Special series and town hall “Transporting a City”

CBC Windsor is exploring how people get from one place to the next in a special series and town hall “Transporting a City”, which launched today.

The three part series will explore the effectiveness of the city’s public transit system; examine the current and future state of bike paths; and ask whether a city whose economic roots are closely tied to the automobile sector will ever give up their vehicles.

On Wednesday, Early Shift host Tony Doucette will join CBC News Windsor host Susan Pedler to moderate a special town hall, where panelists will debate where the city should be investing its transportation dollars. Panelists include:

Kari Gignac - Chair of the Windsor Bicycling Committee and Bike Friendly Windsor Board member. She writes extensively about cycling in Windsor and Essex County.
 
Pat Delmore - Director of Operations for Transit Windsor.  He has recently presented a blueprint for future improvements to the bus system.
 
Andre Capaldi - President of the University of Windsor’s Student Alliance and a proponent of the bus U-passes proposed for inclusion in student tuition fees.

Ed Bernard - Chair of the Research and Development committee/Canadian Association of Mold Makers, with decades of experience in the tool, mold and auto industries.
 
“On the eve of the University of Windsor’s referendum about student bus passes, CBC Windsor wants to encourage discussion around the broader issue of whether the city’s current transportation policies work for everyone, including students” says CBC Executive Producer of News, Rob Miller. “Should Windsor be looking at encouraging people to park their vehicles, and get onto buses or bicycles, or should more money go toward road improvements?

“We want the people of Windsor to tell us how we should be transporting a city,” Miller said.

The public is invited to the town hall, Wednesday, March 7 at the Capitol Theatre. Doors open at 6:30, and the town hall begins at 7:00 pm. There is no admission charge. The town hall will be recorded for broadcast on CBC Radio One, CBC News at 6 and 10:55 pm and on cbc.ca/Windsor.

CBC Radio One is heard on 97.5 FM in Windsor; CBC Television is seen on Channel 9/Cogeco Channel 10; and online at cbc.ca/Windsor.

I saw this release from the Chimczuk directors which I posted about previously here

“Chimczuk Directors Reject Lord Proposal”

What is most disturbing is the reason given

“Since there is no recommendation that any building be built, we cannot see any justification for using the Chimczuk funds in this endeavour, and would certainly not allow for the name “Chimczuk Museum” to be used under this guise.”

Chimczuk’s will according to this post said

“Build a Building to be known as the Chimczuk Museum, for use as a Cultural Museum and Archives and Library.”

“Build a Building” may seem straight forward to this self appointed arbitrar of the name, however, it is pretty much known that a stand alone building with a single use not only could not be built for 3 million, it would be revenue and cost prohibitive as a marketing draw and operations wise respectively.

So now this unelected, board accountable to no one, is implying that existing buildings cannot be used to house a museum. That additions to buildings may not fit, that regardless of the information known now about clustering attractions as a marketing draw, they will decide. I may be right or wrong but the point is that they may be as well and its the bias I am concerned about

There is bias of this unelected, unaccountable board, which I believe are anonymous as I’ve only seen Dr. Wonham’s name published. The fact that they only publish their press on a bloggy newsy thingy that belittles and demeans the mayor and council in absolute terms, has me infer that it is the political leaders that are affecting the boards decision and not the proposals itself. I Remember that it was this same bloggy/newsy/thingy website that constantly talks about perception of conflict being as important as the conflict tself when discussing relationships the mayor has. If Dr Wonham’s red bat phone leads only to a square cave then it speaks volumes of the prism he looks through when hes views any proposals.

The Chimczuk money was left to the city of Windsor and I would rather see its use determined by the elected leaders who have to answer to the public every 4 years. Who knows what the future will bring when determining how a museum or archives is built, to be restricted to the conditions decades ago would be ridiculous.

For some reason, our fair city seems to believe that we’re special.  That the lessons learned on other cities for some reason do not apply to us.

The people behind Strong Towns have written extensively about how our current patterns of growth are akin to a Ponzi Scheme.

Other municipalities have chosen to address this issue, paving the way to planning reform and the way cities build and finance their infrastructure.

Yet, here in Windsor, we ignore the fact that we cannot afford our current infrastructure inventory (when’s the last time YOUR pot-hole ridden road was resurfaced, or YOUR basement has flooded?!?).  We seem to still be under the illusion that, if we can only build more subdivisions and widen more roads, somehow our property tax base will grow to the point of sustaining itself.  What’s that definition of insanity, again?

I bring this up because of the article in todays Windsor Star on the Windsor South Sandwich DRAFT Secondary Plan.  Using pleasing vernacular like “Walkable Neighbourhoods” and referencing established communities like the Walkerville neighbourhood, the city is trying to make this new development appear to be something different, better than what we’re used to.

