ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[ijmorlan]

I too found the 200 busiest during rush hour. However, I did also find it busy during the 30 minute headway Sundays, that really was too infrequent for that bus.

In other news, WRPS has completely blocked the Queen St. Station south entrance. Entirely needlessly, they say the station is open, but nobody with the slightest mobility difficulty (or frankly, being unwilling to walk through the garden) could access it. They're on a call of course, despite having nobody around, and of course having plenty of other places they could have stopped (they're literally beside a parking lot). I guess being on a call means taking zero consideration into where you stop...or...maybe they are taking it into consideration and blocking a rapid transit station is preferable to blocking 1-2 cars into in their mind.

*sigh*...

This is part of why I think there should be a lot more bollards. The idea is that sidewalks are absolutely reserved for pedestrians, no exceptions, enforced by the infrastructure so nobody with a job to do such as the police or the gas company (or just some random idiot for that matter) can just decide on their own to make an exception. If a utility company needs an exception, they can formally request temporary removal of one or more bollards.

[ijmorlan]

This is an interesting prediction. I've thought that not having a single large CBD is a drawback for transit because driving and parking is so easy- downtown Kitchener is still small and sparse enough that finding parking is trivial, and inexpensive. Likewise for Uptown, and even the University Zone.

I think it works both ways. On the one hand, you don’t get that massive crush of traffic and scarce/expensive parking strongly pushing everybody to transit; on the other hand, the transit line get traffic in both directions all day and all along the line, rather than being packed during rush hour in one direction only. So the transit helps more people for the same capital investment.

[MidTowner]

Re: Dan's picture. I think the point of that kind of behaviour on the part of the police is to be as obtrusive as possible, frankly, so there's nothing to be done about it. The message it sends is that their work- all of it, it doesn't matter which- is more important than whatever mere citizens may be doing. That is the message it is supposed to send.

No one should be driving their vehicles onto sidewalks except in the rarest occasion.

[MidTowner]

I think it works both ways. On the one hand, you don’t get that massive crush of traffic and scarce/expensive parking strongly pushing everybody to transit; on the other hand, the transit line get traffic in both directions all day and all along the line, rather than being packed during rush hour in one direction only. So the transit helps more people for the same capital investment.

That's a good point. And with relatively even loading along the length of the system and the length of the service hours, we might not run up against capacity issues very soon at all.

[danbrotherston]

Re: Dan's picture. I think the point of that kind of behaviour on the part of the police is to be as obtrusive as possible, frankly, so there's nothing to be done about it. The message it sends is that their work- all of it, it doesn't matter which- is more important than whatever mere citizens may be doing. That is the message it is supposed to send.

No one should be driving their vehicles onto sidewalks except in the rarest occasion.

I don't think that's their intention, I walked through, and asked if the station was open, they said, yes, it was, no problem, just walk around.  They weren't trying to block the station.

And if the police wanted to be in your face, constables are much more of a presence than a vehicle.

They aren't obtrusive, they're obstructive--frankly even more, the way they were standing, I was concerned about walking up to them, as I didn't want to "startle" them, but given they were both leaning into the vehicle, and wouldn't have a good view of what's around them....ugh....whatever....so many different problems in this photo.

[MidTowner]

I don't think that's their intention, I walked through, and asked if the station was open, they said, yes, it was, no problem, just walk around.  They weren't trying to block the station.

And if the police wanted to be in your face, constables are much more of a presence than a vehicle.

They aren't obtrusive, they're obstructive--frankly even more, the way they were standing, I was concerned about walking up to them, as I didn't want to "startle" them, but given they were both leaning into the vehicle, and wouldn't have a good view of what's around them....ugh....whatever....so many different problems in this photo.

That's my point: they're not trying to block the station, or the sidewalk. They're not really obstructing anything- you can walk around them, you just have to walk in the street or on the tracks for a minute. But they are obtrusive- they're right in your tracks, you need to pause to think about what to do, whereas you should be able to just walk down the street.

But, anyway, we can definitely agree that there are plenty of problems in the photo.

