02-10-2019, 12:50 AM
The record has a writeup of the changes:
https://www.therecord.com/news-story/916...ing-lanes/
Few things....I'm really tired of regional staff claiming "ATAC supports an idea", after presenting a different idea to us, again, they proposed steel bollards, and said they didn't want flex bollards, and also, weren't suggesting a no-stopping zone. This isn't the worst one, because I (mostly) don't care about the changes, but other times, it has been far far more egregious.
Tenille congratulated the region on listening to feedback: "I think the region has done a really good job listening to community feedback," said Tenille Bonoguore, the city councillor for uptown Waterloo."
But I think that's highly generous. This took an enormous amount of advocacy for them to do the study--and I cannot emphasis this enough, the article mentions the parking protected bike lanes, but it ignores official motions from the City of Waterloo, and regional ATAC committees. And it's not like they immediately agreed there were problems, staff repeatedly defended this design both at ATAC and at CoW, arguing it was just fine.
The study was proposed, I believe, because staff did not believe there was a problem, and wanted to prove it, when the results came back, staff were, and I quote, "shocked" to find out that those who actually use the lanes are right about the problems with the lanes. They also refuse to reconsider what most cyclists believe are the biggest design flaws (the roll curbs), and are instead implementing a different improvement--again, I don't care, because I think it will fix the problems, but they're hardly responsive to community feedback.
Lets not sugar coat this, I believe regional staff are a major obstacle to safe biking infra in the region. In this case, they have acknowledged a problem and are proposing to correct it, which is an improvement, when generally they disregard community input and continue to advocate for dangerous designs, but they did not get here on their own, they still had to be pushed very hard.
I'm also shocked by the cost. 250k to put in bollards...how many bollards are we talking here? And keep in mind, if they had used a barrier curb, chances are good, there would be zero added cost. Also worth keeping in mind that the only barely reasonable justification for roll curbs (to allow those with accessibility issues to cross the road anywhere--something that is apparently not needed south of the tracks), ONLY applies in uptown, north of Spring St., there is zero justification for roll curbs, and no reason to incur the extra cost of bollards. There was some hand waving about "consistency" which is absolutely absurd, given the road change greatly, and like...this bike lane is already one of a kind...
Regardless, it's a good news story, but the fight to get here is indicative of so many ingrained problems at the regional level.
https://www.therecord.com/news-story/916...ing-lanes/
Few things....I'm really tired of regional staff claiming "ATAC supports an idea", after presenting a different idea to us, again, they proposed steel bollards, and said they didn't want flex bollards, and also, weren't suggesting a no-stopping zone. This isn't the worst one, because I (mostly) don't care about the changes, but other times, it has been far far more egregious.
Tenille congratulated the region on listening to feedback: "I think the region has done a really good job listening to community feedback," said Tenille Bonoguore, the city councillor for uptown Waterloo."
But I think that's highly generous. This took an enormous amount of advocacy for them to do the study--and I cannot emphasis this enough, the article mentions the parking protected bike lanes, but it ignores official motions from the City of Waterloo, and regional ATAC committees. And it's not like they immediately agreed there were problems, staff repeatedly defended this design both at ATAC and at CoW, arguing it was just fine.
The study was proposed, I believe, because staff did not believe there was a problem, and wanted to prove it, when the results came back, staff were, and I quote, "shocked" to find out that those who actually use the lanes are right about the problems with the lanes. They also refuse to reconsider what most cyclists believe are the biggest design flaws (the roll curbs), and are instead implementing a different improvement--again, I don't care, because I think it will fix the problems, but they're hardly responsive to community feedback.
Lets not sugar coat this, I believe regional staff are a major obstacle to safe biking infra in the region. In this case, they have acknowledged a problem and are proposing to correct it, which is an improvement, when generally they disregard community input and continue to advocate for dangerous designs, but they did not get here on their own, they still had to be pushed very hard.
I'm also shocked by the cost. 250k to put in bollards...how many bollards are we talking here? And keep in mind, if they had used a barrier curb, chances are good, there would be zero added cost. Also worth keeping in mind that the only barely reasonable justification for roll curbs (to allow those with accessibility issues to cross the road anywhere--something that is apparently not needed south of the tracks), ONLY applies in uptown, north of Spring St., there is zero justification for roll curbs, and no reason to incur the extra cost of bollards. There was some hand waving about "consistency" which is absolutely absurd, given the road change greatly, and like...this bike lane is already one of a kind...
Regardless, it's a good news story, but the fight to get here is indicative of so many ingrained problems at the regional level.