Is Iron Horse Trail really threatened?

I wonder if the reaction to the proposed realignment of a section of the Iron Horse Trail, as written up in today's Record, might be a little over the top.

The story, quoting local transportation activist and cycling supporter Mike Boos and Life on a Bike blogger Chris Klein (both members of the Tri-Cities Transport Action Group, aka TriTAG), is about the vestigial tail end of the trail, a section from Park Street to Caroline Street in Waterloo. The Iron Horse Trail effectively ends at Caroline, where cyclists, inline skaters and walkers are dumped onto the road and sidewalks. Mady Development Corp., which has already begun work on 144 Park, wants this last bit shuffled over to a property line, so that there's a condo on one side and a parking garage on the other: effectively, Iron Horse Trail users would burp out onto Caroline from a valley of concrete.

Boos and Klein fear this could ruin this end of the trail. Certainly, it may not be an appealing entry point, certainly not as nice as the shaded path that is there now. And I can imagine many graffiti opportunities. We should want to make bicycle infrastructure more appealing, not less appealing.

But the developer is promising to widen the trail, designate ped and bike lanes and add some public art. Might not be so bad. And frankly, the actual transition from the trail to Caroline Street that exists now is not pretty. I have often wondered if something better could be done with it. Maybe this will be it.

 

 

Comments

[Mike Boos]

The claim being made by the developer is that leaving the trail in place will mean the trail is in a concrete canyon between parking garages. What he doesn't mention is that the move will also place it between two parking garages, one of which the developer has no control over the appearance. Who's to say you can't bring those improvements to the existing trail?

The proposed new trail doesn't do a whole lot to improve things anyway - there won't be enough natural light or space for tree cover, and the path itself will only be 2 m wide, when generally accepted standards today call for 3 m for safe cycling. A 'pedestrian' walkway is also provided, but it's so full of obstructions that they'll use the more direct cycling area instead.

There are examples out there of developments that actually respect their surroundings - look up the Flat Iron Lofts in Toronto. Mixed uses and they're leaving the trail there intact. Waterloo should demand a higher standard of its developers.

[Chris]

As one of the quoted concerned citizens in this article, I can say that the interference with Iron Horse is only the worst item of a bad lot.

For instance: The combined development will have almost 500 parking spaces in a location that is incredibly walkable, cycleable, and next to a future LRT station.

It will push the rerouted trail through a canyon of parking garages on one side, and then over the entrance to another parking garage on the other.

If we were talking about a development that would contribute to a vibrant uptown, and was respectful of (or seeked to enhance) the current trail, this would be a different conversation. Instead, we are setting the precedent that Waterloo's trails are no obstacle to developers' ambitions.

And this, while the Region is trying to find $3M in funding for the Spur Trail on the other side of King? Just underscores how far off the plot the city of Waterloo may be.

Google up "flatiron lofts" and take a look at what development possibilities we *could* see in Waterloo, that would be a positive contribution to our city rather than a dormitory and parkade.

[Kevin]

Bill, there's an LRT station set to go in at Allen and Caroline. It's for this reason that so many people want to keep the trailhead visible and accessible.

[dmatos]

The best argument against relocating the trail (and, in fact, putting it back to its original terminus, right at the corner of Caroline and Allen), is that it is going to be much more important with the advent of LRT. There is a station planned right on Allen, between Caroline and King. A segregated bicycle path that does not include sharing space with cars at the station would be a wonderful thing to help support multi-modal transportation.

Not only that, the proposed trail relocation then runs down Caroline Street in front of the new condo development, crossing in front of the parking garage entrances and the building entrances, increasing the risks for cyclists.

Finally, it's a sad reminder of the importance (or lack of) that's placed on cycling infrastructure, even when it's established and well used, when we're willing to consider pushing it aside to enable cash-grab developments which offer nothing at the street level to lure non-residents to the neighbourhood. An especially poor decision, given how close the development is going to be to the foot traffic generated by the nearby LRT station.

[Tanya McMann]

I don't think it will have any effect on us cyclists but it won't do much for the trail as a walking path or for the neighbourhood in general. Just look at the giant walls on that new condo that will line the trail, and Park Street.

We're talking about twin towers with a giant base structure create an enormous footprint, killing any sense of place for two square blocks. Who wants to walk past a giant flat wall? It will have a negative effect on the community.

If it had commercial storefront space at the bottom floor, or had large parkland over most of the property, it would be different... but it's just going to be a giant freaking wall on the left, and a large parking garage on the right.

If the city okays this, they're not doing their jobs.

[Rob (Mk.II)]

Esthetics do matter on trails. A path between parking garages is ugly and ugliness tends to bring out the worst aspects of human nature. I can see broken glass and other forms of vandalism being the norm on this section regardless of the width of the trail. There are also issues of personal safety particularly at night.

[MichaelLipka]

The concern the struck me here is that the proposed section of trail would be adjacent to building exits.

It's never a good idea to have cyclists moving past doors where pedestrians are exiting. This is one of the reasons we don't allow cyclists on sidewalks.