Zoom w a View: Canada’s Gold Medal Men’s Curling Team comes to London

In many things in life, three out of four isn’t bad.

Today’s adventure, like that, was actually terrific.


["Three out of four ain't bad!": photos GAH]

When Kevin Martin’s gold medal team visited London today (White Oaks Mall @ 2:45 p.m.; you shoulda been there) to sign autographs and be the centre of 4 million photographs, minus Kevin himself, a friend and I decided to brave the crowds and shake hands with Ben Hebert, Marc Kennedy and John Morris.


["Ben and Marc address the crowd"]

It was well worth the hour wait in line to have the three youngest members of the dream team sign the one item I had taken - a corn curling broom purchased in 1969.

Along with a signed postcard from the team, it will hang in a select corner of my workshop for years to come (pictures to follow) and be the focus of three out of every four conversations about sports.

And Kevin, if you are ever in town, pop by the shop.

There’s a spot reserved for your signature on The Spoiler.

(Cold beverages will be served).

.

Live Small: National debt is a silent, deadly avalanche Part 3

First, the bad news.

Canada’s national debt will peak at approx. $620 billion in 2014.

[Please click here to read National Debt Part 2]

Second, good news from my crystal ball.

If we’re able to start reversing the trend in 2015, as forecasted by Finance Canada, and start paying the debt down at the same steady rate as in an earlier 11 year period (from 1997 - 2007 we reduced the debt from $563 billion to $458 billion), it will take us 62 years, or until 2076, to pay off our national debt.

Unfortunately, paying down debt is an uncharacteristic habit of the Canadian government.

In the bar graph I’m referencing (compliments of Dept. of Finance and the London Free Press, Feb. 27) that indicates national debt from 1961 - 2014, there appears to be only one period we tackled the debt, i.e., the aforementioned 11 year stretch that ended 2 years ago.

It’s not that we don’t have the money. Corporate and household wealth has grown since 1961, but so have expenses (there's so much stuff to buy!) and our collective penchant for paying lower taxes.

In fact, for some government leaders, ‘lower taxes’ is their motto, because they hope that the economy will carry the day and our debt away, and they'll get elected for another term.


["Growing debt can act like an avalanche"]

Again, unfortunately, not only is paying down debt an uncharacteristic habit, but other things sometimes get in the way of progress.

Recessions rear their ugly heads on occasion.

Intense and costly weather-related problems occur, and are occurring more frequently as years go by, and damages must be paid for by someone.

There has been much written lately about how growing household debt is a major problem for the Canadian economy (our economy is driven by consumer spending, so spend, spend, spend), but little has been said about growing provincial and national debt and the major problems to be imposed one day on future generations.

Will they feel an even greater need to spend all they earn, and take on even more debt than today's families, to keep their country’s economy afloat?

Will there come a time when natural damages are so great that the country they live in cannot repair it or move on?

Will they feel smothered in debts as if under a silent, deadly avalanche?

Time will tell, but for now, we’re heading in the wrong direction and the snow pack is getting thicker.

In conclusion, I think we’ll be facing smaller lifestyles and smaller disposable incomes as we face growing pressure to pay down our growing household, provincial and federal debts.

***

Raise your hand if you think taxes should be off the table?

If taxes are off the table, what will have to happen instead?

.

Live Small and Prosper: Things that are going North ($$$) Pt 1

My motto Live small, aka ‘live small and prosper,’ aka ‘reduce spending, pay down debts and save money for the tough times ahead’ seems to be getting more important every day.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the federal Conservatives try to squeeze a bit of it into our national anthem - while they’re tinkering in order to distract people from the fact they don’t know how to solve Canada’s large financial, economic and environmental problems.

(Hint: Start off with O Canada, our home and mortgaged land...

Then, after the phrase ‘true patriot love,’ throw in ‘save dough 'cause times are tough.’)

Until that happens I’ll maintain a list of things that are going North ($$$), as far as our wallets are concerned.

First, our national debt will go over $600 billion in 2012, according to Canada’s Dept. of Finance.

