GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[steveintoronto]

Just got a chance to skim through the report.

I don't know how to attach two pages that are crucial to the staff report, so readers will have to access the link, and view attachments 50 and 51. If someone could, please attach them in a post to this string. *Those* will be prime exhibits for Metrolinx at the OMB hearings...if it ever gets that far. The City might have second thoughts after consulting lawyers, not to mention that the final say belongs to the Province anyway via the Min of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The Province only entertains being taken before the OMB as a courtesy, it is not required by legislation.

But gloss through the report linked above, and consider this: Not one mention (at least that I've found so far, I'll keep digging on this) of *air rights* over the expanded part of the yard, if not all of it eventually. Impractical? Tell that to NYC!

How NYC's Newest Neighborhood Will Float Above an Active Train Yard

Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan
3/19/14 7:10am
Filed to: cities
19315

In Manhattan this spring, crews are ramping up work on Hudson Yards, the largest private development in US history. But what's fascinating about this new mega-development aren't just its buildings. It's the fact that they will float above an existing train depot on a massive artificial foundation. We got an early look at how it's being built.


First, a little back story. West Side Yard, a sunken rail yard wedged above the High Line and two blocks away from Penn Station, is a critical nerve center in NYC's transit system: A 26-acre depot that serves overflow Long Island Railroad trains during rush hour, with 30 tracks and space for storage and maintenance, too. It's so important that it's been spared from the rush to redevelop the West Side in the wake of the High Line—though that's not to say its creators didn't foresee it.


View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
When the rail yard opened in the 1980s, its engineers were already imagining the day when a hungry developer would pave over it. So they left a small gap that runs around the edges of the yard—just enough space for structural members to be laid down without interrupting traffic. Think of it as an insurance plan for future city-builders.

Now, those builders have arrived—and they're building something far bigger than the planners of the 1980s probably ever imagined: Hudson Yards, a tightly-packed puzzle of four skyscrapers and a cadre of other towers that represent the largest private development project in the entire history of the US, and the largest development in NYC since Rockefeller Center.

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
It will add an entire new neighborhood to Manhattan—65,000 people will live or work here—and all of it, from offices to schools to streets, will rest on the super-strong platform that's now being built over the rail yards.

A Bridge That Holds Up a Neighborhood
Building this platform, let alone the buildings themselves, will require a Jenga-esque succession of tactical construction stages—in part because the rail yard will continue to function as the massive new neighborhood rises above it. Related Companies, the developer of the project, explains the structure with this graphic:

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
But let's take it in steps. To begin with, crews will drill 300 caissons—essentially, large column-like pipes—into the bedrock below the tracks, filling them with concrete:

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
Builders have been doing this in NYC for ages—just look at the Brooklyn Bridge. A century later, this feat will be just as complicated: Because trains will continue to run through the yard, crews will sink the caissons in sections, avoiding the moving trains, drilling as deep at 80 feet into the bedrock below the West Side.

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
Once the caissons are in place, work will begin on a massively heavy, incredibly strong platform—a foundation perched on columns. This work will go piece-by-piece too, all to ensure the safety of the train drivers and the construction crews both:


View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
But the most difficult bit will come at the narrow neck of the rail yard. Here, the trains form a dense thicket of activity, and there's no room for massive caissons. Instead, crews will built a series of trusses across the rail yard:

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
Then—then!—come the buildings. Skyscrapers, apartment complexes, restaurants, a public school. Some 17 million square feet of office and residential spaces. 14 acres of public land. Hotels, shops, a theater. All that and more will sit perched on what amounts to a bridge—a bridge that supports thousands of people and no fewer than three skyscrapers.

View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif
By the time the platform is complete, workers will have installed 25,000 tons of steel (more than half of the Williamsburg Bridge) and 14,000 cubic yards of concrete. It will weigh more than 35,000 tons. For comparison's sake, the bridge portion of the Brooklyn Bridge weighs around 14,680 tons.

A New Generation of NYC Megastructures
The architect of some of the first skyscrapers in the world, Daniel Burnham, once said "make no little plans, they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized." In other words, small ideas don't get anyone excited enough to see them through to completion.

It's a good way to describe Hudson Yards, a cornucopia of pricey real estate that will be so vastly lucrative that it justifies one of the largest structures ever built in New York. Some may see it as more evidence of Manhattan's transformation into a city of penthouse-dwelling oligarchs. But that constantly-churning economic metabolism is the core of New York's urban soul. What's great about it, though, is that what emerges out of the mire of the present will last far beyond it. Each generation scrubs away the legacy of the last—and then makes up its own stories about how the past came to be.



View attachment upload_2016-7-16_14-7-1.gif

Four of America's Tallest Towers Will Rise Within Blocks of Each Other
While most of the supertall building boom spotlight has been placed China and the UAE over the past … Read more

However you feel about the new burst of development in New York, it's been too long since the city built a new megastructure. We're lucky that we get to watch this one take shape. We'll have more on the project soon.

Reply193 replies

http://gizmodo.com/how-nycs-newest-neighborhood-will-float-above-an-activ-1546127069

In all fairness, *most* of what is in the West Side Yard is electric, but not all, and diesel hauled runs under many NYC properties, but at least *some* of the Mimico yards can be used for air rights, not to mention that parts of the yard could also be sunk. How much lead of track would that take? Take a look at the underpass just west of Union Station.

If the new yard is sunk, it can almost immediately follow thereafter that it can be built over, noise and vibration problems addressed, and many other ones too.

But then again, this ain't New York! (as hard as it tries to be)

Drum: Just noticed your post and your starting a new thread on this issue. I'll be there!

Edit: I had trouble finding Drum's string through the master listing, so here it is:
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...reet-4s-townhouses-3s-office-buildings.25730/

 

[crs1026]

GO's operations after electrification will still be 30% dieselised. The number of diesel locomotives really won't fall very much - electrification is linked to expansion. Willowbrook will remain a diesel servicing facility, for our lifetimes, anyways.

Having said that, Willowbrook is huge and some overbuild is certainly possible. But the location may not be attractive until the Queensway has been built out. Maybe in another decade.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

GO's operations after electrification will still be 30% dieselised. The number of diesel locomotives really won't fall very much - electrification is linked to expansion. Willowbrook will remain a diesel servicing facility, for our lifetimes, anyways.

Having said that, Willowbrook is huge and some overbuild is certainly possible. But the location may not be attractive until the Queensway has been built out. Maybe in another decade.

- Paul

Absolutely true, but the new section is ostensibly for RER rolling stock, which I believe is intended to be all-electric. Since what's already there in the yard is grandfathered by older zoning regs, then the *addition* can be below grade, such that it minimizes noise and vibration to surrounding areas, and can be decked over later. It will not be much if any different from subway yards. A noise wall can still be erected around the perimeter facing residential to further isolate noise in the present, especially that emanating from the existing operations once the cement operation is removed. I don't know how deep it goes, but suspect soil is deep enough to be dug down 15 feet or so w/o hitting bedrock. Metrolinx can then look at recouping a lot of costs by selling/renting air rights over the yard.

 

[Palma]

I would agree. I hope the OMB sticks it to them.

this is one time I will be happy at the OMB for voting against the City. What is wrong with Tory that he voted for this

 

[steveintoronto]

Just reading through the Metrolinx Act, and if push comes to shove:
[...]
Conflicts re official plans, by-laws
(13) Despite any Act, a designated policy in a transportation planning policy statement prevails in the case of conflict between the designated policy and an official plan or a zoning by-law. 2009, c. 14, s. 23.
[...]
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06g16#BK23

There may be conditions or provisos to that, looking for them now, so far, can't find any.

 

[crs1026]

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the intent of that law is so that there won't be an argument that a GO line or facility is in contravention of a municipal plan, ie gives GO the right to use its land as it sees fit.

This situation is a little different - it's the use of land adjoining GO. GO has no immediate use for the land being rezoned, or they would simply expropriate it and end the argument. It's the prospect of GO having new neighbours who then complain about how GO is using its own land. GO can't commit to curfews or restricted use of its yard. The ML Act doesn't give GO the power to dictate the zoning of adjacent land, which is why they have to ask the OMB for a ruling.

GO is being proactive to avoid a community issue that doesn't have to arrive. The Councillors ought to be accountable for creating the problem, but in typical fashion they will deflect the blame back onto GO.

EDIT - PS - an analogous situation was when the Canadian Transport Commission ordered GO to restrict piledriving on the West Toronto project. That came about from community complaints. The ML Act doesn't trump the CTC.

- Paul

 

[Filip]

Heheh can't say I'm rooting for Metrolinx

 

[edmundoconnor]

I can't really see that the City has much of a leg to stand on here. When your own planners can be called as witnesses for the opposing side, then you're effectively done. Di Ciano may have thought he was clever by staying away from the actual vote, but it just shows he even he thought the whole affair didn't pass the smell test.

 

[steveintoronto]

Di Ciano is an odd factor in all of this. There's the issue of the municipality v. Metrolinx, which has happened more than a few times in various jurisdictions, but in this case, the dispute is manifesting in a developer gone to bat for by the City. That is one issue. The other is whether a municipality can call the shots on zoning a provincial entity's land.

It seems that the present land that ML concrete sits on is an easement of provincial land (Metrolinx') or the opposite, either way it's complicated, and ML Ready Mix is another case in itself of years of being outside of the law (Environmental).

A precedent can be cited in Mississauga as to Metrolinx not being legally bound by municipal zoning regs:
[...][City staff were asked by councillors how the construction of the station could have happened the way it did without approvals from the public and the municipality.

“It is provincial land that they’re on,” said Martin Powell, the city’s commissioner of transportation and works. He said, therefore, they do not need site plan approval from the city.][...]
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...ing-bus-station-beside-mississauga-homes.html

I've researched this case and for any other where Metrolinx has been brought before the OMB. I can find none. ML (and other provincial entities) do appear at times before the Board, so it appears, as a *grace* to the Province's own accountability. But from that clause I quoted prior, it appears to be just that. From reading the Metrolinx Act, they have some potent powers, some of them a bit concerning. I am aware of them bowing to municipalities under other Acts, namely the HTA as that applies to bicycle racks on the front of buses. They have to have a 'certificate' for each municipality they pass through to allow them to do it, and the certificate(s) carried on the bus adjacent to the driver. I know this from a case I had with them, where they eventually realized when I got the press involved that they were not only wrong, they had a public relations disaster on their hands. (Non-secured load...and counselling the breaking of the law by supervisors, a criminal act)(drivers, btw, are immune from prosecution under the Metrolinx Act, since they are acting "in good faith" although there's some question as to how absolute that is once they are made aware of the law).

Getting back to ML and the Judson land:

Jul 07, 2015 | Vote 0 0
City denies Mimico concrete company easement relocation
Remicorp’s appeal to Ontario Municipal Board latest in string of hearings

Etobicoke Guardian
By Tamara Shephard


The city has denied a Mimico concrete batching company adjacent to a residential neighbourhood consent to relocate Metrolinx’s easement on its property.

Susanne Pringle, manager and deputy secretary treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment Etobicoke York Panel, last month refused Remicorp Industries Inc.’s consent application.

“The applicant has not received consent from the easement holder (Metrolinx) to relocate the existing easement,” Pringle wrote in her decision.

“The applicant has not demonstrated the need for the relocation of the existing easement.”

Remicorp owns and operates ML Ready Mix Concrete.

An easement is defined by the city as a “right of use” of someone else’s property by another party for a specific purpose.

Metrolinx objected to having its access and maintenance easement on Remicorp’s lands relocated.

“Metrolinx has reviewed the alternative proposed by Remicorp and has determined that this alternative does not accommodate the current and/or future requirements of Metrolinx,” Mike Millar, Metrolinx director of realty services wrote the city clerk in a letter last August.

It is unclear why Remicorp wants to relocate Metrolinx’s easement.

But Remicorp’s lawyers confirmed the company is appealing Pringle’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.

