Cleaver Road Bridge debate resurfaces at council, but no decision revisited

Casandra Turnbull

Managing Editor

The future of the Cleaver Road Bridge returned briefly to the council table during a special meeting on Jan. 22, following a delegation from Highland Estates resident Andrea Bowden, though no change was made to council’s earlier decision.

Bowden, appearing before council for the sixth time on the issue, urged councillors to reconsider their Dec. 18 resolution that directed the bridge toward pedestrian-only use, arguing that council should review a full engineering assessment before committing to a long-term outcome. She asked that, should engineering ultimately show a pedestrian bridge is not viable, the matter be brought back to council for reconsideration of vehicular use.

Several delegations in the community have communicated concerns. The data has repeated itself, yet although evidence shared repeatedly it has not yet been shown in council votes, Bowden said. She called for a councillor to bring forward a motion amending the Dec. 18 decision, describing it as “basic due diligence” before a multi-million-dollar investment is finalized.

Before council could formally receive Bowden’s delegation, Coun. Robert Chambers raised a procedural concern regarding the Dec. 18 vote. Chambers, who was absent for that meeting, argued the resolution passed without a majority of council, noting the vote was 5–4 in favour. He cited Section 35 of the county’s procedural bylaw, which allows for the renewal of a motion defeated by less than a majority of council, and questioned whether the same principle should apply to motions passed under similar circumstances. He also noted that he wrote that section of the procedural bylaw and argued he clearly understands its intent.

“This is a rare case where a motion was passed without the majority of council approving it,” Chambers said, adding that while he was prepared to seek a revote, he did not believe Jan. 22 was appropriate due to councillor Steve Howes’ absence. He stressed the importance of resolving the matter given its potential impact on the 2026 budget.

County staff advised that Section 35 applies specifically to motions that are defeated, not those that are passed, even if by less than a majority of council. While there were differing interpretations among councillors and the mayor, it was ultimately agreed that the procedural issue should be reviewed at a later date when full council is present.

Coun. John Bell noted that if a pedestrian-only option ultimately proves unworkable through further engineering, the issue would return to council, drawing a comparison to the Salt Springs Road Bridge, which was revisited after design challenges emerged.

In the end, council voted to receive Bowden’s delegation as information only, leaving the Dec. 18 direction unchanged for now. That earlier decision followed the release of a staff briefing outlining six possible options for the Cleaver Road Bridge, ranging from vehicular rehabilitation or replacement to pedestrian use or full removal, with cost estimates spanning from roughly $250,000 to more than $4 million. The century-old, single-lane bridge has been closed to vehicles since July 2023 after a structural inspection deemed it unsafe, a move that has continued to divide residents and council alike.