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:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 2.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trails
More than you know - I trimmed that clip short! Big Grin
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
Any idea why I keep seeing people walking or running along the non-existent shoulder of Bearinger Rd beside the conservation area at night? It's incredibly dangerous, and the MUT is only 25 feet away. Is it a design issue? The trail entrance is over 300 feet up Laurelwood Dr and there's a paved path that basically leads right to Bearinger around the stormwater runoff area on the corner. I've even seen people walking along Bearinger with their kids, and I assume they came from the library.

[Image: 0MAj1Vc.png]
Reply
(10-01-2017, 06:33 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(10-01-2017, 06:19 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: So, the IHT now ends at the sidewalk on Ottawa St. with a grass boulevard and a barrier curb.  

Who exactly is building this nonsense?

But there is no trail across the street, is there?

No, but there is a street, and as a cyclist, I'm legally required to ride there and not on the sidewalk, and yet, the infrastructure is forcing me to break the law.
Reply
(10-01-2017, 09:06 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Any idea why I keep seeing people walking or running along the non-existent shoulder of Bearinger Rd beside the conservation area at night? It's incredibly dangerous, and the MUT is only 25 feet away. Is it a design issue? The trail entrance is over 300 feet up Laurelwood Dr and there's a paved path that basically leads right to Bearinger around the stormwater runoff area on the corner. I've even seen people walking along Bearinger with their kids, and I assume they came from the library.

It's a design issue, nobody knows that trail is there unless you look in advance from Google Maps, or happen to know the area. From the north end, it's maybe slightly visible, from the other, it's totally hidden. And from both directions, it's not obvious the trail follows the road.

It's something that could be easily fixed if someone took the time.
Reply
Another local project to be funded through the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF): Farmers Market Trail Feasibility Study and Detailed Design. The trail would follow the rail right-of-way from the farmers market to Northfield ION station in stage 1, while stage 2 would continue to the R&T ION station. The study needs to be completed by March 31, 2018 to qualify for the funding.

   
Reply
(10-02-2017, 03:06 PM)highlander Wrote: Another local project to be funded through the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF): Farmers Market Trail Feasibility Study and Detailed Design. The trail would follow the rail right-of-way from the farmers market to Northfield ION station in stage 1, while stage 2 would continue to the R&T ION station. The study needs to be completed by March 31, 2018 to qualify for the funding.

Looks like a nice alternative to riding to the back of Walmart and into the parking lot of RDM and the other places at the end of Kumpf drive.
Reply
(10-02-2017, 03:42 PM)clasher Wrote:
(10-02-2017, 03:06 PM)highlander Wrote: Another local project to be funded through the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF): Farmers Market Trail Feasibility Study and Detailed Design. The trail would follow the rail right-of-way from the farmers market to Northfield ION station in stage 1, while stage 2 would continue to the R&T ION station. The study needs to be completed by March 31, 2018 to qualify for the funding.

Looks like a nice alternative to riding to the back of Walmart and into the parking lot of RDM and the other places at the end of Kumpf drive.

The existing trails should be retained as additional routes in the network, even though through traffic will presumably take the new more direct route.

I took a quick look at the route in Google Maps and it appears that it should be possible hug the west side of the railway all the way from R&T park up to the market, with the most likely possible problem being a lack of space just south of Northfield station. Although I think the path should continue up to King St. north of the market, which would provide better access to the different parts of the market than if the trail stops at St. Jacobs market road.

Very promising! I hope we see this trail before too long.
Reply
The hybrid alternative 2/3 from the IHT to hub was approved.
[/url]
[url=http://view.earthchannel.com/PlayerController.aspx?PGD=waterlooonca&eID=407]Interesting debate
.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
Is there a map or diagram of what they are going ahead with?
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
That trail proposal partially overlaps the current Laurel trail routing from Columbia to near Bearinger. So the stage 2 would not add whole lot of trail meters to the current network but it would be great to see.
Reply
This was the approved route, but keep in mind this is the idealized planned route, the actual route that will be built for now will detour down Joseph to Victoria:
   


Staff were directed to report back annually on progress on other routes to the hub, so that was good to see.

The one issue I had with the discussion that took place at committee yesterday was the characterization that it wasn't that big of a time penalty for users.

They were comparing the alternative 1 and alternative 2/3 options and said that the difference was about 300m.

By my measurement 1a is 1.3km, and 2/3 is 1.7km as planned, and 1.9km as it will first be built.

The difference is 600m not 300m. So in the example they gave of a 10kph cyclist taking an extra 100 seconds would actually be 216 extra seconds which is nearly 50% of the travel time. That would be like asking a motorist to take a 3km detour.

In reality though it is kind of an apples/oranges comparison because they really aren't alternatives to each other (e.g. if both were ever built someone approaching from the north would never bypass the direct route (1) for the hybrid (2/3), and someone approaching from the south would probably never bypass alternative 2/3 and keep going to alternative 1).
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
I’m confused (sorry) - so is your diagram what will be built?
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
Basically it will follow the planned route until Joseph.
   

At Joseph they are going to build a new sidewalk along west side of Joseph from GEXR line south to Victoria and mark the lanes of that section of Joseph with sharrows.  Pedestrians will then follow the sidewalks on Victoria to the hub and cyclists are supposed to use the "already...marked shared cycling facilities".

I am trying to picture what they mean by shared cycling facilities on Victoria, but am drawing a blank. I don't recall bike lanes and as of the last aerial photos in Google there were no sharrows - unless they added them after Ion construction.

I guess it is a bit disingenuous to call this route entirely off-road - only the planned route meets that definition, the interim solution will involve some on-street sections for cyclists on Joseph and Victoria.

"The sidewalk connection to Joseph Street is an interim measure to connect the proposed trail to Victoria Street, pending property discussions to complete the trail to King Street. This will help fill in the walking and cycling network, as Joseph Street south of Victoria Street already has sidewalks and marked shared cycling facilities."
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(10-05-2017, 06:36 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: ...

I am trying to picture what they mean by shared cycling facilities on Victoria, but am drawing a blank. I don't recall bike lanes and as of the last aerial photos in Google there were no sharrows - unless they added them after Ion construction.

I guess it is a bit disingenuous to call this route entirely off-road - only the planned route meets that definition, the interim solution will involve some on-street sections for cyclists on Joseph and Victoria.

"The sidewalk connection to Joseph Street is an interim measure to connect the proposed trail to Victoria Street, pending property discussions to complete the trail to King Street. This will help fill in the walking and cycling network, as Joseph Street south of Victoria Street already has sidewalks and marked shared cycling facilities."

There are no shared use facilities on Victoria, they are only on Joseph, continuing south to DT.  The most generous thing I can say about this "interim" route is that the 200 iXpress stop which the transit hub replaces is at Joseph and Victoria.

It isn't the only interim portion of the route, I don't believe they plan to build the Waverly MUT initially either, so it will be on road for that section.  Given that it's a delayed part, I have some doubt that it will be built in a time fashion, or ever.

I wish they would have improved the infra on Victoria, it's a major road with many destinations, but is an ugly unpleasant and dangerous traffic sewer right now.
Reply
A couple of notes from a bike ride this afternoon:


The sidewalk on the West side of King, just South of Conestogo, was signed as a "Shared Pathway"/MUT. The subtle addition of an arrow nudges people onto the (now complete) fully paved MUT on the West side of the road:

For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)