Residents weigh in on proposed road/bridge work in Bellrock

May 14, 2015

At the second public information meeting regarding the proposed $1.2 to $1.5 million revitalization of the village of Bellrock, which was held at the community hall on May 7, South Frontenac public works manager Mark Segsworth highlighted the proposed design for close to 30 residents who attended the meeting.

The proposed plan, which was designed by the Greer Galloway Group of Kingston, has numerous aims. It addresses drainage issues in the village and includes the resurfacing of a number of roads with asphalt and the construction of sidewalks on Mill Street, First Lake and Levesque Roads.

To address residents' concerns about speed and safety issues on First Lake Road, the road will be reshaped and de-hilled and a four-way stop will also be put in at the intersection of First Lake Road and Mill Street. According to Segsworth the plan is “consistent with the village revitalization that we have done in Battersea and Perth Road Village and it meets our goals of trying to build for the future.”

Prior to the meeting Segsworth said that suggestions and concerns raised by residents at the first public meeting, which took place in February this year, were considered and addressed. Property owners at that time were mainly concerned about the proximity of the new resurfaced roads to the houses and the costs and necessity of new sidewalks.

The design includes an urban cross section (new curbs and gutters) on First Lake Road and Mill Street. The drainage and standing water issues will be addressed by constructing a number of ditches and swales, and will require that the township acquire some private property and easements on three separate pieces of property located in the village.

Segsworth said that he is hoping to finalize the plan and put it up for tender in the next few weeks. This year's budget has socked away $600,000 towards the costs of the project and another $600,000 will be put into next year's budget. Construction is expected to get underway after Labour Day this year and the expected completion date is in the summer of 2016.

Some of the concerns raised by residents at the meeting included the cost of maintaining the sidewalks in the winter and whether the micro blasting needed at a few locations in the village would affect local wells. Segsworth took note of a number of other concerns, including replacing trees that need to be removed. A total of 11 private properties in the village would be directly affected by the project, some by as little as one metre.

Long Swamp Bridge

A second public meeting held at the hall immediately following the first focused on a number of proposed alternatives as to how to deal with the dilapidated bridge on Long Swamp Road just south of the village. The bridge is one of 52 bridge structures in the township. It has been deemed unsafe because its decking is insecure and it sits under water for at least one month each spring. It is part of a class 6 road that sees just 50 vehicles daily. It was established at the meeting that the road is primarily used by residents in the summer and winter months. Residents voiced their opposition to removing the bridge and thereby closing the road since they said that the road offers quicker access to their homes while providing a direct link to commerce and services in Verona for residents from outlying areas. It is also an important detour route when Highway 38 is closed. The road is used by emergency service vehicles and the bridge is used recreationally by residents for fishing and as a put in.

Troy Steele and David Bonsall, engineers from Wills Engineering in Kingston who were hired by township staff to propose the alternatives for dealing with the bridge, outlined four options, none of which Segsworth said would be undertaken for four or five years. These options included doing nothing; removing the bridge and closing the road; rehabilitating the bridge; or replacing it.

The “do nothing” option, while it has no immediate costs, poses future liability issues since the bridge would eventually become unsafe. The second option, to remove the bridge, would cost approximately $50,000, but was the option least popular with residents as it would close the road.

Replacing the bridge at an estimated capital cost of $400,000 would resolve all issues best, but it is by far the most expensive of the four options.

The residents at the meeting seemed most supportive of rehabilitation. At an estimated capital cost of $150,000, the rehabilitation option also address safety issues and would increase the bridge's load bearing capacity likely to 10 tons, though it would require ongoing maintenance.

Segsworth seemed pleased with the input he received, but added, “This not going to happen anytime soon but we are wanting to know which way area residents are leaning as far as the alternatives go.”