(09-03-2020, 05:56 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2020, 02:54 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]I hope not, it would only encourage further sprawl. The Ottawa extension is in city plans, but it is in the "outside of the timeframe of the Transportation Master Plan" category.
Does the sprawl in Breslau actually need encouragement? Seems inevitable and (I thought) long planned for.
I mean, there are limits in place. Investing in another new bridge is a great way to ensure those limits don’t get enforced.
Fundamentally, I know Dan is right. Improving access will lead to more sprawl. I really resent that it is like that, though. An Ottawa St. extension would really improve access across the river, which has limited crossing options. Why can't we just use other development controls to limit sprawl while improving infrastructure?
I actually wish the region would consider more pedestrian and cycling only bridges. They are doing it over the expressway at Alpine, but the Grand River would really benefit from them as well. A pedestrian bridge in lieu of an Ottawa Extension would be great. Selfishly, between Snyder Flats and Lexington too.
(09-04-2020, 07:34 AM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]I actually wish the region would consider more pedestrian and cycling only bridges. They are doing it over the expressway at Alpine, but the Grand River would really benefit from them as well. A pedestrian bridge in lieu of an Ottawa Extension would be great. Selfishly, between Snyder Flats and Lexington too.
There was supposed to be a bridge to Snyder's Flats as part of the Walter Bean Trail. But either local opposition or lack of funding have prevented it from happening.
https://www.waterloochronicle.ca/news-st...kitchener/
(09-04-2020, 07:34 AM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Fundamentally, I know Dan is right. Improving access will lead to more sprawl. I really resent that it is like that, though. An Ottawa St. extension would really improve access across the river, which has limited crossing options. Why can't we just use other development controls to limit sprawl while improving infrastructure?
I actually wish the region would consider more pedestrian and cycling only bridges. They are doing it over the expressway at Alpine, but the Grand River would really benefit from them as well. A pedestrian bridge in lieu of an Ottawa Extension would be great. Selfishly, between Snyder Flats and Lexington too.
I don't much like it either. I don't think we'll actually solve it though, until we are less ruled by money...
In terms of expressway crossings, that's a very interesting point, and it actually brings it back on topic. The ONLY reason the bridge is proposed is because it will let GRT service the neighbourhood across the highway with bus stops on Strasburg Rd. (i.e., a bridge is cheaper than more bus routes). It isn't a cycling or ped policy, and in fact, a better cycling option (or at least a more cost effective one) would be to improve the underpass at Homer-Watson...
Sprawl in Breslau is inevitable, unfortunately. When Metrolinx builds the Breslau GO station, I imagine the entire area will slowly become suburban.
(09-04-2020, 01:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: [ -> ]Sprawl in Breslau is inevitable, unfortunately. When Metrolinx builds the Breslau GO station, I imagine the entire area will slowly become suburban.
I do fear this.
Frankly Metrolinx's Breslau plans are the kind of plan that perpetuates our broken transportation and land use models...there are few transit projects I oppose, but that one is on the list.
(09-03-2020, 10:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2020, 05:56 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ] Does the sprawl in Breslau actually need encouragement? Seems inevitable and (I thought) long planned for.
I mean, there are limits in place. Investing in another new bridge is a great way to ensure those limits don’t get enforced.
I sort of think it's going to happen either way (that is, both the bridge and development). Whether or not we think it's a good thing is a different discussion. However, having the bridge isn't a terrible idea as it would allow for alternative transportation to and from Breslau. As it is now, it's a fast growing community, and has few options other than car for getting around. With a bridge, you now open up GRT access, cycling and even walking.
(09-04-2020, 01:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: [ -> ]Sprawl in Breslau is inevitable, unfortunately. When Metrolinx builds the Breslau GO station, I imagine the entire area will slowly become suburban.
With proper planning (which will not be seen from Metrolinx for the foreseeable future), the station area could become one of those highly walkable, dense areas that were only built before planning. The station itself could be the centre of a bunch of highrises built together and linked across the tracks, then nearby streets could have midrise. All uses regularly needed by residents could be available — retail, professional, etc. — with transit linking to the rest of the city and of course to Guelph and beyond by GO.
