Highway 7

[bcwessel]

valid question that has been brought before. seems we wont see `new` highway anytime soon at least add one lane on each side of existing hwy.

Might sound like band aid solution but congestion is awful.

Better yet, we could redevelop Highway 7 into a true mobility corridor. What if the route were widened to provide dedicated bus and cycle lanes, and funding for the brand new corridor was shifted to funding for GO, GRT, and Guelph Transit links along this route? It would certainly be more in-keeping with the Province's commitment to improving active and bus/rail transit.

[KLM]

Better yet, we could redevelop Highway 7 into a true mobility corridor. What if the route were widened to provide dedicated bus and cycle lanes, and funding for the brand new corridor was shifted to funding for GO, GRT, and Guelph Transit links along this route? It would certainly be more in-keeping with the Province's commitment to improving active and bus/rail transit.

I agree with you, that would be great but is there any willingness from province to do something like that? I personally would rather go with your idea than to build spankin` new highway thru farmland.
I know for the fact that Guelph Transit in their business plan to make bus route from Guelph to K-W.

[bcwessel]

I agree with you, that would be great but is there any willingness from province to do something like that? I personally would rather go with your idea than to build spankin` new highway thru farmland.
I know for the fact that Guelph Transit in their business plan to make bus route from Guelph to K-W.

If the decision to rebuild Highway 7 were a strict matter of following through on already-adopted Provincial policy, with regards to Places To Grow reurbanization strategies and other attempts to shift modal share in Ontario away from full private automobile dominance (GRT LRT, Ottawa Transpo LRT, MiWay, Viva, Transit Ci..., er Transportation Ci..., er One City) then yes, the McGuinty Liberals should be more than willing to expand transit service on this important corridor. However, as others have speculated previously, the sudden appetite to rebuild Highway 7 appears to be more of an attempt to placate angry bi-election voters than to develop a coherent, efficient inter-regional network of quality transit routes.

[Duck]

Better yet, we could redevelop Highway 7 into a true mobility corridor. What if the route were widened to provide dedicated bus and cycle lanes, and funding for the brand new corridor was shifted to funding for GO, GRT, and Guelph Transit links along this route? It would certainly be more in-keeping with the Province's commitment to improving active and bus/rail transit.

I can't imagine that there are very many people who commute between Guelph and Kitchener on a bicycle.

-Iain

[bcwessel]

I can't imagine that there are very many people who commute between Guelph and Kitchener on a bicycle.

-Iain

Of course not; there's no place for their bikes to go (safely and comfortably). People don't swim between Kitchener and Guelph, either.

[mpd618]

I can't imagine that there are very many people who commute between Guelph and Kitchener on a bicycle.

And yet, it's flat and not actually all that far. In the Netherlands, people travel such distances on paved paths separate from motor vehicles.

We all have to stop thinking of people as either being "cyclists" or not. Whether or not they currently ride is a separate question from whether they would ride if you made it easy and pleasant for them to do so. Highway 7 is about as hostile a place to legally cycle as you are likely to find in the area. When you make it essentially impossible for people to make a particular transport choice, concluding on that basis that it's not worth investing in infrastructure for that choice is... a little circular.

[RangersFan]

Better yet, we could redevelop Highway 7 into a true mobility corridor. What if the route were widened to provide dedicated bus and cycle lanes, and funding for the brand new corridor was shifted to funding for GO, GRT, and Guelph Transit links along this route? It would certainly be more in-keeping with the Province's commitment to improving active and bus/rail transit.

I would really love that idea, if only the idea could catch serious attention from the Ontario Government.

[Smore]

because the only thing not done on this new highway is taking the land and putting shovels in the ground, maybe we can imagine that the old highway will become a bike path when the trucks with big mirrors and distracted drivers are all gone to the freeway!

[Waterlooite]

Of course not; there's no place for their bikes to go (safely and comfortably). People don't swim between Kitchener and Guelph, either.

