[T3G]

You know you can have extra capacity without that monster station building, right?

University Avenue is a stroad with a very wide sidewalk. You could have wide entrances on the sidewalk and even eat into the rightmost lane if need be. There was no need to intrude into the Osgoode Hall grounds except for the lack of imagination on the part of Metrolinx.

Furthermore, the reason for being this up is not because of the width of the sidewalk entrance. It is because the reason that has been argued for why the monster station building needs to exist is because of the elevators, that it's not possible to have accessibility otherwise. Hmm, somebody better inform the MTA...

 

[LemonCondo]

I don't know why the Bowling Green example is relevant at all. It has three stairway entrances as well as this elevator entrance.
Bowling Green serves the IRT Lexington Avenue Line, with 4 and 5 trains stopping here. Stats show 22,909 passengers per day in 2019.

Osgoode has four stairway entrances and an accessible entrance for 29,066 passengers per day in 2019.

So why is so strange that we are building two fairly decent sized entrances for the station as we are building an entirely new line. Why are we looking at tacked on elevators to ancient New York subway stations as any kind of inspiration?

 

[T3G]

Because the New York solution doesn't cause significant and irreparable damage to a landmark, that's why.

Toronto is very light on reasons for anyone to visit, why destroy one of the few?

 

[11th]

Because the New York solution doesn't cause significant and irreparable damage to a landmark, that's why.

Toronto is very light on reasons for anyone to visit, why destroy one of the few?

We are going in circles if you insist on the notion that clearing the corner is destroying Osgoode Hall; but I respect that being yours and others opinion.

Though I doubt Osgoode Hall or its former corner of trees as being someone's main reason to visit Toronto - maybe the kissing gates? but that part is staying intact.

 

[EnviroTO]

I think the point of the bridge posting is to say the lowest cost option isn't always the best option. An extremely low capacity entrance was proposed. I can't imagine how it would handle the load. An extremely low capacity bridge was proposed. I can't imagine how it can handle the load.

 

[T3G]

But the picture is of an elevator. It's not fair or accurate to compare that to the proposed size of a staircase at all.

No one is proposing an ultra narrow staircase like they have in the present entrances to Osgoode station. The mere thought of such is a strawman. There is ample space on the sidewalk at University Avenue to have wide staircases and also to put regular sized elevators there. You don't need to have such a huge station building. It's overkill.

 

[generalcanada]

But the picture is of an elevator. It's not fair or accurate to compare that to the proposed size of a staircase at all.

No one is proposing an ultra narrow staircase like they have in the present entrances to Osgoode station. The mere thought of such is a strawman. There is ample space on the sidewalk at University Avenue to have wide staircases and also to put regular sized elevators there. You don't need to have such a huge station building. It's overkill.

so metrolinx isnt entirely set on the station building design. they only have proposed to build the entrance on the corner, they are open to having it moved even onto the sidewalk in the future. Remember the actual station entrance wont be actually visible until sometime after 2028, we have lots of time to go through preferred station design and location.

The reason why Metrolinx was so fussy about any other excavation location other than Osgoode Hall is because they needed to start construction right now.
They couldnt wait for Toronto city council to get themselves together and close down university both ways to allow for the university park option
If council really wanted this option, they would get started on it now so that metrolinx can use that as an option in a few years time

We can get the entrance moved onto the sidewalk but dont say metrolinx hasnt looked at those options, because they definitely have

source: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-235575.pdf

The City of Toronto, working with Parsons Corporation undertook a high-level due diligence review of the ten proposed entrance and headhouses for the Ontario Line Osgoode Station.8 A CLC meeting was held on February 1, 2023 to discuss the findings with a group of community members, staff from the City of Toronto and Metrolinx. The City of Toronto also organized a community discussion on February 8, 2023, led by the Ward 10 City Councillor, to discuss the findings of the City’s due diligence review. Additional workshops will be held by Metrolinx in summer 2023 to discuss the reconfiguration options for Osgoode Hall’s heritage fence, station entrances, and landscaping. City staff have also requested that pedestrian access around the North Entrance be improved to address the potential volume of passenger activity at the station and adjacent streets. The location of the Osgoode Station entrance at the northeast corner of Queen and University is currently undergoing an archaeological investigation which will continue throughout the remainder of winter 2023. Updates will continue to be provided to the community through the Osgoode Station CLC.

 

[generalcanada]

No you don't.



This is true.



'already'? It was built in the early 1950s, so its capacity was mostly sufficient for 70 odd years. Psst, King Station is getting expanded, the concourse level will begin to grow in 2 years. I expect some additional vertical circulation as well, but I haven't seen the detail plans so can't attest to that.



This argument would cut both ways.......but I digress........

I believe Osgoode as currently designed will have congestion issues; that's a point of conjecture I suppose, as those designing the station feel there is adequate space in their models; I think there are problematic pinch points, and they've been overly conservative in their assumptions as they apply to the existing Line 1 station, which their mandate suggests they are not to address more than necessary....

That said, I would agree w/you that @T3G 's idea, taken on its own (without other changes to the design would not be sufficient. But there's nothing wrong w/the idea per se, is merely a matter of how one would otherwise address capacity constraints.

Regrettably, I think the choices made here impose substantial constraints and additional costs, in respect of future capacity expansion.

Leaving the existing Line 1 Station non-compliant with the Fire Code (no second completely independent exit from the platform) is a serious problem to me; and I'm not entirely convinced its consistent with the law.

I believe vertical circulation capacity between Line 1 and the O/L is also inadequate.

I think these issues would have been better addressed with a completely different set of design choices. But both Mx and the City dropped the ball there........sigh.

***

Edit, I should add, the large impact on Osgoode has as much or more to do w/the keyhole access (extraction shaft for the TBM) than the entrance itself. This too could have been avoided by doing the entire stretch from University to Yonge as cut and cover, including the intersection of Univ/Queen and extracting the TBM within the ROW of Queen.

I think Metrolinx going so deep here that we need 7 escalators is straight compensation for their issues they had at the cedarvale and eglinton stations where they had to underpin the line 1 stations. As far as I know, those stations are basically the reason why crosstown is so delayed

Going 40m below ground really limits them in terms of vertical circulation because of how tight that station mining box is, they cant do what they did with say pioneer village where you have a singular long escalator you need many short escalators
Im not too sure why they insist on 0 integration between the 2 stations, seems kind of counter intuitive to me.

As for the cut and cover, even though they are doing cut and cover for Queen station, I think doing the entirety of queen is...ambitious to say the least lol.
Id love it, but you know....the car needs its pound of flesh LOL

 

[fanoftoronto]

I think Metrolinx going so deep here that we need 7 escalators is straight compensation for their issues they had at the cedarvale and eglinton stations where they had to underpin the line 1 stations. As far as I know, those stations are basically the reason why crosstown is so delayed

Going 40m below ground really limits them in terms of vertical circulation because of how tight that station mining box is, they cant do what they did with say pioneer village where you have a singular long escalator you need many short escalators
Im not too sure why they insist on 0 integration between the 2 stations, seems kind of counter intuitive to me.

As for the cut and cover, even though they are doing cut and cover for Queen station, I think doing the entirety of queen is...ambitious to say the least lol.
Id love it, but you know....the car needs its pound of flesh LOL

But they've closed down a majority of Queen regardless. Bay to Victoria, for 4 years.

What's stopping them from doing the closure from University to Victoria and doing cut and cover for the entire stretch, while also underpinning the 2 stations to facilitate a much easier transfer?

The number of cumulative hours per year that'll be wasted at these long ass transfers through 5 to 7 escalators/stairwells will be astronomical.

Imagine something like the Yonge subway construction in the 1950s, except on Queen in the 2020s.

 

[generalcanada]

But they've closed down a majority of Queen regardless. Bay to Victoria, for 4 years.

What's stopping them from doing the closure from University to Victoria and doing cut and cover for the entire stretch, while also underpinning the 2 stations to facilitate a much easier transfer?

The number of cumulative hours per year that'll be wasted at these long ass transfers through 5 to 7 escalators/stairwells will be astronomical.

Imagine something like the Yonge subway construction in the 1950s, except on Queen in the 2020s.

I actually don't think metrolinx wants to do underpinning ever again.
There is a big tradeoff between constructability and usability, Underpinning at shallow depth is possible, but theres so many unforseen complications you cant know about
As for cut and cover all the way to university and hell all the way over to moss park, Again ambitious, but even metrolinx looks at traffic study data and sees that its nowhere near realistic.
With the queen closure were getting at least on 1 route out of the city a doubling of commute times from like 25 minutes to almost an hour. Imagine what it would be like with queen closed all the way

 

[fanoftoronto]

I actually don't think metrolinx wants to do underpinning ever again.
There is a big tradeoff between constructability and usability, Underpinning at shallow depth is possible, but theres so many unforseen complications you cant know about
As for cut and cover all the way to university and hell all the way over to moss park, Again ambitious, but even metrolinx looks at traffic study data and sees that its nowhere near realistic.
With the queen closure were getting at least on 1 route out of the city a doubling of commute times from like 25 minutes to almost an hour. Imagine what it would be like with queen closed all the way

This just highlights how bad Metrolinx is at estimating timelines and budgets. Instead of fixing these inherent issues with their management policies, Metrolinx has moved to eliminate the challenges themselves.

