City
The Fort York Bridge is a no-go
Despite the efforts of Councillor Mike Layton and what appeared to be solid public support, City Council voted earlier today to cancel the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. Well, in fact, debate regarding the future of the bridge itself never even made it to council — insofar as the initial decision to nix the bridge came from the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, today's motion to bring it before council for further debate required a two thirds victory. The vote on the motion came in at 22-23.
Due to factors related to construction over the railway tracks and the need to revisit the Environmental Assesment for a new bridge — which pretty much everyone agrees needs to be built — it's likely that it'll be at least five years before a new project takes shape. That's disappointing in a number of ways for supporters of the bridge, not the least of which because the initial completion was planned to correspond with the bicentenary celebrations of the war of 1812.
Congratulations on choosing mediocrity, Toronto.
Update (4:30 p.m.)
Here's how the vote broke down.
Discussion
65 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
What a smarmy, easy thing to say from someone who obviously wants everything while sacrificing nothing.
At the same time, however, fuck David Miller and his cohort for being in power for many years and not actually getting enough proper infrastructure projects started and completed or at least built to the point where cancellation was not an option. Had he been more aggressive on Transit City, on the Fort York bridge, on Waterfront, etc., there'd be far less low-hanging fruit for Ford to pluck off in his continued "fuck y'all" message to those who choose to live IN the city rather than just work here.
When someone like David Shiner says "We can't afford it," I want to tell him, "It's not your money!" If the City collects property taxes from the condo residents, then the City is obliged to make the investments necessary to create a functional neighborhood. Instead, the City has chosen to abandon the condo residents to an isolated, underserviced ghetto.
Mike Layton should propose that condo residents receive a property tax rebate until the City finally provides the high-quality public spaces, connections and amenities the residents deserve and have been paying for.
Still, too bad the Ford is happy to have blown the
What a smarmy, easy thing to say from someone who obviously wants everything while sacrificing nothing.
---------------------------------
Totally agree. Thankfully the pinhead(Derek)is not in charge of taxpayers money and cant use it as his personal bank account. we've already been through his kind of thinking which is why we are broke and cant pay for nice things .
- "This is really needed and would improve our city!" "Nahh, it only serves one small part of the community."
- "This project would be great at improving livability!" "Nahh, we can't agree if it should be big or small so let's not build it."
...
"Hey, why does that other city have all those fancy things that we don't have?"
(Roll over much, Jaye??)
So instead in five years it will get a corrugated steel & concrete bridge with chain-link cage walls?
Or was it a reference to Mike Layton's crowd of 20 condo dwellers and hand full of developers?
The miniscule miniscule fraction** of that to cover the cost overrun of the Fort York bridge (which was alreayd budgeted for, in any case) isn't about "respect for taxpayers". It's about punishing Adam Vaughn and downtown elistists.
*Make no mistake about it, even under some dubious P3 scheme or tax increment financing, the city will loose out on future revenue if the Scarborough subway ever gets built, which means we'll all have to chip in more to maintain the level of services appropriate for a city our size.
** The $5 million overrun amounts to one twelfth of the canceled VRT, so by saving $60 a year we'll get fugly infrastructure instead of inspiring infrastructure. Yay.
I'm somewhat more pissed about the City repealing it's own harmonized zoning by-law today. Not so much because the by-law was repealed, as it was somewhat of a minefield, but how incompetently it's been handled over the past few years to begin with. My understanding is this decision cost the taxpayer far more than the cancellation of the bridge.
No, we're broke because Mayor Gravy Train fucked the city in a different way before finding a whole mess of sub-fuckings to partake in.
This city is a disaster. I'm close to giving up on it. Let the suburban inbreds squabble over pennies of property tax and let's go build a real city where they actually want to live in one.
This council sickens me.
And now this. Fort York was the founding site of Toronto. AND the funds for the bridge were already allocated (and the cost overruns were being allotted - correct me if I'm wrong). We're dealing with a group of people that think it's too expensive to devote quality design and attention to such a site. I'm telling you guys. We need to de-amalgamate (I'm with @andrewS).
We progressive's need to stop deluding ourselves that we'll be able to convince these people with such arguments about economics, history, society, or even the point of progress (why work so hard if we refuse to celebrate our own achievements). But this is where the rubber hits the road. I say we start organizing a progressive block and build support through to the next election. Now, who's willing to work towards that.
- http://www.torontolife.com/features/space-man
- http://bit.ly/4QwpOP
it's quite ridiculous how one governments policies (the harris pc's) have had such a profound effect on the city/province for so long. I'm afraid the fords steamrolling of policies will have the same long lasting repercussions - if not more.
rip toronto.
They won't because lets get real here. large part of Ford supporters are home owners, that own at least one car, and don't really use many city services. They don't use city day care, they don't use city youth drop in centres like neighbours next door program, pools, transit, parks, and so on. As long as they can get their kids ice time, property taxes stay low, and the roads are fixed they are happy. What else do they need from the city, seriously? This is why they are tired of rising taxes, when they don't use any programs. This is how this city will vote from now on, when the go into the ballot box they are going to be voting from their wallets, and nothing else. Why would they care about the waterfront, when they go to cottage every weekend? Seriously many especially where i live in Etobicoke avoid downtown like the plaque, especially the crowd that is 40 plus in age, and they are the ones that actually get and vote every election.
remember: we had a SURPLUS before ford came along.
Get your head out of your ideological ass and think - don't react - think.
You just don't get it, do you? The city is, by all definitions, bankrupt. Any projects that get approved from here on in will have to have proven benefits to a lot of people, not just a few downtown crack heads.
Seriously, did you not see how much BIXI just got bailed out in Montreal. You really want to use BIXI and tourism as a reason to build that silly bridge? Why can't the cyclists wait for a widened and improved Bathurst Bridge like the rest of us? That bridge is going to fall down soon enough unless replaced. Why not just add a precious bicycle lane to THAT?
It is because previous Councils were unable to say no to the aggressive tactics of certain interest groups that we are in this friggin' mess.
It's not working in Liberty Village, it's not working in Bathurst/Lakeshore, Concorde Place, and it certainly won't happen in the St. Lawrence Market area.
(You don't think all those new car dealerships have not done their market research?)
You guys never disappoint in giving me my morning laugh.
TORONTO IS NOT BANKRUPT.
(I used caps lock because I heard that works better on Ford supporters)
but is the bridge really needed?
It starts on the south side of Wellington just under Stanley park and the other side is in the park just West of Fort York, right? Why not just walk across the bridge on Strachan? There's even stairs form the bridge into the park, so you don't have any backtracking to do.
I understand that it would help make this area a little more walkable, but it's only a 10 minute walk at the moment. Plus anyone coming from West of Strachan or East of Bathurst could just cross at those bridges.
I'm all for having a walkable city, but there are other places where a bridge would make more sense - like at King/Sudbury into the Liberty Village plaza.
To go back to your original question, no, the bridge isn't strictly necessary. It'll be nice to have (when it's ultimately built, since it's on hold now, right). The thing that makes it awkward is that money has already gone into the planning that will be written off; the bridge could have been built with the current design but since everything will have to wait until Metrolinx and GO are done with their next set of projects, any redesign will be costly.
The ray of hope for me is that other projects will make the area more accessible: grade separation at Strachan (maybe a walkway under that, like at Spadina?), the Portland St extension, the 'bridge to Metro', Bathurst St bridge rehab, new Bathurst/Fort York intersection ...
He knows the bridge is over-budget before a shovel could be put in the ground. Read his previous posts on the subject. He knows staff supports a re-do. He knows the bridge is not the end of the world.
His troll-like quips are just to inflame the comments section.
This blog is ridiculous, divisive and inflammatory and its Derek Flack's fault.
The City itself is around $2.5 BILLION dollars (that's 9 zeroes for the mathematically challenged) in debt. That's just Toronto. That's not including all the (as yet) unfunded pet projects that were already approved. Do you want to bet what the upcoming games are going to ACTUALLY cost the city? Or the $40M BIXI will be asking for in a couple years, like in Montreal? Ontario Hydro (for which we are all responsible has $20.1 BILLION in 'stranded debt.' (Love that term - they are actually $43 BILLION in REAL debt, but an accounting flip of the column makes it half.) Then there's Ottawa's more than half a TRILLION dollars in debt, and Ontario's remaining debt.... I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
Or, more likely you don't. You think money grows on trees.
@ Bob - Oh, poor baby - you don't want people who don't think like you to play in YOUR sandbox. Why don't you leave, then?