Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Pheidippides - 06-23-2017

I confirmed that Allen is a windbreak today:
   

I also measured the platform width of Allen (windbreak), Willis (windbreak), and GRH (enclosure). Allen and Willis are both about 3.9m, while GRH was about 4.4. So the difference is about 0.5m. With the 0.5m "bike lane" on each side, 0.25m utility buffer, and 0.25m curb surely there was room to find 0.25m on each side and not impact the road lane width (excessive already) and sidewalk width.

This new bus shelter at GRH is less than ideally placed (actually not sure a wheelchair/scooter could actually fit past there, especially in the winter):
   

Time for another no parking blitz perhaps?:
   


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 06-23-2017

(06-23-2017, 08:19 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: This new bus shelter at GRH is less than ideally placed (actually not sure a wheelchair/scooter could actually fit past there, especially in the winter):
[Image: attachment.php?aid=3880]

That's a really unfortunate arrangement. Could they not have encroached on the grass by about a meter and not reduced the sidewalk width (and, perhaps, give this thing some side walls)?

Come to think of it, there are a lot of these 'canopy' type shelters being put in near the line. Most of them, though, don't have spare space behind them.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - goggolor - 06-24-2017

The bus shelter closest to GRH has been the de facto smoking shelter since GRH got rid of their on-site smoking area a few years ago. Walls would just make it more attractive to smokers and keep the smell in - I would usually have to wait outside the bus shelter because it would have up to 3 smokers occupying the benches and reek like an ashtray. It remains to be seen whether the GRH smokers will use the new bus stop or cross over to the new heated and enclosed shelter.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 06-24-2017

(06-24-2017, 09:26 AM)goggolor Wrote: The bus shelter closest to GRH has been the de facto smoking shelter since GRH got rid of their on-site smoking area a few years ago. Walls would just make it more attractive to smokers and keep the smell in - I would usually have to wait outside the bus shelter because it would have up to 3 smokers occupying the benches and reek like an ashtray. It remains to be seen whether the GRH smokers will use the new bus stop or cross over to the new heated and enclosed shelter.

There should be a shelter specifically for smoking closer to GRH. If GRH won’t get its act together and figure out a way to make it happen, the transit authority should do it by building a bus shelter that is not particularly close to any bus stop but reasonably conveniently located for the smokers. Put extra prohibitory signage on the real bus stop and LRT stop and none on the decoy bus shelter, and instruct the transit enforcement people that they are not under any circumstances to issue tickets or even warnings for smoking in the decoy shelter. If necessary, have the decoy be officially at a bus stop, but one where no buses actually stop (they can use it if the real stop is under maintenance).

Yes, it’s a ridiculous solution, but it’s less ridiculous than transit riders having to smell smoke in the LRT stop all the time.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 06-24-2017

If anyone tries smoking at a LRT stop proper, the security cameras should mean it gets stopped pretty quick. They'll be monitored live from the control centre.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 06-24-2017

(06-24-2017, 10:34 AM)KevinL Wrote: If anyone tries smoking at a LRT stop proper, the security cameras should mean it gets stopped pretty quick. They'll be monitored live from the control centre.

Lol, that doesn't even happen at Charles St. Terminal, so we'll see.

Also, that bus shelter is a shame, not only would it be trivial to put it 4 feet back and out of the way on the sidewalk (and it can still be left without sides if wanted), doesn't even look like a retaining wall would be needed, but even the existing shelter on the existing sidewalk could easily have been moved back a few more inches.  So pointlessly in the way.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - MidTowner - 06-24-2017

I agree that the bus shelter is really unfortunate. It will create conflicts for sure.

I have no expectation of any enforcement of no-smoking rules at Ion stations. Smokers light up with impunity at any stop in the system at which they find themselves, including at the terminals. I doubt that will change any time soon. It's too bad, because "little" (it's relatively little to me, maybe bigger to others) things like this that dissuade people from using transit when they have other options.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 06-24-2017

As someone with asthma it's a huge issue for me and if people routinely smoked at the transit stops I frequent I'd find it an intolerable situation.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 06-24-2017

This is why I mentioned the security cameras being monitored live from the control centre. The agents there will be able to access staion loudspeakers, I understand, and admonish those causing problems; they can call security for those who remain belligirent.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 06-24-2017

(06-24-2017, 03:01 PM)KevinL Wrote: This is why I mentioned the security cameras being monitored live from the control centre. The agents there will be able to access staion loudspeakers, I understand, and admonish those causing problems; they can call security for those who remain belligirent.