It's not as if underpinning is such a difficult engineering issue to plan, budget, and execute correctly. I'm sure 100s of other such subway projects across the world do it perfectly well.

And to add my two cents on the Queen closure between University and Victoria (or Moss Park) for a full Yonge style cut-and-cover, it's a necessity to deliver efficient and safe interchanges at Queen and Osgoode. Instead of harping on the fact that Queen is closed, we should be seeing how we can increase the speed of the construction itself. Can the 4-5 year closure be reduced to 2-3 years to reduce the impact? Can we deck above the construction right away to restart the traffic lanes?

But alas, we get Metrolinx. If Metrolinx was driving and got into an accident when turning left, Metrolinx would simply stop turning left to avoid such accidents in the future!

 

[T3G]

so metrolinx isnt entirely set on the station building design. they only have proposed to build the entrance on the corner, they are open to having it moved even onto the sidewalk in the future. Remember the actual station entrance wont be actually visible until sometime after 2028, we have lots of time to go through preferred station design and location.

The reason why Metrolinx was so fussy about any other excavation location other than Osgoode Hall is because they needed to start construction right now.
They couldnt wait for Toronto city council to get themselves together and close down university both ways to allow for the university park option
If council really wanted this option, they would get started on it now so that metrolinx can use that as an option in a few years time

We can get the entrance moved onto the sidewalk but dont say metrolinx hasnt looked at those options, because they definitely have

source: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-235575.pdf

In bringing this up, you've inadvertently highlighted a big part of the reason why so many people have an issue with Metrolinx and the way they do things. Going over the head of other stakeholders to do whatever you want, no matter how ostensibly noble your goal is, is not a good practice. Toronto council may be a bunch of numpties, but organizations that are accountable to no one and can do whatever they want have no place in any democratic society. Today it's a location of highly questionable validity, tomorrow it could be something else. I don't think transit is a good trade off for transparency and accountability.

And if they decide not to end up using the proposed location, that's far worse, because that meant they've destroyed a very pleasant little grove of trees for absolutely nothing. Let's say they replant all the trees they cut down if they end up eschewing this option; how many of us will still be alive by the time those trees are as tall and old as the ones they just cut down?

 

[generalcanada]

In bringing this up, you've inadvertently highlighted a big part of the reason why so many people have an issue with Metrolinx and the way they do things. Going over the head of other stakeholders to do whatever you want, no matter how ostensibly noble your goal is, is not a good practice. Toronto council may be a bunch of numpties, but organizations that are accountable to no one and can do whatever they want have no place in any democratic society. Today it's a location of highly questionable validity, tomorrow it could be something else. I don't think transit is a good trade off for transparency and accountability.

And if they decide not to end up using the proposed location, that's far worse, because that meant they've destroyed a very pleasant little grove of trees for absolutely nothing. Let's say they replant all the trees they cut down if they end up eschewing this option; how many of us will still be alive by the time those trees are as tall and old as the ones they just cut down?

theres 2 points here you have

1. metrolinx doesnt listen to people and does whatever they want
2. the osgoode hall will be permanently destroyed by the removal of the 10 trees

firstly, when discussing metrolinx people always mistake what "community consultation" actually means. and ive said this before. It is not telling MX "do this or else" its "do this to make it better". You cant say "we dont want this 50 storey condo" you say "can you make it with brick instead?". And if the answer is no, then you need to accept that. THAT is proper community consultation
Ive said it before here and it definitely annoyed some people but that is what metrolinx thinks and I say its the right strategy

As for Osgoode, Whatever you think of the option for it to be on the corner doesnt really matter since there really wasnt a better option. Again, university park delays this project by 5 years and the sidewalk option wont work because again, the car must have its pound of flesh. Nevermind the fact that all options required that site for construction laydown anyway. The trees would never have been safe
The station needs to be built right now and it cant wait at all. Osgoode hall was the only option

 

[T3G]

firstly, when discussing metrolinx people always mistake what "community consultation" actually means. and ive said this before. It is not telling MX "do this or else" its "do this to make it better". You cant say "we dont want this 50 storey condo" you say "can you make it with brick instead?". And if the answer is no, then you need to accept that. THAT is proper community consultation
Ive said it before here and it definitely annoyed some people but that is what metrolinx thinks and I say its the right strategy

I didn't say community consultation. You said this was because Toronto city council was dragging their feet on approving the University Park project, which is why they had to go over their heads and raze the Osgoode trees to the ground, so they could secure a spot for their station building (which, as I have stated time and again, is overbuilt and far too large for purpose).

