Coolstar
Senior Member
Starting a day earlier than anticipated.
|
|
|
TRONto
Active Member
Some can't, but many can. Happens frequently from the downtown core when landlords jack the rent and the business moves.
crs1026
Superstar
I’m not sure that I can accept the argument that ethnic businesses must remain in the same locale to maintain cohesiveness of their community. You won’t find many Jewish businesses in Kensington any more. The Italian community has migrated all the way from College Street to Woodbridge, Asian businesses have moved from Dundas and Spadina to the east and north. I have lost track of where the Portuguese community has moved from and to. There is no stability of place in Tornto’s development - if anything, it is the exception. Employment availability and related commuting routes may change, and communities may shift as that happens. As socioeconomic status rises, there may be a preference to move up as opposed to remaining in the original community hub.
I agree that Gentrification can be harmful, by forcing a community to uproot before it has achieved the income generation capability or equity to link relocation to “moving up”. Or to be able to simply invest and develop within its original location (Danforth perhaps being an example of that).
I can agree that the Jamaican community may still be in a precarious state and gentrification on Eglinton will make it hard and costly to relocate, but I’m not sure that proves gentrification is evil. It will depend on where that community ends up. In the long run, that may actually be progress.
- Paul
I agree that Gentrification can be harmful, by forcing a community to uproot before it has achieved the income generation capability or equity to link relocation to “moving up”. Or to be able to simply invest and develop within its original location (Danforth perhaps being an example of that).
I can agree that the Jamaican community may still be in a precarious state and gentrification on Eglinton will make it hard and costly to relocate, but I’m not sure that proves gentrification is evil. It will depend on where that community ends up. In the long run, that may actually be progress.
- Paul
Jonny5
Senior Member
A lot of business in the downtown core have equity value in their brands, usually from investor owners. I doubt these ones do, or can raise cash to pay for a move or compensate for the relocation risks, if they can even find an appropriate place available willing to rent to them. Even if they do, it could take six months of being out of business to complete a move and repoen. You can't do that without investor backers as a interim.
Last edited:
Burnt creek
Active Member
Yes. With private sector projects, the sub contractors know that the delays (and ensuing costs) will drive down the Internal rate or return and that there exists a point where project is no longer viable and hence the project will be cancelled . The subcontractors know that.
But on government projects, no politicians or government would ever have the balls to cancel such project given PR backlash that would ensue. Therefore the project sponsor has no leverage. So how do you change that?
Thats tough. But one way you can do that try to alter the incentive mechanism. For example, if governments have to bare the brunt of these delays and get egg on their faces, then so should the subcontractors. The subcontrcators are conveniently hiding in the background. Few know who they even are. If the eglington cross town were part of an olympic bid and if it were required for the olympics, you can bet that that it would not take twelve years. And it would ultimately be complete on time. Thats because these companies do not want their reputation tarnished in front of the world. It would not be just the governments with egg on their face.
Along the same line, I think that calling out subcontractors publically in order to ensure accountability might be a good tactic. We saw the John Tory and others call out Bombardier publicly for their delays. Seems to have worked.
pS.; i was replying to “innsertnamehere”
But on government projects, no politicians or government would ever have the balls to cancel such project given PR backlash that would ensue. Therefore the project sponsor has no leverage. So how do you change that?
Thats tough. But one way you can do that try to alter the incentive mechanism. For example, if governments have to bare the brunt of these delays and get egg on their faces, then so should the subcontractors. The subcontrcators are conveniently hiding in the background. Few know who they even are. If the eglington cross town were part of an olympic bid and if it were required for the olympics, you can bet that that it would not take twelve years. And it would ultimately be complete on time. Thats because these companies do not want their reputation tarnished in front of the world. It would not be just the governments with egg on their face.
Along the same line, I think that calling out subcontractors publically in order to ensure accountability might be a good tactic. We saw the John Tory and others call out Bombardier publicly for their delays. Seems to have worked.
pS.; i was replying to “innsertnamehere”
Last edited:
NotAToy
New Member
@Burnt creek
On compensation, I'm only saying that it's hard on the small business owners. That's it.
You can @a member. Just saying.
On compensation, I'm only saying that it's hard on the small business owners. That's it.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Taken from the Crosstown West IBC that was recently released but it provides interesting information about ridership distribution on the Crosstown that was worth cross-posting to this thread.
I think we are underestimating Crosstown ridership generally, but the good thing is that there will be many interchange opportunities, especially should the Ontario Line be built in the future.
I think we are underestimating Crosstown ridership generally, but the good thing is that there will be many interchange opportunities, especially should the Ontario Line be built in the future.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
Shows why opening the section of the Eglinton Crosstown LRT from Mount Dennis to Cedarvale earlier than the rest makes sense.
Steve X
Senior Member
Once upon a time, ML predicted westbound ridership approaching Eglinton would reach 12,000 pphpd by 2041. Now it's only 6,000 pphpd. Tells us how much to trust these numbers.
NotAToy
New Member
2041? Do you mean 2014? And yes, Metrolinx can't be trusted. Actually, make that the Doug Ford government.
Steve X
Senior Member
Prediction for 2041. Actual ridership is ZERO! for 2014 and is still zero for 2020.
BurlOak
Senior Member
12k was when Eglinton was grade-separated through Scarborough.
Your saying now the prediction is 6k (from page 51 of the IBC).
This is correct, because now Eglinton is on-street.
This is likely more confirmation on how stupid of an idea it was to go away from the Ford-McGuinty compromise.
Voltz
Senior Member
I don't get why you keep going on about this, the plan was not just the Eglinton SRT corridor, cancelling the Ford McGunity plan saved the Finch, Sheppard, and SRT extension LRT's, those extra riders on Eglinton are already taking the Bloor-Danforth Subway, they are on rapid transit already.
Steve X
Senior Member
It wasn't a good projection at all. That assumes that riders do stay on the LRT oppose to transferring at Kennedy. It sounds fine till riders realize they would have to stand in crush load for 15 minutes instead of 5 if they got on at Bloor. That doesn't sound comfortable and thus the ridership wouldn't have reach 12k. Just as TTC has once predicted a lot more people would take Line 4 instead of heading to Finch.
Also to point out that it competes with Line 2 and that isn't near capacity. Money is better spent elsewhere. Since Line 5 has a lower capacity, it would be better to keep the unnecessary riders on Line 2 and save the space for those who actually need it (west of Science Centre Station). The Scarborough subway would keep the riders on Line 2 and they could transfer to the Ontario Line at Pape.