Ken Gray: NIMBY watch

[jeremy_haak]

I'm surprised he published it on his blog. The only reason I sent the e-mail in the first place was because I couldn't figure out how to leave an actual comment (perhaps I need to register with the Citizen?).

[S-Man]

I'm glad you did send a letter, but for future commenting you simply have to register at the Citizen - I think it's still a Wordpress setup.

[Cre47]

If Ken's NIMBY and Facebook friends wish that Parkdale Avenue will be renamed to "Hobbs" (though the letter was not from the 1900+ Facebook friends), they've ran out of luck. There is already a street named after her on the south side of the 417 across from Bayshore

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Hobbs+A...tario&t=m&z=16

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...avenue-reader/

What's next? Will he rename his blog: "The Hobbs Watch"?

[Cre47]

Meanwhile, he's back with the protests about Kanata development though he doesn't specifically talks about the 16-story tower in which Bill Teron railed against it.

I will agree that there is bad development in Kanata, but bad development planning by Bill Teron and company and other municipal politicians during the old Kanata years and that includes Alex Munter.

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/01/22/53533/

[S-Man]

It seems the biggest NIMBYS outside the greenbelt are in Kanata, so he has to acknowledge his cheerleading squad from Beaverbrook.

As for the Hobbs Watch, it may as well be. She could order a sandwich and he'd disapprove/make fun of the way she did it. At what point does Grey cross the line in the Hobbs thing? I know she doesn't pay him any mind, which shows she isn't nearly as obsessive-compulsive as he is, but at what point would/could she fight back with something other than silence? It almost seems he's trying to provoke her into being the big, anti-democratic meanie he labels her as.

[amanfromnowhere]

Originally Posted by S-Man

It seems the biggest NIMBY outside the greenbelt are in Kanata, so he has to acknowledge his cheerleading squad from Beaverbrook.

I am fairly new to Ottawa and have only lived in Kanata (for 2 years) but yes, from my observation NIMBYS are very strong here, at least much stronger than in Winnipeg where I came from... In Winnipeg, majority people are welcome development but not many developers... In Ottawa, vice versa, there are many developers but so many NIMBYS... It's funny but sometimes I think what if to move all NIMBYS to Winnipeg and people from Winnipeg here:-) Everybody would be happy

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by amanfromnowhere

I am fairly new to Ottawa and have only lived in Kanata (for 2 years) but yes, from my observation NIMBYS are very strong here, at least much stronger than in Winnipeg where I came from... In Winnipeg, majority people are welcome development but not many developers... In Ottawa, vice versa, there are many developers but so many NIMBYS... It's funny but sometimes I think what if to move all NIMBYS to Winnipeg and people from Winnipeg here:-) Everybody would be happy

Part of the issue in Ottawa is there is an obession with parks and green space if you look at comments when a project comes up more times then not people say that would be a great spot for a park or we need a big garden etc it really gets silly at times.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by reidjr

Part of the issue in Ottawa is there is an obession with parks and green space if you look at comments when a project comes up more times then not people say that would be a great spot for a park or we need a big garden etc it really gets silly at times.

Which is especially annoying since Ottawa probably has one of the highest greenspace per square kilometre standings in Canada.

In other news, what are peoples opinions about the new Rideau Canal shelters?

[KHOOLE]

Originally Posted by reidjr

Part of the issue in Ottawa is there is an obession with parks and green space if you look at comments when a project comes up more times then not people say that would be a great spot for a park or we need a big garden etc it really gets silly at times.

Ottawa isn't just like any other city. It's a single industry town (data processing died 10 years ago and the wood industry 60 years ago). The city's one and only employer is the federal government and it provides the pay checks for over 100,000 employees as well as feeding all the lobbying and related industries in town.

The only other industry of relevance in town is the tourist industry. Tourists do not come to Ottawa to visit shopping malls and suburbs and tall condos. They come here and spend money here to see historical buildings, historical structures like the Rideau Canal, historical areas like the Market, Chinatown and Little Italy and, yes, green space and parks.

We are lucky to have the NCC to foot much of the cost of our tourist industry with Canadian taxpayers’ money (think Winterlude). Most Canadian tourist cities (think Vancouver, Halifax) do not have that privilege.

