Latest Highway 7/8 route not better
Contrary a Point of View which appeared in The Beacon Herald, most people are unhappy with MTO's path of least resistance.
The comments in the paper are beyond absurd that a swing road south of Shakespeare is the lesser of two evils as this path forces the road not just around Shakespeare, but to continue for 9 kilometres through highly- productive farm land all the way to Stratford.
This option not only destroys quality farm land, but also brings added cost to all the farm businesses, as it restricts normal farm movement to other properties which are vital parts of their operation.
Farms are no longer single parcels of land, but many parcels, both owned and rented. A farmer needs this to be competitive but most of all good land stewards; rotating crops and wise use of animal compost.
In terms that non-farmers can understand this section of road would take out approximately 530 acres. If it were all planted in wheat, at 42 loaves of bread per bushel, you would lose 1,335,600 loaves of bread per year.
As The Beacon Herald article said but reversed. Logic would dictate that it needs to take a route that will have the least amount of negative impact. To that end, the RURAL route should be off the table and enter Shakespeare instead.
As for other vital information on the MTO and the study team, they have a huge list of guidelines to help them find a preferred route. They have failed on almost every one!
Guideline #1. Efficient use shall be made of existing and planned infrastructure -(not making efficient use of existing hwy 7&8).
#2. Encourage more compact communities with services, shops, and businesses. -(Shakespeare will become a ghost town by redirecting traffic around the village).
#3. Curb urban sprawl as best possible -(they are encouraging urban sprawl with a new Highway 7&8).
#4. Preserve green space and agriculture lands - (they are doing anything but with this new route).
#5. Cut down on car dependency -(they are encouraging more commuters).
#6. Contribute to better air quality -- (encouraging more cars at a higher rate of speed, this goes totally against the government's Kyoto accord agreement.)
#7. Spur transit investment -(the highway discourages transit investment).
#8 Promote a culture of conservation -(they are failing by promoting commuters to go further).
#9. Reduce reliance on any single mode of transportation -(again, encouraging more car use).
#10. Revitalize downtowns -(neither Shakespeare nor the city of Stratford's downtowns will be revitalized with the new preferred route).
These guidelines are quoted from the Study Team's Report B. The most important guideline which is mentioned many times and is in their stated purpose is to address the needs of the analysis area.
Here we have a study group that is on their fourth try. At first they said we needed a 400-series style road going around New Hamburg, Shakespeare, and Stratford because that is what we needed!
When people questioned their logic they soon backed off. In reality we have a traffic count of 9,800 vehicles per day (VPD), on an existing road that can handle 17,000 VPD and if they do a good job of up grading the existing road to four lanes (they already own most of the land.) We would have a safer road that can handle in the range of 32,000-38,000 VPD. This will more than address the needs well past their 30 year projection!
Some may be upset, but this route beats the alternative!
Paul Gras
RR 4 Stratford
No comments:
Post a Comment