HEY MR. PRIME MINISTER, WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF -- UPDATE

I posted this link more than two years ago and just revisited it.  It's interesting to note that the only thing that has really changed is that Canada's Minister of the Environment is now Leona. Aglukkag, apointed in 2013.

What's clear to me?  The face may have changed:  the mindset didn't. Try this link below and decide for yourself.

http://www.frankejames.com/debate/?p=11818

Dawson Creek -- One of Canada's Most Sustainable Urban Communities

Last September,  Dawson Creek BC announced a new initiative to help cut greenhouse gas pollution.  The City  pays $100 for each tonne of carbon emissions from the city's buildings, vehicles and other operations to Dawson Creek Carbon Fund which, in turn supports project which reduce greenhouse gas pollution within the comnmunity.  This innovative approach to reducing its own greenhouse gas pollution works towards meeting its own commitment of carbon neutrality in its operations by 2012, as committed to under the B.C. Climate Action Charter.  Dawson Creek worked closely with the Pembina Institute to design the Carbon Fund.

Dawson Creek is a recognized leader in British Columbia in implementing forward thinking

energy efficiency and renewable energy projects and policies. We recognize that taking

action to reduce emissions is one of the most significant things a municipality can do to

combat climate change, and we are excited to meet this challenge head-on. We have

successfully taken some first steps towards fulfilling our commitment to be carbon neutral

by 2012, and there is much more to do.(1)

The B.C. Climate Action Charter was developed to encourage local governments to make operations carbon neutral by 2012; to measure and report on community emissions; and to work towards creating more compact, complete, energy efficient communities. Dawson Creek is amongst the signatories of the Charter and is committed to being carbon neutral in its municipal operations by 2012.

For more information on the subject, refer to the following link

http://www.planningforpeople.ca/is/index.asp
Dawson Creek’s Strategy

(1)  On the Path to Carbon Neutral 

The People’s Food Policy

Another interesting read about the status of Canada's Food Policy
http://www.margaretwebb.com/apples_to_oysters/fire-in-their-bellies/

When it comes to Alberta’s agri-foods sector, is bigger really better?

http://albertaventure.com/2012/06/when-it-comes-to-alberta%e2%80%99s-agri-foods-sector-is-bigger-really-better/

The following is an excerpt -- for the entire article please refer to the link above

Sizing up the competition - Jun 11, 2012  by Robin Schroffel

If there’s one thing that stands out about Alberta’s agri-foods industry, it’s that nobody stands out. While there are plenty of big companies selling into the Alberta market (Cargill, Olymel, Maple Leaf Foods, Lucerne, Agropur and McCain, to name a few), only one – meat processor XL Foods – is actually headquartered in the province.

What exactly are agri-foods, anyway?

In this industry report, we’ve used the term “agri-foods” to refer to items that have been somehow processed or manufactured, to which value has been added. But Lynn Stegman of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development says the phrase is often used as an umbrella term covering both processed and primary agricultural and food products. It would then include things like basic crops and livestock along with manufactured goods and biofuels.
Primary products (agriculture)
Basic crops and livestock produced from the natural resources of the Earth
Examples: cattle, unprocessed grains such as wheat and barley, legumes such as chickpeas and lentils
Value-added products (food and beverage manufacturing)
Primary agricultural products that have been manufactured to increase their value
Examples: meat, prepared mustard, pet food, beer, spun yarn
Biofuels
Fuels in which energy is derived from a biological carbon source, including vegetable oils, animal fats and crops
Examples: methane from biomass, ethanol, biodiesel

Tips to Earn Points on LEED Project or How to Cheat* at LEED for Homes

it might be a little older but it's still worth the read:

file://http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/green-building-curmudgeon/how-cheat-leed-homes

 

Posted on May 24 2011 by Carl Seville, GBA Advisor

Connecting the Fractal City

http://zeta.math.utsa.edu/~yxk833/connecting.html

This essay describes distinct types of cities as characterized by their connective geometry. The pressure to accommodate both the automobile and increased population growth led twentieth-century urbanists to impose anti-fractal geometrical typologies.  The distribution of the sizes of urban components and connections can define fundamentally different types of cities.  In his essay, Nikos A. Salingaros discusses the hierarchy of connections necessary to sustain urban life. Competing networks of connections exist on several scales, each scale being necessary for separate functions. Understanding these interconnections is essential if we wish to incorporate the electronic city into the physical city.  He criticizes the policy of eliminating small-scale connections in favor of large-scale connections -- the city needs both, and in the proper balance.

Urban Gardening and Upcycling

 

The concept is that you water the top plant and it drains through to the plant below that and then to the plant below that.  www.UrbanOrganicGardener.com.

Some great ideas for container gardening!  And he has an entire series to meet all your city dwelling green thumb desires.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TONjtv6uuKI&feature=relmfu

Please Help Support Our Food Banks

http://youtu.be/_hkKndoXJdc

Help Fill the Food Banks just by watching this video and sharing it on Facebook and Twitter. For every YouTube view, before May 11, 2012, Shaw will donate $1 to the food bank drive and Campbell Canada will donate 1 pound of food up to $250,000 and 250,000 pounds of food respectively. Please share and help us fill local food banks. Find out how you can donate at http://togetherisamazing.com/

Published on Apr 12, 2012 by ShawCommunication

 

Brightest Moon of the Year and Meteor Shower Tonight

http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/storm_watch_stories3&stormfile=Supermoon_visible_in_night_sky_this_weekend_04_05_2012?ref=ccbox_weather_topstories

Let's hope the rain lets up and the skies are clear tonight so that we call all enjoy a tha spectacle of moon and stars!

Province to Create a Property Rights Advocate

http://alberta.ca/PropertyRights/index.html
The Alberta government has introduced legislation to establish a Property Rights Advocate to strengthen landowner interests as development in the province occurs.  Bill 6: the Property Rights Advocate Act was introduced in response to landowners' position that they MUST have recourse to an independent tribunal, the courts, or both for the purpose of determining full and fair compensation for access to their land.

Reporting to the Minister of Alberta Justice and Attorney General, the Property Rights Advocate Office will share independent and impartial information about property rights and help people determine the appropriate resolution mechanism including the courts. The Advocate will be required to table an annual report on the office’s business each year in the legislature.

Take a read and decide for yourself whether you think it addresses the concerns of landowners across the Province to the Alberta Land Stewardship Act.

Professional Planners Stamping Land Use Plans? That's Just Silly

As you may have noticed, I  blog primarily to share information I think others might find value in.  This time, however, I need to go on a bit of a rant about a subject that has gotten under my skin for many years.  Perhaps I'm being overly sensitive, perhaps not.  Feel free to enter the debate; I would like to hear a common sense defense that is anything other than elitist, egotistical and self-serving.

The Province has committed to a review of Alberta's Municipal Government Act, the primary legislation governing land use planning.  A week or so ago, there was a comment on Twitter advocating for the introduction into the Act, a requirement for land use plans to be 'signed off' by a registered professional planner.  My immediate response:  THAT'S JUST SILLY. 

In an effort to understand why someone would lobby for such an autocratic amendment, the discussion moved from Tweets to email.  As you may have guessed, I was not convinced.  Having plans signed off by a professional planner, as I understood it, has two primary focuses:  the first would be to provide for consistency in the content of planning documents throughout the Province; the second is to assure municipalities and other agencies that the plans met the requirements of the Act and were developed with a high standard of professionalism.  The example provided was that planning documents should be considered in the same light as engineering studies whereby professional engineers stamp their work to confirm the accuracy and completeness of the product. 

As I said earlier, THAT'S JUST SILLY.  Since we've likened planning to engineering, let's just compare them a little closer.   A quick google produced the following statement, which I believe accurately reflects these professional institutions:

Professional engineering is:
Affixing the seal on documents and drawings indicates the documents and drawings are final for the intended purpose and have been prepared by or under the supervision of a person licensed to practise professional engineering who is assuming responsibility for them. By sealing documents and drawings, licence holders acknowledge that they assume professional responsibility for the design, opinions, judgments or directions given in the documents and drawings. The seal is a "mark of reliance," indicating that a licence holder attests that other people can rely on the information provided in the documents and drawings.   http://www.peo.on.ca/registration/LR.html

The engineering profession is very objective, whereas the planning profession is much more subjective.  According to the Canadian Institute of Planners:

"Planning" means the scientific, aesthetic, and orderly disposition of land, resources, facilities and services with a view to securing the physical, economic and social efficiency, health and well-being of urban and rural communities.

