ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[jeffster]

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.

For what it's worth, if they can build a huge bridge over a highway (like what's has happened over the 401) in a relatively short time, doing a pedestrian bridge over a couple tracks of the railway shouldn't be that difficult. Without affecting testing. They just need to be motivated or have someone light a fire under their ass.

[Canard]

They missed one area. Many others have crossings (Quiet Place, Waterloo Park, the University). It sucks, but it's not like they intentionally said "Welp, how can we screw people?"

[jeffster]

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.

It was a potshot, however, it was also called for. And really, there was no excuse for them not being familiar with the situation. That's why they're paid the 'big bucks'.

I would imagine if had one bus, it wouldn't take long for it to do one loop, as long as it only made right-hand turns. Maybe every 20 minutes? You'd only need a couple stops along Fairway Rd, after all, they'd have to walk some distance before all this.

And I said micro-bus, not micro-taxi. It would be a similar service the region has now with their MobilityPLUS. So it could be scheduled for pick-up and drop-off. There are solutions that the region could implement right away, they just need to figure that out.

[ijmorlan]

...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.

Utter nonsense. It is way safer to cross the LRT tracks than to cross Union at the Spur Line trail, or Park at the Iron Horse, or several other locations I can think of where there is an unprotected crossing of a road by an official path. The danger comes from idiots who can’t be bothered to wait a few seconds and cross after the train rather than before it; for normal, reasonably prudent people, it’s not a dangerous crossing at all. Even without crossing protection, it’s a straight track with excellent visibility. Furthermore, because LRVs are so short (unlike long freight trains), there is little temptation to attempt to beat them to the crossing.

I’ve said it before and I’ll probably say it again. Trains aren’t magically dangerous; the danger comes from being hit by them. They can only be in certain places; and it’s easy, in this case, to see when they will be there.

I’m glad to hear there is apparently a hole in the fence. A people who can’t disobey enough to cross a train line where there should be, but is not, an official crossing is a people who can’t disobey enough to resist tyranny.

[danbrotherston]

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.

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.

[Canard]

Utter nonsense.

https://www.operationlifesaver.ca/

[ijmorlan]

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.

I’m not saying they shouldn’t install crossing protection. I’m just saying that crossing the tracks is safer than crossing many streets, including ones where an official trail crosses the street without protection.

[ijmorlan]

Utter nonsense.

https://www.operationlifesaver.ca/

I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. I’m aware of that web site, and it is on the whole a good one. In particular, people should not play on train tracks, and this is a message that needs to be promoted because there are locations that are dangerous if one doesn’t realize that a train might actually come.

That has little to do with the question at hand, however, which is the comparison between the danger of crossing a road with lots of traffic and the danger of crossing 2 LRT tracks with a train every few minutes with good visibility.

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. Easy to do for somebody who, like me, is rich enough to have a car and be able to spend time blathering on an online forum such as this. Meanwhile, the people affected by the unconscionable failure of the Region and Grandlinq to build appropriate crossing infrastructure have done what they need to do to live their daily lives. At present (and future planned) traffic levels what they are doing is not unsafe, and is probably safer than walking a long way around right next to busy roads full of idiot drivers. Many of these people are probably working 3 minimum-wage jobs to make ends meet, so those of us who are fortunate enough to have middle-class salaried jobs should be slow to judge.

I’ll add that I thought the CTV coverage was actually pretty good. The people they interviewed clearly had thought about the safety implications. One said that they look both ways before crossing, and another was concerned about somebody tripping and injuring themselves on the tracks. With the current state of the crossing, tripping-related injuries are probably a bigger hazard than being hit by a train.

[jeffster]

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.

I would suggest in that someone in this entire group of people that designed, approved and built the LRT brought up the design flaw (that is, no crossing(s) along the old hydro corridor), but they were likely discounted for bringing it up.

Let's just say that I've worked long enough in .gov to understand how many, many, many "simpletons" are ignored because 'they don't get it' when in reality, it was senior staff that 'didn't get it'. I won't give an example that I was very familiar with, as I don't want to ID anyone, good or bad. But the short of it was this, staff with the 'hands-on' experience were ignored by staff that had their doctorate (Ph.D.) in engineering. Who was right? Well, it wasn't the one with a Ph.D.

I think there were three main reasons why no thought (by those in charge) was given to this. 1) They simply didn't care, or they were too lazy to do comprehensive research to make an informed decision. 2) Crossing the hydro corridor was technically illegal, trespassing, so too bad. 3) The desire to come close to budget.

My guess, and it's only a guess, is that when this issue was brought up, they would have come up with point 2 and 3. It was trespassing before so no, and it will affect the budget.

Reminds me of this quote: The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.

[Bureaucromancer]

I'd agree with the above. I seem to recall folks around here saying that about trespassing a couple years back. With much the same time as those who, quite aptly, "refuse to actually think about rail safety".

[Markster]

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.

I think you go too far here. Canard is clearly thinking about safety. Just in a different way from you. No need to claim they aren't.

I agree with ijmorlan that the Operation Lifesaver stuff goes over the top. You'd think that all trains are stealth machines traveling at HSR speeds on any track at any time.
Rails should be seen as another road, with a different kind of vehicle. A vehicle that may be much more infrequent, but absolutely will not stop for you. It's a different kind of dangerous from a vehicular road, but we made tradeoffs about danger every time we cross one of those too.

[KevinL]

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.

[Lens]

I wouldn't go that far. There were plenty of places where openings in the fences we specifically created by the property owners for people to be able to walk through onto their property.

[plam]

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.

Yes. If they were working from maps they wouldn't see it. They would have to work from sat photos, which may not be part of their workflow, or as jeffster points out, the designers may have gotten overruled by people who only looked at the maps.

I'll generally ascribe good intentions to people unless there is specific reason to think that they are malicious.

[jeffster]

I think what would have been really great along here would have been a stop close to the Food Basics (so almost behind Partsource). That's one thing I didn't understand, as there aren't a lot of stops, at least in Kitchener, close to any supermarkets.

I was looking at an older satellite image and there seemed to be two trails, one right by McDonald's, and the other close to Michaels. The one at Michaels seems to have a sidewalk going in between two houses, perhaps put there by one of the property owners.

I only say Partsource/Fresh Burrito because, at that location, you could put a sidewalk in between the two apartment units on Traynor and also one between Partsource and Fresh Burrito. You're avoiding most vehicular traffic. Right in front Partsource and Fresh Burrito are a set of traffic lights, with pedestrian right of way. This is the main entrance to Food Basic (that has a pharmacy) and the LCBO, Dollarama, and Petsmart.