A rose amongst thorns before council tonight

Coming before tonights council is an important document that I really hope our elected leadership reads front-to-back.

You see, by administration's own admission, the Essex-Windsor Regional Transportation Master Plan "establishes an important base from which the City, County and local area municipalities can coordinate efforts to achieve a sustainable, efficient and effective regional transportation system."

That's quite the goal, and believe it or not, there's some good stuff in there! The staff that assembled these recommendations clearly know that there are certain roads the city must take in order for us to head in a more sustainable direction when it comes to our urban land use and transportation planning. Yes, I said land use, as it also acknowledges that there is a clear tie between how we develop our land and the resulting transportation infrastructure needed to access it.

I'll stop here, because SDW's Josh Biggley has written a very concise letter to be included in tonights council package addressing our concerns as well as voicing our support for certain aspects of this proposed regional transportation policy.

"Sustainability needs to become the measure for economic achievement and public investment"
- Clive Doucet, City Counselor, Ottawa

We are writing today to express praise and concern for Item 5, the Essex-Windsor Regional Transportation Master Plan (EWRTMP), as representatives of Scaledown.ca. Scaledown.ca is a local advocacy group and media outlet focused on establishing sustainable social and economic development in Windsor.

We applaud the conclusion of the EWRTMP that states "in order for the County, City and Towns to plan for an acceptable level of transportation service to year 2021, the focus will have to be on a combination of selected roadway capacity enhancements, and changes to development forms in urban settings that offer alternative transportation choices and reduced transportation needs." (emphasis added)

We draw your attention to the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategy which includes providing financial incentives, and disincentives, for single occupant vehicle usage, an integrated planning approach combining land use and built form to impact travel patterns, and the use of "hard urban edges to control urban sprawl". Modifying demand through creative and sustainable land use will prepare Windsor to service the aging Baby Boomers and their long-term independence, retain the socially conscious Generation X and generate a growing tax base for future civic needs.

We support the Demand-Side Options including funding and advocacy for non-motorized modes of transit, ride-sharing, urban design techniques to reduce trip length and, of critical importance, "providing for more transit, cycling and walking-friendly neighbourhood design." We enthusiastically sustain the findings of the study that demonstrate "intensified and mixed use urban development forms would have the greatest long-term benefits to the regional transportation system."

We caution against the premature approval of roadway expansion without exploring the opportunities that exist "through the application of ‘Smart Growth’ land use … to minimize or avoid the need for physical capacity improvements." We support the findings of both the EWRTMP and the 2005 Brownfield Redevelopment Study that show a 380% ROI on brownfield rehabilitation, not including a projected annual transportation cost savings of $66,000/hectare and a 10% increase in tax revenues for the surrounding 2.5 kilometers.

We express dire concerns with a regional transportation approach that facilitates the continued fall in urban population density in favour of the bedroom communities of Lasalle, Lakeshore and Tecumseh. We object to policies and plans that support the perception of Windsor as an obstacle to be navigated through and around as opposed to a residential, entertainment and employment destination. We oppose plans to improve commuter routes that facilitate the relocation of Windsor residents to outlying communities, especially at the expense of our urban neighbourhoods.

We strenuously object to the inflammatory language contained within the EWRTMP regarding the importance of the proposed roadway infrastructure expansion. By stating that "further delay will result in oppressive traffic delays crippling local industry and discouraging local investment and job growth" it suggests that it is impossible for Windsor to achieve economic prosperity without road expansion. To suggest that the proposed roadway expansions will, alone, "achieve a sustainable, efficient and effective regional transportation system" makes misleading correlations between economic sustainability and an increase in road capacity.

We ask council to directly allocate funds to address "the availability of alternative transportation modes … making transit, cycling and walking more attractive to regional residents." We ask that council resolve to fund and implement "more compact built forms, mixed-use neighbourhoods and developments, and [adopt] transit, cycling and pedestrian-supportive land use planning and urban design policies" in support a sustainable city. In addition, we ask that council consider these options before allocating funds for roadway expansion to support objective 4 of the EWRTMP which is "to provide transportation systems that enhance physical mobility and better [serve] the economic and social needs of the community."

Signed,

Joshua Biggley

Chris Holt

Mark Boscariol

We urge you to not only read the document for yourselves and reach your own conclusions as to how this plan, if fully implemented, will affect our regions quality of life, but to also contact your councillors and let them know those feelings.

It is through exercises such as these that we will have our biggest impact as concerned citizens

Growth and the case for Scaling up.

I'm having a bit of an off blog semantical debate with others on this site. Chris wrote a great series called debunking the growth myth but my views on growth are different.

I am in favor of growth in Windsor, and lots of it. I want to see the density of the core of Windsor grow 10 fold. I want to see tens of thousands of new residents in our core, growth of new development of mixed use residential, commercial and office space. I want to see growth in the amount, size and quality of public spaces and the links between them. I want to see growth in Windsor's live music and venue's to host them. I believe this type of growth is necessary in creating a sustainable Windsor.

What I don't want to see is sprawl, big box development because that is unsustainable growth that leads to unwalkable neighborhoods. Lets face it, there should be a simple rule that council and our planning advisory committee should not permit anything to be built that they themselves do not want to live next door to.

Heres some exerpts from an Urban Land Institute that debunks the growth myths making the case for the growth of higher density in the core

Myth #1 - Higher-density development overburdens public schools and otehr public services and requires more infrastructure support

Fact #1- The nature of who lives in higher-density housing-fewer families with children-puts less demand on schools and other public services than low-density housing. Moreover the compact nature of high density development requires less extensive infrastructure to support it.

Myth #2 - Higher-density developments lower property values in surrounding areas.

Fact #2 - No discernable difference exists in te appreciation of properties located near higher-density development and those that are not. Some research even shows that higher-density development can increase property values


Myth #3 - Higher density development creates more regional traffic congestion and parking problems than low-density

Fact #3 - Higher-density development generates less traffic than low-dnesity development per unit; it makes walking and public more feasible and creates opportunities for shared parking


Myth #4 - Higher-density development leads to higher crime rates

Fact #4 - The crime rates at higher-density develpoments are not significantly different from those at lower density developments.


Myth #5 - Higher density development is more environmentally destructive than lower-density development

Fact #5 - Low-density development increases air and water pollution and destroys natural areas by paving and urbanizing greater swaths of land


Myth #6 - Higher-density development is unattractive and does not fit in a low density community.

Fact #6 - Attractive, well-designed, and well-maintained higher-density development attracts good residents and tenants and fits into existing communities


Myth #7 - No one in suburban areas wants higher-density development

Fact #7 - Our population is changing and becoming increasingly diverse. Many of these households now prefer higher-density housing, even in suburban locations.


Myth #8 - Higher-density housing is only for lower income households.

Fact #8 - People of all income groups choose higher-density housing


Maybe this puts me semantically at odds with scaledown's name and purpose. What do you think?

Letter to council

Just to follow up on my post regarding After Hours Bars, here is an open letter to council

Although I'm pleased to see that the after hours issue will finally be dealt with, I am saddened that it will be done in a very political climate where there is a possibility for an over reaction to an complex issue that is not black or white but grey.

I propose the following solution in order to continue flexibility.

Whatever gets proposed for closing times should have an exemption process similar to the noise bylaw.

Applications for exemptions on specific nights by specific establishiments should be brought before the Hospitality Resource Panel (HRP) Made up of administration, police, industry representatives and residents. At this time a report should be sent to council recomendding for or against. If required, the HRP can work out conditions for that establishment whereif ignored will constitute cause for not recommending future exemptions (staggered closing, drink prices, controls on drink contests or any other tool of responsible management)

At that point the recommendation of the HRP can be put on the consent agenda with no need to politicise these requests.

The HRP should be instructed to facilitate exemptions for all responsible owners so that we do not end up curtailing the chance to lure world class entertainers to our city. This is a way to reward responsibly run establishments while controlling those who do not manage their locations responsibly. Please, we have one chance to get this right. Get it right.

Mark Boscariol



P.S. When can we get massage parlors on the agenda? We have the solutions, we just need to get them before council. It's astonishing that our democratic right to get an issue before council can be denied

No Fortune Teller Necessary...

Look before you leap. That is a piece of advice that my parents told myself, and parents around the globe have no doubt imparted upon their young charges, since time began.

Did Windsor's city councillors receive that same advice while they were impressionable young people as well? With all the signs pointing to a drastic societal change roaring towards us, now would probably be the best time to start preparing the citizens who voted them into office for the new world ahead of them.

"...persistently high gas prices may mean that the next building boom will take place not at the edges of metropolitan areas but far closer to their cores. People are more willing to drive 20 miles each way to work every day, burning a couple of gallons of gas in the process, when gas costs less than milk. But as gas prices climb, long car commutes become a rising tax on exurban homeownership, and the price people are willing to pay for homes in remote areas will fall.

So why is it our councillors are still adopting sprawl-inducing amendments to our official plan and regional transportation policies at the expense of strengthening Windsor's core? Have they not heard the news? Are they hoping that these high gas prices will just go away sometime in the near future?. Well, folks, according to The Washington Post, these are realities that the most successful municipalities must prepare for if they are to survive into the next decade.

"...sprawl was built on the twin pillars of low gas prices and a relentless demand for housing that, combined with the effects of restrictive zoning in existing suburbs, pushed new development outward toward cheap rural land. Middle-class Americans, not able to find housing they could afford in existing suburbs, kept driving farther out into the countryside until they did. Gridlock in the suburbs and the expense of providing municipal services to sparsely populated communities imposed their own limits on how far we could spread. As a result, the density of metropolitan areas, which fell steadily in the postwar years, had begun to creep back up in the 1990s.

It's bad enough that Windsorites are feeling the blow this early, as our local economy has been forever bound to the sales of big V-8 and V-10 engines powering huge trucks and vans. We are the canary in the coal mine as we are the first to feel the collective trend away from these vehicles. Let's not impose more misery on the folks who call Windsor/Essex their home and keep hoping and dreaming that this is a nightmare we are soon to wake up from.

It is your duty as leaders to ensure that the big changes looming on the horizon do not take us by surprise. Please take your heads out of the sand and begin to take these developing global trends seriously.

ED: I forgot to link to the Windsor Star article that made me want to post this piece in the first place: Oil And Gold Surge. With oil topping $100 a barrel for the first time ever, people MUST be starting to take notice of this barrage of events.

What's in a "Scene"?

Richard Florida, guru of all things creative, has come out in his latest Globe and Mail article to tell us that a thriving music scene has a lot to do with a city's economic growth.

Richard, tell us more!

