[DirectionNorth]

After reviewing all the facts, I've decided to oppose all transit projects and support new freeway projects. More to come tomorrow to support my position.

 

[ARG1]

After reviewing all the facts, I've decided to oppose all transit projects and support new freeway projects. More to come tomorrow to support my position.

Make sure to purposefully route it through anyone's house who publicly opposes it.

 

[cplchanb]

Right... let's get rid of democracy in the name of efficiency! Government doesn't serve you... why bother complaining?

***

the irony about that statement is that the nimbys and lobbyists represent the 1% and they are the ones almost unilaterally holding up everything. They really ought to put things to a referendum. simple 50+1 and noone can say a thing about it
because it was democratically decided.

 

[toaster29]

Let me clear some things up. I agreed with the councillor that some of the station designs aren't good enough. How is this a major barrier to the construction of this project? Think logically - it isn't.
It's a minor change... especially since these renderings are conceptual, as the actual designs will be created after a bidder is chosen. I can and will comment on these renderings as we are now at the very start of the design process.

Honestly, just build simple structures that look like boxes, like the majority of the original TTC Subway stations, they work well. Private corps can build on top of them to create nice looking architecture. We should be worrying about functionality as opposed to vanity. I'd much rather have more stations that are a normal sized box on the street front, than have some of these extravagant stations that keep pushing up the prices (and mean we get fewer stations). There's a reason Toronto pays more than any other municipality in North America per km of subway constructed. My understanding is that the Vaughan TTC extension did not have any stations with a washroom, how did this pass accessibility?. But we have beautiful art, just go for your shit on the grass outside of the station.

 

[W. K. Lis]

the irony about that statement is that the nimbys and lobbyists represent the 1% and they are the ones almost unilaterally holding up everything. They really ought to put things to a referendum. simple 50+1 and noone can say a thing about it
because it was democratically decided.

The lobbyists tend to directly speak with the politicians and bureaucrats in their offices, cocktail parties, or dinners. Usually, without the screaming.

The NIMBYs tend to show up at community meetings, video conferences, or on the internet. Usually, with screaming, yelling, incomplete research, and the rolling of eyes.

 

[EnviroTO]

Let's be realistic... what transit project in Canada was ever delayed due to public feedback? Now lets ask the same question about how many projects were delayed due to poor planning, misunderstanding of the location where the project was being built, or missed requirements?

It takes a lot of work to design a station and they schedule public consultation far in advance of it being on the critical path of the project, and they have a timeline that allows for them to accommodate feedback. The public's input is focused on such high level things, but the real work is about soil density, bedrock locations, underground water flows, construction methods, location of pipes and electrical conduits, project management, staffing, funding, etc. Even if everything changed in these public meetings, the timing of them is such that it likely wouldn't change anything in terms of timeline.

If they held public sessions when they were at 80% design completion or post construction there would be delays, but when it is at the conceptual rendering stage there is plenty of time to incorporate feedback and care about what the public opinion is, and in a democracy or in an environment where we care about the quality of the end product and how it fits in the community it would be irresponsible to not solicit feedback. I didn't elect my local councillor or MPP because I agree with their station design philosophies!

 

[daniel_kryz]

the irony about that statement is that the nimbys and lobbyists represent the 1% and they are the ones almost unilaterally holding up everything. They really ought to put things to a referendum. simple 50+1 and noone can say a thing about it
because it was democratically decided.

I mentioned this problem in my post. It isn't right that public consultations don't represent the views of people. The answer is to change how they're done.

Honestly, just build simple structures that look like boxes, like the majority of the original TTC Subway stations, they work well. Private corps can build on top of them to create nice looking architecture. We should be worrying about functionality as opposed to vanity. I'd much rather have more stations that are a normal sized box on the street front, than have some of these extravagant stations that keep pushing up the prices (and mean we get fewer stations). There's a reason Toronto pays more than any other municipality in North America per km of subway constructed. My understanding is that the Vaughan TTC extension did not have any stations with a washroom, how did this pass accessibility?. But we have beautiful art, just go for your shit on the grass outside of the station.

I respectfully disagree. Sometimes, simpler stations can look good but that depends on the finishes. We often forget that attention to detail is key when going for a minimalistic look, and I think that Pape Station is a good example where the TTC used very elegant tiles with pretty interesting art. They made the station look nicer while respecting its original design. So, under the right context, I can appreciate a simpler approach.
On the other hand, you should remember what made the Vaughan stations cost so much... it had to do with the unnecessarily large scale and depth of them, not the architectural finishes. In fact, many of the stations seemed great in the renderings but, in reality, have many areas with exposed concrete and pipes. They focused more on making it big and monumental instead of the smaller details that matter way more in creating quality architecture.
That is why it cost so much.

