Ken Gray: NIMBY watch

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by Dr.Z

There are a couple of big outfits within the Ottawa area proper but the biggest ones are outside of the City limits but effectively within the Greater Ottawa area. There are a few big dairy farmers and a milk plant or two. Most crop grown here are exported soya beans and cattle feed. Much of the corn you see along the arterials or county roads are for cattle consumption.

As we all know Canada produces more ag than we consume, hence we are a net exporter. Global competition culminating with Regan-onmics and NAFTA means that farms in Canada become more specialised via competitive advantage. So farms in Eastern On do not feed the region first and export the rest and they are no longer geared to do just that. It is just not efficient or cost effective in our global economy for the farms to feed their surrounding regions first, nor would the local buyers be able to afford such produce (low supply, high demand for tomatoes lets say = high price). The direct support sector still benefits though, being the machinary dealers, mechanics and seed manufacturers, grain elevators, custom farmers and arguably some of the banks and lenders for farm loans, which collectively employ a lot folks in the rural and outlying areas.

Eastern ontario does have a fair amount of corn/hay type farms we also do have dairy farms but what concerns me is some are willing to have windmills fill up all up the farms so it could come down to one day we have to get food shipped in from the west in terms of things like corn etc.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by S-Man

Sadly, all I can remember from the 90s is sprawl, sprawl, sprawl.

And the 80s.

And the 00s.

And the 70s.

And this decade.

Everyone talks about sprawl. No one — nobody — is doing much about it.

[eemy]

That's not entirely true - far more housing has been constructed in the core than in the past (true for most Canadian cities). That's progress.

In terms of the suburban built form though, you're absolutely right. I don't think a good solution has really been put forward though. On the whole, the density of suburban development has never been as high as it is now, which is a good thing (greenfields aren't consumed as quickly). I just don't really know what you can do short of having a dressed up version of what already exists. (New Urbanism)

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

That's not entirely true - far more housing has been constructed in the core than in the past (true for most Canadian cities). That's progress.

In terms of the suburban built form though, you're absolutely right. I don't think a good solution has really been put forward though. On the whole, the density of suburban development has never been as high as it is now, which is a good thing (greenfields aren't consumed as quickly). I just don't really know what you can do short of having a dressed up version of what already exists. (New Urbanism)

I don't know if i would say there has been far more in the core if you look at Orleans/Barrheaven/Kanata there has been a massive amount of development in these areas.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by reidjr

I don't know if i would say there has been far more in the core if you look at Orleans/Barrheaven/Kanata there has been a massive amount of development in these areas.

I meant that in the past there was less residential development in the core than now. You're correct in stating that it continues to be outstripped by growth at the fringe, but it is still progress from where we were.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I meant that in the past there was less residential development in the core than now. You're correct in stating that it continues to be outstripped by growth at the fringe, but it is still progress from where we were.

44% of new homes delivered through intensification last year is definitely a victory.

[S-Man]

And every one of them ruined a nice, unchanged neighbourhood with their provocative 'Wasn't-here-before-ness' making it hard for Ken Grey to drive his car places. And what about the friggin children??

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

That's not entirely true - far more housing has been constructed in the core than in the past (true for most Canadian cities). That's progress.

In terms of the suburban built form though, you're absolutely right. I don't think a good solution has really been put forward though.

For starters: lay down strict rules about the physical street layout.

No more spaghetti.

That could happen tomorrow, but there's no political will to do it.

[amanfromnowhere]

Here's suggested story for Ken:

Residents fight Glebe development proposal

and two embassies that can ruin existing neighborhoods:

A tale of two embassies: New Zealand looks to get demo approval, while Iraq sits and waits

[S-Man]

That Glebe headline is classic. Who'd a thunk it? Terrible, though - a 4-story, 17 unit building replacing a vacant 3-story building that used to house 47 tenants.

Will this overextremification never end? Doesn't the city know that Glebe resident's taxes go to a special "keep everyone away from our neighbourhood" fund?

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

"It is not that I am against development happening on this property at all," said Lalonde. "I just would like to see it to scale with the rest of the neighbourhood. I love the look of the Glebe and I am worried about where we are going with intensification."

Chernushenko said significant changes will need to be made before area residents will be pleased with the proposal, but those changes will be up to the developer.

"It needs to be something that doesn't require rezoning, or minor variances and something much closer to scale with the neighbourhood," he said. "We want to send that signal to developers, not too high and not too dense."

I love the above quotes---Apparently we need intensification without densification or height. And where are we going with intensification? apparently anywhere but up -or sideways--I guess that means we will have to burrow into the ground.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by S-Man

That Glebe headline is classic. Who'd a thunk it? Terrible, though - a 4-story, 17 unit building replacing a vacant 3-story building that used to house 47 tenants.

