Home » Blogs » Torrential brainstorm

Torrential brainstorm

Last Tuesday I represented all Londoners under 30 when I showed up at the Downtown Master Plan public workshop.

The night was more like a brainstorming session where board members, city folk and gray-haired businesspeople answered questions about what they want from downtown.

Maps and workbooks littered the Museum London gallery area where results from the first brainstorming workshop were on full display. A large map on each table showed what some previous brainstormers wanted from downtown: a bus terminal at York St., more green living space, a pedestrian walking centre at Dundas and Richmond, and more ludicrous ideas like a Godzilla theme park. (The City didn’t toss out any ideas.)

After a warm-up speech by a city staffer, each table was asked to come up with a mission statement. We were given a list of adjectives like “affordable,” “pleasant” and “24-hours-a-day.” Matching those were elements like “green space” and “cyclists.”

From there, my group came up with this concise little gem:

The downtown should be a place to live for young and old where communities are connected through green, public, pedestrian places that are always changing!

The second exercise asked us to tackle three challenges discovered so far. We were assigned these puzzlers:

Should the Downtown Boundary be changed?

The Downtown Boundary decides which businesses are given special treatment under downtown legislation and which aren’t. It determines whether the London Downtown Business Association and Mainstreet London will acknowledge their existence and help out.
We decided downtown needs to a two-tier boundary. Because the downtown is currently so big, it’s hard for the city to focus their resources. We need a downtown “core” and a downtown “fringe,” each getting special accommodation. As the market allows, the core will expand into the fringe. The fringe should also promote districts, like a fashion district and a restaurant district, with focused destinations for consumers. Currently, downtown has a few attractions, but they’re dispersed geographically.

Should the existing major entertainment policies be stronger?

The current policies mandate that any big business, like the John Labatt Centre, must be considered for placement in the downtown. We decided that bringing something like an IMAX movie theatre would help bring an assortment of consumers to the area. Like the JLC has demonstrated, major entertainment destinations allow the areas around them to grow. The JLC has promoted a restaurant district like we talked about in the first point.

Should Richmond Row be turned into a two-lane street?

The idea here is both calming traffic and expanding pedestrian walkways. But come on. Richmond Row would be a nightmare on any night of the week when the bar scene gets out. There are also few alternatives for navigating up and down the downtown. What might make sense is reducing the lanes south of King St. and north of York St. This area is currently used only as a through way, not as a gateway, so could be reasonably routed elsewhere and reconnected at King.
From the other tables, people emphasized how pedestrian walkways are important and how London should look to larger cities like Chicago and Toronto as idols. One man suggested we build a glass roof over Dundas St. Another said we need electric shuttle buses to move people from fringe parking lots to the core.

Overall it was an interesting night, but I’m not completely satisfied. I seemed to be the only person under 30 years old. There was little talk from most groups about investing in art. I never heard the words “Creative City,” which is an incredible model for downtown revitalization. As the city continues I hope students or young people will take more of an interest in the downtown and I hope city staffers recognize our benefit. Maybe it’s up to us to show them.

See you at the next meeting?

Follow the Gazette on Facebook and Twitter.