[DirectionNorth]

This is already going to cost a ton and take forever. Concerns about cost and timelines are unrealistic.

This was posted by you ... yesterday!

I don't see a way around Metrolinx (how would you get transit without them?) but I can see a way to not purposefully delay the Ontario Line more than we need to.

I come back to - if there were a large building on each of the four corners, none of them would come down and ML's engineers would find a solution within the roadway space. Why do we value buildings more than green space?

Because we're cutting five trees, and not the entirety of the greenspace?

Maybe some people see Osgoode Hall as just another stretch of grass with an old building and an annoying fence. I see it as part of the open space precinct which includes Nathan Phillips Square and flows onto the breadth of University itself. If we mess with that, we are messing with one of the few barely natural spaces in an increasingly cold and sterile and cavernous downtown. The 200 years of cultivating and protecting that breathing space has value and having a transit project delayed even by a year or two to find a better solution does not override that 200 years of effort.

I don't see open space. Indeed, one might call the Osgoode Hall lands 'closed space'.

ML is also ravaging the First Parliament site, which has much less original artifacts, admittedly. There is also the impact on lesser but valuable buildings along Queen west and down to King. Plus Moss Park. And east of the Don. We are sacrificing an awful lot just for one subway.

Yes, sometimes demolition needs to occur to build a subway. Or we could add some millions and billions onto the cost, but that is hardly a good investment in transit.

A surviving Ash Tree (given EAB) would likely be an endangered species; but that said, I'm open to that argument; I'm actually every bit if not more as non-plussed by removing the fence.

The fence can be rebuilt, I don't think there would be a problem with that (though I'd personally rather NOT rebuild the fence! Or at least move it away from Queen St).

 

[Northern Light]

The mantra “On time, on budget” has taken on a meaning that it should never have had. With such complex projects, it is inevitable that some snags will come up. These may well exceed whatever contingency has been allowed at the outset.

I certainly agree that both time and monetary contingencies are essential to any planning process, and the more complex with the greater uncertainty the large these should be.

However, I feel when you present something to the public (or a private client); you should follow the mantra under-promise, over-deliver.

You write the schedule and the budget and you should be liberal in both to ensure you don't come in late or at greater cost than what you've stated.

FWIW, I've managed a couple of moderate sized capital projects in my time (nothing like a subway, we're talking mid six-figures), and I can in 30% under budget on both and over performed every expectation and hit my deadlines.

I don't think its that difficult. I wrote the damned proposals to make sure I looked good coming out of them! LOL

I’m not defending performance on either Crosstown or TYSSE, but clearly the desire for an unblemished narrative drove egregious subterfuge in both cases.

I frankly can't speak to the Crosstown yet. Its one of the few large projects in the GTA into which I have very little insight, beyond that which is broadly public. So I would find it difficult to assign precise blame.

I do have somewhat greater knowledge on the TYSSE; and I will say, I supported Andy Byford's decision to dismiss those charged w/leading the project from the TTC side.

I will stop there.

Let’s see….. we have Davenport Diamond, Smalls Creek, Osgoode Hall, Humber Flats, Thorncliffe Park……these people have quite the track record in dealing with controversy. Would I vote for a candidate that promised to fire the ML Board and C suite?

Yep.

- Paul

This is it. Its not one project, its not one mis-step, its a slew of them, from which they seem to learn little except 'we got away with it'.

 

[Northern Light]

The fence can be rebuilt, I don't think there would be a problem with that (though I'd personally rather NOT rebuild the fence! Or at least move it away from Queen St).

You know, I think we probably disagree here; but that said, if the fence were being removed for a distance of 'x'metres in order to give the feeling of the grounds being public, or more accessible or inviting, I at least understand that argument.

But to remove the fence to replace it with a solid-walled transit kiosk that doesn't open up 1M of space to the grounds I see as much more problematic.

Its not like Toronto has a lot of fenced off green spaces. Its a historical eccentricity in which I see a virtue.

But again, the argument for some change can be made, I'm just not sold on it being this change, done this way.

I see what I view as better options.

On a project that is 10 years from being delivered, I actually don't believe there is any intrinsic delay; though there are some sunk dollars on existing designs and contractors (Davey tree service is not keeping crews on standby for free).

But that's barely a drop in the bucket budgetarily.

The challenge here, frankly, is the complete lack of transparency from Mx on options considered, and the financial implications thereof.

Am I prepared to spend an extra 10M on a a 20B project to do this right? ( a cost variation of 0.05%) ; absolutely. Am I prepared to spend an extra 100M? Much less so, but we lack those numbers and the basis of those choices, and I'm disinclined to humour such secrecy.

 

[T3G]

Because with a "large" (it's not large it's actually fairly minimal) structure you get an indoor space where you can wait for the next streetcar. It's all about improving the transit rider experience

There is already a shelter at the Queen and University stop. Why can they not instead make it longer? If you wait in the proposed station building, you'd likely not even see the streetcar approaching!

. Not to mention, I doubt with modern safety standards a sidewalk entrance would fly. Looking at the entrance on the SouthWest of the intersection, the amount of sidewalk left is basically non-existan

If you mean the entrance on Queen, I agree. If you mean on University, I don't agree, there seems to be ample clearance, and there is a substantial stroad right next to it that could be encroached on.

I

but arguing about trees when trying to build a subway is a little backwards and possibly obnoxious no?

No.

There is room at the NE corner of Osgoode and Queen. The detailed locations of the stations are built by engineers. Pretending that the details are a stroke of some politician's ego ignores the reality of building infrastructure. Do you blame Tory for the model of urinals in Toronto parks? Do you blame Wynne for the tile color in the Crosstown stations

I didn't say it was the work of a politician, though if you believe that politicians haven't meddled in transit projects before then I don't know what to tell you.

You are an architect in the employ of Metrolinx - why would you go for a small, modest, usable sidewalk entrance instead of the big, bombastic building that will draw attention and make the station noteworthy?

Have you looked at the width of the sidewalk at that intersection?

Curiously enough, I have.

I think your armchair vantage point is faulty, I see plenty of space. Expand the sidewalk at the cost of the rightmost lane, build the building, and leave the damn park alone.

T3G, I at least bother to read the available materials.

Though, clearly not well enough to imagine alternative proposals. Tell me, what exactly is there in the underground, according to the renderings you have shown, that precludes shifting the station building westward onto an expanded sidewalk of University Avenue? Lack of imagination? Greed? Arrogance?

The building rendered is hardly like the palaces of the TYSSE, it is a fairly compact building. Cutting down five trees is worth the protection for mechanical parts in the escalators, elevators, or rider comfort, etc.

Is the lack of protection for mechanical parts in the escalators or elevators something that European cities have experienced? Because I see lots of European cities with metros, but few of them where destroying historic sites to build megalomaniacal structures is employed as a strategy.

You're welcome! Because all the arguments to protect these 5 trees are asinine. It really is easy.

According to you.

I personally find it much more asinine to give Metrolinx cart blanche to ruin the public sphere, given what we know about how they operate as an organization. They are one of the worst organizations we could possibly be allied with. If a stop was put to this madness, and Metrolinx were forced to work around the space instead of destroying it, it would set an important precedent, that the building of transit is not the be-all, end-all of life, and any transit project that is proposed must be designed with care and sensitivity. What you are instead proposing would set the precedent that Metrolinx can do whatever the hell they like, be goddamned to the consequences, as long as the end result is transit.

I am not interested in slippery slope arguments about how redesigning the station would cause substantial delays. These are guaranteed to occur either way, it is a 15 km line being built over the span of a decade by Metrolinx. I don't remember them being forced to halt the construction of the Eglinton Crosstown for years to redesign a problematic part of the line, and yet here we are, it is over budget, behind schedule, and still without anything resembling a timeline for opening in sight. Anyone who thinks the Ontario Line project would've gone any differently under Metrolinx's management had the Osgoode station been left alone is operating outside of reality, and that is a fact.

I just realized why this thread is driving me mad. Y'all are acting like Trump Republicans. Heads buried in the sand when every other option is rejected, saying that you were right all along and being completely unwilling to change your opinion. Get on board, salvation is not that far away! Leave that 'Save the Trees' FB group you're all in and look into the light.

Apart from debasing yourself with this childish attack, what was the point of this post?

 

[MrGoose]

So metrolinx is again cutting images out of there design document to push something? If you look at the top of the image it appears there is cut off text .. and the comments kinda look like they might of been added after the image was cut ouf of whatever document it was produced out of. Further .. why does the building need to be that big when the South Entrance Building is a whole lot smaller. Also .. the relief line .. with platforms twice as long .. never required this building. Is this building required because metrolinx is going with half sized platforms with a 90 second headway ?

Also... if Metrolinx held proper Public Information Centre's showing there design alternatives etc etc .. we prolly would not have this issue. Remember the Relief Line had a two year delay so they could shift it from under Pape to under Carlaw south of the Rail Corridor. Gosh ... if Metrolinx asserted themselves back then then we would prolly be well underway buliding the Relief Line .

Doesn’t matter how big the entrance building is, as long as that access shaft has to be dug, those trees will have to be moved or cut down

Though, clearly not well enough to imagine alternative proposals. Tell me, what exactly is there in the underground, according to the renderings you have shown, that precludes shifting the station building westward onto an expanded sidewalk of University Avenue? Lack of imagination? Greed? Arrogance?

View attachment 454389


Is the lack of protection for mechanical parts in the escalators or elevators something that European cities have experienced? Because I see lots of European cities with metros, but few of them where destroying historic sites to build megalomaniacal structures is employed as a strategy.

The existing station box is what Metrolinx is trying to avoid by putting the access shaft westward.

I personally find it much more asinine to give Metrolinx cart blanche to ruin the public sphere, given what we know about how they operate as an organization. They are one of the worst organizations we could possibly be allied with. If a stop was put to this madness, and Metrolinx were forced to work around the space instead of destroying it, it would set an important precedent, that the building of transit is not the be-all, end-all of life, and any transit project that is proposed must be designed with care and sensitivity. What you are instead proposing would set the precedent that Metrolinx can do whatever the hell they like, be goddamned to the consequences, as long as the end result is transit.

I am not interested in slippery slope arguments about how redesigning the station would cause substantial delays. These are guaranteed to occur either way, it is a 15 km line being built over the span of a decade by Metrolinx. I don't remember them being forced to halt the construction of the Eglinton Crosstown for years to redesign a problematic part of the line, and yet here we are, it is over budget, behind schedule, and still without anything resembling a timeline for opening in sight. Anyone who thinks the Ontario Line project would've gone any differently under Metrolinx's management had the Osgoode station been left alone is operating outside of reality, and that is a fact.

Metrolinx is trying to learn from their previous experiences in constructing the Eglinton Crosstown (Entuitive Engineers Are Playing a Major Role in Crosstown LRT Project: Robert Mackenzie Dec 4 2020, UrbanToronto). Avoid underpinning existing station boxes because that is expensive and time consuming and you never know what you might discover underneath. Additionally, by providing the existing station box a buffer from construction vibrations, you can work at a faster pace. This was a problem in the Crosstown because Yonge/Eglinton remained at peak capacity during the construction and there were very tight tolerances about how much the existing station structure could shift during construction.

Quotes from the article above illustrate some of the challenges that happen in such complex working conditions.

The TTC had very strict limitations on the amount of movement, explained Michael Meschino, a Principal at Entuitive. "The requirement was three millimetres of differential movement at any one joint. Think of it as a string of sausages, with joints between each of the pieces. So, each piece of subway box is an element and there's joints in between them. So, each of those pieces can't move any more than three millimetres, and any more than that you start to distort the box, you start to distort the tracks and you interfere with the subway operation."
...
"The engineering work to get this done was actually a very elaborate staging analysis," Meschino said. "We had to model the stiffness of the soil and what happens when you remove a portion of it. Every single stage along the way was modelled. We had to model the stresses and deflections of every stage—100 stages at Cedarvale, over 400 at Yonge. The needle beams had to have their loads adjusted and reduced as the jacking forces were applied."

According to Stephen Brown, also a Principal at Entuitive, "The situation at Yonge was a bit more difficult than at Cedarvale in terms of the ground conditions and the width of the TTC box. The ground was a bit less stable at Yonge-Eglinton than at Cedarvale. Each one of the props was jacked immediately, to reduce deflections further. Since the current Yonge-Eglinton subway station had a middle platform, the station box was wider. Joints were badly placed for what we were doing and we experienced more sensitivity to movements. We had to keep loading and unloading the props to get them to balance against the excavation work that we were doing."

...
Brown said, "A different engineer was doing the bulk of the excavation. We had responsibility for the area directly underneath the TTC box, each side, for somewhere around the first three metres. Basically, the depth of the underpinning beams and the related work. And that has to be self-supporting with the final excavation, which was going many more metres down, supported somewhat separately in there. It's a complex piece to get sorted out because it's critical to keep the TTC box in proper shape, keep the soil which is directly under that corner from softening and allowing a settlement to occur. So, it's actually laterally pre-stressed into the wall, much as we were doing vertical pre-stressing, while jacking our props all the way along. And then the other engineers got to take over for the rest of the work going down."

In total, the underpinning process required a total of sixteen weeks, from the start of tunnelling to finalizing the cradle. The subsequent excavation work required another six months.

"This was as complicated a piece of engineering as most of us have done," Brown said.

...
A relic from a previous transit project near Cedarvale also presented a problem for the engineers to solve.

Meschino told us, "In the early 90s there was an Eglinton subway actually planned, designed, and under construction before it was shelved by the Ontario government. As part of the Eglinton subway construction, they built a huge new sewer structure that runs north-south through this site and they lowered it to be able to go underneath the subway structure."

He continued, "Well, now fast forward till we get to the LRT, and the actual LRT box is deeper than the subway structure was going to be along Eglinton Avenue. So that sewer that they relocated was now in the way. It was actually interfering with the [station box], so the alignment had to run above the sewer. And the sewer, by the way, is to the west of the existing subway, so we had to get above the sewer, but below the subway structure. It really squeezed the alignment for the new LRT, but it also created a situation where we had to analyze the actual sewer structure to figure out how to protect it and make sure it wasn't damaged during the construction of the new LRT structure.

Yu said, "I was standing on top of that sewer myself, when it was excavated. The geometry was so tight, we had to arch the permanent placement of the new station just a little bit, arch it over the existing sewers. We also insulated the pipes to minimize the construction impact to the new station."

So we can see in the design of Osgoode and Queen, Metrolinx learning from their experiences at Cedarvale and Eglinton in trying to reduce the complexity of construction.
Perhaps they are overlearning those lessons but given how bad the result has been on Line 5, there might be alot of institutional scarring going on. (Of course they might have not learned any lessons because Royal Orchard is so deep).

 

[toronto647]

'Personally I can't wait for the trees to be cut down and the project not getting further delayed... LSO is just using stall tactics for the inevitable. Ford has the notwithstanding clause and will use it. People need better transit and honest Metrolinx needs to do stuff like this without consultation. They met with LSO several times and the outcome is done. NIMBY's needs to stop. We are a growing city and there will have to be give and take.

 

[ARG1]

Is the lack of protection for mechanical parts in the escalators or elevators something that European cities have experienced? Because I see lots of European cities with metros, but few of them where destroying historic sites to build megalomaniacal structures is employed as a strategy.

So we went from huge to "Megalomaniac", I see...

You're not earning yourself any favours overhyping the size of the headhouse, the size of which can best be described as a shack. A "Large" structure would be something like what we see with the Crosstown or the TYSSE, this headhouse has roughly the floor space of the bus shelters on the Ottawa Transitway.

You are an architect in the employ of Metrolinx - why would you go for a small, modest, usable sidewalk entrance instead of the big, bombastic building that will draw attention and make the station noteworthy?

...

