Curing the Doubting Thomas

The downtown campus debate has become quite the divisive issue in our community. Though I want to say that I get the other side of the debate -- I really don't. I, for the life of me, can't understand why there is such rabid opposition to building the new engineering campus in our downtown core. Call me hopelessly optimistic, but I believe that we can achieve great things in our community, of which the University of Windsor is a integral component, if we stop saying we can't and starting asking, how do we succeed.

I know that we all need a little inspiration so, to get everyone started, check out The Project for Public Spaces - Campuses page and see what makes a truly innovate and successful campus. Spend some time reading and dreaming with the folks at PPS (don't feel ashamed if you catch yourself exploring the other program areas). After spending a couple of hours (and that's being conservative!) digging through the pages of inspiration at PPS I think you'll find that it's not a matter of if we support a downtown campus, but a when will we suport a downtown campus.

AltTrans Philanthropy

Just when you think that we have a perpetual uphill battle before us pertaining to the notion of alternative transportation in this - the automotive capital of Canada, you get word of news like this.

Philanthropy is usually geared towards high-profile needs such the need for a new MRI or cancer clinic. Rarely do you see the proceeds going towards preventive measures such as bicycling infrastructure. That is why I wanted to spotlight some anonymous donations made to the City of Windsor for the purpose of undertaking bikeway initiatives.

A number of generous donations have been received by the City of Windsor since 2000 from an anonymous donor within the community who has been liaising with the Manager of Council/Community Services & Deputy Clerk for the purpose of undertaking bikeway related initiatives within the city. Since 2000, the city has received donations totaling $282,288.65 with the most recent donation of approzimately $97,000 having been contributed in November of this year.

Whom ever you are Mr/s Anonymous Donor, on behalf of every resident in this fair city, THANK YOU very much for your incredible generosity. Future generations of Windsorites will be healthier both physically and economically because of your investment in this cities transportation infrastructure.

Something good out of DRTP?

Quick post -- check out the article in today's Star. Apparently the DRTP is dropping the truck component of its' plan and going with the full-height rail tunnel plan.

Two comments on that -- 1) It's about time! and 2) Hey, isn't that part of the Schwartz proposal?

Of course, with all things DRTP, only time will tell the real story. (That or some industrious blogger with the inside scoop! )

Windsor 20/20 on CBC

I was tuning into the webcast of last nights CBC news to catch Windsor independant film maker Gavin Booth being interviewed regarding the Windsor International Film Festival's 48 Hour Flick Fest, when I stumbled across this series the CBC is doing. From their website...

Windsor is an enigma. It should be an overwhelming success story.

It has great weather, hot humid summers and fairly mild winters. It sits in a geographic pocket that puts it four hours from Toronto and five hours from Chicago. It has the busiest international border crossing in North America with one-third of all trade between the US and Canada passing over the Ambassador Bridge. It has affordable housing within the city limits and a skilled workforce. It's a boater's dream with quick access to Lakes Erie and St.Clair from dozens of marinas. It is home to Chrysler Canada and Hiram Walker Distilleries and has turned its once shameful waterfront into a garden oasis and outdoor sculpture park. It has a multi-million dollar casino-hotel-entertainment complex. And it is also the fourth most ethnically diverse community in Canada behind Toronto, Vancouver and Hamilton.

Windsor should be an overwhelming success story... but it isn't. And in part what is missing is vision. The grand plan. The path that takes us to a brighter future. Windsor has the people to make things work. Windsor has a sense of itself as a community. What Windsor doesn't have is a sense of its own future.

Every Thursday, over the next 15 weeks, CBC and Radio-Canada Windsor will examine Windsor's potential and its future.

We're calling the series Windsor 20/20 because it's all about the vision.

Join us. Be part of Windsor's future.

What we've been saying all along.

The segment last night was on the University's possible move to a downtown campus and the impact that move would have on the city as a whole. After seeing Professor Rick Haldenby, who the DWBIA brought into town for a speaking engagement, the reporter traveled to Cambridge, Ontario, to check out the University of Waterloo's school of architecture and what the students and residents thought of their move. With over 90% of the core businesses reporting an increase in business, the overwhelming response was positive.

A big thumbs-up to the CBC for producing the Windsor 20/20 series. We need more progressive visions to guide our city through our current economic doldrums.

Check out the CBC's local website to watch last nights episode before they yank it down to post tonights.

Who's leading who here?

I don't subscribe to the Windsor Star, but an associate suggested that I check out Tuesday's column from Gord Henderson. Apparently Gord and I are on the same creative wavelength when it comes to opinions about the downtown Engineering School. In case you missed them, here are the two articles : Innovate or Die!, by yours truly and Engineering Excuses by Gord Henderson.

Maybe there really is something to this whole blogging thing after all!

Mixed Signals

In October, when SDW went before council to fight against the two proposed Big Box expansions, one on the east side and one of the far west side, we were rebuffed by every councilor except Alan Halberstadt. In spite of mountains of evidence defending our position and attacking the economic promises of the CocoBox, we couldn't win over any councilors nor did we solicit so much as an honourable mention. Imagine my surprise when, the next morning, Eddie Francis tells AM800 that the city is going to have to reduce services or raise taxes. 'It's just the way things are now' Francis pined. While I've already written about that revelation imagine my surprise when, on Tuesday, Mayor Francis dropped another financial bombshell on Windsor. According to Francis it costs approximately $70 million a year to manage and maintain the infrastructure throughout Windsor. That's roads, sewers, water, etc. Here's the kicker -- Windsor doesn't have enough money to cover a budget that large. Hold on a second...SDW was founded to fight against unsustainable growth and to direct development to the currently built environment, focusing on pedestrian and human scale alternatives to the past projects. (Ed: This does not mean we are anti-car ... we just want to have the option to go carless, or less-car, if we choose!) So when SDW said to council that BigBox was going to cost us $0.44 a square foot (that's about $185,000 a year for the CocoBox), why didn't they listen? More importantly, why, only a few weeks later, are they telling us that we can't support the infrastructure that we have after they voted to BUILD MORE! City Council and Mayor Francis either have very short or very selective memories.

It was suggested by a spectator at council a couple of weeks back that Windsor have a Shadow Council, a sort of Official Opposition, to help keep council in check and accountable. I'm not sure that even a Shadow Council could keep up with the confusion being propogated by some members of our council, but there needs to be something done to encourage accountability of our city officials. I'd like to think that efforts like Scale Down Windsor, and other like venues of new media and information, are making a difference in the way that Windsor, collectively and individually, behaves. As Mahatma Ghandi said "We must become the change we want to see."

Debunking the Growth Myth, Part 12

Myth Number 12
Environmentalists are just another special interest. There is no such thing as the public interest.

Reality Check: Environmentalism is both a general interest and a public interest.

It seems that the idea of a public interest has fallen on hard times. Nobody can put their finger on a precise definition of the concept. As a result, environmentalists (and civic activists) tend to be labeled as just another special interest. This labeling marginalizes the environmentalists' viewpoint and makes it seem that they are no different than special interest business groups. For example, a city council might appoint two chemical company representatives and two environmentalists to a committee and assume that these "special interests" would balance out to represent the "public interest".

Business groups typically represents the narrow, private, profit-making interests of a relatively small segment of the community. The focus of such groups is on maximizing short-term economic gain for their particular industry, and they are undoubtedly a special interest in the political sense. Other issues are only important as they relate to this focus. The person who represents a business group on a civic committee is usually financially compensated for representing the group and may receive direct business benefits from committee participation, such as policies and decisions favourable to his or her business.

On the other hand, an environmentalist typically represents a broad range of interests and multiple values that are oriented toward protecting the current and future quality of our environmental support system. The outcome of the environmentalist's interest is the long-term welfare of all citizens and the natural habitat we ultimately depend upon. There is rarely any personal financial reward associated with the environmentalist's positions and more often, this representation comes at a personal cost.

Read the rest of the argument against Myth 12 here.

$120 million for Montreal Arts District

See what is possible when a city has defined a vision, established a plan and co-operation between the different levels of government as well as the community itself?

Quebec Premier Jean Charest said the parties involved have "an out of the ordinary will to do something that is going to be significant for Montreal and really leave a profound mark."

Do you feel that the secret behind Montreal's success as a municipality stems from the fact that they have this high level of government/citizen cooperation? Imagine what Windsor could accomplish if we possessed that out of the ordinary will to do something significant and leave a profound mark? We already have established the need, now we just need to rally community support behind a cohesive plan for a rejuvenated downtown. Then, will we be the next municipality getting media coverage of our huge windfall?

From CBC's website (thanks AC);

"An area of Montreal is earmarked for a major facelift after all three levels of government pledged $120 million toward the revamp as an attractive arts and entertainment hub.

Representatives from the federal, provincial and municipal governments vowed on Monday to participate and contribute $40 million each toward the redevelopment of a downtown area of approximately one square kilometre that includes the city's Place des Arts complex.

The revitalized entertainment district will be known as Le Quartier des Spectacles.

The goal is to improve the area that already plays host to a number of prominent events, including the popular Montreal International Jazz Festival and the annual Just for Laughs Comedy Festival."

Read the rest of the article here.

Rumours confirmed

It looks like Alan Halberstadt is somewhat of a clairvoyant. When we presented to council about the evils of the CoCoBox development on the border of Windsor, Alan launched into a pretty good speech about how the west side WalMart and the Huron Church/Tecumseh Canadian Tire store would like close and leave us with more empty Big Box stores to deal with. I guess he is right!

On a good source, I've been told that in addition to Loblaw's (which we already knew was putting a superstore sort of bigbox store out there) WalMart and Canadian Tire will be opening stores at the periphery of our city. Three stores filled, one to go.

I wonder what Windsor will do with all the empty Big Box stores in the city interior.

Oh yeah, one more psuedo rumour. The Home Depot store, which is moving out the SilverCity complex area in the 1st quarter next year, has already been sold to a new owner. Not sure who it is, but the rumour mill says Ikea has purchased it. We'll have to wait and see who buys that BigBox site -- but the papers are signed, sealed and delivered. Now it's just a matter of time.

Tonight, on the idiot box

I don't normally suggest that you spend valuable time out of the grave in front of that life-draining box in your recroom, but this CBC documentary seems like it may be the exception to the rule. I just wish it came out sooner so we could have driven people to watch it prior to our own little WalMart battle here in Windsor. From the CBC Newsworld website...

WAL-MART NATION
Tuesday November 13 at 10pm ET/PT and Saturday November 17 at 11pm ET/PT on CBC Newsworld.

Wal-Mart Nation is an hour long, documentary journey through the complex and fascinating world of the international anti-Wal-Mart movement.

Wal-Mart's emergence as a global corporate force has triggered an unprecedented political backlash. Wal-Mart has single-handedly galvanized a progressive, grass roots and labour coalition of activists determined to roll back the tide of corporate power and domination. This is a generation baptized by the anti-globalization protests. This is the Wal-Mart Nation. These are their stories.

Carolyn is an unlikely anti-Wal-Mart activist. The former Miss America (1992) is a beauty queen turned feminist activist. She's also a Reagan Republican and anti-abortion crusader. Sapp founded Wal-Mart Versus Women as a vehicle to pu blicize the largest civil rights class action suit in US history.

Anna Liu is a 23 year old, Chinese Canadian union activist determined to unionize Canadian Wal-Mart workers. Despite her militancy, Anna tells us that before attending university she scarcely knew what a union was. We follow Anna and her cadres as they "gate crash" Wal-Mart stores in a desperate attempt to sign up members.

Forbes magazine calls Al Norman, Wal-Mart's number one enemy. Norman, also known as the "Sprawlbuster" is the dean of anti-Wal-Mart activists. Ten years ago the well-connected Democratic Party activist successfully prevented Wal-Mart from building a store in his Massachusetts hometown. His surprising victory spawned the anti-Wal-Mart movement.

Environmentalist Ben Bennett is the leader of a ten-year long battle to keep Wal-Mart out of Guelph, Ontario. But Bennett is now facing his final battle in this decade long war.

Chris Kofinis is a political science professor from Kingston, Ontario. But Kofinis has found himself on the front lines of the anti-Wal-Mart battle, along with presidential hopefuls John Edwards and Barack Obama. As Communications Director for the Washington D.C. based Wake-Up Wal-Mart, Kofinis is spending millions of dollars for on a sophisticated media campaign against America's biggest employer.

These stories are set against the colourful backdrop of the Wal-Mart annual general meeting. Here, Wal-Mart executives, employees, and shareholders gather for a weeklong celebration of the world's most successful company.

Through interviews, animation and actuality sequences, the filmmakers explore the Wal-Mart Effect and how the company has transformed the economy of the United States and the world.

Wal-Mart Nation is a first person journey through a year in life of the anti-Wal-Mart movement. The filmmakers blend actuality footage, interviews, archival film and photos, text and graphics in a provocative, engaging and often-humourous point of view documentary.

Wal-Mart Nation was produced by Ultramagnetic Productions and directed by Andrew Munger in association with CBC Newsworld.

Thinking Outside the Box Store

Hey - isn't there a Canadian Tire planned for the CocoBox development in Ojibway? Remember, just because they've got a reference to "Canada" in their name, doesn't make them the benign store that many think they are.

Many thanks to The Tyee for publishing this article and to Gord for sending it to me. (By the way, the author of this article is Ned Jacobs, son of the late and great urbanist Jane Jacobs. Man, I miss that woman!)

Thinking Outside the Box Store
By Ned Jacobs
TheTyee.ca

The stated object of Mayor Sullivan's EcoDensity initiative is to reduce Vancouver's "eco-footprint" by cutting energy use and waste, while improving livability and housing affordability.

These goals are laudable, but will EcoDensity actually live up to its billing?

The apparent willingness of the mayor and some councillors to significantly expand big box development in South Vancouver is clearly at odds with EcoDensity.

The environmental and social benefits of density are due to economies of location, mainly achieved through growth of neighbourhood centres with diverse functions.

In sharp contrast, big box retail exploits economies of scale, relying on a widely dispersed customer base, public subsidies for car owners, and plenty of cheap parking.

"Green" building design of a box store does not alter its fundamental dependency on cars and fossil fuels.

And while multi-chain big box plantations can be cost-effective and convenient for car-owning consumers, it's always at the expense of commercial diversity and stability in central and neighbourhood business districts. Retailers in our pedestrian-oriented centres pay premium rents for their location, often with limited or pricey parking. Big box retailers compete unfairly by converting lower-cost industrial land to retail use, while asking us all to suffer the consequences of car dependency.

The question before Vancouver City Council is an application by Canadian Tire for a 255,000 square-foot "big box" retail development that is expected to generate up to 11,000 car trips per day on heavily congested Marine Drive."

255,000 square feet is dwarfed when compared to the 420,000 of CocoBox that Windsor's city council just approved a zoning change for. I hope SouthVan does a better job at protecting it's local economy than Windsor.

Read the rest of this article at The Tyee's website here.

Impassioned plea for Ojibway

While I may disagree with this letter writer on some of his smaller points, I must give him accolades for writing such an impassioned letter to the Windsor Star. I am publishing it here, for the fact that if our daily paper prints it at all, it will be in a much neutred form.

Congrats, Gerry. We need more letter writers like you.

Letter to the Editor: Regarding “GreenLink/ Big Box”

Amid great fanfare and theatrics, the City of Windsor rolled out its new "GreenLink" border initiative. Within hours of its release, the spindoctors at the Windsor Star, official mouthpiece of City Hall, revved up its PR engines to full throttle.

Experience the rapture, they proclaimed! Call 311 and give us the thumbs up, they exclaimed! This is your final chance, they shrieked! The messiah has arrived, save yourselves! "Gridlock Sam" and his "Garden of Eden" caravan have just pulled up to Huron Church bearing gifts: 300 acres of parkland!

To a weary population beaten down by years of record smog, pollution and the endless rumble of trucks, the promise seemed enticing. To a city over-run by urban sprawl and cancerous growth, a city whose lack of trees and greenspace is a point of pride amongst members of the local conservation authority, to a sick, bloated worn-out shell of a city mired in its own waste, the second coming of "Gridlock Sam" appeared like a godsend.

I too wanted to be a believer. I picked up the phone to dial 311 and register my approval, when my eye caught a glimpse of an almost imperceptible headline on the front page of the Windsor Star, "Lure of Big Box Jobs Sways Council". I put down the phone and read…..

No! This can't be true I thought. Who in their right mind would propose such a ludicrous plan, a big box sprawlmart supercenter, complete with 48 acres of asphalt right at the gates of the internationally acclaimed, federally and locally funded, provincially protected, Ojibway Prairie Complex.

Imagine taking the family for a nice Sunday drive out to Point Pelee and upon arrival finding a Walmart Supercenter right outside the gate. As you enter, a Walmart greeter hands you a cart and proclaims, "Welcome to Point Pelee". Have they all gone mad?

There are numerous sites throughout this city more suitable for this type of predatory development, than the "Garden of Eden" that is Ojibway. The Lou Romano Sewage Lagoon comes to mind…or how about the Central Avenue Transfer Station? For a highly visible site that could act as a Big Box Beacon, I recommend building it atop of one of the city's numerous reclaimed landfills.

The well oiled, snake oil salesmen at city hall claim this big box monstrosity is a compatible development for this site. "There will be no negative impacts to the surrounding Ojibway corridor" they spout. To further allay our fears, they point out that E.R.C.A. (the protector of our conservation lands) has given its approval of the project. I can't recall a development in the history of Essex County in which E.R.C.A. has denied approval. This should come as no surprise, for like a fox guarding the henhouse the E.R.C.A. board is entirely stacked with politicians from representative municipalities who know nothing of conservation and whose primary interests are to ensure that development in their respective turfs aren’t impeded.

Equally not surprising, although very disheartening is the fact that the city's own (neutered) Environmental Planning Advisory Committee (EPAC) “reluctantly” supports the project. According to their sad logic, “a commercial development is preferable to a residential development”. They don’t realize that either option is like a Trojan horse that will open up the entire area to further encroachment and fragmentation, thus destroying the very fabric and connectivity of this sacred “GreenLink”. The EPAC naively believes they can somehow lessen the impact of this “Boxing In” as long as they “get a seat at the table”, apparently when the feeding frenzy begins. Thus "E-Pack" unknowingly plays pawn to the city puppet masters, who exploit the PR potential that an “Environmental Group” provides by lending an air of credibility and justification to the city's sordid scheme. Why create a costly PR department when the City can exploit these various volunteer committees?

Most self respecting environmental groups, citizens, the MNR, the racetrack, the Windsor Business Association Advisory Committee (WBAAC} and the Town of LaSalle are outraged and opposed to this project. In fact, the Town of LaSalle’s planning department issued the following statement from its commissioned peer review of the Applicant’s Market Impact Assessment and Planning Justification Report which concludes….. “….It is difficult to imagine a more inappropriate location to plan a major big box commercial centre such as that proposed on the subject lands….”

