News   Aug 23, 2024
 1.1K     0 
News   Aug 23, 2024
 1.8K     4 
News   Aug 23, 2024
 539     0 

Star: How downtown slew the 'beast' (Spadina Expressway)

wyliepoon

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
2,011
Reaction score
3
http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/609796

CITY OF THE PEOPLE: SPADINA EXPRESSWAY
TheStar.com | GTA | How downtown slew the 'beast'
How downtown slew the 'beast'

Compiled by Star Library

Sources: Media files, Sherwood Park Residents' Association, City of Toronto Archives
Residents rose up, fought to have a say in plans for their city
Mar 28, 2009 04:30 AM

Noor Javed
STAFF REPORTER

To mark Toronto's 175th birthday, the Saturday Star is presenting turning points in the city's history. Those who say Torontonians are passive only need to look at the battles citizens have waged against the city, politicians and developers to have a say in how their neighbourhoods are shaped.

They stopped a highway.

They rallied, they lobbied and used their democratic power to vote in the change they desired. And in a few years, residents of downtown Toronto derailed a transportation plan that would have changed the face of their city.

According to Metro Toronto's official 1966 transportation plan, the Spadina Expressway was to run through Forest Hill, graze the outskirts of Casa Loma, and divide the Annex – serving as a passage way between North York and downtown Toronto.

Residents were told they would have the best of both worlds when it was built: the attractions of the city, with the accessibility of a suburb. It was a persuasive sales pitch, but downtown residents didn't buy it.

The transportation plan was created over two decades and politicians and city planners considered it the blueprint for urban regeneration in Toronto.

Spurred by the growth of Toronto's first suburb, Don Mills, and the reality that the city was growing, planners drew an extensive network of criss-crossing streets, inner-city expressways, and highways along the perimeter to make the city core more accessible from the suburbs.

"This just was just the beginning of a bigger plan," said Councillor Adam Vaughan (Trinity-Spadina), whose father, Colin, was a leader in the Stop Spadina movement.

That plan would eventually include the Don Valley Parkway, Gardiner Expressway and a network of highways that were never built.

"There was going to be six inner-city expressways (that) would plunge into the middle of the city and ring the downtown core," Vaughan said. "But to build that, you had to build the spine of the beast, and that was Spadina."

As construction began in 1967, opposition began to mount. Much of it was personal. "This road was going to destroy thousands of homes," said John Sewell, a politician who became part of the movement, and went on to serve as mayor of Toronto for two years.

But some of the resistance was philosophical. "It was the urban-thinking backlash to suburban thinking," said Matthew Blackett, publisher of Toronto-based Spacing magazine. "A lot of people downtown didn't want to become the suburbs."

The suburbs couldn't understand why. Those living in the outskirts saw the expressway as a means to ease traffic congestion in the city, and threw their support behind Metro Council, even launching a Go Spadina campaign to counteract the anti-highway movement brewing downtown.

As the land was cleared between Lawrence and Eglinton Aves., residents in the path of the highway began to see what was coming. Houses were demolished, streets removed, and a park divided into two – turning once vibrant neighbourhoods into a muddy ditch.

"Here were these communities that had been around forever, that all of the sudden were being destroyed," said Vaughan.

Out of such concern, arose a movement that began with university students in the Annex, who were determined to do whatever they could to kill the growing "beast." Their cause was taken over by the middle class, gained the support of urban visionaries like Jane Jacobs and Marshall McLuhan, and eventually ballooned into the most important issue in the municipal election of 1969.

"They did the research, they lobbied properly," said Blackett. They held rallies and eventually voted in like-minded politicians. "It was an intellectual debate about city building, and not just an emotional knee-jerk reaction."

Eventually, they won. In 1971, premier Bill Davis killed the expressway.

"This was the most transformative moment in the city's history," said Vaughan.

Metro Council was forced to return to the planning board to revise the 1966 transportation plan, which would eventually eliminate the idea of expressways in the city's core.

"Citizens rose up and said you can't have a conversation about the future of Toronto, if we aren't at the table," said Vaughan.
 
Anyone who has driven around York Region (or Peel) recently can see how that whole "end of suburbia" thing worked out.

The key word is driven. You are discouraged from walking in the suburbs. During the recession, the price of gasoline maybe low, but it will slowly go back up. The supply of gasoline or oil is finite. What will happen after it is used up? Emergency vehicles and buses will get first priority, in that case, and your car will be low on the list.
 
>>>The supply of gasoline or oil is finite. What will happen after it is used up?<<<

While finite, the supply is still very large and there is currently ample supply for years to come, with more being discovered all the time.

It won't actually get used up. As the supply (and/or production) is unable to keep up with demand (should that happen), the price will rise and some people will choose to change to other, more economical fuels. This will reduce demand and slow the rise in price.

