The tragic problem of local speeders

There's been some friction regarding Auburn Street in Waterloo between the city and the local residents regarding traffic calming measures. This post is not about that.

This is about Councilor Mark Whaley's quote at the end of the linked article, regarding the problem of drivers speeding along this residential street:

"We know that most of the speeders are those who live in the neighbourhood. It's frustrating."

How could anyone be speeding past that obvious "children playing" sign?

 This touches off something I remember from a Kitchener city council discussion on raised crosswalks for Williamsburg Road. Council observed that because 92% of traffic was local, the speeders must be among the same local residents calling for traffic calming. Some people have expressed the sentiment that instead of calling for traffic calming, local residents should just drive slower in their own neighbourhood.

It's obvious, isn't it? It's despicable that someone would speed in their own neighbourhood, on the same streets their own kids may be crossing. If we could only get people to see that, they'd drive slower and more carefully, at least on their home turf. Right?

But that idea leaves me feeling a little hollow. Why, for instance, is there not a similar outrage to drivers who speed through the neighbourhoods of others? If it's despicable to endanger your own kids, why is it not considered as bad (or worse) to endanger a stranger's family?

And then, of course, there's the troublesome issue that asking people to drive more slowly... doesn't work. Nor does arbitrarily reducing speed limits (at least, not without taking other steps.) We tend to drive on streets at the speed we feel comfortable at. On wide open roads with no parked cars, gentle sweeping turns and few obstructions, we naturally drive fast-- often faster than the posted limit.

It doesn't matter where we are, and whose kids are crossing the road. Perhaps near home, our comfort level goes up with familiarity, and we speed up a little, take corners we've taken a hundred times before a little faster. But we can't stop that by wishing it away.

(UK DOT 1987, via SRTS)

Unfortunately, as the cliche goes, speed kills. If we could reduce vehicle speeds, especially on neighbourhood roads, not only would accidents be more avoidable, but they'd also be less lethal. So how do we really get people to slow down?

The answer lies mainly in the design of our streets, and the ways that design can influence our behaviour. Some design measures, like speed bumps, have serious unintentional effects in impeding and damaging transit and fire vehicles. But other measures exist: steps like narrowing the roadway, providing crossing islands, or reducing crossing distances at intersections with neckdowns can cause us to unconsciously drive a little slower.

Neckdowns make crossing easier and turning vehicles slower. (via Streetsblog)

The presence of on-street parking in a tighter environment also contributes to an instinctive lightening of the gas pedal. Unfortunately, in suburban neighbourhoods, that can be impeded by the design of the houses themselves reducing the amount of room to park along the curb.

It's important to note that these measures can all help, but we don't really have a silver bullet. There has been growing talk in North American cities that we'd be better off with a 30km/h speed limit (as well as the predictable knee-jerk reactions against it) but that's the cart, not the horse. To actually be able to change a city speed limit, the streets in our city must first bring traffic down to that number by design. Which helps explain why complete streets, and rightsizing of overbuilt roadways, are all important.

So it's good to note that while some measures have been rolled back due to residents' objections, some of the Auburn Street calming measures (such as raised crosswalks) will still proceed.

Even then, traffic calming won't be enough on its own. A family member has pointed out his tree-lined, parking-lined, narrowed and speed humped street with a 30km/h speed limit as a place where, despite all these measures, some people still drive like idiots. Maybe these measures help to alleviate the problem, but they can't solve it.

It looks pretty nice. Maybe there's a Reckless Drivers Anonymous up the road?

So maybe, for lack of any magic bullet improvement, we should still ask people to drive safely. It can't hurt. Can it?

Waterloo really does bike!

There's a lot going on in Waterloo for bikes. And I'm not just talking about Waterloo Bikes (though they'll come into it). Maybe when they took the fluorine out of the water, they put something else in, because change is afoot in Waterloo-- real physical change, and change in perspective.

Uptown Protected Bike Lanes?

Let's start with the changing attitudes. I've raised the Uptown Streetscape improvement plan before but this fall it came back to the public with a preferred option. One that included bike lanes and reduced traffic lanes. That on its own really says how far we've come! We can actually talk about converting uptown's King Street away from a 4-line thoroughfare, into a complete street serving all users.

