Your Voice in Ward 5 - Guelph
The Mayor’s State of the City address, delivered last week to the Chamber of Commerce, contains lots of interesting statistics of Guelph’s position compared to similar sized municipalities in Ontario, as well as a picture of where we are heading in the future.
To view the Powerpoint presentation, with audio commentary, go to:
http://guelph.ca/cityhall.cfm?subCatID=1835&smocid=2411
Leanne
The ousting of local Conservative candidate Brent Barr is a stunner.
I’m so glad municipal politics is not tied to the political party system. I don’t consider myself to be an indoctrinated member of any political party. I have voted all over the map since I cast my first ballot at 18. If our current City Council was beholdin’ to party ideology or an oligarchical master, would the best interests of our community be served? I think not.
Leanne
City hall junkies can now read what Mercury reporters are really thinking after sitting through Council and committee meetings!
Mercury “city beat” reporters Magda Konieczna and Laura Thompson share their thoughts at:
http://guelphmercury.blogs.com/59_carden_st/
From Guelph Mercury - September 15, 2007
The city’s logo is too important not to be great
TONY LEIGHTON
The path to mediocrity is paved with good intentions. I have no doubt that our city government intends to provide Guelph with a world-class logo. But between intention and delivery something has gone wrong.
The two logos — rightly called “wordmarks” — being presented by the city as our final choice, give us no choice at all. At best, we must choose between not very good and worse. And there’s precious little time left to hem and haw and hope not to hurt feelings. This has to be asked now: can we, please, go back to the drawing board?
The most unfortunate of the two contenders is dominated by a whimsically swooping thick purple ‘G’ that ends in a big arrowhead. The rest of the word — ‘uelph’ — emits from the ‘G’ in a thin handwriting-style script of pale green that is visually swallowed by the mighty arrowhead. It might work for a small florist shop or a menu, but for a city, it’s far too frivolous and undignified.
The other design is better but boring. Again, the ‘G’ is offset in another typeface (which will compromise readability), this time in pale green, and the ‘uelph’ is pale blue with a garnish of little leaves at the top of the ‘h.’ The florist shop would love it. I suppose if you changed the ‘G’ to the same typeface as the ‘uelph,’ it might be passable.
But is passable all we want? No. We want greatness.
Why? Because this will be the symbol of our home for years to come.
We want a logo that stands with the best city logos in the world and betters our city’s brand significantly. We want it to represent our attributes and aspirations, our sense of who we are and where we are going.
We want a logo that feels graphically substantial, so that if you wore it on your shirt others would admire it. We want a logo that is strong, clear, classic, durable, evocative, distinguishing, friendly yet dignified, flavourful, and absolutely memorable. It should be simple because the more unusual a name — ‘Guelph,’ for example — the simpler the graphics can be. It should also be highly legible — which neither of the choices are — because outside of Guelph most people have trouble understanding our city’s name.
The two contenders do none of this. Zero.
The process may be the reason. It doesn’t appear there was a competition or review of top designers, nor an attempt to tie the new logo to the city’s new strategic plan. It is also clear that design experts — professionals working every day in this field — were not consulted in choosing the finalists. There was no peer review.
In the world of graphic design, which includes logos and wordmarks, the best logos almost always come from firms that specialize in graphic identities. It’s like any other field — if you want greatness, you enlist specialists in the top tier of talent.
In Guelph, we too often aim low. Mediocrity of civic symbols is a recurrent problem.
Consider the first version of the new city hall. Until there was a public outcry, the former city council proposed that a gigantic City of Guelph crest would stare down onto Carden Street from a blank cement wall. It was Soviet-like. That same council was one vote away from approving an ugly slab-cement parking garage on Baker Street that would have cast us as design morons.
The vital question regarding wordmarks is, “What does a mark tell us consciously and subconsciously?” Like words, logos are communications tools. The best ones say a lot with a little. The two contenders communicate almost nothing, except maybe “small.”
We can do better. Greatness can be achieved. But only if we have the courage to revisit the process.
Here’s how it could work. Create a written design brief that explains clearly what Guelph wants in its wordmark. Base it on the city’s strategy and vision, and require that our logo exemplify the qualities of the world’s greatest logos: depth, resonance, voice. Hire a highly capable firm that specializes in graphic identities to provide up to a dozen options. Then ask a small group of qualified local experts with much experience in esthetics, visual communication, and brand identity, to recommend the winning mark.
And do not settle for anything less than remarkable.
Symbols are important. They can say so much about us. May ours be powerfully eloquent. Please.
Tony Leighton was the founding editor of Applied Arts, Canada’s magazine of graphic design. As a professional copywriter, he works with designers daily.
Yes, it’s that time of year again. University of Guelph is welcoming new and returning students back to Guelph this weekend. Gordon Street (between Stone and College) will be closed Sunday, September 2, for the move-in mayhem.
Each year, Ward 5 (and the city) welcomes students into our neighbourhoods. In most cases, students add vibrancy and diversity to our community. They work, study, shop, volunteer and enjoy life as a resident of our city. However, some individuals have not yet learned the essential lifeskill of being a good neighbour. This is an ongoing challenge.
There are several things that we can do as a community to overcome these challenges.
An excellent resource for those with ongoing issues is the University of Guelph Neighbourhood Relations Co-ordinator. Her name is Kathryn Hofer and she has a great deal of experience in mediation and community development. Kathryn can help student tenants deal with landlord and safety issues, but is also a great resource to long-time residents in dealing with difficult housing problems. Call Kathryn at (519) 824-4120 ext. 56276.
In addition, the City of Guelph has a number of by-laws to protect the safety and security of residents and students.
Property Standards - no furniture on lawns, garbage, property maintenance, etc. If you have concerns about the condition of a property, call (519) 837-5615 or email building@guelph.ca
Lodging House By-Law - no more than 4 unrelated persons per detached household unit. Accessory apartments are limited to 2 bedrooms. No licenced lodging house can be 100m from another lodging house. If you suspect an illegal lodging house on your street, call our Zoning and Building department at (519) 837-5615 or email building@guelph.ca. They will inspect to ensure compliance - this is for student safety as well. A complete copy of the Shared Rental Housing Regulation can be found at http://guelph.ca/living.cfm?subCatID=1303&smocid=1886
Noise By-Law - Courtesy and respect should be shown at all times even during the day, when shift workers may be sleeping. Guelph Police Services enforces the noise by-law - call (519) 824-1212 for enforcement if you experience excessive noise. It is sometimes preferable as a neighbour to be approached personally first, but if you suspect a hostile confrontation, better to call the Police Services.
Of course, you are also welcome to call me to help with your student housing concerns at any time - (519) 824-9000 or email leanne.piper@guelph.ca
Leanne
Dear Mayor Farbridge and City Council Members,
We are aware that a road has been proposed to be cut through the small park between Essex Street and Waterloo at the corner of Gordon Street in order to accommodate a large truck that occasionally uses the street. Apparently two large trees have already been removed to create a turnaround where Essex dead-ends at Gordon.
Guelph Urban Forest Friends is very concerned about the additional loss of trees that will occur as a result of this road. Park land and trees are precious resources that belong to all citizens of the city. We ask that a public consultation be held with respect to the proposed road and that well prior to commencement of work on the project, the alignment of the road be clearly delineated with signs and that all trees slated for removal be clearly marked with signs so that the people who use and value this park are aware of the proposal.
Thank you for your consideration.
Tara Treanor, Norah Chaloner & Judy Martin
on behalf of GUFF
On occasion, I get calls or emails from constituents reminding me that they are taxpayers and have certain expectations about the services they receive for their tax dollar. Many residents are worried about facing significant tax increases over the next few years.
As a taxpayer, I share these concerns. My teenage children are eating me out of house and home, not to mention rising fuel costs, and looming post-secondary education bills. I have a modest income and live a simple life (one bathroom - family of six!)
I don’t relish the idea of significant tax increases anymore than my neighbours and constituents. I want value for money just like everyone else. But what is value for money? What services and ammenities do progressive communities invest in? What services contribute to quality of life?
My Guelph is more than just garbage pick-up, sewage, roads and police. My Guelph includes greenspace, clean water and air, healthy active citizens, affordable housing, arts, culture, music and heritage. My Guelph takes care of its most vulnerable citizens. My Guelph invests in high quality community and urban design. My Guelph invests in economic and labour force development.
Municipal politics is about making investments that yield the best return for the community good. Please share your thoughts - what are your priorities?
Leanne
A recent commentary in the Mercury is critical of the concept of putting a civic museum in a building the city does not own. The writer compares it to building a swimming pool in your neighbours backyard. Personally, that sounds like a great deal.
The business case for adaptive re-use of the convent for a museum is quite brilliant. To use the swimming pool analogy: if I was planning to build a pool anyway, and my neighbour was not using his backyard, and he offered me full and exclusive use of his yard for three generations of my family, at a token $1 year cost, I would take up the offer in a millisecond. I would keep my own yard open for a garden and greenspace, and in effect, double my useable yard space with my neighbours blessing and support.
The convent is an empty building. The financial and environmental cost to demolish is significant (up to 1/3 of Ontario landfills contain demolition waste). The Diocese has no future planned use for the site and has offered it to the City for use as a civic museum for a nominal cost. They were not strong-armed - they fully understand the beneficial synergies that would come from this partnership. The current museum is bursting at the seams and will be moving forward to secure a new site at some point within the next five years. To buy or lease a new building at market value would be costly. A long-term lease with the Diocese (ie.50-100) years removes this expense.
If Council failed to act to secure the Convent site, the cost to relocate the museum will not disappear, it would just be deferred into the future. Past councils have done this with a number of capital projects which had led to a huge backlog of community needs - main branch library, south end firehall, civic administration centre, etc.
Losing the Convent would mean the City would have to relocate the museum by purchasing or leasing another building at market value. In order to meet the museums future needs, they will need a building twice the size of the current facility, at an estimated cost of $1,000,000. Leasing the convent for an estimated $2 per year means that million dollars can be spent on other things or invested.
I share the concerns expressed about the number of capital projects on the horizon. Guelph cannot lose its AA financial rating. But we cannot continue to defer capital projects in perpetuity. Our city as a whole suffers when we fail to act on identified needs. We must prioritize our projects carefully in order to finance them effectively - and we will do this.
If you haven’t been to visit our Civic Museum lately, I encourage you to drop by the facility on the corner of Dublin and Waterloo and experience this community gem.
Please add your comments.
Sorry - I accidentally deleted a post re: John McCrae School so I am creating a new thread so that the discussion can continue.
I’ve reposted it below:
Comment from Gord Sloan:
Thanks Leanne
Could I suggest that a more appropriate site for a “core area” school would be College Ave School. JMS site is not appropriate when it can only be sustained by the use of buses for getting a majority of students to that site.
Gord
Posted by Gord Sloan
Does anyone else have concerns about the plans to build a new school? I certainly do. Such as:
The new school will be at least twice the size/capacity of the current building-so a much larger building.
This is no longer a neigbourhood school. The majority of those attending have to be bused in. There is a minimum of 10 school buses servicing the school currently. Another large percentage arrive by family car. Not a walkable site for majority of students.
The students who attend this school live between the Speed River and the 401!! Obviously the school is geographically poorly located to serve the area in question.
Water St has been experiencing traffic pressures for sometime, which in turn has had a negative affect on the quality of life for residents of Water St. Expanding the school and the traffic that is generated by the school will make the living environment even less appealing for residents.
Residents have not been consulted about the plans for the John McCrae site, by the school board.
Who is looking out for the interests of the residents that are going to be most directly affected by this project? I have had no communication from the school board trustees for Ward 5, either to keep us informed or to ask for any input.
Gord Sloan
