+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Land Development and Real Estate (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Urban Areas (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 50 fl | U/C (/showthread.php?tid=38)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - panamaniac - 09-21-2020
(09-21-2020, 07:01 PM)ac3r Wrote:I share that memory - and remember my fascination with bulldozers and “steam shovels” (!).(09-21-2020, 05:53 PM)Square Wrote: And yet another development which is getting boarded up with no windows for viewing
I remember when I was a kid, they'd often have little port holes cut through the wood with orange mesh fence so you could still look through to see if you were curious.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - jeffster - 09-21-2020
(09-21-2020, 07:01 PM)ac3r Wrote:(09-21-2020, 05:53 PM)Square Wrote: And yet another development which is getting boarded up with no windows for viewing
I remember when I was a kid, they'd often have little port holes cut through the wood with orange mesh fence so you could still look through to see if you were curious.
I have to wonder if it has anything with cell phone videos, potential OSHA violations, YouTube and LinkedIn.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - tomh009 - 09-21-2020
(09-21-2020, 05:53 PM)Square Wrote: And yet another development which is getting boarded up with no windows for viewing
I think the fence is only about 1.8m so you might be able to reach above it with a phone in hand to take photos.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - ijmorlan - 09-21-2020
(09-21-2020, 07:20 PM)jeffster Wrote:(09-21-2020, 07:01 PM)ac3r Wrote: I remember when I was a kid, they'd often have little port holes cut through the wood with orange mesh fence so you could still look through to see if you were curious.
I have to wonder if it has anything with cell phone videos, potential OSHA violations, YouTube and LinkedIn.
Regardless of why, I think they should be required to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. Cutting a few holes like you suggest is an utterly trivial expense, and the public has a right to ambient education — learning from what is going on around them.
But more fundamentally, they should want to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. There is something wrong with our civilization if the people who do things don’t want to be seen.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - DK519 - 09-22-2020
(09-21-2020, 11:00 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(09-21-2020, 07:20 PM)jeffster Wrote: I have to wonder if it has anything with cell phone videos, potential OSHA violations, YouTube and LinkedIn.
Regardless of why, I think they should be required to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. Cutting a few holes like you suggest is an utterly trivial expense, and the public has a right to ambient education — learning from what is going on around them.
But more fundamentally, they should want to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. There is something wrong with our civilization if the people who do things don’t want to be seen.
A cordless drill and a 4" hole saw should do the trick!
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - Rainrider22 - 09-22-2020
I was by there yesterday. I noticed that they have tiered level screening so you can see in....Not sure if they plan to cover it up but at this point it looks like they are leaving parts visible...
I remember the port holes too...
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - Square - 09-22-2020
Nope, it's closed solid today all the way to the south end of Wellington.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - panamaniac - 09-22-2020
(09-21-2020, 11:00 PM)Pijmorlan Wrote:(09-21-2020, 07:20 PM)jeffster Wrote: I have to wonder if it has anything with cell phone videos, potential OSHA violations, YouTube and LinkedIn.
Regardless of why, I think they should be required to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. Cutting a few holes like you suggest is an utterly trivial expense, and the public has a right to ambient education — learning from what is going on around them.
But more fundamentally, they should want to provide casual viewing opportunities for the public. There is something wrong with our civilization if the people who do things don’t want to be seen.
I’d wager that concern about potential legal liability (I know, but isn’t there always nowadays?), is more likely the reason than not wanting their work to be seen.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - Square - 09-22-2020
Out of all the downtown construction sites, only this one and DTK were fully covered. At least DKT, we had jgsz showing the site with pictures, here it is basically blocked off with no good vantage point.
Also I remember some one cut a small hole at DKT, and it was closed up right away, lol
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - ijmorlan - 09-22-2020
(09-22-2020, 08:22 PM)panamaniac Wrote: I’d wager that concern about potential legal liability (I know, but isn’t there always nowadays?), is more likely the reason than not wanting their work to be seen.
Liability for what? It’s absurd.
Note: not saying you are being absurd — actually, you’re probably right — but either the fear of liability is insane or the court system is insane. There is no world in which it is reasonable that people can’t see construction sites because of legal liability.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - jeffster - 09-23-2020
(09-22-2020, 11:12 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(09-22-2020, 08:22 PM)panamaniac Wrote: I’d wager that concern about potential legal liability (I know, but isn’t there always nowadays?), is more likely the reason than not wanting their work to be seen.
Liability for what? It’s absurd.
Note: not saying you are being absurd — actually, you’re probably right — but either the fear of liability is insane or the court system is insane. There is no world in which it is reasonable that people can’t see construction sites because of legal liability.
If you have ever watched Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, and familiar with some of the songs, you would understand the connection better to why they want things covered. “Come with me, and you’ll be, in a world of OSHA violations”. The context was, that Willy Wonka Factory was pretty much breaking every single safety law from the Occupation Safety and Health Administration book. While people posting violations on YouTube isn’t new, it has become more prevalent. And now the platforms being used are LinkedIn and TikTok. Either way, though, guys break the rules quite a bit (OHSA - Occupational Health and Safety Act in Ontario, for example) and companies end up with large fines for some guy goofing off if the ministry finds out.
Not to mention, guys standing around for their break (which is common) and not working during their break, simply looks like a bunch of lads standing around and doing no work, which also gets posted to YouTube and Twitter. There is no privacy in today’s world. Now you have to hide behind plywood.
EDIT NOTE: For some how, lads came out as ladies...my apologies.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - tomh009 - 09-23-2020
(09-22-2020, 08:44 PM)Square Wrote: Out of all the downtown construction sites, only this one and DTK were fully covered. At least DKT, we had jgsz showing the site with pictures, here it is basically blocked off with no good vantage point.
I have posted a bunch of photos from DTK in this thread that were shot over the fence (easy to do with a smartphone); that should be possible at Station Park as well.
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - Spokes - 09-24-2020
(09-21-2020, 10:19 AM)westwardloo Wrote: Based on the size of the pit. I would guess they are doing both towers, but they may also just be doing the foundation/ parking structure of the west tower for now.
That's what got me wondering
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - Coke6pk - 09-26-2020
(09-22-2020, 11:12 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(09-22-2020, 08:22 PM)panamaniac Wrote: I’d wager that concern about potential legal liability (I know, but isn’t there always nowadays?), is more likely the reason than not wanting their work to be seen.
Liability for what? It’s absurd.
Note: not saying you are being absurd — actually, you’re probably right — but either the fear of liability is insane or the court system is insane. There is no world in which it is reasonable that people can’t see construction sites because of legal liability.
The wall (I am assuming) is to protect passer-by's from the dangers of the work site. If a flying piece of debris flew thru a viewing hole, there would be a liability. (I also remember them, and miss them too... I'm just trying to think like a lawyer for this post)
Coke
RE: Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | U/C - ijmorlan - 09-26-2020
(09-26-2020, 10:33 PM)Coke6pk Wrote: The wall (I am assuming) is to protect passer-by's from the dangers of the work site. If a flying piece of debris flew thru a viewing hole, there would be a liability. (I also remember them, and miss them too... I'm just trying to think like a lawyer for this post)
Coke
I recall the holes having metal mesh across them, similar to chain link fence. I don’t see debris flying through as a significant or even measurable threat.