Shabby Public Realm

[M.R.Victor]

I know this is a bit off topic, but I was wondering if there was a middle ground between those who argue that hydro wires need to be buried and those who would rather leave them off.

Basically, my thoughts are that the city (or Toronto Hydro, or maybe a concerned BIA) could simply install better hydro poles. By that I don't mean the old wooden ones certainly not the highway-grade concrete ones either. I mean, in the same way that street lamps can be well-designed, could we not have well designed hydro poles? Either classical, or futuristic, or minimalist, or whatever...

The reason for my argument is that, even if the city were to bury hydro wires, the streetcar power lines would remain, thus the cost incurred would create little visual benefit. If overhead wires are to be a part of Toronto's urban landscape, we could at least embrace that fact as opposed to treating it as a lingering embarrassment that we nonetheless continue to be too cheap to address.

Imagine how bold such a move would be. It certainly would be innovative, as no other city in the world (to my knowledge) has ever done this. What do you guys think?

 

[pman]

hyrdo wires

I recently asked Toronto Hydro (via questions section on their website) a few questions about why so much of their infrastructure is suspended in mid-air and got this response. They agreed I could post the questions and answers provided I didn't cite responder names or email addresses.

Questions:

1. What agency decides it's acceptable to string overhead wires from frontier-town wooden poles on main streets? (e.g. Davenport)

2. When streets are completely rebuilt down to the dirt, why does Toronto Hydro not bury the overhead wires? (e.g. Dundas at Bathurst)

3. Why does Toronto Hydro leave standing redundant poles that clearly have no function? (e.g. Chaplin and Oriole, at least a while ago)

Toronto Hydro answers:

1. Overhead wires are governed through the City of Toronto Permit Office.

2. Moving the distribution grid wiring from overhead to underground is an expensive endeavour and often not cost effective.

3. Other utilities have 180 days to remove their services from a pole from the day Toronto Hydro completes their work.

I think the thrust of TH's answers is that design standards are governed by the City, TH is mandated to provide the cheapest option (no surprise I guess), and redundant poles are somebody else's problem.

 

[junctionist]

I know this is a bit off topic, but I was wondering if there was a middle ground between those who argue that hydro wires need to be buried and those who would rather leave them off.

Basically, my thoughts are that the city (or Toronto Hydro, or maybe a concerned BIA) could simply install better hydro poles. By that I don't mean the old wooden ones certainly not the highway-grade concrete ones either. I mean, in the same way that street lamps can be well-designed, could we not have well designed hydro poles? Either classical, or futuristic, or minimalist, or whatever...

The reason for my argument is that, even if the city were to bury hydro wires, the streetcar power lines would remain, thus the cost incurred would create little visual benefit. If overhead wires are to be a part of Toronto's urban landscape, we could at least embrace that fact as opposed to treating it as a lingering embarrassment that we nonetheless continue to be too cheap to address.

Imagine how bold such a move would be. It certainly would be innovative, as no other city in the world (to my knowledge) has ever done this. What do you guys think?

I think that burying hydro wires and installing more attractive street lights and poles, even along streets with streetcar wires, would make a huge difference. There are clusters of wires along streets like Queen on wooden racks. They're a huge obstruction of the streetscape (the buildings) and a barrier to normal tree growth. Streetcar wires are two thin wires in middle of the street, supported by a single perpendicular wire mounted on poles. They're not comparable to the hydro wires along streets in terms of visual obstruction. Toronto Hydro needs those large wooden poles because of the number of overhead wires they maintain along many important streets. Perhaps using more attractive poles would be a good interim approach to beautification, but eliminating those wires should be the goal in the long run. In a few very important areas with streetcar service, we could also eliminate the overhead wires streetcars need by getting some of those modern streetcars that can use both overhead power and battery power along their routes.

 

[spider]

The real expense in burying local Hydro services on main streets is not the conductors you see strung from pole to pole to pole along the street, nor is it the poles. Major streets probably already have underground cabling in conduits but these are a high voltage network feeding the aerial distribution that is so unsightly.

Stand on the sidewalk and look up to where the current Hydro drops are located on each building on the second or third floor, this interface would have to be replaced by a new entrance to each building below grade from new underground transformer vaults under the sidewalk. Many of these older buildings are probably served by knob and tube wiring that should be updated when a new breaker box interface is installed.

 

[Hipster Duck]

I thought this was an interesting project out of Vancouver. One thing I can't stand is how cluttered some of our best heritage buildings are with cell phone transmitters. Even the Flatiron building is covered in these things, albeit painted a brick colour.

