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 - danbrotherston - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 07:54 AM)jamincan Wrote: River Road, Frederick, Benton Haha! Shocking that I of all people forgot about Frederick and Benton . Also, Homer-Watson north of Ottawa. And I mean, this list is only the clearly overbuilt roads...like roads which would see LOS A or B when reduced to 2 lanes. This is to say nothing of slightly more radical opinions like, not using only LOS to measure congestion, or *gasp* arguing that completely free flowing traffic 100% of the time achieved by having more road capacity than the free market will consume even when priced at 0 dollars should not necessarily be a societal goal. I've said many times, "government waste" people usually fake...we've got literally billions of dollars of government waste all over the region and these same anti-waste folks would throw a tantrum if you tried to stop that waste. It reminds me of when they reduced the garbage collection schedules and people would...in the same breath...complain about taxes and object to a more cost effective garbage plan being put in place. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 09:10 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-11-2022, 07:54 AM)jamincan Wrote: River Road, Frederick, Benton This is the bit I really don’t get. I understand someone thinking that cars are the best and we need to cater to people who want to drive them; but I don’t understand a so-called “engineer” who deliberately overbuilds things at massive expense, thus incurring further increased maintenance expenses. I mean the first person is wrong, but the second person just makes no sense at all. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 10:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(07-11-2022, 09:10 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Haha! Shocking that I of all people forgot about Frederick and Benton . I don't know how to describe it...but I think I've experienced it. Before I became...for lack of a better term, radicalized...I too dreamt of networks of perfect wide roads connecting every part of the city easily and efficiently. I mean, we do the same thing here with transit networks. I suspect that is the same reason engineers want to do it for roads. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 10:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(07-11-2022, 09:10 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Haha! Shocking that I of all people forgot about Frederick and Benton . Because those engineers were taught that such road s were *not* over engineered. They were taught that it was *necessary* to be that big and that wide and that straight for roads to be safe, and all across North America the standards to which they must adhere to were written in that same era even though anybody with an ounce of keeping current knows how much stuff like that has been shown to do the opposite of keep things safe. Even if an civil engineer is young enough to have been taught the new data, they still have to adhere to those standards or what they design will just get thrown in the trash. Also, plenty of them are just unimaginative pencil pushers who just accept what the manuals say without questioning why they haven't been updated with the new data, which is kinda odd because engineering is supposed to be a culture of continuous learning for your entire career, why you need to under go regular testing to keep your certifications "current". RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 03:59 PM)Bytor Wrote:(07-11-2022, 10:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: This is the bit I really don’t get. I understand someone thinking that cars are the best and we need to cater to people who want to drive them; but I don’t understand a so-called “engineer” who deliberately overbuilds things at massive expense, thus incurring further increased maintenance expenses. I mean the first person is wrong, but the second person just makes no sense at all. I think two things are being conflated here...over-engineered roads are different from overbuilt roads as we are discussing here. Roads that are too wide, with too large corner radii are "over-engineered". Roads that are overbuilt have too many lanes for the traffic they carry. Like Westmount Rd. is extremely narrow...it is definitely not "over-engineered" but it is over built because it has four lanes. Most of our roads are both however, and both cause problems and wasteful spending. But your argument is true for road engineering--the standards the region sets are excessive. But the choice to build four lane roads where they are not necessary is a policy choice...not an engineering choice--there are no standards requiring Highland Rd. to be four lanes. Engineers do have guides and standards that they use to try justify these decisions it is even more vague and handwavey than road standards, and if council directed them to, no engineer would put up an engineering fuss about building narrower roads like they do about deviating from "engineering standards". Even more however, even by the standards the engineers use for roads the road we are discussing are actually still over built. Even by the most aggressive traffic modelling Highland Rd. does not justify four lanes. The choice to build four lanes is a policy choice from engineers who like building four lane roads. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - bravado - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 04:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The choice to build four lanes is a policy choice from engineers who like building four lane roads. I'm definitely not an engineer or involved in this at all but I am curious about this: Do engineers just design things with outdated doctrine and pass that on to politicians? or: Do politicians make lazy demands for wide roads that engineers just go along with, and leave the costs to future politicians/generations? If it is option 2, what's the point of having professionals that we are supposed to respect for their expertise? A politician might personally like a wasteful left-turn lane (or whatever), but I expect professionals to explain why it is a bad idea and for that to be adopted over the whims of a councillor. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 04:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-11-2022, 03:59 PM)Bytor Wrote: Because those engineers were taught that such road s were *not* over engineered. They were taught that it was *necessary* to be that big and that wide and that straight for roads to be safe, and all across North America the standards to which they must adhere to were written in that same era even though anybody with an ounce of keeping current knows how much stuff like that has been shown to do the opposite of keep things safe. I understand the differentiation that you are trying to make, but the source is still the same—adherence to manuals and standards that are out of date, through either being required to adhere by the employer or by pencil pushers unable to think independently. Whether that is "An AADT of 20,000 requires 4 lanes" (overbuilt) or "a residential road needs to be 50k/h and thus 13m from curb to curb with 2x3.5m travel lanes and 2x3m parking lanes" (over-engineered), the cause is the same. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 07-11-2022 (07-11-2022, 11:50 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-11-2022, 10:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: This is the bit I really don’t get. I understand someone thinking that cars are the best and we need to cater to people who want to drive them; but I don’t understand a so-called “engineer” who deliberately overbuilds things at massive expense, thus incurring further increased maintenance expenses. I mean the first person is wrong, but the second person just makes no sense at all. But you then you grew up and learned things, including but not limited to the fact that big wide roads are expensive. Engineers are supposed to be all about tradeoffs: in modern engineering, every component of every bridge is built just strong enough (plus a safety factor) to support the loads that particular component will experience. We don’t just pile up huge amounts of stone so that there is no possible way the bridge will collapse. If an engineer insisted on using 8 gauge wire everywhere in a house, they wouldn’t get very far. But apparently putting in 4-lane roads all over the place even where the traffic doesn’t come close to justifying it is just A-OK. Why are road engineers allowed to be 12 year olds? (no disrespect intended to 12 year olds; but thinking that is perfectly fine in a 12 year old isn’t necessarily OK for an adult) And yes, I remember being similar: on at least one occasion I drew up a subdivision plan which just had a whole bunch of houses connected to a freeway interchange. And at one time I thought office buildings should have one parking spot per employee, too. I was just thinking of the convenience when driving, not about the costs. So it’s not just you. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-12-2022 (07-11-2022, 05:06 PM)Bytor Wrote:(07-11-2022, 04:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I think two things are being conflated here...over-engineered roads are different from overbuilt roads as we are discussing here. But this simply isn't true. There are no manuals no standards at the region, at the province, at a national level that require a road like Highland Rd. to have four lanes. This was fully acknowledged by regional staff. They said they prefer four lanes without any justification beyond a preference for four lane roads. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-12-2022 (07-11-2022, 04:59 PM)bravado Wrote:(07-11-2022, 04:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The choice to build four lanes is a policy choice from engineers who like building four lane roads. I think it is largely the first. Although you might want to be clearer about "doctrine". But FWIW...council isn't pushing back either. Leaving aside the original discussion of road expansion and overbuilding, and looking at higher level policies, we built a transportation plan and so did the city of Waterloo recently, and despite climate emergencies, climate plans, and a full awareness of the issues, no staff member, no council member, and few members of the public were willing to even mention let alone question the underlying assumptions of those plans...that VMT increases over time. It is treated as a universal law of the world, as much as geometry or physics. The next battle to fight with the region and council will be to accept that VMT increasing is not a natural law that policy must work around, but instead is a direct result of that policy, and can be changed by choosing different policy. Ultimately, we could fight and force the region to be more fiscally responsible with road building and that wouldn't be a bad thing. The way we build roads is incredibly wasteful, even in a world where you plan for increasing VMT. But to me, it isn't worth fighting anymore, because its a "win the battle, lose the war" situation. The thing that must change to meaningfully change our policy is the underlying VMT assumption. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-12-2022 (07-11-2022, 07:00 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(07-11-2022, 11:50 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: I don't know how to describe it...but I think I've experienced it. This is a good question. Although one possibly relevant thing I've learned in the past 2-4 years or so...traffic engineers are far from the only or most egregious examples of people not growing up. Look no further than the tantrums around vaccination to find truly toddler-esque adults. It is easy to set standards for say...structural engineering. You can model a building or a bridge, estimate the dead and live loads, see the transfer of forces. It all follows a natural model. The same is much harder, or even untrue for roads. You are modelling human behaviour, which unlike the forces of our universe, respond to our policies. If you build a bridge under strength, the force of gravity will not reduce to compensate. If you build a road with "too narrow" lanes the humans operating vehicles on it will slow down to compensate. I'd argue that most fields of engineering lack a focus on human factors engineering--one only needs to try and use my washer to understand this, but few other fields have such a devastating impact on people and cities because of that lack of focus. It's interesting, you look at the cockpit of an airplane, and you see ugly switches and dials everywhere, it looks like no designer has ever looked at a plane. It certainly is not as sleek and beautiful as the interior of a Tesla. And yet, the airplane controls are designed extremely intentionally and extremely carefully in order to minimize user errors. Down to things like buttons which felt too similar and caused crashes when pilots actuated the wrong ones, are redesigned to be different. But rarely is that attention paid in automobiles, the Tesla with it's screens being a prime example. So...not just traffic engineers. Heck, since this is the ION thread, go look at the driver's cab of the ION. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - neonjoe - 07-12-2022 The widths of our roads are as much a planning exercise as an engineering exercise. The planners have a large impact on whether the road can suffice as a two lane road or needs to be four lanes. One decision like allowing a Costco at the edge of town an impact traffic significantly. One recent memory of a new road that was built with the right capacity but quickly was overwhelmed was Ira Needles. It started as a two lane roadway and in less than 5 years was rebuilt as a 4 lane road. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-12-2022 (07-12-2022, 07:00 AM)neonjoe Wrote: The widths of our roads are as much a planning exercise as an engineering exercise. The planners have a large impact on whether the road can suffice as a two lane road or needs to be four lanes. One decision like allowing a Costco at the edge of town an impact traffic significantly. One recent memory of a new road that was built with the right capacity but quickly was overwhelmed was Ira Needles. It started as a two lane roadway and in less than 5 years was rebuilt as a 4 lane road. "Planning exercise".... You mean land use planning? The thing is, that's not how it's planned. At least at a regional level--I don't think the cities do any better. The region's transportation plan was developed in isolation. They took what they believed would be the development pattern, and used that as gospel. Engineers were very explicit, the scope of work did not include asking about the land use plan. Which is insane, because now we are developing a regional plan that...god willing...will not align with the transportation plan that they are implementing. The Ira Needles incident was...unfortunate. I think an overreaction, or rather, reaction to complaints. They widened a road without widening the intersections. This does not increase the road capacity, all it does is permit impatient drivers to recklessly filter around slower drivers. The road was built as four lanes, but was only paved 2 wide to save money. That's why widening it was so easy. They claim development happened faster than expected but realistically I think the novelty of the roundabouts, the unusual traffic patterns they general (slow down at every intersection) was foreign to people, they perceived it as "excessive congestion" and complained to council, who then demanded that staff "fix" the non-problem, which they did by spending money widening pavements for no value, and then were angry and bitter about it after that. I have no doubt that this kind of thing is what leads them to have a "preference" for four lanes, because unlike building unsafe, deadly infrastructure which kills people, the environment, and our city, this kind of apparent "blunder" is the thing that makes heads roll in the city. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - neonjoe - 07-12-2022 (07-12-2022, 09:17 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:You're not wrong. I do believe though that this is another one of the cases where having separate tiers of government causes more miscommunication where the planning doesn't match the transportation etc. Normally I would say the region does a slightly better job building more realistic roads and widening when the 'demand' comes. A road that come to mind include Fisher Hallman between Ottawa and Bleams, it opened in 2000 as a two lane road and was only widened in 2016. On the other hand the city rebuilt Huron Road with four lanes during the same era and it still never seems busy.(07-12-2022, 07:00 AM)neonjoe Wrote: The widths of our roads are as much a planning exercise as an engineering exercise. The planners have a large impact on whether the road can suffice as a two lane road or needs to be four lanes. One decision like allowing a Costco at the edge of town an impact traffic significantly. One recent memory of a new road that was built with the right capacity but quickly was overwhelmed was Ira Needles. It started as a two lane roadway and in less than 5 years was rebuilt as a 4 lane road. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - plam - 07-12-2022 (07-11-2022, 04:59 PM)bravado Wrote:(07-11-2022, 04:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The choice to build four lanes is a policy choice from engineers who like building four lane roads. Speaking of option 2, sometimes a municipal council says they want the thing that's not good enough, the engineer doesn't push back, and then the engineer gets a disciplinary hearing and charges. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/engineer-designed-bridge-collapsed-facing-discipline-1.6450110 |