Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

generalcanada said:
the parsons report is right here if you wanna look at it again.
They confirmed what metrolinx already knew only the campbell house and the current osgoode hall plan were good options. Look at the laydown areas for all of the options. its always on the corner anyway with most having it used by shallow excavation.
Click to expand...

The Parsons report is a bad joke, and other options were discussed internally and with the City that are not in that report.

I've offered up that insight previously.

Regardless can we please stop re-litigating this same thing ad nauseum.

generalcanada said:
you overestimate the power of metrolinx. put it another way, hypothetically, If the don bridge required closing down the dvp fully for 5 years instead of intermittent weekend closures. I want you to take a guess at who specifically would be yelling in opposition to metrolinx? psst....the answer is litterally everyone else in the province from kingston to barrie to hamilton.

Remember Metrolinx, while ideally arms-length their funding comes directly from the government, any attempt to give the middle finger to millions of people at once would inevitably come back to bite them in the ass and get their project cancelled.
Click to expand...

The power of Phil Verster to hold a press conference and say what options were really examined and why they were not pursued is real. The only possible consequence is not the cancellation of the O/L, its that Phil might be fired.

Fine, he should assume that risk. He's been making six-figures for 2 decades or more, he's a very, very well off guy who does not need to work at this point in his life unless he's been incredibly reckless.

As such he ought to feel he can 'risk' full disclosure to the public.

generalcanada said:
firstly, when discussing metrolinx people always mistake what "community consultation" actually means. and ive said this before. It is not telling MX "do this or else" its "do this to make it better". You cant say "we dont want this 50 storey condo" you say "can you make it with brick instead?". And if the answer is no, then you need to accept that. THAT is proper community consultation
Click to expand...

Fundamentally, you and I disagree so completely here its as if we're speaking different languages.

To be clear, I completely agree with what you're saying when the law has dictated or politics have dictated very clearly that only 'x' is up for discussion, we ought to be upfront about that.

Where we differ is that I believe that its the best interest of the broader community that should drive everything, and that means the community determines its priorities, not pols, or bureaucrats.

In order to have people set down their priorities and weight options, you require full disclosure on what those options are; and this does not take a great deal of time, they already exist in writing, internally within Mx and the various firms involved in scoping and designing this work.

Its a matter of posting it to their webpage and saying "Here you go, see what we're thinking" And you do this at an early enough stage that there are few or no sunk costs if the decision is made to change directions.

generalcanada said:
As for Osgoode, Whatever you think of the option for it to be on the corner doesnt really matter since there really wasnt a better option. Again, university park delays this project by 5 years and the sidewalk option wont work because again, the car must have its pound of flesh. Nevermind the fact that all options required that site for construction laydown anyway. The trees would never have been safe
Click to expand...

This is simply wrong, factually. You repeat arguments at times that I have already disproven. Why can't you just let this go?

generalcanada said:
The station needs to be built right now and it cant wait at all. Osgoode hall was the only option
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. Period, Full-stop.

Yes, it was an option, and it may, on balance have been the best one, though I don't believe so, but since the two alternatives I would have preferred were never really discussed publicly, its very difficult to ascertain how the public would have felt.

Perhaps this thread needs to be locked again...........sigh.
 
Last edited:
I would happily prefer not to talk about the Osgoode hall ever again, but im not the one bringing it up, only debating others who insist on doing so
Now onto this, without touching the osgoode hall at all.
Where we differ is that I believe its its the best interest of the broader community that should drive everything, and that means the community determines its priorities, not pols, or bureaucrats.
Click to expand...
That is whats called direct democracy and citizens assemblies, something switzerland does, Anything and everything must be put to a vote to the population While awesome, and something we should switch to its not something we currently do.
Also advocating for giving cities and towns much more control than what they do now, again I support that, but not something we do now.

With that said, What we have today is that anything the majority government wants to happen goes. No matter how unpopular it is to the people who voted in the minority
The minority can sometimes ask for small changes, but if the majority wants something its going to happen

In my mind its a pessimistic view in which you cant change the system, you can only advocate for small changes in the system
 
In Vancouver, TransLink considered an elevator only secondary entrance at Burrard Station to increase capacity,
which would have added SIX elevators to accommodate the loads.
It became too expensive, though, and was shelved.
burrard-station-upgrade-elevators-f.jpg

dailyhive.com

Burrard Station could get new elevator-only secondary entrance with 6 lifts | Urbanized

TransLink is considering a design concept of building a secondary entrance into SkyTrain's Burrard Station in downtown Vancouver, but there is a catch: Access between the street level and the underground concourse level could be exclusively by a system of six elevators.
dailyhive.com dailyhive.com
 
evandyk said:
Speaking of adding elevators, I recently took my bike to Dupont Station and the elevator was working. It only took like 10 years for the TTC to accomplish that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, given the TTC's record on elevator maintenance, I'd almost argue we shouldn't consider anything with a single elevator "accessible"
 
TossYourJacket said:
Yeah, given the TTC's record on elevator maintenance, I'd almost argue we shouldn't consider anything with a single elevator "accessible"
Click to expand...
It's less about the number of elevators and more about the lack of urgency in fixing them when they break. If you had 2 elevators per station then you will have 2 out of service elevators waiting to be fixed. Same problem.
 
Islington Express Bus said:
WTF is he even suggesting? Also last I checked, the Ontario Line will be passing under four active stations.
Click to expand...
That no form of downtown subway is needed or worthwhile; it's a fairly old school Toronto progressive take and certainly lines up with the way he talked about Transit City.
 
Last edited:
Islington Express Bus said:
WTF is he even suggesting? Also last I checked, the Ontario Line will be passing under four active stations.
Click to expand...
Technically, UNDER three (3) active stations. The "fourth" station would be OVER the Science Centre Station, or whatever they'll rename it to later.

FIVE, if the Exhibition Station we count interfacing with GO Trains at Exhibition Place. More (SIX or SEVEN or even EIGHT), if there is further GO Train expansion connections (IE a GO Midtown Corridor, see link).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top