M II A II R II K
Senior Member
How Toronto plans for failure
May 08 2010
By Christopher Hume
Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/806539--how-toronto-plans-for-failure
###########################
Of all a city’s functions, none matters more than planning. It touches every aspect of civic life — economic, social and cultural. But as Toronto’s civil service is currently organized, planning gets little respect. In fact, the department reports to a deputy city manager, who reports to the city manager, who reports to city council. For the last three years, the deputy city manager responsible for planning has been a man named Richard Butts. His background is in garbage collection and as he readily admits, “I am not a planner.â€
Judging from his record, that much is obvious. The most recent example is now unfolding on the waterfront; it concerns a sports complex proposed for the Lower Don Lands. Though it would undo many years of planning, Butts has made it clear he’s prepared to ride roughshod over Waterfront Toronto’s award-winning scheme. Yet even if he were the most enlightened manager on the planet, planning in Toronto doesn’t stand a chance, and, therefore, neither does the city. Indeed, it is set up for failure.
In more successful cities such as New York, Boston and Vancouver, planning departments report to the mayor, council or an executive committee. In this way, planners have direct input into their community’s most important decisions. Some cities have a planning board like one that existed in Toronto before it was disbanded in the 1980s as part of an effort to streamline municipal administration. “To me,†says former mayor David Crombie, “asking about the importance of planning is like asking where oxygen belongs? It’s central.â€
During Crombie’s time as mayor, which lasted from 1972 to 1978, neighbourhood planning offices were opened across the city. Inspired by Jane Jacobs, Crombie was determined to rid Toronto of the U.S.-style single-use planning that prevailed in the suburbs and still does. The finest example of 1970s planning in Toronto is the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood, which to this day hums along nicely, a fully integrated part of the city. Though construction continued long after Crombie left office, his administration’s contribution, the plan, was the critical component. Nothing as ambitious or successful has even been attempted since. And if the decade-old waterfront revitalization program is any indication, the city has lost its ability to think big and act accordingly.
###########################
May 08 2010
By Christopher Hume
Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/806539--how-toronto-plans-for-failure
###########################
Of all a city’s functions, none matters more than planning. It touches every aspect of civic life — economic, social and cultural. But as Toronto’s civil service is currently organized, planning gets little respect. In fact, the department reports to a deputy city manager, who reports to the city manager, who reports to city council. For the last three years, the deputy city manager responsible for planning has been a man named Richard Butts. His background is in garbage collection and as he readily admits, “I am not a planner.â€
Judging from his record, that much is obvious. The most recent example is now unfolding on the waterfront; it concerns a sports complex proposed for the Lower Don Lands. Though it would undo many years of planning, Butts has made it clear he’s prepared to ride roughshod over Waterfront Toronto’s award-winning scheme. Yet even if he were the most enlightened manager on the planet, planning in Toronto doesn’t stand a chance, and, therefore, neither does the city. Indeed, it is set up for failure.
In more successful cities such as New York, Boston and Vancouver, planning departments report to the mayor, council or an executive committee. In this way, planners have direct input into their community’s most important decisions. Some cities have a planning board like one that existed in Toronto before it was disbanded in the 1980s as part of an effort to streamline municipal administration. “To me,†says former mayor David Crombie, “asking about the importance of planning is like asking where oxygen belongs? It’s central.â€
During Crombie’s time as mayor, which lasted from 1972 to 1978, neighbourhood planning offices were opened across the city. Inspired by Jane Jacobs, Crombie was determined to rid Toronto of the U.S.-style single-use planning that prevailed in the suburbs and still does. The finest example of 1970s planning in Toronto is the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood, which to this day hums along nicely, a fully integrated part of the city. Though construction continued long after Crombie left office, his administration’s contribution, the plan, was the critical component. Nothing as ambitious or successful has even been attempted since. And if the decade-old waterfront revitalization program is any indication, the city has lost its ability to think big and act accordingly.
###########################