With 20,000 Ottawa federal jobs to be axed within the next 5 to 10 years (source CCPA), there will probably be a glut of condos in Ottawa. There will be less money going around and tourist dollars will be very valuable for the City help to pay for its infrastructures, old and new.

So, I wouldn't put down parks. There may be too much unused green open space along the Ottawa River, I agree. The NCC has been sitting on LeBreton Flats for the past 50 years and a plan to redevelop the Ottawa Chaudiere islands for at least 20 years. The city’s Strathcona Park is a gem and so are each and every one of possibly over a hundred protected areas that the city has for its citizens to use for leisure and play. Quality of life is what defines a city and parks are part of it.

The City has probably reached its optimum size anyway. Any bigger, the City may end up by spending much more to maintain itself that it can take in, even if taxes are increased considerably. Development can't go on forever in Ottawa. There is a limit to the number of jobs and to disposable income.

So, maybe we need a new planning model.

[amanfromnowhere]

Originally Posted by KHOOLE

Ottawa isn't just like any other city. It's a single industry town (data processing died 10 years ago and the wood industry 60 years ago). The city's one and only employer is the federal government and it provides the pay checks for over 100,000 employees as well as feeding all the lobbying and related industries in town.

The only other industry of relevance in town is the tourist industry. Tourists do not come to Ottawa to visit shopping malls and suburbs and tall condos. They come here and spend money here to see historical buildings, historical structures like the Rideau Canal, historical areas like the Market, Chinatown and Little Italy and, yes, green space and parks.

We are lucky to have the NCC to foot much of the cost of our tourist industry with Canadian taxpayers’ money (think Winterlude). Most Canadian tourist cities (think Vancouver, Halifax) do not have that privilege.

With 20,000 Ottawa federal jobs to be axed within the next 5 to 10 years (source CCPA), there will probably be a glut of condos in Ottawa. There will be less money going around and tourist dollars will be very valuable for the City help to pay for its infrastructures, old and new.

So, I wouldn't put down parks. There may be too much unused green open space along the Ottawa River, I agree. The NCC has been sitting on LeBreton Flats for the past 50 years and a plan to redevelop the Ottawa Chaudiere islands for at least 20 years. The city’s Strathcona Park is a gem and so are each and every one of possibly over a hundred protected areas that the city has for its citizens to use for leisure and play. Quality of life is what defines a city and parks are part of it.

The City has probably reached its optimum size anyway. Any bigger, the City may end up by spending much more to maintain itself that it can take in, even if taxes are increased considerably. Development can't go on forever in Ottawa. There is a limit to the number of jobs and to disposable income.

So, maybe we need a new planning model.

Probably, Ottawa needs to get used that it is already big city? When that fact is recognized by all citizens (not by members of this forum only) a new thinking will come along with new ideas and models. Fully agree that the city reached its optimum size, but look at Stockholm - it has the similar size, but what the difference! They are not just a big city - they live and think as a big city and this is the big difference...

[reidjr]

KHOOLE
While the goverment is the largest employer its not the only one Ottawa still does have a high tech sector sure its not as big in but its still there and it could get bigger there are a fair amount of Ontario goverment jobs be it hospitals or service centers then you have the like's of UOttawa & Carleton both to have alot of people working for them and all signs are they will get even bigger there are aslo other jobs sure they may not pay huge but there still other types of jobs.As for condos if anything i think they will be even more of a demand part of the reason is those who are let go or retire may want to downsize and sell there big house in the burbs and move into a condo as for parks yes there nice but they alone don't appeal to everything you want to attract more and more people you have to offer more such as more museums maybe a zoo or aquriam you need to have something fpr everyone that could aslo include a amusement park of sorts parks alone will not do much my point is if you want to attract people offer tons of things for all different ages.

[amanfromnowhere]

From Wiki:

The Federal government is the city's largest employer, employing over 110,000 individuals from the National Capital region. Ottawa is also an important technology centre; its 1800 companies employ approximately 80,000 people. Another major employer is the health sector, which employs over 18,000 people. Business, finance, administration, and sales and service occupations rank high among types of occupations. Approximately ten percent of Ottawa's GDP is derived from finance, insurance, real estate whereas employment is in goods-producing industries is only half the national average. The City of Ottawa is the second largest employer with over 15,000 employees.

It even didn't mention tourism... I have difficulties to see that your statement "the city's one and only employer is the federal government" is correct...

