Toronto Bloor Street Revitalization | ?m | ?s | Bloor-Yorkville BIA | architectsAlliance

[ILuvTO]

Were the businesses that chose not to upgrade their sidewalks not part of the BIA? My assumption is they were. Based on that, it does confuse me that members of a BIA would be reluctant to spend money on a project they are already spending other money on in conjunction with the city. If I am off base, someone please correct me.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Taal brings up a great point regarding the fictitious slide in standards. There is no slide in standards because our standards were so much lower in past decades. Is this an excuse to not push for higher standards? Absolutely not. I think we should appreciate however that a city is an ever evolving process of regeneration and decline. There is no utopian standard to aspire to. Investment in capital improvements and standards of maintainenance are effectively bottomless pits. These can only evolve as the cultural evolves, and as they evolve the law of unintended consequences will start to work it's magic.

Sort of. In terms of streetscaping improvements, we are on par with the low standards that we had before. In other realms, notably private encroachment onto public space, we are arguably worse off than we were 30 years ago. As the photos in the "Toronto: Then & Now" thread attest, signage in the 1970s was at least small and tasteful while street furniture was relatively free of advertising and wheat paste residue.

More importantly though is what happened everywhere else while Toronto stood still. It's not just larger cities like New York, Chicago and Montreal that look noticeably more kempt today than they did in the 1970s, it's also small towns and cities across Ontario - some very close to Toronto. Even rust belt disasters like Detroit have made a noticeable improvement to the streetscapes they have sought to retain. In terms of sloppy streetscaping, Toronto more or less stands uncomfortably alone.

 

[Tewder]

Yes, and just how often is the power of expropriation invoked for strictly aesthetic urban improvements? Using one exceptional example of wholesale urban redevelopment and equate it to the norm as to how business is/should be done is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

The Bloor Street revitalization project isn't big enough an urban plan for you? I mean, let me know the parameters of what you will accept as intellectual honesty and I'll do my best to find yet other examples.

And just how did you know that there hasn't been any attempt to persuade private owners to pony up, above and beyond funding committed by the BIA, which is supported by the very owners?

... and yet this line of argument is intellectually honest?

Whatever! At the end of the day whatever City Hall did do or didn't do failed, and the tangible proof thereof is the embarrassing mess of a beautiful project that we can see with our own eyes, no matter how blinded by City Hall boosterism they may be.

What of the financial costs it would entail? I highly doubt that most property owners will be happy with any scheme unless the City pony up the full cost.

Private property owners are unwilling to pay for most things but they still have to, and they were willing to pay for the vision of improvement here as it was viewed as being in their own interest. Given that City Hall was forwarding the cash it had every ability to leverage some requirements in return, refusing to endorse any plans that did not meet basic requirements such as pavings to building edges. No brainer.

I've noticed you've also conveniently neglected to address the scenario I've put forward. But of course, it is easy to suggest someone should do all they can when they are not the ones with a personal sake in it. It's easy to be an armchair critic, no?
AoD

To be fair AoD we are all 'armchair critics' here in case you haven't noticed, which is sort of the point, no? Are you suggesting that only those in the 'know' get a say? Are you suggesting that you are in fact in the 'know' regarding the dealings of City Hall?

Anyhow, I am not a professional but I do know I have never seen anything so ridiculous as this expensive botched mess. Shame too because the rest of it is so beautiful, which makes this all the more galling.

 

[taal]

Sort of. In terms of streetscaping improvements, we are on par with the low standards that we had before. In other realms, notably private encroachment onto public space, we are arguably worse off than we were 30 years ago. As the photos in the "Toronto: Then & Now" thread attest, signage in the 1970s was at least small and tasteful while street furniture was relatively free of advertising and wheat paste residue.

More importantly though is what happened everywhere else while Toronto stood still. It's not just larger cities like New York, Chicago and Montreal that look noticeably more kempt today than they did in the 1970s, it's also small towns and cities across Ontario - some very close to Toronto. Even rust belt disasters like Detroit have made a noticeable improvement to the streetscapes they have sought to retain. In terms of sloppy streetscaping, Toronto more or less stands uncomfortably alone.

The list goes on and on really - if there's one thing Toronto doesn't do, it's just that, streetscaping. That's why I wonder why some are getting so worked up about this But in all honestly even if Bloor was clad in gold and sparkled with diamonds Toronto would still be by far and large behind many other similar sized cities ... and again Toronto's always been like this, this isn't something new - it also seems the rest of the GTA has followed Toronto's lead in this regard.

I think we'll see slight improvements over the year - maybe NPS to start and then QQ but still, we're not going to have those amazing completely polished streets of say Chicago.

Welcome to Toronto : )

ps - I was going to add when I visited London, England about 8/10 years I'd actually say it related somewhat in this regard - but in my last visit, cleanliness has improved immensely there - maybe because of the Olympics - but it still bares some commonalities.

 

[urbandreamer]

No. It wasn't always like this. Toronto of c.1945 was very nice, if older folks I know are to be believed.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The Bloor Street revitalization project isn't big enough an urban plan for you? I mean, let me know the parameters of what you will accept as intellectual honesty and I'll do my best to find yet other examples.

Note, here is what I've said:

Yes, and just how often is the power of expropriation invoked for strictly aesthetic urban improvements? Using one exceptional example of wholesale urban redevelopment and equate it to the norm as to how business is/should be done is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

How often has it been use for such ends -- i.e. wholesale expropriation of private property for aesthetic improvements. Please feel free to inform me, all this talk about "bigness" notwithstanding.

Whatever! At the end of the day whatever City Hall did do or didn't do failed, and the tangible proof thereof is the embarrassing mess of a beautiful project that we can see with our own eyes, no matter how blinded by City Hall boosterism they may be.

Have you seen it with your own eyes, or are you reacting to a few photos taken of the selective offender? Let's be honest here, you didn't mentioned anything about it being an embarrassing mess until the photos of the few spots were shown, and it went from good to bad in no time. Over-react much?

Private property owners are unwilling to pay for most things but they still have to, and they were willing to pay for the vision of improvement here as it was viewed as being in their own interest. Given that City Hall was forwarding the cash it had every ability to leverage some requirements in return, refusing to endorse any plans that did not meet basic requirements such as pavings to building edges. No brainer.

Well, I would love to hear what kind of arm twisting tactics you are suggesting/be willing to apply under those circumstances under the force of law. And refuse to endorse any plans that doesn't meet their basic requirement? That's rich - you are just setting yourself up for stasis in that case - and believe me, you'd then be complaining about how the city can't even anything done. At least in this case one can see the end result of all that investment - for good and bad - and that's very important for making sure there is support for further incremental improvements.

To be fair AoD we are all 'armchair critics' here in case you haven't noticed, which is sort of the point, no? Are you suggesting that only those in the 'know' get a say? Are you suggesting that you are in fact in the 'know' regarding the dealings of City Hall?

Certainly, I would suggest those who have to pay for it get a say - and so they did, under the arrangement of the BIA, more than those who doesn't, i.e. us.

Anyhow, I am not a professional but I do know I have never seen anything so ridiculous as this expensive botched mess. Shame too because the rest of it is so beautiful, which makes this all the more galling.

If I were you, I'd be more concerned about upkeep and those pesky hydro/gas/telco firms coming in and make a massacre of it all in a few years time.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

ud:

Toronto of c.1945 was very nice, if older folks I know are to be believed

And going further back, TO is called "Muddy York" for a reason - I am sure it is "cleaner" and maybe more treed but when it comes to high quality streetscape? Doubtful.

AoD

 

[condovo]

I'm in Montreal right now visiting family. Yesterday, a friend visiting from Toronto and I embarked on a four-hour walk through downtown, Outremont, and the Plateau. My friend has a strong interest in architecture, design, and urban affairs though he doesn't participate on this site. I'm a native Montrealer who doesn't view my former city through rose-coloured glasses. We set out on our tour with a keen eye for things that drive us nuts about Toronto's public realm hoping, franky, to be reassured that Montreal's doing no better. Here's what we found, or didn't find:

