ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[dtkvictim]

Oh, I didn't realize it was more than two blocks, because there is no visual indication it's not just a sidewalk beyond that point (there's a sign, but the sidewalk design just looks like a sidewalk). Looking at Google maps now... I was also never certain if only the South/West side was a MUT, or both sides, since they look the same. Based on the signs, I'm assuming just the South/West side is. If you are a cyclist taking Weber to Waterloo, what's the proper etiquette for

1. Getting from Weber to the MUT at Water? Do you make a left turn onto the sidewalk, or dismount on the right side and cross as a pedestrian twice?
   
2. Crossing the signalized intersections, do you have to dismount when it's a MUT?
   

I never wanted to bother with Weber when cycling to work, so I took Duke for most of it. Although, the Duke and Victoria light doesn't change for cyclists, so I eventually gave up and just started walking to work...

Yup...it's pretty terrible.

Generally when I bike, I will come up Water, turn left into the parking lot (I suspect this is less surprising to drivers than trying to make a left turn onto the sidewalk, and it saves some time). I merge onto the MUT/sidewalk and proceed on the west side of Weber. I won't stay publicly whether I dismount to cross, but sufficies to say that I find it ridiculous that the regional engineers did not provide for a crossing for the users of the MUT, and that I don't believe dismounting improves safety, if drivers are going to turn without looking, I don't believe it matters whether you are on a bike or not, the Victoria St. corner is so poorly designed for non-motor vehicle users anyway.

It is sure is a shame that you were forced by the poor infrastructure in the region to give up cycling to work .

Coming up Water I would definitely do that as well. I was more so wondering if you were already on Weber, what the planners intended for cyclists to do in order to get to the MUT.

And yes, Weber/Victoria is a terrifying intersection. Once I started walking for my commute, I walked through it 2 times a day as it was the shortest way (sometimes 4 times if I want back downtown for lunch). If I was still working there, I think getting hit would be an inevitability. I already had to actively avoid being hit multiple times.

Oddly enough (and more on topic to ION interacting with intersections), the next worst intersection I walked through was Water/Duke, for some reason. I think it might have to do with how the crosswalk to the east of Water is seemingly randomly set back a few meters, making visibility more difficult for cars (not that it's a good excuse for the drivers). This photos shows the interaction I had most often:

[danbrotherston]

Yup...it's pretty terrible.

Generally when I bike, I will come up Water, turn left into the parking lot (I suspect this is less surprising to drivers than trying to make a left turn onto the sidewalk, and it saves some time). I merge onto the MUT/sidewalk and proceed on the west side of Weber. I won't stay publicly whether I dismount to cross, but sufficies to say that I find it ridiculous that the regional engineers did not provide for a crossing for the users of the MUT, and that I don't believe dismounting improves safety, if drivers are going to turn without looking, I don't believe it matters whether you are on a bike or not, the Victoria St. corner is so poorly designed for non-motor vehicle users anyway.

It is sure is a shame that you were forced by the poor infrastructure in the region to give up cycling to work .

Coming up Water I would definitely do that as well. I was more so wondering if you were already on Weber, what the planners intended for cyclists to do in order to get to the MUT.

And yes, Weber/Victoria is a terrifying intersection. Once I started walking for my commute, I walked through it 2 times a day as it was the shortest way (sometimes 4 times if I want back downtown for lunch). If I was still working there, I think getting hit would be an inevitability. I already had to actively avoid being hit multiple times.

Oddly enough (and more on topic to ION interacting with intersections), the next worst intersection I walked through was Water/Duke, for some reason. I think it might have to do with how the crosswalk to the east of Water is seemingly randomly set back a few meters, making visibility more difficult for cars (not that it's a good excuse for the drivers). This photos shows the interaction I had most often:

Heh, in my opinion you vastly overestimate the thought planners put into their cycling infra. I don't think any planner thought anything about how any cyclist could make it through any part of their infra along Weber. Some places have more thought put in, but Weber is especially poorly designed even by regional standards.

As for me personally, I wouldn't be coming up Weber, I've ridden on it a few times, but I wouldn't again if I could avoid it. If I had too, I'd probably be on the sidewalk, which is curbfaced, narrow and poorly sloped, rather bumpy, and too busy with pedestrians to safely ride on, so frankly, none too safe either, but I'd just continue on the sidewalk and cross at the next red light.

Yes, a number of the ION intersections are particularly poor for pedestrians which...seems problematic for a mass transit system.  The one in question is particularly strange though, I'm not sure why the crosswalk is set back so far. Often they do so in order to reduce crossing distances (a laudable goal) in the face of immense and unnecessary turning radii (I can think of an easier way to solve the crossing distances), however that intersection doesn't have such problematic turning radii, so the crosswalk could be brought forward, I have no idea why it wasn't.

The other reason I've heard is so that right turning traffic approaches the crosswalk from a more perpandicular angle (which only works if the turning radii aren't too wide) so visibility is better, but I'm not aware of any regional engineers using this as a reason, this is more from the Dutch CROW manual. As is, it simply causes a detour for pedestrians (or more specifically, pedestrians who are not physically able enough to walk up the barrier curb).

