Veterans Memorial Parkway - freeway conversion

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by Wharn

I hate to break this to you but most people in London don't use transit to begin with.

Hey, your logic is terrible. Don't build a great transit system because currently Londoners don't use transit??? Let's use that logic in another situation. Hey, Steve Jobs, don't invent an iPad because no one is using Tablets. Hey Kitchener, stop planning your rapid transit because no one uses the system right now. How about we say "let's design a transit system that will attract a lot of Londoners? Sometimes, you have to have a vision and build a great system to attract people. London's vision has never been bold. We do everything piecemeal.

Building a Ring Road is the last thing London needs. We need more suburbs and sprawl like we need another hole in the head. I would be ok with Veterans becoming a freeway at some point, but the whole ring road thing will not help us travel IN the city. It will suck life out of our core. Investing in a great transit system will help us IN the city. I know that the people of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto love their rapid transit - and that is why Victoria, Winnipeg, K/W and Quebec City are investing in rapid transit. We should be doing the same.

[ForestryW]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Hey, your logic is terrible. Don't build a great transit system because currently Londoners don't use transit??? Let's use that logic in another situation. Hey, Steve Jobs, don't invent an iPad because no one is using Tablets. Hey Kitchener, stop planning your rapid transit because no one uses the system right now. How about we say "let's design a transit system that will attract a lot of Londoners? Sometimes, you have to have a vision and build a great system to attract people. London's vision has never been bold. We do everything piecemeal.

Building a Ring Road is the last thing London needs. We need more suburbs and sprawl like we need another hole in the head. I would be ok with Veterans becoming a freeway at some point, but the whole ring road thing will not help us travel IN the city. It will suck life out of our core. Investing in a great transit system will help us IN the city. I know that the people of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto love their rapid transit - and that is why Victoria, Winnipeg, K/W and Quebec City are investing in rapid transit. We should be doing the same.

Yes, exactly. Well put on all counts.

[Pimpmasterdac]

Parkway study takes another step

Joe Fontana pushed through Monday a sped-up plan to study extending Veterans Memorial Parkway south of Hwy. 401 — a sure sign of his willingness to punch development beyond London’s growth boundary.

The mayor fought off a call to delay by about two months the $300,000 environmental review needed to consider extending the road south of the 401 to Wilton Grove Rd., convincing a council committee’s majority to set the stage for the project now.

...
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/.../news/london/2011/03/28/pf-17787666.html

---
I like the sounds of this, it means Fontana is serious about making VMP a freeway sooner rather than a 62 year pipedream!

My only concern, one raised by Haljackey is if the interchange is going to be a Parclo or a free-flowing interchange if the city decided to extend VMP south? $30 million for an interchange sounds like a lot, so I'm not sure if that's for a Parclo or the free-blowing one.

Either way, good that there getting all this EA redtape outta the way!

[haljackey]

No additional details at all have been given about the 401/VMP interchange.

From what I know there are three possible designs at this point.

1. Status quo. (Trumpet interchange that exists now)
2. Reconstructed trumpet interchange. The loop ramp's circumstance would be much larger, making it safer as the turn is not as sharp and allows for higher speeds. The ramp from 401 EB to VMP (NB) would also be not as sharp and be widened from 1 to 2 lanes.
3. Parclo A-4 extending the VMP south to Wilton Grove Road. This means stoplights must be built for 401 EB to VMP NB and 401 WB to VMP SB. A parclo also means the interchange is no longer free-flowing and significantly decreases the efficiency and capacity of the interchange.

I think a Clover-turbine interchange (also known as a two-level cloverstack) would be the best option because it is free-flowing and is relatively cheap to build (only 2 levels). Weaving is eliminated on this junction too.

Pic of the junction:


Build this type of junction if you want to extend the VMP south! Since the land around the 401/VMP is undeveloped, secure the needed right of way now!

Also why no talk of a northern extension of the VMP? An extension north is more justified than an extension south in my opinion.


EDIT: I asked Joe on his Facebook page about this interchange. I didn't want it to be too formal so I wrote on his wall lol!

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Also why no talk of a northern extension of the VMP? An extension north is more justified than an extension south in my opinion.

I think at this point the southern extension is most justified, because of the amount of industrial development south of the 401 east of Highbury.

However, I think the province should be funding it.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Hey, your logic is terrible. Don't build a great transit system because currently Londoners don't use transit??? Let's use that logic in another situation. Hey, Steve Jobs, don't invent an iPad because no one is using Tablets. Hey Kitchener, stop planning your rapid transit because no one uses the system right now. How about we say "let's design a transit system that will attract a lot of Londoners? Sometimes, you have to have a vision and build a great system to attract people. London's vision has never been bold. We do everything piecemeal.

