The fight is on....

Argh! What were they thinking? According to the Windsor Star today, PAC approved the mega-development on the edge of Windsor and Lasalle. Oddly enough, the noted that nobody from Lasalle showed to express their disapproval for the development, even though the media had reported that they were worried about the economic and traffic impact on their town.

We now have about 3 weeks to put the pressure on our councillors to vote to deny this development and reverse the decision of PAC. It has been done before, but we are going to need to work together. The Star said that Jenny Coco and gang are promising 1500 full and part-time (read: mostly part-time) jobs along with $4.8 million per year in tax revenues. Our money hungry city is going to be chomping at the bit to give this land away. Our argument is going to have to be very convincing to have them pass up $4.8 million a year into city coffers.

Possible objections:

1. Costs for infrastructure development and support
2. Costs to protect, rehabilitate and restore damaged
3. Costs to provide infrastructure, etc for the inevitable housing developments that will follow.

Those are just off the top of my head, and that is not even including the impacts to the established neighbourhoods in Windsor.

Post your thoughts in the comments field. Chris and I will try and formulate them and then put together our objections. We'll make sure that we have representation at council from SDW to speak out against this development!

If anyone knows how the voting went, especially with the councilors who sit on this committee, please post it here. That will help us to know who we have to work with, and against, in this critical process!

Dave Hall's Latest Article

Dave Hall gives Windsor Star readers some valuable insights into what's happening in Windsor's business community. Todays article is on green architecture, putting the brakes on big-box development and business' actually moving INTO downtown...

Green designs benefit budget and environment

A member of Greenpeace for over 30 years, Windsor architect Joseph Passa comes honestly by his commitment to designing environmentally-friendly buildings. With dozens of his company's green designs popping up across the region, Passa Associates Inc. is among Canada's leading designers of environmentally-friendly buildings. A list of awards backs up their expertise. "Green buildings have been my passion for decades," said Passa, who was trained in Canada and New Zealand. "Now it's a growing worldwide movement which is drawing interest and commitment from across the globe." In the past, it's often been thought that environmentally-friendly buildings are more expensive to design and build. While that can be the case, Passa said it doesn't have to be. "We've designed schools for the local separate school board which have come in well under budget," he said. "We have to follow the same budget and constraints as any other architectural firm and we've shown we can do it without spending more money." As examples, Passa said Our Lady of Mt. Carmel elementary school came in $65,000 under budget while St. Christopher's was $350,000 under budget when it was completed. Both exceeded the national energy code standards by between 40 and 60 per cent. St. Christopher's was recently recognized as the most energy-efficient school in Ontario and the fourth most in Canada. Buildings designed by Passa Associates are scattered across the area and include a new fitness facility at the University of Windsor, Glengarda Child and Family Services linen building, the Rotary Children's Safety Village, Lakeview Montessori School, South Walkerville Medical Centre, Clairmont Financial, Hofburg seniors residence, Parkpoint condominiums and Crystal Harbour condos among many others. Passa and colleague David Rompf have just had an article published in the Journal of Green Building, outlining four of their local projects. Next month, Passa will spend a week in Verona, Italy, studying sustainable aspects of stone construction at the 42nd international exhibition of stone design and technology on a scholarship awarded by the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada. In recognition of his commitment to green buildings, Passa has also just been named to a three-year term on the Ontario Heritage Trust. His mandate will be to devise ways of maintaining the historical integrity of heritage buildings while at the same time making them more energy-efficient. Passa said one of the heritage buildings under retrofit consideration is Toronto's Elgin and Winter Garden Theatres on Yonge Street. "We're hoping to renovate the building and make it more energy-efficient while retaining its history and charm."

RACEWAY WANTS PAUSE IN BIG-BOX DEVELOPMENT

Plans for a Birch Run-style big-box retail development (reported here previously) adjacent to Ambassador Golf Club, on the city's southwest border with LaSalle, are scheduled to go before the City of Windsor's planning advisory committee today. The neighbouring Windsor Raceway, however, wants a delay. The proposal by Coco Developments requires a zoning change to allow for a commercial centre development and construction of a 400,000-square-foot retail centre on 50 acres of land at the northwest corner of Sprucewood Avenue and Matchette Road. Since the majority of the lot is designated residential, the proposal also requires an amendment to the city's Official Plan. The development calls for a pair of 100,000-square-foot buildings and about 2,400 parking spaces. There are plans to buffer it from the adjacent Ojibway Park prairie grass reserve. Lawyer Chris Kruba, a spokesman for Windsor Raceway, said the track is requesting a deferral to "give us time to assess how the development will impact our property and business." City administrators are recommending approval of the zoning change as well as a change in the designation of a portion of Sprucewood from Class I collector road to Class II arterial road. There have been no objections voiced by Transit Windsor -- which has a route past the site -- or from police services, the Essex Region Conservation Authority and the planning department. However, that department has recommended that the majority of traffic access be from Sprucewood rather than Matchette. Fearing the development's impact on its Malden Town Centre retail businesses as well as concerns over increased traffic, LaSalle council has stated its opposition to the plans. If it's dealt with today by PAC, Windsor council will get the proposal Oct. 15.

DOWNTOWN OFFICES TAKEN BY MAGAZINE, MARKETER

Two businesses have located in the downtown core. The Drive Magazine has moved into 309 Chatham St. W. and Indaba Marketing Inc. has taken space at 430 Pelissier St. Formerly at 711 Riverside Dr. E., The Drive now occupies part of a building that houses Rogues Gallery Comics. Indaba, a Zulu word meaning "a meeting or council of people with like mind," is owned by Debi Croucher, a marketing specialist who also works with the Windsor International Film Festival.

In other downtown news, the streetscaping project on Ouellette Avenue between University Avenue and Park Street is expected to be completed by the end of October.

Letters...

I just want to commend all the readers who are taking the time to compose wonderful letters to our municipal decision makers regarding the livability (or lack thereof) of Windsor, and how the decisions that they have been entrusted to make will ultimately affect us all. Here's another one that was sent along to the members of PAC in anticipation of tonight's meeting...

Dear PAC members,

I am writing regarding the proposed commercial development on the lands located at the northwest corner of Matchette road and Sprucewood ave. This type of project is completely backwards to the way the city needs to grow, which is internally with revitalization of the core. Would the proposed development meet the criteria for what Eddie Francis refers to as "Smart Growth", I certainly hope not. It is perplexing to me that extremely wealthy developers continue to grow even wealthier at the expense of the communities they build in. If this is allowed to be built then next we'll be expanding the roads going to said development at whose expense? How much has the area surrounding Costco already cost taxpayers with roads needing expanding and helping to make it easier for current residents to flee to suburban tax havens? They can now shop on their way out to their McMansions. We have 50,000 automobiles coming into the city already from the outlying communities every day and instead of making it more difficult for them to drive in and out of our city we keep making it easier.

