Urban Toronto - Powered by vBulletin
UrbanToronto News - the latest headlines
Topping Off August 2014: What's Hot on UrbanToronto
ALSO
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: Kitchener: Hwy 8 Highway Expansion and Mussel Relocation Project

  1. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DHLawrence85 View Post
    Just connecting the Hanlon to the four-lane section south of Puslinch will do a world of good to 6. I love driving by the PCC car that that one farmer has at the end of his driveway, but it's not worth going ten under the limit behind a fleet of 18-wheelers.
    Yeah, it's supposed to come one day ... remember when they delayed the widening of 401 between 6-north and 6-south for a couple of years so they could co-ordinate with that project? What was that, 1994? 1996? I guess it's a good job they didn't wait any longer ...


  2. #17

    Default

    Apparently the business lobby in Morriston has been holding back the bypass.

  3. #18

    Default

    What businesses in Morriston are there to lobby? I can not believe that they have been responsible.

  4. #19

    Default

    Probably a couple of stores that get a lot of drive-by business. As usual, minor interests that hold the rest of us hostage. It reminds me of some of those small towns you see along US Interstates. To keep the locals happy, when they built the interstates in the 1950s and 1960s by-passing the town, they built one partial interchange at one end of town, and another at the other; forcing anyone who get's off for gas or something, to then drive slowly through the entire town before getting back onto the highway.

  5. #20

    Default No More Highway Expansion

    I may be a lone voice in this thread....

    But I'm getting quite tired of, and depressed by the continuing expansion/widening/creation of highways in this province.

    With few exceptions, they have only led to urban sprawl, pollution and congestion, all at the taxpayers expense.

    I am not saying we should remove all highways or roads, by any means, nor that there is not ever a place for the odd small-scale widening to address a design quirk caused bottleneck.

    But I would really like to see the overwhelming effort made by the province and local municipalities to intensify, to curb, nay, eliminate sprawl and to get people to choose transit/cycling/walking/inter-city rail etc. for their transportation option.

    In K-W the efforts should be focused on construction of the new LRT, improved bus service, better cycling facilities, sidewalks everywhere (and nicely streetscaped ones at that); and on improved intercity rail from VIA and GO.

    If all that was done, and still #8 was bottlenecked, I'd be the first to say we need to fix it. But I want to see the other more progressive options delivered first, then we can properly gauge whether more highway here is essential.

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShonTron View Post
    What businesses in Morriston are there to lobby? I can not believe that they have been responsible.
    There's a gas station, a store, Enver's, another restaurant, and possibly one or two other businesses.

    I agree with you about new highways. In the GTA, with the exception of a couple of bottlenecks, I'd much rather see resources directed to mass transit expansion and regional rail. I'm more supportive of intercity highways that reduce the isolation in some parts of our province and genuinely improve economic growth. Brantford, for example, has managed to reverse a lot of its decline since the 403 was finished.

  7. #22

    Default

    Yeah like having 6 lanes from Toronto to Windsor would be there to allow for Truck traffic to move in a more safe and faster way.

    Having 2 lanes with heavy truck traffic is a pain to drive in.

  8. Default

    There hasn't been a post here in a while, but thought I'd post an update.

    http://www.therecord.com/opinion/col...highways-widen

    Better late than never as highways widen

    By Jeff Outhit, Road Ahead
    Ontario is concluding the delayed expansion of a local highway while launching the delayed expansion of another.

    All four eastbound lanes are now open on Highway 8 between Kitchener and Cambridge. By late November, three westbound lanes should be open from Sportsworld Drive to west of the Grand River. However, the planned fourth (outer) lane will stay closed this winter to complete work on the bridge over the Grand.

    Highway 8 expansion concludes next year with final paving, gravel placement along the shoulders and final bridge work. The project cost $87 million.

    After missing most of the construction season, work launches this fall to widen the Highway 7/8 expressway in west Kitchener, between Courtland Avenue and Fischer-Hallman Road.

    The project is estimated at $150 million and will replace several bridges. It includes widening to six lanes, the installation of a median barrier, better lighting and extended noise barriers.

    This year, shoulders are to be paved to accommodate work planned for the median. The latest project staging provided by the Ministry of Transportation calls for:

    • 2012 — Work on the Fischer-Hallman bridge and the west end of the expressway, west of Westmount Road.

    • 2013 — Work on bridges at Westmount, at CN Rail and at Courtland. Work on the expressway from west of Westmount to west of Homer Watson.

    • 2014 — Work on bridges at Homer Watson and at Ottawa Street. Work on the expressway from Ottawa to Homer Watson.

    • 2015 — Final paving.

    The province is working with regional government to finalize a remodelled interchange at Homer Watson. The plan calls for twin roundabouts at Ottawa and at Alpine Road and a second access ramp onto the eastbound expressway, from the proposed Alpine roundabout.

    All this expansion is regrettably overdue. Planning documents show Highway 8 was originally supposed to be widened by last year. Highway 7/8 widening was originally planned to conclude by 2013.

