Policies & Threats Related to Greenspaces
It’s VERY interesting to compare the three articles below. The first from the Citizen is dated April 17, 2012, and the second from the Sun is dated July 12, 2011. The third was published in the Sun, also on April 17. The first indicates that there “may” be a home for felled infected Ash trees in LRT stations, but the second published nine months ago calls these trees a “windfall
April 19, 2012 Ann Coffey reports: The attached PDF from Vermont (632 KB) states: “Management practices that eliminate ash could be a greater threat to ash than EAB itself”. Retain ash to provide wildlife benefits. Consider ash as a seed source, and unhealthy ash trees as potential future snags. Dead trees may be used for nesting, feeding and/or as a perch site. Where practical, and with due consideration of safety,
A first call to action, sponsored by the Greenspace Alliance and the Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre (April 18, 2012) Lessons from Vermont Ash trees a windfall for the LRT? Media coverage, letters to the editor and to Council Say it with pictures TreeAzin Booklet from BioForest Technologies Media Release of May 24, 2012 A position paper: Saving Ottawa’s Trees Correspondence with City Hall >> City of Ottawa news release, July 11,
February 16, 2008 The Ottawa Citizen of Saturday, February 16 [article no longer online] (The Observer, page B7) carried an op-ed piece by Ted Cooper wherein he discusses his motivation for contesting decisions about development along the Carp River and why fellow engineers appear to neglect their prime duty: Safeguarding of public health and safety. Erwin Dreessen Updated February 20, 2008 OMB Appeal: Ted Cooper’s Witness Statement An Ontario Municipal
Excerpt from: File No. CA 003-05, L. Kamerman, Mining and Lands Commissioner, Friday, the 9th day of March, 2007, pages 9-11. [Underlining added] Adverse Economic Impact The issue in Mr. Russell’s appeal is whether his proposal will adversely affect the conservation of land. For purposes of the section 28 application and appeals, the issues are technical, not social or economic. Economic and social interests come into play in the planning
From: Ted Cooper To: Marianne.Wilkinson@ottawa.ca ; Shad.Qadri@ottawa.ca ; Peggy.Feltmate@ottawa.ca Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 9:46 PM Subject: Filling at Richcraft Dear Councillors: I couldn’t believe what I was seeing and hearing on CBC News at Six concerning the on-going filling activities at the Richcraft Plan of Subdivision. This is another example of MVC misunderstanding it’s responsibilities in enforcing Regulations under the Conservation Authorities Act. As you know there are problems
Carp River Floodplain Development For at least two years Ottawa Riverkeeper has been working with a coalition of local groups to warn the City of Ottawa against building in the floodplain of the Carp River. Recently, a major error was discovered in the engineering studies being used to back the decision to build hundreds of homes in the floodplain. As a result, the City of Ottawa has temporarily put the
13 February 2008 CBC TV News at Six yesterday carried a story about an unending row of trucks dumping huge amounts of fill on land owned by Richcraft at Maple Grove Road very near the Carp River. Ottawa Riverkeeper Meredith Brown was interviewed. See a story about this in the February issue of the ORK newsletter. It turns out that the Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority had issued a permit last
(Letter to the Editor of The Citizen, published on February 8) Search for truth February 8, 2008 Re: Sweet vindication for crusading engineer, Feb. 5. Hats off to Ted Cooper. He selflessly committed himself to the greater public good in his fight against the ill-conceived plans to fill and develop the Carp River floodplain. It is greatly appreciated that Citizen reporter Patrick Dare and columnist Randall Denley brought Ted Cooper’s
On March 31, 2011 Part II Order requesters received the Minister’s reply. All requests were denied but three conditions were imposed on the City: 1: The City and KWOG shall implement all commitments made in their letter of October 15, 2009: + Additional Stormwater Management (SWM) Runoff Volume Controls and Widening of Planned Restoration Corridor; + Municipal Planning Controls Regarding Floodplain Management; + SWM Model Validation and Contingency Plan; +
