Buenos Aires - Cliché Bitching About Toronto Thread

[Tewder]

Also, there are different maintenance issues in warm weather climes. The storms can be brutal, and so can the constant blinding sun... and as far as weather goes do Chicago or NYC have it much better than Toronto, if at all? It really all boils down to maintenance, which must be ongoing anywhere.

 

[Skeezix]

^
The capitals of all the scandinavian countries deal with the same type of weather conditions we do in Toronto; but they look amazing. So I don't think it's an issue of climate, but one of lack of civic culture and lack pride in the built and urban environments, and of course, misplaced priorities. Otherwise, why in the world, our downtown streets (outside of the financial district, that is) still have the leaning wooden posts with all the utility wires running overhead? It is an EMBARRASSMENT, the city looks like a wild west frontier town, for god's sake!

To be fair to us, a lot of European cities buried their utility wires when they had the crap bombed out of them during WWII. But that doesn't, of course, explain places like Oslo and Stockholm, etc. etc. that also managed to bury their wiring.

 

[BobBob]

I feel that Toronto is indeed best understood as a "wild west frontier town", and I don't mean that in any demeaning way. It's been a chaotically growing city bursting with new settlers trying to make ends meet since the very beginning. In the 19th century, it was surrounded by favela-like improvised shanties built on zero infrastructure (mud roads, no sewage) which were only legalized and incorporated into the city later. In the 20th century, that was regulated and organized somewhat better, but this "frontier boomtown" culture persisted underneath the surface, along with the pace and nature of its growth. Toronto is much different from almost every other large North American (not to mention European) city in that sense, and that's what makes it unique. It's a huge, wealthy, highly developed, ever-expanding shanty town.

 

[Redroom Studios]

yes, perhaps with a longer history and increased density things will slowly improve. Places in Europe always blow me away because every square inch seems to be manicured, well planned and built to a high standard. Another difference that comes to mind is that we have more of that independant American style "every man for himself" attitude where developers are marketing and selling projects that will maximize their own profit and disregard what their building brings to the community. I think the more socialist outlook of Europe seems to put community concerns first and put more energy into maintaining a continuity of style. But that doesnt explain why so many American cities appear nicer than Toronto. My thoughts on that after spending some extensive time in California is that the Americans tend to segregate their populations much more so that all their seedy looking areas are consolidated and out of sight to the average tourist. As long as you dont go off the beaten path, much of California looks like some kind of utopia. The areas they have on display are usually beautifully manicured. But here in Canada, we dont segregate our communities so much, everyone is more equal to begin with and it is much more common for people of various income levels to live side by side. I think there is something in that mentality as well as the physical reality of it that contributes to the poor aesthetics of Toronto (and Ontario cities in general). This was just off the top of my head and so I hope that people can grasp my point. I'm sure there may be counter arguments but what I'm describing here is my own intuition based on anecdotal observations...

 

[pman]

To be fair to us, a lot of European cities buried their utility wires when they had the crap bombed out of them during WWII. But that doesn't, of course, explain places like Oslo and Stockholm, etc. etc. that also managed to bury their wiring.

For that matter, even Montreal buries the wires along its major streets. Along with Boston, New York, Chicago, Sydney and Melbourne, to name some non-European cities. What kills me is that so many of the few Torontonians who notice this problem take the urban hipster-dufus pose that our unbelievably hick overhead hydro infrastructure somehow gives us a cool edginess. When in reality it just makes Toronto look sad and shabby.

 

[Roy G Biv]

For that matter, even Montreal buries the wires along its major streets. Along with Boston, New York, Chicago, Sydney and Melbourne, to name some non-European cities. What kills me is that so many of the few Torontonians who notice this problem take the urban hipster-dufus pose that our unbelievably hick overhead hydro infrastructure somehow gives us a cool edginess. When in reality it just makes Toronto look sad and shabby.

I had a friend try to tell me that this kind of fencing "works" in parks and other prominent places:

We were standing in front of the tennis courts and Trinity-Bellwoods...

 

[pman]

I had a friend try to tell me that this kind of fencing "works" in parks and other prominent places:

We were standing in front of the tennis courts and Trinity-Bellwoods...

I wonder if part of the problem is that no Toronto street, sidewalk or other public space has one person responsible for its overall design, maintenance and cleanliness.

I have the sense that one department repaves the sidewalk according to design criteria established in the 1950's. Then Toronto Water, Enbridge, Bell and Rogers almost immediately do various utility cuts with cheap temporary patches that seriously degrade with one freeze-thaw cycle. Then Toronto Hydro throws in a couple of new poles, sometimes right in the middle of the sidewalk. But they don't remove the old and now useless poles. Then whatever trees were planted along the sidewalk die and their 60's era raised concrete planters become receptacles for uncollected trash.

Am I right to suspect that no one department or person at City Hall is responsible for planning and coordinating this work, or for ensuring that the cr*p that does get built is properly maintained? Has anyone at City Hall even tried to learn lessons from other cities on the design and maintenance of the public realm?

 

[grey]

I think responsibility for streetscape design would fall under the Planning Department in collaboration with local BIAs (where they exist).

