Wharncliffe Rd. Transformation - CN Tracks - Page 6

K85 · #**101** Posted **May 4, 2018, 9:51 PM**

The dope from the mac outpost place

"Not enough consideration has been given to the bigger picture. The local environment here on Wharncliffe Road South, the businesses, the small businesses along Wharncliffe that will be affected"

Are you that mother fucking dense that you contradict your first sentence with the opposite seeking sympathy? I hope you close..

kaiserLDN · #**102** Posted **May 7, 2018, 3:32 PM**

Hopefully a new mayor will take charge of this project and get this done quick. She is a very very selfish lady. 92 years old and doesn't have a care in the world about the remaining population in the city.

Djeffery · #**103** Posted **May 7, 2018, 9:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiserLDN

Hopefully a new mayor will take charge of this project and get this done quick. She is a very very selfish lady. 92 years old and doesn't have a care in the world about the remaining population in the city.

She might be 92 by the time this is done (hell, I might be 92 by the time this is done lol), but she is only mid 70’s now.

MolsonExport · #**104** Posted **May 28, 2018, 5:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiserLDN

Hopefully a new mayor will take charge of this project and get this done quick. She is a very very selfish lady. 92 years old and doesn't have a care in the world about the remaining population in the city.

how do you know this? What do you know about her, that you could arrive at this completely unfounded conclusion?

kaiserLDN · #**105** Posted **May 31, 2018, 1:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

how do you know this? What do you know about her, that you could arrive at this completely unfounded conclusion?

sorry buddy. The bridge was 94 or something years old and she is in her 70s from a news article in the LFpress. "oops" misread the numbers.

MrSlippery519 · #**106** Posted **Sep 26, 2018, 3:38 PM**

I drove by this lovely house yesterday afternoon...you cannot even see the house from Wharncliffe as the weeds are so overgrown.

Quite the sad state, if all the people pushing to keep this house where it is why not offer their free time to make the beautiful gardens actually look nice

Pimpmasterdac · #**107** Posted **Oct 18, 2018, 12:26 AM**

Paolatto was on CTVNews today and said that while he's in favour of the project, he thinks engineers have made a mistake by planning to close Whanrcliffe for several months to complete the project. He would order engineers to have the road remain open like the CP/Wharncliffe underpass, to pander to some tire business and the Mac Outpost complaine.

Honestly shows how uninformed he is, that they're planning to drop the grade 6-7 feet yet this bozo thinks somehow keeping live traffic is possible and doesnt see the long term benefit.

haljackey · #**108** Posted **Oct 18, 2018, 1:04 PM**

In theory you could do it but it would add cost and time to the project.

During construction, Wortley and Thames street could be made one-way roads perhaps? That should help them carry traffic through the CN line a bit better while Wharncliffe is closed for reconstruction. Traffic would then rejoin Wharncliffe via Stanley/York.

Pimpmasterdac · #**109** Posted **Jun 18, 2019, 1:53 AM**

Looks like the city has finally got tired of waiting for this woman to shit or get off the pot. Expropriation order is being put forward to Corporate Services Committee to acquire her property along with 10 others so that utility work will being in early 2020. CTV London of course made another fluff piece making the city seem like shes poor helpless woman, instead of an unreasonable NIMBY who the city is trying to reach a more than fair comprise with.

CTV London
Corporate Services Committee Report

haljackey · #**110** Posted **Jun 18, 2019, 4:20 PM**

I drive under this rail bridge every weekday on my way to work downtown.

She has delayed the project for years, and costed the city a lot of time and money with each delay. The media also covers the story to death, delaying things further.

This will be delayed even longer if the city doesn't grow a spine and actually expropriate her this time.

MrSlippery519 · #**111** Posted **Jun 18, 2019, 6:17 PM**

I thought it was already approved so is this the next step to sign off on land extrapolation? I thought that the only thing she could fight at this point was the process of moving the house or am I not remembering correct?

So she has a choice, allow the house to be moved or it gets knocked down.

Lets hope the city moves this along, 2020 utility work sounds great which means the extrapolation needs to happen sooner than later.

jammer139 · #**112** Posted **Jun 18, 2019, 9:01 PM**

You are correct. This is a required next step to expropriate the parcels of land for the project including her entire lot.

Unfortunately land owners have a process that forces the government to prove the necessity of taking the land. Adding delays.

https://blg.com/en/News-And-Publications/Documents/Publication_4009_1033.pdf

haljackey · #**113** Posted **Jun 19, 2019, 12:43 PM**

CBC article this morning. Committee voted 5-1 to demo the house

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/stanley-street-expropriation-nan-finlayson-1.5180424

LFP also has a story: https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/london-homeowner-fighting-extradition-loses-another-round

Now let's see if it actually happens...

MrSlippery519 · #**114** Posted **Jun 19, 2019, 2:45 PM**

I feel like it will happen this time, the fight it over it has been voted on countless times and with the recent 5-1 vote the house will be demolished. Its a bit sad actually seeing as the city offered to move the home...I think this is a case of too many people talking in this old ladies ear about what she should or should not do.
At the end of the day this is a massive project the city is long overdue on, doing this will be a bit improvement to traffic flow in and around that area it is simply unavoidable.

TallerIsBetter · #**115** Posted **Jun 19, 2019, 4:43 PM**

Moving the house is a rediculous option. They should give her full market value + 10% plus moving/realtor/legal costs plus $100,000 and give her 180 or 270 days notice. She can find a similar home in the same area and let it grow into a jungle and be happy.

Djeffery · #**116** Posted **Jun 19, 2019, 9:07 PM**

No debate at committee, but I can imagine there will be lots at council. Interesting that the ward councillor voted against this. Is she sucking up to the sentiments of people because I can't imagine the people who live in at least the west half of her ward are against getting Wharncliffe done.

manny_santos · #**117** Posted **Jun 20, 2019, 4:55 PM**

I'm trying to remember, was part of the point of this widening not related to safety concerns on the CN bridge? I can't find any articles online about it but I seem to recall 10-15 years ago there was a story in the LFP and on TV about the dire structural condition of that bridge, and that was a reason it was eventually going to need replacement. I may be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall back then there was discussion of the city wanting to avoid a bridge collapse similar to one that happened in Minnesota and killed 13 people.

If my memory isn't wrong on this, then is there not a safety concern around delaying this widening and demolishing this house?

MrSlippery519 · #**118** Posted **Jun 20, 2019, 7:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TallerIsBetter

Moving the house is a rediculous option. They should give her full market value + 10% plus moving/realtor/legal costs plus $100,000 and give her 180 or 270 days notice. She can find a similar home in the same area and let it grow into a jungle and be happy.

It is, but to be fair it is a heritage home and the city was trying to please a whole bunch of different groups. The fact is this individual will take no amount of money they have flat out said they are not leaving.
Extrapolating the property and tearing down the house is the only option at this point, lets just hope this happens soon so the work can begin.

Djeffery · #**119** Posted **Jun 20, 2019, 9:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I'm trying to remember, was part of the point of this widening not related to safety concerns on the CN bridge? I can't find any articles online about it but I seem to recall 10-15 years ago there was a story in the LFP and on TV about the dire structural condition of that bridge, and that was a reason it was eventually going to need replacement. I may be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall back then there was discussion of the city wanting to avoid a bridge collapse similar to one that happened in Minnesota and killed 13 people.

If my memory isn't wrong on this, then is there not a safety concern around delaying this widening and demolishing this house?

I don't remember but that doesn't mean anything. I know they say old things are built better, but that rusting hulk is something like 100 years old and gets a shit ton of rail traffic on top of it. I drive under it everyday multiple times and while worrying it's going to fall on my head isn't something that is constant, I do find myself every so often when I'm stuck under it at the red light looking around at the structure and wondering if this thing is going to make news one day.

Stevo26 · #**120** Posted **Jun 22, 2019, 4:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I'm trying to remember, was part of the point of this widening not related to safety concerns on the CN bridge? I can't find any articles online about it but I seem to recall 10-15 years ago there was a story in the LFP and on TV about the dire structural condition of that bridge, and that was a reason it was eventually going to need replacement. I may be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall back then there was discussion of the city wanting to avoid a bridge collapse similar to one that happened in Minnesota and killed 13 people.

If my memory isn't wrong on this, then is there not a safety concern around delaying this widening and demolishing this house?

There sure is a safety concern. And the woman should have had her house expropriated years ago for exactly that reason. It would be hard for her or any lawyer to argue against that.

Plus, by refusing expropriation or trying to delay it still further, she might have opened herself to potentially huge legal liability if the bridge had collapsed and people ended up dying or being injured and it could be proven that her attempts to delay expropriation had caused the city to delay mitigating the problem of the decaying bridge.

Such a lawsuit would probably guarantee that she would lose her house, if not from having to sell to pay crippling legal fees, then from having to sell to pay out the judgment.

Of course, the city itself could also be held liable for not acting sooner to expropriate.

If I had been in her shoes and the city had offered me 10% over fair market value for my home plus money for legal fees and a sum of money over and above that as a sweetener, I wouldn't have hesitated. I would have said, "Where do I sign?"

If my house was already fully paid for, the money I would make from such a deal would allow me to buy even nicer digs.