+- 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: Walking in Waterloo Region (/showthread.php?tid=189)
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - ijmorlan - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 02:57 PM)KevinL Wrote: What if we put in a pedestrian crossing with the *opposite* of a beg button? Have the default be a red light for traffic and a white light for pedestrians. When a car comes up to the light, a detector loop changes the pedestrian signal to a flashing red, then we go pedestrian-red vehicle-green.
I’ve been thinking along these lines for some time now, for a number of locations. I'm thinking this would be good for University at the train tracks, the right turn from Caroline onto Erb (which should be two lanes and separated from the rest of the intersection by a substantial island), Bridgeport at Laurel Trail, and probably other locations. Depending on the location, the detector could actually be placed such that car traffic going at the design speed gets a green just in time and doesn’t wait at all if the light has been green for pedestrians for sufficiently long.
Way too creative for today’s planners to even understand, much less approve. At least, that is my prediction based on experience.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - BuildingScout - 08-10-2016
I think Jubilee Dr. as a street is a reasonable compromise. City planning itself is an exercise in compromise between the different demands on infrastructure: pedestrians, cyclists, commuters, residents. I use Jubilee Dr. often to reach the park itself, and also drive on it slowly in the middle of the Winter to show the beautiful park lights to residents from warmer climes who wouldn't appreciate a walking tour.
Additionally, my experience has been that traffic on Jubilee Dr. has slowed down significantly over the years. Back in the 90s speeds of 50-60 km/h were rather common. Nowadays I often find myself behind someone driving at 30-40 km/h. I have no idea why the change, but this is something I had noticed before this thread pop up. Some people claim that speeds have gone up recently, which is also possible now that is being used as an alternative to King. Certainly speeds on Joseph seem to have gone up with the construction.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 03:21 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Google's travel times are based on real data, and a lot of it. So if you feel they re being to optimistic or pessimistic on their routes, please do feel free to contact them and ask them to adjust their algorithms.
Real data? You mean tracking how long people actually take to traverse that street? Well, then given that most people don't follow the speed limit, that would only reinforce what i said, if you follow the speed limit, it takes considerably longer than 3 minutes.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 05:22 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: Some people claim that speeds have gone up recently, which is also possible now that is being used as an alternative to King. Certainly speeds on Joseph seem to have gone up with the construction.
That would be ironic given that I think the speeds on Jubilee are actually faster than the speed on King were. Of course we all know peoples (including my own) perception of speed is rather flawed.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - BuildingScout - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 05:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Real data? You mean tracking how long people actually take to traverse that street? Well, then given that most people don't follow the speed limit, that would only reinforce what i said, if you follow the speed limit, it takes considerably longer than 3 minutes.
It's a distance of 1.1km which per Google takes 3 minutes, i.e. an average driving speed of 22Km/h. At those average speeds I don't think driving at the speed limit would make it "considerably longer".
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 05:54 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:(08-10-2016, 05:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Real data? You mean tracking how long people actually take to traverse that street? Well, then given that most people don't follow the speed limit, that would only reinforce what i said, if you follow the speed limit, it takes considerably longer than 3 minutes.
It's a distance of 1.1km which per Google takes 3 minutes, i.e. an average driving speed of 22Km/h. At those average speeds I don't think driving at the speed limit would make it "considerably longer".
Average speed is misleading because it includes time waiting at lights and stop signs.
For example, the average speed of the "Joseph" detour is only 17 km/h, somehow slower than the road with a 30 km/h limit.
And given that this Google data is no doubt coloured by the current and certainly temporary LRT detours, I think it's fair to say that back of napkin or Google Maps calculations are not going to win any debates here, none of them take into account the majority of the actual traffic impacts.
Regardless, we're talking about a few minutes. For me, I don't think that convenience is worth giving up a car free park. Others obviously disagree.
