Posts: 7,583
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: (10-12-2017, 01:36 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Along the tracks, or just crossing carelessly?
I’m just curious because I can’t think of a single trip where the “best” route (ignoring rail safety and the rough terrain) involves walking along the tracks through campus. The only future exception is going between the station platform and E5, where the shorter route (and the one that should have been implemented in the plan) involves walking between the two tracks from the platform to the crossing in front of E5.
The route from UW Station to the UW Plaza (going in front of E5) is missing a direct (and level) pedestrian link, and it is not surprising at all that people would walk on the tracks in that area.
In Red is the paths you are supposed to take, as designed.
In Green are the natural paths a pedestrian will want to take.
That will be true in the future, but not today, since the station is not a destination at the moment.
I've never seen anyone walking along the tracks there, but I'm not there all that often, so it could be happening, but I don't see a reason for it right now.
When the station is open, I'm quite sure it will absolutely be a regular occurrence as people run for the train.
Posts: 419
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
32
My wife and I were also disappointed by the ION station locations in the North. The conversation evolved into the various transits faults we saw in our respective tours of action at UW, then finally into a proposed solution.
I give you: The Dumb University Monorail
At under 4km in length, this prohibitively-expensive fully-automated line would serve thousands of University students who would walk or bus anyway and have no use for higher-order transit. It connects with the UW Transit Plaza but otherwise interacts very poorly with existing and planned transit, making it a philosophical fit with our current systems. It serves the undersized Columbia Lake Townhouses, the pleasantly close UW Residences, the as-yet-unbuilt Transit Plaza, the criminally over-bussed Wilfred Laurier, and the notably dangerous University/King.
I also presume it would use its own, incompatible fare system.
What do you think?
Posts: 1,189
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2015
Reputation:
34
(10-12-2017, 01:24 PM)Canard Wrote: Hopefully, they’ll also put them up inside the University, where I endlessly see people walking on the tracks, often with headphones in, or texting.
That seems like an appropriate environment for testing, because young people walking without paying attention to their surroundings is, has been, and will always be a part of life in the university area.
Posts: 1,094
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
57
Paging Canard!! I don't have any photos unfortunately, but they've started painting crosswalks, etc, on the embedded track! Saw it at Victoria / Charles yesterday, crossing from U-Haul to the Tannery.
Posts: 10,280
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
(10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: A contributing factor is how narrow all the pedestrian paths and crossings are. They are insufficient for the volume of pedestrians. The E5 crossing is the only one that was built to an appropriate width.
I think they are about the same width as all the other Ring Road sidewalks, are they not?
Posts: 430
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
50
(10-12-2017, 02:16 PM)chutten Wrote: What do you think?
Not as ridiculous as the proposal for a 400m underground cable-hauled people-mover between the Ion stop and the University Ave bus stops.
Oh, wait, wrong city.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
@ chutten:
Your description makes me sad. I love Dortmond’s H-Bahn and the Morgantown PRT.
Posts: 7,583
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(10-12-2017, 02:49 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: A contributing factor is how narrow all the pedestrian paths and crossings are. They are insufficient for the volume of pedestrians. The E5 crossing is the only one that was built to an appropriate width.
I think they are about the same width as all the other Ring Road sidewalks, are they not?
I'm not sure of the exact width, in some places it might be the same width, but it's a totally different context. Traveling through there it's clear they're far too narrow, and in many cases awkwardly overbuilt at the same time.
Posts: 419
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
32
(10-12-2017, 03:29 PM)Canard Wrote: @ chutten: ![Sad Sad](https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/images/smilies/sad.gif)
Your description makes me sad. I love Dortmond’s H-Bahn and the Morgantown PRT.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love for it to happen. Excluding the Region, only the Universities have the money to make it a reality. I just don't have the greatest of faith even in my own designs and it's easier to poke fun at one's self than undergo years of transit planner training to figure out what would be better...
Posts: 605
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation:
78
10-12-2017, 04:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2017, 04:23 PM by KevinT.)
(10-12-2017, 01:41 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I wonder what was/will be the first actual date for live wires? I do know one thing — I won’t be testing it with a pole!
You don't have to, look for the red lights on the tops of the poles near TPSSs to be lit. You'll also see the levers on the side of the breaker boxes in the TPSS compounds in the up/red/live position instead of locked in the green/down/safe position.
...K
Posts: 605
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation:
78
(10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: The route from UW Station to the UW Plaza (going in front of E5) is missing a direct (and level) pedestrian link, and it is not surprising at all that people would walk on the tracks in that area.
In Red is the paths you are supposed to take, as designed.
