News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Someone with close contacts at City Hall confided to me that the majority of those involved in the planning and upkeep of Toronto's public realm drive and live in the suburbs. Their priorities lie elsewhere and even under Miller the city struggled to hire people who lived in the old city because any preference based on location would be deemed as discrimination.

At least this is not entirely true. I regularly encounter one of the managers for this area cycling along Dundas to work.
 
Someone with close contacts at City Hall confided to me that the majority of those involved in the planning and upkeep of Toronto's public realm drive and live in the suburbs. Their priorities lie elsewhere and even under Miller the city struggled to hire people who lived in the old city because any preference based on location would be deemed as discrimination.
Sounds like complete b.s.
 
Sounds like complete b.s.
There have been court cases about municipalities trying to force staff (often police or fire) to live in the municipality. As far as I know, all such rules were rejected by the courts because of the freedom of movement rights we all have. Of course one should hire the best person for the job but you cannot, apparently, take their place of residence into account.
 
My source also told me that Bloomberg makes sure that everyone in his city hall that is involved with any planning decisions lives in the city of New York proper.

At our city hall you can be a member of the planning department and live in Markham - commuting by car every day. What type of city do we think they are going to build? To what detriment to the locals?

For what it's worth, my contact is a professor at U of T.
 
Someone with close contacts at City Hall confided to me that the majority of those involved in the planning and upkeep of Toronto's public realm drive and live in the suburbs. Their priorities lie elsewhere and even under Miller the city struggled to hire people who lived in the old city because any preference based on location would be deemed as discrimination.

Whether or not the majority of these people live in the suburbs, it's clear that their idea of what constitutes an acceptable public realm is fundamentally suburban/rural, and is completely car-centric.
 
Whether or not the majority of these people live in the suburbs, it's clear that their idea of what constitutes an acceptable public realm is fundamentally suburban/rural, and is completely car-centric.
This is simply untrue.
 
This is simply untrue.

The norm on Toronto's main streets is narrow sidewalks, incredible visual clutter and pervasive use of the cheapest solutions - whether for repairing utility cuts, planting trees or stringing wires from wooden poles. It's not an urban look but it is our default setting and it's the result of choices made by our civil servants and politicians.
 
The norm on Toronto's main streets is narrow sidewalks, incredible visual clutter and pervasive use of the cheapest solutions - whether for repairing utility cuts, planting trees or stringing wires from wooden poles. It's not an urban look but it is our default setting and it's the result of choices made by our civil servants and politicians.

I couldn't agree more!
 
The norm on Toronto's main streets is narrow sidewalks, incredible visual clutter and pervasive use of the cheapest solutions - whether for repairing utility cuts, planting trees or stringing wires from wooden poles. It's not an urban look but it is our default setting and it's the result of choices made by our civil servants and politicians.

 

The photo is of Jarvis and Wellesley. The bike lanes you see on Jarvis are about to disappear to accommodate resurrection of the reversible 5th lane and better serve drivers, which would seem to be consistent with the notion that the city privileges automobiles above other modes of transportation. Wellesley is certainly a lot less shabby than the Toronto norm, but I wouldn't say it's representative.
 
The photo is of Jarvis and Wellesley. The bike lanes you see on Jarvis are about to disappear to accommodate resurrection of the reversible 5th lane and better serve drivers, which would seem to be consistent with the notion that the city privileges automobiles above other modes of transportation. Wellesley is certainly a lot less shabby than the Toronto norm, but I wouldn't say it's representative.

Ya, we know about the bike lanes and wasted tax payer dollars to turn Jarvis Street back into a highway to save drivers two or three minutes of driving time, the point was to highlight all the markings on the road and sidewalk done in early October.
 
Ya, we know about the bike lanes and wasted tax payer dollars to turn Jarvis Street back into a highway to save drivers two or three minutes of driving time, the point was to highlight all the markings on the road and sidewalk done in early October.

I didn't look closely enough to see the markings the first time. It looks like some really big utility cuts are planned for that sidewalk. Any idea of what they're for? Also, does anyone think it would make a difference if we asked Kristin Wong-Tam's office to monitor the project and demand decent and timely repairs to the sidewalk afterwards?
 
If I'm not mistaken, orange is for telecommunications. That's a really good idea re: discussing the problem of nasty sidewalk repairs with KWT to see if there's a better way for departments/contractors to better co-ordinate the work and improve patch jobs plus in a more timely fashion, as I noted those markings have been there for nearly a month now. After all, nearly half of her Ward is in one of the busist, most high profile areas in the city so if she was onboard with the idea I'm sure she'd work with Councillors Vaughan & McConnel on the issue.
 

Back
Top