Comment 104251

By RobF (registered) | Posted September 03, 2014 at 11:55:03

They look great on paper, and are done in cities all over the world, but here they turn into little more than stand alone box stores, huge parking lots and dead, low-density streets.

Though I agree with what you are saying in terms of mixed-use, I find it off-putting when you end with defeatism (oh, but this is Hamilton ... others cities do it, if only we could).

Draft plans such as the Barton-Tiffany one cited rarely turn out as envisioned ... why? You consistently point to outdated zoning and a fear of mixed uses? What is the city afraid of, and who is fighting to preserve the status quo?

I think the case for mixed-use spaces has become received wisdom amongst urbanists and planning and design professionals. What is useful is to uncover the logic and politics driving sub-optimal outcomes. For example, what was the city's rationale for not allowing retail on the main floor of the Good Shepherd building or house at Peter and Locke? What changes need to be made to allow it to happen? What are the likely obstacles to making the necessary changes? Without this we stop at the task of envisioning what could be, and that doesn't help us make the political and institutional changes required to make the city we dream of possible.

This is a comment more than a criticism ...

Comment edited by RobF on 2014-09-03 12:01:01

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools