Ironically, at same time as a study about threats to the Greenbelt (GB) is released, the Province is initiating stage 2 of their Environmental Assessment for the GTA West Transportation Corridor. I call it ironic as the study identifies major infrastructure projects, which includes highways, as one of four top threats to GB, and the Corridor is a new 400 series highway which cuts through the GB.
If you are interested here is a link to the project. On the left side you will see “public information and community workshops.” Click on it; below the dates of the meetings you will see links to maps and reports.
As this Corridor is mainly a 400 series highway for trucks and cars it is very, very disappointing. A strong case is made for the need to move goods more effectively than is happening today, let alone in 15-20 years. But, I consider the proposal to be very unimaginative and very destructive in terms of the amount of agricultural land and significant natural heritage landscapes being destroyed or harmed between 400 (starting just south of King Road) and Milton. Its proximity to King’s south boundary does mean that we cannot indulge in a selfish sigh of relief that we have escaped this one. Specific route and interchanges are yet to be determined. Hence, it was great to see several residents of King at the one public session I went to.
To clarify my comment about that the GTA corridor is “mainly” a 400 series highway. At the information session when I was asking there was not more consideration to building a rail corridor I was told that the plan does include some sort of public transit corridor adjacent to the highway and that it would be built “later.”
Hi Debbie.
I agree with your comments about this proposed corridor. I am wondering if there is anything that an ordinary citizen can do about this or is it a done deal. I just don’t understand how the Greenbelt is suppose to be protected and yet another highway will be allowed. We know that once the highway is completed, more development will quickly follow. It all seems so shortsighted.
Catherine
Catherine, I can only agree with your comments, your frustration. Your comments are excellent. I will start by saying that too many “ordinary citizens” have a false belief in how much the Greenbelt Plan or Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan prevents development (be it private or provincial such as this corridor.) Without question I believe it significantly curbs it i.e. reduces how much is done; and it requires very tough analysis and studies which in the end might stop it from happening or it modifies how it is executed. Furthermore, the studies & reports cause it to be a more public process than it might be; which in turn means there is opportunity to challenge analysis done, to present different solutions, to lobby decision makers. “Ordinary citizens” need to be vigilant,to ask questions, to tell their elected representatives what they want or don’t want.
Section 4.2 of GB Plan acknowledges that new infrastructure will required and it sets up a number of hurdles/tests/expectations if this infrastructure is to cross the GB.
I think the “ordinary citizen” can continue to express opposition and explain why; but I also think it is wise to be saying, “if it is going to happen here are the mitigation measures which must be in place OR this particular aspect is truly unacceptable and effort must be made to find an alternative such as XXXX etc. etc.
Finally…even though GB is not as robust as we would like it is pretty good and that’s why the review of it in 2015 is so challenging.