Rainforest said:
I'd be very surprised if the Cummer / Drewry station cannot be built for a lot less than $500M.

If they only coordinated with the construction happening now in the south-east corner of Yonge & Cummer .. They could basically use the huge Food Basic / plaza parking lot for the construction site.
Click to expand...

I think there would be logic to this if development on that site wasn't already underway, then you'd be seeing coordination between them and the subway. I think that (ahem) train has left the station, however. The Yonge /Cummer corner seems to be their later phase but I doubt they'd be keen to give it over for a decade to construction.

So, now the box has to go south. That doesn't mean it can't work, or that the station has to be $500m but the prior post suggested it was a fractional cost to add a new station and it isn't (even if the station makes sense).
 
Allandale25 said:
Upcoming protest related to Option 1 vs Option 3 Refined. Posting for information not as an endorsement.

View attachment 352754
Click to expand...

Not the biggest turnout but the complete crowd size isn't shown in this picture I guess.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1445817605533716482

7f62382a-5b39-4f80-aeb6-1710e94b6e28-jpg.353980
 
Standing up for ecological / good planning & design, not single-purpose railways!
Click to expand...
Say what?? Single-purpose railways?? You can use it to go to Danforth or to Unionville, you can use it to go to Hamilton or to Oshawa, you can go downtown or transfer to the airport, and you can definitely use it more than once. What does this single-purpose argument mean?? Stand up for ecological / good planning & design... well I agree they should minimize their footprint both during construction and by final design, but besides doing that I doubt there is anywhere less impactful to neighbourhoods and the environment than building a track 2m from where one already exists.
 
Rainforest said:
I'd be very surprised if the Cummer / Drewry station cannot be built for a lot less than $500M.

If they only coordinated with the construction happening now in the south-east corner of Yonge & Cummer .. They could basically use the huge Food Basic / plaza parking lot for the construction site. The distance from the north end of the existing tunnel at Finch to the southern edge of the parking lot is about 350 m. Probably doesn't require TBMs, can be just dug. And, the Finch station is not very deep, hence the Cummer station wouldn't have to be very deep either.

One can counter that south of Cummer is not the best location for the station box, as it is a lot closer to Finch Stn than to the next station at Steeles. Preferably the station box should be located north of Cummer, perhaps even north of Wedgewood. But choosing between a station shifted to the south from the ideal spot, and having no station at all, I'd rather go with the former.
Click to expand...
I dont know if you have been there recently but that intersection no longer has a parking lot, it's becoming a condo. https://www.preconstruction-condos.com/m2m-condos/
 
kamira51 said:
These people are absolutely ridiculous and part of the reason why our transit takes forever to build in this province because they gotta appease the people that cry.

Absolutely disgusting.
Click to expand...
These groups (some of them at least), don't oppose transit. They oppose Metrolinx's very poor community consultation, and process.

It's often not even a question of timeframe - for Lakeshore East, the EA was completed years ago - and if didn't have technical failings in it, wouldn't be creating havoc now, with the new impacts much worse than was ever anticipated in the EA.
 
I agree the coms have been bad - but I also think they're wilfully misunderstanding.
They make it sound like Metrolinx made a hard decision and then popped out of the woodwork. Truthfully, it was presented as an OPTION, with explanations as to why. To date, no FINAL decision has been presented. And even then, there is still a TPAP, which involves consultation.

So I'm of 2 minds:
1) Metrolinx has done a bad job explaining the process and a worse job explaining how/why these people have nothing to worry about with vibrations etc. They've made some half-hearted efforts but at the public meetings, really offered nothing concrete to say, "Hey, folks -we get your concern but the tunnels will be 20m underground and here's a half dozen examples of how it's been done and it shows you've got nothing to worry about. We're committed to providing you with all the data and engaging with you throughout in order to alleviate any concerns."

