Today Mon Tue
It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 12, 2012
Chance of Snow
-1°/-4°
It is forcast to be Clear at 10:00 PM EST on February 13, 2012
Clear
4°/-3°
It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 14, 2012
Chance of Snow
6°/1°

40 Comments

news

Adam Giambrone, Guardian of David Miller’s Vision?

20100202giambrone1.jpg
Giambrone speaking at his campaign launch party Monday night.


Adam Giambrone began outlining his vision for Toronto last night, in the speech he gave at his packed-to-the-rafters campaign launch party at Revival. Though it was short on details (such inaugural speeches of necessity always are), it became clear that Giambrone is positioning himself as the heir to David Miller, and that the first and most important task of Giambrone’s mayoralty would be to secure the future of many of the projects and principles that marked Miller’s time in office.
This, we can safely predict, will lead to much shouting and wringing of hands.
While Giambrone taking up Miller’s mantle will almost certainly lead to a great deal of knee-jerk criticism, it is also a very reasonable basis on which to run. Miller has detractors aplenty, and his administration has been far from perfect. That said, Miller has been responsible, in the aftermath of amalgamation and of Mel Lastman, for giving us back our optimism, our faith that municipal government can go beyond small-minded parochialism, that it can have aspirations and ambitions on a grand scale. (This is why we remain convinced that history will be much kinder to Miller than recent polling numbers are.)
There are many people who disagree with David Miller’s priorities, and many more who take issue with his track record at implementing them, but almost nobody doubts that he has been a mayor worth taking seriously. The policies and projects for which Miller is most known and most responsible, and which Giambrone supports—Transit City, Mayor’s Tower Renewal, TAVIS (the Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy), working on priority neighbourhoods—befit a city trying to better itself. Whether they are the best tools for the job or not, Miller’s administration has most of all been characterized by a fundamental shift in our public discourse, toward city-building and away from the idea that government necessarily and inevitably gets in the way of accomplishment.
The question, therefore, is not whether Miller’s vision for the city is a basis on which it is worth running for mayor. It is whether Adam Giambrone is up to that task.


The answer to that is: maybe.
On the plus side, Giambrone is tireless and brimful of conviction, patient with his detractors and eager to increase civic engagement. One of his major themes yesterday—and one of the key ways in which Giambrone committed to initiatives that go beyond Miller-era projects—is voting reform. Giambrone came out in favour of extending the vote to landed immigrants, as well as a host of other measures (including internet voting) aimed at widening the pool of Torontonians who engage in municipal politics. It is a conversation we as a city sorely need to have, and it is to Giambrone’s credit that he included the issue prominently in his first speech. Giambrone also possesses the crucial virtue of not being interested in change merely for the sake of change—a real challenge in an election year when everyone wants to know how you’ll be different from the guy who sat in the chair before you. He rightly rejects fear-mongering and scapegoating, and indulges in far fewer attacks than do his rivals.
20100202giambrone2.jpg
On the minus side are real and deep questions about Giambrone’s ability to wield power in Council, set management priorities, and ensure that policy gets implemented effectively.
Though little has been said in the media thus far on the first count, and it isn’t the sort of thing people tend to talk about during campaigns, the ability to whip a vote is essential for effective governance. Giambrone is not known as a power-broker on the current council: unlike David Miller there is no indication as of yet that he would be able to marshal essential middle-of-the-road councillors to vote in his favour on key items. (Giambrone’s youth is a red herring—it is his lack of authority that is the real problem.)
As for his ability to manage management, well, that is what we can call The TTC Problem. Giambrone has taken, of late, to pointing out that the chair of the TTC isn’t responsible for daily operations; the chair’s job is to provide policy direction, while management is charged with implementing these policy directives effectively. This is true, but it is only a partial accounting. It is also the chair’s job to ensure that those in charge of operations are managing effectively, and to take remedial action if they are not. On this count Giambrone has failed. He has been right to trumpet Transit City as both ambitious and essential, and to keep reiterating the depth and breadth of our need for an expanded transit system. Unfortunately, Giambrone has also come to be seen as something of an infrastructure fetishist, so concerned with expansion of the system that he is unable to focus on riders’ frustrations with their current transit experience.
If Giambrone is to succeed in his bid for mayor he will need (among other things): union backing, some quick turnaround at the TTC (where he is staying on as chair for the moment), and Rocco Rossi to bleed support away from Smitherman. That’s campaign strategy 101. But if Giambrone is to persuade more than his natural baseline of 15-18% of voters to support him, he will also need to make us believe that he can be…mayoral.
Giambrone has the heart, and he has the right intentions. Now he needs to convince us that he can channel them effectively.
Photos by David Topping/Torontoist.

