Waterloo Region Connected
Trails - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Trails (/showthread.php?tid=378)



RE: Trails - timc - 07-10-2021

By the way, what ever happened to the proposal to move the traffic signal to the Columbia Street trail crossing?


RE: Trails - dtkvictim - 07-10-2021

(07-09-2021, 09:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(07-09-2021, 08:28 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: I can sort of understand... Conflict between trails users, visibility for buses, and not stopping on the train tracks. But what frustrating design.

I'm confused...how is this supposed to help conflict between trail users? This quite clearly will increase conflict between trail users, who now have to navigate four sharp turns, with no extra width (bicycles require more space to turn). Further, anyone waiting to cross Ring Rd. (perhaps to go from the bus terminal to the DC or the rest of campus--a small demographic I know) will have to wait IN THE PATH of the the trail.

This section was already heavily congested, at peak hours, I fully expect traffic jams. This is beyond a bad design, this is professional malpractice...engineering negligence, whatever you want to call it. If this were a road, this would never have gotten implemented. If it had, heads would roll. But because it's cycling infra, I'm sure we'll be getting a garbage statement about how this meets all current regional standards and is perfectly fine.

I'm sorry, I know this is impolite to say, but it is honest, our regional engineers are incompetent at designing cycling infra and should not be permitted to do so anymore.

I phrased that poorly, I meant conflict between all the competing requirements. I'm completely in agreement that this is bad design, and will increase conflict between trail users. But it does increase visibility between buses and trail users, and (presumably) provides a safe space for buses to wait off the tracks. So clearly those requirements were given a higher priority.

I'm really unfamiliar with the area though, so maybe I'm misunderstanding what's being built.

(07-10-2021, 02:05 PM)timc Wrote: By the way, what ever happened to the proposal to move the traffic signal to the Columbia Street trail crossing?

What's this? Part of the reason I'm unfamiliar with that section of the Laurel trail is because I find it more comfortable to cycle through Philip/Columbia than through the Laurel/Columbia crossing. Lights at the crossing would be nice to have.


RE: Trails - danbrotherston - 07-10-2021

(07-10-2021, 02:54 PM)dtkvictim Wrote:
(07-09-2021, 09:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I'm confused...how is this supposed to help conflict between trail users? This quite clearly will increase conflict between trail users, who now have to navigate four sharp turns, with no extra width (bicycles require more space to turn). Further, anyone waiting to cross Ring Rd. (perhaps to go from the bus terminal to the DC or the rest of campus--a small demographic I know) will have to wait IN THE PATH of the the trail.

This section was already heavily congested, at peak hours, I fully expect traffic jams. This is beyond a bad design, this is professional malpractice...engineering negligence, whatever you want to call it. If this were a road, this would never have gotten implemented. If it had, heads would roll. But because it's cycling infra, I'm sure we'll be getting a garbage statement about how this meets all current regional standards and is perfectly fine.

I'm sorry, I know this is impolite to say, but it is honest, our regional engineers are incompetent at designing cycling infra and should not be permitted to do so anymore.

I phrased that poorly, I meant conflict between all the competing requirements. I'm completely in agreement that this is bad design, and will increase conflict between trail users. But it does increase visibility between buses and trail users, and (presumably) provides a safe space for buses to wait off the tracks. So clearly those requirements were given a higher priority.

I'm really unfamiliar with the area though, so maybe I'm misunderstanding what's being built.

(07-10-2021, 02:05 PM)timc Wrote: By the way, what ever happened to the proposal to move the traffic signal to the Columbia Street trail crossing?

What's this? Part of the reason I'm unfamiliar with that section of the Laurel trail is because I find it more comfortable to cycle through Philip/Columbia than through the Laurel/Columbia crossing. Lights at the crossing would be nice to have.

I actually disagree with this. Visibility is improved when drivers are not parallel to the trail when turning. While I trust bus drivers more than average to look in their mirror for people coming down the trail behind them, but it remains the case that it is easier to see a trail user at between 90 degrees and 0 degrees from straight ahead, than from 180 (directly behind you) to 90 degrees of straight ahead. This is one reason why Dutch intersection design sets protected crossings back from the edge of the road. It is also the case that this design will upset the flow of trail users making their behaviour much harder to predict. I quite frankly, think this makes the crossing more dangerous in addition to more inconvenient and congested.

This change also has the side effect of upsetting the flow of the trail users. This makes their behaviour harder to predict, which reduces safety. I fully expect this change makes the crossing more difficult for road users to manage the conflict, rather than less. In addition for people crossing RR.

As for buses waiting, yes, this does mean buses can stop for trail users without blocking the LRT tracks. But this was never an issue, before the buses had the right of way over the trail users (even though virtually nobody in the city knows this, but a well designed crossing could fix this). As a result, buses do not have to stop for trail users and block the LRT tracks. The buses *WOULD* block the trail, but this is a) preferable to the new garbage situation, and b) rare, given that traffic on RR is light and so buses wouldn't would rarely have to wait, and c) mitigatable by giving buses priority onto RR by placing a stop sign for cars.

As for the priority, even if the right thing to do is to bring the crossing to the road (which I still don't agree with), that does not justify the utterly negligent design being built.

