Cycling in Waterloo Region

[danbrotherston]

Does anyone know the story with the bike signals at the intersection of King and the Eastbound 85 Exit ramp/Manulife?
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4914633,-...312!8i6656
There are pavement markings and signals hung, but the signals are bagged and it seems to have been that way for nearly a year according to street view.

Of course the next time I go through the intersection after posting about it the signals appear to have been unbagged! Still not sure why they were left covered all summer, but at least they are functional now.

I don't think there are many things in our region which more concretely demonstrate how little idea engineers have about ped and cycling infra, than having tactile plates in a bike lane.

[ijmorlan]

I don't think there are many things in our region which more concretely demonstrate how little idea engineers have about ped and cycling infra, than having tactile plates in a bike lane.

Those are mostly for the blind, right? So a blind pedestrian won’t necessarily be able to tell where the bike trail is vs. the sidewalk, and might actually be on the bike trail. So as they approach the street they get the warning that they’re about to enter the street.

Ideally, bike trails would be like streets from the point of view of indications for blind people — tactile strips, curbs, etc. At least I think I believe that. Essentially, bike trails would be roads, just with much narrower lanes and a prohibition on motor vehicles.

That’s my theory anyhow.

I’m more concerned about inconsistent or incomplete application of tactile strips. In some locations, I wonder if the tactile strips shouldn’t be wider, or if they really catch all the ways to enter the street.

[danbrotherston]

I don't think there are many things in our region which more concretely demonstrate how little idea engineers have about ped and cycling infra, than having tactile plates in a bike lane.

Those are mostly for the blind, right? So a blind pedestrian won’t necessarily be able to tell where the bike trail is vs. the sidewalk, and might actually be on the bike trail. So as they approach the street they get the warning that they’re about to enter the street.

Ideally, bike trails would be like streets from the point of view of indications for blind people — tactile strips, curbs, etc. At least I think I believe that. Essentially, bike trails would be roads, just with much narrower lanes and a prohibition on motor vehicles.

That’s my theory anyhow.

I’m more concerned about inconsistent or incomplete application of tactile strips. In some locations, I wonder if the tactile strips shouldn’t be wider, or if they really catch all the ways to enter the street.

If that was the case the tactile strip should be between the bike lane and the pedestrian area.

Basically, we have to decide if we are segragating bikes and peds or not, because in this situation we are and also we aren't at the same time...oh and for a bonus, we have a poorly placed post.

Of course, for some level 10 insanity, we also have a place where we absolutely ARE segregating peds and cyclists and we still have tactile plate:  https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.4927898,-80.5128655,3a,75y,266.38h,93.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY24Xyx9wRB-IbtxGzzsGbg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Of course, everything about that intersection is broken, and someone should lose their job as a result of how bad it is, but that's another issue....

[timc]

The tactile plates should only be used at pedestrian crossings. It seems to me that putting them in a bicycle crossing sends the wrong message to pedestrians.

Those plates on Lexington are baffling.

The ones near the bus stops along Columbia aren't much better.

[ijmorlan]

The tactile plates should only be used at pedestrian crossings. It seems to me that putting them in a bicycle crossing sends the wrong message to pedestrians.

Those plates on Lexington are baffling.

The ones near the bus stops along Columbia aren't much better.

In both of those cases, they are placed across the line where a blind person could step into motor vehicle traffic without stepping down a curb.

So I think I understand why they are there, but at the same time I agree they’re weird. In the Lexington Rd. case there is also a weird bit of concrete joining the sidewalk to the area near the transition from on-road lanes to off-road trail. I don’t know why there is any concrete there — couldn’t the asphalt bicycle lane just separate from the rest of the road in much the same way that a freeway ramp separates from the main roadway?

I agree putting the tactile strips in a bicycle crossing sends the wrong message to pedestrians in general, but I think the theory of their installation is that no one can enter a motor vehicle roadway without either stepping down a curb or crossing a tactile strip. Unless we’re going to build bicycle routes as roads (i.e., no one can enter them without either stepping down a curb or crossing a tactile strip) or have exceptions, there will have to be oddities of this nature.

Of course I think it would be great if bicycle routes were given the same respect as motor vehicle routes.

OK, I just took another look at the Columbia St. example, and there is a huge driveway entrance where the sidewalk goes across the driving route into the Sobey’s mall. By my theory, there should be tactile strips across the sidewalk at either side of the driveway. But I guess the idea is that the driveway is a driveway, not a place where people have to cross the road.

I don’t know. I agree it’s a mess. I’m not convinced the problem is specifically with the placement of tactile strips in these locations.

[danbrotherston]

The tactile plates should only be used at pedestrian crossings. It seems to me that putting them in a bicycle crossing sends the wrong message to pedestrians.

Those plates on Lexington are baffling.

The ones near the bus stops along Columbia aren't much better.

In both of those cases, they are placed across the line where a blind person could step into motor vehicle traffic without stepping down a curb.

