ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version +- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com) +-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14) +--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25) +--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
|
RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bob_McBob - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 01:02 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: In this case I have no hesitation in calling out the planning process as incompetent because the existence of “desire lines” was evident in aerial photography available to everybody, from politicians to designers to every armchair critic in the world, by just taking a look at Google Maps. If the people responsible for planning major infrastructure can’t be bothered to take a quick look at the aerial photography before proceeding with detailed design, then they are negligent in their duty to the public. Theoretically I always knew it would be obvious, but looking at the aerial imagery just makes me that much more pissed off about how this situation was created. I count well over a dozen desire paths leading to businesses in the plazas, as well as an actual trail crossing the hydro corridor. The icing on the cake is the access point behind the Shoppers, which had an groomed trail, ramp, and pedestrian crossing marked in the parking lot, but now leads to a fence. I don't believe any planner looked at this area and thought moving the trail to the other side of the hydro corridor and completely cutting off access to the businesses was an acceptable solution. They just didn't care. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - jeffster - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 09:21 AM)jamincan Wrote: For what it's worth, this is apparently from staff involved in setting up the walkway: Ok, so you wonder why those chose that style -- they could have choses a different type of fencing, something more like a railing that is 30-40" high or was CTC against that? It seems like this style of fencing is the cheapest route -- as is the decking leading up to the crossing. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - jeffster - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 03:51 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote:(05-05-2020, 01:02 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: In this case I have no hesitation in calling out the planning process as incompetent because the existence of “desire lines” was evident in aerial photography available to everybody, from politicians to designers to every armchair critic in the world, by just taking a look at Google Maps. If the people responsible for planning major infrastructure can’t be bothered to take a quick look at the aerial photography before proceeding with detailed design, then they are negligent in their duty to the public. Not sure if I understand you correctly, but I believe the spot they choose was ideal because it was close to low-cost groceries with Food Basic -- they also have a pharmacy, close to the LCBO, Dollarama and PetSmart. These are the places that most of the people would use who need to require. Those by the two large apartments can still walk to Shoppers quickly if they want to, and the walking distance to the other shops are unchanged. You can argue they should have had two crossings though. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 02:35 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(05-05-2020, 01:47 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I would argue that the LRT planning process was generally conducted in a competent fashion, especially given the political and financial constraints. They were not perfect and missed some things (such as this one) and we may disagree with some of their decisions, but I think calling the entire planning process incompetent is a bit much. Yes, I do agree that they did not do well with bicycling infra; pedestrian was better but they did miss the Traynor crossing, and some of the platform layouts are not conducive to legal pedestrian usage. But the reality is that (particularly) the cities' and (to a lesser extent) the region's priorities were to minimize vehicular impact: witness the contortions, for example, to protect parking on King St. But this is the reality of municipal politics in North America, and we really shouldn't blame the LRT planning team for those priorities. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 03:51 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Theoretically I always knew it would be obvious, but looking at the aerial imagery just makes me that much more pissed off about how this situation was created. I count well over a dozen desire paths leading to businesses in the plazas, as well as an actual trail crossing the hydro corridor. The icing on the cake is the access point behind the Shoppers, which had an groomed trail, ramp, and pedestrian crossing marked in the parking lot, but now leads to a fence. I don't believe any planner looked at this area and thought moving the trail to the other side of the hydro corridor and completely cutting off access to the businesses was an acceptable solution. They just didn't care. My question is, who determined what crossings were needed? Whose responsibility was it? Were these given to the planning team as requirements, or was the planning team just told to figure out what crossings were necessary? This is an honest question, I have no idea what the planning team's terms of reference were. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 01:47 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(05-05-2020, 01:02 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: If the LRT planning process had been conducted in a competent fashion, the need for crossings (multiple) in that stretch would have been identified during the environmental assessment process, and appropriate crossings included in the final design for construction. I actually agree that overall the process was mostly OK. But certain screw-ups are big enough to deserve being called out. Note too that in this particular case, they had several years after construction began to fix it before the LRT opened, so even after screwing up in the first place, it should have been fixed; if that had happened, I would be much more forgiving, because anybody can make a mistake, even a really dumb one (I’ve made some humdingers myself). This is what convinces me that the relevant people did not care. A related example is how long the trail beside the tracks between University and Seagram was closed — many months, even though the effect of the LRT work on the route only lasted a few weeks. If they cared about bicyclists, they would have minimized the closure, just as they routinely did for road work. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - plam - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 04:47 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Yes, I do agree that they did not do well with bicycling infra; pedestrian was better but they did miss the Traynor crossing, and some of the platform layouts are not conducive to legal pedestrian usage. If I recall my conversation with the Regional staff correctly, they were actually pushing for no-split through Uptown Waterloo and got overruled by council(s). But they are going to take that experience and use it as ammunition in the Cambridge extension. We can all collaborate together to make things that are not optimal... RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 04:51 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(05-05-2020, 03:51 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Theoretically I always knew it would be obvious, but looking at the aerial imagery just makes me that much more pissed off about how this situation was created. I count well over a dozen desire paths leading to businesses in the plazas, as well as an actual trail crossing the hydro corridor. The icing on the cake is the access point behind the Shoppers, which had an groomed trail, ramp, and pedestrian crossing marked in the parking lot, but now leads to a fence. I don't believe any planner looked at this area and thought moving the trail to the other side of the hydro corridor and completely cutting off access to the businesses was an acceptable solution. They just didn't care. "Who determined"...it doesn't matter who determined...if someone gives you requirements, and you can see that they are wrong, you should tell them about it...even if it isn't your job. As Bob_McBob said, apathy is the problem. What really bugs me at a regional level is they release all these planning and vision documents that have nice platitudes like the goal should be choice of transportation options, and limiting climate change is essential. And today, at council they received a report about the ~100 million dollars to be spent on road widenings in the next two years. That isn't a choice policy, that's a car policy. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 09:13 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(05-05-2020, 04:51 PM)tomh009 Wrote: My question is, who determined what crossings were needed? Whose responsibility was it? Were these given to the planning team as requirements, or was the planning team just told to figure out what crossings were necessary? Of course you can tell people about that. But if you have no authority to set the requirements, you can't change them. Same in my job, maybe also in yours. I am not saying this was not a problem. I am simply asking whether it was the LRT planners at fault, or someone else. It's easy to blame the planning team, but were they the actual decision-makers? RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 05-05-2020 (05-05-2020, 09:20 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(05-05-2020, 09:13 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: "Who determined"...it doesn't matter who determined...if someone gives you requirements, and you can see that they are wrong, you should tell them about it...even if it isn't your job. As Bob_McBob said, apathy is the problem. I know that people like the idea of an ultimate authority is appealing to people, but in my experience it isn't usually reflective of actual decision making, at the scale our region operates (and the scale my company operates), virtually every decision is collaborative, there's not usually one person, there's dozens, or hundreds, or thousands, and I don't mean people working together, everyone is pulling just a little bit in their own direction. An organization functions better or worse depending on how much those folks are in sync, pulling in the same direction, and that's not a constant, it can be different for every decision. For cars, the region is all pulling in sync. For other infra, not so much. You can even see it in our council, which is, intentionally not an authoritarian dictatorship, you have different councillors all with their own values trying to pull things a bit. Then listen to staff, the same thing is happening there. So yeah, everyone has a little bit of power--some more than others, but most staff and most councillors are not pulling towards walkability or cycleability. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 05-06-2020 One part about the consultation is that it basically stopped once a private contractor (GrandLinq) was selected. At that point the design was still relatively abstract; finer details like pedestrian crossings and bike lanes weren't factored in. Had they continued to get public input while GL was finalizing the designs, oversights like this could have been avoided. But it seems they wrote the contract to avoid having the private partner deal with all that. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 05-06-2020 Probably those details should have been worked out before locking in the contractor, the schedule and the price. But political imperatives may have dictated the speed at which the consortium was selected. Happens way too often in software, too. And you pay for it afterward. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - robdrimmie - 05-06-2020 (05-06-2020, 11:21 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Happens way too often in software, too. And you pay for it afterward. See also http://www.grteasygofarecard.ca RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 05-07-2020 Oh, yes, a great example. There were some implementation issues to be sure, but I think the fundamental problem was that the use cases were not well thought out and the requirements not well written. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 05-07-2020 (05-07-2020, 09:03 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Oh, yes, a great example. There were some implementation issues to be sure, but I think the fundamental problem was that the use cases were not well thought out and the requirements not well written. Requirements are a difficult thing, the requirements were probably in many ways overspecified, and in other ways under specified, and nobody was interested in the end solution or the user experience, they were merely focused on the requirements. It's also clear the vendor has not met the requirements. |