ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[Chicopee]

http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/7...-everyone/

There's a letter in the Record from a gentleman who lives in the (beautiful) Mount Hope area. He's concerned that accessing GRH and Central has become difficult from his neighborhood. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it business as usual at Pine and King, or are left turns off Pine forbidden? Also, was the back entrance to Central closed by Braun /Linwood? I was there last at the end of November, and I believe it was open. Since the LRT construction is predominantly complete along that corridor, I thought it was essentially the same as before. There's even a left turn lane from King eastbound (south) into Central.

[KevinL]

The letter writer does seem confused - Pine/King remains a full-movement intersection, and the back entrance to Central is unchanged to my knowledge. Some other intersections are now right-in, right-out only, but U-turns at full intersections are encouraged to make up for the missing lefts.

[jgsz]

It's more difficult to jaywalk.

[bpoland]

From Pine onto King is now right turn only. They installed a half median as well as signs to prevent straight and left turns. I think you also can't turn left from King onto Pine either (or do a u turn there).

[Markster]

Traynor walkway consultation was today. Elizabeth Clarke posted a summary to Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_f...=686822111

The current proposal is to locate the Fairway side between Swiss Chalet and Michael's. Further comments are welcome before the plan is finalized.

Here's the map of the proposed crossing:
   

To cross post my comments from another forum...

While I 'm glad they're working on putting in a crossing, it's probably the least useful location that isn't actively stupid (like if they had put it behind the middle of the strip mall).

The higher density housing is all to the west of the proposed crossing, and the more useful destinations (the grocery, the fast food) are also to the west of the crossing. That apartment tower you see to the right of the photo doesn't even have access to the hydro corridor (it's a massive retaining wall), anyone who lives there has to walk around to Wilson Ave anyway.
For a lot of people, this is not going to improve their trip to the grocery store.

I can see the city's reason for this location though.
1) It's encroaching on a large strip mall that will likely be more amenable to the taking of a small sliver of its property (on a % basis).
2) It's closer to the only "official" entrypoint to the Hydro corridor trail, from Balfour Cres. Any further west, and the city would be compelled to create a public access right of way directly from Traynor, negotiating with one of the apartment complexes.
3) It connects with one of the signalized intersections on Fairway.

My preference would be for it to be lined up with the traffic light to the west. Behind PartSource. That would put it in the centre of the general distribution of retail on Fairway, instead of on the eastern edge.

On the bright side, the proposal would reduce the Trip of Maximum Inconvenience:
As current
241 Traynor Ave to 560 Fairway (Swiss Chalet): 1.2km (80m before LRT)
As proposed
Reyburn Ave @ Traynor to 666 fairway (McDonald's): 700m (80m before LRT)

[danbrotherston]

To cross post my comments from another forum...

While I 'm glad they're working on putting in a crossing, it's probably the least useful location that isn't actively stupid (like if they had put it behind the middle of the strip mall).

The higher density housing is all to the west of the proposed crossing, and the more useful destinations (the grocery, the fast food) are also to the west of the crossing. That apartment tower you see to the right of the photo doesn't even have access to the hydro corridor (it's a massive retaining wall), anyone who lives there has to walk around to Wilson Ave anyway.
For a lot of people, this is not going to improve their trip to the grocery store.

I can see the city's reason for this location though.
1) It's encroaching on a large strip mall that will likely be more amenable to the taking of a small sliver of its property (on a % basis).
2) It's closer to the only "official" entrypoint to the Hydro corridor trail, from Balfour Cres. Any further west, and the city would be compelled to create a public access right of way directly from Traynor, negotiating with one of the apartment complexes.
3) It connects with one of the signalized intersections on Fairway.

My preference would be for it to be lined up with the traffic light to the west.  Behind PartSource.  That would put it in the centre of the general distribution of retail on Fairway, instead of on the eastern edge.

On the bright side, the proposal would reduce the Trip of Maximum Inconvenience:
As current
241 Traynor Ave to 560 Fairway (Swiss Chalet): 1.2km  (80m before LRT)
As proposed
Reyburn Ave @ Traynor to 666 fairway (McDonald's): 700m (80m before LRT)

Great analysis. I'm not too familiar with the area or the movement patterns, but it sounds like it's worth pushing for a better location. Is it possibly worth pushing on the property owners on both sides to stand up and volunteer to have the pathway (for reasonable compensation of course).