Second, our hydro bills will rise once we switch to the new ‘smart meter’ rates.

Third, oil just past $80 US per barrel. That can’t be good (unless it’s burbling from your back yard. Is it? Call me).

Fourth, Canada’s average household debt to income ratio just went from 140 to 145 percent (predicted to be at 160 soon).


Fifth, experts predict that higher interests are on the way, so mortgages and lines of credit will cost Canadians more.

Sixth, the HST (Hiked Sales Tax) will be starting in just a few months, and many shopping purchases and monthly bills will cost Canadians more.

Seventh, a copy of Batman’s debut in a 1939 comic book sold recently for $1.075 million US. So, if you’re into rare comics (and I say, why not), start saving up.

Okay, that’s enough good news for one day.

***

Canada, did I miss anything else going North ($$$)?

Have you bought a new piggy bank lately?

Please click here to read Part 2.

.

Live Small: National debt is a silent, deadly avalanche Part 2

Let’s start with the good news:

“Uncharacteristically, 1996 was followed by 11 straight years of budgetary surpluses, and in that time period our country’s national debt was reduced by approx. 100 billion dollars, and in 2007 it sat at 458 billion.”

I don’t know how many times per week you can squeeze good news out of me, but I mentioned the above yesterday - so that’s once.

[Please click here to read National debt is a silent, deadly avalanche Part 1 for more context.]

However (you knew bad news was coming, right?), I finished yesterday’s post by saying, “to those who think those (11 straight years) were really great years and we made tremendous progress, and, as a country, we’ll be able to continue that path with ease, let me say two things.”

Well, here are the two things:


["We'll throw a party. Pop a few balloons"]

First, at that same rate of ‘tremendous progress,’ it would take until the late fall of the year 2056 (approx. 46.7 years from last Sunday) to reduce the rest of the debt, i.e., 458 billion as of 2007.

You might think that sounds great. We’ll throw a party. Pop a few balloons.

Me?

In 46.7 years, at 107 years old, I’ll likely be a little too tired to raise a glass of good cheer or eat a crumpet to celebrate.


["Dance, Gordie, dance!"]

Pop a balloon? Who will hold the pin? Me or one of my two sons, 86 and 84 years old at the time? We’d be lucky to even see a balloon.

Second, as many Canadians already know, our national debt is headed in the wrong direction again.

Why, last year alone saw us spent more beyond our means (a deficit of over $55 billion) than at any other time in human history, and that’s a long time, even in dog years.

Now, I’m not here to debate whether stimulus spending by the Conservatives was a good thing or not (time will tell), but the spending forecasted by Canada’s Department of Finance tells us we’ll pass the $600 billion barrier for the first time in 2012.

But not the last time. It will peak at approx. $620 billion in 2014.

And if we’re able to start reversing the trend, as forecasted by Finance Canada, at the same steady rate as in the earlier, uncharacteristic 11 year period, it will take us 62 years, or until 2076 (I’ll be 126, so popping a balloon will be out of the question), to pay off our national debt.


["Will we ever save $620 billion?']

Sixty-two years.

That’s a long time, and considering the recent recession, its impacts on global economies and a few other matters, i.e., I’d like to save up for a vacation, a few questions about our national debt spring to mind.

And isn’t that always the case?

***

Where will you be in 2076?

If alive, pop a balloon for me.

Please click here to read Part 3.

.

Reading and Riding: The Little Green Handbook (TLGH) not so little

I’ve been putting a lot of miles on my exercise bike lately (I have to stay ahead of a few younger hockey players), usually with a book in hand.

Because I was nearing the end of Climate Wars by Gwynne Dyer I took TLGH (previously read) with me last night on a 40 mile trip, knowing it said a few things about growing debt and economic losses with a global perspective.


(Please visit ‘Read This’ in right hand margin for more details about both books mentioned above, and please click here to link to more information about Climate Wars).

Not only does the author of TLGH discuss growing global debt and economic losses, he links them to climate change.

On page 102 the author asks, are we already experiencing the effects of climate change?

