[oclug] RE: OT: sprawl

[bbarnett at L8R.net]

On 02-Aug-2001 dean linford wrote:

>>>> > We are pretty forunate in Ottawa that the city planners did a decent
>>>> > job of leaving a green belt and trying to maintain some of the green
> 
> I thought it had a lot to do with the Feds/NCC, to make it 
> look good "to the world". Bet it will be hard to keep, now 
> there are less parties to drag out various fights. 
> 

Some does.. and the NCC pretty much does what it wants.  

> 
>>>> If you want to keep your city green, you *need* to have urban sprawl.
> 
> Dispersed need not be sprawl.
> 

It does ;).  If you have unused space, you've started sprawling.  If your city 
is more spread out than it could be, its urban sprawl.  Ergo, if its disperse,
its urban sprawl. 

> 
>>There is no such thing as rural sprawl :P.
>>
>>Urban sprawl is used to refer to a city that is spreading outwards without
>>using all the available space.  This space can be higher buildings, or vacant
> 
> I thought it refered to an urban space that sprawled. 
> 

Yes, it does.  That's what I just described above.

>>land that is not being used to house people or a business of some sort.  The
>>greenbelt is an example of something that tends to contribute to urban
>>sprawl,
> 
> Well, I think they were trying to brake up urban centres. 
> Confusion may come from "suburban", and how that evolved. 
> Now if 5 acre lots were still common in suburbs...
> 

They should be.  The greenbelt is a good thing, screw urban sprawl.  I don't
are if it exists, people are healthier with it.  More parks, more green space,
not the cramped bull that people are purposing these days.

The Ottawa City council seems to be formed by a bunch of "city boys" that has
never left the city except to drive to another.  DIscusting.




---

                                     Dynamic Hosting
                                   HTTP://www.L8R.net/             
                      "We Provide Static Hostnames for Dynamic IP's"