Waterloo Region Connected

Full Version: Cycling in Waterloo Region
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(07-28-2020, 12:30 PM)KevinL Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-28-2020, 11:24 AM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]Wellington St was originally intended to become a major thoroughfare, was it not?

Correct, it was to be the new Highway 7 before the project was expressway-ified.

The interchange was built to be part of the new Highway 7, and still will be I think.

But the section from the interchange to Victoria was reconstructed by the province to be a municipal road, not a freeway, and yet it was reconstructed at standards which basically guarantee traffic speeds will be in excess of 80km/h but was built with a 50km/h limit. Provincial engineers don't know how to build city streets.
(07-28-2020, 12:39 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-28-2020, 12:30 PM)KevinL Wrote: [ -> ]Correct, it was to be the new Highway 7 before the project was expressway-ified.

And indeed, travelling east from the Wellington St. interchange, one travels along Shirley Ave. and Bingemans Centre Dr. on a road that is amply sufficient to handle traffic to Guelph, at least as far as the bend where it turns across the tracks and meets Victoria St. But we’ve discussed this extensively just recently.

I was talking much earlier, when Wellington St was last rebuilt -- maybe in the 70s? While it turns out not to be the right thing for today's world, the vision back then was to have high-capacity arterials in and out of the city core. King St E at the expressway, Benton St and Wellington St are all examples of this, I think.
Wasn't the long-term plan that Benton was supposed to be connected to Homer Watson?

Edit: or was it Belmont and Homer Watson that were supposed to connect? I know there was supposed to be some sort of reconfiguration of roads west of DTK, but it's hard to comprehend what they intended.
(07-28-2020, 02:58 PM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Wasn't the long-term plan that Benton was supposed to be connected to Homer Watson?

Edit: or was it Belmont and Homer Watson that were supposed to connect? I know there was supposed to be some sort of reconfiguration of roads west of DTK, but it's hard to comprehend what they intended.

Belmont and Homer Watson, I think. It would be a pretty straight line through Lakeside Park, though I personally hope they never connect it because doing so would impact the park.  I regularly travel between my place (Alpine and Homer Watson) and my parents' place in Uptown Waterloo (near Avondale and William) over the nearly 16 years I've been in this house and a straight shot up Belmont would be a nice, but Westmount is a much better road for that purpose when driving and the trails through Lakeside Park are really nice when cycling.
(07-28-2020, 03:07 PM)robdrimmie Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-28-2020, 02:58 PM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Wasn't the long-term plan that Benton was supposed to be connected to Homer Watson?

Edit: or was it Belmont and Homer Watson that were supposed to connect? I know there was supposed to be some sort of reconfiguration of roads west of DTK, but it's hard to comprehend what they intended.

Belmont and Homer Watson, I think. It would be a pretty straight line through Lakeside Park, though I personally hope they never connect it because doing so would impact the park.  I regularly travel between my place (Alpine and Homer Watson) and my parents' place in Uptown Waterloo (near Avondale and William) over the nearly 16 years I've been in this house and a straight shot up Belmont would be a nice, but Westmount is a much better road for that purpose when driving and the trails through Lakeside Park are really nice when cycling.

I don't think they ever will, those projects have been cancelled, the park is now an environmental area. Of course the fight is to now narrow the ridiculously overbuilt roads.
(07-28-2020, 02:40 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-28-2020, 12:39 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]And indeed, travelling east from the Wellington St. interchange, one travels along Shirley Ave. and Bingemans Centre Dr. on a road that is amply sufficient to handle traffic to Guelph, at least as far as the bend where it turns across the tracks and meets Victoria St. But we’ve discussed this extensively just recently.

I was talking much earlier, when Wellington St was last rebuilt -- maybe in the 70s? While it turns out not to be the right thing for today's world, the vision back then was to have high-capacity arterials in and out of the city core. King St E at the expressway, Benton St and Wellington St are all examples of this, I think.

Yes, indeed. I was just making the point that even the non-expressway roads that have already been built would provide a portion of a perfectly good route to Guelph — all that is missing is straightening out the connection from Bingemans Centre to Victoria St. and adding lanes all the way to Guelph.
(07-28-2020, 03:39 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-28-2020, 02:40 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]I was talking much earlier, when Wellington St was last rebuilt -- maybe in the 70s? While it turns out not to be the right thing for today's world, the vision back then was to have high-capacity arterials in and out of the city core. King St E at the expressway, Benton St and Wellington St are all examples of this, I think.

Yes, indeed. I was just making the point that even the non-expressway roads that have already been built would provide a portion of a perfectly good route to Guelph — all that is missing is straightening out the connection from Bingemans Centre to Victoria St. and adding lanes all the way to Guelph.

Well, yes, maybe, but I'm not getting into THAT discussion! Big Grin
(07-28-2020, 02:58 PM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Wasn't the long-term plan that Benton was supposed to be connected to Homer Watson?

Edit: or was it Belmont and Homer Watson that were supposed to connect? I know there was supposed to be some sort of reconfiguration of roads west of DTK, but it's hard to comprehend what they intended.

Benton was supposed to connect to Queen, and Belmont to Homer Watson.