Music combines with technology and business trends to put these places on the map. It reflects their openness to new ideas, new people and new sounds. If you really want to see entrepreneurs in action, go talk to local musicians. They have to put their band together, get gigs, market their songs, promote themselves, set up tours, manage budgets and meet payroll. The places where these music scenes flourish have the underlying commercial ecosystem that is open to new ideas and can mobilize real resources around the market opportunities they signal. And as one of my former students once put it, music is the best way to market a region. Creative people don't like marketing slogans. But they do identify with a city's sound - what he called its "audio identity."

So, if a thriving music scene is an indicator of economic growth, what does a retreating music scene tell about it's host community?

Do the recent losses of primo indie music venues Sky Lounge and the Avalon Front tell us more about the fate of our local economy than Dennis DesRosiers dire automotive predictions? Well, that's sort of comparing apples to oranges (sorry folks, but the automotive industry is probably not going to be defining Windsor's phoenix-like economic rise from the ashes) but you get the point.

"It signals the rise of regional ecosystems that are not only open to new sounds and new ideas, but have the size, scale and commercial oomph to retain key talent and turn their ideas into global commercial successes. Once music scenes of this scale get going, they produce a logic and momentum of their own and signal that more entrepreneurship is on the way."

Windsor's attitude towards our artistic side shows that we really do not understand what we need to do to safeguard our local economic future. The Capitol Theatre is probably on borrowed time, and there are other popular venues to take in a great local band, but our choices are dropping instead of rising.

This should concern more people in city hall than it does.

9 attitudes of Highly Creative People

I couldn't resist reposting an article I found somewhere else, I think this is what Windsorites should look for in who they listen to

Written on May 9th, 2007 at 12:05 am by Darren Rowse

Today I’d like to look at some attitudes to build into your approach if you want to be a more creative person:

1. Curiosity

I’ve written previously on the topic of curiosity because I’m convinced that it is an essential skill to build as a blogger. Learning to ask ‘why’, ‘what if’ and ‘I wonder…’ are great questions t build into your life if you want to be a more creative person.

2. Seeing Problems as Interesting and Acceptable

One of the problems of the Western mindset is that we often see problems or obstacles in life as unacceptable parts of life. We avoid pain or suppress it when it comes and in doing so don’t often see and feel symptoms that are there to tell us something important. Creative people see problems as a natural and normal part of life - in fact they often have a fascination with problems and are drawn to them.

3. Confronting Challenge

Many of the most creative ideas through out history have come from people facing a challenge or crisis and rather than running from it asking ‘how can I overcome this’?

4. Constructive Discontent

Creative people often have an acute awareness of what’s wrong with the world around them - however they are constructive about this awareness and won’t allow themselves to get bogged down in grumbling about it - they take their discontent and let it be a motivation to doing something constructive.

5. Optimism

Creative people generally have a deeply held belief that most (if not all) problems can be solved. No challenge is too big to be overcome and no problem cannot be solved (this doesn’t mean they’re always happy or never depressed - but they don’t generally get stumped by a challenge).

6. Suspending Judgment

The ability to hold off on judging or critiquing an idea is important in the process of creativity. Often great ideas start as crazy ones - if critique is applied too early the idea will be killed and never developed into something useful and useable. (note - this doesn’t mean there is never a time for critique or judgement in the creative process - it’s actually key - but there is a time and place for it).

7. Seeing Hurdles as leading to improvements and solutions

This relates to some of the above - but by ‘hurdles’ I mean problems and mistakes in the creative process itself. Sometimes it’s on the journey of developing an idea that the real magic happens and it’s often out of the little problems or mistakes that the idea is actually improved.

8. Perseverance

Creative people who actually see their ideas come to fruition have the ability to stick with their ideas and see them through - even when the going gets tough. This is what sets apart the great from the good in this whole sphere. Stick-ability is key.

9. Flexible Imagination

I love watching a truly creative person at work when they’re ‘on fire’. They have this amazing ability to see a problem or challenge and it’s many potential solutions simultaneously and they have an intuitive knack at being able to bring previously disconnected ideas together in flashes of brilliance that seem so simple - yet which are so impossible to dream up for the average person.

Is Creativity tied to Personality Type or Can it be Learned?

As I read through this list of traits of creative people - the question that I find myself asking is whether creativity is tied to personality type or whether it can be learned.

My own uneducated answer to this question is - ‘yes’.

Some people are just creative - they don’t train themselves to think like they do and they often don’t even know that they are any different from the rest of us - it’s just who they are.

However I believe that we can all enhance our ability to be creative over time.

Let's Get Windsor Moving (out to the county)

On Monday, January 7th, there will be a couple of items going before city council that will continue Windsor’s drain of residents out to surrounding bedroom communities and further solidify the automobiles dominance in our transportation hierarchy.

Smart Growth, here we come…

Item #5 is the Essex-Windsor Regional Transportation Master Plan. In classic Orwellian double-speak, it pays homage to progressive notions such as following “a more regional approach to transportation planning matters including road infrastructure, transit, cycling and other sustainable transportation forms.”, yet the document continues on with a “list of critical projects that need to be completed.”, such as;

• Extend Wyandotte Street East to continue this streets push east.


• Widen E.C. Row Expressway to at least 6 lanes from Banwell Road to Ojibway Parkway,


• Widen Provincial Road/Division Road to a 4 lane arterial road from Howard to the south city limits,


• Widen and extend Lauzon Parkway to connect with highway 401 and then south to highway 3 in Maidstone “for the overall economc development and growth of the city”

Apparently, it is imperative that the city begin work on these projects, as “(f)urther delay will result in oppressive traffic delays crippling local industry and discouraging new investment and job growth” Wow, they seem pretty sure of themselves. My question to the city would be exactly how these projects will encourage new investment and job growth, as those are some of the reasons thrown about that nobody can question, because if you do you are anti-Windsor and anti-growth.

Item #4 is more of the same, as the results of the Manning Road and County Road 22 Class Environmental Assessment and the preliminary design are coming before council. I got a chuckle when I read that these “improvements” were being carried out under the slogan “Let’s Get Windsor Essex Moving Strategy”, as I figured it meant let’s get Windsor residents moving out to Essex county. I don’t think that’s what they meant, however.

This engine will just continue chugging along until there is a critical mass of residents crying out together for it to slow down. City council, it seems, is trying to be everything to everyone, yet it succeeds at nothing. It says it wants to strengthen out downtown and established communities, yet it paves and widens escape routes to the suburbs allowing more city residents to flee the same traffic those widened roads encourage. It wants to plant “a million trees” to help clean our toxic air, yet it encourages motorist-only methods of transportation to built-up areas where walking and cycling are not a mobility options.

"More of the same" is the kind of thinking that set us down the road that lead us to where we find ourselves today. Is this something you're happy with?

Neither am I.

Story of Stuff

I probably should have posted this entry prior to the beginning of the holiday shopping season (known affectionately as "Black Friday"), but yes - I got caught up in the cycle as well.

Baby steps, Chris. Baby steps.

Take 20 minutes of your time and watch this short, animated film. Try not to get put off by the preachy-ness of it, as it contains some great information about our stuff, and the life-cycle costs it imposes on our society and our overall quality of life. After you're finished hearing the story, be sure to pass it on to your friends and family. Everyone needs to know that we are voting with our dollars for things we normally wouldn't support in an otherwise sane world.

It is the general consensus by us SDW chaps that if we only took a few steps back and took in more of the "Big Picture", we wouldn't make the same choices we are making today.

Happy New Year, and look forward to some more regular entries here in the near future...

Respects and hope for change

What a horrific way to win an arguement regarding after hours clubs. The blame here should not fall on council and/or Mayor. They can only make decisions based on the reports that administration and Police give them. When a special interest group like the DWBIA conflicts with those reports, confusion results. This was not an unforeseen incident, this incident was foreseen. Someone needs to focus on why Police and administration reports claimed that there wasn't a problem at this location even though there was as many shootings in the past as there was years go by. Even though video footage exists that shows a problem existed at this location.

The only way I know how to honour this latest victim is take measures to ensure we don't need a 3rd plaque to commemorate the next victim.

Maybe Mr. Rogers was right after all...

For many of us in Generation X Mr. Rogers was a staple of television life in our definitve years. I still remember his cheery song, "Won't you be mine? Won't you be mine? Won't you be my neighbour?" Mr. Rogers was a true urban visionary with his veiled advocacy for a walkable and diverse neighbourhood. In spite of being a product of the automotive driven sprawl fanatacism that still permeats our culture today, Rogers was able to, with a change of shoes, find all that he needed in his mixed use habitat. Though Mr. Rogers wasn't really a new urbanism advocate, he was a concerned neighbour, a friend, hoping to make a positive change in his little part of the world.

I've been thinking about neighbours since moving to a new neighbourhood last year. South Windsor is highly car dependant, with a glaring lack of sidewalks and streetlights to impede its' walkability. In spite of the challenges I see multitudes of people out walking, riding their bikes and otherwise engaged in the experience of living in a diverse neighbourhood. Alas, my generation is quite addicted to our 'convenient' automobiles, but the older generation, many who have lived in the area since it was built in the mid-50s, take the time stroll the streets, mingle with neighbours, and stoke the fires of friendship that have burned for decades.

I'm quite proud of my little block on Academy Drive. When we moved in our neighbours, who have lived in their home since it was built, came to introduce themselves. They quickly got our names and phone number and added us to the neighbourhood directory. We were invited to the neighbourhood BBQ held every August and got the low-down on all of the neighbours; who had kids (more than I thought), who liked kids (pretty much everyone) and a myriad of other neighbourhood history. Although there are no sidewalks on my street the neighbours religiously reclaim the road for impromptu discussions, often under the auspice of "trying to round up the kids" or, my personal favourite, "mowing the lawn". Our small block takes pride in bucking the trend of isolation, instead cultivating and developing strong personal ties within our little enclave of urban happiness.

The real sense of community was displayed last Sunday when Windsor got its' first winter storm of the season and, even before the snow had stopped, neighbours were out shoveling their driveways. However, instead of each neighbour tackling their own drive neighbours swarmed each others driveway clearing the snow with military precision. From driveway to driveway this little army of snow shovels traveled, enjoying the process of simply being together.

It behooves each of us who cherish the neighbourhoods that we live in to echo the call of Mr. Rogers and ask our fellow citizens, "Won't you be my neighbour?" Sure, it means turning off the television, putting away the iPod, logging off the internet and going outside to interact with each other, but our future depends on restoring the strong human interaction that technological conveniences have unwittingly stripped from us. I am sure that you will find, as we have in our neighbourhood, that the richness of friendship and a vibrant community far surpass the electronic solitude sold to us as mass media.

He's makin' a list, checkin' it twice...

OK, class. It's time for your holiday homework. Take a cue from James and put your New Year's Resolutions down on paper and be sure to post them in a spot in your home where they are easily within view of not only yourself, but whomever you share your abode with.

You want to stick to them, right?

I am just about to do this myself...

Guest Blogger - James Coulter

…scale down, James

It’s that time again. The end of another year, a time when we look back at what has been and look forward to what may be. We make resolutions, some we can keep, some we can’t. Here are my resolutions for 2008.

Drive less. Over the last year I have gotten much better about how much I actually drive. This past fall I added lights and reflectors and was able to ride my bike to work into November. For 2008 my goal will be to ride to work no less than three times per week and other than big weekly grocery trips I will not drive for trips shorter than 5km round trip.

Get involved in my community. My wife has told me more than once “if you don’t like what’s going on, do something about it”. My first step has been to get involved with …scale down, Windsor. For 2008 I will watch, attend or at least read the minutes of Council meetings. Also for 2008 I will volunteer with my community residents association.

Use public transit more. If there is an event downtown I want to attend, I will use the bus to get there (if my bike is not an option).

Start a garden. My backyard needs some sprucing up, so I will plant a vegetable garden rather than a cartoon landscape.

Continue to work on my home to improve its energy efficiency.

Visit the library twice each month. In 2007 we started to go to the library as a family activity. Our visits have been irregular, so for 2008 I will plan to hit the books more often.

Keep stirring the pot. In 2007 I sent a couple of letters to the editors at the Windsor Star. I kept that up in 2008 along with my work here. I think the Windsor blogosphere will have a big impact on the next municipal election and I want more Windsorites to get involved with the blogs and other activities to make a difference until 2010.

James Coulter is an Engineering Technologist with the School of Building, Design and Construction Technology at St. Clair College. His opinions are plentiful and may not reflect those of his employer or the teaching faculty at the college.

Advice from beyond the grave

Dean Vernon Wormer, of Faber College fame, came back from the grave last night to repeat these words of advice for our City Council...

"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son."

A dying city's magic pill

I have always enjoyed spending my time in places that were geared towards pedestrian movement. They are just places that I feel most comfortable in. Judging by the numbers of people saving their money and vacation time for places like Walt Disney World, Greenfield Village, Amsterdam, Venice, all-inclusive tropical resorts and even cruise ships (all vacation hotspots with a glaring lack of cars whipping about), I am not the only person who thinks this way. That is why I have always been perplexed as to why people do not demand that their home towns and communities start exhibiting the same qualities they demand in their vacation places. Maybe when they did, we wouldn't feel the need to save up thousands of dollars to "run away" for a little R & R.

Building a business case for a walkable and livable Windsor is what's needed today. By living through a tremendously difficult transition period where our entire economy is going through some extremely tumultuous growing pains, now is the time to investigate exactly how we can not only survive and thrive in the new economy, but how we want the built environment we spend our daily lives in to evolve as well.

In the following article by Neal Pierce of the Washington Post Writers Group, Christopher Leinberger, one of America’s top real estate analysts and now Brookings Institution fellow (also an Ann Arbor teacher - listen to Smart City's interview with him here), is quoted as saying that cities that do not develop “walkable urbanism” -- places with the mix of destinations people want, from shops and parks and schools to pubs and entertainment, all accessible on foot" are “probably destined' to lose out economically"

I have deep roots in this community and do not want to see Windsor lose out economically. Do you?

WALKABILITY = LIVABILITY = BILLIONS
By Neal Peirce
Sunday, December 16, 2007

WASHINGTON - Could it possibly be that Washington, for years bashed by politicians, its population shrinking and at one point almost bankrupt, has become a model of how the entire nation might smartly develop in the 21st century?

I never thought I’d see the day. But Christopher Leinberger, one of America’s top real estate analysts and now Brookings Institution fellow, makes a startling case for it in his just-published book, The Option of Urbanism - Investing in a New American Dream (Island Press). Leinberger’s case isn’t about Washington’s radically improved politics and city management. Rather, it’s about walkability. It’s about dramatic reinvestment --some $8.2 billion worth -- pouring in the city’s downtown since 1997. Complementing monumental Washington, there’s been a rush of new cinemas, theaters, quality restaurants and trendy retail stores and a wildly popular sports arena, all helped along by a downtown business district providing special security, marketing and planning.

But the success story’s not exclusively a downtown one -- the entire Washington citistate of 5.3 million people is now booming. And it’s starring especially in what Leinberger calls “walkable urbanism” -- places with the mix of destinations people want, from shops and parks and schools to pubs and entertainment, all accessible on foot.

In a sense walkable urbanism is nothing new; it was the way towns and cities were organized from the first urban settlements some 5,500 years ago into the 20th century.

But after World War II, with Americans’ rush to thousands of new suburban locations, a never-before-seen norm appeared. Leinberger calls it “drivable sub-urbanism.” And what a market smash it proved, offering Americans a sense of freedom, mobility, privacy, their own piece of turf and a yard for the kids to play. Plus plenty of jobs and profits, from autos to oil to real estate to fast food. The new form became virtually synonymous with the American Dream. Two generations of Americans knew practically nothing else.

But in the 1990s the model began to lose some of its luster. Suburbia’s big parking lots and low-density zoning meant an auto for every trip. Walking and transit were impractical. Older suburbs began to decline, inducing families to drive farther and farther to new suburban rings. Thousands of malls and shopping strips were abandoned.

Traffic congestion -- and Washington’s no exception -- became so severe many families were obliged to build their lives around it. Kids had to be driven everywhere. Vehicle miles driven in America shot up a stunning 226 percentfrom 1983 to 2001, while population increased just 22 percent.

So by the mid-1990s a significant number of Americans -- and not just the poor and minorities long-consigned to inner cities -- began to ask: Isn’t there abetter way? Popular media began to shift its images of the city from crime and violence to the exciting, hip, place to be (such television shows as Seinfeld,Friends, and Sex in the City).

Urban crime rates took a deep dive. Most downtowns began a surprising revitalization, with more offices, entertainment, restaurants, and a leading edge of middle-class people (often youth and empty nesters) returning. And the ideas of walkable town and city life, spread with fervor by the architects and planners of theNew Urbanism movement, gnawed at the decades-old supremacy of the suburban ideal.

None of this, Leinberger insists, means “drivable sub-urbia” will disappearany time soon: a huge weight of custom, continued consumer choice, zoning and the sheer vastness of today’s spread-out suburbia assure it will remain dominant for years to come. Nor will cities’ problems, from poverty to schools, disappear soon.

But walkable urbanism has demographics going for it. The share of U.S.families with children at home has been declining sharply; the largest household growth in the decades ahead will be empty nesters, never-nesters and singles, many likely to look to cities and their excitement. And cities, competing, will likely keep heeding advice to lure creative young professionals; in fact those that don’t offer true walkable urbanism, Leinberger suggests, are “probably destined” to loseout economically.

In the 1980s the Washington region had two highly walkable places--Georgetown and Old Town Alexandria. Today, Leinberger calculates, it has 17 highly walkable, beckoning urban centers, with at least five more emerging -- the most of any U.S. metropolis.

Significantly, 16 of Washington’s walkable centers have subway stops; the modern Metro system, begin in the 1970s, has transformed the region as communities --Arlington County, Va. is the star -- have consciously planned dense, multi-use development around the stops.

But Washington started its Metro when generous federal aid still flowed. Denver’s doing it the harder way, with a $4.7 billion light rail system that’s 80 percent financed by local taxpayers. But the Denver region will end up with 119 miles of track, many walkable centers, and a burnished reputation. In the process it, too, is setting a national model.

Think you have it bad? Try a 240-km commute

How about this? Would this be defined as "progress"? Then why is this lifestyle the one the majority of Canadians/Americans aspire to?

From the Toronto Star;

Think you have it bad? Try a 240-km commute

December 08, 2007
Tim Harper

BERRYVILLE, Va. – With West Virginia's Blue Ridge Mountains and bucolic farmland still virtually in her rear-view mirror, Lori Forrester wheels onto Route 7, her target fixed, 120 kilometres southeast.

A quick left. And then she stops.

Pastures of green have given way to taillights of red...

...Research by David Dinges, chief of Sleep and Chronobiology at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, shows that the work commute is squeezing Americans' sleep.

When he and colleague studied why Americans are sleeping less they found, to their surprise, that the extra waking hours were not spent on leisure, in front of the television or with family, but sitting in the car.

"The more time people spent commuting, the less they slept,' he said. "The other activities did not relate to sleep time.''

It is also known that a lack of sleep, fewer than seven hours a day (or more than eight hours) also leads to obesity and risk of heart attack, diabetes and stroke, he said.

While that doesn't mean that lack of sleep is killing people, it plays into other factors that might.

It could mean that long commutes mean more fast food, he said, but that has yet to be proved.

"What's really going on here is that we can't do anything without getting into our motor vehicle and going somewhere,'' he said.

Beyond the health risks of sleep deprivation, there are also psychological dangers.
Dinges says fatigue leads to more risk-taking on the highways, likely adds to road rage and general "emotional deregulation'' which leads commuters to expect greater rewards for their time.

Alan Pisarski, a commuting consultant and author of Commuting in America, said there is still a significant economic advantage if your housing prices are cheaper in the exurbs, even with transportation costs going up.

"You have something you wanted, something you have always valued,'' he said.
"But how do you get to enjoy this thing when instead of being there, you're sitting in a car?''

I'll take my ten minute bike ride anyday, thank you very much!

The times, they are a'changin'

Yesterday, my whole family decided to enjoy the first major snowstorm of the season and go for a walk. We headed up to Ottawa street, playing in the snow drifts and pelting each other with snowballs. We then ducked into Karen's 4 Kids, as two of the three tykes needed something a little more substantial on their feet.

The kids didn't know what to do when the salesperson lead them to a chair, sat them down and took off their shoes. When he sat on the stool in front of them, cradling their tootsies in that silver foot measurement device, they looked as if they were being strapped into some medieval torture device for some long forgotten offence. Then it dawned on me...

They've never had their feet measured before!

In all the years their parents have been putting footwear on their feet, those shoes and boots have just been pulled down off the department/big box store's shelves and thrown on without a second thought. Then, here was this salesperson, dealing not just in manufactured goods (some actually made in Canada as well!) but also in service, pulling out an assortment of boots for the kids to chose from, trying them on and test-walking around the store. It was an experience that I remember participating in hundreds of times growing up, but have since forgotten as those store owners and shoe salespersons evolved into "sales associates" over the years.

The kids actually had fun shopping for winter boots, once they realized they weren't in trouble.

Razing Reederz?

Guest Blogger - James Coulter

On Tuesday, the Windsor Star proclaimed “Windsor Rated 7th in Innovation”. The Dave Hall story calls Windsor “one of the country’s leading cities for innovation”.

The ranking came from a report published by the Conference Board of Canada titled City Magnets – Benchmarking the Attractiveness of Canada’s Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA’s). I went to the CBofC’s website looking for the report. It’s behind a paywall, if you want to read the full report it’ll cost you $2400. However, there is a ten page summary that is free and I read it over. The report ranks 27 CMA’s according to several categories including; economics, housing, education and innovation. CMA’s were given a letter grade A, B, C, D, depending on how each fared against whatever criteria they used. The report sheds some light on economic and social trends in Canada and who the best, biggest and brightest star cities are. The overall top three were Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver, while the report had Saguenay, St. John, and Thunder Bay at the bottom. Remember my last post, big cities getting bigger, smaller cities getting left behind.

I found what the report had to say about cities and innovation. The top CMA was Ottawa/Gatineau. Make’s sense, lots of government research facilities, software companies a good university. In fact there is so much research and ‘innovation” going on in Ottawa/Gatineau that they scored AAA. No other category had any CMA scoring more than an A. Calgary and Toronto were distant B grades. According to the summary more than half the CMA’s scored no better than a D. At best Windsor’s 7th place is a C. It seems a little misleading to describe Windsor as “one of the country’s leading cities for innovation” when our C is so far behind the AAA of first place Ottawa/Gatineau.

For me, the big news was in the Star story. Dave Hall revealed a dirty secret about our city. According to the Star Windsor’s “educational rank is dragged down by the worst adult literacy rate among the cities surveyed”. For a city that wants to reinvent itself as a knowledge economy centre this is a huge problem.

The last paragraph of the summary says, “Although some indicators, like climate, are beyond the control of policy-makers, we believe that all levels of government should look at the results of this benchmarking study to help determine priorities. Canada’s future depends on it.” In Windsor, our priorities need to change to include literacy. In light of this report’s findings it is outrageous for the Mayor and Council to impose budget cuts on the city’s libraries. Save the $900,000 branding monies and use them for literacy campaigns and reading programs. Education and knowledge are priorities and we should demand that our city give us every opportunity to learn and better ourselves.

James Coulter is an Engineering Technologist with the School of Building, Design and Construction Technology at St. Clair College. His opinions are plentiful and may not reflect those of his employer or the teaching faculty at the college.

Defining Progress?

How does our city define progress?

Is it a quantifiable measure of the increase in our standard of living? Our quality of life? Our cost of living? This is a definition that must be nailed down.

Today, after four months of heavy investment, the section of Wyandotte, between Walker Road east to Drouillard is scheduled to open to vehicular traffic. Watch the "progress" of this investment here.

This is where we need to decide our most appropriate definition of the term "progress". This infrastructure investment will (much like Riverside Drive's Peabody Bridge, which for the life of me I could not find a picture of!) no doubt increase the speed and safety for the cars, yet it doesn't provide for the safe passage of cyclists. The backfilled road cut has provided the abutting property owners with Wyandotte frontage - no doubt drastically increasing the value of their property.

Yet, one must keep in mind that the road renovation removed much esthetic interest in the neighbourhood, as well as an historic structure that was excavated and built by hand by the town of Walkerville in the early 1930's. Anyone who has ever travelled along Wyandotte will remember this bridge.

How do you define the term "progress" and when, in the evolution of our city, do we stop "progressing" before we establish our version of that definition?

Driving Sustainability

The recent report from the Conference Board of Canada did not bring good news for Windsor. Our city received a C grade, ranking 23 of 27 cities on the list. Calgary, Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton and Victoria were the top 5 cities, with Windsor, St. Catherines-Niagara, Saguenay, Saint John and Thunder Bay bringing up the rear.

One of the areas that Windsor scored poorly on was public transit. Anyone who has attempted to make use of our public transit system knows that we are in terrible shape, without some sort of 3rd party think-tank to tell us. With a decreasing tax base, and lacking a visionary council (aside from Alan Halberstadt), our infrastructure, from sewers and roads to sidewalks and bikepaths, has suffered. As council has permitted, through sins of omission, the sprawling residential, and now commercial, landscape, costs of providing a usable transit system have spiralled. Instead of increasing service and decreasing costs, Windsor is doing exactly the opposite.

A couple of months ago I read an article by Dave Olsen of The Tyee entitled Fare-Free Public Transit Could Be Heading to a City Near You. Olsen suggests that municipal transit systems are self-castrating, effectively stopping any possibility of growth because they insist on doing exactly what Caroline Postma and the rest of the transit board have done -- raise rates while restricting service. After reading the article, high on hope and delusions of grandeur, I emailed Alan Halberstadt and suggested that Windsor adopt policies similar to those of Chapel Hill (NC), Vail (CO), Logan (UT), and a myriad of European cities. Halberstadt's response was disheartening, 'great idea, but you couldn't sell that in Windsor'.

It seems that the blogsphere may be right, and council is the impedence to the growth of Windsor. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC was quoted in the New York Daily news saying "I would have mass transit be given away for nothing and charge an awful lot for bringing an automobile into the city." A massive population density has both allowed and compelled NYC residents to become dependent on public transit, even their billionaire mayor uses the subway to get around. With a visionary mayor at the helm of that city, the future looks bright for NYC public transit. Windsor city council plays it safe, opting to build an arena (hey, everyone loves a good hockey game right!?!) instead of leading out. When council tells us that there is no more money for transit, after spending $65 million (without ancilliary property developments), I find it hard to believe that they really have the best interests of the city in mind. I believe that the problem with council is that they don't often feel the impact of their decisions. It is easy to cut the library budgets, transit budgets, etc. because, I hypothesize, council does not frequent these public institutions. If they did, they might find public transit and library books a priority.

Fear not, I have a plan! I suggest that councilors be required to use public transit to travel TO and FROM all city meetings. That means council on Mondays, board meetings, and especially those all-to-frequent "closed" meetings. I think that, after a week or two of riding our buses, council might find their purse-strings loosened.

It really is a travesty when it takes 1.5 hours to travel from the University of Windsor to Forest Glade Arena, each way! The irony of the situation, as pointed out by Olsen, is that the more we fund transit, the more ridership increases, the less we spend on infrastructure development and maintenance. If you listen to Mayor Francis, we can't afford the infrastructure costs we have despite multi-million increases in funding over the 2006 levels. Investing in public transit would increase the mobility of all of the citizenry of Windsor, decrease traffic levels on all commuter routes (the Mayor said that EC Row is at capacity already!) and provide benefits to our air quality. This does not mean that the automobile will become outmoded, rather people will be able to decide to take the public or private transit as they discover all that Windsor has to offer. When we decide to invest in our built environment and learn to be good stewards of all that we have in this city, only then will our perception of ourselves, and perception of our city by others, experience a positive change.

Mike Kakuk - Enviro-Luddite

Ok, I'm not really much into name calling, etc. I think that, generally speaking, it defeats the purpose of a conversation. I suppose I could justify my enviro-luddite label for Mike Kakuk, but in reality, my emotions are running high and I'm resorting to name calling.

Mike's latest blog post, Is the price of convenience too high?, starts by acknowledging the destructive nature of idle-thrus but suddenly takes a wild right turn and demands that we examine the "bigger picture." The big picture, according to Mike, is that governments and car companies should make cars that will allow us to idle, guilt-free, with zero- and low-emission cars. He goes on to explain that in order achieve the perfect environment that we should all drive a horse-and-buggy and burn wood to heat our homes. (Truth be told, this is the part that wound me up).

Mike's solution to the whole problem!?!? Keep the drive-thru moving quickly by having people who want to order food go inside! Oh, come on man! The issue with drive-thru's isn't just the idling cars, but the volume of traffic, the impact on surrounding neighbourhoods and the exacerbation on our 'secluded' society. To think that Windsor and Essex County is subject to Mike's social babble every morning on AM800 scares the hell out of me. When someone with such a short view of the world around them is an integral part of the mass media machine we really have our work cut out for us.

I've often accused Mike and Lisa of throwing Mayor Francis a lob ball on his Tuesday morning spin session, but I really had no idea that the problem was this pervasive. I think the irony of this turn of events, at least in my mind, is that I decided that, aside from listening to the Mayor on Tuesday morning at 7:20, that I am an 1550AM (CBC Radio) man. I might only be one listener, but, as my favourite saying by Mahatma Ghandi goes, we need to be the change we wish to see in the world.

Last item -- here is a link to the Mayor's position on drive-thrus in mp3 format.

BTW: Don't forget to vote in the online poll that ends on 17 December. The question is Should drive-thru's be banned to improve the environment? Just click on the link to Mike's article (see above) and then scroll down on the right side. Let's show Windsor, Mike Kakuk and our city administration what we really think!

The Shock Doctrine

One of my favourite authors over the past couple of years has been Naomi Klein, author of No Logo, among other hard-edged non-fiction. Her newest book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, including the accompanying short film (high quality version here), makes some serious allegations about the profiteering and politics associated with the natural, and unnatural, events of our global community. While I haven't yet read her book (I'm trying to frequent the library to help sustain those vital knowledge stores -- but that's for another article), her short movie reinforced an idea that has been festering in my mind, and has occassionally found it's way out of my mouth, for more than a year now. The idea is, to echo Klein, that our local economic disaster is being exacerbated by capitalists who masquarade as saviours to a city, but offer nothing more than a rich-get-richer scheme dressed up in slick marketing and spin.

A case in point -- the CocoBox bigbox development proposed for the border of Windsor and Lasalle. Though Jenny Coco has owned this land for nearly a decade, during which time she has switched from commercial, to residential, now back to commercial zoning, she has only recently settled on a project for these lands. To hear Jeffrey Slopin, her legal representation, sell it, this is the best thing for Windsor since the automotive industry. Slopin and Coco are selling this development as a well-spring of prosperity, creating 1500 jobs and generating nearly $4 million in tax revenues for the city of Windsor. It reminds me of that 80's classic from Dead or Alive, You Spin Me Round - "you spin me right round, baby, right round". The facts are meaningless when the promise of jobs and money are dangled over the heads of the unemployed masses. Let's be honest, the last thing that Windsor needs right now is another shopping centre to siphon away our dwindling paycheques. Consumption consumerism is the drug of choice for so many people. Coco, Slopin, and even city council, are spinning this development into a cure-all for the economic ailments of Windsor when, in reality, we are severing our hand to cure a hangnail.

There is a moral to this story. Information is knowledge. Knowledge is power. We have elected representation, but that does not mean that we cannot, or should not, speak out about the issues facing the community around us. More important, we must be educated, even vigilent, about the slick marketing, information spinning profiteers at all levels of business and government. The message of SDW is to reinvest in our built environment, developing sustainability and quality into our community, not just quantity. Projects like the east end arena, tunnel purchase, CocoBox, GreenLink, etc. etc. should all be examined with a discerning eye. There is no quick-fix for Windsor; only hardwork and perseverence are going to return the social and economic dividends we are hoping for. Let us all be wary of those preaching economic salvation without works. We can change Windsor, but we are going to have to pay penance for our past, and, most important, challenge the status quo of disaster economics, in whatever form it takes.