Design Review Panel: Another Half Solution?

  • Posted by Tanja
  • Filed in City
  • February 14, 2006

feb1406_designpanel.jpgLast night I attended a public meeting held by the City Planning Dept to discuss the possibility of a Design Review Panel for Toronto.

In a nutshell, the Panel, made up of design and planning pros, would be another step in the approval process for new building/developement projects. They would review and provide expert advice and opinion (not make final decisions) on proposed buildings and other major public projects.

As I sit here listening to 2 hours worth of meeting audio being digitized though, I realize there was much too much repetition and running in circles to make it worth making a podcast of. So instead of subjecting myself (and you) to that kind of editing torture (especially on Valentine's day)... let's get right to the heart of it. (oh! the puns!)

First off, the idea of having a Design Review Panel is not new. It has been a meaningful part of the planning process in numerous other cities, including Vancouver, where it has proven itself to be a force of positive change in the architechtural landscape.

Ideally, yes, having design experts look at developer plans and suggest ways to improve exterior design (right down to the sidewalk alterations) before approval would lead to more well thought-out design plans and better, more beautiful, more community-integrated developments.

feb1406_designpanel2.jpgAt the same time, as Frank Gehry pointed out in his speech at the AGO today, we may be getting into the game quite late. We've already seen the construction of so many bland, skyline polluting buildings that it's hard to pull such a sharp u-turn at this point.

Still, we must try to make advances, right? Better late... than never?

Abslutely, but we'd have to get it RIGHT this time.

The concerns of citizens who attending the meeting were quite harmonious. Everyone had their own slightly different opinion to throw in, but they were all singing a tune of community dissatisfaction:

1) The community needs to be integrated into this process and needs to have a stronger voice.

People are tired of 'experts' having a monopoly over opinion on aesthetic and what is 'good' for the community. Communities are built by the people who inhabit then, and that expertise (if we might be so bold as to call it that) needs to be valued. At the very LEAST, this kind of panel should have to visit the community in question, if not consult with memebers.

2) The disconnected approach of Toronto planners has already given us such a bleak lanscape that adding another level to the process isn't going to change much.

Dissatisfaction with current planning seemed unanymous, but one concerned citizen's argument, in particular, stood out to me. She pointed out that a number of guidelines are set in place to protect our various cultural and historic communities: how they function, are structured, go about business, etc. At the same time, planners routinely allow exemptions to these rules in order to allow new profitable developments to take place.

If that is acceptable, than we, as Toronto citizens, are left with no power to protect the communities we value... and so then, what the hell is the point of adding another layer to the system that already doesn't function as it should?

What's the next step then?

Let's go head with the Panel 'cause we could use the help, but make sure that the community has a chance to be heard directly by Panel members. The project is in Scarborough? Then Panel members need get on the RT and see the community as it exists beyond the pages of city plans.

And while they are busy with that, let's come up with a better strategy for the Planning department, so that the Design Panel won't be exposed to so many horrendous bleak proposals in the first place.

Reader Reviews and Comments

Submit a Review or Comment

This is a solution that is half-baked. The city already has urban design guidelines that have to be met before a project goes through. (This is a relatively new idea, so many of the buildings in this city that were built before the 90's don't fit these guidelines). But when it comes to getting buildings that are not bland, you get into a tricky position. It starts to come down to the idea of aesthetics (which people are never of like mind) and individual freedom. This city has a sad history of ugly buildings, yet but that tide is turning as the people who want to live and work in those buildings demand better. Why, in a country that has entrenched individual rights (and purposefully eschewed collective rights) should we have a community council. It doesn't make ideological sense.

Posted by: Michael at February 15, 2006 8:47 AM

Just to play devil's advocate for a second here (and I am a little conflicted on this myself)... public input is obviously an extremely important element in any urban development. But why are the credentials of architects undermined? Urban design is a more public realm than most professions, but I feel like it isn't fair to base on that alone that the education and professional opinion of architects should be ignored. I see the absurdity in making the comparison to a doctor taking the advice of the public on a professional medical opinion, but ultimately - can you see some similarities?

Posted by: Bud at February 25, 2006 10:09 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

Email This Entry

Email 'Design Review Panel: Another Half Solution?' to: Message (optional):
Your email address:

Please type the verification code displayed in the image:

By forwarding this entry to a friend, we do not opt you or your friend into
receiving any additional mailings from blogTO. We hate spam too.
Disclaimer: Comments and blog entries represent the viewpoints of the individual and no one else.