Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
It's official!!
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Absolutely thrilled to see the new Ontario standard LRT icon make its premiere in Waterloo Region! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/wrLRT?src=hash">#wrLRT</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/chrisjamesdrew">@chrisjamesdrew</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/RegionWaterloo">@RegionWaterloo</a> https://t.co/aXiqicskTQ</p>— iain (@Canardiain) <a href="https://twitter.com/Canardiain/status/787041221143298048">October 14, 2016</a></blockquote>
Beyond all realms of thrilled! 
Posts: 10,849
Threads: 67
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
392
Posts: 1,222
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2015
Reputation:
40
Does the ION track count as a lane?
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
No. If you're suggesting they should use another word, what word should they use?
Posts: 8,032
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
217
The Record is also reporting the work to rebuild some of the concrete platforms, using the same quotes as CTV it seems.
http://www.therecord.com/news-story/6912...y-mistake/
Of course, bravo to the record for clearly and accurately stating:
"The cost falls on GrandLinq as part of its light rail project agreement with the Region of Waterloo."
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-15-2016, 12:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-15-2016, 12:35 PM by Canard.)
GrandLinq has a paint crew out this morning painting all the traction power substations to remove the graffiti! There are also, unfortunately, a whackload of guys at R&T who are now chipping away the concrete that was already repoured once *again*. Holy moley.
Posts: 779
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
44
(10-14-2016, 03:11 PM)Canard Wrote: Yes! Also, all the streetlights in the King/Victoria are now all the "pancake" super-bright LED ones. I seem to remember comments before about them not being the new ones. Well, they are now!
Why would they change them twice in about two weeks? Kind of silly to not do it the first time!
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-15-2016, 11:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 08:29 AM by Canard.)
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-15-2016, 11:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 08:30 AM by Canard.)
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-15-2016, 11:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 08:30 AM by Canard.)
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-15-2016, 11:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 08:29 AM by Canard.)
Posts: 4,485
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
213
(10-14-2016, 10:14 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The Record is also reporting the work to rebuild some of the concrete platforms, using the same quotes as CTV it seems.
http://www.therecord.com/news-story/6912...y-mistake/
Of course, bravo to the record for clearly and accurately stating:
"The cost falls on GrandLinq as part of its light rail project agreement with the Region of Waterloo."
So is anybody clear on the real reason for the re-work? People around here were I believe convinced it was to ground the rebar. But the article mentions only the distance from the track. So it is not clear to me which is the real explanation (or maybe two mistakes were made and both are correct).
Posts: 54
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation:
0
(10-16-2016, 05:35 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: (10-14-2016, 10:14 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The Record is also reporting the work to rebuild some of the concrete platforms, using the same quotes as CTV it seems.
http://www.therecord.com/news-story/6912...y-mistake/
Of course, bravo to the record for clearly and accurately stating:
"The cost falls on GrandLinq as part of its light rail project agreement with the Region of Waterloo."
So is anybody clear on the real reason for the re-work? People around here were I believe convinced it was to ground the rebar. But the article mentions only the distance from the track. So it is not clear to me which is the real explanation (or maybe two mistakes were made and both are correct).
I thought they had already made an error with distance to track in Waterloo a while back. That is why I was surprised to hear they made the error again.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
(10-16-2016, 05:35 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: So is anybody clear on the real reason for the re-work? People around here were I believe convinced it was to ground the rebar. But the article mentions only the distance from the track. So it is not clear to me which is the real explanation (or maybe two mistakes were made and both are correct).
(10-16-2016, 07:01 AM)C Plus Wrote: I thought they had already made an error with distance to track in Waterloo a while back. That is why I was surprised to hear they made the error again.
Two separate issues. The media is correct that the new platform rework that started in the past few weeks was for the distance to the rail CL. They don't know about the grounding issue.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
10-16-2016, 08:45 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 08:46 AM by Canard.)
|
