Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Why Oh Why are there no sensible answers.":
We think we are such big shots ! I once watched from high on a hill how Quebec City got rid of their snow. It was an awesome sight. Trucks came from all directions, in convoys, down to the docks. The snow was simply dumped in the river.
***************************
I read once years ago, Montreal has a trap door in the bridge over the river. They dumped the snow through that trap door into the river.
The Provincial Ministry of the Environment has invited nominations from Municipalities for environmental initiatives.
The Environmental Advisory Committee was created in 2006, I think.
It was to have 7 members. Thirteen people applied. Councillor Gaertner suggested all should be appointed.
They were.
The Director of Public Works was required to attend meetings of the committee as staff support.
He said; "I don't mind Councillor Buck"
In the next budget funds for an environmental engineer were included . Budget for the position, salary, benefits and equipment ,eight years ago was over $100,000.
The Director wasn't required to attend any more meetings.
I queried the function of the environmental engineer. To identify environmental initiatives, was the response.
Every year I asked what environmental initiatives had been identified.
Early this term, a treatment facility for melting snow was recommended. The relatively small gravel permeable parking lot being used to dump the snow ,as to be paved and a facility constructed underneath, intended to remove salt from the snow as it melted in the warmth of the Spring.
This story extends over three Council terms. Different Councillors. Different Mayors.
The project was included in the capital forecast in 2007.
Original total cost was estimated at $ 750,000.
The design of the facility was undertaken at a cost of $167,000.
Early in this term , the project was recommended to proceed.
This Council did not accept the recommendation for the treatment facility the first time . It was established salt could not be removed from snow melt.
The capital forecast increased to $850,000.
The recommendation returned It was no longer salt that needed to be removed. Now it was about pathogens. animal excrement.
Still it wasn't accepted.
The final reason was because the snow dump was in the wellhead protection area. Still it was a no go.
Finally, it is approved to be included in the plans for the $20 million dollar joint facility for works and parks.
It adds a $1,000,000. to the project.
All members of Council, with one exception, agreed to proceed .
No argument was presented to support the decision. The vote was taken and passed
Monday, 7 October 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
25 comments:
Oh my heavens !
Is it too late? Is that thing cut in cement the way the software program was sealed ?
Off topic as I don't know where to put it
Did you know that Aurora's communications people told the consultants that they spend time writing speeches for the Mayor & councillors? For the mayor. Maybe. But for the rest of you ?
It would be great being Councillor Buck's speechwriter, 09:28. You'd just have to write a few, knowing that she'll just keep repeating them.
To the glee of another blogger... I post this link....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_filtration
Someone should suggest that Councillor Ballard cease quoting Mr Churchill out of context. That great old guy wrote reams & you can find all sort of goodies, often contradictory. The councillor should use his own words since I doubt if staff are writing his lines.
Enjoy the Council meeting tonight. I'm not sure if any business will be accomplished but that is not unusual. The silly season used to be limited to the summer. Now we seem to have it all year 'round.
33 LONGTHORPE COURT
Possibly I am failing to understand a situation that would have been obvious to members of Council.
If members of Council had gone to the lot to view the house and the trees, accompanied by the appropriate Staff Director, it would have been apparent that the necessary grading would not permit the survival of the three trees. I have been there and I have seen this for myself.
Countless hours of Council's time have been wasted on this matter.
This is absolutely stupid and intolerable behaviour on the part of our elected officials.
Shortly after 9:00 p.m. Clr. Gaertner commenced her speech with the following words:
"I don't want to do what people want. I want to do what is right."
This is the same creature who sat around the Council table for four years while the hound from Hell did "what was right."
This included a lawsuit commenced against three Aurora citizens for defamation, a lawsuit that was ultimately discontinued.
Clr. Gaertner is a complete hypocrite, a person who doesn't know from which direction the sun rises and sets.
Le Renard !!!!!
Watching tonight - & I have quit- was like being one of several judges at a school public speaking event. You hear one exceptional kid who blows your socks off. Then you look at your fellow judges & know deep in your soul that some youngster pontificating on his boring stamp collection will win.
Well done, sleep well.
Councillor Abel actually got 1 thing right. Aurora can't do anything but maybe fine the property owner if he takes a chain saw to those trees.
It is easy to see why Aurora's service charges are through the roof. We waste staff time and hours on matters that are none of the Towns business. Now it appears we might be headed for the courts over a dispute between neighbours which should never have reached the council table. Completely nuts. It s taxpayers' money - not some re-election fund.
Am I correct in saying that there is an existing tree by-law and that it is under review?
Under the existing by-law it is permitted for a property owner to remove up to four trees a year without a permit.
Is this a correct statement?
If it is, why the waste of time by council on three trees? It appears that the property owner could have removed them whenever he wished.
Your clarification would be appreciated.
I believe i might be coming around to your way of dealing with Council, Evelyn. Last night was so bad that I found myself laughing out loud.
Canadian Press
" Toronto judge acquits 89-year-old peace activist who refused to fill out census. "
A man's tree is his castle, except in Aurora.
Loved the show. Hated the ending. & the cost.
10:16.... should have thrown the crackpot in jail.
She objected because the company that had the contract to tablulate the census was Lockheed-Martin (a US mega corporation that among other things is a defense contractor).
When the RFP was issued, Lockheed-Martin was the ONLY response.
What can you do? The government would have been chastised if they did not issue an RFP; then they are chastised when they do and award the contract.
Now you have wackos objecting. Lock her up!
What, no recap of last night's events? (Haven't calmed down yet?)
13:54
Suppose you provide your version of events.
Après vous, 14:59.
I hear several councillors trying out the Blame Game. Like the trees had been concealed. Like all those neighbours did not select their lots because of proximity to the trees. There was no concealment. A bunch of horse-puckey. That owner did nothing wrong.
When I heard those residents say that they bought their lots because of those 3 trees...I almost fell off my chair. So...if those 3 trees did not exist they wouldn't of bought those lots?...Really?...Who were they trying to kid?
I had a neighbour once poison a tree on the other side of their property. Should I have reported them? It was felt that it was an ugly specimen (in their minds) and the branches hung over their lot.
Drill a little hole, inject some poison. And Bob's your uncle!
Post a Comment