+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph (/showthread.php?tid=225)
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - westwardloo - 09-29-2023
(09-29-2023, 08:47 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: You're missing the point. We ALREADY have an investment in roads. We already have a highway (that I think should be improved) between Guelph and KW. We are building a second highway. If this was the only car route between the two cities, I'd be a lot less negative about it. I'd still argue that transit or cycling should come first, but at least you have an argument that something has to come first. Instead we are seeing the situation where driving between the two cities is the only option being further entrenched.Your right there is a road that has existed since the population of these two city centres we under 100k, absolutely no need to invest in an actual grade separated HWY. There are already buses to cambridge we shouldn't build the LRT. There is already VIA serving kitchener to toronto no need to invest in GO Trains. There is already a Hospital no need to build a new Hospital. We already have parks no need to invest in new parks. We already have roads and sidewalks no need to invest in new MUT's. We already have schools no need to build new schools. We already have libraries no need to build new libraries.
Just to be clear, I am absolutely pro-public transit and bike lanes. Absolutely love to see governments finally investing in this type of infrastructure after years of no investment. That doesn't mean I can't see the economic benefit of connecting Kitchener/ Waterloo to Guelph. Personal vehicles are not the only ones to use this HWY. Guelph has a huge amount of Manufacturing at the north end of the city.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - danbrotherston - 09-29-2023
(09-29-2023, 01:55 PM)westwardloo Wrote:(09-29-2023, 08:47 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: You're missing the point. We ALREADY have an investment in roads. We already have a highway (that I think should be improved) between Guelph and KW. We are building a second highway. If this was the only car route between the two cities, I'd be a lot less negative about it. I'd still argue that transit or cycling should come first, but at least you have an argument that something has to come first. Instead we are seeing the situation where driving between the two cities is the only option being further entrenched.Your right there is a road that has existed since the population of these two city centres we under 100k, absolutely no need to invest in an actual grade separated HWY. There are already buses to cambridge we shouldn't build the LRT. There is already VIA serving kitchener to toronto no need to invest in GO Trains. There is already a Hospital no need to build a new Hospital. We already have parks no need to invest in new parks. We already have roads and sidewalks no need to invest in new MUT's. We already have schools no need to build new schools. We already have libraries no need to build new libraries.
Just to be clear, I am absolutely pro-public transit and bike lanes. Absolutely love to see governments finally investing in this type of infrastructure after years of no investment. That doesn't mean I can't see the economic benefit of connecting Kitchener/ Waterloo to Guelph. Personal vehicles are not the only ones to use this HWY. Guelph has a huge amount of Manufacturing at the north end of the city.
I'm not saying we cannot improve things, I'm saying that continuing to improve driving doesn't make sense when we still have ZERO transit options.
I find it hard to take your rebuttal in good faith, because none of the examples are analogous. Lets take your schools example. You say "schools" as if all schools are the same. But for example, if the city only had private schools, and we were building more private schools, while still having no public schools, meaning that many children in the region could not attend school at all, you'd certainly find that problematic right? That's what we're doing with this road right now. We have a road, which provides access for those with cars, those without cars, have no access right now. And instead of fixing that, we are instead, adding more capacity for those with cars.
I also saying that we shouldn't be spending money increasing capacity on roads, because that is a choice that will not improve the future prosperity of our city. But that is a separate argument.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - danbrotherston - 09-29-2023
(09-29-2023, 01:46 PM)KevinL Wrote: We could build decent road capacity by widening the existing township highway to four lanes, and making a smooth connection from it to the end of Shirley (and on through Bingeman Centre) to the parkway. But the province has decreed we get an expressway instead, so that's what we plan around.
I have noticed this kind of thing about government (and large companies). There is essentially zero ability to be agile. I always laugh when large companies do "agile", because as far as I can tell, as far as managers are concerned "agile" means calling teams "pods" and making the morning meeting a standing meeting. And that's literally it. The work plan is still handed down on from high (and by high I mean, between years and decades ago, and with zero regard for on the ground circumstances).
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - ac3r - 09-29-2023
(09-29-2023, 01:46 PM)KevinL Wrote: But the province has decreed we get an expressway instead, so that's what we plan around.
