Trails

[dtkvictim]

This could go in like 10 different threads, so I'm picking this one. A MUT from Weber/Victoria up to the VIA/GO platform is going in now.





Definitely the wrong thread: The lights are also now up at Ahrens, but not turned on yet.

[danbrotherston]

This could go in like 10 different threads, so I'm picking this one. A MUT from Weber/Victoria up to the VIA/GO platform is going in now.





Definitely the wrong thread: The lights are also now up at Ahrens, but not turned on yet.

Oh my god. This was claimed to be built years ago! And I trudged through the snow for years when it wasn’t. Now they build it? I figured they were just going to build the new station. Why are we so bad at doing simple easy stuff like this?

[cherrypark]

Budgets, staffing capacity, and the 100 hoops to jump through on compliance and certainty they won't get sued, I suppose. Old desire path was not sanctioned but this has to be all accessibilities, etc. and able to be maintained. Still no excuse, but my read is that is why.

[KevinL]

It should have been put in when the Weber separation happened, but they though the hub at King would be built 'soon' at that point and removed this path from the project scope.

Now that the hub is still years away, they finally decided to proceed here.

[ac3r]

This is a great example of how nobody in this region knows how to do anything.

[dscurtis]

I took a few photos of the "Willow Cycle Link" project in Uptown Waterloo on Saturday. The project looks nearly complete.




I also sent an email to Chris Hodgson at the City asking for information on the crossing of William St. He says a pedestrian crossover is being planned, with installation estimated to be spring 2025. In my mind that's fantastic news! I sent a reply this morning asking if any other crossings on the Spur Line Trail will get PXO's or other crossing upgrades. We'll see what he says.

I really despise the concept of uncontrolled crossings, since they lessen liability for drivers, and people find them confusing. I often have drivers stop for me on my bike even though they have the right-of-way. I think they average person doesn't understand the difference between the yellow diamond signage at uncontrolled crossings (Wc-15) and the black-and-white rectangular signage at pedestrian crossovers (Ra-5). It seems the core of the issue is the HTA insisting that cyclists dismount at PXO's, and therefore OTM Book 18 thinks uncontrolled crossings are better than PXO's for cyclists when road traffic volume is low. Instead, there should be an allowance for cyclists to ride across a PXO at a reasonably slow speed (which is what is practically happening anyway).

I like the City of Waterloo's sign at Erb/Bridgeport/Caroline which mimics Ra-5, but also includes a bicycle. To my surprise, this sign is included in OTM Book 18 on page 332, but curiously the sign code says "custom code". The City placed it under a yield sign at a right-turn island which matches the recommendation below. Now if only this same sign could legally be used at all PXO's...

[dtkvictim]

Proof of the sign in question, for anyone interested. I've seen multiple arguments online over whether or not vehicles need to yield to cyclists here. Technicalities aside, many seem to insist this sign doesn't exist (though I think it's relatively new).

[danbrotherston]

That is interesting. If I recall my Ontario's drivers ed, white signs are indeed regulatory so in theory it should be in force. But I don't know under what legislation it is acting.

The Willow Cycle Link project is nice though. I remember being surprised by the traffic diversion there (it long predates the project), they're so extremely rare in Canada. The one on Willow and the one nearby on Herbert are really the only two I can think of, and probably exist as a result of NIMBY pressure about the apartment building on William (NIMBYs are like a stopped clock, right occasionally).

This kind of thing is basically ubiquitous in the Netherlands, virtually every residential street is disconnected in this way. It should be the norm. The cycle link is nice, in that it formalizes what you would already do.

[dscurtis]

Proof of the sign in question, for anyone interested. I've seen multiple arguments online over whether or not vehicles need to yield to cyclists here. Technicalities aside, many seem to insist this sign doesn't exist (though I think it's relatively new).

Thanks for sharing the photo, I meant to include my own photo but I forgot to include it. OTM Book 18 is three years old, so the sign must be at least that old. However, I can't recall seeing any other examples, so it seems rare.

I just received an email response from Jenny Renaud at the City of Waterloo and she provided me the following list of pedestrian crossovers anticipated for installation in 2025 ("top priority locations that we are currently working on detail designs for"):

•     Albert St @ Waterloo Technology Park
  
•     Allen St @ Spur Line
  
•     Bridle Trail @ Woolwich St
  
•     Columbia St @ Lucerne Ave
  
•     Columbia St @ Rhine Fall Dr
  
•     Columbia St @ St. Moritz Ave
  
•     Davenport Dr @ Kids Ability
  
•     Father David Bauer Dr @ Barrel Yards access
  
•     Parkside Dr @ Waterloop Trail access
  
•     Regina St @ Hickory St
  
•     William St @ Willow St
  
•     William St @ Roslin Ave
  

[ijmorlan]

This kind of thing is basically ubiquitous in the Netherlands, virtually every residential street is disconnected in this way. It should be the norm. The cycle link is nice, in that it formalizes what you would already do.

It is the norm in the suburbs, just about everywhere — all those culs de sac and crescents effectively disconnect the local streets. But other aspects of the design undermine it so that overall the area is more car-oriented than downtown areas.

[ijmorlan]

I also sent an email to Chris Hodgson at the City asking for information on the crossing of William St. He says a pedestrian crossover is being planned, with installation estimated to be spring 2025. In my mind that's fantastic news! I sent a reply this morning asking if any other crossings on the Spur Line Trail will get PXO's or other crossing upgrades. We'll see what he says.

Thanks for this. I had been wondering. I live near there, and the way the trail currently just ends at the William St. sidewalk is weird so it’s good to hear it will cross the street. It would be nice to have trails on both side of the tracks from there to the bridge over the creek.

[danbrotherston]

This kind of thing is basically ubiquitous in the Netherlands, virtually every residential street is disconnected in this way. It should be the norm. The cycle link is nice, in that it formalizes what you would already do.

It is the norm in the suburbs, just about everywhere — all those culs de sac and crescents effectively disconnect the local streets. But other aspects of the design undermine it so that overall the area is more car-oriented than downtown areas.

Nah, the point of the examples I gave are the ONLY cars are restricted, pedestrians and cyclists are not. Yes, the suburbs do have *some* cut-throughs, but not reliably so.

Further, even in the suburbs cul-de-sacs aren't actually the norm, there are still multiple routes through. Further, the cul-de-sacs are giant gobs of pavement. Again, the above examples are simply dead ends. Cars there would have to slowly turn around in a 3 point turn rather than being able to do a high speed u-turn in the pavement width.

The devil is in the details....these things are different.