In Green are the natural paths a pedestrian will want to take.
A contributing factor is how narrow all the pedestrian paths and crossings are. They are insufficient for the volume of pedestrians. The E5 crossing is the only one that was built to an appropriate width.
Interesting. That's newer imaging than I get in Google Maps satellite view in a Chrome browser on Windows, newer than Google Earth on my Galaxy S7, but the same as in Google Maps on my S7. Time to look at the OMSF in GM on the S7, maybe all the yard tracks are visible now? Nope, not for me at least.
...K
Posts: 7,583
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(10-12-2017, 04:20 PM)KevinT Wrote: (10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: The route from UW Station to the UW Plaza (going in front of E5) is missing a direct (and level) pedestrian link, and it is not surprising at all that people would walk on the tracks in that area.
In Red is the paths you are supposed to take, as designed.
In Green are the natural paths a pedestrian will want to take.
A contributing factor is how narrow all the pedestrian paths and crossings are. They are insufficient for the volume of pedestrians. The E5 crossing is the only one that was built to an appropriate width.
Interesting. That's newer imaging than I get in Google Maps satellite view in a Chrome browser on Windows, newer than Google Earth on my Galaxy S7, but the same as in Google Maps on my S7. Time to look at the OMSF in GM on the S7, maybe all the yard tracks are visible now? Nope, not for me at least. ![Sad Sad](https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/images/smilies/sad.gif)
I am also getting older imaging. I think in Google Earth you might be able to select the images you see. In streetview on desktop you can also select the age of the image to view, it is too bad they don't have a similar feature for satellite.
Posts: 605
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation:
78
10-12-2017, 04:29 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2017, 04:32 PM by KevinT.)
(10-12-2017, 02:05 PM)Markster Wrote: In Green are the natural paths a pedestrian will want to take.
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=4386]](http://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/attachment.php?aid=4386)
The problem with the green path is that there's no feasible way to make it safe. Arriving trains are decelerating in this zone and carry a lot of energy into a pedestrian collision, as do departing trains accelerating out. You'd have to spread the tracks even wider apart than they are at the platforms in order to fence in the path, with additional room (wider yet!) to squeeze in a post for the signals and crossing gate where the mid-track path tees into the red line crossing.
Not every desire line can be turned into a practical solution.
...K
Posts: 2,163
Threads: 17
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
76
Re: google maps
On desktop, if you deselect 3D imagery, you get a newer view.
(10-12-2017, 04:29 PM)KevinT Wrote: The problem with the green path is that there's no feasible way to make it safe. Arriving trains are decelerating in this zone and carry a lot of energy into a pedestrian collision, as do departing trains accelerating out. You'd have to spread the tracks even wider apart than they are at the platforms in order to fence in the path, with additional room (wider yet!) to squeeze in a post for the signals and crossing gate where the mid-track path tees into the red line crossing.
Not every desire line can be turned into a practical solution.
Then they should have a crossing to the E5 side at the station itself, and have a parallel path on that side of the rail corridor. There are no corridor constraints here. If the stormwater management pond is in the way, then they can rebuild the bridge that they tore down. There is room to have made a good pedestrian environment.
n.b. Pedestrians are already permitted to walk in the middle of the tracks elsewhere on the line (see approaches to Allen station, one of the few truly sensibly built stations). I know that's not on the rail corridor, but it still represents LRT and pedestrian mixing.
Posts: 7,583
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(10-12-2017, 04:42 PM)Markster Wrote: Re: google maps
On desktop, if you deselect 3D imagery, you get a newer view.
(10-12-2017, 04:29 PM)KevinT Wrote: The problem with the green path is that there's no feasible way to make it safe. Arriving trains are decelerating in this zone and carry a lot of energy into a pedestrian collision, as do departing trains accelerating out. You'd have to spread the tracks even wider apart than they are at the platforms in order to fence in the path, with additional room (wider yet!) to squeeze in a post for the signals and crossing gate where the mid-track path tees into the red line crossing.
Not every desire line can be turned into a practical solution.
Then they should have a crossing to the E5 side at the station itself, and have a parallel path on that side of the rail corridor. There are no corridor constraints here. If the stormwater management pond is in the way, then they can rebuild the bridge that they tore down. There is room to have made a good pedestrian environment.
n.b. Pedestrians are already permitted to walk in the middle of the tracks elsewhere on the line (see approaches to Allen station, one of the few truly sensibly built stations). I know that's not on the rail corridor, but it still represents LRT and pedestrian mixing.
The pathway to E5 on the east side of the tracks was actually in the original plan. I have no idea why it wasn't built.
|