Shabby Public Realm

[Tarantulal Downpours]

It's somewhat of an uphill battle. To effectuate change the public has to demand it so that civic leaders and private developers respond. Otherwise, it's simply not in their interest.

In others words I'm not sure just who is going to advocate for these changes: 1) the vast general public simply doesn't care or take pride in these things the way they do in other cities and 2) in the vacuum of this public apathy civic spending has been politicized and co-opted by influential, vocal interest groups that simply do not care about ugly streetscapes, and who through propaganda make it a matter of questionable 'ethics/priorities' if you do to the point where it involves money (volunteer all you want but don't expect funding while there is a homeless person on the street).

... and is this really all that different from other civic portfolios? Transit and infrastructure have also been ignored for decades because nobody wanted to spend the money or take responsibility for spending it, and consequently nothing much was done for many years. Once again, the public didn't care and there were more politically expedient ways to direct funds. Now all of a sudden (so to speak) we seem to care a great deal about mass transit, as we all know.

At the end of the day who's to say what it will take to change the public attitude towards the public realm? In fact, as has already been demonstrated by Grimace and others, we are starting to see some change. Perhaps as the demographics of downtown change as driven by mass development and the condo boom we are seeing a change in expectations that will only continue to generate momentum. More and more people want to live downtown but want to live in relatively clean, welcoming and uplifting environments. At some point the expectations and influence of this growing demographic will begin to challenge other political forces.

I basically agree with everything you've mentioned in this thread. Have you ever considered becoming a city councillor?

 

[yin_yang]

after a decade of neglect, i feel that miller (?) really brought the streetscape forward a notch. new lights. yonge/eg and north from there looks amazing now. yonge street downtown is ok. new parks.

still no vision, but at least some gems thrown in there. whatever. another thing that someone will work on.

 

[RC8]

I do think that the decades of neglect before the Miller era make the current situation look a lot worse than it is.

Right now we are looking at Queens Quay revitalisation, a West Don Lands neighbourhood with well designed public realm, S. Commons, lakefront promenade all along the central waterfront (work ongoing by the silos for instance), John street revitalisation, Dundas West revitalisation, etc.

Recently we saw the Junction re-done, as well as Bloor and Roncesvalles.

Toronto has clearly been tackling the public realm issue over the past decade. We just started off from a really low point.

 

[Tarantulal Downpours]

I do think that the decades of neglect before the Miller era make the current situation look a lot worse than it is.

Right now we are looking at Queens Quay revitalisation, a West Don Lands neighbourhood with well designed public realm, S. Commons, lakefront promenade all along the central waterfront (work ongoing by the silos for instance), John street revitalisation, Dundas West revitalisation, etc.

Recently we saw the Junction re-done, as well as Bloor and Roncesvalles.

Toronto has clearly been tackling the public realm issue over the past decade. We just started off from a really low point.

What about North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke? What improvements have they seen?

 

[UrbanFervour]

What about North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke? What improvements have they seen?

They don't really have "public realms" do they? Aren't they mostly sprawling, "geography of nowhere" bedroom communities, for the most part, where people don't have to engage with the public? Isn't that the point of those places?

 

[Tarantulal Downpours]

They don't really have "public realms" do they? Aren't they mostly sprawling, "geography of nowhere" bedroom communities, for the most part, where people don't have to engage with the public? Isn't that the point of those places?

They don't have public realms? What in your mind compromises the public realm? Is Don Mills in the middle of nowhere? It's right in the middle of the city.

 

[Paleo]

What about North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke? What improvements have they seen?

If the local papers are any indication, I have only read about NIMBY opposition to public realm improvements out in the outer 416.

 

[taal]

Don Mills ? Seriously ?

If you want to talk about suburbs you talk about NYCC, or SCC, or about ECC (far out on Bloor). So the outskirts of Toronto definitely have similar areas that are ripe for improvement.

I don't have any hopes for the John street revitalization, the report makes it so clear that there is no funding, there is some talk about how funding can be established but basically it's not going to happen in the near future. Same for Yonge.

 

[jayjoe40]

Vocal interest groups that simply do not care about ugly streetscapes, and who through propaganda make it a matter of questionable 'ethics/priorities' if you do to the point where it involves money (volunteer all you want but don't expect funding while there is a homeless person on the street).

 

[Tarantulal Downpours]

If the local papers are any indication, I have only read about NIMBY opposition to public realm improvements out in the outer 416.

Perhaps with intensification, but I don't think people in North York would be against beautifying streetscapes. Victoria Park was improved somewhat with the repaving of the road, sidewalks and addition of sidewalks planters for instance; though it could have been much better.

Don Mills ? Seriously ?

If you want to talk about suburbs you talk about NYCC, or SCC, or about ECC (far out on Bloor).

Do I?

Vocal interest groups that simply do not care about ugly streetscapes, and who through propaganda make it a matter of questionable 'ethics/priorities' if you do to the point where it involves money (volunteer all you want but don't expect funding while there is a homeless person on the street).

If the city stopped blowing money on social programs that never amend the problems they're used to address, we'd have plenty a heck of a lot more money to spend on the public realm, transit, etc. I can't figure out this city's obsession with handing over money to the poor. Do the receivers of government cheques also ask their parents to support them? If my mentally ill, poor best friend can support himself without government aid, then why can't anyone else?

Here are some wise words from Margaret Thatcher:

I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation and it is, I think, one of the tragedies in which many of the benefits we give, which were meant to reassure people that if they were sick or ill there was a safety net and there was help, that many of the benefits which were meant to help people who were unfortunate--"It is alright. We joined together and we have these insurance schemes to look after it." That was the objective, but somehow there are some people who have been manipulating the system and so some of those help and benefits that were meant to say to people: "All right, if you cannot get a job, you shall have a basic standard of living!" but when people come and say: "But what is the point of working? I can get as much on the dole!" You say: "Look. It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!"

 

[RichA]

2-3% of the population are psychologically unemployable

"Look. It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!"

They will have to always be paid for, or you could let them starve, or walk from door to door, asking for food like in the Depression. However, a means test and public works projects for those who are clearly able-bodied should be implemented. The Tories called it "work fair" and it was a good idea. The few who are capable of working will be able to perhaps get back on their feet. But there will always be those who are too mentally ill to function in society. They can't be left to stave or just die in the streets.

 

[Tarantulal Downpours]

They will have to always be paid for, or you could let them starve, or walk from door to door, asking for food like in the Depression. However, a means test and public works projects for those who are clearly able-bodied should be implemented. The Tories called it "work fair" and it was a good idea. The few who are capable of working will be able to perhaps get back on their feet. But there will always be those who are too mentally ill to function in society. They can't be left to stave or just die in the streets.

Yes, there are certain people who do actually need assistance, but if a person isn't a vegetable then there really is no excuse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ALOI63X_CE Skip to :20

 

[RichA]

Wait for Chinese immigration to create a majority of them

Yes, there are certain people who do actually need assistance, but if a person isn't a vegetable then there really is no excuse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ALOI63X_CE Skip to :20

No racism intended, but if some of the layabouts in Toronto had to survive in say, Hong Kong, they'd starve. As more non-Europeans come to Canada and the political and social environment changes, people who are generational welfare recipients will likely be forced to change their behaviour.

 

[freshcutgrass]

What about North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke?

Oh, you mean the people who thought Toronto would be better with Rob Ford as mayor?

For them, public realm improvements is just code for "downtown elites", and imply undesirable accessories like "women's shelters".

Is Don Mills in the middle of nowhere?

Ah...Don Mills...the perfectly planned post-war utopia. What improvements could it possibly need?

 

[adma]

Ah...Don Mills...the perfectly planned post-war utopia. What improvements could it possibly need?

Restoration and retention of whatever remains of its "post-war utopia" heyday? (i.e. turning the back on McMansion teardowns or misguided EIFS-ing and the like)