I personally find it much more asinine to give Metrolinx cart blanche to ruin the public sphere, given what we know about how they operate as an organization. They are one of the worst organizations we could possibly be allied with. If a stop was put to this madness, and Metrolinx were forced to work around the space instead of destroying it, it would set an important precedent, that the building of transit is not the be-all, end-all of life, and any transit project that is proposed must be designed with care and sensitivity. What you are instead proposing would set the precedent that Metrolinx can do whatever the hell they like, be goddamned to the consequences, as long as the end result is transit.

I'm sorry, but exactly what part of this building is "bombastic" and a "destruction of the public realm"? This to me fits in to the surrounding greenspace like a small house in the middle of the forest or a park would. Other than the fact that building is made out of stone, this looks to me similarly to the Grenadier Cafe in High Park, or maybe some washroom building in the York Region Forest. If this to you is "bombastic", I can't wait to see your description of VMC.

 

[superelevation]

Whats funny to me is that concurrently as people are saying "Metrolinx can't get stuff done on time!" "Eglinton is Dragging on forever!" they are pushing for design solutions (digging via University) that will delay the project, increase risk and potentially . . . . make the project drag on forever - for 5 or so trees. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

As some others have said working in a city is not easy. Move the entrance from Osgoode and now it's some other group coming out of the woodwork to fight the project, move it on to the street and now maybe we need to do tons of subway shutdowns, etc etc etc. there is no option that will make everyone happy. The sooner we realize this the sooner we can start getting stuff done. If it really were the case that some silver bullet solution existed do we really think it would just be ignored? A lot of people worked on this project and Metrolinx or not I am sure they thought about all kinds of things.

I am really disappointed seeing this thread. There were consultations on the Osgoode site years ago, the trees are not 200 years old. The report which has been provided makes a pretty clear case as to why the site was chosen, perhaps Campbell House could have been - I don't doubt it would also have seen protests, I just don't really think it's about the trees when David Miller is on Twitter talking about relocating the line to Union Station.

Edit: The Moss Park example is instructive, maybe they could have mined it too! But then the station costs more and takes longer, maybe they could have cut and covered on the street, but now Queen (which has a certain transit route!) is blocked in yet another place. Sometimes eggs must be broken.

 

[officedweller]

How about demolishing and rebuilding Line 1"s Osgoode Station in the process?

Together with an in sidewalk entrance like Waterfront's second entrance in Vancouver?
Elevator in background; stair down and escalator up. Ticketing functions on level below.
There's still a bit of sidewalk on the left.

See also:

Waterfront History Guide • The Canada Line

Waterfront History, Located on Burrard Inlet between downtown’s historic Gastown and Canada Place, Waterfront Station is the Sole Northern terminus station of Canada Line as well

thecanadaline.com

 

[kEiThZ]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1621959589817192448

 

[kEiThZ]

PS. Hasn't gone unnoticed how this opposition looks to the rest of us:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622344756364775426

Bunch of old white Boomers delaying a transit project to protect 5 trees on the fenced off lawn of an elite law school. Supported by leading left-leaning politicians. And people wonder how politicians like Rob Ford and Doug Ford got to power. I wonder how many homeless people these protesters stepped over after getting out of their cars (we all know people like this don't actually take transit with the unwashed masses).

 

[rbt]

Bunch of old white Boomers delaying a transit project to protect 5 trees on the fenced off lawn of an elite law school. Supported by leading left-leaning politicians. And people wonder how politicians like Rob Ford and Doug Ford got to power. I wonder how many homeless people these protesters stepped over after getting out of their cars (we all know people like this don't actually take transit with the unwashed masses).

Gives me memories of St. Clair, where Ford was taking part in stoking the delays. Those court injunctions were driven by people who often didn't live in Toronto (they lived in Vaughan and had a storefront in Toronto).

Anyway, Metrolinx almost never wins high-profile cases in court and that's when the opponent is run of the mill corporate lawyers with a small team: their engineers should presume Plan A is dead and start working on Plan B immediately to minimize any delays.

I'm in favour of Plan A. Plan A died late (rather than early) due to delayed transparency and poor consultation with the land owner.

