+- 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: Cycling in Waterloo Region (/showthread.php?tid=186)
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
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-02-2020
I threw together a proposed cycletrack for Frederick St. based on merely Kate's idea on twitter:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1-9wJIFqFKGzT2IEJNC60a2dCQ3QZUsbI&ll=43.44779787219805%2C-80.48934450000002&z=17
I think it has promise, and it fixes so many problems with that trashfire of a road, including the lack of accesss to the LRT. Honestly, it shouldn't take me 2 hours to come up with a better design.
I am not totally sure about the eastern (northern) section, I feel like the cycle track would work better on the south side, the T intersection with Otto can be improved, and there are fewer driveways and more parking (for protection), and the Lancaster intersection can be improved more if it's on the south side I think, but I'm not sure if it's worth transitioning it to the south side.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - clasher - 05-02-2020
I guess the cops have some parts of the car if they know what colour and year range it was? What a piece of shit to stop and then drive away... probably sleeping off the booze and hoping to get away with killing someone... can't be too many dark grey chevy sonic owners in the region and surrounding areas.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - ijmorlan - 05-02-2020
(05-02-2020, 09:28 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: A 17 year old kid (described as a 'cyclist' in the article) was killed by a 20 year old man (described also as "driver") last night. The killer fled the scene in a damaged dark grey 2012-2017 Chevy Sonic, anyone with information is asked to call crime stoppers:
https://www.kitchenertoday.com/police-beat/police-investigating-fatal-collision-near-elmira-2318740
And before anyone complains about my terminology as being 'angry', it is merely 'correct', the child is dead, as a result of the actions of the man, ergo the man killed the child, ergo the man is the killer.
If the weapon was anything other than a car, nobody would bat an eyelash at the use of the word “killer” (although the police would say “suspect”). So, I conclude that your terminology is entirely fair. As soon as one sees it, the usual media practices start to seem really weird.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-03-2020
I extended my Frederick cycle track to the east, it's possible to connect all the way to Victoria while adding significant parking with only one two lane section bypassed. I believe the whole road is under capacity in the four lane sections.
This would substantially improve the walkability around the road, add many crossings, and improve property values in the ajoining properties.
Phase 1 - Courtland to Duke.
Phase 2 - Duke to Lancaster
Phase 3 - Bypass at Lancaster to Bruce (and up to Victoria MUT)
Phase 4 - Bruce to Victoria.
I prefered adding parking to turn lane because I suspect easier sell, and safer crossings.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1_jJqC6Zf4HGheR6w1elFjzQCrIctt7Ud&ll=43.455770022824865%2C-80.47446000000002&z=15
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Coke6pk - 05-06-2020
(05-02-2020, 09:06 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(05-02-2020, 09:28 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: A 17 year old kid (described as a 'cyclist' in the article) was killed by a 20 year old man (described also as "driver") last night. The killer fled the scene in a damaged dark grey 2012-2017 Chevy Sonic, anyone with information is asked to call crime stoppers:
https://www.kitchenertoday.com/police-beat/police-investigating-fatal-collision-near-elmira-2318740
And before anyone complains about my terminology as being 'angry', it is merely 'correct', the child is dead, as a result of the actions of the man, ergo the man killed the child, ergo the man is the killer.
If the weapon was anything other than a car, nobody would bat an eyelash at the use of the word “killer” (although the police would say “suspect”). So, I conclude that your terminology is entirely fair. As soon as one sees it, the usual media practices start to seem really weird.
If the weapon was a gun, and it was an "accidental" (quotes are mine, no gun shot is accidental) shot by a 6 year old, do we call them a killer? If a person uses a weapon to defend themselves against a life threatening attack, do we call them a killer?
I'll be the first to admit, I know almost nothing about this incident. But if the driver was drunk/distracted/etc., the moniker may apply. (At the risk of being labeled as a victim shamer), if the cyclist was in all black at night w/ no lights and was hit by a car, there would be a big difference between "Person who killed another person" and a "Killer".
If they stopped and then left the scene (I read that above), there is no excuse for that.
Coke
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-06-2020
(05-06-2020, 03:34 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(05-02-2020, 09:06 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: If the weapon was anything other than a car, nobody would bat an eyelash at the use of the word “killer” (although the police would say “suspect”). So, I conclude that your terminology is entirely fair. As soon as one sees it, the usual media practices start to seem really weird.
If the weapon was a gun, and it was an "accidental" (quotes are mine, no gun shot is accidental) shot by a 6 year old, do we call them a killer? If a person uses a weapon to defend themselves against a life threatening attack, do we call them a killer?
I'll be the first to admit, I know almost nothing about this incident. But if the driver was drunk/distracted/etc., the moniker may apply. (At the risk of being labeled as a victim shamer), if the cyclist was in all black at night w/ no lights and was hit by a car, there would be a big difference between "Person who killed another person" and a "Killer".
If they stopped and then left the scene (I read that above), there is no excuse for that.