Queen was going to be widened to 4 lanes from the edge of the city in to around IHT/Mill St, then swerve over to meet up with Benton. That's why Benton was widened to 4 lanes to Courtland (even though it's pretty quiet past Charles), and the region ended up owning a number of houses along Benton from Courtland to Bruder, as they were going to be demolished for the widening.
Car centric design is everywhere and the city staff issues are not limited to Waterloo:

https://twitter.com/ChrisCalviFree/statu...21219?s=19
I filled out the Temporary Bike Lanes Feedback Form

I was mostly positive. I mentioned how I was actually pleased that the lanes seem to be slowing down traffic, especially on Westmount. I haven't noticed any increase in congestion along the pilot.

But I did express some consternation that orange construction pylons are being used, which is confusing. I've seen a few cyclists riding along on the sidewalk or elsewhere on the road who didn't seem to understand that the pylon'ed area was for them.

But, I hope this project sticks.
I like the additional lanes, but I worry that aspects of them that are likely related to the temporary implementation will make them appear worse for motor vehicle traffic than they are. Specifically, at many intersections there is now only a single lane for left turning, right turning, and straight through traffic. In many situations this will not work with even moderate traffic levels.

Please note I am not saying that we need to build as many lanes for motor vehicles as people will use, but it is reasonable to expect that intersection capacities will not be much lower than the capacities of the sections of road which connect the intersections.

An example which should have been done differently is Erb St. eastbound at Westmount where the bicycle lane begins. Right now the bollards begin just west of the intersection, eliminating the ability of straight through traffic to bypass right turning traffic. If the right lane was instead designated as a right turn lane and the bollards began immediately the other side of the intersection, this would work much better. But in other locations this simple fix wouldn’t work without breaking up the bike lane into disconnected and therefore more dangerous pieces.

A permanent installation would presumably not have these issues; the roads could be rebuilt as one motor vehicle lane in each direction with appropriate turn lanes, plus bicycle lanes (preferably segregated) in each direction. I’m concerned that some will see the existing implementation and just see it as a mess, and — “that’s what happens when you build bicycle lanes” — some of the support or at least acceptance of the change will be lost.
Also I should add I’m skeptical of some of the “slowing traffic down” stuff. Westmount is an arterial road; it’s entirely reasonable for traffic to travel 60km/h on it, assuming traffic is light enough to support that (it’s not reasonable to expect to maintain that speed at busy times). The fact that it is lined with houses is just a massive urban planning fail. That being said, if the bollards make it so that 60km/h is the fastest traffic rather than having lots of people zipping through at 70km/h or higher, then that is a good thing.
(07-30-2020, 09:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]Also I should add I’m skeptical of some of the “slowing traffic down” stuff. Westmount is an arterial road; it’s entirely reasonable for traffic to travel 60km/h on it, assuming traffic is light enough to support that (it’s not reasonable to expect to maintain that speed at busy times). The fact that it is lined with houses is just a massive urban planning fail. That being said, if the bollards make it so that 60km/h is the fastest traffic rather than having lots of people zipping through at 70km/h or higher, then that is a good thing.

Not only is the limit on Westmount (as is the case in many "arterial" roads) 50km/h, it is also a residential street, where traffic should be slowed.
(07-31-2020, 06:57 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-30-2020, 09:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]Also I should add I’m skeptical of some of the “slowing traffic down” stuff. Westmount is an arterial road; it’s entirely reasonable for traffic to travel 60km/h on it, assuming traffic is light enough to support that (it’s not reasonable to expect to maintain that speed at busy times). The fact that it is lined with houses is just a massive urban planning fail. That being said, if the bollards make it so that 60km/h is the fastest traffic rather than having lots of people zipping through at 70km/h or higher, then that is a good thing.

Not only is the limit on Westmount (as is the case in many "arterial" roads) 50km/h, it is also a residential street, where traffic should be slowed.

Saying it is residential, while true, is also misleading. It is a 4-lane road that was built for the purpose of moving motor vehicle traffic (although I think that it, like almost all others in the Region, should be 2-lane with turn lanes). Calling it residential makes it sound like it is the same as Roslin Ave. or Empire St., which it is not.

Although thinking about it, if it were rezoned appropriately (mixed used including midrises), it would soon have so much going on that it would probably be more like Danforth Ave. in Toronto, and nobody would ever have the opportunity to get up to 60km/h.
(07-31-2020, 07:38 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-31-2020, 06:57 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]Not only is the limit on Westmount (as is the case in many "arterial" roads) 50km/h, it is also a residential street, where traffic should be slowed.

Saying it is residential, while true, is also misleading. It is a 4-lane road that was built for the purpose of moving motor vehicle traffic (although I think that it, like almost all others in the Region, should be 2-lane with turn lanes). Calling it residential makes it sound like it is the same as Roslin Ave. or Empire St., which it is not.

Although thinking about it, if it were rezoned appropriately (mixed used including midrises), it would soon have so much going on that it would probably be more like Danforth Ave. in Toronto, and nobody would ever have the opportunity to get up to 60km/h.

Actually, I don't know the history of the road, but I have no idea if it was built to move motor vehicle traffic, or if it was built before that was the singular purpose of roads.

But I don't really care, it's archaic purpose has no relevance to what we make of it today. What I do know is that the road has houses on it--it cuts through a neighbourhood, and while it has been made a main road that purpose must be balanced against the people who live in that neighbourhood. I have no problem slowing traffic down to 50 or even 40 in the sections which are residential.

Frankly, I don't really think any of our urban arterial roads should be above 50km/h anyway. We need better roads, not faster roads.