West Montrose Covered Bridge

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

Developer on hold pending review
By Steve Kannon | OBSERVER XTRA | Friday, February 12, 2010
http://observerxtra.com/2/news/devel...ending-review/

Temporarily halting major development in West Montrose was Woolwich’s first step in studying the heritage of the covered bridge and its surroundings. A legal challenge may be what comes next.

In adopting an interim control bylaw for lands surrounding the bridge, council has put on hold for one year a gravel pit bid by Guelph-based Capital Paving. With time running out on the process – it has about six months left on a two-year window since filing its application – the company has indicated it may take the township to an Ontario Municipal Board hearing.

Despite some reservations, councillors approved the move Tuesday night, clearing the way for a study to determine the need for a cultural heritage landscape (CHL) designation for some of the area surrounding the historic bridge.

The bylaw was written to leave homeowners with a fair amount of flexibility, restricting only the kind of development that would require significant planning. Even granny flats, which do require a zone change, have been exempted, said director of planning and engineering Dan Kennaley.

“This strikes a balance between, on the one hand, providing protection to a potential cultural heritage landscape and its feature and, on the other hand, not unduly restricting what people can do with their properties while the study is being carried out,” he said.

The restrictions apply to an area bounded by Northfield Drive to the west, Line 86 to the north, Katherine Street to the east and an irregular line to the south corresponding somewhat with Letson Drive.

Councillors, seeing the possibility of an OMB appeal, pressed Kennaley for assurances the interim control measures would hold up to a legal challenge.

Based on provincial policies, significant cultural heritage landscapes must be conserved, and it’s incumbent on the township to undertake the study, he noted.

Mayor Bill Strauss, who has resisted the cultural heritage study, said he is not happy with the township going ahead with the bylaw nor the CHL process. He also stressed that the study should be completed by October, when the current term of council expires.

“We have to get this done faster – somehow, this has to be back here in October. That’s all that I’m going to be satisfied with,” he said.

Coun. Mark Bauman made the same call for a speedier report, but backed the need for a heritage study.
“This is Woolwich Township doing its due diligence.”

Sensitive to the possibility of legal action, Kennaley said the township is looking to make an airtight case for its decisions.

“What we finally recommend is going to have to be very defensible.”

On the subject of legal wranglings, Kennaley has noted that scenario is likely no matter what the township does in conjunction with the gravel pit application. If council sides with the developers, resident groups in both communities have built war chests in preparation for a legal battle. If the township supports its citizens, the developers will take their cases to the OMB and MNR.

At a meeting last month, a lawyer for Capital Paving suggested the passing of an interim control bylaw would prompt an OMB appeal, and likely a second appeal to force a decision on the gravel pit application prior to the two-year deadline. After the two years, the entire application process would have to start over, a prospect the company wants to avoid, Jonathan Kahn told councillors.

[ElmiraGuy]

I had supported this cause to some extent until they started saying that the gravel trucks would destroy the bridge when crossing it.

While that would not doubt be the outcome were it true, there was never any intention by the pit developers to send their trucks across the covered bridge.

I despise mis-information.

More and more however, I am inclined to support the developer instead of these NIMBY's.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

Gravel pits get a rough ride
By Steve Kannon | OBSERVER XTRA | Friday, May 28, 2010
http://observerxtra.com/2/news/gravel-pits-get-a-rough-ride/

Residents’ assault on a proposed gravel pit in West Montrose had all the precision of a military operation. Given what’s at stake, that kind of effort was expected.

From experts tackling noise studies and hydrogeological data to children pulling at their heartstrings, Woolwich councillors at Tuesday night’s public meeting heard a slew of reasons to oppose a zone change application from Capital Paving. The Guelph-based company is looking to extract gravel from 115 acres near West Montrose and its historic covered bridge.

As with a similar meeting earlier this month for a gravel pit near Conestogo, more than 150 people packed council chambers in Elmira. As was the case at that meeting, residents aired concerns about the quality of life in their community should the project go ahead, backing up their concerns with figures and expert testimony.

Dr. Kim Cuddington, a professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Waterloo, who previously addressed council about the pit’s potential impact on water, focused this time on the repercussions to the woodlot running along the river’s edge.

The company, she pointed out, is counting on those trees to block noise and dust, as well as to provide a visual screen to hide the pit. But it also intends to cut down some of the trees, which would alter the conditions of existing noise and dust studies.

And while expecting the trees to serve as a buffer zone, Capital Paving has failed to study what impact changes in the groundwater will have on the local environment, including the woodlot, Cuddington noted.

