London Construction - Development News Thread#1

[sparky212]

The new entrance to the Galleria looks great . If they could have extended to wellington square it would look better

[tolosulode]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

Its funny because you assume that I've been brainwashed by my professors.. however I get informed in many other ways than just school, I've been to many world famous planner/Urban Designer presentations, I've travelled to better planned communities, and I read a lot of books, magazines and a lot from the internet,

and don't forget your 9 months of work experience too. My question is "are you even allowed to question their ideas?" If so, welcome to the realm of true eduction otherwise, start questioning their ideas.

I don’t think you should be comparing London to WOODSTOCK! - are you kidding me?

London very much wanted the success Woodstock now enjoys otherwise London would not have even tried to get Toyota to locate here. London wished this was their news story. http://dcnonl.com/article/20060310300

they are a tiny town

but not for long. Brantford, Kitchener, Preston, Galt, Hespler, Waterloo, Hamilton and many other cities were at one time too tiny in comparison to London which has now been left in their dust.

I'm not sure if you just skimmed through my post but i did mention that our Arterial roads are only EXTREMELY busy for about 40 mins day... 20 in the morning 20 mins in the late afternoon.. what the point of creating these vast roads for just that time? I’m not a business man but I'm pretty sure that not a wise way to spend money...

Part of any economic strategy is forecasting the future and forecasts for reduced traffic volume is unwarranted thus the need for wider arterial and collector roads but as I mentioned in a previous post, residential neighbourhoods require narrower grid pattern roads that are not currently accepted in practice by developers and planners but are sought after by municipal engineering authorities for these are ideal for servicing and help create a true sense of "community".
Your lack of business sense at such a young stage of your career is understandable and is an issue that in part should be addressed at your educational institution. You can only make meaningful decisions about planning a community with an emphasis on the quality of life which is most directly related to economic well-being. Please again refer to my reference to the article in the London Free Press published yesterday, Sat. Jan. 10 concerning London's alarmingly poor economic perforrmance relative to peer cities across the country. London ranks 21st out of 24 cities which in any professor's grade sheet is an F-.

London's growth, or lack thereof, is affected by, as you mentioned, to it's proximity to larger urban centres. Toyota needs to be near suppliers in the Kitchener-Waterloo region and thus choosing Woodstock makes sense for their new assembly plant but the confluence of the 403 and 401 at Woodstock also had a bearing on Toyota's decision. If London is ever to "catch up" in terms of growth with the norm across the country, London needs to go beyond servicing the community in an ordinary fashion and must do the extraordinary to get noticed since it is inherently at a disadvantage simply by its distant location from high-growth areas.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

I'm not sure if you just skimmed through my post but i did mention that our Arterial roads are only EXTREMELY busy for about 40 mins day... 20 in the morning 20 mins in the late afternoon.. what the point of creating these vast roads for just that time? I’m not a business man but I'm pretty sure that not a wise way to spend money...

Not all of them. Have you ever been on some of the two-lane roads in London? Wonderland between Gainsborough and Fanshawe Park Road is congested at ALL times of day. Oxford between Hyde Park and Sanitorium is congested at ALL times of day. Commissioners between Wonderland and Viscount, as well as Hyde Park between Oxford and Fanshawe Park, same deal.

I feel the economic and pollution reduction benefits of a good transportation network far outweigh the costs. That does include public transit, but no matter how big a public transit system there is there will always be tons of road traffic. And, once we move to non-polluting energy sources, we will still need wide roads to carry traffic.

[JrUrbanDesigner]

Originally Posted by tolosulode

residential neighbourhoods require narrower grid pattern roads that are not currently accepted in practice by developers and planners but are sought after by municipal engineering authorities for these are ideal for servicing and help create a true sense of "community".

By stating this you are horribly mistaken, it is infact the planners NOT in any way shape or form the engineers that seek narrower grid patterns...
Where did you hear this? and in what city is this happening? Because I can tell you for a fact it is not happening at our City Hall, and as a matter of fact its Engineers that are the problem in most municipalities- they just don’t see the street as anything more that carrying capacity. They rather not do grid street because they don’t like multiple accesses on arterial roads, they don’t even like window streets..

Tolosulode- just out of curiosity what's your career background?
And I think that we will just have to agree to disagree because this could go on for a long time.. I do suggest that you and everyone here go out to one of the Sean Galloway's (Our City's Urban Designer) presentations, maybe to understand better what urban design really is all about and how were using it to make London a better place to live.

[tolosulode]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

By stating this you are horribly mistaken, it is infact the planners NOT in any way shape or form the engineers that seek narrower grid patterns...
Where did you hear this? and in what city is this happening? Because I can tell you for a fact it is not happening at our City Hall, and as a matter of fact its Engineers that are the problem in most municipalities- they just don’t see the street as anything more that carrying capacity. They rather not do grid street because they don’t like multiple accesses on arterial roads, they don’t even like window streets..

