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




Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Highway 7 - Kitchener to Guelph
(09-28-2023, 02:32 PM)ac3r Wrote: I'm fine with Victoria Street being as many lanes as it is...I think the extremist anti-car people tend to forget we still do actually need roads for things. Sometimes they'll need a lot of lanes. It's an incredibly important road leading to the core of our region.

But...at the very least they could beautify it and improve the safety. It's soooo ugly.

Also I think any east-west LRT would likely run along Ottawa. Victoria would be an easy path to route a train on but from a TOD planning perspective it isn't as ideal as Ottawa would be.

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.
Reply


(09-28-2023, 04:13 PM)SF22 Wrote:
(09-28-2023, 02:32 PM)ac3r Wrote: I'm fine with Victoria Street being as many lanes as it is...I think the extremist anti-car people tend to forget we still do actually need roads for things. Sometimes they'll need a lot of lanes. It's an incredibly important road leading to the core of our region.

But...at the very least they could beautify it and improve the safety. It's soooo ugly.

Also I think any east-west LRT would likely run along Ottawa. Victoria would be an easy path to route a train on but from a TOD planning perspective it isn't as ideal as Ottawa would be.

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.
Reply
(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.

Could the two lines share track between Ottawa and Victoria? Is that allowed by the regulations? That would have the additional benefit of super frequent service for the downtown segment.
Reply
Here's your Line 3 :'P

I used to think Victoria would be most ideal and in a way it would be because you could easily throw tracks down the middle of most of it, but Ottawa makes more sense because it has existing urban communities around them which have infrastructure and services required for more development right out the gate. It's also much more conducive to TOD primarily because you don't have the Grand River as a physical barrier to urban intensification where there is a river, valley and incredibly steep shore banks there...and almost everything beyond it is Woolwich...that'd be a political mess. Where I put the dots (those would be stations heh) there is already plenty of room for density and in fact many areas are seeing it already, even way out by the Strausburg dot where there are a number of fairly large projects with towers.

It'd lets us keep Victoria/Highway 7 as an efficient and important road in and out of the region (and as a very good link to Guelph). The awful streetscape could for sure be redone but the road itself is useful and that's reflected in the amount of traffic it sees (and I'm not referring to lack of alternatives here...this road just sees a lot of stuff like commercial or commuter traffic). Even directly, look at the number of successful businesses that exist along there. Most of them are things that "need" a car, in a way: flooring, pool supplies, auto repairs, furniture, appliances, a couple department store type places like Canadian Tire and a lot of industrial focused businesses. All useful stuff.

[Image: 7HMOzPe.png]
Reply
(09-28-2023, 05:54 PM)ac3r Wrote: It'd lets us keep Victoria/Highway 7 as an efficient and important road in and out of the region (and as a very good link to Guelph). The awful streetscape could for sure be redone but the road itself is useful and that's reflected in the amount of traffic it sees (and I'm not referring to lack of alternatives here...this road just sees a lot of stuff like commercial or commuter traffic). Even directly, look at the number of successful businesses that exist along there. Most of them are things that "need" a car, in a way: flooring, pool supplies, auto repairs, furniture, appliances, a couple department store type places like Canadian Tire and a lot of industrial focused businesses. All useful stuff.

If you are suggesting it's efficient right now, that's a joke. I can't see how it could become an efficient road without reducing it to 2 lanes, and adding access roads for the businesses or something like that. Suggesting that commuter traffic is using this road out of desire and not due to a lack of alternatives (especially to Guelph) just isn't right either... Why would anyone want to commute on a road with a hundred driveways, many lights, and mixed with non-commuter traffic?

