Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[duty free]

Okay so people who are forced to sell their homes against their will and move somewhere else aren't victims? Got it.

If it's for the greater good then they should be happy to have been able to play their part? Got it.



Please continue to force the transformation of society for the greater good.

View attachment 591775

Do go on...

That’s exactly right they’re not victims if they are fairly compensated monetarily. That’s the law.

If you own property in Canada it can be expropriated for public purposes legally, even if it is against your will. If you purchase property you should understand that it’s a possibility. If you purchase property in the most populated city in the country on a major street it’s a very real possibility as the city continues to grow.

If a person can’t come to terms with that reality then they shouldn’t buy a house. It’s cute that you think it’s communist, but it’s just the law in this country and it’s for millions of people’s benefit.

These aren’t developers. This is the government. I don’t think you understand what rights property owners actually have in Toronto.

 

[Towered]

That’s exactly right they’re not victims if they are fairly compensated monetarily. That’s the law.

If you own property in Canada it can be expropriated for public purposes legally, even if it is against your will. If you purchase property you should understand that it’s a possibility. If you purchase property in the most populated city in the country on a major street it’s a very real possibility as the city continues to grow.

If a person can’t come to terms with that reality then they shouldn’t buy a house. It’s cute that you think it’s communist, but it’s just the law in this country and it’s for millions of people’s benefit.

These aren’t developers. This is the government. I don’t think you understand what rights property owners actually have in Toronto.

I'm sympathetic to these homeowners to a certain degree (hence my earlier remark about MX covering their therapy bills), and MX has handled the situation poorly, but expropriation exists for a reason - we can't have a society where any allegedly aggrieved individual could potentially hold major infrastructure projects hostage for their own selfish needs.

 

[duty free]

They've been promised for a decade that there homes weren't going to be touched or taken.

And now they haven't been offered any extra compensation for this gross incompetence and inconvenience.

Had Metrolinx had the competency on day one to have told them the truth - it's a fair point.

Given Metrolinx's history of trying to cut corners on cost, one needs to find out more if this is actually a case that the vibrational damage is more severe than predicted, of if there's been some change in the construction technique to perhaps save money. Almost anything can be mitigated for a cost. Have they chosen to screw these neighbours to save money - or are they just technically incompetent?

It's ridiculous and degrading to suggest that they haven't been victimized by that grossly incompetent and overpaid agency.

I hate metrolinx as much as anyone, so I agree that they always handle things poorly and that this is no exception.

Doesn't change the fact that if those particular houses need to be expropriated then that is what needs to happen. Especially if it’s a safety concern.

 

[duty free]

What's "fairly"?

It seems obvious to me that a fair price for someone who wants to sell their home is categorically different to a fair price for someone who does not want to sell it. Yet it appears this is not at all obvious to a lot of people posting here.

There are things I own that I would never agree to sell for what a "fair market" would pay for them. Their value to me, for reasons of personal connection, memories, sentimentality, uniqueness, or a host of other reasons, means I prefer to have them than any money someone else would pay.

If someone is to force me to give them up, giving me the "fair" price that Value Village would slap on them in exchange is not acceptable. The loss to me is greater than that.

Maybe the people we are discussing in this thread are rich pricks who won the lottery on property values. I don't think it's right to engage in that sort of judgment. This is property they own, and they don't want to sell. If they are to be stripped of it, they deserve at the very least the "fair market value", plus an "unwilling seller" markup (IMO at least 20%), plus all relocation costs (including taxes and legal fees for purchasing a replacement property), plus costs for personal aggravation and distress (IMO at least $10K-$15K). Then we may be in the ballpark of something "fair".

A forced sale is an infringement upon individual rights. In a fair and just society, that cannot be done lightly or without compensation, not just for the property, but for the infringement itself. I'll gladly allow the rich to "win" a little more to protect this principle for everyone.

As always what’s fair depends on who you ask.

The city assesses your property’s value every year when you get charged property tax. The bank assess your property value every time you refinance. Realtors estimate your property’s value when you sell. Each one will give a different assessment so which one is the right one depends on what you are trying to achieve.

The easiest, fastest and cheapest solution is to compensate them way above market value. But guess what some people won’t be satisfied with any number because it’s not about the number.

 

[T3G]

They aren’t really poor bastards, they’re home owners in Toronto. Framing it like they’re victims is ridiculous

If they're not "victims", why compensate them at all, then? Your political philosophy is incongruous.

Everyone who is forced out of their home is a victim. The fact that we are even discussing this is truly bizarre. We don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship where people are expected to be subservient to the state. If I am forced out of my home because of a situation created by the bumbling stupidity of the state, I expect to be compensated well above what a conservative penny pinching bank estimates my house is worth. The fact that one day maybe some infrastructure will be created by this bumbling state institution is worthless information to me.

 

[nfitz]

That’s exactly right they’re not victims if they are fairly compensated monetarily. That’s the law.

As people and corporations keep having to take legal action against Metrolinx, to get fair compensation - then those individuals who don't have the same legal resources are indeed being victimized.

Why are you working so hard to defend these incompetent turds at Metrolinx?

 

[myself]

What about the renters who now have to find a new place and will also likely be facing a very steep increase in rent, are they going to be compensated? Or are we just assuming that all 25 houses here are SFH that are owned and lived in by said owners? And why all 25 houses? How much does the depth/condition change on the other side of Riverdale ave? Are they just drawing the line at the road because its convenient? Or is the brand new daycare at such a significantly higher risk than the house across the road on the north side of Riverdale?

Many questions, very few answers.

 

[duty free]

As people and corporations keep having to take legal action against Metrolinx, to get fair compensation - then those individuals who don't have the same legal resources are indeed being victimized.

Why are you working so hard to defend these incompetent turds at Metrolinx?

No one is defending Metrolinx. I would fire everyone working there if it were up to me.

Eminent domain exists for a reason. The law protects the home owners rights. The home owners have the right to fair market value. That’s the price of their home as if the project weren’t happening. I can’t imagine a scenario that doesn’t end with them getting fair compensation.

Pay them, pay them well and get them out of there so we can move forward on this project. I’m sick of people trying to hold up this project in Leslieville and Riverdale. Just get on with it already. We can’t afford to wait 15 to 20 years every time we build a new subway line.

Did people complain as much in the 60s? How was it handled then?

 

[duty free]

If they're not "victims", why compensate them at all, then? Your political philosophy is incongruous.

Everyone who is forced out of their home is a victim. The fact that we are even discussing this is truly bizarre. We don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship where people are expected to be subservient to the state. If I am forced out of my home because of a situation created by the bumbling stupidity of the state, I expect to be compensated well above what a conservative penny pinching bank estimates my house is worth. The fact that one day maybe some infrastructure will be created by this bumbling state institution is worthless information to me.

What a dumb post. Added nothing to this discussion.

 

[T3G]

What a dumb post. Added nothing to this discussion.

What is the precedent/justification for this attack?

I'm not sure what makes you an authority on what is or isn't a valuable post, but colour me unimpressed.

 

[generalcanada]

https://torontolife.com/deep-dives/train-wreck-the-bone-rattling-reality-of-ontario-line-construction/

Looks like the people from that star article went to Toronto Life. Quite alot of detail.

Hard to have sympathy when they admit to buying a replacement 3-million-dollar home. Also, Weird how it works only 1 way for her. "I got a good deal" and "they should pay what it was worth a year ago". It doesn't work like that.

I got a good deal. It was originally listed for $3.9 million but eventually dropped to $2.9. I got it for $2.7 million. Metrolinx finally got back to me at the beginning of March with a number for my house: $2.2 million. They valued it based on data from November of 2023, when the market was low. By my estimation, it should have been closer to $2.5 million; the work that I’d done on the garden alone was worth $500,000. They threw in a five per cent “inconvenience bonus.” To say this experience has been an inconvenience is like calling the Pope a little bit Catholic. People assume I’m rich because I’ve been expropriated, but it’s the developers who give you good cash, not these guys. Metrolinx nickel-and-dimes you.

Also wheres theese videos? If it was as bad as they say, id love to see the proof. Id be recording theese all the time? why arent they?

