News   Apr 23, 2024
Shimmy
 72     0 
News   Apr 22, 2024
Ferris + Associates Merges with NAK Design Group, Reshaping the GTA Landscape
 833     0 
News   Apr 22, 2024
UrbanToronto Webinars: Building Sustainably — Industry and Individuals
 286     0 

Metrolinx: Bombardier Flexity Freedom & Alstom Citadis Spirit LRVs

My understanding is the Waterloo lrv will be doing static testing in the maintenance facility for the first few months before hitting the test track between Northfield and Erb.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
So pretty much like what happened with 4400, 3301 and 4402 in Toronto
Click to expand...

It's unlikely that ION's pilot vehicle will need to be shipped back to BBD for comprehensive upgrades/fixes as there is fairly little non-standard/original in them, compared to the TTC streetcar--my understanding is the main reason 4400/1/2 needed to be sent back was to replace the wheelchair ramp module because of Toronto's unusual requirement of multiple stages, especially deployment down to the road surface. The LRVs are much simpler, and should probably need only minor fixes that can be done onsite in Waterloo.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
So it's a mistake for a company to hold back on delivering something if they know that the other company receiving the item isn't ready yet? I really hope that Metrolinx starts getting a black eye over this and city council too both of them are at fault for this.
Click to expand...
Based on my experience, its my job to see my work order completed as require regardless if my contractor is not ready for it. The material is put on trailers and store either on my property or site with me submitting my monthly billing for work done. Depending on the length of time material is store, cost maybe have to be past on to the contractor for the cost of the trailers. It also means my hold back will be longer to see and could have an impact on cash flow.

All the sub trades for Burlington GO stations ship material to the site years ago, that only got used in the last 9 months, since they knew the project was going south and wanted to make sure they got paid upon delivery then, not now. Erection and insulation could becomes an extra expense due to delays and increase of cost.

If I am to delay my work, then a new timetable has to be agree to as there maybe extra cost incur doing so. By taking a project out of production schedule, does that leave a hole in my workforce to the point I have people doing nothing that costing me money to how do I fit it in with other projects down the road without using a lot of overtime.

Even if BBD did pump out the cars like they are supposed to, they will run out of storage space to the point cars will have to be store on flats in CP/CN yard. At this point, they could be tag without 7/24 security or be store an area with full protection at an extra cost.

At this point, ML is up shit creek since they have no place for the cars in the first place. Then that can fall back on Good Old Rob Ford for killing the Sheppard line as well the SRT since he hated streetcars in the first place. Then ML didn't have balls to stay the course for the SRT to the point it was kill by an overprice white elephant subway.
 
Last edited:
TheTigerMaster said:
Could they be stored in GO rail yards? They use the same track gauge and presumably have decent security there.
Click to expand...
Will say no since they will have to remain on the flats that requires about 210' per car and a few would eat up the yard in no time.

You need to build a special coupler that would connect to locomotive and the LRV if on the track to move the cars from Willowbrook to the Eglinton complex, but how many LRV's could be pull at one time??

If the LRV are on the track, you could store more of them in the yard compare being on the flats since 2 LRV would take up the space of one LRV on the flat. Then there is the cost of leasing the flats.

Then there is the issue of off loading the LRV's from track since the new complex is to have the same ramp setup as TTC that will slope down to the track. You could use the same ramp system as KW for cars that will arrive by flat and you push the the store one that were on on the track into the yard without the ramp.

The can of worms just keep on getting bigger.

It would be something to see if a string of LRV's were move on rail by a locomotive.

You have more room over in the VIA complex as well the new GO yard being built next to the mainline, but will only hold X cars. What do you do with the cars that can't fit the yards??.

Now, if the electrification was in place by 2020/21, could the LRV's be able to use it?? If so, you run them as 4-6 pack trains.
 
Last edited:
I don't have the Act open at this moment, but I will address it in detail later after I've had a chance to peruse the Metrolinx Act (and associated ones) again:
drum118 said:
If Metrolinx had the powers it should had from day one, Sheppard and the SRT would be built as plan.
Click to expand...

Allandale25 said:
So by "powers" do you mean the specific power to build projects without City of Toronto Council approval? In other words, you'd like Metrolinx to have the ability to ignore any vote by local Councils on transit projects?
Click to expand...
Metrolinx has *vast powers* in their enabling legislation, including taking over powers and complete operations of municipal systems. Their power is draconian in some respects, but that's all the more bearing on the need for overview, and not just by the provincial auditor.

I don't think Metrolinx are used to being called to account, as we all know. Watch for a Trump defence when the court beats them silly. I'll detail sections of the Metrolinx Act later, but for those wanting a head-start:
Metrolinx Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 16 - Ontario.ca
 
TOareaFan said:
is there a big limo budget item at ML?
Click to expand...
It was a euphemism, but not far off the mark if the following is to be believed (It is the TorStun, but no defamation action was launched against them)
Metrolinx CEO Bruce McCuaig worried story might expose agency worker's Liberal Party links

By Shawn Jeffords, Toronto Sun

First posted: Saturday, June 07, 2014 07:00 PM EDT | Updated: Saturday, June 07, 2014 07:53 PM EDT

Days before publication of a “damaging” story about Metrolinx staff receiving perks — some paid for by public cash — the agency’s CEO was concerned the coverage might expose the workers “links to the Liberal Party.”

The revelation is part of a large disclosure of documents obtained by the Toronto Sun through a Freedom of Information request. The e-mails and reports detail how Metrolinx CEO Bruce McCuaig wrote to board chairman Rob Prichard to warn him about a Toronto Sun story exposing the troubled Promotional Partnerships program in August 2013.