[jeffster]

I’m just trying to educate myself as to how all of these incompetent civil engineers manage to get their degrees! I turn on my tap and clean water Comes out. I flush my toilet and everything magically goes away. We just experienced a major rain storm and the water magically went somewhere. Electricity somehow is delivered to my house.

*sigh*...I see, so when you said you were just asking, you weren't asking, you were saying. And now you are playing stupid.

Congrats on being an unhelpful toxic person.

Dan, I think you really need to learn how to chill with other members. Just saying that this is supposed to be a friendly place for people to come to. We can have our disagreements. We can have our opinions. But calling people toxic or stupid (playing stupid) is not helpful here at all.

[robdrimmie]

I’m just trying to educate myself as to how all of these incompetent civil engineers manage to get their degrees! I turn on my tap and clean water Comes out. I flush my toilet and everything magically goes away. We just experienced a major rain storm and the water magically went somewhere. Electricity somehow is delivered to my house.

I've just reported this post. This is garbage. Moderators, please address this repeated and constant trolling.

[danbrotherston]

*sigh*...I see, so when you said you were just asking, you weren't asking, you were saying. And now you are playing stupid.

Congrats on being an unhelpful toxic person.

Dan, I think you really need to learn how to chill with other members. Just saying that this is supposed to be a friendly place for people to come to. We can have our disagreements. We can have our opinions. But calling people toxic or stupid (playing stupid) is not helpful here at all.

Hey Jeff,

I honestly took this members original comment, as earnestly asking a question. I took my time, I did research (I tried to find the link to the product I mentioned), and I was surprised to discover the question was asked sarcastically as a form of derision.

Now, you're right, perhaps that's on me, and my naivite for assume the good of people. I won't make that mistake again with this member. I will always assume the worst when they comment, and that's fine, I ignore that kind of thing all the time.

So perhaps I used the word toxic too hastily because I was personally embarrassed by being caught naive. Please tell me what word I should use for someone who I have learned to always assume is being sarcastic and derisive.

[creative]

So “childish” name calling is ok but defending civil engineers is not! I have close friends who work for/have worked for the city engineering department. I find this constant reference to “incompetent” highly offensive!

[jamincan]

Dan can seem inflammatory at time, but his frustration is real. The fact of the matter is that cyclists were at best a second though when it comes to the LRT. I seem to recall at one point that one of the staff members actually suggested cyclists should just not use King Street at all.

I don't really know where the process failed, but regardless of your views on the qualifications of the engineers, the result is indisputably unsafe for cyclists. I suspect part of the problem is that this was bundled as a P3 project which meant that a lot of the consultation that would have occurred through the design stages never really happened, or was disregarded. I suspect issues like this one, or the Traynor crossing, would have been identified prior to construction if it was not done through a P3.

[ijmorlan]

As I see this is in quotes, I assume this was the actual conversation!

I assume you are being flippant, because it is widely understood that quotation marks, admittedly confusingly, can be used either to indicate exact quotation or paraphrase. When communicating in English one frequently has to pick up things from context that aren’t explicitly said.

[ijmorlan]

So “childish” name calling is ok but defending civil engineers is not! I have close friends who work for/have worked for the city engineering department. I find this constant reference to “incompetent” highly offensive!

If you think the things called out as incompetent aren’t, explain why.

I’ll just take one example, because one is enough: crossings of the LRT between Courtland and Wilson. Anybody who took a quick glance at Google Maps aerial photography could see that there were numerous paths crossing that corridor; and anybody working on engineering for a Regional project can reasonably be expected, as part of their professional due diligence, to be aware of stated Regional priorities and policies, including supporting multiple modes of transportation. Having done these things, any competent engineering organization would have brought up the issue during the design phase and ensured that the bad effects we saw did not happen.

By your way of thinking, we’re not ever allowed to criticize work done by a professional, even when it is obviously shoddy.

The problem in this discussion board is not Dan’s frustration that cyclists and pedestrians continue to be treated as second-class citizens in infrastructure design, but rather your refusal to try to understand where he is coming from.

[ijmorlan]

Assuming this is a good solution, this seems simple, and could be retrofitted in after the fact (ie now). And it sounds like the cost would not be high. Is that correct? Might you have link to such a product?

https://www.ppirubber.com/PPI-Rail_Solut...Indoor.htm

https://www.rtandsdirectory.com/category...ay-fillers

I’m not an expert, so I’m not sure how well these would work for the LRT; but I do feel comfortable asserting that failure to use these on the freight track in the space between King and Regina was a mistake.

And yes, the weird shifting to the side where there is only one track is part of the issue. Has anybody heard any justification for that? In some places I think it’s OK, especially where it allows for a platform that is part of the sidewalk, but in other places it just seems pointless. I’m thinking especially of King St. between Allen and the railway tracks.

[tomh009]

Assuming this is a good solution, this seems simple, and could be retrofitted in after the fact (ie now). And it sounds like the cost would not be high. Is that correct? Might you have link to such a product?

Unfortunately, I cannot find the site I (and others) sent to the regional engineers years ago. Here's an article mentioning these tramway flanges used in Zurich https://www.streetfilms.org/cyclists-vs-...in-zurich/ , but it is not a link to an english site.

Unfortunately, as I understand it, the price would be very high, it needs to be embedded in the track, it basically replaces the existing embedded rubber...I'll call it a gasket...surrounding the track, as a result, the products I am aware of would require ripping up all the concrete around the tracks...this would be rather expensive.  It's possible a different product is available or could be developed to retrofit into the flangeway but I am not aware of any such product.

The best I think could be reasonably accomplished would be something like the top right of page 13 on this document: https://altaplanning.com/wp-content/uplo...o_ALTA.pdf

That could be accomplished with paint and a sign, if we were willing to rework some surface concrete that could be even better.  It's not ideal, the sidewalk is poorly suited as a MUT, it's too narrow, and the intersection is terrible. But that ship has sailed, we are stuck with that unfortunate poor design.  But with a little paint and a sign it could be miles better. 

Thanks. Yeah, it's not promising. I found a discussion of this in a Seattle bike blog page (link below), and they said it's not very effective. It's expensive ($1M/km -- although using it only in selected areas would not be so bad), doesn't eliminate wheel jamming issues, and it has to be replaced regularly.
https://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2015/03/...le-biking/

Paint and sign seems like the best option at this point. Not everyone will pay attention but it should significantly mitigate the problem.

[danbrotherston]

Unfortunately, I cannot find the site I (and others) sent to the regional engineers years ago. Here's an article mentioning these tramway flanges used in Zurich https://www.streetfilms.org/cyclists-vs-...in-zurich/ , but it is not a link to an english site.

Unfortunately, as I understand it, the price would be very high, it needs to be embedded in the track, it basically replaces the existing embedded rubber...I'll call it a gasket...surrounding the track, as a result, the products I am aware of would require ripping up all the concrete around the tracks...this would be rather expensive.  It's possible a different product is available or could be developed to retrofit into the flangeway but I am not aware of any such product.

The best I think could be reasonably accomplished would be something like the top right of page 13 on this document: https://altaplanning.com/wp-content/uplo...o_ALTA.pdf

That could be accomplished with paint and a sign, if we were willing to rework some surface concrete that could be even better.  It's not ideal, the sidewalk is poorly suited as a MUT, it's too narrow, and the intersection is terrible. But that ship has sailed, we are stuck with that unfortunate poor design.  But with a little paint and a sign it could be miles better. 

Thanks. Yeah, it's not promising. I found a discussion of this in a Seattle bike blog page (link below), and they said it's not very effective. It's expensive ($1M/km -- although using it only in selected areas would not be so bad), doesn't eliminate wheel jamming issues, and it has to be replaced regularly.
https://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2015/03/...le-biking/

Paint and sign seems like the best option at this point. Not everyone will pay attention but it should significantly mitigate the problem.

Yes, the cost is clearly a non-issue when it comes to our conditions which have only a few dozen meters of track in a conflict zone.

I definitely prefer a separation scenario as well, I wish they had actually built cycling infra in this area.

In my experience it's especially dangerous since in order to cross the tracks at a good angle a cyclist must move right, before swinging left, there is no more dangerous behaviour a cyclist could do than to move right, then swerve left with a downhill driver bearing down on them.

I stand behind my statements on this topic.

[tomh009]

Yes ... but, as you said, that ship has sailed. If it's still possible to make some kind of a purse out of this sow's ear, we should do it. A sign and painting can't cost mush more than a few thousand, can they?

[danbrotherston]

Yes ... but, as you said, that ship has sailed. If it's still possible to make some kind of a purse out of this sow's ear, we should do it. A sign and painting can't cost mush more than a few thousand, can they?

Nope, painting and signage would be really cheap. But I'm not holding my breath, it took years of arguing to get signs on Weber, and I'm not bothering anymore. They won't even put a 25 cent garbage bag on the idiotic pedestrians signal, if they won't do that, I don't expect them to do anything.

I have half a mind to do some tactical infrastructure, but I don't like heighs, so I'm not going to climb the pole to put a bag on the signal myself...althoughh there are other ways to disable the ped signals. Either way, this is probably the most likely way we are to get improvements here.

[tomh009]

Yes ... but, as you said, that ship has sailed. If it's still possible to make some kind of a purse out of this sow's ear, we should do it. A sign and painting can't cost mush more than a few thousand, can they?

Nope, painting and signage would be really cheap. But I'm not holding my breath, it took years of arguing to get signs on Weber, and I'm not bothering anymore. They won't even put a 25 cent garbage bag on the idiotic pedestrians signal, if they won't do that, I don't expect them to do anything.

I'd like to give this a shot, post-COVID. My efforts may be for naught, too, but sometimes a different person asking for the same thing can make a difference.