Then the vibrations started. My shelves rattled and shook. Vases and other merchandise fell to the floor and shattered. I was constantly moving stuff from the shelves to the floor and back again according to the cycle of drilling and excavation.

 

[DirectionNorth]

The bigger problem than simply XYZ plan, is our complete inability to hold to any transport plan, whether that's Network 2011, Transit City, the mid 1980s RT plan, ALRT, or yes, the 1966 "balanced" plan that gave us the cancelled Spadina Expressway. We always can everything after building half a line, and go for something else instead.

Anyways, the Spadina Expressway would only have moved congestion around. Instead of the Gardiner off-ramps, we'd be hearing about traffic reversing off the Dundas NB onramp, or how it takes thirty minutes from the top of the ramp to turn onto Queen St. Downtown traffic capacity is completely full, and no expressway might have changed the fact, unless we bulldozed the city to remake it in the image of San Antonio, Texas.

---------------------
On the expropriation side, while Metrolinx is only required by law to pay "fair market value," (the term thrown around here), I believe that owners should be paid an extra 30-ish percent on top of market value, and the occupiers of the units (ie. renters, businesses, and those living in their own homes) an extra mid-to-high five digits (maybe $50-70 thousand) in "inconvenience fees" or whatever you want to call it.

This forestalls NIMBY claims that homeowners were unfairly compensated. And the possibility that organisations with the transparency of a brick wall, like Metrolinx, will lowball estimates to get away with saving $200,000 on an eleven-figure project with their incompetency all over it. Also, this should forestall (most) lawsuits - owners get paid more than their property's worth, and courts will strike down claims that agencies have undervalued properties.

We also reduce political opposition that results in far more expensive projects, whether that's unnecessary tunneling or bad routing decisions.

Forced land takings should have extra costs - we live in a society where rights should be valued, and while there definitely are legitimate reasons for property takings, we should at least try to respect the rights of the people in the way. (sidestepping ML incompetence here ...)

---------------------
Also tangentially related to the thread, does anyone know what the capital portion of costs are? Global News says $19 billion for "southern stations, tunnels," and "trains, systems, and operations" (emphasis mine), but Global News is also trash on the transit file. Last estimate I saw was $10.9 billion, but I'm not sure if that is still true today.

 

[Arvalan]

Can't believe it's been 5 pages of arguments/discussion on the fact they are expropriating houses in Riverdale.

 

[EnviroTO]

There needs to be expropriation when large public projects are build that require properties in a particular place in order to serve their intended purpose. Not having expropriation would lead to the public purse being extorted. The one hold out would end up getting way more than makes sense because they would know the deep pockets of the government would pay more to prevent the public project from being blocked, and furthermore there would be a huge insider risk where people in the know could quickly buy properties fast to be in a position to make a major windfall. On the other hand, paying fair market value for the property alone does not fully compensate someone for all the time, effort, and stress associated with a move they didn't want to make. What these homeowners should be paid is the cost of a property in the neighbourhood with similar characteristics to their own, the full cost of moving and any required renovations to make the property equivalent, and a person to manage the work associated with this activity so the burden isn't on the homeowner. If the person assigned can't find a similar property in the neighbourhood, then they really aren't paying enough.

Most of these people say they want to keep their house. While I understand that they can't be in the house if there is risk of structural damage and probably shouldn't be there if there is going to be excessive noise for an extended period, I don't know why they couldn't find a way to allow them to get back their generational home once the property is restored (even if for legal reasons the property is owned by the government through the interim period).

Trying to formulate some kind of fairness into this process, based on the above I would suggest the homeowners should really be given the choice of two options:
1. Fair market value + 10% --> take the money and run.
2. Assisted relocation within the neighbourhood (within 750m radius) --> all the effort of the move is taken away, a property that meets all the specifications of the property owner that can be proven to exist within the current property is found or built.

In the event that the same property is available after the public work is complete, the original property owner should be able to have first rights to buy the property at any price the property is listed at or a dollar more than the highest bid, whichever is lower.

 

[PL1]

Don Valley crossing north of Pape, August 29