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.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 9 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Road and Highway Discussion
(09-13-2022, 10:20 AM)Chris Wrote: I wasn't sure if this finally deserves it's own thread now that they are officially studying the Lancaster train crossing issue so I'll put it here for now.

Region seeking ways to improve Lancaster Street railway crossing
https://kitchener.citynews.ca/local-news...ng-5811362


With the tracks so close to the intersection I don't see how an underpass or overpass would work here. It almost seems like it would be easier to move the yard somewhere else? Maybe some land out in the business park area along Bingeman or Shirley? I know nothing of what a train yard involves and imagine moving one is not a trivial endeavour.

Simplest, best, and by far the cheapest approach is simply to close the crossing to vehicular traffic, keeping it for bicycles and pedestrians only. Build a grade-separation for active transportation, or don’t, or not yet, or realize that such a grade separation is of insignificant cost compared to one for vehicles and just do it — the big problem is what the crossing does to motor vehicle traffic, not with having a level crossing as such. This one is much worse for traffic than typical ones because it is within the area affected by yard switching movements so it is less predictable and sometimes closes the crossing for significant periods of time.

This would enormously improve Lancaster St. E., which is not meant to take significant amounts of traffic, not to mention the intersection of Lancaster, Krug, and Cedar which does not work well with significant amounts of traffic coming down Lancaster.

There is an existing bridge 2 blocks South (West) at Margaret, and a planned underpass to the North (East) immediately next to the expressway which will connect Wellington with Edna. These two routes provide alternates for any existing trip that might use the Lancaster St. crossing. Note that the correct comparison is not between being at David’s Fries and crossing to the dental office at Victoria and Lancaster; the appropriate comparison is between alternate routes between typical points further away.

Also rename Otto St. to Margaret Ave. so people on Frederick realize that they can get to Margaret that way.
Reply


The distances are the same as the Margaret St. bridge so as long as the tracks could be lowered slightly (which is difficult but not impossible given the adjacent yard) then a bridge is entirely feasible.

But I agree with ijmorlan, it is superfluous. But I don't see the regional engineers going for any closure. Leaving aside their utter aversion to restricting cars in anyway whatsoever, they consider it a main through route from Victoria/Highway 7. When there was an expectation that Highway 7 bypass (a whole other story) would be built in a reasonable timeframe, I think there could be a discussion about it, because they wanted to deprioritize Victoria and prioritize Wellington. But without that project moving forward they will still be considering Victoria -> Landcaster to be an essential traffic route.
Reply
Opinion question for you people. This is the semi-new multi use trail on Franklin in Cambridge. This is a bit of a repeat offender. They had their "I'll just be 10 minutes" lights on, but it still made me a bit cranky.

What's the normal way to deal with this garbage? Police report? Email a councillor? Wait for a kid to bike around it and get killed in traffic?

[Image: j8F31xL.jpg]
local cambridge weirdo
Reply
(09-13-2022, 05:35 PM)bravado Wrote: Opinion question for you people. This is the semi-new multi use trail on Franklin in Cambridge. This is a bit of a repeat offender. They had their "I'll just be 10 minutes" lights on, but it still made me a bit cranky.

What's the normal way to deal with this garbage? Police report? Email a councillor? Wait for a kid to bike around it and get killed in traffic?

“I park in bike lanes” sticker multipack
Reply
(09-13-2022, 05:35 PM)bravado Wrote: Opinion question for you people. This is the semi-new multi use trail on Franklin in Cambridge. This is a bit of a repeat offender. They had their "I'll just be 10 minutes" lights on, but it still made me a bit cranky.

Do they park there regularly? For how long?

I’m just curious because while I don’t like it, and we should have better approaches, I understand why trucks park for a few minutes in odd places. Just the other day I saw a truck parked in the bike trail on Erb at King; they were taking drywall into the former Hatashita Jewellers building on the corner. I didn’t like that, but I’m not sure what they should be doing instead. Although I do think that whatever they do, it should be permitted, by which I mean not “allowed” but rather “not done until they obtain a permit from the City”.

On the other hand, if that property just regularly parks their truck on the sidewalk all the time, it should be towed on site from now on.
Reply
(09-13-2022, 09:03 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(09-13-2022, 05:35 PM)bravado Wrote: Opinion question for you people. This is the semi-new multi use trail on Franklin in Cambridge. This is a bit of a repeat offender. They had their "I'll just be 10 minutes" lights on, but it still made me a bit cranky.

Do they park there regularly? For how long?

