News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

The boys are also trying the same tactics with the City of Hamilton re the dredging of Chedoke Creek. This is a remediation plan to remove around 20,000 tons of sewage sludge from the creek (mostly due to the City's pretty terrible record of sewage treatment). The creek parallels HWY 403 at that point.

A second example of public pressure to get these projects taken care of is the Randle Reef.

All of these were very public efforts to get projects underway and I do not remember the Haudensaunee participating in those efforts. But I could be wrong.
 

Our design of the Bloomington GO Station in #Bloomington, ON, transformed the site’s environmental challenges into a LEED Gold space. Its design features unique elements that minimize the environmental impact of the station. Our integration of the station building and bus loop within the body of the parking structure controlled the development’s footprint, winning the project an Award of Merit at our internal Design Excellence Awards.
 
Unionville GO Station
0B169E51-0EC5-447A-95E2-E15B81B8537F.jpeg
E0C4B29D-9EDB-4C84-88E6-CCF66689F969.jpeg
13CE5499-1C39-4C12-89EF-07E207DD6BC9.jpeg
FD5CB3BA-8FC6-499D-9777-90A29B20CE8B.jpeg
E4CB5EEA-09BC-42BD-926D-25C4303DBF25.jpeg
39E7CAC1-442C-45BC-9B89-56E76A967796.jpeg
30B3383C-7285-47CA-A5B2-4E67FE4442AC.jpeg
D237CFFC-C575-4411-889C-2DFF5C2CD11D.jpeg
B6B30F2E-3A68-423B-B69A-5BFDCBEB9FAE.jpeg
5FFD0448-8B9C-4E53-8C14-982C287E72BF.jpeg
 
These LEED certifications are ridiculous. Focus on the details, but lose sight of the big picture. A parking garage isn't environmentally friendly, no matter how many native plants you use or how many LED lights you have.

1661378210045.png
 
This should be the standard for any future upgrades, canopies, accessibility and prepared for level boarding retro, but no giant parkade. It looks sharp and just as good if not better that the typical regional station in Europe
 
There are indeed treaties - which from my understanding give pretty clear direction that the Haudenosaunee (or really, the Mississaugas of the New Credit) forfeited lands in the GTA to the Crown.
I'm confused - I thought the Mississaugas of the Credit were a Toronto-based Anishinaabe people - what has that got to do with the Haudenosaunee? Surely the British and French (or heck the Irish and Iranian) peoples are more closely related than the Mississaugas and the Haudenosaunee (at least based on language)!

Which treaties covering the GTA are not that disputed. Or at least, this is the first time I've heard of an indigenous group disputing title holding on the lands.
Which treaties are these? The Toronto purchase with the Mississaugas was only for the land from Etobicoke Creek, to somewhere near Victoria Park. So that doesn't cover either Mississauga or Scarborough - let alone the rest of the Lakeshore line! And it's only with the Mississaugas who lived in that area, not the majority of them in Southern Ontario!

I'm no expert on treaties - there are some with the Haudenosaunee in Ontario - such as Treaty No. 3½ (Tyendinaga). But there's so many problems with that - not least that the treaty was with the Haudenosaunee who had been ethnically cleansed during the US war of independence, and then given permission to settle in traditional Mississauga territory. Given the crown has admitted it seized back in the 1800s half the land they gave the Haudenosaunee in the 1700s - and have been dogging the negotiations now for 30 years - I'm not surprised there are issues (and that land includes part of both the CP and CN mainlines and the 401 east of Brockville)!

I'm concerned that there seems to be a lack of understanding here, that the Haudenosaunee have anything to do with the Toronto Purchase!
 
There are indeed treaties - which from my understanding give pretty clear direction that the Haudenosaunee (or really, the Mississaugas of the New Credit) forfeited lands in the GTA to the Crown.

The reserve and lands along the Grand River are generally a bit more disputed, as the treaty isn't as clear (the reserve as originally defined in the initial treaties was land on both sides of the Grand River for most of it's length, later shrunk down to just Six Nations), but the treaties covering the GTA are not that disputed. Or at least, this is the first time I've heard of an indigenous group disputing title holding on the lands.

I think (i may be wrong) that the Haudenosaunee are claiming here that the lands are their "traditional territories" and they have a right to compensation based on that, regardless of what a treaty from the 18th century might say. And that's the overreach. They have a right to consultation and oversight on the matter, as Metrolinx has done, but not to compensation.

Highway 69 is a distinctly different issue as it actually runs through a current day indigenous reserve. Same thing with the Calgary Ring Road, it runs directly beside the Tsuut′ina reserve. It's not running solely on ceded territory like Metrolinx's Lakeshore West line.

The problem lies in this quote:



The problem is that Lakeshore West does not run through Indigenous lands or their territories. It runs through their traditional territories, but those are covered by those old treaties from the late 18th century and early 19th century showing the lands being ceded to the crown. The last known disputes on the Toronto purchase were settled in 2010:

I couldn't find a graphic that neatly depicted the 'jurisdiction' of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, but it is certainly broader than what we currently know as Six Nations. Without getting into the weeds of Crown treaties, what their boundaries and terms are as well as any amendments, settlements, etc., this is a rough depiction of the scope of the '1701 Nanfan Treaty' ;

1661392519514.png


So-called First Nations Territories ('Reserves') are considered a 'settler construct' under the Indian Act, and most First Nations organizations claim jurisdiction over 'traditional territory', which the SCOC has acknowledged. Settlement agreements aside, most First Nations maintain their sovereignty over their traditional territory.

Under the Constitution, the 'Crown' is the federal and provincial governments, and Metrolinx is a Crown agency of the Ontario Government. Treaty responsibilities, such a duty to consult, free, prior and informed consent, rest with the Crown. CN is not the Crown.

Is expecting an EA for a corridor many decades old or any of the other grievances a shakedown? Not for me to say.
 
I couldn't find a graphic that neatly depicted the 'jurisdiction' of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, but it is certainly broader than what we currently know as Six Nations. Without getting into the weeds of Crown treaties, what their boundaries and terms are as well as any amendments, settlements, etc., this is a rough depiction of the scope of the '1701 Nanfan Treaty' ;
Interesting - particularly as some of that land in that treaty was Huron, which wasn't part of the Five (and later Six) Nations.
 
I couldn't find a graphic that neatly depicted the 'jurisdiction' of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, but it is certainly broader than what we currently know as Six Nations. Without getting into the weeds of Crown treaties, what their boundaries and terms are as well as any amendments, settlements, etc., this is a rough depiction of the scope of the '1701 Nanfan Treaty' ;

View attachment 422500

So-called First Nations Territories ('Reserves') are considered a 'settler construct' under the Indian Act, and most First Nations organizations claim jurisdiction over 'traditional territory', which the SCOC has acknowledged. Settlement agreements aside, most First Nations maintain their sovereignty over their traditional territory.

Under the Constitution, the 'Crown' is the federal and provincial governments, and Metrolinx is a Crown agency of the Ontario Government. Treaty responsibilities, such a duty to consult, free, prior and informed consent, rest with the Crown. CN is not the Crown.

Is expecting an EA for a corridor many decades old or any of the other grievances a shakedown? Not for me to say.
I mean duh of course it’s a shakedown.

Hey nice railroad you’ve got here, would be a shame if someone disrupted the operations of this here railway unexpectedly whilst doing “environmental assessments”

But all this can go away if you helped out our community by giving us a big wad of cash.

If the First Nations actually do have jurisdiction over their traditional territories then I’m sure you’d be fine with paying taxes to the local band (without representation, after all you are a settler) and bending over when they demand to be able to use your home. After all you are a settler and the Haudenosaunee have no laws protecting settlers

If what you state is true, that Native nations do indeed have jurisdiction over their traditional territories, then Canada has been abolished save for random rocks in the middle of the ocean which no Native nation has ever claimed.
 
Last edited:
Interesting - particularly as some of that land in that treaty was Huron, which wasn't part of the Five (and later Six) Nations.
The way I understand it, that was considered the 'Iroquois Influence'. I came across another graphic:



It seems that, consistent with the rest of human history, alliances and allegiances are a moving target.
 
Unionville GO Station
Thanks for these! By the looks of it, 3 tracks expandable to add a 4th track on the outside of the east platform? Makes sense for a location that will likely be a short-turn location for Stouffville RER.

I like that Metrolinx seems to be doing more of these "side platform, with an option to easily be expanded to an island platform" designs. Makes going from a 2-track station to a 4-track station significantly easier down the road. I believe Kennedy has a similar design, where it's either the east or the west platform that looks for now like the roof line just randomly ends on the back side of the platform, but that it's been clearly designed to be extended to cover another platform.
 
This should be the standard for any future upgrades, canopies, accessibility and prepared for level boarding retro, but no giant parkade. It looks sharp and just as good if not better that the typical regional station in Europe
Now bring on the electric trains...
 
Now bring on the electric trains...
but seeing that they already have established the platform grade why not have the higher platforms as part of the base contract? why subject us to future cost escalation and doubling up construction? Its a tremendous waste of money especially if its already known exactly what our platforms need to be.
 
The Civil and Utilities Plans for Site Plan Approval for "a pedestrian tunnel and entrance at Randolph Avenue as a replacement for the existing West Toronto Rail Path (WTRP) entrance" contains a reference to the 4th track (track "T0") at Bloor.

Cross posted from here: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...f-toronto-phase-ii-proposed.2969/post-1854941

HT to @Northern Light for noting the update tunnel connection via Crossways was also posted in the Dundas-Bloor Mobility Hub thread: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...cted-hub-network-metrolinx.16392/post-1848753

Annotations added in red below. I don't have time to look through all the PDFs on AIC but DWGS. S-3000 to S-3009 weren't apparent.

1661452939549.png
 
but seeing that they already have established the platform grade why not have the higher platforms as part of the base contract? why subject us to future cost escalation and doubling up construction? Its a tremendous waste of money especially if its already known exactly what our platforms need to be.

Because none the equipment is not set up as yet to operate at the higher platform heights.

And while the platforms may not necessarily be at the final height, they have been built with it in mind, so at the end of the day it's a relatively simple upgrade to do.

Dan
 

Back
Top