“Since it was granted by our client, Metrolinx has never used, or made a request to use, the easement,” Remicorp’s lawyer John Alati said in a statement.

“The City’s decision was wrong and based on flawed and irrelevant considerations. As such, our client has instructed us to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.”

The ML Ready Mix facility at 29 Judson St. is on the south side of a residential street near the Mimico GO Train station, across from a park, seniors’ residence and adjacent houses.

Dan Irwin, who lives directly across the street from ML Ready Mix, lauded Pringle’s decision.

Irwin said he and other residents collected more than 500 signatures on a petition submitted to the city committee objecting to the company’s easement relocation application.

Meanwhile, company owners and residents await the province’s Environmental Review Tribunal decision on the company’s appeal of its Ministry of the Environment-issued amended Environmental Compliance Approval.

Alati said the company’s appeal is related to permitted truck traffic, record keeping and hours of operation.

The pitched battle between company officials and neighbouring residents began in 2007 when the concrete facility began operating. The Ministry of the Environment has said it learned of the operation the following year.

Some neighbouring residents have complained for years to the city and to the provincial ministry about the frequency and hours of trucks rumbling in and out of the facility, and the accompanying dust.

ML Ready Mix operated without ministry environmental approvals until 2013, which further exacerbated tensions between it and adjacent residents.

http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...-mimico-concrete-company-easement-relocation/

Very curious....I suspect there's a few more surprises lurking in the background on this case. I dug out more last night, bit hazy this morning, will post more later.

Quick Edit: As far as I can tell so far, the only *legally required and binding* course of action against Metrolinx is in the Legislature unless it is a Federal matter.

lol...I had to do a double-take, waiting for coffee to kick in, on "ML Ready Mix Concrete".
ML = Metrolinx...glossing over what I wrote, I thought it was a typo.

 

[steveintoronto]

Going to have to use a new post to attach this, it's a bit-map pdf, and has to be presented as a whole page:
From: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/ey/comm/communicationfile-47475.pdf

I'm trying to trace who owns what and what other legal claims are bearing on the MLConcrete lands. Their legal counsel claims they want the City to expropriate it, and the text discusses the historical easement claim of CN, then Metrolinx on the land. I'm still hazy, must get out cycling, will pursue this further later, but have a read and peruse the complete file linked above.

Edit: Having trouble opening my own attachment, it is Pg 3 of the entire document linked above.

GO has no immediate use for the land being rezoned, or they would simply expropriate it and end the argument.

It's a very good question, and the possible/probable answer is in the lawyer's letter linked above. He suspects Metronlinx wants to use the easement (probably an old siding from pre-CN days on the property, still digging on that, ownership of such sidings was typically by the railway after the 1900s) to get the land for 'a cheap price' in expropriation. Wish I could copy and paste to get the wording exact, consult the link for exact wording)

EDIT - PS - an analogous situation was when the Canadian Transport Commission ordered GO to restrict piledriving on the West Toronto project. That came about from community complaints. The ML Act doesn't trump the CTC.

Exactly! The more I read on this, the more it becomes clear that there's a power struggle going on, and in the end, the City realizes that they can't win, so they're playing an end-game to complicate things. Ironically, it might just be under CTC and other federal acts (Perhaps Railway Act and Transport Act) that Metrolinx have a legal device to do what ML Ready Mix' counsel infers, Metrolinx wants to gain ownership of the land by virtue of the easement under federal powers.

This is an interesting case, more for what isn't being said than is. Googling for "ML Ready Mix" in itself is an eye-opener.

I suspect in the end, a compromise will be presented before the OMB to satisfy both the City and Metrolinx' needs....perhaps even before it gets to the OMB, which can take years.

