For the most part, Toronto follows a rigid grid-pattern of streets neatly laid out from the edge of Lake Ontario, in the interest of establishing property divisions for the ownership of lots. With a pronounced lack of hills that give cities like Montreal, Paris and London interesting viewpoints and winding lanes, Toronto is not an obviously interesting place for flâneurs. But then, Toronto’s charms have never been obvious.
The current pedestrian life of the Annex, for example, owes much to real estate developer Simeon Janes, who laid out most of the area in the final decade of the 19th century, and who hated driveways. In his street plans he relegated stables, tradespeople and garbage collection to back laneways — although largely hidden now, you can still walk through these laneways which create a quieter, secret network for walking. In the 1830s, council began working towards gas street lighting, allowing pedestrian life to begin flourishing at night, and in 1841 the city contracted for the first gas street lamps.
According to the Pedestrian Planning Network, Toronto’s first pedestrian killed by a motor vehicle was Hannah Heron, who had both her legs run over by a streetcar on September 2, 1892. The 61-year-old woman was visiting her aunt and was about to catch a trolley home on the Church Street line. Streetcars had been introduced to Toronto only three weeks earlier, and many city folk were unfamiliar with the capabilities of the modern trolley. The two motormen operating the trolley were as unfamiliar with transit cars as Ms. Heron — the driver had one day’s experience, while the other had not yet passed an examination for competency. But the police found the victim and drivers at equal fault.
As we get to the 1930s, the car becomes the obvious principal problem for walkers. But beyond traffic laws and budget allocations that prop up the inefficient car at the expense of pedestrians, the laws that affect street life and foot travel are numerous and unexpected. They touch on sex, poverty and wealth, and often race as well. On occasion foot travel is welcomed as a money-making prospect. For example, in the early 1970s, local businesses strongly supported the Yonge Street Mall, which stretched from King north to College.
In 1857, a year of severe economic depression throughout Ontario, the streets of Canadian cities swarmed with beggars and vagrants. Alexander Manning was re-elected as mayor of Toronto in 1879 on a platform which included cleaning up dirty streets. William Holmes Howard, elected in 1886, likewise targeted the problems of “drunkenness, slum conditions, filthy streets, and foul water supply.”
Today we see the same mentality in the selective application of the Safe Streets Act to target the poor and down-at-the-heels. As with vagrancy laws a century before, it really depends on who is doing the walking.
Business Improvement Areas (BIAs), supported by City Council, have contributed to the walkability of parts of Toronto even as they do their damnedest to ensure that walkers are the savoury kind: well-off, well-dressed, well-spoken consumers. The concept for Bloor West Village was first presented in a seminar in 1971, and in 1980 the Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas was formed. It works on relevant legislation with provincial and city governments. A review of BIAs and BIDs (Business Improvement Districts) in 2003 noted that one of five major objectives is to improve the pedestrian experience.
With the advent of the broken window theory of crime (that an uncared for environment creates the conditions for crime to take place) the city’s “undesirables” — like loiterers, panhandlers, and punks — become targets of these attempts to clean up the streets. Thus, pedestrianism becomes legitimate only where it is practised by a certain class, and defined as a leisure, exercise or consumer activity. Still, the 2002 Toronto Pedestrian Charter lists accessibility (“Walking is a free and direct means of accessing local goods, services, community amenities and public transit”) and equity (“Walking is the only mode of travel that is universally affordable”) at the top of its six principles.
Despite the lack of support for pedestrians, despite the legislation that stalks our footsteps, despite the cars that rule almost all of our sreets, there is hope. Not, as we might wish, for a city where pedestrians benevolently rule, but perhaps at least for small steps towards co-existence.
In 1997, Toronto finally created a resident committee dedicated to pedestrian issues. The Toronto Pedestrian Committee advises staff on pedestrian issues, provides for public consultation on these issues, and promotes the idea of walking as a way to get around. On May 21st, 2002, Toronto City Council adopted the Pedestrian Charter, a commitment to a pedestrian friendly city that is at least symbolically important. The Charter is meant to “promote awareness of the personal, social, and environmental benefits of walking as a safe, healthy, accessible, and sociable mode of transportation, especially for short trips; articulate a vision of the physical, social, economic, legal, and psychological framework required in order to encourage more people to walk, and to walk further; and raise awareness of the need to acknowledge the walking component of public transit trips as an integral part of the city’s transportation system.”
“Pedestrian offences,” as the police like to call them, made news this spring, when Toronto’s finest launched a March-break program called Operation Ped Safe to save us from untimely squashing. Since they are trying to save us from ourselves, we dearly hope the police will stand at corners and ticket drivers who endanger pedestrians for more than just two weeks a year. Maybe then walkers will finally feel like they are taken seriously in this city. |
|