Quick Hits
Noise and the Hybrid Buses Business Case
Those requesting that a business case be made for the purchase of Hybrid buses seem to be ignoring the fact that there is a qualitative cost that can’t be quantified. The fact that the noise from hybrid buses range from 3 to 7 decibals up to as much as 50% quieter is difficult to measure in terms of benefits. In the core where homes and cafe patio’s can be less than a dozen feet from the curb this can mean a huge difference in quality of life for residents and patrons of businesses. It makes the area more pedestrian friendly and increases the quality of the experience. I’ll bet that anyone that doesn’t support purchasing hybrid buses either doesn’t live on a bus route or has a house set back very much from the curb.
Flower planters finally up on Ouellette
Take a look on Ouellette to see the results of streetscaping, after a bit of squabbling the DWBIA was finally able to install flower planters on Ouellette that it had voted to purchase in March.
Now you can see the full results of streetscaping. Those flower planters are only able to be hung where new streetscaping occurs. This goes for the decorative lights that come on at night as well. Now be the judge of what streetscape can do. I’ll try to see if I can get a before after pic of streetscape on my block tomorrow
Windsor Star Editorialist Scaling down
Reading today’s Windsor Star Editorial left me wondering if my Web browser was crossing where my favorites point. I thought I might of been reading James or Chris’ Wednesday’s scaledown contribution but instead I was reading the Mainstream Paper’s editorial.
I don’t think we could have said it better at scaledown so I’ll repeat the best parts here.
Cleaning up
Focus on neighbourhoods
Windsor Star
Published: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis and council seem to care more about what strangers and tourists think about this city than you or your family do. They have earmarked significant resources to beautifying streets leading into town while leaving core neighbourhoods — those places where people live rather than drive through — blighted with weeds and garbage……………………
…………………………The issue comes down to priorities. Francis and council have earmarked about $1 million for improvements to “gateway roads” like Dougall and Howard avenues so that people breezing into town get a good first impression. While this is a worthy initiative, it should not be an either/or scenario. If anything, more resources should be devoted to making neighbourhoods more livable and inviting for taxpaying residents.
While it is important Windsor be a great place to visit, it is more important people want to live here too.
Post Feedback
I to thought I was reading the wrong newspaper today and had to go and make sure I clicked on the right link!!!!
This editorial is totally out of whack from their regular fair of praising the mayor, not linking him to any of Windsor’s problems or pointing the finger at him! The city must not have been spending a lot of Greenlink ad dollars lately!!!!
Talking to reporters at the star, they are far from the united front of blind support that critics portray them as.
Reading the star today, they have been presented a wide range of views over the past 2 years. Remember, these guys live in Windsor too, How can you blame them for a bias of trying to unify Windsorites?
The problem with the star is that by trying to support the Mayor they actually tie issues to him. That is a mistake, first rule of activisim is to separate the issue from any individual so that critics of the individual don’t automatically become critics of the mayor. Their support of the mayor actually polarizes his critics who end up opposing things for the sole reason his name is attached.
I’ve said and sent a few late night emails off the cuff that they could have used to make me look the fool, but I figure they cut me a break only cause I actually proved I walked the walk and didn’t just talk the talk.
I’m sure the minute I give up, or get tired like those before me, I will never be cut any slack for shooting off my mouth. I’m just lucky that setting an example for my 3 year old always gets me back on track when I burn out.
Mark, not many of them do live in Windsor. Neither do the reporters or show hosts on CKLW (sure some do but the majority don’t live in Windsor).
But I digress, I like the new planters! But I still think the cement plant holders are the worst possible thing to have downtown. In fact they go against what Peter Bellmio suggested to clear people after a night of drinking because those tree planters are the perfect height and width to be used as a bench. Plus the cement looks atrocious!
Speaking of plants. Interesting to see that city owned lots still don’t have their ornamental shrubs trimmed because nonoe have been trimmed in my neighbourhood since the spring. Not once! So either walk the walk or just plain shut up! That is my message to the city and thier BS about quality of life in Windsor.
So who’s decision was the stupid concrete planters? What is wrong with simple ornament tree grates? They are replaceable as the tree grows and dont get in the way and don’t look like crappy eyesores!
I thought it was the city that balked at what the DWBIA wanted but I am sure Mark could enlighten us.
I would rather have what they did in Detroit on Woodward. They have a small concrete base (about a foot high) with beautiful metal railings that surround the planter. Can’t sit on them and they allow more sunlight to hit the bottom and thus could yeild better low growing border plants (how about some nice hostas folks?). Better than the scraggely bushes and cigarett butts that are in there now.
