<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19507">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>all good points- I hope you can bring them forward
to the appropriate Councils/Councillors very soon - If you want a shock to
realize how one portion of this planned highway is really drastic, expensive,
and nuts if you ask me, go to the very back of Golf Steakhouses' parking lot
that overlooks the Grand River. Picture a highway coming from up high on your
right off the end of Wellington Street, going over the river several hundred
feet above it, either by a bridge or 'with fill' as Robert says below (would
that still require some kind of low bridge so the water can still flow through
it I hope?), stretching from the high point on your right over to a low point on
your left near where the monument place is - Nelson Stone Centre and the
Ram Dham Hindu Temple on Bridge Street. This is a <EM>gigantic </EM>undertaking.
It is quite a slope, so good luck in winter driving with exposure on all sides
to winter weather. Their examination of other less disruptive and expensive
alternatives, some of which are suggested below, is well -warranted, should be
encouraged (still!), and could save us, those who have to foot the bill,
million$. Heaven knows they've had tons of time to consider much less costly
options, so I don't know why they keep insisting on this one.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Lori S. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=mill@continuum.org href="mailto:mill@continuum.org">Robert
Milligan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=eleanor7000@gmail.com
href="mailto:eleanor7000@gmail.com">Eleanor Grant</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=All@gren.ca
href="mailto:All@gren.ca">* GREN2</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 08, 2014 12:43
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [All] Hwy 7</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Hi Eleanor (&
All), </SPAN>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Good thinking — I also have been
involved in preventing a possible new Hwy 7 (dating back twenty years or so).
Our views are somewhat similar and complementary — although I’ve never
had the opportunity to have a discussion with you!</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">A 4-lane </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Shirley </SPAN><B
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Av</B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> / </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">BC
Rd (full length service road space limitations?) could have been continued
along </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Shirley</SPAN><B
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> Dr </B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">so as to
meet Victoria St (near the GR Bridge). But “conveniently",
Shirley</SPAN><B style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> Dr</B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> was designed to be a very narrow 2-lanes with
some buildings too close to the road (ordered from on-high?). As a result, use
of a limiting Shirley </SPAN><B style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Av</B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> / BC Rd connection to Victoria St N at Lackner Blvd
is almost a necessity. </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">A </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">possible
traffic circle at Victoria/BC/Lackner could minimize traffic light
delays. And an agreement with CN/GEXR could prevent possible longish
freight delays during peak hours — if by some miracle a new era of
railway/municipality cooperation is ushered in.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">The RMW is likely planning to use
fill — not an expensive bridge — in extending Wellington St.
through the ravine. </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"> I’d
suggest the same in extending to </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Shirley </SPAN><B
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Av</B><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">. In fact,
this would be a small step towards a stage 2 where part of RMW’s Hwy 7 plan
(see KW Mapart) that extends over to Ebycrest Rd and beyond could be curved
down towards current Hwy 7 so as to meet it near Spitzig Rd. — thus
giving a faster by-passing connection of Victoria St. And perhaps the same
type of by-pass idea could be used in Guelph to connect with the Hanlon
Pky.</SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">The pressure to build a new Hwy 7 is at
least coming from developers who own land along the route, and from Chair Ken
Seiling, a former Mayor of Woolwich Township, who seeks it as part of
his legacy, etc. (guess what I mean by etc).</SPAN><BR
style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 15px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">Robert M</DIV>
<DIV><BR style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 15px">
<DIV>On Apr 7, 2014, at 2:46 AM, Eleanor Grant <<A
href="mailto:eleanor7000@gmail.com">eleanor7000@gmail.com</A>>
wrote:</DIV><BR class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<P dir=ltr>Hi All - </P>
<P dir=ltr>A little essay I'm composing on Hwy 7. I'd appreciate
corrections and fact fill-ins ....</P>
<P dir=ltr>Eleanor</P>
<P dir=ltr>----------------------------<BR>2014 April 7</P>
<P dir=ltr>Paving over prime productive farmland for any purpose must always
be seen as a last resort and something to avoid if at all possible.
