Welcome to the Gallery – a place where you'll find hope and strength through the healing power of art and the universal reach of technology –
a place where you can
Connect, Create, and Thrive!
Interested in partnering with us?
Click here to find out how!
Displaying (8) Comments | Comment on this piece | Report objectionable art
zbWcwx Its not my first time to go to see this site, i am visiting this web site dailly and get good information from here every day.
By: | Nov 18, 2020 | Report Comment
5wxCNb This blog is obviously educating and also factual. I have discovered helluva useful stuff out of this blog. I ad love to go back every once in a while. Cheers!
By: | Sep 25, 2020 | Report Comment
bDa9gE Great, thanks for sharing this blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.
By: | Jun 17, 2014 | Report Comment
F3belb Thank you for your article.Much thanks again. Really Cool.
By: | Oct 23, 2013 | Report Comment
BojUPm Muchos Gracias for your blog post. Fantastic.
By: | Sep 13, 2013 | Report Comment
H4hdNn Thanks a lot for the article.Really thank you! Fantastic.
By: | Sep 06, 2013 | Report Comment
that LRT will not be able to provide the catapicy needed for the corridor in the long-term future. An LRT advocate's response:-Some LRT lines run parallel to high catapicy GO routes, and therefore, the heavy demand for long-distance travel along that route has already been taken care of.-Should the catapicy of an LRT line be exceeded, another LRT line can be built very easily on the next suburban arterial road. This is an affordable way of easing the burden off existing LRT lines, while expanding the transit network to reach many more neighbourhoods.With regards to the second argument LRT advocates make, is it feasible just to plan another parallel LRT line as a means of increasing catapicy? I think it's a great idea, but I wonder why it's hardly discussed as a solution.Also, you were discussing catchment areas for different transit corridors, and how they affected catapicy requirements in a different post (the Queen Street Subway Debate). Are catchment areas the same if we considered trips not bound for the core? And how large would the Eglinton LRT's catchment area be?Steve: This gets a bit tricky depending on whether one is looking at current or future land use patterns. The Transit City plans (and indeed The Big Move) assume lane use projected out 15 and 25 years from today including new locations of both homes and jobs. Certain things basic geography will never change, but if there is an evolution of a new residential corridor along Eglinton, then it can originate more traffic destined for many places. Conversely, if there is a new office complex, this will draw traffic from around the region.Some of the traffic is a direct result of the interconnection of lines. If Eglinton connected with a DRL at Don Mills, then it will act as a feeder to that line and will attract traffic Eglinton might not otherwise get. However, the presence of the DRL will also siphon off some trips that might otherwise have continued west to Yonge, and this will reduce the peak point demand on Eglinton.The big problem with so many proposals, especially in a campaign atmosphere, is that they look at a few squeaky wheels , but don't consider overall network behaviour. Funding tries to prioritize routes based on accounting mumbo-jumbo establishing which route, on its own, might make sense, when a network view might produce a different result. The best example of this is the whole debate about the effects and benefits of adding catapicy to the existing Yonge subway, extending the line to Richmond Hill, expanding GO service, and building the DRL. If the DRL is only view in isolation, it costs a lot and doesn't appear to serve the region. However, if it is seen as providing a relief valve for the YUS, this improves options on a regional scale and may avoid some of the upgrade costs.Finally, as to building a parallel line. There are not too many cases where this is a simple option, although it is attractive. For example, Finch East is an obvious parallel to Sheppard, but the section for several kilometres east of Yonge was left as low rise residential in the Official Plan due to some horse trading among politicians and planning staff. Steeles might be another location, but it only makes sense if the YUS goes at least that far north to provide a good connection.As with so much planning, it depends , and there isn't one easy, standard solution for every problem.
By: | Apr 29, 2012 | Report Comment
During a recent diucissson, being “recent” from the perspective of someone clogged, I had a diucissson with someone about “Politically correct bullshit” *Twitch clench* with someone who should know better if they’d ever turn their intelligence to the idea instead of jerking their knees at it.I asked for their definition of “polite” and “politically correct”, hoping for something I could set examples against to cause some thought.Has anyone else had this diucissson, or have some definitions they have found useful in getting smart people to stop saying stupid thing that they might be willing to share?I still find the most useful for summing up what is wrong with the discourse of PC . My takeaway from this and other articles I've read on the subject, and my own analysis (because it's kind of a bugbear of mine), is that PC should read simple good manners towards people who are less powerful than you are, just as you would use toward people you perceive as your equal or superior . Or something like that. Ask your friend the last time he made an edgy joke about his CEO's awful ties in his presence.It's interesting that Zuky reposts this from his old blog with a disclaimer that he no longer likes it as much as when he first posted it. I'd love to see an updated version and wonder how it would be different.
By: | Apr 29, 2012 | Report Comment
still life
mzabor
acrylic
There are 41 pieces of art in this thread