City planning

A few weeks ago I went to a meeting of the Beaverbrook community association to do with proposed mid-rise to be built on Teron road. I have been wanting to write about the meeting but there are so many angles to cover that eventually I got bored with the topic and started thinking about bicycles instead. That is not to say that I do not want to talk about the intensification of my neighbourhood.

First of all, I do not like suburbs. I live here because it is the most sensible place to live given our situation. Despite this, I do enjoy living in a suburb and I am particularly fond of Beaverbrook. However, I am not fond of Beaverbrook because it is low-rise. There are a lot of other suburbs in Ottawa that are low-rise and I am not terribly fond of them. I am fond of Beaverbrook because it is well architected. No, it is not nature, it is architecture that makes it special. Nature is when we don’t mow our lawn for two months in the summer and I am willing to bet that our low-rise insisting neighbours do not look too kindly on that.

There is certainly a benefit to fighting for your community to preserve a particular look, especially when that neighbourhood is as highly regarded as ours. I just really don’t like the approach and the tone the neighbourhood association has taken. I approve of challenging developers and working with the city to set and enforce the limits, but I do not approve of the low rise at any cost demands and I can’t in good conscience object moderate intensification even if I don’t like it aesthetically.

If it was up to me, I would actively recruit developers that have as much talent and vision as Teron had back in the 60’s. The only problem I have with the proposed seven story condo building to be going up on Teron road is that it is boring. It looks like every other condo building built in Ottawa over the last 5 years. I bought into Beaverbrook that was designed by someone who knew how to make a neighbourhood look and feel special. There are architects out there that can make seven or ten or even fifteen storey condo building look special and embody a vision people would want to buy into just as people bought into the original Beaverbrook concept. I just wish that someone could hire the right kind of developers and make sure that Beaverbrook remained special for a long time to come. Hope springs a turnip.

The only thing more fun than going to see P&P at the theatre is going to see P&P with three friends who are as big fans of the novel as I am. So, you might ask, you had fun no matter what, but how was the play? It was good and bad.

First the good. Pierre Brault was lovely as always. I’ve seen him in dramatic monologue, as Shakespeare’s drunk and doing stand up comedy and he was good every time. I don’t know whether it is a good thing that the best performance was done by the actor playing Mr. Collins, but his dance at the Netherfield ball was hilarious.

Another thing I liked was the writing. Particularly in the first act, the ratio of original language was higher than any other adaptation I have seen while still making sense and imparting all the information in good time. A few creative storytelling tricks surprised and impressed me. However, the writer seemed to have run out of steam towards the end and the second act was much sloppier, contained a few scenes that were too long and the last 15 minutes were positively rushed. The non-original dialogue also appeared more often, was longer and more cringe-worthy. So writing was excellent except when it was not.

As soon as the play was over, the four of us started taking it apart and talking about what we liked and did not like. There were a few decisions that were made that would make Austenites grumble but would not be noticed or ruin the play for anyone else. Charlotte’s betrayal, Elizabeth’s calmness after she first turns Darcy down, Elizabeth’s inaction when Mr. Bennet ousts Lydia from the family home and few other choices made me cringe, but are not necessarily bad in and of themselves. I have a particular way of interpreting the novel and interpretations that clash with my own will grate me without necessarily being grating in general.

What was grating in general was the utterly abominable level of acting. The actresses playing Elizabeth, Mrs. Gardiner and Mrs. Reynolds were the worst offenders though a few others were also poor. Many of the actors stood straight backed and shouted their lines at the audience. Elizabeth’s voice was particularly shrill and combining with her back-brace like posture (perhaps she was pretending to wear a corset?) and lack of any intonation in line execution were such that by the end of the play I felt particular dislike towards her. Watching Pride and Prejudice while disliking Lizzy is Not Good. This level of acting would have been fine at a high school play or community theatre, but when I pay over $70 to sit at the back of one of the largest theatre spaces in town I expect professional skill. Fortunately, along with the aforementioned Mr. Collins, actors portraying Darcy, Bingley and Mary were enjoyable and somewhat balanced the atrocity.

It is too bad about the line shouting and sloppy script toward the end because it was a quite nice play otherwise. I am not sure whether to recommend it or not. There were moments where I was quite enjoying myself and then there were moments when I was cringing. I suppose you just have to go and make up your own mind. Apparently the show is so popular they added extra performances.

I have now spent a third of my life in Kanata and I still have not shifted my way of thinking about transportation. One thing that has been on my mind lately is what is considered too far for a kid to get to himself. Trev is going to be starting grade 1 next year and this is the magic time when kids start to walk to the school by themselves. That is, in places I grew up in, Zagreb and Montreal, kids walk to school by themselves. Kanata, I don’t know. So instead of complaining about suburban helicopter parenting, which is more likely to make me look like judgemental snot than other parents paranoid tyrants, I will examine my own childhood and what I did at particular ages:

Grade 1 (age 6): Walked to school every day (500m). Most days I walked with my neighbour who was 6 months older than me and in grade 2. I stayed home on my own for several hours and had a latch key. Though I was theoretically on my own, the next door neighbour was always reachable and she looked out for me.

Grade 3 (age 9): Took tram to dance school (2.5km) 3 days a week during the day (school was half days). Longest routine walking trip on my own was 1.5km

Grade 5 (age 11): Changed schools so had to walk or tram 1.2km to get there. At this point I was walking or biking (in Zagreb sidewalk biking represents most of the bike modal share) around my neighbourhood and central Zagreb.

Grade 7 (age 13): Was able to get off the train in Rijeka and go to my grandma’s house, bike to Sava in Zagreb (5 km with one or two nasty traffic intersections), navigate central Zagreb up until 9PM. Sometimes I staid out later and did not feel unsafe but my parents freaked out a bit.

Age 15: Navigated Montreal until 10PM. Biked as far as Ile Sainte Helene but abandoned biking because it was not convenient (I lived on a big hill attached to a big road). I would go anywhere in central Montreal without much fuss. The furthest regular trip was to the volunteering site 7.7 km away (two busses)

Age 17+: Went pretty much anywhere I needed to go whenever I needed to get there by walking or public transit. Did not have access to family car and did not meet Chris (who had a car) until I was 19.

So what is going to be my policy on what I expect and allow my kids to do? Are we going to let Trev stay on his own in the house in the morning and lock up before going to school next year? If not then then when? If he wants to visit a friend in Kanata Lakes when he is 13 am I going to pick him up with the car at 8:30PM or is he expected to walk home in the dark? If he has to go somewhere that will take him 45 minutes by bus and/or walking to get to when he is 15 am I going to drop everything I am doing and drive him there because it is just too far? What are the social implications of us expecting our kids to get everywhere by their own devices when their friends get lifts?