OC Transpo: An Abundance Of Bafflegab: MULVIHILL
There’s that “abundance of caution” again … and what exactly is “agile mode”?
An Oct. 29 memo to Mayor Mark Sutcliffe and members of council from OC Transpo general manager Renée Amilcar advises of continued issues with the St. Laurent station LRT tunnel. Remember the water-damaged ceiling pieces that were found on the tracks? Yeah, that tunnel.
In part, “OC Transpo and Infrastructure and Water Services Department (IWSD) are working in agile mode to respond to the area of concern identified on the south side of the tunnel during the ongoing Ontario Structure Inspection Manual (OSIM) inspection of the aging structure. IWSD and OC Transpo are working together to finalize a mitigation measure in this location to ensure ongoing, safe operation of the O-Train. As a result, Line 1 will continue to operate on one track out of an abundance of caution.”
In an earlier memo, dated Oct. 10, to those same individuals, Amilcar spoke to that very same issue … the St. Laurent tunnel leaks and they are working hard to fix it. Again, OC Transpo was working in agile mode and with an abundance of caution.
In other words, despite working in “agile mode” and with an “abundance of caution,” the tunnel continues to leak badly and OC Transpo is working hard to save it from collapsing altogether. Gotcha.
If the work is so minor, why can’t it be done at night? If so minor, surely there isn’t the need to disrupt transit riders for three days. Or is the work needing to be done not really that minor making one feel like the wool is, once again, being pulled over one’s eyes?
So many questions and so few answers.
Donna Mulvihill is a community activist and former hospital coordinator
For You:
St. Laurent LRT Situation ‘Complete Chaos’
O-Train Woes Indicate Serious New Problem
Tunnel Problems Restrict O-Train Service
Bookmark The Bulldog, click here
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
– The Bulldog – News Feed Enter 
You have to wonder why councillors accept these nonsense words. Why has nobody asked Mme Amilcar to either explain her lingo or stop using it? I have difficulty believing that they make any more sense to them than to the public. What about the press? Why hasn’t a reporter challenged her on her terminology instead of just repeating her gobbledygook? She needs to provide a glossary to accompany her briefings to Council and the press.
The other word that I’m having difficulty with, particularly in relation to the tunnel roof, is “mitigate” which means “to make something less severe”. It does not mean to fully repair or make whole again and brings to mind a patchwork solution. Does this mean that instead of two-cubic-metre chunks of concrete falling on my head while I’m on the platform or in a train, the chunks will be only one-cubic-metre in size? How will that ‘mitigate’ the outcome for me?
It appears from the information she’s provided that the work that’s being done in the tunnel is patching the parts that are actually or almost falling off. She talks about someone chipping bits of concrete off at the site of the latest roof failure. That was done in a matter of hours and the tunnel was reopened. I’m not a structural engineer but I’m pretty sure that is not a permanent fix to the issue with the roof. Yes, they’ve dealt with that small location but what about the rest of the roof which was built at the same time and, presumably, in the same manner and with the same materials as the bits that, in this “aging structure”, are disintegrating.
Speaking of engineers, we are told that Mme Amilcar is an engineer. That comes with an undertone of “so she knows what she’s talking about”. I have two questions about that. First, what kind of ‘engineer’ is she? There are many types of engineers, some of whom know about tunnels made of concrete and some of whom don’t. What was she trained in? Second, it appears that, while she is registered as an engineer in Quebec, she may not be registered and entitled to practice in Ontario. If that’s the case, it’s irrelevant what training or expertise she has in the field of engineering when she isn’t permitted to use it in her current job.
Why is the City, not OC Transpo, responsible for the maintenance of this tunnel? At the time it was built, pre-amalgamation, transit was a responsibility of the Region, not the City, and it was the Region that built the Transitway that the tunnel is part of. Is this split jurisdiction in any way the source of or a contributor to the tunnel’s problems? There may have been some reason for the City having that responsibility in days gone by but wouldn’t it have made sense, either at the time of amalgamation or with the conversion of the Transitway to the LRT, to have OC Transpo take on the tunnel maintenance? Even if it’s an OC Transpo task, they could still consult the City or have them come in to assist when the roof starts falling down.