Comments on: Hmmm …

By: Daniel Carins

Daniel Carins — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:02:31 +0000

Damn right – I’m fed up with the ubiquitous regeneration plans that aim to translate every backwater into a world-beater. Surely primary school kids know that it’s not possible for everyone to be the best (I read an interesting article about how people rate their own driving ability compared to other people, but that’s a different story…).

Rather than for some places (I’m not talking about Toronto) that are facing desperate times to focus on attracting new talent (read: nice, middle class people) by building “aspirational housing”, world-leading “educational establishments” (read: a new building for the old college), a lot of glass and steel office buildings with space for a starbucks, and planting a lot of trees, surely it would be far more efficient and probably more effective to tap into existing talent, work to existing strengths and demands, and try something more organic (of course the sub-text reads: blue-collar/working class/low income/social housing people don’t have any talent, and are unwanted – success comes by getting nice middle class people who eat pastrami).

Of course, this will never happen, as civic leaders won’t get the kudos for saying “let’s do lots of really small things that won’t get any media coverage!” and can’t get their mugs on the telly when they attend the opening of the glass and steel office buildings with the space for starbucks. Or which consultant hired by civic leaders, is going to have the courage to say, after being paid handsomely to come up with the new vision, “what you need to do is… less new office space for big companies who will never arrive, and keep your old, cheap places for new start ups” etc. You can imagine the limp fanfare when that report hits the clients’ desks.

The whole regeneration industry of client (and public) expectations, consultants’ bids and final reports, monitoring, government targets etc is all geared up towards mediocrity, blandness, and inefficiency. It suits the consultants fine, but when everywhere is regenerated to the same level, everywhere gets back to where they started.

By: Fin

Fin — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:03:38 +0000

I would be happy to see the catch phrase “world-class” disappear forever. I haven’t read the Toronto plan so i can’t comment on it specifically, but I agree with Colin that too many cities aspire to “world-class” status by copying a mish-mash of initiatives going on elsewhere, many of which aren’t appropriate for that place.

How about simply aiming for “excellence”? Equally vague, yes, but lacking the implication that duplicating ideas from elsewhere is the route to a great city.

By: RF

RF — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:44:23 +0000

Dan – I am rolling on the floor reading your comment. Thank you!

Hayden – I address precisely this issue (of family friendly inner-city neighborhoods) in the forthcoming Canadian issue of Who’s Your City? It is a big, big difference between Canadian and US cities, and that can be quite surprising for Americans, like us.

By: colin dyas

colin dyas — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:57:28 +0000

I went to Toronto once. Couldn’t find downtown as most of it was underground. Hence it’s a strange type of City compared to most (especially for a Brit). But it was pleasant enough with some nice green/blue infrastructure, some interesting cultural places, and genuinely nice people.
I’ve actually read its “Agenda for Prosperity” document of January 2008. Its vision, uniqueness, measures of success, & self-championing are no different to any other place based regeneration strategy. In addition, its change mechanisms of reorganisation and new structures are typical and expected, as they typically mask deeper issues of culture and governance.
Whether top-down change influences the people and evokes a new culture is debatable. Especially when cities are experiencing more conflict between “the civic” and “the public” and when sustainability is not even referred to in the report. There is a green agenda, but its not the same thing.
Overall its difficult to see how Toronto’s thinking is unique, extraordinary, or world class, but I wish it well.
As for guru’s there is no such thing as truth. Only observations that are sometimes taken as truth. In my experience no two places are alike, and its dangerous to suggest that “best practice” (whatever that means) is transferable from one place to another as an urban panacea. Its like comparing an omelette to a fried egg. It’s the same thing served differently, albeit one is more preferred than the other. So the broad range of measures used to compare Cities don’t really mean much.
In closing I come from a City (Liverpool, UK) that uses the same strapline as Toronto; namely “The world in one city” (see p21 of the report). Both are unique places, but the sameness of the narratives and ideologies of urban regeneration is rather sad, and seems to demean more real and original ideas related to local place, and not any place

By: Mike L

Mike L — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:53:03 +0000

Richard, it sounds like Sue-Ann is complimenting you.
You are stated to be a “creative guru”.
The purpose of “Build Toronto” is to make Toronto even more “world-class”, exactly addressing her complaint.

By: hayden fisher

hayden fisher — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:39:23 +0000

Richard, I visited Toronto at the age of 19 and found myself amazed that people actually lived in the city instead of in the kind of suburbs where I had grown-up. The streets were clean and buzzing with activity. The openness to diversity was incredibly refreshing. I quickly fell in love with Toronto. A few years later, while unsuccessfully attempting to obtain additional testing time on standardized tests due to ADHD, and taking an IQ test related to the same, an IQ examiner ask me: why does property in the City cost more than property in the country? Recalling the trip to Toronto, I quickly responded: GREATER SOCIAL UTILITY!!

I love America! But I also confess a fantastic fondness for Toronto. If you had to leave the States, good choice. Keep making that “invisible” difference, one truly knows he or she has made an impact when his or her influence exceeds the direct-sphere of connections and contacts. You’re out of orbit successful!!

By: Dan Dickinson

Dan Dickinson — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:07:04 +0000

Mr. Florida,

I spotted an error in your blog post which evaded your fact-checkers. You accidentally referred to the Toronto Sun as a “newspaper.” That would be incorrect. Over time you’ll learn to spot the warning signs: check for a girl wearing a bikini and a tragic overuse of puns on the front page.

Good luck in the future.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:41:17 +0000

Of course there making this up. The Toronto Sun is nothing more than a tabloid that i wouldn’t use as toilet paper.