Stop the presses! News you won't hear anywhere else in Windsor.

Wow. Talk about one news headline that I never expected, realistically, to see in my lifetime, let alone from an auto executive at the 2008 Detroit International Auto Show.

From Fortune magazine...

Nissan exec: Car culture is fading Worldwide, people are losing interest in automobiles, one executive says.
By Alex Taylor, Fortune senior editor
2008 Detroit auto show
January 14 2008:

DETROIT (Fortune) -- If you are looking for some insight into what the automobile of the future will look like you could do worse than talk with Tom Lane. An American, he runs all of Nissan's Product Strategy anad Product Planning from his office in Tokyo.

Unlike most executives, he welcomes the imposition of new U.S. fuel regulations that mandate 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

"It is not an issue" for Nissan (NSANY) he says.

He expects the new regs to drive more small cars, improved technoloy, and a broader variety of shapes and sizes, as designers try to get more variety out of similarly-sized vehicles.

But he points to some discouraging global trends that don't bode well for the industry.

He notes that consumers in Japan are losing their mojo when it comes to cars. The population is aging, and younger drivers would rather spend their money on new cellphones and Internet access.

"Japan is increasingly not interested in new cars," he says.

The population in Europe is aging too, and Lane sees similar ennui spreading there. As car ownership becomes more expensive and cities increasingly impose congestion pricing on car usage in center cities, he sees car owners switching to mass transit for their daily commute, and then renting cars for longer trips.

"The U.S. is headed that way," he says. "The challenge for us, going forward, is a more interesting offer. Doing a better Sentra or an Altima isn't going to do it."

The image in the fortune teller's crystal ball is getting clearer with each passing day. Windsor cannot continue to put all of its eggs in the basket of the automotive industry.

City street as social space. Hans Monderman 1945 - 2008

Hans Monderman was a Dutch road traffic engineer and innovator. He was recognized for radically challenging the criteria by which engineering solutions for street design are evaluated. His work compelled transportation planners and highway engineers to look afresh at the way people and technology relate to each other. Functional models of his designs are changing the way people view the street in northern Holland, and tried also in Spain, Denmark, Austria, Sweden and Britain.

Hans Monderman died of prostate cancer on January 7, 2008, at the age of 62

For your weekend reading pleasure, I thought I would pass along this reprint from an old New York Times article documenting Sarah Lyalls time spent with this iconic traffic engineer

Road design? He calls it a revolution

by Sarah Lyall
The New York Times
Saturday, January 22, 2005

DRACHTEN, Netherlands "I want to take you on a walk," said Hans Monderman, abruptly stopping his car and striding - hatless, and nearly hairless - into the freezing rain.

Like a naturalist conducting a tour of the jungle, he led the way to a busy intersection in the center of town, where several odd things immediately became clear. Not only was it virtually naked, stripped of all lights, signs and road markings, but there was no division between road and sidewalk. It was, basically, a bare brick square.

But in spite of the apparently anarchical layout, the traffic, a steady stream of trucks, cars, buses, motorcycles, bicycles and pedestrians, moved along fluidly and easily, as if directed by an invisible conductor. When Monderman, a traffic engineer and the intersection's proud designer, deliberately failed to check for oncoming traffic before crossing the street, the drivers slowed for him. No one honked or shouted rude words out the window.

"Who has the right of way?" he asked rhetorically. "I don't care. People here have to find their own way, negotiate for themselves, use their own brains."

Used by some 20,000 drivers a day, the intersection is part of a road-design revolution pioneered by the 59-year-old Monderman. His work in Friesland, the district in northern Holland that takes in Drachten, is increasingly seen as the way of the future in Europe.

Variations on the shared-space theme are being tried in Spain, Denmark, Austria, Sweden and Britain. The European Union has appointed a committee of experts, including Monderman, for a Europe-wide study.

His philosophy is simple, if counterintuitive. To make communities safer and more appealing, Monderman argues, you should first remove the traditional paraphernalia of their roads.

That means the traffic lights and speed signs; the signs exhorting drivers to stop, slow down and merge; the center lines separating lanes from each other; even the speed bumps, speed-limit signs, bicycle lanes and pedestrian crossings. In his view, it is only when the road is made more dangerous, when drivers stop looking at signs and start looking at other people, that driving becomes safer.

"All those signs are saying to cars, 'This is your space, and we have organized your behavior so that as long as you behave this way, nothing can happen to you,"' said Monderman. "That is the wrong story."

The Drachten intersection is an example of the concept of "shared space," a street where cars and pedestrians are equal, and the design tells the driver what to do."

It's a moving away from regulated, legislated traffic toward space which, by the way it's designed and configured, makes it clear what sort of behavior is anticipated," said Ben Hamilton-Baillie, a British specialist in urban design and movement, and a proponent of many of the same concepts.