[reidjr]

Originally Posted by amanfromnowhere

From Wiki:



It even didn't mention tourism... I have difficulties to see that your statement "the city's one and only employer is the federal government" is correct...

Its the largest but its not the only one look at the hospitals and schools there not federal but there are a fair amount of people that work there.

[amanfromnowhere]

Originally Posted by reidjr

Its the largest but its not the only one look at the hospitals and schools there not federal but there are a fair amount of people that work there.

That's what I was saying:-) My comment was addressed to KHOOLE's statement about the only one employer in the city

[KHOOLE]

QUOTE=amanfromnowhere;5561137]From Wiki:

It even didn't mention tourism... I have difficulties to see that your statement "the city's one and only employer is the federal government" is correct...[/QUOTE]


The federal government and the hi-tech industry are the only two job-creating industries in town. Hi-tech came to Ottawa in the 80's and 90's because there were government contracts and subsidies to be had (think Nortel). That bubble burst in 2001 and I doubt that it will ever come back to what it was before. That in itself is a negative job growth. Except for the fact that the buildings are already built and available, hi-tech could just as easily be in North Bay, Owen Sound, Medicine Hat or Mumbai.

How current and reliable is the Wiki entry? When was it posted and when was it updated? Is it verifiable?

Except for the universities, all the other industries, including the City of Ottawa workforce are dependant on the presence of the federal government.
The universities are an exception because their growth is dependant on their prestige and quality of teaching.

So that leaves us with a federal government with an unstated intention of giving pink slips to 10% of its employees country-wide which could translate to 20,000 in Ottawa.

Mind you, Ottawa is privileged because it has no slums and its residents, including retirees, earn and own more than the average Canadian. Financially, the Ottawa economy is stable and should remain so. However, that does not mean that one will be easily able to sell a "big house in the burbs" for a condo downtown when there may not be as many buyers for that big house. In fact, that big house may have to be sold for less than the asking price.

And, how would one want a condo with a real cheap mortgage when one isn't sure of having a job in a year or two or three? That's how the sub prime mess started in the U.S. in 2008.

By a new planning model, I mean that people have to start thinking outside the box. The building industry is dependant on people not only having jobs but also they must have spare money to spend. Right now, in Canada, the average Joe owes $1.50 for every $1 he earns. A new planning model may mean to invest in a better and bigger tourist industry (that's what the Convention Centre is about) or to find a brand new industry.

Ideas anyone?

[waterloowarrior]

A job loss of 20,000 would not be good, but that's about 2.9% of Ottawa-Gatineau's employment base. After the cuts we would still be higher than our 2007 job numbers p. 47.
http://ottawa.ca/city_services/stati...dr_2010_en.pdf

[reidjr]

KHOOLE
I think its important to keep in mind that 20,000 number is not the final number that is just what one group thinks could happen in terms of 11,000-20,000 now even if it turns out to be that number there are other factors such as how many of that number would be near retirement how many want to switch jobs my point is there good be a few factors in play now even those who are let go they could still find work in Ottawa be it the high tech sector or even in the medical sector.

[Cre47]

Originally Posted by reidjr

KHOOLE
I think its important to keep in mind that 20,000 number is not the final number that is just what one group thinks could happen in terms of 11,000-20,000 now even if it turns out to be that number there are other factors such as how many of that number would be near retirement how many want to switch jobs my point is there good be a few factors in play now even those who are let go they could still find work in Ottawa be it the high tech sector or even in the medical sector.

And remember in the 90's they have cut too much so they have to re-hire massively. I'm pretty sure the same thing will happen.

[Ottawan]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

A job loss of 20,000 would not be good, but that's about 2.9% of Ottawa-Gatineau's employment base. After the cuts we would still be higher than our 2007 job numbers p. 47.
http://ottawa.ca/city_services/stati...dr_2010_en.pdf

This would be true, except that these are top-tier jobs, so a spin-off multiplier applies to them, meaning that the loss of these jobs could have the effect of reducing employment in service sectors.

[Cre47]

I'm wondering if our buddy supports the subdivision aforementionned in this letter. Did Ken made an article about the Manotick subdivision?

Sure planning, can be a top issue in the next election. But probably the type of planning you're thinking. We're taking about curbing suburplosion.

Though OC Transpo should be another top issue as well with the BS cuts from last September.

http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/...ection-reader/