His answer links climate change to intense weather events and growing economic losses, and I think his connections are hard to refute. (Though, of course, there will always be those who will try.)

The author writes:

A study of climate change is not easy, as records must be taken over a long period and it is necessary to distinguish between usual and unusual weather events. It is also necessary to study the frequency as well as the intensity of weather-related events. This is a long and laborious process, but we do have sufficient evidence of climate change.

For example, he mentions that 9 of the 10 warmest years on record happened after 1990, that those and subsequent exceptionally warm years had a well-documented progression of weather-related disasters (e.g., droughts, heavy rainfalls, tropical storms, floods), that tropical cyclones are increasing in number annually, and insurance records show that “the number of natural catastrophes in the world increased from 30 per year in the 1970s to 140 per year at the end of the 20th century (and of the worst 40 natural disasters, only six were not related to the weather.”

The author of TLGH then discusses the probability of global bankruptcy and asks, how long can we cope with weather-related economic losses?


He writes:

If global income is substantially greater than the losses, and if it increases at least as fast as the losses, we have nothing to worry about. There will always be enough money to repair the damage.

If global income increases more slowly than the losses, it is worthwhile to calculate how long the money will last.

In an earlier post, I showed the figures he used related to global income and global economic losses that allowed him to determine that losses are increasing much faster than income.

What I didn’t share at the time was an interesting calculation related to his statement that we appear to be heading toward global bankruptcy.

Here are a few lines about his calculations:

Weather-related economic losses can be fitted by using exponential function. The best fit corresponds to a doubling time of 4.42 years.

(Raise your hand if you missed that class in Gr. 13. Hang in there).

Gross world product can be fitted using a polynomial function, which increases slowly and has no doubling time.

(Again, hang in).

The two calculated curves cross in 2045. If about that time we decide to repair the damage there will be no money left for anything else.

I know that 35 years seems like a lifetime away and climate change, weather-related economic losses and global bankruptcy seem like topics beyond our understanding or ability to control.

But, they’re really not.

TLGH puts many such matters in perspective. Take a look for it.

***

Reading and riding keeps the legs and brain active.

Too active?

.

Newspaper Clippings: Do heavy storms lead to heavier debt?

What do these things have in common?

Canada’s national debt is rising. Greece is nearing bankruptcy. France has financial problems and was recently battered by a storm.

[re France: Link to story from The London Free Press]

In common? Maybe nothing.

But I did get thinking that our comfortable place in the world may be gradually changing, and intense weather events could be one factor that moves us toward larger, unmanageable debts - uncomfortable territory.

In The Little Green Handbook I read the following:

“According to Munich Re (insurance co.), global weather-related economic losses increased from $3 billion per year in 1980 to $80 billion per year at the end of the 20th century.


“Losses per decade increased from $86 billion for 1980 - 89 to $474 billion for 1990 - 99.” (pg. 102)

I went on to read that only a small percentage of the losses are covered by insurance, “but someone has to pay for them.”

So, should countries be more concerned about their national debts knowing that intense weather events are on the increase and, generally, someone has to pay?

I think so.

I went on to read the following:

“Prospects are not encouraging, because the losses are increasing much faster than income. Global weather-related losses per decade increased from $86 billion to $474 billion, or 450 per cent in the last two decades of the 20th century.

“However, gross world product (GWP) increased from $291 trillion per decade to $386 trillion, or 33 per cent, during the same period.

“GWP is still greater than the weather-related losses, but the losses are increasing much faster, and in time they might match global income.

“That would mean global bankruptcy.”

Yipes.

Okay, Canada is likely still in a very secure position financially, but high national debt could still put us in a vulnerable position if costly weather-related events add to our growing debt load.

In other words, my ‘live small and prosper’ philosophy should become national policy as soon as possible.

***

I’m willing to start a petition.

.

Searching For a Glass of Fine Beer: Alexander Keith’s India Pale Ale

It was an impulse buy.

