kamira51
Active Member
I hope so, part of the reason why I voted for him was because of this highway.
|
|
|
innsertnamehere
Superstar
I doubt it. It'll delay it by a few years and perhaps see a few design tweaks.. the big question is if the highway can clear the Federal EA process in time to allow for it to reach procurement by 2026, assuming Ford will lose the next election.
Haljackey
Active Member
Seeing Brampton go full PC is quite a statement. I guess they really want this highway?
Doesn't the province have supreme authority over this? The EA and federal review could pose hurdles for sure, but the province decides in the end. I'd say 2026 is too far out. Douggie needs shovels in the ground by 2025 and full construction underway in 2026. That way the project would be too expensive to cancel and thus would be political suicide for anyone opposing it.
(London did our part- we went full NDP again. Not sure what's up with the rest of the province
)
Doesn't the province have supreme authority over this? The EA and federal review could pose hurdles for sure, but the province decides in the end. I'd say 2026 is too far out. Douggie needs shovels in the ground by 2025 and full construction underway in 2026. That way the project would be too expensive to cancel and thus would be political suicide for anyone opposing it.
(London did our part- we went full NDP again. Not sure what's up with the rest of the province
)
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Normally the province does but the Federal EA is a new thing in the country and pulls some of that authority away from the province. I doubt it will force the cancellation of the project, the problem is more so one of timing. I'm not sure how long the Federal EA process takes to complete, but given that this will likely have a year+ long procurement process, it needs to be done relatively quickly so that this can have it's P3 contract close prior to the next election if it's going to happen.Seeing Brampton go full PC is quite a statement. I guess they really want this highway?
Doesn't the province have supreme authority over this? The EA and federal review could pose hurdles for sure, but the province decides in the end. I'd say 2026 is too far out. Douggie needs shovels in the ground by 2025 and full construction underway in 2026. That way the project would be too expensive to cancel and thus would be political suicide for anyone opposing it.
(London did our part- we went full NDP again. Not sure what's up with the rest of the province
That assumes of course that Ford won't win again, and that the Liberals will still oppose the highway next election cycle. Neither of which are guarantees.
Ward8
Active Member
You never know.. Mike Harris filled in holes that had already been dug for the original Eglinton subway.
This will be an interesting issue to see play out. The 413 is a polarizing issue and there is a well organized opposition to it. There is a bizarre alliance between environmentalists, urbanists, and NIMBYs, who oppose the highway for different reasons. Some see it as bad planning, others are terrified of their communities changing. That said, building a highway seems like a prudent way to alleviate congestion to the average joe. I don't feel that the election gives us much insight into broad public opinion. Turnout was apparently a record low, and the majority of voters chose parties that are anti 413, though that's a weak correlation.
They might be able to bull it through, but I'm not convinced that this is a settled issue. It's anybodies guess as to how this plays out.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
one could argue that all the areas where the highway is proposed to run all voted PC - including many Brampton ridings which were previously NDP as proof of wider support of it too.
At the end of the day the PCs were duly elected under our democratic system and the 413 was a key item of their campaign - as organized as opposition groups are, the real deciding factor on issues in our democracy is a general election and the people have spoken on that.
The question now is not whether the highway has support or not, as clearly some level of substantial support exists, it's whether the strong lobbyist groups against it can get to the highway before it gets too far along. And that's a very valid question.
ericmacm
Active Member
Regarding the Federal EA process, the details of what is going on is highlighted on the 413 website. Ontario basically has to prepare preliminary materials, including the Initial Project Description for submission to the Impact Assessment Agency. The Impact Assessment Agency then uses this information to consult with local stakeholders/public and prepare a Summary of Issues based on valid concerns. The summary is sent back to Ontario and they must come up with a Detailed Project Description that shows how they are going to address the Summary of Issues. If the Agency is not satisfied, that triggers the Federal EA.
Long story short, the Federal EA process seems to give the province the opportunity to prove that they are doing the appropriate due diligence before a full EA is triggered. I would consider it incredibly unlikely that Ontario ends up triggering the full Federal EA. The question is how long this initial process takes. The process was announced in May of 2021, so it has been longer than a full year so far. I can't imagine that this initial process takes more than a couple of years at most. Additionally, considering the fact that the Provincial EA is still ongoing simultaneously, it may potentially not even impact the timeline.
Long story short, the Federal EA process seems to give the province the opportunity to prove that they are doing the appropriate due diligence before a full EA is triggered. I would consider it incredibly unlikely that Ontario ends up triggering the full Federal EA. The question is how long this initial process takes. The process was announced in May of 2021, so it has been longer than a full year so far. I can't imagine that this initial process takes more than a couple of years at most. Additionally, considering the fact that the Provincial EA is still ongoing simultaneously, it may potentially not even impact the timeline.
ShonTron
Moderator
Brampton flipping entirely to the PCs is still a bit of a shock to me – and I don’t think the 413 was a big part of it either way. I think it was just part of the malaise with low voter turnout that benefited the Cons, plus Ford spending a lot of time and money targeting Brampton seats – finally supporting things like the 2nd hospital, and the medical school – after screwing it bad in the first 3 years.
11th
Senior Member
On the other hand, if Brampton citizens are that much against the 413, then more of them should've voted for the NDP incumbents; maybe the highway isn't that big of an issue to them, or they are just indifferent about the whole thing.
cd concept
Senior Member
I think the best solutions to protect the wetlands and main waterway areas from minimal damage. Is to either tunnel under or suspension bridge over it. To keep environmentalists etc somewhat happy and also add some character to the ravine areas.
Deadpool X
Senior Member
That would simply make the highway too uneconomical to begin with.
cd concept
Senior Member
Why?
DirectionNorth
Active Member
Tunnels and bridges are expensive.
cd concept
Senior Member
And so is moving earth, dumping alot of gravel stone etc on to the ground to raise and level the highway off. A viaduct style bridge in sensitive areas like the marsh and valleys areas is the way to go. China has high speed rail viaducts several storeys high running above farmland etc. Hardly disturbing the land except for the pylons that hold the viaduct railway underneath it.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
The area is mostly flat land, so other than the creeks (where you'd probably see a bridge), the bridges are extra cost. A bridge in sensitive areas > earth fill in sensitive areas, but my position is still that no highway (or at least a scaled down version with stronger development protections) > bridges in sensitive areas, given that my issue with this project (and our transport policy in general) is mostly land-use.