I just don't see what is bad about this. A new, modern highway to our closest neighbour is a good investment. And widening existing, low capacity roads (either Shirley or those within the townships) don't make a lot of sense because they'd just become really wide roads, not highways. Highways have a degree of safety included in the design which I am sure many would disagree with, but it's true. Any traffic engineer can tell you this, or it's easy enough to just study highway safety design. If we can build a modern road with a modern design that gets you to and from Guelph quicker, that's a win in my eyes. The existing one is old and bad. I'd like to see a good pedestrian/MUT bridge built as well so those who can't drive can still safely travel westward, but that'd be a regional project, not something to do with those who handle highways.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - neonjoe - 09-29-2023
A freeway to Guelph is far better than having the existing highway turning into an even greater Stroad. The typical stroad is an evolution of old rural highways as the areas around them grow. A freeway doesn't induce as much of a demand for eventual commercial along the route as the requirement to exit the highway causes another bit of friction for the driver to stop.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - danbrotherston - 09-30-2023
(09-29-2023, 04:01 PM)neonjoe Wrote: A freeway to Guelph is far better than having the existing highway turning into an even greater Stroad. The typical stroad is an evolution of old rural highways as the areas around them grow. A freeway doesn't induce as much of a demand for eventual commercial along the route as the requirement to exit the highway causes another bit of friction for the driver to stop.
Highway 7 is a stroad IN Kitchener but the suggestion given by KevinL to connect it to Shirley would eliminate that. Outside the city it has few destinations and is a proper highway. Improving the highway with a parallel cycling path, and a divider in the middle to prevent head on collisions would fix the safety issues. You'd now have a proper highway connecting the cities, with limited access (only a few businesses). Yeah, Shirley is also kind of a stroad, but it's not as bad as Victoria. But what are you going to do when the state of the art in road construction in your province is absolute garbage.
Building a new divided highway with new capacity absolutely will induce more demand, that's the whole point of building it.
If we built transit instead, we'd induce that demand in transit ridership instead.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - ijmorlan - 09-30-2023
(09-30-2023, 02:09 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Highway 7 is a stroad IN Kitchener but the suggestion given by KevinL to connect it to Shirley would eliminate that. Outside the city it has few destinations and is a proper highway. Improving the highway with a parallel cycling path, and a divider in the middle to prevent head on collisions would fix the safety issues. You'd now have a proper highway connecting the cities, with limited access (only a few businesses). Yeah, Shirley is also kind of a stroad, but it's not as bad as Victoria. But what are you going to do when the state of the art in road construction in your province is absolute garbage.
Victoria/Shirley would make a great highway. I would hope that new driveways would not be allowed as a matter of course and that existing ones would be removed as redevelopment takes place; instead, access to the highway should be managed and planned, not simply allowed to evolve unsupervised.
The re-routing would then make it easy to re-think Victoria in the city as a proper street.
The other big thing freeway enthusiasts are completely ignoring is the enormous cost of a freeway. Sure, if a freeway cost the same as widening an existing road and making some minor adjustments to traffic flow, they would have a point (although there would still be other issues to consider), but that’s not the case. Optimizing the existing road would probably save enough money to build a transit line between the cities (well, OK, not if we can’t get out of the absurd cost situation we seem to be in right now, but I’m assuming we can get back to building train systems for a reasonable price).
Quote:If we built transit instead, we'd induce that demand in transit ridership instead.
Exactly. People act as if people have made a blood oath to continue travelling the same way they already travel, and that’s not true at all: people will travel using whatever is available, and if the only good option is using a car, that’s what they’ll do. Since we assume people will drive, we build roads, and as a result, driving a car is really the only good option in many places.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - Bytor - 09-30-2023
(09-28-2023, 04:41 PM)ZEBuilder Wrote:(09-28-2023, 04:13 PM)SF22 Wrote: I think Victoria St is a better fit for a new LRT line on the north side of King, and Ottawa is a better fit on the south side of King. We could redevelop so much of Victoria between the highway and Breslau that is currently low-rise commercial, just massively reimagine at least 4km between Margaret Ave and Lackner, whereas Ottawa one that side has a lot more single family homes and people who are more likely to not want the LRT disruption, as they know it brings a lot of development that might directly impact their properties.
Whereas south of King, Ottawa hits two big shopping centres (Laurentian and Sunrise), and the smaller Westmount/Ottawa plazas. There are also high-rise buildings already going in along Ottawa across from McLennan Park, plus the big development beside Mill Station, and the thousands of units proposed for the Schneider property.
Not sure how to square that circle, but it's no wonder that planning a permanent transit route like the LRT is a total nightmare.
