Yonge Street, North York Streetscape Improvements

[pman]

This is a good example of the divide between the old City and boroughs. The latter's elected representatives mostly want to maintain a 1950's auto-centric form, while the former's councillors generally seem to want something more urban. As a downtown resident, I have no interest in telling people in North York and Etobicoke how to run their suburbs. At the same time, I cringe at the thought of people like Mamolitti, Pasternak, Shiner, Holyday and de Baeremaeker having anything to do with my city. We need to acknowledge that amalgamation guarantees that nobody gets the city they want and put an end to this mega city mess. I know, the TTC...but could it be any worse if it were uploaded to a provincial agency than it is under Council's brain trust?

 

[amnesiajune]

We need to acknowledge that amalgamation guarantees that nobody gets the city they want and put an end to this mega city mess.

Amalgamation is the low-information constituent's boogeyman - nearly every issue that people think of when they complain about amalgamation is something that was already under the domain of Metro Council, not the individual municipalities. This is one of those things - neither Toronto nor any of the surrounding municipalities would've had the power to reconfigure major roads - those were all part of the Metro roads department.

 

[constructo]

Few people living and working in that area are even aware of the proposed plan to reduce Yonge from 6 lanes to 4. Here's the latest article.

North York bike lane proposal absurd: Councillor | LEVY | Toronto & GTA | News |

 

[constructo]

North York bike lane proposal absurd: Councillor | LEVY | Toronto & GTA | News |

Here's the link for the above article.

 

[pman]

Amalgamation is the low-information constituent's boogeyman - nearly every issue that people think of when they complain about amalgamation is something that was already under the domain of Metro Council, not the individual municipalities. This is one of those things - neither Toronto nor any of the surrounding municipalities would've had the power to reconfigure major roads - those were all part of the Metro roads department.

I'm not suggesting reinstating Metro. Sydney runs just fine with a large number of smaller municipalities and no metro-level government. They're light years ahead of us on transit and road infrastructure, which is under state (i.e. provincial) control. London too, for that matter - their boroughs don't have any say in TFL planning or operations. I'd suggest that the true low-information position is Toronto's inability to learn anything from vastly more successful cities, and to assume that the only alternative to amalgamation would be a return to our pre-Harris municipal structure.

 

[44 North]

Amalgamation is the low-information constituent's boogeyman - nearly every issue that people think of when they complain about amalgamation is something that was already under the domain of Metro Council, not the individual municipalities. This is one of those things - neither Toronto nor any of the surrounding municipalities would've had the power to reconfigure major roads - those were all part of the Metro roads department.

Kinda rich that you of all people are talking about low-information boogeymen. Haven't I seen you blame just about every major problem on downtown elites ("white" ones to be exact)? Transportation crisis, housing crisis, no subways crisscrossing the GTA, no DRL... you know the real cause, apparently.

 

[amnesiajune]

Haven't I seen you blame just about every major problem on downtown elites ("white" ones to be exact)?

If the Scarborough subway/LRT debate is "every problem", and having the capacity to understand other people's views is personally blaming, then sure.

 

[nfitz]

If the Scarborough subway/LRT debate is "every problem", and having the capacity to understand other people's views is personally blaming, then sure.

Wait, what did I miss. You are blaming white people for the disaster of building the $4 billion subway station? Did I miss something? Which thread was this? I assume this is some kind of inside joke, as obviously skin colour has nothing to do with this.

 

[pman]

If the Scarborough subway/LRT debate is "every problem", and having the capacity to understand other people's views is personally blaming, then sure.

While we may understand conflicting views, it doesn't mean they can be reconciled with each other. For example, the Gardiner East rebuild will cost a fortune, move very few people and impair development of the east port lands. It was opposed by most of the councillors representing nearby wards. But people like Pasternak and Minnan-Wong, representing wards nowhere near the Gardiner, pushed it through. I shudder to think how Council's suburban majority will eviscerate the proposal to improve streetcar mobility on King, even though TTC users on that street outnumber car passengers by about three to one. Even though taking a King (or Queen) streetcar is far too often a misery of short turns, bunching, breakdowns and delays. But all we get from suburban councillors is ranting about the war on the car. And suburbanites run the risk of being subjected to the horrors of bike lanes on north Yonge, or losing precious traffic lanes for a Finch West LRT. They can block the former since it's ultimately a Council decision whatever the planning department wants, but the latter will be imposed by the province via Metrolinx. A separate suburban municipality might have had a sufficiently unified voice to stop Finch West.

I don't think the problem is understanding the other view. Even cretins like Holyday and Mamolitti can be expected to understand that the residents of the core want a different kind of city from their constituents. The problem is that they simply don't care.

I'm not trying to be anti-suburb, though it's pretty clear that the path to a Council seat in the former boroughs is to demonize residents of the core. In fact, I'd be happy if people in Scarborough, North York and Etobicoke got the auto-centric boroughs they seem to want, provided they had absolutely no power to determine what happens in the former City. Surely this would be a win for everyone.

 

[rbt]

I don't think the problem is understanding the other view. Even cretins like Holyday and Mamolitti can be expected to understand that the residents of the core want a different kind of city from their constituents. The problem is that they simply don't care.

One of the hazards of a central employment area is that people from distances far away have very strong opinions over how it functions for 10 hours a day (the period they're in that area).

Heck, traffic around downtown is something that 90% of Ontarian's who reliably vote have a strong opinion on because nearly everybody has gone to a baseball/hockey game, theatre night, etc. Only a small fraction outside the GTA have taken a GO train, but they've all sat on the DVP or Gardiner for far longer than they feel was necessary.

 

[44 North]

Wait, what did I miss. You are blaming white people for the disaster of building the $4 billion subway station? Did I miss something? Which thread was this? I assume this is some kind of inside joke, as obviously skin colour has nothing to do with this.

Didn't miss much. Just calling out someone's use of 'low info boogeymen' that can be found in threads like Line 3 and RL.

 

[pipolchap]

On street parking reduces the street to 2 lanes anyway most of the time, about 90% of the week.

One of the complaints raised was 100's of on street parking will disappear. What they fail to mention is over 15,000 spots remain available in the area. Not counting the on street ones, which number about 300.

 

[amnesiajune]

Wait, what did I miss. You are blaming white people for the disaster of building the $4 billion subway station?

Pointing out that northeast Scarborough has a lot of visible minorities and city council doesn't is apparently "blaming white people".

 

[ADRM]

On street parking reduces the street to 2 lanes anyway most of the time, about 90% of the week.

One of the complaints raised was 100's of on street parking will disappear. What they fail to mention is over 15,000 spots remain available in the area. Not counting the on street ones, which number about 300.

It's kind of remarkable how many consequential land-use debates in this city revolve around a non-existent parking problem. The real low-information boogeymen are the ones who think there's not enough parking in this city.

 

[salsa]

It's kind of remarkable how many consequential land-use debates in this city revolve around a non-existent parking problem. The real low-information boogeymen are the ones who think there's not enough parking in this city.

Meanwhile I hear there is a very spiffy underground train on Yonge Street. Can anyone confirm?