But, as proposals go, it wasn't perfect. It's the barest of concessions to bikes and doesn't really provide a welcome cycling environment to attract serious use. So Graham Roe of Waterloo Bikes, as well as yours truly, both spent some time going over the possibilities of protected bike lanes in uptown Waterloo. I put together a detailed post up on TriTAG's blog, which led to a CBC radio spot to discuss the idea. Also, a lot of great conversations during and around the public consultation.

Protected bike lane on Kinzie in Chicago

Graham has carried it further. He has spoken to the issue on radio as well, and even started and promoted a petition that edges towards one thousand signatures.

I think we've moved the needle on this one. But that is largely because it is an idea we're ready to seriously discuss, and a lot of people are realizing they'd bike if the infrastructure was accommodating. This matches what other cities have discovered-- just how many people would move around by bike if they felt it was safe and convenient.

Courtesy: Transitized

And when you throw in a study which demonstrates the rise of alternative transportation in our uptown core, we can paint a picture of a city in transition, both in thought and action.

I might have accused Waterloo in the past of losing its mojo. It seems reports of its demise were greatly exaggerated.

But wait... there's more.

Waterloo Interior Loop is a Real Thing, except for the Loop part

The city of Waterloo presented its latest public information centre on the so-called Interior Loop that I posted about before. Details and boards from the latest PIC are available on the city's website here.

Options have been condensed to concrete proposals and intentions. While the "Loop" aspect of the Interior Loop is still lacking a key piece on its north side, the rest of the trail has received very detailed, systematic examination.

Just two of two dozen points of improvement.

We see consistent crossing treatments, strong signage, trail infill, realignments and surface improvements. All to create a navigable, accessible trail. It's hard not to like, but easy to underappreciate-- this kind of systematic standard-setting usually just doesn't happen.

Okay, so there's still a failure to address the Weber St. crossing of the Laurel trail north of Lincoln. Only marginal improvements will be delivered there this time round. But on the other hand, we have real improvements that will be delivered in 2014, and are already budgeted.

Some of the expected (by me) local resistance to trail improvements has not emerged. In fact, I've heard support for the all-important resurfacing of Hillside Park trail from local residents along warnings about flooding problems that need to be handled.

Winter maintenance is still not on the cards, though.

Meanwhile...

Columbia St. W and Lexington Road Upgrades

Waterloo continues to knock off deficiencies in its east-west network. Out in the west end, a $10M widening project will add lanes, roundabouts, sidewalks and "raised" bike lanes to Columbia between Fischer-Hallmann and Erbsville. This marks the first use of raised or separated bike lanes in Waterloo. There's some chatter about whether the 4-to-2 lane adjustment makes sense on this stretch, but I'll leave that for others to worry about. Hopefully Waterloo also learned to do bike lanes and roundabouts better than this dangerous setup.

DO NOT WANT

East of the expressway, Lexington Road may see new sidewalks, bike lanes, and a multi-use trail between Davenport and University. The Public Information Centre for this is on Wednesday 11th December at Waterloo Mennonite Brethren Church (details). Can these changes be carried through successfully? It may depend on the reaction of residents on Lexington who may prefer to keep their streetscape as-is, if nobody else shows up.

I'll show up. Preserving "the look" and even a few trees can't trump basic human accessibility on foot. We're talking sidewalk on just one side, after all.

Of course, all this leaves an elephant in the room: the stretch of Lexington/Columbia between Davenport and King-- across the expressway, through four massively overspecced lanes, past a nasty choke point at Marsland and through busy Weber. This will be the hardest to deal with, but as I've pointed out before, the most necessary. Waterloo has already blinked once, but as the rest of this corridor comes together, it gets harder and harder to ignore.

What I'm wondering: with a proposed south-side multi-use trail east of the expressway, has someone tipped their hand? Does the city have something up their sleeve for overpass improvements? Has MTO softened their stance on bridge changes to improve walking and cycling?

What about Kitchener?

That's what's great about living in these twin cities. We have two (or four, including Cambridge and the regional government) chances to see good things done well. Of course, it's also two (or four) times as hard getting broad sweeping improvements through region-wide. You take what you can get.

Today, though, Waterloo gets the spotlight. They're bringing some really positive change forward, and more exciting change seems tantalizingly close.

Let's make it happen.

Waterloo Trail Improvements - summary

These are based on my recollections and conversations at the open house Wednesday.

The "Interior Loop Trail" (contest to come up with a name!) was the showcase of the proposal, and was generally positive, though with some caveats.

Link to PDF

Positives:

Overall, it's ambitious (as trail improvement plans go) to address this route so systematically, and with (according to staff) a lot of potential for change to take place even in the next year. Creating a loop enables a lot of different trips, not just back and forth from uptown, but from neighbourhood to neighbourhood in the north. Improving the quality and consistency of the trail, and taking a serious stab at wayfinding aids, are also welcome.

In addition, a lot of intersections and crossings would be improved. Not a huge amount of detail here, but again the term "systematic" really jumps to mind. Virtually every trail segment and intersection has been looked at.

Downsides: 

As you can see, it won't be a "loop" for a while. In the north is a large section that remains to be worked out, with a couple of possibilities (working out an agreement with Waterloo Inn if/when they redevelop, or following city-owned land close to the highway). But they're still conceptual.

Another small gap lies in Uptown, in the King St. area, though that's not surprising given the LRT construction plans. Also, LRT is responsible for delaying surface improvements in Waterloo Park. But, the same project may yield opportunities to extend paths and trails along the rail corridor up to Northfield and beyond (...St. Jacobs?) This intriguing possibility was raised by Jan D'ailly, chair of the Waterloo advisory committee on active transportation (WACAT).

Other noteworthy items:

Carter and Mackay streets (between Weber and University on the south-east side of the loop) are being proposed with sharrows. I had a discussion with a staffer about whether this was appropriate or desirable. These streets are very low volume wide residential streets, with sparsely used on-street parking. It could be that sharrows will be benign here, and useful wayfinding devices. It struck me as an odd context to apply sharrows in, though.

The proposed trail crossing at Weber/Mackay is still a work in progress. A couple of options were presented. This crossing will be a challenge, but also of great benefit.

Big picture:

The trail system in Waterloo is still disjoint and inconsistent, but this proposal would be a major step in bringing it together if it is followed through.

For cycling, the way we should look at the trail system is as a place where very casual or novice cyclists of any age should feel comfortable and confident to ride. Unfortunately with all of the current breaks, bad intersections and lack of signage, they are not so appealing. When a gentle trail is interrupted by 4 lanes of speeding traffic without any crossing, it is effectively a dead end for many people.

The city of Waterloo should be congratulated for attacking this problem. It's not a perfect proposal, and it's not a complete solution. But as incremental improvements go, this one is bigger than most.

Now we need to see it happen. And that's where we come in: to provide feedback and shape the proposal, and then to be willing to speak to council about the benefits it will bring.

Stay tuned.

Waterloo Trail Improvements Open House: TONIGHT!

The City of Waterloo is proposing big trail improvements over the next few years. There is an open house on the trail improvements tonight:

Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2013
6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Waterloo City Centre (City Hall)
100 Regina Street South

If you walk or cycle in the city of Waterloo and in particular on the trails below, you should check out http://waterloo.ca/atprogram for more information and drop in tonight!

Original PDF here

Note: For those with sharp eyes (it's come up a couple of times) University Avenue at Carter/Hillside Trail is not listed for crossing improvements because a crossing island is already planned there for 2014 as part of regional road reconstruction.

But don't let that stop you from coming down to the open house! This proposal deserves support and maybe you can help provide some constructive criticism.

 

 

Welcome back, Mayor Craig

It's refreshing to see Mayor Craig back in the transit debate. None of the councilors deserved to have their voices silenced, especially both the project's biggest critic (Craig) and its biggest supporter (Seiling).

Still, I was surprised by Craig's approach to this issue. He has proposed, essentially, that we should find out how much money it would cost to waste taxpayer's money. It was a curious idea, but the more I think about it, the more I realize Waterloo region is lacking a certain something that every other level of government has displayed: we aren't wasting incredible sums of money by cancelling projects.

Nobody in our region has blown hundreds of millions canceling gas plants. We haven't set a giant pile of money on fire, like Ottawa did, canceling an O-train extension and then having to spend billions more on a replacement plan for LRT just five years later. And Mr. Craig pointed it out himself-- "Toronto is cancelling things left and right"-- we have a long, long way to go before we can match the Big Smoke's ability to pile taxpayers' money into trucks, drive it off a cliff into the ocean and never see it again.

But with inspired leadership like this, we can get there. Mayor Craig says we can still cancel this rapid transit project that has remained stubbornly on time and on budget. His plan will make us a true Ontario city, stagnant and short-sighted, and we'll find out exactly how much money we can spend to get absolutely nothing.

