ION Phase 2 - Cambridge's Light Rail Transit

[jeffster]

Can we leave polarizing politics out of it for one day please!?

At least he didn't mention the fact Mike Harris Jr. welcomed his fellow MPP's, and listed the PC members in attendance.  I was sitting beside Laura Mae Lindo and Catherine Fife, and the look on their face...

That was a poor place for polarizing politics....

Coke

Off topic, was Michael Harris fairly involved with the LRT, either for at least 1st phase or 1st and 2nd? I think he was, IIRC. Then at some pointl Ford kicked Michael Harris out based on fake news because Mike Harris wanted Mike Harris to enter politics. Not to be confused with the other Mike Harris nor the Michael Harris (I think one was a Conservative hopeful and the other a Liberal hopeful) that had nothing to do with Michael Harris or Mike Harris or Mike Harris nor each other (Michael Harris and Mike Harris).

[KevinL]

New consultations are set for November 19-21; presentation materials are already available. http://rapidtransit.regionofwaterloo.ca/...uments.asp

The fourth document listed is the most detailed, and has interesting details of which portions are proposed to be elevated, etc.

[white_brian]

Wow! That is alot of detail

[timc]

I can’t wait for the online comments about how little public consultation there was for this project once it finally gets going.

[ZEBuilder]

New consultations are set for November 19-21; presentation materials are already available. http://rapidtransit.regionofwaterloo.ca/...uments.asp

The fourth document listed is the most detailed, and has interesting details of which portions are proposed to be elevated, etc.

that is a lot of elevated track and bridges. The coolest part to me is where the ion goes through the roundabout at dundas and beverly that is getting constructed on pg 8 of the drawings

[GtwoK]

I have.... questions.

Why on EARTH do they need to tear down this mansion or acquire this much property here? What's with all the space closer to Highway 8 left untouched? It looks like the train could just as easily run though there and disturb much less property




Likewise, here, at the top of Shantz Hill. The property line doesn't even go near the buildings, why acquire and raze these entire properties? The chance anything would get built here on the newly empty land seems slim to none. Especially anything consolidated, given the slope.



I hadn't been keeping super up to date with the Preston arrangement, and I knew there was some kerfuffle, but this is the solution they cam up with? This feels slapdash and comically inaccessible. You're practically walking through people's backyards to get to it. Why could it not have been oriented alongside the road? I can't even fathom what the purpose of this block will be to Preston in the future, what sort of development would you want on this block with the LRT station running through it? Residents wouldn't want to live in the pieces of the houses that remain, and SURELY you don't want your station hiding in between 2 condos on either side of it, so even if the remaining property was consolidated, there shouldn't be anything taller than a single storey. What absurdity. To hell with the bending to every whim of the public, if you're massacring the goddamn city block to the point it's unusable, tell the public to fuck themselves. This doesn't even make sense!



And to a lesser extent, same goes for here. Why is the station on this angle? Who's going to use the station entrance further set into the property? Who is it for? Why isn't along the road? Anyone coming from the West (top of the picture) is inexplicably inconvenienced. And again, what could POSSIBLY be built on the Williams property here now, why would you want a building obstructing the station? It's completely rendered useless, and for what?



And this..... they couldn't have just built an overpass or something? They're building one to get over Fairway to avoid a complicated intersection — this is just silly

[GtwoK]

Here. Why can't we do this in Preston? This seems like the extremely obvious choice. Not only does this align better with, well, EVERYTHING, but it also prevents the total expropriation of 6 properties, and the partial expropriation of 8 (although, it would totally expropriate the beer store in addition, since it would not be accessible by vehicles any longer). It'd ALSO leave the cambridge surplus property stll street facing, for potential redevelopment

[jamincan]

Hopefully they take the opportunity to add some sort of multi-use path along the corridor between Fairway and King St. as they could make the entire Sportsworld area far more accessible by bike.

[danbrotherston]

Hopefully they take the opportunity to add some sort of multi-use path along the corridor between Fairway and King St. as they could make the entire Sportsworld area far more accessible by bike.

That would be nice, they were planning on routing the LRT down King, which the project team said would have necessitated a new bridge, and they suggested the old bridge could be a bike route...but that's dead now so.

But are you really saying that you don't find the painted bike lanes along 100 km/h transport truck traffic on Martin Grove Rd. to be accessible by bike?

[dunkalunk]

Here. Why can't we do this in Preston? This seems like the extremely obvious choice. Not only does this align better with, well, EVERYTHING, but it also prevents the total expropriation of 6 properties, and the partial expropriation of 8 (although, it would totally expropriate the beer store in addition, since it would not be accessible by vehicles any longer). It'd ALSO leave the cambridge surplus property stll street facing, for potential redevelopment

Short answer here is because CP owns the track and this alignment would impact their right of way. Concerning the Hidden Valley situation, it's because MTO owns the right of way and is not on side with working with local transit agencies.