With this in mind, the cities of Waterloo Region are trying to solidify
their Countryside Lines and contain all development within them.</P>
<P dir=ltr>So it's troubling to see further steps now being taken toward
building an 18 km new Highway 7 across Waterloo-Wellington - a highway the
need for which has never been amply demonstrated.</P>
<P dir=ltr>The construction date has been postponed several times, and is
only promised again whenever an election is looming. This may have
given opponents the false hope that the highway would never be built after
all. <BR>But the March 29 WR Record carried a notice that the Initial
Design Report for the project was now completed and would be on view at
Kitchener City Hall starting April 9. And a few days later an Ont
government pre-budget document announced that construction would begin in
2016. Which Kitchener Centre MPP John Milloy, the government house
leader, quickly corrected to 2015, perhaps under pressure from local
business interests.</P>
<P dir=ltr>This date is getting too close for comfort.</P>
<P dir=ltr>We all agree that doing nothing is not an option. The
present highway narrows to 2 lanes from Spitzig Rd, just outside Kitchener,
to Wellington Rd 32. It's a bottleneck for truck traffic and
commuters, and makes access to the area's greenhouse businesses
difficult. Crashes and fatalities are increasing.</P>
<P dir=ltr>Yet no explanation is ever provided for not simply widening the
road. If this stretch of Hwy 7 - apx 10 km - were made 4 lanes, plus
turning lanes where needed, the bottleneck would be eliminated. One
set of traffic lights and a short service road could provide access to the
businesses. </P>
<P dir=ltr>One more thing would be needed: improved access to the Conestoga
Expwy, bypassing Victoria St. [perhaps by a bridge over the ravine at
the end of Wellington St to avoid the 2 turns on Shirley, and widening
Bingeman Centre Rd. Is the rail crossing near Victoria a
concern? I remember being delayed there for 9 minutes when on my way
to work in Guelph one time. Also if B C Rd became a highway, would
access to small businesses along there suffer? A service road to them
perhaps? ] </P>
<P dir=ltr>Until improving the present road is tried, no money should be
spent to take land out of cultivation and build a controlled access highway
that's not needed. Improving the present highway is all that would be
needed for a generation or more.</P>
<P dir=ltr>By a generation from now, other significant things may have
changed which would make intensive road travel between Kitchener and Guelph
less needful. For example:</P>
<P dir=ltr>- All-day 2-way rapid GO train service between Kitchener, Guelph,
and Toronto, also recently promised by Premier Wynne. We hope the
political will will be there, whoever is in government, to complete this
ambitious project of buying tracks and upgrading them for rapid
publicly-owned passenger service. A much better use of public
money.</P>
<P dir=ltr>- Access to GO trains through a good bus grid in both Guelph and
KCW, plus frequent and rapid light rail through KCW.</P>
<P dir=ltr>- Park-and-ride GO stations at Breslau and perhaps also at the
edge of Guelph.</P>
<P dir=ltr>- A shifting of the manufacturing centre of gravity south to
Maple Grove Rd. If this is accompanied with good transit, including a
good bus grid in Cambridge and connectivity between Hespeler and Guelph,
there could be fewer commuters on the Kitchener-Guelph highway. [But I
can't figure out how truck traffic will get in and out of Mpl Grove.
And by removing more and more commuters from highways, are we simply
building highways for trucks??? ]</P>
<P dir=ltr>The present 10-km bottleneck on Highway 7 is annoying as heck to
those who must drive it regularly - yet the difference in travel time is
actually small. If you could drive 10 km at 100 km/hr it would take
you 6 minutes, while if you have to drive it at 50 km/hr it takes 12
minutes. A saving of 6 minutes! Is this a drain on the economy,
or just on our nerves? Education about this fact might calm people
down. The extra 6 minutes can be planned for and spent listening to
favourite music, for example.</P>
<P dir=ltr>For the sake of 6 minutes, do we really want to tear up a
beautiful productive farming community interlaced with pristine wetlands,
and spend over $400 million on construction? (Where are all the people
who objected to the cost of the LRT!) And leave a strip of land
between the two highways that will be useless for any purpose but ribbon
development of the most unsightly kind?</P>
<P dir=ltr>It would be helpful to know where the pressure is coming from to
build this white elephant and avoid widening the present highway. Is
it too late to smoke them out, and have this long-overdue public
conversation?</P>
<P dir=ltr>-------------------------</P>
<P dir=ltr>(Damn I wish somebody would find a Jefferson salamander in
Hopewell
Creek:)<BR></P>_______________________________________________<BR>All
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:All@gren.ca">All@gren.ca</A><BR>http://mail.gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>All mailing
list<BR>All@gren.ca<BR>http://mail.gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>