Cycling in Waterloo Region

[Acitta]

I was just informed by my roommate that a cyclist was struck on Queen St. near Mill at the crossing by Schneider's House. No news reports yet.

[tomh009]

I was just informed by my roommate that a cyclist was struck on Queen St. near Mill at the crossing by Schneider's House. No news reports yet.

I cross there on foot quite often, if not quite daily, but I can't remember when I last saw a cyclist using that crossing (the Kitchener E side of Queen St is quite a narrow sidewalk there, with no trail connection) so it's rather surprising it happened at this particular location. Rush-hour traffic is quite busy there, though.

Let's wait for news ...

[cherrypark]

Incompetent or overly cheap - I can never really tell. I would bet that aside that the pole is new, they just didn't want to spend the money on any subsurface changes or placing that post in a new spot. New pole, same intersection subsurface layout.

It was likely the wiring underground or possibly other buried infrastructure. It's inconvenient, but I'd hope cyclists have the sense to not drive into the pole to begin with.

More a concern of it being a space impediment when there are also pedestrians or people waiting for a crossing you can no longer get around. To say nothing of the fact that every MUT crossing seems to get the same ped only grade slope to make your wrists suffer.

[danbrotherston]

It was likely the wiring underground or possibly other buried infrastructure. It's inconvenient, but I'd hope cyclists have the sense to not drive into the pole to begin with.

More a concern of it being a space impediment when there are also pedestrians or people waiting for a crossing you can no longer get around. To say nothing of the fact that every MUT crossing seems to get the same ped only grade slope to make your wrists suffer.

And it's not just that, the pole is only the most obvious problem in the design. Basically, the crossing is half the width, and all cyclists will want to use the wrong side.

Basically, they have created a situation where there is an incredibly tight turn.

And even if the underground equipment was a problem, it didn't need to be this way. If staff were less obsessed (yes obsessed) with maintaining a massive turn radii from a residential street the crossing could have been moved outward to be more in line with the trail. And then the pole would have been between the ped and cycling crossings.

And in any case, the designs of these trails is bad. It's fine on Homer Watson where there are few to no pedestrians or cyclists, but this is a relatively busy area that's only going to get busier. Pedestrians and cyclists should be separated, but at least pedestrians and cyclists shouldn't be made to cross their paths as they are at each intersection here (given that pedestrians have a natural tenancy to walk on the right side of a pathway). But that's at least a problem with the Ontario crossing standards rather than a problem with our engineers specifically.

[bravado]

https://cyclewr.ca

Survey Link

Just FYI: local advocacy group Cycle WR - of which I am a member of the board - has launched an informal survey to try and get some data from Region people who like to bike on occasion.

[dtkvictim]

Maybe already been discussed here but I never knew Highland Road East from Queen to Stirling is getting separated bike lanes as part of it's reconstruction: https://www.engagewr.ca/highland-and-delaware

The bike lanes are up next to the sidewalk and separated from the road by a grass median and curb. I ended up there while driving because of a construction detour, and the lanes are reasonably narrow (around 3.3m according to the documents), and there are pedestrian islands you have to consciously steer around acting as traffic calming. And floating bus stops according to the documents.

Other than lack of connections (all I can think of is that pathway that connects over to Mill and the IHT) it seems pretty decent. Will try and get some photos some time.

[dtkvictim]

I can't imagine the city left it like this, I assume someone stole or moved the cones, but I could see someone eating pavement here... Long exposure makes the ground look a lot better lit than it was.

[danbrotherston]

Maybe already been discussed here but I never knew Highland Road East from Queen to Stirling is getting separated bike lanes as part of it's reconstruction: https://www.engagewr.ca/highland-and-delaware

The bike lanes are up next to the sidewalk and separated from the road by a grass median and curb. I ended up there while driving because of a construction detour, and the lanes are reasonably narrow (around 3.3m according to the documents), and there are pedestrian islands you have to consciously steer around acting as traffic calming. And floating bus stops according to the documents.

Other than lack of connections (all I can think of is that pathway that connects over to Mill and the IHT) it seems pretty decent. Will try and get some photos some time.

I think this is part of the city's larger bike plan. There will be more meaningful connections in the future, I think along Spadina Rd. Also Stirling and Highland south of Queen both have (mediocre) bike infra.

As for the design, it's perfectly good. This is what good standards will net us. Projects will just be...not garbage by default.

[westwardloo]

Maybe already been discussed here but I never knew Highland Road East from Queen to Stirling is getting separated bike lanes as part of it's reconstruction: https://www.engagewr.ca/highland-and-delaware

The bike lanes are up next to the sidewalk and separated from the road by a grass median and curb. I ended up there while driving because of a construction detour, and the lanes are reasonably narrow (around 3.3m according to the documents), and there are pedestrian islands you have to consciously steer around acting as traffic calming. And floating bus stops according to the documents.

Other than lack of connections (all I can think of is that pathway that connects over to Mill and the IHT) it seems pretty decent. Will try and get some photos some time.

I think this is part of the city's larger bike plan. There will be more meaningful connections in the future, I think along Spadina Rd. Also Stirling and Highland south of Queen both have (mediocre) bike infra.

As for the design, it's perfectly good. This is what good standards will net us. Projects will just be...not garbage by default.

Glad to see the city implement actual grade separated bike lanes during reconstruction of the road. Much better design then lines painted on the side of the road. for some reason I prefer a 2 way bike lane on one side of the road and for them to be seperated from Pedestrian traffic as well. No doubt people will be walking in the bike lane, but I think this should be minimum standard Region wide when reconstructing any road. I can't believe Regional "engineers" allowed bridgeport to be completely rebuilt with NO bike infrastructure.  Such a missed opportunity.

[danbrotherston]

I think this is part of the city's larger bike plan. There will be more meaningful connections in the future, I think along Spadina Rd. Also Stirling and Highland south of Queen both have (mediocre) bike infra.

As for the design, it's perfectly good. This is what good standards will net us. Projects will just be...not garbage by default.

Glad to see the city implement actual grade separated bike lanes during reconstruction of the road. Much better design then lines painted on the side of the road. for some reason I prefer a 2 way bike lane on one side of the road and for them to be seperated from Pedestrian traffic as well. No doubt people will be walking in the bike lane, but I think this should be minimum standard Region wide when reconstructing any road. I can't believe Regional "engineers" allowed bridgeport to be completely rebuilt with NO bike infrastructure.  Such a missed opportunity.

FWIW, I do believe these are separated from the pedestrian space. As for whether they make sense to be two way, that's probably a context dependent situation. The Netherlands uses both depending on what makes sense. Which is, frankly far better than the people who ideologically believe there is one true answer (yes...there are people who have religious beliefs about one way vs. two way bike infra). I'll give the city some credit here, their "context" is pretty immature...it basically amounts to "how much space is there"...but building bike infra is new for these folks, there probably should be a two way section at one location here, but I'd have to look at a map to see where.

That being said, don't expect this type of infra everywhere, this is getting bike infra because it's in the cycling plan...the city still hasn't gotten to the point of believing there should be bike infra everywhere. (And for that matter the Netherlands doesn't either, but they have a more...advanced view of it...every location has a bike route to it, not all routes are bike routes).

That being said, Bridgeport is a bigger question...I'm not sure where it was rebuilt with no infra? I might have missed something. Bridgeport itself is a blight on the city, but leaving that aside, they were planning on putting bike infra on several sections IIRC...and I do think the region does want to do something to improve the road. I've heard bike lanes floated a few times...but ultimately the real problem is that Bridgeport is a highway and it has no place in the city...accepting that is well beyond the region today.

[westwardloo]

Glad to see the city implement actual grade separated bike lanes during reconstruction of the road. Much better design then lines painted on the side of the road. for some reason I prefer a 2 way bike lane on one side of the road and for them to be seperated from Pedestrian traffic as well. No doubt people will be walking in the bike lane, but I think this should be minimum standard Region wide when reconstructing any road. I can't believe Regional "engineers" allowed bridgeport to be completely rebuilt with NO bike infrastructure.  Such a missed opportunity.

FWIW, I do believe these are separated from the pedestrian space. As for whether they make sense to be two way, that's probably a context dependent situation. The Netherlands uses both depending on what makes sense. Which is, frankly far better than the people who ideologically believe there is one true answer (yes...there are people who have religious beliefs about one way vs. two way bike infra). I'll give the city some credit here, their "context" is pretty immature...it basically amounts to "how much space is there"...but building bike infra is new for these folks, there probably should be a two way section at one location here, but I'd have to look at a map to see where.

That being said, don't expect this type of infra everywhere, this is getting bike infra because it's in the cycling plan...the city still hasn't gotten to the point of believing there should be bike infra everywhere. (And for that matter the Netherlands doesn't either, but they have a more...advanced view of it...every location has a bike route to it, not all routes are bike routes).

That being said, Bridgeport is a bigger question...I'm not sure where it was rebuilt with no infra? I might have missed something. Bridgeport itself is a blight on the city, but leaving that aside, they were planning on putting bike infra on several sections IIRC...and I do think the region does want to do something to improve the road. I've heard bike lanes floated a few times...but ultimately the real problem is that Bridgeport is a highway and it has no place in the city...accepting that is well beyond the region today.

