+- 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)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
RE: Trails - nms - 06-13-2017
(06-13-2017, 12:11 AM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Woolwich seems intent on turning as much of the Kissing Bridge Trail as possible into a generic tree-lined path with Trees for Woolwich community plantings in the open sections. It's hard to argue against more trees, but a big part of the appeal of this trail is the unique vantage offered as it cuts through the countryside. Much of it already runs through woodlots or is otherwise enclosed by trees planted since the line was decommissioned, so I guess I don't really see the appeal of enclosing the rest.
Perhaps shade when walking? Walking an unshaded trail in the summer heat can be brutal.
RE: Trails - Canard - 06-13-2017
Do you mean like when you go on a trail and you kind of get that moire-fringe thing going on, looking at all the trees, because you know they were planted instead of just being natural?
RE: Trails - kwliving - 06-15-2017
Where did that chart come from? "Accessability"? Good grief.
RE: Trails - Pheidippides - 06-15-2017
Wasn't sure where to post this.
I had not been in Waterloo Park for a while and was surprised tonight to see how much progress had been made on the reconfiguration of the circulation routes within the park over by the central entrance.
The picture below is looking (west) up the road along the tennis courts the new trail is seen on the left. It winds its way up the hill and crosses the road and connects to the trail that runs alongside the tennis bubble.
And looking to the east (back toward Albert) the road no longer goes straight through (but the trail does) while the road curves into the parking lot (no longer dirt but paved):
RE: Trails - ijmorlan - 06-15-2017
(06-15-2017, 04:13 PM)kwliving Wrote: Where did that chart come from? "Accessability"? Good grief.
Not intending to provide any excuse for this sort of sloppiness, but the University of Waterloo isn’t helping by calling their special needs office AccessAbility Services (AAS):
https://uwaterloo.ca/accessability-services/
RE: Trails - plam - 06-16-2017
The Waterloo Park work really reduces the number of times I have to deal with oncoming cars. There is also a short unpaved trail from Seagram Dr going to Central Dr parallel to the train tracks. It's good that it exists (avoids the need to go through the parking lot) but it would be better if it was paved. And it is already on Google Maps (but not the trail improvements Pheidippides posted).
RE: Trails - tomh009 - 06-16-2017
A pedestrian island on the IHT? What's up with that?
(Also a dismount sign, look both ways sign, and TWO stop signs).
RE: Trails - Canard - 06-16-2017
What's up with that is "let's try and make sure people don't die".
Guilty myself for doing rolling stops here (gasp) but won't once service starts. Need to set an example - I would prefer to see cattlegates here that force a zig-zag. Otherwise someone is going to fly out and get nailed by an LRV.
Something like this should be the bare minimum of what's acceptable here:
Here's how Guelph handles interfaces with a rarely used rail line and their MUT's. Reminds me of what might come to @SpurLineKW pic.twitter.com/i6EZvU8C8s
— iain (@Canardiain) June 3, 2017
RE: Trails - timc - 06-16-2017
(06-16-2017, 09:41 AM)Canard Wrote: What's up with that is "let's try and make sure people don't die".
Guilty myself for doing rolling stops here (gasp) but won't once service starts. Need to set an example - I would prefer to see cattlegates here that force a zig-zag. Otherwise someone is going to fly out and get nailed by an LRV.
I can't tell if you're being ironic. You want gates like that?
RE: Trails - danbrotherston - 06-16-2017
"Cattlegates" have literally killed a cyclist in this city. They're a huge inconvenience, and on any trail that's even half way successful will cause traffic jams. They're just awful, and should be avoided at all costs.
A median island is only slightly better.
Dismount signs are the definition of failure on bike infrastructure. If other countries can manage to cross a road with LRT tracks on a bike, there's no reason that we can't as well.
RE: Trails - timc - 06-16-2017
(06-15-2017, 09:58 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(06-15-2017, 04:13 PM)kwliving Wrote: Where did that chart come from? "Accessability"? Good grief.
Not intending to provide any excuse for this sort of sloppiness, but the University of Waterloo isn’t helping by calling their special needs office AccessAbility Services (AAS):
https://uwaterloo.ca/accessability-services/
I've looked at the chart three times and can't see "Accessability". The UW spelling of "AccessAbility" is clearly intentional: it stresses "ability".
RE: Trails - Canard - 06-16-2017
(06-16-2017, 10:13 AM)timc Wrote: I can't tell if you're being ironic. You want gates like that?
Yes I do. People are stupid and lazy and doing stupid and lazy things in an area with bad sight lines plus a 50 ton LRV approaching = death.
Forcing them to take a little extra care - especially doing a zig-zag, which essentially guarantees they have to look left and right, gives the best chance for survival.
RE: Trails - tomh009 - 06-16-2017
(06-16-2017, 10:14 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: A median island is only slightly better.
Dismount signs are the definition of failure on bike infrastructure. If other countries can manage to cross a road with LRT tracks on a bike, there's no reason that we can't as well.
I don't really see how a median island helps -- it doesn't force anyone to modify his or her behaviour.
I do understand the issue you have with the dismount signs. I would like to hear your opinion on the stop signs for cyclists (on a trail such as this one) though. My observation on cyclist behaviour on the IHT (in non-peak hours) is that all of the above signs are pretty much ignored and most people take the road crossing at pretty much full speed.
RE: Trails - danbrotherston - 06-16-2017
(06-16-2017, 10:47 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(06-16-2017, 10:14 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: A median island is only slightly better.
Dismount signs are the definition of failure on bike infrastructure. If other countries can manage to cross a road with LRT tracks on a bike, there's no reason that we can't as well.
I don't really see how a median island helps -- it doesn't force anyone to modify his or her behaviour.
I do understand the issue you have with the dismount signs. I would like to hear your opinion on the stop signs for cyclists (on a trail such as this one) though. My observation on cyclist behaviour on the IHT (in non-peak hours) is that all of the above signs are pretty much ignored and most people take the road crossing at pretty much full speed.
I agree cyclists generally disregard "stop" signs on trails (as they do on streets)....I certainly slow down when I cross a road, but I also cycle pretty fast, but I rarely stop. Putting up signs which are basically intended to be ignored is bad policy because it encourages people to break all the rules, after all, if one is okay to break, others are okay to break as well right? This is something which is basically everywhere in our society, so I don't think we can change it, but realistically, the incremental cost of one more sign which everyone will ignore is small. But I'll still argue against it. It is also not without consequence, ignoring a sign can shift liability in the case of a collision.
In an ideal world, they'd simply be "yield" signs, or even better, the trail would have priority on minor roads....or even better than that....small residential streets which it crosses would be a 30 km/h zone and controlled by default priority like in the Netherlands....but yeah...none of those things are going to happen apparently.
RE: Trails - panamaniac - 06-16-2017
(06-16-2017, 09:13 AM)tomh009 Wrote: A pedestrian island on the IHT? What's up with that?
(Also a dismount sign, look both ways sign, and TWO stop signs).
I'm not seeing any pedestrian island there, just the ramps on either side of the tracks/two-way street (Borden, no?). Am I blind?