FAQs

Last year, we reached out to you with a preferred alternative for the West Montrose Covered Bridge rehabilitation at a public consultation held in November 2023. After a detailed inspection and evaluation of the timber truss, we have revised the preferred alternative. The revised preferred alternative includes removal of the existing steel Bailey truss, replacement of deteriorated truss members and bridge elements, as recommended from the inspection, and reinforcing select members to accommodate a 10-tonne design vehicular live load. The three-tonne load limit will be maintained and a height restriction bar is proposed to prevent damage to the bridge from oversized vehicles. 

The preferred alternative was approved by Regional Council in February 2024. The next steps include filing the Notice of Study Completion and Environmental Study Report for the 30-day review period. Following this, construction is planned to proceed in 2025.

The following Alternatives were considered:

• Alternative A: Steel Girder Reinforcement - Presented at Public Consultation #1 and #2
• Alternative B: Timber Truss Reinforcement with Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP) - Presented at Public Consultation #2 as the Preferred Alternative
• Alternatives C1-C4: Repairs to wooden truss members to achieve a design vehicular live load limit of:
  • C1 – 12 tonnes
  • C2 (Preferred Alternative) – 10 tonnes
  • C3 – 8 tonnes
  • C4 – 6 tonnes

The alternatives were evaluated through a quantitative assessment that used a weighted additive scoring method to mathematically evaluate the options being considered using various factors. The methodology is referred to as the Multi Attribute Trade-off System (MATS). This approach focuses on the differences between the alternatives and provides a traceable decision-making process. Overall scores are assigned to each alternative and the option with the highest score is selected as the preferred alternative to complete the evaluation. Sensitivity tests were also performed to determine trade-offs between each alternative.

The criteria that alternatives were evaluated and assessed with using the MATS methodology includes global groups of factors, followed by the selection of a number of sub-factors under these global groups under which measurements could be made. Four global factors were selected for the evaluation of the bridge rehabilitation alternatives: Heritage, Structural, Social Environment and Cost.

Alternative C2, which involves rehabilitating the bridge to a 10 tonne load limit, performed the best overall in the MATS evaluation and was determined to be the preferred alternative based on the global factors and sub-factors that were considered. 

There are a number of bridge elements recommended for replacement from the condition inspection. These elements require replacement regardless of which alternative is recommended as preferred because of their condition. 

Alternatives involving a 6, 8, 10 and 12 tonne load limit were assessed in order to understand the various levels of intervention required for each loading scenario. There are marginal differences when comparing the level of intervention required for a 6 tonne load limit versus a 10 tonne load limit. These differences are outlined as follows:

• For the 8 and 10 tonne load limits, the lower top chord needs to be made composite with the top chord by adding a wood plate between the top chord and lower top chord and fastening them together. This is not required for the 6 tonne load limit. 
• A new 4” wood plank is required to be fastened to the end diagonals for a 10 tonne load limit, instead of a 3” plank that would be necessary for the 6 and 8 tonne load limits

All other recommended improvements are required for the 6, 8, 10 and 12 tonne design live load levels. It should be noted that the bridge can currently support an 8 tonne load limit with the steel Bailey truss in place, and up to 11 tonnes in the absence of snow loads.

Yes, replacement of the truss members will be with sawn wood.

The proposed preferred Alternative C2 does not preclude closing the bridge to motorized vehicles. If motorized vehicles were to be restricted from using the bridge, the level of intervention necessary to rehabilitate the bridge would be consistent with at least the 8 tonne load limit to accommodate pedestrian and horse and buggy loads. Closing the bridge to motorized vehicles would improve the long-term durability of the bridge. While we can post signage that restricts motorized vehicles from using the bridge, it would be difficult to physically prevent all vehicles from accessing the bridge while maintaining adequate passage for horse & buggies. 

Based on the public feedback received during public consultation #3, the project team is not recommending a restriction of all motorized vehicles on the bridge at this time.

The legal posted load limit of 3 tonnes will be maintained after the proposed bridge rehabilitation. The Region and Township do not wish to attract more and heavier vehicles to West Montrose, therefore, the intention is not to design the West Montrose Covered Bridge for heavy vehicles. The existing bridge on Line 86 serves this purpose.