The one hope for the “Ojibway Complex” is that the progressive and farsighted Town of LaSalle take up the fight to the Ontario Municipal Board. LaSalle has already publicly stated that it does not support this Big Box commercial development. The project “does not represent good planning, is contrary to both the Town of LaSalle and the City of Windsor’s Official Plan and does not meet the requirements of the Cabinet Approved Provincial Policy Statement” and most certainly is in conflict with the Endangered Species Act. There are many citizens in both LaSalle and Windsor who would stand up and fight if LaSalle would take the lead.

The renown conservationist Robert Marshall stated, “It is exigent that all friends of the wilderness ideal should unite. If they do not present the urgency of their view-point the other side will certainly capture popular support. Then it will be only a few years until the last escape from society will be barricaded. If that day arrives there will be countless souls born to live in strangulation, countless human beings who will be crushed under the artificial edifice raised by man. There is just one hope of repulsing the tyrannical ambition of civilization to conquer every niche on the whole earth. That hope is the organization of spirited people who will fight for the freedom of wilderness”.

It is glaringly obvious that the Mayor and City Council, with the exception of Councilor Halberstadt lack both the vision and intent to safeguard the natural habitats that so many citizens, many of them children, have fought so hard over the years to protect. All the rhetoric and public relations propaganda in the world can not hide the fact that this council has no regard for its citizens or the earth. This council makes a sham out of the city’s motto: “The River and the Land Sustain Us”. Just look at the area of the “Little River Enhancement Group”. Children spent years of toil rehabilitating this site, only to witness the city’s encroachment with roadways and bridges, urban sprawl housing projects, and the soon to be $100 million dollar future “white elephant” arena and 2400 car parking lot.

The City has truckloads of taxpayer dollars for lavish projects that primarily benefit the wealthy few; the developers, lawyers, planners, consultants and so called hired experts. This is the real “Green-$-Link” of which the city refers to in the new improved Schwartz Plan 2. A green-$-link that has already cost Windsor taxpayers upwards of $5,000,000! Lost in the public memory hole is the fact that the current “1500 Jobs?/ Big Box Beacon” is almost the same location of the original “Schwartz Plan Ring Road” proposed by our enlightened council. For this same council to now advocate a disneyscaped 300 acre parkland Greenlink border plan while aiding and abetting the destruction of the real green-link, the Ojibway Provincial Prairie Nature Reserve, is hypocrisy at its finest.

I urge everyone who still cares about the natural world, who still values community and integrity, who still envisions a world worthy of leaving for our children, to stand up and fight against the City of Windsor’s betrayal of its citizenry, its neighbors and the natural world. Call or Write LaSalle and encourage Council to oppose this sordid plan at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Call Windsor’s 311 or write/e-mail Windsor City Councilors to object to this Big Box Boondoggle!

Gerry Kaiser

Innovate or Die!

I've been reading the rhetoric that the proposed, and now likely defunct, University of Windsor School of EngineeringDowntown Campus has been generating both online and tranditional media outlets. The blogging community has come alive withall sorts of opinions and gyrations on both sides of the issue. Reading Gord Henderson's column from November 8th made me green with envy, and then it made me mad.

What really turns me up about this whole process is the very name of the new engineering school -- Centre for Engineering Innovation. In fact, to be completely honest, I am extremely disappointed in the sheer number of engineering students and faculty who have come out in opposition to moving downtown. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but aren't they supposed to be engineers? Aren't they going to spend the rest of their careers coming up with innovate and new solutions to meet, and exceed, business objectives? It seems to me that, when trying to build an engineering school downtown, that the very best ideas, the most brilliant solutions, should be springing from the collective intelligence of the resident faculty and their students. Instead, what we are getting is a glimpse into the product that the engineering school at the University of Windsor will be delivering over the coming decades -- a giant helping of the same old thing.

Innovate or die, that oft repeated, though completely accurate, mantra of the business world, should be the new slogan for Windsor. We've tried 50 years of doing things, or more accurately, undoing things, without so much as a hint of success in staunching the flow of jobs, money and people out Windsor. Clayton M. Christensen, a professor at the Harvard Business School, established the critical need for businesses to innovate or risk losing both customers and profit to the competition. In fact, Christensen, in his 2003 book The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth, found that the odds of creating successful growth, albeit in a business environment, jumped from 6% to 37% when a distruptive strategy is implemented versus the tread-worn path of incremental growth.

Mayor Francis, to his credit, is finally running the city like a family-business -- sort of. He abhors debt and is working to set the city, at least on paper, on firm financial footing. To Mayor Francis I say, "If you want to run Windsor like a business, you need to do what good businesses do!". We have to pull out all of the stops to find new and innovative ways to engage the citizenry, whether residents or businesses, in building a more diverse and sustainable Windsor. We are building the image of Windsor, much like Chrysler builds minivans, and trying to sell our product to the highest, and hopefully most sustainable, bidder. It is time to stop hashing out the same old plans, in the same old ways, just with different councilors at the table. It is time to take up the position being suggested by Larry Horowitz of the DWBIA, Gord Henderson of the Windsor Star and, of course, the editors of Scale Down Windsor and transform Windsor into a land of milk and honey. I think that if we look deep enough we'll discover that we have the talent, the desire and, if we look in the right places, the money to make the changes that need to be made. Just don't look to the University of Windsor School of Engineering -- apparently the talent and desire to innovate are in short supply in Essex Hall.

Community buys into Downtown Campus

I know from personal experience that the Windsor Star and Gord Henderson are not normally representative of the general public's attitudes, but they've got that attitude nailed this time.

Now - I have yet to complete any empirical studies or thorough surveys a la Ipsos Reid, but I do tend to talk to a lot of people around this city. And the vast majority of people I talk to admit incorporating a downtown university campus is a seeming no-brainer.

According to Henderson's column today (and I saw Gord taking feverish notes during Haldenby's speaking engagement, and the subsequent nauseous look on his face a few times) "The contrast between Cambridge, where people rolled up their sleeves, wrote cheques and got it done in short order, and Windsor, where the university seemingly doesn't understand the role it could and should play in this community, and where the public remains largely indifferent, is stark and painful." I must tell you that I share the same thoughts as Gord here. When I listened to Haldenby describe how enormous the impact was to the City of Cambridge (my mother is from Sheffield - very close by so I know it well) my heart began to ache.

"On Sept. 13, 2004, nine months from the start of construction, this riverfront showplace welcomed its first students. The payback, for Cambridge and the school, has been remarkable. It includes 800 new or refurbished housing units in the once-derelict core. An area where you couldn't get a cappuccino now boasts six such establishments. There's always something interesting happening downtown, courtesy of 350 creative, fun-loving minds. The boost in tax revenues exceeds the city's phased contributions. And the school, which has made headlines around the world, now attracts the nation's best talent, with applications soaring from 600 to 2,000 for 72 first-year openings. I listened to Haldenby and it made me sick with envy that our university, unlike the can-do folks at St. Clair College, can only come with lame excuses for not becoming a community partner in the revival of our dying downtown.", Henderson has every right to be concerned for Windsor.

What the University is proposing in it's new Centre For Engineering Innovation is about four times the size of the school of architecture in Cambridge. Four Times! Now take the numbers from the spin off developments credited to their downtown move, multiply it by four, and lay it over our downtown. Now you can see why the editorial board of the Star is rabidly behind this concept.

To put things in perspective, the University has stated that it is still $20 million short of the $110 million campus (U of Waterloo's architecture campus cost a total of $27 million). Whoever provides that final $20 million would have a lot of say in where the campus was located. Remember a year ago when the Star reported that "Council approves $48M arena plan: Move won't raise taxes, Postma tells voters", yet today the arena numbers have ballooned to a hefty $65.9 million.

Yup, that extra (nearly) $20 million recently tacked onto the sprawling east-end arena's budget would have done a lot of rejuvenating in our downtown.

Henderson paraphrases Haldenby by stating that "(w)ith its textile industry dead and its core area battered by floods in 1974 and ravaged by subsequent flood-control measures, Cambridge's movers and shakers spent years looking for a miracle. They kicked around proposals, ranging from an Imax theatre to a textile museum, that would have been chronic drains on the public purse."

Do we really feel that we've seen the last of the budgetary manipulations with regards to the arena? Do we really feel that we won't be propping up their annual budgets on a yearly basis resulting in "chronic drains on the public purse"? Cambridge understood the economic ramifications of all those different proposals, and obviously Windsor doesn't.

(ED: we will be posting the complete video and audio files from Professor Rick Haldenby's forum on this site very soon, so keep checking back to see if my google-fu has produced a final edit yet.)

Downtown Campus Part I

Last night's speaking engagement was a success on many levels.

Here's what I've learned

1. 19 cities tried to impose retail malls in their downtowns, 19 of those projects failed (including London Ontario's)
2. Every successful midsize city had 3 common elements
a. Protection of Heritage bldgs
b. a river or some other body of water
c. a post secondary campus
3. The benefits of a downtown campus are mutual. Some Universities benefits include:
a. Higher amount of applicants which yield a more prestigious student body
b. Greater recognition for graduates. Higher % of applicants that take jobs worldwide
c. Greater visibility increases ease of fundraising efforts

One of the problems that the speaker pointed out is that the continuation of this debate will help no one. A university Campus will come downtown only when the debate has ended.

Ross Paul made some comments that I can disagree with for good reasons. He mentioned "cobbling" together a smaller campus for another department might be a small start.

I disagree, as I think that would be an incredible victory. Our greatest problem is that we have no set and established vision for the City Center West Lands. Even a smaller campus created by the university would combine with efforts from the college to designate that land once and for all as a post secondary campus site with more to follow.

This would end all uncertainty for property owners adjacent to this land. For the first time in decades they could start producing plans for the surrounding 100 acres. It is not important whether the campus is not fully complete for a decade. If my hopes come true it will never be complete as it will always be a work in progress that keeps building. The point is that the process will begin whereas right now we sit in an unbearable limbo.

The first recommendation by the International Downtown Association Panel was that we make a decision regarding this land. Regardless of what the university decides to put on this land, a decision will be made.

Unfortunately too many people are caught up in the specific department that should come downtown where I agree with Dr. Paul that this is not what we should focus on. Finger pointing must end, we must work together as true partners to save our community.

The only other comment I felt that Dr. Paul made that should be addressed is his contention that the university is not only supposed to help downtown, its meant to help the entire region.

Well, he should remember that a successful downtown will also benefit our entire region. That is of course unless someone can point out a successful region that has turned their back on their downtown.

Remember this is not only about downtown, this is about the core of Essex County. Erie st., Ottawa and all the other BIA's will be affected by the decisions made to reinvest in the city's core.

Fumbling around in the void of information

A funny thing happened on the way to the editorial pages in todays Windsor Star.

I read through Gord Henderson's column which continued on his previous columns in pronouncing the death of a downtown university campus. Gord tells us about these City Centre West renderings I have been hearing so much about. The ones that I was told would make my mouth break out in an instantaneous torrent of saliva. The ones that "show the area from the new bus terminal west to Caron Avenue, and from University Avenue north to Riverside Drive, changed from asphalt wasteland into a dynamic urban space featuring attractive academic buildings, creative museum space, student residences and existing housing." If Francis wants to build public suport behind the downtown campus, the best thing he could do would be to "leak" these drawings. However, according to the Henderson, the dream is all but dead - "Plenty of vision. Lots of great pictures. But no cash. The story of our lives."

Then, right next to Gord's column on page A3, sat Grace Macaluso's "Mixed signals sent over U of W project", which basically apologises for Gord's current stance that the project is dead: "(t)his is despite the fact that Star columnist Gord Henderson today cites university board of governors chairman Marty Komsa explaining that the board has not only rejected putting the engineering school downtown, it has also passed on a follow-up proposal to put an ambitious $58-million mixed-use campus downtown due to lack of funds." According to Macaluso, , Lori Lewis, U of W manager of news services, said her comments on the weekend about the downtown proposal were premature. "I may have spoken out of turn," she said.

Talk about mixed messages.

This is what happens when the public is given only tidbits of tantalizing news. Like the land developers we love to hate, we speculate, guestimate and postulate, which benefits nobody but the people selling newspapers.

I am excited by the fact that the University appears to be backpedaling on their firm stance against a downtown campus, however. Maybe the DWBIA's forum tonight featuring Rick Haldenby from the University of Waterloo will open up a few eyes and ears to the possibilities that lie ahead if the public rallies their support behind these plans.

I don't think we are hiding our support here at SDW. The evidence is clear about the benefits hundreds of students living, learning and playing in an urban campus brings to the host community. We are also not convinced that the new Centre for Engineering Innovation is the only campus that would work. How about the new Law or Medical campus?

We must dare to dream, and this is where publicizing Francis' dreams-on-paper of a rejuvinated downtown would catapult us closer to that reality.

Good read for the start of the cold winter

This artful and entertaining collection of essays by the novelist Will Self (The Book of Dave) will delight anyone who enjoys his weekly column of the same name in the Independent or his last collection of essays, Feeding Frenzy.

Here Self shifts from gonzo journalism to the study of psychogeography, the study of how geographical environments affect emotions and behavior.

Setting off on a quest for the intrinsic character of various places as well as the manner in which the contemporary world warps the relationship between psyche and place, Self casts a dismissive eye on most of the world. Singapore strikes him as Basingstoke force-fed with pituitary gland; Sao Paolo's lack of a street plan makes it an unholy miscegenation between London and Los Angeles. But Steadman's beautifully harsh illustrations (worthy of their own book) and Walking to New York, a previously unpublished semi-autobiographical meditation on life and death, reveal a surprising depth to Self's cynical insights.

"Cars and bullet trains may speed up our transit time, but they do nothing to enrich the quality or depth of our interactions. On the contrary, because we arrive so fast, we have no reason to make occasions of anything. By nudging others into this consciousness, Self acts as "an insurgent against the contemporary world."After an afternoon of overload at a local mall, he escapes to the suburbs with his kids, where he reflects on how interzones -- those places where "country and city do battle for the soul of a place" -- excite him. This suburban expedition is Self's way of dragging his children into their own consciousness of place. He wants to yank them "out of all this intense urbanity" and expose them to the suffocating pressure of "the sheer orderliness of all the neat verges and linseed- oiled garage doors" -- just like the teenage Self once felt. Once again, the insurgency: Self watches as his son tenses on his way into the suburbs and relaxes on his way home to the city, his psyche penetrated.

This new book promises to be an excellent read. Check out the book review published by the L.A. Times. Unfortunately, it's not yet vailable at the Windsor Public Library, but it is available at the St. Clair Shores Indigo store - but please try and purchase it from an independant retailer first.

Toronto's SPACING editor in Windsor

Join writer Shawn Micallef, Associate Editor of one of my favorite blogs Spacing as well as the Magazine of the same name in discussing how growing up in an automotive border town inspired him to pursue urban-minded projects. Associate editor of Spacing Magazine, Micallef created the mobile phone documentary called [murmur] which allows people to hear memories and stories of specific geographic locations.

It's really unfortunate that Shawn's lecture is taking place at the same time as the DWBIA's symposium on Downtown Regeneration Through Campus Location, because I've been a fan of Shawn's work and would love to hear him talk about how his early life in Windsor has shaped his views on urban design.

Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Time: 6:30pm - 7:30pm
Location: Central Branch -- Fred Israel Auditorium
Street: 850 Ouellette Avenue

Check out this events Facebook listing here.

Debunking the Growth Myth, Part 11

Myth Number 11
A person's visual preference is no basis for objecting to development.

Reality Check: The beauty of land is priceless and its destruction is permanent.

Citizens who oppose a development because it will ruin a pleasing view, or an attractive natural setting are often trivialized and dismissed by local officials who feel that profits and economic criteria are what is important. However, a pleasing natural view can be one of the most significant qualities in a good community. Unfortunately many people tend to dismiss such benefits of natural landscapes. It's all too rare that human development is a visual improvement upon a natural setting.

Seldom is a development stopped because it will harm an attractive natural setting. However, the "view" is often the most important siting criteria for a home or commercial development. The right "view" can make a $100,000 home sell for twice as much.

A 1994 study by the National Association of Home Builders found that the surrounding environment is the single most important factor affecting the market value of a home. A mountain vista or the proximity to a park, beach, or stream affects home value more than the size of the house (square footage), number of rooms, pools, or appliances. When visual preferences carry such a price tag, they can hardly be dismissed as trivial.

The aesthetic values of undeveloped land probably represents other human values as well. Our preference for natural landscapes may reflect an innate appreciation for the multitude of ecological values that can be derived from them – clean air and water, wildlife habitat, species diversity, etc. – as well as food generating potential from hunting and foraging that our ancestors depended on. The quality of our surrounding environment is still a direct reflection of our own health and well-being. Urban natural areas can also be extremely significant to children as places to play, explore, and build a closer relationship with nature.

for a printable version of the argument against Myth 11, click here.

GST tax cuts and "Trickle Down Economics"

Is anyone else concerned when they see the upper-tier governments post HUGE budget surpluses, while we here at the municipal levels can't afford to replace our water mains?

Barbara Yaffe had an excellent op-ed in this weekend's Windsor Star that helps link the two issues.

While the municipalities struggle with providing the basic requirements to live, only receiving $0.08 out of every dollar, our federal government is posting $13 billion surpluses and passing out tax cuts like Hallowe'en candy.

Canadian Federation of Municipalities president Gord Steeves pulled no punches in this press release, following Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's October 30 economic statement;

"The federal government obviously has room to cut taxes and invest in our cities and communities. Even after all the debt payments and tax cuts announced today, the government will still have $26 billion more than it needs over the next six years.

If the Government really wants to provide Canadians with tax relief, it should start by sharing the equivalent of one cent of the GST with cities and communities and making the gas-tax transfer permanent.

By providing cities and communities with more resources to meet growing needs, this would take the pressure off the property tax—the most regressive tax we have. This would also help our cities and communities compete with the best in the world, providing a sound basis for Canada’s future prosperity.

This year’s $13.8-billion federal surplus showed the government has been collecting more tax than it needed. The cost of not renewing our municipal infrastructure —pushed off the balance sheet where we can’t see it—is a massive municipal infrastructure deficit pegged at between $60 and $100 billion.

The government has so far failed to tackle this deficit, one of the most critical issues facing Canada’s cities and communities, with a long-term plan and commitment. The government’s Budget 2007 infrastructure investment of approximately $18 billion over seven years is important, but it pales when compared with the massive and growing municipal infrastructure deficit.

Today’s actions by the government leave this deficit untouched and continuing to grow, and the longer we fail to tackle it, the greater the cost when we finally do. Declaring victory and walking away from the battleground will not fix our cities. We need a plan, and we need long-term commitment.”

Think of this as we enjoy our GST cut. I think that I would prefer to spend my tax dollars on what's important to my family and my community. The first place I would start is to preserve an affordable flow of water into my house and alleviate the sewers backing up into my basement.

I would gladly forego a cut in GST for that.