 

[AKS]

Some of these types of patchworks are not uncommon. They're even found on new or nicely paved streets. Hydro digs out new streets and replace it with black asphalt. I noticed them around downtown. Namely Queens Quay by Waterclub. And around the newer buildings, Luna and Parade at Cityplace. They dig and remove the bricks and replace them with black asphalt. Then leave the removed bricks sitting around when they're done. There seems to be a lack of coordination. I don't think any of our streets will ever look nice unless we say "no digging" to hydro.

 

[DSC]

Some of these types of patchworks are not uncommon. They're even found on new or nicely paved streets. Hydro digs out new streets and replace it with black asphalt. I noticed them around downtown. Namely Queens Quay by Waterclub. And around the newer buildings, Luna and Parade at Cityplace. They dig and remove the bricks and replace them with black asphalt. Then leave the removed bricks sitting around when they're done. There seems to be a lack of coordination. I don't think any of our streets will ever look nice unless we say "no digging" to hydro.

Oh yes, 'no digging" will certainly work as long as you don't care that your phone doesn't work, your Hydro has failed and there is water pouring all over the street. Making utility cuts is a fact of life - the problem is getting them permanently repaired in a reasonable amount of time.

Utility companies are required to get a permit to dig into streets and sidewalks; they must then temporarily patch the area. The problem is not $$ as they pay the City to permanently repair these "utility cuts" whwn they get the permits. (The rates were significantly increased in 2011.) The City has lots of "utility cut contracts' every summer and they try to repair lots of cuts in the same area at the same time (clearly more efficient). They seem to work on about a three-year cycle so the temporary patching can last up to 3 years. (More if there are plans for other work in the area.)

The City should clearly try to speed up the delay between a cut being made and it being permanaently repaired to a maximum of about 18 months - they like to allow at least one winter to permit proper 'settling' of the disturbed earth.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

What they really should do is compare the lifecycle cost of multiple digging for the utility upgrades of the same type to that of implementing a more permanent system which minimizes digging. I have a feeling that few are doing the latter because it'd be easier to have the cost spread out over a number of budget years instead of paying a higher cost upfront.

AoD

 

[cassius]

Does anyone know when the City plans to replace the asphalt sidewalk with concrete along Queen Street West, just east of Bathurst, south side? Where the fire happened about 4 or 5 years back. Come to think of it, that entire strip, north and south sides, need a complete redo.

 

[AKS]

Oh yes, 'no digging" will certainly work as long as you don't care that your phone doesn't work, your Hydro has failed and there is water pouring all over the street. Making utility cuts is a fact of life - the problem is getting them permanently repaired in a reasonable amount of time.

Utility companies are required to get a permit to dig into streets and sidewalks; they must then temporarily patch the area. The problem is not $$ as they pay the City to permanently repair these "utility cuts" whwn they get the permits. (The rates were significantly increased in 2011.) The City has lots of "utility cut contracts' every summer and they try to repair lots of cuts in the same area at the same time (clearly more efficient). They seem to work on about a three-year cycle so the temporary patching can last up to 3 years. (More if there are plans for other work in the area.)

The City should clearly try to speed up the delay between a cut being made and it being permanaently repaired to a maximum of about 18 months - they like to allow at least one winter to permit proper 'settling' of the disturbed earth.

I don't see why they don't do it while buildings are under construction or nearing it. Luna was completed in 2010. That's less than 3 years ago. Parade was completed in 2011. Just last year. Yet, they're digging it up patches here and there. The road is new, but it's all blotchy looking now. I can't imagine the money that will be wasted on Queens Quay revitalization. They're going to spend millions to beautify it. Then I'm sure one or two years after it's completed, hydro will dig up blotches and patch it with asphalt. Toronto will never have a nice looking realm. They will all look like patch work.

 

[vatche]

Y do other other cities don't have this issue as much as Toronto?

 

[Tewder]

... because Toronto at heart still has a frontier-town mentality.

 

[DSC]

Do other other cities don't have this issue as much as Toronto?

In Montreal most of the under-street conduits are City-owned and utility companies rent them. They are run by the Commission des services électriques de Montréal. (See: http://www1.ville.montreal.qc.ca/banque311/content/commission-des-services-électriques-de-montréal and http://www.csem.qc.ca/ )
Having lived in Montreal for many years I must say that their sidewalks are generally in far worse state than those here but this may be more to do with the wealth of the City (or corruption?)

 

[Grimace]

^^DSC, you're clearly not in the spirit of this thread.

NYC's sidewalks are also as bad or worse, even in the nice areas. In the rougher parts of town, forget about it.

 

[RC8]

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.