Morning Brew: May 30th, 2008
Photo: "BCE Place" by jsaneb, member of the blogTO Flickr pool.
Your Toronto morning news roundup for Friday May 30th, 2008:
The proposed extension of Front Street to Dufferin (it currently ends at Bathurst) has been cancelled, which means that the hopes of chopping down part of the Gardiner (which was contingent on the Front Street Extension becoming reality) may be dashed as well, despite support of the mayor. Why not take it underground east of Yonge, and have it resurface at the DVP? If Boston can do it, so can we.
Toronto is set to study the feasibility of safe injection sites. The news comes shortly after a much contested site in Vancouver stirred up things in the high courts, and Federal Health Minister Tony Clement spoke of how unethical it is to give drug addicts a safe place to shoot up. Idealogy has its short-comings.
--
I can't see the difference; can you see the difference? The TTC is testing new subway entrance signage but they could probably skip testing altogether. Am I missing some legibility or historical significance argument that only a Joe Clark could speak to, or are the new signs fine as is?
A motor home went up in flames on the streets of Mississauga yesterday, forcing the occupants to have to find some other way to the Nascar race they were headed to. The money they save on gas might make taking the train or a bus or plane worth while.
Although Canadian teams amount to just 20% of teams in the NHL, they generate 31% of the league ticket revenue. Why? Because only Canadians (and especially Torontonians) are willing to pay ludicrous prices to watch a shite team flop around on the ice while team execs gold-plate and diamond-encrust their yacht anchors. That's why.
Comments (35)
the gardiner is here to stay. its toronto's historical legacy. besides, when you tear it down, you are still left with a wall of condos + other useless + pedestrian unfriendly elements. like the rail line, the industrial mish--mash etc....
Love those proposed new TTC signs, which look like the old signs you still see here and there. Yep, skip the "test" and just put 'em in.
Uh-oh, the "tear down the Gardiner" people are on the warpath again. Personally, I think Toronto should rise to the challenge of living with the Gardiner intact. Find a way to make it beautiful and the bring the space under it to life. Hundertwasser would certainly know what to do with it!
LOL if Boston can do it, $14.6 Billion dollars later http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1219/p02s01-ussc.html
I'm not talking about nearly the scope to which Boston took the Big Dig. I'm just talking about the stretch of the Gardiner from about Yonge to the DVP.
I'm in Boston once/month for work, and traffic would be disgusting without the tunnels (it's still not a thrill at rush hour).
The funding for transportation projects in the US is vastly superior to that in Canada. Unless we make a major change up here, a "Moderate Dig" in Toronto has little chance of going forward.
the portobello market in london is one of the coolest markets in the world. its under an overpass. imagine that.
THe only difference is that london has a healthy fabric for the market to tie into. the space around the gardiner is a wasteland of condominium glut. MAybe we could put the leslieville wal mart under the gardiner?
The Front St extension was another pro-car project. It had
nothing to do with removing the Gardiner (which should be done). Montreal also has its downtown hiway underground. We can do it too!
It: "a wasteland of condominium glut"
I could not agree more. Also, those condo towers have not been designed to relate to this "boulevard" that they're talking about building in place of the Gardiner. Many, if not all of them, have placed their parking entrances, ventilation equipment and dumpster areas on the side that now faces the Gardiner/Lakeshore.
It's possible to make something of this mess, but it sure as hell wouldn't be cheap. And Toronto is a city that likes to do things on the cheap.
Toronto is compelled to do things on the cheap, then. As long as that's the case, we should avoid grand acts like removing the Gardiner. As if the highway's emotional weight prevents people from crossing lakeshore.
"I don't think Toronto 'likes to do things on the cheap' at all."
Get thee to Chicago, friend!
So Toronto CHOOSES to be broke and unable to keep school pools open? We choose to underfund transit?
My main gripe with your statement is that we don't LIKE to be cheap. We HAVE to be, because we are short on money and spend money on frivolous things (golf for councillors, TTC station beutification, city-owned food carts for samosas, etc) and have nothing left for infrastructure.
Yes, point taken, Jerrold. True.
And to bring things full circle, I think those "new" TTC signs definitely do NOT look like the cheap option (unlike, say, those theatre-prop street signs the city started putting up a few years ago to replace the old ones). I think they will make the streetscape a little more interesting.
"My main gripe with your statement is that we don't LIKE to be cheap. We HAVE to be, because we are short on money and spend money on frivolous things (golf for councillors, TTC station beutification, city-owned food carts for samosas, etc) and have nothing left for infrastructure."
Next time I'm stuck in traffic on the Gardiner I'll remember that if only we didn't issue councillors golf passes (which has a marginal cost to the course of almost $0) or rent out food carts (which hasn't even been done), or install signs at new subway entrances (God forbid we spend a few dollars so someone can find where the entrance is) and etc... (is there any etc that amounts to something?), I would instead be driving through a miraculous tunnel with no traffic problems at all.
