T3G
Senior Member
The delays of the Eglinton line are exceptionally well documented.
Happy reading:
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
Happy reading:
picard102
Senior Member
They literally set up equipment to do it and began cutting before the injunction hearing in the building next to them.
They stopped and waited due to the public pressure to do so, and I'm sure lawyers putting the fear of god in them.
That you don't think that doing an end run around the legal process is bad faith confirms that nothing would satisfy your requirement of proof they are acting inappropriately.
generalcanada
Senior Member
guess you missed the sarcasm. i know about the crosstown delays.
IMO unforseen construction delays of eglinton have 0 relation to the ontario line. In fact its the opposite, you can use that project as evidence metrolinx is learning. being that they have split up the ontario line to like 5 separate projects (exhibition station early works, downtown tunnel and stations, don yard early works, shared GO corridor, north tunnel, maintenance yard and trains, north bridge over DVP, north elevated sections)
1 single gigantic contract just doesnt work as they have learned. another example is GO expansion which we should all know about at this point
...yes...thats...what an injunction is? Its 100% completely fine until the order comes down?
they had all the rights to cut those trees before the injunction actually took place.
Now if you tell me that metrolinx kept cutting the trees AFTER the injunction I will 100% agree with you.
Do you have evidence for this?
are you really going to argue that following the law to the letter is bad faith?
picard102
Senior Member
I'm going to argue that going ahead and doing something knowing you'll be told not to is absolutely bad faith.
Doing so directly outside the building where they are discussing it is bad faith.
To defend it is bad faith.
Metrolinx acted in a manner that displays their disregard for the public and legal institutions.
generalcanada
Senior Member
yea no, thats a bad argument. it was never guaranteed the injunction was going to be granted?
Do you as a defendant give restitution to the plaintiff before judgement comes down? I mean cmon man thats just silly.
Ward8
Active Member
Write up from Steve Munro
stevemunro.ca
Interesting points all around. Some of the engineering difficulties of a better station design, and the broader user experience problems with the current design. Namely the lack of a direct connection between platforms. Definitely a solid review with the various elements explained in layman's terms.
Osgoode Station Entrance Review
Metrolinx plans along several of its corridors have provoked community opposition and proposed alternative schemes, but Metrolinx has been quite intransigent about “just getting things built&…
stevemunro.ca
Interesting points all around. Some of the engineering difficulties of a better station design, and the broader user experience problems with the current design. Namely the lack of a direct connection between platforms. Definitely a solid review with the various elements explained in layman's terms.
picard102
Senior Member
It was more likely than not, as the actions would be irreversible.
It would be silly. Good thing a injuction isn't restitution.
Kitsune
Senior Member
Write up from Steve Munro
Osgoode Station Entrance Review
Metrolinx plans along several of its corridors have provoked community opposition and proposed alternative schemes, but Metrolinx has been quite intransigent about “just getting things built&…
Interesting points all around. Some of the engineering difficulties of a better station design, and the broader user experience problems with the current design. Namely the lack of a direct connection between platforms. Definitely a solid review with the various elements explained in layman's terms.
So the site is also being used for TBM Extraction so they can start on station construction earlier .. thats why the site needs to be so big. Also .. we went from this...
to this:
... its the half sized station boxes of the ontario line (remember the relief line boxes were 200m to match the existing subway) and suboptimal placement (the relief line was shifted to form a T for better inter-platform connections) that is causing them to take over osgoode hall it appears. Also .. why does the Ontario line require grandiose station buildings when the relief line did not..
Ward8
Active Member
This is the most alarming part of the blog post. Unless I'm interpreting things wrong, there is no direct connection between platforms. The only connection between in the lines is the Osgoode keyhole shaft. (Someone can confirm or correct if I'm wrong.) It appears there are engineering challenges that they are avoiding, but the shorter platform and platform placement don't appear to give any advantage to transit users.
Meaning a person entering the station at the new Simcoe entrance/a person who exits the western most door of a train, would have to walk the whole platform, exit the paid fare area, go up the escalators, re-enter the turnstiles and go back down the escalators if they intended to transfer to the university line.
kv1990
New Member
I also find it troubling that the Simcoe entrance will only connect to the OL platform and not have any direct connection to line 1
T3G
Senior Member
I didn't even notice that in the plans that were posted earlier upthread.
Clearly we were all focusing on the wrong thing ... The more I hear about this project, the less I like it. Seems to me the only thing it has going for it as compared to the Relief Line is the expanded coverage. Cheaping out by buying lighter, shorter trains instead of the heavy duty subway spec trains common sense would suggest the line should run, the stupidity of the in-station connection, and the destruction of the public realm. Metrolinx is truly leaving behind a legacy that we can all be proud of.
Maybe @Northern Light was onto something with the suggestion of taking this back to the drawing board!
Clearly we were all focusing on the wrong thing ... The more I hear about this project, the less I like it. Seems to me the only thing it has going for it as compared to the Relief Line is the expanded coverage. Cheaping out by buying lighter, shorter trains instead of the heavy duty subway spec trains common sense would suggest the line should run, the stupidity of the in-station connection, and the destruction of the public realm. Metrolinx is truly leaving behind a legacy that we can all be proud of.
Maybe @Northern Light was onto something with the suggestion of taking this back to the drawing board!
Ward8
Active Member
W. K. Lis
Superstar
See https://stevemunro.ca/2023/02/07/osgoode-station-entrance-review/
This was the first I heard about the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) extraction at or around Osgoode Station. Will it be reinserted further east (Moss Park)? Will there be other TBM’s or will they use the same one for the entire length of the Ontario Line?
How far will the tunnel mining operation go for? Was this mentioned at any public meetings before? Are there diagrams that mentioned anything about this, or was it in some footnote at the back of some document?
This was the first I heard about the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) extraction at or around Osgoode Station. Will it be reinserted further east (Moss Park)? Will there be other TBM’s or will they use the same one for the entire length of the Ontario Line?
How far will the tunnel mining operation go for? Was this mentioned at any public meetings before? Are there diagrams that mentioned anything about this, or was it in some footnote at the back of some document?
Kitsune
Senior Member
Also .. seems like this line is more for Go Transit users .. with only a couple add-ons to appease Toronto. The relief line south would of been under construction for a couple years now .. and relief line north planning would of been done and tunneling prolly starting next year. No reason they could not have started Relief Line West planning in 2019 .. except ... Metrolinx hired a consultant that was very anti-relief line after Ford get elected and that was the point the Relief line was doomed.
Northern Light
Superstar
This is correct.
As proposed, the connection between the 2 lines is the eastern exit path/keyhole site at Osgoode Hall, which sees O/L passengers exit by coming up to a new connection to the existing concourse on the eastern side.
Passengers would then to exit an existing paid area and walk over to the existing concourse, re-enter the paid area and descend using the existing vertical circulation.
It is an exceedingly cumbersome proposal.
I'm not phased by the fact there isn't a direct platform to platform connection, that would indeed be challenging to make work.
Rather, I see the challenge as being that there is only one connection point, that its awkwardly laid out, and that there is no expansion of vertical circulation between the existing concourse and Line 1, despite, presumably additional traffic; nor is there an alternate/additional exit added to the Line 1 station to mitigate this by sending some portion of existing traffic elsewhere.
Further, any modified design really needs both lines to be within one paid area, doing this requires extending the existing concourse to the east and west and modifying the relationship to or location of the existing street entrances.
Yes.
******
In respect of the above, lets take the applicable text directly from Steve Munro's post, linked above:
Edit to add: A partial correction to the above is coming in a future post. Thanks to people being generous in their trust, I have been given some new insights into things which I will discuss in a future post. But I want to leave this up to avoid confusion and making subsequent responses less understandable.
Last edited: