picard102 said:
The drawing board? Hardly. The RL didn't have the station destroying heritage property and taking up a prominent park space in the center of the city.
Somehow other people figured out other options, but ML being ML want to do things in the most obtuse way.
Click to expand...
The context of the Relief Line is a line that was more interested in making access to City Hall easier rather than providing a decent connection. While this was less true with Osgoode, this was extremely apparent with the Queen-Yonge station. Also, "destroying property"? Really? It's 5 trees that can be replanted after construction is complete.
 
I find it amusing that some people think that Metrolinx hasn't already investigated all the alternatives to locating a station entrance here. Yes, this is a "cheap", "convenient" and easy place to locate the entrance. That's what makes it the best option. It's also the only option that makes it compliant with modern safety and accessibility standards (from what I've seen).

Are you seriously advocating for tens of millions of dollars of public funds to be wasted to change the location over some trees? Do you seriously think they can move mountains and get every single stakeholder to agree to digging up and redesigning University Avenue? Do you seriously think this exercise wouldn't delay the delivery of this transit line that has been planned since the 1930s and desperately needed for the last 30+ years?

Not every idea or opinion needs to be explored. Metrolinx could post all of the studies and engineering that went into this plan, and conduct public consultations, and it still wouldn't be enough for many people. For most, consultation isn't consultation until they get their way. It will never be enough. I applaud Metrolinx for breaking through the planning culture that has festered in this city since the 1970s and held us back in so many ways.

Celebrating this big step in the delivery of the Ontario Line today. Let's get digging.
 
torontologist said:
I find it amusing that some people think that Metrolinx hasn't already investigated all the alternatives to locating a station entrance here.
Click to expand...
Given Metrolinx’s previous behaviour, I think a lot of people are rightly sceptical that they did. Look at the drama around the Finch line MSF, the Ontario Line MSF, that jog in the Yonge line extension, etc.
 
torontologist said:
It's also the only option that makes it compliant with modern safety and accessibility standards (from what I've seen).
Click to expand...
In what possible way would scaling down the entrance, or shifting it, in all its pointless grandeur, further west into the sidewalk on the eastern side of University, and cutting out one of the northbound lanes, not make the entrance compliant with these standards?

torontologist said:
Are you seriously advocating for tens of millions of dollars of public funds to be wasted to change the location over some trees?
Click to expand...
It is extremely bad faith to represent the argument as being all over some trees. It's a historic site, an important piece of the public realm, and just because the burghers at Metrolinx failed to take this into account in the designing process doesn't mean the city is obligated to stand by and watch them ruin our public spaces. I say again, the transit system is supposed to serve the city, not the other way around.

torontologist said:
Do you seriously think they can move mountains and get every single stakeholder to agree to digging up and redesigning University Avenue?
Click to expand...
Well, if they could somehow push through the banning of through traffic on King Street, I would say nixing a single northbound lane on University should be a much more trivial pursuit.

torontologist said:
Do you seriously think this exercise wouldn't delay the delivery of this transit line that has been planned since the 1930s and desperately needed for the last 30+ years?
Click to expand...
I don't like this argument because it pretends that Metrolinx has our best interests at heart and is being unfairly spurned. If memory serves, planning for the Relief Line was already underway when the Ontario Line was proposed, yes? For what possible reason, except for that of ego and vanity, was the whole project redone, instead of continuing the planning from where it was left off, thus saving time and money in the long haul? And if this line is so urgent and so desperately needed, why is it getting "light metro" rolling stock, while Scarborough, a wasteland of sprawling suburbia, is getting full size TTC rolling stock?

Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
Everyone wants to have the line built. Doesn’t mean we need to destroy the city to do it.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. What good is there in having a grand, vast transit system, if it doesn't go to any places that are worth going?
 
ARG1 said:
The context of the Relief Line is a line that was more interested in making access to City Hall easier rather than providing a decent connection. While this was less true with Osgoode, this was extremely apparent with the Queen-Yonge station. Also, "destroying property"? Really? It's 5 trees that can be replanted after construction is complete.
Click to expand...
You understand that they are going to tear out parts of the historic fence, or as someone who isn't local are you just reacting to what you perceive is going on?
 
