Unfortunately I did not have the proper facts in the post "of Mice and Men" regarding the suppot that the development commission gives to small business
The small business center has fielded 3,497 general inquiries via telephone calls, walk ins and email through the two offices in Windsor and Kingsville. Between these 2 locations, they have also held 612 one-on-one client consultations and conducted 51 seminars, workshops, presentations and networking events with a total attendance of 1,876 people. The economic impact of this office were 53 businesses started and 46 jobs created.
However I still maintain that I stand by my assertion that a simple public statement supporting restarting the Community Improvement Plans and opposing what I call the `Costco Badlands` type of development would do exponentially more to help small business in Windsor than anything stated above.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Another London Article
Since London got their new celebrity Planner, they seem to get a lot more attention paid to planning issues. Here's another article
Their new planner, Sean Galloway, debunked the top ten myths of urban design, and his responses are so good that we wanted to reprint them here just in case the London Free Press decided to take this article off its website. So here goes...
Here then, are Galloway's 10 myths, debunked;
10. It's all about front porches. Indeed, building more houses with front porches is important, but it's really about making friendly buildings and attractive street-scapes.
9. It wants to eliminate the back yard. Back yards are important for privacy, but urban design reminds us not to forget the front yard as a place of activity and usefulness.
8. It's all about density, density, density. It's about providing variety and diversity, allowing people to grow up in a single-family home, move to an apartment, then a townhouse, then back into a single- family home, then back into an apartment as their life progresses -- all in the same neighbourhood.
7. It expects everyone to walk everywhere. It's about providing friendly streets and sidewalks and public transit and other infrastructure to entice people to walk more. Nobody expects the car to be eliminated.
6. It is just about the rear laneway. London is fearful of the rear laneway (for reasons nobody is sure of, considering they are all over Old North and Old South, for example). Some can be unpleasant, but there are examples of attractive back alleys in new urbanist developments across North America. Not everyone wants a big house with a big back yard.
5. It will not fit into a "normal" person's lifestyle. What is normal? People may want to drive to the supermarket for the big shop, but do they want to get in the car and face traffic just to pick up a loaf of bread or litre of milk? People want options. They want variety in the kinds of buildings they interact with, variety that makes the experience of living in a community richer.
4. It is just It's not about replicating Victorian architecture; it's about eliminating repetitive architecture that saps identity from a neighbourhood. about creating pre-war housing architecture.
3. It is all about new urbanism or placemaking. New urbanism a catchphrase, but it's about old-fashioned, grid-style developments with a diversity of home types and architecture. Placemaking involves integrating all industrial, commercial, residential and retail areas.
2. It is just about what the buildings look like. No, it's about how we deliver our walking spaces, our driving spaces, our open spaces. It's more than just architecture and landscaping.
1. It is not economically viable. New urbanist communities are thriving across North America. New ones are being built every day. They're sought after by home buyers.
So Londons new urban planner did some debunking of his own - and we really like his conclusions!
Their new planner, Sean Galloway, debunked the top ten myths of urban design, and his responses are so good that we wanted to reprint them here just in case the London Free Press decided to take this article off its website. So here goes...
Here then, are Galloway's 10 myths, debunked;
10. It's all about front porches. Indeed, building more houses with front porches is important, but it's really about making friendly buildings and attractive street-scapes.
9. It wants to eliminate the back yard. Back yards are important for privacy, but urban design reminds us not to forget the front yard as a place of activity and usefulness.
8. It's all about density, density, density. It's about providing variety and diversity, allowing people to grow up in a single-family home, move to an apartment, then a townhouse, then back into a single- family home, then back into an apartment as their life progresses -- all in the same neighbourhood.
7. It expects everyone to walk everywhere. It's about providing friendly streets and sidewalks and public transit and other infrastructure to entice people to walk more. Nobody expects the car to be eliminated.
6. It is just about the rear laneway. London is fearful of the rear laneway (for reasons nobody is sure of, considering they are all over Old North and Old South, for example). Some can be unpleasant, but there are examples of attractive back alleys in new urbanist developments across North America. Not everyone wants a big house with a big back yard.
5. It will not fit into a "normal" person's lifestyle. What is normal? People may want to drive to the supermarket for the big shop, but do they want to get in the car and face traffic just to pick up a loaf of bread or litre of milk? People want options. They want variety in the kinds of buildings they interact with, variety that makes the experience of living in a community richer.
4. It is just It's not about replicating Victorian architecture; it's about eliminating repetitive architecture that saps identity from a neighbourhood. about creating pre-war housing architecture.
3. It is all about new urbanism or placemaking. New urbanism a catchphrase, but it's about old-fashioned, grid-style developments with a diversity of home types and architecture. Placemaking involves integrating all industrial, commercial, residential and retail areas.
2. It is just about what the buildings look like. No, it's about how we deliver our walking spaces, our driving spaces, our open spaces. It's more than just architecture and landscaping.
1. It is not economically viable. New urbanist communities are thriving across North America. New ones are being built every day. They're sought after by home buyers.
So Londons new urban planner did some debunking of his own - and we really like his conclusions!
Of Mice and Men
If I ever was remembered for being a blogger, this would be the post I would want to be remembered for...
A couple of days ago, I attended a seminar delivered by Matt Fischer, CEO of the Windsor-Essex County Development Commission. I came away with the understanding that the Development Commission’s primary focus was that of identifying and supporting the 3% of businesses, described as Gazelles, that account for 54% of the job growth in our community.
Mr. Fischer also elaborated on one of the Development Commission’s secondary (and substantially less funded) goals of supporting businesses that he referred to as Mice. Mice were described as new independent local small businesses which presently and in the future will account for 44% of new job growth. The Development Commission acknowledged that while there focus is on the Gazelles, they will attempt to offer support to the “Mice”.
I wholeheartedly support the Development Commission’s business strategy of focusing scarce and limited resources on what it has identified as its primary objective - that of identifying and supporting Gazelles. However, there appears to be a discord between the Development Commission’s acknowledgment of the significance of Mice and the actions of our City leaders.
In 1995, I co-founded Bedroom Depot, a furniture retailer that had overcome the challenges that realize the failure of 70% of Mice within the first three years. The greatest obstacle that I encountered was the inability to locate in suburban neighbourhoods due to the fact that the Big Box Power Center Developments refused to accept my lease offers until I demonstrated the success of two retail stores with a financial history in excess of two consecutive years.
If we want to encourage Mice we need to provide them with locations that are in close proximity to their customer base. Herein lays the disconnect. Matt Fischers’ response was that “Main Street” provided this location, or what you would call an atmosphere of “Incubation” to Mice.
When I invested in Chanoso's restaurant, I realized the only way to ensure a long term investment was downtown. I always hold true to the fact that I am not a downtown promoter due to the location of my business; I located my business downtown as that is where I felt the future of Windsor lies.
My question to our city leaders is: “Since we know that the population of these “Main Streets” or BIA’s has declined by 10%, how do we expect to foster Mice when we do not create an environment in which they can successfully operate?”
How do we approve unattractive, unwalkable, anti-Mice developments while at the same time putting the Community Improvement Plans on hold? Implementing Community Improvement Plans is the best way in which to reverse the decline of the “Main Street” environments.
Mr. Fischer’s response was that these were valid concerns that should be addressed in the City’s Official Plan. I’ve called 311 to express these concerns. What I ask is whether Matt Fischer has provided his input into our official plan? If the Development Commission cannot find the funds to support Mice, can it at least take a stand and place a call to 311 to express its support of the City’s Official Plan policies that would provide an environment in which Mice could thrive.
I also call on the members of the Windsor & District Chamber of Commerce to call 311 to express their support of policies that would help the Mice in our community. It would be in all of our interests and most prudent, if the City’s Community Improvement Plans were taken off the shelf and put into action.
As a post script, I want to note that it was at the Development Commission’s Challenges of Change Summit that Richard Florida said that the attractiveness of a city was the number one determinant to attracting and retaining the creative class.
It is Chris Leinberger from the Brookings Institute who has substantiated proof of the real estate value and the economic development benefits of walkable neighbourhoods.
When will the Chamber of Commerce and Development Commission begin echoing scaledown.ca’s call for attractive, walkable mixed use developments that foster the local independent small businesses which they everyone acknowledges will be responsible for the creation of 44% of all new job growth in Windsor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