Or perhaps not completely nothing. After all, that money will buy votes in the next election. And by gum, if that's not worth it, then my name ain't Douglas Craig.

This was originally written for the Record, but it seems they have an editorial which makes all the same points, in the same order, maybe with less sarcasm and more polish. Perhaps there was some cross-pollination... I don't mind, but I like my version better.

 

Ions and Anions

It's been a long journey, but Waterloo is getting its trains.

Like this train. Only bigger, and not made of cardboard.

With the signing of a $92.5M deal that was approved by Council on Wednesday, we are seeing the first really big commitment of funds to the rapid transit project. This brings a sense of relief: the project is becoming real.

The project is not without its detractors, of course. Back before the 2011 approval, we had T4ST-- a group of Taxpayers, ostensibly "4" Sensible Transit, but some of whom just seemed to be "4" No Transit, or anything that costs money-- that they could see, of course. Billions on roads pass by uncriticized, but the rapid transit project was a very visible target.

Still, since the 2011 vote, they've largely fallen quiet.

Quiet, like an efficient light rail system whooshing by in a cloud of delicious urbanism.

The news, lately, has been about a certain Ted Livingston, founder of Kik and born-again rapid transit opponent. Ted is an intelligent and passionate man, with a progressive bent and a desire to see a walkable Waterloo (though it's not clear if he means Waterloo the region, or Waterloo the city.) He is strongly opposed to LRT. And his concerns should not be dismissed.

But they should also not be garnering quite as much press as they have. Ted's qualifications are that he's an intelligent and passionate man, and that he's founded a tech company in the region-- well, that puts him one up (well, maybe two up) on me, but it doesn't make him an expert in urban planning.

So far, Ted's approach to the walkability problem has been a very tech-startup approach. In other words, every problem is a technical problem, and every problem can be tackled from scratch. A central thesis of Ted's approach to walkability is to focus all development on a single core within the region, and the expense of everywhere else. Within this single core, everything is in reach on foot, and both driving and transit are unnecessary. So why spend money on LRT?

On top of this, he demands that an investment in LRT should be mathematically justifiable. Now... this may be possible, but it requires agreeing with the goals and strategy driving this decision and that reflect the reality of our region. If those goals are dismissed, the justification holds no weight for you. And Ted is quick to dismiss goals that are based on mobility in a region with multiple nodes and corridors. A region like... ours.

A region that puts its best face forward?

But perhaps Ted has a point. What if we could take a startup approach to city building? With all constraints thrown aside, we could achieve something truly innovative...

... Slight problem: startups usually fail. Startups test risky solutions to problems, and when a solution is a good one, things turn out fantastic for those involved, but everyone is really, really surprised... because it just doesn't happen very often. Success is the exception.

So I hope I can be forgiven for being suspicious of any argument that doesn't allow for who we are and what we have now. Waterloo is an incubator of startups, a place where ideas can be rapidly tested in an environment that welcomes and encourages innovation. As a city or a region, though, it can't be run like a startup gamble. There's a lot more than venture capital at stake.

But still-- business acumen is business acumen, and Ted has it. This lends his words weight. (And we do like a good controversy and narrative, so media has fanned the small flame he has lit.)

But we should also acknowledge all of the other voices of the business community who have spoken for LRT and rapid transit. Google. Agfa. Open Text. Desire2Learn. The Perimeter Institute. Colliers. The KW Chamber of Commerce. Communitech-- the same Communitech that works to create the right conditions for companies like Kik to come into existence and thrive. Even plucky startups like Snapsort, who produced a strongly positive and evocative (and, to be fair, sometimes wildly inaccurate) infographic supporting LRT, proving that it's not just the big fish who have this opinion.

All sorts of people do.

So... that's Ted. Someone who is making a sincere attempt to boil the LRT project down to a single metric, but won't hold still long enough to listen to a chain of reasoning that leads him away from it, and hasn't learned that running a city is not the same as running a startup that can bankrupt and be discarded the moment it goes disfunctional. None the less, I'm still trying to reach out to him. Being for walkability, and seeking to understand complexity (or at least going through the motions), makes him different from other more one-dimensional LRT opponents.

"You remember that one person who wanted us to never invest any money at all for any reason ever?"

