Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
(09-21-2020, 04:44 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (09-21-2020, 09:47 AM)creative Wrote: Paved shoulders move water away from the roadway before it can infiltrate into the road's subbase, increasing the life expectancy of the road surface. Shoulders help provide extra structural support of the roadway.
en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Should...
Shoulder (road) - Wikipedia
The paved shoulders are also used by the mennonite buggies to allow faster traffic to pass.
I think outside of the 1-2 that are explicitly designated as buggy lanes (not paved shoulders legally at all), the fact that paved (and unpaved) shoulders are helpful to mennonite folks is incidental, not intentional.
Mennonites, like cyclists, would be much safer with designated infrastructure.
Posts: 4,442
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
204
(09-21-2020, 12:24 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I do agree that in practice, this is rarely the issue, our actual standards are basically zero....there was a collision where a driver killed a pedestrian on the sidewalk, while looking around on the floor of their car for a waterbottle for more than five seconds, while making a left turn, the courts dismissed the charges because the justice felt that not looking at the road for 5 seconds straight did not deviate from a normal standard of driving.
Lots of good points. Thanks especially for pointing out the distinction between liability as assigned by insurance vs. by police/prosecutors/courts.
That last example is truly appalling. While on one level the justice is absolutely right — it’s totally normal for drivers to behave with extreme negligence — on another more relevant level that is just an absolutely appalling miscarriage of justice. Basically, murder is A-OK as long as it’s really common. Seriously, somebody accused of a gangland hit should try that one — “we’re always offing each other, I just happened to be the one to conduct this particular hit”.
Posts: 10,619
Threads: 67
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
347
(09-21-2020, 05:50 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: (09-21-2020, 04:44 PM)tomh009 Wrote: The paved shoulders are also used by the mennonite buggies to allow faster traffic to pass.
I think outside of the 1-2 that are explicitly designated as buggy lanes (not paved shoulders legally at all), the fact that paved (and unpaved) shoulders are helpful to mennonite folks is incidental, not intentional.
Mennonites, like cyclists, would be much safer with designated infrastructure.
Yes. But buggies would require pretty substantial dedicated infra, maybe 5m of width to allow passing. Or a 3m paved MUT with 2x1m gravel shoulder, shared with bicyclists and (admittedly few) pedestrians?
Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
(09-21-2020, 07:18 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (09-21-2020, 05:50 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I think outside of the 1-2 that are explicitly designated as buggy lanes (not paved shoulders legally at all), the fact that paved (and unpaved) shoulders are helpful to mennonite folks is incidental, not intentional.
Mennonites, like cyclists, would be much safer with designated infrastructure.
Yes. But buggies would require pretty substantial dedicated infra, maybe 5m of width to allow passing. Or a 3m paved MUT with 2x1m gravel shoulder, shared with bicyclists and (admittedly few) pedestrians?
Actually, it wouldn't necessarily, you could easily accomodate a narrower path using turnouts (an option we should use to reduce road costs too mind you), but in any case, a 5 meter path is still cheaper than the 2x 3m paved shoulders that would be needed on a highway to give any semblance of accomodation for buggies.
Posts: 1,461
Threads: 27
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation:
121
Posts: 4,442
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
204
(09-21-2020, 08:02 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Actually, it wouldn't necessarily, you could easily accomodate a narrower path using turnouts (an option we should use to reduce road costs too mind you), but in any case, a 5 meter path is still cheaper than the 2x 3m paved shoulders that would be needed on a highway to give any semblance of accomodation for buggies.
Not necessarily. If the shoulders aren’t paved they’re usually gravel, so paved shoulders just involve paving an area that would be graded anyway. A separate path is a whole additional exercise in grading followed by paving.
That being said, a separate path would actually provide a really good experience for buggies, bicycles, and walkers alike and would therefore make it much easier to enjoy our countryside without a motor vehicle. I’d be in favour.
Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
(10-01-2020, 09:02 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: (09-21-2020, 08:02 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Actually, it wouldn't necessarily, you could easily accomodate a narrower path using turnouts (an option we should use to reduce road costs too mind you), but in any case, a 5 meter path is still cheaper than the 2x 3m paved shoulders that would be needed on a highway to give any semblance of accomodation for buggies.
