Cycling in Waterloo Region

[Acitta]

Are the bricks part of this project?

Yes, I believe they will be used on Queen St. for a retaining wall.

Where do they need a retaining wall?

[danbrotherston]

Yes, I believe they will be used on Queen St. for a retaining wall.

Where do they need a retaining wall?

They are building a protected bike lane along Queen from Joseph to Church. The plan I saw showed the bike lane on the south east side of the street (opposite Joseph), and while I had hoped there was room to build it in the existing space, given the retaining wall blocks, I assume they are going to have to move the retaining wall in front of St. Paul's Lutheran Church.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4482062,...384!8i8192

They might also need to add one next to Primerica.

But to be clear, I am only speculating here.

[Bytor]

Where do they need a retaining wall?

They are building a protected bike lane along Queen from Joseph to Church. The plan I saw showed the bike lane on the south east side of the street (opposite Joseph), and while I had hoped there was room to build it in the existing space, given the retaining wall blocks, I assume they are going to have to move the retaining wall in front of St. Paul's Lutheran Church.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4482062,...384!8i8192

They might also need to add one next to Primerica.

But to be clear, I am only speculating here.

If that is what it is for, that's never going to get done this fall. Those pallettes have been blocking the bike lane for too long already.

Motorists would never be disrespected like that.

[danbrotherston]

They are building a protected bike lane along Queen from Joseph to Church. The plan I saw showed the bike lane on the south east side of the street (opposite Joseph), and while I had hoped there was room to build it in the existing space, given the retaining wall blocks, I assume they are going to have to move the retaining wall in front of St. Paul's Lutheran Church.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4482062,...384!8i8192

They might also need to add one next to Primerica.

But to be clear, I am only speculating here.

If that is what it is for, that's never going to get done this fall. Those pallettes have been blocking the bike lane for too long already.

Motorists would never be disrespected like that.

Lol, no argument here.

I don't know what the construction schedule is going to be, I know they were supposed to do it this year, they may not. But they also might be able to, or maybe move the wall this year.

I believe the biggest delays have been (and in general are) to do with co-ordination between crews. The region and hydro spent a lot of time faffing about at Water St. which delayed things. Ultimately, the work that Steed and Evans (the primary contractor) is doing isn't that time consuming. Water St. has been done in just a few weeks, and they haven't exactly been focused there.

As an aside, Water and Joseph SHOULD have been a stop sign. Now, I fully disagree with our regional planners and engineers about a lot of things, and it was there call that the signal (at massive cost, like 100k) has to be reinstalled.

But a significant factor in that signal installation is the NIMBYism from the residents of the Vic Park neighbourhood who killed the dead ending of Water St. Because Water remains a through street, it carries enough traffic that the Region insists on a traffic signal.

Frankly I am sick and tired of the NIMBYs there. My new Park/Victoria master plan, is to close Jubilee through the park, but since we've already made such massive investments in Water St., we can remove all the parking, extend the bike lane to Jubilee, and then end Jubilee AT Water and redirect all the Park St. traffic down Water to Charles. That should also eliminate enough traffic from Victoria to make a 3 lane conversion feasible there.

I think this is a good plan on it's merits, and also yes, it is a vindictive plan to punish those who have fought tooth and nail to make our community worse.

</real_talk>

[Bob_McBob]

Mike Farwell railing against bike lanes in The Record. 

https://www.therecord.com/local-waterloo...uided.html

[danbrotherston]

Mike Farwell railing against bike lanes in The Record. 

https://www.therecord.com/local-waterloo...uided.html

Yeah, he's a real piece of work.

He's a) talking about behaviour changes that take years, about b) projects which are not completed yet (we have no grid of protected cycling lanes, despite his imagination), using c) data from surveys which were completed before ANY protected cycling lanes existed in the region.

Like I said, he's a real piece of work. I wish I could get a platform like his.

[cherrypark]

Mike Farwell railing against bike lanes in The Record. 

https://www.therecord.com/local-waterloo...uided.html

Yeah, he's a real piece of work.