Comments

  • http://undefined TokyoTuds

    Well stated Mr. Dotan, a good balanced review of Adam Gambrione as a mayoral candidate. It irks me the ad hominem attacks and unfair accusations against him, rather than fairly attacking his position and record. He has been elected to council twice, has been on council for nearly 7 years, and TTC chair almost the whole time. I’ve met him at an event and we spoke for some time, and I found him to be intelligent, approachable, enthusiastic about public service, and endlessly energetic. I would vote for him except for your main point, that he may not be able to “manage” city council. For this reason I am still looking at Smitherman (and hope Rossi isn’t hoping Adam will bleed votes from George).

  • http://undefined Hamutal Dotan

    Thanks! Though, it’s, um, Ms. :P

  • http://undefined Peter K

    I prefer to entrust my vision the a qualified optometrist.

  • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

    I lol’d very hard.
    Great article, again.

  • http://undefined Greg Smith

    Scanning comments elsewhere (e.g. Royson James’ column today), I find people going on about how Giambrone is so “arrogant”. The constituents who speak out in opposition to him say the same thing.
    Personally, I have not found this to be the case. Is this “arrogance” just code for “uppity young guy who won’t wait his turn” and/or who’s “capable of securing a desired outcome with which I [angry constituent] disagree?”

  • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

    Before the nasty comments start flying…
    Someone commented earlier that Mr. Rossi and Mr. Smitherman don’t have a platform beyond, “I want to be Mayor.” In contrast, Mr. Giambrone seems to have attached himself to a fairly well-defined policy agenda, with the bonus feature that it involves no 90° turns that would delay progress and increase budgets. To continue doing what is already being done is, in some senses of the word, conservative.
    Put those italicized words together and you get a label that has been used by very different people.
    The problem of “managing management” is one of leadership. It is true that elected officials (TTC Chair, ministers in provincial/federal government) cannot keep tabs on every single detail of what happens. But they can make it known that decisions on a certain short list of topics are important, that the Chair (Board, minister, etc.) must be consulted on those points, and that (s)he is approachable.
    On the other hand, if the organizational culture is resistant to bringing certain decisions before “The Boss”, then that person cannot generally make huge changes without cleaning house, which is often difficult.

  • http://undefined TokyoTuds

    Ah, thanks Ms. Dotan!

  • http://undefined Dave F McDonald

    Giambrone’s comments about his duty and responsiblity as TTC Chair are enough on there own to disqualify him from being Mayor. It is the same irresponsible attitude that has brought the City a financial crisis. When leaders don’t accept accountability then followers will not either. Just look at what is happening now with department budgets after they were asked to make 5% cuts. They can’t do it because Miller, Giambrone and others have been telling staff and the public for years that there are no efficiencies to be made or fat to cut even as spending is constantly increasing. Toronto has done the visionary thing for 6 years and most of the public is fed up. What we need now is a good plumber and Giambrone has no experience at that at all.

  • http://piorkowski.ca/ qviri

    on their own

  • http://undefined Peter K

    Giambrone just comes from the wrong side of the issues for me. We had 7 years of David Miller and he proved those policies aren’t working right now.
    Miller’s more experienced and a better politician than Giambrone. So what makes Giamborne think he will succeed with the same policies Miller has failed with?
    Unfortunately, I still don’t see a candidate in the race worth getting behind. There’s one or two I could hold my nose and vote for, but nobody even near inspiring.

  • http://undefined Steve Munro

    For all that I am one of Giambrone’s supporters, I must agree with the comments about “managing management”. At the provincial and federal level, it’s called Ministerial responsibility, and in the worst case, the minister falls on his/her sword when the bureaucrats really screw up. (Several bureaucrats go on to lucrative jobs as consultants after they walk the plank, usually with tidy severance packages.)
    This is not just Giambrone’s problem, but a general problem with much of Council in its relationship to the professional management at the city and its agencies. Most of the time, they do a decent job, but some times they really screw up and the pols take the blame. St. Clair had its share of managerial incompetence, for example, and there are lots of cases in general where bona fide attempts by citizens to improve projects are ignored because they don’t fit the official view of the world.
    That’s where Councillors, especially those in charge of agencies, need to speak up. It is outrageous that the token fiasco and related events during the fare increase happened. It is outrageous that TTC staff proposed a fundamental change in pass pricing without Commission approval, and actually suggested that people pay full cash fares after tokens ran out. People complain about operators being rude and insensitive, but there are problems much further up the line.
    Giambrone took the political hit for this — he should for being out of touch and not reigning in management when things went awry — but management needs a sound thrashing too.
    The not ready for prime time trip planner is another example. It should have been beta tested by a controlled group of volunteers who could point out and verify fixes for a host of problems. I have yet to see anything in the various comment threads that is not directly related to problems I saw in a pre-beta version.
    The announcement was more important than getting it right, and the TTC’s image suffers needlessly. Why it took so long to produce something with so many problems is a story in its own right.

  • http://undefined Community Girl

    I wish that others outside of Ward 18 could experience the real Giambrone. The one who lies to his constituents, the one who is vindictive and self serving. The drag is, that he has an amazing penchance for spindoctoring and wooing left wing voters by supporting things such as cyclists and transit. I am an NDPer in Ward 18. Things look really different from where I am standing. I hope the rest of the city doesn’t have to experience what this guy is all about. It’s pretty disheartening.

  • http://undefined Steve Munro

    Ooops! Management should be “reined in”, not “reigned in”. The TTC is not a monarchy, although it did have pretensions to becoming an admiralty.
    Sorry about that.

  • http://undefined Andrew

    If councilors are in charge of underperforming agencies, I think it’s legitimate — and vital! — for the public to make known its displeasure by firing them. For me, number one on that list is Giambrone.
    You say you are one of Giambrone’s “supporters”. I’m wondering what message you think it sends to promote him to Mayor in spite of his inability to manage the bureaucracy. Or in other words, if you choose to reward more of the same, why would you expect the TTC to ever improve?

  • Darren

    Critics should never support more of the same. There is a lack of efficient critics of the TTC. We can be pro-transit and critical of the TTC at the same time.

  • http://undefined dowlingm

    I think what this mayoral race lacks most is structure. We have nine months ahead where a bunch of people will lob talking points and the same blog posts and comments will be made over and over and over and over.
    It’s time for the media – mainstream and those who want to be considered their equal – to get together and organise monthly debates at ward and citywide level. Not a month before the election when the narrative has become mindcrushingly familiar, but starting right now. Each debate should be split 50:50 between an announced issue in the first half and topical issues in the second and streamed over the web.
    Transit is an important part of the city (not least by the proportion of taxation it demands) but we also need to hear about other issues like
    * the decline of and flight of non-service jobs such as Canada Bread,
    * making paid-duty cops both less necessary and decided city wide not the local division,
    * disposal of city holdings in both utilities and lands,
    * whether our current taxation methods and levels are appropriate and having a debate on new ones like a parking tax,
    * whether the City occasionally overreaches when it does stuff like weather studies which are arguably duplicated by other levels of government
    * what support for the arts means when it’s not about simply maintaining last year’s grants to last year’s players
    and so on…

  • http://undefined Jack

    I can’t believe what I am reading. Adam has some of you fooled. We know about Adam, we experienced 7 yrs of Giambrone dictatorship in ward 18. This guy’s ego is so big. He f@#ked ward 18 and now he wants to screw Toronto. When he is finish screwing Toronto, he will then run Provincally and Federally. And then folks, he will then have successfully F@#K the whole country. He needs to take his Fossil friend councillors(Moscoe, Perk(young fossil)and a few others with him and go back to digin bones.

  • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

    It’s alright to be worried about cursing the TTC through low expectations.
    On the other hand, fostering unreasonably high expectations is conducive to constructing a narrative of failure which overshadows actual progress—an extremely dishonest tactic.
    Being an efficient critic involves distancing oneself from people who attempt to poison public debate in this manner.

  • http://undefined Darren

    The ‘height’ of an expectation is a very subjective issue Paul. I can believe that an objective can be reached via cost reduction, while someone else may not as they dont believe in that same cost reduction, so the savings on that reduction remain unused somewhere else at the TTC. These differences in opinion go up the ladder to the politicians managing the TTC.

  • http://undefined dngm

    … now why do I get the impression that the whole of Giambrone’s critics is actually four very loud people who are upset that they’re having trouble finding parking on public streets?

  • http://undefined Andrew

    If you took a poll of metropass holders, and asked the question, “Would you rather vote for Adam Giambrone, or throw him in a pit filled with venomous snakes, and then cover the pit with a heavy rock?” I think I know which option would win.

