I watched a public consultation last night for this new City of Toronto project, which is half middle-income affordable. It was greeted by some really appalling NIMBYism. Nearby condo owners concerned about “crime.” 1/ 
And “it’s too tall,” and traffic, all the usual complaints. For a new rental complex replacing a parking lot, in a cluster of highrises, next to a multibillion-dollar new subway. 2/
Very solid site plan and decent prototype architecture. What’s not to like? 3/
Three thoughts: a)Community consultation is often worse than useless. This meeting was a waste of everyone’s time. 4/
b) Every single Toronto planning meeting should begin with the words: “This city has a housing crisis and is projected to grow by as much as 30 per cent, or a million people, in the next 20 years. We believe this neighbourhood has capacity for new people.” 4/
C) This culture of no has to be actively countered. Planners have spent 40 years saying that development has impacts, needs to be managed, is putting pressure on infrastructure, is going to overcrowd parks, etc, etc. People hear these things. 5/
For some reason Toronto planning does not clearly communicate the facts that major growth is provincially mandated, pays for itself (and much more) and is desperately needed. Facts. 6/
Even on the high level, planning downplays what is happening. Toronto is not “expected” to grow by 700,000. It is *planned* to grow by 700,000, an artificial cap that will almost certainly be far exceeded. 7/
Reference for the 1m projection 8/toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2…
Needless to say: leaders like @Thompson_37 need to show some leadership. 9/
To clarify: I didn’t intend a critique of the city staff in that meeting. The problem is the general tone and structure of planning discussion. Planners see it as their job to get yelled at by rude, poorly informed citizens. This shouldn’t be.
(A long thread, sorry, but this feels like an important point.) Almost every public meeting I’ve ever attended has been a rhetorical mismatch. Angry neighbours with the courage of their convictions; city planners listening politely and speaking calmly.
*Especially* when the private sector is not involved. Anti-growth voices are enthusiastic and loud. They are really countered. Ordinary citizens never hear a case for a change coming from public officials.
Basically, planning consultations are often fuel for anti-growth politics. The angriest (and generally worst) ideas get the most airtime. This seems to me like a serious structural problem.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