The majority of the businesses there definitely don't require a car, even if some of them do. Even places like Canadian Tire only require a car for a small fraction of trips, if it wasn't so difficult and miserable to get there without a car. Even with a car it's so miserable that I drive to other Canadian Tire locations, and the other locations generally aren't even in nice places...
Reply
I look forward to Phase 3 Ottawa St being eleventy billion dollars at the current rate of procurement incompetence
local cambridge weirdo
Reply
(09-28-2023, 12:46 PM)SF22 Wrote:
(09-28-2023, 12:06 PM)cherrypark Wrote: Buses use highways too. The induced demand remains a drain on transit demand, but this also benefits enabling Victoria St. to perhaps growth back towards a part of the city than a commuter car sewer over the next couple decades.

I honestly believe that we will never see Victoria shrunk from 4/5 to 2 lanes without an alternative route to get towards Guelph.

There is an already-existing alternative route to the part of Victoria that one might consider narrowing to 2 lanes: Bingeman’s Centre Drive. We’ve been over this multiple times on this board and I don’t recall anyone presenting a counterargument. To implement this fully one would have to re-configure Shirley Dr. between Bingeman’s Centre Dr. and Victoria St., as well as the intersections at the ends of that segment.
Reply


(09-28-2023, 04:05 PM)SF22 Wrote:
(09-28-2023, 01:58 PM)panamaniac Wrote: Has it ever been proposed?  I find it hard to imagine.  It's not that many years ago that the fight on Victoria S.  was widening to 4 lanes vs 3 lanes.

I read it somewhere, months ago, on an official document. But it was something I stumbled across on a tangential project, so the likelihood of me finding it again anytime soon is pretty low. I'm not sure if they want to shrink Victoria past Edna (although there are the rumours that they want to put another LRT line down Victoria), but there's definitely talk about having it be 2 lanes from about Strange/West (where it already is 2 lanes) all the way through to the highway.

It was proposed in one transportation plan when the region believed that the province was going to imminently build a highway. When that didn't happen, they built MUTs instead. It will never happen.
Reply
(09-28-2023, 02:53 PM)cherrypark Wrote: It is a truly barren, non-place currently. The MUTs added make it at least accessible but its such an unpleasant place to be outside of a car (or even inside of one).

Yeah, before the MUTs, I refused a referral to a place on Victoria with no sidewalks. I told them, I could not possibly go there without risking my life, and I wasn't risking my life for a fucking insurance company.
Reply
(09-28-2023, 11:20 AM)westwardloo Wrote: Looks like behind the scene Design work is still slowly moving forwards. WSP just completed the Design and Construction report for the bridge over the Grand River. 

https://newhighway7.ca/wp-content/upload...-Final.pdf 

I will wait for the oncoming onslaught of posts complaining about car centric investments. (Europe has highways between major population centres) I still stand by this being a critical piece of infrastructure that will connect the city of Guelph with K-W.  Do I wish all day 2-way GO would come to the Region faster absolutely, but I also see the benefit to improving all mods of transportation.

Ask and ye shall receive...

Why do you believe it is critical? They are currently connected by a highway. They are NOT connected by frequent transit or any other mode (and this includes Breslau). Why isn't the transit the critical infra that is missing?

As for improving roads, I don't see that this improves road access. It only improves road CAPACITY...which is only needed because there is no other option.

As for Europe, yes, much of Europe is highly car centric. But even if I agreed a highway was needed, there is no reason this highway couldn't be less car centric. For example, it could have a bus with it. But wait...and this is a big one...it could have a pedestrian/bike bridge. Right now there is no way to cross the grand river in that area if you are not in a car. There is no bus, no bike lane, no sidewalk of any kind. If you cannot afford a car or are unable to drive one for any reason, you either get to risk your life walking on the side of a highway where people are routinely killed, or you get to get a fucking swimsuit on.

We are spending what will probably be on the order of a billion dollars eventually to build an entirely new route, and after that expenditure, will we have changed the only actual lack of access? Nope, same as before.

This is why it pisses me off.

Oh...and of course there's the issue of climate change destroying our society...but that's a minor side issue at best.

Investments like this will be looked on very badly by future generations. Whether those future generations are sitting on buses watching a mostly empty four lane highway go by or they are in the ruins of our former society looking at these concrete structures by firelight, is still to be seen, but either way, they will not have nice things to say about us.
Reply
(09-29-2023, 03:33 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(09-28-2023, 11:20 AM)westwardloo Wrote: Looks like behind the scene Design work is still slowly moving forwards. WSP just completed the Design and Construction report for the bridge over the Grand River. 

https://newhighway7.ca/wp-content/upload...-Final.pdf 

I will wait for the oncoming onslaught of posts complaining about car centric investments. (Europe has highways between major population centres) I still stand by this being a critical piece of infrastructure that will connect the city of Guelph with K-W.  Do I wish all day 2-way GO would come to the Region faster absolutely, but I also see the benefit to improving all mods of transportation.

Ask and ye shall receive...

Why do you believe it is critical? They are currently connected by a highway. They are NOT connected by frequent transit or any other mode (and this includes Breslau). Why isn't the transit the critical infra that is missing?

As for improving roads, I don't see that this improves road access. It only improves road CAPACITY...which is only needed because there is no other option.

As for Europe, yes, much of Europe is highly car centric. But even if I agreed a highway was needed, there is no reason this highway couldn't be less car centric. For example, it could have a bus with it. But wait...and this is a big one...it could have a pedestrian/bike bridge. Right now there is no way to cross the grand river in that area if you are not in a car. There is no bus, no bike lane, no sidewalk of any kind. If you cannot afford a car or are unable to drive one for any reason, you either get to risk your life walking on the side of a highway where people are routinely killed, or you get to get a fucking swimsuit on.

We are spending what will probably be on the order of a billion dollars eventually to build an entirely new route, and after that expenditure, will we have changed the only actual lack of access? Nope, same as before.

This is why it pisses me off.

Oh...and of course there's the issue of climate change destroying our society...but that's a minor side issue at best.

Investments like this will be looked on very badly by future generations. Whether those future generations are sitting on buses watching a mostly empty four lane highway go by or they are in the ruins of our former society looking at these concrete structures by firelight, is still to be seen, but either way, they will not have nice things to say about us.
Did I say Transit wan't a critical piece of infrastructure? The answer is no, I would love to see more investments in public transit. Unlike you I am not a one or the other kind of person. I would like to see us invest in both. Much like what Europe does.   

So your saying if they (Province or Region) included a guaranteed investment of a bus between Guelph and Kitchener using the new HWY 7 you would support the HWY? 

I  do agree with the idea of pedestrian link over the Grand. I think that would be a "relatively cheap" addition to the project that could bring a lot of benefits for accessibility of biking and walking in the region. I would love for the Region to look at more Pedestrian bridges over the grand. (Snyders flats to university would be open up a huge park space to residents of Waterloo)

"Investments like this will be looked on very badly by future generations Whether those future generations are sitting on buses watching a mostly empty four lane highway" - 
 
Hahaha I know I am pissed off at my grandparents for building the conestoga parkway and so glad they decided not to build HWY 24 to brantford...... Oh wait that is not how I feel at all.   Tell me have never driven the current HWY 7 at rush hour without actually saying it.
Reply
(09-29-2023, 08:23 AM)westwardloo Wrote:
(09-29-2023, 03:33 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Ask and ye shall receive...

Why do you believe it is critical? They are currently connected by a highway. They are NOT connected by frequent transit or any other mode (and this includes Breslau). Why isn't the transit the critical infra that is missing?

As for improving roads, I don't see that this improves road access. It only improves road CAPACITY...which is only needed because there is no other option.

As for Europe, yes, much of Europe is highly car centric. But even if I agreed a highway was needed, there is no reason this highway couldn't be less car centric. For example, it could have a bus with it. But wait...and this is a big one...it could have a pedestrian/bike bridge. Right now there is no way to cross the grand river in that area if you are not in a car. There is no bus, no bike lane, no sidewalk of any kind. If you cannot afford a car or are unable to drive one for any reason, you either get to risk your life walking on the side of a highway where people are routinely killed, or you get to get a fucking swimsuit on.