1. Iron grates over mature sidewalk trees. No cracked, crumbling, Toronto-style concrete slabs.
2. Beautifully-designed and maintained iron and metal street lights. No Toronto-style concrete 'stalks' covered in poster-iti.
3. Street sweeping patrols wearing matching windbreakers labelled 'Destination: Centre-Ville. Propriétés.'
4. Immaculate parks and squares with freshly-cut, dandelion-free grass; beautiful flower beds; gorgeous fountains, monuments, and public art; no litter; and no homeless. We visited at least five parks and squares of various sizes in different neighbourhoods. The story was the same across the board.
5. Not one patch of asphalt in sidewalks on any major thoroughfare, and most minor ones too. Not one. No utility spray-painting or random cuts in the pavement either. We walked along St-Catherine, Sherbrooke, Peel, de Maisonneuve, McGill College, University, Bleury, Parc, Bernard, Wiseman, Laurier, St-Joseph, St-Laurent, Laval, St-Denis, etc. Virtually no patches anywhere.
6. Un-corralled patios.
7. Curbed bike lanes.
8. Bixi bike stands everywhere; in busy downtown, quiet Outremont, and Bohemian Plateau. Everywhere.
9. One panhandler.
The list goes on and on.

Montreal is a poorer city than Toronto with fewer resources at its disposal and this is what it's managed to accomplish. While Toronto's standards may not have fallen, Montreal's has zoomed ahead.

All said, there is no excuse whatsoever for the sorry state of Toronto's public realm (i.e. terminally-broken fountains on University), including half-assed beautification projects (i.e. $25 million granite sidewalks that stop within inches of building frontages on Bloor). No excuse. Sorry, I ain't buying it. When a city wants to get things done, it gets things done. Don't believe me? Take a trip down the 401 and see for yourself.

 

[MetroMan]

Montreal is a poorer city than Toronto with fewer resources at its disposal

What gives you that idea? Yes, Toronto generates the largest portion of tax revenue in the country but who says we get a fair part of it back? We don't.

David Miller focused on the beautification of the city but was only partially successful. Considering the current crop of candidates that we have up for election, it doesn't appear that our Mayor is going to be focusing on it in the next 4 years. It's a shame.

 

[taal]

I'm in Montreal right now visiting family. Yesterday, a friend visiting from Toronto and I embarked on a four-hour walk through downtown, Outremont, and the Plateau. My friend has a strong interest in architecture, design, and urban affairs though he doesn't participate on this site. I'm a native Montrealer who doesn't view my former city through rose-coloured glasses. We set out on our tour with a keen eye for things that drive us nuts about Toronto's public realm hoping, franky, to be reassured that Montreal's doing no better. Here's what we found, or didn't find:

1. Iron grates over mature sidewalk trees. No cracked, crumbling, Toronto-style concrete slabs.
2. Beautifully-designed and maintained iron and metal street lights. No Toronto-style concrete 'stalks' covered in poster-iti.
3. Street sweeping patrols wearing matching windbreakers labelled 'Destination: Centre-Ville. Propriétés.'
4. Immaculate parks and squares with freshly-cut, dandelion-free grass; beautiful flower beds; gorgeous fountains, monuments, and public art; no litter; and no homeless. We visited at least five parks and squares of various sizes in different neighbourhoods. The story was the same across the board.
5. Not one patch of asphalt in sidewalks on any major thoroughfare, and most minor ones too. Not one. No utility spray-painting or random cuts in the pavement either. We walked along St-Catherine, Sherbrooke, Peel, de Maisonneuve, McGill College, University, Bleury, Parc, Bernard, Wiseman, Laurier, St-Joseph, St-Laurent, Laval, St-Denis, etc. Virtually no patches anywhere.
6. Un-corralled patios.
7. Curbed bike lanes.
8. Bixi bike stands everywhere; in busy downtown, quiet Outremont, and Bohemian Plateau. Everywhere.
9. One panhandler.
The list goes on and on.

Montreal is a poorer city than Toronto with fewer resources at its disposal and this is what it's managed to accomplish. While Toronto's standards may not have fallen, Montreal's has zoomed ahead.

All said, there is no excuse whatsoever for the sorry state of Toronto's public realm (i.e. terminally-broken fountains on University), including half-assed beautification projects (i.e. $25 million granite sidewalks that stop within inches of building frontages on Bloor). No excuse. Sorry, I ain't buying it. When a city wants to get things done, it gets things done. Don't believe me? Take a trip down the 401 and see for yourself.

There are definitely homeless people in Montreal ... your just not looking in the right place. Toronto's homeless problem has gotten quite a bit better over the years I find - there are quite a few less of them on Yonge and other major roads.

In terms of your other comments, I agree, less the fact that they 'zoomed ahead' if you visited Montreal even 10/15+ years ago (and the Toronto of that time) you'd reach the same conclusion (less our sidewalks as I presume those were better back then).

