Hey Guest,
Welcome, Join our awesome community where you can discuss on various topics
or Create an Account


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.

Dear WRConnected Users: WOW! Our fourth "birthday"! We've grown so much over the past four years, and much of that is because of you, the amazing WRConnected Users. But like any other website, there are costs associated with running it. As some of you may already know, we accept donations. Some of you have made donations (thank you!). This helps cover some of the background costs associated with running this site. If every user were to donate $1 we would more than cover our yearly expenses. If WRConnected is useful to you, take a minute and help keep it online for another year. Any donation is helpful. Thank you.

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Grand River Transit
(08-10-2018, 02:28 PM)KevinT Wrote: … genius level simple …

Genius level expression. Captures a lot of truth in very few words.

And yes, having a button to indicate one wants to charge more fares is a great idea.
Reply
New detour for the 1,4, and 7 for 1.5 years (!). Looks like Gaukel is closing for Charlie West construction.

Duration: Monday, August 20 – approximately 1.5 years
Reason: New Development - Condo Build
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(08-10-2018, 07:03 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: New detour for the 1,4, and 7 for 1.5 years (!). Looks like Gaukel is closing for Charlie West construction.

Duration: Monday, August 20 – approximately 1.5 years
Reason: New Development - Condo Build

Interesting. By the time that reopens Charles terminal may no longer be used by GRT
Reply
Are they just moving the bus routes or is the street going to be completely closed? I don't think I've ever seen a case of a street being closed for a private construction project.
Reply
(08-10-2018, 08:21 PM)panamaniac Wrote: Are they just moving the bus routes or is the street going to be completely closed?  I don't think I've ever seen a case of a street being closed for a private construction project.

If there's no corresponding adjustment of the 6s, 34s, and 7s to Waterloo, it's probably just due to be closed in one direction, and closing a single lane for construction is not uncommon.
Reply
According to the City of Kitchener Road Closures, Gaukel is closing both ways up to Hall's Lane. GAUKEL ST CHARLES ST W TO HALLS LANE W Reason: Site Servicing
Start: Aug 20, 2018
Details: CLOSURE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION UNTIL DEC 2019
Detour: VIA CHARLES ST TO WATER ST TO KING ST
Reply
What's the reasoning, out of curiosity? Neither Duke nor Young were shut down for City Centre construction, and neither King nor Victoria were shut down for One Vic (albeit, there were sidewalk coverings and scaffolding. Why does Charlie West need the entire street, both directions?
Reply
Available space, I'd guess. The entire property is the footprint of the building, leaving essentially no space beyond Hall's Lane for staging. They will have large deliveries and other logistics coming in and out.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
(08-11-2018, 04:54 PM)KevinL Wrote: Available space, I'd guess. The entire property is the footprint of the building, leaving essentially no space beyond Hall's Lane for staging. They will have large deliveries and other logistics coming in and out.

Also Gaukel doesn’t go anywhere. Closing it to traffic will make very little difference to traffic patterns (except for the buses, obviously). I don’t know how much the City charges for closures or how they decide whether to allow them, but if I were making those choices I would quote a relatively low price for closing Gaukel compared to a lot of other streets I can think of.
Reply
(08-11-2018, 08:01 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(08-11-2018, 04:54 PM)KevinL Wrote: Available space, I'd guess. The entire property is the footprint of the building, leaving essentially no space beyond Hall's Lane for staging. They will have large deliveries and other logistics coming in and out.

Also Gaukel doesn’t go anywhere. Closing it to traffic will make very little difference to traffic patterns (except for the buses, obviously). I don’t know how much the City charges for closures or how they decide whether to allow them, but if I were making those choices I would quote a relatively low price for closing Gaukel compared to a lot of other streets I can think of.

On that point, once the terminal closes, I would strongly argue for Gaukel to be closed to traffic, and instead have a greenway to the park.
Reply
I hope they at least keep Gaukel open to pedestrians (they've already close the site side of Charles to pedestrians) as there are enough full time closures already inconveniencing pedestrians.

I know there are permit fees for this kind of closure in Kitchener, but are there other fees like they have in other cities for street occupancy (e.g. Toronto) that might encourage the limiting the closure to the shortest time possible? Even the City of Waterloo charges $29/lane/day for minor roads, $125/lane/day for major roads, and $250 per month when it affects sidewalks and pathways (which itself is revealing - lane closures are charged by the day, but sidewalk closures only by the month; you can inconvenience pedestrians for 29 days without paying a fee, but inconvenience a single lane of a road for a day and its a minimum of $29 a day plus the $123 application fee despite that the application for states that "Maintain safe and convenient passage for all pedestrians through or around the work site").

20-Aug-2018 to 31-Dec-2019 is 499 days. Even at the low end of the Waterloo rates $14,000 seems like a small price to pay given the total costs to everyone's time/fuel over that time period resulting from the detour.


(Unrelated note, I noticed that the sidewalk snow clearing fees for Kitchener are in that document and are as follows (per linear ft):
King St. $7.91
Other Downtown Streets and gov't properties $2.40
Crosswalk clearing (schools, etc.) $3.12)
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(08-11-2018, 08:27 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(08-11-2018, 08:01 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Also Gaukel doesn’t go anywhere. Closing it to traffic will make very little difference to traffic patterns (except for the buses, obviously). I don’t know how much the City charges for closures or how they decide whether to allow them, but if I were making those choices I would quote a relatively low price for closing Gaukel compared to a lot of other streets I can think of.

On that point, once the terminal closes, I would strongly argue for Gaukel to be closed to traffic, and instead have a greenway to the park.

That would be awesome and very consistent with some of the other things happening in Kitchener. And in this particular case, essentially no impact on motor vehicle traffic, not that that should necessarily be a veto in cases where there is an impact. There is already a big entrance area of Victoria Park immediately across Charles from Gaukel so it would even make sense with the rest of the existing design. And at the other end, it’s right across King from City Hall. So it would connect two important points. At Charles, the left turn lane space and the portion of the intersection in line with the left turn space could become a massive pedestrian refuge, making it easier to cross. Some interaction between motor vehicle traffic and LRT traffic would even be removed.

So overall, a great and inexpensive project with really no downside.
Reply
(08-11-2018, 08:27 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(08-11-2018, 08:01 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Also Gaukel doesn’t go anywhere. Closing it to traffic will make very little difference to traffic patterns (except for the buses, obviously). I don’t know how much the City charges for closures or how they decide whether to allow them, but if I were making those choices I would quote a relatively low price for closing Gaukel compared to a lot of other streets I can think of.

On that point, once the terminal closes, I would strongly argue for Gaukel to be closed to traffic, and instead have a greenway to the park.

That's not a new idea, but it's such a good one that I wish WRC had some sort of mechanism that would allow us to urge the City to do this, "on behalf of the over 1,000 members of WRC".
Reply
Especially when you consider that the lower part of Gaukel will likely see both sides redeveloped. Great opportunity for pedestrian-focused urbanism through here.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
(08-12-2018, 10:29 AM)KevinL Wrote: Especially when you consider that the lower part of Gaukel will likely see both sides redeveloped. Great opportunity for pedestrian-focused urbanism through here.

1000 members. All in favour of closing Gaukel and making it a pedestrian Greenway to Victoria park, say aye.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 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 user-driven content fueled 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

              Advertise