Eventually, if the supply does begin to run out, the price will rise to the point where only those that really need oil for whatever reason will be willing to pay the price and most people would stop using it. Demand drops and that little bit of remaining supply lasts longer.

It is up to people to decide whether it makes sense to simply wait until the price gets too high before making a change, or to buy new alternative technologies early to avoid the rush. Unfortunately since technology tends to drop in cost over time, this "buying early to avoid the rush" doesn't tend to be a very good strategy in the long run.

EDIT: It occurs to me that transit is a technology that doesn't seem to get much cheaper over time, so maybe investing in that isn't necessarily a bad choice, even if not many people are going to use it at first -- as long as it is the sort of infrastructure that can last.
 
Last edited:
I feel like the star regurgitates this story repeatedly and I have to say it is a bit tired.
 
While finite, the supply is still very large and there is currently ample supply for years to come, with more being discovered all the time.
Think again. For every barrel of new oil being discovered we're consuming five barrels (despite the vast improvements of technology). Why do you think they go to the most remote places on earth to drill?

It won't actually get used up. As the supply (and/or production) is unable to keep up with demand (should that happen), the price will rise and some people will choose to change to other, more economical fuels. This will reduce demand and slow the rise in price.
There are NO economic fuels which can credibly replace oil. We are *not* going to "run out" of oil in the sense that a car runs out of fuel. That's why we're like the Titanic heading for the iceberg.

Eventually, if the supply does begin to run out, the price will rise to the point where only those that really need oil for whatever reason will be willing to pay the price and most people would stop using it. Demand drops and that little bit of remaining supply lasts longer.
People "stop using" oil? You do realize that food, medicine, and manufactured goods all depend on it, right?

It is up to people to decide whether it makes sense to simply wait until the price gets too high before making a change, or to buy new alternative technologies early to avoid the rush. Unfortunately since technology tends to drop in cost over time, this "buying early to avoid the rush" doesn't tend to be a very good strategy in the long run.
Waiting until things become unbearable to make changes is like waiting until the wind picks up to start preparing your house for the incoming hurricane. Unfortunately that's what we're doing.
 
There are NO economic fuels which can credibly replace oil. We are *not* going to "run out" of oil in the sense that a car runs out of fuel. That's why we're like the Titanic heading for the iceberg.

Even wind energy can replace oil, we have enough wind energy available in the great Lakes for north-east US & Ontario and in Texas for the entire US, at a price of around $10 to $15/litre today.

It's entirely economical ("justified in terms of profitability").

Nuclear can do it for less (likely around $4 to $6/litre).


Some things would change but most things would stay the same with minor adjustments here and there.
 
Last edited:
"Here were these communities that had been around forever, that all of the sudden were being destroyed," said Vaughan.

Most of the communities that were in the path of the Spadina Expressway were barely 50 years old by the time they came under threat. The area that the Allen was built in was virtually brand-new when it was knocked back down. There are, and were, plenty of reasons to block the Spadina Expressway without having to resort to Hubris.
 
The key word is driven. You are discouraged from walking in the suburbs. During the recession, the price of gasoline maybe low, but it will slowly go back up. The supply of gasoline or oil is finite. What will happen after it is used up? Emergency vehicles and buses will get first priority, in that case, and your car will be low on the list.

That's fine, by that point most cars will be electric. Even GM, the most cumbersome of automotive dinosaurs, is making strides.
 
That's a pretty big assumption. They said that 30 years ago as well.

And just like 30 years ago we have a slew of gas/electric hybrid vehicles, plus a few pure electric vehicles coming down the pipeline - not to mention a handful of hydrogen powered vehicles already on sale :)
 
And just like 30 years ago we have a slew of gas/electric hybrid vehicles, plus a few pure electric vehicles coming down the pipeline - not to mention a handful of hydrogen powered vehicles already on sale :)

Yes, they're in existence, but "in existence" and "in use" are two different things. For example, computers were in existence in the 40s, but they wern't widely used until sixty years later.

I'm just really skeptical about how fast this technology that we see in autoshows will be used by enough people to make a difference.
 
Yes, they're in existence, but "in existence" and "in use" are two different things. For example, computers were in existence in the 40s, but they wern't widely used until sixty years later.
Computers weren't widely used until at least 2000? Wow, talk about revisionist history.
 
Yes, they're in existence, but "in existence" and "in use" are two different things. For example, computers were in existence in the 40s, but they wern't widely used until sixty years later.

I'm just really skeptical about how fast this technology that we see in autoshows will be used by enough people to make a difference.


The streets are lousy with ugly Hybrid badges and stickers.

Be as skeptical as you want, but don't ignore what's already there.
 

Back
Top