TTC: Public Art — Apathy or Abuse?

[rbt]

which then brings to question if were so pinched for dollars why is TTC budgeting so much on gargantuan public art to begin with in every thing they do?

I'm pretty sure there is a city bylaw that requires around 1% of a buildings budget be dedicated toward public art. So, it's the exact same reason condos and office buildings do it.

 

[cplchanb]

I'm pretty sure there is a city bylaw that requires around 1% of a buildings budget be dedicated toward public art. So, it's the exact same reason condos and office buildings do it.

I see.....logical pre 2008 but a budget hole in 2016, So that means millions of dollars will go down the drain on "public Art" for the DRL. Talk about prudent means of spending. I hope theres provisions for exceptions or a capped value?

 

[rbt]

I see.....logical pre 2008 but a budget hole in 2016, So that means millions of dollars will go down the drain on "public Art" for the DRL. Talk about prudent means of spending. I hope theres provisions for exceptions or a capped value?

I don't think there is a cap, otherwise CityPlace probably would have hit it a long time ago.
Found the guidelines, the actual legal wording seems to be in the Offical Plan policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.4 but I've not dug that up yet:
http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toro...an_design/files/pdf/publicart_udg_aug2010.pdf

We could, of course, modify the law to apply a cap to a government agency or reduce the %age for underground components. I'm pretty sure most of those tile finishes in Sheppard subway are the public art component. I'd actually be in favour of increasing it to 5% from 1% so we could get a artistic result closer to this rather than 1000 different 'Sheppard & Leslie' tiles.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I don't think there is a cap, otherwise CityPlace probably would have hit it a long time ago.
Found the guidelines, the actual legal wording seems to be in the Offical Plan policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.4 but I've not dug that up yet:
http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toro...an_design/files/pdf/publicart_udg_aug2010.pdf

We could, of course, modify the law to apply a cap to a government agency or reduce the %age for underground components. I'm pretty sure most of those tile finishes in Sheppard subway are the public art component. I'd actually be in favour of increasing it to 5% from 1% so we could get a artistic result closer to this rather than 1000 different 'Sheppard & Leslie' tiles.

where is that it makes it looks like they put the subway into some sort of temple they dug up rather then art work.

 

[lead82]

I don't think there is a cap, otherwise CityPlace probably would have hit it a long time ago.
Found the guidelines, the actual legal wording seems to be in the Offical Plan policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.4 but I've not dug that up yet:
http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toro...an_design/files/pdf/publicart_udg_aug2010.pdf

We could, of course, modify the law to apply a cap to a government agency or reduce the %age for underground components. I'm pretty sure most of those tile finishes in Sheppard subway are the public art component. I'd actually be in favour of increasing it to 5% from 1% so we could get a artistic result closer to this rather than 1000 different 'Sheppard & Leslie' tiles.

Not only is that station beautiful, look how wide the platform width is. It is embarrassing how narrow our station platforms are. This is especially a problem at interchange stations. St George and Bloor/Yonge are very narrow. This is a big city metro, in a city half our size.

 

[amnesiajune]

Not only is that station beautiful, look how wide the platform width is. It is embarrassing how narrow our station platforms are. This is especially a problem at interchange stations.

There's nothing unusual about Toronto. Here's Oxford Circus, the third-busiest station in London:

Here's 34th Street - Penn Station in New York, the fifth busiest station in New York:

 

[TransitBart]

Agreed. This is the same agency that let Hayden's Arc En Ciel at Yorkdale station literally rot, even though it would have initially been inexpensive and straightforward to fix it. I'm sure that the sale of this ad space was inadvertent, but it is nonetheless embarrassing, and it gives us insight in the TTC's continued inability to manage and protect the public art with which it has been entrusted.

This is neither true nor fair.

If you told TTCRiders (professional rabblerousers) that we were reducing service on a bus route to protect valuable public art, what do you believe the response would be? If, say, councillor Doug Ford were on the TTC board, and you told him that you had a curator and a budget for art, what would you imagine the response would be?

The degradation of art and the system itself is a function of our inability to decide - in a liberal democracy - how large public institutions should be and how to fund them. To some, art is clear second fiddle to transit. To others, there is a place in a public transit agency for art which is as important as SOGR maintenance.

Everyone here needs to remember that the TTC is a public institution which is governed by our politicians. If the institution lacks funds, don't blame the civil servants running it. They are paid to run it within the budget envelope provided. They are doing their jobs competently.

None of us criticizes doctors when the waits in emergency rooms is long. We aim at the government funding healthcare. A similar approach is necessary here. I would bet money that no TTC employee ever let anything joyfully go to ratshit, rather that was just the way the wind was blowing.

Canadians I think have done a poor job of holding politicians to account. This discussion is off the mark and letting the guilty - or at the very least - responsible parties off the hook.

 

[TransitBart]

if were so pinched for dollars why is TTC budgeting so much on gargantuan public art to begin with in every thing they do?

Folks. The TTC does not create these requirements. The politicians who run the city/province/country do. When a project is conceived - whether TYSSE - Leslie Barns - the Eglinton Crosstown, or amazingly the UPX, political demands to smooth the waters so the thing can proceed add 50% to the actual cost of any given project.

The TTC itself could not give a shit about art. It was Toronto councillors and Liberal MPPs who desired large and gracious stations.

At Leslie Barns, there is a gigantic park around the barns and trees and benches on Queen St - like what??? - that came from the barns' budget.

Eglinton Crosstown has a social equity and business development mandate - what?? - it's a tube in the ground with rails...

And finally - the Weston UPX stop has nothing to do with making UPX useful and everything to do with local politicians' desires to get something for the locals.

