What Kind of Manhattan Are We Creating in Toronto?

Last week, I commented on the Manhattanization of Toronto that was announced by Councillor Joe Mihevc at the last Council meeting at the end of August. http://tinyurl.com/qxkwba7 I raised concerns about the massive growth in Toronto without coming to grips with the need for new infrastructure, additional transit and roads to handle the significant growth not only downtown, but throughout the city.

John Bentley Mays of the Globe & Mail in his weekly Friday column on Sept. 5, 2014, "The Perfect House", rightly concluded that if Manhattanization meant significant population growth via the construction of high-rise construction towers at every corner, Toronto is already there.  http://tinyurl.com/o4xd98g

However, he took issue with whether or not 20 years from now it will be a very different city as Councillor Mihevc suggested or whether it will be more of the same. 

Mays raises a good point that much of the new developments are functional and well-built, but lack creative artistic design and a broader visual street appeal.  When looked at on a collectively basis on any particular street or community, many of the buildings which have been separately designed and built lack an integrated feel and a vision that would make the communities with these new towers enjoyable to walk through and live in. 

But the developers can't be blamed for this lack of creativity.  Creativity is something which is frowned up at the city.  The municipal urban design group is generally supportive of new ideas and better streetscapes which allow air and light and architectural design.  To achieve these goals on a commercial basis requires increased height which then runs into a brick wall at the Planning Department.  The Planning Department seems to be fixated on height without any broader view as to design and how things actually function at the lower level.  Big massive podiums are not very street friendly but achieve density with less height.

Take the Aqua condominium complex in Chicago near the waterfront.  It is a huge project with a number of buildings, yet they are all set back from each other, with light flowing through them.  The fact that they are 60 or 80 storeys is less material than the fact that there is space at the bottom with light and air and pedestrian traffic flow.  This is something that local planners either can't or won't address. 

Part of the reason for blinkered approach that the Planning Department in Toronto takes, is because councillors seem to feel that they are the ultimate planning, architectural and design pundits for any project.  They have the Planning Department running gun shy of disagreeing with anything that a local councillor wants. 

There is no broad, forward thinking view in this city, only local parochial interests, which will create more of the same as John Bentley Mays suggests in his article unless there is a drastic change at City Hall.  Jennifer Keesmaat talks a wonderful talk but at the end of the day, her planners very rarely can see beyond height, and existing developments.  There has to be more weight given to the urban design people and more thought given to looking at multiple developments in the same area to see how they integrate with each other and insisting that the ultimate design works from the streetscape to pedestrian friendly usage, etc.  Until that happens, "Toronto will almost certainly be what it is today, only more so, and certainly not a "very different" kind of place".