I doubt that if even the most perfect bike trail or bike lanes between Guelph and Kitchener/Waterloo were built (with all those important "safe" and "comfortable" elements) that many people would commute by bike either. I don't think this is a fair or realistic expectation or hope at all, regardless of the situation or environs.

[zanate]

I doubt that if even the most perfect bike trail or bike lanes between Guelph and Kitchener/Waterloo were built (with all those important "safe" and "comfortable" elements) that many people would commute by bike either. I don't think this is a fair or realistic expectation or hope at all, regardless of the situation or environs.

Well, you're going to need a little more than just a nice intercity trail. You will also need connectivity at both ends to origin points and destinations. The Guelph automall is hardly a panacea of bike permeability!

Circa 2005, my spouse worked at a business located on the first left turn off Highway 7 once in the Guelph city limits and, despite her not being any kind of Serious Cyclist (tm), she frequently biked there, via Maryhill. The main obstacles she had to overcome were not the distance at all, but rather getting out of KW (she chose to drive to Schaefer Park on Bloomingdale Road) and the lack of any shower or change facility at her workplace. The physical route was an obstacle too. Wellington Road 30 is less bad than Highway 7, but not exactly casual cycling territory.

But at least for her, getting to her destination in Guelph was not a problem, and with that obstacle removed, she made the trip.

So, your doubt that "many" would commute is something I share, but not because the distance is unmanageable. It's that the supporting bike networks within both Kitchener and Guelph need to improve a lot before we would tap the full potential of an intercity trail. You may not see "many" commuters, but you would definitely see a lot more.

But on the other hand, 3-metre trails are hardly the stuff of $400M highway projects. Comparatively speaking, they're extremely cheap. The commute potential will grow as our bike networks grow, and in the meantime recreational potential is great: this for instance is a popular trail, and it doesn't even connect two major urban centres.

[zanate]

As an afterthought, I'd like to point out that the usefulness of intercity cycling paths mirrors the usefulness of intercity transit. Taken in isolation, you can construct a case against it (and pretty much any single bike path.) Will this one path result in tons of new cyclists using it? No? Then it's not worth it.

The same goes for transit: a Kitchener-Guelph train link isn't very useful if you can't easily get around Guelph without a car. You could make the same argument about a new road, too, if it failed to connect to any other roads. The fault is not that of the path or the transit route or the road, it is the lack of a supporting network.

You might say "build the supporting network first" and in some situations it would be the right thing to do. In others, you have to consider that this kind of link is part of the supporting network for other routes, and we should get on with it already.

[bcwessel]

As an afterthought, I'd like to point out that the usefulness of intercity cycling paths mirrors the usefulness of intercity transit. Taken in isolation, you can construct a case against it (and pretty much any single bike path.) Will this one path result in tons of new cyclists using it? No? Then it's not worth it.

The same goes for transit: a Kitchener-Guelph train link isn't very useful if you can't easily get around Guelph without a car. You could make the same argument about a new road, too, if it failed to connect to any other roads. The fault is not that of the path or the transit route or the road, it is the lack of a supporting network.

You might say "build the supporting network first" and in some situations it would be the right thing to do. In others, you have to consider that this kind of link is part of the supporting network for other routes, and we should get on with it already.

The roll-out of bicycle infrastructure, at least in Kitchener, appears to be happening during times of scheduled road maintenance, which makes sense from the standpoint of only having to do the work once. This saves not only on cost, but also on construction-related road closures and the like. The downside of this strategy is that some of the new infrastructure is being built in places of low network connnectivity. However, if we take the long view, we can see those new, underused lanes eventually becoming important sections of a more complete bike system. I think it would be prudent to extend this logic to intercity connections, with the expectation that as conditions improve in adjacent built areas between which people want to travel, these routes will become increasingly important for those who need/choose to do so by bicycle.

[Duck]

Beyond the statement released last week from the government about the project, have any other formal documents (maps, plans, etc.) come forward with regard to the new highway? Maps and interchange configurations are always exciting.

If I remember the history of this correctly, wasn't the original proposal to widen the existing Hwy 7 by adding another lane (so Victoria/Woodlawn just blend together really)? At what point was the proposal shifted to building a whole new highway?