Whether it's art, or other pork, the transit agencies themselves don't give a hoot. If they were told to build a concrete sarcophagus they would.

Everything we build needs to be maintained. Building it is only the first cost.

My point here is not to complain about the cost - I like good public works - but to remind the audience here that ultimately our politicians are responsible and so are we for holding them to account. Including getting off our collective asses and sending them packing by voting when we don't agree with them.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Folks. The TTC does not create these requirements. The politicians who run the city/province/country do. When a project is conceived - whether TYSSE - Leslie Barns - the Eglinton Crosstown, or amazingly the UPX, political demands to smooth the waters so the thing can proceed add 50% to the actual cost of any given project.

The TTC itself could not give a shit about art. It was Toronto councillors and Liberal MPPs who desired large and gracious stations.

At Leslie Barns, there is a gigantic park around the barns and trees and benches on Queen St - like what??? - that came from the barns' budget.

Eglinton Crosstown has a social equity and business development mandate - what?? - it's a tube in the ground with rails...

And finally - the Weston UPX stop has nothing to do with making UPX useful and everything to do with local politicians' desires to get something for the locals.

Whether it's art, or other pork, the transit agencies themselves don't give a hoot. If they were told to build a concrete sarcophagus they would.

Everything we build needs to be maintained. Building it is only the first cost.

My point here is not to complain about the cost - I like good public works - but to remind the audience here that ultimately our politicians are responsible and so are we for holding them to account. Including getting off our collective asses and sending them packing by voting when we don't agree with them.

When Line 1 was extended up Spadina to Wilson, it was the first of the TTC subway stations that actually had better artistic architecture. The extension opened in 1978, after being constructed and opened under the Progressive Conservatives. People had enough of the 1950 and 1960's washroom tiles of the older stations. All the political parties wanted better looking stations these days.

 

[crs1026]

I'm not sure that the artistic surfaces are really that much more expensive than an equal expanse of vitrolite, for example. So some amount of the art budget woukd be spent anyways and is not waste.

The idea of a cap for megaprojects such as transit expansion is sensible. A 1% premium for more mundane developments is sensible also. We don't want office blocks that look like they are part of remote Cold-War era Soviet construction.

It's all in showing some balance and not going to excess in either direction. No art is as disastrous as too much art.

- Paul

Edit: PS - for the one stop Line 2 extension, a 1% art buget is ridiculous. But maybe 1% of just the STC station budget is reasonable?

 

[Skeezix]

And what advertising dollars could they get out of Arc en Ciel?

Don't get me wrong - what they did wasn't right with either. But there's a very different perspective at play here. At at the least, they are not likely to damage the artwork by putting those ads on it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

We don't know that, but assuming it's true, that's hardly the point.

 

[Skeezix]

which then brings to question if were so pinched for dollars why is TTC budgeting so much on gargantuan public art to begin with in every thing they do? It has no source of revenue. Now if it was something like a display set up by ROM with signs
encouraging them to visit thats different, but it was mentioned above, some art pieces are so subtle that 90% of the people who pass by dont notice nor care.

The public art budget is not "gargantuan" - for the Sheppard line, it was a drop in the bucket and I assume the same was true here. As for your 90% figure, I'd like to see your data on that.

 

[rbt]

The public art budget is not "gargantuan" - for the Sheppard line, it was a drop in the bucket and I assume the same was true here. As for your 90% figure, I'd like to see your data on that.

I think "Sliding Pi" at Downsview fits that description of artwork 90% don't care about; but I've never done a poll.

 

[Skeezix]

This is neither true nor fair.

If you told TTCRiders (professional rabblerousers) that we were reducing service on a bus route to protect valuable public art, what do you believe the response would be? If, say, councillor Doug Ford were on the TTC board, and you told him that you had a curator and a budget for art, what would you imagine the response would be?

The degradation of art and the system itself is a function of our inability to decide - in a liberal democracy - how large public institutions should be and how to fund them. To some, art is clear second fiddle to transit. To others, there is a place in a public transit agency for art which is as important as SOGR maintenance.

Everyone here needs to remember that the TTC is a public institution which is governed by our politicians. If the institution lacks funds, don't blame the civil servants running it. They are paid to run it within the budget envelope provided. They are doing their jobs competently.

None of us criticizes doctors when the waits in emergency rooms is long. We aim at the government funding healthcare. A similar approach is necessary here. I would bet money that no TTC employee ever let anything joyfully go to ratshit, rather that was just the way the wind was blowing.

Canadians I think have done a poor job of holding politicians to account. This discussion is off the mark and letting the guilty - or at the very least - responsible parties off the hook.

It is true (the facts about Arc en Ciel are not up for debate), and it is fair.

Who said the choice was between maintaining this piece of public art or reducing service on a bus route? Who presented this to you as an either/or decision? Are they really making enough money off this one ad to preserve service levels on a transit route? I would be shocked if that was the case. Can similar funds not be raised with an ad or ads located elsewhere on the system which do not cover up publicly funded public art? I would assume that to be the case - there are a lot of empty walls near a lot of foot traffic in the system.

And yes I do blame the civil servants running the agency when they cannot responsibly manage public assets. But, agreed, the politicians and lack of funding are primarily to blame here.

TTC employees quite literally let Arc en Ciel go to ratshit, and they didn't seem to care. The facts in that case are appalling.

Yes, I agree that we do a poor job of holding politicians, and the people running public agencies like TTC, to account.

 

[Skeezix]

I think "Sliding Pi" at Downsview fits that description of artwork 90% don't care about; but I've never done a poll.

You're only speaking for yourself, not 90%.