• The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) launched the Highway 413 Project (at that time, referred to as the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) West Study), publishing Ontario Government Notices in 16 newspapers across the preliminary study area (PSA).
• In January, a Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) and Municipal Advisory Group (MAG) were formed. Initial meetings were held with both advisory groups to review the Draft Terms of Reference (ToR) – a document that provided a framework to guide the preparation of the Environmental Assessment (EA).
• On March 15, 2007, individuals on the project contact list were notified by e-mail and/or letter of the release of the Draft ToR for review and comment.
• During the nine-week review and comment period for the Draft ToR, the Project Team met with local municipal Councils and committees, engaged with Indigenous communities, and held a Public Information Centre (PIC) at four different locations across the preliminary study area.

.

• On March 4, 2008, after a ministry review period, the Ontario Minister of the Environment (MOE) approved the ToR for the Individual Environmental Assessment study.
• June 2008 marked the formation of the Community Advisory Group (CAG). The group’s members include representation from interest groups, organizations, and individuals in and around the study area. The CAG enables direct communication between the community and the Project Team, and members are asked to:
  • Provide comments and suggestions on study findings.
  • Provide insight and discussion on potential issues, challenges, and opportunities.
  • Participate in developing strategies to address the issues and opportunities.
• An additional CAG meeting was held in December 2008 to discuss different types of transportation problems.

.

• Stage 1 of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) West study (now Highway 413 Project) was initiated following the process outlined in the Environmental Assessment ToR. Stage 1 focused on addressing long-term inter-regional transportation problems and opportunities and considering alternative solutions to address these issues as part of developing an integrated, multi-modal transportation system that enables efficient movement of people and goods and provides better economic and transportation linkages between Urban Growth Centres in the preliminary study area.
• A key element of Stage 1 was to determine if significant investments in other modes (such as transit, freight rail / inter-modal, marine, air, etc.) in the region would offset the need for a new highway corridor, or if new infrastructure would be pivotal in keeping up with the projected population and employment growth.
• In February 2009 a Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting was held to discuss transportation problems and the preliminary study area. Another was held that July to receive feedback on the proposed process to generate and evaluate alternatives and input to the types of alternatives that should be considered. A third CAG meeting was held in November to continue to receive feedback on the generated transportation system improvement alternatives.
• February 2009 marked the first Municipal Advisory Group (MAG) meeting; this group was formed to provide input to the Project Team from a municipal and regional perspective, and the initial meeting was hosted to discuss transportation problems and opportunities in the preliminary study area. A second MAG meeting was held in June 2009 to receive feedback on the proposed process to generate and evaluate alternatives and acquire input to the types of alternatives that should be considered. A final MAG meeting for the year was held in November 2009 to receive feedback on the generated alternatives and the assessment process used.
• 2009 was also the year in which the Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) was established. There were three RAAG meetings throughout 2009, in February, June, and November, which focused on discussing transportation problems and opportunities, receiving feedback on the proposed process to generate and evaluate alternatives, and receiving feedback on the generated alternatives and assessment process used (respectively).
• In March 2009, a Public Information Centre (PIC) was held to identify transportation problems and opportunities across the region.
• In December 2009, another PIC was held to assess transportation alternatives that address the problems and opportunities. These findings informed the Project Team’s development, assessment and evaluation of a range of Area Transportation System Alternatives to meet the identified problems and opportunities within the preliminary study area. Elements that were reviewed when identifying alternatives included:
  • Marketplace/competition issues
  • Infrastructure
  • Environmental protection
  • Security
  • Innovation

.

• As Stage 1 of the Environmental Assessment continued, in June 2010 a Public Information Centre (PIC) and meetings with Indigenous communities were held to gain feedback on selecting a preferred transportation alternative(s) and recommending a multi-modal strategy for the preliminary study area.
• A Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting was held in May 2010 to present and receive feedback on the preliminary planning alternatives. An additional CAG meeting was held in September of that year to provide an update on the project’s status and present and receive feedback on the Draft Transportation Development Strategy (TDS).
• A Municipal Advisory Group (MAG) meeting was held in May 2010 to present and receive feedback on the preliminary planning alternatives, the short-listed transportation alternatives, and new transportation corridors.
• A Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) meeting was also held in May of 2010 and focused on presenting and receiving feedback on the preliminary planning alternatives.

• As a culmination of Stage 1 work, in February 2011 a draft Transportation Development Strategy (TDS) was released. The purpose of the TDS was to document the decision-making process in development of the strategy, including assessment and evaluation of the area transportation system alternatives, and recommendations of alternatives to carry forward.
• A Municipal Advisory Group (MAG) meeting was held in April 2011 to present and discuss the Draft TDS, with particular focus on the Preliminary Route Planning Study Area, to facilitate municipal review of the report and discuss any preliminary municipal comments. A similar Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) meeting was held in the same month to facilitate agency review of the report and discuss any preliminary agency comments.
• A Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting was held in May 2011 to present and discuss the Draft TDS, with particular focus on the proposed new corridor.

.

• In June 2012, a Public Information Centre (PIC) was held to present findings from additional analysis in the Halton area, per comments received on the Draft Transportation Development Strategy (TDS), and to present the updated multi-modal strategy for the preliminary study area.
• It was concluded that even with significant investments in public transit expansion and other modes in the region, a new highway corridor would still be needed to keep up with the projected population and employment growth.
• A Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting was held in June 2012 to review the findings of the additional analysis in the Halton area and draft recommendations, and provide an update on the overall study, its schedule, and next steps.
• In November 2012, the final version of the TDS was issued. The Final TDS represented the conclusion of Environmental Assessment (EA) Stage 1 and set the foundation for EA Stage 2.

• Stage 2 of the Environmental Assessment (EA) Study was initiated in February 2014, and a notice of Study Commencement was issued. Building on the recommendations from Stage 1, the EA Study continued with a focus on identifying the route and developing the preliminary design for a new transportation corridor within the Route Planning Study Area. Other strategies outlined in the Transportation Development Strategy (TDS) would be implemented via other municipalities or projects.
• A Greenbelt Transportation Advisory Group (GTAG) was formed in 2014. The group includes representation from environmental interest groups, environmental ministries, and other Greenbelt experts. Members were asked to share information regarding key environmental and agricultural features, discuss potential impacts to sensitive features within the Greenbelt and discuss and generate mitigation strategies to be used. The first meeting was hosted in October of 2014, and focused on presenting a study overview and update, in addition to feedback on the Preliminary Short List of Route Alternatives within the Greenbelt.
• In September 2014, the Municipal Executive Advisory Group (MEAG) hosted their first meeting, where attendees discussed the study background, process and schedule, how to coordinate with municipal planning initiatives, and reviewed the Long List of Route Alternatives.
• Meetings continued throughout 2014 with the GTAG, Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) and Community Advisory Group (CAG), focusing on providing study overview and updates and requesting feedback on the Preliminary Short List of Route Alternatives.
• In 2014, two Municipal Advisory Group (MAG) meetings were held, in June and November, where the discussion centred on an overview of the study background, process and schedule, and feedback on the Preliminary Short List of Route Alternatives.
• Starting in December 2014, the Project Team reviewed and considered input received at and following the November/December 2014 Public Information Centre (PIC)s and began work to select the Technically Preferred Route.

• The Project commenced the background investigations, development and evaluation of the long list of route alternatives, development and evaluation of the short list of route alternatives, and recommendation of the Technically Preferred Route alternative.
• Community Workshops were held throughout 2014 and 2015. The workshops gave interested community members a variety of opportunities to provide input to the Project Team. The workshops focused on:
  • Providing an overview of the study objectives, process, and timelines.
  • Providing an opportunity for attendees to apply for participation in the Community Advisory Group (CAG) and the Greenbelt Transportation Advisory Group (GTAG).
  • Participating in interactive activities, including providing input on key issues and existing features within the study area to be considered in the development of the route and interchange alternatives, as well as providing input on the route location.
• Ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities and continued fieldwork studies.
• In May 2015, Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG), Municipal Advisory Group (MAG), CAG, and GTAG meetings were held to discuss the approach for evaluating the Short List of Route Alternatives and to discuss trade-offs in the west, central, and east sections of the study area.
• A Public Information Centre (PIC) was held on November 27, 2014 (Halton Region), December 2, 2014 (York Region), and December 4, 2014 (Peel Region). The purpose of the PIC was to present:
  • Study background and process
  • Existing conditions within the study area
  • Development and screening of the long list of route alternatives
  • Identification of the short list of route alternatives and potential interchange locations
  • The Focused Analysis Area
  • Factors and criteria for evaluating the short list of route alternatives.
• Fieldwork was undertaken to aid in the evaluation of the short list of planning alternatives.
  • Fish and Fish Habitat
  • Terrestrial Ecosystems
  • Groundwater
  • Contamination
  • Land Use
  •  Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes

• Project suspended by the provincial government of the day.
  • Prior to the suspension, the Project Team had identified a Technically Preferred Route but had not yet presented the route to the public at the next scheduled Public Information Centre.

• On June 19, 2019, the government announced that Environmental Assessment Stage 2 would be resumed from its point of suspension in 2015.
• To select the Technically Preferred Route in 2015, lead environmental and transportation specialists completed a comprehensive evaluation of each short list route alternative. Following the resumption of the study, the background information and evaluation was updated to include a review of recent policies and plans. The Technically Preferred Route identified in 2015 remained the same following the 2019 evaluation review.
• The second Public Information Centre (PIC) was held on September 19, 2019 (York Region), September 26, 2019 (Halton Region), and October 3, 2019 (Peel Region). The purpose of the PIC was to present:
  • Updates since study resumption
  • Study background and process
  • Assessment and Evaluation Process of the Route Alternatives
  • Draft Technically Preferred Route
  • Draft Technically Preferred Interchange Locations
  • Draft 2019 Focused Analysis Area
  • Community Value Plan (CVP) process.
• A CVP Meeting was held as part of the second PIC to incorporate public input on the future design of the new multimodal transportation corridor. Members of the CVP Team recommended design elements reflecting the social, cultural, historical and environmental interests of their communities. The CVP is focused on how best to implement the proposed new highway and transitway in the most context-sensitive manner, given the identified Preferred Route.
• In October 2019, a Municipal Executive Advisory Group (MEAG) meeting was held to review the Short List of Preferred Route Alternatives and to discuss the evaluation criteria for the selection of preferred interchange locations.
• In November 2019, Community Advisory Group (CAG), Municipal Advisory Group (MAG), and Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG) meetings were held to provide an overview of the evaluation of the short-listed route and interchange location alternatives, Technically Preferred Route, and 2019 Focused Analysis Area, as well as to discuss potential issues to inform the preliminary design of the Technically Preferred Route.
• A Greenbelt Transportation Advisory Group (GTAG) meeting was also hosted in November and covered the application of the Guidelines Planning and Design of the GTA West Corridor Through the Greenbelt, in addition to the topics covered in the CAG, MAG, and RAAG meeting of that same month.
• Continued public engagement occurred throughout the year, including ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities.

• Field studies continued to develop a deep understanding of the local natural environment and ensure minimal project impact. Field study and research areas included:
  • Fish and Fish Habitat
  • Terrestrial Ecosystems
  • Fluvial Geomorphology
  • Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes
• Based on new information received after the 2019 Public Information Centre (PIC)s, the Project Team developed additional route alternatives and undertook supplementary analysis on the routes and crossing of the Humber River in Section 8. Given the interdependencies, changes in Section 7 were also included in the supplementary analysis.
  • The route alignment through Section 8 was shifted northerly, considering the natural environment and associated community features, future development lands, and existing residential communities.
• In August 2020, the Preferred Route was released illustrating the route and interchange locations for the transportation corridor that will be developed to a preliminary design level of detail. The preliminary design will generally follow the Preferred Route but could deviate based on design constraints or mitigations.
• Another Community Value Plan (CVP) meeting was held on November 3, 2020, via the Zoom platform. Members of the public were invited to apply to be a member of the CVP Team at a PIC in 2019, and an open invitation was posted on the project website in fall 2020.
• Continued public engagement occurred throughout the year, including ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities.

• In 2021 there was progression on a variety of key project areas, including:
  • Continued identification of significant study area features.
  • Preliminary design of the Preferred Route commenced.
• On May 3, 2021, the Federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change designated the Highway 413 Project under the Federal Impact Assessment (IA) Act. Fieldwork was suspended while the Project Team established expectations and legislative requirements for the pre-Planning phase in consultation with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) and federal agencies.
• A Community Value Plan (CVP) meeting was held on May 20, 2021, via Zoom. Current CVP team members were invited to attend and an open invitation for new members was posted on the project website in early May 2021. At this CVP meeting, members provided comments on the Draft CVP including roll plans and design elements that illustrate the application of the CVP Toolkit along the highway and transitway.
• To provide an update on the project and to address community questions, the Highway 413 Project Team hosted a Community Engagement Webinar (CEW) on July 28, 2021, via Zoom. A second CEW was held on September 29, 2021. The same overview of the project was presented at both, followed by a question-and-answer period. Expert panelists from a variety of disciplines were in attendance to answer questions.
• On August 13, 2021, letters were sent to local Indigenous communities to inform them of the federal designation. All potentially impacted communities were invited to attend ongoing project meetings to provide feedback and ask questions.
• A third round of Public Information Centre (PIC)s were held virtually on December 7, 2021 (Peel Region), December 9, 2021 (York Region), and December 14, 2021 (Halton Region) to provide a study update, and to explain the Federal Impact Assessment (IA) process to help shape the content of the Initial Project Description (IPD).
• The PICs focused on sharing the reason for the Federal designation, reviewing the IA process, discussing the technical studies being added to the project, and obtaining feedback on the Project Team’s understanding of the socio-economic contexts of communities and the key issues raised by stakeholders and Indigenous communities.
• Continued public engagement occurred throughout the year, including ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities.

• As Stage 2 of the Environmental Assessment continued in 2022, progress was made in several key project areas, including:
  • Continued identification of significant study area features
  • Continued preliminary design of the Preferred Route, including initial mitigations for anticipated impacts.
  • Pre-planning for the Federal Impact Assessment (IA) Process.
• Field studies continued to further develop the understanding of the local natural environment and ensure minimal project impact. Field study and research areas included:
  • Fish and Fish Habitat
  • Terrestrial Ecosystems
  • Species at Risk (SAR) including the: Western Chorus Frog, Rapids Clubtail and the Redheaded Woodpecker
  • Fluvial Geomorphology
  • Land Use
  • Erosion and Sediment Control
  • Archaeology
  • Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes
  • Agriculture
  • Foundation Investigations
• Indigenous communities participated in the fieldwork as Community Field Liaisons.
• Continued public engagement occurred throughout the year, including ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities.

• In 2023 and beyond, Stage 2 of the Environmental Assessment (EA) continues. The Project Team expects to be able to further progress a variety of key areas, including:
  • Continued identification of significant study area features.
  • Submission of the Initial Project Description (IPD)
  • Advancing the preliminary design of the Preferred Route, including development of options for mitigating anticipated effects of the project.
  • A round of Public Information Centres.
• Field studies will continue to further develop the understanding of the local natural environment and potential project impact. Fieldwork and research is planned for areas including:
  • Archaeology
  • Fish and Fish Habitat
  • Terrestrial Ecosystems
  • SAR including the: Western Chorus frog, Rapids Clubtail and the Redheaded Woodpecker
  • Drainage and Stormwater Management
  • Foundation Investigations
  • Pavement Investigations
• Continued public engagement and engagement with Indigenous communities will occur throughout the year as new information is available from progress on the highway design and studies that are part of the Provincial EA process or Federal Impact Assessment (IA) process.
• Once the final IPD is accepted, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) will consult with the public, Indigenous communities, and other stakeholders and then will prepare a Summary of Issues that were raised. The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) will then prepare a Detailed Project Description (DPD), which demonstrates how the issues have been, or will be addressed. After the DPD is submitted, IAAC must provide a decision regarding whether a Federal Impact Assessment is required. Following the completion of the EA/IA, the corridor will be designated a controlled-access highway under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act. The project will go through a detailed design and procurement phase. This will culminate in the initiation of project construction.