Now that theres a Downtown Residents Association, hopefully they will have input on what happens in the core. DWBIA should no longer have the monopoly on streetscaping - it is obviously not their strong suit.
I fought the planters, I wrote letters to the editoriial stating my opposition for the same reasons you cited above. DWBIA did not want planters, past board and my boards were told the project would be halted if we did not allow the planters
Concrete planters were an appendage of the fully grown trees which were untouchable and given first and only priority. It was determined by parks that the bulbs of the trees were above the surface and if the planters were removed the top of the bulb would be exposed and the tree would die.
Fully grown trees were given first and only priority, I understand their pont of view, just didn’t agree. The new trees planted on the Dougall beautification were pretty darn big.
Its not that I didn’t want the trees, I just wante trees that required planters replaced with trees that didn’t.
There is some options to mitigate the ugliness, the past E.D. Judith Veresuk came up with a plan to see if we could get artists to mosaic tile the planters with artistic design. I thought that each planter could then become a piece of public art. So far, no ones bit
BTW, if you don’t agree with parks and rec’s assessment of the trees, you can argue till the cows come home like I did. They won’t budge.
Well maybe it’s time for the DWBIA to put their foot down? Instead of settling for ugly concrete, which replaced ugly brick, tell them to hold up the project then.
Now we’re stuck with a fugly cold cement streetscape for the next 20 years…
“Their support of the mayor actually polarizes his critics who end up opposing things for the sole reason his name is attached.”
Quite the generalized statement Mr. Boscariol.
It couldn’t possibly be that business cases are seldom presented until the last minute; or that questions go unanswered; that information is not forthcoming; contracts are shrouded in secrecy - ALL items over which the Mayor has complete and full control. Considering that the Mayor too has to be the “official” spokesperson on the border issue; or speaks in place of the “Chair” of any committees such as the WUC or Transit.
The MAYOR attaches himself to the issue and therefore politicizes them beyond belief with miscommunication or hyperbole that does not stand to scrutiny.
For myself, it’s about the politics over the substance and the doublespeak emanating from the Office of the Mayor. There are those who simply critique the critics without any idea as to what the “critics” are criticising. Don McArthur summed it up perfectly in his blog awhile back when he wrote that “politics” and the “the City of Windsor” are two separate entities.
Now I don’t speak for the other two blogs that offer a critical perspective; however, I criticize the “politics”, which then is purposefully distorted by some.
Regarding the statement that the Star is hardly the united front criticis portray them as - I could really care less about the personal feelings of reporters - and I don’t mean that to be harsh.
They have a job to do. As with anyone, you must not speak negatively of your employer if you wish to remain employed.
And really, this “critic” of the Star does not blame the reporters - the responsibility rests upon the senior editors Mr. Coleman and Mr. Beneteau.
Furthermore, your statement - “How can you blame them for a bias of trying to unify Windsorites…”
Having taken a few journalism courses, the purpose of the Star is NOT to be political - or “unification” - their product is reporting the NEWS. And if you really want to get down to it - their product is ADVERTISING as a certain CanWest owner said awhile back.
And while “changing the conversation” is admirable - how it has been contorted by the mainstream media and some other individuals - completely undermines its the basic tenements of the campaign.
The “thought” police are best reserved in books by George Orwell and not for mainstream media.
Find me a paper that doesn’t editorialize its articles. I don’t know if you’re naive or just arguing.
If the New York Times and Washington Post print Op-Eds on the front page and make them look like news, whats do you expect from the Windsor Star.
I was talking about Gord Uniting the mayor’s critics
The W.E.Can campaign has some limited success partially because its arms length distance from the mayor
The Windsor Star is goal is to sell papers so that they can sell advertising, thats it. If it critisizing the mayor sold more papers, they’d likely do it, if stirring up a false debate sells more papers, they’d likely do it.
All things being equal if cheerleading for your city did not affect sales then you’d probably choose to do some good.
You describe reporters as if they’re inhuman robots. They all have a bias, just as we all do. Just like the mayor is human, you’re human and I’m human. We all are fallible and no one person will ever “save” the city. It’ll only be saved if enough of us save it.
I never said what the purpose of the star ’should’ be, I am saying what it is in reality. I thought we were the utopianists but maybe you are even more
I believe You do what you do because you think its the best way to effect change for you personally. Same with me and likely same with the mayor and councillors and the Windsor Star.
Trust me, Like the Star if my sales fell, I’d be gone in a flash, I’m sure most of us would be if our livelihoods or families were threatened.