Trails

[Canard]

No, because it's an active freight rail line and is signposted "No Tresspassing - Active Construction Site" off of King.

I keep wondering if the Region paved this as sort of a "don't ask - don't tell" kinda thing, fully expecting trail users to carry on through here. If they do this, they had better put up some kind of fence or railing separating the concrete LRT Rapidway from the freight tracks.

[danbrotherston]

Also, if the part farther east along the freight tracks is supposed to be a trail (and I've been using it as such), has anyone noticed how wavy the asphalt is there?

Yes, east of King it is a MUT.  It is marked as such.  West of King it is not clearly marked.

[Markster]

At the west end of the parking lot, there is no proper path between the intersection and the end of the paved portion of the freight track. Usually westbound I use the driveway within the parking lot to get to the sidewalk on Erb, while eastbound I use the path which is near (but not along) the tracks.

And there's already a desire line being beaten into the grass where the trail should run.

   

While we’re talking about this intersection, anybody know what the extra traffic signal on top of the signal for northbound Caroline traffic is for?

That's a transit signal.
   

Presumably, in the future, buses will be given their advance left via this signal.

There is another mistake: they’ve used normal traffic signalling even though it’s a very special situation. Since no straight movements are allowed, and left turns are supposed to be transit only, there should be a regular traffic right arrow and a transit-activated transit left. As it is, the signal allows left turns even when there is no bus. Many people are still taking that left even though it’s not permitted. If the signal never allowed those left turns and was a transit signal I think we would see much higher compliance.

Yeah, it's strange. This intersection seems like the kind of place to make use of a lot of green arrows, clearly indicating the only legal directions of travel.

[Markster]

Other curiosities:

These stop lines on the sidewalk. You only need to stop for the train if you're crossing the street, and there are already appropriately placed gates for that.

       

This jaunty set of curb cuts.  They seem designed to make this sidewalk frustrating for people in mobility devices.

   

The continuing abomination that is the northwest corner.  This remains incredibly dangerous to all pedestrians.  There is no indication of where the sidewalk ends and the road begins.  There is a steep pit that will topple pedestrians if they try to keep space away from the road.  The sidewalk itself is absolute minimum width, which is not helping anything.

       

[ijmorlan]

While we’re talking about this intersection, anybody know what the extra traffic signal on top of the signal for northbound Caroline traffic is for?

That's a transit signal.


Presumably, in the future, buses will be given their advance left via this signal.  

There is another mistake: they’ve used normal traffic signalling even though it’s a very special situation. Since no straight movements are allowed, and left turns are supposed to be transit only, there should be a regular traffic right arrow and a transit-activated transit left. As it is, the signal allows left turns even when there is no bus. Many people are still taking that left even though it’s not permitted. If the signal never allowed those left turns and was a transit signal I think we would see much higher compliance.

Yeah, it's strange.  This intersection seems like the kind of place to make use of a lot of green arrows, clearly indicating the only legal directions of travel.

Is that signal photo from that intersection? I don’t remember seeing the sign indicating that it is a bus priority signal — did it just get added, or is the photo from somewhere else?

Either way, the signal is wrong — there is no need for a regular green signal. A right arrow for regular traffic and the bus signal for buses (activated only by buses) are all that are needed.

[Markster]

Is that signal photo from that intersection?

No, it is merely an example I grabbed from the internet.

[Viewfromthe42]

Sad thing about that desire line is how easily slight shifts in the trees could have accommodated it, and how the sidewalk which goes towards Caroline would be unlikely to be needed, as North or South, pedestrians would likely take an angled approach rather than a perpendicular one. But as the trees grow, they will block off the desire line, or make it dangerous for anyone to use if bicycles go on it at any speed while blind.

[Markster]

Sad thing about that desire line is how easily slight shifts in the trees could have accommodated it, and how the sidewalk which goes towards Caroline would be unlikely to be needed, as North or South, pedestrians would likely take an angled approach rather than a perpendicular one. But as the trees grow, they will block off the desire line, or make it dangerous for anyone to use if bicycles go on it at any speed while blind.

No bicycles will be taking that desire line, as there are hard curbs on either end. It's all pedestrian.

As far as I can tell, Grandlinq was designing a minimum distance around these substations to discourage casual interaction with them. Here, they've been clever about it and created a "landscaped buffer".

It's a real shame. The sidewalk is nice and wide, and is basically a MUT, but is very unintuitively following the path for cars.

[darts]

Is that part of the property owned by the mall or the city?

[Pheidippides]

I was by the new safety island on Weber at the Laurel Trail. It doesn't even look wide enough for a regular bike to fit on; you'd have to turn your bike parallel to the road to avoid getting clipped at the front or rear. A 27m right-of-way and there isn't room for a 2-3m island?

[UrbanCanoe]

Is that part of the property owned by the mall or the city?

Looks like it's owned by the Region. The 'trail' is part of the same parcel as the rail line. Wow, it gets awfully narrow near the middle of the image...

   

[timc]

I was by the new safety island on Weber at the Laurel Trail. It doesn't even look wide enough for a regular bike to fit on; you'd have to turn your bike parallel to the road to avoid getting clipped at the front or rear. A 27m right-of-way and there isn't room for a 2-3m island?

Yeah, and don't even bother trying to cross there with a trailer.

[tomh009]

I suspect trailers and tandems are usually outside the spec for even good safety island design.

[Pheidippides]

Markster has a few pictures of it on Twitter.

<a href="https://t.co/I0sZom3k4p">pic.twitter.com/I0sZom3k4p</a></p>&mdash; Mark Jackson-Brown (@Markster3000) <a href="https://twitter.com/Markster3000/status/903031049659277313">August 30, 2017</a>

[Markster]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">All the concrete is in for the Laurel Trail Weber crossing.<br>Now to get them to extend the MUT south to the Soeby's plaza... <a href="https://t.co/I0sZom3k4p">pic.twitter.com/I0sZom3k4p</a></p>&mdash; Mark Jackson-Brown (@Markster3000) <a href="https://twitter.com/Markster3000/status/903031049659277313">August 30, 2017</a></blockquote>