[Jacob Lisgar]

the images all look great but this all sounds like a lot of hocus pocus. A company with no development experience is partnering with 3 levels of government that can barely implement a debit card system on transit and were supposed to be excited about the city of the future. Waterfront Toronto must have burned through all their government money and they need some corporate cash to fulfill their futuristic dreams. Most people in Toronto need housing that is not expensive, cheap commercial space for local businesses, safe and effective mobility options and decent parks. I don't think people care that much about robots and driverless cars and internet advertising everywhere. I may be a bit skeptical but I think at the end of the day we will just see a neighbourhood that looks like a mix of Liberty Village and City Place that will employ some existing technologies that will drive up the cost of living. Hopefully a lot of community input can help create something great but I think all the government and corporate involvement will spoil the results.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Google haven't developed anything before?

GooglePlex?

 

[Irishmonk]

the images all look great but this all sounds like a lot of hocus pocus. A company with no development experience is partnering with 3 levels of government that can barely implement a debit card system on transit and were supposed to be excited about the city of the future. Waterfront Toronto must have burned through all their government money and they need some corporate cash to fulfill their futuristic dreams. Most people in Toronto need housing that is not expensive, cheap commercial space for local businesses, safe and effective mobility options and decent parks. I don't think people care that much about robots and driverless cars and internet advertising everywhere. I may be a bit skeptical but I think at the end of the day we will just see a neighbourhood that looks like a mix of Liberty Village and City Place that will employ some existing technologies that will drive up the cost of living. Hopefully a lot of community input can help create something great but I think all the government and corporate involvement will spoil the results.

Comparing the best and brightest minds of Google and Waterfront Toronto to the bean counting hacks that gave us Liberty Village and S*ittyplace is a huge stretch. Frankly, we should be grateful to have such heavyweight talent from south of the border coming up here to hone their cutting edge technology and visions for us to access, use and even live in. Especially when a Google HQ is in the mix. And, btw, Amazon's heavy footsteps could well be following in google's wake shortly.

This is all largely due to the incompetence of the short fingered vulgarian in the WH, who seems pleased to be driving away cutting edge brilliance in favour of the last few hundred coal mining jobs in West Virginia. We may be entering Toronto's golden period. Now, what are the chances that any of this could be happening if the Thug brothers were still running things here.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

A more nuanced view from Citylabs:

https://www.citylab.com/life/2017/10/sidewalk-labs-living-laboratory/543165/

Still got the area for potential Amazon bid wrong though.A more immediate benefit of this announcement is publicity for the city.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

On that publicity note - from the Star:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...h-tech-quayside-neighbourhood-in-toronto.html

This is a big week for Toronto and technology. On Wednesday morning, the Ontario government is expected to reveal some details of the “bid book” it is submitting to Amazon as part of a competition that has cities across North America trying to land the tech giant’s second headquarters.

Doctoroff told the Star that he is happy to sing Toronto’s virtues to a tech rival.

“If Amazon sees what we see in Toronto, they should be coming here,” he said.

AoD

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Everyone already said their bit on the excitement, so I guess now is good point to add in some criticism. Looking at this announcement, I am left unfazed by their hoopla.

A bunch of programmers decided that they know better on how to design the city better than planners. I expect the same result as when engineers of the 40s, 50s and 60s decided that they knew best on how to design a city.

Waterfront Toronto better do their very best to reign them in.

Outcome-based zoning. No strict zoning based on use, but rather based on allowable noise or emissions levels, monitored by distributed sensors.

So in other words, "modular zoning". Lol. That is going to be a favorite.

Buildings designed to create outdoor microclimates that are comfortable to sit in outside for more months of the year

Buildings creating outdoor microclimates. I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[innsertnamehere]

the outdoor microclimate thing isn't that much of a stretch. You already see it in Ontario at places like the Niagara and Halton Hills outlet malls, which have a covered roof, but are open air. The environment is comfortable for the vast majority of the year. The Well is doing the same thing.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Everyone already said their bit on the excitement, so I guess now is good point to add in some criticism. Looking at this announcement, I am left unfazed by their hoopla.

A bunch of programmers decided that they know better on how to design the city better than planners. I expect the same result as when engineers of the 40s, 50s and 60s decided that they knew best on how to design a city.

Waterfront Toronto better do their very best to reign them in.

So in other words, "modular zoning". Lol. That is going to be a favorite.

Buildings creating outdoor microclimates. I'll believe it when I see it.

I agree with the general gist - but I see it less of an issue when applied within the site boundaries - there is room for experimentation at that level without the risk of things going dreadfully wrong. I do like the notion of moving to performance-based policy making though - and the potential it offers when it comes to urban form (narrower streets, etc)

AoD

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

the outdoor microclimate thing isn't that much of a stretch. You already see it in Ontario at places like the Niagara and Halton Hills outlet malls, which have a covered roof, but are open air. The environment is comfortable for the vast majority of the year. The Well is doing the same thing.

I sort of pictured something more than a covered roof.

You can say any one of our towers in the financial district create a microclimate around them if we are being that lenient with the term.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Covered roof does a lot. Stops rain, most winds, and does actually mitigate temperature extremes by a few degrees as it keeps in heat. You can go to one of those outlet malls on a frigid day in January and it is surprisingly hospitable.

 

[Dr. Snoot]

Everyone already said their bit on the excitement, so I guess now is good point to add in some criticism. Looking at this announcement, I am left unfazed by their hoopla.

