SACO — A few city councilors have questioned whether the city should move forward with a restoration project of the Stackpole Creek Bridge after learning it will not qualify for the National Historic Registry after the proposed restoration.

The Stackpole Creek Bridge is a non-engineered stone arch bridge built in 1848 on Simpson Road. The question whether to rehabilitate or replace the bridge has been debated and discussed for about a decade.

In 2013, the question became more urgent, as the bridge was deemed unsafe for vehicular traffic and closed to automobiles. The same year, Maine Preservation put the bridge on its annual list of Maine’s most endangered historic properties.

In 2014, residents voted to allow the city to borrow up to $990,000 to reopen the bridge, leaving the question on whether to restore or replace it up to the City Council.

The City Council approved a restoration of the bridge and – after learning it would cost about $370,000 more than originally expected – voted in December to transfer funding from capital improvement projects, including $245,000 that had been allocated for a Pleasant Street Extension road and sewer project, in order to secure additional money for the project.

Currently, the bridge is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. However, Mayor Ron Michaud said at Monday night’s City Council meeting that the city had been notified that should the bridge undergo the planned restoration process, it would not be eligible. The construction standards of the bridge would negate its ability to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

“Where do we go from here?” asked Councilor David Precourt.

Michaud said reconstruction on the bridge is still scheduled to begin this summer.

“Even though we won’t have a historic bridge once we’re all done with this and it’s not going to meet historic standards?” asked Precourt. The current design for the restoration wouldn’t meet the same standards as a new modern bridge, he said, plus there would be annual maintenance costs.

Michaud said the council could discuss the matter at a future date during a workshop.

Councilor Alan Minthorn asked if the council, in light of the new information, could recall December’s vote that approved additional funding for the restoration project, as the proposed design was “fraught with excess cost to the city that we don’t need to have.”

Michaud declined Minthorn’s request, as it was not on the night’s agenda.

— Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 325 or egotthelf@journaltribune.com.