** Edit: Ms. Scian has clarified that the City reacted to not being consulted on this proposal. Read her comment below.
Well, what a difference a few months make. Region staff engaged the citizenry and the city and proposed some fairly significant alterations (link note: see page 12 onward).
- Move the Northbound connection to the existing rail spur that crosses the parking lot north of Waterloo Town(e) Square (by sharing track, an option we believed was impossible in 2009)
- Move the Northbound station off King and onto the spur, next to the public square
- Create a new station at King and Allen
- Move the Southbound tracks from east side of Caroline to west.
 |
| New Uptown Route Alignment |
This proposal has been conditionally endorsed by the city, and passed unanimously by the Region. Which is good, because it is a definite improvement. But some think it just didn't go far enough. And while I don't want to take away from the accomplishment that has been made, I would be inclined to agree. Here's where the new plan falls short:
Usability
The new station positions mean Southbound and Northbound uptown stations are hidden from each other, and fairly distant. This is one of the biggest problems the loops present: they make the system more confusing, and are an obstacle to these stations attracting riders. Virtually every rider who visits uptown will do so as part of a return journey.
Connectivity
I also see a problem for route connections. As it stands, the King St. face of the public square is a minor transit node, with the various 7's and the 5/35 all stopping here. And yet, the split LRT route makes it impossible to do anything but partially serve these connections.
(I should note that downtown Kitchener's loop also presents this problem in spades.)
Spacing
The new Allen St. station position means there is a scant 500m separation between the two southbound stations.
So how can we address this?
In the link above, TriTAG proposes moving the southbound station up Caroline to be near the Erb St. intersection. I've urged the Region to consider this proposal carefully, as it would provide some partial solutions to each of the problems I mentioned above.
But an Erb/Caroline position is its own tradeoff. The Erb intersection is much busier than Willis Way, and it is already complicated. (Cyclists in particular regard it as one of the blights in this city.) The C.I.G.I. building (originally built as part of the Seagram's complex, I believe) crowds the intersection and limits the space available for a station. And, this corner is less of a destination than Caroline/Willis is.
It may be that in the balance, there is no better loop alignment than the current plan.
But the reality is, there are so many constraints in play that prevent a unified alignment through the area. We can't infringe on the square. We can't eliminate two-way traffic on any street. We don't want to rip out any existing buildings (like, say, the bridal shop at Caroline and William) and we can't steal space from parking lots (e.g. Rec Centre.)
Where does that leave us?
As a region, we have a choice: we can settle, having come up with a decent compromise that seems to be generally acceptable. (Though don't ask the folks in the Catalina townhomes, because they're spitting nails about the Caroline side switch.) Or, we could recognize that LRT is the backbone of our whole plan to provide alternatives to driving in Waterloo Region, and make the hard decisions needed to fix its routing properly.
These decisions would result in much screaming and gnashing of teeth, but... in ten years, nobody will remember the fallout that will inevitably come from giving LRT the priority it deserves. Not if the system works. And it needs to work. The compromises that keep it from offending various interests are deficiencies we will have to live with forever, and each of them takes away from the viability of the whole.
Hi Chris,
ReplyDeleteI think it is important to remember that June's proposed changes were tabled without any consultation with City of Waterloo Council or Staff. We found out through the grapevine. It is my consistent position that any decisions that are being made that fundamentally impact the City of Waterloo must include input from the City of Waterloo. That is a fundamental expectation that our organization does not think is unreasonable. I am always prepared to blow a whistle if I need to.
Waterloo will now shift our focus to two items: Ensuring that the list of requests that were submitted on Monday are addressed to our satisfaction AND clarifying the shared funding piece.
I applaud you and other LRT supporters who understand that being supportive of LRT does NOT involve blind faith. This project is complex and expecting it to be smooth and flawless would be foolhardy. As in your blogpost, we can all effectively play the dual roles of supporting the project and providing careful scrutiny. In the end, we all want this project to be successful.
Keep up the good work, Karen
My preferred plan for the Kitchener downtown is a throwback to what was apparently the plan when Duke and Charles were a one-way loop around it. Close that stretch of King to cars and then there is plenty of room for sidewalks, bike lanes, and and LRT. Easy access to the downtown from a block away by car. Park near your destination, walk one block, and you are in. There is not enough room for enough parked cars on King as it is to support the downtown financially, so try another solution.
ReplyDeleteOf course, this idea was lost a long time ago
Thanks for your comments, Karen. I've added a clarification note in the post.
ReplyDeleteI try not to give in to cheerleading the LRT project, even though I find these developments so exciting. I am a pragmatist at heart, and tend to favour the "good plan now" over the "better plan later". But if I'm going to provide commentary, I also have the opportunity to challenge the two levels of government to go the extra mile.
I noted the conditions the City placed on its plan endorsement, and they make sense to me. In a way, I see the City/Region division provides a dynamic tension that will help balance both local and regional priorities in this case.
Thanks Chris,
ReplyDeleteI agree ... I'm all for creative/dynamic tension: it creates growth and learning.
Karen
@DJ FoS: King St in Kitchener was apparently ruled out because of the complexity of the utilities buried there and the concern that there isn't a good map of what is there, since it was created so long ago. So if they go digging they might find things that would complicate, delay or cost more money to resolve.
ReplyDeleteThat is what would be my ideal for both downtowns as well. But not likely.
It's important to remember that we live in a community of competing and complementary interests. There is no ideal route through Uptown Waterloo. History and geography have created a space where it is virtually impossible to run an ideal LRT route anywhere.
ReplyDeleteUptown Waterloo is unfortunately in a limbo where its historic downtown is not dense enough to support a higher level of transport. To do so would require a serious compromise of the existing streetscape and height. Ironically historic downtown Galt and Preston are more analogous to the examples of medium-density European urban environments that can support LRT without dramatically changing the urban fabric beyond its historic character. Yes, Waterloo has some parking lots that may be redeveloped in time but I would hate to see the old Seagram warehouse lost for the sake of a marginally better corner.
I'm not sure that hard decisions are the right course of action. This is a community with a tendency for long memories. Ask people of a certain age about Kitchener City Hall or the multiple plans to reshape downtown Kitchener into various grand visions.