A more personal issue, the safety of neighbourhood children, was on the mind of resident Barbara Dowling. Noting there are already six to 16 gravel trucks on nearby roads every hour, she said Capital Paving’s numbers indicate their pit would add up to 35 more. In conjunction with other pits proposed for the area, that could mean another 115 trucks on the road each hour: two trucks every minute.

Although that’s a worst-case scenario, it’s a frightening prospect for residents, especially those with children, she said.

“That really scares us, and that should scare everyone in this room. We’re afraid for the safety of our children.

“You are our safety net. We need you to represent us. We need you to protect us and our children,” she told councillors.

Tackling the financial impact of the pit, Ron Hare argued Woolwich stands to lose far more money than it could ever gain from the gravel pit operation.

With an expected yield of 2.6 million tonnes, the pit would pay out less than $200,000 to the township, which gets $0.06 per tonne, and Waterloo Region ($0.015 per tonne). Citing a recent study in Caledon, however, he noted the pit would bring permanent decreases in property values, resulting in lower tax revenues.

Based on the Caledon report, homes within half a kilometre of a pit lost upwards of 25 per cent of their value; homes within one km, 15 to 20 per cent; while those at two km lost almost 15 per cent.

In the case of West Montrose, there are 130 homes within one km of the site. He estimated the loss in property taxes at $100,000 each year.

“That’s $1 million after 10 years, $2 million after 20 years and $3 million after 30 years.
“This will be very expensive to the township,” he said of the pit.

That potential shortfall of millions of dollars over the years would have to be made up somehow. Either residents across the township will pay more taxes or services will be cut across the board, he argued.

“This isn’t just a local, West Montrose issue. This stands to impact everyone in the township and the region. We don’t need to waste money; we have to be frugal and careful and wise.”

For its part, Capital Paving expects to be a good neighbour, consultant Glenn Harrington told the audience. In response to public concerns, it has scaled back the hours of operation to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday. There will be no extraction on weekends or at night. Choices such as using conveyors instead of trucks to move materials on the site and paving the internal haul road will help reduce dust and noise, he said.

Enumerating the company’s awards, Harrington argued Capital Paving is a “good corporate citizen,” with numerous studies to back up its position a gravel pit is suitable in West Montrose.

But a lawyer retained by the BridgeKeepers organization, Rodney Northey, maintained that the company’s efforts fall short.

Capital Paving, he noted, made similar assertions about a pit application in Puslinch, near Guelph. Earlier this year, however, the company lost an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, which dismissed some of the company’s claims.

With more at risk in West Montrose, Capital has even more to prove.

Tuesday night’s meeting was for information purposes only, part of the zone-change process required under the Planning Act. The company is also moving through a parallel evaluation process under the Aggregate Resources Act, a review handled by the Ministry of Natural Resources.

The township is also looking to determine if the area surrounding the covered bridge should be deemed a cultural heritage landscape. It passed an interim control bylaw halting development pending the outcome of the study, but that measure has been appealed to the OMB by the Murray Group, which plans a gravel pit application of its own on land adjacent to the proposed Capital operation.

[UrbanWaterloo]

BRIDGEKEEPERS AND REGION OF WATERLOO TEAM UP TO PAINT WEST MONTROSE COVERED BRIDGE
June 12, 2012 | Region of Waterloo | Link

The Region of Waterloo is teaming up with BridgeKeepers (the West Montrose Residents’ Association) to paint the interior of the West Montrose Covered Bridge on Saturday, June 23.

Volunteers recruited through BridgeKeepers will be painting the interior of the bridge, with materials and supervision provided by the Region. The BridgeKeepers anticipate it will take up to 15 volunteers to join in the effort.

“Local residents have always played a part in maintaining the bridge, and they take a lot of pride in doing so,” said Tony Dowling, spokesperson for the BridgeKeepers. “That goes right back to when the bridge was built in 1881 – the bridge keeper would light the kerosene lanterns in the bridge each night, and shovel snow onto the bridge in the winter to allow the sleighs to slide over the wooden floor.”

“The bridge is the centerpiece of our community,” notes Dowling. “Although it’s owned by the Region of Waterloo, I think everyone in the village thinks of it as their own. We’re thrilled that the Region has been able to sort out the logistics to let us participate in this project.”

People over the age of 17 who are interested in volunteering to paint the bridge can contact Tony Dowling at 519-669-8911 or email info@bridgekeepers.ca.

Bridgekeepers is also encouraging local artists to come out that day to “paint the bridge” on their own canvasses, and children to paint miniature wooden models of the bridge (supplied by the BridgeKeepers).

