Rail Deck Park (?, ?, ?)

[CityStay]

No way it will cost 3.4B to 4B. I think the real number will be around 5 Billion when all said and done. But it's well worth it. Toronto needs a grand park near downtown. This is the last area left that we can utilize to build something like this.

Hear, hear!

Now pass this wisdom down to your grandchildren so that they will be able to continue the fight!

 

[crs1026]

^The $1.5B cost is credible, but that’s not the point. The point is, even if it’s half of that, the City doesn’t have the money. Parks don’t generate revenue, so there is nothing to leverage to finance it.
Most likely outcome is some amount of the property being developed, and parkland on the rest. Maybe a gradual covering of the tracks, over some longer period of time.
It’s a grand idea, but somebody has to pay for it.
- Paul

 

[Alex L]

^The $1.5B cost is credible, but that’s not the point. The point is, even if it’s half of that, the City doesn’t have the money. Parks don’t generate revenue, so there is nothing to leverage to finance it.
Most likely outcome is some amount of the property being developed, and parkland on the rest. Maybe a gradual covering of the tracks, over some longer period of time.
It’s a grand idea, but somebody has to pay for it.
- Paul

Property taxes, development charges, capital budget. That's how most parks get built. That isn't nothing. Spread out over 20 years or so, it's doable.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Can't the city or province simply expropriate the land from whomever claims to own it? Simply return whatever they paid for it, plus interest. At developer-friendly Queen's Park we'd need to wait until DoFo is gone.

 

[Mercenary]

Chicago's Millennium Park was built without tax payer money as they got wealthy Chicagoans, corporations to put up the money to build the Park,

Why cant wealthy Torontonians and large corporations such as the Big 5 Banks put up the money to build something. And besides if it's private donors, the money will be better utilized and they will on top of the construction process, so less chances of delays and going over budget.

 

[rbt]

Can't the city or province simply expropriate the land from whomever claims to own it?

Great question and the answer is yes.

Simply return whatever they paid for it, plus interest.

No, expropriation is required to make them whole. Several sections of the charter indirectly address property rights so the "making them whole" part is pretty serious.

That means paying the current value of the land plus any costs incurred for the disruption (moving costs, losses of profit, time, etc.). Those last bits don't apply here but determining the current value of the air-rights would almost certainly be taken to court, who will lean toward any reasonable value defence provides due to the Charter.

 

[Admiral Beez]

No, expropriation is required to make them whole. Several sections of the charter indirectly address property rights so the "making them whole" part is pretty serious.

Sounds like a good time to use Section 33. If Queen's Park was willing to use Section 33 to force Toronto City Council reductions, why not here?

"Notwithstanding the Charter sections on property rights, the Ontario government deems in the public interest that these lands are hereby seized by the province, with compensation equal to purchase cost"

 

[dowlingm]

Sounds like a good time to use Section 33. If Queen's Park was willing to use Section 33 to force Toronto City Council reductions, why not here?

"Notwithstanding the Charter sections on property rights, the Ontario government deems in the public interest that these lands are hereby seized by the province, with compensation equal to purchase cost"

Can't use Section 33 against what doesn't exist. Property rights were specifically excluded from the Charter. There is a description of how certain provinces successfully kept such rights out in this document from the Library of Parliament:

Property rights and the Constitution (BP-268E)

publications.gc.ca

 

[Jonny5]

Chicago's Millennium Park was built without tax payer money as they got wealthy Chicagoans, corporations to put up the money to build the Park.
Why cant wealthy Torontonians and large corporations such as the Big 5 Banks put up the money to build something.

Chicago politics is a very... unique kind of politics.There's reasons many of the CEO's of the largest employers in Chicago coughed up money for that and many other things. I don't think we want to replicate that in Toronto.

I'm not sure it would even be legal for the Canadian banks to do so now with the regulations about "politically exposed persons."
All those banking regulations everyone wanted basically say that's a big no-no. You can't have it both ways. We told the banks to stay out of this stuff. So they are.

 

[DtTO]

I have a question; is this park actually even possible? There is currently no electrification whatsoever along these rail lines, and as far as I know, the ventilation requirements for these diesel electric trains would make it cost prohibitive, or even impractical to put a park on top. Sure, GO RER involves electrification, but that's going to take a long time to actually happen, and even when it does, as far as I know, it will not include all lines in one phase. Further, the retention of the old train shed support columns at Union as a "heritage" item, prohibits the installation of a catenary electric system.

I really like the idea of a park here, and hiding the train lines, but considering the above, as well as the staggering cost, which could easily be spent on another subway line, I'm a little hesitant. Perhaps a private partnership, like the ORCA Project, while not ideal, would be a better use of resources? Even Chicago's Millenium Park only cost $500m, this just doesn't seem reasonable at all, to me.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I have a question; is this park actually even possible? There is currently no electrification whatsoever along these rail lines, and as far as I know, the ventilation requirements for these diesel electric trains would make it cost prohibitive, or even impractical to put a park on top. Sure, GO RER involves electrification, but that's going to take a long time to actually happen, and even when it does, as far as I know, it will not include all lines in one phase. Further, the retention of the old train shed support columns at Union as a "heritage" item, prohibits the installation of a catenary electric system.

I really like the idea of a park here, and hiding the train lines, but considering the above, as well as the staggering cost, which could easily be spent on another subway line, I'm a little hesitant. Perhaps a private partnership, like the ORCA Project, while not ideal, would be a better use of resources? Even Chicago's Millenium Park only cost $500m, this just doesn't seem reasonable at all, to me.

You actually think that the park is going to get built before RER? GO electrification is only 6-8 years away at this point - the contract for it will probably be awarded in the next year or so. This park will be lucky to see phase 1 *start* construction 6 years from now.

The Union train shed problem was figured out quite a while ago from my understanding and is no longer an issue.

There are such things as ventilation systems as well for any remaining diesel trains.

 

[nfitz]

You actually think that the park is going to get built before RER? GO electrification is only 6-8 years away at this point - the contract for it will probably be awarded in the next year or so. ...

The contract is primarily for operation. There's no longer guarantee that the current government is going to electrify.

 

[crs1026]

Property taxes, development charges, capital budget. That's how most parks get built. That isn't nothing. Spread out over 20 years or so, it's doable.

On top of the shortfall in revenue that is causing cuts to public housing, social services, transit sogr, just to name a few?
As much as I like the park idea, Toronto has basic brick and mortar spending needs that are more important to me, and a shortfall of revenue to address these. Sure, define some amount that can be spent per year, and chip away at it....but that’s a long time to complete given the City’s current finances.
- Paul

 

[Alex L]

On top of the shortfall in revenue that is causing cuts to public housing, social services, transit sogr, just to name a few?
As much as I like the park idea, Toronto has basic brick and mortar spending needs that are more important to me, and a shortfall of revenue to address these. Sure, define some amount that can be spent per year, and chip away at it....but that’s a long time to complete given the City’s current finances.
- Paul

I don't think that anyone realistically expects the park to be complete in less than 20 years. The issues you pointed out are higher priorities. A lot of those will get federal and provincial money, Ford or no Ford. And even if you had the full amount to complete the housing capital backlog, you couldn't manage the logistics of spending it all in one year anyway. It would have a huge number of contractors.

Near where I live is an empty former factory that was promised to be a community centre 20 years ago. They've chipped away at it - built a fieldhouse and square for a farmer's market. The plans are all done. The City has a budget every year and that's how it gets done.

Myself, I would look to work with Oxford and build a deck from the Rogers Centre to Spadina as stage one. Rogers would probably sponsor at least part of that. There would probably have to be at least two stages to get it to Spadina. If Justin is listening, maybe some federal money could go towards this, like his father's pledge toward Harbourfront.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Link to LPAT decision document, with court record also attached.