The Canada - US Olympic Hockey final was in 45 minutes, 3 friends were popping over and I felt, to be a good host, I should have more in the fridge than 3 bottles of beer.


["15 for the price of 12? Why thank you": photos GAH]

I admit, everyone was bringing their own, but 3 beers and a bag of BBQ chips? I’d better get moving.

Because 4,000 other Londoners felt the same way and the Beer Store was pretty busy I went for the ‘15 for the price of 12’ Keith’s display inside the front door and ran for the check out. Some over zealous referee could drop the puck at anytime.


["I like the wavy lines created by my Tom Waits CDs"]

While standing in line I recalled that the first time I had Keith’s, about 8 years ago (on tap at The Wort in Old South), I sent it back because I thought it tasted off.

But it wasn’t off. It just had a slightly different flavour than other Canadian beers I’d grown used to.

I opened my first bottle of Keith’s moments before the hockey game began, and between yelling like a maniac and stuffing my face with BBQ chips, I had the following fairly lucid thoughts:

For a hockey game, Keith’s is fine.

It is sweet (like honey) and mildly hoppy on the nose.


It is cold, smooth and refreshing on the tongue, washes down BBQ chips with ease, and leaves some barely discernible flavours on the throat, like pale malts and slightly bitter hops.

(The cardboard case says, “a smooth golden ale, with a distinct taste” and I won’t argue with that, I just like many ruby red, more flavourful ales better, and there are many).

It’s nicely carbonated and at 5% alc./vol. accompanied me into the overtime period (without knocking me out) and was right beside me when Sid scored the winner.

In the Canadian Beers section of David Kenning's book 'Beers of the World', Keith's is listed, and described as follows:

The flavor is a pleasant combination of tangy and sweet, and there are additional hints of apricot, honey and butterscotch."

I sensed some of that, but I'm perhaps 10 years away from picking up hints.

Though it’s brewed across Canada, from Halifax to Edmonton, and it felt right to buy Canadian while watching the hockey game, I likely won’t buy it again until 2014, and only if Canada is in the finals again.

If it’s a Czech - Russia final, I’ll buy a Czech beer and holler, “Beat those boys in red!”

***

Are you a Keith’s fan? Why?

Please click here to read about a lovely lovely IPA.

.

Hit Singles: The Buck Snort Café

Backgrounder: “While driving to a fire fighter college in Texas a number of years ago, in order to visit my oldest son, I spotted a road sign in Kentucky directing traffic to the town of Bucksnort. Shortly after telling my wife we should retire to Bucksnort and open a coffee shop, this song followed.” gaharrison

The Buck Snort Café

Chorus:

I’m going to the Bucksnort Café,
I’ll have my first cup of the day,
I’ll talk to my pals, joke with the gals,
Life is good at the Bucksnort Café.


Verse 1. I’ll get toast and thick marmalade,
The cranberry scones are homemade.
Two packets of sugar, some cream, and a stir,
Life is sweet at the Bucksnort Café.
I’ll pull out my Free Coffee card,
To get eight holes punched ain’t too hard.
First eight there’s a fee, the ninth cup is free,
Get a deal at the Bucksnort Café.

I’m going to the Bucksnort Café,
Their coffee gets me going each day,
I’ll talk to my pals, joke with the gals,
Life is good at the Bucksnort Café.

2. We’ll talk ‘bout the issues at hand,
Solve problems afflicting the land.
If politicians were smart, they’d take us to heart,
And drop in at the Bucksnort Café.
The price of eggs is too high,
But my wife will be rich when I die.
We talk ‘bout this stuff though life ain’t too rough,
Life goes on at the Bucksnort Café.

I’m going to the Bucksnort Café,
Buy me a refill – I’ll stay,
I’ll talk to my pals, joke with the gals,
Life is good at the Bucksnort Café.

gah

Please click here to read other lyrics for hit singles.

.

Live Small: National debt is a silent, deadly avalanche Part 1

On average, our household debt is going in the wrong direction.

Like a silent but deadly avalanche, debt will soon wipe out the possibilities for success and security many Canadians desire.

On Canada’s national or federal scene, our government’s budgetary business faces a dark, smothering future as well.

Think back if you can.

In 1981, something happened in Canada that likely created a stir at the time but was quickly forgotten.

The Canadian national debt crept quietly past 100 billion dollars.


But 1981 Trans Am cars made a more pleasant sound to our ears so we barely noticed.

In 1985 our national debt past 200 billion dollars.


But the 1985 Corvette was hot, so our attention went elsewhere.

In 1988 Canada’s national debt pushed beyond the 300 billion barrier.


But many home buyers pushed past 3,000 sq. ft. and were too busy shopping for new furniture to care.

In 1991, just three short years later, national debt ballooned to 400 billion dollars.


But Home Improvement debuted that year, starring Tim Allen, and many viewers purchased bigger screen TVs to increase their viewing pleasure.

In 1994 national debt past 500 billion dollars.


And Dave Matthews Band released ‘Under the Table and Dreaming,’ and that’s where most people spent their summer.

In 1996, Canada’s debt hit 563 billion, its highest level in history.


But hockey was very entertaining that year so most Canadians paid more attention to the Stanley Cup win by the Colorado Avalanche.

Uncharacteristically, 1996 was followed by 11 straight years of budgetary surpluses, and in that time period our country’s national debt was reduced by approx. 100 billion dollars, and in 2007 it sat at 458 billion.

To those you think those were really great years and we made tremendous progress, and, as a country, we’ll be able to continue that path with ease, let me say two things.

First....

***

O Canada, our home and mortgaged land...

Please click here to read National debt is a silent, deadly avalanche Part 2

.

Link and Learn: Plant seeds while snow cover is on the ground?

Even though some burly Canadians want winter to last until April (lazy toots - one I know just doesn’t want to cut the grass), there are those who want to get their hands dirty in pots of soil or in the garden.

My oldest sister is one of them and is likely reading a seed catalogue right now.

For her, and others with green thumbs looking for winter to end, I recommend an interesting article found in the London Free press recently entitled ‘Sowing The Seeds Of Change.’


In it I read the following:

"There's an exciting new movement sweeping the globe that focuses on local sustainability in response to peak oil and climate change."

"One goal of this movement is to grow and buy more food locally. This simple, logical concept aims to improve food quality, reduce exposure to pesticides and genetically modified crops, and save resources."

I bet some people are thinking about their garden right now.

"Instead of buying foods grown far away, heavily packaged and shipped long distances, growing your own food or buying from local producers helps you control how it's grown and treated and eliminates the need for packaging. You can harvest fruits and vegetables at their absolute peak for freshness and outstanding flavour."

Heck, now I’m even thinking about my garden, and I don’t have a green thumb.

Maybe I’ll start a few cherry tomato plants inside this year. The article tells me how to go about it.

***

Are you waiting for seeds to arrive?

Do you make an early start on gardening each year?

.

Today’s Weather: How long will the snow cover last?

In earlier posts I called for 12 inches of snow and hoped it would last for several months, to the end of February and beyond, so that Mother Earth got a much needed rest.

I got my wishes.


["It's cold and crusty on Ollie's Mt.": photos GAH]

Ollie’s Mountain is still 3 ft. deep and made up of crusty snow, so it should last for 2 - 3 more weeks if temps don’t slip above zero degrees for too long each day.


Snow in my back yard is not as deep but I hope it will last at least until after March break because my youngest son and I are planning to go to Ellicottville, NY after the break, and we want snow to be on the ground so that he can snowboard and I can watch him glide down the hills while I’m sipping local brews from a hotel patio.

I know many others want spring to arrive so they can work in their yards, prepare gardens etc., but if I don’t have to putter around outside until April I’ll be happy.

***

Are you counting the days until the snow is gone, or hoping it hangs around?

.

Live Small: Many boomers missed the class re CPP in high school

“Two in every three Canadians nearing retirement think Canada’s pension system (CPP) is flawed,” stated a recent article found in the London Free Press (Feb. 27).