Yet, despite this wonderful new growth being planned, our current citizens are constantly under pressure to reduce their civic spending to compensate for this unsustainable growth.  We are privatizing core services, costing local jobs.  We’re having our local amenities consolidated in far-flung “big-box” municipal-service zones.  We are doing this because we cannot afford what we have, yet we are under the illusion that we can still build our way out of our economic doldrums.

The fact still remains that our current growth patterns are unsustainable.  Current patterns of development costs more to maintain over the long run than it produces in revenue.  We are continuing to dig deeper, despite the organizations out there sounding the alarm.

This is a deep-seated structural flaw in our civic mindset.  It’s time our municipal leadership started to question the Ponzi mentality governing Windsor.  I urge you to pass along Strong Town’s research to your ward councillor.  They need to hear this loud and clear.

Or a stop, many of my colleagues would say.

It’s hard to argue that point.  Lately, much of my attention has been diverted to a new venture.  Still in the vein of Scaledown, though more localized to my immediate neighbourhood.

I am far from abandoning the mission and vision established over the course of 4+ years ScaleDown has been active.  That would be like abandoning the sound of my voice.  I will stand by everything we’ve espoused to date and argue that the contributors to this site have been ahead of Windsor’s curve when it comes to addressing our built environment and it’s effect on our quality of life.

However, I am narrowing the focus a bit from here on out when it comes to expending my energy.  As many of you may know, I live in beautiful Olde Walkerville.  A neighbourhood I’ve held in high regards for many of my postings as an example of all the good things that are possible when it comes to urban design. 

Unfortunately, I have been reminded quite a few times that simply because a neighbourhood has withstood the trials of many other communities, we are still vulnerable to the pressures of “growth” and “progress” that plague our culture.  When we lost the Seagraves building and then the old Bank of Montreal building at Ottawa/Walker, and the insensitive infill development on our residential streets, we scrambled to get the word out about the precarious nature of our architectural heritage and how it defines our ‘hood.  We were constantly on the defensive, which put us in a weak position.

Hence the establishment of the Olde Walkerville Residents Association.  From our press release:

Residents in the Olde Walkerville are determined to preserve the neighbourhood’s unique “character” and bring together residents through a variety of social events.

The Olde Walkerville Resident’s Association (OWRA) was created to “promote, support, facilitate, coordinate, or undertake activities that will enhance the well-being and character of the Olde Walkerville community.”

Chris Holt, Mita Williams, Adriano Ciotoli, Greg Cooper, Chris Schnurr and Chris Edwards have been meeting laying the ground work for the association and planning the launch party.

“We need more opportunities to get to know our neighbours,” said Mita Williams, “I’m hoping the Olde Walkerville Resident’s Association can bring us together to do just that.”

In addition to social events to build a stronger community, the group has their eye on preserving Walkerville’s significant history and architecture.

“Walkerville has been cited as an example of good neighbourhood planning, so we as a neighbourhood and as a community want to preserve and enhance this as well as our culturally and historically significant buildings, architecture, green space and trails,”  stated Holt.

Our stated goals are:

• providing a forum for dialogue on neighbourhood matters;
• maintaining the character of Olde Walkerville based on its unique history;
• preserve and/or enhance culturally and historically significant buildings, architecture and spaces, green space, parks, and trails within the community;
• enhance the livability and quality of the Olde Walkerville neighbourhood;
• fostering a tight-knit community.

We really feel that we can have a positive impact in our lil’ ol’ neck o’the woods by building a stronger community and highlighting the benefits to creating vibrant, walkable urban spaces.  On a more personal level, I feel that if more neighbourhoods took a more proactive approach to “fostering a tight-knit community“, we really wouldn’t have a need for the ScaleDown blog to continue.  Once residents in Windsor decide that the power lies in their hands, they will once again enjoy beautiful communities that are serviced by local, independant retailers within walking distance from their homes.  They’ll rediscover the joys of going for evening walks and greet their neighbours out doing the same.

We’re lucky here in Walkerville in that we have most of what we value in tact.  We aim to protect and enhance our ‘hood for the enjoyment of everyone for a very, very long time.

So, as you can see, my shifting energies are well within my stated goals established way-back-when.  I look forward to this next leg of the journey.

Live in Olde Walkerville and interested in attending the OWRA Launch Party?  Come to the Gourmet Emporium (1799 Wyandotte Rd E) Wednesday evening at 7:00 and get to know more of your neighbours.  Bring $5 for a membership to the RA to help strengthen the organization.  Don’t live in the ‘hood, but want to help the residents protect this hostoric community?  Come as well and buy a $5 “Friend of the ‘Hood” membership to support their efforts.