A number of the elements recommended for replacement are not original to the bridge and have been replaced over time. This includes the deck, floor beams and needle beams, segments of the bottom chord and some of the stringers. The rehabilitation plans to maintain original truss members where possible and to only replace what is necessary.

Fire retardant materials are proposed to be applied to various elements of the bridge. 

A water source would be required for a typical sprinkler system. The local watermain does not have sufficient pressure to provide fire suppression capabilities. The Region will continue discussions with the Fire Department and any necessary environmental agencies to further investigate options for fire suppression. 

The original construction drawings of the West Montrose Covered Bridge do not indicate any cambering of the bridge. However, the Region believes that there is benefit to reducing the visible sag in the structure and this is part of the recommended preferred alternative.

The roadway elevation of the bridge will not be raised, as the floorbeam/deck elevation can be held constant. No adjustment of the approach road elevations will be required and the approach roads will meet the bridge deck at the same elevation as they do now.

The Region does not support an exposed wooden deck for public safety reasons. Wooden decks are more slippery for pedestrians and cyclists and are not preferred for horse and buggies. Staff are not in support of a wooden deck for these potential liability and safety reasons. An epoxy chip seal wearing surface will be considered as an alternative treatment to tar and chip during detailed design.

Yes, the Region intends to pre-qualify potential Contractors bidding on the project.

The Region is not undertaking a historical restoration, the Region is conserving the bridge through rehabilitation and repair.  The West Montrose Covered Bridge is an example of an evolved structure that has functioned as the builder intended to date.   The beauty of this wooden structure and other historic bridges in Woolwich Township is that as structural components reach the end of their useful lives they can be repaired and replaced without a full-scale removal or demolition of the bridge. The Bridge has evolved through various repair and renewal projects. The ongoing repairs and replacements to the West Montrose Covered Bridge throughout its lifetime have been extremely well documented. However, determining the character defining elements of the bridge that should continue to be conserved was central to the recommendations of our heritage consultants, and those elements have been conserved as much as possible in the proposed rehabilitation alternative.  

The Preferred Alternative C2 incorporates the conservation methodology of Ontario Heritage Toolkit’s Eight Guiding Principles in the Conservation of Historic Properties and of Parks Canada’s Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. Alternative C2 may be considered a sympathetic conservation approach for the rehabilitation of the bridge that meets the requirements of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code.

No. The original 1881 design of the bridge would not meet the Canadian Highway Bridge Code, even for modest traffic loads.

The work will require a staging area to allow for storage of materials and equipment, assembly of components, and a site trailer. Letson Park and/or Gole Park is proposed to be used for this purpose. These areas will be restored to original or better condition upon completion of the project. The existing oak tree at Letson Park will be protected during construction. Access to the mailboxes at Gole Park will be maintained.

The properties on the four corners of the bridge are privately owned. The bridge will need to be accessed via these properties during construction. The Region will contact the property owners to discuss this access. 

Construction is currently expected to start in the Spring of 2025 and be complete by Spring 2026.

The draft 2024 - 2033 Transportation Capital Program contains a budget of $5,655,000 for this project. This is a high-level estimate and will be updated as detailed design proceeds. This project is being partially funded by the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program with a 33.33% contribution from the provincial government and a 40% contribution from the federal government.

The preferred design will be brought forward to Regional Council for approval in early 2024. Following Council approval of the preferred design concept, the Environmental Study Report will be filed for a 30 day public review period. Detailed design will then proceed, and construction is expected to commence by Spring 2025 and be completed by Spring 2026.

If the major rehabilitation is not undertaken, the key structural systems will continue to deteriorate to the point where the bridge will no longer be able to safely carry even its own weight.

 The bridge must undergo major rehabilitation if is to carry us through the current century.

Construction will require a full closure of the bridge to all motorized vehicles and horse-and-buggy traffic for up to one full year.

The Region will work with the successful Contractor to look for opportunities to make efforts to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists during construction, where possible. However, there will be critical phases where the bridge will be unavailable to pedestrians and cyclists.

Detour routes will be established and efforts will be made to make these routes as convenient and safe as possible for all road users. 

More detailed information will be made available prior to construction, through letters to adjacent property owners, sign boards and postings to the Region’s website and/or the Region’s engagewr.ca platform.

The Region will monitor traffic conditions on Line 86 during construction and assess whether any changes to the posted speed limit are necessary.

