What I was getting at is that there's lots of available room within our existing boundaries for infill housing. We are nowhere near full, despite what some people will tell you. In fact, most areas are not dense enough to properly support modes of transport that aren't the car.
Of course, there are a number of ways that one could be offended by a statement like this.
One, you could argue that more density would make the city unlivable. Two, you could get into the chicken-and-egg game of whether a more expansive transit system is needed before allowing more density. Three, you could say that we already have enough zoned and unbuilt housing supply -- so why do we need more? And I'm sure that there are many others that I'm not mentioning here.
Density can be a counterintuitive feature for cities. It can actually make a place more livable by encouraging more amenities adjacent to where people live and work, and it can also reduce traffic congestion by empowering alternative forms of mobility. If the only reasonable way to get around is by car, then of course most people will drive.
We also need to avoid the chicken-and-egg mental trap when it comes to mobility infrastructure. Land use and transportation
What I was getting at is that there's lots of available room within our existing boundaries for infill housing. We are nowhere near full, despite what some people will tell you. In fact, most areas are not dense enough to properly support modes of transport that aren't the car.
Of course, there are a number of ways that one could be offended by a statement like this.
One, you could argue that more density would make the city unlivable. Two, you could get into the chicken-and-egg game of whether a more expansive transit system is needed before allowing more density. Three, you could say that we already have enough zoned and unbuilt housing supply -- so why do we need more? And I'm sure that there are many others that I'm not mentioning here.
Density can be a counterintuitive feature for cities. It can actually make a place more livable by encouraging more amenities adjacent to where people live and work, and it can also reduce traffic congestion by empowering alternative forms of mobility. If the only reasonable way to get around is by car, then of course most people will drive.
We also need to avoid the chicken-and-egg mental trap when it comes to mobility infrastructure. Land use and transportation
Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
work hand in hand and need to be thought of and executed on simultaneously.
Finally, the objection of already having lots of sites zoned for new housing is an enticing one. But zoned and delivered are two vastly different things. And the unfortunate reality is that there are a lot of zoned sites that won't be able to develop in the short and medium terms because the market isn't there. But that doesn't mean that other housing typologies couldn't be built.
At the same time, we need move away from "cruise ships of urbanity." Broadly speaking, Paris -- to cite just one of many examples-- is at least and on average about 4x denser than Toronto. And somehow, people still like living and visiting there.
One of the reasons why "new small-scale retail, service, and office uses" are now permitted in low-rise neighborhoods of Toronto -- and why many are on to talking about these uses in our laneways -- is because it's a way to serve the "needs of residents" and "reduce local automobile trips". But what are these needs exactly? And if you had to choose only one, what would it be?
Let me provide some further background.
According to this mapping, 94% of Parisians live within a 5-minute walk of a bakery. And according to this mapping, 94% of people in Mexico City live within a 5-minute walk of a taqueria. So in other words, these two cities seem to have the kind of "small-scale retail, service, and office uses" that satisfy at least some of the needs of their residents.
People in Paris need bread. And people in Mexico City need tacos. But what do people in Toronto need? I'm not sure we have a perfectly parallel thing. But according to Instacart, the top-selling grocery item last year across both the US and Canada was -- bananas. One and four carts typically contain them, and apparently this number has remained fairly consistent.
So maybe this should be our small-scale retail and walkability test metric: What % of the population lives within a 5-minute walk of fresh bananas? (I'm open to other food suggestions here.)
I used Turo for the first time this evening. For those of you who aren’t familiar, Turo is like Airbnb, but for cars. It connects people who have cars with people who need rental cars. Here is a photo of ours at SLC:
always
work hand in hand and need to be thought of and executed on simultaneously.
Finally, the objection of already having lots of sites zoned for new housing is an enticing one. But zoned and delivered are two vastly different things. And the unfortunate reality is that there are a lot of zoned sites that won't be able to develop in the short and medium terms because the market isn't there. But that doesn't mean that other housing typologies couldn't be built.
At the same time, we need move away from "cruise ships of urbanity." Broadly speaking, Paris -- to cite just one of many examples-- is at least and on average about 4x denser than Toronto. And somehow, people still like living and visiting there.
One of the reasons why "new small-scale retail, service, and office uses" are now permitted in low-rise neighborhoods of Toronto -- and why many are on to talking about these uses in our laneways -- is because it's a way to serve the "needs of residents" and "reduce local automobile trips". But what are these needs exactly? And if you had to choose only one, what would it be?
Let me provide some further background.
According to this mapping, 94% of Parisians live within a 5-minute walk of a bakery. And according to this mapping, 94% of people in Mexico City live within a 5-minute walk of a taqueria. So in other words, these two cities seem to have the kind of "small-scale retail, service, and office uses" that satisfy at least some of the needs of their residents.
People in Paris need bread. And people in Mexico City need tacos. But what do people in Toronto need? I'm not sure we have a perfectly parallel thing. But according to Instacart, the top-selling grocery item last year across both the US and Canada was -- bananas. One and four carts typically contain them, and apparently this number has remained fairly consistent.
So maybe this should be our small-scale retail and walkability test metric: What % of the population lives within a 5-minute walk of fresh bananas? (I'm open to other food suggestions here.)
I used Turo for the first time this evening. For those of you who aren’t familiar, Turo is like Airbnb, but for cars. It connects people who have cars with people who need rental cars. Here is a photo of ours at SLC:
4.2K+Subscribers
Popularity
4.2K+Subscribers
Popularity
The pickup was perfectly seamless. I got a text from an alleged human the day before. It said that they would leave the car on the second level of the parking garage next to baggage claim. And that I would get more precise instructions -- such as where the key will be -- after it was parked there.
I was also told that there would be a small charge to pay in order to exit the garage. And that the charge would obviously depend on how quickly I retrieve the car after they park it. In my case it ended up being US$10, but we also stopped for food on the way.
Overall, I’d say the pickup experience was easier and faster than your typical rental car. The car was as advertised. And thankfully, it was also there waiting for us. The two standout features for me are probably: (1) It was cheaper and (2) you get to pick your exact car.
This second one is important because sometimes you need a rental car so that you can drive it into a snow-covered canyon. And when faced with this situation, it can be helpful to know exactly what you’ll be getting — right down to the type of tires.
The pickup was perfectly seamless. I got a text from an alleged human the day before. It said that they would leave the car on the second level of the parking garage next to baggage claim. And that I would get more precise instructions -- such as where the key will be -- after it was parked there.
I was also told that there would be a small charge to pay in order to exit the garage. And that the charge would obviously depend on how quickly I retrieve the car after they park it. In my case it ended up being US$10, but we also stopped for food on the way.
Overall, I’d say the pickup experience was easier and faster than your typical rental car. The car was as advertised. And thankfully, it was also there waiting for us. The two standout features for me are probably: (1) It was cheaper and (2) you get to pick your exact car.
This second one is important because sometimes you need a rental car so that you can drive it into a snow-covered canyon. And when faced with this situation, it can be helpful to know exactly what you’ll be getting — right down to the type of tires.
