Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account


Dear WRConnected Users: Six years! Can you believe it?!? We've grown so much over the past six years, and much of that is because of you, the amazing WRConnected users. But like any other website, there are costs associated with running it. In the past, many of you gave donations which were incredibly generous (thank you!!). Now as many of you know we have premium memberships in their place. Buying a premium membership not only gets you perks, but it helps cover some of the background costs associated with running this site. If WRConnected is useful to you, take a minute and help keep it online for another year. Thank you.



Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Road design, transportation and walkability
#1
(04-24-2020, 06:34 PM)WLU Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 12:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Just for some context, right now we are doing the exact opposite. Rural and Cambridge transit expansions have been cancelled, but council approved a 8.7 million dollar road expansion.

https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/major-construction-project-for-fischer-hallman-road-gets-the-green-light-1.4908216
Great to see this road expansion finally getting done.  Has been discussed for sometime now and is sorely needed.  I would say for the usage it gets and the amount of people who will benefit, it's a bargain at $8.7 million.

And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain? What else could we have spent that 8 million on?
Reply


#2
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 06:34 PM)WLU Wrote: Great to see this road expansion finally getting done.  Has been discussed for sometime now and is sorely needed.  I would say for the usage it gets and the amount of people who will benefit, it's a bargain at $8.7 million.

And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

Bus lanes on the same stretch of road! Tongue Huh

Seriously, very few roads in this region need 4 general traffic lanes. Turn lanes, OK. Past that, improve transit.
Reply
#3
(04-24-2020, 08:59 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

Bus lanes on the same stretch of road!  Tongue  Huh

Seriously, very few roads in this region need 4 general traffic lanes. Turn lanes, OK. Past that, improve transit.

Definitely agree with that--although bus lanes there would probably still contribute to sprawl--which honestly would be tolerable if our region/cities were at all willing to build communities that weren't car exclusive--even with bus lanes, living in that part of town without a car is nearly intolerable.
Reply
#4
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 06:34 PM)WLU Wrote: Great to see this road expansion finally getting done.  Has been discussed for sometime now and is sorely needed.  I would say for the usage it gets and the amount of people who will benefit, it's a bargain at $8.7 million.

And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

Well, considering how much home owners paid for development fee's, $8M is very little of that total. It has needed to be done for a long time, and it simply can't be left alone. You can also expect more and more businesses to open in that area as well. I do get that there are some people that don't own a car, and never will, and hate the idea of any roads being built or expanded, but it is what it is. And with the likelihood of covid-19 sticking around for a long, long, long time, I can see people becoming more dependant on cars rather than filthy public transit.
Reply
#5
(04-25-2020, 12:37 AM)jeffster Wrote: Well, considering how much home owners paid for development fee's, $8M is very little of that total. It has needed to be done for a long time, and it simply can't be left alone. You can also expect more and more businesses to open in that area as well. I do get that there are some people that don't own a car, and never will, and hate the idea of any roads being built or expanded, but it is what it is. And with the likelihood of covid-19 sticking around for a long, long, long time, I can see people becoming more dependant on cars rather than filthy public transit.

I can see people getting accustomed to cleaner air, and choosing clean public transit rather than filthy private automobiles.

Seriously, though, try not to be so transparent when using this current situation to reinforce preferences you already have. I can think of plenty of arguments why the pandemic may lead to an increased demand for public transit, not least of which is that it is cost-efficient, and many people have sadly had their cash flow significantly impacted. But who knows.

By the way, the development charges from suburban houses built five and ten years ago have not been set aside to one day pay for Fischer-Hallman to be widened. They paid for the specific services that needed to be laid down to serve those homes and only those homes.
Reply
#6
(04-25-2020, 12:37 AM)jeffster Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

Well, considering how much home owners paid for development fee's, $8M is very little of that total. It has needed to be done for a long time, and it simply can't be left alone. You can also expect more and more businesses to open in that area as well. I do get that there are some people that don't own a car, and never will, and hate the idea of any roads being built or expanded, but it is what it is. And with the likelihood of covid-19 sticking around for a long, long, long time, I can see people becoming more dependant on cars rather than filthy public transit.

I agree the road needs "some" work, it could instead be upgraded to a urban cross section without being doubled in size as they are doing now--that would easily handle todays traffic.  Of course the city could also have decided not to sprawl another couple of KMs larger a few years ago and there would be no demand for widening the road.

My dislike of this road project has nothing to do with my owning a car or not, it has to do with my dislike of the unsustainable, broken land use sprawl policies, and broken transportation policies which led to it.  And yes, more businesses will open in the area...BECAUSE of the road.

And like I said, I would dislike it far less if the communit that was being built there was not designed to mandate every single resident own a car...as is, there are zero other feasible transportation options.

