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.

Dear WRConnected Users: Three whole years! We've grown so much over the past three years, and much of that is because of you, the amazing WRConnected Users. But like any other website, there are costs associated with running it. To this point it has been funded out of my own pocket. As some of you may already know, we accept donations. Some of you have made donations (thank you!). This helps cover all of the background costs associated with running this site. If every user were to donate $1 we would more than cover our yearly expenses. If WRConnected is useful to you, take a minute and help keep it online for another year. Any donation is helpful. Thank you.


Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 3.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Road and Highway Discussion
Just learned that Weber Street North over the LRT tracks will be reduced to one lane in each direction starting Monday for approximately 3 months, this to rehabilitate the bridge and prepare it for ION (Replace those temporary construction fences along the parapet with something more permanent.)
Reply
(07-27-2017, 02:51 PM)JCnb Wrote: Just learned that Weber Street North over the LRT tracks will be reduced to one lane in each direction starting Monday for approximately 3 months, this to rehabilitate the bridge and prepare it for ION (Replace those temporary construction fences along the parapet with something more permanent.)

This road makes me very grumpy!
Reply
Really? I think we talked about this before, but I can't find anything on the city's website. I wasn't aware it was going to happen this soon.
Reply
This is just the rehabilitation for the underside + ION related fences. Construction of the MUT is slated for 2019.

http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettin...302017.pdf
Reply
They're building an MUT on that bridge? Won't that require that it be widened?

It's awesome to hear that but I'm curious how this will be done; would love to see a cross section.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
(07-27-2017, 05:55 PM)Canard Wrote: They're building an MUT on that bridge?  Won't that require that it be widened?

It's awesome to hear that but I'm curious how this will be done; would love to see a cross section.

Sidewalk on the northwest side is to be removed.
Reply
But the sidewalks are raised... which I would have thought would be structural/integrated into the cross section. (I'm assuming you mean, delete one sidewalk, shift lanes over the sidewalk width, and gain that width on the other side for MUT)
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
(07-27-2017, 06:31 PM)Canard Wrote: But the sidewalks are raised... which I would have thought would be structural/integrated into the cross section. (I'm assuming you mean, delete one sidewalk, shift lanes over the sidewalk width, and gain that width on the other side for MUT)

Roughly speaking, yes, as I understand it. I don’t know about the detailed design, but I believe the curb is only a regular 20cm or less so regardless of how the bridge is designed underneath it wouldn’t take much to fudge the elevation of the surface.

The plan seems to say that there are bike lanes on both sides however. I’m guessing this means the general traffic lanes are just a bit narrowed compared to how they are now.

I should also mention that in general I’m opposed to omitting sidewalks in the city but in this particular case I think it’s a less harmful instance. It’s a substantial stretch with absolutely no destinations, and the other side (where the MUT is going) has more pedestrian destinations for a significant additional distance.

Incidentally I was looking at one of the plans linked from the PDF.
Reply
See far right of page 1 here: https://icreate3.esolutionsgroup.ca/2306...native.pdf
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
I hope that isn't the final design. That frustrates me so much. That bike lane is a death lane and shouldn't be built.
Reply
A death lane? Please do elaborate some.
Reply
(07-27-2017, 08:58 PM)tomh009 Wrote: A death lane?  Please do elaborate some.

Traffic planners say that two lanes are necessary there because transport trucks are slow going up the bridge approach.  Transport trucks take the whole 3.3 meter lane, and might easily get cut off by impatient drivers.  Cyclists are riding in a 1.5 meter cycle lane, between the transport trucks and a concrete wall, so what happens in that situation.  I certainly would never ride there, and if I were a praying person, I'd pray for the safety of those who choose too.  I'm quite certain that lane makes the road more dangerous, than not having it.
Reply
I can't see a bike lane in the picture.
Reply
Bike lane on the top with no sidewalk.

Also no sidewalk on that side.

Staff originally recommended taking one lane of the bridge to make room for safe bike lanes a MUST and a sidewalk but apparently only drivers showed up at the PUC and quashed that idea.

This road frustrates me so much right now.
Reply
Here's a case where human beings have space taken from them for the sake of various kinds of vehicles (bicycles, cars, transport trucks). I admit that getting rid of a sidewalk here is less egregious than in other places, but it still shouldn't be done. 1500 mm for a sidewalk could be found by reducing the car lanes to 3 meters and 3.3 meters, rather than 3.35 and 3.65.

Better yet, why not put a multi-use trail on both sides of the bridge? Normally I'm not a big fan of them, but in this case traffic among people and bicyclists will still be fairly light, so it shouldn't be hard for them to co-exist. As danbrotherston says, few people in their right minds will choose to bike Weber just because they've got a
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)