[afransen]

Sprawl Repair Manual by Galina Tachieva

Its a big file, and download speeds are slow.

Basically, the author advocates for transect based zoning, based on urban density. Within transects a variety of built forms are allowed. Several case studies are shown at different scale on how suburban sprawl can be intensified.

Usually this means demolishing cul-de-sacs and building "places"

Thanks for sharing, I'll give it a read (or skim at least--over 300 pages).

 

[afransen]

Yeah, I can see why people might buy into it, but the outer suburbs are increasingly denser than the inner suburbs, at least if you compare swathes of SFHs, so I'm not sure it can't be unlearnt or easily discouraged.

Why is the system so stuck on it though? Surely our city planners aren't SFH cultists. I know the politicos might be and I guess that's why we're stuck on stupid.

Why does good policy always have to run through a "pilot project"? Get out of here with this incrementalist approach and aversion to positive change.

Well, as with everything else, I guess it's all down to base human psychology; in this context familiarity and comfort derived therein.

On this, I get the feeling that it is due to very conservative political and planning culture in Toronto. People are not willing to rock the 'yellow belt' boat. All the innovation gets funneled to narrow areas where there isn't critical mass of NIMBYs.

 

[afransen]

Why does good policy always have to run through a "pilot project"? Get out of here with this incrementalist approach and aversion to positive change.

Thin edge of the wedge. Just like the 'temporary' King St Pilot, 'temporary' bike lanes, etc. It's a jiu jitsu redirection of opposition by deflecting rather than directly confronting. It seems to work, albeit slowly. Better than not at all.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Thin edge of the wedge. Just like the 'temporary' King St Pilot, 'temporary' bike lanes, etc. It's a jiu jitsu redirection of opposition by deflecting rather than directly confronting. It seems to work, albeit slowly. Better than not at all.

Yeah, I'll give it that. Putting them down gently.

To be fair though, King Street still looks temporary.

 

[MrGoose]

Cheers for posting that. It was an interesting read.

I'd love to see half those recommendations put into action here in Toronto. That'd be the day!

You can see some of the recommendations put into place.

Things like Square One and Promenade Mall being redeveloped. Or the condos/tower block immediately south of Fairview Mall. Or midtown Oakville. If you take a look at those plans, the ideas espoused in that book shine through. Place-making, intensification etc. Also, newer suburban builds are more gridlike in nature, being functionally, giant rowhouses so some of the suburban redesign ideas don't apply as much.

 

[SunriseChampion]

You can see some of the recommendations put into place.

I'd be more interested in seeing the cul-de-sac destruction and intensification of existing SFH lots. Intensification of parking lots is also beautiful as they are the most egregious waste of space known to mankind, but are low-hanging fruit and the least "offensive" option to the NIMBYot crowd.

 

[Northern Light]

Yeah, I'll give it that. Putting them down gently.

To be fair though, King Street still looks temporary.

The permanent changes to King are coming..........patience. LOL

 

[MrGoose]

I'd be more interested in seeing the cul-de-sac destruction and intensification of existing SFH lots. Intensification of parking lots is also beautiful as they are the most egregious waste of space known to mankind, but are low-hanging fruit and the least "offensive" option to the NIMBYot crowd.

Toronto’s suburbs don’t even have that many cul de sacs. The most American-Mcmansion-y suburbs are way up in York Region. Around King and Aurora.

Most Toronto suburbs are grid-ish.

 

[MrGoose]

I personally think that where subdivision collector roads meet arterials is a prime place for intensification.

 

[SunriseChampion]

The permanent changes to King are coming..........patience. LOL

Patience? It's like the only streetcar I use (ok, ok, 509 and 510 as well a bit) and my fav high street in this town (ok, ok, Roncesvalles is decent as well but).

It's been depressing. You get all stoked for improvements and then get stuck tripping over lowest common denominator manifestations of said improvements for years.

*looks at chain link fence pollution to make sure nothing's changed in the last ten minutes*

 

[SunriseChampion]

Toronto’s suburbs don’t even have that many cul de sacs. The most American-Mcmansion-y suburbs are way up in York Region. Around King and Aurora.

Most Toronto suburbs are grid-ish.

Have fun getting lost in Ajax.

 

[Northern Light]

Patience? It's like the only streetcar I use (ok, ok, 509 and 510 as well a bit) and my fav high street in this town (ok, ok, Roncesvalles is decent as well but).

It's been depressing. You get all stoked for improvements and then get stuck tripping over lowest common denominator manifestations of said improvements for years.

*looks at chain link fence pollution to make sure nothing's changed in the last ten minutes*

I understand. I wish it would improve faster too.

 

[SunriseChampion]

I understand. I wish it would improve faster too.

Well, can't complain too much about King Street seeing as we're being saddled with the Gardiner demon-from-hell forevermore.

 

[Northern Light]

Toronto’s suburbs don’t even have that many cul de sacs. The most American-Mcmansion-y suburbs are way up in York Region. Around King and Aurora.

Most Toronto suburbs are grid-ish.

Just wait, the redevelopment proposal for Canada Square seeks to add a cul-de-sac and not apply a grid across its super-block!

 

[Northern Light]

I personally think that where subdivision collector roads meet arterials is a prime place for intensification.

There is so much opportunity on arterials........vast amounts of it..............

Look up and down Coxwell, Greenwood, Donlands etc. in the core (ish) area.

Look up and down Pharmacy, Warden, McCowan and Bellamy........

And so many more.

Which is not to diminish any other intensification scheme.

A quick sample of the older portions of Warden suggest that as-of-right zoning of a mere 5 storeys would result in 400 new units every 500m.

If one were to examine Warden, and remove areas of industry, or those that already intensified, this could apply to at least 10km within City of Toronto boundaries.

Which is to say, not less than 8,000 units (roughly, housing for 20,000) on but one single street.

Apply that across the City and we're well into accommodating 500,000 or more, all without any intensification of interior neighborhoods or a single tower.

Lots of opportunity!