lenaitch
Senior Member
Large reflective surfaces can be problematic to surrounding residents, drivers, etc. without extensive computer modeling.
- Thread starter vic
- Start date
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Yet people keep putting windows on buildings.
lenaitch
Senior Member
It's not so much the glass as it is the coatings that are applied to it. Clear glass only reflects about 4% of the light that hits it, but there is a lot of sciency stuff behind it. Obviously, an entire highrise of glass is going to reflect more that a house window, it's simply math. There have been instances of large buildings with coated glass actually melting the siding of adjacent houses.
If this sound wall had a gloss surface, and therefore highly reflective, it could impact neighbouring buildings and cause problems for motorists, particularly at low sun angles.
cplchanb
Senior Member
also we need to always take concept renderings with a huge grain of salt. most of the time it's design architects who have utopian dream designs that the construction architects reign in.
crs1026
Superstar
I’m not sure that the original design premise of the shiny cladding will play out in real world - ie no cladding can really “hide” a guideway that large. But it may soften the look somewhat.
And it has symbollic value - simply because it is not what ML originally intended, but is a compromise based on vociferous pressure from the community. Whether it is attractive or not will always be subjective, but ML did in the end reach out to the community to find a design the community could accept.
There’s a saying - a compromise satisfies no one. But seeking input and reaching a compromise is a much better outcome and it transforms what may have started as nimbyism into something more constructive.
- Paul
And it has symbollic value - simply because it is not what ML originally intended, but is a compromise based on vociferous pressure from the community. Whether it is attractive or not will always be subjective, but ML did in the end reach out to the community to find a design the community could accept.
There’s a saying - a compromise satisfies no one. But seeking input and reaching a compromise is a much better outcome and it transforms what may have started as nimbyism into something more constructive.
- Paul
dullturtle06
Active Member
Or they could have put in a transparent sound barrier. The issue i have is the guideway looks pretty small before the sound wall installation. But with the soundwall looks absolutely horrible. Plus they could have treated the concrete with a finish coating. The concrete is already leaking water and going through the freeze thawe cycle. 2 years and it'll start chipping.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
lenaitch
Senior Member
Transparent looks 'ok' for maybe a couple of years. It would quickly get dirty and impacts such as airborne particulate, chemicals and even insect remains will start to etch it. Also, most polycarbonates are degraded by sunlight and they become brittle and start to develop hairline cracks. It would probably all need replacing inside ten years.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Nevermind that - it'd meet graffiti even earlier. I'd say patterned concrete coupled with plantings (climbing vines) works well.
AoD
Allandale25
Senior Member
KevinT
Active Member
Toolio555
New Member
Cricket cricket…another metrolinx project delayed until who knows when
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Why should QP {ie every other taxpayer in the province} pay for these increasing costs? Toronto is already getting Eglinton and Finch free of charge unlike KW, London, and Ottawa who had to fork over a good chunk of their own money to build their RT networks.
Toronto not being able to fund these stations has NOTHING to do with increased costs and EVERYTHING to do with their unwillingness to pay for it. Toronto already enjoys the lowest property tax rates in the whole damn province and this gap will continue to grow as, once again, Toronto's new budget doesn't even increase their revenue at the rate of inflation unlike every other major city in the province.
Torontonians and City Hall need to grow up and accept the fact that new things cost money and money requires taxation at an appropriate rate. This truly childish and irresponsible attitude that they should enjoy ultra low taxes and simultaneously enjoy gold plated infrastructure has got to stop. Whining at QP every time they need money is getting old. Perhaps the city should learn a lesson that every other city and person on the planet already knows............if you want something you have to pay for it.
Toronto not being able to fund these stations has NOTHING to do with increased costs and EVERYTHING to do with their unwillingness to pay for it. Toronto already enjoys the lowest property tax rates in the whole damn province and this gap will continue to grow as, once again, Toronto's new budget doesn't even increase their revenue at the rate of inflation unlike every other major city in the province.
Torontonians and City Hall need to grow up and accept the fact that new things cost money and money requires taxation at an appropriate rate. This truly childish and irresponsible attitude that they should enjoy ultra low taxes and simultaneously enjoy gold plated infrastructure has got to stop. Whining at QP every time they need money is getting old. Perhaps the city should learn a lesson that every other city and person on the planet already knows............if you want something you have to pay for it.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Maybe the Greater Toronto and Hamilton and Barrie and Kitchener and Niagara Falls and Pickering and Oshawa area should become a separate province, since that's the area that the GO trains serve.
Last edited:
Toolio555
New Member
Woohoo new transfer date March 27 baby, looks like all the whining paid off, no need to thank me
Last edited: