TOareaFan
Superstar
from the pics....it would seem their biggest challenge will be to get pedestrians off of it 
|
|
|
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
from the pics....it would seem their biggest challenge will be to get pedestrians off of it
I think they will have the same problems as we do in Toronto with Queens Quay and Cherry Street.
Megaton327
Senior Member
The only question is what will enforcement look like. Queen's Quay and Cherry are mainly bad because there is, as far as I have seen or heard of, zero enforcement by police regarding vehicle/pedestrian/cyclist ingress into (or illegally across) the streetcar tracks. If KW takes this more seriously and gets police to diligently remove and ticket offenders, tow parked/enroaching vehicles, etc. and patrol the entire system regularly and take swift action, then it will be much better. But in Toronto there's no enforcement, and the lines suffer for it.
I was shocked to see the soft curbs in KW, though. Enforcement will really help but it shouldn't be like that in the first place. Even Queen's Quay has a hard curb for most of it and it's still bad because people enter it at intersections and there's no hard curb for the pedestrian side.
mpd618
Active Member
from the pics....it would seem their biggest challenge will be to get pedestrians off of it
The pedestrians are being directed there because the sidewalks have not yet been completed.
TOareaFan
Superstar
you know, I would thank you for the clarification if it was not so clear I was making a joke in the first place
jamincan
Active Member
you know, I would thank you for the clarification if it was not so clear I was making a joke in the first place
Subtext is usually lost on the Internet. It wasn't at all obvious to me that your post was in jest.
TOareaFan
Superstar
I am old guy....how many smiley faced guys do you need to tack on to get that point over....honest question.
Fred.S
Active Member
I think if they have any issues with cars encroaching on the soft curbs, it would be easy enough to put up bollards. Shouldn't need any major retrofits.
Markster
Senior Member
Doing some searching for the justification for no curbs for the side running sections, I found this:
https://www.phps.on.ca/en/multimedialibrary/resources/appbconsultation-pre-tpappublicpart12.pdf
A 2011 document that was weighing the route options for Uptown. The big three choices being
1) Bi-directional on King
2) Split directions on King and Caroline
3) Bi-directional on Caroline
Feel free to give it a read, and a laugh.
The King St only option was clearly designed to fail; it mentions how it will require demolishing all heritage buildings between the Spur Line and Erb St. Of course, the ended up turning LRT on the Spur Line, which entirely avoids that section.
It mentions how the split stations mean "more development opportunity" committing the great sin of assuming that proximity to a single direction of transit is equal to proximity to bi-directional transit.
Reading a little into it, it looks like split directions is given the virtue of allowing right and left turns into and out of side streets and driveways. I guess that they made a design that supports that (flat curbs) and never did any context specific design (Uptown Waterloo from William to the Spur has literally no driveways requiring this)
https://www.phps.on.ca/en/multimedialibrary/resources/appbconsultation-pre-tpappublicpart12.pdf
A 2011 document that was weighing the route options for Uptown. The big three choices being
1) Bi-directional on King
2) Split directions on King and Caroline
3) Bi-directional on Caroline
Feel free to give it a read, and a laugh.
The King St only option was clearly designed to fail; it mentions how it will require demolishing all heritage buildings between the Spur Line and Erb St. Of course, the ended up turning LRT on the Spur Line, which entirely avoids that section.
It mentions how the split stations mean "more development opportunity" committing the great sin of assuming that proximity to a single direction of transit is equal to proximity to bi-directional transit.
Reading a little into it, it looks like split directions is given the virtue of allowing right and left turns into and out of side streets and driveways. I guess that they made a design that supports that (flat curbs) and never did any context specific design (Uptown Waterloo from William to the Spur has literally no driveways requiring this)
Megaton327
Senior Member
The reasoning about turns for side streets and driveways is ridiculous, here in Toronto we have side streets and driveways too, they just lower the hard curb to a soft one solely for the length of the intersection, while leaving it raised elsewhere. Did nobody tell them it was an option? They had to have soft curbs for the entire length of those stretches even with no intersections? Yikes.
Markster
Senior Member
Context-specific design was not one of ION's strong suits.
There are a lot of cookie-cutter designs that have been applied in a very hackneyed fashion.
There are a lot of cookie-cutter designs that have been applied in a very hackneyed fashion.
timc
New Member
Hmm. It seems in retrospect that a King/Spur Line option might have been more satisfying than the alternatives in that document.
If memory serves, the spur line wasn't considered as an option until after that workshop. And I guess by that time the Uptown loop alternative had been decided and we didn't want to re-open that discussion.
If memory serves, the spur line wasn't considered as an option until after that workshop. And I guess by that time the Uptown loop alternative had been decided and we didn't want to re-open that discussion.
Markster
Senior Member
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Buses can't use the LRT ROWs and stations right?
Markster
Senior Member
Nope. Many stations are island stations which require doors on the left side of the vehicles.
As for using the ROW, that's an operational choice they made. Though, they wouldn't be able to use this section anyway, as it's a dead end, and relies on the LRVs being double-ended.