‘Suck it up’
Dear Editor:
What’s with the Advertiser’s editorial cartoon on April 6 showing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ordering finance minister Chrystia Freeland to turn the screws on Canadian consumers with its annual increase in the “carbon tax” on fossil fuels?
What the cartoon totally – and deliberately – doesn’t say is that the majority of Ontarians actually receive more back in quarterly payments from this federal program than they pay in increased fossil fuel prices at the pump and for home heating.
Everyone in Ontario receives the same benefit, but it is generally wealthier citizens, the ones who drive gas-guzzling SUVs and heat their large homes with fossil fuels who pay more than the quarterly rebate gives back in the Climate Action Incentive Plan.
What’s the point raising gas prices every April? It’s to slowly but surely shift us away from the carbon-based fuels that are cooking the planet, and onto much more climate-friendly alternatives such as heat pumps and electric vehicles.
But back to the Advertiser cartoon and to this question: who will suffer most if we kill the carbon tax, as the federal Conservatives always ridicule it while never, ever referring to the program’s quarterly rebates? Answer: Unless we get off fossil fuels, and very soon, we’re surely turning the screws on our children and grandkids.
They’re the ones who will be living with the horrific consequences of unchecked climate change because we didn’t have the gumption to suck it up and act now – before it’s too late.
Liz Armstrong,
Erin
‘Stop creating a market’
Dear Editor:
RE: ‘It’s heartbreaking’: family calls attention to suspected puppy mills, March 30.
This article states there may be 400 puppy mills in southern Ontario and possibly 40 in Wellington County. This is shameful.
If the price of the puppy is too good to be true, then it is. Most of us couldn’t imagine our beloved pooches spending one second in the isolated conditions these exploited animals are forced to endure.
Advocate for change with your local council. Consider microchipping essential. Stay away from Kijiji. Buy from reputable licensed breeders for the quality of life and health guarantee you expect.
We need to do better by our furry family members and stop creating a market for unacceptable animal abuse.
Kailyn Evans,
Fergus
Keep it ‘quiet and clean’
Dear Editor:
RE: Proposal for trucking hub in Puslinch meets opposition, March 30.
I am adding my name to the list of people who are opposed to the proposed rezoning change at 128 Brock Road South. This is not an area which should have a truck depot.
I moved to Aberfoyle over 13 years ago. At the time we liked how Aberfoyle had such a clean and quiet atmosphere. We liked the small-town feel and also the feel of community and its ready location to Guelph, Cambridge and the 401.
The idea of a truck depot, in my opinion, anywhere north of McLean Road does not seem like the right location for this type of business. We have two industrial areas at or south of McLean Road which I feel would be better suited for a business such as this one. These industrial areas are away from residential areas and do not take away from the beautiful and quiet drive through Aberfoyle (just need to stop some speeders now).
I have seen the trucks which line up on Brock Road to go into the gravel pits early in the morning. I think those quantity of trucks will pale in comparison to those which will be destined for the proposed new truck depot at 128 Brock Road south. It also seems like these trucks could be at any time of day.
With about 21 truck bays you can imagine the amount of truck traffic in and out of this location. The noise levels will probably also increase. I do not think the truck depot will have control of all the various truck drivers using this location. There goes our quiet and clean Aberfoyle.
We shall now also have additional traffic on Gilmour Road. We already have approximately 83 household residential properties who use Gilmour Road for access to Brock Road at the roundabout. You will now have to add between 85 and 170 additional automobiles that will have to use this area. The amount of traffic and congestion at times will be unreal. Again there goes our clean and quiet Aberfoyle.
I have not touched on the potential problems which will arise in regards to water usage and potential wastewater usage. We all know how this area is reliant on clean and unpolluted water. The problems which could arise because of all these truck, cars and business issues could endanger all businesses and residents in the area.
Please do not approve the rezoning at 128 Brock Road South for this proposed truck depot, and keep our Aberfoyle beautiful and clean.