However, the more of the article I read, the more I realized something else is flawed - and not the CPP primarily.

Okay, you should know this:

"The latest TNS Canadian Facts survey showed that 67% of people over the age of 50 don’t think the current pension system meets their retirement needs very well."

But, does that mean it’s flawed?

And also, because “nearly half of respondents aren’t confident that their combined Canada Pension Plan and Registered Retirement Savings Plans will provide enough cash flow to live out their golden years comfortably” doesn’t mean the CPP is flawed.

When I read the following, i.e., “the CPP was designed to replace only about 25% of average pre-retirement salaries for low-income earners and even less for middle and high-income earners,” I immediately felt something else was wrong - and part of the problem might be me.

For example, maybe I wasn’t listening when my Gr. 13 math teacher threw the above information out for a complete discussion.


["What do ya mean I'm busted?"]

I’m sure I would have grasped the concept that, if I got used to living on $100,000 per year and the CPP would only replace $25,000 of that income once I retired, I’d need to save a whack of money to make up the diff.

(Yes, we said ‘diff’ in the sixties. We were pretty keen about our own neato way of talkin’).

Or maybe the problem is that the topic of planning for the future was never presented at all in schools to the masses of people who now look forward to a shaky retirement.

***

Should governments consider more high school courses related to financial matters?

Would the curriculum get too crowded now that Gr. 13 is gone?

.

Household debt could sink a lot of Canadian families

I think we’re heading into an age of austerity but many people didn’t get the memo.

“Household debt in Canada rose to record levels in 2009, with almost two-thirds of families reporting that they would be in financial trouble if their paycheques were just one week late” began a recent newspaper article in a local newspaper.

My eyeballs came to a screeching halt.

People don’t have an emergency stash around the house, say, under the mattress?

Obviously not - for two-thirds of families.


[“Okay, maybe a tad bigger for starters”: photo link]

So, what are people learning in high school these days? Surely folks should be at least learning how to make egg-in-the-hole, darn their socks and then ‘sock away’ a bit of emergency cash, so that a set back doesn’t sink them entirely.

“...Average household debt rose to $96,100 last year (cf $54,200 in 1990). That resulted in a debt-to-income ratio of 145%, the highest ever, with the level set to climb to 160% by 2012.”

My recommendation:

Because “the booming housing market was singled out as a particular area of concern, with record-low interest rates encouraging families to take on more debt than they can afford to buy a property,” levels of government should be strongly encouraging home builders and buyers to move toward smaller homes.

Sure, it means rethinking the American dream, but let's do that.

Less square footage, perks and debt now means families have a better change of owning their home one day rather than it owning them.

***

Is your debt-load going north or south?

.

Zoom w a View: This squirrel doesn’t know when to quit

I came so close yesterday to knocking this guy off a nearby fence rail.

I thought he’d be in Lucan by now.

When I saw him checking out my bird feeder this morning I shot this picture just before hurling two more snowballs at him.


["I dare you to come down," I said: photo GAH]

As usual, he escaped without a scratch but my aim is getting better.

So, watch out you fuzzy little critter.

.

Young at Heart: Scottie Niedermayer for President

After watching Scott play a great game last night I posted a comment about him.

LM sent me a link to a great article about Scott.


["Ollie says Scott is tough to beat, and Ollie knows tough"]

He is definitely one of the great ones and if he is still playing in four years I’d recommend him as team captain again.

.

Young at Heart: Dear Scott Niedermayer...

Dear Scott,

You played one heck of a game.

Whenever you were on the ice for the Canadian Olympic team, the Americans had trouble getting close to our net.


In my humble opinion, I think you'd make a great Prime Minister or head of the Dept. of National Defense.

When I play hockey next Wednesday for my 50-plus team (age 50, not 50 goals, 'cause nobody would get close to 50 goals, even over 5 years), I'll wear my Team Canada sweater and try to make some smooth moves like you.

See you in four years!

Gord H.