As for COVID, yes, it will impact public transit, but it won't be sticking around a "long long" time, we will have a vaccine almost certainly early to mid next year, how that will impact use of our very clean public system long term is yet to be seen.
Reply
#7
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 06:34 PM)WLU Wrote: Great to see this road expansion finally getting done.  Has been discussed for sometime now and is sorely needed.  I would say for the usage it gets and the amount of people who will benefit, it's a bargain at $8.7 million.

And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

  Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.
Reply
#8
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

  Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.

If you deny the reality of induced demand there really isn't much point in talking to you. 

As for the subdivision. Also no. A far flung suburban subdivision costs the city more to provide services too than it collects in tax dollars. People like me who live in an efficient high density area subsidize the lifestyle of the people who live out there.
Reply
#9
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote:
(04-24-2020, 08:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: And what if you factor in the environmental costs of the road and the sprawl that it will generate?  It won’t improve traffic, it will simply induce more traffic. Still a bargain?  What else could we have spent that 8 million on?

  Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.

A road widening may be initiated in response to demand, but that doesn't contradict induced demand. To explain briefly: at a certain point, a road reaches a saturation point. The number of people using the road balances the number of people avoiding it. I may start using that road, but at the same time, someone else is making the decision to use another, or take transit, or work from home. Expanding a road changes that equation. It does lower congestion for a time, but as more people use the road, existing users don't have an incentive to not use it any more until it once again reaches a saturation point.

Basically, induced demand simply acknowledges that the supply of a particular transportation mode - whether that be roads or transit or bike lanes - affects the demand toward certain modes. Supply and demand works on roads just as it does for any other good.
Reply
#10
(04-28-2020, 08:48 AM)jamincan Wrote:
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote:   Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.

A road widening may be initiated in response to demand, but that doesn't contradict induced demand. To explain briefly: at a certain point, a road reaches a saturation point. The number of people using the road balances the number of people avoiding it. I may start using that road, but at the same time, someone else is making the decision to use another, or take transit, or work from home. Expanding a road changes that equation. It does lower congestion for a time, but as more people use the road, existing users don't have an incentive to not use it any more until it once again reaches a saturation point.

Basically, induced demand simply acknowledges that the supply of a particular transportation mode - whether that be roads or transit or bike lanes - affects the demand toward certain modes. Supply and demand works on roads just as it does for any other good.

It's additionally hilarious that they talk about the MTO...which is King of induced demand. You might argue that car use in the city is at least equally affected by land use as it is road building, but the MTO's construction almost exclusively drives induced demand. Cities, companies, houses, shopping, people, jobs, are where they are almost as a direct result of MTO built expressways--subdivisions advertise the highways as features.
Reply
#11
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote: That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.

Is this an opinion or something you're able to cite? Induced demand is a well understood, well-researched phenomenon.

The wikipedia page has quite a bit of information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

This article from 2014 is a pretty good discussion about the research and the effect: https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traff...ed-demand/
Reply
#12
(04-28-2020, 08:48 AM)jamincan Wrote: Supply and demand works on roads just as it does for any other good.

In particular, the quantity demanded of a good offered for free will sometimes be shockingly high compared to the quantity demanded when there is a charge for it.

Obviously, the quantity of roads demanded at a price that pays for the roads is way lower than the quantity demanded at a $0 price, which is the current regime in Ontario with the exception of the 407 and a few ferries (OK, $0 plus the insignificant gas tax if you want to count the gas tax as a toll, which is questionable but at least a colourable argument).
This is what is so excessively insane about our parking minima, to slightly change topic for a moment: we require enough parking to be built that not only is parking affordable, but it’s actually free in most suburban locations, even at busy times.
Reply
#13
Another comment related to induced demand: inefficient modes appear to “need” or “deserve” expansion more than efficient modes. For example, the 401 is 83m across through Toronto (curb to curb) for 14 lanes of traffic. It’s still clogged often and looks like it “should” be expanded. That number of lanes can move maybe 13300 vehicles per hour in each direction.

If however all that traffic was replaced by LRT, the entire road could be replaced by the same 2 tracks that we see on Ion; you would need about 75 of our Ion LRT vehicles every hour in each direction (or, more realistically, a 4-car train every 3 minutes). A careful observer would notice that it was a very busy LRT line, but it wouldn’t appear particularly congested.

Similarly, by the time a one-lane-wide sidewalk (i.e., a fairly wide sidewalk) is congested with pedestrians, it’s carrying an absurd number of people compared to what the same space would be carrying in cars or even buses. Same comment applies to bicycle paths. As a result, bicycle paths and sidewalks typically appear underused even though the benefit per dollar spent may be quite reasonable.
Reply
#14
(04-28-2020, 07:09 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote:   Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.

If you deny the reality of induced demand there really isn't much point in talking to you. 