Again, if there was no road there, we wouldn't be having this discussion, I don't think anybody would suggest putting it in. Just as we aren't discussing putting one in Waterloo Park, which is instead removing even more cars, and building a central Promenade.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - BuildingScout - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 06:28 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(08-10-2016, 05:54 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: It's a distance of 1.1km which per Google takes 3 minutes, i.e. an average driving speed of 22Km/h. At those average speeds I don't think driving at the speed limit would make it "considerably longer".
Average speed is misleading because it includes time waiting at lights and stop signs.
Again, if there was no road there, we wouldn't be having this discussion, I don't think anybody would suggest putting it in. Just as we aren't discussing putting one in Waterloo Park, which is instead removing even more cars, and building a central Promenade.
Stop signs and lights only reinforce my point. If speed is dominated by things other than the speed limit a drive at the speed limit is not going to be much slower than racing down the street.
I also disagree that we wouldn't have this discussion if the road wasn't there. With King St slowing down, there are no North-South roads between Westmount and Weber. We would certainly be looking into connecting Courtland and Park. This wouldn't be the first time we have connected streets in town through a green area. Just recently someone here suggested extending Homer Watson through Lakeside Park.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - notmyfriends - 08-10-2016
You could always just develop the part of the park between Jubilee and Joseph, that way the road won't run through the park anymore!!!1!
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 07:21 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: I also disagree that we wouldn't have this discussion if the road wasn't there. With King St slowing down, there are no North-South roads between Westmount and Weber. We would certainly be looking into connecting Courtland and Park. This wouldn't be the first time we have connected streets in town through a green area. Just recently someone here suggested extending Homer Watson through Lakeside Park.
The speed isn't dominated by either, they both play a part. And it actually reinforces mine, you can change light timing and intersections to optimize for specific traffic, thus reducing the wait times at those elements.
And yes, someone did make that argument, and how much support did it get? Very little. And lakeside is more of a natural area, not even remotely as busy as Waterloo or Victoria Park. I just pointed out a suggested route through Waterloo park that would be very useful, but nobody would argue for it.
The loss of King is temporary. But even if it was, I really don't believe for a moment that we'd be seriously considering putting a road through the park.
When it comes to the state of the road, I don't think we're going to reach any agreement, I think a road through the park is in no way justified by the convenience which I find minor (even as a frequent user). You disagree.
More generally, routes matter more, if you design wayfinding and optimize intersections you can build a route out of different roads. Just look at waterloo with Park/Caroline/Erb/Albert, not that such a design is very conducive to pedestrians, but it is very friendly to cars, and yet not a continuous road.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - BuildingScout - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 09:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: When it comes to the state of the road, I don't think we're going to reach any agreement, I think a road through the park is in no way justified by the convenience which I find minor (even as a frequent user). You disagree.
Actually my argument is not convenience alone, that was Markster's. I think the sinuous slow drive through the park makes it more attractive. More importantly it makes the park woven into the fabric of the city instead of a reservation one merely drives past on a side street.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 08-10-2016
(08-10-2016, 09:40 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:(08-10-2016, 09:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: When it comes to the state of the road, I don't think we're going to reach any agreement, I think a road through the park is in no way justified by the convenience which I find minor (even as a frequent user). You disagree.
Actually my argument is not convenience alone, that was Markster's. I think the sinuous slow drive through the park makes it more attractive. More importantly it makes thee park woven into the fabric of the city instead of a reservation one merely drives past on a side street.
Fair enough, that is a different argument. But most people driving through the park are not there for that reason, if they were, I probably wouldn't care as much. I also don't have a problem with the park being a "reservation for those not in a car".
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - MidTowner - 08-11-2016
(08-10-2016, 07:21 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: I also disagree that we wouldn't have this discussion if the road wasn't there. With King St slowing down, there are no North-South roads between Westmount and Weber. We would certainly be looking into connecting Courtland and Park. This wouldn't be the first time we have connected streets in town through a green area. Just recently someone here suggested extending Homer Watson through Lakeside Park.
