ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[chutten]

No one considering a pedestrian overpass for the hydro corridor? Or does the grade make it untenable?

[danbrotherston]

No one considering a pedestrian overpass for the hydro corridor? Or does the grade make it untenable?

Why an overpass?

[Markster]

There's no real reason they can't add an at-grade crossing. There are countless (well, actually they're quite countable) crossings of the Waterloo Spur. An overpass would need long ramps for access, which just makes destinations that much further away.

There is a section, on the west, where the LRT is in a small cut as it goes through the park. You could put in a overpass there, but at that spot it wouldn't actually improve connectivity that much, as it's quite close to Courtland.

[panamaniac]

A pedestrian overpass seems a completely unnecessary expense.

[KevinL]

A pedestrian overpass would still require something we don't have - a parcel of public land on the Fairway side for the pathway to connect to the road. As it stands, that is a solid wall of privately-owned lots with no official way past - unless the Region purchases a small strip somewhere to make a proper, sanctioned pathway, I think all this discussion is moot.

[Canard]

That point alone kills it, I think. You're right Kevin.

I'm hearing that someone is tying keys to the construction fences. Has anyone seen this or heard this and know more?

[Viewfromthe42]

Tying keys to the construction fences? What do you mean by that, keys to what?

I'm getting worried about the lack of security around Victoria and Waterloo. It's not just once that the gates have been left open and driven through on Victoria, with cars trying to get from the Waterloo side to the Joseph side of Victoria. They also wind up in the construction area where the old Momentum Developments showroom was, not sure how much danger or safety is there. The new one was last night when I saw a car all but crossing the tracks at Waterloo, since the gates were wide, wide open there. I know it's unlikely that the fences will ever be fully secure, and GrandLinq probably doesn't care about how many people lift the fences off their pegs and walk through, but in certain areas if they can do this and make it seem like a driveable passage, it's quite dangerous to the oblivious or frustrated motorist.

[Canard]

Re keys: sorry, that's all the info I was given. I said I'd ask around and see if anyone knew anything.

[danbrotherston]

A pedestrian overpass would still require something we don't have - a parcel of public land on the Fairway side for the pathway to connect to the road. As it stands, that is a solid wall of privately-owned lots with no official way past - unless the Region purchases a small strip somewhere to make a proper, sanctioned pathway, I think all this discussion is moot.

I am curious as to this particular issue, first, I'm not sure why a parcel is needed.  After all, a parcel is not needed for a driveway from a road to a parking lot at the front of these places.  Presumably, the trail could just connect to the properties in the same way.  I don't understand why a business would object to this either, would they not want to make their property more accessible to potential customers?

[Viewfromthe42]

Some might. Others might see such an isolated structure as an attractor of loitering, crime, unwanted types, etc. It's like how every driver wants a highway accessible nearby, they just don't want to be next to it or the roads feeding it or the sound and traffic coming from either.

[danbrotherston]

Some might. Others might see such an isolated structure as an attractor of loitering, crime, unwanted types, etc. It's like how every driver wants a highway accessible nearby, they just don't want to be next to it or the roads feeding it or the sound and traffic coming from either.

*sigh*..."unwanted types"...those would be the types of people who arrive on foot or by bike I suppose.

You know, its funny, these "hole in the fence" type workarounds for intentionally broken connectivity that I see all over the city are far sketchier and far more likely to attract those "unwanted types" than a proper trail access.

[kps]

I'm getting worried about the lack of security around Victoria and Waterloo.

There's a security guard there this week, now that there's a few days' burst of work on the approach again.

[Viewfromthe42]

I see the security guard. Sometimes he will close the fence, sometimes he will leave it (car-sized openings). People/bike-sized openings are never dealt with.

[KevinL]

A pedestrian overpass would still require something we don't have - a parcel of public land on the Fairway side for the pathway to connect to the road. As it stands, that is a solid wall of privately-owned lots with no official way past - unless the Region purchases a small strip somewhere to make a proper, sanctioned pathway, I think all this discussion is moot.

I am curious as to this particular issue, first, I'm not sure why a parcel is needed.  After all, a parcel is not needed for a driveway from a road to a parking lot at the front of these places.  Presumably, the trail could just connect to the properties in the same way.  I don't understand why a business would object to this either, would they not want to make their property more accessible to potential customers?

It comes down to, the Region or Grandlinq would be indicating one location on the Fairway side as the pedestrian crossing point. I can't see any private landowner allowing that given potential for liability (what if a driver in their parking lot hits a pedestrian that has nothing to do with a business there?) nor the Region allowing so informal a travel corridor. An official crossing point demands an official walkway, which by the logic above, must be on public land.

[danbrotherston]

I am curious as to this particular issue, first, I'm not sure why a parcel is needed.  After all, a parcel is not needed for a driveway from a road to a parking lot at the front of these places.  Presumably, the trail could just connect to the properties in the same way.  I don't understand why a business would object to this either, would they not want to make their property more accessible to potential customers?

It comes down to, the Region or Grandlinq would be indicating one location on the Fairway side as the pedestrian crossing point. I can't see any private landowner allowing that given potential for liability (what if a driver in their parking lot hits a pedestrian that has nothing to do with a business there?) nor the Region allowing so informal a travel corridor. An official crossing point demands an official walkway, which by the logic above, must be on public land.

There are sidewalks through parking lots all the time, this one would just happen to be coming from a direction that isn't the same direction as the road.

And if there really are liability reasons, then we should fix those problems.