  • http://undefined Andrew

    On the contrary, I think people have been trained to have dangerously low expectations of the TTC, cf. all these comments where people excuse the lack of managerial oversight as “it’s not his fault”.

  • Darren

    LOL…in all seriousness though. I was a metropass holder for 11 years shy a month. I stopped as of this January due to the fare hike. I can afford it but I choose to make a statement. If I ride my bike 6-7 times a month in winter, therefore I can give just enough money in tokens to the TTC without feeling too much of a level of disgust.

  • http://undefined Raoul

    What a polite little article… for anyone who hasn’t checke dout GiamBaloney’s Youtube video, read the comments.
    God, can someone competent come forward to run for mayor??

  • http://undefined quickymgee

    if people continue labelling people with visions the way they do, i’m going to start thinking “arrogant” is a good thing: being able to look at the big picture rather than pandering to the dum dums is kind of what i’m looking for in a mayor.

  • http://undefined quickymgee

    Leave the plumbing to the plumbers. Mayors need to be leaders.

  • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

    Subjectivity is not required. Any person’s track record on any matter can be made to seem inadequate by concocting suitable expectations. E.g. “Why did it take God six whole days to create the world? Any idiot could have done it in five! And a full day’s rest is simply excessive.” I repeat that this is a dishonest tactic.
    On the other hand, those capable of the business thinking that supposedly would improve public administration would never accept the viability of cost reductions (viz.: “business ventures”) on the basis of opinion.
    Andrew, I don’t see how your comment contradicts what I wrote in any way. I also don’t read “it’s not his fault” anyplace. Which comment are you referring to? Even Steve Munro, the most charitable commenter, says only that Giambrone should share the blame with TTC management and other councillors.

  • Darren

    Paul, is there a reason why everything needs to be connected to a comment I have previously said?
    Expectations in transit, politics, and life in general is subjective. Its human nature. And it defines one’s political views. Voters share these difference and come October they will Adam to account based on their sibjective views on how he managed the TTC and he would be as mayor.

  • http://undefined torontocomments

    The fact that Councillor Giambrone waited until the eve of announcing his run for mayor to finally to finally acknowledge “customer service issues” about the TTC speaks volumes about his qualities as a leader. Today’s Fixer column in the Star recalls an incident from 2 years ago, which I’m sure the Councillor’s many supporters on this site would no doublt like to forget. When confronted with complaints forwarded by Fixer readers, “he STRUGGLED TO CONCEAL HIS DISDAIN… insisting that we and the riders were wrong; service is improving, he claimed, adding he had audits (paid for by the TTC) to prove it.” So, in other words, he was insisting that he had ‘research’ proving the public was wrong. That is the very definition of arrogance, incompetence and putting your head in the sand. (Here’s a link to the story… http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/fixer/article/760410–idle-pass-machines-frustrate-ttc-riders )
    Given this attitude in the TTC Chair, it’s no wonder that the St. Clair ROW project turned out to be the disaster it did. Yes, Giambrone is right when he says that it isn’t the job of the Chair to “manage”. But it is the duty of the Chair to ensure appropriate oversight of the Commission in the interests of the public. Oversight includes making sure that effective management, policies, and organizational responsiveness are in place. As TTC Chair, Councillor Giambrone has been considerably less than impressive. I don’t like the other candidates running for mayor…. but even as an NDP supporter, there is no way in hell, I’d support Giambrone for mayor. Incompetence such as his should not be rewarded.
    p.s. I usually admire much of what Steve Munro has to say about transit, but am disappointed in his public support for Councillor Giambrone.

  • http://undefined Andrew

    You’re right. That’s what I get for commenting after half a bottle of tequila.

  • Darren

    Ditto on every single point

  • http://undefined omnivore

    the reason you feel that way may be that you lack information that would allow you to form an opinion. Ask someone from his Ward. Here’s one, which has to do with the parking issue, and TTC that you treat as an irrelevancy:
    Giambrone used TTC studies to support his arbitrary decision to eliminate almost all parking on Dundas. The details are much more damning than I will get into here, but here’s the key detail. Giambrone cited a study where he compared a month of one year, when there was no parking allowed on the street, and the same month the previous year, when parking was permitted. It showed clearly that the TTC was slowed down by about one minute between roughly Dovercourt and Lansdowne during the month with parking.
    It’s pretty questionable to many businesses that in an area, where they are remote from a subway stop; where the only subway stop in the ward is adjacent to one of the only shopping centers (Dufferin Mall, which siphons off most local business that would arrive by subway), and has poor streetcar service anyway, that cutting parking radically was worth gaining 1 minute of streetcar schedule. But most people assumed that he was looking at the data and coming to a fair conclusion.
    Then, someone noticed that the month without parking was a March, and it had been one of the mildest on record, while the month with parking was one that had (IIRC) 3 major blizzards in it. And, the city had been abysmal at clearing the streets, so all traffic was slow in that month. Could they see the data from other months?
    Giambrone refused to let them see the data, and it took a year of cajoling, promises broken to provide it, failure to show up for BIA meetings, and on and on before a comparison of an October (no parking, no snow) and the next October (parking, no snow) was obtained under freedom of information. Keep in mind that this is a TTC report, the same material that Giambrone referenced to justify the parking cut. He’s the head of the Commission, he has access, but the data didn’t suit his purpose, which is to use his ward as a way of currying favour with the Commission and the Mayor, by abandoning or experimenting on his constituents.
    Needless to say, the study showed, in the TTC’s own words, that there was no delay, that no attribution of delay could be made on the basis of parking, and that in any case the dynamics of transit times is affected by too many factors to attribute it to one in any case. His department. His report. His decision, made by ignoring the data.
    By then, however, Giambrone had represented to council — knowing that he was doing so on distorted data, that better data undercut his argument completely — that the parking caused delays and that was what needed to change. Keep in mind, the best he’s representing is a one minute increase, and keep in mind the conditions — 3 blizzards vs no snow — that produced that “delay”.
    So, he lies. To council. To his constituents. To other councillors. But that’s not the issue. They all lie. The issue is that he makes arbitrary decisions, that cost a great deal of money. That gain nothing. That hurt among the poorest merchants, with the worst infrastructure in the city. Who happen to be portuguese, and not, say, nice white people with hip media jobs — he’s very media savvy, you know — who like to go to Revival, a place outside his ward, for his campaign launch. Not, to put it briefly, the average Torontoist reader or contributor.
    I know many people in that area, BIA members and residents. Residents who now have metered parking at the top of their streets, which drives hundreds of cars a day down their small, narrow residential streets where their kids play, looking for the very few parking spots that exist, because Giambrone took the parking off the main thoroughfares, where it did no harm beyond what happens in every other area of the city, and made it a residential issue. Of course, the battle he fought was with the BIA, and residents aren’t part of BIAs, so they had no say in it. And now they are livid. But Giambrone doesn’t care.
    If the policy is to take parking off of main streets, then fine: do it everywhere, and be fair about it. If it’s better to move main street parking to sidestreets, then do it on Palmerston and Grace, Beaconsfield and Manning. Lett everyone listen to the cars drive up and down, so someone can go to The Orbit Room at 1 AM. But the reality is that if they tried that, the boutiques on Queen West from University to Gladstone would dry up, the restaurants and clubs would feel the same pain as the businesses on Dundas West in his ward, and the city would have an unholy shitstorm the likes you’ve never seen. Giambrone calculates that a bunch of poorer, disorganized portuguese and vietnamese and latino businesses don’t matter, and frankly, he’s right, if we’re talking about the downtown hipster Torontoist audience. Part of the dismissive attitude is, frankly, a bit questionable, and a little too easy to attribute to an I”m Alright Jack attitude.
    In every other thing he’s touched, apart from declaring Grandiose Plans While Basic Problems Get Worse, Giambrone has been a disaster. It’s not about just leadership, although that’s true. It’s about competence. Municipal politics is about delivering, not declaring. He can’t deliver, and as a life-long NDPer and leftist, I find it very difficult to say much of this.
    It’s great to say you want to support immigrants and immigrant’s rights; but Giambrone’s ward is full of them, and he subjects them to crushing hardship — let’s not forget that after the whole debacle, he actually CUT TTC SERVICE ON DUNDAS completely. That’s not supporting immigrants, but then those aren’t the noble immigrants of the keen, well-meaning educated elite’s imagination, but real ones, that, it turns out, can’t run businesses without people being able to reach them, just like non-immigrants.
    Giambrone’s specialization is studying ruined cities. I suggest that you draw your own conclusions as to his urbanistic competence when it comes to living ones.

  • http://undefined mark.

