03-07-2022, 12:08 AM
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.
Login or Create an Account
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.
Login or Create an Account
Thread Rating:
Cycling in Waterloo Region
|
03-07-2022, 08:07 AM
(03-06-2022, 10:33 PM)bravado Wrote:(03-06-2022, 09:28 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I am not an engineer, which means that I am not qualified to sign plans. Yup! Yeah, our plazas always have lots of entrances like that, and I see why, it makes them easier to access, but makes our roads (stroads) much worse. To be fair, our engineers do understand the traffic flow disruptions that this causes (maybe they know about safety too, but don't really care), but even car traffic flow is not a big enough reason to limit access. It's a fundamentally broken transportation system. What really bothers me about our engineers is the standards they blindly follow. There is a standard which says an MUT is acceptable if there are fewer than x driveways in y meters. But they refuse to make a distinction between a high frequency high speed driveway for a gas station and a tiny residential driveway that carries two trips a day at best. Which is why they will put a MUT on a road like that, despite the obvious danger, but WON'T put it in a safer place that just happens to have homes on it. It's crazy...I've had this conversation with them, and they literally just repeated the standard back at me. I have zero respect for these folks at that point.
03-07-2022, 08:11 AM
Re: going to Cambridge - it largely depends where in Cambridge you're going. The route via Wilson/Old Mill/Blair is about as direct as you can get when heading to Galt. Once you're over the river and in Blair, it's practically an expressway - no cars, no stoplights. Just zoom on down until you enter downtown Galt.
If you want to go to Sportsworld, I would recommend taking the pedestrian bridge over the Grand River near the Doon campus. It's indirect, and there are some really simple obvious improvements the city could make to make it more practical, but this is the city we live in now, and it's a safe, reasonable route. If you want to go to Preston, I recommend taking the above route to Fountain and then if continuing to Hespeler taking the MUT from Riverside Park along the Speed River. There is a MUT along Fountain and the MUT along the Speed River, while gravel, is generally well maintained. More direct alternate road routes into Hespeler from Kitchener aren't great on a bike. Hidden Valley - Galt Sportsworld Detour Preston/Hespeler Detour
03-07-2022, 11:01 AM
(03-07-2022, 08:07 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: It's crazy...I've had this conversation with them, and they literally just repeated the standard back at me. I have zero respect for these folks at that point. Blind rule-followers are bad engineers. Engineering is supposed to have a large element of creativity and thoughtfulness. Isambard Kingdom Brunel is probably spinning enough in his grave to generate electricity for half of England.
03-07-2022, 11:31 AM
(03-07-2022, 11:01 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(03-07-2022, 08:07 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: It's crazy...I've had this conversation with them, and they literally just repeated the standard back at me. I have zero respect for these folks at that point. I'd thought I would continue the pile-on here with an aerial maps screenshot of driveways that cross the MUT circled in red in this ~100m section of MUT next to Franklin road. They spent quite a lot of money and time on this!
03-07-2022, 09:36 PM
(03-06-2022, 09:08 PM)ac3r Wrote: I don't bike in Waterloo Region much because it's still dangerous so I'm not familiar with much of the infrastructure here, but it does indeed seem negligent they would not add some sort of signage or similar to warn drivers. Around here, you're more likely to see a sign warning cyclists of turning vehicles.
03-25-2022, 08:07 PM
(03-07-2022, 09:36 PM)timc Wrote:(03-06-2022, 09:08 PM)ac3r Wrote: I don't bike in Waterloo Region much because it's still dangerous so I'm not familiar with much of the infrastructure here, but it does indeed seem negligent they would not add some sort of signage or similar to warn drivers. On my adventures today in Cambridge I did see literally that… nothing like local governments abdicating their responsibilities.
03-28-2022, 07:50 PM
Or more likely, "Short of a bike activated spike strip, there is no way that we can account for every car coming around the corner, so please be careful"
03-29-2022, 04:16 AM
(03-28-2022, 07:50 PM)nms Wrote: Or more likely, "Short of a bike activated spike strip, there is no way that we can account for every car coming around the corner, so please be careful" Account for *every* car, maybe not, but they don't put that sign *everywhere* they only put it places where there are problems. They could, for example, traffic calm the approaching road so that drivers are travelling more slowly and have more time to react. Instead we get a sign.
CycleWR is now a non-profit. cyclewr.ca/join
04-13-2022, 10:09 AM
Here's some more brilliant Waterloo Region bike infrastructure...a flexible bollard right in the middle of the bike lane: https://www.reddit.com/r/waterloo/commen...featuring/
04-13-2022, 12:55 PM
Ontario St is closed off King/Halls Lane. Hopefully the next section of the cycling grid getting started.
Unfortunately, I don't see how this section goes in without losing a lot of trees
04-13-2022, 01:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2022, 01:06 PM by danbrotherston.)
I haven't looked at the plans recently, but I would think they'd only need to take the two trees on one side...one of which doesn't look too healthy.
But yeah, I suspect that will be the cost. FWIW...I don't know why they are continuing with the Ontario section, given that they seem to be unwilling to continue it to Duke St. ending it at King doesn't help build a grid. I think a bigger win would be to negotiate with the region on building a section along Victoria, plus improve the infra and continuity along Young/Guakel. But that's a pretty hard pivot to make now. The other ambitious plan would be to build it along Queen St...but that road was just rebuilt and they opted out of cycling infra...which is sad...it really is a good place for it. Oh well, try again in 50 years....
04-13-2022, 03:10 PM
(04-13-2022, 01:04 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I haven't looked at the plans recently, but I would think they'd only need to take the two trees on one side...one of which doesn't look too healthy. Isn't that section of Duke going to be without cycling infrastructure anyways? It's not a grid whether it goes to King or to Duke... Selfishly this Ontario segment will serve me well in one direction, so I'm happy. But otherwise I share in the disappointment.
04-13-2022, 04:13 PM
(04-13-2022, 03:10 PM)dtkvictim Wrote:(04-13-2022, 01:04 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I haven't looked at the plans recently, but I would think they'd only need to take the two trees on one side...one of which doesn't look too healthy. Heh...yeah, that too. *sigh*... |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 40 Guest(s)