(06-07-2020, 02:35 PM)tomh009 Wrote: This IHT extension is not bad at all, I think ...

(06-07-2020, 05:00 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:

(06-07-2020, 02:35 PM)tomh009 Wrote: This IHT extension is not bad at all, I think ...

It’s OK, but it’s not an extension. It’s a new route of the trail to detour around the building now occupying the former route.

(06-08-2020, 07:07 AM)Spokes Wrote:

(06-07-2020, 05:00 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: It’s OK, but it’s not an extension. It’s a new route of the trail to detour around the building now occupying the former route.

And is the problem with that, that the building was given priority over the trail?  I never got all of the concern.

(06-08-2020, 07:44 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:

(06-08-2020, 07:07 AM)Spokes Wrote: And is the problem with that, that the building was given priority over the trail?  I never got all of the concern.

In this case, I’m just nitpicking about what the new piece of trail is — not an extension, but a detour replacement for a pre-existing portion of the trail.

I also don’t like that the trail was detoured, but that’s not my point right now.

(06-08-2020, 07:44 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:

(06-08-2020, 07:07 AM)Spokes Wrote: And is the problem with that, that the building was given priority over the trail?  I never got all of the concern.

In this case, I’m just nitpicking about what the new piece of trail is — not an extension, but a detour replacement for a pre-existing portion of the trail.

I also don’t like that the trail was detoured, but that’s not my point right now.

(06-08-2020, 08:18 AM)Acitta Wrote:

(06-08-2020, 07:44 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: In this case, I’m just nitpicking about what the new piece of trail is — not an extension, but a detour replacement for a pre-existing portion of the trail.

I also don’t like that the trail was detoured, but that’s not my point right now.

The original section of the trail was not particularly nice. This is an improvement, IMO.

(06-08-2020, 01:57 PM)Spokes Wrote:

(06-08-2020, 08:18 AM)Acitta Wrote: The original section of the trail was not particularly nice. This is an improvement, IMO.

Agreed.

(10-21-2020, 10:56 AM)creative Wrote: I personally love that portion of the trail. I’ve never even encountered a car entering or exiting the garage. I know that it happens many times a day but I’m sure that the residents are aware of the trails existence and take caution when entering or exiting the garage.

(10-21-2020, 09:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-08-2020, 01:57 PM)Spokes Wrote: Agreed.

The new trail is better in some ways, the section you showed is clearly improved, but in other ways it is worse. It's a little longer, and includes a sharp turn, but the biggest problem is the section along Caroline. Not only does it pass in front of a garage entrance with poor sight lines and wide turn allowances (drivers are going to be going too fast), but the designers need to have an engineering lesson because the design of the entrance suggests to drivers that they have the right of way, even though they don't, and places unnecessary curbs in the path of cyclists--it's the usual stuff done by road engineers who don't understand anything else, but it definitely degrades the safety and experience of the trail over the previous condition.

As a bonus, the condo corporation is apparently responsible for clearing the trail on their property, according to the city at least, and they did not do so last winter. A resident yelled at me for riding on the sidewalk past their building, when the trail had 2 feet of snow on it, leaves a kinda bad taste in my mouth.

Not to say these things couldn't have been done right, but the no developer at any time has shown competence in designing the trail (I realize this was two developers. When they originally came to council they proposed a 2.5 meter trail directly abutting the parking garage....which doesn't mean any standards for a MUT, they "learned" at council after advocates came and explained all the things wrong with their design, but we shouldn't have to explain to people how to do their jobs right.

(10-21-2020, 01:40 PM)panamaniac Wrote:

(10-21-2020, 09:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: The new trail is better in some ways, the section you showed is clearly improved, but in other ways it is worse. It's a little longer, and includes a sharp turn, but the biggest problem is the section along Caroline. Not only does it pass in front of a garage entrance with poor sight lines and wide turn allowances (drivers are going to be going too fast), but the designers need to have an engineering lesson because the design of the entrance suggests to drivers that they have the right of way, even though they don't, and places unnecessary curbs in the path of cyclists--it's the usual stuff done by road engineers who don't understand anything else, but it definitely degrades the safety and experience of the trail over the previous condition.

As a bonus, the condo corporation is apparently responsible for clearing the trail on their property, according to the city at least, and they did not do so last winter. A resident yelled at me for riding on the sidewalk past their building, when the trail had 2 feet of snow on it, leaves a kinda bad taste in my mouth.

Not to say these things couldn't have been done right, but the no developer at any time has shown competence in designing the trail (I realize this was two developers. When they originally came to council they proposed a 2.5 meter trail directly abutting the parking garage....which doesn't mean any standards for a MUT, they "learned" at council after advocates came and explained all the things wrong with their design, but we shouldn't have to explain to people how to do their jobs right.

I'm surprised by this.  Are there other sections of the IHT (or others) that are private property?