Big-box senior storage.  This is what we’ve come to.  I’m not going to get into the details of the ramifications of our societiys decision to remove our elders from the community at large.  We’ve made so many bone-headed decisions in the name of efficiency and progress, it’s going to take generations before we realize the outcome of removing the wisdom embodied by our elders that we’ve removed from our daily life.  

I’m lucky in that my parents, in their 70’s now, are in great health and still functioning members of our community.  I’m also lucky in the fact that they choose to live in the city.  You see, my kids have regular access and exposure to their grandparents.  Just two blocks from my home is where they pick up the Crosstown 2 bus, which plops them down right smack-dab in front of where their grandparents live.  Without needing to defer to my schedule, they have the option of visiting them at their leisure, the power of which they exercised dozens of times this summer alone.  All three generations are better off for this ability.

Which is why Schlegel VIllages Inc’s recent decision to move the senior care facility from the former Grace Hospital site to neighboring LaSalle is sad.  Not just for the neighbours of the Grace site, who have been dealing with an attrocious mess of inaction and political subterfuge.  But also for the future residents of this facility destined to be warehoused together, removed from their communities and accessability to area hospitals, virtually cut off from their former lives by the inaccessibility of their new homes.  Sure, Schlegel says (as interviewed on CBC radio) that the facility is accessible to all of Windsor, presumably because he could drive there from the city in 15 minutes.  He should have clarified by adding “by automobile” to his statement.  There is no transit service in LaSalle, a civic choice made, presumably, to keep property taxes low.  The rest of their natural lives they will be governed by the generosity of others and their access to a car and their willingness to be a taxi service.

We’ve frequently written about the difference between “Active Aging” and our current obsession with the mere storage of our aged.  This is a poor planning decision and a poor social decision we will be living with for generations.

I won’t even get into the hypocracy of a provincial government who touts “Smart Growth” and then funds this kind of auto-centric sprawl.

One thing that struck me in our conversation is I really believe he has benevolent intentions. When I made my case several times about why I thought holding the name was wrong, it was like he wasn’t arguing with me, he simply could not see what I was saying. It was like his good intentions were simply blinding him to how others could see it.

Sorry but I wanted to give him a taste of what is to come. If this post bothered him. Think of what the WIndsor Star and Mayor and council will do if he tries to thwart any plan they endorse. they’re gonna label him public enemy number 1 and like my father used to say, never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel

Just like he anointed himself keeper of Chimczuk donations, I am anointing myself the guy in charge of giving him a wake up call. Others who jump to his defence because hes a good guy aren’t doing him any favours, they’re simply endangering him to future abuse he may face.

Just like his reason for the trademark, better him than someone worse. Well better he hear this from me (whats my readership, like 6?) than someone else with a readership of tens of thousands

I wish you well Dr Wonham,

Although I told him I deleted them and would keep them off permanently. He thought that was insufficient and I should retract them and explain why I retracted them.  I warned him that although I would retract the words as mischaracterizations of what he did, My retraction would have to include an explanation and replacement characterization that I felt he would dislike equally. He insisted I continue and so here it is:

It seems the city did not protect the name Chimzcuk based on legal advice that the name could not be trademarked in the future. It seems now that this legal advice was bad as the name was trademarked by the “Chimczuk Museum inc”.

I do not question David Wonham’s right to do what he did, I do not question the benevolent intent that he maintains he has for doing what he did. I do not question that he did what he did with warning and transparantly. I probably shouldn’t use the words stolen or hijacking to characterize his actions.

However, what is the proper characterization and description of what he did? Who died and made him sole arbiter of how the Chimczuk money gets spent. Mr. Chimczuk died but did not leave David Wonham in charge.

David Wonham says he did this to protect the money. He has appointed himself benevolent dictator over money that belongs to the city of Windsor. Moneys belonging to Windsorites.

Problem is that I didn’t elect David Wonham, last I heard, few even voted for him. What happens if he has a change of heart? What happens if he gets hit by a bus or struck by lightning? Is the money still safe? Maybe so maybe not. Maybe the name gets auctioned off to the highest bidder, maybe it falls into disreputable hands.

David Wonham may have good intentions, I hear that the road to hell is paved with them. He says he’s protected us from the potential of someone with far worse intentions seizing the name. The problem is that he’s not giving the name up. If he gave it to the Greater Windsor Community Foundation, I’d be a bit more trusting. It doesn’t help that he made himself a political figure by running for mayor. Makes you question if anything the mayor he lost to by so much would have any proposal  be subject to biase.

But why should the mayor or anyone in the city submit anything to this self appointed/anointed Chimczuk expert?

