News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.6K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.2K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 445     0 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Im wondering if it has anything to do with the planned shift of the Eglinton platform several meters to align with the station below? I don't frequent the subway, so Im not sure if that work has even started yet? I thought that there were going to be a large number of Eglinton station closings to accommodate this work, but Im not aware of any closings other than for the signalling upgrades....
a lot of the signal upgrade closings also allowed for the platform shift. It seemed like they were closing Line 1 through this stretch almost every other weekend to get the work done for a while there.
 
I was wondering the same thing, the Eg station thread has a bit of an update. Platform shift has apparently been minimized to leave the pocket track.
thanks. I didn't even know about that whole thread...
 
There's this new invention called photography. Show us what is finished, what is about to be finished, and what is way behind.
Photography won't show us engineering flaws. I highly doubt it's a structural problem anymore. They can finish Eglinton in half a year.

Since we haven't seen successful high speed footages, it might not be safe to run trains in tunnels at high speed. Hence they can't open the line. Who knows what they need, redo the tracks? buy new trains? build new tunnels? build a new line? ML are fools
 
Photography won't show us engineering flaws. I highly doubt it's a structural problem anymore. They can finish Eglinton in half a year.

Since we haven't seen successful high speed footages, it might not be safe to run trains in tunnels at high speed. Hence they can't open the line. Who knows what they need, redo the tracks? buy new trains? build new tunnels? build a new line? ML are fools

Someone with insight suggested to me that part of the delay (and a big reason for the general silence) may be litigation. In other words, somebody will not release the completed asset - or accept it and write payment cheques for completion - until the oustanding legal disputes are settled.

It’s just a conspiracy theory, but it explains the silence. The opening may actually sit in the hands of the lawyers.

- Paul
 
Someone with insight suggested to me that part of the delay (and a big reason for the general silence) may be litigation. In other words, somebody will not release the completed asset - or accept it and write payment cheques for completion - until the oustanding legal disputes are settled.

It’s just a conspiracy theory, but it explains the silence. The opening may actually sit in the hands of the lawyers.

- Paul
i mean thats what that cbc article in december said.

"metrolinx says the contractor doesnt have a credible plan"

but if you read further, they did put together a plan for opening in march, but metrolinx just disagrees with it, citing deficiencies. then they got some rando source in MX saying they dont think it could be running till september
 
Anyone who has done home renovations knows how the conversation goes....

"You need to come back and redo the work you messed up, before we are willing to say the job is done and pay you for the work"
"We did the work to your specs, so we need to be paid additional compensation to do that added work."
"The work was in the original contract, and if you won't do it right we will take you to court and enforce our contract. And we will tell everyone we know what a shoddy contractor you are"
"Say what you like..... our lawyer will be hanging off your every word. Sure, let's go to court.... and we will tell the judge how many times you changed the requirements, or wouldn't give us direction and made us wait, or asked us to do it badly....and how we discovered that the work that was done previously wasn't properly done and we had to fix that......oh, and while we are waiting for a court date, you won't be moving back in......"

- Paul
 
Last edited:
Honestly i think a large part of this farce is due to the loose lips from Verster. Had he not publicly shamed Crosslinx the way he did for the last 2 years
I think they wouldve worked together to make early 2023 possible. Now that the bridges are burnt there is no incentive or desire from Crosslinx to work hard to
meet anything above the bare minimums.

Its one thing to hold people to account but when both parties are vested in this together they need to keep back door disputes private at least until work is completed.
 
Someone with insight suggested to me that part of the delay (and a big reason for the general silence) may be litigation. In other words, somebody will not release the completed asset - or accept it and write payment cheques for completion - until the oustanding legal disputes are settled.

It’s just a conspiracy theory, but it explains the silence. The opening may actually sit in the hands of the lawyers.

- Paul

Speculation on my part but I think this is correct wrt construction milestones and payments. The way P3s are structured, the government pays the consortium based on milestones being completed, and having a partial opening of the line without Eglinton completed would require a significant rework of the Project Agreement. ML wouldn't want to pay for a the Substantial Completion payment for a line that still requires further construction work.
 
Honestly i think a large part of this farce is due to the loose lips from Verster. Had he not publicly shamed Crosslinx the way he did for the last 2 years
I think they wouldve worked together to make early 2023 possible. Now that the bridges are burnt there is no incentive or desire from Crosslinx to work hard to
meet anything above the bare minimums.

Its one thing to hold people to account but when both parties are vested in this together they need to keep back door disputes private at least until work is completed.

The problem is that

a) P3 contracts are popular because of the naive and simplistic belief that such a “fixed-price, contractor manages everything” format guarantees cost and time performance

b) the P3 format is attractive to governments and organizations like ML because it firewalls them from blame, and the contractual agreement of confidentiality encourages government to maintain a narrative of “on time and on budget” long after that ceases to be truthful

I continue to ask how it is possible for ML’s auditors to sign off on annual reporting by public agencies when in the agenciy’s books there is a glaring but undisclosed variance on a multi billion dollar project.

The schedule and cost deficiencies in this project must have been first apparent to ML some years ago, and have likely worsened over that time. Surely failure to disclose that in Ml’s recent annual reports and MD&A’s must have crossed a line somewhere legally. If the auditors noted the non-disclosure and accepted it, have they failed in their fiduciary duty to the taxpayer? (If they missed it, how competent were they as auditors?) Whatever happened to Sarbanes Oxley ?

The solution to this in my view is a law that requires all large public projects to have an arms length third party auditor who has a duty to the public to verify the performance of the project (or non-performance) and to report on same, without interference from either government or parties to the project. This oversight needs to include cost, schedule adherence, and control of scope.

The causes to the delay may have been beyond anybody’s control, but the lack of transparency likely gave the parties too much room to wrangling and spinning when a more honest, transparent approach might have solved them sooner. The legal jostling and public floggings should come after opening. Transparency is not needed just to ensure accountability, it actually encourages the identification and quick resolution of problems and unforeseens.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
The problem is that

a) P3 contracts are popular because of the naive and simplistic belief that such a “fixed-price, contractor manages everything” format guarantees cost and time performance

b) the P3 format is attractive to governments and organizations like ML because it firewalls them from blame, and the contractual agreement of confidentiality encourages government to maintain a narrative of “on time and on budget” long after that ceases to be truthful

- Paul

P3 contracts also allow a government to defer costs to a later date and by the time the bill comes due there could be a new government in charge or we could all be dead etc.
 
P3 contracts also allow a government to defer costs to a later date and by the time the bill comes due there could be a new government in charge or we could all be dead etc.

Not as much as you might expect due to much higher rates private companies have when borrowing funds (~12%, not 4%).

Since government gets much better interest rates on bonds, government often directly backs the loans the P3 companies use to build the infrastructure. Those bonds, despite being indirect, appear immediately on government books as a liability as if they borrowed the funds directly.

P3 contracts without a "Finance" component are pay-as-they-build in the exact same way a traditional "Build" contract is.
 
Last edited:
I almost wonder if there is a communications strategy to have everyone expect the worst (2024-2026) and then open it later this year so people will be pleasantly surprised.
I said that last year and was unfortunately disappointed. But I hope you're right!
 

Back
Top