 

[steveintoronto]

I've yet to see if this pertains under the Metrolinx Act, I'm unaware of it so far, it might occur in a same or similar fashion elsewhere in provincial or federal law, and the Metrolinx Act already has very powerful expropriation clauses, but this is interesting none-the-less as an indicator of what the "easement" situation holds for Metrolinx having a real leverage over the ML Ready Mix property: (edit to add: By Metrolinx laying claim to this strip, it will be impossible for ML Ready Mix to sell the property under existing deeds, let alone Di Ciano's or the City's intent for residential development)

Ontario Northland Transportation Commission Act
[...]
General powers of Commission
24. (1) The Commission has in respect of the railway and works, in addition to all the powers, rights, remedies and immunities conferred by this Act, all the powers, rights, remedies and immunities conferred upon any railway company by The Railways Act, being chapter 331 of the Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1950, or by general Act of the Legislature affecting railways for the time being in force, but The Railways Act or any other such Act does not in other respects apply to the railway or is not binding upon the Commission. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.32, s. 24 (1).

Expropriation of easements, etc.
(2) The Commission may from time to time, at its option, in lieu of expropriating land under any such general railway Act, expropriate such easements, rights of user and rights of support as is indicated in any notice to be given by the Commission in that behalf. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.32, s. 24 (2).

Alternative method of expropriation
(3) In lieu of proceeding in the manner provided by The Railways Act or any other general Act of the Legislature affecting railways, the Commission may at its option acquire and expropriate any such lands, easements, rights of user and rights of support in the same manner with necessary modifications as is provided in the case of land or property taken by the Crown as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure under the Ministry of Infrastructure Act, 2011, and any claim for compensation for any such lands, easements, rights of user or right of support shall in that case be determined in the manner provided by the Expropriations Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.32, s. 24 (3); 2011, c. 9, Sched. 27, s. 35.
[...]
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90o32

No wonder ML Ready Mix wanted the situation resolved, and their stating (in effect) 'CN and Metrolinx no longer have a claim on the easement'.

One has to wonder if the City knows about this (one would only hope their legal counsel is adept and informed), and if so, there's a huge story not being reported on the situation.

 

[crs1026]

Expropriation is a case of "be careful what you ask for". I suspect the current owner would love to be expropriated, as their lawyer would no doubt argue that the property has enormous commercial value which GO is depriving them of the opportunity to exploit..... the selling price will be unjustly enriched.
The better solution would be for the current owner to retain the property, confine its use to what is reasonable and proper under the existing zoning (and with proper approvals), respect the residential area to the north, and abandon any aspiration of converting it to residential use.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

After watching hours of the Planning Cmte and full council debate and vote on this, it's clear that there are motivations far deeper than the obvious, one of those might be the wish for Metrolinx to do just that: expropriate the property. It would certainly make the locals and the Planning Dep't happy going by the testimony of Ms Keesmat (Chief Planner). It was asked by a councillor if "the City can expropriate it" to which the answer was 'no'.

There is another alternative outcome, one of many, all of which Metrolinx wins their case (it's the Province, they can and do overrule any move by a municipality, even by Ministerial diktat), and that's to use the "Mixed" category (oddly, the the specific category of Mixed was not stated in anything I've heard or read) by the City, but the Province impose conditions on the use of the Judson section. Clearly, the powers to do this exist in a number of Acts.

Site specific conditions are often imposed on particular properties in zoning and planning. This is a wanting case for it.

The City does have impending cases against the present operation on the site, and of course, imposition will almost inevitably be by the Court, some of the violations (lack of building permits, for instance) are egregious.

 

[rbt]

Ontario economy seems to be growing fairly well the last little bit. This news should firm up GO RER funding in the next couple Ontario budgets; the past couple budgets have merely hand-waved at the possibility of funds being provided in the future in some way.

https://news.ontario.ca/opo/en/2016/07/ontario-economy-a-growth-leader-in-first-quarter-of-2016.html


Also, the new Mount Pleasant GO parking lot now open:

https://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2016/07/more-go-parking-for-commuters-in-brampton.html

 

[ShonTron]

The ML Ready Mix lands (29 Judson Street, which, as far as I can tell, are not owned by Dunpar nor subject to redevelopment) sit on land where the Grand Trunk Mimico Station used to be, before it was moved across Judson Street and fixed up. The Dunpar lands, immediately to the west, at 49, 53 and 55 Judson, were industrial, and separate from the CN yard.