Will this overextremification never end? Doesn't the city know that Glebe resident's taxes go to a special "keep everyone away from our neighbourhood" fund?

That's not really a fair comparison. The previous building was an old age home. If you look at the proposal, the new condominium does not fit the character of the street nearly as well as the previous building and does have a noticeably larger massing, though I think the architect did a very good job on the whole. I understand resident's objections, though I think it's probably a bit overwrought. The change isn't that extreme.

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

That's not really a fair comparison. The previous building was an old age home. If you look at the proposal, the new condominium does not fit the character of the street nearly as well as the previous building and does have a noticeably larger massing, though I think the architect did a very good job on the whole. I understand resident's objections, though I think it's probably a bit overwrought. The change isn't that extreme.

For some nothing fits in the Glebe almost every project some in the Glebe people get upset.

[Dr.Z]

Originally Posted by reidjr

...what concerns me is some are willing to have windmills fill up all up the farms so it could come down to one day we have to get food shipped in from the west in terms of things like corn etc.

Unless the jet streams alter extremely there will not be enough wind capacity for that to happen. My understanding is that most of the farmers willing to do this have already looked at the possibility. The remaining lands are too inconsistent for wind generation vis-a-vis grain prices to make a living off of. Not that most (non-dairy) farmers can make a living from farming anyways.

Remember the situation isn't, the local farmers are shipping their corn to local cattle farms first, and exporting the rest. Everything is trucked to the grain elevators that goes into a giant pool; the local cattle farmers buy their own feed that wasn't packaged locally. It's not like there are a lot of cattle here anyways. We're growing feed for Alberta and mid-US, to grow food (steaks) that we the people consume.

Hay for dairy cows is a different story, but is irrelevant because its not a commodity.

[reidjr]

Dr Z
The other form of green energy is solar farms you don't need wind or anything you really don't even need a ton of sun it could be to easy for farmers just to say hey i am going to give up farming and just go with a solar farm.

[Dr.Z]

Originally Posted by reidjr

.... it could be to easy for farmers just to say hey i am going to give up farming and just go with a solar farm.

It could be easy but it's not.

First, Ag land is exempt from the Ontario FIT program.

Second, FIT pricing has been dramatically reduced.

Third, there are caps on the generation eligible for the program.

Fourth, there are transmission and grid capacity requirements; you can't just plug in 200mW of juice into a standard 100V line leading to a 240V transformer.

Fifth, the capital costs of a 'solar farm'; you won't find many lenders given the current FIT payback rates.

Sixth, OPA approval is not guaranteed.

But its all moot anyways b/c Ag land is exempt.

[Dado]

Well that didn't seem to impede those who established the solar farm near Galetta/Arnprior since it is built on ag land.

What's really amusing about that installation is that the thing is surrounded by chain link fencing and they also pay someone to drive around in a tractor to mow the vegetation that overgrows the place. You'd think they would just keep a flock of sheep instead... with the fencing in place, it's not like coyotes are going to be much of a problem, and sheep will do a far better job of keeping vegetation down around all the panel supports than a lawn mower ever could.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Dado

Well that didn't seem to impede those who established the solar farm near Galetta/Arnprior since it is built on ag land.

What's really amusing about that installation is that the thing is surrounded by chain link fencing and they also pay someone to drive around in a tractor to mow the vegetation that overgrows the place. You'd think they would just keep a flock of sheep instead... with the fencing in place, it's not like coyotes are going to be much of a problem, and sheep will do a far better job of keeping vegetation down around all the panel supports than a lawn mower ever could.

I don't know the details about that project, but it may have been approved under the previous funding program and before they put in the protections for prime ag (like this project http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=194776)

[eemy]

Why can't they just farm around the windfarm? That's how most windfarms seem to work.

[Dr.Z]

Originally Posted by Dado

Well that didn't seem to impede those who established the solar farm near Galetta/Arnprior since it is built on ag land.

You're right, FIT didn't impeded that solar farm b/c it was built/approved pre-FIT.

I forgot to add that FIT also requires 60% of content to be made in Ontario. This is also a resource capacity problem.

Arnprior is a good location because of the proximity to the existing power grid and distribution system at the hydro station. Of all the criteria the grid/distribution capability is the most difficult to meet b/c its a physical infrastructure capacity problem rather than a regulatory issue; its not like HydroOne/OPA will be upgrading thousands kms of transmission lines and transformer stations in case a farmer here or there will want to go solar. That's a GIANT capital expenditure to be paid for by whom?