    The province is not planning to widen the Highway 85 expressway through Waterloo, even though its four lanes get congested and traffic is expected to increase by up to 20 per cent by 2016. Instead, the highway will be repaved, bridges repaired and lighting improved in the next few years.

    The province is watching to see if rail transit, planned to launch in 2017, will help take cars off the expressway. Hmm.

    Jeff Outhit can be reached at 519-895- 5642 or jouthit@therecord.com.

  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LRGM View Post
    The province is not planning to widen the Highway 85 expressway through Waterloo ... The province is watching to see if rail transit, planned to launch in 2017, will help take cars off the expressway. Hmm.
    Thanks for the update! Yikes ... seems optimistic. I wouldn't think the LRT, that doesn't even connect into Cambridge, will alleviate much traffic on the 85; I'd have thought most of what it was relieving would be on King, Weber, etc. Though perhaps it will take a little of the traffic heading to the Universities/Rim that get's off on Bridgeport. Given that really all they have to do is widen one structure (Bridgeport), and add a single lane from about Lancaster to University north (it's already pretty much already there from Bridgeport to University South), it seems a shame that such a relatively minor project isn't happening.

    Given the state of RIM, perhaps the loss of thousands of RIM jobs in Waterloo is more likely to relieve pressure.

  10. Default

    What boggles my mind is that the Lancaster and Bridgeport interchanges are already wide enough to support 3 lanes of highway. All they have to do is throw down a little asphalt, and repaint. The way the highway squeezes from 4 lanes to 2, then the Lancaster onramp merges in, and 100m later, the Bridgeport offramp appears. Even if they don't want to expand the highway to 3 lanes, some merciful relief would be offered simply by connecting the Lancaster onramp to the Bridgeport offramp.

    There seems to be a bit of a problem with highway improvements, where if they're going to do anything at all, it has to be to rebuild everything to account for the demand for 30 years from now. Some of these things were overbuilt back in the day to support gradual expansion, but they seem to want to throw that out and rebuild to the new standards.
    Last edited by Markster; 2011-Dec-05 at 12:54.

  11. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markster View Post
    What boggles my mind is that the Lancaster and Bridgeport interchanges are already wide enough to support 3 lanes of highway. All they have to do is throw down a little asphalt, and repaint. The way the highway squeezes from 4 lanes to 2, then the Lancaster onramp merges in, and 100m later, the Bridgeport offramp appears. Even if they don't want to expand the highway to 3 lanes, some merciful relief would be offered simply by connecting the Lancaster onramp to the Bridgeport offramp.
    Yes, that's an interesting thought ... would be a pretty cheap way to get to a third lane exiting at Bridgeport ... though I'd think that to really deal with the bottleneck, you'd need to get 6 lanes across Bridgeport - and I'm assuming the structure can't handle that. But still, compared to the money that's been dropped between Lancaster and ... well know Fischer-Hallman, and down to the 401, simply widening that one structure and a bit of asphalt to get 6 lanes to University (westbound) seems pretty small potatoes.

  12. Default

    The existing bridge is perfectly fine. Take a look for yourself.

    That bridge is easily wide enough to support 3 through lanes with an off ramp lane. (And still have shoulders on both sides.)
    Certainly, it's probably a metre too narrow for current MTO standards, but likely when it was built, it was always planned to have an extra lane painted on it. The same with the neighbouring Lancaster bridge.

  13. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markster View Post
    The existing bridge is perfectly fine. Take a look for yourself.

    That bridge is easily wide enough to support 3 through lanes with an off ramp lane. (And still have shoulders on both sides.)
    Certainly, it's probably a metre too narrow for current MTO standards, but likely when it was built, it was always planned to have an extra lane painted on it. The same with the neighbouring Lancaster bridge.
    I agree about Lancaster - more than enough space. But your seeing something I'm not at Bridgeport - particularly southbound. Perhaps you could squeeze it all in northbound - but I don't see where you get 3 through lanes, one merging lane, and two shoulders southbound, without widening the structure.

  14. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markster View Post
    What boggles my mind is that the Lancaster and Bridgeport interchanges are already wide enough to support 3 lanes of highway. All they have to do is throw down a little asphalt, and repaint. The way the highway squeezes from 4 lanes to 2, then the Lancaster onramp merges in, and 100m later, the Bridgeport offramp appears. Even if they don't want to expand the highway to 3 lanes, some merciful relief would be offered simply by connecting the Lancaster onramp to the Bridgeport offramp.

    There seems to be a bit of a problem with highway improvements, where if they're going to do anything at all, it has to be to rebuild everything to account for the demand for 30 years from now. Some of these things were overbuilt back in the day to support gradual expansion, but they seem to want to throw that out and rebuild to the new standards.
    I agree. I've been thinking that for a long time now. Even if the North bound lanes had that 3rd lane exiting at Bridgeport.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •