News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5K     0 

City of Toronto Media Relations has issued the following:
==========================================

Media Advisory

November 21, 2017

Technical briefing on results of feasibility analysis and next steps for implementation of Rail Deck Park

Toronto Deputy City Manager John Livey and Acting Chief Planner Gregg Lintern will hold a technical media briefing on the results of the feasibility analysis and outline next steps for implementation of Rail Deck Park that will be considered at the City's Executive Committee on Tuesday, November 28.

Date: Tuesday, November 21
Time: 1:15 p.m.
Location: Toronto City Hall, 23rd floor East Tower, Boardroom, 100 Queen St. W.

Note: The technical briefing is for background purposes only and is not for attribution. Cameras are not permitted. Audio devices are permitted for note-taking only. Media will be asked to sign in.

Following the technical briefing, John Livey and Gregg Lintern will provide a media availability.

Toronto is Canada's largest city, the fourth largest in North America, and home to a diverse population of about 2.8 million people. It is a global centre for business, finance, arts and culture and is consistently ranked one of the world's most livable cities. In 2017, Toronto is honouring Canada's 150th birthday with "TO Canada with Love," a year-long program of celebrations, commemorations and exhibitions. For information on non-emergency City services and programs, Toronto residents, businesses and visitors can visit http://www.toronto.ca, call 311, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, or follow us on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/TorontoComms and on Instagram at http://www.instagram.com/cityofto.

- 30 -
 
Also, detail on costing of the phased approach:

A priority phase one option has been identified, extending from Spadina Avenue to the current location of the "Puente de Luez" pedestrian bridge, comprising an area of approximately 3.9 ha (9.5 acres) with a total cost of $872 million. The phase one area would create a large, contiguous park space to provide for a range of recreation and culture uses and support future expansion to the east and west (refer to Figure 7 of the Comments section).
 
innsertnamehere said:
nah thanks. This is needed parkland, desperately needed. Worth every damn penny.

Also, the report states that they have built in a ridiculous amount of contingency funding into that price - which will likely come down.
Click to expand...

Spread it over 30 years, 1.65B isn't all that much. The only exception to that I would make is the site above the Spadina RER station - it can use an office/mixed use development.

AoD
 
innsertnamehere said:
nah thanks. This is needed parkland, desperately needed. Worth every damn penny.

Also, the report states that they have built in a ridiculous amount of contingency funding into that price - which will likely come down.
Click to expand...

$600 Million of the $1.6 Billion is contingency. I assume this will come down as we get more accurate pricing in later stages of design.
 
A lot, lot less
 
$1.6 billion here is money poorly spent. I would rather incorporate a few towers (not as many as the ORCA wall-o-condos) to defray the costs, maybe bring some corporate branding, and perhaps leave some more openings down into the train tracks to reduce the costs of completely decking over the site.

But otherwise, the $1.6 billion (which I doubt section 37 money will entirely cover) would be better spent elsewhere in the city.

For funding:
The city plans to use several different pools of money to pay for the bridge, including development charges, potential investments from the federal and provincial governments as well as commercial contributions.

"Today's staff report demonstrates that this vision is both necessary and feasible, and can be largely paid for through the growth that continues to happen in our city," Tory said in his statement.

City staff will also consult with experts on the field about how to structure the financing. Once set, that plan will go to council for a "definitive commitment" to the project.

The city also has plans to launch a community stakeholder advisory group, and will also be looking at the option of soliciting sponsorships and donations.
Click to expand...

Also in terms of land ownership:

Last week, a city committee voted to move ahead with zoning the air above the busy rail lines as parkland. Next up, ironing out technical details before an environmental assessment can begin.

The report also briefly touches on who owns the air rights over the rail tracks. One condo developer, P.I.T.S. Developments Inc., says it purchased the rights and has been working on a plan to build a mix of condos, offices and park land on the site. However the city appears to dispute that ownership claim in its report.

"The owners registered on title for these properties are Canadian National Railway Company (CN) and The Toronto Terminals Railway Company Limited (TTR)," it noted.

A legal review found four organizations own the rail deck land itself: Metrolinx, the city, CN and TTR.

The report notes transactions to acquire or give up land can be "highly complex," so this could also be an issue to watch in the future.
Click to expand...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rail-deck-park-report-1.4411980?cmp=rss
 
innsertnamehere said:
nah thanks. This is needed parkland, desperately needed. Worth every damn penny.

Also, the report states that they have built in a ridiculous amount of contingency funding into that price - which will likely come down.
Click to expand...

Not "parkland" really. A very expensive green roof with some shrubs. If they find a way to build it so it can be salt-free, they might live, and it might not fall down. It will be a nice place to walk condo-bound dogs. I'm calling it Poop Deck Park.

Wait, a John Tory-led project that will come down in price. Really?
 
I don't have a problem w/the idea of this park.

I have a profound problem w/the timing.

Its not as if we didn't know 10 years ago, or 20 that downtown had relatively few parks and virtually none of size.

At that point, it was possible to buy actual land, not air rights for well shy of 1/2 of what will now be paid; maybe 1/4.

There is the travesty.

Think ahead, grab land when cheap, lease it out for a bit if so desired, create park much more affordably.

That said, we are in todays' reality, where there is no cheaper comparable site.

I think the only reasonable debates are about the extent/size of the park and what design/function one wishes it to have.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top