County looks to strengthen case for Bishopsgate interchange following AMO talks

Casandra Turnbull
Managing Editor
The County of Brant will look to regional partners and additional economic data to strengthen its case for a Highway 403 interchange at Bishopsgate Road after provincial transportation officials indicated they do not currently see a need for the project.
County staff provided councillors with more details about discussions held during the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Conference as part of a government relations update presented to the Policy Development Committee on Sept. 1.
The report outlined the results of County delegations at the Aug. 16-19 conference, with much of the advocacy focused on two longstanding priorities: the proposed Bishopsgate Road interchange and expansion of natural gas service into rural areas.
County representatives, including Mayor David Bailey, Coun. Ella Haley and staff, met with Hardeep Singh Grewal, parliamentary assistant to the minister of transportation, to discuss transportation infrastructure, particularly along the Bishopsgate Road and Rest Acres Road corridor.
The County argued the proposed interchange is needed to accommodate significant residential and industrial growth, improve connectivity and ease pressure on the existing Rest Acres Road interchange. According to the report, more than eight million square feet of current and planned industrial-commercial development is tied to the corridor.
However, the response from the Ministry of Transportation was not what County officials had hoped for.
“It was conveyed to us that the ministry doesn’t see the necessity for that interchange,” general manager of strategic initiatives Adam Crozier told councillors during the Sept. 1 meeting.
The written report similarly states MTO representatives indicated the ministry does not currently identify a need for a Bishopsgate interchange.
County officials countered that if the interchange is not going to move ahead, development applications along Rest Acres Road should be permitted to proceed. They also cautioned that development decisions could affect the opportunity to eventually establish a north-south regional transportation corridor connecting highways 401 and 403.
Coun. John Peirce pressed staff for more information about the discussion and questioned whether the County could strengthen its advocacy by once again seeking support from neighbouring municipalities.
Peirce noted Oxford and Norfolk counties and the Region of Waterloo have supported the interchange in the past and suggested there could be value in approaching the province collectively from a regional perspective.
Crozier agreed the County needs to be more strategic and cohesive in building its case, including taking a regional approach.
The County also raised the Bishopsgate interchange during a separate AMO delegation organized by the South Central Ontario Region Economic Development Corporation. That delegation met with Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade Minister Victor Fedeli and focused on the interchange's importance to employment, industrial and commercial growth throughout the region.
Staff now plan to provide the province with more detailed information, including development charge and building permit revenues, total development square footage and projected job creation associated with current and planned developments. The information is intended to demonstrate the economic consequences if the interchange does not proceed and strengthen the County's business case.
The County's priority issues list shows there remains no confirmed provincial commitment or timeline for the Bishopsgate project, with the next step being development of an enhanced business case.
Natural gas expansion was another major topic of discussion at committee.
Coun. David Miller asked for an update on the County's AMO delegation concerning rural natural gas expansion, noting residents who rely on alternatives such as diesel fuel can face high heating costs.
County representatives met with Associate Minister of Energy-Intensive Industries Sam Oosterhoff alongside Brant MPP Will Bouma to discuss a possible third phase of Ontario's Natural Gas Expansion Program.
The County is seeking funding for shovel-ready projects in Harley and Glen Morris that staff say are not financially viable under existing Ontario Energy Board requirements without provincial support.
“From what I understand province has directed Ontario Energy Board (OEB) to come up with a framework for eligible criteria for a third intake of the natural gas expansion project.
We do see there will likely be some measure of a third intake for the natural gas expansion program. It sounds like the delegation went quite well and I understand they are aware of our project in Harley,” Crozier said.
The province has directed the OEB to develop recommendations for criteria that could be used for a future program intake. Those recommendations are due to the province by Jan. 15, 2027 and are expected to consider factors including project readiness, cost-effectiveness, community benefits and economic impacts.
Staff said they will continue preparing technical and supporting documentation so the County is positioned to apply if a third phase is announced.
Councillors also sought clarification on a $500-million Community Sport and Recreation Infrastructure Fund highlighted in the AMO report. Coun. David Miller asked whether it was the same funding program the County had applied to for the Brant Sports Complex expansion.
Staff clarified the previous Brant Sports Complex application was through a federal program, while the fund announced at AMO represents another round of provincial funding.
The County's priority issues list notes applications are open and appropriate staff and Bouma have been made aware of the opportunity.
Beyond those discussions, the County continues to advocate for several other priority issues, including Paris flood mitigation funding, approvals and funding for the new Paris Water Pollution Control Plant, rural economic development and global market support, and gender-based and intimate partner violence prevention.



Comments