News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

nfitz said:
That's in reference to the City Manager's report. Which has a larger remit than planning. Presumably the Chief Planner is offering their view from a planning perspective, which is different that the City Toadie^H^H^H^H^H^HManager.
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry, I should have been more specific. The report and recommendations (or lack thereof) are from the City Managers dept, not Planning.
 
When Rob Ford maid the billion dollar claim, I guess the City Manager not have debunked it. He should have just nodded in agreement.
 
The City Manager just repeated that last year staff recommended the remove option, I guess they shouldn't have recommended that option according to some here because they are not politicians.
 
Glyn Bowerman ‏@Banquos_Banquet 5m5 minutes ago
2 Types of Q's to Staff: 1. Please say what I already know to be true. 2. Please confirm my erroneous belief. No? Let me rephrase

So true. This is always the way in these big debates.
 
nfitz said:
Where is this report? Can you provide a link to it?

I see reports from the Deputy City Manager and from the Acting City Manager, but not from the Chief Planner of the Planning Department.

That's in reference to the City Manager's report. Which has a larger remit than planning. Presumably the Chief Planner is offering their view from a planning perspective, which is different that the City Toadie^H^H^H^H^H^HManager.
Click to expand...

That's why I put the last sentence ( I wasn't sure if knew the actual source of the report)

I'm generally ambivalent to the choice, but I prefer remove if pressed to choose.
 
It's painful to hear Councillors who want to develop a boulevard along the corridor since it would be great to "have patios and cafes along the waterfront, and make it pedestrian friendly by adding bike lanes along the boulevard".

I guarantee everyone that this boulevard (if successfully voted through) will be so watered down, it wont even resemble a boulevard similar to University Ave. People will start advocating for bike lanes, reduced speed limits since it "wont have a community feel", lane reductions because there will be "too much traffic", and an LRT line which will "make the boulevard turn into the St.Clair disaster". Personally it's not so much that I dont support the boulevard option, it's just that I know it will be screwed up so bad to the point that it would be completely different than what is being envisioned.

Edit: And now I read that some counsillors (ie: Colle) want to sell off or lease this portion of the Gardiner. Can we just put this in a referendum? I'm losing trust in these people day by day.
 
Last edited:
Amare said:
It's painful to hear Councillors who want to develop a boulevard along the corridor since it would be great to "have patios and cafes along the waterfront, and make it pedestrian friendly by adding bike lanes along the boulevard".

I guarantee everyone that this boulevard (if successfully voted through) will be so watered down, it wont even resemble a boulevard similar to University Ave. People will start advocating for bike lanes, reduced speed limits since it "wont have a community feel", lane reductions because there will be "too much traffic", and an LRT line which will "make the boulevard turn into the St.Clair disaster". Personally it's not so much that I dont support the boulevard option, it's just that I know it will be screwed up so bad to the point that it would be completely different than what is being envisioned.
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me... So basically whatever you would like to do we should do the opposite... Are you George Costanza?
 
Last edited:
Amare said:
It's painful to hear Councillors who want to develop a boulevard along the corridor since it would be great to "have patios and cafes along the waterfront, and make it pedestrian friendly by adding bike lanes along the boulevard".

I guarantee everyone that this boulevard (if successfully voted through) will be so watered down, it wont even resemble a boulevard similar to University Ave. People will start advocating for bike lanes, reduced speed limits since it "wont have a community feel", lane reductions because there will be "too much traffic", and an LRT line which will "make the boulevard turn into the St.Clair disaster". Personally it's not so much that I dont support the boulevard option, it's just that I know it will be screwed up so bad to the point that it would be completely different than what is being envisioned.
Click to expand...

That sounds like it would be an amazing option balancing a variety of transport modes. But no fear this city would ever do anything to take precious road space from suburban commuters.
 
St. Clair West disaster. Hilarious.

I lived on St. Clair West for years. St. Clair West was a disaster before. With seedy businesses, lack of development and poor public transit. The 512 isn't perfect, but the street has certainly seen a lot of reinvestment in recent years, and is much better than it was. Traffic? Please. I'm mostly a driver (work in construction) and the 512 barely affected traffic. If anything created a St. Clair traffic disaster it was all of the big box development in the stockyards area.

I suspect that people who cling to that phrase don't remember what it was actually like, or go there much now.

I can only hope for more St Clair Disasters. We should be so lucky.
 
I have an idea: I'll support the remove option if the developers pay to remove the highway, rather than have public tax dollars do it for them. If they still want it gone because they HAVE to build condos here, then more power to them.

Though considering how cut off this will be from the rest of the city, it will be more like CityPlace than Harbourfront.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top