Coke
The word "killer" means "one who kills"...the word kill means to make not alive anymore.
We choose not to use the word "killer" not because it is inaccurate, but because we choose to not make people face the reality of their actions.
Yes, a person who kills another person in self defense is a killer, by definition. When that person does so in self defense as you describe, usually we choose to focus on the person being a victim of an attack rather than a killer because that's how our society feels about those cirumstances. That focus does not change the correctness of the term "killer", it just reflect our social values.
The same is true in the case of driving. We choose not to use the word "killer" and associated direct words because we want to take focus off of the person who has caused this, to absolve them, not of legal responsibility, but of the idea that they have caused someone to die, intentional or not. We do this because people see themselves as drivers, and being faced with the reality that as a driver you may kill someone--be a killer--is difficult for people to face. I however, believe that this is a mistake, that leads to all sorts of negative outcomes.
Of course, as our society is composed of angry mobs, who are largely in denial about virtually everthing, my position too has negative outcomes.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - robdrimmie - 05-06-2020
(05-06-2020, 03:46 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: We do this because people see themselves as drivers, and being faced with the reality that as a driver you may kill someone--be a killer--is difficult for people to face. I however, believe that this is a mistake, that leads to all sorts of negative outcomes.
I agree with the majority of your post, especially that the use of killer in this scenario is correct and the general point of it all, but I think the way you think people empathize with drivers who kill anyone in an accident might not be correct.
I think that we want to grant the absolution because humans make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are tragic. These ones in particular are all the more tragic because we know how to significantly reduce their frequency but can't be arsed because of car culture.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-06-2020
In other news, the region continues to generally prioritize cars. Four projects are going to council for approvals of bids this month (i.e., it's way too late to try and fix anything), from worst to best, because I'm trying to be positive:
1. Arthur St. and Sawmill reconstruction. Despite a major cycle route directly crossing this project, and a difficult/scary intersection for cyclists being reconstructed, there is exactly zero consideration given to cycling in this project. It wasn't even a consideration.
2. Dundas St. is being reconstructed with on street bike lanes. I used to call this a win, but on such a major street, I don't feel this is actually much value in this anymore. Further, despite me raising this issue with the project staff, they have failed to tighten up most of the turn radii with residential streets. And I don't mean the usual, 20-30 meter radii that regional engineers insist on, I'm talking the 200-500 meter radii that are as a result of oblique street angles, leading to 20-30 meter crossings of 70 km/h traffic of 2 lane residential streets.
3. Erb St. is being reconstructed, in this case the region is building some protected lanes which is great, or at least some great. But the turning radii are still gigantic leading to huge crossing distances with residential streets.
4. The region will be constructing a MUT along Ottawa St. to connect the IHT with the planned bike lanes on Ottawa to the east. This is great news, but it is that rare kind of thing where they are correcting bad decisions made very recently. This project is part of the Weber St. reconstruction, and also includes protected cycle lanes along Ottawa. And they even managed to at least compute the correct turning radiis. They're still using the regions unnecessarily giant turn radii but the engineers computed the effect turn radii from outside the bike lane, instead of simply the curb radius which ignores the fact that cars are turning from 2 meters away. Honestly, this is simple stuff, but I don't believe they got it right on Dundas OR on Erb.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - ijmorlan - 05-06-2020
(05-06-2020, 03:34 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(05-02-2020, 09:06 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: If the weapon was anything other than a car, nobody would bat an eyelash at the use of the word “killer” (although the police would say “suspect”). So, I conclude that your terminology is entirely fair. As soon as one sees it, the usual media practices start to seem really weird.
If the weapon was a gun, and it was an "accidental" (quotes are mine, no gun shot is accidental) shot by a 6 year old, do we call them a killer? If a person uses a weapon to defend themselves against a life threatening attack, do we call them a killer?
I assume the car was driven by an adult, so starting talking about kids with guns doesn’t seem very on-point to me. Similarly, the number of vehicle-assisted defensive killings is probably almost non-existent (it’s theoretically possible — imagine running over an attempted carjacker — but I can’t recall hearing of it actually happening).
A better analogy would be a drunk hunter killing someone with their gun. Thinking about it, I’m not quite as confident as previously they would be called a killer, but I also can’t see it as an unreasonable characterization.
Quote:I'll be the first to admit, I know almost nothing about this incident. But if the driver was drunk/distracted/etc., the moniker may apply. (At the risk of being labeled as a victim shamer), if the cyclist was in all black at night w/ no lights and was hit by a car, there would be a big difference between "Person who killed another person" and a "Killer".
That’s a good point. And while I think some people look for any excuse to see the cyclist as being at fault, everybody clearly has some responsibility to be visible.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-06-2020
(05-06-2020, 04:59 PM)robdrimmie Wrote:(05-06-2020, 03:46 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: We do this because people see themselves as drivers, and being faced with the reality that as a driver you may kill someone--be a killer--is difficult for people to face. I however, believe that this is a mistake, that leads to all sorts of negative outcomes.
