+- 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: General Road and Highway Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=335)
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
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-24-2020
(10-24-2020, 04:08 PM)ac3r Wrote:(10-24-2020, 02:04 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I still don’t understand why they insist on putting the barrier curb between the bicycle lane and the boulevard, rather than between the motor vehicle lanes and the bicycle lane
My first guess was snow plowing, because this would allow snowplows to drop the side plowing blade down, but it may be for the stormdrains. I don't know if they plow them in the winter.
So, snow clearing is the "official" reason for the roll curb between the bike lane and the roadway.
However, this reason is dubious...other cities have stated that they can clear the bike lane using the wing blade when there is a barrier curb. And certainly there is no reason that the roll curb must be so completely flat. Like no exaggeration, the curb I have to go over to enter most MUTs in the city is VASTLY more aggressive than the curb protecting me from distracted drivers here. There's zero excuse for that....engineering malpractice.
There is still ZERO reason for a barrier curb between the bike lane and the sidewalk, which makes no sense, just a waste of money, the bike lane is already angled towards the roll curb, so there is no water flowing along the curb...
As for the drainage question, there's nothing about a roll curb that makes drainage better, water can cascade off a barrier curb just fine.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-24-2020
(10-24-2020, 02:15 PM)creative Wrote: I was looking at this yesterday. The roll curb contains the storm water drains which drain water off of both the roadway and bike lane with no drainage grates within the bike lane.
There is no reason that the water cannot cascade off a barrier curb to the roadway below, the grade of the bike lane (2-4 degrees towards the road) is what enables them to have no storm drains, not the roll curb.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-24-2020
(10-24-2020, 02:04 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(10-24-2020, 01:39 PM)KevinL Wrote: The worst bit of those bike lanes happens here as the eastbound lane nears the Mill intersection - it's merged into the sidewalk! That continues at MUT width for a little bit, but nothing has been rebuilt at the tracks so it becomes standard sidewalk width from there. Oof.
I hadn’t noticed that.
My impression is that while I still don’t understand why they insist on putting the barrier curb between the bicycle lane and the boulevard, rather than between the motor vehicle lanes and the bicycle lane, I think even this very flat concrete bicycle lane is a signfiicant step up from just paint. The visual appearance is that the road is just the 4 motor vehicle lanes and while I can’t speak for other motorists I think they are less likely to swerve into these bicycle lanes than paint-only lanes.
Still doesn’t explain the fixation on roll curbs, but I guess we’ll see what happens as collision statistics accumulate over the next few years.
I think it's an improvement over a simple painted line, I am not convinced it is much improvement over a buffer. And frankly, roll curbs come in many different degrees, for some reason engineers insist on using the flattest possible curb between the bike lanes and roadways. I can only believe that some of our engineers fundamentally disagree with the concept of separated bike lanes and seek to minimize the separation as a result.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-24-2020
(10-24-2020, 05:20 PM)dtkvictim Wrote:(10-24-2020, 04:14 PM)KevinL Wrote: At the Imperial/Kehl intersections they change to an asphalt MUT, which continues past Homer Watson.
Thanks, I just looked at the GIS cycling map, I understand now. I didn't realize the MUT continued along Ottawa. I've only gone to that area once or twice since the roundabouts went in and vowed never to go back outside of a car...
I've also asked this question before about the MUT along Weber (from Water to the Spur Line) but didn't get a definitive answer: Are cyclists expected to dismount when crossing intersections and roundabouts on a MUT? I don't know if this spot even fits the criteria since it's slightly different than Ottawa St, but I was a passenger in a vehicle going through the roundabout at Ira Needles and Erb when a cyclist rode through the path in my attached picture below. The driver gave a comment along the lines of "I should've hit him for not dismounting", but I don't know if the cyclist was even wrong because it's unclear to both drivers and cyclists what is expected. Does the cyclist dismount for the Green and Blue sections? Just the Blue section? None at all?
For dismounting, never in the green section, it's officially a MUT.
