Councillors here remain opposed to a proposed Brantford to Cambridge highway corridor that could affect residents.
On Feb. 1, Puslinch Mayor Dennis Lever talked about “a group of residents in our community, going by the acronym SMART – Save Money And Reduce Traffic.”
Lever said it started in relation to the proposed Highway 424 – the Brantford to Cambridge corridor.
Lever said there was a court case involving an appeal of the Ministry of Environment proceeding with an environmental assessment based on terms of reference conflicting with the Greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan.
That appeal was denied.
“I’m sure the SMART coalition was not very pleased with the outcome.”
During the previous council, Lever observed from the gallery, a number of discussions by council about if it supported the corridor. He remembered that there was significant opposition from residents at the time.
He believes there were studies in opposition to the corridor as well.
“One of the key things is that this corridor did not go from Brantford to Cambridge. It went from Brantford to Highway 401 in Puslinch – somewhere.”
“That area has a great number of environmentally sensitive areas,” he said.
Councillor Susan Fielding said, “This has been an ongoing saga.”
The previous council was very much in opposition to the proposal, she said.
“I think it would be very bad News for Puslinch and very destructive. It would be foolish environmentally.”
She believes if the outstanding work was completed on other MTO projects, it might take a lot of the traffic away and change the scenario.
Based on the speed of other projects “We’ll probably never see this in our lifetimes, but that doesn’t mean we should not give comment now.”
“Unless things have changed, will the recent court ruling set the route in Puslinch?” she asked.
Lever said his interpretation was the appeal alone was denied, but left the door open for appeal on any other decisions of either ministry in the future.
Fielding favours a new resolution opposing the corridor through Puslinch.
“It’s important to be on record early on. I don’t recall any residents telling me they were in favour of this.”
Councillor Wayne Stokley also favoured a resolution with council’s opposition to make officials aware of council’s feeling.
Councillor Jerry Schmidt said, “We would be stating the opinions of this council. Otherwise it could be perceived this council had a change of heart.”
Councillor Ken Roth said council should support its ratepayers.
Lever suggested council review the previous council resolution because he was uncertain of the wording.
He added any resolutions of opposition without technical backing, tend to hold less weight when decisions are made.
Fielding said there is documentation.
“Anything we can do to make the case stronger would be good,” she said.
