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

[AlvinofDiaspar]

... 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!

Well, I suppose I won't be able to convince you reality at other cities isn't all hunky dory (or at least perfect) until I show you photographic proof, so here it is - North Michigan Avenue, Chicago. The ne plus ultra of streetscaping and the model for Bloor St. All of these shots are taken from Google maps:

Note that a) there isn't even granite paving all along, b) the concrete paving isn't even consistent and c) streetscape elements (flower beds, etc) isn't consistent. And yet we have constantly been told this is a "superior" model and that no other city does it as badly as our Bloor Street job? Here is the photographic evidence for disproving that particular thesis. Can you now say with honesty that what you see is superior to what we've gotten and that they don't bungle up either?

If you really want to see where Toronto falters along Bloor in this case - it's the architecture, not the streetscaping.

AoD

 

[Tewder]

All those sections you show are clearly old, and even then don't look half as bad as what you see in Toronto...

How about showing examples of urban renewal, as asked? Lets see examples of multi-million dollar, five year projects that end up looking as bodged as Bloor. Apparantly you think this is par for the course and happens in all cities, that we are all simply 'over-reacting' in our criticism.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

All those sections you show are clearly old, and even then don't look half as bad as what you see in Toronto...

Now now, why would a major city allow their preimer throughfare to get "old" like that, considering there are sections that are far more consistent - I thought half-jobs is just a Toronto specialty? It is also pretty clear that some of the inconsistency has nothing to do with newness or oldness (like the odd looking planters at the corner of the pink granite building) - it is just idiosyncrasies that accumulated. And not half as bad as what you see in Toronto? Really, can you honestly say that what we now have on Bloor is not superior, both in materiality (granite vs. concrete) and in presentation (curbside details, etc) from the street to even the "newer" sections of Michigan Avenue? And for the record, these are taken literally from the core of the Magnificent Mile - not some sections at the extremities. You are free to go on google maps to look that up yourself.

How about showing examples of urban renewal, as asked? Lets see examples of multi-million dollar, five year projects that end up looking as bodged as Bloor. Apparantly you think this is par for the course and happens in all cities, that we are all simply 'over-reacting' in our criticism.

Here is what you've asked - a verbatim quote at that, your attempt to change it nothwithstanding:

name one major urban thoroughfare in any city comparable to Toronto that looks like this bungled job on Bloor

I think I have satisifed your initial requirement, no?

BTW, as I have stated it before, I am not even against the criticism of how regrettable it is that the project isn't more extensive in scope or how the interface between public and private realms are handled - but quite frankly what I've heard on here, i.e. the stance that anything that isn't perfect is an abject failure - does nothing but to discourage further improvements in the public realm by involved parties.

AoD

 

[Hipster Duck]

^Michigan Avenue is not a "half [assed] job". Yes, the pavement in front of the Neiman Marcus is different from the pavement in front of the Kenneth Cole, but at least the pavement is consistent in front of each building - as in, there is some coordination between the city and the private property owner to ensure that somehow the paving doesn't change to something different a mere foot away from the property line.

 

[Tewder]

Now now, why would a major city allow their preimer throughfare to get "old" like that, considering there are sections that are far more consistent - I thought half-jobs is just a Toronto specialty?

Do you really want to pursue that line of argument in defence of Toronto's urban realm?

It is also pretty clear that some of the inconsistency has nothing to do with newness or oldness (like the odd looking planters at the corner of the pink granite building) - it is just idiosyncrasies that accumulated.

A little bit of both, actually, which I really don't take issue with. The issue is with the city's handling of a plan for renewal and not doing it right in all the details. Why shouldn't we expect more? Why shouldn't the standards be the highest? If you were having this done at home you would be furious if the job were incomplete to your expectations, no matter how beautiful the completed portion may be, wouldn't you?

BTW, as I have stated it before, I am not even against the criticism of how regrettable it is that the project isn't more extensive in scope or how the interface between public and private realms are handled - but quite frankly what I've heard on here, i.e. the stance that anything that isn't perfect is an abject failure - does nothing but to discourage further improvements in the public realm by involved parties.

AoD

The improvements were done by self-interested parties, the City (the public) and the BIA (the private). It was perceived as a benefit to all for this to be done. I agree that this should be encouraged, but it should also be encouraged that it be done right.

