Sunday Driving

speeddemon

On Sunday morning driving up Bathurst Street – yes, such a thing does happen occasionally – I looked down at the speedometer to see that I was travelling at about 70 km/h. That can’t be the legal limit, I thought to myself. Fifty unless otherwise posted, yes?

For anyone who’s ever driven this stretch of road, speeding isn’t normally a concern. Bathurst tends to be a slog of a drive; a terrible way to make your way north or south through the city. But when it isn’t clogged with traffic, clearly the street is built for speed.

speedlimits

Making my way back from my Sunday north-of-Bloor errands, I decided to take Spadina Road south for a bit. Here, sign posts dotted almost every other block it seemed, informing drivers to keep it to 40 km/h. (Fifty unless otherwise posted, yes?) Of course, when I noticed the signs, I was moving nearly 20 km/h over that limit.

Mostly out of curiosity, and with only a pinch of obligation, I experimented adhering to the suggested speed limit. I’m here to tell you that forty kilometres an hour feels really, really slow. I mean, really slow. Slowing to a crawl slow. Like, what’s the use of having a combustion engine if you’re only going to go this slow slow.

And the cars lined up behind me were probably very much in agreement. By the time I wound my way around Casa Loma, it was as if I led a funeral procession. Nobody was driving so much as promenading.

deathrace2000

We have to stop designing streets that enable speeding. Drivers will drive as fast as they feel they are capable of driving. Speed limits, speed traps and photo radar are merely impediments to that impulse. Only streets built to accommodate vehicular traffic moving at a maximum of 40 km/h will keep speeds at 40 km/h. Anything else is just pretend.

racily submitted by Cityslikr

Political Posturing Won’t Build Transit

I abhor faux-populism as much as the next Timmy’s loving, hard working, respect demanding little guy. timhortonsMy bullshit detector is acutely tuned to even the slightest judder of pandering. Common sense? Got it in spades. “Common Sense”? I see right through that, Mr. PR Marketing Man.

I’m a straight shooter and that’s what I expect from my elected officials. Give it to me right between the eyes, I say. I can take it. Brain me. Spare me the gut shot.

After decades of it, faux-populists from the right side of the political spectrum are pretty easy to spot. They refer to voters are ‘folks’. They roll up their sleeves. They don’t put the money they’ve saved folks back into the folks’s wallets but into the pockets of the folks’s jeans. Conservative faux-populists are always on the look out for the little guy but phrase it as ‘looking out for the little guy’. A subtle but very important distinction.

Left wing faux-populists are a little more difficult to spot because they’re supposed to be looking out for the little guy not just pretending to, like their counterparts on the right. bobrobertsYou don’t expect any sort of disingenuousness or duplicity on that subject from the left. Fairness, equality and fighting for those who find neither of those things on a daily basis is basically what those on the left are supposed to be doing.

Yet, I’m beginning to smell the stank of faux-ness from them when it comes to the question of transit at the provincial level.

Over at Raise the Hammer on Friday, the NDP Transport Critic (and my local MPP) Rosario Marchese responded to an earlier criticism of his party’s approach to transit funding.  “… the NDP has identified $1.3 billion worth of corporate tax cuts that the Liberals plan on giving away starting in 2015,” Mr. Marchese writes. “That’s $1.3 billion a year that will no longer be available for priorities such as transit.”

I’m all for finally sitting down and having the debate about the efficacy of corporate tax cuts in stimulating our economy. After years of pursuing such a policy, I think there’s lots of evidence pointing to the fact it does nothing of the sort. eattherichDoing more of the same in the hopes of getting a different outcome is the very definition of insanity and all that.

But we need to start hearing more specifics as to the application of new tax revenues coming in due to the cancellation of the proposed corporate tax cuts. “$1.3 billion a year…available for priorities such as transit.” How much exactly of that would go to transit? In his article Marchese admits that even the full amount wouldn’t pay for the Big Move as it is currently structured. And arguably, there are other provincial priorities that are in as desperate a need for an injection of new cash as the GTHA’s transit plans. More details, please.

Adam Giambrone puts some meat on the bones over at NOW this week, pushing the idea of restructuring personal income taxes as part of the transit funding solution. Wealth taxes and surcharges on those earning $350,000 a year and on the sale of properties worth over $3 million. Actual progressive rates of taxation reflective of an individual’s ability to pay.

Even the Globe and Mail’s Jeffrey Simpson seems in the mood to talk about the need for new taxes. The table is set. There’s really no need to be coy about it as the provincial NDP seems to insist on being.

Besides, while I’m all for talking about a fairer approach to taxation, when it comes to finding funds for expanding transit in the GTHA, there are limits to relying solely on corporate and personal income taxes. emptytalkIt’s hard to imagine how either could be administered at just a regional level. If they can’t, then you’re asking the entire province to pitch in and finance transit in the GTHA and we all know what a political minefield that is. There would probably have to be more of a province wide transportation plan which would obviously slice the pie into smaller pieces.

And before we go getting all redistributive here, let’s keep in mind that there should be some sort of incentive/disincentive type of taxation when it comes to transit funding too. Tolls, congestion fees and parking levies to force drivers to begin paying a more equal share of their road usage, funnelling that money into public transit.

The devil’s in the details as people like to say now with Metrolinx and Toronto’s city staff putting forth proposals for revenue tools. We need to start getting specifics, and stop hiding behind what are essentially cheap slogans. To my ears, the reliance on a ‘No More Corporate Tax Cuts’ mantra sounds as flimsy and faux-populist as finding efficiencies and cutting waste does in terms of this transit funding conversation. Vague, politically palatable pap that suggests your heart really isn’t in it. tenfootpoleTransit as topic you’d really rather avoid, thank you very much.

The Liberal government at Queen’s Park has moved slowly enough on the transit file, glacially slow most of the time, to have allowed the opposition parties plenty of time to claim it for themselves. Instead, both have shied away and handed the hot potato off, making the government appear like the only adults having a grown up conversation with the public. Empty rhetoric and catchphrase platitudes may a faux-populist make but it’s not going to get us any new transit built.

warily submitted by Cityslikr

Zazzing Our Way To A World Class City

Let me set aside Councillor Mark Grimes’ Las Vegas trip including a ‘back of house’ tour of MGM’s Bellagio hotel last summer as nothing more than unfortunate. As the casino debate was just beginning to ramp up, oceans11the chair of the Exhibition Place board – yes, that Exhibition Place where MGM would unveil ambitious plans to build their casino a few months later – decides to travel to the belly of the beast and subsequently raise all sorts of eyebrows just before a casino decision is to be made at city council. Bad optics, for sure. Terrible, very bad fucking optics.

But I’m going to take the councillor at his word when he tells us that the real reason he went to Las Vegas had nothing to do with casinos. The trip was a fact-finding mission that, according to David Rider of the Toronto Star, Councillor Grimes took in order “…to learn about a covered pedestrian mall with dazzling light show he wanted to emulate at Exhibition Place as a link to neighbouring Ontario Place.”

“The purpose of the trip was the Fremont Street Experience,” the councillor said. fremontstreetMr. Rider describes the Fremont Street Experience as “a five-block entertainment district with light and sound show, zip-lines and more that has helped revitalize the older part of downtown Las Vegas.”

This aspect of the councillor’s Vegas junket is what truly chills me to the bone.

It’s city building by zazz.

What exactly is ‘zazz’, you ask? (Just like Lisa Simpsons did.) I’ll tell you what zazz is. (Just like Lindsey Neagle told Lisa Simpson.) “Zing! Zork! Kapowza! Call it what you want, in any language it spells mazuma in the bank!”

In terms of city planning and development, zazz is putting empty spectacle ahead of personal connections to space or place. Zazz is fast food to slow cooking. Zazz reeks of desperation rather than inspiration.

Now look. I’ve got nothing against Las Vegas. I haven’t been in close to twenty years which is indicative of my level of interest in it, I guess. There are few other places in the world where you’re offered the opportunity of witnessing a white tiger bite a German magician in the head.

When it comes to urban planning ideas though? I’m sorry I have to follow this to its obvious conclusion but tell me you wouldn’t do the exact same. freemontstreetWhat goes on in Vegas, needs to stay in Vegas.

Take a look at this aerial view of the CNE grounds and Ontario Place from the Torontoist earlier this year. Fort York over to the east. The southern reaches of Parkdale in the northwest. Ponder all the possibilities that could be.

Now, is your first response to developing Exhibition Place all light shows and tribute bands? Gowan’s Strange Animals (and Other Oddities). A Foot in Cold Lakefront Water. Fast GO Train: Songs of April Wine.

This isn’t vision so much as revision. There’s this really cool place I like to go to. Why don’t we try to create something just like it closer to home? We’re not attempting to adopt an idea. We’re trying to ape a marketing concept.

It’s building commercial public space in lieu of simply public space.fearandloathing

Toronto’s a big place. There’s plenty of room for both types of commons. Yonge-Dundas Square fits into the surrounding retail environment. Because we have the CNE for three weeks every year doesn’t necessarily mean we should turn the area into a non-stop party zone.

Wait. I have another one. Alanis Morissette: Isn’t It Ironic… See, it’s actually Alanis Morissette performing in a tribute band to Alanis Morissette, Isn’t It Ironic. Hey! She didn’t know the meaning of the word either.

As Michael Cruikshank of York Heritage Properties pointed out at a casino information session last month, the city’s left itself vulnerable to these kinds of machinations and spiels due to its lingering lack of bigger plans for the Exhibition Place site. The zazz appeal of a Fremont Street Experience is easy to see. Glitz. Glamour. waynenewtonWorld Class Destination that looks great in a tourism brochure. Retailing of the public sphere, and it won’t cost us a dime.

If Councillor Grimes really wants to make the best decision about the fate of Exhibition Place, maybe he should also take the time to travel to cities that weren’t seduced by dollar signs and simulations of big city life. It might not be as exciting or offer up ‘back of house’ tours of grand spectacles but it could provide alternatives to the prevailing notion in certain quarters of City Hall right now that the folks are only looking for Vegas-style entertainment when they head out on the town. Sometimes people want a little more than bread-and-circuses.

 — Newtonianly submitted by Cityslikr