Weber and Westmount are separated by less than three kilometres, and King is only slowing down, not closing. And Weber was recently widened in part to compensate for the fact that King is going to be able to handle less car traffic volume.
But those are only the arterials. You’re arguing that Jubilee is slow, and it’s not really true that there are no other north-south roads between Westmount and Weber. Highland-West-Strange-(Dominion)-Park is not too difficult a route to follow once you’ve done it a few times.
And what’s the argument for more north-south roads through the core? Weber seem pretty free-flowing to me. Westmount isn’t exactly a parking lot even during our short rush hour.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - MacBerry - 08-11-2016
(08-10-2016, 11:23 AM)Markster Wrote: I personally would be against blocking through traffic through the park. It's just too useful a connection.
That said, I'd be entirely in favour of adding pedestrian-priority crossings of the road. One or two standard "Level 1" pedestrian crossings would be perfect. The addition of sidewalks should also help make it seem less like a "parkway".
Honestly, I think Pokemon GO has been one of the greatest things for traffic control in the park. There are countless people crossing Jubilee at the Boathouse now, and the cars seem to be going slower for it.
I believe that the late Jane Jacobs would be a strong supporter of these types of apps that get people out into the community and onto the streets (not literally the streets) where people mingle, watch and interact and keep the city alive. The presence of people out and about does make our streets safer in spite of waht we see in the news.
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - tomh009 - 08-11-2016
(08-10-2016, 05:32 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(08-10-2016, 05:22 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: Some people claim that speeds have gone up recently, which is also possible now that is being used as an alternative to King. Certainly speeds on Joseph seem to have gone up with the construction.
That would be ironic given that I think the speeds on Jubilee are actually faster than the speed on King were. Of course we all know peoples (including my own) perception of speed is rather flawed.
Observed speeds today, using my car's speedometer:
- 5:30 PM: 30-35 km/h
- 8:30 PM: 35-40 km/h
RE: Walking in Waterloo Region - Pheidippides - 08-11-2016
Here's some more data from the City of Kitchener, in 2012 the 85th percentile speed on Jubilee was 36kph and the traffic volume was 5,110; so based on the traffic counts the volume has dropped nearly 3,000 (-36%) in a decade. So most people are speeding, but not excessively.
I think I would be in favour of the removal of Jubilee from the road network from south of Water to North of David, but having seen opinions on both sides (great discussion!) and collected some empirical data now I would be ok with the status quo as well (although it would really nice to do running workouts around the perimeter of the entire park without getting stopped twice every lap to cross a road). I think it is worth noting that Jubilee is often closed on weekends throughout the summer and chaos has not ensued and it bikes could still be allowed to pass through if it were closed to cars.
Just like I'm sure putting 7th avenue through New York's Central Park would save people time getting from Harlem to Times Square, the value that is added by having a large car-free space often out-weighs making the road network as efficient as possible.
I'm sure Google's actual travel times are probably fairly accurate and more realistic, but if considering just the actual driving times (not accounting for stoppages) the times from Victoria/Park to Queen/Courtland would be:
Via Jubilee = 900m @ 30kph = 1min 48sec (no lights, one stop sign, no turns)
Via Victoria/West/Homewood/Queen = 1800m @ 50kph = 2min 10sec (one light, one stop sign, two left turns)
Via Victoria/Joseph/Queen = 1400m @ 50kph = 1min 41sec (4 lights, 1 stop sign, two right turns)
The reverse beg signal was truly an ingenious suggestion; I wonder how many trips would then be diverted with a slower travel time?
Also, here is the current policy on traffic calming. It is considered a "scenic" drive and so would probably qualify with an exemption under criteria number one, even if it was excluded under criteria number 6.
Finally, I thought we came to a consensus that the crossing flags would not be a good idea over a year ago over a year ago in a different thread.