Toronto Ontario Line: Osgoode Station | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | HDR

syn said:

Metrolinx plans to cut down historic Osgoode Hall trees after all​


At the very least, couldn't these trees be moved to a different location?
Click to expand...

innsertnamehere said:
you can't really move trees that large and old, I suspect. At least not without great expense.
Click to expand...

It would be very expensive, as @innsertnamehere notes above; though, in the context of the O/L budget, it's not a rounding error.

The larger issue to me, is their chance of success. Moving a 200-year old tree.........with the greatest care, perfect conditions etc, I would give less than a 50% chance of success (meaning tree still alive in its new home 2 years later).

****

Below, I've linked a truly excellent explainer from the landscape industry on transplanting trees.

It's from the U.S. and was written last year, so adjusting for exchange rate, last year's inflation, and Toronto being a more expensive market in which to work vs where this company is based, I would add a solid 50% to the budget numbers they quote maybe even a bit more.

The most expensive job they describe is $67,500USD, per tree. So I would suggest $100,000 per tree would not be bad number. Given 4 trees, $400,000 would be a good starting place.

There are further added complexities at Osgoode. The site is constrained by a heritage building and heritage fences. You obviously can't move the former, if you have to move/remove the latter to get in to do the work, that's a considerable added expense.

You also have the complexity of how those trees roots may be interwoven with one another, and any additional trees on-site. Are the crew allowed to cut the roots of less valuable trees that aren't in the way of the work, in order to save those 200-year old ones? If so, is warranty coverage or cost of tree replacement for any damaged trees in the plan?

www.greerbros.com

What does it cost to move a large tree? — Greer Brand Industries

A guide to tree-moving prices.
www.greerbros.com www.greerbros.com

****

All of which is to say, this is yet another reason why every effort to consider moving the location of the station entrance is preferable. Mitigation is imperfect at best, and can get quite expensive.
 
Last edited:
T3G said:
Is there a reason - I mean, quite apart from the Metrolinxness of the whole thing - that precluded a sidewalk entrance outside the Osgoode Hall grounds like they already have for Osgoode station on University Avenue?
Click to expand...
It's an accessibility issue. The reason they're building an entrance pavilion is to have dual elevators down to the OL concourse level. Can't really fit those in the middle of the sidewalk along Queen. Also there is a general trend away from sidewalk entrances, not just at MX, but at the TTC as well. For example, St Patrick station will have had all but 1 of it's sidewalk entrances replaced with entrances integrated into nearby buildings once the United Building is done.

Not to justify the stupid location of the entrance pavilion, there are better locations for it, but there is a good reason for building such a structure, instead of having a sidewalk entrance. To be honest, I'm curious if the new entrance pavilion will replace the sidewalk entrance on the east side of University Ave. I wouldn't be surprised if it does.
 
There is a better plan. It involves moving the northbound lanes to take over the centre median and turning the old lanes into a park, with space available for the entrance.

See https://universitypark.evergreen.ca/

map3.jpg
 
toronto647 said:
"Metrolinx plans to hold a community meeting in the coming weeks to provide updates about Osgoode Station."

I wonder if this townhall will be before or after the trees are cut lol... My bet is they host the community consultation meeting after the trees are cut down.
Click to expand...
maybe a group of 5 UTers should chain themselves to those trees December 5th?
 
toronto647 said:
"Metrolinx plans to hold a community meeting in the coming weeks to provide updates about Osgoode Station."

I wonder if this townhall will be before or after the trees are cut lol... My bet is they host the community consultation meeting after the trees are cut down.
Click to expand...

Based on how they've done things so far, I think that's a fair assumption.
 
syn said:
Based on how they've done things so far, I think that's a fair assumption.
Click to expand...
...and in doing so, they would be actors who have no real interest in the community whatsoever, other than to spin apologia for crappy decisions to buy PR points.
 
W. K. Lis said:
There is a better plan. It involves moving the northbound lanes to take over the centre median and turning the old lanes into a park, with space available for the entrance.

See https://universitypark.evergreen.ca/

map3.jpg
Click to expand...
Alright, I'll admit that I'm starting to warm-up to the whole 'University Park' concept. That central University median strip, while looking impressive, has always been something of a 'no man's land'. Shifting University's northbound lanes west will create a great new, accessible public realm. There's even the possibility of a restoration of the 'lost' adjacent Taddle Creek, a portion of which once flowed south along today's 'Philosophers Walk'. Reminds me a bit of proposals for restoring portions of London's lost River Fleet. Looking at the graphics, there also seems to be some reconfiguring of traffic flow at the University/Front/York intersection, with substantial greenery and making it more a proper city square, something I've always thought was a lost opportunity here. As for those trees, I still don't think they stand much of a chance even with this scenario, as any deep excavating for the new Osgoode station is bound to disturb their extensive root systems.
 
Doppleganger said:
Alright, I'll admit that I'm starting to warm-up to the whole 'University Park' concept. That central University median strip, while looking impressive, has always been something of a 'no man's land'. Shifting University's northbound lanes west will create a great new, accessible public realm. There's even the possibility of a restoration of the 'lost' adjacent Taddle Creek, a portion of which once flowed south along today's 'Philosophers Walk'. Reminds me a bit of proposals for restoring portions of London's lost River Fleet. Looking at the graphics, there also seems to be some reconfiguring of traffic flow at the University/Front/York intersection, with substantial greenery and making it more a proper city square, something I've always thought was a lost opportunity here. As for those trees, I still don't think they stand much of a chance even with this scenario, as any deep excavating for the new Osgoode station is bound to disturb their extensive root systems.
Click to expand...

I'm a big proponent of daylighting creeks.

Sadly, Taddle Creek will almost certainly never be among them.

Its flows are integrated with the combined sewer system throughout downtown, which is why U of T abandoned its hopes for surfacing the creek in Philosopher's Walk.

But the University Park Concept still has merit.

And I'd love to see some of the original ravine topography restored with a copse of woods around it, up in the Queen's Park / U of T area.

That will not be in play further south. But there we may still gain a critical mass of usable public realm of quality.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
I'm a bit proponent of daylighting creeks.

Sadly, Taddle Creek will almost certainly never be among them.

Its flows are integrated with the combined sewer system throughout downtown, which is why U of T abandoned its hopes for surfacing the creek in Philosopher's Walk.

But the University Park Concept still has merit.

And I'd love to see some of the original ravine topography restored with a copse of woods around it, up in the Queen's Park / U of T area.

That will not be in play further south. But there we may still gain a critical mass of usable public realm of quality.
Click to expand...
Sounds very similar to the River Fleet. When Boris Johnson was London mayor he proposed opening up and restoring sections of it, but it was deemed too unrealistic as the underground river is now much too integrated with the city's sewers to be viable. Still, a 'restored' wooded ravine in the heart of the city(minus the water) has its appeal.
 
Unfortunately , parks abutting major arterials or forming the medians of major arterials will just encourage roadkill or accidents involving peoples pets. This is part of why I prefer couryard parks, or enhancements to existing parks/ravines rather than poorly thought out new parks or expansions of parks.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top