Also, in general I'm a strong believer in land ownership rights and the right of the land owner to fight expropriation. Sometimes expropriation is necessary as there really is no other option, but sometimes it's just easier. After moving the tunnel location on the Yonge extension to reduce vibration under houses (not even expropriation), I'm unsure how Metrolinx can say they've made a best effort to minimize expropriation at this location.

 

[picard102]

This was posted by you ... yesterday!

Acknowledging the length of time and money this project will cost isn't defeatist. It's reality.

 

[crs1026]

PS. Hasn't gone unnoticed how this opposition looks to the rest of us:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622344756364775426

Bunch of old white Boomers delaying a transit project to protect 5 trees on the fenced off lawn of an elite law school. Supported by leading left-leaning politicians. And people wonder how politicians like Rob Ford and Doug Ford got to power. I wonder how many homeless people these protesters stepped over after getting out of their cars (we all know people like this don't actually take transit with the unwashed masses).

You are making a lot of assumptions and taking cheap shots - and your fact base is completely off.

a) age and demographics - prove it. You have senior people showing up because they are top folks in some of the constituency and stakeholder groups and it is most appropriate that they speak for this "movement". And it's a short notice event on a particularly cold day where they may have been obliged to show up where others decided not to.
b) the grounds are public access
c) this is not the grounds of an elite law school - it's a court house. No law school on site
d) if left-leaners respect civic processes and right-leaners want to tear them down, then I guess I'm a left leaner..... but in practice all political stripes eventually try to use power to excess when they are in office ..... and the opposition of any stripe always deplores doing so.
e) how they reached OH is an assumption on your part that is again a very cheap shot

There is a valid debate going on about how much of the Anglo-Saxon Colonial Settler heritage Torontonians want to retain, and whether the effort to do so is disproportionate to all the groups whose heritage is being given low priority. Little Jamaica being pushed out by transit driven gentrification is the best example (and again, no one disputes the need for higher order transit on Eglinton.... the question is, at what cost.) There are many other ethnic and immigrant groups that have faced struggle in their joining Toronto's social structure, and all of them deserve conservation of their heritage. Not to mention Toronto's Indigenous heritage. The problem being, new immigrant groups' community halls and key locations tend to be in the most unattractive, low-rent parts of the city.... and ethnic communities tend to move around in the city as they become more established and prosperous. So they may not have the same association with particular buildings and intersections, and the buildings themselves may not lead to conservation on pure architectural grounds (unlike all the pretty Victorian mansions that Toronto's old-empire founders left us)

If an inclusive, representative consensus of younger Torontonians with a non-Anglo-Saxon heritage felt that Osgoode Hall is just a tired old building and does not resonate with them, then I can understand why ravaging this site has no concern. We wiped out the Indigenous presence in the city to build its Victorian version.... maybe the Victorian colonial version deserves to be wiped out to build a newer version of the city reflecting a new set of ethnicities and identities. Fair is fair. Sic transit gloria.

But just about every great city retains old stuff, and Osgoode Hall is about as central to Toronto's Victorian heritage as you can get. So unless you really want to cancel the Victorian heritage, it deserves civic deference.

- Paul

PS - Debating making transit better at Osgoode is really no different than debating tearing down Union Station or its parts to make a better, more functional, higher-capacity rail station. That has been proposed, and many are really glad that has never been found acceptable. There are lots of accommodations to heritage there, and I'm sure the engineers felt that razing the whole structure would have been cheaper and easier. It is the same conundrum. At Union, we spent the money and we are enduring a very long construction period. I'm not sorry we did it that way.

 

[dusk]

Bunch of old white Boomers delaying a transit project to protect 5 trees on the fenced off lawn of an elite law school. Supported by leading left-leaning politicians. And people wonder how politicians like Rob Ford and Doug Ford got to power. I wonder how many homeless people these protesters stepped over after getting out of their cars (we all know people like this don't actually take transit with the unwashed masses).

It's exhausting honestly. We get it, Toronto isn't like it was in the 1980s. It's a new generation and we need to cut down a few trees to build transit in our city. It's pretty wild how we're even debating this.

It's a good thing I'm not "king" of Toronto. I'd destroy every single family home in the city and build elevated automated rail everywhere. But nope, let's protect old white homeowners lol