News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.8K     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
 5K     0 

UD2 said:
Reason triumphs today, I'm happy to see the Mayor and his band of councillors who thinks using their brain are able to defeat the developer backed puppets who tried to destroy our city infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you've been reading too many comic book fables. Was the mayor leading this band wearing some sporting green tights? Is he real handy with a bow and arrow? You think Tory isn't cozy with developers?
 
ssiguy2 said:
The debate is over and at leats now developers and Waterfront Toronto can develop future plans with certainty and that's a good thing.

I would have preferred a teardown but Toronto can still create a wonderful Waterfront that is far better with the Gardiner than without. Seeing Lakeshore will be redone, the entire area under the Gardiner is a clean slate. They can make it a pedestrian wonderland as long as they don't allow any bikes which guarantees little pedestrian life.

Cover the enire underside with beautiful wood panelling, old style lamp fixtures, cafes, restaurants, food stalls, clothing stores.......make the Gardiner a "go to" place. A combo Yonge/Queen/Kensington Market. The area where people in the Waterfront/Portlands go to do their shopping, entertainment, get a drink, grab a bite to eat, watch street performers, buy their fresh produce or meet friends for a coffee. The entire stretch from Yonge to the DVP could prove to the world tha elevated urban expressways can be a city's best friend.

An area where after walking down Yonge and taking in all the weird sights and sounds people don't stop at Union but keep going and "do the Gardiner". The Gardiner could become Toronto's urban oasis that unlike any other offers a 4 season. Toronto is a winter city and the Gardiner could be the place everyone wants to see and be seen even when it's raining or snowing.

It's true that this was a decision for 100 years and it could turn out to be one of the best the city every made. If Toronto gets this right, in 20 years to 100 years from now people will be looking back and commending Tory and the current councillors for having the wisdom to keep the elvated highway and people will say "thank god they didn't tear down the Gardiner".
Click to expand...

See Borough Market in London. It's under a network of three different railway lines.
 
Lenser said:
Sounds like you've been reading too many comic book fables. Was the mayor leading this band wearing some sporting green tights? Is he real handy with a bow and arrow? You think Tory isn't cozy with developers?
Click to expand...

It's especially funny when you consider the one reason why Tory pushed the Hybrid so much is because of his developer friends at the Unilever site.
 
WislaHD said:
It's especially funny when you consider the one reason why Tory pushed the Hybrid so much is because of his developer friends at the Unilever site.
Click to expand...

The Unilever site is vitally important to Tory. His untested Tax Increment Financing plan, to fund Toronto's share of the $8 billion cost by dramatically raising the value of specific lands, relies on huge development on the First Gulf site, a likely home to a SmartTrack station. Last month Gerofsky at public works committee repeated the importance of a Queens Quay LRT and other transit options to maximize the site's potential. "We always knew in order to pull this off we needed great transit."-Toronto Star
Click to expand...
Well then, if its all about his friends, he should be pushing for the East Bayfront LRT then!
 
Rainforest said:
I think, it is a bit more complex than that. Certainly, downtown has been overlooked in the past few decades in terms of transit investments, and it needs more transit (for the benefit of the whole city). However, the assumption that downtown heavily subsidizes those pesky suburbanites is not necessarily correct. Downtown has art facilities that belong to the whole city, but in practice are more accessible for those who live nearby. The fact that suburbanites travel to downtown jobs, and then dine and job in the area, contributes to the downtown's property tax base to some extent. Etc
Click to expand...

It would be even more accurate to say that downtown commercial properties subsidize the rest of the city given that buildings and office workers don't require much by way of city services - policing, social services, etc. - yet building owners contribute millions towards the city's budget. The city does have a strong interest in cultivating the continued attractiveness of the downtown core for this very reason. I will also note that the Financial District BIA was in support of the Hybrid option; not a group of taxpayers you want to piss off.
 
ttk77 said:
I certainly won't be making the mistake of voting for Tory again.
Click to expand...
So which unqualified city-destroyer will you be foisting on us next time because you fail to properly research your vote. (not aiming this at anyone in particular ...
 
DarnDirtyApe said:
It would be even more accurate to say that downtown commercial properties subsidize the rest of the city given that buildings and office workers don't require much by way of city services - policing, social services, etc. - yet building owners contribute millions towards the city's budget. The city does have a strong interest in cultivating the continued attractiveness of the downtown core for this very reason. I will also note that the Financial District BIA was in support of the Hybrid option; not a group of taxpayers you want to piss off.
Click to expand...

Not really, they have been pissed off multiple times through inaction in the transit file (which arguably is far more catalytic than keeping the Gardiner). MINT can survive without that stretch of the highway - it can't grow without continual transit expansion.

AoD
 
nfitz said:
So which unqualified city-destroyer will you be foisting on us next time because you fail to properly research your vote. (not aiming this at anyone in particular ...
Click to expand...

Hey, a lot of us supported Soknacki. :(

I remain in my position that Chow would not have been a lot better.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Not really, they have been pissed off multiple times through inaction in the transit file (which arguably is far more catalytic than keeping the Gardiner). MINT can survive without that stretch of the highway - it can't grow without continual transit expansion.

AoD
Click to expand...

Sure the Financial District will survive, but the BIA presumably supported the Hybrid option for a reason. They have a vested interest in ensuring that the core is accessible both by transit and for cars and trucks. Doing business downtown is expensive enough as it is without layering in potentially increased congestion for suppliers coming in from the east side of the city.

And there's always the threat of expansion in 905... this has abated in recent years but the pendulum can always shift back.

Anyway, my point was that it's primarily downtown businesses who subsidize everything else.
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
So which unqualified city-destroyer will you be foisting on us next time because you fail to properly research your vote. (not aiming this at anyone in particular ...
Click to expand...

So if the only two realistic winners are "unqualified city-destroyers" who do you vote for? Had everyone voted their conscience and Ford had won as a result how would you have reacted? Olivia's unqualified disaster of a campaign is what brought this on...it was hers to lose and she lost it.
 
As an out-of-towner who only visits the city / downtown to meet friends or to be a tourist, both options seemed good to me.

I prefer the hybrid approach, but I wouldn't be upset if it was completely demoed either.

Tough call and good for Toronto city council for actually making a decision on it.

Is there still the option of moving the new elevated section closer to the rail line?
 
Haljackey said:
Is there still the option of moving the new elevated section closer to the rail line?
Click to expand...

Staff is supposed to report on that possibility in September. The real issue they should look at is moving Lakeshore out from underneath the Gardiner and eliminating/redesigning some ramps - report after report called for that in the "maintain" framework.

There is no point beating this dead horse again during the term of this administration, the focus should be exact the maximium amount of funding for redesigning the mess.

AoD
 
Last edited:
ttk77 said:
So if the only two realistic winners are "unqualified city-destroyers" who do you vote for?
Click to expand...
Neither of course. If I were to do that, then that would be a complete moralistic failure. I can't imagine I could ever be that immoral.

ttk77 said:
Had everyone voted their conscience and Ford had won as a result how would you have reacted?
Click to expand...
Se we'd have one right-wing kook instead of the other right-wing kook. But we'd have one who was already a laughing stock, and unlikely to get much traction on any major issues. You seem to be still under the illusion that Tory is a significant improvement on Ford. A marginal improvement perhaps ... but he'll accomplish far more than Ford ever did. I'd prefer an ineffective far-right leader than an effective one.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top