Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph

[tomh009]

I do think that a less congested highway could also enable better-quality bus service between Kitchener and Guelph.

Wider highways do not decrease congestion...

Having another route does give more options for running bus service, but if we wanted to make transit more reliable, transit lanes, or a congestion charge would be more effective.

Yes, in the long run that is correct.

But, in the short run, a dedicated bus lane from Kitchener to Guelph is surely not realistic. Even if we had an hourly bus schedule, it wouldn't really make sense.

I am generally a fan of congestion charging. But I don't think the Kitchener-to-Guelph highway is the right place to introduce it to Ontario.

[ijmorlan]

The point is this hwy will open up Victoria st to potential sustainable redevelopment as it no longer serves as a hwy. Which means a walkable mixed use development, that could provide housing to thousands of residents.

My idea does this also, by moving the through traffic to Bingeman’s Centre/Shirley which is already pretty much a highway (albeit with an urban speed limit).

Agreed about South Kitchener.

[Spokes]

Wasn't this already funded? And then funding pulled?

And hadn't this already stated. Then ford stopped it?

[jeffster]

Wasn't this already funded?  And then funding pulled?

And hadn't this already stated. Then ford stopped it?

This is a typical government move, pervious government approves something, drags their heals about it, finally starts it up just a before an election cycle, lose election, new government pauses work, looks into the plan, decides it’s a good plan, then re-approves it. This happens before an election cycle.

If the NDP win the next election, expect another pause. Then they can re-approve and take credit for highway 7. If the Liberals or Conservatives win the next election, I doubt things will change.

Mind you, highway 7 got its approval in 2007 — why it took so long for “shovels in” 10 years later, I have no idea.

I am going to add: I imagine there is some civil servant that started working on this highway 7 plan way, way back. This may have been their first job with the province. By the time this is over, they likely will have their years in, and they can retire.

[LesPio]

New Highway 7 inches forward with drainage plan

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...-plan.html

[ijmorlan]

New Highway 7 inches forward with drainage plan

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...-plan.html

I just want the new access roads under the train tracks. If those are built (specifically the western one) then we can close the Lancaster St. road crossing and eliminate problems at Lancaster/Victoria and Lancaster/Krug/Cedar.

[westwardloo]

New Highway 7 inches forward with drainage plan

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...-plan.html

I just want the new access roads under the train tracks. If those are built (specifically the western one) then we can close the Lancaster St. road crossing and eliminate problems at Lancaster/Victoria and Lancaster/Krug/Cedar.

That would be an interesting idea. I don't think it would ever happen, but I do think the region should study the idea.

[ijmorlan]

I just want the new access roads under the train tracks. If those are built (specifically the western one) then we can close the Lancaster St. road crossing and eliminate problems at Lancaster/Victoria and Lancaster/Krug/Cedar.

That would be an interesting idea. I don't think it would ever happen, but I do think the region should study the idea.

To be clear, the new access roads are part of the Highway 7 plan; the only question is timing.

That being said, I don’t expect the Region to take seriously the idea that Lancaster doesn’t need to cross the tracks at all, so rather than building yet another road/rail grade separation, we can just close the road, leaving active transportation only (which can at some point get its own much cheaper grade separation).

But if the new access roads do get built, they might cause some people to choose to use them rather than Lancaster, reducing traffic levels on Lancaster and possibly causing others to start thinking in this way; or at least slow down progress on the grade separation. In some cases, a slowdown can be turned into a cancellation. Usually this has been used to cancel LRT projects, but it’s not impossible for it to apply to ill-conceived road projects.

[ac3r]

I've heard discussions at work that when the region gets all day GO train service, Bingemans Centre Drive, Lancaster Street and St Leger Street won't be level crossings any longer in order for the train to maintain a reasonable speed into the city. St Leger Street may end up just becoming a dead end like they did with Ahrens and Waterloo Street (and in the future Duke Street) as it does not see much traffic where the other two may go underground.

[jeffster]

New Highway 7 inches forward with drainage plan

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...-plan.html

I just want the new access roads under the train tracks. If those are built (specifically the western one) then we can close the Lancaster St. road crossing and eliminate problems at Lancaster/Victoria and Lancaster/Krug/Cedar.

What does this do at Lancaster/Krug/Cedar? I mean, how does this change that disaster?

[ijmorlan]

I just want the new access roads under the train tracks. If those are built (specifically the western one) then we can close the Lancaster St. road crossing and eliminate problems at Lancaster/Victoria and Lancaster/Krug/Cedar.

What does this do at Lancaster/Krug/Cedar? I mean, how does this change that disaster?

It dramatically reduces the amount of traffic to/from Lancaster. Or so I believe. It would take a traffic study to show for sure; maybe they’re all turning at Frederick or Victoria but I doubt it — I think a lot of the traffic at that intersection is to/from Lancaster above Victoria.