Not necessarily. If the shoulders aren’t paved they’re usually gravel, so paved shoulders just involve paving an area that would be graded anyway. A separate path is a whole additional exercise in grading followed by paving.
That being said, a separate path would actually provide a really good experience for buggies, bicycles, and walkers alike and would therefore make it much easier to enjoy our countryside without a motor vehicle. I’d be in favour.
I mean, paving isn't cheap, but if you notice European roads often don't have gravel shoulders either.
Posts: 1,461
Threads: 27
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation:
121
Posts: 874
Threads: 2
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation:
101
I'm not really familiar with this project, but some of those answers seem quite disappointing.
Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
10-02-2020, 05:32 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-02-2020, 05:34 PM by danbrotherston.)
(10-02-2020, 04:53 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: I'm not really familiar with this project, but some of those answers seem quite disappointing.
Those answers are beyond disappointing:
Question:
"Why don’t the one-way cycle tracks connect to King Street in Alternative 1? Removing the existing right-turn lane at King Street would provide enough space to do so."
Answer:
"Strictly in terms of capacity, the traffic assessment notes that removing the southwest bound dedicated right-turn lane is possible; however, this lane provides an important connection for turning vehicles from the adjacent properties to the north given sightline constraints"
Translation:
"We absolutely could, but we don't want too, cycling is connections are not a priority, even in the face of excess road capacity."
Truly pathetic answers.
I especially love how they call out that cycling infra is required in the cycling plan between King and Margarette, yet they justify not building it to King.
Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
10-11-2020, 02:17 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-11-2020, 02:17 PM by danbrotherston.)
The Kitchener Cycling Master plan staff report is out: https://lf.kitchener.ca/WebLinkExt/DocVi...518&dbid=0
(I have no idea if this doc link will expire...I hate their document management system, the report is INS-20-015).
Also CoW is reconstructing MacKay Cres. in Waterloo. It serves as a an on road connection for the major trail, Laurel trail. While no dedicated cycling infra is proposed, I think the road is quiet enough that with the proposed significant narrowing, it would actually be just fine. Of course, by far the most serious obstacle remains the brand new yet still completely substandard unsafe crossing of Weber St.
https://www.engagewr.ca/mackay-crescent
Posts: 10,619
Threads: 67
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
347
(10-11-2020, 02:17 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The Kitchener Cycling Master plan staff report is out: https://lf.kitchener.ca/WebLinkExt/DocVi...id=1875733&searchid=5e507e22-97d6-4c3e-904c-615d1c7fe518&dbid=0
(I have no idea if this doc link will expire...I hate their document management system, the report is INS-20-015).
The Laserfiche web interface is not exactly user friendly. 
Posts: 7,844
Threads: 37
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
216
(10-12-2020, 12:17 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (10-11-2020, 02:17 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The Kitchener Cycling Master plan staff report is out: https://lf.kitchener.ca/WebLinkExt/DocVi...518&dbid=0
(I have no idea if this doc link will expire...I hate their document management system, the report is INS-20-015).
The Laserfiche web interface is not exactly user friendly.
No, it's absolutely trash. I'm happy to send anyone the files who wants them, I guess there's probably nothing wrong with hosting the PDFs myself publicly...
Posts: 866
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation:
79
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but city of Kitchener is looking for feedback on downtown separated bike lane Grid. Looks like quite the extensive network. Lots of cool renders of how downtown could look with bike lanes. Bidirectional bike lanes on Duke, Ontario, Joseph, Water and Cedar street. With some streets turning into 1 way vehicle traffic due to width restrictions. Seems to be a great start for a separated bike lane infrastructure in the city. I do wish they continued down Krug st to connect to East and existing bike lanes on Krug past East.
I encourage people that are interested in the city to invest in alternative forms of transportation to fill out the survey.
Information can be found:
https://www.engagewr.ca/downtown-cycling-grid
Posts: 874
Threads: 2
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation:
101
I don't have time to look through the construction drawings, but the renders and maps on the information sheet look like a huge step in the right direction (even if imperfect).
Does anyone know what the planned road reconstruction is on Benton from Courtland to Charles? I don't understand why it's 4 lanes, and it could potentially be a great connection to the Mike Wagner green and IHT if they put in cycling infrastructure there. Although it will probably always lack connecting infrastructure from Charles/Frederick because of the LRT.
|