I'm not sure if exactly the same is true at Charles Street Terminal, but I have complained about smokers there before, and been greeted with a shrug.  

Unless it is an explicitly someone's job to deal with it, I don't think it's going to happen.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 06-24-2017




RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - embe - 06-25-2017

(06-23-2017, 11:03 PM)KevinL Wrote: That's a really unfortunate arrangement. Could they not have encroached on the grass by about a meter and not reduced the sidewalk width (and, perhaps, give this thing some side walls)?

The picture angle could be misleading, but judging by the size of the pile for the lamp post the grade is steeper than it looks. Agreed about narrow access


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 06-25-2017

(06-25-2017, 10:05 PM)embe Wrote:
(06-23-2017, 11:03 PM)KevinL Wrote: That's a really unfortunate arrangement. Could they not have encroached on the grass by about a meter and not reduced the sidewalk width (and, perhaps, give this thing some side walls)?

The picture angle could be misleading, but judging by the size of the pile for the lamp post the grade is steeper than it looks. Agreed about narrow access

Having been there in person, but also not being a geotechnical engineer, I think sufficient extra space would have been available without a retaining wall.  With a retaining wall, no question.

There's also another issue in the background of that photo, which is the switchback sidewalk.  I agree 100% that it's necessary because it's the hospital (and also, we should be ADA [CDA?] compliant regardless), however, the slope there isn't that great, and there it would easily be traversable with a step or two, so I expect the majority of able bodied individuals will simply walk on the grass instead using circuitous sidewalk.  This type of thing should be anticipated and accommodated with a step.  Not doing so will simply lead to mud.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 06-25-2017

(06-24-2017, 09:37 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: There should be a shelter specifically for smoking closer to GRH. If GRH won’t get its act together and figure out a way to make it happen

They can't. All hospital grounds in Ontario have to be completely smoke-free by January 1, 2018.

Quote:the transit authority should do it by building a bus shelter that is not particularly close to any bus stop but reasonably conveniently located for the smokers.

I don't even know if this can legally be done. I think that such a shelter would be an enclosed public place, and smoking would have to be prohibited.

If it is important to prohibit smoking in transit shelters, then the law needs to be enforced.


RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 06-26-2017

(06-25-2017, 10:56 PM)timc Wrote:
(06-24-2017, 09:37 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: There should be a shelter specifically for smoking closer to GRH. If GRH won’t get its act together and figure out a way to make it happen

They can't. All hospital grounds in Ontario have to be completely smoke-free by January 1, 2018.

Quote:the transit authority should do it by building a bus shelter that is not particularly close to any bus stop but reasonably conveniently located for the smokers.

I don't even know if this can legally be done. I think that such a shelter would be an enclosed public place, and smoking would have to be prohibited.

If it is important to prohibit smoking in transit shelters, then the law needs to be enforced.

So they should build their shelter just off hospital grounds. For the idea that GRT builds it, I addressed the issue of smoking prohibition by suggesting that the transit enforcement officers would be strictly instructed not to enforce that specific shelter and that no signage would be present in or around that specific shelter. Actually the same provisions would apply to a hospital-owned shelter, on or off the hospital property.

Yes, it’s stupid to depend on selective enforcement, but it’s also stupid to pretend that smokers don’t exist and don’t need to be provided reasonable accommodation. Why should stupidity that is in legislation take precedence over stupidity that works around stupid legislation?

I stand by my suggestions.

I should also point out that I would consider a complaint about people smoking in a purpose-built shelter to be invalid on its face, as unlike the situation with an actual bus shelter or even something like a restaurant patio, the proper and reasonable answer to the complaint is “then don’t go there”.