Regardless of where people are going however, I think it’s clear that the fix for Lancaster/Krug/Cedar is not to knock down some buildings and increase capacity there, but rather to change things elsewhere so less traffic goes through that intersection. My personal suggestion would be to close Lancaster immediately north (west) of Victoria but it may be that closing it immediately south (east) of Victoria or Frederick would be more effective. Or maybe there should be a one-way section.

Another point about that intersection: a big issue is that it’s not really Lancaster/Krug/Cedar; it’s Lancaster/Krug/Cedar/Weber, a 5-way combination of streets with a traffic light at Cedar/Weber. But the problem goes away if the traffic levels go down enough.

In any case, the real point is to look at the whole network. Oddly, they do this when they design a freeway; freeways rarely (especially now) just widen an existing road; instead they build a new route. How do they know where to do this? By analyzing the traffic network. But when it comes to building a grade separation to fix Lancaster/Victoria, I haven’t heard any official source suggest examining the whole network to look for solutions.

[tomh009]

What does this do at Lancaster/Krug/Cedar? I mean, how does this change that disaster?

It dramatically reduces the amount of traffic to/from Lancaster. Or so I believe. It would take a traffic study to show for sure; maybe they’re all turning at Frederick or Victoria but I doubt it — I think a lot of the traffic at that intersection is to/from Lancaster above Victoria.

Having done a daily commute into Kitchener down Lancaster, from the Waterloo direction (though admittedly more than five years ago), I would guesstimate that at least two thirds of the Lancaster traffic turned off onto either Victoria or Queen.

I have not driven across the Weber/Cedar/Krug intersection many times, and possible never in rush hour. But is it really congested? Are there a lot of accidents? From my more recent pedestrian observations (again, mostly not in rush hour) it doesn't really seem super busy.

[jamincan]

I've never really had much problem there either, but I've never been there at peak periods either.

[ijmorlan]

It dramatically reduces the amount of traffic to/from Lancaster. Or so I believe. It would take a traffic study to show for sure; maybe they’re all turning at Frederick or Victoria but I doubt it — I think a lot of the traffic at that intersection is to/from Lancaster above Victoria.

Having done a daily commute into Kitchener down Lancaster, from the Waterloo direction (though admittedly more than five years ago), I would guesstimate that at least two thirds of the Lancaster traffic turned off onto either Victoria or Queen.

I have not driven across the Weber/Cedar/Krug intersection many times, and possible never in rush hour. But is it really congested? Are there a lot of accidents? From my more recent pedestrian observations (again, mostly not in rush hour) it doesn't really seem super busy.

Lancaster/Cedar/Krug is not super busy, but turning left from Krug onto Cedar can be a problem. The backup of traffic on Lancaster/Cedar waiting at the stoplight at Weber can extend past the Lancaster/Cedar/Krug intersection, meaning that one never gets a chance to make the turn.

My sense is that all the other movements are probably OK. Not “Level of Service A” or whatever, but moving vehicles isn’t the sole or even main purpose of that part of the city, so that’s totally fine. But there should not be movements that are locked out for minutes at a time.

Since Lancaster itself isn’t really appropriate for moving traffic, I figure rather than accommodating traffic by building a grade separation, just move people to different routes.

[tomh009]

Having done a daily commute into Kitchener down Lancaster, from the Waterloo direction (though admittedly more than five years ago), I would guesstimate that at least two thirds of the Lancaster traffic turned off onto either Victoria or Queen.

I have not driven across the Weber/Cedar/Krug intersection many times, and possible never in rush hour. But is it really congested? Are there a lot of accidents? From my more recent pedestrian observations (again, mostly not in rush hour) it doesn't really seem super busy.

Lancaster/Cedar/Krug is not super busy, but turning left from Krug onto Cedar can be a problem. The backup of traffic on Lancaster/Cedar waiting at the stoplight at Weber can extend past the Lancaster/Cedar/Krug intersection, meaning that one never gets a chance to make the turn.

My sense is that all the other movements are probably OK. Not “Level of Service A” or whatever, but moving vehicles isn’t the sole or even main purpose of that part of the city, so that’s totally fine. But there should not be movements that are locked out for minutes at a time.

Since Lancaster itself isn’t really appropriate for moving traffic, I figure rather than accommodating traffic by building a grade separation, just move people to different routes.

OK, thanks, understood. Another way to address that issue might be a left-turn signal specifically for that direction. It would slow the ovrall flow of traffic somewhat but, as you said, that should not be a major concern at this intersection.

The railway grade separation is a much bigger discussion. And I don't know what they are planning in that regard, or whether they even have a plan yet.