Now, let's move on to someone else: Mayor Brenda Halloran. On Wednesday, she chose to vote "no" to a train order that had come in $2.5M under budget. Citing concerns about the cost and our ability to fund social programs, Halloran has decided to keep carrying the anti-LRT torch she held aloft in 2011.

In 2011, that was fine. In 2011, I seem to recall her saying that she would not be obstructive if council decided to proceed with rapid transit. In 2011, she made a decision to listen to her constituents, and there were enough voices to make her vote no. She took a reasonable position in 2011, even if I don't agree with it.

Nor, I suspect, did he.

Fast forward to 2013, and on the table is a vehicle order, procured with imagination and daring, for a price millions under budget. And Halloran voted: no. Even as Councillor Brewer of Cambridge voted yes to bring this project forward while expressing Cambridge's unhappiness about their LRT being relegated to a future stage 2, Waterloo's mayor expressed a desire to stop this process in its tracks.

There is no way to interpret this except as a decision by the mayor to be seen opposing this project. And in doing so-- on a motion that is a shining example of a well-run project-- she has abdicated the ability to hold this project to a high standard of fiscal management and restraint. By voting "no" when things are done well, she will have no influence at all when she perceives something is not meeting her standard. (Unless she can somehow vote "no" twice?)

In other words, I believe she has decided that opposing the project all the way down is better than being a steward of the biggest project in Waterloo region history.

Better for who, though?

Better for this dufus pressing the red button marked "DO NOT PRESS".

Still. It's 2013, over two years since this blog started, and over two years since the big issue that got me interested in local affairs was given the green light to proceed. Today I got to see a tangible piece of the real deal on a trailer in front of regional headquarters; I got to hear the vision and determination of many of our local leaders; I felt like Waterloo region really has seized the opportunity to pull itself out of the sprawl trap that so many other cities struggle in.

We are, after all, a city-- a region-- of innovation. But we're also a city-- a region-- of history and tradition. We build on our rich pasts. We get things done here. And we move forward.

Bring on the Ion.

ION LOADING... [---> 40%            ]

155 Caroline: deadline approaches, have your say

On Monday, Waterloo council will consider the approval of zoning changes and public land disposal that will enable the construction of 155 Caroline St. and reroute the Iron Horse trail. It is not a development that I have been in favour of, and my thoughts on why were summed up over a year ago here.

And if you want to speak to council on the matter, please see here for lots of helpful links. Do you think this is the right thing to do? Do you disagree? This is a good time to be heard.

As for my opinion, I'll just put here what I sent to the mayor and city councilors. To sum up, I could be talked into rerouting the trail, if there is an overall public benefit. But no such benefit is in the offing, at best what we have faced is damage control.

I am writing to express my concern about the city of Waterloo staff recommendation to dispose of a portion of the Iron Horse trail to allow for the development of 155 Caroline. I believe that the current plan represents a disregard for the public realm, and a missed opportunity for Waterloo to show leadership in developing a better Uptown.

To be clear, I am not advocating that the Iron Horse trail "must not be altered under any circumstances". Rather, I believe that the city of Waterloo has failed to ensure that the disposal of a key piece of public infrastructure results in an overall public benefit.

Developers are free to build within the codes and zoning laws put in place by the city. But cities routinely use variances and zoning changes beneficial to development as "carrots" to encourage development to a higher standard.

The disposal and land transfer of a portion of the Iron Horse Trail is the mother of all carrots. It creates an incredibly lucrative opportunity for the developer. In exchange for a favour of this magnitude, the developer should bring forward a plan that creates a significant improvement for the city of Waterloo and for residents in surrounding neighbourhoods.

Instead, what we have seen is a substandard proposal from a corporation that wants to do this its own way. Its response to numerous concerns and complaints have been to make superficial changes to limit the damage. My own conversations with the developer revealed an unwillingness to change anything meaningful, only to allay (and sometimes belittle) people's concerns.

Since city staff have been so accepting of a mediocre outcome, it falls on your shoulders to reject this proposal and demand better. There is tremendous opportunity to create a development here that is beneficial to all, that creates a sense of place, that follows smart intensification practices, and leverages our investment in active transportation and transit.

Most of all there is a massive opportunity for the city of Waterloo to raise the bar on what it considers good development.

Please reject the disposal of the Iron Horse trail and zoning changes for 155 Caroline on Monday.