The Region is also probably not interested in reopening debates or plans or increasing the costs of related projects like the River Rd extension or Highway 8/401 flyover. line that is 8 years away from construction.

The greivances you have with the finer points of the alignment are logical, and I do think more work needed to be done with CP and the MTO to reduce project impacts. All excellent things to bring up at a public consultation.

[robd]

The whole Preston angled station is so that it is closer to downtown Preston which seems pretty silly. The station touches the edge of Preston and I struggle to see it boost densification in the area, the river is a obstacle that means the station looses a lot of benefit of access and future development. The whole eagle section and using the old RoW seems to again prevent intensification and simultaneously will probably slow the journey down, unless higher track speeds offset the distance.

The sportsworld stop is a disaster unless the transit terminal moves, its a 500m walk and a crossing of what is effectively a highway. This is a stop that could really benefit from being a park and ride location. Given that Galt gets two stops 700m from each other then the 500m to a major transit terminal seems unwise.

The whole running it down the middle of Hespeler Rd will just make it feel isolated from buildings, I know the idea is that Hespeler Rd will be redeveloped, but they are still building low rise commercial right now, the way it's structured will still result in people driving.

I'm also wondering if there is a loss of the multiuse path in Galt, its not clear on the drawings. I see that they are placing a sidewalk the other side of Mill Creek, which suggests my fears may be correct.

[tomh009]

The sportsworld stop is a disaster unless the transit terminal moves, its a 500m walk and a crossing of what is effectively a highway. This is a stop that could really benefit from being a park and ride location. Given that Galt gets two stops 700m from each other then the 500m to a major transit terminal seems unwise.

500m walk ... from where?

The whole running it down the middle of Hespeler Rd will just make it feel isolated from buildings, I know the idea is that Hespeler Rd will be redeveloped, but they are still building low rise commercial right now, the way it's structured will still result in people driving.

The impact (and design) of the LRT is not a five-year horizon, figure on 10-20 years. You have seen it in Kitchener and Waterloo, intensification will come. The routing is based on where we expect to see more intensification, not on optimizing to current buildings.

[GtwoK]

Here. Why can't we do this in Preston? This seems like the extremely obvious choice. Not only does this align better with, well, EVERYTHING, but it also prevents the total expropriation of 6 properties, and the partial expropriation of 8 (although, it would totally expropriate the beer store in addition, since it would not be accessible by vehicles any longer). It'd ALSO leave the cambridge surplus property stll street facing, for potential redevelopment

Short answer here is because CP owns the track and this alignment would impact their right of way. Concerning the Hidden Valley situation, it's because MTO owns the right of way and is not on side with working with local transit agencies.

But in both of those cases, the LRT does not interact with the right of way at all, which is what I mean — With regards to the hidden valley mansions, you could fit 3 more double-track widths in between where they've placed them and the MTO right of way.

And with my mock diagram, you can see the pink line representing property the CN boundaries, and my solution is outside of them. It doesn't interact with CN anymore than the proposed solution does. Unless the CN ROW extends beyond their property bounds, for some weird legal reason?

[robd]

The 500m walk is from the existing transit terminal. Maybe GRT changes at the time will remove it's importance, but it certainly removes current connections GO transit.

I get the long term horizons and am in favour of LRT. But if this is the intent then we shouldn't be permitting current construction on unsuitable buildings, it's just a waste of resources. Buildings should last 100+ years not 15. I can see why its on Hespeler Rd, but we need to find a sensible way to remove the majority of traffic and ideally place the stops on the curbside. Otherwise you are just raising pedestrian/car interactions and I have little faith that we will adequately remove traffic or prevent accidents due to the generally poor level of driving. The whole plan just feels half baked to appease too many people, Hespeler Rd is just like Fairway, horrible in design and dangerous for anyone not driving, I don't see how adding transit in the middle will change this perception for the majority.

[trainspotter139]

The 500m walk is from the existing transit terminal. Maybe GRT changes at the time will remove it's importance, but it certainly removes current connections GO transit.

I get the long term horizons and am in favour of LRT. But if this is the intent then we shouldn't be permitting current construction on unsuitable buildings, it's just a waste of resources. Buildings should last 100+ years not 15. I can see why its on Hespeler Rd, but we need to find a sensible way to remove the majority of traffic and ideally place the stops on the curbside. Otherwise you are just raising pedestrian/car interactions and I have little faith that we will adequately remove traffic or prevent accidents due to the generally poor level of driving. The whole plan just feels half baked to appease too many people, Hespeler Rd is just like Fairway, horrible in design and dangerous for anyone not driving, I don't see how adding transit in the middle will change this perception for the majority.

Hespeler Rd. will lose 1 lane in each direction when the LRT extension is built. Curbside stops are even less ideal for LRT as it is more difficult to prevent traffic incursion on the right of way and creates a situation where both left and right turns are affected by LRT movements.