New Highway 413 Yea or Nay? | Page 8 | GTAMotorcycle.com

New Highway 413 Yea or Nay?

Should they build highway 413?

  • Yes, any new highway in GTA is a good highway

    Votes: 29 76.3%

  • No, it won't help traffic and its bad for the environment.

    Votes: 9 23.7%
  • Total voters
    38
backmarkerducati said:
It would be nice if they could build a highway and then actually open it....

driving.ca

(Not So) Open Road: ON Highway 427 Extension remains unused due to legal battles

Province cites safety concerns, builder disagrees
driving.ca driving.ca
Click to expand...
I have no idea if the concerns are justified or not. They probably want to avoid what happened with the LINC where it got built and opened, then killed a bunch of people while reports saying it was dangerous and didn't meet safety standards were suppressed. Or Ontario is just stalling to avoid paying the last 25% of the bill.
 
mimico_polak said:
This burns me so much. The thing was done, usable, and a good extension (albeit short)...and then I drove by one day and the asphalt is torn off back to Hwy 7. Like WTF! Years of building, a year or 2 of use....and ripped up again.
Click to expand...
You get the opportunity to try to avoid similar government waste. For all of our sakes I hope you are successful.
 
mimico_polak said:
This burns me so much. The thing was done, usable, and a good extension (albeit short)...and then I drove by one day and the asphalt is torn off back to Hwy 7. Like WTF! Years of building, a year or 2 of use....and ripped up again.
Click to expand...
So the section of the 427 from #7 to Zenway is also closed? I used to use that section ten years ago as part of my commute into TO. I'm guessing the new extension didn't include an off-ramp at Zenway, so that's why it got included in this closure. Once it does open I might have to take a run down there to see the changes.
 
GreyGhost said:
You get the opportunity to try to avoid similar government waste. For all of our sakes I hope you are successful.
Click to expand...
Trust me I get frustrated every day with the level of red tape around...frustrating as EFF. But I keep beating my head against it.

Massive difference going from private to public...eye opening is the best description.
 
Douggie is still pushing forward. Opposition is making some truly assinine arguments.

Mike Schreiner equates emissions over 30 years with emissions from a year and freaks out that it is more. I'm also not sure that it creates emissions or if it relocates them from 400/401.

He says this will save 30 seconds. Eff that, going from north to west or vice versa this will save 15 minutes much of the time.

He says this will pave over farmland which affects food security. How much of that 2000 acres is growing food? I suspect 100 acres or less. It will be corn (for ethanal/oil) and soybeans (for oil) for the majority.

As with most of these causes, there are lots of good arguments that can be used. Resorting to bs crazy ideas makes you look like a moron and people discount any valid points you may have included.

toronto.citynews.ca

Proposed Highway 413 sparks intense debate at Queen's Park - CityNews Toronto

The proposed Highway 413 would cost $6 billion and connect Highway 400 with Highway 401/407 interchange in Vaughan, Ontario.
toronto.citynews.ca toronto.citynews.ca

“Highway 413 alone will unleash 17.4 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions between now and 2050,” argued Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner. “That is more pollution than the City of Toronto produced in 2018. All of this damage for what? To save people 30 seconds.”

On Monday, Schreiner issued a statement calling on Ford to cancel the proposal, saying Highway 413 will pave over 2,000 acres of farmland “at a time when food security is more important than ever.”
 
It's not just a chunk of farmland that grows a crop of grain or corn. It's the entire ecosystem and pollinators that are at risk.
A little research is quite eye opening.
 
Wingboy said:
It's not just a chunk of farmland that grows a crop of grain or corn. It's the entire ecosystem and pollinators that are at risk.
A little research is quite eye opening.
Click to expand...
And that is one of the arguments that is valid and important and I would hope that the leader of the green party could understand and articulate that point. Instead he chose to try fearmongering and pretending this destroys valuable edible crops.
 
JZ67 said:
I agree with both bikepike and GreyGhost. The solution is multifaceted. We need better public transit connecting the 905 to 416. We also need to relieve congestion on the 400 series highway. A good PT system will help but doesn't work alone.

The 407 could be that answer but using it is too expensive. Buying back the portion owned by private investors and/or reducing the rates will do what the 413 is supposed to do.

Silly story. I found myself on a toll road in Indiana and checked to see how long I was going to be on it. GPS said 80 miles. I figured I was in for a pretty hefty bill. Got to the toll booth and it was $1.95.

Who wouldn't take the 407 if their daily commute was a few bucks rather than 10's or 20's of dollars daily.
Click to expand...
Canada Pension Plan (CPP) owns over 50% of the 407. Even though CPP is mandated to invest in things that are both good for Canadians and good for the environment, both of which it's easy to argue that the 407 is not. (Psst it's about the money)
 
timtune said:
Canada Pension Plan (CPP) owns over 50% of the 407. Even though CPP is mandated to invest in things that are both good for Canadians and good for the environment, both of which it's easy to argue that the 407 is not. (Psst it's about the money)
Click to expand...
At least we are paying that portion of the extortion to ourselves. The remainder goes to qc or overseas.
 
....
Ok let's see

We have too much traffic. So we build another highway. People hear about it so start using the highway and more cars come on it. Before long, that new highway becomes filled with traffic. So now instead of one highway with traffic, we have 2.

Same thing goes with adding lanes. Until we get a system that is more appealing than inefficiently taking individual cars, we'll just keep getting more traffic.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't it be more prudent to spend our monies on getting people out of cars and into public transportation?
Instead of building a new highway west, how about continuing GO transit to London and beyond and MAYBE get some public transportation into the north where there is NONE.
 
bitzz said:
Wouldn't it be more prudent to spend our monies on getting people out of cars and into public transportation?
Instead of building a new highway west, how about continuing GO transit to London and beyond and MAYBE get some public transportation into the north where there is NONE.
Click to expand...
Imagine this, instead of building a highway, you build a railway with frequent trips that connects with the existing GO transit stations. Or imagine this instead of just having a full 3 lane highway, you build one that has maybe 2 lanes for cars and one for rapid bus transit that doesn't have to deal with cars and traffic. with limited stops (that connects with other transit hubs). OR IMAGINE, having a mix of the 3. 1 train that goes fast and stops at maybe 3-4 stops. A rapid transit bus that connects to stops in between and a lane or 2 for cars.

Obviously this isn't happening in a GTA near you. This highway is more a vote-getter than a thoughtful addition to our infrastructure.

In the end as we keep developing that area, you will get more cars taking that highway, who will end up being stuck on the southern highways (401, 427, 404, 400, etc) and that will just keep making the situation worse for everyone
 
bitzz said:
Wouldn't it be more prudent to spend our monies on getting people out of cars and into public transportation?
Instead of building a new highway west, how about continuing GO transit to London and beyond and MAYBE get some public transportation into the north where there is NONE.
Click to expand...
Probably not. Our preferred built form of acres of single family homes is almost impossible to service effectively with public transit. You just dont have the density to make it work.
 
LePhillou said:
Imagine this, instead of building a highway, you build a railway with frequent trips that connects with the existing GO transit stations. Or imagine this instead of just having a full 3 lane highway, you build one that has maybe 2 lanes for cars and one for rapid bus transit that doesn't have to deal with cars and traffic. with limited stops (that connects with other transit hubs). OR IMAGINE, having a mix of the 3. 1 train that goes fast and stops at maybe 3-4 stops. A rapid transit bus that connects to stops in between and a lane or 2 for cars.

Obviously this isn't happening in a GTA near you. This highway is more a vote-getter than a thoughtful addition to our infrastructure.

In the end as we keep developing that area, you will get more cars taking that highway, who will end up being stuck on the southern highways (401, 427, 404, 400, etc) and that will just keep making the situation worse for everyone
Click to expand...
Reminds me of this:
 
LePhillou said:
Imagine this, instead of building a highway, you build a railway with frequent trips that connects with the existing GO transit stations. Or imagine this instead of just having a full 3 lane highway, you build one that has maybe 2 lanes for cars and one for rapid bus transit that doesn't have to deal with cars and traffic. with limited stops (that connects with other transit hubs). OR IMAGINE, having a mix of the 3. 1 train that goes fast and stops at maybe 3-4 stops. A rapid transit bus that connects to stops in between and a lane or 2 for cars.

Obviously this isn't happening in a GTA near you. This highway is more a vote-getter than a thoughtful addition to our infrastructure.

In the end as we keep developing that area, you will get more cars taking that highway, who will end up being stuck on the southern highways (401, 427, 404, 400, etc) and that will just keep making the situation worse for everyone
Click to expand...
Bus rapid transit can work well if you have density for it (but not enough for rail). As with most forms of public transit, the last mile screws it in the suburbs. Unless they are forced to (eg. sky high parking costs at work or no parking spots at home), most people in the suburbs aren't going to walk blocks to a bus stop where they then wait quite a while for a bus to take them to the BRT station where the rest of their trip should be reasonably efficient. If you drove instead, many people would be at work before they even got on BRT given the walking time, need to arrive early in case the bus was early and slow bus ride with stops every block. If local busses ran much more frequently (say every five minutes), that makes things much better as you don't need to worry about missing a specific time but even running every half hour, they are mostly empty, there is no way suburbs would supply the volume of riders required for a functional public transit system. In the burbs, public transit is functionally a supplement for people that can't afford a vehicle. The service delivered is the minimum possible to minimize the associated costs while pretending a transit alternative exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom