Toronto 2024 Olympic Bid (Dead)

[Euphoria]

I appreciate that you're crunching numbers. Do keep in mind, though, that there is a multiplier effect of usage as this extended highway provides access to residents who didn't have it before south of Eglinton, as well as CBD commuters who fill our office towers each day. As the 407 has proven, people will make the equivalent of an additional mortgage payment for convenience. Look, a buried Gardner would likely follow a similar route through the downtown to the one I'm suggesting, using a Front St. extension. The opportunity to tunnel under the existing elevated expressway has probably passed due to condo development. Now, if you want a DRL you're going to have to put it somewhere and you're going to have to bury it -- oh yeah, and you'll need to find a way to pay for it. An underground north-south toll highway is a way that would also help reduce our traffic woes. Coupling a subway with an expressway is a double shot at reducing traffic congestion. As a side note, there would be some revenue from freed up land if the Gardner was removed, albeit not much. Again, show me a better alternative that provides the same level of infrastructure, because the only take away from your critique is not to build any of this infrastructure. We can't afford it. It's too hard. People will get mad. Save the unicorns.

 

[Euphoria]

One more thing, an Olympics provides a bit of a magic wand to support big infrastructure in terms of drawing funding from senior levels of government and a huge amount of funding from T.V. rights and private sponsorship. Another reason to bring the circus to town. I know it's been said, but lest we forget...

 

[pman]

Spoken like a true champagne socialist, fretting about government spending on needed infrastructure as he basks on a beach in Barbados. "Let the plebs back in Toronto suffer in their gridlock and pour me another Bahama Mama!"

I'm not sure that a lot of the infrastructure we would build for the Olympics is "needed." For example, a 70,000 seat stadium would clearly never have a future economical use, so there's a couple billion down the toilet. Furthermore, the required spectator capacity means that we wouldn't be able to recycle Pan Am infrastructure like the aquatic centre, but would have to do new builds that again would be massively over capacity for any realistic future needs. Aside from some sports facilities we turn to mobility infrastructure, where Euphoria's proposal for a new tunnelled expressway into the core is probably a good example of what we could expect from this mayor and this council.

I get that our infrastructure is totally inadequate, and I get that our political process is so broken that almost every single transportation investment this city has made since 1970 has been horribly wrong. But it doesn't follow that if we give the same people who make these catastrophic blunders a really big pot of money, they'll build anything supported by professional planning, hard data, and rigorous analysis.

 

[animatronic]

I appreciate that you're crunching numbers. Do keep in mind, though, that there is a multiplier effect of usage as this extended highway provides access to residents who didn't have it before south of Eglinton, as well as CBD commuters who fill our office towers each day. As the 407 has proven, people will make the equivalent of an additional mortgage payment for convenience. Look, a buried Gardner would likely follow a similar route through the downtown to the one I'm suggesting, using a Front St. extension. The opportunity to tunnel under the existing elevated expressway has probably passed due to condo development. Now, if you want a DRL you're going to have to put it somewhere and you're going to have to bury it -- oh yeah, and you'll need to find a way to pay for it. An underground north-south toll highway is a way that would also help reduce our traffic woes. Coupling a subway with an expressway is a double shot at reducing traffic congestion. As a side note, there would be some revenue from freed up land if the Gardner was removed, albeit not much. Again, show me a better alternative that provides the same level of infrastructure, because the only take away from your critique is not to build any of this infrastructure. We can't afford it. It's too hard. People will get mad. Save the unicorns.

I didn't say don't build infrastructure, I said don't pretend that user fees can cover costs. And since we have a limited supply of capital, a ridiculously expensive to build and maintain tunnel is pretty far down the priority list.

 

[Tewder]

I get that our infrastructure is totally inadequate, and I get that our political process is so broken that almost every single transportation investment this city has made since 1970 has been horribly wrong. But it doesn't follow that if we give the same people who make these catastrophic blunders a really big pot of money, they'll build anything supported by professional planning, hard data, and rigorous analysis.

Those are totally valid concerns pman, and i share them. We won't know what a bid looks like until we see a bid, unfortunately. What we'd hope for is involvement by Waterfront Toronto or some similarly structured organization, and a plan that leverages the games for key infrastructure improvements, development of the Portlands and city streetscape and beautification improvements. If we look at other successful games we should be expecting this.

I do also share concerns about some of the olympics-specific infrastructure required, the stadium in particular. Again, i'd want to see the details. If designed intelligently though the stadium would have a life beyond the games, and ideally would add an interesting piece of architecture to the city's waterfront. The velodrome in Milton sets a good precedent.

But you don't have to take my word for it, the PanAms already gave us a taste of what an Olympics could offer us only on a much larger scale. In the following UofT article this potential and these opportunities are described by Mark Sterling, director of the Master of Urban Design program at the John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design, on planning. If that's not credible enough for anyone he's also a consultant to the City of Toronto and Waterfront Toronto... I think he just might have some real insight into this issue? :

There had been public sector interest in redeveloping the West Don Lands since the 1980s, but various plans were stymied by problems of soil contamination and the fact that the area is on a flood plain. Eventually, in the mid-2000s, momentum gathered behind a plan, and Waterfront Toronto kicked off a process to pre-plan what was envisioned as an 80-acre mixed use site that would ultimately contain 6,000 residential units – many of them affordable – businesses, retail and 23 acres of parkland.

“I got involved as part of a team doing what’s called a public realm master plan,” says Sterling, who served as urban design lead on the project. “We were designing the streets and most of the parks in detail. My role was to work with the engineers and landscape architects to make sure that as we were planning the detailed design of the streets and blocks and open space of the area, we were integrating the thinking about the way the buildings would frame those spaces.

“Then the Pan Am games showed up.”

By the time the West Don Lands were selected as the site of the Pan Am athletes’ village, the plan for the neighbourhood had already made its way through municipal approvals processes. Construction was ready to begin – and it was expected to take 15 to 20 years to complete.

But, Sterling recounts, “When Pan Am came along, all of a sudden there was an impetus to say, well, maybe we could build most of the buildings now. The buildings required for the Pan Am village were all built according to the plan that was already in place.”

In other words, he says, the Games were a catalyst for a project that was already in the works.

“In a normal development cycle, we would have expected one building to be built every two to three years. So this really kick-started the whole thing. It kick-started affordable housing provision as well because there was quite a strong mandate in that area to provide affordable housing.”

http://news.utoronto.ca/miltons-vel...nds-using-pan-amparapan-am-games-build-legacy


​

Now we know that there are already all kinds of plans in place by Waterfront Toronto, and all kinds of transit plans in place. I think we can reasonably extrapolate from this article that an olympics would provide the impetus and political will and funding needed.

 

[Euphoria]

That article makes a critical point spot on: "'A city should only take on these events like Pan Am, says Sterling, 'if you can use them for something you already know you want to do. Some of the failed Olympics have amounted to a big party with a lot of expensive concrete stuff left over. The positive ones are the ones where they’ve actually made a difference in their cities.

'The legacy question is a big one. There’s no reason to do this otherwise.'”

The nature of the bid, its lasting impact on the city/province/country, is the heart of the matter. I couldn't agree more.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Spoken like a true champagne socialist, fretting about government spending on needed infrastructure as he basks on a beach in Barbados. "Let the plebs back in Toronto suffer in their gridlock and pour me another Bahama Mama!"

Get it right - national drink is a Rum Punch, which are the bestest of all drinks!

I'll also be voting for your Beaches-East York MP from my beachside bunker as our cockamamie FPTP election system means my vote goes to my 'last known Canadian residence'. Any hints on which candidate to choose, please answer my plea in the Fed election thread.

Spent my Saturday - between UT comments and Blue Jays agonizing - on a two dive adventure with local boys Barbados Blue at the Stavronikita wreck. Highly, highly recommended to any UT types that dive. I'm a newby, but it was awesome and we got an 18" away look at a big hawksbill turtle!

But to return to this thread's conversation: I'd be just as violently opposed to any other Canadian city hosting an Olympics. I'd be ecstatic if we got to send our Olympians to Los Angeles or Paris in 2024, as the Americans or French can happily pay for the show.

 

[Tewder]

Aside from being incredibly out of touch with real life in this city, you've clearly lost all perspective. Being 'violently' opposed to anything is a dogmatic point of view, and it says more about you being backed into a corner by your own closed-mindedness than it does any claim of concern for Toronto. I agree that there are concerns to consider when looking at an event of this unprecedented scale, and I've discussed those concerns here openly, but I also believe we owe it to ourselves to look at the possibilities, to not be so willfully blind to any potential in all of this. If a bid came out that was nothing but white elephants, achieving nothing for this city, I would join you with my opposition. We just don't have this information yet.

 

[animatronic]

Aside from being incredibly out of touch with real life in this city, you've clearly lost all perspective. Being 'violently' opposed to anything is a dogmatic point of view, and it says more about you being backed into a corner by your own closed-mindedness than it does any claim of concern for Toronto. I agree that there are concerns to consider when looking at an event of this unprecedented scale, and I've discussed those concerns here openly, but I also believe we owe it to ourselves to look at the possibilities, to not be so willfully blind to any potential in all of this. If a bid came out that was nothing but white elephants, achieving nothing for this city, I would join you with my opposition. We just don't have this information yet.

We have the information we need. We've had it for years. All this crap about consultations is just part of the Kabuki.

 

[Tewder]

We have the information we need. We've had it for years. All this crap about consultations is just part of the Kabuki.

I guess that remains to be seen. Something tells me you're going to be opposed no matter what is on offer for Toronto. I will keep an open mind and assess a real bid, not the fantasy and not the doomsday fear-mongering that has been in tall supply around here lately.

 

[animatronic]

I guess that remains to be seen. Something tells me you're going to be opposed no matter what is on offer for Toronto. I will keep an open mind and assess a real bid, not the fantasy and not the doomsday fear-mongering that has been in tall supply around here lately.

Sure - and maybe Rob finally kicked his crack habit. At a certain point you lose the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

I will keep an open mind and assess a real bid, not the fantasy and not the doomsday fear-mongering that has been in tall supply around here lately.

You keep an open mind? You want the Olympics no matter what the real bid reveals

 

[animatronic]

You keep an open mind? You want the Olympics no matter what the real bid reveals

If it were a good bid for the citizens of Toronto they would have spent the last six months shouting it from the rooftops. The fact that they are keeping it covered until after Sep 15 says a lot.

As others have pointed out the only real argument in favour of the Olympics is that it can further our civic goals. By sneaking the bid in under the wire - without the time for a larger discussion about what those goals are and is an Olympics is the best way to achieve them - they have guaranteed that the bid will only serve the interests of its promoters.

 

[Tewder]

If it were a good bid for the citizens of Toronto they would have spent the last six months shouting it from the rooftops. The fact that they are keeping it covered until after Sep 15 says a lot.

It's likely far more banal and way less nefarious than you imply. The September 15th date is only about a 'letter of interest'. You know as well as I that politics rule in Toronto, that Tory is stepping carefully, taking a temperature check to see if a games bid would be damaging to him in any way. He needs stakeholders on side, a majority of the people of Toronto and solid corporate sponsors before a bid would even be considered. The fact is, where an 'absolutely not' stance was once the knee-jerk/safer political position the success of the PanAm games have changed the discourse enormously.

As others have pointed out the only real argument in favour of the Olympics is that it can further our civic goals.

Ding! Ding! Ding!! I want to take s second to express - for the first time in this thread - my 100% complete agreement with you here on this point! It deserves to be noted.

By sneaking the bid in under the wire - without the time for a larger discussion about what those goals are and is an Olympics is the best way to achieve them - they have guaranteed that the bid will only serve the interests of its promoters.

... but there are a wide range of 'promoters' involved in an event of this magnitude and this includes civic and urban planners and developers (again please refer to the article: http://news.utoronto.ca/miltons-vel...nds-using-pan-amparapan-am-games-build-legacy)

Yet another positive take on the potential of a Toronto games is from an LGBT point of view. I love the inspiring vision in the following article which advocates for a games in Toronto as a way of promoting globally this city's commitment to diversity, tolerance and LGBT equality. What a great message to send out to the world about Toronto and what a great position it puts our city in as a leader in this regard, all the more so on the heels of WorldPride and the PanAms:

if it’s terrible for the Olympics to be hosted in an anti-gay country, shouldn’t we leap at the opportunity for a progressive, liberal city like Toronto to host the games, to show them how it’s done?

[...]

But a Toronto Olympics wouldn’t be just a massive party. It would be an opportunity to promote LGBT rights and broader human rights globally.

The Olympics has long been a force for advancing equality and fairness across lines of race, religion and nationality through its focus on pure athleticism. As the most high-profile female sporting event in the world, it has helped shatter gender stereotypes. Canadian Olympians are promoting LGBT acceptance in schools. And the IOC’s recent pledge to fight discrimination against LGBT people is a welcome step to expand queer rights especially given that 79 participating Olympic nations criminalize gay people in some way.

With the world’s eyes on Toronto, we would have a tremendous opportunity to show the world what an inclusive, LGBT-positive city — and country — looks like. We would be certain that LGBT athletes from around the world would have the right to express themselves and feel safe while at the Olympics. And we’d be almost certain to see openly LGBT athletes compete and win medals, demonstrating to the world that we are equals, we are brothers and sisters in our global community.

http://www.dailyxtra.com/news-and-i...-community-support-toronto-olympic-bid-122735​

 

[animatronic]

It's likely far more banal and way less nefarious than you imply. The September 15th date is only about a 'letter of interest'. You know as well as I that politics rule in Toronto, that Tory is stepping carefully, taking a temperature check to see if a games bid would be damaging to him in any way. He needs stakeholders on side, a majority of the people of Toronto and solid corporate sponsors before a bid would even be considered. The fact is, where an 'absolutely not' stance was once the knee-jerk/safer political position the success of the PanAm games have changed the discourse enormously.



Ding! Ding! Ding!! I want to take s second to express - for the first time in this thread - my 100% complete agreement with you here on this point! It deserves to be noted.




... but there are a wide range of 'promoters' involved in an event of this magnitude and this includes civic and urban planners and developers (again please refer to the article: http://news.utoronto.ca/miltons-vel...nds-using-pan-amparapan-am-games-build-legacy)

Yet another positive take on the potential of a Toronto games is from an LGBT point of view. I love the inspiring vision in the following article which advocates for a games in Toronto as a way of promoting globally this city's commitment to diversity, tolerance and LGBT equality. What a great message to send out to the world about Toronto and what a great position it puts our city in as a leader in this regard, all the more so on the heels of WorldPride and the PanAms:

http://www.dailyxtra.com/news-and-i...-community-support-toronto-olympic-bid-122735​

You are either astroturfing or incredibly naive to think that this last-minute strategy hasn't been in the works since Tory got elected.