cryogen
New Member
Zach - a word of caution - your rational thinking will get you banned from this site. Facts and common sense aren't tolerated here.
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
ProjectEnd
Superstar
How is it blocking construction? Because Doug said it was?
(Hint: it's not)
Joins a month ago and is already an expert...
Tuscani01
Senior Member
To drive this point home... The encampment is in red. The construction site is green:
Tuscani01
Senior Member
And if that isn't enough, the site plan drawings don't even include the site where the encampment is located. Its a block outside of the site boundary:
Northern Light
Superstar
I'm not sure about ownership/plans, but if there is a need for an off-site staging area, there's an open parcel just on the other side of King beside the Cherry Park trail, and one on the other side of the rail corridor, opposite the encampment on Breithaupt.
***
I happen to take the position that the encampment is not reasonable, because the region re-housed everyone who was originally there, and has demonstrated a willingness and ability to do so, if new people weren't being 'directed' to that location. I believe housing is a right, but camping is not. The judge's solution is also in error to me, because he identifies that camping elsewhere should be an alternative, instead of ordering sufficient housing be provided. Wrong remedy.
We also need to recognize that there really isn't that acute a shortage of housing, there's a shortage of people who can afford the housing that's there; and that's a function of minimum wage and social assistance/disability rates, not lack of land for tenting. There are 40,000 purpose-built rental units in Kitchener. The vacancy rate is 3.1%. It was under 2% at one point. If you assume you can't get it below 1.6%, that still leaves 600 vacant units in Kitchener. That would house everyone in the encampment 20x times over. (estimates have the number of encampees at 30-35 currently)
Cost of renting 35 units at full market value with no recovery is $840,000 per year (2k per month assumption) That's 3.4M over 4 years, and would be coverable by the project contingency.
I don't want this decision used as a crutch/excuse for inaction.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
This construction will also close Duke at the rail line, so the Duke right of way can also be used for staging on both sides of the rail line.
Jolene
New Member
Facts and common sense don't seem to be your strong suit.
simplmind02
New Member
The common sense part of this is that no one thinks its ok to set up camp somewhere and refuse to leave or demand a new location or housing.
Is there enough shelter space for an additional 30 people? If so, that should end this discussion, shut it down and offer them beds there. But sounds like they "don't want" to be in shelters? Wonder why, when they have land to themselves, guarded by security 24/7, and being "homeless" is the most innocent thing happening in the encampment.
Arguing whether or not they need the land for the construction is really non of our business. A plot of regional land along the tracks was requested as part of construction, that's it.
Is there enough shelter space for an additional 30 people? If so, that should end this discussion, shut it down and offer them beds there. But sounds like they "don't want" to be in shelters? Wonder why, when they have land to themselves, guarded by security 24/7, and being "homeless" is the most innocent thing happening in the encampment.
Arguing whether or not they need the land for the construction is really non of our business. A plot of regional land along the tracks was requested as part of construction, that's it.
taylortbb
New Member
You're confusing two different projects.
There's the Metrolinx platform construction project, and separately, the Region's station building construction project.
It's the Metrolinx platform construction project that requires the encampment site for staging, your drawing is for the station building project. Showing a diagram for an different project doesn't prove anything.
The Metrolinx platform construction project is known to go past Duke St. Exactly how far I don't know, I haven't see any drawings for that project.
cryogen
New Member
Exactly, this shouldn't be controversial. You shouldn't camp on city property, period.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
No, you are confused. Go back and look at the photo. The site plan is for phase 1 works, which are for the Metrolinx works. The project you are referencing (the Region's station building) is outlined in the document I posted but not detailed - and listed as Phase 2.
Northern Light
Superstar
Is it is possible to disagree with the judge's ruling (as I do) but also state, irrespective of the merits (given that the decision stands for now, and an appeal could take some time) that the project can proceed notwithstanding the encampment.
If an alternate site is needed for staging, so be it. The region, I think, ought to appeal the judge's ruling and request an expedited appeal. But in the mean time, the project should go ahead.
****
Equally, I too believe the region is capable of housing those in the encampment; and I outlined above, that doing so, even in market-rent apartments isn't all that costly relative to the project budget. If, in fact, encampees are turning down offers of housing, I think the region's case is clear.
If they are not, because there is none on offer, the region needs an alternate strategy.
Regardless, the state of any offer of housing should be made public, so that people can fairly judge, and the project should move ahead while it all gets sorted.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Correct, @Tuscani01.
We have a shadowy agency which refuses to make the vast majority of their documents public (despite being an agency ostensibly 'owned' by Ontarians), and which now claims it's all someone else's fault that they can't meet a deadline. Never mind the fact that they consistently find it utterly impossible to meet any deadline. We also have a peroxide-poisoned premier who has always felt that transit is a bit icky and definitely below his status claiming that a judge is to blame for works in vague proximity to a project on which his own agency can't get their shit together.
Metrolinx needs to be broken up and fed to the wolves. It's not even incompetence: they know they don't have to answer to anyone so they just do it their own way on their schedule and forcing the public to pay their inflated costs. Ontarians should find this utterly unacceptable.
What a bunch of simping BS. If Metrolinx can't figure this out, given any potential change of circumstance as issued by the judge, get out of the construction industry, period.
We have a shadowy agency which refuses to make the vast majority of their documents public (despite being an agency ostensibly 'owned' by Ontarians), and which now claims it's all someone else's fault that they can't meet a deadline. Never mind the fact that they consistently find it utterly impossible to meet any deadline. We also have a peroxide-poisoned premier who has always felt that transit is a bit icky and definitely below his status claiming that a judge is to blame for works in vague proximity to a project on which his own agency can't get their shit together.
Metrolinx needs to be broken up and fed to the wolves. It's not even incompetence: they know they don't have to answer to anyone so they just do it their own way on their schedule and forcing the public to pay their inflated costs. Ontarians should find this utterly unacceptable.
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
Not to beleaguer this any further, the judge's ruling here does nothing to address the plight of homelessness, the right to and need for adequate housing, the economic realities that got people to encamped here in the first place, or the squalid and miserable conditions these encampments fall into. The only thing it protects them from is meeting the violent end of police batons and forced removal for today...and that's it.
...and as pointed by many here, it has very little to do with the delays of this project outside it being used as a political football for those who don't like to give account for said delays. /bleah
...and as pointed by many here, it has very little to do with the delays of this project outside it being used as a political football for those who don't like to give account for said delays. /bleah
Last edited:
taylortbb
New Member
I am not confused, you're not reading the drawings you posted. The phase 1 works are not the Metrolinx works.
The station building project was split into two phases due to budget constraints. It was then re-combined into a single project when the federal funding came through to do the entire project. Your drawing is for phase 1 of the station building, from when it was split into two phases.
The Metrolinx works are within the rail corridor. If you look at your drawing you'll see that it doesn't show what's happening in the rail corridor. It has some red dashed lines in the rail corridor, showing an approximation of the Metrolinx rail corridor works at the time it was prepared (as obviously the two projects need to coordinate). But that image is not a drawing of what's happening in the rail corridor, and does not attempt to show the entire extent of Metrolinx's project within the corridor.