HawthorneVillager.com

Hell no, we can't grow
http://www.independentfreepress.com/geo ... ticle/8506

....To be sure, the main numbers in the plan are staggering-- 312,000 more people for Halton by 2031. More frightening is the fact that Burlington and Oakville will be built out by 2021 leaving between 100,000-150,000 people to be accommodated in Halton Hills and Milton alone....

.....The Province hasn't even met the current funding requirements of Halton and admits it is playing "catch-up". We're certain McGuinty and company don't have the extra $8.6 billion needed for Halton or the money that Durham, York and other municipalities would require.

Halton municipalities are right to send the province a "Hell no, we won't grow" message at this time. We hope other regions join this fight.

Okay, so you just restated the article....did you have a rebuttal or agree with it? Let's hope the FIB-erals listen to Halton this fall and let's hope the politicians do come through and put some big-time pressure on them during election time.

I don't know.
Something is wrong here.
http://www.independentfreepress.com/geo ... ticle/8513
because I agree with this one:
http://www.independentfreepress.com/geo ... ticle/8501

This seems rather selfish. Especially coming from people on this board. Before HV the people of Milton didn't want to grow. Then the big pipe and the builders started growing, and here we are, the unwanted new neighbors, and we have the audacity to say "well its okay that were here, but now no more." I call bullshit.

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

The above is from the article, no sh*t we didn't build very fast in 25 years, there wasn't sufficient water in the well water systems. I'm not even sure that number is particularly meaningful, as that growth was all in the last 5 years:


2006 58,700
2005 53,200
2001 31,471

http://www.milton.ca/template.php?Catal ... growth.htm

Growth is good for Milton, its good for jobs, and its good for the environment, it may not be good for individuals, but its better overall then sprawling uncontrolled growth in all municipalities.

There is a legitimate concern that the provincial government provide sufficient funding to make work their plan of centralized growth, and that is a question for the election.

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

I agree with you completely gc, I just hope we can get some more funding so that we won't have to drive down country roads in a budding town, etc, etc. I admit I'm part of the problem as I'm one of those that has moved to Milton recently. So are most people on here. So let's stop complaining, live with it and work together so that growth moves forward in a reasonable, responsible fashion. Growth doesn't equate to out of control pollution, crime, etc like is often mentioned on here. I welcome debate on this but let's be adults about it.

forget the country roads, I just want one advance green, just one please

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

Actually residential construction is a huge environmental problem.

It starts off by removing green space and displacing natural inhabitants.
Consumes natural resources and requires tremendous amounts of energy to manufacture and move materials.
Produces a huge amount of waste.

Sure you may get a more environmental friendly home, but will it offset the amount of energy used and waste materials needed to construct it in the first place?

_________________
Professional - Audio - Video - Data - Security - Central Vac - Insured - Trained - Certified
http://www.phand.ca/

I suppose good for the environment in this context means, better, still bad, but better.

At the moment peoples hunger for there own home is insatiable. Given the option of a) focused development of communities, new roads, and new comercial in a limited number of areas or b) unchecked development in all areas. I feel the later will lead to more wasted resources for roads, sewers, and land clearing. While the total number of home remain the same, the arterial infrastructure can not be streamlined.

Ideally we should include more medium and high density residential, but of course, people don't want appartments and condo's in there back yards.

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

Well getting 300K+ right here is good for teaching business. Job secure for sure? Not so sure if it is because it is no money to build schools here right even now. And they have to lay off more people working for schools and cut some programs to be able to deal with these crowds.
I have to commute every day to different parts of Toronto. For me this is going to be mission impossible. Because, liberals and NDP are not going to build any another 401 or 407 or 427 to accommodate this half-a-million. Instead they want to destroy the Gardiner Express and make us pay every time we are driving into the money pit named Toronto. Hopefully it will force all kind of business to our corner. But because we and our business must pay more taxes to accommodate this 300K+ it is getting less competitive and more jobs are going away from the province and Canada.
The only one environmentally friendly environment I know for sure it is natural areas. Forests and fields. Without any buildings.

That is why I am in favour of concentrated development, those homes will be built, rather in one place then all over. I agree money is needed from the province to build the infrastructure, but I'd rather it be built once not once per area. We just need more high density.

The only other solution I can see, for the sake of the planet, is voluntary population elimination. We can even use these volunteers to provide food and fertilizer.

Anyone want to volunteer?

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

So concentration, population elimination and volunteers to take care about it.
I'm afraid it sounds like one issue from the past.

While you are alluding to Nazi Germany, I'm afraid you miss my reference to Soilent Green. My point stands, are you willing to not have kids to prevent the need for furture development?

_________________
14C - Lot 82 - Upland B
Roleplaying Game Software for your iPhone: RPGTouch

I prefer to have three to keep us at the same level and compensate adults who are not able to reproduce themselves because they are selfish, limited by nature or mental.
I prefer to limit this 300K to 100K or less because according to this article it is going to be immigration and not internal reproduction. Because immigration is now 60% of highly educated and experienced workers and most of them are ending up in Tim Hortons Team. And this is at the same time while high-skills and production work is going to countries where immigrants like me are coming from.
Some of my friends are with internationally recognized MBA and incredible international business level experience yet jobless here in GTA, because they don't want to work as the janitors. And every time it is open position somewhere around GTA it will be at least ten people as the candidates.
Some places I'm working for in Toronto it is 200 people per one opening.
More and more people are on welfare and food bank; so if Ontario Liberals wants more people like this they have to ask this money from Ottawa.

Am I reading this correctly? Did something get lost in the translation here?

_________________
Professional - Audio - Video - Data - Security - Central Vac - Insured - Trained - Certified
http://www.phand.ca/