(04-16-2016, 05:10 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]They say that the only stupid question is the one not ask, so here goes. Â Why are any fences required for the ION?
Because arguing with legal departments is a pain, I'm guessing.
(04-16-2016, 05:39 PM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't. I don't have them handy but I've posted lots of photos of other examples of LRT systems operating directly next to multi-use paths at speed with either a hedge or a knee-heigh fence as a demarcator.
Have a look at pages
39 and
40 of this thread, with many pictures posted and linked showing LRTs with minimal or no fences around them.
I know it's common for parallel streets in KW to cross, but do we really need to fabricate a new intersection for the LRT?
Based on the other intersection closures starting the same date, it's likely Francis and King closing.
(04-16-2016, 09:15 PM)timio Wrote: [ -> ]I know it's common for parallel streets in KW to cross, but do we really need to fabricate a new intersection for the LRT?
Based on the other intersection closures starting the same date, it's likely Francis and King closing.
Yeah, someone followed the Duke curve around and didn't realize it became Francis.
(04-16-2016, 04:30 PM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]There are all sorts of fence designs that would serve that purpose and be more presentable. For example:
I think, though, that even a black chain link fence would be more presentable than the standard galvanized steel. At a bare minimum, it doesn't look like it will be too high.
To me at least it seems more like a fence that goes with a house, I can't see it as a stand alone fence in the park. I dunno maybe it is more distracting than a standard fence that I can't help but look at it and notice it.
(04-17-2016, 04:33 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]We don't need a big massive prison fence.
And as I pointed out, a big chain link fence has the added disadvantage that it traps things
in (such as wildlife, a stray dog or a drunken straggler) as much as out particularly if set up in a corridor fence-in-both-sides configuration.
I've tweeted a few local politicians about this - if I don't get anywhere I might contact the media for some help with this one. If enough people fight out against this, we might be able to at least get it changed to something more attractive, if they're dead-set on having it some ridiculous height.
This is so stupid and it makes me so angry.
Yeah... That's a real great way to get arrested real quick!
Jane Mitchell is confirming on Twitter that they actually have no idea what GrandLinq is going to do through Waterloo Park. That, to me, is absolutely inexcusable. How can they just say blindly "do whatever you want" and not be involved with decisions like these?!
(04-17-2016, 12:07 PM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]Jane Mitchell is confirming on Twitter that they actually have no idea what GrandLinq is going to do through Waterloo Park. That, to me, is absolutely inexcusable. How can they just say blindly "do whatever you want" and not be involved with decisions like these?!
Well, you could try reading the
project agreement to see whether there's anything about asethetics in public places.
On the other hand, that side of Waterloo Park already has a lot of chain link fencing, so maybe they just need to add signs that say DO NOT FEED THE TRAMS.
I remember that originally there were only going to be visual barriers, like trees and bushes. Then once the project started, it became a fence. I'm also not happy about how this is going to look.
Getting creative, maybe the City could make use of the fence and make a community garden the length of this section? There are now thousands of apartment dwellers nearby at Barrelyards, several of whom I'm sure would be happy to have a plot there.
If not, a hedge or more decorative fence would be nice.