News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.8K     0 

The first hurdle that the Hybriders have to overcome is reopening the EA and running their plan against its objectives.

"The first step in the EA process is to prepare a Terms of Reference (ToR), which has been submitted to the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) for their review and approval decision as required under the Ontario EA Act. If approved by the MOECC, the ToR will be used as the planning document for the completion of the Environmental Assessment study." You cannot change the objectives unless you get the OK from the Minister

If the Hybrid Plan is then accepted as meeting the EA objectives, the EA has to be approved by Council, posted for comments and sent to the Minister (Glen Murray).

He has previously been a strong WT supporter and its in his riding. He can reject the EA, send it back or approve it. Rejection is normally because the plan suggested for final approval does not meet the objectives.

If the revised EA is approved the OMB can certainly get involved if it means changes to Official Plan etc

While all this is going on there may be private lawsuits from landowners/developers, more of it may fall down and I may be too old to care!

Ok, so does it mean that Toronto may waste 2 years completing the EA only to have it rejected by Glen Murray? And then we start a new EA on a different alternative? The Gardiner cannot stay up beyond 2020. By the time we wait for the lawsuits and OMB interventions to end, the Gardiner will crumble and end up removing itself.
 
Ok, so does it mean that Toronto may waste 2 years completing the EA only to have it rejected by Glen Murray?.

Yes, that is possible (whoever may be the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change at the relevant time).
 
Ok, so does it mean that Toronto may waste 2 years completing the EA only to have it rejected by Glen Murray? And then we start a new EA on a different alternative? The Gardiner cannot stay up beyond 2020. By the time we wait for the lawsuits and OMB interventions to end, the Gardiner will crumble and end up removing itself.

Also known as progress in Toronto.
 
Y'know, re all the "what a disaster" mewling fre the vote: I'm kinda jaded by the outcome. Look, it's no different from various votes-not-going-the-progressive-way during the Eggleton or Lastman regimes. Did you expect any different from Tory?

Just don't try to paint him as "no different from Ford", because that's the opposite version of the kind of whiny hyperbole that branded Ford as being "just another" Mel/Eggs-type "disaster", which worked to "normalize" him in a way he did not really deserve...
 
Y'know, re all the "what a disaster" mewling fre the vote: I'm kinda jaded by the outcome. Look, it's no different from various votes-not-going-the-progressive-way during the Eggleton or Lastman regimes. Did you expect any different from Tory?

Just don't try to paint him as "no different from Ford", because that's the opposite version of the kind of whiny hyperbole that branded Ford as being "just another" Mel/Eggs-type "disaster", which worked to "normalize" him in a way he did not really deserve...
But Tory was going to be "consensus builder" as in this Sun article during the mayoral campaign.
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/19/its-time-for-tory

As the debate and vote showed, there's still no consensus among councilors.
 
Y'know, re all the "what a disaster" mewling fre the vote: I'm kinda jaded by the outcome. Look, it's no different from various votes-not-going-the-progressive-way during the Eggleton or Lastman regimes. Did you expect any different from Tory?

Just don't try to paint him as "no different from Ford", because that's the opposite version of the kind of whiny hyperbole that branded Ford as being "just another" Mel/Eggs-type "disaster", which worked to "normalize" him in a way he did not really deserve...

I agree, adma. It's not a disaster, even if it's a disappointment to me. And it's not Fordian, at all.

I also expect the threatened lawsuit will end up being more a of land swap deal. 3C is going to want compensation, but I'd expect what they really want is developable land, and if they can 'buy' some City land that will be opened up by the next piece of the WT berm building / Don mouth reconstruction, they'll be happy.
 
I also expect the threatened lawsuit will end up being more a of land swap deal. 3C is going to want compensation, but I'd expect what they really want is developable land, and if they can 'buy' some City land that will be opened up by the next piece of the WT berm building / Don mouth reconstruction, they'll be happy.

I suppose no one is going to give much if any of a damn if they end up ditching the new ramps and reducing the turning radius per the original plans -the debate was never really about the fine details around traffic engineering.

AoD
 
But Tory was going to be "consensus builder" as in this Sun article during the mayoral campaign.
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/19/its-time-for-tory

As the debate and vote showed, there's still no consensus among councilors.

IMHO, "consensus" in a diverse body scares (unless it's humanitarian) the frak out of me, it's to close to fascism for my sensibilities. The decision yesterday did not come easy, and mostly in desperation do to procrastination, politics and stupidity.
 

Back
Top