I'll say it again though Toronto's never been about that - the amount of extremely polished areas we have are so limited, maybe Cumberland in Yorkville and our central waterfront (not on QQ, but actually the waterfront it self around harbourfront center) ... and that's probably it.

 

[taal]

So anyone having an all of the sudden revelation about how Toronto stands in this department has either:
1) Never left Toronto.
2) Has completely turned a blind eye over the last decade or so ...

To me this has been an ongoing issue Toronto faced - and frankly it hasn't seemed to diminished Toronto's growth in the other cultural realms.
I agree though, ideally this wouldn't be a problem, but this will take decades to fix - and it's likely a lot of people on this forum won't be around to witness it (including my self).

 

[Tewder]

Over-react much?

So I'm 'intellectually dishonest' and I over-react... and you're debating with me?

The fact is though you are not debating with me. You are blatantly looking to defend City Hall at any cost, which is a completely untenable position to take, to which your grasping-at-straws insults would attest. It does beg the question though, what is your loyalty to City Hall?

Well, I would love to hear what kind of arm twisting tactics you are suggesting/be willing to apply under those circumstances under the force of law. And refuse to endorse any plans that doesn't meet their basic requirement? That's rich - you are just setting yourself up for stasis in that case - and believe me, you'd then be complaining about how the city can't even anything done. At least in this case one can see the end result of all that investment - for good and bad - and that's very important for making sure there is support for further incremental improvements.

Um, I already gave you the most basic example... that I came up with in about two seconds. If you would stop being a mouth-piece for City Hall for just a moment you may think of an option or two too.

... but, since you seem to enjoy putting people in the hot seat with all these little false 'challenges' of yours, name one major urban thoroughfare in any city comparable to Toronto that looks like this bungled job on Bloor, and then explain to me how it is that Toronto is so haplessly beleaguered that these things just happen so innocently here. I'd love to hear this!

If I were you, I'd be more concerned about upkeep and those pesky hydro/gas/telco firms coming in and make a massacre of it all in a few years time.

AoD

That's a whole other issue. The issue here is over $20 million spent over more than five years for a bungled outcome. You see nothing wrong with this, obviously. You shrug your shoulders and say 'oh well, everybody did their best'. Good for you for your optimism but I see this as symptomatic of a problem that needs to be identified, understood and corrected for the future good. Call me a dishonest reactionary, I guess I'm just funny that way

 

[old boy]

I grew up in Toronto in the 50's and 60's and it's like there was one city then and something very different now. I suspect places like Montreal have changed in that period too, but in more muted ways. A common idea about Toronto was that it probably would be a fine place if they ever finished it. Well, the " finishing " is a long time coming. I'm left with the half full / half empty feeling that the only thing going for us is the incremental change default position that some other posters sigh about. The current crop of mayoral wannabees reads like a audition for Dumb and Dumber as far as any substance on what beautification might mean to Toronto. As much as there is to lament the failure of this city to get it right, and I mean the " visioning " thing, and any means whatsoever of getting there, there is still tremendous vitality in Toronto. There will never, ever, be money in a budget as long as refinement is seen as a frill, and in this city no one in the political arena has the guts to lead in this realm. Miller barely floated the beautification idea. The city hasn't produced winning sports teams in a long while, and no champions in the political arena either. A little more patience is needed, we're told. Who's buying it anymore ?

 

[urbandreamer]

I know what's wrong with Toronto. But I'll have to say it in person to y'all, cuz it's not pc.

Wiseman+Bernard? Damn, I will live there someday! (I used to work in that 'hood, always a pleasure to walk home to Griffentown from there.

Once you go north of say Dupont, you notice things change for the better. The wealthy have more pull at city hall.

 

[condovo]

In terms of your other comments, I agree, less the fact that they 'zoomed ahead' if you visited Montreal even 10/15+ years ago (and the Toronto of that time) you'd reach the same conclusion (less our sidewalks as I presume those were better back then).

I lived in Montreal 10-15 years ago. Back then, it was in terrible shape. I'm flabbergasted by the improvements I've been seeing, including an entire traffic interchange (at Parc and Pine) that's been demolished and replaced with beautiful streetlights / furniture, plantings, and granite-curbed sidewalks. Before it was a graffiti-covered, crumbling mess. That's just one example of how Montreal has pulled ahead. There's a sea-change happening in the city. You can see it. You can feel it.