Posts: 1,227
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
31
(05-23-2016, 02:20 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: (05-22-2016, 09:44 AM)BuildingScout Wrote: Right now we have the lights synchronized in both streets, making them efficient ways in and out of town. Your suggestion is to replace them with two way streets substantially slowing this means of ingress/egress. This is desirable how?
Exactly what precludes two-way streets from being synchronized? Weber and Fischer-Hallman have synchronized lights and work well.
Easy, you can't have lights synchronized in both directions.
Posts: 744
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
11
(05-23-2016, 02:00 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: I even question the premise. Two way Erb St. W. is neither safer, nor more livable than Erb St. E. Both are ugly main throughways not ideal for urban habitation.
Two-way Erb Street West is 4 lanes as compared with 3 lanes of one-way Erb Street East, so this is not apples-to-apples.
On the two-way section, taking the bus or biking makes a whole lot more sense than on the one-way section.
Posts: 10,283
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
Why is taking the bus on a one-way street a problem?
Posts: 1,972
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
37
(05-23-2016, 05:37 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Why is taking the bus on a one-way street a problem?
If we assumed that there were destinations on Erb or Bridgeport other than someone's house (which is at least a bit true around Regina and the Laurel Trail, say), then it's a problem when the bus drops you off on Erb and you'd rather be on Bridgeport. They're not quite next to each other.
Also a bit of a problem for biking, although it's a bit faster on a bicycle than on foot to walk from Erb to Bridgeport.
Posts: 744
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
11
(05-23-2016, 05:37 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Why is taking the bus on a one-way street a problem?
It makes the route more complex to understand, in terms of finding your way back and for figuring out whether the bus can meet your needs. Several blocks deviation to go the reverse route don't matter much if you're driving, but they do matter if you're walking.
Posts: 10,283
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
(05-23-2016, 09:08 PM)plam Wrote: (05-23-2016, 05:37 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Why is taking the bus on a one-way street a problem?
If we assumed that there were destinations on Erb or Bridgeport other than someone's house (which is at least a bit true around Regina and the Laurel Trail, say), then it's a problem when the bus drops you off on Erb and you'd rather be on Bridgeport. They're not quite next to each other.
Also a bit of a problem for biking, although it's a bit faster on a bicycle than on foot to walk from Erb to Bridgeport.
If your destination is on Bridgeport (as an example), currently the bus stop would be an average of 0.5 blocks away (on the spot for westbound, one block away for eastbound bus).
With a two-way street, the bus stop would be either 0.0 or 1.0 blocks away, depending on whether your destination is on the same street as the bus route (I think it's safe to assume that buses would not run on both). So on average, I really think it's pretty much a wash for the buses.
Posts: 10,283
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
(05-23-2016, 09:55 PM)mpd618 Wrote: (05-23-2016, 05:37 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Why is taking the bus on a one-way street a problem?
It makes the route more complex to understand, in terms of finding your way back and for figuring out whether the bus can meet your needs. Several blocks deviation to go the reverse route don't matter much if you're driving, but they do matter if you're walking.
The walking distance to/from the bus stop is arguably nearly the same, as I posted above. Finding the bus could be more complicated. Now, if someone will invent a smartphone, that will significantly reduce the severity of this problem. 
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
I'm afraid that I'm also quite in favour for leaving Bridgeport & Erb as-is (as 3-lane, one-way roads). For someone who doesn't live in UpTown Waterloo, they are a rapid way in and out of the core. I do not subscribe to the automatic belief that in all cases we should intentionally hinder or impede vehicular traffic because it's "just better". Why would we intentionally make one mode of transport crappier? Why is one mode favoured over another? I always feel like when people start this "war on cars" thing, it spawns out of a feeling of imagined unfair treatment rather than logic or numbers.
I would not ride my bike on Erb or Bridgeport right now... But I still wouldn't ride it on those roads if they were two-way and had fewer lanes. There are lots of quiet side streets and trails that I feel far more comfortable riding on, so I'm perfectly happy to go find those routes. Not every route in a city can be a 30 km/h limited school zone with chicanes and "speed reducing features"!
I think we're allowed to have one busy road in and out of UpTown.
(I really didn't want to get into this but noticed BuildingScout was getting a bit picked on here and thought I'd chime in.)
Posts: 2,003
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
124
I think the automatic assumption that the current configuration is faster isn't necessarily true either. As an example, I have a hard time believing that traffic will back up nearly as badly at Bridgeport/Erb as we see now.
Posts: 2,402
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
48
‘War on cars’? You brought up ‘30 km/h limited school zone with chicanes and "speed reducing features"! But I don’t think anyone here suggested that would be the best form for Erb and Bridgeport. The ‘logic and numbers’ involved in promoting other modes besides driving have to do with the fact that automobiles are the least efficient use of space- transit can carry many times the number of travelers using the same road capacity- and have greater negative impacts to the environment and safety.
But that’s not actually what was being talked about here. The ‘war on cars’ is imagined here- Pheidippides pointed out that two lanes with a turning lane would have enough capacity for the volumes that Erb and Bridgeport get. The arguments here have specifically been about Erb and Bridgeport. There hasn’t been any ‘war on cars’ type statements.
Posts: 1,312
Threads: 2
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
40
I think the assumption might be true if one is commuting from west of uptown Waterloo to the expressway, and even then I think taking F-H to the expressway would be quicker than trying to go through uptown.
Posts: 1,191
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2015
Reputation:
34
Were Erb and Bridgeport always one-way streets? If not, what were things like before? I would like some historical perspective on the issue.
Posts: 419
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
32
(05-24-2016, 09:43 AM)timc Wrote: Were Erb and Bridgeport always one-way streets? If not, what were things like before? I would like some historical perspective on the issue.
They weren't always, but different car volumes in 2016 may require different thinking.
I'm happy to let smart, qualified individuals make these decisions. In my opinion we should focus on bringing these decisions to those individuals' attentions rather than trying to hash them out ourselves.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 1,227
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
31
05-24-2016, 05:29 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-24-2016, 05:29 PM by BuildingScout.)
(05-24-2016, 09:40 AM)clasher Wrote: I think the assumption might be true if one is commuting from west of uptown Waterloo to the expressway, and even then I think taking F-H to the expressway would be quicker than trying to go through uptown.
I actually looked into this using both google maps and actual timings at different times of the day. If you live West of Amos and Erb, you take F-H. If you live East of there you take Erb to the highway.
|
