Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Speaking of Voting…
The federal election is behind us. It’s time to get to the polls for the 7th Annual PUG AWARDS!
The PUG AWARDS are a wonderful means by which the general public can voice their opinions about the design of our city. Each year, newly built architectural projects throughout the city of Toronto are open to judgment, holding those responsible for the projects accountable for their designs (whether they be deemed brilliant or disastrous).
Cast your ballot for each of the 30 buildings, deciding whether you “love”, “like”, or “hate” each project here:
Monday, April 25, 2011
Urban Infra-structure
by Astra Burka, OAA Architect and Filmmaker
“The aim of urbanism is comprehensibility, i.e. clarity of organization. The community is by definition a comprehensible thing. And comprehensibility should also be a characteristic of the parts.”
- CIAM 9, Aix-en-Provence, 1953. A/P.S. 1954, “team 10 primer”, edited by Allison S Smithson, November 1974. (Congrès internationaux d'architecture moderne – International Congresses of Modern Architecture)
I was just browsing through the “team 10 primer” and found the quote discussing urban infra-structure. The words “comprehensibility”, “clarity of organization” and “characteristics of the parts” seemed very CLEAR to me.
I spoke with Blanche van Ginkel(formerly Lemco) who along with her husband Sandy were invited participants to the Team Meetings in the 1950’s. Blanche asked me what I was writing about. I said that I was writing for the AFHTO Blog about urban infra-structure. I explained that I was taking some photos of College Street to illustrate the results of chaotic planning compared with logical and comprehensible planning in Holland and France.
Blanche explained that Dutch town planning, whose basic roots started in the 17th century, still exists today. City plans derived from regional plans. The draining of the land created cities. The “old” Amsterdam is a series of islands surrounded by canals. Why can we not think like this? Is it because we have the luxury of too much space versus Holland that has no space?
Toronto has this obsession of producing community plans and street studies ad nauseam. How can we plan a street or a community when we do not have a plan for the city or know what is the larger picture? The examples shown of College Street illustrate the lack of consistency in creating urban infra-structure. We have over 14 jurisdictions involved with the space between buildings and it seems that no one is planning on the same page.
Maybe this is the Canadian way of planning, starting with the micro vision to confuse us and then create so many rules and bylaws that it becomes like the Wild West with everyone out for themselves.
Are we afraid to create a vision? Or are we afraid to rock the boat? Why can’t we be creative and plan our futures in a comprehensive way?
Anyway, I am ranting again. My belief is you can plan clear ideas. So why is it not happening?
Thursday, February 17, 2011
The New UNREADABLE Zoning Bylaw has Landed in Toronto
by Astra Burka, OAA
Finally after 8 years, hours of work, lots of staff, consultants and money, the harmonized zoning bylaw is here. We need a demo reel or a course to understand it, but alas the city forgot to do this.
Instead of taking the opportunity to create a new and simplified approach on how we create our city form, the amalgamated zoning has become a convoluted monster document that experts have to be hired to decipher it.
Rumour has it, that the preliminary planning review report on a submitted “structure” reads like a novel and is so elaborate that planners, lawyers and experts cannot even understand it. What about the design community? And what about the ordinary citizen who wants to add a porch or deck to their house? It now takes 6 months, instead of the 1 to 3 months for a Committee of Adjustment approval.
How did we get here?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)