Charles St GRT terminal redevelopment

[cherrypark]

Why not have both? Plan for a building with a green roof that slopes towards Victoria Park.  Park users could enjoy the generally south facing slope (which I realize could take away from south facing windows for the gallery space, but I think most art galleries prefer not to have natural (UV) light flowing into their spaces).  It could become a natural amphitheater for outdoor concerts or performances if shaped right.

That makes me think of the TU Delft library, one of the best spots on campus for a sunny day and library studying alike.

[REnerd]

This x1000.

[ac3r]

Affordable housing expected to be part of former Kitchener bus terminal redevelopment: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener...-1.6528117

[bravado]

Affordable housing expected to be part of former Kitchener bus terminal redevelopment: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener...-1.6528117

It’s disappointing that the apes who wrote the comments on that article have the same voting rights as people with empathy and emotions.

[CP42]

Affordable housing expected to be part of former Kitchener bus terminal redevelopment: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener...-1.6528117

One comment I found interesting and don’t think I have heard before: sell and use the proceeds to offset the price of the new transit hub to taxpayers (which is currently stalled due to a lack of funding). 

One transit hub’s retirement helps fund the transit hub of the future. I like that. 

I’m sure the region could include their requirements in the conditions of the sale so they still have say in what goes there, but are able to help progress the new transit hub as well.

[danbrotherston]

Affordable housing expected to be part of former Kitchener bus terminal redevelopment: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener...-1.6528117

One comment I found interesting and don’t think I have heard before: sell and use the proceeds to offset the price of the new transit hub to taxpayers (which is currently stalled due to a lack of funding). 

One transit hub’s retirement helps fund the transit hub of the future. I like that. 

I’m sure the region could include their requirements in the conditions of the sale so they still have say in what goes there, but are able to help progress the new transit hub as well.

The transit hub isn't stalled due to lack of funding...it's stalled due to lack of priority. We had plenty of money to spend on the airport.

It doesn't help that the estimated price is utter bonkers for a small single floor building and train platform with minimal amenities. It's literally costing as much as a 30 story apartment building.

[panamaniac]

I wonder if the component will be “affordable housing” or public housing? Room for elements of both, istm.

[CP42]

One comment I found interesting and don’t think I have heard before: sell and use the proceeds to offset the price of the new transit hub to taxpayers (which is currently stalled due to a lack of funding). 

One transit hub’s retirement helps fund the transit hub of the future. I like that. 

I’m sure the region could include their requirements in the conditions of the sale so they still have say in what goes there, but are able to help progress the new transit hub as well.

The transit hub isn't stalled due to lack of funding...it's stalled due to lack of priority. We had plenty of money to spend on the airport.

It doesn't help that the estimated price is utter bonkers for a small single floor building and train platform with minimal amenities. It's literally costing as much as a 30 story apartment building.

https://kitchener.citynews.ca/amp/corona...ub-3371544

“The region has been attempting to secure additional 100 per cent funding from the province with no success and it has forced the region to reconsider funding strategies and look to see if there is a different way to make this project happen and find the funding for the additional cost.”

Was going off of this article. My understanding was they were looking for other sources of funding before proceeding.

[taylortbb]

The transit hub isn't stalled due to lack of funding...it's stalled due to lack of priority. We had plenty of money to spend on the airport.

This really isn't accurate. The budget that matters here isn't total expenditures, it's how much do property taxes increase. The airport is revenue generating (airport improvement fees, landing fees, commercial tenant rent, etc), and those revenues are approximately equal to the cost of expansion.

If the transit hub would generate enough revenue to pay for itself the regional could easily issue the debentures for it, but if it requires property tax increases that's where the hesitation comes from.

The airport expansion also is about 1/3 of the upfront cost as the transit hub, so even ignoring revenues your comparison isn't accurate.

[CP42]

The transit hub isn't stalled due to lack of funding...it's stalled due to lack of priority. We had plenty of money to spend on the airport.

This really isn't accurate. The budget that matters here isn't total expenditures, it's how much do property taxes increase. The airport is revenue generating (airport improvement fees, landing fees, commercial tenant rent, etc), and those revenues are approximately equal to the cost of expansion.

If the transit hub would generate enough revenue to pay for itself the regional could easily issue the debentures for it, but if it requires property tax increases that's where the hesitation comes from.

The airport expansion also is about 1/3 of the upfront cost as the transit hub, so even ignoring revenues your comparison isn't accurate.

Thank you for this well thought out response. These are all very great points to consider if you were to make the comparison between these two projects.

[danbrotherston]

The transit hub isn't stalled due to lack of funding...it's stalled due to lack of priority. We had plenty of money to spend on the airport.

This really isn't accurate. The budget that matters here isn't total expenditures, it's how much do property taxes increase. The airport is revenue generating (airport improvement fees, landing fees, commercial tenant rent, etc), and those revenues are approximately equal to the cost of expansion.

If the transit hub would generate enough revenue to pay for itself the regional could easily issue the debentures for it, but if it requires property tax increases that's where the hesitation comes from.

The airport expansion also is about 1/3 of the upfront cost as the transit hub, so even ignoring revenues your comparison isn't accurate.

Total cost yes...but the province has already given us some funding.

[Bytor]

It’s disappointing that the apes who wrote the comments on that article have the same voting rights as people with empathy and emotions.

Damn it, you made me go look so now it's your fault I hat humanity for the rest of the day.

[Bytor]

If the transit hub would generate enough revenue to pay for itself the regional could easily issue the debentures for it, but if it requires property tax increases that's where the hesitation comes from.

The Region has shot down any possibility of it being revenue generating by utterly refusing to listen to the many, many suggestions of a food court and other small shops like one finds at major transit stations elsewhere.

[tomh009]

Really, a tiny food court would not generate much revenue. This is not really a major transit station, and it will see fewer pax than the old Charles St terminal. The region already has experience as a landlord from that facility with the Transfers restaurant, and I expect they decided that this was not sensible business for the region, who doesn't otherwise manage any other commercial space/tenants, as far as I know.

The main benefit would be passenger convenience, but that is less significant than at Union Station and its ilk (notably Union's retail is also pretty limited) as most of the passengers will be either arriving or departing (rather than connecting) so they will be able to easily access retail outside the hub. This makes it more difficult for the retail merchants to make the business case.

I like the idea of retail inside the hub, but I recognize the challenges for both the region and the potential merchants.

[Acitta]

Really, a tiny food court would not generate much revenue. This is not really a major transit station, and it will see fewer pax than the old Charles St terminal. The region already has experience as a landlord from that facility with the Transfers restaurant, and I expect they decided that this was not sensible business for the region, who doesn't otherwise manage any other commercial space/tenants, as far as I know.

The main benefit would be passenger convenience, but that is less significant than at Union Station and its ilk (notably Union's retail is also pretty limited) as most of the passengers will be either arriving or departing (rather than connecting) so they will be able to easily access retail outside the hub. This makes it more difficult for the retail merchants to make the business case.

I like the idea of retail inside the hub, but I recognize the challenges for both the region and the potential merchants.

Have you been to Union Station recently? Since the renovation, there is a major new food court and other restaurants, a bar and other small food retail. I wouldn't call it limited.