The current project recommendations do not include a wholesale replacement of the existing wood members. Recommendations have been made on the basis of the current bridge conditions and the design live load of 10 tonnes. The recommendations would not be different if the rehabilitation cycle were reduced to 25 years.

The Project Team is multi-disciplinary, consisting of recognized technical experts in bridge engineering, timber rehabilitation, construction engineering, cultural heritage preservation of structures, Environmental Assessments, value engineering, archeological and environmental impacts. This full complement of skills is critical to delivering a successful project.

Bridge Engineering

Bridge engineering will be performed by Doug Dixon and Associates, for the substructure design, and Entuitive, for the superstructure design. 

Doug Dixon has more than 38 years of Bridge Engineering experience in the public and private sectors. Doug is a member of three Technical Subcommittees for the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) for the development of the CSA-S6 and has been since 2000.  Doug is also one of the voting members of the CHBDC Technical committee.   

Entuitive’s Bridge Engineering team is led by Stephen Brown, P.Eng., and Andrew Lehan, P.Eng. Stephen Brown is a structural engineer with over 42 years of experience.  He is known in the industry for successfully integrating constructability considerations into permanent bridge designs.  Stephen has worked on many timber rehabilitation projects of heritage significance, including the strengthening of the roof trusses of the Ontario Legislature Building at Queen’s Park and the stabilization of Daniel Stong’s Grain Barn at the Black Creek Pioneer Village open-air museum.  He was the recipient of an Ontario WoodWorks Award for his timber truss design at the Mount Pleasant Cemetery Visitation Centre Chapel. Andrew Lehan is a structural engineer with over 13 years of experience.  He is the Vice-Chair of the Technical Subcommittee on Section 9 (Wood Structures) for the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code.  He was also a primary co-author of the Ontario Wood Bridge Reference Guide. 

 Entuitive, and Doug Dixon and Associates are qualified under a number of categories under the Ontario Ministry of Transportation’s Registry, Appraisal, and Qualifications (RAQs) system.  Qualification represents the highest degree of bridge engineering skill acknowledged by the Ministry. 

Timber

David Moses is the Project Team’s timber bridge expert. David is the founder of Moses Structural Engineers and holds a PhD in structural engineering specializing in timber from the University of British Columbia. David is a recognized leader, designer, teacher, researcher, writer and invited lecturer. He has over 25 years of experience in timber engineering and has been involved in hundreds of structural engineering projects across Canada and the United States, including the assessment and retrofit of numerous heritage timber structures like the CMHC buildings on Granville Island, the Alaska Ferries Terminal in Prince Rupert, and the Roger’s Pass Monument reconstruction.  David is a long-standing member of the Timber Frame Engineering Council of the Timber Framers Guild, which celebrates and promotes traditional timber framing techniques. David is also a member of the Technical Subcommittee on Section 9 (Wood Structures) for the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code and the CSA O86 Engineering Design in Wood Technical Subcommittees on System Design and Connections.  He has received numerous Ontario WoodWorks awards including the prestigious Wood Advocate and Wood Champion awards.  He was also a primary co-author of the Ontario Wood Bridge Reference Guide.  David is very familiar with the West Montrose Covered Bridge, having performed the most recent detailed timber condition assessment for the bridge in 2017.

Cultural Heritage

Preserving the heritage of the West Montrose Covered Bridge is of paramount importance to the team. The Project Team includes nationally recognized senior cultural heritage experts, Richard Unterman and Wendy Shearer, who are providing support and direction for best practices of the heritage restoration. These experts are focusing on best practices to maintain the working timber trusses.  Best practices in heritage conservation require that alterations or additions to a recognized heritage resource be made so that the character-defining elements of tangible and intangible heritage value are safeguarded and integrated in any preferred solution. 

 Richard Unterman has over 40 years of professional experience in the cultural heritage landscape and built heritage resource field, undertaking projects for both private and public sector clients. He is one of the founding members of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals. Richard’s work as Principal of Unterman McPhail Associates (UMA) has contributed to a better understanding and recognition of cultural heritage resources through the many documents he has produced, including: heritage impact statements, cultural heritage evaluation reports, statements of cultural heritage value or interest, heritage inventories as well as cultural heritage assessment reports. UMA will be completing the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report and Conservation Plan for the West Montrose Covered Bridge.     