A bunch of programmers decided that they know better on how to design the city better than planners. I expect the same result as when engineers of the 40s, 50s and 60s decided that they knew best on how to design a city.

Waterfront Toronto better do their very best to reign them in.

I like how we instantly go to doomsday scenarios.

I guess city planners shouldn't have listened to engineers in London, UK who suggested building a separated sewer system in 1870 to avoid a cholera epidemic or an electrified subway in 1890? Obviously technology has a massive impact on City building. Look at Uber-like apps, automatic train switching, dynamic traffic signal timing, silva cells, green roofs, and the list goes on and on... literally everything post horse and buggy.

The entire point of the enterprise is to develop cutting-edge technology that planners obviously cannot yet have contemplated and to experiment with these ideas, not to tell planners what to do. Google isn't creating a fiefdom. I'm not sure how you could be critical with such a small amount of information? We're talking about Google, which literally invented Googling. I thing this is amazing and we absolutely should give them some leeway to make change.

 

[steveintoronto]

From the Financial Times:

Alphabet to build futuristic city in Toronto
[...]
In its proposal, Sidewalk also said that Toronto would need to waive or exempt many existing regulations in areas like building codes, transportation, and energy in order to build the city it envisioned. The project may need “substantial forbearances from existing laws and regulations,” the group said.
[...]

lol...In Toronto? Good luck with that! That aspect wasn't reported in the Cdn press:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...h-tech-quayside-neighbourhood-in-toronto.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...dewalk-labs-eyes-toronto-for-its-digital-city

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/ne...36491720/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

Architects and planners can only dream...

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the Financial Times:

Alphabet to build futuristic city in Toronto
[...]
In its proposal, Sidewalk also said that Toronto would need to waive or exempt many existing regulations in areas like building codes, transportation, and energy in order to build the city it envisioned. The project may need “substantial forbearances from existing laws and regulations,” the group said.
[...]

lol...In Toronto? Good luck with that! That aspect wasn't reported in the Cdn press:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...h-tech-quayside-neighbourhood-in-toronto.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...dewalk-labs-eyes-toronto-for-its-digital-city

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/ne...36491720/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

Architects and planners can only dream...

From the submitted proposal, p. 27

Specifically, Sidewalk proposes to outfit buildings in Quayside with the sensors necessary to measure the data needed to craft the outcome-based code system before implementing it in the Eastern Waterfront. To ensure safety, Sidewalk will work with municipal and provincial agencies to design informative pilots within existing regulatory frameworks.

https://sidewalktoronto.ca/wp-conte...lk-Labs-Vision-Sections-of-RFP-Submission.pdf

AoD

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I like how we instantly go to doomsday scenarios.

I guess city planners shouldn't have listened to engineers in London, UK who suggested building a separated sewer system in 1870 to avoid a cholera epidemic or an electrified subway in 1890? Obviously technology has a massive impact on City building. Look at Uber-like apps, automatic train switching, dynamic traffic signal timing, silva cells, green roofs, and the list goes on and on... literally everything post horse and buggy.

The entire point of the enterprise is to develop cutting-edge technology that planners obviously cannot yet have contemplated and to experiment with these ideas, not to tell planners what to do. Google isn't creating a fiefdom. I'm not sure how you could be critical with such a small amount of information? We're talking about Google, which literally invented Googling. I thing this is amazing and we absolutely should give them some leeway to make change.

It's a fair counter argument.

I'm weary as the past several decades of urban planning theory has been devoted to undoing the damage caused by engineer-inspired modernist planning. We seem to be jumping head first into a programmer-inspired neo-modernist era, without any thinking over the consequences of technological innovation on city building.

Take autonomous vehicles. I anticipate widespread adoption, and I am terrified that we are going to unlock a new massive wave of urban sprawl as a consequence.

Hopefully the role of a planner has evolved and learned from the past and can know when and where to say 'no' to programmers. The Green Belt for instance, can be used as anti-sprawl countermeasure to AVs. This Sidewalk Lab can, as you say, help planners learn what to anticipate and to expect with new technology, and prepare accordingly. That is the optimistic outlook.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's a fair counter argument.

I'm weary as the past several decades of urban planning theory has been devoted to undoing the damage caused by engineer-inspired modernist planning. We seem to be jumping head first into a programmer-inspired neo-modernist era, without any thinking over the consequences of technological innovation on city building.

Take autonomous vehicles. I anticipate widespread adoption, and I am terrified that we are going to unlock a new massive wave of urban sprawl as a consequence.

Hopefully the role of a planner has evolved and learned from the past and can know when and where to say 'no' to programmers. The Green Belt for instance, can be used as anti-sprawl countermeasure to AVs. This Sidewalk Lab can, as you say, help planners learn what to anticipate and to expect with new technology, and prepare accordingly. That is the optimistic outlook.

Fair, but I also think that there is room for the past several decades of planning theory to get disrupted and be experimented on in an urban lab setting - for example, there are certain types of urban development (semi-organic, code violating) that we just couldn't replicate with what tools we have now without compromising safety and security. I wouldn't want to apply it en masse without testing it first and this is what this project is about I think.

Take autonomous vehicles. I anticipate widespread adoption, and I am terrified that we are going to unlock a new massive wave of urban sprawl as a consequence.

I think that is fear is overblown - people aren't going to choose a sprawl lifestyle just because they don't have to be at the steering wheel anymore. Done well it may serve as a way to provide transit access where it was cost-prohibitive before.

AoD