Building a Ring Road is the last thing London needs. We need more suburbs and sprawl like we need another hole in the head. I would be ok with Veterans becoming a freeway at some point, but the whole ring road thing will not help us travel IN the city. It will suck life out of our core. Investing in a great transit system will help us IN the city. I know that the people of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto love their rapid transit - and that is why Victoria, Winnipeg, K/W and Quebec City are investing in rapid transit. We should be doing the same.

I can see you failed to read the rest of my post, and you also failed to read past posts made by me in this thread. I advocate a balance of roads and transit and I was only pointing out the lunacy of focusing solely on rapid transit in a small, low-density industrial city with no discernible main corridor (North-South, which road will it be? Wonderland, Richmond/Wellington, Adelaide or Highbury? They all more or less have the same traffic levels! They're all congested!) and no central employment district (We have the University and Downtown, but also a whole ton of industries along the rail lines and the periphery). And you have yet to explain to me how European cities like Lisbon, Madrid, Paris and Stuttgart all manage to have medium-density development with combined transit-freeway networks.

The answer is that freeways don't cause sprawl, bad planning does. London currently has nothing beyond a little stub of freeway sticking out of its ass and it has sprawl that is worse than just about any Ontario city that I've seen. You're correct that London's vision has never been bold, which is why we have nothing special in the way of roads or transit. Building either one takes a leap of faith.

[Kokkei Mizu]

Just came across this story today, even though it's a few days old. Still, I thought people would wanna know council is going ahead with the study.

London Mayor Joe Fontana's ability to push forward his growth-focused agenda faced a key early test at city hall Monday night, and he passed.

With an eye to doubling London's annual growth -- which would grease the rails for his promised four-year tax freeze -- Fontana's contentious bid to spend $300,000 studying extending Veterans Memorial Parkway beyond Hwy. 401 into rural lands passed 8-5.

The extension would take the parkway beyond the 401 and outside the city's growth boundary, a city-imposed limit Fontana appears willing to breach.

"It's crucial," he said of the study before Monday's debate.

Monday's vote underscores the realities of this council on two fronts, both relating to how it handles the growth issues that are becoming increasingly prominent.

First, the issue pitted Fontana against the councillor who's emerging as the key voice of debate with the mayor -- Joni Baechler, who pushes a more measured approach to development that critics unfairly slag as anti-growth.

Secondly, the vote breakdown was no huge surprise to observers who've become accustomed to the allegiances on this council.

Fontana's motion was supported by him, Denise Brown, Paul Van Meerbergen, Dale Henderson, Matt Brown, Steve Orser, Bud Polhill and Sandy White.

It was opposed by Baechler, Judy Bryant, Nancy Branscombe, Paul Hubert and Harold Usher. Two councillors were absent -- Joe Swan and Bill Armstrong.

For Baechler, the $300,000 environmental study could be a waste of money, considering the province hasn't yet committed money to an upgrade of the Parkway-401 interchange that would be crucial to the extension's success.

"If the province says no to the interchange . . . the (study) is going to just sit on a shelf because who is going to pay for that interchange?"

Baechler also noted the $300,000 tab will be totally, and unfairly, paid by taxpayers because the project isn't included in the city's development-charge study.

But for Fontana, this issue is about much more than $300,000. It's potentially about opening acres of 401-fronting land for industrial development he swears is waiting to arrive.

"I believe we must do this," Fontana has said. "It's imperative to our economic development, $300,000 to prepare ourselves for a potential that I think is there . . . is the prudent thing to do."

But Fontana argues the windfall for Londoners would be even greater.

Though there are 329 football fields of ready-to-go land within minutes of the 401, the mayor has argued businesses want land fronting that high-volume highway.

Fontana says he's received "incredible calls and opportunities" about unserviced land along the highway.

But details haven't been offered, and Baechler has suggested she wonders how serious these offers could be.

Still, Fontana's push to expand Veterans Memorial Parkway beyond the 401 was overwhelming recommended at the committee level, by a 4-1 vote with only Baechler opposed.

On Monday night, it was likely to face a tougher test -- but success would endorse Fontana's ability to push through his plans.

Interestingly, one absence Monday night proved intriguing: Joe Swan didn't attend council and a contentious planning issue dealt with early in the night ended in a 7-7 tie, with the 14 council members hopelessly deadlocked.

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/04/05/17878386.html

[Snark]

An environmental assessment is good for 10 years after submission.

Money spent now on something that will likely happen is an investment.

As for the 329 football fields thingy: media silliness in boiling complex things down into a sound byte. No surprise for Fox News North though. I can't wait for their version of Glenn Beck to invade the Freep.

The Blackburns continue to roll over in their resting place.

[Wharn]

I would much rather see the city conduct a study for upgrading the existing arterial between Oxford and Trafalgar Streets. Think about a southbound extension after that's been completed or at least considered.

[Simpseatles]

I don't see any need for extending VMP past the 401 right now, and I've got some reasons!

1.401/VMP interchange: What if the city doesn't get the money it needs, does a half-assed job on the interchange, and we get stuck with traffic lights instead of freeway to freeway.

2.All this, just to get to Wilton Grove Road? It's such a short distance.

3.What about the extension north, that's been proposed on maps for 10 years? The city is growing north at an alarming rate, and those people need a way to get to the 401. Also, it would be the first step towards the northern ring road.

4.What about all the areas within, or at least near the current urban growth boundry?

-There's a parcel of land between Highbury, 401, and Bradley untill Jackson which is all prime industrial land.

-And then there's the area between Dingman Drive, 401, and Wellington. It's also within the urban growth boundry, and again, prime industrial land!

-And finally the part that gets me, is that the massive new Innovation Industrial park that's currently under construction around VMP, 401, and Bradley will add some 401 frontage and it is within the current urban growth boundry!

-But... if all this new industrial land along the 401 doesn't satisfy some people, the city could potentially change the urban growth boundry to include all of Bradley, between the new innovation industrial park, and Highbury. The whole area would have 401 frontage and be on the side of the 401 where the actual city is. Again it would be, here we go again, prime industrial land!

While I am pleased that Fontana understands what we've all felt about London's industrial land along the 401, I just think there are some problems with the idea, and it should be reviewed.

[haljackey]

I agree that as a resident a northern extension is more warranted than a southern extension. For businesses, Fontana appears to think its better to extend it south.

I'll support anything as long as the 401/VMP interchange is built to freeway standards like it is now. If you add traffic lights then I got beef with you.

[manny_santos]

And if you're coming from the east on the 401, Wilton Grove Road is easily accessible from Highway 74, only a kilometre to the east.

The southerly extension isn't needed at this point. And there is no reason for the urban growth boundary to expand - London already has tons of land it can develop within the existing boundary, both greenfield and brownfield. Doing otherwise just encourages more sprawl.

[Pimpmasterdac]

Personally I would rather the city began converting the southern intersections to grade separated interchanges at Bradley and Hamilton, than do upgrade the 401 interchange.

I'm no expert on traffic construction, but from the turbine-clover interchange that haljackey presented, it looks like it would require 7 overpasses/tunnels to be constructed. I could imagine the 10s of millions requires for such an undertaking, which would be better spent upgrading the existing at-grade intersections!

While there is a def need to extend it south and have a higher capacity interchange, it would be a logical start to begin the conversion to a freeway first.

It needs to be extended North, but they need to upgrade what already exits on VMP! Its only 2 lanes in the northern section and there's still a god damn railway crossing. Plus knowing our city they prolly still don't own the land to extend it to Clarke Road and will wait for the owners to voluntarily sell their land (another 20 years).

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

Personally I would rather the city began converting the southern intersections to grade separated interchanges at Bradley and Hamilton, than do upgrade the 401 interchange.

Honestly, I think the part that needs to be upgraded the most is the section with a speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour and numerous intersections; this, as my previous post stated, rougly correlates with the part that runs from Oxford to Trafalgar. Having another freeway stub on the city's south end will do us no good. The southern portion of the VMP is already fairly safe and is not prone to congestion. The city needs to prioritize.

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

It needs to be extended North, but they need to upgrade what already exits on VMP! Its only 2 lanes in the northern section and there's still a god damn railway crossing. Plus knowing our city they prolly still don't who the land to extend it to Clarke Road and will wait for the owners to voluntarily sell their land (another 20 years).

Silly Pimpmasterdac, you should know by now that the city always avoids any remotely controversial moves. Expropriation would put them in a slightly uncomfortable position, and they don't want that. But agreed, that Railway Crossing needs to be turned into an overpass when they twin the two-laned section.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Silly Pimpmasterdac, you should know by now that the city always avoids any remotely controversial moves. Expropriation would put them in a slightly uncomfortable position, and they don't want that. But agreed, that Railway Crossing needs to be turned into an overpass when they twin the two-laned section.