Personally, I’d object to even having to submit anything to David Wonham. I’d rather see the money sit there and rot before I legitimized him having any say over it. Why such a hard stand? If I died and some strange unelected person tries to anoint themselves arbiter over moneys I gave the public I’d be turning in my grave

What made him worthy of having the right to do this? The exact same skills held by a cybersquatter or in the example he used with me “they guy in russia who sat on starbucks name”

I find his action to take the name defensible, I find his actions to hold on to this name that should belong to the city despicable. I find him an opportunist, rationalizing his actions in the name of “the city did wrong first”, file that one in the two wrongs don’t make a right.

A warning to those who want to donate to the city in their will. Watch your name, watch the wording of your will. I’m sure there’s a David Wonham out there waiting to seize control over your good name as well.

I assume that takes care of covering the retraction and apology for the use of the term stolen or hijacking. I’m open to any other comments that describe better what was done to the name Chimczuk by David Wonham

This practise is nothing new.  An older home in an established neighbourhood becomes a candidate for replacement.  Demolition permits are secured and contractors hired.  Immense amounts of time and money are invested in building the new home, only to have the replacement actually harm the community.

The older pre-WWII neighbourhoods that have survived in Windsor have qualities that make them desireable.  Built close to the sidewalk, buffered by the semi-private space where neighbours congregate and built a sense of community (the once-ubiquitous front porch/veranda): these strengths are slowly going the way of the dodo bird.  As the Congress for the New Urbanism has rediscovered, this building form is essential to the connections that make residents love their city.  The ties that have been broken by the raised-ranch home in the suburbs, separated from the commons by the monstrous two-car garage poking its nose out front, are essential in reclaiming the walkable urbanism that scholars believe is our future.

So, how do stop this from happening in our neighbourhoods?  Many communities have implemented Urban Design Guidelines that would force developers to adhere to the elements that are deemed important to the neighbourhood.

We need to investigate this layer of the approval process to strengthen our sense of place in Windsor.

The Windsor Star first touted that CS&P had experience in Windsor designing the Windsor Police Headquarters and the Ontario Court building.

That shouldn’t have helped them get the job, that should have seen them banished from our city.

Not a religious guy but I will be saying some prayers tonight that something else is going on.

You see, Years ago I championed for the DWBIA to partner with planning to bring a panel of experts to come to Windsor to fix our downtown. They brought the president, from Washington DC, and Downtown experts in various fields, a border and entertainment expert from Niagara Falls, An expert from Kalamazoo that had won the most improved Downtown in America award after an economic disaster losing their main employer Pfizer and an retail marketing and urban planning expert from Toronto.

I was fortunate enough to accompany these people on a walkabout of Downtown Windsor when we stopped in front of the CS&P headquarters. I can’t remember which expert said what but they all agreed that Windsor stood out from other downtowns across north America for its uniquely UGLY architecture and unattractive buildings. I asked to give me an example and the Windsor Police Headquarters was chosen as one of the worst downtown buildings they had ever seen in North America.

I wish I had been recording so that I could share the lengthy diatribe of how that building represented all that was wrong with Windsor. Everything from the surrounding one way streets, to the lack of integration of the main floor with the street. How that building would damn the surrounding area from ever being developed. How it and the adjacent casino garage were one of the main reasons Windsor’s downtown was unwalkable, This area was forever condemned to desolation and it hurt everything from city hall square to charles clark square to the riverfront. It stopped the rest of downtown from benefitting from the Casino.

All under the excuse and guise of “Well, we just gave them what they asked for”

I’m not even scratching the surface of the problems of the cold and sterile nature of the building’s facade, Just think of comparing it to the warm and inviting facade of the Norwich block we destroyed.

I will spare you any more criticism but I was forever scarred by what I had to hear about my beloved downtown. Today I felt like a war vet getting flashbacks of that day where I felt humiliated as a windsorite in front of those I respected so much. It wasn’t them, they were simply telling me that more people in our city needed to hear what they were saying and educate themselves. I may be getting some of the details of what they said incorrect but you have to trust me, unless CS&P has changed, this company has been a menace to our city. And you can’t say that they didn’t know better at the time. At the time our police headquarters was built, the information was out there.

On a positive note, With what I learned, I went on to successfully petition council to follow their own design guidelines when building the transit terminal which originally designed to look like something that came out of East Germany, a soul less windowless bunker of a building. Thats why the thing went over budget and although it cost taxpayers including myself, I know in my heart I helped save us from another death blow to another area. (Yeah, I’m taking credit as the only speaker asking council to go against admin recommendation and having my request added as an ammendment)

Oh, Please, Oh Please I can only hope that we are not doomed to repeat our history since some important people don’t seem to know what our history with CS&P is.

Oh and as a pretty darn important P.S. CS&P also doesn’t have the tender’s mandatory preservation experience as well and they’re already talking about not being able to preserve parts.

These guys forever murdered a part of the city creating a pedestrian unfriendly barrier between our downtown and our casino/convention center/arena. They are a big part of downtown not being able to leverage that tremendous asset.