Sean Marshall

Tag: Toronto

  • Suburban cycling infrastructure: the 416 versus the 905

    IMG_2051-001Riding along the McNicoll hydro corridor in northern Scarborough

    Earlier this summer, I took two rides from my downtown apartment to suburban locations. On one ride, I biked northeast to Agincourt, on another trip, I biked to Downtown Brampton on a route that took me past the Humber River and Etobicoke Creek. I experienced different standards for on-street and off-road cycling routes. The City of Toronto generally does better, but suburban cycling infrastructure generally depends on off-road trails, rather than on-street bike lanes and cycle tracks.

    In the urban, central part of Toronto, bike lanes and cycle tracks (separated bike lanes located along major streets) are the predominant form of cycling infrastructure. While there are some bike lanes in suburban Toronto and in other municipalities like Mississauga and Brampton, most bike routes, if they exist, are off-road multi-use trails, in ravine or hydro corridors, or alongside major roads, like sidewalks.

    Multi-use paths are pleasant to ride on, but they’re often treated as recreational trails, rather than transportation corridors. Most paths are not cleared of snow in the winter (winter cycling really should be encouraged), and they are often isolated from the adjacent road network and local destinations, and they can meander, rather than follow straight lines. Road crossings can often be awkward.

    Bike lanes, which offer less protection from motorized traffic at least are integrated with the rest of the street grid, and are generally more direct. But on fast-moving suburban arterials, they aren’t ideal without separation. This is where the side-of-road path comes in.

    IMG_2305-001Shared pathway, Derry Road, Mississauga

    (more…)

  • Toronto’s new rapid transit plan

    Yesterday, City Council decided, by a vote of 27-16, to go ahead with the $3.1 billion one-stop extension of the Bloor-Danforth Subway to Scarborough Centre, rejecting Councillor Josh Matlow’s last-ditch attempt to resurrect the LRT replacement and extension of the ageing Scarborough LRT line. Council — Mayor Tory included — also voted to spend resources studying three more suburban subway extensions and a re-alignment of the proposed Relief Line subway backed by the local councillor.

    Unfortunately, the chance of going back to the less-expensive, yet longer seven-stop light rail line is slim-to-nil at this point. In my view, it’s time for transit advocates that backed the LRT to focus their energies elsewhere. Like Metrolinx’s fare integration strategy, and the plans for other LRT lines, such as the eastern and western extensions of the Eglinton-Crosstown.

    TT - Scarborough VoteHow council voted on Councillor Matlow’s motion to resurrect the LRT option for Scarborough

    In order to ensure that he had enough votes, John Tory entertained Ward 39 Councillor Jim Karygiannis’ motion for a study on an extension of the Sheppard Line from Don Mills Station to Scarborough Centre. (There’s a LRT proposed for Sheppard East, but no matter.) Karygiannis’ motion passed, as well as several other councillors’ pet subway projects. Ward 10 Councillor James Pasternak has long pushed for a Sheppard Subway extension west between Sheppard-Yonge and Downsview Stations, and he successfully got that included as well. Finally, Justin Di Ciano (Ward 5) got a study approved for a subway extension in his ward as well, resurrecting a long-dormant proposal for a subway extension from Kipling Station to Sherway Gardens.

    It’s worth noting that all three right-leaning councillors are reliable votes for John Tory.

    Downtown, Paula Fletcher (Ward 30) moved that staff re-examine the Relief Line, moving the recommended alignment from under Pape Avenue to Carlaw Avenue between Gerrard and Queen Streets. This would shift the planned — yet unfunded — subway line two blocks west. The Pape alignment was chosen for ease of construction and operation (the line must curve from north to west just south of Queen Street), and is only two blocks away. That study will cost $520,000 and staff time.

    All these new studies are illustrated below. For clarity’s sake, the Sheppard East LRT, the Scarborough LRT proposal, and the existing Scarborough RT (Line 3) are removed. You can read more about how the votes went down on Steve Munro’s site.

    Transit Plan July 2016The map of planned, approved and existing rapid transit lines, and those extensions and re-alignments approved for study

    The “subways, subways, subways” sentiment is alive and well at City Hall, even if Rob Ford has passed on. And despite the thirst for expensive new subway lines,  Mayor Tory is still backing an austerity agenda at City Hall. Apart from the decorum, not much has changed in the mayor’s office.