Yes, staff are consulting on moving the traffic signal from the underused former Rim buildings parking lot to the Laurel Trail. Of course, since that involves impacting drivers, there is extensive public consultation taking place, unlike with this garbage crossing where they haven't spared a thought for the users they're impacting...after all, the real business of the region is moving motor vehicles quickly.


RE: Trails - dtkvictim - 08-14-2021

Iron horse trail, out of the back/side of Victoria Bowling. Not sure if this is here every year or not, but I've only seen it recently.

[Image: lpbx2Kq.jpg][Image: meAiqn7.jpg]


RE: Trails - ac3r - 08-15-2021

Lol that's a bit strange to see. Who buys a beer out of a wood shed attached to the back of an old bowling alley?


RE: Trails - jamincan - 08-15-2021

Hell, I would. I wish stuff like that was a bit more common.


RE: Trails - ac3r - 08-15-2021

I definitely would too (well, if it was good beer), but it's such a random thing to see along a trail.

With that in mind, I wish it was legal to drink in public here. I usually do it regardless, but it would be nice if you could sip on a cold drink in the park without having to worry about getting a ticket or being told to throw it out. It's such a common thing around the world, but here it's treated as if it's some sort of hard drug.


RE: Trails - ijmorlan - 08-15-2021

(08-15-2021, 02:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: I definitely would too (well, if it was good beer), but it's such a random thing to see along a trail.

With that in mind, I wish it was legal to drink in public here. I usually do it regardless, but it would be nice if you could sip on a cold drink in the park without having to worry about getting a ticket or being told to throw it out. It's such a common thing around the world, but here it's treated as if it's some sort of hard drug.

Our alcohol rules are basically temperance watered down. It’s amazing how deeply ingrained they are. It seems that targeting the rules more specifically towards the problems associated with some alcohol-related behaviours rather than towards alcohol itself would be a benefit.

In the meantime, what happens if you use an opaque container? I mean, can they really ask what’s in your insulated coffee mug with a lid? But of course I suppose this doesn’t really address your concern because you would still be hiding.


RE: Trails - Chris - 08-15-2021

(08-15-2021, 10:14 AM)ac3r Wrote: Lol that's a bit strange to see. Who buys a beer out of a wood shed attached to the back of an old bowling alley?

This guy right here.


RE: Trails - Acitta - 08-16-2021

From Tom Galloway on Twitter: Work progressing on Stewart St MUT link to future Transit Hub. Last piece from the IHT.
   

Also on Twitter: Construction of the new multi-use trail on Lackner Blvd between Ottawa St N and Victoria St N is done! This closes the gap and makes it possible to bike to Victoria St's multi-use trails all the way from Fairway Rd.


RE: Trails - jamincan - 08-16-2021

(08-16-2021, 03:19 PM)Acitta Wrote: Also on Twitter: Construction of the new multi-use trail on Lackner Blvd between Ottawa St N and Victoria St N is done! This closes the gap and makes it possible to bike to Victoria St's multi-use trails all the way from Fairway Rd.
And thus closes the chapter of one of the most egregious cases of bad cycling infrastructure the Region has ever seen. While the Northfield death-lane is bad, I feel like the Lackner chopped bike lanes were even lower effort. The MUT is a huge improvement and a long time coming.


RE: Trails - danbrotherston - 08-17-2021

(08-16-2021, 07:21 PM)jamincan Wrote:
(08-16-2021, 03:19 PM)Acitta Wrote: Also on Twitter: Construction of the new multi-use trail on Lackner Blvd between Ottawa St N and Victoria St N is done! This closes the gap and makes it possible to bike to Victoria St's multi-use trails all the way from Fairway Rd.
And thus closes the chapter of one of the most egregious cases of bad cycling infrastructure the Region has ever seen. While the Northfield death-lane is bad, I feel like the Lackner chopped bike lanes were even lower effort. The MUT is a huge improvement and a long time coming.

Maybe CAA wants to run a worst bike lane competition.


RE: Trails - KevinL - 08-20-2021




RE: Trails - dtkvictim - 08-21-2021

(08-16-2021, 03:19 PM)Acitta Wrote: From Tom Galloway on Twitter: Work progressing on Stewart St MUT link to future Transit Hub. Last piece from the IHT.

Will this connect to Joseph St? Is there a map of the trail here?


RE: Trails - danbrotherston - 08-21-2021

dtkvictim Wrote:
Acitta Wrote:From Tom Galloway on Twitter: Work progressing on Stewart St MUT link to future Transit Hub. Last piece from the IHT.

Will this connect to Joseph St? Is there a map of the trail here?

I am remote right now so no map but an explanation. Tom clarified in another tweet 'last' isn't really the right word, another...eventual piece might be better.

This will connect from Stewart and park to Joseph (which is good because it will connect with the city's downtown grid which has been planned funded and constructed in the time the region has been fucking around with the connector trail). Unfortunately it is part of perimeter developments parking garage in that location so it will be under construction for a long time. 

More, the region still has to figure out how to get the trail behind the pharmacy building to the terminal (which still has to be funded). 

This whole thing is very region. Even when the money is gifted they cannot do shit.

I'll give them one iota of credit, they decided to go via Stewart st which I know took longer, but seriously, this has been what, five years now, and not even close to completion.  For a trail!  These folks are not serious about anything but roads.