News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.4K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1.1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 399     0 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

^That video drove home to me how much drab, grey subterranean concrete there is in the GO station network. For all the emphasis on big colossal station buildings and parking garages, you’d think ML would try to put a bit of colour in those underfround passages. I see they are using a more elaborate amount of lighting, and lots of mirrors.... but what’s with the uniform gray pallette?

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
^That video drove home to me how much drab, grey subterranean concrete there is in the GO station network. For all the emphasis on big colossal station buildings and parking garages, you’d think ML would try to put a bit of colour in those underfround passages. I see they are using a more elaborate amount of lighting, and lots of mirrors.... but what’s with the uniform gray pallette?

- Paul
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Two thoughts:

One, it shouldn't be that expensive, when building, to consider including solar reflection technology; that could bring some natural light down.

This idea, for those unfamilar w/the tech: https://www.solatube.com/residential/daylighting-technology

Second thought, the under-track tunnels would be a good spot for a public art component in stations.

I can see where one would avoid paint or dyed concrete; the former could be seen to invite tagging, while the latter can be hard to colour-match for patches.

But, art, usually, are gets left alone.

Make it a requirement that the piece use bright colour, and add warm lighting; placed on both side of the tunnels between the tracks it would add a lot to the quality of the commute for GO Riders.
 
crs1026 said:
^That video drove home to me how much drab, grey subterranean concrete there is in the GO station network. For all the emphasis on big colossal station buildings and parking garages, you’d think ML would try to put a bit of colour in those underfround passages. I see they are using a more elaborate amount of lighting, and lots of mirrors.... but what’s with the uniform gray pallette?

- Paul
Click to expand...

I used to often transfer at Dorval's intermodal station in Montreal to the AMT (Montreal's GO.) The underground passageway acted as a greenhouse, and it was filled with tropical plants. It was gorgeous to see, especially in the dead of winter when it would be ~20 degrees below outside.

1616086952814.png


I'd love to see something similar on GO.
 
SaugeenJunction said:
Lots of places this could go, but decided on here. Looks like changes to the environmental assessment process for transit projects, including some exemptions (maybe)? Would love for some input from some bright minds.

O. Reg. 231/08: TRANSIT PROJECTS AND METROLINX UNDERTAKINGS​

Click to expand...

^I’m not a lawyer, but my inexpert reading of the Reg seems to suggest that its effect is to place everything Ml does into the TPAP process (as opposed to the full EA process). This doesn’t seem to mean ML is exempted from conducting a study, it just avoids a Catch 22 where some things can be done by TPAP and others must be done by EA. Simplifies and makes the rules and process more consistent.

To digress, The interesting discovery for me (I had never actually read the Metrolinx Act) was how much the Minister’s approval is written into the Metrolinx Act. I had always been under the impression that QP had quietly politicised Ml’s operation by requiring the Minister vet all their decisions. It turns out, if ML wants to run the 16:55 train at 16:50, they really do need the Minister’s signoff. By law, ML is more of a Ministry of Transportation than I had appreciated.

The other interesting discovery was that all the sections giving ML the authority to dabble in municipal transit were qualified by words such as “with the agreement of the municipality”. There are lots of ways that QP can coerce municipalities to agree to things, but on paper a unilateral SuperLinx amalgamation would require a change in legislation.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
^I’m not a lawyer, but my inexpert reading of the Reg seems to suggest that its effect is to place everything Ml does into the TPAP process (as opposed to the full EA process). This doesn’t seem to mean ML is exempted from conducting a study, it just avoids a Catch 22 where some things can be done by TPAP and others must be done by EA. Simplifies and makes the rules and process more consistent.

To digress, The interesting discovery for me (I had never actually read the Metrolinx Act) was how much the Minister’s approval is written into the Metrolinx Act. I had always been under the impression that QP had quietly politicised Ml’s operation by requiring the Minister vet all their decisions. It turns out, if ML wants to run the 16:55 train at 16:50, they really do need the Minister’s signoff. By law, ML is more of a Ministry of Transportation than I had appreciated.

The other interesting discovery was that all the sections giving ML the authority to dabble in municipal transit were qualified by words such as “with the agreement of the municipality”. There are lots of ways that QP can coerce municipalities to agree to things, but on paper a unilateral SuperLinx amalgamation would require a change in legislation.

- Paul
Click to expand...
You should talk to some of our mutual friends about this. It truly is incredible how many changes - positive and negative - get (and have gotten) scuppered at the last minute because of any perceived detriment to the governing power.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top