  • What do I know? I’m just a downtown elitist

    23211094949_cd3f8fc6a1_k

    I once described Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong as the city official that “knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.” In 2014, Minnan-Wong complained about the costs of building new washrooms at the soccer fields at Cherry Beach, holding up a sign that simply said “$600,000.” That photo of Minnan-Wong, scowling for the cameras, trying to generate some outrage in an election year, was meme gold and so was parodied in the #TOpoli Twittersphere.

    At $600,000, yes the washrooms were expensive. But as they were built in an isolated part of the Portlands, they required a new connection to the nearest watermain; a sewage tank had to be constructed as well, being so far from existing lines. The city has a mandate to provide quality parks and recreational facilities. Minnan-Wong, along with the Fords, also complained about the costs of umbrellas at Sugar Beach, a popular new waterfront park.

    In 2016, under Mayor John Tory’s administration, we have a City that doesn’t know the cost of some things (like the Scarborough Subway) nor does it know the value of other, smaller things, like the Toronto sign.

    The Toronto sign, placed on Nathan Phillips Square ahead of last year’s Pan Am Games proved to be incredibly popular with residents and tourists alike. The LED backlighting allows the sign to be coloured at night to mark any holiday or any important current or special event. The $100,000 climbable sign (reminiscent of the successful “I amsterdam” signs) was supposed to be temporary, and will have to be replaced within three years. A staff report estimate the cost of major repairs to the existing sign, and a new mobile sign, would cost $421,700 over two years. This would be money well spent.

    But some councillors, including Etobicoke’s Stephen Holyday and Scarborough’s Raymond Cho, would rather privatize the sign, perhaps selling it off. At least Councillor David Shiner, a fiscal conservative, called it “a potent symbol of Toronto pride and unity” after amalgamation, but even he questioned the need for paying for city staff to maintain the sign. A strong argument could be made that the costs to maintain the sign should come from Tourism Toronto and the local tourism industry, but calls from some quarters to sell it off are ridiculous.

    Last Friday, we learned that the estimated cost of building the one-stop, six kilometre subway extension to Scarborough Centre jumped from $2.0 billion to $2.9 billion. But unlike cycling infrastructure or fully funding an effective Vision Zero program to protect vulnerable road users, the mayor, key council allies, and provincial MPPs remain hell-bent on building it.

    Scarborough Centre MPP Brad Duguid, a powerful cabinet minister in the provincial Liberal government, quoted in the Toronto Sun, said that critics of the subway plan “…have been yapping away on this project from Day 1 and the vast majority of those critics come from fairly elitist downtown views of the city. People in Scarborough and the suburbs of Toronto count as well.” Duguid claimed that “the area surrounding the new [Scarborough Centre] station is growing fast.” Never mind that population and employment densities are not very high along the subway route, even in Scarborough Centre, and no major commercial development has come to central Scarborough since the 1990s.

    On Metro Morning, Duguid, a former city councillor who endorsed John Tory’s mayoral bids in 2003 and 2014, doubled down on his previous rhetoric. He repeated false claims about Scarborough Centre’s growth, claimed Scarborough residents have paid for downtown subway expansions, he even stated that the Scarborough Subway “transcends politics” (which earned a guffaw from host Matt Galloway).

    I live downtown, and I don’t use the subway; like many who live here, I walk to work. Many others cycle, or take overcrowded streetcars on King and Queen Streets. The Yonge Subway is overcrowded from commuters from outside the downtown core. Most downtowners wouldn’t directly benefit from a Relief Line either, but it’s an essential part of the network. The last subway built in Downtown Toronto was in 1966. I’m hardly an “elitist” either; I rent my apartment. I don’t enjoy many luxuries, and I certainly don’t hold a position of power or influence. I simply want the best transit for the best price; the Scarborough LRT, along with GO Transit RER and the Eglinton-Crosstown and Scarborough-Malvern light rail corridors represent the right investment for the eastern half of Toronto.

    We’re content to keep up an underused section of the Gardiner at greater expense than an urban boulevard, at the cost of lost development opportunities on the eastern waterfront. We’re committed to a $2.9 billion, 6 kilometre one-stop extension when a 10 kilometre, 6-stop LRT would cost $1.8 billion, funded entirely by the province. But we’ll complain about umbrellas and washrooms, budget too little for road safety plans, and question the costs of maintaining a popular sign at City Hall. I love this city, but sometimes Toronto still gets me down.

  • Leadership, John Tory style (updated)

    Updated May 29

    I was frustrated this week by Mayor John Tory’s pronouncement that he’s “not in favour of adding any more politicians here,” referring to the proposed new ward boundaries released last week that would increase the number of city councillors from 44 to 47. This is despite a rigorous and solid process, with plenty of public and stakeholder consultation sessions. But to Tory, “politician” is a dirty word. Never mind that the boundaries were created in 2000, from even older federal/provincial boundaries that based on the 1991 census, Tory doesn’t like the solution developed after three years of work.

    2014 Election - 2018 Ward Projections
    The discrepancy between each ward’s population and the city-wide average in 2018

    Instead, Mayor Tory wants staff to back to the drawing board and come up with a plan that he likes, following the fine tradition in municipal politics of ignoring the advice and hard work of staff and outside experts because you don’t like the answer they give. Tory’s hand-picked Executive Committee agreed with his motion to defer the debate until the fall. 

    This is a problem. It’s necessary for aspiring candidates to be organizing right now if they want even a slight chance of knocking off an incumbent councillor. For that reason, the boundaries need to be decided as soon as possible. And adding three new councillors really shouldn’t be a big ask — it would cost $870,000 a year, including the costs of hiring additional assistants.

    One reason why Calgary’s Naheed Nenshi is a great mayor is because he trusts his staff and praises their hard work. I was at a lecture in which Mayor Nenshi took very little credit for that city’s response to the 2013 floods. Instead, he spoke about how he. along with senior city staff responded in a coordinated manner, involving all city employees and citizen volunteers in the effort to minimize the flood’s impact and clean up the damage.

    John Tory, on the other hand, shames city staff and local councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam in a crass stunt for Jack Lakey, author of “The Fixer” column in the Toronto Star. This reminds me very much of Rob Ford’s modus operandi.

    In the article, Mayor Tory is photographed cleaning up a planter on Alexander Street, as he explained that he was frustrated by the city bureaucracy who couldn’t get the planter repaired and looking good. Rob Ford was famous for this kind of stunt — filling in potholes, attending to residents’ complaints — often going over the head of councillors or city staffers. Urban forestry manager Dean Hart is named and shamed, but that department does not have responsibility for planters — that’s Transportation Services, which Lakey glosses over. To quote a friend: “so a city division which gets annual budget reductions declines to do work that’s out of scope, and in turn gets this response?” That’s not leadership.

    Leadership means addressing the real problems. Perhaps there is a problem with buck-passing. Maybe there’s a way to improve communications between city departments. A good leader involves the parties responsible and encourages them to find a solution, not publicly shame them. Maybe a leader doesn’t demand annual budget cuts in all areas (except, of course, the police), then blames staff when the effects of the budget cuts become visible. Meanwhile, Ward 27 is the most populated in the city, and Councillor Wong-Tam one of the hardest-working on council. Yet Tory doesn’t want to implement a sensible ward boundary plan.

    Running for election, John Tory liked using the word “bold” a lot, especially when he was touting his signature transit plan, SmartTrack. He promised leadership, but has instead dithered on or deep-sixed important initiatives, like a city-wide cycling network (He won’t back crucial sections of a new city-wide cycling network, saying only that he supports “sensible” bike lanes.

    On police reform, Tory dithered on eliminating the racist practice of carding until forced to take a position when a group of prominent citizens spoke out against it.

    As for social programs and revenue tools to fund essential city services and infrastructure, Tory would rather keep property taxes below inflation, despite the warnings of top bureaucrats. As Desmond Cole points out, Tory is pretty much carrying out Rob Ford’s agenda of low taxes, weak leadership on issues like police reform, and ignoring the plight of Toronto’s poor and lower-income residents. Car owners and homeowners (particularly the owners of single-family dwellings) rule in John Tory’s Toronto.

    Yet, we’ll keep up a needless section of elevated highway. But, at the same time, we can’t build a new streetcar line in the East Waterfront.

    As one person on Twitter pointed out, had we given central Toronto the representation it deserved, Council might have decided to go with the least-expensive Boulevard Option for the eastern section of the Gardiner Expressway. And committees like Public Works and Infrastructure, which has control over items such as cycling infrastructure, are dominated by suburban councillors.

     

    Bike Routes and Wards
    Cycling infrastructure and Public Works and Infrastructure Committee membership by ward.

    Sure, John Tory won’t embarrass us. He won’t smoke crack, he won’t be caught uttering blatantly racist remarks and he’ll march in the Pride Parade. But he’ll continue the Ford agenda of low taxes and reduced city spending, except for things like the Gardiner East. And it now appears that he will continue Ford’s legacy of crass photo-ops, pretending to care about “customer service.”

    But the city will continue to grow, and we’ll see some progress on important issues, such as inclusionary zoning to build some new affordable housing. There are lots of good people — prominent advocates and people working behind the scenes, staffers and councillors at City Hall, community leaders and great organizations pushing for better — that desire a better city and continue to make Toronto great. There’s plenty of bold leadership for a city that needs it, but you’re not going to find it inside the mayor’s office.

  • Mapping Toronto’s proposed new ward boundaries

    18506683800_6c96dcc66b_k

    Toronto is way overdue for ward boundary reform. Finally, in time for the 2018 election, Toronto will have reshaped ward boundaries — and probably three new wards. This will give quickly-growing Downtown Toronto and North York Centre more representation at City Council.

    Consultants retained by the City of Toronto have been tasked with reviewing the size and shape of Toronto’s wards, and providing a recommendation for new ward boundaries. Back in August 2015, an options report was released with five distinct options. After further consultation, the final report was released yesterday, May 16.

    The final report’s recommendation is similar to the “Minimal Change” option in last August’s options report, but there have been some minor tweaks to the ward boundaries. If the recommendations are approved by City Council, there will be 47 wards, up from 44. Each new ward will have an average population of 61,000, with a range between 51,800 and 72,000 (+/- 15%). These new wards are designed to last for four election cycles, and will be re-drawn again in time for the 2034 election.

    The report will be considered by the Executive Committee on May 24, 2016, which will vote on a recommendation to take to City Council on June 7, 2016. If there are no further hiccups, this gives just over two years for aspiring council candidates and city staff to prepare for the next election, which will be held on Monday, October 22, 2018.

    The recommendation brought forward is a compromise that improves representation in high-growth areas, while minimizing the loss of council representation elsewhere. It increases the number of councillors, but by a minimal amount. (Had Toronto maintained the practice of having two wards per provincial/federal riding, there would be 50 councillors.) Happily, proposals to cut the number of representatives at City Council were not a very popular idea. In terms of staffing and associated costs, each councillor costs approximately $290,000; it would therefore cost about $870,000 to add three new wards, which in my opinion, is a bargain.

    While Downtown Toronto will gain three new seats, and North York gaining one, one seat is lost in Toronto’s west end, in current wards 14, 17, 18. This probably squeezes out Cesar Palacio, a rather poor city councillor who remains in office despite strong competition in the last few elections. Otherwise, despite ward boundary shifts across most of the city, every incumbent councillor should easily find a home that’s mostly made up of their current turf.

    I created the CartoDB interactive map, linked below, for Torontoist; my full article is available there.

    I mapped the results of the 2014 election for every ward in the city — that was the primary reason why I started this blog in November 2014. That previous work should be helpful for predicting the results of the 2018 election with the new boundaries.

    https://seanmarshall1.cartodb.com/viz/5c5c1540-1b21-11e6-8cfa-0ecd1babdde5/map

     

  • On Toronto’s newest ten-year cycling plan

    The newly completed Finch Hydro Corridor
    The Finch Hydro Corridor

    The City of Toronto has released a new proposed Ten Year Cycling Network Plan, which establishes a minimum grid of cycling infrastructure across the entire city. It will be presented to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee next week; city staff, who have worked long and hard on this project, consulting many stakeholders and members of the public, recommend its adoption by City Council. It will create over 500 kilometres of safer cycling routes, while connecting existing bike lanes and trails to each other. The plan would cost just over $150 million over ten years, a bargain.

    Of course, we’ve been down this road before. Only a fraction of the cycling infrastructure approved in previous plans has been built. And many new trails that were built — following hydro corridors and abandoned railways in suburban parts of the city — don’t connect to nearby ravines and parks. And railways and highways remain major barriers; there are only three places where the city’s designated cycling network crosses Highway 401.