 

[junctionist]

Chicago might have not gotten their Magnificent Mile perfect either; however, it doesn't make me feel better about Bloor.

 

[lead82]

Those pics don't do Michigan avenue justice. Firstly the planters are way better because they are designed with a little black fence to prevent idiots from sitting on the planters. Second, the street furniture is much nicer in Chicago as they don't have cheap plastic garbage cans that are too small to hold enough garbage between pickups. Thirdly, as previously stated the architecture quality of buildings there puts Toronto to shame with the kind of crap that we got on our major thoroughfares. Certainly the Bloor project is a vast provement if what was there before. The main issue is that even the finished section is unfinished. The Yonge to Church section needs benches and the NW corner of Bloor and Church needs to be finished already(it has been cordoned off for months Noe with no visible work being done there).

 

[TrickyRicky]

Of course those are two issues: attractive investment in streetscaping, and quality of the architecture of private buildings. Honestly for all the talk about streetscaping without the former, any streetscaping is like putting lipstick on a pig. I'm firmly in the camp of pushing for much higher standards but I really don't think some people here appreciate how low the standard was in the past when there were no St. Georges or waterfronts at all. We need to set the bar higher both in terms of streetscaping of the public realm and quality of private buildings and businesses (I wish I could find a before and after picture of the streetscaping that used to be in my section of Bloor Street prior to 2002).

But for all the talk here really I ask you what are you doing about it? What improvements are you making to your home and business and how it connects to the public realm? Live in a multi-res? Join your condo board or tenants association. Join your local residents association, park or residents association. Your local BIA probably has such a hard time getting people involved that when it comes time to vote in members they just get appointed because there is so little interest and initiative being put forward by the community and its residents.

As Steven Covey would say, work within your sphere of influence and work to expand your sphere of influence. Planting a flower box in front of your condo is worth 100 pages of commentary.

 

[old boy]

Some people say individuals can't make a difference, while some counter that it's only individuals who do. Good comments, Tricky.

 

[Blovertis]

All this bellyaching about the "botched" job on Bloor is really OTT. Yes it went over budget and that's too bad, but the end result will be fantastic. The design and materials on the finished section east of Bloor have greatly exceeded my (admittedly modest) expectations.

A "botch" is something that can't be fixed without a complete do-over. Within a few years those few owners who didn't repave their properties will integrate with the new streetscape and everyone will be happy.

Let's not forget that Bloor has only been a luxe avenue for a relatively short time -- it really only became high end starting in the seventies. Thirty years is a blink of an eye in the history of city. Before then it was just another thoroughfare -- unworthy of anything better than concrete.

 

[Hipster Duck]

But for all the talk here really I ask you what are you doing about it? What improvements are you making to your home and business and how it connects to the public realm? Live in a multi-res? Join your condo board or tenants association. Join your local residents association, park or residents association. Your local BIA probably has such a hard time getting people involved that when it comes time to vote in members they just get appointed because there is so little interest and initiative being put forward by the community and its residents.

As Steven Covey would say, work within your sphere of influence and work to expand your sphere of influence. Planting a flower box in front of your condo is worth 100 pages of commentary.

Tricky, no offense, but that kind of "you can be the source of change/what are you doing about it?" argument doesn't travel very far.

If the force for social change is a tug of war between structure (institutions, formal and informal rules, etc.) and agency (individual action), I wouldn't be surprised if structural changes account for 95% of a paradigmatic shift in a complex system such as a city.

You can write your city councilor, you can pick up litter, you can change incandescent bulbs to CFLS; you can do everything in your power to be personally responsible but the system, and the institutions that prop it up, are bigger than individual people - including supposedly influential people in a power position. Rolling up your sleeves and joining your BIA, while commendable, isn't much more productive in changing the overarching inequities and injustices of our system than bellyaching on an internet discussion forum. One might derive more personal fulfillment, but I don't see that it actually does any real difference - and I say that not to disparage BIAs, but because I acknowledge that personal action within a highly structured societal system - where we don't understand the interactions and interdependencies of the institutions and rules that we have created to support it - really doesn't account for much.