I’m just curious because while I don’t like it, and we should have better approaches, I understand why trucks park for a few minutes in odd places. Just the other day I saw a truck parked in the bike trail on Erb at King; they were taking drywall into the former Hatashita Jewellers building on the corner. I didn’t like that, but I’m not sure what they should be doing instead. Although I do think that whatever they do, it should be permitted, by which I mean not “allowed” but rather “not done until they obtain a permit from the City”.

On the other hand, if that property just regularly parks their truck on the sidewalk all the time, it should be towed on site from now on.

In this case, the owner/operator of that truck lives there and occasionally moves cars around or whatever in their driveway and also in the generous bit of public property that is also obviously their property.
local cambridge weirdo
Reply
(09-13-2022, 10:26 PM)bravado Wrote:
(09-13-2022, 09:03 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Do they park there regularly? For how long?

I’m just curious because while I don’t like it, and we should have better approaches, I understand why trucks park for a few minutes in odd places. Just the other day I saw a truck parked in the bike trail on Erb at King; they were taking drywall into the former Hatashita Jewellers building on the corner. I didn’t like that, but I’m not sure what they should be doing instead. Although I do think that whatever they do, it should be permitted, by which I mean not “allowed” but rather “not done until they obtain a permit from the City”.

On the other hand, if that property just regularly parks their truck on the sidewalk all the time, it should be towed on site from now on.

In this case, the owner/operator of that truck lives there and occasionally moves cars around or whatever in their driveway and also in the generous bit of public property that is also obviously their property.

In that case, it should be unceremoniously towed, the same as it would be if they left it in the middle of the street. Unless it was just there for a couple of minutes while they were moving vehicles around. But in that case why couldn’t they just stash it along the curb in the vehicular part of the street? Sidewalks aren’t built to take that much weight.

Although note that even my language above shows the problem: I’m implicitly granting that where it is shown in the photo is not “in the middle of the street”.
Reply


(09-14-2022, 07:34 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(09-13-2022, 10:26 PM)bravado Wrote: In this case, the owner/operator of that truck lives there and occasionally moves cars around or whatever in their driveway and also in the generous bit of public property that is also obviously their property.

In that case, it should be unceremoniously towed, the same as it would be if they left it in the middle of the street. Unless it was just there for a couple of minutes while they were moving vehicles around. But in that case why couldn’t they just stash it along the curb in the vehicular part of the street? Sidewalks aren’t built to take that much weight.

Although note that even my language above shows the problem: I’m implicitly granting that where it is shown in the photo is not “in the middle of the street”.

This whole rhetoric is revealing though.

WHY is it THERE and NOT in the roadway? Why do drivers think this is a better idea. Why do the police agree with them? How did our society get to be so broken?

In any case, the right answer is for them to be ticketed, but it's a pretty big challenge if they are only there for a few minutes. In that case the process becomes a bit more of a challenge because it involves starting by electing a new government, creating a new enforcement body, and completely changing the norms and values in our society. You know...small stuff.

I'll be honest though...this kinda stuff makes me more than "a bit" cranky...it's infuriating. Of course, the interesting thing is that it happens here in the Netherlands quite a bit too...but the context is different. Nobody is doing it to avoid blocking a road...they're doing it because they have no other option...and cyclists and pedestrians just take over the road as needed. Context is everything (although I'd still prefer less cars/car freedom than even this).

Alternative option...the thing is parked but running? Keys are in it? Go wreck the transmission as you move the thing to a less offensive parking location (I might suggest the dude's front lawn).
Reply
(09-14-2022, 08:04 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(09-14-2022, 07:34 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: In that case, it should be unceremoniously towed, the same as it would be if they left it in the middle of the street. Unless it was just there for a couple of minutes while they were moving vehicles around. But in that case why couldn’t they just stash it along the curb in the vehicular part of the street? Sidewalks aren’t built to take that much weight.

Although note that even my language above shows the problem: I’m implicitly granting that where it is shown in the photo is not “in the middle of the street”.

This whole rhetoric is revealing though.

WHY is it THERE and NOT in the roadway? Why do drivers think this is a better idea. Why do the police agree with them? How did our society get to be so broken?

Even with society's current state of mind, it just doesn't make any sense to me. The choice is between completely blocking the ONLY MUT vs blocking 50% of the roadway which has a perfectly usable parallel lane (from what I can tell). The only way this decision makes sense is if you don't consider parking across the entire MUT to be blocking anyone.