[ijmorlan]

[....]

Great analysis.  I'm not too familiar with the area or the movement patterns, but it sounds like it's worth pushing for a better location.  Is it possibly worth pushing on the property owners on both sides to stand up and volunteer to have the pathway (for reasonable compensation of course).

The ultimate solution would be to put a trail on each side of the LRT tracks. Then the crossings could be placed anywhere without worrying about whether they “officially” connect to something appropriate — no matter where they went, they would connect two parallel trails. Unofficially, of course, they would be placed for optimum connectivity. I would prefer to see two or maybe even three crossings along that stretch.

[Canard]

I really like that idea, ijmorlan. The parallel trails could run all the way from Courtland to Wilson, with feeder "taps" as required/as permitted! It also kind of future-proofs it, as property changes. The fixed crossing(s) would be less vulnerable.

[ElsieEm]

The letter writer does seem confused - Pine/King remains a full-movement intersection, and the back entrance to Central is unchanged to my knowledge. Some other intersections are now right-in, right-out only, but U-turns at full intersections are encouraged to make up for the missing lefts.

Within the last few weeks they've actually blocked off the back entrance of Central to cars. You can still walk through, but a quite-permanent-looking barrier is there now. Surprised me because I thought their delivery trucks came through that way, not to mention making it harder for customers!

[Canard]

LOL I just realized all the existing path lines lead directly to Tim Hortons.

[KevinL]

The ultimate solution would be to put a trail on each side of the LRT tracks. 

I don't believe there's room on the south side of the tracks for a second trail, unfortunately. The rails are too close to the property line along there.

[danbrotherston]

The ultimate solution would be to put a trail on each side of the LRT tracks. 

I don't believe there's room on the south side of the tracks for a second trail, unfortunately. The rails are too close to the property line along there.

Well the property line could be taken.  Of course, paths already exists in some form on both sides.  On the north side there is already a continuous trail.  On the south side there is a sidewalk, that while admittedly set a fair distance back from the rails is still a safe route.

The problem is, this doesn't actually fix the problem.  If I live directly across the tracks from my destination, but the crossing is 300 meters away, I still have to walk over half a KM to get to the destination right across from my house.  There are both more and less extreme examples, but trails on both sides doesn't help a badly positioned crossing.

[ijmorlan]

I don't believe there's room on the south side of the tracks for a second trail, unfortunately. The rails are too close to the property line along there.

Well the property line could be taken.  Of course, paths already exists in some form on both sides.  On the north side there is already a continuous trail.  On the south side there is a sidewalk, that while admittedly set a fair distance back from the rails is still a safe route.

The problem is, this doesn't actually fix the problem.  If I live directly across the tracks from my destination, but the crossing is 300 meters away, I still have to walk over half a KM to get to the destination right across from my house.  There are both more and less extreme examples, but trails on both sides doesn't help a badly positioned crossing.

No, but they allow the crossing to be positioned based on what are unofficially the best locations, without worrying about whether the crossings officially connect to anything. For example, you could take a place where there is a path coming out of the back of any parking lot and put the crossing there. With two parallel trails, this is fine because officially the crossing is just connecting the trails. Without the trails, the crossing has to officially connect, requiring formal negotiations with a property owner.

Also, for anybody not directly crossing the tracks, as long as there is a crossing between where they are and where they want to be on the other side of the tracks, the exact position of the crossing doesn’t matter at all. Combined with more crossings (two or three or conceivably even more although at a certain point it’s enough), the inconvenience could be reduced enormously.

[Canard]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Catenary (both messenger and contact wire) is up on Charles! Bonus: new LED streetlights are on from Benton to Cedar. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/wrLRT?src=hash">#wrLRT</a> <a href="https://t.co/nYa0V7aCv1">pic.twitter.com/nYa0V7aCv1</a></p>&mdash; iain (@Canardiain) <a href="https://twitter.com/Canardiain/status/826210722753474560">January 30, 2017</a></blockquote>

[Pheidippides]

Track work near Waterloo Public Square: