Rezoning app up on the 12th again195 & 203 Oakmount Road, 200 Keele Street – junctioneer: ………………….nice tree cover for how long?
THE REZONING application for 200 Keele st St in another modified form is up at the city council tomorrow. One of the important community related issues is Ravine Control and Tree Protection.
Showing posts with label zoning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label zoning. Show all posts
Monday, January 11, 2010
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Zoning code rewrite pits trees against solar panels and gardens, private property against developers; Denver, CO
Welcome to the Washington Park Profile – one of Denver's finest newspapers - “Sustainability” Still Undefined, Elusive In New Zoning Code:
Another potential solar problem area that has traditionally been looked at as an untouchable environmental imperative – our city’s tree canopy – concerns DuVivier, as well. “Several states have trees as a hot button issue,” she said. “Some have restrictions on trees that might block solar panels. I know we want more trees for oxygen, but it’s about having the right trees in the right place. Not every tree is equal. We want to encourage species that provide shade and oxygen but allow the sun to get to solar panels and gardens.”
In addition to going farther to preserve solar access, 3PA’s McFadden would like to see Denver pay more attention to other issues including a broader allowance for backyard husbandry (chickens, goats, etc.), vertical gardening (indoor gardening in high-rise structures) and reducing rainwater runoff from residential lots through rainwater catchment (which is quite dicey due to traditional water laws that forbid such diversion of the gold that falls from the sky – although Colorado State Senate bill SB09-080, signed by Gov. Ritter last April, allows some rural residents with exempt wells not administered under the state’s traditional priority water rights system to begin capturing rainwater from their rooftops), rooftop gardens and other techniques for diverting the liquid gold to onsite needs rather than down the gutter to the storm drain, to the rivers."
Another potential solar problem area that has traditionally been looked at as an untouchable environmental imperative – our city’s tree canopy – concerns DuVivier, as well. “Several states have trees as a hot button issue,” she said. “Some have restrictions on trees that might block solar panels. I know we want more trees for oxygen, but it’s about having the right trees in the right place. Not every tree is equal. We want to encourage species that provide shade and oxygen but allow the sun to get to solar panels and gardens.”
In addition to going farther to preserve solar access, 3PA’s McFadden would like to see Denver pay more attention to other issues including a broader allowance for backyard husbandry (chickens, goats, etc.), vertical gardening (indoor gardening in high-rise structures) and reducing rainwater runoff from residential lots through rainwater catchment (which is quite dicey due to traditional water laws that forbid such diversion of the gold that falls from the sky – although Colorado State Senate bill SB09-080, signed by Gov. Ritter last April, allows some rural residents with exempt wells not administered under the state’s traditional priority water rights system to begin capturing rainwater from their rooftops), rooftop gardens and other techniques for diverting the liquid gold to onsite needs rather than down the gutter to the storm drain, to the rivers."
Friday, March 6, 2009
Putting the 'park' in parking lot; Toronto, ON, Canada; 3/4/09
Putting the ‘park’ in parking lot Eye Weekly - Toronto,ON,Canada
Though those making proposals didn’t realize it at the time, it turns out that converting at least part of the Queen and Soho parking lot into a park proper is a tangible possibility. Thanks to the indefatigable Freedom of Information–request skills of IllegalSigns.ca’s Rami Tabello (because what else would an anti-billboard activist do in his spare time but track down illegal parking lots), we now know that the city actually owns a section of the parking lot. The strip of parking spaces that runs along the eastern side of the lot is, in fact, a large boulevard leased to the lot for their parking purposes (an agreement called an “encroachment”). Back in the 1960s, when the original building was demolished, more parking was seen as a welcome addition, so it made sense for the city to lease the strip of land when the property owner eventually decided to opt for a vertically unambitious development.
Though those making proposals didn’t realize it at the time, it turns out that converting at least part of the Queen and Soho parking lot into a park proper is a tangible possibility. Thanks to the indefatigable Freedom of Information–request skills of IllegalSigns.ca’s Rami Tabello (because what else would an anti-billboard activist do in his spare time but track down illegal parking lots), we now know that the city actually owns a section of the parking lot. The strip of parking spaces that runs along the eastern side of the lot is, in fact, a large boulevard leased to the lot for their parking purposes (an agreement called an “encroachment”). Back in the 1960s, when the original building was demolished, more parking was seen as a welcome addition, so it made sense for the city to lease the strip of land when the property owner eventually decided to opt for a vertically unambitious development.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)