News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

A lot of these requests sound a lot like"Eglinton Connects". Perhaps City Planning can put these together and create a "Finch Connects" plan with all stakeholders?

Personally, I think it's a fantastic list of wants from the community, and will set a good base for future development along the corridor.
 
Tuscani01 said:
A lot of these requests sound a lot like"Eglinton Connects". Perhaps City Planning can put these together and create a "Finch Connects" plan with all stakeholders?

Personally, I think it's a fantastic list of wants from the community, and will set a good base for future development along the corridor.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It looks like the community is very much interested in the "how" details, as opposed to "should we" (as some councillors are still debating). The City should hopefully be jumping on this, because if these demands are met, it could lead to some pretty influential local allies for this project. Finch West already has it's vocal detractors (again, looking at some blowhard councillors), but it would be nice to see some local vocal advocates.
 
Tuscani01 said:
A lot of these requests sound a lot like"Eglinton Connects". Perhaps City Planning can put these together and create a "Finch Connects" plan with all stakeholders?
Click to expand...

Good news:
Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.32 PM.png



Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.55 PM.png



More info: http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=5e31a6f943000510VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.32 PM.png
    Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.32 PM.png
    35.6 KB · Views: 593
  • Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.55 PM.png
    Screen shot 2015-11-16 at 4.27.55 PM.png
    71.8 KB · Views: 596
Asking for retail/community space along the street is certainly admirable - Finch could use all the help in the world in this regard. It's an urban nightmare at present and needs a huge makeover.
 
This is something that irks me. On the one hand we decry that projects go over budget and that we don't have enough money for projects. On the other hand, we ask for a whole slew of scope creep additions to a transit project that do not relate to transit. Should a transit agency be building community space? No. If the City wants that space, it can ask the land be set aside and determine funding separately.

Scope creep is what kills these projects from the perspective of 'public perception of success' - look at the political decision to make TYSSE stations 'world class', AFTER the design on the basic spec stations had begun. Of course that will drive up the budget.
 
It will be the "extras" added on to the LRT that will add more to the cost. Then the opponents will cry about "the cost overruns", which has nothing to do with the LRT project itself.
 
jcam said:
This is something that irks me. On the one hand we decry that projects go over budget and that we don't have enough money for projects. On the other hand, we ask for a whole slew of scope creep additions to a transit project that do not relate to transit. Should a transit agency be building community space? No. If the City wants that space, it can ask the land be set aside and determine funding separately.

Scope creep is what kills these projects from the perspective of 'public perception of success' - look at the political decision to make TYSSE stations 'world class', AFTER the design on the basic spec stations had begun. Of course that will drive up the budget.
Click to expand...

There is a middle ground here that we should be trying to reach. Transit and urban improvement should not be ships that pass in the night. We have seen how badly that worked on Eglinton - the urban improvement plan came well after the LRT plan, and it was a rather ambitious list that created a lot of sticker shock. This could have been prevented if the urban plan and the transit plan were developed together.

We should be funding transit lines with some sort of attached envelope for improvements. The exact details come through consultation. The envelope needs to be included in the original funding. The planning exercise should be to find best use of a fixed amount of funding, not a dream list that runs away into overruns.

The requests that came forward recently seem pretty reasonable. It should not surprise anyone that this happened. The requests can't have an open ended spend, that's what the consultation can prioritise and assess.

If you look at, say, the Davenport Diamond consultation - similar idea generation is happening well before the project is committed. It can be done more broadly.

- Paul
 
Indeed, there should be a Finch version of Eglinton Connects. It's such an ugly suburban street from end to end, and since we're committing an LRT line, this is as good a chance as any to make serious improvements in the vein of a "complete street".

The naysayers often cynically declare that these suburban arterials can't ever be another Queen Street or Roncesvalles, but I have yet to see anyone make a legitimate argument as to why. Of course it can be done. These streets are essentially blank canvasses.
 
I would expect that NIMBYs would object for having any building higher than one story. Finch West should see two and three story buildings going up, except for the NIMBYs of course.
 
well i know the owner of the apartment buildings to the north west of the finch and keele intersection. Theres something like 3 buildings, maybe more, and the owner is just waiting to sell the land to developers or build new apartment buildings himself.
 
Tuscani01 said:
Easy there... that's exactly what is being done.
Click to expand...

I'm not opposed to it on principle at all, I'm just frustrated by the fact the initial numbers of these projects don't account for these things, then politicians hold them up as failed projects. I just wish we could approve projects like a business would, through a stage gated process. Have fuzzy numbers at the outset and be honest about the fuziness, then have an open process of scope refinement before the 'final' number that is bantied around is agreed upon.

Personally, I think the City should look at collocating other City services or any City-supported spaces in any of these developments. It can be a win-win, but it needs to be highlighted at the beginning.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top