Area residents hoping to see the Toddsville Bridge over Oaks Creek preserved for pedestrian and recreational use have six more months to investigate restoration options for the more than 100-year-old bridge.

But people living adjacent to the bridge want it torn down and say the longer the derelict structure stands, the more likely it is someone will get hurt.

Both sides commented on the bridge’s future during Otsego County’s Public Works Committee meeting Tuesday morning, in which the committee voted 2-1 in favor of giving the group more time to look into funding opportunities and ownership issues.

The committee _ chaired by James Powers and including representatives Keith McCarty and Philip Durkin _ made it clear that the county does not want to keep the bridge but was willing to give concerned citizens an extension on the bridge’s stay of execution.

The committee is requiring a representative from the group to return each month and provide status reports on the effort and to ask the towns of Hartwick and Otsego to resume ownership of the bridge, both of which would have to agree to the situation.

"We don’t want it," said county highway superintendent Ron Tiderencel. "I’d like to see the towns take it back."

Several Toddsville residents spoke in favor of preserving the bridge, as did several individuals affiliated with non-profit organizations interested in seeing the bridge restored.

Marcy Birch, who lives on Greenough Road, said the bridge provides accessibility between upper and lower Toddsville and gives fishermen access to Oaks Creek, a DEC stocked trout stream. She said it also could serve walkers and cross-country skiers if the bridge were rehabilitated.

She said a $1,500 grant was available immediately to pay for an engineering study that would determine how much it would cost to repair the bridge for pedestrian and bicycle traffic only. Additionally, one engineer who had restored similar bridges and looked at photos of the Toddsville Bridge told Birch it was in the best shape he’d seen for a bridge that age and would cost "well under $100,000" to restore.

Her husband, attorney Bob Birch, said there were still legal issues concerning the bridge and that technically the county had not officially abandoned the structure. He said the highway laws require the county to notify adjacent landowners and provide them with up to $5,000 in compensation for lost property values due to the bridge’s closure.

Birch said he pointed that out because up to 14 lots adjoin the bridge and that demolishing the structure could cost the county $70,000 in compensation costs to property owners, in addition to the actual costs of demolition and removal.

Deborah Geurtze, who lives four houses up from the bridge, read a letter from Toddsville resident Bill Hayes, who she said could not be at the meeting.

In his letter, Hayes called the bridge "unique, useful to our community and worth saving." He also wrote that the cost of repairing the bridge was doable and less expensive than feared.

Residents also cited the bridge’s historical importance and potential inclusion as part of a walking or cross-country skiing path under consideration.

Three neighbors living adjacent to the bridge spoke in favor of its removal, citing safety issues, questions about liability and concerns that the derelict bridge has become a hangout spot for rowdy adolescents.

Amy Townsend, said that even after the county removed the bridge’s decking Nov. 17, kids and adults have been videotaped climbing the structure.

"Somebody’s going to get hurt before the six months are up," she said. "There’s some fencing, but it’s not keeping them out of there."

While she didn’t think the plans for a walking bridge were necessarily bad, she said it wouldn’t work out as they hoped and that kids would continue to congregate on the bridge. She said kids gather on the structure and turn the area, including her lawn, into a playground, where kids are swearing, breaking glass bottles and generally being obnoxious.

"We didn’t buy our property to be used as a park," she said. "We’re used to having a nice quiet property."

Joan Hotaling, who lives across the street from Townsend, said it would be impossible to monitor the bridge and ensure it was only being used for pedestrians and bicyclists. She also questioned the necessity of having a bridge there for a walking path when the roads it connects are not very from a bridge over County Route 26.

"All that money for two-tenths of a mile and our sanity?" she said. "We are the people who are going to have to suffer."

McCarty, who made the motion to give the group more time, said he thought restoring the bridge for public use was a great idea, but that the committee was responsible for looking out for Otsego County’s best interest. He said questions remain about who would be responsible for the bridge if someone were hurt and who would take ownership of it from the county.