Howard Power,
Aberfoyle
Hub presents problems
Dear Editor:
RE: Proposal for trucking hub in Puslinch meets opposition, March 30.
As residents of Aberfoyle we are deeply concerned with the application submitted by Wellington Motor Freight to rezone the property located at 128 Brock Road.
Although the article is titled “hub in Puslinch” a more accurate description would be “hub in Aberfoyle,” a small hamlet with community amenities such as our library, ice rink, sports fields, hiking trails, community hall, Aberfoyle Mill restaurant, antique market, farmers market, small elementary school and more.
Turning Aberfoyle into a trucking hub is not in keeping with the values of this community, nor the Provincial Policy Statement and Wellington County Official Plan. Rather it serves only to provide easy access to the 401 for Wellington Motor Freight while causing traffic congestion, poor air quality, potential hazards to our water supply, noise and light pollution.
After attending the information meeting on March 22, we were astonished to hear Wellington Motor Freight state that their study on the impact of traffic on Gilmour Road resulted in zero impact, in spite of parking for 170 employees and 123 tractor trailers. Frankly this brings into question any and all studies provided by the applicant.
We trust that the mayor and our council will recognize the negative impact rezoning this property will have and act in the best interests of the community they are responsible to represent.
Sue and Jim Stone,
Aberfoyle
Conflicts with CIP
Dear Editor:
RE: Proposal for trucking hub in Puslinch meets opposition, March 30.
The Puslinch Corridor Improvement Plan (CIP) outlines vision and goals. This corridor is made up of Aberfoyle and Morriston urban centres, as well as Brock Road, and of the mixed-use industrial areas.
One of its’ objectives is to facilitate and coordinate the transition of neighbourhoods and areas. When you follow all the links to the township website, it is heartwarming to see the consistency of this vision:
“Within the next 10 years ‘our corridor’ will be integrated and transformed into an attractive, prosperous, and distinctive economic corridor. Residents, families, and visitors will come to ‘our corridor,’ to shop, eat, socialize, celebrate, play, and explore. They will be able to move around safely through a network of roads, paths, and trails. Our corridor will be connected to its agricultural heritage, rural way of life, and local pride.”
Puslinch design guidelines outlines streetscape, quality and character of the corridor and it shows flowers, trees, and historical buildings. And it exhibits community pride and confirms why we moved here. What it does not show are pictures of trucks!
“It has also been prepared with the view that, over time, small improvements throughout ‘our corridor’ will add up. While early implementation may result in a handful of on-the ground improvements, it is anticipated that revitalization, beautification, renewal, and economic activity will gain momentum over time.”
We agree – and yet what is being considered? A rezoning from secondary agricultural/highway commercial to industrial. Trucks, trucks and more trucks!
And with that comes over 150 employees, a 5.7-acre parking lot, 21 loading bays and parking lots for 170 employee and 123 tractor and trailers. The consultants’ assessments for Wellington Motor Freight’s propose minimal to no noise, light, traffic or water impacts on the corridor or on surrounding communities. How can up to 170 new cars a day, back and forth, not have an impact on the unpaved Gilmour Road?
How can that be? And how can the vision and goal so proudly laid out for “the corridor” be so easily thrown out, and for reasons we have yet to hear?
As stated on the township plans, these documents are “intended to be a living document(s) which can be revised at councils’ discretion to respond to the changing needs of the township.” So, what has changed?
On behalf of OneAberfoyle, say no to the rezoning of 128 Brock Rd. S. and let’s build the community together that we all agree with.
Lisa Ross,
Aberfoyle
‘Detrimental impact’
Dear Editor:
RE: Proposal for trucking hub in Puslinch meets opposition, March 30.
An open letter to Derek Koza, President and CEO of Wellington Motor Freight.
I am a long-time resident of Aberfoyle Meadows. Our residential community is in very close proximity to where you are attempting, via rezoning, to relocate your trucking company.
To say your potential relocation has put our community in a tailspin would be an understatement.
Our residents have made Aberfoyle Meadows their forever homes, many with their families and many retired here. They chose it for its natural beauty, acres of walking trails, beautiful trees, wildlife and a serene quietness that attracted us all to this little community. It is a sought-after neighbourhood with very few homes coming up for sale. We know a good thing when we have it!
With all that said, we stand to lose much of what we value if you are successful in relocating your company to the land adjacent to our community. When we bought here, we did so with the adjacent land south of Gilmour zoned residential. It was rezoned to light commercial a number of years back with the worst-case scenario of some small businesses supporting our community needs. We strongly oppose it being rezoned again to bring in a large trucking firm such as Wellington Trucking.
In the recent Puslinch council meeting you said “if we are not wanted here, we will relocate”.
Please don’t take this personally, but we would like to hold you to your statement and beg you to find another location for your company. It seems to me that finding a piece of land that doesn’t pose a detrimental impact to the residents and the surrounding area would be a lot easier and less costly on your part.
We have too much to lose and will fight with everything we have to keep our community and surrounding area untouched by water contamination, air pollution, sound pollution, traffic congestion and, last but not least, the devaluation of our homes.
Please reconsider. We would be forever grateful.
Joan Young,
Aberfoyle
Housing the rich?
Dear Editor:
Last year all governments spoke of the need for accessible and affordable housing in Canada.
Our mayor, during the election, outlined a variety of options that might include smaller homes, container homes, etc. And there are many singles, young people starting out, senior couple/ singles, the newly divorced and many more who find rentals very steep and buying out of sight.
In last week’s Advertiser I read about planned homes/apartments in Centre Wellington: two four-storey apartment buildings proposed for St. Andrew Street, the 100-plus home development on the golf course, and then suggested prices for the stacked townhouses behind New to You at $650,000 each … so do we or do we not need accessible housing in Fergus-Elora?
I am guessing that these just mentioned do not fit the bill. We have two subdivisions called Storybrook and South River for which $900,000 or more would be the entrance ticket.
Now Habitat to its credit will be building apartment units on Garafraxa West – a start to meet a need; by the way, there are so far 90 applicants for the approximately 30 units. Need not met: based on the building in Centre Wellington, it appears that the affluent or those with a really good cash flow will be satisfied.
Who decides what housing will be built? Is it the developers who say “let’s build this” or does our elected council have any say what-soever as to design or even needs of our population? Add in planning and design and approval time, and years might be used up. Seems that is not good enough when adequate affordable housing is needed now.
There are, as I write, underused/for sale properties on Beatty Line, Hill Street West – even a few churches in town have spaces for smaller or creative housing that could be rented. What an outreach that could be. Are there unused warehouse or factories that could be refitted?
Is there anyone in this town who is devoted to making a difference or concerted effort to expand our housing choices, rather than letting the richer have housing?
Dave Jones,
Fergus
Trudeau story buried?
Dear Editor:
RE: Trudeau holds press conference in Guelph to announce housing plan, March 23.
Ever since moving to Rockwood a couple of years ago I have been a regular reader of the Wellington Advertiser. I believe in supporting community newspapers and find your content very relevant to residence of Wellington County.
That being said, I was surprised when I was reading the March 23, issue to find a story about the Prime Minister of Canada visiting Guelph to announce his housing plan buried on page 11.
I would expect when the PM visits Wellington County for any occasion that it would make front page news. I understand that you are a Conservative-friendly newspaper, but that shouldn’t affect how you report on the PM no matter what party they belong to.
Why did you bury a story on the visit by the PM to Wellington County on page 11?
Fadi Daoud,
Rockwood
*Editor’s note: The following factors were considered for placement of this story: Guelph is not part of Wellington County; pages 10 and 11 are two of our most popular pages (we did not “bury” it); we were not informed in advance of Trudeau’s appearance and had to rely on a government press release; and the housing plan was previously announced by the government last year.