My Point of View: Is Wortley Village the right place for luxury condos? Part 6 (Conclusion)

[The following concludes a series of thoughts about the development process as it pertains to an empty lot at the corner of Wortley Rd. and Bruce St. in Old South, London]

I feel it’s almost as if, during the process in which a local developer was granted major variances pertaining to a commercial/residential building’s size, that City Hall had more the mind of a builder or developer than an advocate for the city as a whole, and because of that, I am left with a few questions for the city planning department and developer.

First...

Based on the following comment to my blog site (Feb. 17):


[Nature's lesson: Squirrels dominate what was meant for birds: photo GAH]

Sonny D. said,

Gord, I don't know how anyone unconnected with the developer could possibly consider a four-storey building NOT being totally out of place on that particular corner of Mayberry.

Hopefully wiser heads will prevail but given this town's past record on such matters ...

1. Will wiser heads prevail? Will the four-story building be redesigned to include only three floors, or four shorter floors, in order to conform to the city bylaws?

Second...

Based on another comment (Feb. 18):

kkrige said,

I cannot say that I think their plan fits in with the fit of the village at all. I do not have a problem with some sort of development, but it should be something that fits with the feel of the village. I was talking with a friend about this and we also remarked that after all the renovations that went on a few doors down, the art gallery must not be pleased either.

2. Will anyone other than a few people in the city planning department and the developer be pleased with a building that obviously doesn’t fit the feel of the Village or the site?

Third...

Based on another comment (Feb. 18):

Crazylegs said,

I agree - the plan is a terrible fit. I've always felt that old, muddy parking lot should be put to some better use, but this isn't it. I can understand the developer wanting to maximize the lot's earning potential, but cramming a box full of condos, cars, and storefronts into a confined space is not right for the village.

I like your idea, Gord. Build something that embraces and supports the community vibe. Just don't make it a pain for me to visit The Village Tail for my weekend cat food run!

3. Will local small businesses lose customers because parking becomes a pain as a result of inadequate parking allowance (a condition allowed by the city)? Who should they hold responsible if this is the case?

Fourth...

Based on another comment (Feb. 26):

Jesse said,

Surely if the building is too high according to City Regulations then it shouldn't be built that high? Otherwise what's the point of the building regulations?

4. What is the point of building regulations?

Other questions based on my own concerns:

5. Who is to act as a fair advocate for the neighbourhood if not the city planning department or others who know the appropriate bylaws off by heart?

6. Is there any member of the planning department who has a bias toward builders or developers, e.g., another builder or developer, or a person associated closely with same?

7. Is there any member of the planning department who knows the Village well and could speak honestly about what fits with the area, e.g., a current or former resident, or a person associated closely with same?

Another based on a comment made at my blog site (Feb. 25):

Scott said,

I know the deadline is coming up - are you planning to appeal? I'd think we especially might have a case on the parking issue, as 36 private spaces is not the same as the 44 spaces requested by the zoning. As of today, no one has filed an appeal.

8. Has anyone from the community planned an appeal based on the parking issue?

9. If not, could it be because D. Tennant Jr. already has a well known lawyer, of local and national fame, ready to represent him in the event that an appeal is made?

10. Now that the precedent has been set to allow buildings in the Village that clearly do not fit (according to size in a variety of ways) over the clear objections of many who live in the area, who can local residents depend on to look out for their interests in the future?

In conclusion, I’m disappointed with the overall size of the building, the city’s lack of fair judgement in the decision making process, the developer’s unwillingness to listen to the community in which he plans to build, and with what may be the community’s prospects for fair play in the future.

And every time I walk past the massive building that will soon appear at the historic corner of Wortley and Bruce on my way to the local coffee shop or hardware store, I’ll be reminded of the time the community knocked on City Hall’s door, and the developer’s door too for that matter, and nobody was home.

.

Zoom w a View: Fuzzy little squirrels might need food too, but...

Earlier today I asked you to picture a black squirrel (the one that got away) in my bird feeder.

Well, he wasn’t too impressed with my hat-throwing ability - I missed by a country mile (much longer than urban standards) - so he returned later.