T3G said:
It is extremely bad faith to represent the argument as being all over some trees. It's a historic site, an important piece of the public realm, and just because the burghers at Metrolinx failed to take this into account in the designing process doesn't mean the city is obligated to stand by and watch them ruin our public spaces. I say again, the transit system is supposed to serve the city, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If these were simply 50- or even 75- year old trees I might be much more supportive. But there is an awful lot of civic history that this particular space is tied to. It’s not protecting trees in the same way as the tree on somebody’s front lawn or a ravine. It’s protecting the integrity of the whole space. The how and who of their planting, and the legacy of their being conserved for two centuries, and not the amount of shade they create, You can’t equalise this loss by planting three times as many saplings in a ravine somewhere, as is ML’s methodology.

If all ML needs is laydown space, why not use Nathan Phillips Square? Or on University itself? I”m not arguing for that…. but the argument that this is the “only” space available, is not accurate. This is a decision based on what we value, and what we don’t. There are choices.

- Paul
 
With friends like Metrolinx, who needs enemies?

This rushing to cut the trees down without due process, quickly, and under the cover of the frosty weather so there are less witnesses, is shockingly devious, like that of a cartoon villain, and I'm sure that if it were a major private sector corporation behaving in such an underhanded way, people would be up in arms. But hey, they (sometimes) deliver mediocre transit, so it's all good, right?
 
T3G said:
In what possible way would scaling down the entrance, or shifting it, in all its pointless grandeur, further west into the sidewalk on the eastern side of University, and cutting out one of the northbound lanes, not make the entrance compliant with these standards?


It is extremely bad faith to represent the argument as being all over some trees. It's a historic site, an important piece of the public realm, and just because the burghers at Metrolinx failed to take this into account in the designing process doesn't mean the city is obligated to stand by and watch them ruin our public spaces. I say again, the transit system is supposed to serve the city, not the other way around.


Well, if they could somehow push through the banning of through traffic on King Street, I would say nixing a single northbound lane on University should be a much more trivial pursuit.


I don't like this argument because it pretends that Metrolinx has our best interests at heart and is being unfairly spurned. If memory serves, planning for the Relief Line was already underway when the Ontario Line was proposed, yes? For what possible reason, except for that of ego and vanity, was the whole project redone, instead of continuing the planning from where it was left off, thus saving time and money in the long haul? And if this line is so urgent and so desperately needed, why is it getting "light metro" rolling stock, while Scarborough, a wasteland of sprawling suburbia, is getting full size TTC rolling stock?


Exactly this. What good is there in having a grand, vast transit system, if it doesn't go to any places that are worth going?
Click to expand...
ok I'll bite:
In what possible way would scaling down the entrance, or shifting it, in all its pointless grandeur, further west into the sidewalk on the eastern side of University, and cutting out one of the northbound lanes, not make the entrance compliant with these standards?
Click to expand...
My understanding of the drawings is that it's spaced in a way that ensures it complies with requirements for exhaust vents and safety exits. I'm not an engineer so who knows if it could moved or not. Since you haven't provided any evidence that it *can* be moved, I'll throw your argument back at you: What says that is *would* be possible to move it to what is now University Avenue and not affect the safety and accessibility elements? Show me the receipts. I do know that moving the entrance box and taking out half of University would require a lot of political wrangling with the City or a ministerial order, which I'm sure would get everyone's undies in a twist the same way these trees have. People are acting as if we can just wave a wand and move the station lol

To sum it up: Metrolinx has engineering studies and financial analysis on their side, and you guys have vibes and feelings that it should be moved.
It is extremely bad faith to represent the argument as being all over some trees. It's a historic site, an important piece of the public realm, and just because the burghers at Metrolinx failed to take this into account in the designing process doesn't mean the city is obligated to stand by and watch them ruin our public spaces. I say again, the transit system is supposed to serve the city, not the other way around.
Click to expand...
The importance of this site is entirely dependent on Osgoode Hall, which will remain untouched. The trees can be replaced, and are the only element that will be affected. How is it bad faith to say it's about the trees? I guess it's also about the fence, but that fence is hostile architecture that prevents people from accessing the space easily and presents the park as being private property of the Law Society of Upper Canada. If you ask me, the whole fence should go, minus the cute cow gates.

