ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[GtwoK]

I believe I see what Markster is referring to (well, not in terms of pedestrians, but in terms of turn radius)



The yellow is the traffic flow. Note how from Victoria on to Charles, the traffic turning right "hugs" the shape of the curb, because of the sort of cutout type of shape they've created. That is to say, if the curb continued to follow it's radius (dotted red), it would end up at the edge of the vehicle ROW, effectively being a normal curb at any other intersection.

On the other hand, turning from Victoria into the School of Pharmacy parking lot, the curb radius tangents at the LRT ROW; the right-turning traffic no longer hugs the curb, and the turning raidus is sort of assumed by the driver (though not hard to assume). The red line shows what would have been a better (more consistent) curb alignment. Note how in blue, the cutout curbs would also complete the curve of Victoria St. Looks nicer

I think the complaint is more aesthetics than it is functionality. There's no real consistency as to why some curbs are "cutout" and others aren't.

[Canard]

Oh, THAT I totally get makes no sense. Now I get it - you guys are saying the upper left is correct, and lower right is not. I agree with that! I also agree that drivers would "get it" more if it were correct.

(I still don't see how that has anything to do with pedestrians though)

[kitborn]

Using the Charles/Victoria intersection as an example, what happens to vehicle traffic when the LRT goes through the intersection? Does all traffic get a red signal?

[GtwoK]

Using the Charles/Victoria intersection as an example, what happens to vehicle traffic when the LRT goes through the intersection? Does all traffic get a red signal?

Presumably, after the Charles traffic gets a red, before Victoria turns green, the LRT would get it's Advance signal. After making it through, Victoria would then get its green.

[Viewfromthe42]

The upper left corner serves two purposes: it guides drivers, and it shortens the crossing for pedestrians. Had the upper left curb been designed like the lower right one, it would guide drivers onto the LRT tracks. Since WB Victoria drivers will already theoretically be in the driving lane, turning right to go NB won't see any potential guidance issue. But if you look at the existing curb compared to the red theoretical curb in the bottom right, using the car headed SB as a reference, you add almost 10ft+ of travel for a pedestrian to cross, and you asphalt a very sharp piece of road between the curb and the LRT tracks, one which no car will ever actually drive on.

[Canard]

So basically the "better for pedestrian" thing is just that you stand closer to traffic/spend less time physically crossing the road?

If it stops the practice of pedestrians standing way too close (or over!) the edge of too-wide radius curves, I'm all for it. Sounds like it would kill two birds with one stone.

[GtwoK]

A question about this, now that I'm seeing it again... What's up with Victoria  West of Charles (on the right in this diagram)? It looks like they've removed the left turn lane onto Joseph in favour of a right turn lane onto Joseph? That seems like a... mistake.

[bpoland]

Looking at the diagram, the only thing I can think is that because the stop line for cars is so far back, they figured that a right turn into the pharmacy parking lot would mostly follow the curb. I agree with you though, it would have been nicer to extend the curb outwards -- even if it makes the turn sharper for cars.

[MidTowner]

Looking at the diagram, the only thing I can think is that because the stop line for cars is so far back, they figured that a right turn into the pharmacy parking lot would mostly follow the curb. I agree with you though, it would have been nicer to extend the curb outwards -- even if it makes the turn sharper for cars.

Making the turn sharper for cars should be the point. A wide turn radius encourages taking the turn at unsafe speeds. We should have tighter radii where there are a lot of people on foot or bike.

[Viewfromthe42]

As someone using Victoria and Weber as a crossing daily, I can tell you that the south corner of that intersection is my scariest pedestrian crossing. The gargantuan turning radius means cars don't tend to slow down at all, and their focus tends to be on the curve throughout, only getting onto me at the last screech-to-a-halt second. The giant gap between crosswalks which connect to that corner also winds up lulling drivers into thinking they've passed both, and they'll speed up after passing the first.

[Canard]

Yeah, I can imagine that (as a driver)...

There is a merit worth mentioning to huge radii turns - one single right-turning car which can't complete the turn because of a pedestrian doesn't block the rest of the straight-through traffic behind it, because there's room for the vehicle to sit there at a 45 degree angle and wait for the pedestrian to clear the crossing. So flow is improved.

[chutten]

Yeah, I can imagine that (as a driver)...

There is a merit worth mentioning to huge radii turns - one single right-turning car which can't complete the turn because of a pedestrian doesn't block the rest of the straight-through traffic behind it, because there's room for the vehicle to sit there at a 45 degree angle and wait for the pedestrian to clear the crossing. So flow is improved.

That can be accomplished while leaving the radius tight by having the crosswalks further from the corners like the Dutch design: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2011/...-or-is-it/

[Markster]

Thanks GtwoK and 42 for picking up on the follow up questions! Those were exactly my thoughts.

The "lower right" corner just encourages cars to merge into the LRT lane if they want to turn right, to skip the queue. Maybe that's the point of the design....

[Canard]

Why would they design it to intentionally have cars driving and queueing on the tracks?

[Viewfromthe42]

*hopefully* They are smart enough to make sure the curb is high enough to prevent them from queuing in the LRT lane.