Quote:
Originally Posted by highwater
He envisions some grand all-encompassing 'master plan' and doesn't want to see any projects happening outside of that context.
|
This is a strong case of the inevitable tension between the perfect and the good. Top-down planners aim for the perfect, but the people who actually get things done - think, for example of Gil Penalosa - start with a broad sense of what is needed, shoot from the hip to get things rolling and then iterate to hone in on successes. (Sorry for the mixed metaphors there.)
Obviously you can't built a light rail system by shooting from the hip, but the planning involved is neither uncertain nor controversial. It's complicated but not complex, and we have abundant examples of successful implementations to guide us (and we also have one or two examples of unsuccessful implementations as cautionary object lessons).
Likewise with updating the transit corridor zoning to leverage the LRT as an investment magnet, the way forward is simple, clear, and very well understood. We even have an excellent implementation of TOD zoning that's close enough to visit and study firsthand: the King-Spadina Plan that has been so remarkably successful in restoring investment, vitality and density to that part of Toronto.
Again, when you strip out the plannerese, the rules are surprisingly straightforward:
1. Build to the sidewalk
2. Open onto the street
3. No parking requirements
4. Parking must be inside or behind the building
5. Buildings should be broadly compatible in height with their neighbours (with the stated intention of increasing overall height and density).
6. Use the property the way you want as long as the use is not harmful to neighbours.
We absolutely don't need to wait for an all-encompassing plan to get started on these two initiatives (three if you include painting a yellow line down the middle of our one-way streets).