    Last week’s Council approval of the Bloor Street bike lanes between Shaw Street and Avenue Road — a simple pilot project — didn’t look like a sure thing, even though it ended up voting 38-3 in favour.

    Deputy Mayor Denzil Minnan-Wong warned of “bike lane creep,” afraid that a safe bike route would extend to Danforth Avenue (which it should). And Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 3, Etobicoke Centre) ridiculously claimed cycling advocates were “trying to build a wall” around the downtown core, ignoring the fact that there’s a subway along the same corridor, which moves many times more people than two lanes of Bloor Street, and there are other options — such as the Gardiner Expressway, which we are needlessly committed to keeping up — for getting downtown with a car.

    Some of the highlights of the new plan:

    • Long distance cycling corridors, such as Bloor/Danforth from Etobicoke to Kingston Road in Scarborough, Kingston Road from the Beaches to West Hill, and Yonge Street from Downtown to Steeles Avenue.
    • New connections across railways, ravines and highways.
    • Extensions to popular off-road trails, such as the West Toronto Railpath.

    Highways are very dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists to cross: high-speed ramps are marked with signs telling pedestrians to wait for gaps. Cyclists must navigate cars quickly changing lanes and exiting freeways. And railways can create long, impenetrable barriers unless pedestrians trespass on railway property. I wrote about it at more length in Spacing.

    The worst example might be where Bridgeland Road ends on one side of the Metrolinx-owned Newmarket Subdivision (GO Transit’s Barrie Line) and Floral Parkway ends on the other side. Highway 401 conspires to make this an exceptionally bad case. Happily, this is one of the places where the city seeks to build a new bridge or tunnel to allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross safely, and I am glad to see other gaps addressed in this latest plan.


    An example of how railways and highways create barriers to active transporation

    There are four large maps (large PDF files) that show the existing cycling network and the proposed new routes. They correspond to the four community council boundaries.

    Toronto and East York
    North York
    Etobicoke-York
    Scarborough

    It’s not only important that City Council approve this new plan, it’s also crucial that proponents of active transportation keep on top of the city to actually build the new cycling infrastructure and multi-use paths and bridges. We’ve seen this play out before: council approves a great plan for cycling, for transit, for urban development, and then rests on its laurels. Let’s do better this time around.

  • Where the sidewalk ends in Toronto (Updated)

    IMG_3357
    McNicoll Avenue at Boxdene Avenue. There’s no sidewalk on the south side of this busy Scarborough road.

    Update: I posted a revised and updated version of the map and article on Spacing Toronto. There, I mention a new absurdity in the war on sidewalks: on Glen Scarlett Road, near the old Stockyards in Toronto’s Junction neighbourhood, the city is proposing  a new sidewalk for 2016 as part of a road reconstruction project.

    The local councillor, Frances Nunziata, is siding with local industry in opposing a sidewalk. Local industries — including slaughterhouses and warehouses — oppose a sidewalk as it would cross their loading docks; Nunziata’s office claims that since the street “is unsafe for pedestrians to be walking on due to heavy traffic, [the City] should not be encouraging pedestrians to use this road by installing a sidewalk.”

    This logic is completely counter-intuitive. It ignores the needs of workers walking to work, and local residents walking to the streetcar loop at St. Clair Avenue and Gunns Road, or to nearby shopping and residential areas.

     

    There was a very interesting interview on CBC Radio’s Metro Morning on Tuesday, February 16). Host Matt Galloway spoke with Fiona Chapman, the City of Toronto’s manager of pedestrian projects, on missing sidewalks. Nearly one-quarter of all local streets in Toronto don’t have a sidewalk; many more only have a sidewalk on one side of the street. Chapman was discussing a presentation to the City’s Disability, Access, Inclusion and Advisory Committee on staff recommendations that would seek to fix this problem.

    CityData - SidewalksStatic map showing the City of Toronto’s sidewalk inventory as of 2011.