Highways - where the car is naturally king - are part of the "traffic world" and another matter altogether. In Monderman's view, shared-space plans thrive only in conjunction with well-organized, well-regulated highway systems.

Monderman is a man on a mission. On a daylong automotive tour of Friesland, he pointed out places he had improved, including a town where he ripped out the sidewalks, signs and crossings and put in brick paving on the central shopping street. An elderly woman crossed slowly in front of him."

This is social space, so when Grandma is coming, you stop, because that's what normal, courteous human beings do," he said.

Planners and curious journalists are increasingly making pilgrimages to meet Monderman, considered one of the field's great innovators, although until a few years ago he was virtually unknown outside of Holland. Hamilton-Baillie, whose writings have helped bring Monderman's work to wider attention, remembers with fondness his own first visit.

Monderman drove him to a small country road with cows in every direction. Their presence was unnecessarily reinforced by a large, standard-issue European traffic sign with a picture of a cow on it.

"He said, 'What do you expect to find here? Wallabees?"' Hamilton-Baillie recalled. "'They're treating you like you're a complete idiot, and if people treat you like a complete idiot, you'll act like one.'

"Here was someone who had rethought a lot of issues from complete scratch," Hamilton-Baillie said.

"Essentially, what it means is a transfer of power and responsibility from the state to the individual and the community."

Dressed in a beige jacket and patterned shirt, with scruffy facial hair and a stocky build, Monderman has the appearance of a soccer hooligan but the temperament of an engineer, which indeed he trained to be.

His father was the headmaster of the primary school in their small village; Hans liked to fiddle with machines. "I was always the guy who repaired the TV sets in our village," he said.

He was working as a civil engineer building highways in the 1970s when the Dutch government, alarmed at a sharp increase in traffic accidents, set up a network of traffic-safety offices. Monderman was appointed Friesland's traffic safety officer.

In residential communities, Monderman began narrowing the roads and putting in design features like trees and flowers, red brick paving stones and even fountains to discourage people from speeding, following the principle now known as pyschological traffic calming, where behavior follows design.

He made his first nervous foray into shared space in a small village whose residents were upset at its being used as a daily thoroughfare for 6,000 speeding cars. When he took away the signs, lights and sidewalks, people drove more carefully. Within two weeks, speeds on the road had dropped by more than half.

In fact, he said, there has never been a fatal accident on any of his roads. Several early studies bear out his contention that shared spaces are safer. In England, the district of Wiltshire found that removing the center line from a stretch of road reduced drivers' speed without any increase in accidents.

While something of a libertarian, Monderman concedes that road design can do only so much. It doesn't change the behavior, for instance, of the 15 percent of drivers who will behave badly no matter what the rules are.

Nor are shared-space designs appropriate everywhere, like in major urban centers, but only in neighborhoods that meet particular criteria. Recently, a group of well-to-do parents asked him to widen the two-lane road leading to their children's school, saying it was too small to accommodate what he derisively calls "their huge cars."

He refused, saying that the fault lay not with the road, but with the cars. "They can't wait for each other to pass?" he asked. "I wouldn't interfere with the right of people to buy the car they want, but nor should the government have to solve the problems they make with their choices."

Monderman's obsessions can cause friction at home. His wife hates talking about road design. But work is his passion and his focus for as many as 70 hours a week, despite quixotic promises to curtail his projects and stay home on Fridays.

The current plan, instigated by Mrs. Monderman, is for him to retire in a few years. But it is unclear what a man who begins climbing the walls after three days at the beach ("If you want to go to a place without any cultural aspect, go to the Grand Canaries," he grumbled) will do with all that free time.

"The most important thing is being master of my own time, and then doing things that we both enjoy," he said. "What are they? I don't know."

The CocoBox Battle, Round 2

Two appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board were launched against the proposed west-end Big Box development. Lynne Meloche of LaSalle is taking on these retail giants, as well as the Town of LaSalle. Both parties object to the location of the proposed mega-discount shopping utopia at the border of their town as well as within the area of the fragile Ojibway Complex. I hope that ...Scale Down can offer both parties any help we can so they maximize their chances of success in their cases.

From today's Windsor Star...

LaSalle fights big box plan

Town asks OMB to block west-end retail plaza

The Town of LaSalle and several residents hope to stop a major big box development recently approved by the city for land next to Windsor Raceway.

They're appealing the city approval to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Coco Development Group plans to create a 420,000-square-foot commercial plaza at the intersection of Sprucewood Avenue and Matchette Road, right beside the LaSalle border. It would be anchored by four unnamed major big box retail outlets.

City council gave approval to the project at the end of October despite objections from LaSalle's council, people concerned about the impact on neighbouring natural areas, and residents who live near the location.

Councillors supported the project because of the number of jobs it would create, during construction and once the stores are open.

The site hugs the city's border with LaSalle and is across the street from the provincially protected Ojibway tallgrass prairie.

In LaSalle's appeal, it suggests the big box development will have a detrimental effect on neighbouring lands and roads.

Matchette and Sprucewood are two-lane access roads -- the only connection to the site -- and cannot handle the huge volume of traffic the big box centre is expected to generate, said LaSalle town planner Larry Silani.

"We are concerned because this is not an appropriate location," he said. "The kinds of traffic volume this generates, it should be on a highway interchange or roads designed to carry large volumes of traffic.

TRAFFIC VOLUME

"Matchette and Sprucewood are not meant to carry that much traffic."
The town is also concerned its nearby town centre on Malden Road, developed over several years, will quickly be destroyed by a big box outlet just a few blocks away.

The City of Windsor's legal department has received notification of the OMB appeal, but has not had time to study the information, said Wira Vendrasco, lawyer for the city.

An OMB hearing -- should it reach that point -- is not expected to be scheduled for at least a few months.
A pre-hearing conference is the next expected step.

LaSalle has had no further discussion with the city or developer since council approved the project in the fall, Silani said.

"We are not opposed to commercial development, we just believe it's the wrong location," he said. "The Town of LaSalle is always open to dialogue, but there is a fundamental difference of opinion. It's not just fill in a ditch and everybody here will be happy.

"It's the wrong location. Hopefully OMB will listen and we'll go from there."

Whereas SD agrees with the plaintiffs that the location is a terrible one for this development, we went further in our argument to Windsor's city council that more big-box development is not only unnecessary for Windsor, but will also be detrimental to our economic health.

We asked council to defer the rezoning of the proposed development until a comprehensive Economic Impact Study could be conducted. Councillor Halberstadt asked administration for the study and acting city planner Thom Hunt told him that there was an economic study on Windsor's retail market already underway.

We are looking forward to the release of this report and hearing whether the city's own staff believe that Windsor is over-retailed.

Look Boss, the Plan! the Plan!

The best thing I learned when in the automotove industry when my company became the first in Windsor to be certified for ISO/QS 9000 was "Say what you do, do what you say". (Zalev got credit in the paper for being the first in Windsor but my former company Rustshield was certified 2 weeks earlier according to the auditor)

The story that deserves front page coverage and should be every news lead story is the city of Windsor’s official review of the five year plan (Offical Plan Review - OPR). It was always my hopes that scaledown could contribute to the debate about the official plan.

Maybe it’s the idealist in me that says that if the real power in municipal politics is the actual five year plan. Hopefully its not simply naivete to think that politicians should remain beholden to this official plan above and beyond any special interest. The fulfilment of the 5 year plan should be the main indicator of how our politicians and administration have performed for our city. Every council vote be viewed as to whether it serves to progress or impede the official plan.

It was my hope that in the next municipal election the candidates platforms address how they can better implement the official plan ahead of their competitor. According to the city’s planning site “The PPS (Provincial Policy Statement) requires that municipalities set targets for intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas.” Our Downtown has seen a 10% decrease in population with no new residential developments planned in the near future. Currently the developer of a 40 unit residential bldg is fighting an uphill battle against many councillors to try to eliminate the after hour club obstacle to developing sellable residential units. Where is the official plan’s goals on their minds during this debate.

Many other areas in the core face the same fate. When was the last time you heard a municipal candidate state how he plan to accomplish that requirement. When the current council chose to freeze community improvement plans, where was their explanation as to how they could contradict this stated goal.

Its time that every resident of Windsor own and hold up a copy of the city’s official 5 year plan at every council meeting. That municipal councillors duty is to implement policies that follow the plan they adopt.

If those goals require development incentives, reallocation of resources, creating two tier development rates for intensification than that is what they should be doing.

It is Scaledown’s vision to connect every resident of Windsor to their own walkable neighbourhood filled with independent local businesses and artists that together create a vibrant economy. We think that this should be the vision of the official plan of the city of Windsor. Call 311 and tell them if you agree with us.

Please enter the debate by discussing what you would contribute to Windsor’s official plan at scaledown.ca so readers can call 311 or visit the cities official OPR website.

The time is now to "Sex Up" the Planning profession

"There are two sayings that are familiar in every news room across the country: 1) sex sells; 2) if it bleeds it leads."

- Armstrong Williams

The people in the news industry are in the business to sell lots and lots of newspapers. If they don't know what sells, nobody does.

There seems to be a disconnect in the general public's understanding of just how important the profession of Planning is to building a healthy municipality. The message has yet to get through to Joe Public; and we haven't done a very good job of selling it to them. When you finally realize exactly what it is we're selling, and what it is that's on the line, you have to wonder why we still have a job in this industry!

We need to sell the importance of Urban Planning.

A municipal entities decision "to plan" is a community commitment to consciously head in a certain direction. The path should lead to an increase in the public good, and that is what the taxpayers assume is being done. But what is the public good? The following types of benefits demonstrate what is meant by the public good, and how planning helps to increase it. (click here for the expanded rationale)

- Planning helps define the future character of communities by creating and maintaining a sense of place,
- Planning protects natural and agricultural resources,
- Planning provides predictability regarding future development,
- Planning saves money,
- Planning promotes economic development,
- Planning can promote sustainable development,
- Planning helps protect private property rights.

Planning is a science, and politics should not get in the way of that science being practised. Good urban planning can have a positive impact on Windsor's economic, ecological and social/cultural environments, just as much as bad or incomplete planning advocates the opposite. With such power in the hands of a select municipal department, one would feel that they would command the power and respect that accompanies their heavy responsibilities.

Yet, it is apparent that our planning professionals and the work they perform are underappreciated in our City Hall; and are therefore relegated to the role of mere administrators performing the will of our elected officials. These are not the jobs they were hired to do. They were hired for their ability to, through the examples of other municipalities and the "best practices" established by them, promote a vision of a better working Windsor and lay out the road map how to get there.

So what attributes would the city be looking for when it hires its new City Planner, as it is planning to do soon? Let me be the person who hires for this important position. I would employ the candidate who advocates for necessary planning reform in a manner that our non-planning elected officials (his/her bosses) understand and appreciate; all while leading their team to employ the knowledge they have accrued in actually making a city work.

Unfortunately, this is not likely to happen anytime soon. Our elected officials either do not understand just how much the planning departments role affects almost every aspect of city life, or they are putting "politics" over substance and not doing the job that they were hired to do.

So, we need to go over the politician's heads and make Windsor's electorate intimately aware of this important municipal department and how empowering them would put out many of the fires that are constantly erupting in our city before they even ignite. We need to "Sex It Up" and make it interesting to them, especially now with the planning department undergoing their 5 year Official Plan Review and the average resident holding the bulk of the power at this stage in shaping the vision they hold and the destiny that is possible in the city of Windsor.

Cut You Car-Use Tip - Auto Insurance By The Mile!

I have always thought that there must be some carrots out there that would encourage people to just drive a little less. You know what I mean; walk to the store to get milk or start your kids walking to school instead of being chauffeured. As it stands now, the only thing we would save is a little bit of gas. Until I came across this article by Springwise...

Auto Insurance By The Mile!

Back in 2005, we covered Norwich Union's Pay-as-You-Drive program in the UK to charge consumers for auto insurance based on how often, when and where they use their vehicles. Starting in Texas, the United States will soon see a similar service for the first time thanks to MileMeter's "auto insurance buy the mile."

Like Norwich Union's offering, MileMeter will use consumers' usage levels to determine how much they must pay for auto insurance. Unlike Norwich Union's, however, MileMeter will not use any kind of vehicle tracking device to record that usage. Rather, consumers will buy coverage in advance in increments of as few as 1,000 miles; when their odometer reaches the end of that increment, the coverage expires. The cost per mile varies with the geographic area and the age of the driver, but a reasonable ball park for a 30-year-old driver and minimum coverage in a midrange urban ZIP code in Texas might be 4 cents per mile, MileMeter CEO Chris Gay says. Multiple drivers in a household can also be covered for a single vehicle.

Dallas-based MileMeter will launch in Texas this summer, with plans to roll out quickly to other states, Gay says. In the meantime, it's attracted a fair bit of attention, not least because it was one of only seven finalists in the most recent Amazon Web Services Startup Challenge. Because it doesn't use gender as a basis for determining rates, MileMeter has been ardently supported by the National Organization for Women (NOW). And by rewarding drivers who use their cars less, it has the potential to make an environmental impact as well.

Sounds like a win-win all around—time for more entrepreneurs to start thinking in increments!

I don't know about the legalities of this type of insurance in Canada, but this is something that we should really have access to. I know that my vehicle spends most of its time just hanging out in the driveway collecting dust, and I would be very interested in reduced auto insurance. The more reasons for people to opt out of using their cars, the better the health of our communities.

Gentrification: Dr. Jekyl or Mr. Hyde?

Over the past 20 years suburbia has drawn the tired masses from the urban centres of cities, large and small, with promises of owning a piece of the American dream. Marketed as a haven for low price, high opportunity housing, surburbia blossomed like a toxic plume, leeching residents, retail and real estate investment from the heart of the city. One-time mixed income neighbourhoods were bought up by real estate speculators and absentee landlords driven by profit margins and profit taking. Vibrant neighbourhoods were decimated by a largely disinterested population, exacerbated by tragic civic planning, who were lulled into believing that they were somehow 'less' than the McMansion Monarchy.

Geo-political events of the 21st century have begun to coax some of the suburban masses out of their gated (whether physical or economic) developments into the urban cores. Of great importance are the Gen Xers, give or take a decade, who, upon leaving their parents suburban homes, are opting to buck that elitist trend and exploring home ownership in the rehabilitated cores. Cities are seeing a renaissance of revitalization. Young, educated and often well-funded residents are taking up the cause of restoring the allure of urban living. What starts with one or two 'urban pioneers' quickly becomes a full blown 'urban village' attracting progressive investment, including those elusive real estate dollars, as urban blight is gentrified.

The word gentrification has a polarizing voice eliciting visions of restored real estate, trendy shops and entertainment venues mixed with a diverse social network, albeit built on the monotony of economic prosperity. The opposing voice sees the same physical composition of gentrified neighbourhoods but, instead of celebrating the economic restoration, declares gentrification as a well-heeled battle against the urban poor, lobotomizing true social diversity with Starbucks branded comradare.

The topic of gentrification, both its' benefits and risks, has come up among the ScaleDown staff as we discover our place in the future of Windsor. After contemplating the ideas and visions we are advocating for as part of the process of 'scaling down' we realized that gentrification is product of monstrously misaligned 'supply and demand'-based market. It is not the product itself that causes the gentrification, but a supply void of a product that is so heavily in demand that consumers will pay almost anything to be a part of this urban revolution. Instead of fearing gentrification we intend to harness the effects of this social stigma for the benefit of the entire community. By pushing for strict development standards, advocating for, and designing, socio-economic diversity and engaging urban citizens in acts of advocacy, on both a civic and human scale, the process of gentrification can be tamed to draw investment dollars without impeding the new social fabric. With wide-scale reinvestment into core communities the economic tragedy most often associated with gentrification can be mitigated, if not avoided. Success in establishing 21st neighbourhoods as replicas of the early-20th century communities will prepare us for the challenge of rehabilitating the suburban wastelands that are sure to be the bane of the next generation.

PS: If you want to read more about gentrification, both the pros and cons, Google gentrification and read the diversity of information from both sides of the arguement.

After hours council wrap up

To close this after hours club debate I wanted to make the following random observations and questions.

1. If the original motion would have not been split, council would have rejected last night's proposed solution 6-4. Alan Halberstadt gave us a masterful display of politics, He played the other councillors against each other making them look foolish. It shouldn't have came to that.

2. For the life of me, I cannot understand why a motion that was supported by the vast majority of residents, businesses backed up by the city's own hired Expert Peter Bellmio wouldn't pass unanimously. Why defending the rights of 3-5 after hours clubs was more important to some than the demands of the entire community. Fulvio need to be the self appointed defender of 3 businesses over the demands of the entire community disappointed me the most.

3. I don't understand why Diane Sibley misrepresented the amount of businesses that would be affected, implying that there were 60 (later corrected to 50) affected businesses when her own report stated that there were only 3 clubs that operated after hours in the downtown

4. Why councillor Joanne Gignac feels the need to endorse only "All or nothing" solutions. Would she also be against exemption applications to the noise bylaw that sees events such as film festival outdoor screenings?

5. The simple answer to the mystery of "why Adult Entertainment clubs are not high risk facilities while certain after hours clubs are?"

Answer: because the nature of the customers of each type of business is completely different. The customers of adult entertainment clubs go out of their way to avoid drawing attention to themselves when leaving our downtown.

The customers of certain after hours clubs, go out of their way to draw attention to themselves.

One doesn't affect public safety or detract from the silent buffer needed between day and night while the other does.

6. Why the mayor felt the need to criticize the DWBIA, implying they weren't doing enough. The DWBIA has initiated a facade grant program, camera's, lobbied for the creation of an HRP. All the while fighting the foot dragging of city administration to accomplish many of these initiatives (Camera's took 2years to install, HRp took 1 year to get city endorsement) However, I can tell you that the BIA will happily accept his challenge to continue implementing solutions.

This is not over yet. Administration must have their feet held to the fire to ensure they properly follow the instructions of council to the letter and in the spirit. After that we must ensure that the body overseeing exemption applications remains neutral and is enstructed that although their foremost priority is safety, their mandate is to encourage businesses that manage their establishments responsibly.

The real victory here is that this issue united past and present members of the DWBIA, who spoke in unison. Kudo's to Paul Twigg and Michael Plunkett, former leaders of the BIA for joining our current leadership in their struggle. It also united the vast majority of business owners with the residents of downtown who need to fight arm in arm to better downtown as often as they can.

***Shameless Plug Alert!***

OK, I know we espouse an altruistic attitude here and all, but it's time for me to throw all that out the window for a moment.

VOTE FOR US!!!

We feel honoured to be put in the ring, vying for the title of "Best New Blog" in the Canadian Blog Awards 2007 competition. Thank you to everyone who has supported us, contributed to the site and made us into the quality blog that we have become.

Yes, the nomination period is over and it's time to vote for the best blogs of 2007. You can vote only once per category, per round. (...Scale Down is located about 3/4 of the way down the list) The results of Round One voting will be revealed a day or two after voting closes January 21st, 2008 11:59 PM PST. Final Round voting will start on Wednesday January 23rd. The second round of voting will narrow the list of nominees in each category down to the top 5 from the first round of voting.

So, help us survive the first round of voting by visiting the site and casting your vote for "...Scale Down, Windsor". There are a ton of competitors for this award, so we'll definitely need your help. Enlist your family and friends too. We're not shy!

Reprint: Why London's downtown matters

I couldn't help reposting this editorial from the London Free Press. They seem to get it better than some Windsorites.

Why London's Downtown Matters
The London Free Press
Jan. 11, 2008.

No discussion of urban design, or placemaking, or the Creative City, or a vibrant economy, or healthy suburbs can occur without a lot of talk about a city's downtown.

And there has certainly been lots of discussion about London's over the years. As early as the 1950s, downtown businesses have been fretting about a decline, while politicians have made various attempts to "revitalize" the core.

It's an ongoing project.

Downtown gets more attention than any other neighbourhood in London, politically, economically, socially.

And it should: it's the biggest in Southwestern Ontario.

Planning rules have been eased and taxes removed to encourage development of residences in the core. Laws have been written to prevent office skyscrapers from being built outside the core. Grants have been made available by various agencies to redevelop apartments above retail space and improve retail facades. The list is endless.

Hundreds of millions of dollars in public money have been invested in such institutions as the John Labatt Centre, the Covent Garden Market, the Central Library, the Convention Centre, the Central Y and the VIA Rail station -- all because community leaders, private and public, know a healthy downtown means a healthy city -- a healthy region.

It's all paying off. People are returning to the core to live. But that doesn't mean there's not still plenty of work to do.

Some Londoners believe the downtown is unsafe. Hogwash. Some believe there's nothing to buy. Hogwash. Some say traffic is a problem and parking is scarce. Hogwash. London's downtown has a larger variety of retailers, the best restaurants, more cultural activities, the biggest sporting events, superior business opportunities and unique residential options that beat out those anywhere else in the city. They're as not predictable as those in the suburbs, but they are treasures and they're unique to London.

Meanwhile, London's core is healthier than many other downtowns across the province, and certainly across the continent. The reasons for this are myriad, but mostly it is because community leaders have faith in it and have continued to invest in it. And they have faith in it because they know the downtown is not just the heart and soul of the city, it's the future. We can never be allowed to give up on it.

Bringing in the ringers

The University of Windsor announced the creation of a new Cross-Border Transportation Studies Institute on Thursday. According to the press release, the new Research Chair, Dr. William Anderson, spent the past 10 years with Boston University as a part of the Department of Geography and Environment. Of particular interest to ScaleDown readers, Dr. Anderson (link to CV) was also a part of the Centre of Transportation Studies who, with third party funding, published a number of papers relating the economics of mass transit, new urbanism and the global economy and urban land use.

I spent a few weeks in Boston nearly a decade ago and witnessed, first hand, the enormity of the project passionately known as The Big Dig. Much like Toronto's battle with the ill-conceived Gardiner Expressway, Boston's core was butchered by a series of raised highways built in the 1950s as a way to alleviate urban traffic congestion. Instead, thousands of residents and businesses were displaced and neighbourhoods were alienated by a swath of elevated traffic. The billion dollar plus project moved the raised highway underground, added tunnel capacity and even had (although not implemented yet) a plan for a rail route connecting two of Boston's airports.

Now that Dr. Anderson has decided to make Windsor, and the Unversity, his new home, I am sure that we can expect to some outstanding and thought-provoking research out of the new Cross-Border Transportation Studies Institute. With the Institute's mandate to focus on cross-border transit we can finally look forward to an impartial voice on the DRTP and Greenlink, as well as some real experience in dealing with a large scale community transformation through infrastructure realignment. Let's hope that Dr. Anderson can avoid the political plague that mars so many of ideas in this city and push for some real, innovative and sustainable change.

Four More Years ?!?

That’s how long we’re putting the Community Improvement Plans for Sandwich, Downtown, Glengarry-Marentette, Ford City and Little River on hold. There have literally been hundreds of thousands of hours--those of our salaried administrative staff and the volunteer hours of prominent community leaders and residents--that have been invested into these documents.

Community Improvement Plans are a provincial governments requirement prior to a municipality requesting any incentive that would require a contribution from them. I’ve argued many times that Windsor is one of the largest cities in North America that has not offered targeted incentives to revitalized core neighbourhoods. London is our nearest Canadian example, and Detroit being our nearest geographical one. They’ve worked for both of those cities, as London has seen 5 new high rise apartments built in their core, and Detroit saw a population increase of over a thousand people in their core while the rest of the city had its population decrease by over 50 thousand.

Here is a brochure of incentives London has been offering for a decade. I don’t mind being a bit behind London when it comes to economic development, but waiting over 10 years is ridiculous. Tax Incentive Financing is the best example of an incentive that the experts say does not cost the taxpayers one red cent. Rate increases are phased in over 10 years on new investment, while the municipality still collects the taxes on the existing property as it was prior to the new investment. The city only gives up any revenue it wouldn't have received without the incentive. If we would have started this 10 years ago, the phase in would be done by now on any new developments that we would have seen. Not only that, but the province would be kicking in their portion of this tax incentive so technically we’d be getting provincial funding that I believe would be far greater than the costs of completing the community Improvement plan in itself.

Here is a great powerpoint presentation from New Mexico that explains the concept and benefits of TIF’s.

The effectiveness of this type of incentive has only been debated in Windsor. The debate has ended in 48 U.S. states and every other Canadian city in favour of this economic development tool. Think of it this way, had we simply completed one before we moved on to another, we would now have had the incentives in place for 3 years and would be able to judge them on their effectiveness, for a fraction of the costs invested.

This is not a give away. Windsorites claim they want “tax cuts now” and the best way to get them is to stop suburban sprawl. Core development saves moneys on infrastructure, less fire stations, road widenings and a host of other costs associated with sprawl.

We simply can’t afford to wait 4 more years to finish the Community Improvement Plans to help restart core development.

Letting the economy do our dirty work for us...

Why is it that it takes an episode of economical crisis for the trends to change to a more sustainable path?

When gas prices rise to over $100 a barrel, people begin to demand better fuel economy in their new vehicles. When job loss hits a region, people begin to stay put and renovate their current homes, or move into existing neighbourhoods. That is the news Dave Hall brings us today in his business column..

Housing starts lowest since 1984, down 41%

Falling to their lowest levels since 1984, housing starts across the Windsor area dropped by 41 per cent in 2007 compared to the previous year, according to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

Single-detached starts fell by 40 per cent and multiple home starts dropped by 44 per cent. Overall, there were 614 starts in 2007, compared to 1,045 a year earlier.

"A combination of adequate choice in the resale market, job uncertainty and weaker consumer confidence has resulted in less demand for new homes," said Margot Stevenson, a market analyst for CMHC.

In December, there were 26 single unit starts, unchanged from a year ago. Multiple starts, which consisted of four semi-detached units and 12 apartment rental units, were 56 per cent higher in December than a year ago.

In a year-to-date comparison, starts fell by 55 per cent in Windsor, 43 per cent in Lakeshore and 41 per cent in Amherstburg.

In LaSalle, they increased by 44 per cent over the same period and by a whopping 157 per cent in Tecumseh.

Across Ontario, starts fell by seven per cent in 2007 compared to 2006.

It seems that it takes times of economical crisis to force the changes that the experts say we need to make to move towards a more sustainable existence. Is it because people equate this more sustainable world to one of strife and stagnation?

I think this is one of the primary messages we need to conquer if we are to make the core areas of Windsor a more attractive and viable place to live and raise a family.

James' Lunch Date...

Guest Blogger - James Coulter

I went to lunch last week with a city employee.

My intention was to get some input/advice for the downtown charrette. I ended up, well, a little disappointed.

The conversation around the charrette was productive. My city friend helped me establish a framework for a questionnaire and really helped me nail down why I want to organize this event. I want to demonstrate to our elected officials that the people of this city really care about downtown and that they want to be involved in the planning process.

How did I end up disappointed? Well, once we got through the first part of our conversation I started to ask about certain areas of the city and why they ended up the way they have. Specifically, I wanted to know about the East Riverside Planning Area. I live in the East end, and my running routes sometimes take me through this sloppy, wasteland of chipboard and vinyl, crapola houses.

I said to my friend, “I remember seeing the plans of survey for this area back when it was first being developed. I remember thinking that this was such a great opportunity for the city to develop a new town centre. Something like a modern Olde Riverside or Walkerville. You know, a main street with shops and offices and apartments with nice residential streets intersecting.”

He said, “That was the plan. It was drawn up like that - really nice.”

“Well”, I asked, “What happened?” The answer was ridiculous, but it said so much. It seemed the developers came back and said that they couldn’t sell the kind of housing that the plan called for. The market wanted the suburban home, the kind with the big garage and a house behind it. So the plan was amended and the rest is history. Our city is in trouble because our officials amend the official plans to accommodate developers, contractors, and high-school buddies, whatever. The city’s official plan is full of progressive language talking about mixed-use development, walkable communities and alternative transportation. Yet the building department allows continual expansion of big box developments and more and wider roads and housing, miles from any amenities.

I guess it was naïve on my part to imagine that city government is any different from higher levels of government where special interests and lobbyists “grease the wheels”, but really. Our elected officials live in our neighbourhoods. They drive the same roads as us and worry about the values of their properties and business interests - just like us. So how can they make decisions that do nothing to improve the quality of life for their constituents, their neighbours? City politicians are closest to the electorate, why should a developer or an out-of-town land owner’s interests be more important than ours?

Politicking to save a part-time job and some kind of quasi-celebrity status, it’s nauseating.

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.

Zenn and the art of responsible motoring

I know, you're an intelligent, responsible person who just wants to do the right thing. You recyle, use compact flourscent light bulbs and avoid Wal-Mart like the plague, yet there's still that gnawing feeling something isn't right...

"I know that I should buy a more fuel efficient vehicle, yet the best are Japanese imports! What's a responsible Canadian consumer to do?"

Well, imagine that there existed a vehicle that produce zero emissions and was made right here in Canada. Yes, a truly responsible vehicle for those who must drive and it would support your Canadian economy. It exists.

But you can't buy one.

Rick Mercer doesn't understand either

Huh? "But Stephen Harper says that we can't meet our Kyoto obligations. Why on earth would he deny a zero emissions vehicle the right to Canadian roads? Wouldn't promoting vehicles like the Zenn move us in a direction of saving Canadian automotive jobs?"

Good question indeed. And one that you should personally ask the Ministry of Transportation if you want to see the Zenn car, and others like it, on our roads. (of course, you will do this after demanding more walkable, pedestrian friendly communities, therefore decreasing your need for a car in the first place, right?)

Can't we all just get along?

"Cities everywhere are facing shrinking revenue streams and struggling to provide municipal services. By working together and sharing resources, local governments can maintain and even improve essential public services like fire and police protection."

Sound familiar? What kind of progressive, downtown revitalization group would say such a thing? Nope, that was the Michigan Suburbs Alliance.

"In order for southeast Michigan to move forward, it is imperative that municipalities also cooperate with non-governmental regional stakeholders. Just as intergovernmental cooperation can stretch municipal resources, collaborating with others in the region, such as our world-renowned universities, can enable cities to make accomplishments they would not be able to individually. As funds continue to dry up, regionalism will prove to be not only important, but essential to maintaining the vitality of mature suburbs."

So they took the bull by the horns and actually did something about it. By creating the Creating Collaborative Communities program, they are teaching city managers, mayors, council members, human resource and finance directors, fire and police chiefs, and union leaders how to best approach joint service delivery and continue providing high quality services to their residents.

Can you say "Road Trip"?

There are many resources available to groups that deem it imperative in this day and age to work towards regional cooperation. The advantages of doing so in Windsor/Essex are crystal clear - survival.

The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has identified regional cooperation and coordinated regional planning as a priority. This is a timely issue as the global competition amongst regions becomes more pronounced. Virtually all growth-related issues—from how to achieve economic diversity to how to integrate land use and transportation planning in order to accommodate growing populations—are regional in scale. Recognizing the importance of regional cooperation to the future economic competitiveness and livability of metropolitan regions, ULI works with District Councils and ULI members on regional efforts that will enact change on the regional and local levels. They have recognised Regional Visioning as such an essential aspect of growth management, they've developed the Reality Check program to engage regional leaders in a regional dialogue on growth issues.

“Reality Check brought together many of Southern California’s warring constituencies and led to a broader and more inclusive vision for the growth of the Los Angeles region.”– Stuart R. Mork, Reality Check Chair, Los Angeles

After the evidence provided by Windsor city councillor Fulvio Valentinis last night, we couldn't be further away from our adjoing municipalities when it comes to regional cooperation. But to call them "warring constituencies"? Possibly.

What do you think? Is it time that our region's stakeholders get locked up into a room (like these folks (video) in Washington) until they come up with a solution? It is painfully obvious that the Windsor/Essex region will not move forward together unless they collectively deem it a priority. The video you just watched shows a region planning for unprecedented growth. We need to plan simply for survival.

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.