I agree that either one works, I just prefer biking on by-directional bike lanes. 

Sorry, meant to say Bridge St. from Lancaster to University. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4829814,...&entry=ttu

My understanding is the at the Region wants to eventually building bike lanes on both Bridgeport and Erb and make them two way streets again, but unfortunately inflation and budget constraints have pushed those projects past 2030.

[danbrotherston]

FWIW, I do believe these are separated from the pedestrian space. As for whether they make sense to be two way, that's probably a context dependent situation. The Netherlands uses both depending on what makes sense. Which is, frankly far better than the people who ideologically believe there is one true answer (yes...there are people who have religious beliefs about one way vs. two way bike infra). I'll give the city some credit here, their "context" is pretty immature...it basically amounts to "how much space is there"...but building bike infra is new for these folks, there probably should be a two way section at one location here, but I'd have to look at a map to see where.

That being said, don't expect this type of infra everywhere, this is getting bike infra because it's in the cycling plan...the city still hasn't gotten to the point of believing there should be bike infra everywhere. (And for that matter the Netherlands doesn't either, but they have a more...advanced view of it...every location has a bike route to it, not all routes are bike routes).

That being said, Bridgeport is a bigger question...I'm not sure where it was rebuilt with no infra? I might have missed something. Bridgeport itself is a blight on the city, but leaving that aside, they were planning on putting bike infra on several sections IIRC...and I do think the region does want to do something to improve the road. I've heard bike lanes floated a few times...but ultimately the real problem is that Bridgeport is a highway and it has no place in the city...accepting that is well beyond the region today.

I agree that either one works, I just prefer biking on by-directional bike lanes. 

Sorry, meant to say Bridge St. from Lancaster to University. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4829814,...&entry=ttu

My understanding is the at the Region wants to eventually building bike lanes on both Bridgeport and Erb and make them two way streets again, but unfortunately inflation and budget constraints have pushed those projects past 2030.

Oh yes...Bridge...right.

Yeah, again this comes down to standards (and also a little bit "I'm an avid cyclist" awful engineers).

The standard were they are going on (which by the way, are specifically substandard by the Ontario traffic manuals that were out during final design and construction) for Bridge St. were terrible.

To fix this, the old guard engineers who hate protected bike lanes (they are so bad that when forced to build them, they intentionally--yes intentionally--build crap) need to get "fired" (or retired, as usually happens to people who succeed beyond their capability--I sure wish I was in a position where I could not be fired).

This seems to already be done I think. Which means the next step is to push to rewrite the design manuals to bring it up with at least the Ontario standards. FWIW...this isn't as necessary, since you can throw the Ontario manual in their face when they fail to meet it. But the point is...the standards have to be there, because ultimately our engineers mostly don't know how to engineer, so instead they usually just copy verbatim what the standards say, so those standards better be right.

[dtkvictim]

Photos from Highland.

The area between Spadina and Stirling are still very under construction. The half closest to Stirling hasn't even started yet.



Between Spadina and Queen is more is less usable now



On street parking demarcated by paint on one end and a curb bumpout for a driveway on the other end, followed immediately by a pedestrian crossing.







Another pedestrian crossing closer to Spadina

[dtkvictim]

Second post because of image limit

There are continuous sidewalks/bike lanes at Ruby St and Winslow Dr. These side streets seem to narrow at the intersection, contrasted with the old large turning radii and long crossings. I am a little confused about why the sidewalk to sidewalk transition has sharks teeth though... And even funnier, tactile plates have been added to the "crossing" while the old crossing didn't have them.







Old intersection for reference

[danbrotherston]

Wow...just wow.

That has so many features from the Netherlands, it's hard to believe it's in Kitchener, shocking because of how strongly this stuff was resisted by most engineers, shocking because even when they wanted to do a good job they couldn't. I'm going to have to go take a look when we visit in December.

Hopefully, again, this is driven by standards. I know this is part of the cycling network, so it isn't going to be repeated everywhere, but hopefully the pedestrian features become standard.

Unfortunately, the region and the city of Waterloo still won't do this kind of thing...but at least there is precedent.

As for the sharks teeth on the sidewalk that is a bit weird, in the Netherlands sharks teeth are not used on ped infra, only bike and car infra, but I know that road is going to be bike route so possibly that will be a combined trail. The tactile plates are funny, but not unprecedented, I imagine they're just being conservative, but that isn't the worst example of them I've seen. In the Netherlands, they'll only use the equivalent treatment if there is a surface change, which there isn't in the picture.