For the blue section, legally yes, practically no. Under the law, you are required to dismount, but every engineer in the region, and province, fully know that cyclists do not ever dismount, and they design these crossings knowing AND expecting that behaviour.
The result of this, it's basically legal entrapment...if you are hit, you will be at fault every time, police will not charge the driver for failure to yield.
Engineers continue to do this (to be fair, at a regional level at roundabouts, regional engineers feel they are required to do this by the HTA, but not at signalized intersections). As a result this is nothing more than a shift of liabiliity, the crossing is designed to protect drivers from the responsibility to look for cyclists. The same occurs at highway on/off ramps where peds do not have the right of way. It isn't about safety, or design, it's about protecting drivers from liability.
As for your driver who gave the comment "I should've hit him for not dismounting", I would never speak to such a person again let alone allow them to drive me...anyone who feels they *SHOULD* hit someone with their car on purpose is no person I have any interest in ever interacting with...that is a despicable thing to say. Sorry if this is someone who you care about.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-24-2020
(10-24-2020, 02:39 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: Is there any signage up indicating these are bike lanes? There should especially be some where it merges with the sidewalk...
Also curious, how do they terminate on the south end? I assume the intended connections here are the IHT trail to the North and the Homer Watson MUT to the south?
It's good to finally have sidewalks immediately next to the Ion station.
Signage should be coming, it usually lags completion by weeks to months (to years---looking at you Weber St.)
Going south it merges into the Homer Watson MUT very nicely. All we need is a real crossing of 7/8 for some real connections (if you're willing to brave the roundabouts anyway)...sadly for some reason despite there being plenty of space for this, it is on no road map or master plan I've ever seen...instead we'll spend 17 million dollars on a new bridge at Strasburg because that makes GRT happy.
As for going to the IHT, while Ottawa is a major active transportatio route on the cycling Master Plan, there are no current plans to extend cycling in this direction. It was entirely rebuilt under ION of course, and there is no room to retrofit anything in, I suspect this will remain a hole in the network for .... well, till we live in a different world--this is a pretty big oversight, which is pretty much par for the course for the LRT.
The region will be retrofitting a MUT in going east from the IHT on Ottawa towards King, where it will connect with planned lanes there, but westwards a retrofit looks impossible.
The most reasonable connection is to ride the MUT along the tracks up to Borden and then on road on Borden until the IHT. Borden has no infrastructure, but it's better than riding on Ottawa.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - tomh009 - 10-25-2020
(10-24-2020, 10:19 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Going south it merges into the Homer Watson MUT very nicely. All we need is a real crossing of 7/8 for some real connections (if you're willing to brave the roundabouts anyway)...sadly for some reason despite there being plenty of space for this, it is on no road map or master plan I've ever seen...instead we'll spend 17 million dollars on a new bridge at Strasburg because that makes GRT happy.
Strasburg Rd connecting to ... Southmoor Dr and Stirling Ave S? With bike lanes on the bridge, I should hope!
Because that would have more potential for connectivity to the IHT. Stirling already has bike lanes up to Highland Rd (I think). And the Shoemaker (Schumacher!) Greenway should have real trail potential.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - ijmorlan - 10-25-2020
(10-25-2020, 08:19 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Strasburg Rd connecting to ... Southmoor Dr and Stirling Ave S? With bike lanes on the bridge, I should hope!
Bicycles and pedestrians only, to my knowledge.
Which actually doesn’t mean that separate bicycle lanes wouldn’t be welcome, but you don’t need to worry about motor vehicle traffic.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-25-2020
(10-25-2020, 08:24 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(10-25-2020, 08:19 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Strasburg Rd connecting to ... Southmoor Dr and Stirling Ave S? With bike lanes on the bridge, I should hope!
Bicycles and pedestrians only, to my knowledge.
Which actually doesn’t mean that separate bicycle lanes wouldn’t be welcome, but you don’t need to worry about motor vehicle traffic.
Yes, to clarify it will be a bicycle and pedestrian bridge, no cars.