Tolosulode- just out of curiosity what's your career background?
And I think that we will just have to agree to disagree because this could go on for a long time.. I do suggest that you and everyone here go out to one of the Sean Galloway's (Our City's Urban Designer) presentations, maybe to understand better what urban design really is all about and how were using it to make London a better place to live.

Modern subdivision design by municipal engineers is succinctly described in this text book preview "Residential Land Development Practices By David E. Johnson" found here: http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&i...result#PPP1,M1
This text is published by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Please find that in the index is a reference on page 55 to "connectivity" but not yet available for preview. This has to do with the concept of making the city "walkable".
On pages 75 and 87 are references to the benefits of narrower roadways.

The concepts and practices you are advocating in urban planning are not only used by municipal engineers but are also supported by them. Of course, as in all disciplines, there is variability in practices from region to region and perhaps that has been your personal experience but overall, the municipal engineering profession applies technology with a social conscience in order to make urban life safe and economically viable.

On a specific note, multiple access points on arterial and collector roads is an issue with traffic flow (i.e. in its disruption / degradation) and safety and this is best addressed through controlled access (i.e. blind ends). For an example in London, even though not necessarily a pure grid pattern, see the subdivision south of Oxford Street, between Juniper and Laurel Streets (Oakridge ?) and notice how the access to Oxford Street is controlled to allow for the efficient flow of traffic on that artery. Imagine all the roads in this area connected directly to Oxford Street and the chaos in traffic flow that may result from that.

If you have not figured out my profession, then I would suggest not playing the game "What's My Line".

I am sure Sean has become a very capable and innovative planner and some day I will attend one of his lectures.

[JrUrbanDesigner]

I’m not here to fight about the issue of London’s roads, that’s not the reason I joined.. I simply want to be part of the planning/design discussions’ that go on in this forum as this topic is of interest to me..

Urban Planners/Designer will forever disagree with Engineers and vise-versa for some reason we just can't get along..

One thing is for sure we see streets in totally different ways
Urban Planners/Designers view of a street is - A streetscape created not only for the car but also for the pedestrian, the cyclist, and public transit, with built form to its lot lines, with wide sidewalks, with trees and landscaping in the boulevards, on-street parking, ect..

We classify streets as Mainstreets, Grand Boulevards, Avenues, Parkways, and Local Streets
Check out
http://www.calthorpe.com/clippings/UrbanNet1216.pdf

An Engineers view of a street is- What capacity do we want it= how many lanes it will be = how many access points we will allow
no real care about what they will look like...

Engineers classify streets as Arterial, primary/secondary collector, local-

[tolosulode]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

I’m not here to fight about the issue of London’s roads, that’s not the reason I joined.. I simply want to be part of the planning/design discussions’ that go on in this forum as this topic is of interest to me..

Urban Planners/Designer will forever disagree with Engineers and vise-versa for some reason we just can't get along..

One thing is for sure we see streets in totally different ways
Urban Planners/Designers view of a street is - A streetscape created not only for the car but also for the pedestrian, the cyclist, and public transit, with built form to its lot lines, with wide sidewalks, with trees and landscaping in the boulevards, on-street parking, ect..

We classify streets as Mainstreets, Grand Boulevards, Avenues, Parkways, and Local Streets
Check out
http://www.calthorpe.com/clippings/UrbanNet1216.pdf

An Engineers view of a street is- What capacity do we want it= how many lanes it will be = how many access points we will allow
no real care about what they will look like...

Engineers classify streets as Arterial, primary/secondary collector, local-

All of this brings me back to original point of questioning your professors. Your experience is, without prejudice nor malice, too limited at this stage of your career (considering that you are still in school) for you to have any meaningful working relationship with any municipal engineering department or consulting engineering company. To whitewash municipal engineers with such a broad brush surely does not come from your personal experiences for these must be few at this stage in your life. This attitude has undoubtedly been given to you by your planning professors and thus the notion of brainwashing is undeniably true. Time spent in the field (and I mean time as in several decades, not months) will enlighten you. Your professors are far off base and it is highly unethical for them to disparage any other profession in such a manner. An engineers code of ethical and professional conduct does not allow for such behaviour and I know that the same applies to professional planners. Shame on them.

[JrUrbanDesigner]

Shame on YOU for shaming people you have never met!
And as i said before STOP ASSUMING things.. this seems to be bad quality of yours.. My professors have not ever said anything bad about engineers, infact untill my past few work terms have I come to realize this myself, and with talking to other Urban Planners/Designers (who by the way have at least few dacades of experience) from other Ontario Municipalities I know its very hard to get Municipal Engineers to change.. Im not saying that those who work for consultant firm are the same, because I have no experience with them.

[LondnPlanr]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

Shame on YOU for shaming people you have never met!
And as i said before STOP ASSUMING things.. this seems to be bad quality of yours.. My professors have not ever said anything bad about engineers, infact untill my work past few work terms have I come to realize this myself, and with talking to other Urban Planners/Designers (who by the way have at least few dacades of experience) from other Ontario Municipalities I know its very hard to get Municipal Engineers to change.. Im not saying that those who work for consultant firm are the same, because I have no experience with them.

Welcome to the forum.

First, take off your 'Galloway' hat, and listen to what others in this forum are telling you. I understand what all of your ideas are, and your passion is terrific, but working in the field is a whole new ball game.

Work for a private developer first, and then walk into a meeting and try to convince them that building a rear lane is a good idea, or that eliminating cul-de-sacs is a good idea. You will get laughed out of the room; trust me on that one.

It's not about diving head first into all of Mr. Galloway's ideas. In London in particular, it is going to be about creating a 'new' London one step at a time. Not one developer, and I know this for fact, is going to step up to the plate and create London's 'first' New Urbanist community from scratch. It's going to take baby-steps for any of that to happen, and I regret to inform you that even the baby-steps haven't been taken yet. Yes, there are a few places in town that boast window streets, but that's about it... seriously.

And in regards to your discussion regarding the size of local roads, ie. narrow streets, etc., I know that the struggle in London lies completely at the feet of City Hall engineers. I also know for a fact that the standard of 20m for a local road has only recently been allowed to be taken back to, *gasp*, 18.5m in some areas. Remember, ROW's are not just for pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles; they are for underground services, as well. I don't have enough time to get into the nuts and bolts of it, but let me tell you, getting a road standard reduced in London takes a lot longer than you think.

Sorry for the scratch-ad-hoc-iness of this post, but I'm at work, and just had to respond to this stirring debate/argument.

[Blitz]

Work for a private developer first, and then walk into a meeting and try to convince them that building a rear lane is a good idea, or that eliminating cul-de-sacs is a good idea. You will get laughed out of the room; trust me on that one.

Why are cul-de-sacs so common in London? There is a massive new subdivision currently under construction in Windsor that conforms to that city's grid system (almost the whole city is a grid and Windsor has little traffic congestion). It's not new urbanism, it's simply building roads on a grid. If this is done elsewhere, why not in London?

I've lived in both cities for several years each and London has horrible traffic congestion for its size that probably has something to do with the way new subdivisions are built. It seems like when you only have a few main roads then those roads will obviously become clogged whereas a grid system spreads the traffic out a bit more.

[oxpark]

Ah yes, to be young and idealistic - I remember those days. I also remember starting my planning career and realizing that if I was to keep those ideals and positions, I'd no longer have a job, at least not in private practice with a consulting firm or land development company. To a certain degree, you can get away with a significant amount of business naivete working in a municipal environment, as many of the planners and engineers at 300 Dufferin do.

To JrUrbanDesigner, try to start your career in a municipal environment to get a good grasp of the planning approvals/political process and then get into private practice. If you don't want to develop a broad knowledge base, just stay with the municipality. I actually agree with many of your comments (most of which are true in theory) but if you think you can significantly change how developers operate in London, you will be disappointed.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Blitz

I've lived in both cities for several years each and London has horrible traffic congestion for its size that probably has something to do with the way new subdivisions are built. It seems like when you only have a few main roads then those roads will obviously become clogged whereas a grid system spreads the traffic out a bit more.

The one advantage of building subdivisions the way London developers have over the past 50 years is less traffic cutting through the subdivisions, making streets safer for pedestrians and neighbourhoods quieter for those who live there. You don't see people cutting through Oakridge Acres en masse, because it is quite literally a maze to get from Oxford to Riverside through that area.

Now, JrUrbanDesigner, I may not agree with your ideals, but don't be discouraged by the long-established attitudes of developers. It is visionaries like yourself who are the long-term catalysts for positive change. Perhaps we won't know if those changes will benefit London until they are tried in new areas. Have you seen the plans for the new neighbourhood around Commissioners and Hamilton Roads? It is quite different from what has traditionally been built in London, with greater integration of natural features and living spaces, and it was designed to make local commercial establishments much easier to walk to than most areas where you have to drive several kilometres to get to a grocery store. It even includes the city's first roundabout at a major intersection, at Commissioners and Hamilton. I was at the planning committee meeting this was presented at in late 2007, and Josh Hurwitz was there supporting it.

[LondnPlanr]

Originally Posted by Blitz

Why are cul-de-sacs so common in London?

Two words: Premium Lots.

$$$$$

That's it.

[MolsonExport]

For Gawd's sake, London has only 2 complete East-West and North-South roads:

East-West: Fanshawe Park Road and Oxford
North-South: Wonderland and Highbury.

That's it. Everything else does not go through all the way.

[QuantumLeap]

Well folks, its nice to have such a vibrant discussion going - though its getting mighty hard to follow! Welcome, Junior, you have gotten yourself in quite a mess!

I have moved to Toronto at least temporarily, but I'm still following the forum. That said, I won't be moving back to London until the Galloways, Flemings and Bryants of London are taken seriously. These are people who understand the potential for new development to have architectural merit, quality relationships with public space, and environmental credentials. This is where all the big, important places in the world are moving to. Yes, London has some serious challenges, though it offers some major opportunities. For example, I think we are tremendously lucky NOT to have an expressway through the middle of the city - have you ever seen the blight along these roads in most American cities!?. As for the challenges, there is the Fact of the city as it now is- its density, road layouts, architectural styles. Development in the future will have to respect that framework, and work within it. We have to maintain what we have, until an opportunity presents itself for workable change. But that doesn't mean that how we build now can't be a radical departure from the sprawl etc that we have now. What I object to London these days is not what it is- it can't help that- but the persistent resistance to changing where its going. I am disappointed to see that some forummers are defending the bleak future of magnifying the mistakes of the past, but very glad to see that some of you are advocating bold new routes.

[JrUrbanDesigner]

Originally Posted by QuantumLeap

Well folks, its nice to have such a vibrant discussion going - though its getting mighty hard to follow! Welcome, Junior, you have gotten yourself in quite a mess!

I guess my mess did create a pretty good discussion!

Thank you to those who have said kind words and support what I believe in. Like I said before I finally decided to be part of this forum and not just sit on the side lines, but I'm definitely not here to make enemies! Quite the opposite actually, I think the composition of this group is great and maybe there’s someway for us to get together and form a formal group to be able to be a unified voice on certain planning/urban design issues, together we may make a bigger impact then if we fight on our own!

And for the record I think that arterials should have 2 lanes of traffic each way, Manny all the road sections you named like:

Wonderland between Gainsborough and Fanshawe Park Road
Oxford between Hyde Park and Sanitorium
Commissioners between Wonderland and Viscount
Hyde Park between Oxford and Fanshawe Park

Should be widened by one lane each way, but I don’t think we should go forward and add a third lane of traffic going each way!

I think London has some great potential and think it could become a great city it just needs some help, some innovative thinkers and people who follow through with ideas. Mr. Galloway and Mr. Fleming (among others in the planning department) are great individuals who have great ideas and ways to implement them. But you have to remember they are only city staff and its the community (that’s us ) who need to show support for these ideas in order for councillors to see that they are important and that these innovative planning practices are what Londoners want, to be able to make a better London for EVERYONE!!!


Here’s some news that I don’t think I read on this forum yet (unless I missed it )

Southside Group is going ahead with phase 2, of what I think has to be one the worst big box developments in London(from a design point of view), on the Southwest side of Wonderland and Southdale .. It looks like there are plans for one building set back as far as the HomeDepot with several planned stores such as Winners, Homesense, Dollarama, Jysk among others
Its unfortunate that we continue to create these giant big box centers with hundreds of parking space fronting the street making it a nightmare for any pedestrians!


By the way i have added some pictures of the on-going progress at Westmout mall on my blog

[waterloowarrior]

good discussion.... JrUrbanDesigner, I am at a similar position (still doing school with 1 year of work experience so far) and having a work term in the private sector was a great benefit. I found that I learned much more during my private sector work term than the public ones.

On another note, stormwater management is something that needs to be better emphasized better in school

here's an interesting 'manual for streets' from the UK...
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/manforstreets/

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

I guess my mess did create a pretty good discussion!

By the way i have added some pictures of the on-going progress at Westmout mall on my blog

oooooh, another local blog...

I haven't been down towards Westmount in some time so it's nice to see some photos of the progress. I totally agree about the transit terminal - I like the one at Masonville, aside from the lack of a sheltered walkway and long walk through the parking lot. It's possible it could be a temporary solution, since the City did have some long-term plan involving BRT and terminals, so something else might be done with the Westmount Mall area as far as that goes.

Glad to hear that piece of garbage at Wellington and Horton is sold - I hope it gets torn down, and I hope whoever bought it didn't pay much more than the cost of the land. I would much rather have seen that go up in flames than the Wick.

[LondnPlanr]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Glad to hear that piece of garbage at Wellington and Horton is sold - I hope it gets torn down, and I hope whoever bought it didn't pay much more than the cost of the land. I would much rather have seen that go up in flames than the Wick.

The neighbouring Salvation Army Centre of Hope purchased the 'offensive' property at the corner of Wellington and Horton.

Be careful what you wish for, however, as these buildings will be torn down and used as *gasp* surface parking... for now.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by JrUrbanDesigner

By the way i have added some pictures of the on-going progress at Westmout mall on my blog

I enjoyed reading your blog.