Comment 5631

By Ted Mitchell (registered) | Posted February 24, 2007 at 22:32:57

I want to clarify this: Vision 2020 uses the analogy of a three legged stool. The legs are economic, environmental, and social factors. Each is as important as the other.

Dreschel's second last paragraph seems to accept this. But then he comes out stongly in support of a conventional economic focus by backing a project which has serious negative social and environmental effects.

In other words, he didn't get it. He uses the words social and environmental without knowing what they mean. Others do the same by misusing the word "sustainability" to justify conventional thinking by adding a touch of superficial green paint.

Hamilton has all kinds of economic opportunities, and some of them will come from ignoring the economy altogether.

No, I have not gone mad. A strong focus on social factors and environment will attract people with enormous creative economic power (e.g. downtown renewal: restricting car access to certain streets, 12'wide sidewalks, noise bylaws, multiuse buildings, low energy architecture, etc.)

Pipe dream? Ask a neighbour how much it would be worth to them to be able to enjoy their backyard free from vanity noise (leaf blowers, boom cars), air pollution (idling diesels, woodsmoke, 2stroke exahust) and let their kids walk the neighbourhood without worrying about being killed by cars flying by.

Presently there is no place in Hamilton where you can live downtown, ie close to the action, and be free from such ignorant fallout. What is that worth???

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds