Even after a public meeting with Puslinch and Cambridge officials residents still have issues with the proposed Townline Road takeover by the city.
Puslinch CAO Karen Landry said there were about 27 people in the audience at the special June 4 meeting.
Both residents and councillors had quite a few questions, she said.
Cambridge commissioner of transportation and public works George Elliott spoke to the request and the Blackbridge Road EA study by the city.
The meeting was a chance to exchange information and discuss the study process and draft recommendations.
The meeting also provided a chance for residents to address council with questions regarding the future of Townline Road.
The study covers the infrastructure needs of Townline Road, Blackbridge Road and the historic Black Bridge crossing of the Speed River.
Elliott said study reflects the current city and township needs of the road for the next 20-plus years.
He noted that while there are potential future regional needs within the corridor – the study is not a regional road corridor investigation
Township staff were consulted prior to the study and are involved as project stakeholders.
The study recommends ownership transfer of Townline Road to the City of Cambridge.
Why was the study undertaken?
In his presentation, Elliott said city and township traffic volumes continue to rise with the growth of the communities.
The road and bridges infrastructure are in need of major maintenance to ensure safety and the desired level of service to residents.
Regarding resident concerns that there is a hidden agenda to make this a four-lane arterial road for trucks and regional use, Elliott stated a two-lane road is recommended in the current study.
However, the Regional Transportation Master Plan identifies this corridor as a potential future study need which is forecast beyond 20 years.
“Consideration of a major arterial and regional road is not part of this study.”
Some residents have petitioned that Blackbridge is a distinct community and should be protected and that a road expansion initiative should not be undertaken – and that perhaps a new road should bypass the area, he said.
Again, Elliott stated the option of “going around” was not part of the study.
Further “even if a new road ‘going around’ was built, the current roadway and bridges need to be reconstructed and improved to meet current standards and local needs.”
Since Cambridge is undergoing a Cultural Heritage Landscape project, some residents believe the EA study and road improvements are premature.
Elliott’s response was that the city has undertaken extensive effort to analyze and take steps to promote and protect heritage in the area.
He anticipated the cultural heritage project will be completed prior to the detailed design work for road improvements.
As to why the road is being widened 3-metres, Elliott stated only the road allowance is being widened.
The paved road surface will only be widened to upgrade road widths to current standards.
He added the widening of the road allowance would create better shoulders and improve drainage ditches along the roadway.
Puslinch Township would continue to own a one foot frontage on properties on the east side of Townline Road.
This maintains planning controls of all lands within the township at the Puslinch council level … not Cambridge.
Landry noted “one of the predominant concerns was speed and maintaining the rural feel of the community,” she said.
She said many residents were also concerned with potential increases to traffic volumes.
Truck traffic was also a major concern Landry said.
In response to questions on the potential road widening, Landry said it is something the city plans to follow up on.
It was their understanding that a three metre widening on the Cambridge side when the subdivision was built, she said.
Other requests included a three-way stop sign to address speed and traffic concerns.
One resident also mentioned there needs to be a better means for pedestrians to cross the road.
Landry said a few residents expressed concern with the need to improve the ditches as there had been no recent problems in respect to drainage.
Some concerns were raised about losing trees at the front of their properties.
More comments were made that Townline Road is not really a city street and residents wanted to maintain the rural character of the area.
She said residents asked that even if Cambridge did not implement its cultural heritage landscape plans, that the EA has been prepared to follow the concerns raised to preserve heritage.
Landry also said concerns were raised about EDR (Emergency Detour Route) plans not being clear about direction of traffic attempting to get back onto Highway 401.
With respect to the preservation of trees, Landry said that Elliott indicated the detailed design work has yet to be completed.
One option which could be considered is the installation of a pathway rather than a traditional sidwalk, which would have more flexibility to meander and thus preserve trees.
Though more curbing was proposed originally, Landry believed it would now only be in a specific area – which takes in the concerns of keeping the rural feel.
Concerns were also raised regarding wells and septic systems, she said.
Landry said Cambridge officials indicated those concerns would be addressed in the detailed design route and that the city would work with homeowners to mitigate any issues.
Residents also did not want to see Townline Road turn into a major arterial roadway.
One suggestion was if Cambridge utilized the idea of a pathway, that lower level lighting be used instead of larger lights.
A few residents asked if there might be the option of the city extending water and sewer services across the road.
As to the potential of adding more lanes Landry said officials said current traffic is between 7,000 to 9,000 cars per day in certain sections – but at Blackbridge Road is around 4,000.
Cambridge indicated two-lane roads are designed for 12,000 to 13,000 cars per day.
Even after the meeting, Landry believed residents still had concerns.
Resident reaction
Townline Road resident Gary Evans agreed and says local residents still have serious concerns about the proposal.
“All the residents in the area are against giving the road to Cambridge, because its first order of business after it gets the road … is to widen it on the Puslinch side … and take 10 feet of our property.”
He said for those living in the area, it is not something they want to see – giving a portion of residential properties to another municipality.
Evans said that in looking at the road itself, “there appears to be lots of room on the Cambridge side to do this.”
“But I think the issue is that they do not want to affect any of their residents.”
While he believed the work could be accommodated on existing Cambridge road allowance, any widening would result in traffic being closer to homes on that side of the road.
“For myself and the residents of the area, we’re really upset that council would even consider giving the road to Cambridge when they know the city’s first order of business is to widen the road on our side.”
Though Puslinch council had asked if Cambridge could accommodate the work on its own side of the municipal boundary, Evans said the Cambridge study stated there are built environmental constraints – though it was unclear to him what exactly those constraints were.
“On our side of the road there are septic beds, wells involved and everybody’s driveways will be affected by this.”
He commented that when work was done on the road 20 years ago some driveways became a slope.
He said removing 10 feet from the property will only exacerbate the sloped driveways.
“They’ll need an elevator to get up into their house.”
“Our concern is that widening the road on our side and improving the sight lines will result in increased speeds.”
He said people travel the area at high speeds as said that within the past six months there have been to major accidents.