The Sun had submitted a series of detailed questions to the provincial transit agency about a pair of sponsorship agreements Metrolinx had struck up with the Rogers Centre and the Toronto International Film Festival in 2011. The deals saw Metrolinx staff score exclusive tickets to an NFL game and glitzy TIFF galas and screenings for free or at a cut rate.

The agreements were inked even as the province rolled out some sweeping rules which banned public servants from receiving perks that same year.

E-mails show the Sun’s questions set off a flurry of activity and concern over what the story might say. But, beyond the damaging details of programs run amok, McCuaig said the Sun might have something else.

“The story might focus on some of the people who have used the tickets and their links to the Liberal party,” McCuaig wrote in an e-mail on Aug. 15, 2013, days before the story was published.

A sentence immediately following that is redacted, blacked out by a heavy black bar, citing personal privacy exemptions in Freedom of Information legislation.

More than 30 Metrolinx staffers bought tickets at a cut rate or were given free stubs to the Buffalo Bills game. It’s not clear which staffers attended the TIFF events.

In the e-mail, McCuaig tells Prichard the Ministry of Transportation is aware of the impending story. Documents show responses provided to the Sun were vetted by both ministry officials and Premier Kathleen Wynne’s office.

McCuaig concedes to Prichard that limited records were kept on how tickets were distributed and disposed of and he’s aware of online photos which show Metrolinx staff at a TIFF gala event. He stresses that once he discovered the problems, he ordered the practice stopped and initiated an internal audit to correct the issue.

“In any event, I expect the story to be negative and damaging,” McCuaig tells Prichard.

In reply to the message from McCuaig, Prichard makes no comment about staff ties to the Liberal party. He advises the CEO to get out in front of the brewing controversy.

“Don’t defend the indefensible,” he writes. “Call it out.”

The Sun story focused on the program and its mismanagement. It led to calls for an Auditor General’s investigation from opposition parties and several weeks of coverage. It made no mention of Liberal links to Metrolinx.

McCuaig was not available for comment despite several interview requests made by the Sun. In a statement, Metrolinx spokesman Anne Marie Aikins said she spoke for McCuaig.

“We have responded openly in a timely fashion to all of the frequent calls from the Toronto Sun since July 2013 regarding the promotional partnership program,” Aikins said. “Bruce McCuaig has done an interview with the Toronto Sun on this topic and does not have anything new to add at this time.”

McCuaig granted the Sun an interview last August after e-mails showed Transportation Minister Glen Murray asked Metrolinx senior executives to respond to the Sun.

Aikins said Friday that McCuaig’s e-mail was an update to Prichard.

“The e-mail from Mr. McCuaig to our board chair in August 2013 was intended to provide his thoughts on the possible content of the upcoming story in the Toronto Sun.”

The agency statement did not answer questions about employee links to the Liberal Party. Aikins stressed employees are hired based on merit.

“We have a six-step recruitment process to ensure we hire only the most qualified candidates,” she said, referring the Sun to Metrolinx hiring rules.

The Liberal party campaign team released a statement referring comment to Metrolinx.

“We can’t speak to what was on the mind of Metrolinx staff in regards to the documents you provided,” Liberal spokesman Rebecca Mackenzie said, adding the party’s commitment to building “$16 billion worth of shovel in the ground transit projects currently on the go.”

NDP urban transportation critic Rosario Marchese said McCuaig’s comments undermine the agency’s credibility and independence. It appears Metrolinx “kowtows” to the Liberal party, Marchese said.

“Credibility for Metrolinx is a big deal and any link to the Liberal party is a problem,” he said. “When you mention that link, you realize they are too closely connected and that ruins the reputation of Metrolinx at a time when we desperately need them to focus on transit and not focus on marketing and not focus on protecting the Liberal party. It’s not their job.”

Tory MPP Doug Holyday said McCuaig’s comments raise questions the CEO and the Liberal party should answer.

“When you say links, (is it) ‘Metro-links’ to who? Maybe it’s the Liberal party? It’s not the only instance where Liberal friends have shown up on government appointed boards.”

Holyday said McCuaig’s comments raise the spectre of possible patronage at Metrolinx.

“Government is not a place for one to put one’s political friends,” he said. “We should be hiring the most capable and talented people in the area we’re dealing with. I’m not sure that has always been the case with the Liberals.”
Click to expand...
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/06/0...ght-expose-agency-workers-liberal-party-links

RE: My prior post on the Metrolinx Act, there's stories on-line by the Torontoist and NOW magazine, I'm reluctant to post them, I'm finding problems in them. I'll take some time to review the Act clause by clause later, as neither of the articles quote them, and speak in generalizations.

http://torontoist.com/2014/10/understanding-metrolinx/

https://nowtoronto.com/news/metrolinx-blames-you/
 
Last edited:
TheTigerMaster said:
So does this whole controversy come down to Metrolinx not yet wanting to take delivery of the vehicles, because they don't yet have anywhere to store them?
Click to expand...
I would say "YES". Not only they have no place to store them, but no place test them, as well maintain them.
 
It's not a clear cut answer, and the one who wins will have the best legal team. Neither of them are great managers, and we've yet to see what we're not being told about but will appear before the court. As it stands, BBD appear to have the upper hand, but only legally, not morally, they've made such a mess of so many contracts. What really isn't helping Metrolinx is their proclivity to resort to name-calling.

Which reminds me, got to buy some popcorn to watch this all unfold...

What I'll find riveting is sworn testimony and entered evidence of engineers and professionals.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top