ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[Canard]

I don't think we should be trying to encourage smoking by accommodating it. I'm very happy at the theme parks I visit over the past 10 years or so I've seen them go from No Smoking in queues, to Designated Smoking Areas, to some parks having a total ban now.

Hopefully within a generation it will be completely gone.

[ijmorlan]

I don't think we should be trying to encourage smoking by accommodating it. I'm very happy at the theme parks I visit over the past 10 years or so I've seen them go from No Smoking in queues, to Designated Smoking Areas, to some parks having a total ban now.

Hopefully within a generation it will be completely gone.

In general I agree with you. It’s a scourge, and I’m fully in favour of most of the measures that have been taken so far — banning advertising and sponsorships, making restaurants (including their patios) and public transit smoke-free, hiding the smokes at places where they can be purchased — but some people at the hospital aren’t really visiting and don’t have a choice about being there, and need a place where they can engage in their addiction without bothering others. At some point in the increased regulation of smoking we cross over from hiding it and avoiding encouraging people to take it up, and start simply oppressing those who are living with a smoking addiction. I think we are at that point about now.

And I say that as somebody who believes that it is abusive (but should not be CAS-actionable) for a smoker not to quit when they have kids, and that it should be CAS-actionable if they smoke in the presence of their kids.

Caveat: I think there is a big difference between the occasional cigar or pipe and the more usual cigarette chain smoking. But this message is long enough.

[Canard]

Those are really good points, I hadn't thought of it that way before. As usual, this forum has made me re-think of my viewpoints. Thanks!

[SammyOES2]

I see ijmorlan's point, but I also see the point that hospitals have a duty to provide quality health care to their patients.  We don't allow sick patients to have booze on the property.  We don't allow them to do (unauthorized) drugs.  Sometimes patients aren't allowed to have coffee.  All addictions for some people, and all things that the hospital sometimes (or always) needs to restrict in order to provide quality care.  So it seems at least reasonable that we don't enable smoking on the property when people are in the care of the hospital.  Especially if the hospital can provide remedies to the patient to deal with the addiction while they are admitted.

Its honestly mind boggling to me that non-smoking isn't enforced in transit shelters. Seems like a no brainer 'money-grab' for the city.

Edit: To be clear, if I had the power to make the decision, I don't actually know what way I'd go without looking at a lot more data.  But I don't think its obvious that ijmorlan is right or wrong.

[MidTowner]

Some patients can have alcohol in hospital, if they have a serious addiction. No one is actually addicted to "smoking," one is addicted to nicotine and can be provided it in a number of ways.

It would be easy for public health (that's who does it, right?) to cruise around and issue tickets. You could issue a half a dozen tickets in a few minutes at some stops I use.

[danbrotherston]

I see ijmorlan's point, but I also see the point that hospitals have a duty to provide quality health care to their patients.  We don't allow sick patients to have booze on the property.  We don't allow them to do (unauthorized) drugs.  Sometimes patients aren't allowed to have coffee.  All addictions for some people, and all things that the hospital sometimes (or always) needs to restrict in order to provide quality care.  So it seems at least reasonable that we don't enable smoking on the property when people are in the care of the hospital.  Especially if the hospital can provide remedies to the patient to deal with the addiction while they are admitted.

Its honestly mind boggling to me that non-smoking isn't enforced in transit shelters. Seems like a no brainer 'money-grab' for the city.

Edit: To be clear, if I had the power to make the decision, I don't actually know what way I'd go without looking at a lot more data.  But I don't think its obvious that ijmorlan is right or wrong.

While I've never have a nicotine addiction it seems like it's not the kind of thing that you can give up easily, for the day, week, even month, you might be in the hospital---even with nicotine addiction aids.  Worse, visiting a hospital is usually a very stressful experience, something which I understand is generally a trigger for people who are addicted to smoking.

There are other reasons for the prohibition against booze which don't apply to cigarettes as well.

As for patients not being allowed coffee, usually that's for a medical reason.

Again, please don't use the term "enable", it's an accommodation for people with an addiction, you can't just stop doing something when you're addicted, no matter how much you may want to.  The fact is some will have a physiological need to smoke (this is what a chemical addiction is) and just trying to stop them is unlikely to be successful.  Much better to accommodate them in a way which prevents harm to other people through second hand smoke.  Providing a tiny glass box outside seems to be a reasonable measure to achieve this.

As for enforcement being a "money-grab"....doubtful, enforcement of this form often barely covers it's costs, and again, keep in mind who you're "grabbing" money from.

This all comes back down to a point in society that we should treat addiction, drugs, etc., as a medical issue not a criminal one.  But that's obviously straying very far from transportation policy.

[Markster]

A neat article about the derail at Willow St.

Derail switches installed to protect Ion infrastructure from oversized freight trains

WATERLOO — A derail switch has been installed in uptown Waterloo along a stretch of the Ion line shared with freight trains to safely stop an oversized car before it reaches light rail infrastructure.

The derail switch installed by GrandLinq as part of the Ion system is part of a "multi-step" safety system to prevent a serious crash in the unlikely event a freight train that is too big gets onto the joint use section of the Spur Line through Waterloo, where there will be light rail platforms and overhead wires on poles.

[...]

Then there's a "high and wide" detector ahead of the derail switch that remotely measures a train's dimensions.

If a train is flagged as too high or wide, then a signal down the track will turn red to tell the operator to stop the train. Once stopped there, the oversized car would need to be addressed before the train could proceed.

If the operator fails to respond to the red, the derail switch is activated.

[danbrotherston]

A neat article about the derail at Willow St.

Derail switches installed to protect Ion infrastructure from oversized freight trains

WATERLOO — A derail switch has been installed in uptown Waterloo along a stretch of the Ion line shared with freight trains to safely stop an oversized car before it reaches light rail infrastructure.

The derail switch installed by GrandLinq as part of the Ion system is part of a "multi-step" safety system to prevent a serious crash in the unlikely event a freight train that is too big gets onto the joint use section of the Spur Line through Waterloo, where there will be light rail platforms and overhead wires on poles.

[...]

Then there's a "high and wide" detector ahead of the derail switch that remotely measures a train's dimensions.

If a train is flagged as too high or wide, then a signal down the track will turn red to tell the operator to stop the train. Once stopped there, the oversized car would need to be addressed before the train could proceed.

If the operator fails to respond to the red, the derail switch is activated.

I am under the impression this also has to do with time of day, during the LRT operating hours freight would not be allowed on the LRT tracks regardless of size.

[Markster]

I am under the impression this also has to do with time of day, during the LRT operating hours freight would not be allowed on the LRT tracks regardless of size.

Yes, they mention that in the article.

Ion and freight trains will use the same track along that stretch, but not at the same time. Freight trains will come through at night after the Ion stops running for the day.

The size detector is another layer of safety that I had not heard about.  No sending double-stack container cars up, even in the dead of night!

[Canard]

!!!!!!

That is an awesome find, Markster!!

I will have to keep a close eye out to find the detector. I routinely fly along the Spur Line Trail but I haven't noticed it - not that I have been looking. However, a big through-beam gantry should be pretty easy to spot. I'll have a look on my next ride.

[danbrotherston]

I am under the impression this also has to do with time of day, during the LRT operating hours freight would not be allowed on the LRT tracks regardless of size.

Yes, they mention that in the article.

...

They mention hours of operation, but don't talk about it in context of the derail, and at several points implicitly suggest that the derail is about "oversize" trains only.

I think it's slightly misleading in that regard, but otherwise a very interesting explanation.  Yet somehow, not sufficient to defuse the paranoia some people seem to have on FB.

[SammyOES2]

While I've never have a nicotine addiction it seems like it's not the kind of thing that you can give up easily, for the day, week, even month, you might be in the hospital---even with nicotine addiction aids.  Worse, visiting a hospital is usually a very stressful experience, something which I understand is generally a trigger for people who are addicted to smoking.

Fair points, but I think its fair to leave it to health professionals if the stress / distress of being prohibited from smoking is better/worse for the patient (in a very wholistic sense) then allowing smoking.

There are other reasons for the prohibition against booze which don't apply to cigarettes as well.

As for patients not being allowed coffee, usually that's for a medical reason.

Patients aren't being allowed to smoke for medical reasons. There is no condition that smoking helps. And I might go as far to say there is no condition that smoking doesn't actively hurt in terms of your bodies ability to heal. Again though, its not something that we can judge as non-medical people. I assume there's a lot of research into this.

Again, please don't use the term "enable", it's an accommodation for people with an addiction, you can't just stop doing something when you're addicted, no matter how much you may want to.  The fact is some will have a physiological need to smoke (this is what a chemical addiction is) and just trying to stop them is unlikely to be successful.  Much better to accommodate them in a way which prevents harm to other people through second hand smoke.  Providing a tiny glass box outside seems to be a reasonable measure to achieve this.

For some it probably is an accommodation. But for others it is definitely enabling. Again though, we're not qualified to actually judge what the health trade offs are, and they're definitely not obvious.

As for enforcement being a "money-grab"....doubtful, enforcement of this form often barely covers it's costs, and again, keep in mind who you're "grabbing" money from.

Definitely a fair point.

[kps]

The size detector is another layer of safety that I had not heard about.  No sending double-stack container cars up, even in the dead of night!

I think we should have Plate K LRVs. Show Hong Kong what's what.

[Markster]

I think we should have Plate K LRVs. Show Hong Kong what's what.

You're going to have to elaborate on that.

[kps]

I think we should have Plate K LRVs. Show Hong Kong what's what.

You're going to have to elaborate on that.

   
(photo by Gwyn Lishman, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic)

Plate K is the largest North American loading gauge, at 20′3″ high, most commonly filled by Autoracks.

(I don't seriously think we should have Plate K LRVs. I do seriously think GO should have plate K cars (actually, K height with full 10′8″ width); they could have more capacity via two full-length flat floors, and stop fighting the freight lines over catenary height.)