Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
08-27-2016, 10:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2016, 12:07 PM by Canard.)
The rectangular cutouts in the concrete are for redundant inductive loops for traffic control only.
No progress at Cameron Heights or KCI crossovers.
Railway crossing signals are in at Waterloo Park on the "south" crossing.
UoW platform is getting the same concrete rework for stay current grounding that R&T park got a few weeks ago. 3 more platforms to go after these two.
Bearanger TPSS enclosure is finished off - wood on back, dense vertical black bars on front. Columbia had the poles in place; Northfield TPSS is just about finished off. Not sure how I feel about them.
The crossing behind Albert McCormic Arena has arms now and the guys are wiring/testing them this morning.
Tons of work at the OMSF! Must be 50 guys out in the yard, at least.
Ballasted track is now in place in both directions across the Northfield bridge over the Conestoga Parkway.
Embedded track curve at Northfield/King is complete! Northfield traffic has now shifted to the south side of the Rapidway.
Posts: 2,004
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
125
Quote:UoW platform is getting the same concrete rework for stay current grounding that R&T park got a few weeks ago. 3 more platforms to go after these two.
What is this about exactly? I have no idea what "stay current grounding" means, unfortunately.
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Oops - "stray". The Project Agreement says that the rebar in the platforms has to be welded (at least one of the bars that runs the full length must be welded to every "width" rebar). They missed this on the first 5 platforms they poured so have to jackhammer them up pretty good. Oops!
Posts: 2,004
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
125
Aha, makes sense. Hopefully they either got it right the first time or caught it the second time at Caroline - it would be slightly ironic if they had to repair it a second time!
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Posts: 6,905
Threads: 32
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
224
Great article out of Ottawa (from a fellow I went to High School with!):
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news...as-history
Posts: 2,015
Threads: 11
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
77
I came across this old diagram of the which helps to answer my own question of a few pages back about what exactly is being installed at the platforms now and later:
http://rapidtransit.regionofwaterloo.ca/...pdf#page=4
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Posts: 495
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation:
20
08-28-2016, 03:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-28-2016, 03:36 PM by Elmira Guy.)
Charging fees to the townships for services they do not benefit from is absurd.
While the title of this article is slightly (and deliberately I'm sure) inflammatory, it's absurd to charge fees for services that do not exist. Why should reisdents of Conestogo, Maryhill, Heidelburg, Wellesley, et al pay for transit when there is no transit available in those communities? Elmira and St Jacobs have transit (sub par though it may be), and residents of those communities rightly pay for it. But the other communities in the townships are not going to see transit service for decades, yet the region may very well decide to charge $3,600 per new home no matter where in the township they are built? If the chooses this option, is it unfair for residents of the townships to expect some transit service in return for their money, or is that asking too much?
I am an unswerving supporter of LRT but I don't think people should have to pay for something when there community is not serviced by it.
Region Eyes Fees On Township Builds To Help Finance LRT.
http://observerxtra.com/2016/08/18/regio...nance-lrt/
Posts: 1,935
Threads: 102
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
18
I agree with you Elmira_Guy but I think the argument would likely be:
"Rapid Transit will prevent suburban sprawl protecting all the townships from these changes.
While I agree it will cut down suburban sprawl and the associated costs that come with it, I just don't see how that significantly benefits the individual Township homeowner.
I hope this idea does not come to pass as it may prevent future rapid transit extensions and lines within the region.
Posts: 495
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation:
20
08-28-2016, 04:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-28-2016, 04:13 PM by Elmira Guy.)
Is it not already the case though that the cities are not permitted to expand out into the townships? For example, is there not a green belt between Waterloo and Woolwich?
Seems to me that residents of the townships should be getting some sort of rebate seeing as they had their waste transfer stations shut down and are now being forced to bring all rubbish and yard waste (that can't be curbed) into Erb St landfill. I mention that as I see it as indicative of the view held by the region towards the townships. Less important, but still a good source of revenue even if the services being charged for are not made available.
I'm curious to see what others think. It will be quite indicative of how people view the townships and their residents
|