Torontovibe said:
That response is a total joke. Obviously nobody in Ford's office reads or gives a damn what taxpayers have to say. Yes, we are not citizens, just taxpayers.
Click to expand...

We aren't even the right type of taxpayers! The real taxpayers are hardworking, honest people who've had enough of Miller's spend-all party at city hall.

If you don't fit there, you're obviously skipping on your taxes.
 
A city report to the Government Management Committee has recommended 45 Strachan Ave & 10 Ordnance St to be declared surplus and turned over to Build Toronto.
 
Marcanadian said:
Then I got a generic automated response seconds later from Rob Ford:
Click to expand...

Lucky you. I've written 'Bob & Doug' twice (and copied my Councillor, Kristyn Wong-Tam) and never even received an automated response, let alone a response. I must note that Kristyn Wong-Tam responded to both of my letters enthusiastically, and quickly. My second letter was also copied to one of the City Planners who also responded in a detailed and very timely manner. I won't waste my time with that useless Ford again.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Lucky you. I've written 'Bob & Doug' twice (and copied my Councillor, Kristyn Wong-Tam) and never even received an automated response, let alone a response. I must note that Kristyn Wong-Tam responded to both of my letters enthusiastically, and quickly. My second letter was also copied to one of the City Planners who also responded in a detailed and very timely manner. I won't waste my time with that useless Ford again.
Click to expand...

He probably has thousands of emails sent his way compared to Wong-Tam. Give it time.
 
Mike in TO said:
A city report to the Government Management Committee has recommended 45 Strachan Ave & 10 Ordnance St to be declared surplus and turned over to Build Toronto.
Click to expand...

I'm so happy Build Toronto is becoming a slush fund for the Ford government.
 
The point was not to build a cheap, ugly utility, but to construct a structure that recognized both the location and history of Fort York. What strikes me as amazing if how easily some people will completely write off the public realm in the name cheapness and expedience. Some of those individuals will then travel to other countries to see attractive public infrastructure and wonder why it can't be done here. The reason is because quality design and attractive additions to the public realm are deemed to be nothing more than "gravy" or viewed as frivolous expenditures. Civic parsimony is celebrated at the expense of the people.
 
khristopher said:
It's the Toronto government, not the Ford government.
Click to expand...

Yes, in theory, but the Brothers Ford have been quite clever in getting people, including the Provincial government, to act as though the Mayor can decide things without any input from Council - the death of Transit City being a very good example.
 
Everyone here seems to be ignoring the elephant in the room. $23-million for a pedestrian bridge? The hugely controversial and extremely busy Millennium bridge in London was only £18-million - with everything that went wrong during the construction.

I'm sure the bridge would be useful; and I'm in favour of something. But that's a lot of change for a bridge that to be honest, isn't going to be that heavily used.
 
nfitz said:
Everyone here seems to be ignoring the elephant in the room. $23-million for a pedestrian bridge? The hugely controversial and extremely busy Millennium bridge in London was only £18-million - with everything that went wrong
Click to expand...

Ah, but recall that was in 1998-2001 GBP at a time when the exchange rate was 2-2.5:1, inflation and exchange rates being what they are. So adjusted for inflation and the contemporaneous exchange rate you're probably looking north of $50 mil in today's dollars......

Making our bridge look more reasonable by comparison, no?

;)
 
I wouldn't think a project like this should cost 1/2 of what such a major project like the Millennium bridge cost. 1/10 maybe ...

There must be cheaper solutions that do the job. I'm not even sure I think much of the design - seems to meander more than necessary lengthening trip times. Is there a good plan of the location and paths? When I look, I keep finding these renders that don't tell what's really going on.
 
nfitz said:
I wouldn't think a project like this should cost 1/2 of what such a major project like the Millennium bridge cost. 1/10 maybe ...

There must be cheaper solutions that do the job.
Click to expand...

Landmark architecture may be many things, but cheap ain't one of them.
 
nfitz said:
Everyone here seems to be ignoring the elephant in the room. $23-million for a pedestrian bridge? The hugely controversial and extremely busy Millennium bridge in London was only £18-million - with everything that went wrong during the construction.

I'm sure the bridge would be useful; and I'm in favour of something. But that's a lot of change for a bridge that to be honest, isn't going to be that heavily used.
Click to expand...

I agree, and to boot, people still want this whole fiasco approved at 4.2 million bucks over the original quote/budget of 18 million...hey im all for a half decent cheaper solution.
 
Automation Gallery said:
I agree, and to boot, people still want this whole fiasco approved at 4.2 million bucks over the original quote/budget of 18 million...hey im all for a half decent cheaper solution.
Click to expand...

You think starting the process again is going to save us money? The only way we are going to "save" money (money already budgeted for!) is when the bridge is cancelled. Notice I didn't say if.

Sigh. Four more years of destruction/cancelled projects/corruption-laced selling of assets. I can't wait!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top