August 24 Council agenda includes a Staff report including recommendations as to King’s feedback to the Ministry of Transport on the GTA West Corridor, specifically the eastern portion of the Corridor which is in vicinity of King.  Except for the possibility of this corridor being a bypass  for King Road there is nothing about this project which is positive nor is the analysis adequate. There are alternatives which have not been adequately investigated as is required by the Greenbelt Plan infrastructure policies;  the full cost of the project has been significantly underestimated as expropriation of high cost land has not been included; and finally the environmental impact is too great.  I think the Staff’s report is pretty good in terms of effectively looking after King’s interests except that we should be challenging the need for an interchange at Pine Valley/7th concession:  if the corridor is to be built the interchanges should be limited to the two urban growth centres i.e. Bolton and Vaughan City Centre.

I have deliberately said there is the “possibility” that the Corridor will be a bypass for King Road as the Corridor is to be a toll road.  Just as drivers avoid 407 ETR, I believe that this toll road will be avoided.

The Greenbelt Plan (GB) has policies for decisions to build new infrastructure which have not been respected.  4.2.1 in the Plan says that expanding or building new infrastructure is to be allowed  when it is providing “connections among urban growth centres and between these centres.”  In the the portion of the Corridor under consideration there are 2 urban growth centres:  Vaughan City Centre which can be serviced by an interchange at Weston Road and Bolton which can be served by an interchange at Hwy. 27.  What is the need for a 3rd one between these two i.e. at Pine Valley Drive/7th Concession?

Section 4.2.2 d of GB says that “new or expanding infrastructure shall avoid key natural heritage features or key hydrologic features unless need has been demonstrated and it has been established that there is no reasonable alternative.”  This is clearly relevant to this project as this corridor crosses through Credit River and Humber River watersheds.   Furthermore, the detail as to how the Humber River will be traversed and assessing need for extensive channels etc. to deal with high waters (floods) has not been done; hence, how can alternative routes be assessed and how can the corridor, with any route, be compared to alternatives.  There are alternatives which have not been adequately assessed:  expand current highways; increase rail capacity; incent use of the current east/west toll road (i.e. 407); even more investments in public transit.

It is easy to be persuaded  that this new highway corridor is required as congestion is already intolerable for commuters and is hurting our economy.   I can understand why one might think that it is going to be worse in the future as there will be more traffic.  But, this line of thinking assumes that the future will be the same as the past i.e. that as new employment is created at the designated employment centres there will be more manufacturing and warehouses.  Certainly we know in King City that the past is not a blueprint for the future.  At King Rd/Jane there is going to a global headquarters and R&D.  And even though the previous property owner of the site (King City Corporate Centre) had a plan involving warehouses there was not going to be alot of people driving to work due to high levels of automation.  As the Regions (York and Peel) update their Official Plans there needs to be special attention to estimating traffic demands at the employment centres.

I am disturbed that current estimate for this project are for the construction costs only; the acquisition of lands by expropriation is not included.  Give the value of land ($500,00 + per acre) in the target area this needs to be incorporated to allow comparisons with alternatives. Again, I say:  how can this project be compared to alternatives?

When I have had the opportunity to talk with the Minister about my concerns I was assured that this is only an environmental assessment to select the route; that it is not a decision to build. This may be true, today; but, someday, there will be a decision whether to build or not, and the information at hand will be incomplete.

I believe the GTA West Corridor represents far more risk to King than benefits and I don’t believe it is a solution for a significant problem for Ontario.   If you want more information on the project go the search button at bottom right of my home page and type in GTA West; my previous posts have links to reports.  And here is the Staff Report.