Built in 1881 by John and Benjamin Bear, the West Montrose Covered Bridge is the only remaining historical covered bridge in Ontario. The Region of Waterloo has owned and maintained the bridge since 1998.

BridgeKeepers, incorporated as the West Montrose Residents’ Association Inc., is a West Montrose-based association, whose mission is “to preserve the Covered Bridge Experience.”

For more information, contact: info@bridgekeepers.ca, or visit www.bridgekeepers.ca

Tony Dowling, BridgeKeepers, 519-669-8911 | email: info@bridgekeepers.ca

Tom Reitz, Manager/Curator, Waterloo Region Museum, 519-575-4530 | email: treitz@regionofwaterloo.ca

[UrbanWaterloo]

West Montrose Covered Bridge Closed
September 21, 2012 | Region of Waterloo | Link

The Region of Waterloo has made a decision to restrict all vehicle and buggy traffic on the West Montrose Bridge as a safety precaution.

A floor beam that supports a portion of the bridge deck has failed likely due to overloading by heavy vehicles, despite weight restrictive signage.

Accordingly, the Region is taking precautionary measures to restrict traffic until a repair can be made, which could take up to a couple of weeks.

The bridge will remain open for pedestrians.

[UrbanWaterloo]

West Montrose Covered Bridge now open to horse and buggy traffic
December 07, 2012 | Region of Waterloo | Link

Horse and buggy traffic can now cross the West Montrose Covered Bridge, along with pedestrians. The historic structure remains closed to motorized traffic.

The bridge was closed in September to all but pedestrians when a floor beam that supports a portion of the bridge deck failed, likely due to overloading by heavy vehicles, despite weight restrictive signage.

The beam has now been fixed, and safety experts have determined that horse and buggy traffic proceeding at a walking pace can now safely use the bridge.

“We will be holding a public meeting in January to discuss next steps and long-term options for the future operations of the bridge,” said Tom Reitz, the Region’s Manager/Curator of the Waterloo Region Museum. “While we think it is important to maintain access for horse and buggy and pedestrians, we ask the public to please refrain from trying to use the bridge with any other motorized vehicles as we work to protect this highly important and functioning heritage resource in our community.”

The barriers at each end of the bridge have been rearranged and volunteers from the Old Order Mennonite community worked with Regional staff to ensure their placement allow access to a single-horse with buggy and a two-horse team with buggy, but still prevent motorized vehicles from crossing. Warning signs at the bridge and on roads approaching the bridge are being changed to notify approaching traffic.

[UrbanWaterloo]

West Montrose Covered Bridge reopens to limited weight vehicles
Public meeting scheduled to discuss how to additionally protect the bridge in the future
February 04, 2013 | Region of Waterloo | Link

The Region of Waterloo is hosting a public meeting Feb. 12, 2013, to present information and gather community input on proposed improvements to the bridge that are designed to prevent future damage and preserve the heritage structure.

The meeting will take place in Woolwich Township Council Chambers, 24 Church Street West in Elmira. The public is invited to drop in anytime between 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. There will also be a formal presentation at 6:30 p.m., and Regional staff will be present to answer questions.

The West Montrose Covered Bridge was reopened Feb. 4, 2013 to limited weight motorized vehicles after being closed in September when a floor beam that supports a portion of the bridge deck failed, likely due to overloading by heavy vehicles, despite weight restrictive signage. Buses, trucks and tractors are still prohibited from crossing. Horse and buggy traffic proceeding at a walking pace were allowed back on the bridge in December.

“The Region of Waterloo, in collaboration with the Township of Woolwich and local residents, is committed to maintaining the West Montrose Covered Bridge as a viable open bridge with the appropriate limitations to ensure that the heritage integrity of the structure is conserved,” said Tom Reitz, the Region’s Manager/Curator of the Waterloo Region Museum who oversees the bridge as one of the Region’s heritage assets. “This meeting will be an opportunity to discuss next steps and long-term options for the future operations of the bridge.”

Some of the options under consideration that will be presented at the meeting are: limiting access to the bridge through speed, height and load restrictions and enforcement; fire protection systems; and ongoing bridge maintenance requirements.

The public can also review the information that will be available at the public meeting and complete an online comment form on the Region’s website at regionofwaterloo.ca/heritage.

[benton]

they should just make it a pedestrian only bridge and build a pioneer village around it.

[KevinL]

they should just make it a pedestrian only bridge and build a pioneer village around it.

The horse-and-buggy riders prefer it as the other bridges in the area have heavy car traffic. If there's a way to restrict cars but still allow buggies, that might work.

[DHLawrence]

Maybe some sort of weight-controlled traffic gate?