He's a) talking about behaviour changes that take years, about b) projects which are not completed yet (we have no grid of protected cycling lanes, despite his imagination), using c) data from surveys which were completed before ANY protected cycling lanes existed in the region.

Like I said, he's a real piece of work. I wish I could get a platform like his.

I am sure Mike will be sure to write the same article admonishing the new cul-de-sac homes in south Kitchener needing plowing all winter to serve 10 multi-car households that drive into the core for work.

[danbrotherston]

Yeah, he's a real piece of work.

He's a) talking about behaviour changes that take years, about b) projects which are not completed yet (we have no grid of protected cycling lanes, despite his imagination), using c) data from surveys which were completed before ANY protected cycling lanes existed in the region.

Like I said, he's a real piece of work. I wish I could get a platform like his.

I am sure Mike will be sure to write the same article admonishing the new cul-de-sac homes in south Kitchener needing plowing all winter to serve 10 multi-car households that drive into the core for work.

Oh, I have no doubt....but maybe I'm not going to hold my breath...just in case.

[danbrotherston]

Some news, first and foremost, in the latest "our city doesn't consider bicycle a real form of transportation"...the IHT is close at the Railway crossing in Vic park...closed is a strong word, maybe, they're letting folks through no problem, if you're on foot and fairly able, it's fine. If you're less able, or on a bicycle, the tracks are completely dug up, and it's impassible (unless you can lift your bike over unbridged railway tracks).

The good news however, is that apparently the new north crossing will be reconstructed at the same time so by the end of today or tomorrow, it should be as good as any railway crossing.

[tomh009]

I do believe Queen St is closed at the tracks for considerably longer. Those crossings were all in terrible condition so glad to see that they are being redone even if it's a few days of disruption.

[danbrotherston]

I do believe Queen St is closed at the tracks for considerably longer. Those crossings were all in terrible condition so glad to see that they are being redone even if it's a few days of disruption.

It may very well be, however the thing about Queen St. is that a) there was notice, and b) there are many many other routes for drivers to go.  There is literally no other safe route for cyclists to cross the tracks. At this point, I will be walking to pick-up my daughter from daycare because I don't see a safe bike route, and I can't carry her AND my bike over the tracks.

I'm glad they're being reconstructed, but this is a fundamental problem here, cycling is my means of transportation, but today it's being treated as an unnecessary extra.

[tomh009]

I feel your pain ... but I don't see an obvious solution for the IHT closure (Queen St to Homewood St to IHT spur to IHT maybe). Notice, that should have been done and would have been easy to do.

[danbrotherston]

I feel your pain ... but I don't see an obvious solution for the IHT closure (Queen St to Homewood St to IHT spur to IHT maybe). Notice, that should have been done and would have been easy to do.

I mean there are two crossings in the park. They are both being worked on today, so it would have been quite easy to stage it across two days.

[tomh009]

I feel your pain ... but I don't see an obvious solution for the IHT closure (Queen St to Homewood St to IHT spur to IHT maybe). Notice, that should have been done and would have been easy to do.

I mean there are two crossings in the park. They are both being worked on today, so it would have been quite easy to stage it across two days.

Who is actually doing the work? Is it CN (CP?) or the city? I was surprised to see that the trail crossings use wooden logs rather than concrete or pavement, so I'm wondering if it's CN/CP that's doing this work. If that's the case, we need to blame them, not the city.

[danbrotherston]

I mean there are two crossings in the park. They are both being worked on today, so it would have been quite easy to stage it across two days.

Who is actually doing the work? Is it CN (CP?) or the city? I was surprised to see that the trail crossings use wooden logs rather than concrete or pavement, so I'm wondering if it's CN/CP that's doing this work. If that's the case, we need to blame them, not the city.

CN owns the crossing, the city will not touch it. The wooden logs were kind of confusing, I think someone was throwing a bone, since CN was not officially permitting a crossing there, and would only officially permit a crossing after it was built (which they are apparently doing now).

CN is doing the work now, and they may deserve some blame, but whether it's city, or city standards, or CN or whatever, there is a lack of consideration for cycling as a form of transportation.