    Most local streets that don’t have sidewalks are found outside the old Cities of Toronto, East York and York, particularly in parts of Etobicoke, North York and Scarborough built in the 1950s and 1960s. Some of these residential and industrial streets were built with ditches instead of storm drains; others were laid out without sidewalks in mind. In the master-planned Don Mills development, there are many walkways connecting parks, major roads, and schools; it was likely intended that these would be used for getting around on foot rather than sidewalks. In other post-war subdivisions, particularly affluent areas like those in central Etobicoke, it was probably assumed that everyone would get around by car.

    The City of Toronto is hoping to change this. As roads come up for reconstruction, the new policy, recommended by staff, is to install a sidewalk where there isn’t one already, even despite local opposition. The current policy, in place since 2002, is that a new sidewalk could only be installed on an existing local street after the local councillor completed a consult of the neighbourhood and there was a consensus supporting the installation.

    In Toronto, the installation of new sidewalks has been surprisingly controversial. But the city’s presentation lists some of the reasons why sidewalks are often opposed. Sidewalks have to be cleared by the adjoining landowner. Residents can’t park their cars in the driveway if they block the sidewalk. They might result in the removal of landscaping or trees. And there is a minority who just want to keep outsiders out of their neighbourhoods. You could call this NIMBY-ism, even though sidewalks are technically is in the front yards, not the backyards, of local opponents.

    Sidewalks provide safe, accessible routes for pedestrians, especially important for people using strollers or mobility devices. They promote the city’s initiatives encouraging children to walk to school, for all persons to engage in physical activity, and for seniors to age at home. City policy, including the Toronto Pedestrian Charter, supports sidewalks.

    On Chine Drive, in an affluent part of Scarborough near the Bluffs, local residents opposed the construction of a sidewalk, even though it would provide a safe path to a nearby school. Since 2004, some residents opposed the sidewalk, claiming that they were afraid it would “take away from the rustic look of the neighbourhood.” Supporters, including parents with young children, wanted a safe route to the local school. It took ten years, but in 2014, the sidewalk was installed.

    Last year, on nearby Midland Avenue South, there was a similar fight to keep sidewalks off of that street. This is despite the fact this section of Midland Avenue is designated as a collector road, and is part of the Waterfront Trail’s route in the Scarborough Bluffs area. The city owns the land, known as a boulevard, where the sidewalks would go, but without the consent of local homeowners, the city was left in a bind. This new city policy will hopefully solve this problem.

    Below, I created an interactive map of the City of Toronto’s sidewalk inventory, created with data from the City of Toronto’s Open Data Initiative. It shows each public street in the city of Toronto (excluding private roads and laneways), as of 2011. I made a few edits, such as including the new Chine Drive sidewalk, and correcting a few errors that I was aware of.

    Almost every arterial and collector road in Toronto has a sidewalk on at least one side of the street. Exceptions include Highway 27 and Black Creek Drive, where, like expressways, pedestrians and cyclists are prohibited, the Bayview Drive Extension though the Don Valley, and in the far northeastern part of Scarborough, in Rouge Park. But it’s the local streets, marked in orange and red that are most apparent.

    https://seanmarshall1.cartodb.com/viz/3f206014-d4f2-11e5-b47b-0e787de82d45/public_map

    Providing safe, accessible, and consistent pedestrian infrastructure is simply the right thing to do. The city owns the land on which sidewalks can be put down, if they aren’t already. There are legitimate concerns that need to be taken into account when new sidewalks are proposed — trees and landscaping especially — but at the end of the day, the needs of vulnerable road users need to be addressed first and foremost.

  • Welcome to Toronto, we guess

    Welcome sign when entering the City of Toronto

    Last weekend, I was out exploring the Toronto-Mississauga border. I have a few thoughts about suburban transit projects like the Mississauga Transitway and as I have time, I’ll post those here.

    But where Eglinton Avenue crosses Etobicoke Creek, motorists (and the few brave cyclists and pedestrians), are greeted with a sign that said, simply, “Welcome to TORONTO” and underneath, “Ontario’s Capital.”

    Yes, Toronto is the capital of Ontario; that’s what they teach childen in Grade 2, along with the other provincial and territorial capitals of Canada. But surely, a city of three million people that’s known for its talent, creativity, and diversity can come up with something better than this uninspired sign, which is found at many, if not most, entrance points to the city. The welcome sign would even better off without the “Ontario’s Capital” tab.