(09-04-2020, 11:44 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]I don't much like it either. I don't think we'll actually solve it though, until we are less ruled by money...
I’m not sure that’s really the problem. If we were ruled by money, wouldn’t we notice that 2 lanes of motor vehicles plus the same width of pedestrians and bicycles would be a way more cost-effective way of getting people across the river? And if people just have to go at rush hour so those motor vehicle lanes aren’t enough, maybe it should be on additional lanes that are tolled so as to be self-funding.
For that matter, maybe all the motor vehicle lanes should be tolled. Nobody can reasonably claim they’re being excluded — right now they can’t cross the river at all right there, so lowering the toll from the cost of an airlift down to $1 or whatever would be a distinct improvement.
I wouldn’t even be unalterably opposed to tolling pedestrians and bicycles, as long as the toll related to the incremental cost of accommodating them, which would probably mean maybe a 5¢ toll, which rounds to 0 when you take into account the costs of collection.
(09-05-2020, 03:32 PM)jeffster Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2020, 10:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]I mean, there are limits in place. Investing in another new bridge is a great way to ensure those limits don’t get enforced.
I sort of think it's going to happen either way (that is, both the bridge and development). Whether or not we think it's a good thing is a different discussion. However, having the bridge isn't a terrible idea as it would allow for alternative transportation to and from Breslau. As it is now, it's a fast growing community, and has few options other than car for getting around. With a bridge, you now open up GRT access, cycling and even walking.
I think this is defeatist. This will happen if we let it happen, resigning it to ourselves to it happening lets it happen. If we instead resolve for it not to happen, we can stop it.
As for transportation, there are two bridges already, active transportation and GRT service could easily be provided without an additional bridge. In fact, there is easily room to put active transportation on the existing Victoria St. bridge without even removing lanes.
Edit: For reference, here's a proposed low cost (at least for Phase 1) multi-phase Victoria St. MUT expansion that would connect Breslau and the planned future suburbs with cycling/ped infra to the rest of the city...probably on order of 500k dollars--it isn't 8-80, but for 500k, it should still be a no brainer.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1...sp=sharing
(09-05-2020, 04:36 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ] (09-04-2020, 01:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: [ -> ]Sprawl in Breslau is inevitable, unfortunately. When Metrolinx builds the Breslau GO station, I imagine the entire area will slowly become suburban.
With proper planning (which will not be seen from Metrolinx for the foreseeable future), the station area could become one of those highly walkable, dense areas that were only built before planning. The station itself could be the centre of a bunch of highrises built together and linked across the tracks, then nearby streets could have midrise. All uses regularly needed by residents could be available — retail, professional, etc. — with transit linking to the rest of the city and of course to Guelph and beyond by GO.
We basically have the same vision for this...
As for being ruled by money, we *are* ruled by money, and none of those things are true. You are describing a form of utopia where absolute rational economic forces are at play. That is different from being ruled by money IMO. Instead, we have roads filled with giant trucks because there is more money to be made by convincing people that driving a big truck makes them feel more powerful, even though it makes the world worse for everyone.
But even your vision, I don't particularly support, (although at one point, I would have). I think compassion and empathy must be part of our society. At it's core, you could probably make an economic argument for euthenizing all troublemaking (non-conforming) citizens, but that's an extreme, less extreme is what we have right now, which is that capitalist markets are not particularly bothered by the US's descent into authoritarianism and fascism, because those problems don't affect capitalism, certainly capitalism has operated just fine in other less savoury countries than even the US. (And I'll leave aside the equity issue, because at it's core, you could simply argue for a UBI to solve that).
(09-05-2020, 04:36 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ] (09-04-2020, 01:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: [ -> ]Sprawl in Breslau is inevitable, unfortunately. When Metrolinx builds the Breslau GO station, I imagine the entire area will slowly become suburban.
With proper planning (which will not be seen from Metrolinx for the foreseeable future), the station area could become one of those highly walkable, dense areas that were only built before planning. The station itself could be the centre of a bunch of highrises built together and linked across the tracks, then nearby streets could have midrise. All uses regularly needed by residents could be available — retail, professional, etc. — with transit linking to the rest of the city and of course to Guelph and beyond by GO.
Transit linking to the rest of the city is key. Waterloo Region will no doubt get a 3rd LRT line in the future (or 2nd...whether we count Phase 1 and 2 as separate lines or not), and if it ran east/west then I could see places like Breslau developing in a denser way as this would let people get into the city centre as well as travel north-south to Waterloo and Cambridge. But the city planners aren't going to densify an area in the city in the way you imagine without dedicated rapid transit (GO trains obviously not counting, as they're commuter trains and buses are slow and of limited capacity). It'd be nice to see, and I'm sure as the years go on and we grow and grow we'll be going in this direction, but in the short term we can only imagine, plan and hope we actually develop things in a way that makes the most sense.
(09-05-2020, 05:32 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2020, 03:32 PM)jeffster Wrote: [ -> ]I sort of think it's going to happen either way (that is, both the bridge and development). Whether or not we think it's a good thing is a different discussion. However, having the bridge isn't a terrible idea as it would allow for alternative transportation to and from Breslau. As it is now, it's a fast growing community, and has few options other than car for getting around. With a bridge, you now open up GRT access, cycling and even walking.
I think this is defeatist. This will happen if we let it happen, resigning it to ourselves to it happening lets it happen. If we instead resolve for it not to happen, we can stop it.
As for transportation, there are two bridges already, active transportation and GRT service could easily be provided without an additional bridge. In fact, there is easily room to put active transportation on the existing Victoria St. bridge without even removing lanes.
Edit: For reference, here's a proposed low cost (at least for Phase 1) multi-phase Victoria St. MUT expansion that would connect Breslau and the planned future suburbs with cycling/ped infra to the rest of the city...probably on order of 500k dollars--it isn't 8-80, but for 500k, it should still be a no brainer. https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1...sp=sharing
It's not defeatist at all. If we want vibrant safe communities for young families we still need this type of development. It's simply not going to stop because some people don't like houses and cars.
(09-06-2020, 11:29 PM)jeffster Wrote: [ -> ] (09-05-2020, 05:32 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]I think this is defeatist. This will happen if we let it happen, resigning it to ourselves to it happening lets it happen. If we instead resolve for it not to happen, we can stop it.
As for transportation, there are two bridges already, active transportation and GRT service could easily be provided without an additional bridge. In fact, there is easily room to put active transportation on the existing Victoria St. bridge without even removing lanes.
Edit: For reference, here's a proposed low cost (at least for Phase 1) multi-phase Victoria St. MUT expansion that would connect Breslau and the planned future suburbs with cycling/ped infra to the rest of the city...probably on order of 500k dollars--it isn't 8-80, but for 500k, it should still be a no brainer. https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1...sp=sharing
It's not defeatist at all. If we want vibrant safe communities for young families we still need this type of development. It's simply not going to stop because some people don't like houses and cars.
*rolls eyes*...can you drop the nonsense, just because you grew up in a miserable car dependent suburb doesn't mean everyone wants that for their children. There is nothing vibrant about car dependency and suburban sprawl, and there's strong evidence that it isn't good for young famillies. It's also the case that there are vast swaths of the city already built this way and it is in fact the walkable livable areas that are in desperately low supply. Of course, none of that really change the fact that the real problem is the fact that your development is unsustainable---young families probably also want to have a planet for their children to live on in the future.
But you're just going to accuse me of hating cars and houses. Clearly we are not even on remotely the same page, nor do you care to be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul_xzyCDT98&ab_channel=NotJustBikes
I for one, do not want to raise my child in such an environment, and that is one reason that we will probably leave KW.
Some people want that, though, so we're always going to have suburban areas. jeffster is right in saying that not all people don't want to live in urban areas in a tiny apartment. I have spent most of my life growing up in Europe and there are tons of people there who would love to have a detached home like so many people over here have. It's pretty natural to want your own independent home with your own tiny plot of land to use, so much so that in countries like Russia it's common to own a
dacha in addition to an apartment in the city. There's no need to get passive aggressive over it. The city has spent the last two decades trying to densify and urbanize, but we can't exactly force people to accept that nor expect it to happen in an instant. There needs to be a balance and we're at least trying to work towards it.