Out of Ebenezer Howard’s (1850-1928) Garden City came suburbs (through a gradual evolution naturally), and in Toronto’s Don Mills we took the Wednesday to observe this. We are also given a guest lecture by Mr. Ian Bender, former Director of Planning in Simcoe County, which brings his experience and views on lessons learned.
Toronto Field Trip
We went to Toronto, to explore the various developments we every week discuss in class. The rain aside, standing there, applying all our senses, we see, hear, smell, touch, interact and feel what each space visited is to us, even if we’re only visitors. Starting from the Union Station, we walk to the Waterfront. Under the Gardiner Expressway, between the sky scrapers and condominium towers, and along the lake, noticing traffic noise, wide streets, limited park space, towers obstructing the view, and loud airplanes climbing the skies above us. The issues? They are many and complicated.
From the Water Front we proceed to St. Lawrence Market area (picture, left). Indeed a place with a distinct sense of place. A good place for some quality lunch.
With full bellies city observations are easier and the rain less noticeable. We head over to Regent Park, a social housing area now being redeveloped, consequently displacing scores of low-income tenants. Controversial? Yes.
After passing through Cabbagetown (picture, below), we bus and sub our way to Don Mills.
In Don Mills we get to see the result of a de-malling. Now catering to the up-market clientele, one has to wonder where all the regular people are to do their shopping? Perhaps it is easier to plan, build and justify low density, traffic-calmed shopping zones for the rich than for the general public? Indeed, if the argument is that financial profit should be the ruling baseline (the mall being a private enterprise) one must wonder if public spaces are of any interest at all?
Privatization of public land, slum replacement and upper-class preference is what we manages to see in this one day. It is so very interesting, eye-wakening and thought provoking – indeed intellectually stimulating – but in the end perhaps somewhat frustrating.
As for Plan 703, well...we’re not as critically and technically ‘modernistic’ as Ray Simpson would like, that’s for sure. Because, I, for one, don’t mind to read a completely biased Sierra Club text containing highly questionable ‘facts’ and biased generalizations. I am aware there are many ways to salvation and we should always be critical of expression of views that believe the end justifies the means, but that does not mean we have to despise and reject such views. In all fairness, I don’t disagree with Simpson’s point of alertness and critical thought towards such writing, every political interest utters such propaganda, but I am not yet ready to dismiss such interest, because then cooperation might be less fruitful, as we in the end have the same goal (the text was selling “Smart Growth”, for the right reasons but with the wrong reasoning).
Indeed, in my view a response to the text would not be to critique it as a whole, but rather correct the weak arguments and still support the end idea, as today’s policies of growth should undoubtedly be approached with smarter than current techniques.