I'm not saying I oppose such a bridge but there is a big reason why I wouldn't support it and why I would prefer an alternative, and a simple reason why it is the preferred option. (Keep in mind, there is middle ground between supporting and opposing).
The estimated cost for this bridge is 17 million dollars. Now leaving aside the ridiculously over inflated construction costs we pay, and the fact that MTO is requiring the region to build a bridge that can span 8 lanes because they plan on failing to address climate change.
Quite simply, 17 million dollars buys a HELL of a lot of cycling infra. In fact, 17 million dollars is over a third of the entire 10 year capital budget in the proposed cycling plan (which could easily get cut down for being too expensive).
Now, the highway is a major barrier to cycling in the city and I fully support building frequent safe crossings of the highway, it is important. However, the bridge over Homer-Watson is merely 500 meters away, or about 2 minutes cycling, which could connect the cycle lanes and such which could connect to all the same places on the other side through Meinzinger Park. And there is plenty of extra space under this bridge to put in cycle lanes, hell it's FOUR LANES. Yeah, it should have been connected when it was reconstructed, but a retrofit would be cheap and easy. And yes, the Ottawa and Homer-Watson roundabout is a garbage nightmare for anyone not in a car, but that should be fixed anyway--it doesn't go away with a bridge at strasburg...and a trail could easily bypass the roundabout on the north west side anyway.
So why is the region intent on doing this vastly more expensive option to acheive basically the same connectivity. Basically it allows them to say the folks on southmore and avalon pl can access the bus stops on Chandler Dr, meaning GRT can now claim those houses have good access to transit (within 500m or whatever their usual metrics are. Now I'm not going to say this isn't a good thing, it's great, but lets not pretend it's a cycling project...it's a transit project, but it's going to get labeled a cycling project and people are going to be upset about the price and complain about cyclists....and it is still a lot of money for a small number of connections (like around 100,000k per dwelling).
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - Acitta - 10-26-2020
Highway 7/8 Cycling and Pedestrian Bridge Strasburg Road/Chandler Drive to Avalon Place
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - ijmorlan - 10-26-2020
(10-26-2020, 10:43 AM)Acitta Wrote: Highway 7/8 Cycling and Pedestrian Bridge Strasburg Road/Chandler Drive to Avalon Place
That document suggests $7 million as the estimated cost, not $17 million. Does anybody know which is correct? That is a huge difference in cost.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-26-2020
Thanks for looking that up.
It does talk about it being GRT project in the report.
The cost estimate is wildly different from what we've heard before, whether that is because I've seen a newer number or older number, I don't know.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - KevinL - 10-26-2020
It's a GRT project because they want the Avalon neighbourhood to have access to better bus options. Cycling access is secondary.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - tomh009 - 10-26-2020
(10-26-2020, 12:29 PM)KevinL Wrote: It's a GRT project because they want the Avalon neighbourhood to have access to better bus options. Cycling access is secondary.
Even if GRT access is driving it, it does provide both pedestrian and cyclist access across the expressway. And that is a benefit.
Let's hope $7M is the correct number.
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - creative - 10-26-2020
Did a quick internet search. All of the articles that I came across, including this one from 2017, reference 7.6 M. https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2017/11/01/region-seeking-input-on-proposed-7-6m-pedestrian-bridge-in-kitchener.html
RE: General Road and Highway Discussion - danbrotherston - 10-26-2020
(10-26-2020, 02:48 PM)creative Wrote: Did a quick internet search. All of the articles that I came across, including this one from 2017, reference 7.6 M. https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2017/11/01/region-seeking-input-on-proposed-7-6m-pedestrian-bridge-in-kitchener.html
Well that is good, perhaps MTO relaxed the requirement for the span to clear 8 lanes.
The number I heard was an in person number from a staff presentation at ATAC.
Hopefully ~7M is closer to the actual number. But I still stand by the point, 7M buys the entire downtown grid. For cycling, there are more cost effective (and frankly, in most ways better) alternatives, but those alternatives do not meet GRTs goals. This will still get described as a cycling project.