Monday, Feb. 10 is TMP day in King.  2-4 PM there is a information meeting for public at Municipal Centre; this is excellent opportunity to talk directly with Staff and consultants, look at maps.  5-6PM is a working Council meeting; public can attend to hear presentations to Council.  6PM is council and 1st agenda item is the draft 2020 TMP; public can make deputations to Council.  Target is to approve the TMP at Feb. 24 Council meeting. As this plan’s scope is all our roads and active transportation ( sidewalks, trails) it is not surprising that its a big report.   Here is brief report reviewing background and objectives.  Here is the draft TMP. Its evident that residents’ feedback given during 2019 consultattions has been heard; the draft may not satisfy or please but it has been heard and considered and sometimes I think the draft will satisfy.  I am also pleased with the far reaching outlook; even though its objective is to identify transportation needs to 2031 there is perspective offered about needs beyond given current population forecasts from York Region. I have questions and concerns and will be asking questions on Monday.

As I said the draft TMP does include active transportation; there is a significant section beginning at page 78 of 172 which is very informative as to current state and what it could be.  But it also identifies that more work needs to be done to have appropriate policies to guide implementation etc; specifically recommends need for masterplan focused on this.  Given that the very rough estimate of capital requirements to achieve a quality active transportation network by 2031 is huge, I agree that a masterplan is required.  I strongly encourage readers who want or do walk and cycle to review this section and provide feedback.

I am glad to see a more nuanced classifiction of rural arterial roads.  Classifying Kingscross Drive which has no pedestrian features as an arterial road didn’t seem appropriate and a new classification, “signature collector” has been proposed.  I will be following up as to whether Collard is not also a candidate for this.

There are numerous points/comments made about the 15th SDRD west of Keele.  The idea of opening it up through to HWY 400 is understandably controversial:  on one hand it is perceived as the solution to congestion at Keele/King Road and volume of traffic on King Road; on the other hand there is the reality of the important environmental features which would be negatively impacted by such and concern about impact on the 100+private wells in the Kingscross community.

For me, there is great value in this draft TMP as it puts “everything” out.

All maps identify that it is special study area and and that EA is required. Identifies that YR’s TMP  shows widening of 15th between Bathurst and Hwy 400 from 2 to 4 lanes for 2031-2041 and it recommends that King should be advocating to advance because of capacity issues at Keele/King Road by 2031. I assume that this is what drives the short term recommendations in the draft TMP that the EA should commence; as I believe that this is a YR responsibility so I don’t see why  King should fund it.

And, the draft TMP does identify that decisions on the GTA West Corridor (Hwy 413) may have an impact on assessments of the traffic volume which would be eliminated by having 15th SDRD go through to Hwy 400.  Specifically this new highway were to be built and its western terminum was in the King Vaughan area that may obsolete the need for an interchange at 15th.

As everyone knows that traffic is a significant issue in terms of impact of quality of life I draft strongly encourage reqaders to review this draft TMP and if you can come to the Monday meetings.  Intent of Monday is to learn and understand it; Council will be making a decision on Monday Feb. 24 as to whether it should be approved.