Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
70 King St N | 16 & 22 fl | Proposed
#76
(03-16-2018, 01:12 PM)urbd Wrote:
(03-15-2018, 08:29 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: It doesn't have to be though; the road can, and should, be rebuilt at a more human(e) scale that would fit better with the building. The current state of the road isn't a good reason not to build the building though.

We could start by trying to convert Bridgeport and Erb back to two-way streets. One way roads are terrible... especially for pedestrians and cyclists.

I don’t see why they have to be. Reduce the number of general traffic lanes to 2, install bicycle lanes in both directions, adjust intersection design.

I think the bad reputation of one-way roads comes from the design goals, which in the cases I think you’re thinking of consist of trying to jam an expressway through a city core. That is, what they really want to do is push an expressway right through downtown, but that is infeasible so instead just take two existing streets and make them the two directions of a pseudo-expressway. If the design goal instead were to provide a high-quality urban design for pedestrians and cyclists while still providing vehicle access, I think the outcome might be very different.

Personally if it were up to me I would reduce King and Regina to one lane, one way each — King St. southbound, Regina northbound. This would be from William to at least Erb and possibly further. This would leave lots of space for excellent bicycle facilities in both directions on both streets as well as wider sidewalks.
Reply
#77
(03-16-2018, 01:29 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I don’t see why they have to be. Reduce the number of general traffic lanes to 2, install bicycle lanes in both directions, adjust intersection design.

I think this is the best option as well. It would mean sacrificing on-street parking though (seriously, we have on-street parking on these roads?), which is always a sticking point for some reason.

I would love to see these roads reduced to two lanes each, with a separate two-way cycle track built alongside each.
Reply
#78
(03-16-2018, 03:03 PM)timc Wrote:
(03-16-2018, 01:29 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I don’t see why they have to be. Reduce the number of general traffic lanes to 2, install bicycle lanes in both directions, adjust intersection design.

I think this is the best option as well. It would mean sacrificing on-street parking though (seriously, we have on-street parking on these roads?), which is always a sticking point for some reason.

I would love to see these roads reduced to two lanes each, with a separate two-way cycle track built alongside each.

There isn’t on-street parking in Uptown, however, except for the bit on Erb just east of Caroline (am I forgetting something?).

The street parking is east of Weber I think. In that area, I think we could pretty much leave it up to residents whether they prefer 3m of lawn, or street parking. Actually you could almost go so far as to let each property decide, depending on the exact design.

Although I want to know the traffic counts. What if the streets were just a single lane, but with turn lanes and rules (may only turn where there is a turn lane and only if you fit into the turn lane) such that the single lane is never held up by turning traffic, only traffic signals? Then put a green wave so the traffic moves without stopping at exactly whatever speed we want (try to go faster, you get a red). The existing road space is used very inefficiently, even by vehicular standards: traffic regularly clogs up where right- and left-turning vehicles are waiting, so the actual road capacity is way below the raw capacity of 3 lanes.
Reply
#79
The right-of-way is so wide (with the exception between Regina to just west of King) that you can fit wider sidewalks on both sides of both Erb and Bridgeport, a separated cycling lane (EB on Erb, WB on Bridgeport), and one EB lane, one WB lane, and a centre turning lane on both Erb and Bridgeport.

All of these concepts have been discussed before over on this thread:
http://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/s...5#pid22395

I wish something would actually get done.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
#80
(03-16-2018, 04:36 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: The right-of-way is so wide (with the exception between Regina to just west of King) that you can fit wider sidewalks on both sides of both Erb and Bridgeport, a separated cycling lane (EB on Erb, WB on Bridgeport), and one EB lane, one WB lane, and a centre turning lane on both Erb and Bridgeport.

It’s much more important for bicycles to be able to travel both ways on both streets than it is for motor vehicles. Any separated cycling path should be two-way.
Reply
#81
They could come together west of Caroline and east of the expressway where the is more room.

It the only way I can satisfy the motor vehicle crowd enough to get a decent east-west segregated bike lane is to keep two motor vehicles lane in each direction plus a centre turn-lane I would be willing to make that trade-off in a heartbeat.

Erb and Bridgeport are only about 200m (1 minute) apart in most places. That's close enough for me.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
#82
If I have to choose between the two, I'd rather have two-way segregated bike lanes over two-way motor vehicle lanes. It's far less of an inconvenience for motorized vehicles to detour than it is for someone on a bike.
Reply
#83
Yes. We often think one-way streets are not great but when Bridgeport was two-way it was still a hostile experience going anywhere near it with a bicycle. Two-way segregated bicycle facilities are probably a better bet, in the same way that islands (when properly implemented) can be helpful. Bridgeport and Erb aren't really that far on a bicycle, but they feel sort of far.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides a news reporting service, opportunities for event promotion and other user-driven content complemented by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links