Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Let's get to the bottom of this:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Hey <a href="https://twitter.com/rideIONrt">@rideIONrt</a>, lots of discussion online about this crossing at Quiet Place in Waterloo. Is this the "final" design? Or temporary? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/wrLRT?src=hash">#wrLRT</a> <a href="https://t.co/02RZRWahGV">pic.twitter.com/02RZRWahGV</a></p>— iain (@Canardiain) <a href="https://twitter.com/Canardiain/status/860505950691766274">May 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
(total meltdown on facebook over this)
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
I expect it's final. Where the near right side of the path gets to the tracks, the Asphalt extends right to the "corner" hole between the edge of the rail-flattening grey block, and the edge of path-height dirt/gravel parallel to the tracks. If you bring the path to those corners at maximum width, there's not much room to grow. And if you do that, and people use the full asphalt width, one slight move to the outside of the path at one of those "corner" holes (two on the right side, one on the left side) and you'll have a foot/stroller/wheelchair/bicycle fall in and send someone on quite a dangerous trip. So there probably should be an asphalt-to-corner-hole gap closer to what you see on the left side, but that would either need an S-like path to dodge away from the three staggered corner holes, or would need longer rail-flattening grey blocks, neither of which I expect to see. P3 at work.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
05-05-2017, 01:10 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2017, 01:11 PM by Canard.)
I also suspect it's final, but a bunch of people are "insisting" it "must be temporary". I agree that it's less than optimal, but I cannot fathom that they would have put down asphalt only to rip it up and put wider asphalt down in the same configuration at some later date.
Can you elaborate on your comment "P3 at work."?
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
By P3 at work, I mean that you have to write down almost explicitly what you want in order to get anything remotely like it, given how much of the design is on the P3 team. So while the Region would have specified a trail go here, I would strongly think that they would not have designed it like this, for reasons of width and safety. But to make it to-the-letter-but-not-really safe, this is as much as P3 would put into it. It probably meets all the requirements that were spelled out between Canada/Ontario laws around safety, and anything the Region put into their project requirements, but it hardly qualifies as a good design, or one that the Region would have come up with had they been doing the design.
Posts: 10,281
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
If you are contracting with a company to build something for you, it really behooves you to be specific so that you can make sure that the contractor will deliver what you need.
A contractor, whether P3 or otherwise, is NOT required to deliver the best solution, only what is specified in the contract documents. If this crossing was not detailed in the contract documents, then the fault lays with the region, not with Grandlinq.
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
Hence why I said this is P3 at work, not Grandlinq at work.
Posts: 2,163
Threads: 17
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
76
Yeah, it looks pretty final to me. Final and "minimum sufficient".
It's a damn shame that they did not specify that pedestrian crossings be a proper MUT width of 3m.
I look at that, and am terrified of two-way bike traffic. You're likely to run off into the coarse gravel, and if you then hit the concrete plate from there, you're going to have a bad time. I do not like designs that increase the chance of wiping out on active railway tracks.
All of the pedestrian crossings have a chronic problem, where the asphalt sections are strictly narrower than the concrete plates. At UW, you see this narrowing frequently, even where the crossing is perpendicular. It's needless constricting of the paths. Pretty much every pedestrian crossing is needs to be about 50% wider.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
How very interesting:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/Canardiain">@Canardiain</a> Hi Iain. This crossing will be widened prior to completion. It was paved to improve access through the area in the short-term.</p>— ION (@rideIONrt) <a href="https://twitter.com/rideIONrt/status/860553680713547781">May 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 10,281
Threads: 65
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
296
(05-05-2017, 01:28 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Hence why I said this is P3 at work, not Grandlinq at work.
Really, it's the region's contracting team. If this is not specified, they missed it. Don't blame the fact that there is a private contractor involved, when everyone knows the rules.
Posts: 68
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation:
4
Don't think anyone has said it yet but anchor walls and signage are up at Fairview Park station. Without hoarding.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Well, they fixed the "o", at least. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/Canardiain">@Canardiain</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/rideIONrt">@rideIONrt</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/PrideSignsltd">@PrideSignsltd</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Grandlinq">@Grandlinq</a> noticed walking by this morning the 'O' has been adjusted.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/wrLRT?src=hash">#wrLRT</a> <a href="https://t.co/rdhHMt6A7q">pic.twitter.com/rdhHMt6A7q</a></p>— Gordon MacKenzie (@jgmacken) <a href="https://twitter.com/jgmacken/status/860118302420606976">May 4, 2017</a></blockquote>
Posts: 2,002
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
124
(05-05-2017, 10:29 PM)tomh009 Wrote: (05-05-2017, 01:28 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Hence why I said this is P3 at work, not Grandlinq at work.
Really, it's the region's contracting team. If this is not specified, they missed it. Don't blame the fact that there is a private contractor involved, when everyone knows the rules.
I think the suggestion is that the structure of a P3 increases the odds of certain details being missed and the resolution potentially being unsatisfactory. Does the contractor go back to the Region and point these out, or do they just build to spec?
Posts: 1,190
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2015
Reputation:
34
(05-05-2017, 01:10 PM)Canard Wrote: I also suspect it's final, but a bunch of people are "insisting" it "must be temporary". I agree that it's less than optimal, but I cannot fathom that they would have put down asphalt only to rip it up and put wider asphalt down in the same configuration at some later date.
They did it at UW Engineering 5 last year, and replaced it with some nice matching concrete this spring.
Posts: 1,709
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
34
(05-06-2017, 07:49 AM)jamincan Wrote: (05-05-2017, 10:29 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Really, it's the region's contracting team. If this is not specified, they missed it. Don't blame the fact that there is a private contractor involved, when everyone knows the rules.
I think the suggestion is that the structure of a P3 increases the odds of certain details being missed and the resolution potentially being unsatisfactory. Does the contractor go back to the Region and point these out, or do they just build to spec?
You build to spec. Usually, that's where the quickest, easiest money is. And then if they want it changed, it's a change order that needs to happen, and that's a lot more money than trying to bring it up with the Region and only getting paid to build the right thing, instead of the wrong thing, then take it down, then do the right thing. My experience with this comes from a relative who manages some of the big construction companies in the GGHA, and the money is always available because government contract writers never know all the details or their impacts, but if you're party to conversations with the builders, they'll be able to tell you months or years in advance of a shovel hitting the ground just what is wrong with what they're too happy to be paid to do, and how much it will cost to undo and redo it after the fact, and the profits it gives them. This is not to suggest that they are a bunch of bad people, just that they are in the business of making money, and any dollar you leave on the table to be taken, they will do their best to get it, whatever the optics of the means to that end might be.
|
