Council rejected ATV’s using the Trestle Trail Bridge during Committee of the Whole on March 9, but it isn’t a final “no”. The motion is will be reintroduced in Monday’s council, with different wording.
The ATV association is seeking to put a multi-use trail through Queens Co., to connect to similar trails in Lunenburg and Shelburne Counties. One major obstacle is crossing the Mersey River, and the association had hoped to get permission to use the Trestle Trail Bridge.
The rejected motion asked to allow the use of the Trestle Trail Bridge. That did not sit well with many councillors, but it wasn’t over the ATV’s themselves. Many felt there was not enough information to make an informed decision.
The Main St. side of the bridge is Counc. Sheldon Brannen’s district, and he said he’s heard from both sides on the issue. “I feel the process hasn’t gone the way it should have. I don’t feel I have enough information to make a good decision on this,” he said. “Based on what I know now, it’s a no.”
Some of the things he wanted to know are the full route from Lunenburg Co. to Shelburne Co, and how the ATV association plans to connect them on both sides of the bridge. That information wasn’t available yet, because the ATV Association was waiting for the decision on the bridge.
“It would be irresponsible for us to approve the bridge without looking at the other components. (If we approved) We’re now putting pressure on those landowners to support the trail”
Counc. Randi Dickie said while it isn’t part of her district, many users of the trail and some homeowners from the area have contacted her. The response so far has been overwhelmingly negative towards sharing the trail.
In her view, she felt the Trestle Trail and the area in general promotes physical activity through walking, biking, running, etc. Sharing the trail with ATV’s would deter people from using it, she said.
“Motorized vehicles would jeopardize the safety and comfort of those who have used the trail.”
Counc. Owen Hamlin is one of the councillors who has heard more support for trails rather than against, with a tally of 39-16 in favour. He has also surveyed people on the trail and says many are against it, but only if they have to share the whole space. A separate side would be better in their view, he said, to separate the ATV’s from the rest.
Part of the problem right now, he said, was he felt the ATV association has not explained themselves well enough to the public, especially on how they police the trails.
“We envision wildmen running at all hours of the night. Well these people rarely operate at night except in the woods”
The motion to approve letting the ATV Association use the bridge failed 3-7.
The issue will return to council however, when Counc. Mervin Hartlen, who voted to approve the use, planned to introduce a reworded motion during council on March 15.
Counc. Hartlen spoke at the ATV Association’s emergency meeting on March 11 to explain council’s position and listen to the concerns of the group.
While the group was frustrated with the process, they agreed to get an independent consultant’s report done to address the councillors issues. The group would fund the report through grants available to them.
Before the association goes ahead with the report however, the new motion would have to be passed in council.
The motions the association is asking for would allow use of the Trestle Trail Bridge, pending the report satisfies councillors issues.
The motion was expected came forward in council on March 15. A report on the council meeting will appear in the March 23 edition of The Advance
nmoase@theadvance.ca
