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 - 08-17-2016 That moment where concrete ties become wooden. I mean, I guess it had to happen somewhere. I still find it strange they end up using both. This is looking across King towards the passage that lets trains continue down the spur line. I recall at the Spur Line Trail meeting, the city indicating their hopes that the rail line would be shifted slightly north (left in this picture) to allow the trail to continue through here. The picture shows that there is indeed space (just barely), and you can see the tracks shift to the north side at the end of the passage, but are towards the middle in the foreground where they enter the passage. Seems unnecessary to have them positioned there, I suppose they could still move, but it doesn't look like they will. I am not surprised about this, given that the city is twice removed from those actually doing the work. I did express my frustration at the idea in the original meeting. I felt that even if the rails could be moved, the trail would be tight through there. I felt that the "temporary" (now looking less temporary) "routing" of the trail down Regina and onto Willis Way should be considered permanent and room in the budget should be made to implement a proper trail connection that people would actually feel safe using. I didn't think they should count on being able to actually move the freight alignment, although I suppose we still have some time to go on this. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - zanate - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 12:06 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I did express my frustration at the idea in the original meeting. I felt that even if the rails could be moved, the trail would be tight through there. I felt that the "temporary" (now looking less temporary) "routing" of the trail down Regina and onto Willis Way should be considered permanent and room in the budget should be made to implement a proper trail connection that people would actually feel safe using. I didn't think they should count on being able to actually move the freight alignment, although I suppose we still have some time to go on this. My recollection of spur trail planning is different. ISTR finding out from staff that the gap between those buildings was rail only and the spur trail would never officially use it, that it would route down to Willis Way officially, but (nudge nudge wink wink) of course they couldn't stop people from filtering through the more direct way even if it's technically trespassing. I don't remember hearing anything about shifting rails and the idea surprises me, because rail cars are often quite a bit wider than the rails on which they sit, so clearance is an issue. So, I'm not expecting much here. Also, isn't there a footpath along the parking garage next to the button factory? Surprised that this hasn't become the official trail route, but I guess it's a challenge to cross King. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 01:09 PM)zanate Wrote: My recollection of spur trail planning is different. ISTR finding out from staff that the gap between those buildings was rail only and the spur trail would never officially use it, that it would route down to Willis Way officially, but (nudge nudge wink wink) of course they couldn't stop people from filtering through the more direct way even if it's technically trespassing. I don't remember hearing anything about shifting rails and the idea surprises me, because rail cars are often quite a bit wider than the rails on which they sit, so clearance is an issue. *shrugs*...I wouldn't be surprised if staff didn't all have their stories straight. Remember also "staff" is an ambiguous term. At the meeting, I heard this from city staff directly, not region staff. As for space, I realize that rail cars are wider, but look at the positioning of the trail at the far end of the passage. It is clearly closer to the north building than the south. If you take a closer look (in person), if you give an equal buffer on the south side of the track as the north side has from the building, there is still about 2 meters of space between that and the next building. Narrow to be sure, but something staff would probably consider feasible. However, at the entrance, since the rail is in the middle between the two buildings, there is not sufficient space for a trail. The adjustment staff stated specifically they wanted was for the rail to be moved closer to the north building, as it is at the other end. There is a gap at the parking garage, but it is also quite narrow, one end is in the middle of a bus stop, the other end is in the middle of a parking lot, not exactly the best place for a bike/ped path. Although crossing King and Regina there are no more difficult than crossing at the rail line. Quite frankly, the Willis Way route is not a bad compromise, especially given that it has lights at King. But it needed to be built properly. The access at the City Hall is decent, but the crossing of Regina is wanting. The bigger problem is, that there is a very large percentage of the population who are uncomfortable riding on a road, even a quieter one like Willis Way. The lack of connections between our pieces of infrastructure I think is one of the biggest obstacles our bike network faces. But I realize this is getting off topic...so just to bring it back...I hope that connections between buses and LRT work better than connections between the Spur Line and Iron Horse Trail. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bureaucromancer - 08-17-2016 It seems like the proper solution would be to consider that section equivalent to street running, sign the hell out of it and acknowledge that the risk is quite manageable for a pedestrian path with the level of use the spur actually gets. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 01:54 PM)Bureaucromancer Wrote: It seems like the proper solution would be to consider that section equivalent to street running, sign the hell out of it and acknowledge that the risk is quite manageable for a pedestrian path with the level of use the spur actually gets. This would be my suggestion except that I don't think it will work for bikes, because riding along the tracks, even embedded in asphalt is really risky, especially in a confined corridor. You could possibly split bikes from peds at the intersection further back, but there still must be accommodation for people on bikes who aren't comfortable riding on the road. Also, there's railway rules and all that jazz, quite frankly, I'm already impressed they managed to get the spur line trail within the rules without a big fence. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 01:54 PM)Bureaucromancer Wrote: It seems like the proper solution would be to consider that section equivalent to street running, sign the hell out of it and acknowledge that the risk is quite manageable for a pedestrian path with the level of use the spur actually gets. Two words: Transport Canada. Street running heavy rail will never be a thing again, anywhere. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - GtwoK - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 11:02 AM)Canard Wrote: What did the poles look like? What diameter? Was there a mounting flange on top? Only got a brief glance at them while walking past. Looked to be maybe 8" across. The inner diameter was much smaller, maybe 3 or 4". Don't remember if there was flange on top, but looked like they may have been connecting them , possibly with pipe or wire of some sort? Here's a crude drawing RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 08-17-2016 I would say those are surely for bollards. Look in the background of your image, the intersection side of the crosswalk: every light stripe has a spot for a bollard, and this would envelop the last of the brick crosswalks in downtown. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - GtwoK - 08-17-2016 Doh, how did I not notice that when making the image? That being said, why have we never seen them used? RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 08-17-2016 There's never been much in the way of events large enough to need to close off *THAT* much of King Street, aside from perhaps an expanded version of the two weeks (?) they had it closed 1 or 2 summers back for event-a-day car-free-ness. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - isUsername - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 02:40 PM)Canard Wrote:(08-17-2016, 01:54 PM)Bureaucromancer Wrote: It seems like the proper solution would be to consider that section equivalent to street running, sign the hell out of it and acknowledge that the risk is quite manageable for a pedestrian path with the level of use the spur actually gets. I can't believe this is still a thing in the U.S.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFk-yeGHn-o RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 01:56 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(08-17-2016, 01:54 PM)Bureaucromancer Wrote: It seems like the proper solution would be to consider that section equivalent to street running, sign the hell out of it and acknowledge that the risk is quite manageable for a pedestrian path with the level of use the spur actually gets. Put the pedestrian path in the middle, between the rails and extending out to approximately the ends of the ties. Put bicycle lanes outside of that. Mark clearly. Done. And/or use gap fillers to fill in the flange space. This is a problem that can be solved technically fairly easily, with some creativity. In the event bureaucrats (Transport Canada) get in the way, officially have the trail detour to the path immediately north of the parking garage from King to the laneway. In any case, install an excellent crossing of King St. right at the tracks. Also, leave space in the design for the path to run immediately north of the tracks from King to Erb/Caroline. Oops, they screwed that up! Oh well. If somebody had been really interested in excellent bicycle infrastructure, the tracks could have been shifted slightly south from King to the bridge crossing the creek. Then the path could have been on the north side of the tracks from Seagram all the way down to Breithaupt St., with no places where crossing the track was necessary (unless you count the squeeze between King and Regina). One more comment: the Laurel Trail officially runs/ran next to the tracks between King and Regina. It was cleared of snow right up to and including last Winter and was shown as a trail on the City's map. I don’t see why the slight route adjustment being done now needs to interfere with the routing of the trail. I assume this was done in the 80s or early 90s and was apparently fine at the time so it should be allowed to continue, especially now that the spur line will be getting precisely no traffic at all except in the early morning hours. I find it hard to believe that even the paranoids at Transport Canada would have a problem with this. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 06:40 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: This is a problem that can be solved technically fairly easily, with some creativity. I don't think anyone doubts that. From an infrastructure standpoint, it's dead easy. The point I'm making is that what seems easy to us, isn't, because of all the red tape and rules and regulations on the "other side" that forbids things like this for reasons that are not apparent to us, as armchair civil engineers and city planners. (08-17-2016, 06:40 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: In the event bureaucrats (Transport Canada) get in the way, officially have the trail detour to the path immediately north of the parking garage from King to the laneway. In any case, install an excellent crossing of King St. right at the tracks. I can't imagine that the Region would actually undertake any form of construction or upgrading of the path here to turn it into a "non-official trail" and somehow try to lie to Transport Canada that "No no, it's not really a trail! Honest!". (08-17-2016, 06:40 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: One more comment: the Laurel Trail officially runs/ran next to the tracks between King and Regina. It was cleared of snow right up to and including last Winter and was shown as a trail on the City's map. I don’t see why the slight route adjustment being done now needs to interfere with the routing of the trail. I assume this was done in the 80s or early 90s and was apparently fine at the time so it should be allowed to continue, especially now that the spur line will be getting precisely no traffic at all except in the early morning hours. I find it hard to believe that even the paranoids at Transport Canada would have a problem with this. That's really interesting that it was officially through that gap until recently. I think that's pretty telling of what's happened here - that this path flew under TC's radar for many years, and only with the Rapid Transit project coming along bringing it to light. With regard to the second bolded statement - I absolutely do believe that they will have a problem with it. My guess (since we're all only guessing, right now) is that the rules and laws probably work in such a way that "if you touch it, it's now going to have to follow the new rules". "If you leave it alone, it can stay as it was, grandfathered in." Because there was work on the tracks around there, it's possible that TC rained down on them and said "This whole trail situation can't happen anymore." Think of it this way: Look at all the fencing along the Waterloo Spur. It's there because of the same one freight train at night that goes through that gap in the buildings between Regina and King. So, if it was ok to have people walking along the tracks there, why on Earth would TC require all these fences along the spur? It doesn't add up. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 08-17-2016 The impression I get from previous discussion is that things are "ok" with Transport Canada until you go and make any changes to the track. So all the new spur line track being put in for ION has all the bells and whistles (literally!), but the spur line trail is allowed to co-exist with the track with no fences at all. Am I wrong about this? And if the spur line were to be reconstructed, would it need fencing to separate it from the trail? If this is so, would it even be possible to have an informal trail running between King and Regina if the track were moved, or would additional safeguards need to be installed? RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 08-17-2016 (08-17-2016, 04:21 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: There's never been much in the way of events large enough to need to close off *THAT* much of King Street, aside from perhaps an expanded version of the two weeks (?) they had it closed 1 or 2 summers back for event-a-day car-free-ness. Assuming that's King & Francis (and I do think it is), King St has been closed that far at least twice this summer. Once was some kind of food truck festival (?) early in the summer, the second might have the multicultural festival. The Blues Festival is further east on King, closing from Frederick/Benton up to City Hall, probably because that makes sense with the locations of the YNC (at City Hall) and BIA (between Queen and Frederick) stages book-ending the stretch of King St that's closed. |