News   Nov 26, 2024
United BLDG Gets Height Bump While Rising Behind Heritage Walls
 454     0 
News   Nov 26, 2024
UrbanToronto at The Buildings Show: The Challenges of Supertalls
 582     0 
News   Nov 26, 2024
Three Towers Up to 44 Storeys Proposed Near Bloor and Hwy 427
 1.1K     0 

Mayor Olivia Chow's Toronto

Mount Dennis Resident said:
1702082924175.png
Click to expand...

Very appropriate there is a giant rock under the future "Rob Ford Stadium" sign.
 
goreckm said:
How do you change the norm without enforcement?
Click to expand...
Actually the fastest way to change the norm is to omit enforcement. Think about it, one chap decides to squat in a public park, sets up his tent and then other likeminded folks, seeing zero enforcement of the clear bylaws against camping in parks, set up camp as well. And in a flash, you have forty or more tents, and the norm today is to let it be.
Mount Dennis Resident said:
Looks like Mayor Chow is trying to make nice with Ford Nation. Maybe giving treats to get something in return.

Mayor Olivia Chow backs plan to rename Etobicoke stadium after Rob Ford​


They tried renaming it in 2017, but failed. Trying again...
Click to expand...
The Gravy Bowl.
 
Admiral Beez said:
Actually the fastest way to change the norm is to omit enforcement. Think about it, one chap decides to squat in a public park, sets up his tent and then other likeminded folks, seeing zero enforcement of the clear bylaws against camping in parks, set up camp as well. And in a flash, you have forty or more tents, and the norm today is to let it be.

The Gravy Bowl.
Click to expand...
Like the McCallion Line, should we rename Line 5 in honour of Rob Ford? Perhaps it could be called the Gravy Train?
 
goreckm said:
Last I checked, blocking a stadium name change wasn't a key campaign promise.
Click to expand...
No, but getting rid of the Gardiner, and fighting for Ontario Place were big promises. I'm not upset that she bailed on those, but I hear a lot of anger from people who did care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T3G
picard102 said:
No, but getting rid of the Gardiner, and fighting for Ontario Place were big promises. I'm not upset that she bailed on those, but I hear a lot of anger from people who did care.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you’ve gotta choose which bill you’ve to die on. Idealogical purity can be a big impediment to actually bringing out meaningful change - and I hope the people who are angry with her actually remember that. Her absolute priority now is the gaping hole in the city budget, and I’d argue that the deal she made is a pretty damn good one.

Yes, it sucks that the Gardiner will remain elevated, and that Ontario Place will still remain a spa, but I don’t think Olivia Chow had much room to maneuver. Reopening the Gardiner debate would have been a massive distraction, and regardless of what was done, no one was going to tear it down, so it would continue to bleed the city dry. And, on Ontario Place, the worst she could have done is continue to make it incredibly embarrassing for the province to proceed with their plans. That’s it; the city had limited room to maneuver.

These would not have been good fights to waste political capital on. She’s gonna need all she has for the upcoming property tax increase.
 
allengeorge said:
Sometimes you’ve gotta choose which bill you’ve to die on. Idealogical purity can be a big impediment to actually bringing out meaningful change - and I hope the people who are angry with her actually remember that. Her absolute priority now is the gaping hole in the city budget, and I’d argue that the deal she made is a pretty damn good one.
Click to expand...
Well, yeah, but the pitch to voters was that she would die on those hills. It was that ideological purity. A simplistic and childish "GARDINER BAD!", or the true love for Ontario Place which was echoed by her supporters who probably couldn't point out where it was on a map of Toronto without Google telling them where it was. She appealed to fantasies of the just-large-enough minority that supported her to die on every one of those hills they cherished.

So then the question now is, what ideological purity test is actually left? Pun intended. What's the hill she will pick out to die on in that budget debate? Maybe police funding?
 
Last edited:
Jonny5 said:
Well, yeah, but the pitch to voters was that she would die on those hills. It was that ideological purity. A simplistic and childish "GARDINER BAD!", or the true love for Ontario Place which was echoed by her supporters who probably couldn't point out where it was on a map of Toronto without Google telling them where it was. She appealed to fantasies of the just-large-enough minority that supported her to die on every one of those hills they cherished.

So then the question now is, what ideological purity test is actually left? Pun intended. What's the hill she will pick out to die on in that budget debate? Maybe police funding?
Click to expand...
It's a hallmark of a bad politician to die on hills. Given the diversity of opinions and the things that are within your control, it's always about compromise. Recently, there has been a lot more hyper partisan politics, and generally they don't play out well.

