[PHOTO] To be located here (2)

As seen from window of an eastbound train on the Bloor-Danforth line entering the Dundas West subway station, the yawning huge pit that will house the foundation for--my guess--another condo is easily visible.

[BLOG] Some Monday links

• 80 Beats reports on a proposal to protect New Orleans from risk of inundation by restoring the marshlands that once provided a natural buffer for the metropolis against the ocean.


• Anders Sandberg argues against the surgical sterilization of the transgendered on the grounds that it's not only intrusive, it's linked to effort to enforce a gender binary that doesn't exist.


• blogTO celebrates the 35th anniversary of the Eaton Centre with photos and videos from throughout its long history.


• The Burgh Diaspora discusses the appeal of foreignness--or out-of-stateness--on prospective migrants' attractiveness to natives, starting from Texas.


• Centauri Dreams reports that Vesta, unlike the Moon, has no permanently shadowed craters where water ice could exist on the surface on account of its pronounced tilt. Ices would exist below the surface, rather.


• Language Hat links to a contentious article claiming that no such thing as an Arabic language exists, but rather regional Arabic standards, inspiring an interesting debate about the dynamics of language in the Arab world.


• Progressive Download's John Farrell traces the origins of hockey in Montréal, referring to an Adam Gopnik essay suggesting the sport took off as a product of an alliance of Irish Catholics and French Canadians against Anglo-Scottish Protestants.

[MUSIC] Material feat Whitney Houston, "Memories"

Reacting to Whitney Houston's death, Tim Gueguen linked to a very early Whitney Houston track, "Memories", track #7 off the 1982 album One Down by the New York band Material.

Whitney Houston's first professional recording as lead vocalist is supposedly this tune, "Memories," from the 1982 album One Down by Material. Material was a group formed in the late '70s by bassist Bill Laswell, and at the time was known for its experimental rock based music. Given the mainstream commercial course of her career the combination seems odd at first glance. On top of that the song was written by Hugh Hopper of British prog rock pioneers Soft Machine, and had a saxophone solo by jazz musician Archie Shepp. On the other hand the arrangement of the song itself isn't too far from what Houston would later do, and One Down seems pretty obviously an attempt at a more mainstream, commercial sound than the group's previous releases.

Houston was an unknown at the time the album was released so her prescense made no difference to its sales at the time. Conversely I've never seen any indication any significant number of her fans, once she became famous, knew the song existed at all, so the album didn't have a second life.

[URBAN NOTE] "Ford’s approval drops after transit defeat"

The Toronto Star reports.

Mayor Rob Ford’s dramatic defeat in a city council vote last week brought transit above ground and shot his approval ratings way down, according to a new poll.

Research and communications firm Stratcom polled 1,300 Torontonians on Thursday and Friday and found that 35 per cent of city residents “strongly disapprove” of Ford’s performance on the job.

The figure represents an 11 per cent jump in the past six months, and double the number from last March, when only 17 per cent of Torontonians voiced their strong disapproval of the mayor.

The poll was taken in 48 hours following the handy defeat of Ford’s vision to build all new transit underground.

Councillors voted 25-18 in favour of an above-ground LRT plan that includes street-level light rail on Finch Ave. W., and on Eglinton east of Laird Dr.

Meanwhile, the survey also shows that 27 per cent of those polled strongly approve of the job the mayor is doing, a number that has been steady since he was elected in November 2010.

The survey has a margin of error within 2.7 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

As Torontoist's Hamutal Dotan points out, while polls taken so soon after a major event aren't reliable, this low level of popularity does put the lie to Ford's claim that he represents the silent majority. Regional variation within Toronto is noteworthy, too.

Perhaps surprisingly, given the fact that his transit plan didn’t include any infrastructure for Finch, Ford’s support is strongest in North York: 35 per cent of residents there strongly approve of the mayor (compared to 30 per cent in Scarborough, 29 per cent in his home area of Etobicoke, and 20 per cent in Toronto/York). Disapproval is by far highest in Toronto/York, where 51 per cent strongly disapprove of Ford. And Scarborough—a focus of much of the transit debate, with heated discussion about undergrounding the Eglinton LRT and the viability of the Sheppard subway—is the least sure of the mayor, with 18 per cent saying they neither approve nor disapprove, or that they don’t know what they think of him.

The full poll data is available here.

[URBAN NOTE] "The not so hidden costs of underground LRT"

blogTO guest poster Ed Cunningham blogs about the costs that would apply to mayor Rob Ford's vision of underground mass transit. His take is that it would make things more expensive, and be on those terms alone the antithesis of a cheap line.

Before I get started, one fact needs to be established. This is not a debate about streetcars vs. subways. Neither Ford's plan, nor the Stintz/Transit City plan involves an Eglinton subway. In both cases the plan is for a light rail line, using Bombardier Flexity low-floor LRVs. The issue is whether the entire line would be buried (Ford's plan) or if it would run above-ground for much of its route, buried only between Laird and Keele (Stintz/Transit City plan). Any mention of subways in this debate is an attempt to cloud the issue, plain and simple.

Having established that this will be an LRT line, regardless of who gets the final say, let's start with where the LRT is going to stop. Toronto currently has one underground LRT stop, at Queen's Quay. It consists of two platforms with a walkway across the tracks to move between them, two entrance stairwells, and an elevator. Seeing as entrances, platforms, and wheelchair access are all necessities, it seems safe to assume that each stop on the Fords' underground LRT would have to be of similar design. If so, we need to talk about maintenance.

[. . .]
7
If you build a station, even a small one, there are significant upkeep costs. Whether the people doing the maintenance work are TTC employees or contractors, that work is still being done, and your fares are still paying for it. The city's above ground transit shelters, which involve less maintenance and are owned and maintained by Astral Media have virtually no effect upon the fare you pay.

Moving beyond maintenance though, let's discuss security. Queen's Quay, by way of example, is an unmanned station. TTC personnel do pass through there, due to the aforementioned maintenance tasks, and operators in the streetcars themselves keep an eye on the station. But what about stations in less populated areas?

Unsupervised, underground, out of view of passing motorists and local residents — is this a place you want to wait for a transit vehicle at 1 a.m.? Obviously this would be more of an issue in some areas over others, but to me, an unsupervised, out-of-the-way spot, where no one can hear me call for help seems like a bad place to spend my time. I would be much happier at an above-ground stop, visible to passing motorists, and from the windows of nearby buildings. So let's assume we can't leave these underground transit stops unsupervised. Would each one have a collector? Some sort of station attendant? A security guard? Either way, the TTC would be paying for someone to be there, and the ridership would be paying the TTC more to make that happen.

Doug Ford has suggested that if the Eglinton RT ran completely underground, it could be entirely automated, which I suppose would compensate for any extra costs incurred in station maintenance, but is his vision realistic? Even if the vehicles themselves were automated, would it be reasonable to run them without a paid attendant, who could contact emergency services in case of criminal activity, or a medical emergency on board? Would it be reasonable to have no one on board to oversee an evacuation through underground tunnels in case of a fire, blackout, or other emergency? Besides, Bombardier doesn't even mention this as an option in their specs on the Flexity Freedom.

What's at least interesting are the commenters, who seem fairly solidly opposed to Cunningham's alternative of surface light rail, seeing the lack of support for underground mass transit as signalling the marginality of Toronto's outlying neighbourhoods, even their political second-class status.

Ah, region wars. And Toronto has three more years of this, at least.

[URBAN NOTE] "We all love subways, but Ford never shifted from heart to brain"

Toronto Star Rosie DiManno's column--thanks for linking, jsburbidge!--expresses the pro-subway view honestly.

Yes, I do agree with DiManno that subways are cool. Yes, if the money was available, or could plausibly be made available, building subways would be a defensible investment in the long term.

The problem, of course, is that the money is not and was never available. Opting for subway construction that the city of Toronto couldn't afford in place of surface light rail that Toronto can afford wouldn't guarantee the construction of subways. Rather, the non-expansion of the transit network beyond the single actually planned subway route north into Vaughan region and some more buses would be guaranteed.

The pure should never be made into the enemy of the good.

Listen, light rail could work, fitfully, for Toronto. It just won’t work optimally. Not world-class but half-assed, a reach that doesn’t exceed anybody’s grasp. You can certainly do more with less money. Inevitably, though, you get what you pay for — a system that doesn’t fare well and won’t wear well and rises only to the level of minimal satisfaction for its patrons. Even at that, it’s no sure thing the LRT cost estimates will withstand the challenge of construction. One has only to look at the exorbitant cost over-runs and community misery exacted by the St. Clair dedicated streetcar line disaster.

There was more creepiness than poignancy to the photos posted of Ford’s midnight ramble on the Scarborough RT some five hours after the 25-18 vote that slapped him down — sock to the jaw, more like — at council. Many will take smug pleasure at Ford’s hubris, regardless of their views on public transit. For a political veteran, he left his flank badly exposed and was ridiculously outmanoeuvred. Someone with better consensus-building skills should have been able to avert the showdown, preemptively eliminate or placate the threat that Stintz posed — even under the haste with which this crisis developed — or solidified his support before the vote by trading off favours. Ford’s opponents on council are hardly without their own niche interests that might have been exploited.

But Ford is adamantly not conciliatory, not collaboratively tactful and apparently delusional to boot if he thinks council’s will can be ignored, or that he’s got a circumventing ally in the premier. Dalton McGuinty may hold the purse-strings but he’s not going to get bloodied in a battle that rightfully belongs on another level of government’s turf.

In this battle, Ford has nothing left in the arsenal. Dogmatic about not charging a new subway to the taxpayer — a disingenuous position because the money always comes out of our pockets, no matter which government pays the freight — he unilaterally refused to consider surtaxes or tolls to fund his beloved Sheppard subway. Colleague Royson James eloquently charted the interlocking calamities of that position in his column Thursday: Queen’s Park endorsed Ford’s scheme, diverting funds earmarked for Finch and other lines to the Sheppard subway; he agreed to put the Eglinton line underground while somehow finding $4 billion in private sector funding, through public-private partnerships, development fees and other sources for Sheppard. As if. So, no Sheppard subway in the offing and no financial plan beyond Gordon Chong’s recently released mish-mash to make it a reality even if what was undone could be un-undone.

All the negatives rendered Stintz’s deke irresistible to both Ford’s enemies on council and his fairer-weather friends. Subways are what we all want in our hearts but Ford never shunted his vision from heart to brain. His projection, expounded in campaign rhetoric, never left the station. And the lugs on council opted for the quantifiable pedestrian over the ambitious.

[URBAN NOTE] "New poll shows Toronto divided on transit plans"

blogTO's Derek Flack describes the differences between Toronto's different historic municipalities over plans for a subway. Predictably, the two options being offered--light rail transit and subway--are equally popular across the city, with the geographic periphery outside the subway system more strongly in favour of subways than the core.

A new poll confirms that Toronto residents are divided when it comes to how they think the city should proceed with the expansion of our transit infrastructure. Complied by Stratcom, who also recently asked after the mayor's approval rating, the survey finds that an equal number of respondents — 43 percent — favour Ford's underground transit plan as do those who support the decision made by city council to focus spending on a more LRT-heavy strategy. The remaining 14 per cent answered that they were not sure whether or not they agreed with council. The poll's margin of error is +/-2.7%, 19 times out of 20.

While the divide shouldn't come as a surprise, it does counter Doug Ford's repeated claims that the vast majority of residents want subways. Although that number reaches a majority in Scarborough (52.1 per cent believe council was in error), it lags behind the 70 to 80 per cent the mayor's brother has cited, though it's always been anyone's guess where he gets his numbers from. In North York and Etobicoke, 45.3 and 46.9 per cent of those polled believe council got it wrong while 38.0 and 39.7 per cent believe the right decision was made.

But then, as Flack notes, subways aren't a realistic option: there just isn't funding for this option. Light rail may well be relatively popular in the end.