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 - Canard - 01-04-2017 ^ Agreed on all counts! Hear, hear! Where is the CBC article? RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Markster - 01-04-2017 Just putting warning tickets on the windshields will go a long way to stopping the behaviour. There's clearly a sense of "crowd immunity"; people park there because they see others park there safely and without penalty. Few of those people would likely choose to be the first person to park there on a given day, but they will happily be the 5th. Once people start seeing paper on windshields, I'm sure news will spread like wildfire in The Tannery to stop. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-04-2017 I almost posted last night that I was very tempted to print my own "Please don't do this, here's why!" sheets to put on people's windshields. If I come up with something, I'll PDF it for others to use, too... RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 01-04-2017 I don't think it's a good idea to put papers on people's windshields. That is not your job, and just results in more litter. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Markster - 01-04-2017 I don't see anything terribly wrong with doing it. Though, after an initial shock and probably some anger, people will likely just brush it off and keep parking there, because the paper isn't official in any way. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 01-04-2017 The bigger concern from that photo is that The Tannery and/or Communitech are encouraging this illegal parking, as that section of the rapidway was plowed professionally. That's a very worthwhile conversation for the region to have with their favourite golden child. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-04-2017 (01-04-2017, 11:55 AM)timc Wrote: I don't think it's a good idea to put papers on people's windshields. That is not your job, and just results in more litter. There are far worse alternatives. (That being said - I absolutely haaaaaaaaaaaaaaate hatehatehate when people advertising stuff touch my car and put stuff under the wiper. I go out of my way to actively avoid patronizing those businesses who do that. So I'd be a pretty big hypocrite doing that to someone else - even though they're in the wrong!) I don't really like the idea of doing nothing. I fear we'll watch the system hiccup and have fits during service start-up, and risk delaying opening even further, while they try and figure out how to deal with the problem at that time. That's why I thought notices might be a good idea, to start, if Bylaw isn't going to pick up the ball and start ticketing. I also fully appreciate that this all has a very strong air of busy-bodying and I kind of hate that, but I also hate that people are abusing my lovely little tramway even before it's had a chance to shine. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 01-04-2017 I'd just apply a logical exercise. I may dislike it if someone puts something under my windshield wiper. I also understand that if I park illegally and get a ticket or a warning, I'm definitely in the wrong, and will get something under there, and quite deservedly. If someone saw another car hitting mine and left a note with witness contact information, I'd be more appreciative of that than a surprise broken light and no idea where to go. So if you park on the tramway, you're already inviting a very legitimate interference with your wiper (let alone a tow truck), so public notices like yours shouldn't be a surprise, especially since they don't come with the fine of the ones bylaw would deliver. That said, practice the obvious: don't abuse the wiper, lift gently, from the arm hinge point, and lower it back down gently. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-04-2017 (01-04-2017, 01:27 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: So if you park on the tramway, you're already inviting a very legitimate interference with your wiper I think the interference potential being invited is far greater than that. Obv. yes and agreed on all points above. Maybe they(bylaw)'ll wait until a month before urban testing (realistically: Q3 2017) begins and then start laying down the law, in order to avoid the risk of lots of negative public backlash in the likes of "Well this space is just sitting here doing nothing anyway, why can't I?" (Which, I have to state, I hate and don't agree with at all - rules are rules - but am just saying I could imagine that's what the people who are parking there might fire back with.) RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Coke6pk - 01-04-2017 (01-04-2017, 01:27 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: I'd just apply a logical exercise. I may dislike it if someone puts something under my windshield wiper. I also understand that if I park illegally and get a ticket or a warning, I'm definitely in the wrong, and will get something under there, and quite deservedly. If someone saw another car hitting mine and left a note with witness contact information, I'd be more appreciative of that than a surprise broken light and no idea where to go. So if you park on the tramway, you're already inviting a very legitimate interference with your wiper (let alone a tow truck), so public notices like yours shouldn't be a surprise, especially since they don't come with the fine of the ones bylaw would deliver. That said, practice the obvious: don't abuse the wiper, lift gently, from the arm hinge point, and lower it back down gently. OK, Former by-law officer reporting for duty! First and foremost, 99.99999% of people who know they were parking in the wrong will NOT feel anything placed under their windshield was done so deservedly. I've worked many law enforcement jobs, and by-law was where I was assaulted the majority of times! (We) feel empowered as drivers to have the "right" to do whatever we want with our automobiles, and don't appreciate being told otherwise. The cyclists/pedestrians on the board will agree with me I'm sure. [I am at most times an auto driver as well, I can see my faults and will own up to them! I am NOT car bashing!] Anyway, since we (meter maids) are so hated, I guarantee that if you got a ticket, we will have never touched your wiper blade [Unless it was frozen to the windshield]. A folded ticket slid at the bottom of the "U" will glide nicely under the blade, and I will not have to deal with the complaint of "I have no problem paying the $20 ticket, but I want $50 for new wipers" argument. I'm sure the flyer stuffers do the same thing to avoid any liability. I'd cringe if I ever saw anyone lifting blade arms, even gently. Back on topic... a warning letter will do very little to nothing. For enforcement to work, you need punitive damage [Fines] and threats work to a degree (ie. TOW AWAY ZONE... but if no one is ever towed, the threat is useless). While it may make bystanders happy to see a vehicle towed, and the driver has the inconvenience of having to go pick up a car at a different location, it doesn't necessarily ensure compliance in the future. Towing is to open an immediate need [ie Rush Hour traffic lane, LRT tracks when in operation, Fire Route, Snow Clearing, etc.] To tow (off a city street) just to punish is not an acceptable practice anywhere that I am aware of. Furthermore on towing, the city by-laws here in the region have set fines attached. Tows are not part of the process. If a vehicle is to be towed, it is at the expense of the requestor. [ie. Property owner needs their spot back, they can elect to pay for a tow to have the vehicle removed. When I towed from city streets here, it was at the city's expense to permit snow clearing / clear road access for safety]. (This is obviously different from the rules in places like Toronto/Mississauga/Brampton where towing is a part of the parking by-law, and set rates allowed to be charged, and liens placed on the vehicle until tow bill is paid) Lastly to round out my XL post, all Regional parking by-laws were enforced by the city by-law officers when I worked there... so in the case of the Tannery (or the 5 cars on the tracks in front of the Duke Food Block I saw this morning), contact CoK and complain to them. The No Parking signs posted will be sufficient for them to tag under the Region's by-law. Coke RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-04-2017 Thanks for that very informative reply, Coke! City of Kitchener bylaw was not aware of any new bylaws as of Tuesday, and instead directed me to the Region. One person at the Region gave me the correct bylaw, and another wrote and said there are no new bylaws. So, sounds like nobody really knows what's going on (except you!). RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Coke6pk - 01-04-2017 (01-04-2017, 02:52 PM)Canard Wrote: Thanks for that very informative reply, Coke! I "like" to think so.... LOL Putting up a no-parking sign does not make it a "Prohibited Area" under the by-law. If you go to the Regional Courthouse (77 Queen), at the front are stacks of binders of the actual full by-laws regulations. They will read something like "No parking will be permitted on the north side of King Street in the City of Kitchener from a point 9 m west of Queen Street to a point 9 m east of Ontario Street." (It is illegal to park 9m from any intersection, so those don't fall into the No Parking section, as they don't need to be signed). These continue for every block, each side of the street, for every street in the region that has a no parking sign. If someone ever contested the legality of the sign, the binders are their for the prosecutors use, but are too heavy to carry in/out each week for trials. Council approves all of these. In the same way, every Handicapped Space and Fire Route are detailed in these regulations, normally with maps showing highlighted areas. When you call the city, they will not know a new street was added, and they would definitely say a new by-law wasn't added, but with a new regulation added, a new street would have to be listed before those no parking signs were posted. I will ASSUMEthat all areas that currently have track will have been added to the city regulations under the "Park in a Prohibited Area" by-law, and adding "light rail tracks" to the by-law wording is for court clarification, but will not change the fact that a city or regional council approved those detailed areas as a place where parking was not allowed. If the by-law officer shows up at the Tannery with their computerized ticket machine, they enter street and (normally) nearby street number and the computer decides if it is the city or regional by-law being enforced. If it is not a valid location (ie. I printed my own No Parking signs and put them up on my street), the machine will give by-law an error message. If there are clear no parking signs the officer will report the issue so that a) Signs are removed or b) Council adds that section to the regulations. If the officer is creative, they can see if any other sections of the Regional Traffic By-Law apply. [Park within 15m of a railway crossing, Park Obstruct Traffic, more than 0.15 m from curb... ] Coke EDIT: Since the tracks are marked as diamond lanes, I wonder if they will use 3.(a)(xviii) - Within a reserved lane during the hours and days that the reserved lane is in effect. I think on the tickets it printed as "Park in a Bicycle Lane", but that may have been updated. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-04-2017 Just go up a few posts and look at the bylaw I quoted. No signs are required (just a courtesy, really); all tracks are off-limits to stopping and parking. It's pretty clear! RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 01-04-2017 True, but that might mean a different input is required. If it's an automated system where tickets are punched in typically by an address or a blanket condition (within 9m of an intersection), there would need to be an update to include "blocking the rapidway" or some such, and both the bylaw people on the phone and on the ground would need to be made aware of it. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 01-04-2017 @Coke6pk That's all very interesting, and you've brought up a number of issues. As Canard pointed out, the bylaws have been amended (as of Jan 1) to explicitly prohibit parking (or stopping, or even driving) on the rapidway. That should be sufficient. However, at least every time I've called (and that's frequently), I am told that in order for them to ticket a car parked in a bike lane, there must be no parking signs as well, which clearly isn't required, legally, and yet that seems to be the policy. On the other hand, I asked for no parking signs at the trail crossing at Gage because cars and trucks frequently park there (too close) blocking line of sight. I was told that bylaw would enforce that if I called, even without signs, but other officers told me they didn't think that was against the bylaw at all. It seems there needs to be some education of city staff on these specific issues. Further, I'm surprised and frustrated by the requirement to have a bylaw actually written for no parking. Why not just a bylaw saying "no parking allowed where signs indicate no parking allowed, the following is an inexhaustive list of locations that should have no parking signs...." after all, it is the sign that matters, that justifies that someone shouldn't park there. If there's no sign, they have no reason to believe they shouldn't, if there is a sign, they have no reason to believe they should. So the sign is what should matter. Logically. And you're absolutely right about entitlement of drivers, IMO, it's the most frustrating thing about our roads, and probably the hardest thing to change. Frankly, I think the city should take a hard line on this. Giving too much leeway only reinforced the entitlement. |