Putting a future LRT on Ottawa makes more sense than Victoria if the system is being designed for the purposes of moving people (how it should be). If it is being designed as an economic driver to force redevelopment Victoria makes more sense purely due to the amount of land that is available for redevelopment. When one looks at that side of Kitchener Ottawa is really the central spine, Victoria and Fairway are really out on the periphery, the central spine is what makes more sense to have an LRT on since you can feed into the system from both the Victoria side as well as the Fairway side, much like the current system feeds everything towards King.
Before people go saying where they hink a new LRT line should be built, I think they need to have some idea as to what transit ridership is on the relevant bus routes.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - ac3r - 10-01-2023
Bus route ridership is only one, very tiny part of the puzzle. They didn't built the entire LRT just because of the 7/8/200 routes being full, it was first and foremost built with the design of transit oriented development and promoting density for the long term health of the urban fabric of the region itself. It just so happened that those busy bus routes followed the "spine" that runs through all 3 cities and that the LRT logically followed that.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - ijmorlan - 10-01-2023
(10-01-2023, 07:03 AM)ac3r Wrote: Bus route ridership is only one, very tiny part of the puzzle. They didn't built the entire LRT just because of the 7/8/200 routes being full, it was first and foremost built with the design of transit oriented development and promoting density for the long term health of the urban fabric of the region itself. It just so happened that those busy bus routes followed the "spine" that runs through all 3 cities and that the LRT logically followed that.
It’s still fair to say that people should have some idea what the existing ridership is. But you are correct to observe that LRT construction is a response to the overall condition of the city with an eye to the long-term, not exclusively a way of moving a few more people on a busy bus route.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - nms - 10-02-2023
When the track between Kitchener and Guelph is double-tracked, and a round-trip Kitchener-Guelph DMU/EMU could be slotted in between two-way, all day service, that could go a long way to improve non-vehicle connectivity between the two regions. For simplicity sake, the 2WAD trains leaves on the hour (and the half-hour if we're dreaming in Techincolor), while the DMU/EMU shuttles back and forth on the :15 and :45 (and maybe the :30 if 2WAD isn't as frequent as hoped). But I've been playing with trains since I was a wee nipper, and laying new tracks was always easier then...
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - SammyOES - 10-02-2023
I sometimes feel like the existing highway 7 being described on this forum is the highway from 20 years ago and not the highway that exists now and definitely not the highway that will exist in 20 years.
It is the site of a lot of development. And much more to come - all of it coming with traffic. I drove down it middle of the afternoon one day and there was traffic backed up from shantz station west all the way to where the two lanes merge down to one (and I’ll note the KW-Hamilton GO bus was sitting in this line of traffic). It’s a death trap at certain times of days if you’re trying to turn left at a place that doesn’t have lights.
It’s basically the only road connecting the 3 major subdivisions of Breslau. So, sure, we could turn it into a semi-divided highway with 4 lanes and turns only allowed at designated spots to maintain reasonable traffic flow to Guelph and make the whole thing safer. But that has a lot of other social costs too.
Breslau, particularly the newest subdivision where the GO station is proposed, seems like it could have potential to actually be higher density than a standard subdivision. And it might be nice to eventually bring that density all along Victoria from King to that GO station with things like transit and pedestrian/bike friend infrastructure. And trails. Etc. But I don’t see how any of that is possible when we’re trying to have that road also be the main route between two places with a combined population of half a million people.
I’m not totally sold the highway is the best option. It IS expensive. It only helps transit tangentially and inefficiently. It may not actually help make Breslau denser and more sustainable. And so on. But I definitely don’t see how the status quo or only minor tweaks to the road are going to be a good option either.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - danbrotherston - 10-03-2023
(10-02-2023, 09:38 PM)SammyOES Wrote: I sometimes feel like the existing highway 7 being described on this forum is the highway from 20 years ago and not the highway that exists now and definitely not the highway that will exist in 20 years.
It is the site of a lot of development. And much more to come - all of it coming with traffic. I drove down it middle of the afternoon one day and there was traffic backed up from shantz station west all the way to where the two lanes merge down to one (and I’ll note the KW-Hamilton GO bus was sitting in this line of traffic). It’s a death trap at certain times of days if you’re trying to turn left at a place that doesn’t have lights.
It’s basically the only road connecting the 3 major subdivisions of Breslau. So, sure, we could turn it into a semi-divided highway with 4 lanes and turns only allowed at designated spots to maintain reasonable traffic flow to Guelph and make the whole thing safer. But that has a lot of other social costs too.
