News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

hw621 said:
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/calgary-ctrain-deaths-surrey-lrt-october-2018

What can we learn from this?
Click to expand...

Not much tbh.... the ctrain is like our streetcars so the risks of fatalities is pretty much the same for this incident. unfortunately in this case the 2 victims were just at the wrong place at the wrong time or from negligence such as jay walking.
at least for the ect, the majority of the line is either grade separated or segrated row so at least 99% of the pedestrians can clue in that they shouldnt be there.
 
OneCity said:
Very sad.

And sad this has to be questioned. LRT as well as bicycle lane implementation "experts" and political supporters have staunchly defended against many design flaws which impact efficiency and more important safety. Separation being a big one in terms of both safety and efficiency. We can do much better
Click to expand...

Yes, let's slow down vehicular traffic - given accidents involving them constitute the greatest majority of transportation-related fatalities. Crickets.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Yes, let's slow down vehicular traffic - given accidents involving them constitute the greatest majority of transportation-related fatalities. Crickets.

AoD
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part. Common sense design for new builds or enhancements shouldn't be isolated to any one specific form of transit. Although with the LRT there was a lot being ignored.
 
OneCity said:
I agree for the most part. Common sense design for new builds or enhancements shouldn't be isolated to any one specific form of transit. Although with the LRT there was a lot being ignored.
Click to expand...

You just gave me a bunch of platitudes - we both know that this accident is peanuts relative to safety issues around vehicular traffic - it is making a mountain out of a molehill, like the "will you please think of the children" BS.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
You just gave me a bunch of platitudes - we both know that this accident is peanuts relative to safety issues around vehicular traffic - it is making a mountain out of a molehill, like the "will you please think of the children" BS.
Click to expand...

Please don't get at me as though I'm against improving automobile safety. That can be addressed on its own. I likely agree with you on many parts there to begin with us making your own mountain.

The point is we certainty can implement LRT in a safer manner. I'd hope that's obvious. And not only safer it would become more effecient for its own passengers and automobile users. So the benefit is greater than just safety.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
We could learn something, but we won't.
Click to expand...

OneCity said:
The point is we certainty can implement LRT in a safer manner. I'd hope that's obvious. And not only safer it would become more effecient for its own passengers and automobile users. So the benefit is greater than just safety.
Click to expand...

A lot of the time, full grade separation is not feasible or warranted (e.g Finch LRT). In which case, what are your suggestions for implementing it in a “safer manner” compared to the currently design?
 
salsa said:
A lot of the time, full grade separation is not feasible or warranted (e.g Finch LRT). In which case, what are your suggestions for implementing it in a “safer manner” compared to the currently design?
Click to expand...
Grade separation to some extent (you don't have to tunnel) can work for Finch. There's the hydro corridor, you could run the line as an elevated, and you could fence the ROW. These are all ways to isolate the two, the problem is that it makes surface rail less attractive to developers.
 
Streety McCarface said:
you could run the line as an elevated, and you could fence the ROW. These are all ways to isolate the two, the problem is that it makes surface rail less attractive to developers.
Click to expand...

Not really directed at your comment, but the general notion I've seen posted here that 'developers don't want elevated', or at least that 'elevated stymies development', feel is somewhat unfounded. I'd wager, at least in a general sense, that if given the two options of an in-median segregated ROW and an elevated guideway out front, that developers would opt for the guideway. Just because with an in-median setup, properties are oftentimes relegated to right-in/right-out. Which isn't all that great, at least compared with open passage below like offered with an elevated solution.
 
44 North said:
Not really directed at your comment, but the general notion I've seen posted here that 'developers don't want elevated', or at least that 'elevated stymies development', feel is somewhat unfounded. I'd wager, at least in a general sense, that if given the two options of an in-median segregated ROW and an elevated guideway out front, that developers would opt for the guideway. Just because with an in-median setup, properties are oftentimes relegated to right-in/right-out. Which isn't all that great, at least compared with open passage below like offered with an elevated solution.
Click to expand...

Elevated lines were generally looked down upon in North America during the 20th century. Since most were torn down, many groups have not complained about them in recent years, but dozens of miles of the L in Chicago were demolished due to community backlash and low ridership, while hundreds of miles of elevated lines in New York City, especially Manhattan, and most notably the Second Avenue Elevated, because of privacy and noise concerns. They believed subways were the future.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top