To use your flower box analogy as an example, you and your BIA could go to Home Depot and build a flower box on your public street to spruce it up. The next day, however, the city could send in a bulldozer and clear it because it violates a fire code established in 1964. Can we really make an objective judgment as to who was right and who was wrong? Do we fully comprehend the motivations behind both groups and what might have led to their actions? Even if we understand their motivations, can we not agree that their responses reflect a relatively constrained set of choices based on practice and rules?

 

[Rowe]

I love the Bloor street design, feels so clean and established.

Ya, maybe the facades are a bit 'eh' but overall, I think it is a nice improvement.

 

[christiesplits]

If you really want to see where Toronto falters along Bloor in this case - it's the architecture, not the streetscaping.

AoD

Agreed. While I'm ultimately disappointed by what I have seen thus far with the streetscape, I agree that the architecture is the greatest travesty on Bloor, not the pavement. Case in point, all that discussion about a possible Yonge/Bloor square on the (then) empty SE intersection did not take into consideration that the square would be dominated by that atrocity known as the Hudsons Bay Centre.

I would argue that the HBC building alone would suck the life out of the square and that no dose of pedestrian activity from a potential square could remedy that urban vacuum. It would be completely uninviting, and no bandaid solutions along the sidewalks could bring back to life this dead intersection. Can you imagine a 45-story concrete bunker overshadowing Tralfagar Square or a great retail strip like the Champs Elysees?

Great retail strips need a high degree of commitment from public and private actors in terms of urban design and aesthetics. We cannot build poorly constructed flower beds, only for the city to let them wither while the adjacent buildings stick puke-yellow stucco over their depleting brick exterior in an attempt to bring "pizaz" to the streetscape. Neighbourhoods are only as good as their architecture, and should provide the inspiration for greater beautification projects, not the other way around.

 

[junctionist]

Agreed. While I'm ultimately disappointed by what I have seen thus far with the streetscape, I agree that the architecture is the greatest travesty on Bloor, not the pavement. Case in point, all that discussion about a possible Yonge/Bloor square on the (then) empty SE intersection did not take into consideration that the square would be dominated by that atrocity known as the Hudsons Bay Centre.

I would argue that the HBC building alone would suck the life out of the square and that no dose of pedestrian activity from a potential square could remedy that urban vacuum. It would be completely uninviting, and no bandaid solutions along the sidewalks could bring back to life this dead intersection. Can you imagine a 45-story concrete bunker overshadowing Tralfagar Square or a great retail strip like the Champs Elysees?

Great retail strips need a high degree of commitment from public and private actors in terms of urban design and aesthetics. We cannot build poorly constructed flower beds, only for the city to let them wither while the adjacent buildings stick puke-yellow stucco over their depleting brick exterior in an attempt to bring "pizaz" to the streetscape. Neighbourhoods are only as good as their architecture, and should provide the inspiration for greater beautification projects, not the other way around.

Despite the needless flaws, this project has improved Bloor dramatically. The streetscaping makes it more apparent that architecture needs to improve along that stretch of Bloor, something which property owners like that of the HBC building can address. If we invested in the streetscaping of a lot more streets by, for instance, burying overhead wires the neglected buildings would stand out more and would probably see better maintenance.

As for a square at Yonge and Bloor, if it was designed well it would definitely be vibrant. HBC's concrete wall isn't attractive, but it wouldn't scare people away from a great public amenity. In fact, the City could have commissioned a sophisticated pavilion with a cafe to add some architectural interest. Some trees would eventually mature and block HBC from view. And that's assuming HBC would never be improved, which is doubtful.

 

[Tewder]

I feel that some may be misunderstanding my criticism. I have no problem with the project. I love the pavers and planters, and the allees of trees will be a massive improvement. I also don't have a huge problem with the architecture, with certain exceptions obviously. I mean, for the most part it is what it is. The density is good and improvements to certain retail establishments are doing their part. My gripe is with the disfunction that allows an essentially well-intentioned opportunity for urban renewal to go off the rails in the details. Does this ruin the outcome of the whole project? Probably not, but I hate that this even has to be an issue. It should have been done right to start with, bottom line, and I simply cannot excuse that it wasn't or the participants involved. I don't see why we have to be understanding or sympathetic, and feel it is an obligation to demand better.