Comments on: Digging Up History

By: Mo Fabid

Mo Fabid — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 23:33:17 +0000

And so sewers and the untreated waste water (environmental catastrophe!) is less important than a play that mostly rich people watch in this city? How about the north end and children going without food and school supplies? All for another poorly acted play? The Grand got $19 million for what?

Typical selfish and ludicrous arts-at-any-cost mentality.

By: don quichotte

don quichotte — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:22:30 +0000

Neglect of this condition by city hall is now responsible for large increases in insurance premiums and deductibles throughout the city.
We have an expanded treatment plant now that is much larger than needed this however did not stop recent overflow throughout down town. We are all paying the insurance companies for this now. Thanks UT Kingston for your apparent incompetence.

By: Flying_Monkey

Flying_Monkey — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:27:03 +0000

Absolutely. There's a big contrast between cities which have rediscovered waterfronts as places to reconnect the city to the water, and places which privatise them and gradually cut off the water from the city. Kingston is a bit inbetween. There's places where the government has reconnected the city and then other places (the prime sites, of course) where it seems to cut off more and more.

By: Dave T

Dave T — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:43:25 +0000

In most caricatures there is an element of truth, no? A lot of planners DO frame the debate in this fashion, especially when they use buzzwords like "urban sprawl" and "sustainable". In fact, you seem to be agreeing with me on the motives behind the battle cry for "denser" housing. As in $$$… But I think you hit the nail on the head reference the waterfront. Funny how nothing seems to be allowed there except for view- blocking high rise condos and hotels…

I grew up near Halifax in the 70's and 80's, and saw a waterfront of abandoned warehouses, slums, and trash turned into a thriving area full of boardwalks with restaurants, shops, buskers, and vendors. The contrast with our unused, empty, soulless "waterfront" couldn't be more striking…

By: Flying_Monkey

Flying_Monkey — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:39:18 +0000

Thanks, Dave. Needless to say, I disagree! I taught urban planning for six years and that is a caricatured description of the debate. A liveable city has got nothing necessarily to do with highrise. The highrise and condo thing has much more to do with commercial desires to maximise the return from high value areas of land. The rhetoric used to justify this shouldn't be confused with what I am talking about. I can't see any serious policy for liveability of any kind in Kingston. What I can see is landowners acting with impunity to maximise their profits, I see the city closing off access to the waterfront, I see no strategy for sustainability or liveability at all.

By: Dave T

Dave T — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:36:56 +0000

I'm not sure how to explain my point in the limited space here (it probably would be easier and more enjoyable over some good wine and a good dinner), but here goes…
There seems to be a growing conflict over what people consider "liveable". Among trendy urban planners, the term seems to mean "dense", as in large numbers of people crammed into small areas. To accomplish their goals, these planners have chosen to try "negative reinforcement" (i.e. making it increasingly miserable for those living outside the downtown core of cities to travel by car). And city politicians (including Kingston's) have jumped on the bandwagon, as the concept fits their ideologies, and funnels business to their downtown cronies.
The trouble with these grand theories is most people don't want to live in undersized, overpriced downtown apartments and highrise condos like battery hens. They want a yard to relax and BBQ in, They want a garage. They want to able to listen to music without having to worry about the neighbours banging on the ceiling. Most of all, they are tired of being ignored other than as cash cows to fund projects downtown.

By: Flying_Monkey

Flying_Monkey — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 03:05:10 +0000

Dave, Danielle is right. You seem to want this to be a black and white issue. It isn't. And I am not 'anti-car'. My wife and I have a car, which we use when necessary. We are drivers, and cyclists, bus and railway users and walkers. And we don't live downtown either. What i am 'anti-' is everything being designed around the car and for the convenience of people who only want to use a car all the time, everytime. For cities to be liveable, there needs to be a better balance. And I am rather bemused b the idea that Kingston is run by 'car-haters' – what's your evidence for this?

By: Danielle Lennon

Danielle Lennon — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:52:02 +0000

I agree that this one instance of buying speakers was inconvenient but there are plenty of places to park if you just go down one block from Princess on either side. Side streets like Bagot, Wellington and Barrie for example, have plenty of parking. There's also the Food Basics lot and the Chown lot behind the Grand. I don't think Flying_Monkey is suggesting that drivers can't come downtown but that you can walk once you're there. You can walk from Division St. to the water in 10-15 minutes, tops. If you did want to buy a large item, tell the store that you would if they make it convenient for you (like getting it to your car or delivering it) and I guarantee they'll do everything they can to make the sale.

By: Kook

Kook — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:32:16 +0000

I agree totally – it would be pretty sweet to see a pedestrianized downtown core.

I don't quite follow your references to the 'sewerage'… Here are the facts though: sanitary (& combined) sewers and watermain projects are paid out of the rates you pay on your Utility bills (that's why they are set up as utilities – they are supposed to be structured as self-sustaining business units), where as road resurfacing, storm sewers, sidewalks, etc will come out of the municipal property taxes you pay. The Princess St job is a joint City/UK project.

By: Dave T

Dave T — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:37:18 +0000

Flying_Monkey,

We agree on some things, but not the tiresome anti-car rhetoric… Should those of us who live away from downtown be excluded from enjoying it because it is too far for us to walk, or we don't have an hour or more of time to waste sitting on a bus? Is downtown only for students and tourists, and the rest of us working stiffs (who drive) don't matter?

You do realize that businesses lose out when customers can't cart their purchases to their cars in a reasonable distance? Or look longingly for a parking spot, can't find one within ten blocks, give up, and go to the Cat Centre… About a month ago, I found a pair of $1500 speakers I loved at Just Hi-Fi; unfortunately since there was nowhere to park, and I was not about to try and lug two 70 pound boxes for ten blocks in the middle of winter, I ended up going to Future Shop, where the staff cheerfully carted my purchase the fifty feet to my car.

No matter how much the car-haters running this city wish otherwise, I, as with most, will spend my dollars where it is convenient for me. Unfortunately, other than restaurants and night life, that isn't downtown…