Breslau, particularly the newest subdivision where the GO station is proposed, seems like it could have potential to actually be higher density than a standard subdivision. And it might be nice to eventually bring that density all along Victoria from King to that GO station with things like transit and pedestrian/bike friend infrastructure. And trails. Etc. But I don’t see how any of that is possible when we’re trying to have that road also be the main route between two places with a combined population of half a million people.
I’m not totally sold the highway is the best option. It IS expensive. It only helps transit tangentially and inefficiently. It may not actually help make Breslau denser and more sustainable. And so on. But I definitely don’t see how the status quo or only minor tweaks to the road are going to be a good option either.
Leaving aside the highway, I'm curious what development and density you see coming? As far as I know the Ontario plans for Breslau station a platform surrounded by miles and miles of parking...which won't generate any density (and will only generate a small increase in traffic volumes because cars take up so much space to store, that such a parking lot will only generate 2-3 thousand new vehicle trips over the entire day).
And the suburb is exactly that...a suburban area designed for people who want to not live in the city. Density is exactly what it advertises avoiding, despite it's firmly suburban character. Although I'll admit it had been a few years since I looked at a home there.
FWIW...I developed another one of my "ideas" for bringing bike and walking infra out to the area: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1vQ51xDjpt0MSns4gQvNR42Ij6Jl7etJS&usp=sharing
And that would be made more difficult if the highway was improved, but I think the cost in induced traffic of building a whole other highway is probably worse, and for much less than the cost of the highway, we could also build real bike infra to the area.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - Bytor - 10-05-2023
(10-01-2023, 07:03 AM)ac3r Wrote: Bus route ridership is only one, very tiny part of the puzzle. They didn't built the entire LRT just because of the 7/8/200 routes being full, it was first and foremost built with the design of transit oriented development and promoting density for the long term health of the urban fabric of the region itself. It just so happened that those busy bus routes followed the "spine" that runs through all 3 cities and that the LRT logically followed that.
Of course, but you don't just target a random area as your next densification project and build an LRT there even though it would hardly get any riders and be decades before it grows enough to give you a lower operating cost per ride than a bus route.
Might Ottawa St. someday have dense enough residential nodes and big enough employment nodes along it to warrant an LRT? Possibly. But right now Highland/Victoria beats it in every way.
Ottawa St. S has problems like it's catchment area for possible stations being constrained by the Expressway to the north. Highland Rd's current mixture of residential development is also 50% more dense than either Ottawa North or South. Residential areas redevelop more slowly than the low-density commercial we currently see out Victoria St. N. With smart rezoning focusing on mixed-use commercial, oriented to things like a Canadian Tire in the podium instead of as a big box store, it would redevelop much faster than the pedestrian-hostile big-box parkas like Sunrise or Laurentian and more extensively than Ottawa St. could do in the same time frame.
RE: Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph - dunkalunk - 10-11-2023
(09-29-2023, 01:46 PM)KevinL Wrote: We could build decent road capacity by widening the existing township highway to four lanes, and making a smooth connection from it to the end of Shirley (and on through Bingeman Centre) to the parkway. But the province has decreed we get an expressway instead, so that's what we plan around.
The thing about Shirley Ave/Bingeman Centre, it needs some work to be brought up to standards for speeds and driveway accesses. The currently posted speed limit is 50 past Riverbend Dr, which is kind of absurd, given that it's a 4-lane road with median that's likely safe to be driving 70km/h. The things that are stopping this are the shoulder bike lane which should be removed and put above the curb and the large number driveways on the South side.
Given the number of driveway accesses, there really ought to be a separate access road south of Bingemans Centre Drive just to serve the industrial driveways on a separate street than the main East-West connector road so the speed limit can be raised.
The section of Shirley Dr East of Bingemans to Victoria has too many driveway accesses and bends to be brought up to higher speed or capacity road, you may need to route a new Highway 7 closer to the rail corridor, or compromise and keep it on Bingemans Centre Dr to Lackner.
Ideally though, I'd like to see the whole thing scrapped except for the Bruce St. connector. Remove some directional ramps to increase weaving distance and improve safety on the Conestoga Parkway. Add the directional ramps Eastward back in, and call it done.
Compared with what the province is proposing, that's 3 fewer rail tunnels, 3 fewer overpasses, and the Edna ramps are maintained. It wouldn't preclude building an overpass in the future, but with the presence of alternate routes across the Grand River and into Guelph, I don't see who this really helps except for making countryside land around Breslau more developable. The 401 still becomes a bottleneck past Highway 6.