by

East Waterfront Update

Last night, I dropped by the first Public Forum for the EA now in progress for the Eastern Waterfront transit proposals.  There are three study areas:  East Bayfront covers the area roughly to Parliament Street, West Donlands looks at the slice from Parliament to the River up to King, and the Port Lands covers everything east of the river.  Although there will be separate studies, the work is co-ordinated, and some of the public participation is consolidated to avoid duplication of effort.

At this point, the EA is only at the Terms of Reference stage.  This part can be immensely frustrating because nobody actually designs anything, they only talk about what the ground rules will be when they actually start to work.  If you get these wrong, you may find yourself with a subway where you expected a pleasant streetcar ride, or an expressway where you expected a civilized pedestrian oasis. Continue reading →

by

A Question of Density, Indeed

My thanks to Greg Mckhool for reminding me that I needed to write something about this:

There is a misleading comment in the Dr. Gridlock column of today’s (Apr. 3) Globe and Mail by the TTC’s Tom Middlebrook that needs to be highlighted.

He tries to justify extending the subway to Vaughan’s “field of dreams” by saying that Toronto’s downtown didn’t look like it does today when the Yonge subway was built.  Technically that’s true, but there certainly was a downtown there, and transit ridership along Yonge was substantial. He should know better…

You can find Jeff Gray’s column (Dr. Gridlock) here. Continue reading →

by

Density and Subway Construction

Two recent press items caught my eye:

  • In today’s Globe & Mail, we have an article about residents of Sheppard Avenue who are astounded to find that high density, high rise development is coming to their neighbourhoods.  This development is a direct consequence of the Sheppard Subway line and, indeed, that line’s existence was cited by the Ontario Municipal Board as a reason that the developments should be approved.  Click here.
  • In Thursday’s Metro, Ed Drass reports rather astounding, if sensible, statements attributed to Rick Ducharme, Chief General Manager of the TTC.  Ducharme feels that if the Spadina extension is going to be like Sheppard, without significant, high density development, then it should not be built.  Click here.

Continue reading →

by

Public Spaces, Private Investment

CBC’s Metro Morning is running a series this week on the transformation of public space in Chicago by privately funded improvements.  Some flavour of the series is on their website here.

Why can’t we do this sort of thing in Toronto?  There is much hand wringing and bemoaning the lack of civic pride and good works that would make a truly Beautiful City.  Council rejects proposals of private funding for the renovation of Nathan Philips Square.  What are we thinking?

Well, take a good look at the Chicago photos on the CBC site.  You will notice, or rather not notice, something that is far too common here in Toronto:  advertising.

You can’t move in public spaces these days for advertising, and nothing gets built without a whacking great corporate logo on it.  What is the point of art and architecture when the dominant visual is whatever piece of dreck XYZ corporation is trying to sell this week?

If the private sector is really interested in making Toronto a better place, it will give us good, friendly spaces, impressive where that is appropriate, subtle, amusing and just refreshing where that’s what is needed.  A little plaque somewhere will tell us something about XYZ.

Nathan Phillips Square looks good without 10-storey-high neon advertising, thank you.