Also, how the hell does this line not serve the city? Who decides what serves the city and what doesn't?
Well, if they could somehow push through the banning of through traffic on King Street, I would say nixing a single northbound lane on University should be a much more trivial pursuit.
Click to expand...
One is an arterial thoroughfare (University) and one was one downtown road (King) among many, with lots of stoplights. They are two different animals. Also, the demographics with the most political power (rich people in midtown and uptown) use University a lot. It's a completely different scale and serves a different function. The King project took years and this would too. We don't have years to get the Ontario Line started.
I don't like this argument because it pretends that Metrolinx has our best interests at heart and is being unfairly spurned. If memory serves, planning for the Relief Line was already underway when the Ontario Line was proposed, yes? For what possible reason, except for that of ego and vanity, was the whole project redone, instead of continuing the planning from where it was left off, thus saving time and money in the long haul? And if this line is so urgent and so desperately needed, why is it getting "light metro" rolling stock, while Scarborough, a wasteland of sprawling suburbia, is getting full size TTC rolling stock?
Click to expand...
Metrolinx does have the interest of the greater population at heart- it's a public entity that provides very important public goods. That they are "arrogant", or "mean" is like, your opinion guys. Not everyone feels that way, especially people outside of the Toronto politics and activism bubble.

The Relief Line was a stump that would not have delivered transportation to the people who need it most (Thorncliffe Park) and would not have served the fastest densifying part of the city (west Downtown). It was a bad project.

I also disagree with the choice of light metro for this line, though it does save money on the extensive bridges that will be required for the Ontario Line. This is a problem that the Relief Line didn't have as it was a stump. Also, it's rude to call Scarborough a wasteland.

Exactly this. What good is there in having a grand, vast transit system, if it doesn't go to any places that are worth going?
Click to expand...
Literally nothing is getting destroyed by this station entrance except for a few trees. Again, it seems it is all about the trees after all lol
 
Last edited:
picard102 said:
You understand that they are going to tear out parts of the historic fence, or as someone who isn't local are you just reacting to what you perceive is going on?
Click to expand...
Oh wow, a fence that could be reinstated after construction is done!

... give me a break
 
torontologist said:
What says that is *would* be possible to move it to what is now University Avenue and not affect the safety and accessibility elements?
Click to expand...
Unless there is some kind of geological abnormality underneath the University Avenue sidewalk, but not underneath the Osgoode Hall Park, what reason would there be for this lack of compliance? A space is a space. The east side of University Avenue has a bike lane and an extremely wide lane, so you would gain quite a bit of space by shifting the sidewalk west.

You also glossed over the other part of my post, where I suggested scaling down the entrance. What is stopping the bright minds of Metrolinx from doing this? Feel free to drop in as many elevators as you perceive necessary.

1675536317223.png


torontologist said:
To sum it up: Metrolinx has engineering studies and financial analysis on their side, and you guys have vibes and feelings that it should be moved.
Click to expand...
Word to the wise: if you want people to take you seriously, maybe drop the "vibes and feelings" shtick. Stick to debating facts and logic. You are not better than us because you disagree.

torontologist said:
Also, how the hell does this line not serve the city? Who decides what serves the city and what doesn't?
Click to expand...
If the line demands that the city make a large sacrifice, it is the line that rules the city and not the other way around. It's the same reason why having elevated guideways in the core would be unacceptable.

torontologist said:
We don't have years to get the Ontario Line started.
Click to expand...
Funny, we've been dragging our knuckles on this for decades, but now they want us to believe it is urgent we get this done as quickly as possible? Why the change of heart? Or is it actually that it's just a convenient narrative to justify bulldozing anything that gets in the way?

If anyone in charge felt it was urgent to get this line done, it would've been finished many years ago.

torontologist said:
Metrolinx does have the interest of the greater population at heart- it's a public entity that provides very important public goods. That they are "arrogant", or "mean" is like, your opinion guys. Not everyone feels that way, especially people outside of the Toronto politics and activism bubble.
Click to expand...
I have seen nothing in Metrolinx's "handling" of GO Transit, or their terrible mismanagement of the Eglinton LRT project, that makes me think they have the interests of the population at heart. Their poor communication, the service cuts, the delays, the secrecy, the lack of accountability all paint a very grim picture.

Let me ask you a question: in the article above, it was noted that Metrolinx began cutting the limbs of the trees this morning. If they are so confident in their position, why are they rushing to get it done before a review of the situation can take place? Why are they doing it under cover of the freezing cold weather? What are they so afraid of, that they have to get it done fast? They are not who we want to be allied with in building or managing transit.

torontologist said:
The Relief Line was a stump that would not have delivered transportation to the people who need it most (Thorncliffe Park) and would not have served the fastest densifying part of the city (west Downtown). It was a bad project.
Click to expand...
Then Metrolinx could've piggybacked on what already existed and extended in instead of revisiting the drawing board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top