Here he is enjoying the seeds I left for the birds.


["Help yourself? I think not": photos GAH]

Here are his footprints on the window sill, from which he climbed onto the clothesline.


Though a female cardinal is willing to share the feeders, I am not.


So, I fired three snowballs (it’s good packing today), and the fuzzy beggar hopped over three fences and hid in my neighbour’s tree before I could reload.


Maybe I should set a trap and hunt for my Brunswick Stew recipe.

.

My Point of View: Is Wortley Village the right place for luxury condos? Part 5

[The following continues a series of thoughts about the development process as it pertains to an empty lot at the corner of Wortley Rd. and Bruce St. in Old South, London]

'Is Wortley Village the right place for luxury condos?’

I say no, not as a current proposal stands at present.

First, each of the four variances developer David Tennant Jr. (Hampton Group) requested very clearly indicate the proposed building is too big for the lot.

Second, the Feb. 17 meeting at City Hall, organized to collect input from the community, was chiefly about design objectives (mostly insignificant) for the building, and not about something far more important to the members of the community that had assembled there.

Third, not only does the proposed four-story building not identify with Wortley Village, but the builder clearly does not as well.

Earlier, I suggested that the developer’s desire to “push to build beyond every conceivable limit says something about his experience as well, as it pertains to building and dealing with well-established neighbourhoods.”

I said at that time that “foremost in Tennant’s mind is likely the following credo: Bigger is better.”

I also said, that to see “the city and developer... shake hands on such a proposal tells me they haven’t spent much time, if any, in Old South, and that other things occupy their minds.”

May I further suggest here that the developer has a stronger desire to fit more money into his bank account than design a building that fits into the community.


["It pays to be aggressive." "And have a good lawyer."]

Why do I think this way?

At the Feb. 7 meeting, when asked by members of community if he would consider reducing the building to three stories, Tennant Jr. flatly said no.

“It’s going to be four stories,” he said on more than one occasion.

A concept more suited to the community was not on his table, and in my humble opinion, it is because larger dollar signs (upwards of $400,000 to $500,000 per unit, 8 units per story) were on his mind when he created a proposal that pushed past the city bylaw for a building’s height in the heart of Wortley Village.

If Tennant Jr. says in the future that he identifies with the community, I will say he does not.

When members of the community requested information about the appeal process Tennant Jr. stated he hoped someone in fact would appeal the process because he felt more than confident of the outcome.

Can he afford the best lawyers? Of course he can.

Can members of the community? Not very likely.

If Tennant Jr. says in the future that he likes Wortley Village, I will say he does not, except as a place to build.

Some will say that making more money is a worthy goal, and to some degree that is true.

I’m even willing to admit that though it doesn’t make my world go round it makes life’s journey a bit more interesting if I have more in my wallet than to simply supply my most basic needs..

However, in the case of the proposed larger than life building plan, I think the city has made it too easy for the developer to make a mitt full of money at the expense of the Wortley Village community.

I feel it’s almost as if, during the process, City Hall had more the mind of a builder or developer than an advocate for the city as a whole, and because of that, I am left with a few questions.

First...

***

Please click here to read Part 6, Conclusion.

.

I Ask You: Picture this and picture that

Picture this - I look out the back window to see a squirrel in my bird feeder.


Picture him black, not gray.


Picture him in the feeder eating seeds I’d left for the birds.

Picture me saying, “Crap, I’m out of snowballs. I’ve got one chance to hit him with my hat.”

(At this point, there are those who would say, "He's just a fuzzy little squirrel. He needs to have food too. Leave him alone." To them I say... "Ever tasted Brunswick Stew?").


Picture me flying through the back door, hat in hand, and watching the little beggar (I didn’t say beggar at the time) climb upside down, hand over hand, along the clothesline toward the fence, as if he’s done the trick many times.

Picture me missing him with my hat by a country mile.

***

Squirrel - 1; Gord - no score.

I ask you. Clever little beggars, aren’t they?

Please click here to read a recent I Ask You that still needs an answer.

.