Comment 44265

By puneetseth (registered) | Posted July 28, 2010 at 17:18:33


Appreciate the feedback and discussion. Air quality does represent a factor affecting the health of a population, and would come under the larger umbrella of 'environment' as a social determinant of health. I too am not an expert in the field of air quality measurement, but the overall consensus has been that Hamilton's air quality has substantially improved from the era of peak industry it the East end of the city. Furthermore, air quality alone does not equate to the quality of an environment by any means - it represents a single factor which in this case is debatable as to be a pro or con for West Harbour.

Capital investment into the West Harbour and downtown regions for clean up, infrastructure, fostering of direct employment opportunities and well as the net push to make services and facilities more accessible by public transit and walking/cycling have profound ramifications on the future population health of the area, and will reflect a forward-thinking stance on the part of the city to move away from suburban sprawl before intensifying the otherwise lacking core of the city. As mentioned before numerous times, a healthy city requires a healthy core. We need to get people out of their cars and walking/cycling/using public transit, not relying on backward concepts such as 'driveway to driveway' venues.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools