@AlexBozikovic has a piece on retiring Chief planner Gregg Lintern and the type of person he imagines the City needs as a successor.
They should help Toronto take advantage of its tremendous assets: good civic bones, great wealth and an endless stream of new arrivals who – for the moment – want to live there
www.theglobeandmail.com
He gives Gregg some of the credit he deserves, but misses key items, including the significant relaxation of the Angular plane and while mentioning the need for as-of-right apartment buildings he omits that that work is substantially complete and was initiated under Gregg as well; and that it will come back to Council for approval in 2024.
In point of fact, Planning's proposal for 6 storeys as-of-right on main streets went further than many anticipated, and the only real shortcoming was the 30 unit limit, which was selected, at the time, because it coincided with the requirement for a Type G loading space.
Subsequently, that loading space requirement was shifted to 60 units and that should bump this proposed change accordingly.
Frankly, I don't agree w/unit cap here, I understand the problems Type G loading spaces would cause if you ended up w/curb cuts up and down the street, it would be a terrible pedestrian experience; but I think the rule should then be amended to consider whether the loading could be provided via a laneway or sidestreet, existing or new.
The final form of the new change will not be approved on Gregg's watch, but will likely be written, so we'll have to see what comes out the other end.
****
On a potential successor in general, I certainly support the general idea of someone with a clear vision, and one that I could get behind. I don't recall Maurice Cox who Alex mentions having produced such a vision. (nor has anyone else I'm aware of who might be considered); frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing that be part of the process for a replacement.
Invite a large pool of candidates, to apply in a first round, and weed them down to a top 5 or so; then give them design competition type money, say $200,000 each, and 90 days, to articulate and render key projects and ideas they have for Toronto. Then let the public weigh in a on whose vision they are compelled by. I would still let the City decide who to hire; but I think a Mayor and Council would be pressured by a clear public favourite who would have their own mandate.
I'm not necessarily sold on Maurice Cox, his tenures in Detroit and Chicago were relatively short, his delivery of concrete change, fairly limited.
I agree with much of what he advocates for, in theory, but I'm not entirely sold on his ability to deliver. He's also 64 years old; while I oppose ageism, that would hardly be the mark of generational change. I'd still throw in the mix though for my competition idea.
I'd like to see several department heads decided this way; I think it would make clear what the public can get behind and who can lead the City in the right direction.
Vision is part of the game, but ability to communicate/sell it and get buy-in is another.
globalnews.ca