I like the TTC signs. Simple and to the point. With no type on it, I'd like to see Joe Clark find something wrong with it.
I think the signs should read "Subway" or the newcomers and tourists might think we don't have one. ;)
Jerrold, I don't think that the city really wastes money. These frivolous budget items you mentioned don't amount to much when compared to the road works budget or the operating cost of the TTC.
Not unless you consider how much less they could be spending on the TTC if they didn't have to pay them doctor's salaries*
*Slightly exaggerated, but you get my point.
"If Boston can do it, so can we."
"I'm not talking about nearly the scope to which Boston took the Big Dig. I'm just talking about the stretch of the Gardiner from about Yonge to the DVP."
Your first statement frames the Boston project as a success and implies that it should be a straight-forward process for Toronto to replicate that success.
Your second statement responds to a reader who pointed out that the Boston project went wildly over budget. You seem to imply that because the scale would be somewhat smaller, all of the problems of corruption, mismanagement, and budget over-runs would evaporate, which would be irrationally optimistic.
I've not suggesting that these tiny expenses alone would solve our financial crisis. All I'm saying is that the smaller ones add up. Check out the recent stories on wireless water meters (now being opposed by a union), and the parking mater fraud fiasco ($10million to fix a $1million problem?). Spending by the city could be much better handled, I think.
The stretch of the Gardiner from Yonge to the DVP is about 3.3km. The main stretch involved in the Big Dig was 5.6km. It took 16 years of construction, 20 years of previous planning, and over $14 billion. Even if the problems of the Big Dig are avoided, you'd still be looking at years of construction and several billion dollars.
As for hockey, the Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, and Ottawa Senators have all made it to the finals since 2004. The Canadiens finished first in the East this year, and the Canucks have two division titles in the last 4 seasons. The other 5 Canadian franchises don't seem to be "flopping around."
By "if Boston can do it, so can we" I simply meant that we too can take some of our elevated road underground. In my opinion, because the Boston project went over budget, was mismanaged, etc. (and was of much greater scope), doesn't mean that it's entire unfeasible to explore the option of tucking a portion of the Gardiner underground. Does it?
"doesn't mean that it's entire unfeasible to explore the option of tucking a portion of the Gardiner underground. Does it?"
It isn't unfeasible, but it is a waste of time for he Mayor and City staff to spend any time on it. Why? There. Is. No. Money. And there won't be. Does anyone honestly believe that if the money was suddenly available for this type of large project that burying the Gardiner would be the first one on the list? Hell, we have a $500 million backlog for our basic infrastructure. This whole thing is like drawing plans for a house that you can't (and will never be able to) afford while your current home is falling apart. Dreaming big may get headlines, but as my grandfather once said - wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first.
we cant compare TO to boston. bostons fabric surrounding their overpass was healthy + worthy of being de-highwayed.
The area surrounding the gardiner IS A CONDOMINIUM WASTELAND. IT DESERVES A WALMART AND NOTHING MORE. getting rid of the gardiner is a misconceived quick fix.
Not only that, and elevated highway makes sense if you want to access the area next to it easily.
It's important to note that the actual physical barrier to the waterfront - which no one ever mentions - are the railroad tracks.
I wish Mayor Miller and various people supporting this idea would start thinking...
Re: Dave
That's probably the best statement I've ever heard regarding the waterfront "barrier" and the Gardiner.
@Dave @ 2:11 pm
-------------
You mention the railway tracks as being the barrier.
The tracks had been at street level prior to the building of Union Station. They caused many accidents and injuries.
Union Station was designed to have a grade separation for the railways to avoid further mishaps with pedestrians and motorists.
Of course, in the 1920s when the grade separation was built the harbour was closer to the Esplanade and its alignment.
Look at how far inland is the Harbour Commission Building, yet at the time of its construction it was at the waterfront. The waterfront was industrial and the only public amenity was the ferry docks at the foot of Bay St.
So, it's a case of take your pick. Have the grade separation from the 1920s and the barrier to the lake or
have tracks at grade and the concomitant accidents and mishaps.
Sometimes, a little history brings perspective.
Do we really NEED new ttc signs? I personally think that it's a waste of money. The TTC has a hard enough time finding money to keep things running so why do they need to throw money into replacing sings that are just fine? i understand if they open new stations on the extension, but do they need to replace all the old ones because they dont look as pretty?
If you agree that replacing ttc signs is a waste of money lets all write Adam an email and let him know. chair@ttc.ca
Yes, the space around the Gardiner up to about Highway 7 is a wasteland. I say we just nuke it and start over. Better yet, let's have another Sx & TC opening night and nuke that place first when it fills capacity.
View More Events
Suggest an Event
Join the blogTO Flickr group
Join the blogTO YouTube Group
RSS