Heck of a lot easier than the Horton West and Dundas West extensions of the 70s and 80s, where numerous houses were expropriated and demolished.

I don't think expropriation for the VMP extension will be an issue. The City managed to do the same for previous extensions, and they've already done it for much of the proposed Bradley extension.

[Pimpmasterdac]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Honestly, I think the part that needs to be upgraded the most is the section with a speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour and numerous intersections; this, as my previous post stated, rougly correlates with the part that runs from Oxford to Trafalgar. Having another freeway stub on the city's south end will do us no good. The southern portion of the VMP is already fairly safe and is not prone to congestion. The city needs to prioritize.

Fair enough. The only issue with interchanging Oxford, Dundas, Trafalger etc. is the streets in-between like Tartan, Admiral & Page would become daredevil streets trying to make a turn, as traffic speeds would go up considerably unless cul-de-sac'd as planned (costing more $$$). I agree though, it's more useful getting North-South in the middle of town than the South which is services by Highbury

Originally Posted by Wharn

Silly Pimpmasterdac, you should know by now that the city always avoids any remotely controversial moves. Expropriation would put them in a slightly uncomfortable position, and they don't want that. But agreed, that Railway Crossing needs to be turned into an overpass when they twin the two-laned section.

We need McGuinty or one of these ass clowns that call themselves leaders to make a realistic plan! Get financing planned, expropriation, construction schedules, all that done. The Province, possibly the Feds if we get an NDP-Liberal government, need to contribute something for a change.

We shoulda had this 40 years ago, and they're still talking about another 60 years for it to be completed. London's gotten the shaft constantly, its about time the province steps up to the plate and does something. Otherwise why do we elect Ministers like Bentley & Matthews if they can't even deliver proper transportation to their own city?! I know Ontario is a GTA centric government, but London has to get some crumbs eventually!

[GreatTallNorth2]

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

We shoulda had this 40 years ago, and they're still talking about another 60 years for it to be completed. London's gotten the shaft constantly, its about time the province steps up to the plate and does something. Otherwise why do we elect Ministers like Bentley & Matthews if they can't even deliver proper transportation to their own city?! I know Ontario is a GTA centric government, but London has to get some crumbs eventually!

We have no one to blame, but London itself. We cannot blame the provincial governments for London's poor transportation. Look at the history - past and present. We simply have politicians who have mastered the art of dithering. If you know the history, the provincial government wanted to build the 402 to the north of the city and then through the city to link up with the 401. This would have been an amazing in city highway. Our city council couldn't decide and therefore, we have the 402 where it is today. Our current civic leaders (at least up to Anne Marie) are equally to blame as they have sat on their hands with regards to our real transportation needs. There is not another major city in Ontario that has not got major transportation $$$, but it is because they make plans and make their voices heard. Windsor is getting major bucks for their new parkway, K/W is getting $650 million for rapid transit and other big highway upgrades and extensions. Niagara Region has had lots of highway improvements. Ottawa and Toronto - we all know they are getting lots of $$. We have no one to blame but ourselves. It's a shame.

[Pimpmasterdac]

I know all too well about the shitidiots of London Council of the late 1960s early 1970s that passed on the 402 being used as a ring road for London. The "compromise" was that the province would build Airport Rd. mostly at their expense and eventually make it a freeway. Even now 35+ years later its still not done. While you can't expect provincial government to honour things that were decided 35 years ago, it would be nice for London to benefit from MTO highway building.

They constantly pour money into the GTA, while Toronto shoots itself in the foot by refusing to build any addition freeways into the city. London actually wants to build one, so hopefully the province steps up and helps VMP be a full freeway earlier than the planned 60 years.

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by Pimpmasterdac

They constantly pour money into the GTA, while Toronto shoots itself in the foot by refusing to build any addition freeways into the city. London actually wants to build one, so hopefully the province steps up and helps VMP be a full freeway earlier than the planned 60 years.

Until a short while ago Toronto was also shooting itself in the foot by refusing to build any true rapid transit. Streetcar apologists can say all they want about Transit City, it is still basically a surface route. Unfortunately for London, now that Toronto is putting its funding to good use, we're not able to play the "superior transportation planning" card.

[joeymac]

London has always been poor at future planning.. we could have had a north end expressway paid for by the province 40 years ago.. why would we think city hall has learned anything in 40 years?