    But while I was walking on the Etobicoke Creek bridge — a hostile environment as any for a humble pedestrian — I noticed this plaque, marking the border between the City of Mississauga and what was then the City of Etobicoke. The bridge was built in 1978, but is being widened to support a new bus rapid transit project. This section of Eglinton is built for cars, but it is only as a pedestrian that you can spot this sort of detail.

    IMG_0312-001

    In 1978, Etobicoke’s motto was simply “Tradition and Progress” while Mississauga’s crest didn’t sport a motto. Today, signs welcoming you to Mississauga say “Leading today for tomorrow, a rather boastful, yet meaningless slogan.

  • Two buildings that truly define Toronto

    City of Toronto Archives, Fonds 1526, File 46, Item 12. Creator, Harvey R. Naylor
    City of Toronto Archives, Fonds 1526, File 46, Item 12

    The first tower of the Toronto-Dominion Centre, from Front and Church Streets, 1967

    Back in May and June of 2015, the Guardian newspaper ran an intriguing series on its Cities page entitled “A history of cities in fifty buildings.” The list is quite interesting: it includes several buildings no longer standing, such as the infamous Pruitt-Igoe housing complex in Saint Louis, Missouri, and the World Trade Center in New York, and some iconic, transformative landmarks such as the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, and even the first Starbucks location in Pike Place Market, Seattle.

    In Toronto, the Guardian chose Honest Ed’s as Toronto’s entry on the list. Of course, the Guardian’s list wasn’t meant to include the world’s most famous or iconic buildings, but chose an assortment of structures, standing, demolished — or in Honest Ed’s case, imperiled — meant to “tell unique stories of our urban history.”

    [Disclosure: I contributed to the Guardian Cities site in February, 2015, discussing new streetcar systems in American cities.]

    Over six months later, the Toronto Star finally noticed the Guardian’s inclusion of Honest Ed’s in its list of fifty buildings. The Star sought the opinion of two local architecture professors, Vincent Hui, of Ryerson University, and David Lieberman, of the University of Toronto. Hui agrees with Honest Ed’s inclusion, while Lieberman says that “at first glance, [the Guardian’s series] is a really dumb list.”

    In some ways, Honest Ed’s — that kitschy emporium of bargains, bad puns, and faded memorabilia, fits the criteria of the Guardian’s list. The store was innovative (it was one of the first stores to feature “loss leaders” and store greeters), it served the needs of Toronto’s growing post-war immigrant communities, and was the starting point for a larger empire that included theatres in Toronto and London. The store’s replacement by a new mixed use development proposed by Westbank, is also part of Toronto’s story, as it becomes an increasingly high-rise city. So I agree with its inclusion in the Guardian’s list, based on the newspaper’s interesting (and provocative) criteria.

    But if you were to ask me, I’d select two different buildings that would best represent Toronto’s modern history: the Toronto-Dominion Centre and City Hall.

    f0124_fl0002_id0009
    City of Toronto Archives, Fonds 124, File 2, Item 9

    (more…)

  • GO Transit plans to raise fares in 2016. How about a better fare system?

    Note: Updated in February 2016 due to a conflicting chart.

    At Thursday’s Metrolinx Board Meeting, the Board of Directors will be voting on a GO Transit fare increase effective February 1, 2016. As has become common, Greg Percy, the President of GO Transit, will be recommending a tiered fare increase, and we should expect that the Metrolinx Board will rubber stamp this proposed fare hike, as it usually does.

    Recently, I wrote about the many problems with GO Transit’s fare structure. It penalizes short trips, it does not allow for any fare integration with the Toronto Transit Commission, and many trip pairs (particularly the Barrie, Richmond Hill, and Stouffville Corridors) are priced lower than they should be compared to other stations. In another post, I suggested that GO Transit should seriously consider charging for parking at its lots, as constructing and maintaining parking lots is a major expense that all GO Transit users are paying for, whether they use them or not.

    I was somewhat surprised to see that the fare increase will not apply to short trips, those currently costing between $5.30 (the lowest fare possible) and $5.69. This would freeze the one-way ticket price for trips such as between Danforth, Union, and Exhibition Stations. With a slight increase in the “loyalty discount” offered tot Presto Card users when they pay a GO fare,  from 10% to 11.15%, this results in a very slight fare decrease for short trips.

    You can read the GO Transit report recommending a fare increase here.

    (more…)