2) These people got their backs up immediately and didn't want to hear any explanations anyway and didn't want to engage in consultations and really have no interest in this multi-billion dollar project beyond how it impacts a couple of dozen homes. If, for example, Metrolinx explained they could move it back to Yonge but it would cost taxpayers another $2B, I'm sure they'd see it as a victory. And then we got all the politicians posturing because they have nothing to lose by telling these people they have their backs, even while knowing they can't do much.
So they don't oppose "transit," because they want to the subway on Yonge and they probably want that Royal Orchard station, but it's a selfish desire with no willingness to sacrifice and goes a bit beyond just the process.

So, plenty of blame to go around, IMHO. There's still time for both sides to do better, if either has an interest in doing so.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I agree the coms have been bad - but I also think they're wilfully misunderstanding.
They make it sound like Metrolinx made a hard decision and then popped out of the woodwork. Truthfully, it was presented as an OPTION, with explanations as to why. To date, no FINAL decision has been presented. And even then, there is still a TPAP, which involves consultation.

So I'm of 2 minds:
1) Metrolinx has done a bad job explaining the process and a worse job explaining how/why these people have nothing to worry about with vibrations etc. They've made some half-hearted efforts but at the public meetings, really offered nothing concrete to say, "Hey, folks -we get your concern but the tunnels will be 20m underground and here's a half dozen examples of how it's been done and it shows you've got nothing to worry about. We're committed to providing you with all the data and engaging with you throughout in order to alleviate any concerns."

2) These people got their backs up immediately and didn't want to hear any explanations anyway and didn't want to engage in consultations and really have no interest in this multi-billion dollar project beyond how it impacts a couple of dozen homes. If, for example, Metrolinx explained they could move it back to Yonge but it would cost taxpayers another $2B, I'm sure they'd see it as a victory. And then we got all the politicians posturing because they have nothing to lose by telling these people they have their backs, even while knowing they can't do much.
So they don't oppose "transit," because they want to the subway on Yonge and they probably want that Royal Orchard station, but it's a selfish desire with no willingness to sacrifice and goes a bit beyond just the process.

So, plenty of blame to go around, IMHO. There's still time for both sides to do better, if either has an interest in doing so.
Click to expand...
Im more inclined to think that most of the nimbyers are due to #2. For many of them nothing will change their minds no matter how you describe them.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I agree the coms have been bad - but I also think they're wilfully misunderstanding.
They make it sound like Metrolinx made a hard decision and then popped out of the woodwork. Truthfully, it was presented as an OPTION, with explanations as to why. To date, no FINAL decision has been presented. And even then, there is still a TPAP, which involves consultation.

So I'm of 2 minds:
1) Metrolinx has done a bad job explaining the process and a worse job explaining how/why these people have nothing to worry about with vibrations etc. They've made some half-hearted efforts but at the public meetings, really offered nothing concrete to say, "Hey, folks -we get your concern but the tunnels will be 20m underground and here's a half dozen examples of how it's been done and it shows you've got nothing to worry about. We're committed to providing you with all the data and engaging with you throughout in order to alleviate any concerns."

2) These people got their backs up immediately and didn't want to hear any explanations anyway and didn't want to engage in consultations and really have no interest in this multi-billion dollar project beyond how it impacts a couple of dozen homes. If, for example, Metrolinx explained they could move it back to Yonge but it would cost taxpayers another $2B, I'm sure they'd see it as a victory. And then we got all the politicians posturing because they have nothing to lose by telling these people they have their backs, even while knowing they can't do much.
So they don't oppose "transit," because they want to the subway on Yonge and they probably want that Royal Orchard station, but it's a selfish desire with no willingness to sacrifice and goes a bit beyond just the process.

So, plenty of blame to go around, IMHO. There's still time for both sides to do better, if either has an interest in doing so.
Click to expand...
For $2B, couldn't we just offer to buy out anyone concerned about the subway within a few hundred meters? Then flip those houses after the subway opens for a profit.
 
afransen said:
For $2B, couldn't we just offer to buy out anyone concerned about the subway within a few hundred meters? Then flip those houses after the subway opens for a profit.
Click to expand...
Or even better, rezone for medium density then flip!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top