(07-14-2018, 09:06 PM)Canard Wrote: It's an unfortunate situation, and even more unfortunate that the decision makers have known about it for years now, and progress has been so slow...

...but it doesn't change the fact that testing must continue, and trains will be blowing by here at 70 km/h on a more frequent basis - and people have simply got to stop crossing, or they'll risk getting killed.

Or, we have to stop testing and delay opening.  Take your pick.

For what it's worth, any time I've seen testing through there, one of the OnTrack Safety guys is positioned at the "hole", presumably making sure nobody tries to cross when the train is about to go by.

(07-14-2018, 04:33 PM)plam Wrote: That sounds like an uncalled-for potshot at those who were doing the planning. As Canard writes, those who were planning were probably not familiar with the situation on the ground. This is why we do public consultations these days (and part of the reason it takes longer to build infrastructure here than in less-democratic countries). Unfortunately, certain demographics are used to not being consulted (because they usually aren't), so it takes effort from the whole of society to be inclusive.

I do agree that there should be a solution sooner rather than later. Shuttle buses and micro taxis sound like a good way to spend a bunch of money without necessarily getting good results. Would you want to wait for a shuttle bus? How do you call the micro taxi? Perhaps it would be less expensive to just pay for a crossing guard.

(07-14-2018, 09:06 PM)Canard Wrote: ...but it doesn't change the fact that testing must continue, and trains will be blowing by here at 70 km/h on a more frequent basis - and people have simply got to stop crossing, or they'll risk getting killed.

(07-14-2018, 09:39 PM)jeffster Wrote: And these were the people who were creating a $700+ million dollar decision, without any care or thought to anyone who may have been negatively affected by such construction of the LRT, in an unneeded way.  Had these people paid any attention to detail, any attention to the people living in that area, and had any ability to put themselves into other peoples shoes, this pedestrian crossing would have been put in place before testing of the LRT and before the fence was installed. It would have been part of the design.

I realize that this sounds blunt, but that's exactly what this was, and is. But the people who were heading this, that 'cream of the crop', goes home every night, in their luxury automobile, to their large homes, because they really didn't care.

I'm not bitter of these, I drive a car, own my home, have a .gov job, though not close to 'elite' level. I just feel that once again, those in charge, failed to do their job properly, and at something that most clowns would have thought of.

(07-14-2018, 10:45 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Utter nonsense.

(07-15-2018, 02:55 AM)BrianT Wrote: At 70 km/h there is a safety issue regardless. Not everyone has the ability to apply logic to cross after a train has passed and what if there is a train coming from the other direction at a few moments later? Children may be crossing alone. Some people are disabled and don't move as fast as you do. Others have difficulty with their vision. Blanket statements that you can 'see when they will be there' don't work for everyone using the crossing.

(07-15-2018, 09:18 AM)Canard Wrote:

(07-14-2018, 10:45 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Utter nonsense.

https://www.operationlifesaver.ca/

(07-15-2018, 06:24 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: I think you are making a lot of assumptions about both the salary of and motivations of the people who designed the system.

I have too have little respect for the transportation specialists in the civil engineer field at this point, but I don't feel it's fair to accuse any individual people of negligence, or a lack of attention to detail, this is a systemic issue, not an individual issue.

And to point at them and call them "the elite" and driving in "luxury automobiles to their large homes because they really didn't care" seems to be an entirely unjustified and unearned personal attack--while I'm sure that the head architects of these companies make a great deal of money, they are also not the ones who design the details you're talking about, and I fully believe that the vast majority of the thousands of individuals involved do care about their jobs.



As for the crossing, there is no excuse for not installing a level crossing (as a level crossing is both appropriate and better than a bridge) within days of the transfer to regional ownership--I don't know how many contractors are capable of installing railway crossing equipment, but clearly we have a few in the region...they should have equipment ordered and waiting.

The justification that grandlinq owns it, is a weak and bureaucratic excuse, but unfortunately, probably hard to overcome, but the moment that is not true, it should be done, no excuse for waiting.

(07-15-2018, 10:24 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: Frankly, I think the root of our disagreement here is that for some reason you refuse to actually think about rail safety, instead retreating to blind application of rules.

(07-15-2018, 01:40 PM)KevinL Wrote: The 'it was always trespass before' point should not be discounted. At no point along the Fairway side of the corridor was there, or even is there now, a public access point that could be indicated as a need for connection. As every lot along that entire run is private, any planner or engineer would rightly default to enclosing it with an impassible fence and considering the job done.

It has taken a higher awareness of the situation, of how those informal, technically-illegal passages of the past were not only convenient but vital for the adjoining neighbourhood, for this to come to the level where it is now. This is certainly a wider condemnation of how commercial space is permitted to develop and crowd out public facilities, but that is at the feet of our broader society and not at the planners of this system specifically.