So I think I understand why they are there, but at the same time I agree they’re weird. In the Lexington Rd. case there is also a weird bit of concrete joining the sidewalk to the area near the transition from on-road lanes to off-road trail. I don’t know why there is any concrete there — couldn’t the asphalt bicycle lane just separate from the rest of the road in much the same way that a freeway ramp separates from the main roadway?

I agree putting the tactile strips in a bicycle crossing sends the wrong message to pedestrians in general, but I think the theory of their installation is that no one can enter a motor vehicle roadway without either stepping down a curb or crossing a tactile strip. Unless we’re going to build bicycle routes as roads (i.e., no one can enter them without either stepping down a curb or crossing a tactile strip) or have exceptions, there will have to be oddities of this nature.

Of course I think it would be great if bicycle routes were given the same respect as motor vehicle routes.

OK, I just took another look at the Columbia St. example, and there is a huge driveway entrance where the sidewalk goes across the driving route into the Sobey’s mall. By my theory, there should be tactile strips across the sidewalk at either side of the driveway. But I guess the idea is that the driveway is a driveway, not a place where people have to cross the road.

I don’t know. I agree it’s a mess. I’m not convinced the problem is specifically with the placement of tactile strips in these locations.

On Lexington the concrete is there because cyclists are expected to dismount and walk to the sidewalk.  Basically it's the traffic engineering equivalent of "I have no fucking clue"

But yeah, you point out the driveway example, blind peds could walk off the sidewalk there, and there is no tactile strip. 

On Columbia the tactile plates are in the path of cyclists, walking off them would not put you on the road, nor is it where someone SHOULD cross, which is the other thing they are supposed to indicate....

Like I said, nothing demonstrates the complete lack of understanding of bike and ped infra as tactile plates. Its literally just flailing about...

[jamincan]

That seems to read too much into it.  In initial media reports, the reporter will often have no confirmed information as to possible culpability and, pending charges, is limited in what can be reported even if culpability seems obvious.  Those constraints seemed obvious in the initial reports on this accident, which happened "in the vicinity of the IHT" (the reporter likely had no confirmation that the cyclist was riding the trail).  He or she will, on the other hand, know whether the bicyclist was wearing a helmet, because that information can be shared immediately (and in a case of head injury it is pertinent information, although some may disagree).  I doubt there's anything more to it than that.  It is true that subsequent reports about charges, and the outcome of those charges, often do not seem to have the same prominence as the initial collision reports.

Following up on this conversation, there is some actual research out about how editorial decisions influence perceived blame by readers: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...0727#t0005

Abstract
Traffic crashes are one of the leading causes of preventable death in the United States. Nearly 20% of these roadway fatalities are people who were hit and killed while walking or bicycling. Pedestrian deaths increased by 46% between 2009 and 2016. Despite these troubling statistics, there has not been a sustained and widespread public call to action to improve road safety. Researchers and advocates are increasingly focused on how traffic crashes are reported in the media, and whether existing editorial patterns contribute to victim-blaming and distract from systems-level solutions. However, no previous study has examined whether editorial patterns in traffic crash coverage actually influence perceptions. This study conducted an experiment in which 999 subjects were randomly assigned to read one of three versions of a news article describing a traffic crash involving a pedestrian. After reading the description, subjects were asked to apportion blame, identify an appropriate punishment for the driver, and assess various approaches for improving road safety. In comparing the three groups, even relatively subtle differences in editorial patterns significantly affected readers' interpretation of both what happened and what to do about it on nearly every measure. Shifting from pedestrian-focused to driver-focused language reduced victim-blaming and increased perceived blame for the driver. A thematic frame significantly increased support for infrastructure improvements. This study provides strong evidence that efforts to change public perceptions of road safety should include a focus on improving editorial patterns in traffic crash reporting.

[danbrotherston]

[jeffster]

Watching that video you would think that MUT's are a great alternative to bikes sharing the road, IMHO. For sure I'd prefer this over the other options: riding the bike on sidewalk or on the roads themselves.

[KevinL]

Watching that video you would think that MUT's are a great alternative to bikes sharing the road, IMHO.  For sure I'd prefer this over the other options: riding the bike on sidewalk or on the roads themselves.

It's certainly a fine alternative on Homer Watson, which is one of the most cardiac of arterials you'll find - almost no pedestrians make any use of it. This provides very few conflicts when cycling.

Other streets do not succeed as well with MUTs only, in place of sidewalks. The Region's judgement on what to put where has generally been good, but far from perfect.

[Bob_McBob]

Christ, I cannot believe how many people think "the mess" (i.e. the bike lane pilot) is a reasonable excuse for drivers going the wrong way and pulling any number of other dangerous maneuvers. Apparently because there is no "malicious intent" it's perfectly reasonable for someone to break the law and put others in danger. War on cars though, right?

[Acitta]

Here are the top 10 collision hot spots for pedestrians and cyclists in Waterloo region Social Sharing

[Acitta]

Better bicycle infrastructure would be a benefit to city

[Acitta]

Fresh steel for the Iron Horse Trail

[clasher]

Fresh steel for the Iron Horse Trail

About time!