A public petition and presentation have persuaded city council to take another look at the future of the Coteau Street East bridge, a structure that was scheduled for demolition this year.
Almost a dozen concerned residents gathered in council chambers on Nov. 22, where they listened to Philip Siggelkow make a case for keeping the structure. He had submitted a petition before the meeting with 258 names opposed to the destruction of the historic bridge.
After asking Siggelkow questions, council engaged in a sometimes-heated debate about the structure’s future.
In a surprising move, council voted 4-3 against receiving and filing Siggelkow’s petition and presentation, which would have meant taking no action to address the concerns.
Councillors Jamey Logan, Dawn Luhning and Heather Eby were in favour, while Mayor Clive Tolley and councillors Kim Robinson, Crystal Froese and Doug Blanc were opposed.
After more debate, council voted 4-3 to refer the issue back to city administration to explore a partnership with CN Rail about enhancing the bridge’s safety and possibly refurbishing it.
In favour were Tolley, Robinson, Froese and Blanc while opposed were Logan, Luhning and Eby.
Luhning then introduced a motion to have city administration close the bridge immediately to vehicles and pedestrians until further notice, but council voted 4-3 against that.
In favour were Logan, Eby and Luhning, while opposed were Tolley, Robinson, Froese and Blanc.
The Moose Jaw Express will have a separate story featuring Siggelkow’s presentation to council.
Petition appreciation
“I don’t take it lightly when a citizen comes forward with a petition. It’s an initiative that takes a lot … (of effort) in the process,” said Froese.
Froese’s concern was whether council had done enough to explore keeping the bridge open for pedestrians. She pointed out that vehicles are still driving over the structure, indicating there isn’t much urgency to close it.
City hall has reviewed this issue for over a decade, said city manager Jim Puffalt. The issue now is liability, which means a bridge inspection should occur quickly to ensure lives aren’t at risk when using it.
Five options
A council report in September listed five options for the bridge’s future, from doing nothing and demolishing it in 2025 to performing major rehabilitation and replacing it in 2035 for about $1.5 million, engineering director Bevan Harlton said.
This bridge has reached a point where major rehab would cost as much as building a new structure, he continued. Other issues include ensuring clearance above the rail line and increasing its load weight to four tonnes.
Harlton added that it would cost roughly $500,000 extra to remove the lead paint, that the bridge should be closed sometime between now and 2025, and that a traffic count in 2017 found 54 vehicles used the bridge daily.
Siggelkow noted in his talk that about 150 people use the bridge daily.
Other bridges
Council’s experience with the Seventh Avenue Southwest bridge showed there are other ideas to refurbish such structures instead of tearing them down, Froese said. She wondered if city hall had asked its engineers the right questions about all possibilities to preserve this structure.
“We know that when we knock something down, the chances to replace it are very slim,” she added.
Stick to the plan
Luhning appreciated Siggelkow’s presentation but noted that she had not received any new information within the past year — or during budget discussions last December when all of council approved the bridge’s demolition — to change her mind.
Moreover, she did not believe the benefits of renovation outweighed investing money into the bridge, while reports have said the bridge is not even suitable for pedestrians.
Making hard decisions
Many infrastructure projects need to be prioritized, which means council can’t always veer off budget when something like this arises, Luhning said later. Fixing this bridge won’t be easy or cheap, while council is now asking city administration to spend more time to write another report.
“We have the information we need to make a decision. But nobody wants to make it. Everybody’s afraid to make a hard decision … ,” she added. “We are putting people at risk and we will be responsible for it if something happens.”
More from CN Rail
CN Rail agreed to cost-share the demolition, but maybe it should be asked to share costs with rehabilitation, especially since the traffic count has increased since 2017, said Robinson. He noted that removing the bridge might change the area’s culture since people could not access the adjacent valley safely.
City administration provided the rail company with the engineer’s bridge report but did not discuss — nor pressure — CN about rehabilitating it because of the five-year demolition timeline, said Harlton. That wasn’t the intent of the report, either.
The next regular council meeting is Monday, Dec. 13.