If they held public sessions when they were at 80% design completion or post construction there would be delays

Exactly. If you incorporate public feedback into designs sooner rather than later, it avoids causing delays and cost increases.

from Chief Planner's Roundtable, Design Excellence: Implementation

 

[CapitalSeven]

There was a post a page back or so about "listening to us." What has crept into the consultation/NIMBY mindset, in all governance discourse, not just civic works, is that "listen" means the same thing as obey. "They didn't listen." "We weren't heard"

Yes they did, and yes you were. They did something else because perhaps your viewpoint is unrealistic, unpopular, unaffordable, not in the majority interest, wrong, dumb, or out of left field.

This doesn't excuse Metrolinx's disingenous attitude to consultations. And part of the problem in my view is the attitude in government PR is that every decision is perfect, even if it blatantly contradicts the previous perfect decision and is clearly a financial fallback (the City of Ottawa special). Why can't someone stand up and say, "Yes this a compromise, we looked at your concerns but a bit of noise in your yard was balanced against a billion tax dollars from everyone in Canada, and you didn't win."?

 

[Undead]

Why can't someone stand up and say, "Yes this a compromise, we looked at your concerns but a bit of noise in your yard was balanced against a billion tax dollars from everyone in Canada, and you didn't win."?

There's some sort of cultural taboo in recent years/decades against speaking plainly/directly.

 

[Northern Light]

There's some sort of cultural taboo in recent years/decades against speaking plainly/directly.

More specifically, the culture in certain circles, and Mx would be a good example of this is:

a) A desire to avoid accountability. This is true even when things are done perfectly right; because no one wants to wear it if there's anything that's imperfect.

b) A desire to avoid confrontation; if possible, don't hold a meeting; if you must, then say as little as possible; if you must speak, spin the positive, deny the negative, irrespective of what's true.

This is not unique to Mx nor even to the public sector; but they certainly behave in the above manner in a very conspicuous way.

 

[syn]

A lot of consultation is performative anyway. You can tell by the answers that the experts think the commenter is an uninformed doofus that they are merely humouring.

That's the problem. No surprise Metrolinx is getting so much resistance from some communities.

 

[Tuck]

After months of delay (and therefore more cost) to change the architectural expression and some other people don't like the new expression, do we go back again for another architectural expression.......????

If you want timely and cost effective transit projects, ANY Public involvement is bad. And by making transit projects more expensive, it leads fewer transit projects getting built, or the cost has to be made up someone else such as lines getting shorten, features getting cut, etc...

Transit planning should be left up to the bureaucrats and when they present the plan that's it, no consulting just build it as planned. years and billions would be saved this way. The public would stop complaining as well because they know the plans wouldn't be changed. People in China don't complain about transit projects being built all over their cities because they know they can't stop it.

With this attitude, much of old toronto would be covered with expressways.

Public consultation (and even just the planning in general) is practically pennies compared to the cost of construction. Cutting it would not save anything meaningful except time.

Yes, we should value the experts opinions, but I also don't believe they should go unchallenged - especially in an area like rapid transit development that is so politically slanted that often times "evidence based decision making" actually plays out as "decision based evidence making."

 

[MrGoose]

That's the problem. No surprise Metrolinx is getting so much resistance from some communities.

You try listening to the same set of uninformed opinions calling your work unnecessary and potentially setting your project back years for 3 hours, after your 9-5 work hours.

You as a project manager: we listened to your feedback and have decided to put in noise walls and vibration reduction measures. We even are giving you more area of that park you liked.

Nimbys: I don’t care, bury the line, don’t build anything I can see.

 

[cplchanb]

You try listening to the same set of uninformed opinions calling your work unnecessary and potentially setting your project back years for 3 hours, after your 9-5 work hours.

You as a project manager: we listened to your feedback and have decided to put in noise walls and vibration reduction measures. We even are giving you more area of that park you liked.

Nimbys: I don’t care, bury the line, don’t build anything I can see.

Yup
Thanks to Rob Ford and years of subway propaganda these traditional conservative neighborhoods are just ingrained that underground rail is the only path forward.

 

[syn]

You try listening to the same set of uninformed opinions calling your work unnecessary and potentially setting your project back years for 3 hours, after your 9-5 work hours.

You as a project manager: we listened to your feedback and have decided to put in noise walls and vibration reduction measures. We even are giving you more area of that park you liked.

Nimbys: I don’t care, bury the line, don’t build anything I can see.

Are all people in Leslieville uninformed? I'd say many of them are quite informed, which is why it's hard to accept the previously approved plan was being shelved under the guise of cost savings when the government is spending billions upon billions to bury transit in suburban areas of the city.

Telling people what you're going to do and not giving them any say is not listening to feedback. The previous plan was built in cooperation with local stakeholders. This plan was not.

Metrolinx should've handled this properly in the first place. Poor management is entirely on them.