An MCIP adheres to a Code of Professional Practice developed by the Institute delineating the planner's responsibility to the public interest, clients and employers and the profession.  http://www.cip-

If you just scratch the surface,  requiring a professional planner to sign off on land use plans  seems to have some merit.  However, there is a vast difference in the basic underpinning of each of these professions.  Engineering is not only founded in science, it is also grounded in science.  Planning, on the other hand, is really the synthesis of science, trends and public perception .  In the words of Thomas Adams, 'the best planners need many skills to make sure all considerations are met during a project.' 

Planning attemps to balance private interests with public interests through a creative process designed to capture a collective vision.  A land use plan is the culmination of information garnered through the use of numerous tools, including capacity building, computer modelling, design workshops and, of course, any existing science-based studies and documentation.  It takes information we know to be true, plus information we believe to be true, mixed with a wee bit of crystal ball gazing to make a truly good, implementable land use plan.

Beyond this significant variation between how the two professions are applied in the real world, there is another issue of liability.  Because engineering is science based, engineers have a responsibility to ensure the science behind a design is sound and properly applied.  If it isn't, an engineer might be considered negligent. Because land use planning is so much more subjective, guiding principles and policies are often loosely penned, which can result in broad interpretation and application.  As an example, what I might interpret very literally, might be interpreted by another as something completely different.   While we all might carry liability insurance, when is the last time a professional planner was effectively sued for negligence, not to mention, how would one go about proving negligence? 

If planning isn't a hard science, and a planner can't really be found negligent, what would the purpose of requiring a plan to be signed off?  The only other thing I can think of is, perhaps, whether a professional planner would like to ensure the policies contained in a land use plan meets the requirements of the MGA and all are implementable.  While most of the requirements of the MGA aren't rocket science, anyone who has dallied in the world of current planning for very long can site any number of plans, crafted by professional and non-professional planners alike, containing policies that conflict with other plans in the heirarchy or are simply not implementable. 
If there is an professional that should be signing off on land use plans, perhaps it's the engineer, particularly in instances where plans rely upon detailed engineering studies and reports.  In instances where a plan is so prescriptive that it identifies very specific land uses (not just types) perhaps the authority having jurisdiction over permitting (i.e., the lowly Development Officer) should be 'signing off'; they are, more often than not, interpreting and applying most plans and already have certain responsibilities under the Act to do so.

In my mind, land use planning is not a simple matter.  To me, good planning very much requires a collaborative approach and its success reliant on several factors.  In my opinion, here are the ingredients to development a great land use plan:

1.   1 developer with a development vision
2.   1 interested and engaged community with a similar neighbourhood vision
3.   1committed approving authority with a similar community vision
4.   1 very savvy engineer
The planner, by the way, is the cook in my recipe.  The product relies heavily on the quality of the first 3 ingredients and the skill the cook has in mixing.  A successful plan requires a developer with a vision that will benefit the greater good;  a community that supports the vision; and an approving authority that is committed to implementing the vision.  The engineering is the science that holds the 3 ingredients together to make it all work.  It is the planner (or the cook) who is responsible for the careful balance of ingredients. 

We've all written plans that we are very proud of; and others, not-so-much so for reasons that aren't always within our control.  Perhaps our client was more concerned with his dream rather than that of the community's; perhaps community perception altered the outcome; perhaps politics got in the way of good planning.  What can I say?  It happens to all of us.  Some planners are just going to be better than others, just as some cooks are better than others, and some plans are just better than others.

Whoever thinks there is a benefit to requiring land use plans to be signed off by a professional planner -- well, THAT'S JUST SILLY!

1. any act of planning, designing, composing, evaluating, advising, reporting, directing or supervising (or the managing of any such act);
2. that requires the application of engineering principles; and
3. concerns the safeguarding of life, health, property, economic interests, the public welfare or the environment.

If what you do meets all three tests, you are practising professional engineering and must be licensed by the association.