My point is - who the hell do they think they are to do that? Does the rule of law not apply to Metrolinx or something? If they don't like that someone is taking too long, they can just do whatever they want, answerable to no one? And if they can do that, then why don't they use those powers for good and take over the rightmost car lane instead? Boom, now you have a space for a reasonably sized subway entrance, the Osgoode grounds are left alone. But that would require Metrolinx to actually care about the well being of anyone, so there you go.

As for community consultation, you've trotted out this argument a few times on this forum now and it's never once been true. There is no one size fits all dogma for how to interpret community opposition. An argument that doesn't make sense when applied to one site in one context. Sometimes, a project designer being told their project is bad and they have disgraced their heritage is perfectly justifiable. You may be justified in opposing NIMBYs who oppose bus service on their local street; can you really look me in the eyes, then, and tell me that they should also get stuffed if their opposition is not to a bus line, but a sewage treatment plant being built down their street? Or perhaps to a cement plant being built across the street from a hospital? A coal power station being built right next to a respiratory clinic? But they should suck it up, right? Or perhaps suggest trivial cosmetic changes like the colour of the smokestack?

There are times when "this is what's happening, get over it" is reasonable; there are times when it's not. Every single project, in every single place, in every single circumstance is different, it is not reasonable to apply this kind of blanket dogmatic thinking to the issue of community opposition.

Nevermind the fact that all options required that site for construction laydown anyway.

Really? In all available options, they would've had to raze that grove of trees to lay down construction materials? Are you serious? There's no other empty spots at all in the area that they could've used instead, like traffic lanes or the sidewalk? So closing down Queen Street for 4 years is fine, but closing a lane or two on an extremely wide street like University to stage construction materials is where we draw the line?

 

[generalcanada]

Really? In all available options, they would've had to raze that grove of trees to lay down construction materials? Are you serious? There's no other empty spots at all in the area that they could've used instead, like traffic lanes or the sidewalk? So closing down Queen Street for 4 years is fine, but closing a lane or two on an extremely wide street like University to stage construction materials is where we draw the line?

https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/9367-Osgoode-Station-Options-Analysis-AODA.pdf

the parsons report is right here if you wanna look at it again.
They confirmed what metrolinx already knew only the campbell house and the current osgoode hall plan were good options. Look at the laydown areas for all of the options. its always on the corner anyway with most having it used by shallow excavation.

And if they can do that, then why don't they use those powers for good and take over the rightmost car lane instead? Boom, now you have a space for a reasonably sized subway entrance, the Osgoode grounds are left alone. But that would require Metrolinx to actually care about the well being of anyone, so there you go

you overestimate the power of metrolinx. put it another way, hypothetically, If the don bridge required closing down the dvp fully for 5 years instead of intermittent weekend closures. I want you to take a guess at who specifically would be yelling in opposition to metrolinx? psst....the answer is litterally everyone else in the province from kingston to barrie to hamilton.

Remember Metrolinx, while ideally arms-length their funding comes directly from the government, any attempt to give the middle finger to millions of people at once would inevitably come back to bite them in the ass and get their project cancelled.

THE CAR MUST HAVE ITS POUND OF FLESH

can you really look me in the eyes, then, and tell me that they should also get stuffed if their opposition is not to a bus line, but a sewage treatment plant being built down their street? Or perhaps to a cement plant being built across the street from a hospital? A coal power station being built right next to a respiratory clinic? But they should suck it up, right? Or perhaps suggest trivial cosmetic changes like the colour of the smokestack?

Coal plants? nice one, though If you want i can definitely argue for that.
I can also argue if dump trucks, cement trucks and construction noises shouldnt be endured by local residents all of which can objectively harm people more than a cement plant. Anyone can be a nimby if they try hard enough.
If they have the right to stop any progress if their quality of life is hurt then nothing would get done.

If the people and businesses on Eglinton knew what they knew now with a 10 year super late project that hurts businesses, commute times, traffic and the livability. How much opposition would they put to it?

That is my point. Which asks the question, how much should the community have to take before their voices outweigh the majority in the rest of the province/city who want it.
Anything other than sky-high would mean that nothing would get done ever.