I agree with the majority of your post, especially that the use of killer in this scenario is correct and the general point of it all, but I think the way you think people empathize with drivers who kill anyone in an accident might not be correct.
I think that we want to grant the absolution because humans make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are tragic. These ones in particular are all the more tragic because we know how to significantly reduce their frequency but can't be arsed because of car culture.
I agree with this in the case of some people. The victims family clearly. Those who comment something to the effect of "what a terrible tragedy, two lives destroyed as a result of a mistake"...sure, that's what those people are thinking (although "two lives destroyed" rather glosses over the reality that one is dead, the other is not).
Those who I do not think this belief applies two are two groups, the first, is simply the people who exclaim "cyclists, they're all terrible whatever"...or something to that effect. The other group is far more important, and that is of the media--who have a long track record of absolving the driver of responsibility even to the point of removing the driver from the story. I am perhaps, unfair in assigning a motive to this, but the effect is clear.
That being said, in almost all of the public (not our, obviously) discussion on crashes, the real, "silent killer" is rarely mentioned, which is, of course dangerous road design--oops, I'm doing it too--I should say, engineers who design dangerous roads, those who write the dangerous design standards and the politicians who enable them. The rare case that it is mentioned, it's usually a complaint about lack of a stop sign or traffic signal..the least important road safety policy, I doubt there has ever been a news report so nerded out as to question why a turning radii onto a residential street is a 100 meters wide, and yet that may very well be in the top ten causes of injury on our roads.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - tomh009 - 05-07-2020
(05-06-2020, 05:28 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: 4. The region will be constructing a MUT along Ottawa St. to connect the IHT with the planned bike lanes on Ottawa to the east. This is great news, but it is that rare kind of thing where they are correcting bad decisions made very recently. This project is part of the Weber St. reconstruction, and also includes protected cycle lanes along Ottawa. And they even managed to at least compute the correct turning radiis. They're still using the regions unnecessarily giant turn radii but the engineers computed the effect turn radii from outside the bike lane, instead of simply the curb radius which ignores the fact that cars are turning from 2 meters away. Honestly, this is simple stuff, but I don't believe they got it right on Dundas OR on Erb.
Where on Ottawa will the MUT be?
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 09:01 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(05-06-2020, 05:28 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: 4. The region will be constructing a MUT along Ottawa St. to connect the IHT with the planned bike lanes on Ottawa to the east. This is great news, but it is that rare kind of thing where they are correcting bad decisions made very recently. This project is part of the Weber St. reconstruction, and also includes protected cycle lanes along Ottawa. And they even managed to at least compute the correct turning radiis. They're still using the regions unnecessarily giant turn radii but the engineers computed the effect turn radii from outside the bike lane, instead of simply the curb radius which ignores the fact that cars are turning from 2 meters away. Honestly, this is simple stuff, but I don't believe they got it right on Dundas OR on Erb.
Where on Ottawa will the MUT be?
The MUT will be on Ottawa from Charles to Nyberg, from Charles to the Highway 7/8 overpass will be protected bike lanes (roll curbs), the 7/8 bridge will be the usual MTO no mans land.
Basically the MUT is going in because the region planned for Ottawa to be the main bike route across the city, but then didn't tell the people who were building the LRT (not that it would have mattered, there's good evidence the LRT engineers have never been on a bicycle). So I fully give them credit for attempting to patch an idiotic situation but this will still need another infill project (one that will be far more difficult because of property constraints and the residential context--such that I really doubt it will ever happen--at least not in 50 years) to complete one of the cities "main bike routes".
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - tomh009 - 05-07-2020
That's a fairly short stretch of MUT, but between Charles and Nyberg there is (mostly) a huge boulevard so this should be fairly easy, though I expect that they need to purchase/expropriate a strip of land from the plaza at the Charles/Ottawa corner. Protected lanes from there should be good.
Apart from not implementing the MUT at the same time, were there some things done as part of the LRT implementation that are a problem for this?
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:39 AM)tomh009 Wrote: That's a fairly short stretch of MUT, but between Charles and Nyberg there is (mostly) a huge boulevard so this should be fairly easy, though I expect that they need to purchase/expropriate a strip of land from the plaza at the Charles/Ottawa corner. Protected lanes from there should be good.
Apart from not implementing the MUT at the same time, were there some things done as part of the LRT implementation that are a problem for this?
They were deciding if they needed to tear out a brand new sidewalk or not. The biggest thing is a MUT was not the preferred infra, but they have no choice but to do it now because they can't rebuild the road again. As for the section going east (Edit: should be west) from the IHT, I don't think there's any solution, I suspect that the main planned bike route in the city will have a half km hole in it for basically ever.
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - tomh009 - 05-07-2020
Going NE (Kitchener north) from the IHT, toward Charles, will have a 500m hole? I thought that's where the MUT is going in. What am I missing?