I haven't heard about the masses of her supporters (would be curious to hear what the rumblings are), but I generally hear that people are satisfied with her work. Especially, at the Budget Consultations which haven't taken place since 2007 under Miller. There are also plenty of opinions there, so you can't make everyone happy.
 
Richard White said:
Another fee increase that may have fallen under the radar is parking tickets.

I just got a note from the contracted parking enforcement company we deal with at my property. Turns out City Council doubled (more or less) the fines for parking illegally on private property from $30.00 to $70.00!
Click to expand...

From https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/08/paris-mayor-plans-to-triple-suv-parking-tariffs-cut-air-pollution

Toronto needs to increase ALL parking rates. Should be based on the size of the vehicle.

Paris mayor plans to triple SUV parking tariffs to cut air pollution​


It’s a form of social justice,’ says Anne Hidalgo of move to target richest drivers to tackle climate breakdown

Paris intends to triple parking charges for large sports utility vehicles (SUVs) in order to push them out of the city and limit emissions and air pollution, the mayor has said.

“It is a form of social justice,” Anne Hidalgo announced on Friday of the plan to deliberately target the richest drivers to tackle the climate breakdown and air pollution. “This is about very expensive cars, driven by people who today have not yet made the changes to their behaviour that have to be made [for the climate].”

Paris will hold a referendum on 4 February asking residents to vote for or against a specific parking tariff for heavy, large and polluting SUVs.
Click to expand...
If Paris votes yes on parking tariffs, the cost of on-street parking for an SUV or 4x4 car will rise to €18 (£15) an hour in the centre of Paris and €12 an hour in the rest of the city, officials said on Friday. The prices will apply to vehicles weighing more than 1.6 tonnes with a combustion engine or hybrid vehicles, and more than 2 tonnes for electric vehicles. The move will not apply to Paris residents’ parking.
Click to expand...
Hidalgo said the rise could raise €35m for the French capital. She said it was about taking action for the climate crisis, road safety and air quality and also protecting the 500,000 Parisians who live near the ring road, the Périphérique, and suffer the consequences of big cars driving into the city.

David Belliard, a deputy mayor of Paris for the Green party, said: “SUVs cost between €6,000 to €7,000 more than a standard car and all the studies by car firms show that they are bought by the wealthiest people with high incomes … This measure, if applied, will be directed at the richest people in order to finance the transformation of our public space to adapt to the climate crisis, so it’s a form of social redistribution.”

He said if a person drove into Paris in an SUV and had to pay €36 for two hours’ parking, this would be an incentive to use another form of transport. “It is about sending a strong signal to those who drive these huge cars – or aspire to – that in the future it’s going to cost you more. We invite them to use other means of transport, there are alternatives.”
Click to expand...
Increase the parking rates for large vehicles will help to cover the cost of maintaining the roads that get damaged by the weight of such heavy vehicles. Little damage is done by bicycles or e-bikes, but the biggest damage is by the trucks, SUVs, 4x4s, and other heavy vehicles.
 
Last edited:
Mount Dennis Resident said:
Increase the parking rates for large vehicles will help to cover the cost of maintaining the roads that get damaged by the weight of such heavy vehicles. Little damage is done by bicycles or e-bikes, but the biggest damage is by the trucks, SUVs, 4x4s, and other heavy vehicles.
Click to expand...

It's only going to get worse. Electric batteries have dramatically increased the average curb weight of vehicles. The Hummer EV weighs a whopping 9,063 lbs (comically, it's literally heavier than its own 7,500lb towing capacity)! That's gasoline-powered cube van territory and (legally) makes it ineligible to park on residential city streets (though I doubt that's going to stop anyone). Larger vehicles like SUVs and trucks gain 2000lbs+ in the move from gas to electric due to battery weight. Many—like the EV versions of the Ford F-150, GMC Sierra and Mercedes EQS—barely make it under the parking weight limit at curb weight, and certainly go over in their gross weights (passengers + cargo).

Light trucks weigh what cube vans used to. SUVs weigh what light trucks used to. Cars weigh what SUVs used to.

And we've only seen an expansion of sales of the bigger, heavier vehicles. Maybe we should expect bi-annual resurfacing of just about every street in the city, at this point.

Which is why ideas like "fixing" the Gardiner are just ridiculous. In 1958, when the Gardiner was built, the average curb weight of a car was 3967 lb. Imagine if every car on it is nearly double the weight, and it's jammed with stop and go traffic. It's a maintenance nightmare, period.

I guess at least that crumbling crap pile sits on Dougie's lap now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top