This is also what you get when you have homes/driveways on a major arterial. No one would question parking on the street while shuffling cars around in a regular residential area.
Reply
In this specific case, Franklin Blvd is not a road (stroad) you could ever stop on, but it doesn't matter when this nonsense kills a kid some day.
local cambridge weirdo
Reply
How would that kill a kid? They can just go around it. And most kids would be like "oh cool, a truck" and stop to look. Obviously they shouldn't be parking there but...it is what it is.
Reply
(09-13-2022, 09:03 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(09-13-2022, 05:35 PM)bravado Wrote: Opinion question for you people. This is the semi-new multi use trail on Franklin in Cambridge. This is a bit of a repeat offender. They had their "I'll just be 10 minutes" lights on, but it still made me a bit cranky.

Do they park there regularly? For how long?

I’m just curious because while I don’t like it, and we should have better approaches, I understand why trucks park for a few minutes in odd places. Just the other day I saw a truck parked in the bike trail on Erb at King; they were taking drywall into the former Hatashita Jewellers building on the corner. I didn’t like that, but I’m not sure what they should be doing instead. Although I do think that whatever they do, it should be permitted, by which I mean not “allowed” but rather “not done until they obtain a permit from the City”.

On the other hand, if that property just regularly parks their truck on the sidewalk all the time, it should be towed on site from now on.

Counterpoint: I don't understand parking in the bike lane and they should have been using/blocking 1/3 vehicular lanes with their vehicle. Just because the bicycle traffic is less and not going to hit and damage their truck doesn't mean its optional for them to block any more than the roadway.
Reply
(09-14-2022, 09:35 PM)cherrypark Wrote:
(09-13-2022, 09:03 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Do they park there regularly? For how long?

I’m just curious because while I don’t like it, and we should have better approaches, I understand why trucks park for a few minutes in odd places. Just the other day I saw a truck parked in the bike trail on Erb at King; they were taking drywall into the former Hatashita Jewellers building on the corner. I didn’t like that, but I’m not sure what they should be doing instead. Although I do think that whatever they do, it should be permitted, by which I mean not “allowed” but rather “not done until they obtain a permit from the City”.

On the other hand, if that property just regularly parks their truck on the sidewalk all the time, it should be towed on site from now on.

Counterpoint: I don't understand parking in the bike lane and they should have been using/blocking 1/3 vehicular lanes with their vehicle. Just because the bicycle traffic is less and not going to hit and damage their truck doesn't mean its optional for them to block any more than the roadway.

That is a good point. And I would actually suggest that the bike lanes should have bollards making entry by full-size vehicles impossible, which makes the question of what to do in unusual circumstances moot. But factual correction: it would be one of 2 vehicular lanes at that point, and right at the intersection for maximum disruption to traffic flow.

Of course I’m one who wonders why we can’t have arrangements where they have to book a parking space for construction purposes, or restrict their deliveries to off hours; blocking one of 2 vehicular lanes during rush hour really would jam things up, but doing it at another time of day wouldn’t be much of a problem at all.

But regardless of how my example should have been handled, it seems clear that in this Cambridge case the truck simply has no need to be on the sidewalk even briefly.
Reply


(09-14-2022, 07:25 PM)ac3r Wrote: How would that kill a kid? They can just go around it. And most kids would be like "oh cool, a truck" and stop to look. Obviously they shouldn't be parking there but...it is what it is.

How does that kill a kid? Parent says "man, it's too dangerous for me to cycle with my kid, even the new MUT has giant transport trucks parked on it, so I'm going to put my child in a giant SUV instead, oh no, I ran over the neighbours kid."

Invoking dead children is obviously inflammatory, and not necessarily the best strategy, but the result is undeniable. Our world is designed in a deadly way and among the dead is plenty of children.
Reply
(09-15-2022, 02:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(09-14-2022, 07:25 PM)ac3r Wrote: How would that kill a kid? They can just go around it. And most kids would be like "oh cool, a truck" and stop to look. Obviously they shouldn't be parking there but...it is what it is.

How does that kill a kid? Parent says "man, it's too dangerous for me to cycle with my kid, even the new MUT has giant transport trucks parked on it, so I'm going to put my child in a giant SUV instead, oh no, I ran over the neighbours kid."

Invoking dead children is obviously inflammatory, and not necessarily the best strategy, but the result is undeniable. Our world is designed in a deadly way and among the dead is plenty of children.

As a more direct example, the kid rides into the street while going around the obstacle on the cycling path and gets hit by a car while doing so.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links