 Wendy Shearer is also supporting the Project Team as a cultural heritage expert.  She is a member of the College of Fellows of the Canadian Society of Landscape Architects and a longstanding member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals. She was the first recipient of the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals and has subsequently worked on projects in Yukon, Nova Scotia and Ontario that have received national, provincial, and local heritage awards.  She was an appointed member of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the Ontario Heritage Trust, Ontario's heritage agency.  For 10 years, she taught a course at the University of Victoria that focused on applying the theory of heritage conservation to a range of sites.  Wendy has been involved in heritage planning for more than 20 National Historic Sites as well as numerous sites of provincial and local heritage significance.  She has been involved with several historic bridge projects including the crossing of the Rideau Canal in Ottawa within the World Heritage Site.  She was invited to participate as a heritage professional with the preparation of the National Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada by Parks Canada.  This document includes a process to be used in planning for varied heritage resources and is now adopted by all provinces and most municipalities as a best practice in heritage conservation.

Environmental Assessments and Value Engineering

BTE brings project management, community consultation, environmental assessment and value engineering expertise to the team. BTE’s community consultation expertise is particularly important to the West Montrose Covered Bridge project given the significant community interest.  Steve Taylor, P.Eng., of BTE has successfully delivered over 1500 roadway projects and 100 bridge projects.  He uses the Multi-Attribute Trade-Off System (MATS) to measure the performance and environmental effects of competing alternatives and to quantify/rank the various alternatives.  This approach is important to the project because of the many competing criteria and alternatives, such as the need to strengthen to bridge while using techniques and materials that fit within the heritage fabric of the structure.

Environmental

Drainage

Sanchez Engineering will be responsible for the hydraulic analysis to estimate design floods and to complete the hydraulic design of the bridge. The firm has experience with the hydraulic design of structures varying in size from short span reinforced concrete and metal culverts to long span and multi-span, multi-lane bridges. They have prepared a number of of hydrology reports for approval of bridges, including design and recommendations of structure span, skew, vertical clearance, lateral loads and scour protection.

Natural Heritage

EcoTec Environmental Consultants Inc. has 20 years of experience providing environmental services considering the protection, restoration, and enhancement of the natural environment. Their expertise in the fields of aquatic biology, terrestrial ecology, fluvial geomorphology, and ecosystem restoration is valuable to the Project Team. Their knowledge and understanding of the natural environmental and environmental legislation ensures comprehensive and economic solutions to any environmental challenge. EcoTec will be supporting the Project Team with co-ordinating approvals from Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

Archeological 

ASI is one of the largest archeological consulting firms in Ontario, with over 30 years of experience in conducting archeological studies and Indigenous engagement. ASI has completed the Stage 1 Archeological Assessment for this project and has provided support with First Nations’ consultation.

The additional weight will not have a significant effect on the rehabilitation design.

This approach is not preferred because it is considered another advanced form of signage, providing less assurance that the historic structure will be protected in comparison to a height restriction bar, and would not physically stop an oversized vehicle from proceeding through the bridge.

The Project Team has revised the Preferred Alternative to eliminate the need for the height restriction bar on the south approach by narrowing the road to make it difficult for oversized vehicles to make the turn onto the bridge. The proposed height restriction bar has been moved as far away from the bridge as possible on the north approach to avoid impacts to the view of the bridge. A drawing of this revised concept can be found at this link.

The west bottom chord is recommended for replacement. Early onset decay was noted at several locations and its condition is expected to worsen from fair to poor condition before conclusion of the 50-year rehabilitation design life.  Moreover, the existing Eastern Hemlock material comprising the west bottom chord is not strong enough to resist the applied tensile demand resulting from the 10-tonne design live load.

The floor and needle beams are recommended for replacement due to their condition. These items have been replaced over time and are not original to the bridge. Also, splicing the floor beams would alter the look of the bridge from the side view and underneath, which is not desirable.

The proposed oversized vehicle restrictions would not permit emergency vehicles to use the bridge. It has been confirmed that emergency vehicles do not currently use the bridge as part of their route.

Reinforcement is proposed instead of replacement, where feasible, because of the desire to maintain as much of the original wood as possible. This approach is recommended in both Federal and Provincial Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places.