Toronto Star’s “What If…” section continues

5 comments

1. Bedford’s conclusions are nothing new to anyone who has been following urban issues in the GTA over the last decade. I’m getting a little tired of these types of reports that paint rosy pictures of how things should be and don’t expose the problems and individuals causing them.

   The City and the Province need to have an open discussion on the total reorganization of the city from top to bottom with the needs of the public being a top priority. We need to limit Councillor’s terms to a maximum of 2 in order to ensure that new candidates are brought in (if you can’t make a difference in two four years terms, you shouldn’t be holding public office.) We need to have communities pro-actively studying and reviewing their planning regulations every five years in order for the city planners to know exactly what the community wants and have a relevent and defensible plan to take to the inevitable OMB hearings.

   And most importantly, the “citizens” of Toronto need to get involved and take responsibility for the future of this city instead of passively leaving it up to the decision makers and then critcising their choices. I don’t want to hear about how bad it is, I want to hear about what YOU are going to do to make it better.

2. We’re never gonna get that much-needed rail link to the airport (mentioned in the article) as long as the taxi industry has so much influence.

   They don’t want it because not many people will want to pay $60 for a “limo” anymore once it gets installed.

   Taxis vs transit in this city drives me nuts. When you’re leaving a club or bar on a friday night, you see 5 million taxis, but only one (jam-packed) bus every half hour.

3. i agree that the city could use good development principles, but the city also desperately needs a good form for expressing them, and a good way to apply them.

   keep in mind that basically every major development in the city’s history has required changes to zoning and other by-laws. so the first question is, should we use traditional forms to write down development principles or is there something better?

   as for applying these principles, perhaps this will be a controversial thing to say, but i think the committee of adjustment system needs an overhaul far more than the o.m.b. if we want to address the city’s development issues.

   first, why do folks need to live so close to a development to be entitled to make representations about it? for example, why did SOS get to hold up the st. clair streetcar development while the rest of the city waited? for another example, recent media stories suggest that the commute from low cost housing in scarborough to downtown takes about two hours by ttc; why don’t people from scarborough get to make representations about housing developments in the downtown core (like, perish the thought, increased density in the annex)?

   second, attend a meeting of the committee of adjustment in your area and consider these questions: are the members actually listening objectively to the applicant and to those making representations? does the committee appear to be applying the principles it lists at the beginning of each session (the principles from the planning act)? do the members seem biased? now, attend an o.m.b. session and ask yourself the same questions. the difference might surprise you.

4. i enjoy the article but the conclusion/future/result will take years/decades to materialize.

   in the short term, i think we need to be creative and focus on what we have and take care of what we have.

   an example would be trees, trees soften any ugly/inapropriate develements. Yet our trees on the street do not do well/survive. Take a look at the trees in Dundas square (sure they are just planted tree but i think they might not survive next winter). A drive through mississaga will see healthier tree in urban main street.

   transit stop shelter – toronto transit stop are ugly and boring. queen st and spadina could have all transit shelter supported by corporate $ with local artist comissioned doing the work. same go for subway entrance.

   justta start

5. About 3 years ago I sent the enclosed email to John Sewell after he and Paul Bedford appealed for solutions to Toronto’s traffic woes on TVO. While I never received a reply regarding my suggestions, within a month a radio news announcement spoke of a rail link to the airport that could be up and running within 6 months. If you are truely concerned about Toronto, please continue reading the following email to our ex-mayor:

