Transportfan
Senior Member
I'd hardly compare the 413 to Pearson. The 413 would take traffic away from Toronto.
|
|
|
I'd hardly compare the 413 to Pearson. The 413 would take traffic away from Toronto.
Coolstar
Senior Member
Just like how the 407 was supposed to do exactly that.
ARG1
Senior Member
Yes, however that failed because of privatization leading it to be used as a luxury alternative rather than a bypass, not because its a fundamentally broke chain of logic.
Transportfan
Senior Member
The 413 comes nowhere near Toronto. It's purpose is to get traffic from the 401 to the 400 north.
Student99
Active Member
Stop. The. Presses.
Did you poll people? How did you arrive at THIS assertion . I know "plenty" of people who work 40-hours a week, and drive and have commutes who would love to see this highway built instead of wasting their time stuck in traffic.
Northern Light
Superstar
Why the snark?
Why not calmly, and respectfully ask questions?
You do yourself no favours.
Do you think suburban politicians who have voted against this highway have no idea what their constituents think?
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I'd love to hear what reason the general public has for opposing this project. The general public doesn't understand technical concepts such as induced demand, however given the opposition from area municipalities, I'd wager that this project isn't particularly popular amongst those who are informed about it.
I'd imagine that environmental concerns would be the top reason why the general population is opposed to it.
Notably, the Pickering warehouse that was proposed by Amazon, and supported by the Provincial Government via an MZO, was just cancelled due to public concerns around the environment.
Student99
Active Member
In some cases, yeah, I do. That's how politics works. Politicians don't always follow their own direct constituents.
Student99
Active Member
You do realize that the farmland of the area was created by clearcutting forests decades ago, right? It already isn't the original environment.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
So we should destroy it even more?
Northern Light
Superstar
Politicians, by and large, tend towards what serves their re-election. There certainly are exceptions. But the onus is on you to prove this is one.
Northern Light
Superstar
Again, you feel the need to be insulting for no apparent reason.
As someone who has worked as a professional environmentalist in the past; I certainly wish much of what we now enjoy as 'class 1' farmland had been less altered topographically, and more of it kept natural.
However, that's done.
We also need to eat.
The 'class 1' farmland not only provides an incredible yield agriculturally, but also remains fertile in a way that would make restoration to forests, meadows or wetlands quite plausible should that be desired.
By replacing same with a highway, and by ensuring greater and faster development of land around said highway, we remove a source of food.
One that can't simply be replaced by cutting down more forest further north, as Ontario changes from the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Lowlands to the Canadian Shield as one goes further north.
Shield country is much lower nutrient and nowhere near as fertile.
Call me selfish if you must, but I'm rather partial to food; good food, at reasonable prices.
As such there is an inherent value in the land as agricultural space.
There is also a value in it being comparatively easy to restore.
Once you make it a highway, and litter it with sprawl that becomes substantially more difficult and expensive.
While our food supply is also diminished, and food costs rise.
To me, the trade is a poor one.
***
Just as a supplement to my personal bio, I've also worked in business, as an executive and board member; I own a car, and have had my license for almost 3 decades.
Last edited:
ARG1
Senior Member
These votes are incredibly close, in Vaughan it was a 5-4 vote. That is by no means indicative of any majority of thought and at best is indicative of the city being extremely divided on the issue. Then we can add to the fact that one or 2 councillors might've voted based off what they felt was the right thing to do rather than what is the most popular, there is certainly a strong level of doubt. To add to that point, yes politicians do what they need to do to get re-elected, but there is certainly some leeway. I highly doubt any of these politicians would lose their seats simply because of how they voted on a highway that they ultimately have no say in and is at best a stunt to virtue signal. These are also local politicians and unlike federal or even provincial politicians, are usually quite comfortable and are quite unlikely to get replaced.
Student99
Active Member
That wasn't an insult, that was a question.
If adequate farmland is an issue, since you and others here are very pro-densification of urban centers, then why not advocate for vertical farming? Or rooftop farming?
I don't know why everyone is also saying that if we build this highway, it is condoning sprawl and automatically bring sprawl. Is it not possible to build this with legislation to prevent extra sprawl around it? We have plenty of highways that go through greenbelt without sprawl around them there.
I've driven all across the US, which has an EXCELLENT system of interconnected highways through the interstates, and many of them do not have sprawl around them. It is sad how our terrible highway system compares.
******
Also FYI Caledon approved a whole lot more residential development and a Go station this week, despite now being opposed to the highway. So, you see, it's very possible we could end up with more sprawl and NOT have a needed highway, and have more congestion on our streets.
jamincan
Active Member
Have you paid attention to Ford at all? The only reason he is prioritizing this highway is for his developer friends. It would lead to huge swaths of agricultural land being paved over.
Agricultural land is valuable for a whole host of reasons. Just because it isn't native Carolinian forest doesn't mean that you can replace it with a subdivision without massive environmental repercussions.