There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By kevlahan (registered) | Posted August 13, 2014 at 09:12:44
I think that a large part of the reason for backlash over new developments is from the failure of the these developments to either not even happen (after a huge amount of planning and community input has gone into them), bate-and-switch (when what is actually built ends up being much worse or very different from what the public was consulted on) or when the community is promised the City will stand up for high quality urban design and then we end up with a Centre Mall or the Shoppers on Cannon at Wellington (with no windows or entrance onto the actual street https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Shopper...!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szXRYA49_wvYcNiwVtaZdXg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x2be7ab63f6c5eb0f!)
I participated in the half-day Charette the City organized to imagine good denser urban design at King/Dundurn back in June 2011 (i.e. I took a vacation day to donate my time to the city).
The City's urban design staff were very skilled and knowledgeable in guiding us through the process of imagining a much denser urban design that would fit well into the existing neighbourhood and take advantage of its location at a major transportation hub (freeways, GO, LRT). They kept emphasizing that surface parking should be minimized (and never front the street) and that continuous mid-rise buildings actually achieve higher density than 30 storey towers (due to the need for space around the towers and space taken for elevators and other services).
Instead of something that at least respects these principles, just three years later we are presented with a plan that goes against every one of them!
If the City and developers can get this simple development so wrong, how can residents trust them with bigger projects? It is at least gratifying that staff are recommending against approval.
In the downtown core, instead of a continuous street wall of mid-rise and some high-rise buildings, we may be in danger of getting more 30 storey Landmark places, while keeping whole blocks of surface parking. This is obviously not good densification, and it was not what the planners were recommending.
As a counter-example, look at Christchurch NZ. After it was devastated by an earthquake, the City actually consulted with the residents to design on guidelines for re-building. The overwhelming consensus was that no buildings higher than mid-rise should be built, and the result is the following:
Height restrictions are split between the different Central City Zones, and are shown on the Central City Planning Map 3:
a. Central City Business Zone (Core) 28m (7 storey)
b. Central City Business Zone (Gateway) 17m (4 storey)
c. Central City Mixed Use Zone 17m (4 storey)
http://www.wynnwilliams.co.nz/CBD-Rebuil...
Interestingly, some studies show that beyond 7 storeys residents tend to get disconnected from the street: they avoid going outside unless they have to because it feels like a big deal just to get out out of the building. And remember that Paris is almost entirely 7 storeys and manages a very high urban density.
At the very least, the residents of Christchurch will be able to say they will live in the sort of city they want (rather than what the developers feel like building on any particular lot)!
Comment edited by kevlahan on 2014-08-13 09:28:21
Permalink | Context