David Miller toured Europe and came back with all sorts of inspiration, but from what I understand, the Planning Department was/is critically underfunded and understaffed, and I can't imagine the situation will improve under the control of an anti-progress, anti-planning government. This state of affairs is extremely discouraging considering that the city is in the midst of an enormous growth phase.

 

[pman]

Dundas

I think responsibility for streetscape design would fall under the Planning Department in collaboration with local BIAs (where they exist).

David Miller toured Europe and came back with all sorts of inspiration, but from what I understand, the Planning Department was/is critically underfunded and understaffed, and I can't imagine the situation will improve under the control of an anti-progress, anti-planning government. This state of affairs is extremely discouraging considering that the city is in the midst of an enormous growth phase.

Maybe I'm flogging a dead horse, but Dundas is a good example of everything that's wrong with our streetscapes. Dundas west of Bathurst was dug down to the dirt, along with the sidewalks. Utilities (water? gas?) were upgraded. Streetcar tracks replaced. They're finishing up the complete rebuild of the sidewalks and street. But they kept the wooden hydro poles with the overhead wires. If the city is going to completely dig up the pavement to the level of dirt, why can't they bury the wires while they're at it, and install some decent light standards? The end result will have no potholes, which I guess is an improvement, but it will still be monumentally ugly.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Deep down, I think that Toronto's public realm suffers from the fact that the people who have a stake in the kinds of things that mar our streetscape (like all the hydro poles, cheap lighting, patchy sidewalks, etc.) are mostly engineers who value efficiency over aesthetics. In fact, I'd be inclined to believe that many of the people who make decisions, or the "company culture" in those organizations does not even recognize aesthetic concerns or the built realm at all. If you have to build a garbage-can sized hydro transformer on a telephone pole, so be it - that's how it's always been done, and that's what they know how to build.

Toronto also has a bad habit of cheapening out on what could be the most critical - but not necesarilly the most expensive - element in a design feature. The Bloor street makeover is a good example of this. Millions of dollars were spent on granite paving, but I don't think it would have cost all that much to install decorative light standards. Instead, we have this world class sidewalk that is pretty much unrivalled anywhere else in North America completely wasted by MTO-spec, sodium vapour highway lighting. The effect is the same as wearing hobo sneakers with an Armani suit. You spent $2,000, but if you would have spent another $200 on nice leather shoes you wouldn't look like an idiot.

 

[grey]

Maybe I'm flogging a dead horse, but Dundas is a good example of everything that's wrong with our streetscapes. Dundas west of Bathurst was dug down to the dirt, along with the sidewalks. Utilities (water? gas?) were upgraded. Streetcar tracks replaced. They're finishing up the complete rebuild of the sidewalks and street. But they kept the wooden hydro poles with the overhead wires. If the city is going to completely dig up the pavement to the level of dirt, why can't they bury the wires while they're at it, and install some decent light standards? The end result will have no potholes, which I guess is an improvement, but it will still be monumentally ugly.

Yup, seems to be too much to ask for City agencies to coordinate tasks.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

I have a friend who works for the city whose job it is to help coordinate many utilities and other companies on the projects discussed above. To hear him describe it, it's the city that's overworked and understaffed, and his description of the kinds of people he has to deal with are, to say the least, not flattering. He used the term "suburban hicks" as virtually everyone he deals with, from senior people in the city's transportation department, through to liaison staff with Enbridge, Toronto Hydro, Aecon, etc. all live well outside the city, and could not give a rat's ass about the aesthetic concerns being discussed here.

And did anyone catch Toronto Hydro's self-congratulatory agit-prop section in the Star? I thought it was a parody, to be honest. Toronto Hydro: 100 years of making Toronto look like other cities from 100 years ago.

 

[adma]

And did anyone catch Toronto Hydro's self-congratulatory agit-prop section in the Star? I thought it was a parody, to be honest. Toronto Hydro: 100 years of making Toronto look like other cities from 100 years ago.

Did have a good Chris Hume piece on substations etc, though.

 

[taal]

I have a friend who works for the city whose job it is to help coordinate many utilities and other companies on the projects discussed above. To hear him describe it, it's the city that's overworked and understaffed, and his description of the kinds of people he has to deal with are, to say the least, not flattering. He used the term "suburban hicks" as virtually everyone he deals with, from senior people in the city's transportation department, through to liaison staff with Enbridge, Toronto Hydro, Aecon, etc. all live well outside the city, and could not give a rat's ass about the aesthetic concerns being discussed here.

And did anyone catch Toronto Hydro's self-congratulatory agit-prop section in the Star? I thought it was a parody, to be honest. Toronto Hydro: 100 years of making Toronto look like other cities from 100 years ago.

I get this, but I doubt this is a Toronto only issue ... it probably applies to a good chunck of other cities. It's well known that all cities are understaffed and underpaid ... in most of these cases a good majority of the workforce may indeed live outside the city.
I have friends who work for the city of vancouver and it's exactly the same there (in terms of where they majority live) ... so that can't be it alone ....

 

[Tewder]

Yes this probably happens elsewhere to a certain degree, but most cities do still maintain their commercial/business centres and urban cores. People demand it. The bigger question here is why Torontonians seem to not care? How many people must pass by those fountains on University Avenue daily and yet not bother to email, text or call somebody to complain? Our civic leaders get away with crap here that people just wouldn't stand for elsewhere. It's a shame.