Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

The collection of "totally not nimby" nimby's across the GTA is nauseating. They all are adamant about the fact its not that they don't want the wildly popular project to go through whether its bike paths, transit or more density, but that each project has some immense unique issue that means it can't occur. As much as they deny the reality, these people, including the elder convention out front Osgode hall and Moss park, are almost entirely entitled white homeowners mad at anything close to progress. I walked by the protest yesterday out-front Moss park and the split between (largely poc) residents going about their day on Sherbourne and the suburbanites who drove into town was nearly comical.

To be clear these are not environmentalists, or transit supporters who just want to see it done right, they are regressive WASP's stuck in a by gone era. If partisan "progressive" councilors are able to kill the downtown subway again as Layton did in the 70's this city will be confirmed as a circus.
 
W. K. Lis said:
When they built the Bloor-Danforth subway (Line 2), they built it mostly cut-n-cover. They cut down trees, bull-dozed the houses, and dug down. After building the tunnel infrastructure, they filled it in and planted grass and trees.

The following (from link) is looking west from the Runnymede Station.
View attachment 454226
Click to expand...
Exactly, had these people been listened too so closely for all of Toronto's history we would have no rapid transit. Not a single person today will dispute the minor removal of trees and homes on bloor/danforth/yonge/university was not worth the subway lines we currently have
 
Last edited:
If people are so concerned about 5 trees in the way of a modern metro line in the heart of one of the biggest metropolitan areas on the continent, then should they not be equally enraged and also be taking the same actions against the probably hundreds to thousands of trees (maybe even older than Osgoode!) that are cut down for suburban sprawl each year?
(I support cutting down the Osgoode trees if it means cost and time saving)
 
kEiThZ said:
Even aside from this project and controversy itself, I don't recall any discussion on how Metrolinx is run during the provincial or municipal election. In a city and region starved for transit investment, I'm going to suggest that most people don't care.

Are there wider issues than these 5 trees? Absolutely. Is the average Joe or Jane going to see it that way? Absolutely not. And every headline is going to be about saving 5 trees. Can't wait for the BlogTO piece on it....
Click to expand...
To be fair, some MPPs like Peter Tabuns absolutely ran on the platform of Metrolinx - in his case campaigning for a more open and transparent Metrolinx as well as (most importantly) Burying the Ontario Line in Leslieville. The NDP Platform actually had a lot on it in terms of Metrolinx reforms.
 
ARG1 said:
To be fair, some MPPs like Peter Tabuns absolutely ran on the platform of Metrolinx - in his case campaigning for a more open and transparent Metrolinx as well as (most importantly) Burying the Ontario Line in Leslieville. The NDP Platform actually had a lot on it in terms of Metrolinx reforms.
Click to expand...

So the fact that the NDP didn't get a majority of the seats in the GTA, and isn't in government should kinda speak to how important this issue is to the public.
 
whydidimakethis said:
If people are so concerned about 5 trees in the way of a modern metro line in the heart of one of the biggest metropolitan areas on the continent, then should they not be equally enraged and also be taking the same actions against the probably hundreds to thousands of trees (maybe even older than Osgoode!) that are cut down for suburban sprawl each year?
(I support cutting down the Osgoode trees if it means cost and time saving)
Click to expand...

Have you missed the firestorm over the proposals to develop the greenbelt? There have been protests, media stories, lobbying efforts, including on the Federal gov't to consider intervening.

There have been ongoing efforts for years to expand the Greenbelt as well.

When you consider that most members at UT live in the City or the very urban suburbs, (as would be the case with the vast majority of the residents of south-central Ontario......)

I think the level of engagement is quite extraordinary.

Be assured people take interest in the state of nature elsewhere, just as was the case at the Small's Creek ravine site, just as is the case for Highway 413 (proposed).
 
DirectionNorth said:
Is it worth delaying the project over trees? No, at least, not in my opinion. If they can redesign it without delaying the project, go for it, I guess.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that one person here has suggested that they delay the project - or even opposes the project.

The design-phase is just beginning - there's no reason to cut trees that might not even be necessary.

Anyways, Metrolinx needs to be taught some lessons about consultation and communication.
 
crs1026 said:
Well, actually - the way to build public awareness to a problem is to seize the moment and build the awareness as it unfolds. Waiting until an election and then reciting all ML's ills is not good political or activist strategy. Better to point out the bad behaviour and build the support now, so that when the opposing candidate announces their campaign platform and says "My first priority will be to change ML's Board" the public already knows the issue and endorses the direction. That's what the next two years' speechmaking will be about. Drip, drip, drip......

ML is actually playing into this strategy because they can't help themselves from pulling these stunts and handing out the examples that more and more people are seeing clearly. And maybe they are being egged on from above. The heart of the issue is that ML has been given a mandate to get these projects underway, no pauses or excuses. Some of that may drive from frustration with past municipal council disfunction, but I suspect it's also the true modus operandi of Ford and some of his colleagues. The voters elected a Premier, but not a King. And many people do defer to the engineers without asking if the engineers considered options and are there better ways.....

If I had to bet money, as opposed to express opinions, I would bet that the trees will come down after the next round of court activity. In a strict legal sense the Province does hold many levers over local decisions. Personally I have run out of energy to debate this one. I suspect we've all reached positions that we won't be moving off of.

What will be interesting is what happens this year with the Eglinton-Jane-Humber issue. More than with Osgoode, the solutions may be more obvious to the layperson. None of us can really say with confidence what the engineering solution at Osgoode can or can't be.... but the impossibility of tunneling under the Humber River with steep grades on either side is harder to dispute. But don't think that the opposition will come from naive tree-huggers. I bet this one is harder fought and by a coalition that makes strategic hay out of ML's missteps. i would bet there will be those missteps, too - some people are counting on them..

- Paul
Click to expand...
The thing is I don't disagree with this in theory. Yes, the idea that Metrolinx can unilaterally destroy a historic building for some project they want to work on is a concerning prospect. The problem here is the hill that the protestors chose to die on. When the historic property you so desperately want to protect is 5 60 year old trees and a corner of public parkland that most people don't even know is public, it's very hard to take you seriously, and if somehow the court sided with the protestors, the ramifications could be disastrous. Now there will be precedent for NIMBYs to take Metrolinx to court for every minor tree or parkland that gets taken down, and keep in mind, we're talking about a station whose footprint is a tiny station entrance on the street corner. What powers would NIMBYs have if this scales up to an on street LRT? The Yonge Street Rapidway required a lot of trees to be chopped, and grass to be removed, would NIMBY be in the right to basically cancel that whole project over the trees that surrounded Yonge Street? Even if they wouldn't win, those courtcases add cost and time to the construction of the project.

This might seem like a case of slippery slope, but I have to emphasize how small the destruction footprint for this entrance is, in comparison to virtually every other project that Metrolinx is undertaking, nevermind the more impactful sections like Overlea, Don Mills, and Leslieville on the same line.
 
Last edited:
ARG1 said:
This might seem like a case of slippery slope, but I have to emphasize how small the destruction footprint for this entrance is, in comparison to virtually every other project that Metrolinx is undertaking, nevermind the more impactful sections like Overlea, Don Mills, and Leslieville on the same line.
Click to expand...

Granted, it's a postage stamp sized area..

Some history:

The original drawings that laid out ML's intentions surfaced at Toronto City Council in December 2021. The submission at that time is pretty much what ML has been saying this week. The concerns over the placement of the entrances, and the impact on the Osgoode property, became pretty apparent at that time.

Agenda Item History 2021.EX28.14

Agenda Item History 2021.EX28.14
secure.toronto.ca

After learning that an entrance in the old Bank of Canada Building had been available, but rejected by ML, concerns with the Osgoode location were raised to the Planning and Housing Committee, which asked Metrolinx for a presentation - an invitation which apparently they never accepted.

Agenda Item History 2022.PH32.16

Agenda Item History 2022.PH32.16
secure.toronto.ca

At City Council last June, Council asked for further study and voted (unanimously, with three absentees) to communicate its "significant concern" with the Osgoode site plan.

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.4

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.4
secure.toronto.ca

Suffice it to say that over this period, ML was not particularly forthcoming. If you read the letters to the June debate it is clear that even the public consultation itself was a somewhat closed-doors proposition.

Over the same period Council dealt with other Metrolinx plans including the Don GO yard, the East Harbour right of way, and Smalls Creek. If you watched any of these debates, it was apparent just how frustrated local Councillors were with ML's evasiveness and determination to stay on a predetermined course in spite of input and concerns.

Most recently, the Parsons report was dropped on the City a very short time before the tree cutting was scheduled. Not much of a "let's sit and talk" opportunity. No surprise that an injunction was sought, that's what you do when you want something imminent to not happen.

So, all in all, while the trees may not be the city's biggest destiny issue, one can see how many people have been reaching "the end of the rope" with ML. It's hard to fault those involved for seizing the opportunity to highlight just how non-transparent, and just how bloody-minded, ML is in pursuing the Ontario Line in its most direct, no deviations manner. Some times in civic politics one has to bang on pots.

I'm all for efficiency, getting on with things, and not losing sight of the goal - but it's a bit of a myth to think that projects can be executed this fast and that plans must remain cast in stone. The point is that reasonable delay and discussion may make a good plan better, and cut down on oversights that are fixable.

- Paul

PS - If you look at the drawings of the other downtown stations, they do not have the large work areas that Osgoode and Moss Park have. It seems that if ML saw vacant space, they grabbed it. This does not mean they absolutely need it. Even setting aside the trees, I still question whether ML really needs to be this intrusive with the Osgoode property generally.
 
Last edited:
ARG1 said:
Now there will be precedent for NIMBYs to take Metrolinx to court for every minor tree or parkland that gets taken down, and keep in mind, we're talking about a station whose footprint is a tiny station entrance on the street corner.
Click to expand...
There is plenty of precedent already for public input on large scale public works projects. That said, I look at this point from the opposite perspective. All we're talking about is one change to one part of one station in a 14km project. ML putting out a document on Friday is an abysmal example of communication. There have been other complaint's, but it's no surprise that a lovely looking park - by a historical building - right downtown is drawing peoples attention the most. The fact that it's a courthouse means those people happen to know how to file an injunction.

Most of the people protesting are probably under the impression that a simple alternative is available. They may be wrong about that, but not one is asking to cancel the project or go back to the drawing board. It takes time to communicate complex issues to a lot of people, which is why this should have been done 1-2 years ago.

From where I sit, the biggest issue seems to be the placement of the station building. The temporary loss of trees is negligible in the long term, but the permanent loss of parkland is a significant issue that warrants clear communication (Especially, as I've said before, in areas that have below average amounts of public space.) It appears to me that the building can still move to the University ROW with only small modifications to the existing plan. Rotating the last couple of escalators 90 degrees and moving 20 meters of median isn't going to pose an existential delay to the project. They can design the modifications as they proceed with excavation and construction of the lower floors.

Hell, put the onus on John Tory. Say: "we'll move the building if you fund the park." He won't, so they wont have to worry about it.

Or just justify your decisions more than 24 hours before you start construction. This whole situation is on ML comms.
 
crs1026 said:
PS - If you look at the drawings of the other downtown stations, they do not have the large work areas that Osgoode and Moss Park have. It seems that if ML saw vacant space, they grabbed it. This does not mean they absolutely need it. Even setting aside the trees, I still question whether ML really needs to be this intrusive with the Osgoode property generally.
Click to expand...

Curious as to where the plans of the stations are made public. I would love to go through them but I can't find any material in the Metrolinx website for the Ontario Line.
 
crs1026 said:
PS - If you look at the drawings of the other downtown stations, they do not have the large work areas that Osgoode and Moss Park have. It seems that if ML saw vacant space, they grabbed it. This does not mean they absolutely need it. Even setting aside the trees, I still question whether ML really needs to be this intrusive with the Osgoode property generally.
Click to expand...

wait that statement is litterally not true, Moss park aside doing a "open-cut" type build where they rip up the area and build in the open, the "amount" of space in terms of square footage is actually in line or maybe even a bit smaller than other stations
google maps can give you square footage now. i count 8000 sqft for queen spadina north-east side and vaugely tracing out the area where trees are being cut is somewhere around that.
you really think metrolinx hasnt done their damnedest to find out how to lessen the impact?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top