[danbrotherston]

That's my point: they're not trying to block the station, or the sidewalk. They're not really obstructing anything- you can walk around them, you just have to walk in the street or on the tracks for a minute. But they are obtrusive- they're right in your tracks, you need to pause to think about what to do, whereas you should be able to just walk down the street.

But, anyway, we can definitely agree that there are plenty of problems in the photo.

They are 100% blocking the north (west) access to the platform. You can walk around...in a garden, and you cannot walk in the tracks (aside from being illegal, there's a >1.5 foot climb to get back on the platform). If you are in a wheelchair, walker, or stroller, or even a cane, you cannot use the station from the south in this situation at all. That's clearly obstructing by any definition.

[KevinT]

They are 100% blocking the north (west) access to the platform. You can walk around...in a garden, and you cannot walk in the tracks (aside from being illegal, there's a >1.5 foot climb to get back on the platform). If you are in a wheelchair, walker, or stroller, or even a cane, you cannot use the station from the south in this situation at all. That's clearly obstructing by any definition.

Well said Dan. Maybe tweet the picture at the chief with this explanation? (And perhaps you already did...)

[KevinT]

So I did my first bike + ION commute this morning, and was late enough that I had no issue finding a place for the bike. At first it was nice to just roll on and stand at a lean-seat (what are these things really called?) without having to toy with a rack at the front, but after the 25 to 30 minutes from Block Line to R&T Park it was actually rather a pain to keep standing there and hold the bike with the brake on. I so wanted to love this.

[danbrotherston]

So I did my first bike + ION commute this morning, and was late enough that I had no issue finding a place for the bike.  At first it was nice to just roll on and stand at a lean-seat (what are these things really called?) without having to toy with a rack at the front, but after the 25 to 30 minutes from Block Line to R&T Park it was actually rather a pain to keep standing there and hold the bike with the brake on. I so wanted to love this.

Few tips, if there is space, put your bike in the space with the flip down seats, and have a seat..much more comfortable.

Also, I've found it's possible sometimes to turn the bars 90 degrees, and point the tire into a corner don't have to hold the brakes on that way.

(And I tweeted Galloway and the public WRPS account).

[MidTowner]

They are 100% blocking the north (west) access to the platform. You can walk around...in a garden, and you cannot walk in the tracks (aside from being illegal, there's a >1.5 foot climb to get back on the platform). If you are in a wheelchair, walker, or stroller, or even a cane, you cannot use the station from the south in this situation at all. That's clearly obstructing by any definition.

Well said Dan. Maybe tweet the picture at the chief with this explanation? (And perhaps you already did...)

You should; I'd be curious what the response is. It's my belief that this type of behaviour must in part be designed to be inconvenient to people, so I can't see how pointing out that it is inconvenient would help. But maybe I'm wrong, and it's just sheer ignorance on the part of these and many other police.

In any case, we're in agreement that it's egregious behaviour that shouldn't happen.

[danbrotherston]

[Rainrider22]

Well said Dan. Maybe tweet the picture at the chief with this explanation? (And perhaps you already did...)

You should; I'd be curious what the response is. It's my belief that this type of behaviour must in part be designed to be inconvenient to people, so I can't see how pointing out that it is inconvenient would help. But maybe I'm wrong, and it's just sheer ignorance on the part of these and many other police.

In any case, we're in agreement that it's egregious behaviour that shouldn't happen.

I am surprised that you can come to these conclusions without even knowing what the situation is.  And to draw a conclusion that these and many other police simply want to inconvenience people tells you have some strong personal bias against the police... Perhaps waiting till you have the facts, many times there are reasons for why certain things are done the way they are done.

[MidTowner]

I am surprised that you can come to these conclusions without even knowing what the situation is.  And to draw a conclusion that these and many other police simply want to inconvenience people tells you have some strong personal bias against the police... Perhaps waiting till you have the facts, many times there are reasons for why certain things are done the way they are done.

That's true that I don't have all of the facts. My assumption was based on the "nobody around" comment, and I was careful in my previous comment not to say they should "never" block a sidewalk (or a road, or whatever). You're right that it's very possible that this is one of the cases where they were absolutely justified in doing so, and I would be glad that they prevented imminent property damage or injury (or whatever the case may have been).

[KevinT]