05-19-2016, 08:05 AM
You can see the consultation materials and provide online feedback here:
http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettin...sithub.asp
Having used various transit systems, I worry a lot about Waterloo Street becoming an overpass. With people rushing to get to transit, if they have to ascend by 1-4 levels to get over the tracks and any potential HSR/electrification, and then descend that same height plus more (all non-GO/VIA transit will be below the height of Waterloo Street), it would be exhausting, present a lot of running on stairs, and create long delays and risks of injury. I recognize that some would be romanced by the idea of the overpass as a spot to take photos, but if this is meant as a commuter connection, it makes little sense to go for an overpass.
What I'm most worried about is that we're still thinking of this as a who-knows-how-dense-it-should-be site. GRT/ION/cycling/walking/intercity bus/VIA/GO/car, this site is about the most ideal location for every one of these transit modes. It is surrounded by largely non-low-density-residential built forms. It befits the highest density imaginable to take advantage of all these opportunities. If not 25-30 storeys here, why would we see fit to allow that height closer to heritage neighbourhoods, or ION stops without intercity connections? This should be the prime trip generator inbound and outbound, and I truly hope we get that right. If we carve out the heart of our twin cities, I don't even know what to think.
http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettin...sithub.asp
Having used various transit systems, I worry a lot about Waterloo Street becoming an overpass. With people rushing to get to transit, if they have to ascend by 1-4 levels to get over the tracks and any potential HSR/electrification, and then descend that same height plus more (all non-GO/VIA transit will be below the height of Waterloo Street), it would be exhausting, present a lot of running on stairs, and create long delays and risks of injury. I recognize that some would be romanced by the idea of the overpass as a spot to take photos, but if this is meant as a commuter connection, it makes little sense to go for an overpass.
What I'm most worried about is that we're still thinking of this as a who-knows-how-dense-it-should-be site. GRT/ION/cycling/walking/intercity bus/VIA/GO/car, this site is about the most ideal location for every one of these transit modes. It is surrounded by largely non-low-density-residential built forms. It befits the highest density imaginable to take advantage of all these opportunities. If not 25-30 storeys here, why would we see fit to allow that height closer to heritage neighbourhoods, or ION stops without intercity connections? This should be the prime trip generator inbound and outbound, and I truly hope we get that right. If we carve out the heart of our twin cities, I don't even know what to think.