We are spending what will probably be on the order of a billion dollars eventually to build an entirely new route, and after that expenditure, will we have changed the only actual lack of access? Nope, same as before.

This is why it pisses me off.

Oh...and of course there's the issue of climate change destroying our society...but that's a minor side issue at best.

Investments like this will be looked on very badly by future generations. Whether those future generations are sitting on buses watching a mostly empty four lane highway go by or they are in the ruins of our former society looking at these concrete structures by firelight, is still to be seen, but either way, they will not have nice things to say about us.

Did I say Transit wan't a critical piece of infrastructure? The answer is no, I would love to see more investments in public transit. Unlike you I am not a one or the other kind of person. I would like to see us invest in both. Much like what Europe does.   

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.

(09-29-2023, 08:23 AM)westwardloo Wrote: So your saying if they (Province or Region) included a guaranteed investment of a bus between Guelph and Kitchener using the new HWY 7 you would support the HWY?

You speak in absolutes, but I don't. Yes, obviously I would be more likely to support the project if it included a meaningful and significant transit investment.

(09-29-2023, 08:23 AM)westwardloo Wrote: I  do agree with the idea of pedestrian link over the Grand. I think that would be a "relatively cheap" addition to the project that could bring a lot of benefits for accessibility of biking and walking in the region. I would love for the Region to look at more Pedestrian bridges over the grand. (Snyders flats to university would be open up a huge park space to residents of Waterloo)

"Investments like this will be looked on very badly by future generations Whether those future generations are sitting on buses watching a mostly empty four lane highway" - 
 
Hahaha I know I am pissed off at my grandparents for building the conestoga parkway and so glad they decided not to build HWY 24 to brantford...... Oh wait that is not how I feel at all.   Tell me have never driven the current HWY 7 at rush hour without actually saying it.

I'm assuming this is sarcastic, but it's foolish at best. There is no guarantee the future will look like today, and actually very very strong evidence that it won't. Climate change is not a joke, it is happening. And either we solve it, by reversing a whole lot of the decisions we've made, or we don't reverse it and the future looks even less like today.

Leaving that aside, you might not be pissed at your grandparents, but your grandparents had a lot more excuses for their ignorance than we do. At this point, we have absolutely no justification for deciding to build a second highway between two cities rather than invest in any transit option at all.

And that's a moderate position...lots of people think there's no excuse for people in the 60s and 70s not to have seen what a grift car dependent sprawl is.
Reply
(09-29-2023, 03:33 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: As for improving roads, I don't see that this improves road access. It only improves road CAPACITY...which is only needed because there is no other option.

This deserves to be highlighted. We already have roads everywhere; most road construction at this point is just a capacity increase, which in at least many and probably most cases could be better provided by transit investments.
Reply


What sort of alternatives to a highway between Waterloo Region and Guelph are you guys envisioning anyway? Like...obviously we're not going to build an LRT. Almost nobody except the dorks who wear Lycra or the odd person who takes a leisure day trip will bike between between the two cities, it's just way too much effort/time wasted. Most people are going to take the GO train, bus or drive...the latter two needing roads.

Like I always hear the hate for roads the people who absolutely hate cars, but it's rare that they acknowledge the purpose and necessity of roads. Or propose good alternatives. I mean how do you plan on shipping freight and stuff without good roads? It's usually just a highly emotional or ideological argument that cars are bad, roads are bad, everyone needs to stop using them and we need to direct all road budget to MUTs and other crap. Those are good, sure, but they aren't the same as a highway.

More highway capacity between Waterloo Region, Guelph and everything else westward that isn't in the vicinity of the 401 is good and people will benefit from this, otherwise we wouldn't be planning the changes. We can built MUTs and stuff for the people that want to bike between the two cities (you can do this already anyways and take take side roads to be safer...and of course we need a better bridge across the river for pedestrians/cyclists). But this is a highway and a highway serves an entirely different function that bikes and buses.
Reply
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.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 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