    You make some pretty strong accusations – I’m willing to consider them, but with the same grains of salt I do with other claims to truth. If what you are saying is true (that Giambrone fudged the research to show that the street cars will run quicker if some on-street parking is removed), I don’t believe you when you suggest it was racially motivated. And I don’t believe that this was something he thought he could do ‘on the backs of’ the racialized Portuguese. If he did selectively/conspiratorially use reports to support removing some on-street parking, I assume it was for different reasons than destroying the small Portuguese businesses on Dundas you speak of, which is itself a bit of a stereotype.
    Perhaps Giambrone ‘worked the system’ (i.e. select a TTC report support his case) but it’s much more likely that he would do this because he thought this new parking arrangement was a good thing to do.
    It’s hard (expensive!) to get your hands on it, but there’s research out there that suggests removing on-street parking is good for business. Jan Gehl has had this research done and implemented in, not just Copenhagen, but also in Melbourne Australia. It’s a bit of a ‘common sense’ argument: people in cars zipping by don’t buy anything whereas people walking by are likely to saunter in and buy something.
    It’s also a bit weird that you go through all this trouble to, on the one hand claim Giambrone is operating under some sort of racial imperative, while on the other depict Torontoist readers with that same racial discourse. You even imply that Torontoist readers are somehow racist for considering Giambrone as a legitimate candidate.

  • http://undefined torontocomments

    Mark, your comments about “race” are interesting but really almost besides the point. The issue Omnivore seems to be getting at has more to do with “class”. With some parts or communities of his ward, Councillor Giambrone has been very responsive (ie with the more trendy, affluent or artsy areas/groups). But that’s certainly not the case in all parts of the Ward, particularly in the more working class areas — where instead of community meetings, they have to make do with claims that the Councillor did a “door to door survey” or some other such nonsense. The bottom line is that different parts of the Ward are getting treated very differently in terms of community consultation. And it seems to be the more working class areas/groups (which tend to have a higher proportion of immigrants) that seem to be getting short shrift. As I see it, it’s not that a particular ethnicity or race is being singled out for bad treatment. Rather it’s more a case of the working class groups/area being given less consultation because traditionally, they don’t tend to complain. The unfortunate part for Councillor Giambrone is that these working class areas/groups which until recently did not complain about anything have started to make it known that they expect to be consulted about things that are important to them, just as other people in the Ward are. Now, I know Councillor Giambrone has many supporters who always go on about how well he treats them — but the fact is that not everyone seems to be treated that way. Let’s also be clear that his supporters would be the first to yell “Blue Murder”, if they were denied consultation opportunities that were important to them.

  • http://undefined torontocomments

    Also Mark, if you have ANY research that removing onstreet parking is good for business, please share it. Otherwise, don’t pretend it exists. I don’t think that research exists that would be applicable to the Toronto situation, where you have retail strips competing with indoor malls and big box outlets with acres of free parking. If removing street parking improved viability of Toronto retail strips, you would not have Councillor Perks doing his damnedest to preserve as much street parking as possible in the Roncy St. Reconstruction. When asked why the Roncy Reconstruction would not have bike lanes, he said that that would have meant taking out a lane of parking and the merchants in the area NEED that parking for the customers who come to shop there from out of the area. Now, there was a recent poll done of merchants in the Annex area who said they didn’t think their businesses wouldn’t suffer that much if one lane of parking was removed BUT that was only a poll specific to what the Annex merchants thought would work in their area. As to why removing street parking might work in the Annex but not on Dundas West or elsewhere, let’s not forget that the Annex area has advantages (which has lots of off-street parking, is on a subway line, has no mall to compete with AND is in a high-density area with university students) which the Dundas West merchants don’t have.

  • http://undefined mark.

