Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 4.2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit
(Yesterday, 11:09 PM)timc Wrote: If we can put that much density of lighting (the original, not the 'shop) on King Street, then is there really much justification for not putting a crossing light where the IHT crosses Park Street? From what I remember, the proximity to the intersection at John Street and the potential for driver confusion was the reason to not do it.

I think the photo has been doctored Tongue

Having said that, a lot of the excuses given for why cycling infrastructure can’t be improved are just that — excuses, as far as I am concerned. Anyway, if a second stoplight would be too confusing, just put in a stop sign and give the trail priority (only semi-kidding).
Reply
I know the last one linked was altered, but even the original was extreme.
Reply
Yes; to clarify, my original photo is real. Then, Jesse slightly modified it, which I thought was hilarious. Sorry for the confusion!
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
It wouldn't look so bad if the backs of the lights were painted black or the same grey as the poles -- then you'd only see half of them.
...K
Reply
(08-12-2017, 09:23 PM)Canard Wrote: 1/3 - Saturday, August 12, 2017


The look and feel of King Street has changed dramatically in Midtown.


Looking South on King, from Union.


Looking North on King, from Union.


The Waterloo Spur. This is the Southernmost point of the "Test Track", upon which LRV burn-in operations will occur, in advance of full system testing.


Waterloo Public Square turned out great, I think. Things always look so much better once some greenery goes in.
King has 1 thru lane and a left turn lane - why are 4 traffic lights needed for this (2 for the thru lane and 2 for the left turn lane).  The clutter is horrible - half the lights should go
Reply
Current practice is to install redundant traffic lights, in case one malfunctions.
Is the danger posed by a failed signal higher than the danger posed by confusing signals? Debatable.
Reply
(6 hours ago)Markster Wrote: Current practice is to install redundant traffic lights, in case one malfunctions.
Is the danger posed by a failed signal higher than the danger posed by confusing signals? Debatable.

What bugs me is why the red left turn signal isn't an arrow!  Having the lights that close together is confusing, and requires signage which shouldn't be required if the design made sense.
Reply
Bells, gates to be activated at LRT rail crossings - CTV Kitchener
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
(6 hours ago)Markster Wrote: Current practice is to install redundant traffic lights, in case one malfunctions.
Is the danger posed by a failed signal higher than the danger posed by confusing signals? Debatable.

Thanks for the explanation.   I think 2 lights each with an arrow for the left turn lane would be sufficient and would meet the redundancy requirement.   The current configuration is a total eyesore.
Reply
(2 hours ago)NotStan Wrote:
(6 hours ago)Markster Wrote: Current practice is to install redundant traffic lights, in case one malfunctions.
Is the danger posed by a failed signal higher than the danger posed by confusing signals? Debatable.

Thanks for the explanation.   I think 2 lights each with an arrow for the left turn lane would be sufficient and would meet the redundancy requirement.   The current configuration is a total eyesore.

I think the separate light is required for the fully protected left turn, which basically means you cannot turn left unless you have the green arrow.  This is necessary because the trains will be proceeding through those intersections, and wouldn't be able to if cars were waiting to turn left.

But I agree the forest of lights is really excessive.
Reply
You could get by with a 4-element light with straight and left arrows at the bottom. Would mean that cars turning right had to stop before going, unless you went to 5-element lights, but might not be the worst for pedestrian areas, assuming any drivers understood the effect of a 4-element light in that scenario.

I'm also surprised that with the advent of LEDs, we don't have LED lights capable of showing pure green (for any movement allowed), or only an arrow or multi-arrow (for more limited movements allowed).
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: expat, jeffster, 2 Guest(s)