whole meeting on Tuesday, Councillors Ian MacRae, Neil Dunsmore, Steven VanLeeuwen and Mayor Kelly Linton voted in favour of township staff's recommendation to remove the bridge. Meanwhile, Councillors Kirk McElwain and Bob Foster voted against it.
As part of the recorded vote, council also directed staff to work with Woolwich Township to remove the existing bridge superstructure and leave the abutments and pier in place for possible reuse.
CAO Dan Wilson informed council that citizens and future council can vote on the fate of the bridge each year as part of the annual budget process until 2028 when the bridge is scheduled to be removed. He noted that today's decision will not be the final decision.
"I don't understand why we are voting on this now when we can revisit this decision every year until we demolish it in 2028. If we can reconsider every year, then there's no urgency for our vote," said McElwain.
"We did a reconsideration last November, do we have to do a reconsideration after every budget process? I just don't understand after we make this decision then that is our plan; it doesn’t come up again when the council already decided."
Foster echoed McElwain's sentiments noting that he was perplexed on why council has to make this decision now when it can be revisited every year.
"As a council, we have to decide on whether we destroy our heritage including our heritage on bridges. I'm not in favour of removing the bridge. The rehabilitation of the bridge makes far more sense and I'd like to question the validity of $2.2 million for maintenance as we spend little to nothing each year for bridge maintenance. I think it’s better to rehabilitate this bridge," explained Foster.
Linton informed council that there will be a new council next year as municipal elections will occur this October, so there is no need to reconsider the vote as the new council may bring new ideas or agendas to the table. Citizens who may want to revisit the vote can do so without going through the reconsideration process.
"I like staff's recommendation and the modifications made with the abutments so that in future budgets, we can revisit this decision because it keeps some of the infrastructure in place," said Linton.
"We have to make tough decisions because we can’t pay for everything we want to do here. We still have to set clear priorities to do everything and it is difficult enough to pass our budget to rebuild our bridges in our high priority lists. I'm not prepared to suggest what we’re going to eliminate and what we’re going to postpone from our list of high priority bridges to have the funds to put towards a bridge that was not identified as a high priority."
Linton also reminded council and staff that the township is on track to rebuild 21 bridges in eight years, despite Foster's comment on the township rarely maintaining township bridges.
Meanwhile, MacRae and Dunsmore pointed out local agricultural businesses and farmers unable to cross many bridges because the townships are still on track to rehabilitate them. MacRae noted that he has trouble agreeing with $2.2 million to rehabilitate a bridge that is mainly used for recreational purposes rather than for business or agricultural purposes.
