|
Trails
|
10-07-2016, 03:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2016, 03:29 PM by danbrotherston.)
Thanks for the info, was there any info on planned detours?
Also, where did you see this? I ride this section (Gage to Glasgow) daily and haven't seen anything posted. Did I miss it?
10-07-2016, 06:37 PM
There is a planned detour, but the map won't load for me at:
http://www.kitchener.ca/en/livinginkitch...eTrail.asp The other information is posted now: Central Section - Victoria to Queen The City of Kitchener is planning upgrades to the Iron Horse Trail between Victoria Street and Queen Street. Improvements will be informed by comments and themes drawn from the Iron Horse Trail Improvement Strategy completed in 2015. Planning and design is currently underway for summer 2017 construction. Proposed improvements include: Major roadway intersections - Victoria/West and Queen Trail widening and re-paving Wayfinding and identification signage Henry Sturm Greenway parkette design Trestle bridge improvements Victoria Park parking lot and entrance improvements A Public Information Centre will be held to display concept plans and choose from a variety of design options. When: Tuesday, Oct. 25. Drop in any time between 6-8 p.m. Where: Victoria Park Pavilion (end of Schneider Avenue) Residents can drop in to view the different concept plans available, speak with staff about any questions they may have, and provide feedback. Drawings and visuals will also be posted online to view and provide comment - check back after the information centre for links and more information! For more information or further questions, contact Mark Parris at 519-741-2600 ext 4397.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
10-10-2016, 08:14 PM
The map shows trail closures only. You can get it here:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=...5jj1zKQUAM
10-13-2016, 06:00 AM
There is a Record article on the trail upgrades :
http://m.therecord.com/news-story/690804...be-widened-
10-13-2016, 07:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2016, 07:43 AM by danbrotherston.)
Oh come on. They've reduced the width now down to 3 meters. Unacceptable. I thought 3.6 was unacceptably narrow but I was willing to compromise on that. This is not cool.
Two feet less width saves 80 trees, though. If I had to choose I'd keep the trees and I doubt I'd be alone.
10-13-2016, 10:16 AM
(10-13-2016, 07:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Oh come on. They've reduced the width now down to 3 meters. Unacceptable. I thought 3.6 was unacceptably narrow but I was willing to compromise on that. This is not cool. Damn those trees! Most of the trail between Queen and Victoria has a lot of trees already so I don't see why they should be a priority in this case. There were a lot of trees cut down to clear the hydro lines running through the bush there too. The trial is pretty busy in the summer along this stretch and I think making wider should be the priority. Might have to go to the meeting and make a fuss about it. 
10-13-2016, 10:24 AM
I like trees and they're a contributor to why I enjoy riding the IHT. I have no problem with them staying.
10-13-2016, 10:29 AM
10-13-2016, 10:53 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2016, 10:54 AM by danbrotherston.)
That section of the trail is in a forest, cutting down a few trees at the edge won't make it not in a forest, it will still be treed. Of course, other sections which have lost almost all of the trees and vegetation to nearby buildings are an actual problem.
And frankly, the trail is very busy, I often avoid that section on weekends because it is too busy, and how many people complain about cyclists on the trail, when they are really upset about it being too narrow. I was at the meetings, outside of the bad crossings that was probably the second most common complaint, yet here we are, not fixing it. And just to be clear, nobody's objecting to the trees, as is implied. All that's being said is that making the trail safe and functional (and frankly, up to provincial standards) is more important.
10-13-2016, 01:49 PM
(10-13-2016, 07:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Oh come on. They've reduced the width now down to 3 meters. Unacceptable. I thought 3.6 was unacceptably narrow but I was willing to compromise on that. This is not cool. They've reduced the proposed width, yes. Still, the new trail surface will be 25% wider than the current one, which is a good thing. I'm a frequent user (by foot) and I'm happy with even the current width, so 3m is good for me. But I mostly use the trail outside peak hours so I rarely see heavy traffic on the trail.
10-13-2016, 02:06 PM
If people followed proper etiquette on the trail, the current width would be just fine. The problems happen when people start wandering all over unpredictably, or are just generally unaware of their surroundings, and create a hazard for others. 9/10 times though, I never have an issue with others, and people are generally courteous and respectful of one another.
10-13-2016, 02:24 PM
I don't have a huge problem with a 3 m width for the trail. But I also don't buy the tree excuse for not widening it. There doesn't seem to be any problem with cutting down trees for other purposes, and I assume that replacements would be planted.
10-13-2016, 02:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-13-2016, 02:34 PM by danbrotherston.)
(10-13-2016, 01:49 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(10-13-2016, 07:42 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Oh come on. They've reduced the width now down to 3 meters. Unacceptable. I thought 3.6 was unacceptably narrow but I was willing to compromise on that. This is not cool. I'm not saying they aren't going to widen it slightly, but several sections are already 3 meters, and still feel quite narrow. You should try using it during busy times, it's sometimes difficult to make any progress while biking, and it's only going to get worse, usage is growing quite strongly.
10-13-2016, 02:38 PM
(10-13-2016, 02:06 PM)Canard Wrote: If people followed proper etiquette on the trail, the current width would be just fine. The problems happen when people start wandering all over unpredictably, or are just generally unaware of their surroundings, and create a hazard for others. 9/10 times though, I never have an issue with others, and people are generally courteous and respectful of one another. "Proper etiquette" doesn't cut it. People should be able to walk two or three abreast to enjoy a casual conversation, right now, that's difficult or impossible at busy times. Other people, are so terrified by cyclists as to literally jump off of the trail when I ding my bell going by. These people are the ones who come to meetings and tell about how terrifying and dangerous cyclists are on the trail, they're the ones who argue for banning cyclists. The only way to fix these problems is to widen the trail. 4 meters is the provincial recommended width for multi-use trails, 3 meters is the minimum only when a wider trail cannot be accommodated. A few trees in a large forested area isn't sufficient justification IMO, for the busiest trail in the city, that is seeing very strong growth to be the absolute minimum allowed. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