How does the design of a project like this work? Is there currently a small team tucked away in an office somewhere actually dseigning the details of everything (much as is happening with LRT)? Or is the project still just "an idea"?

-Iain

[Smore]

there are configuration figures, I saw them at an open house last yr (ish?). Don't know where online though...

[timio]

I'll believe it when I see it: Construction to start in 2015

[WaterlooNative]

I keep crossing my fingers that the province will decide to invest in higher order intercity transit instead. Given that Guelph is just finishing upgrading their transit stations downtown, and Kitchener-Waterloo will be doing the same shortly, why do we need to expand this highway when other avenues to move people have not been explored?

Why do we need to solve a 40-year-old problem with a 40-year-old solution when instead we could solve today's problem with today's solutions? Building another highway will simply beget more car use.

[KevinL]

Plus we have a promise from Metrolinx to electrify the Kitchener GO line, which means EMUs could easily be setup on this line in the local region.

[Duck]

I could see something like this here, now, with existing infrastructure:



I don't think electrification would necessarily automatically make the line better suited for service between Kitchener and Guelph... but the justification could be used to force the argument that "hey, since they put all this effort into adding a second track and adding catenary, we'd better offer inter-city service". DMU's like Bombardier TALENT (Ottawa "O-Train") could run today. But the line is at capacity for the current signaling system IIRC, which is why we won't see any more train service added.

Guelph would have to seriously beef up it's bus system if people were to take this seriously; the connections at the ends. Last time I rode it (admittedly that was about 6 years ago), the bus in the subdivision I lived in came once every hour. Not very convenient at all. Later, I still worked in Guelph but live in Kitchener, and could get between my office there (Southgate industrial park) and home (Cedarwoods) in about 25 minutes. If I had to do it with transit, as much as I love trains, I couldn't see it taking any less than an hour, even with express buses. The network is not dense enough.

-Iain

[dunkalunk]

I've done a bit of refining on my alternate Highway 7 concept (Gmap).



In order to cut down on construction costs, the freeway portions would only be constructed between the Conestoga Parkway and Breslau, and in Guelph. The right-of-way would continue to follow the existing Highway 7 in the rural areas. It would be widened to 2 or 4 lanes with concrete barrier and paralell bikeway and include turbo roundabouts at major intersections:



These kind of roundabout force spiralling of traffic flow and work best when most traffic is running primarily on one axis as it does on Highway 7.

Here's a close-up of the interchange:



Pushpins are traffic lights, Placemarks are Roundabouts. This interchange is only 3 levels instead of a 4 level stack and uses many of the existing ramps. There is one traffic light on the WB-SB ramp to allow for metering of traffic onto Conestoga Parkway, Encourage use of the Park and Ride at the GO station, and to reduce the interchange to three levels. If the watertable permits, the SB-EB flyover could instead be built as a flyunder to remove visual obtrusiveness (not there is much in that area anyways).

Thoughts?

[mpd618]

In order to cut down on construction costs, the freeway portions would only be constructed between the Conestoga Parkway and Breslau, and in Guelph. The right-of-way would continue to follow the existing Highway 7 in the rural areas. It would be widened to 2 or 4 lanes with concrete barrier and paralell bikeway and include turbo roundabouts at major intersections:

Hmm. Is there even a point to making it a "full" divided highway between the Conestoga Parkway and the edge of town? Seems like you could get the same benefit of by-passing Victoria Street by just building a regular road, albeit without any intersections between the two endpoints. This just means you could just as well replace two of the interchanges along this stretch with roundabouts. The end result is still a major reduction in travel time (induced demand aside), but it's much more efficient infrastructure.

The many hundreds of millions saved as compared to the planned (for God-knows-when) Highway 7 would allow it to get built sooner, and mean there's enough left over to build some high-quality train service between Kitchener and Guelph.

Of course, the sprawl speculators who probably own much of the farmland near Highway 7 wouldn't be so happy about not having a fancy new highway to justify land-use changes and attract buyers.