    Class and race intersect, usually with gender – the Holy Trinity! omnivore was making his case by suggesting Giambrone was discriminating against people based on class and race, and then asserts that Torontoists readers are a homogeneous class/race (white, young, with ‘hip’ media jobs) – this is bollocks. And I think it’s preposterous to suggest Giambrone is some secret classist or racist.
    As for the on-street parking, I think you make an important point: that there isn’t one ‘solution’ that can be applied to every case. Indeed, it’s very hard to convince people that on-street parking does not equal more business. For many years now, let’s say starting with William H. Whyte’s study in the late 1970s for New York (The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces – both book and film), there’s been the theory that giving over space on the streets to pedestrians, cyclists and transit users will encourage people to be on the street (rather than zipping by in cars) and are much more likely to buy something from the shops on the street. In other words, it’s much easier to go into a store if you’re strolling by. This basic theory can be found in Jane Jacobs’ Death and Life book (1961). Jan Gehl makes similar arguments in his book Life Between Buildings (1971). In 1993, when he was hired by the City of Melbourne, he was tired of having to repeat these theories to people and decided it was time to some grounded research – count parking spaces, how people used public spaces and streets, etc. The woman who ran and won mayoral election ran on a platform that was basically only Gehl’s report. (I’m recalling all this from Gehl’s talk he gave here last year… can’t remember the mayor’s name…) When local businesses made the all-too-common claim that removing parking was going to kill their business, she would be able to point to this research and suggest that perhaps they weren’t very good at business! Here are a couple links that explain this Melbourne project:
    http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/08/02/melbourne-australia-a-model-for-new-york-city/
    http://www.livablestreets.com/streetswiki/melbourne
    However, removing on-street parking is not some simple solution that will enhance a street-scape and make it more inviting to people. (Again, it’s about making a street inviting to people, not cars – people buy things, cars do not!) Sometimes it might make sense to implement some on-street parking to calm traffic down a bit – imagine you were trying to revitalize Dufferin or Bathurst… I wonder how many people who buy things at Dufferin Mall drove there – I suspect it’s not as many as we assume. I understand that some stores sell things that require a vehicle to get them home. But, for example, Best Buy at Dundas and Bay sells those monster TVs without on-street parking. Alley’s are another variable too – for trucks to drop off the store’s products. I could go on and on about this, but it’s a sunny Saturday and I want to go outside!

  • http://undefined torontocomments

    Mark, I’m not saying anyone is a secret classist or racist or sexist.. what I’m saying is that certain groups of people/areas in the ward (the more working class areas/groups) seem to get less consultation then other areas probably because they probably weren’t expected to scream so loudly if they didn’t get it. So I do see it as a class issue — but the explaination put forward does claim that Councillor Giambrone is classist or racist (or sexist). So stop saying that I’ve said any such thing. You might chose to ignore the discrepancy regarding consultation in different parts of the ward — but there is a discrepancy there. I’m trying to explain it… you just seem to be trying to ignore it.
    Regarding the taking away parking issues, I see you bring up the example of BestBuy at Dundas-Bay that it can get by without on-street parking. Here’s why on-street parking isn’t needed in that area: 1) it’s connected to the most highly-trafficked retail space in the City (Eaton’s Centre); on a subway line (see my comment about Annex); there’s extremely high density around there (both in terms of residential and office workers), AND; there is tons of OFF-STREET ‘GREEN P’ PARKING nearby. All these factors mean the situation at BestBuy on Bay/Dundas is very different than the situation faced by the merchants on DundasW between Dufferin and Lansdowne. In short, removing parking on the DundasW strip might not be so much of an issue if the area had higher density and more off-street parking and was on a subway line. But the fact is that these conditions just aren’t in place.
    Also I can’t help but pick up on your comment about how some onstreet parking would calm things down a bit along Dufferin or Bathurst. Funny how you should be concerned about calming traffic down in these areas but have no such qualms about wanting traffic slowed down along DundasW. (And let’s not forget that the reason Councillor Giambrone took parking away from the DundasW merchants was to speed things up). In other words, his actions make the area less desirable for shoppers arriving by vehicle but ALSO TO PEDESTRIANS, because as a planner-type like you should know, speeding up traffic in an area makes it less conducive to a pedestrian shopphing experience. So there goes your claim that the Councillor is making the area more pedestrian friendly — he’s doing no such thing. A related question to ask is why Councillor Giambrone seems so hell on increasing traffic speed on DundasW but not on College or Queen? Why do you seem to be so certain (since you are defending him) that the actions Councillor Giambrone he has instituted on DundasW shouldn’t also be appropriate for College or Queen?
    Mark, I don’t pretend to be planner type, but if you are going to be talking about these things, I do think it’s important to be sensitive to the different factors at play regarding why on-street parking might be important in some areas and not in others and to the conditions we can bring in to minimize the importance of on-street parking so it’s presence is not such a big deal. Your posts don’t seem to indicate any such sensitivity on your part, despite all the “research” you’ve cited (cited rather than actually brought to bear on the discussion by tweaking out relevant points).
    PS. I noticed that you didn’t say anything about Gord Perks’ actions with respect to the Roncy Reconstruction where he made sure street parking was preserved.

  • http://undefined Raoul

    Torontoist’s headline is incomplete. It should read:
    “Adam Giambrone, Guardian of David Miller’s Vision? Or Spawn of Satan.”

  • http://undefined mark.

    First of all, let me clarify a few things (I feel like you’ve slandered me!). I’m not a ‘supporter’ of Giambrone, nor am I a ‘non-supporter.’ If you look at the comments I’ve left on threads concerning Giambrone and/or the TTC, I’ve been looking for something (anything!) beyond the rhetorical ‘if he can’t run the TTC; how can he run the city??!!’ This is why I responded to omnivore (then you jumped in). I suppose I can understand why you assume I’m ‘defending’ him – I don’t accept the easy dismissives. In fact, I don’t blame all problems or think all solutions will be found through government – I have strange sense of the political which is either not limited to or has nothing to do with government.
    Look at the comments I leave here – I use words like ‘perhaps,’ ‘maybe,’ ‘suppose,’ ‘might,’ ‘could,’ etc. a lot. I don’t insult people. So, I resent you accusing me of being a partisan hack. I’m in this for learning, not to push some agenda on people.
    I think you’ve ‘pulled a Darren’ – you’re taking my reply to one thing and applying to another, twisting my words and changing your own position to assure yourself you were right all along. For example, your last comment starts off by saying, “I’m not saying anyone is a secret classist or racist or sexist..” when my comments on this were clearly directed to omnivore’s comment.
    You also say, “So I do see it as a class issue — but the explaination put forward does [not] claim that Councillor Giambrone is classist or racist (or sexist). So stop saying that I’ve said any such thing.” I never did say any such thing. What I did say was, “Class and race intersect, usually with gender – the Holy Trinity! omnivore was making his case by suggesting Giambrone was discriminating against people based on class and race…” I’m assuming that ‘omnivore’ and ‘torontocomments’ are two different people.
    But what I find most bizarre about all this is that we pretty much agree with each other. I see that I wasn’t clear when I waded into the on-street parking issue – I should have prefaced it with stating that I don’t know if removing on-street parking is a ‘good’ thing on this stretch of Dundas. I was trying to make the case that removing on-street parking is usually not some nefarious policy to fuck over local businesses. I was trying to counter the ‘common sense’ argument that on-street parking is necessary for businesses. I don’t hold the rather ideological position that we should eliminate cars. I walk, bike and take transit, but I know that many people have completely reasonable reasons for wanting/needing to drive. I find it clouds the discussion to label cyclists left-wing and drivers right-wing – that doesn’t make sense! The established movement that is probably closest to my own thoughts and opinions is the Complete Streets movement/policies.
    These are all general things, let me respond to some of the specifics in the hopes that this will remain a worthwhile conversation. Best Buy on Dundas – yes, there are parking lots around it, but that doesn’t tell us how many people who buy things there drove there. But you made the point that it is well serviced by transit and has many people within walking distance (high density). And these are things that should definitely be taken into account for the Dundas case. And I agree that what likely makes businesses on Bloor in the Annex not be too concerned about removing some on-street parking has to do with it being well served by parking lots (and so is Kensignton, Queen West, College and just about every other successful/desirable urban area in Toronto). However, this might be more about ‘optics’ than about facts. The parking lot just off Bloor between Lipincott and Borden is, from my own personal perspective, mostly empty during the day – it fills up on weekend nights for people who are off to the bars … and this is a group who ‘uses’ the Annex in a way that many residents don’t want (e.g the Brunswick…).
    As for my hypothetical of Dufferin or Bathurst (instituting on-street parking to calm traffic down), this was just an example. And it’s probably not a very good idea! Again, I’m not trying to advocate the destruction of Dundas West, and I would have “qualms” about turning into a freeway. (gah! Why stoop to these insults!?)
    Finally, I’ll ask you to apologize for this: “Your posts don’t seem to indicate any such sensitivity on your part.” I was trying to show you some of the ideas out there. It’s completely unreasonable of you to expect me to go and do a big pile of research about this specific issue just so I can leave a comment on Torontoist!

  • http://undefined torontocomments

    Mark, I don’t think I slandered you. But your most recent post does show some sensitivity to the issues/factors regarding on-street parking so I will take back the earlier comment regarding this (though to be precise, my comment was directed to what I saw mentioned in your earlier posts). From your most recent post, I don’t think we are that far apart… we seem to agree that transit, density and off-street parking seem to mitigate negative impacts (or concerns about negative impacts) from removing street parking along retail strips. DundasW is not really my issue… but I can see why those merchants are concerned, especially when they are being asked to sacrifice things that are taken for granted on other retail strips across the City. If I stepped in to make some comments, it’s because I felt they have some very legitimate concerns that are being trivialized or ignored. I don’t apologize for that.