<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Hi All, </div><div><br></div><div>I made a 2 hour site visit Tuesday along King (& 1 block west) from Beithaupt to John. Here is what I found:</div><div><br></div><div><b>Viability (esp. re: safety) of a bi-directional LRT along the west side of King</b> is made more possible by limited King Street access by vehicles to parking "lots" of various buildings:</div><div>My very detailed site visit of current parking "lots" for buildings along King from Wellington St. to John St. showed that <b>every parking area currently along this section of King (west side) could have its access fairly conveniently redirected to side streets or a back street-- with one exception</b>, St Mark's Lutheran Church at Green St. (an innovative technological solution is possible). Specific construction possibilities: 2 laneway extensions from Wellington & Agnes (1 each), 3 new access driveways from Walter between Agnes & Park. Relatively little cost would be involved. And if it done just before King St. in front of their buildings is torn up, then they will very much appreciate that their business or school or hospital or? suffers little because of the long construction delays! Minimizing construction complaints is good needed PR for the project </div><div><div><div><br></div><div>Let's assume that all safety concerns can be minimized at least possibly by: (above) re-directed off-street parking access; LRT barrier-separation from sidewalk (planters?) and cars/trucks (small 401 style?); possible fence on top of the road-barrier for cyclist (if adjacent to LRT track) & pedestrian safety (as on 401 barriers near rest stops); banks of 5 very bright red LED lights that cycle on in the direction of the approaching LRT.</div><div><br></div><div>With greater emphasis on more & safer bicycle-ways (Increasingly as climate calamity and economic necessity <b>soon</b> forces a more frugal existence beyond our worst "dreams"), I would suggest that an improved Montreal-model for a protected 2-way bicycle-way be seriously considered along the east side of King St. between Francis (K) and William (W). Innovative use of electrical control system technology could used here also to make cyclist/car (or truck) contact points safer. The west-side sidewalk could be moved over to create sufficient space on the east side for this safe/fast bike-way.</div><div><br></div><div>The suggested cross-section of this new King St would then be (west to east): sidewalk, planter barrier, LRT track, small 401-style barrier (with fence attached if a bicycle lane is beside), Kit. direction car lane, shared turning & emergency lane, Wat. direction lane, 401-style barrier with fence attached), planters, sidewalk.</div><div><br></div><div>If the safety of a bi-directional hybrid (proven German lithium-metal-polymer battery & proven Ford V-10 combustion engine) LRT adjacent to the west-side sidewalk can be sufficiently assured, then we can reap the great advantages of such an LRT track design & vehicle:</div><div>1)<b> Increase intensification potential on King:</b> In conjunction with a relatively inexpensive/interconnection LRT single-track "commuter" corridor (at least along the Iron Horse Rail/Trail from Caroline to under the CN mainline, then east to the GO-Train Station by King), the LRT on King (W to K), could operate in peak period mode (1 to 3 stations) and non-peak mode (all the other "bus" </div><div>stops). Intensification-effects decrease with distance from station/stop.</div><div>2) <b>Further intensification</b>: The less-rider-attracting buses would be replaced by the LRT (smaller versions for non-peak demand along streets?)</div><div>3)<b> Better King St. access from the many east-side driveways</b>:</div><div>4) <b>Fairer to Downtown Waterloo small businesses</b>: LRT track on west-side will be fairer to often older small business on the east-side who would retain convenient street parking;</div><div>5) <b>Community PR Improvement</b>: Replace noisy sharp 90 degree LRT turn at Caroline & Allen -- instead would have a very gradual "commuter" LRT 50 degree track turn from Caroline onto the Iron Horse new Rail?Trail;</div><div>6) <b>Better & less costly use of scarce King St. corridor space</b>.</div><div>7) <b>Cost (one quarter of capital cost) & bad aesthetics of overhead LRT wire (catenary) avoided by hybrid LRT.</b></div><div><br></div><div><b>Many Waterloo Region citizens still have LRT doubts</b>. Even with an approach such as I have just suggested will produce some <b>construction complaints which will fire-up the doubters</b>. What are the related possible advantages of the inclusion of a relatively inexpensive addition of a Commuter Corridor along the existing rail corridor as described partially above (part of a north Waterloo to Ainslie Terminal rail-line corridor?) ? Such an inexpensive (longer) Commuter Corridor can be completed very quickly with virtually no road disruptions. It could be in place long before King St., etc. road construction is completed and attract many riders because of it's "fast" time, capacity and World-class innovation renown. Some car drivers who normally use King would probably use it -- in addition to the longer distance commuters (W to C, C to K) and GO-Train commuters. </div><div><br></div><div>Regards.</div><div>Robert</div><div><br></div><div><div>PS: I also explored the side issue of <b>"Zeek's" mall area access to King:</b> Let me suggest that access to the "Zeck's" Mall to King from the new underpass road would be better for the mall if it <b>shared the access road with the funeral home</b> because it would be less disruptive of mall parking space. This is so because of its mall-perimeter location and because the mall would only contribute half the width of the driveway. Also the access would be towards lower ground in the mall and therefore not have to be as long. The Breithaupt/Moore Streets' present connection -- sloped down to King -- would be best maintained. This situation would mean a staggered cross-connection with King. To me this could work if the traffic lights at both King connectors work in sync. And it would work best if you have on King two regular size opposing traffic lanes with a shared turning/emergency lane in the middle. (The middle lane could be "bisected" by the rail bridges middle support pillar where the middle lane could "bulge" to allow traffic past a possible stalled vehicle opposite the pillar).</div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></body></html>