(09-09-2021, 04:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: https://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/SydneyPLUS/Sydney/Portal/default.aspx?component=AAAAIY&record=9c49ce44-e3b2-4389-91cd-5e9b67aad03d

So the new OTM Book 18 has finally been released. It is clearly a huge improvement. It's also a fun read, and a dangerous drinking game where you read it, and the take a drink every time the region is currently building or built in the last year a piece of infra which is deficient under the new book.

To get us started, the brand spanking new Victoria St. and Iron Horse Trail crossing is deficient by more than DOUBLE. The new guide states that uncontrolled crossings are not acceptable on roads with an Average Annualized Daily Traffic count of more than 9,000 and Victoria St. had more than 19,000 on that section in 2015. Hilarious, if I didn't have to cross it four times a day.

(09-10-2021, 11:38 AM)jwilliamson Wrote:

(09-09-2021, 04:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: https://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/SydneyPLUS/Sydney/Portal/default.aspx?component=AAAAIY&record=9c49ce44-e3b2-4389-91cd-5e9b67aad03d

So the new OTM Book 18 has finally been released. It is clearly a huge improvement. It's also a fun read, and a dangerous drinking game where you read it, and the take a drink every time the region is currently building or built in the last year a piece of infra which is deficient under the new book.

To get us started, the brand spanking new Victoria St. and Iron Horse Trail crossing is deficient by more than DOUBLE. The new guide states that uncontrolled crossings are not acceptable on roads with an Average Annualized Daily Traffic count of more than 9,000 and Victoria St. had more than 19,000 on that section in 2015. Hilarious, if I didn't have to cross it four times a day.

Any idea what Weber at the Laurel Trail gets? Regional engineers would probably say the best fix would be to tear out the island and put up a sign with instructions to cross at the light. Then there won't be an uncontrolled crossing.

(09-09-2021, 04:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: https://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/SydneyPLUS/Sydney/Portal/default.aspx?component=AAAAIY&record=9c49ce44-e3b2-4389-91cd-5e9b67aad03d

So the new OTM Book 18 has finally been released. It is clearly a huge improvement. It's also a fun read, and a dangerous drinking game where you read it, and the take a drink every time the region is currently building or built in the last year a piece of infra which is deficient under the new book.

To get us started, the brand spanking new Victoria St. and Iron Horse Trail crossing is deficient by more than DOUBLE. The new guide states that uncontrolled crossings are not acceptable on roads with an Average Annualized Daily Traffic count of more than 9,000 and Victoria St. had more than 19,000 on that section in 2015. Hilarious, if I didn't have to cross it four times a day.

(09-10-2021, 02:54 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(09-09-2021, 04:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: https://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/SydneyPLUS/Sydney/Portal/default.aspx?component=AAAAIY&record=9c49ce44-e3b2-4389-91cd-5e9b67aad03d

So the new OTM Book 18 has finally been released. It is clearly a huge improvement. It's also a fun read, and a dangerous drinking game where you read it, and the take a drink every time the region is currently building or built in the last year a piece of infra which is deficient under the new book.

To get us started, the brand spanking new Victoria St. and Iron Horse Trail crossing is deficient by more than DOUBLE. The new guide states that uncontrolled crossings are not acceptable on roads with an Average Annualized Daily Traffic count of more than 9,000 and Victoria St. had more than 19,000 on that section in 2015. Hilarious, if I didn't have to cross it four times a day.

Traffic lights are clearly controlled (I think!). What about the flashing-light crossings? Would that address the deficiency?

(09-10-2021, 03:19 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(09-10-2021, 02:54 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Traffic lights are clearly controlled (I think!). What about the flashing-light crossings? Would that address the deficiency?

Yes, a PXO would be an example of a controlled crossing. The guide notes that "Cyclists would be required to dismount"...which basically means they'd just be liable if hit while crossing.

(09-10-2021, 03:33 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(09-10-2021, 03:19 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Yes, a PXO would be an example of a controlled crossing. The guide notes that "Cyclists would be required to dismount"...which basically means they'd just be liable if hit while crossing.

Adding a PXO would not be hugely expensive, would it? That is, for sure, a very busy (and fast) crossing.

(09-10-2021, 03:38 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(09-10-2021, 03:33 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Adding a PXO would not be hugely expensive, would it? That is, for sure, a very busy (and fast) crossing.

Expensive? As in, costs a lot of money?

Not more expensive than other places. Just needs signs, there's already power.

Would it be expensive in terms of traffic congestion? I mean, possibly, but I doubt it. An IPS would be worse...unless they do the obvious thing and sync it with the nearby traffic signal.

FWIW the region should also fix the Victoria/West intersection...but you know the first step is admitting you have a problem, and they aren't there yet.

(09-15-2021, 08:19 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: The Water St bike lane curbs have been placed between Weber and Duke. No activity between Duke and Joseph yet, but I didn't realize that Water St construction had started at all, so pleasant surprise.

Also, the Joseph/Water intersection seems to have the remaining forms placed, so I expect it should be filled in in the next few days? Unfortunately another 2 trees lost here. I wish we could "improve" our city without paving the whole thing over.