As for the subdivision. Also no. A far flung suburban subdivision costs the city more to provide services too than it collects in tax dollars. People like me who live in an efficient high density area subsidize the lifestyle of the people who live out there.
Great reply.  You don't like/agree with someone else's post so "there isn't much point talking".   You subsidize the people who live out there?  Sure you do.  Who do the people that live out there subsidize?
Reply
#15
(04-28-2020, 08:48 AM)jamincan Wrote:
(04-28-2020, 01:31 AM)WLU Wrote:   Not sure what the environmental costs would be as a result of widening the road.  The existing road is aprox. 14 - 15 m wide with the shoulders.  A typical 4-lane road is the same width.  Here the existing shoulders are essentially just being replaced with lanes.  The region may choose to add a small center median on this road which would make it slightly wider but regardless, the overall footprint will be relatively unchanged.  The new road will also have curbs and gutters which provides for controlled drainage preventing run-off of ice melting material into the vegetation alongside the road as is currently the case.  If you're referring to emissions, there is certainly a lot more created per vehicle/km when vehicles are "stop and go" as is the current condition with vehicles sometimes backed up from Bleams Rd. to the cemetery.  The proposed roundabout at Bleams is an excellent addition and assists in maintaining movement.

  I'm not sure how "it won't improve traffic".  If you have x amount of cars on two lanes and then you have 4 lanes, obviously traffic will flow more efficiently.  That whole "induce more traffic" theory is nonsense.  This road is being widened to satisfy the demand.  The road isn't being built to create demand.  If that were the case the road would have been widen 15 years ago before the subdivision was built.  I can't ever think of a road that was widened to "induce demand".  For example, Ira Needles was a built as a two lane road and as traffic increased the road was widened.  Hwy 401 was built as a 4-lane highway (excluding the section through Toronto).  Most of it now is at least 6-lanes and sections along the highway are currently being widened.  Trust me the MTO didn't widen the highway and then cross their fingers hoping more people would use it.  The same can be said for Fischer-Hallman.  Along with development out there, this stretch of Fischer-Hallman also provides commuters travel to communities southwest of Kitchener including Ayr and provides direct access to the expressway.

  Now you can argue that they shouldn't have built the Huron subdivision and then the road wouldn't have to be widened.  Well maybe, but as bland as it may be for some, the demand for suburban living is high as it provides the type of living that a lot of parents prefer to raise families in.  That's a whole separate discussion and yes, when you consider that all of those homes out there are likely paying property taxes at a minimum of $4000 annually, most of which goes to the Region, it is definitely a bargain.

A road widening may be initiated in response to demand, but that doesn't contradict induced demand. To explain briefly: at a certain point, a road reaches a saturation point. The number of people using the road balances the number of people avoiding it. I may start using that road, but at the same time, someone else is making the decision to use another, or take transit, or work from home. Expanding a road changes that equation. It does lower congestion for a time, but as more people use the road, existing users don't have an incentive to not use it any more until it once again reaches a saturation point.

Basically, induced demand simply acknowledges that the supply of a particular transportation mode - whether that be roads or transit or bike lanes - affects the demand toward certain modes. Supply and demand works on roads just as it does for any other good.
Hi Jaminican,  I'm not sure if it's accurate to assume that the number of people that avoid using a road is equal to the amount of people using it.  I think that the vast majority of drivers just tend to put up with congestion where it exists.  For example, one can see this everyday on highway 8 approaching the expressway for the vehicles that want to head westbound on the expressway or the vehicles in Waterloo heading southbound on the expressway between King St. towards the collectors.  Commuters show up everyday knowing that there's going to be congestion and that nothing will really change until changes are made to the highway.  When the expressway in Kitchener was widened between Courtland and Fischer-Hallman the back-ups disappeared and traffic, even in the busiest parts of the day, moves well.

Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you meant by the highlighted line below

"It does lower congestion for a time, but as more people use the road, existing users don't have an incentive to not use it any more until it once again reaches a saturation point."

I do definitely agree with your comment about supply and demand.  I'm just not sure about "induced demand" as I have never seen a road widened to create demand only to satisfy it. 
One thing is interesting about transportation and induced demand certainly as it relates at least to our region.  Prior to the completion of the LRT something in the vicinity of 90% of all trips were made by car, with the balance using public transit, walking and cycling.  After the addition of the LRT and numerous additional km of cycling lanes, I'm not sure a lot has changed.  The addition of these two modes hasn't really induced their demand.  

Cheers
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Possibly Related Threads…
  Road design, safety and Vision Zero ijmorlan 51 8,888 05-20-2019, 09:30 PM
Last Post: MacBerry
  Uptown West Neighbourhood Transportation Study -- Sidewalks tvot 23 16,547 03-16-2016, 11:35 AM
Last Post: Andy
  Active Transportation Advisory Committee zanate 3 3,510 10-21-2015, 05:17 PM
Last Post: zanate

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links