There are many websites dedicated to livable communities and none of them would recommend this type of outward development. The long term costs of this type of sprawl need to be considered such as increased infrastructure and volumes of automobile traffic as well as increased energy needs. With the increase in traffic and parking facilities also comes increasing pollution levels and wider roads which will definitely impact the sensitive and already impacted Ojibway and Spring garden areas. As well there will be a huge impact on our health with increased water, soil and air pollution. Considering our air quality was last on the list of livable communities in Canada is this really where we want to head? There are also other externalized costs to consider such as increased obesity and Diabetes rates in sprawling communities and it seems all would benefit from being able to walk to where they normally shop. Diabetes is now the number one cost to health care in Canada and growing exponentially with our waist lines.

This type of development also only benefits a small portion of our community and the bordering communities due to the fact that it is basically only easily accessible by car. Those who do not drive or do not have a license have no access to big box outlets such as this and are in essence excluded from any consideration when said developments are discussed. This type of retail development also impacts local businesses which contrary to popular belief in this area are the lifeblood of livable/walkable communities. Why would someone walk to their local retailer when they can just shop on the way to and from work at supermalls on the outskirts of town and what incentive is there to stay in Windsor when all the shopping district is moving closer and closer to outlying towns?

I won't bore with all the details but there are many cities that have benefited from reinvigorating their cores and moving away from spawl or putting a complete moratorium on it such as Portland, Oregon, Charlotte, NC, and Grand Rapids, Mi. Communities benefit both economically and socially when cities revitalize their core and these cities become healthier, more equitable and vibrant. Tourism also grows organically from internal development as tourists for the most part enjoy walking and exploring the place they are visiting but Windsor seems to moving away from making it comfortable for citizens and tourists alike to walk or ride in this city.

Links to a few good websites you might like to visit are included below, please take the time to look them up and see how easy it really can be to move in the direction of livable/walkable cities, thank you for your time.

Sierra Club on community and sprawl
Partners for Livable Communties
America's Most Livable Communities
Center For Livable Communities
Livable Communities Coalition

Sincerely,
Steve Biro
Windsor

The Case For Fare-Free Transit.

I realize that this isn't a Windsor-centric article - and I appoligise for that. We really do like to focus on all things Windsor, but if this idea spreads, we will honestly see Windsor's quality of life take a BIG turn for the better.

I am still going to publish it, however, because it is an idea that Transit Windsor General Manager Penny Williams REALLY needs to know about.

So here it is - a direct reprint from that wonderful e-zine The Tyee. Enjoy and spread the word.

17 Reasons (or More) to Stop Charging People to Ride the Bus

The time has come to stop making people pay to take public transit.

Why do we have any barriers to using buses, trolleys, SkyTrain? The threat of global warming is no longer in doubt. The hue and cry of the traffic jammed driver grows louder every commute. Yet since 2000, TransLink has hiked fares 50 per cent, and its board has just agreed to follow the staff’s recommendation to raise them higher still.

That kind of thinking is so last century.

Just ask the mayor of San Francisco, a city similar in size to Vancouver, who ordered his staff to seriously explore the cost efficiency of no longer charging people to ride public transit.

Listen to Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York, who recently voiced to a reporter his top dream: "I would have mass transit be given away for nothing and charge an awful lot for bringing an automobile into the city."

Consider this sampling of communities providing free rides on trolleys, buses, trams, and ferries: Staten Island, NY; Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Vail, Colorado; Logan and Cache Valley, Utah; Clemson, South Carolina; Commerce, California; Châteauroux, Vitré, and Compiègne, France; Hasselt, Belgium; Lubben, Germany; Mariehamn, Finland; Nova Gorica, Slovenia; Türi, Estonia; Övertorneå, Sweden.

Read the rest of this article, and the subsequent 4 parts at The Tyee.

PAC Watch!

The City's Planning Advisory Committee is a committee of council that can make-or-break a developers plans when it comes to building in the city of Windsor. During the Burger King Relocation debate, we saw that this committee doesn't really look for the viability of the recommendations coming before it, nor do they look at the long-term consequences that their approval or denial may inflict upon us. It is for reasons such as this that we must really start to keep an eye on this group of unelected municipal decision makers.

First, let's review the roles and responsibilities of this committee.

-PAC makes recommendations to City Council on a variety of planning matters (e.g. plans of subdivision, condominiums, rezoning applications, and changes to the Official Plan.)
-PAC has no legislative powers.
-PAC is appointed by Council to listen to the concerns of citizens and developers, evaluate recommendations made by the Development planning staff and make recommendations to Council.
-Recommendations are usually to approve, approve with conditions, or deny applications.
-Members of PAC include both elected City Councillors and other people appointed by Council. -There are eight members, including a chairperson.
-Meetings are held in the Council Chambers in City Hall on the third Thursday of each month.
-Public notices are sent by mail to all persons listed on the assessment rolls within 120 metres of the property affected. Newspaper notices are also used. Notices advise of the date, location and time that PAC and Council will consider matters, as well as the name of the applicant, the location of the property affected and a brief description of the matter.

So that's what they do. Sounds pretty benign, doesn't it. Yet, PAC wields a considerable amount of influence. Now, what kind of person does council look for when it decides who is going to be appointed to these positions? Check back in the next PAC Watch!, scheduled to address PAC's October 18 agenda, to find out.

Which brings us to this weeks September 20 PAC meeting on Thursday in council chambers at 5:00 pm. SDW urges everyone to read through the meetings agenda and seriously consider the consequences of approving of these items.

PAC 1: SMART CENTRES (WALMART) (Z-013/07) Council – Oct. 15, 2007 (Planner – Bob Riley) Lands located at 7100 Tecumseh Road East. The applicant is proposing an expansion to the existing Walmart store.


View Larger Map

You've GOT to be kidding me?!? Putting the words "Smart Centres" in the same phrase as "Wal Mart" is insulting to our intelligence. So Wal-Mart, the quintessential killer of local economic development, wants to expand? Apparently, these so-called "category killers" haven't done enough damage to our community. Look at our downtown heart and tell me how our local independent business people are succeeding? Now, you don't really need me to tell you how I think PAC should vote on this one, do you.

I'm not holding my breath, however. I don't think this community has come to terms with just how detrimental these big-box retailers are to our community

Recommendation for PAC 1 vote:
-Approve
-Approve with conditions
-Deny

PAC 2 1223244 ONTARIO LTD. (Z-063/03) Council - Oct. 15, 2007 (Planner – Adam Szymczak) Lands located on the northwest corner of Matchette Road and Sprucewood Avenue. The applicant is proposing construction of four commercial pads of varying size.


View Larger Map

I must tell you - I have always HATED numbered companies! They always seem as though they're trying to hide something. And, in this specific case, those numbers are hiding the fact that this is Jenny Coco's latest sprawl-town development, though it was stated that a third party developer is involved with actually developing the land. Here's the report she submitted to PAC.

This is classic big-box retail/commercial development, folks. I don't need to get into specifics for you to build a mental picture of what it's going to look like. The planner for the project told me it's going to incorporate a minimum of 400,000 square feet (which means it will probably be more) of retail/commercial space with a paved area to accommodate a minimum of 2,300 cars (which means it will probably be more). LaSalle residents should attend this PAC meeting in full force, because this development is intended to ravage any smaller local economic development in place at this time. Windsor residents should be concerned as well, as it will add further to the leapfrogging of sub/ex-urban development and make fleeing to the suburbs a little more attractive to those people sitting on the fence about the future of this community. This is two big-box items on this PAC agenda alone. Sort of feels like an onslaught, doesn't it?

Recommendation for PAC 2 vote:
-Approve
-Approve with conditions
-Deny

CLICK HERE FOR MINUTES OF THE COCO PRESENTATION TO PAC

PAC 3 - 5 The applicants (Boardwalk Properties) are requesting approval of a plan of condominium to permit the conversion of existing apartments (144 units in total) to condominium tenure.

There's a reason these property management companies are attempting to change all these apartments over to condominium tenure, and that is $$$. With today's real estate market, and the fact that anyone with a job can borrow money, home ownership is going up along with apartment vacancies. Yet, not everyone has a job nor can everyone buy a home. Condo conversions can price low-income residents out of the market and drive them out of the community, widening the affordability gap. There has been a growing demand that these prospective condominium owners set aside a certain percentage of units as affordable units and guarantee that they stay in the rental market for low-income residents.

These conversions also remove much needed dollars from municipal coffers. Multi-residential buildings now pay a 3.3% tax rate, but if converted the subject buildings would pay only the residential rate of 1.07% – a rate reduction of more than two-thirds. Our municipal funds are already stretched to the point of breaking, without condoning these residential tax evasions.

However, we here at SDW understand the importance of promoting higher density residential living and the fact that it impacts our municipal infrastructure a lot less than sprawling single family residential does. So, with a few tweaks - namely providing for an affordable housing component and repealing this tax break - we could get behind these proposals. The city would be headed to the OMB, however, to establish this tax-break precedent.

Obviously, this recommendation is based upon the theoretical ideals of conversions. There may be site-specific reasons for PAC to deny the applicants altogether.

Recommendation for PAC 3 - 5 vote:
-Approve
-Approve with conditions
-Deny

Sidewalk Update

Sorry for the late post on this.

Council approved the Pedestrian Generator Sidewalk Policy on Monday night. While that is a huge step forward, according to Andrew Dowie, author of the policy, there is still plenty of work to be done. As one of the commentors to my post noted, now that the policy is approved the Public Works department has to make a procedure to implement the policy.

At the very least we should be getting the word out to each of the impacted areas. If you have children in school you should consider approaching them regarding this policy to make sure that walkable routes have sidewalks. (I'll be going to the PTA at Central shortly to make the pitch)

We have to make sure that the city knows that committing to a more walkable and liveable community is more than just words on paper!

I'll keep you updated on how this policy goes, as it develops. I've asked to participate in the procedure development process much like I did for the traffic calming policy. We'll see if the city takes me up on my offer!

Josh

Supper Clubs, Sinatra and Burger King

"Windsor was the template for Vegas." Those are the words of Sam Drakich, now the former owner of the Top Hat restaurant, describing the glory days of the Rose City during the supper club era of the 50s, 60s and 70s. It was "right out of a Frank Sinatra film. Top entertainment with big bands and colourful gala...Celebrities were all over the city and county." In the aftermath of an ugly battle between the Drakich family, the city of Windsor and a myriad of potential suitors for the former Top Hat restaurant, we, at SDW, wanted to know what killed the downtown core and, with it, the heart and soul of Windsor. In a candid interview with Sam Drakich we explored where Windsor came from, how we got there, and where we are headed.

"...Devonshire Mall hurt downtown [and] poor city management and planning helped speed up the decay" asserts Drakich. A review of the state of downtown Windsor certainly supports the claim that Windsor has done little to support the small business while doing everything within its' power to bring in big business. As already announced on this blog Windsor has lost another classic restaurant La Cuisine. A downtown business manager, who asked not to be named, indicated that in recent months three businesses have closed on his block alone and that they are making plans to close their doors in January. By that account, city hall is turning a blind eye to the devastation of the downtown core. While the city courts chain restaurants, fast food or otherwise, and lauds the development of the Walker Road commercial corridor as "smart development" our small business owners our fleeing the city like rats on a sinking ship.

The word among some administration officials, and business owners, is that Windsor is in trouble and, without a comprehensive plan to attract and keep business, we agree. The plan, according to Drakich, needs to include "a street mall in front of the Windsor Armouries...a plaza with open air concerts and dancing or a ... market". To bring back the American dollars, he continued, we need to re-discover our uniquely Canadian and British roots with stores that cater to a more sophisticated crowd including posh eateries and clothing stores that provide high quality service and merchandise.

Windsor certainly has its' priorities mixed up. The city is investing $65 million into a new arena to service a small percentage of the city while the average home owner faces increased taxes and utility charges to support infrastructure and an administration that is being neutered by council. This is a city built strong by the immigrant business owners who worked hard, played hard and, most importantly, lived, and spent their money, in Windsor with pride. We have an obligation to preserve and prosper their spirit of entrepreneurship. The Windsor that Sam remembers drew Americans and Canadians in droves and was often the talk of the Ed Sullivan Show, Light Night with Jack Parr and, later, Johnny Carson. Entertainment in Windsor was even covered in Billboard and Variety magazines; "Windsor was booming... that was the attraction" said Drakich.

If Windsor had gone from boom to bust over night we could (maybe) understand. Communities all across Canada have faced devastation when local industries have closed. Sudbury and the nickel mines, countless small prairie towns as the grain elevators closed and, most recently, Oshawa and demise of General Motors. Yet Windsor didn't bust overnight; we've been in a slow-motion collapse since the late 80s with business after business fleeing for, first, the suburbs, then the bedroom communities of Lasalle and Tecumseh and, now, they are even stretching out as far as Lakeshore. I remember doing the Mother's Pizza tour in public school, spending countless hours at Fast Eddies and frequenting the Palace theatre and the Cineplex in the old Best Western on the riverfront. Those businesses are gone, victims of commercial evolution, natural disasters and expropriation. Gone with them is an era that, in the minds of all who can, and care to, remember, was a better time.

Windsor needs to change, and change now. We asked Drakich who on counsel had the vision to pull Windsor from the current downward spiral. "Nobody" he responded "have (sic) a vision." We, at SWD, disagree that nobody on council has a vision though the visionaries are outnumbered and, at times, tend to hide their visionary ways. Halberstadt and, surprisingly, Marra have shown some incredibly insightful ideas at times, but they are fighting against councilors, and a Mayor, who live like we are blue-collar bumpkins. Windsor needs leadership, and needs to start making the hard choices. We keep trying to forge out on our own, trying to reinvent the wheel. When city planners present policies for counsel approval they are always asked to contrast and compare the proposed policy against that of other municipalities in Ontario. When it comes to land use and development, without fail, Windsor always takes the low road, preferring to serve us development gruel rather the gourmet plans served up by Guelph, Kitchener and even Toronto.

Windsor can change. At SDW we know that, and we can see it happening. Blogs like this, and others, are starting to mobilize citizens, cast lights on the dark corners of city administration, and ask the questions that need to be asked. Business owners like Sam Drakich and his family were once the lifeblood of Windsor and, now, are sacrificing family businesses to the highest bidder and deepest pockets. With so much invested in Windsor the Drakich family has brought us good times and good memories, unfortunately their legacy will be a Burger King. I wonder if Audrey Hepburn and Frank Sinatra like cheese on their Whoppers?

Regressing in our downtown

Opened in 1975 and closing in 2007, the landmark restaurant La Cuisine on Pelissier is closing it's doors. After 32 years in business the owners state they cannot sustain their business and will be shutting down operations.

This announcement was made on the same day that it was announced City Council approved the plans to have Burger King move onto the old Top Hat property, upon which the Drakich family operated it's supper club for generations, establishing it as a cultural institution, hosting celebrities and townfolk alike.

There's a downward spiral happening in our downtown that we must learn to halt.

A poster (Michelle) to International Metropolis had this to say about her time at the Top Hat. "I used to work at the Top Hat and have some crazy memories of that place. My folks used to bring me there as a kid to watch the many performers that graced the stage. One of my favourites was Bill Hart and his pal Harry, Bill was a ventriloquist and was an amazing man. He and my father became fast friends and I later knew Bill Hart as Uncle Bill. He passed away many years ago followed by his lovely wife Claire. In my early 20’s I found myself working as a waitress at the Top Hat and was fortunate enough to meet a few celebrities. The Gaylord’s were always top professionals and their shows were usually a sell out. One of the most unique guests I served was Frank Gorshin (sp?), TV’s Riddler from the Bat Man and Robin series. That man was an enigma wrapped inside a riddle.To look at him you would physically see a very small framed, yet agile, looking man, but to see him eat you wouldn’t believe it. He ate more than I have ever seen anyone consume at one sitting anywhere. Every day at lunch he ate SEVEN large, and I mean really large mixing type bowls full of different foods, coleslaw, bean salad, pasta etc. and he eats this everyday from what I was told…. amazing to see as he cleared every bowl of every bit of food.Not many people got to see the upstairs dressing rooms and small banquet room at the Top Hat; it had that funny magical feeling that a theatre has backstage. I will never forget my first time serving up there. I was new and had one of those big, oval, brown trays full of prime rib and lobster and steak, I must have had at least $150 worth of food on that tray. Well, I carefully balanced the tray and proceeded from the kitchen up the narrow back staircase and was doing well until I hit my head on a very low beam, fell backwards and lost every meal on that tray.As I stood there shocked, I happened to capture Sam Drakich’s eye and could see a fury welling up…. oh dear Lord…. I thought that would be my last waitressing stint at the Top Hat.To my surprise, Sam did not lose it with me, instead, knowing I was new and had never been up that stairwell before, he asked, or rather demanded to know who let me go up those stairs with that tray….. I was so relieved, so very relieved. I will never forget that day, I found a special fondness for Sam that I don’t know he ever knew about, but I was forever grateful to him for sparing me the wrath of the kitchen (anyone who has worked in a restaurant knows what I am referring to here). I continued to waitress for over 20 years and never, never dropped another tray again....I should tell you about Mike Drakich and Bette Midler someday, that’s a piece of Top Hat history that many don’t know about."

We must learn to value our cultural and architectural heritage in this town, or we will perish in a world of fast food restaurants, big box retailers and raised ranch McMansions.

More BK Opposition

It seems that the Windsor Symphony Orchestra has publicly voiced its opposition to the Burger King relocation to the Top Hat Supper Club's mothballed building. According to the CKLW website:

"The Windsor Symphony Orchestra is asking Windsor to change its tune. The Planning Advisory Committee has approved the relocation of a downtown Burger King drive-thru to the site of the old Top Hat restaurant, right next door to the Armouries. The Symphony is hoping the building will be redeveloped into a concert hall, making the Top Hat property necessary for parking. The WSO is asking the City to delay the issue until the future of the Armouries is decided."

They are stating that if the Burger King is allowed to redevelop the property with a drive-thru, it will severely hamper the WSO's plans for the redevelopment of the old Armories building. A WSO spokesperson was on the radio stating that Windsor shouldn't allow this development as this is one of the first properties that Tunnel travellers see when entering Canada and, apparently, the parking lot being espoused by the WSO would be better than a BK with a drive-thru.

Huh?

So, the WSO would rather bulldoze this building to add a few more acres of asphalt to the downtown than a drive-thru and are pitching it as a lesson in aesthetics? I think both organizations need to rethink their plans and how they would negatively alter the pedestrian scale of our downtown. Lets hope that city council listens to the mounting opposition and defers this matter until a sane conversation about the future of this important piece of real estate can be made - which apparently will not be made by either the WSO or BK.

Will someone please start speaking on behalf of our downtown and its rejuvenation instead of these business' bottom line, please?

Architectural/Urban design Exhibition at AGW

Windsor Blogger Andrew Foot, who has been steadfastly documenting Windsor's architectural heritage and apathy thereof, is holding an exhibition showcasing of Windsor's Modern Era style of architecture. The Modern Era is one of the few styles of architecture in Windsor of which there is still a great stock. As it stand now, the buildings are too young to be considered historic by many, but are just old enough to be considered dated, and tired.

So head on out to the Art Gallery of Windsor this weekend to take in Andrew's exhibition. Friday is the Opening Reception, starting at 7 pm. Meet the artists and learn about Windsor's fabulous architectural heritage. Enjoy jazz performed by the Max Marshall Trio, hors d'oeurves and drinks from the cash bar. Bring the kids for hands-on art workshops and tours of the four shows.

Gallagher Leads Out

For the second time in as many weeks I'm writing to commend Mary Jean Gallagher for stepping up, and out, in the cause of preservation -- this time with the environment. As announced in today's Windsor Star, David Suzuki is lending is his namesake to the amalgamated Princess Anne and Coronation Public Schools. While that, in and of itself, is newsworthy (apparently David Suzuki is more action than showmanship -- now go figure!), what the school board is doing to earn the respect of the Canadian Eco-Crusader is down right stunning.

The combined school, originally pegged at $9 million, is getting another $2 million in upgrades to implement some of the most state-of-the-art green technologies available. The intent, according to the article, is to make this school a model for the rest of Canada. Along with a living roof, they will use plants to filter the air in the school, recycle and reuse grey water and rainwater, and, I am sure, a host of other initiatives. All I can say is 'Bravo!' It is about time that our government institutions led out by example.

Giving kudos to the school board two weeks running (those who know me know that having a special needs child means I have somewhat of a love-hate relationship with the board at times) is something I never thought that I would do, which led to me start thinking about our fair city. If the school board can green its' projects, what makes doing the same thing on a city scale so difficult? How many projects fail to muster even a simple nod to being green, let alone measure up to the veracity of the GECDSB?

I say that it is high time that the city council stop meddling in the affairs of the administration, especially the public works department. Elected officials have no place in the planning or practice of running a city! That's right, you heard it from me first. I think that elected officials should keep their hands, and minds, out of running the city. Leave it to the professionals. Apparently the county officials who sit on the county council want to get a pay raise to bring them on par with their "counterparts" (I think they mean private business counterparts) who "manage millions of dollars". (Some may suggest it is more of a mismanagement) They are insuating that they are exactly as I picture them -- over-paid, and under-qualified, money managers. In my opinion we need more credentialled councillors -- elected officials with some real knowledge on how to run a city. Let's elect urban planners, environmentalists, engineers, accountants, etc. It's time to stop making elections popularity contests -- it obviously isn't working in Windsor -- and start electing based on what has been done, not on what will be done.

Case in point -- anybody who saw what Jimmy Yanchula and his team put together for the city centre west proposal knows that we have some A-1 people at work behind the scenes. In fact, in talking with some of the consultants who worked on those projects, they were often encouraged by those outside the project to "tone down" the innovation to make is more palatable for city council. Shame on council! This is the time to innovate. Windsor really has nothing else to lose -- it really can't get much worse.

Again, kudos to Mary Jean and the gang at the GECDSB for leading out and doing the right thing. Hopefully our city will follow suit and start innovating. With the opportunity to have the U of W Engineering school downtown (hopefully!) we may be well on our way to having our educational institutions show the rest of us, city council included, how green living can be sustainable both ecologically and financially.

Celebrate Walking

Just to remind everyone that there is a lot to be thankful for with the ability to use your feet.

Take a stroll through your community. Get to know your neighbours. Stop and say hi. Know that you are doing your part in building a strong, connected community.

This just in from Spacing Wire...

Walking Life is a month-long exhibition, showcasing work created both by artists and community members, that celebrates the experience of walking.

The exhibition will run at the Gladstone Hotel, 1214 Queen St. W., 3rd and 4th floors, from Sunday September 9 to Thursday October 4, from 12:00-5:00 pm every day. Admission is free.
There will be an opening reception at the Gladstone on Sunday September 9, from 6:00-9:00 pm.
The goals for Walking Life are quite simple. First and foremost, we hope to generate excitement about walking. We’d like to inspire people to reclaim (aka: use!) the sidewalks as public space. We’d like to inspire people to think about the pedestrian experience. And, we’d like people to contemplate the environments in which they walk. We have asked people of all kinds to convey their experiences through art, because the creative process has the potential to stimulate contemplation, interesting discussion and even innovation.

The exhibition is, in part, a prelude to the

Walk 21 conference being hosted by the City of Toronto in early October.

Dave Hall's Business Beat

In case you missed this in todays Star. Thanks to Dave Hall for the information...

TWO OUELLETTE AVENUE PROPERTIES CHANGE HANDS

A pair of Ouellette Avenue properties, just south of Wyandotte Street, recently changed hands but there's no indication yet as to what the new owners plan to do with the buildings.

One of the properties at 801 Ouellette, which is currently operating under the name Club 801, sold for $600,000 after being originally listed for $999,000. And 720 Ouellette, which formerly housed Classic II bingo hall, sold for its asking price of $745,000. The club covers about 40,000 square feet on two floors while the former bingo hall comprises 14,000 square feet on one floor.

DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION ESTABLISHES HOSPITALITY PANEL

The Downtown Windsor Business Improvement Association has established a hospitality resource panel designed to address issues affecting the struggling entertainment/hospitality industry with a unified voice and strategy.

The panel will be made up of two reps from the DWBIA, two from each of the hospitality, safety, development and community sectors and two council members appointed for a term of one year.
Its mandate will be to encourage and promote a strong hospitality industry in the city core which will include developing a coordinated approach to licensing, education and enforcement.
Among the key issues are discount drink prices, collection of so-called last-drink data to determine where inebriated patrons had their last drink, codes of conduct for both the industry and its patrons and a list of best practices.

Initial budget for the panel will be $60,000 which is being shared equally by the city and the DWBIA.

MARK MELDRUM SCHEDULED TO KICK OFF BREAKFAST SERIES

Mark Meldrum, a professor of entrepreneurship with the Odette School of Business at the University of Windsor, will be the featured speaker Sept. 20 when the school's breakfast series kicks off for the new season.

Meldrum will be speaking on innovation and the environment in a presentation entitled "First we kill all the central bankers."

The sessions run from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. in the McPherson Lounge of Alumni Hall on Sunset Avenue.
Other scheduled speakers include Tony Faria on current global and regional automotive trends and how they affect the Big Three on Oct. 11, Edwin Tam on corporate responsibility and sustainability on Nov. 15 and Craig Fleischer on the pulse of the region: an economic update on Jan. 17. To register, contact Barbara Barone at bbarone@uwindsor.ca or 519-971-3678.

Walkable communities = longer lives

City Dwellers Live Longer, Save More by Driving Less

New York City, long seen as a mecca of hedonism and self-destructive indulgence, has witnessed a startling transformation over the past few years: life expectancy has increased dramatically to 78.6 years, nine months longer than the life expectancy in the rest of the US. Even more surprisingly, New York City's life expectancy is increasing at a faster rate than in other parts of the country; in 2004 alone, New Yorkers gained five months of life on average, far outpacing the national average increase of a month or two a year.

What accounts for this longevity?


Find out at the WorldChanging website...

SPRAWL ALERT!

SPRAWL ALERT! Jenny Coco is on the loose again! Note in the article that "Windsor’s Environmental Planning Committee approved the plan". I am assuming the author was talking about the Windsor Essex County Environment Committee (WECEC). Talk about the masters of Smart Growth!

This from the September Biz X magazine;

Windsor City Council will soon consider a controversial rezoning application from Jenny Coco for a major big box complex on the far west side, next to her Ambassador Golf Course. The shopping centre, reportedly equivalent to Birch Run in Frankenmuth, MI, would include 400,000 square feet of big box retail, including two 100,000 square foot buildings. The project is slated for 47.5 acres of land at the corner of Sprucewood and Matchette. LaSalle Council has stated its opposition on the grounds that it will compete adversely with its Malden Town Centre retail outlets. Windsor’s Environmental Planning Committee approved the plan on conditions that a buffer is provided to protect the nearby Prairie Grass Reserve and that parking lots are constructed with permeable surfaces. The city’s nine business improvement areas have yet to weigh in on the impact to core retail districts.

A civic connection for local kids?

Does it actually work if you just try talking with kids? We found this post on Springwise and thought Windsorites may be interested in learning how other communities are dealing with their "kid" problems.

There are plenty of government-run websites aimed at collecting feedback and generating involvement among residents of a particular city or town, but we hadn’t seen many aimed directly at local youth until we came across Derby KidzTalk. Operated by Derby Homes, a non-profit property management organization established by the Derby City Council, the site is geared toward kids between 9 and 16 living in Derby (just west of Nottingham, UK), offering them local information and ways to express concerns and get involved.

The site was originally motivated by a government requirement that Derby Homes involve users in the development of its services. "We are expected to include everyone—young and old, representing the broad spectrum of ethnicity—and this site helps us talk to young people who don't really like coming to formal meetings that adults feel more comfortable with," explains Mark Crown, tenant involvement manager for Derby Homes.

But Derby KidzTalk quickly took off beyond Derby Homes' expectations, reaching 80 registered users and 3,000 hits per month soon after its launch earlier this year. "KidzTalk is bigger than we anticipated for what was a step in the dark," Crown explains. The company is now scrambling to create a marketing plan and approaching other social landlords about the possibility of sharing and co-funding the site. It's also considering selling the format to other organizations.

Our advice? Add 2.0 functionalities as featured in our posts on

Love Lewisham, Amsterdam’s Google Maps mashup and Neighbourhood Fix-It. Take a playful approach to civic awareness by creating scavenger hunts with an online component: find a broken streetlight, report a pothole, etc.

Interpreting the signs - The Livability/Equity Index (part 3 of 4)

This is part 3 of 4, dissecting the results of the Pembina Institutes latest publication and how it relates specifically to Windsor (Part 1, Part 2)

The second dimension of community sustainability is composed of social aspects, such as livability and equity. Livability refers to the features of a community that attract residents to it and that make it a pleasant, safe and healthy place to be. Livability is also increasingly linked to the economic health of the community in that corporate leaders want to locate in urban areas with a high quality of life, both for themselves and to attract the right kinds of employees.

Livability is enhanced by a strong sense of place, a dynamic ommunity , and an attractive environment that lends itself to active recreation and socializing. A livable community is one in which opportunities for healthy social and personal actvities are maximized and stresses, such as crime and disease, are minimized.

Equity refers to the fairness with which social resources such as housing and income are distribute in a community. An equitable community is one in which all types of people - all ages, income levels and ethnic groups - feel comfortabel, enjoy the necessities of life and have the resources and freedom to participate fully in community life. A socially equitable community is one that is more likely to enjoy social peace and a stronger sense of community, and to suffer less alienation among specific are, income or ethnic groups.

And here is where windsor ranks in comparison to the 27 other communities in the study.

1/ Income inequality (An indicator of the degree of income inequality in Windsor)
Windsor's Ranking - 11 out of 27. Fair, considering the sheer quantity of high-income automotive factory jobs we have in this city. There is, however, a noticable divide between these "auto-lotto" winners and the low-paying service industry that services the community.

2/ Dwelling Diversity (A measure of the balance among different housing types and the range of housing options that will be available for a variety of individuals and families. A diversity of dwelling types within a community may reduce the need for ling-distance commuting)
Windsor's Ranking - 17 out of 27. Below average. Windsor has it's sprawling McMansions and it's inner-city neighbourhoods, but not much in between. There has been a movement as of late to build new medium-density residential developments, but not enough to make a difference.

3/ Affordable Housing 1: owners (A measure of housing affordability among home owners. Reflects social inclusiveness)
Windsor's Ranking - 10 out of 27. Good, though I thought we'd do better. Windsor has many undervalued neighbourhoods that most people could afford to purchase in.

4/ Affordable Housing 2: tenants (A measure of housing affordability among tenants. Reflects social inclusiveness)
Windsor's Ranking - 11 out of 27. Good. Reflects Windsor's lower property values and those savings are being passed along to renters.

5/ Heritage Homes (A proxy for the number of potential heritage houses and sense of place that a community posesses. Heritage buildings provide a sense of place and community identity as well as contribute to a pleasant pedestrian environment)
Windsor's Ranking - 4 out of 27. Excellent. However, I think the term "potential" is the buzz word in this indicator. Windsor is an historically significant area and our housing stock reflects that. If only WACAC (Windsor Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee) could get some incentives in place that would help us preserve these buildings.

6/ Community Centres (Community Centres provide recreational facilities, social gathering places, and opportunities to participate in community affairs)
Windsor's Ranking - 11 out of 27. Passable, but I don't know where they got this number. In the number of neighbourhoods I've lived I've never had a community centre nearby.

7/ Parks and Recreational Areas (Green space within a community provides ready access to recreational opportunities and a pleasant, low-stress environment)
Windsor's Ranking - 26 out of 27. Unbearably Poor. As much as this city touts it's riverfront, it neglects any other parkland and greenspace. Maybe we're just saving urban parks for the school board to build new facilities on.

8/ Physical Activity (Reflects the availability of opportunities for physical activity (walkable streets, recreational areas, green spaces)
Windsor's Ranking - 20 out of 27. Terrible, but considering we don't invest in greenspace and our neighbourhoods aren't exactly "walkable" there is tremendous room for improvement in this category.

9/ People Obese and Overweight (Reflects opportunities for physical exercise and general helath of the population)
Windsor's Ranking - 16 out of 27. Poor. Our city has been physically laid out to acoomplish this though. We need to get out of our cars and use those things dangling at the end of our legs more. See our scores for greenspace and physical activity.

10/ Crime Rate (Measure of social stress. Could also influence sense of social cohesion, and perceived safety of streets)
Windsor's Ranking - 22 out of 27. Horrible, but surprised the hell out of me. I know we can attribute a lot of our crime to our north-of-the-border weekend visitors, but for the most part, I feel pretty safe in Windsor

11/ Vehicle Crashes (Measure of social stress and car dependancy)
Windsor's Ranking - 18 out of 27. Poor, but our city planners have made a driver's licence all but mandatory. Kids can hurtle 3500 lb of steel down the road before they can vote. I bet these statistics were fairly close amongst all 27 regions, as this is a disease most of North America is suffering from.

It's fairly clear how these indicators add up to a poor showing for Windsor in the Livability/Equity Index subsection. It's also very easy to see how the indicators add up to our very poor ranking of 22 out of 27. How in the world are we going to attract investment and the people necessary to haul Windsor out of the dustbin if we continue to be happy with results like these?

Our next, and final installment will be the Economic Vitality Index, where we will see just how important a healthy, LOCAL economy is to the sustainability of Windsor

Where the sidewalk ends

Why, when the City of Windsor decides to do something that might be considered sustainable, does it fail to go the distance? A case in point is the proposed Pedestrian Generator Sidewalk Policy which is due to come before council on 10 September. (Click on the picture at left to get to the policy!)

First, let me be absolutely clear that I support the separation of sidewalk creation from the local improvement policies, especially if it means that capital funds (you know the big pot of money, of which 80% is ear-marked for roads in Windsor) are to be allocated to build them. I also applaud the expansion of the policy to include multiple pedestrian generators including, but not limited to, schools, parks and shopping destinations.

While sidewalk access isn't necessarily a problem in the old parts of Windsor, anything built since the mid 1950's has been hit or miss with sidewalks and anything built in the past quarter century is almost guaranteed to have no sidewalk access. I can only assume that, in order to keep housing costs down, builders, without requirements by the city for sidewalks, abandoned sidewalks to increase profits and housing density. According to the Local Improvement policies, established in 1968, property owners who desire to have a sidewalk installed can petition the city that will then require a 66% affirmative response from impacted homeowners. Of course, asking your neighbours to fork over a couple of thousand dollars, give up 5-6 feet of frontage, and put up with the associated construction mess and landscape carnage is, well, akin to asking to kiss your neighbours wife.

If the new policy is so positive, pushing the accessibility to capital funded sidewalks to so many more areas of the city, why do I have my panties in a twist? One word: ambiguity and cost-sharing. Ok, three words.

On the surface, the plan seems to be a real winner (and I think that the intentions of the writer, Andrew Dowie, are good) but there are some blatant loopholes that could, and will, be used to stall the implementation of the sidewalks if they are not tightened up prior to passing council.

First, section 3.2 of the proposed policy states that:

"Where appropriate, benefiting organizations (excluding School Boards) may be asked to contribute a portion of the cost of the sidewalk"

Unless I missed something, that basically means that, although the policy is opening up access to a multitude of pedestrian generators, the city can (and trust me, they will!) ask any non-education beneficiaries to pony up the cash before the sidewalk goes in. That sure seems like a re-worded Local Improvement policy, now doesn't it?

The second, and this is where the ambiguity comes in, failure can be found in section 5 of policy states:

5.1 The City Engineer must determine the existence of the following conditions as outlined in the associated procedure prior to recommending sidewalk construction:

5.1.1 Acceptable pedestrian generator in vicinity of proposed sidewalk;

How close does the pedestrian generator actually need to be? Does it need to abut the sidewalk, or can the sidewalk simply increase the safe accessibility to the generator?

5.1.2 Sufficient pedestrian volumes from above pedestrian generator;

What is a "sufficient ... volume"? In fact, I would say that this policy is important to Windsor because we don't have sufficient pedestrian volumes. Requiring pedestrian volumes at a certain level (not defined, --- there's that ambiguity again) to build infrastructure to increase pedestrian volume it really the old adage of "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

5.1.3 Lack of acceptable pedestrian/vehicle segregation;

I love this one -- in my opinion any place pedestrians are, cars should not be. I'm not sure that is what the city intended, as that would encompass every square inch of this city, but I can dream, can't I? What constitutes "acceptable -- segregation"? Do sidewalks require a boulevard or do sidewalks that terminate at the curb meet the criteria?

5.1.4 Heightened motorized traffic volumes.

Heightened motorized traffic volumes? Isn't that, again, everywhere? This is a huge loophole, and deterrent to implementation. Mark my words, that first time a request is made to use capital funds to build a sidewalk, the city will require an exhaustive transportation study to determine if "heightened traffic volumes" exist. I am sure that, for non-education requests, this will simply be passed down as an additional line item on the cost of the sidewalk implementation.

5.2 The City Engineer must ensure that the proposed sidewalk will satisfy all of the following requirements:

5.2.1 Provision of dedicated pedestrian facilities;

Huh? Ok, I think that I am a pretty smart guy, at least compared to my four-year old, but if that line actually means something to someone, please clue me in.

5.2.2 General neighbourhood need;

Isn't the argument that every neighbourhood needs sidewalks? Heck, I would go as far as to say that every neighbourhood should have sidewalks and front porches, but then I'm a little bit of a socialist sometimes!

5.2.3 Connection to other pedestrian facilities;

Again with the 'A'-word -- how close do these facilities need to be? It can be argued that everything connects to everything else, but somehow I don't think that this was the intention of this catch all requirement.

5.2.4 Other factors of benefit to pedestrian travel.

As I am sure that I have already proven here, you can write a book, and then some, on the benefits of pedestrian travel. What factors are they looking for that haven't already been established? The cost savings are monumental when you incorporate infrastructure wear and tear, environmental benefits, health benefits and overall standard of living (which directly translate into higher property values). If you doubt that last one, check out any of the cities on the top 10 list of most livable cities in the world and then try and find a three-bedroom house for the going rate in Windsor. I tried Vancouver and both Sydney and Melbourne, Australia. Vancouver started at about $430,000 -- the Aussies got off lucky in the high 200's -- but in Australian dollars.

The long and, well, there is no short of it, is this -- Windsor needs to embrace walkable living to change the image of the city to stave off unemployment and extinction. The Pedestrian Generator Sidewalk Policy does a great job of opening the topic up for discussion, but leaves too many loopholes that could be exploited both for the benefit and detriment of the citizens of Windsor. The Public Works people need to strengthen and firm up the language of this policy to make its' true intent known and its' implementation a reality.

New downtown BK before council - with a drive thru!?!

Next Monday, council will be deliberating whether or not to accept the cities Planning Advisory Committee's (PAC's) recommendation to allow Burger King to construct it's new restaurant (which will replace it's existing restaurant on the N/E corner of Wyandotte and Goyeau, in anticipation of expropriation for an enlarged tunnel plaza) where the old Top Hat Supper club used to sit. In it's plans for the site is a drive through. I don't know whether you agree or not, but there is a movement gaining strength that limits/bans drive thus being built within city limits throughout North America and Europe. And seeing how this is a downtown location, a drive thru is probably not in the best interest of a downtown on the verge of renewal. Cars and pedestrians mix as well as oil and water.

Now, I have no objections to Burger King opening up a new restaurant downtown. If you chose to eat this junk, that's purely up to you. I do have a problem, however, with the fact that these current plans include a drive thru.

PAC has lost any credibility with this file as it approved the previous plans, which then got shot down by council for aesthetic reasons. Then BK tried to make the restaurant prettier and more fitting to it's downtown location and they approved it again. Is there anything they won't allow in our downtown?

Phone your councilor, or get listed as a delegate (because there IS still time, much to the chagrin of my calendar-challenged mind!) and let them know that this is not the direction you believe the city should go. Here's the notice posted on the City Of Windsor website.

Council Agenda for the Monday September 10, 2007 Windsor City Council Meeting 3rd floor, Council Chambers, Windsor City Hall

PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PAC 1 Burger King Restaurant, rezoning, southwest corner of University Avenue East and Goyeau Street, construct a Burger King Restaurant with a drive-through window on the site (proposed elevations)

Interpreting the signs - The Smart Growth Index (part 2 of 4)

Yesterday, we read about the Pembina Institute's latest report featuring our fair city, the Ontario Community Sustainability Report - 2007, and read the general conclusions the institute came to regarding the 27 municipalities covered in the paper. Today, we are going to look at Windsor's Smart Growth numbers and what they mean to us here on the front lines.

This study provides a snapshot of the sustainability of selected communities across Ontario in recent years, and employs 33 indicators in three broad categories: Smart Growth, Liveability and Economic Vitality. Having an established indicator framework to monitor and evaluate the changes happening can only advance our understanding of the modifications being implemented across the province and provide feedback on the successes or failures these changes are responsible for. You need to know where you stand before heading off in any one particular direction. So, let's see where Windsor stands, shall we...

For the purpose of this study, Windsor is rated as a medium population municipality (216,473 in '06) experiencing medium population growth (+ 3.87% from '01 - '06). Other municipalities/regions covered in this study experienced population growth ranging from 0.11% (Thunder Bay) to 23.84% (Barrie).

Environmental Sustainability
The Smart Growth Index

In Pembina's choice of indicators for the physical environment, they have chosen to focus on urban form, i.e., the physical design of the city. Urban form includes features such as density of settlement, the mix of land uses, and the characteristics of the transportation system. These are the issues that determine tin large part the environmental sustainability of urban areas. There are 11 indicators being utilized in this section.

1/ Population Density (reflects the efficiency with which land is used in Windsor)
Windsor's Ranking - 9 out of 27. Fair, but probably reflects just how poorly everyone else is because Windsor has a low concentration of mid-to-high density neighbourhoods and numerous sprawling suburbs

2/ Land Use Mix (Mixed land uses help reduce motorized transport and encourage walking and biking)
Windsor's Ranking -5 out of 27. Good. Windsor doesn't have to tear down and rebuild neighbourhoods to increase our land use mix. Also shows better-than-average zoning by-laws.

3/ Urban Intensification (Reflects the degree to which new growth is being accomodated in the already urbanized area versus greenfield development)
Windsor's Ranking -11 out of 27. Fair, but gives a warning about continuing our "build out" mentality.

4/ Length Of Roads Per 1,000 People (Provides a measure of the efficiency of the road network. Sprawled communities tend to require more road surface per capita)
Windsor's Ranking - 5 out of 27. Good, but probably attributable to our geographical circumstance of being "walled-in" by the Detroit River and Lakes.

5/ Street Connectivity (Street connectivity allows easier navigation and access to pedestrians, cyclists and transit vehicles. Lower connectivity means more dead-ends and T-intersections)
Windsor's Ranking -1 out of 27. WOW! I didn't see that rank coming! Let's continue our grid patterns the way we've established them. Cutting down on one-way traffic would also increase our local downtown mobility.

6/ Commuting Distance (A measure of the distances between housing and jobs)
Windsor's Ranking - 15 out of 27. Mediocre, considering our very low Length Of Roads Per 1,000 People ranking of 5. This shows that we still love our suburban raised ranches out in the boonies.

7/ Commuting Modes (One measure of the degree of dependance on the automobile, with many commuters travelling in single occupancy vehicles [SOVs])
Windsor's Ranking - 16 out of 27. Mediocre, but we're the Automotive Capital Of Canada so this doesn't surprise me. Striving to increase our acceptance of alternative forms of transportation will lower this score as we maximize our excellent grid-patterned road network.

8/ Place Of Work (A rough proxy for the job/housing balance in Windsor - i.e., the ability of Windsor to provide sufficient employment base and thereby reduce commuting)
Windsor's Ranking - 8 out of 27. Good. This shows that our ability to utilize our plethora of vacant lands/brownfields will increase our population densities while decreasing our commuting distances. With our average scores in those indicators, this also points out that we are not realizing our potential, though.

9/ Transportation Gap (Spending on roads instead of transit increases car dependency)
Windsor's Ranking - 14 out of 27. Average. Yet this doesn't take into account our poor history of maintaining our infrastructure. Watch this ranking skyrocket in the near future as our roads and sewers reach the breaking point. We must increase our spending on alternative transportation and keep it at a high level regardless of our road infrastructure needs.

10/ Tertiary Water Treatment (Reflects stress being placed on local water bodies from sewage loading)
Windsor's Ranking - 17 out of 27. Mediocre, but also points out that we are geographically challenged seeing how half of Windsor is bordered by water. We are not living up to the committments espoused by our municipal motto "The River And Land sustain Us"

11/ Air Quality (Air quality is a key measure of the healthfulness of the physical environment and reflects to some extent the efficiency of the local transportation system)
Windsor's Ranking - 27 out of 27. It literally doesn't get any worse than this. This number should scare the hell out of every Windsor/Essex county resident.

Windsor's overall Smart Growth Index Score was rated at 52.32, ranking us 12th out of the 27 participating communities. Next installment - The Livability/Equity Index