   Dear Mr. Sewell,
   I attended Centennial College’s Architectural Design program in the late 1960’s but felt uncomfortable with the excesses of that period’s housing formats. Over the last thirty-three years I have pursued other careers but, strictly as a hobby, have tried to keep my planning skills alive. My ex-neighbour, Clarington’s resident architect, told me fifteen years ago that although my proposals had some merit, the City was not yet ready for them. Toronto’s growing pains and traffic problems have escalated steadily so perhaps now is the time to present them.
   – Years of riding streetcars from the Bingham Loop to my usher’s job at the Royal Alexander Theatre introduced me to a wonderful kaleidoscope of neighbourhoods, stores and shops. Many times I wished I could get off and explore their wonders but that would have cost me a double fare that I simply couldn’t afford on my after-school wages. I still wonder if my youth would have been more enlightened if the TTC had offered a “Shopper’s Pass”, wherein for a minimal additional fee, riders could get off to visit the stores and restaurants they have noticed along their routes. I still believe this could promote awareness of other main-street city neighbourhoods and increase income for their transit-route businesses instead of the car-congested shopping malls.
   – As a computer operator back in the 1970’s I often wondered how hard it would have been to set up a car pool registry that could match up commuters by business hours and area of departure and destination. It still seems obvious to me that every minivan with 7 occupants keeps 6 unnecessary vehicles off the streets and every sedan with 4 occupants keeps an additional 3 vehicles out of traffic congestion. If even 25,000 commuters cooperated in such a program, I wonder what impact that might have on rush hour. In Florida, buses and car pool vehicles have exclusive use of certain lanes during rush hours. How many GTA drivers do you think might reconsider sharing their personal space in return for an express commute?
   – If TTC Buses were to provide a direct link between the Malton GO Train Station and the Airport and GO trains ran that route perhaps once per hour, instead of twice per day, do you think downtown core Torontonians would still insist upon driving there? Do you think that flyers originating from anywhere along the TTC Subway and Lakeshore Go Train lines or near the Weston, Etobicoke North, Bramalea, Brampton and Georgetown GO stations would welcome a quick trip with no parking hassles? Since the Malton station is on the CNR line, do you think that VIA train riders from let’s say, London to Belleville to Barrie, might seriously consider this traffic and weatherproof alternative?
   – If some brilliant engineer could figure out some way of raising the roofs above Shopping Mall corridors so that a couple of stories of Mature-Adult apartments could be squeezed in above the stores, I think that many seniors would seriously consider living in them. The vast majority of seniors are responsible, law abiding and clean living. However, they are not in love with the extremes of Canada’s climate. Snowbirds, tiring of high prices in the southern U.S., might just jump at the chance to spend their pensions in spacious climate controlled environments here. Affordable health care would cease be a problem for them as most malls already house health care professionals’ offices. After stores close in the evenings, mall walker, dance, exercise and social clubs might just flood out of their apartments and bring fitness, laughter and friendship to the hallways.
   – Your team’s desire to narrow some of the suburban over-width roadways by building stores with apartments above, close to sidewalks is an excellent idea, except for the fact that the apartment tenants would be surrounded by a sea of vehicles. Perhaps, if the upper floors were heavily insulated acoustically and incorporated an Atrium or a Mediterranean-styled centre courtyard, with a retractable weather-tight cover, occupants might be able to find some tranquility and be able to ignore the chaos all around them.
   – If the City of Toronto Parking Authority were to lease out the air above its Downtown and Bloor Subway parking lots, Rental and Condominium Micro-Apartment complexes, designed by me fifteen years ago, could be erected above. The complexes would be geared to singles desiring housing in urban core locations. Parking income would increase substantially because lot maintenance and snow removal costs would be drastically lowered. Some additional revenue might come from tenants needing monthly-rate, off-hours parking, however, most tenants would be expected to not own vehicles and would walk, bike or use public transit to get around.
   The entire complex would be of prefabricated construction, to be delivered to the site in manageable components and assembled by a skilled erection crew. The steel skeleton would be assembled quickly, during off-hours to keep parking lot losses to a minimum. Once the framework and main floor are assembled, only two parking places would be lost to work crews. The apartment units would be manufactured, compressed and packaged, then shipped on a one-ton truck equipped with a hydraulic boom arm. The unit would be elevated by the boom to the main floor, and then pushed latterly to its appropriate location on its caster-wheeled shipping dolly. It would be lifted to its floor by a chain hoist and unloaded. The walls would be erected, the cabinets installed, the wiring and plumbing hookups connected and the remaining furnishings installed by an assembly crew.
   The complex would incorporate a large, four floors high Atrium, covered by a translucent roof. The courtyard would be carpeted with green Astroturf to provide the illusion of a natural setting and give quiet, low impact walking and exercise space for the tenants. The courtyard would abound with foliage, ornamental trees, comfortable chairs and park benches to promote a relaxing atmosphere. A fountain might supply a pleasing ambient sound pattern. Ornamental street pole lamps and white miniature lights in the trees would provide attractive lighting for evening strolls or viewing the courtyard from the units. All interior courtyard walls could be light beige stucco to provide a warm, cheery sensation, regardless of the weather. At both ends of the complex, decks on each floor would provide access to elevators and stairways, laundry facilities and exercise equipment. Comfortable chairs, sofas and low tables would promote relaxed sociability in the spacious common areas overlooking the Atrium. On the main floor, take-out restaurants, a mini market and video rental could be located near the elevators. Large, opening casement windows at each end and in the hallways would provide illumination and ventilation during temperate weather conditions. Secure bicycle storage garages would be located at parking lot level, opposite to the complex’s entrance.
   The units themselves are painstakingly designed to provide their occupants with all the comforts of modern life. Borrowing from recreational vehicle design principles, they provide adequate storage, cooking and dining facilities, comfortable seating and sleeping accommodations, entertainment hookups and a functional private bathroom with shower. A wide sliding window would give a panoramic view of the atrium and courtyard. The units would be cheerfully decorated, bright and easy to maintain. In the ceiling of each unit, a smoke and CO2 detector plus a fire sprinkler system will be incorporated for maximum tenant safety.
   When completed, each complex would give its occupants affordable independence, close to their jobs and public transit and above all, guarantee safe, secure and pleasant living in an often-hostile urban core location. Given my concept, in a most basic equation, every City of Toronto parking place as well as every Community College or University parking place has the ability to blossom into living quarters for four Non-Driving Singles. If you think this proposal might have real impact on some of your traffic woes, contact me at douglasEwoods@hotmail.com., for further details and a set of rudimentary design drawings of my project.
   In summation, please consider these suggestions of a fellow four-season bicyclist who feels that all city planning should not have to centre on the personal-use automobile.

   Yours sincerely

   Douglas Woods