Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 202627282930
Results 2,901 to 2,969 of 2969

Thread: Blatchford | Neighbourhood Master Plan | Discussion/Rumours

  1. #2901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Guys, it's a construction site after a 2 week period of significant rain. Final grading is obviously not complete. For all we know, sewers aren't connected yet either. I don't know what AUsenik's comment about no catchbasins means, but that makes roughly zero sense. There will of course be street storm drainage.
    Sometimes the obvious has to be said around here... Thanks for that.
    Killjoy.
    Yeah, he can be...

  2. #2902
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,570

    Default

    ^Quick, someone give him the "mr. reality check" placard while Ken is sleeping!
    “Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

  3. #2903
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesL View Post
    ^Quick, someone give him the "mr. reality check" placard while Ken is sleeping!
    sleep? what is that mysterious state you call sleep?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  4. #2904

    Default

    The truth will do that. That is normal for a construction zone that is completely unearthed; infact, that is quite minor as I see no pumps used. You know it is truly wet when multiple hoses are used in various areas with pumps to keep particular areas from becoming too saturated.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  5. #2905
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,199
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    (...) - i.e. don't blame the developer.

    but...but....but...

    what am I now supposed to do with my pitchforks, flaming torches, and burning developer effigy? Those cost money you know!
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  6. #2906
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Hey, I'm the guy that designed the drainage at the Meadows Rec Centre and designed it with many bioswales in mind.

    I also did it on a residential cul-de-sac project. I don't live in the City anymore to see how it worked out, but it's here in Cameron Heights: https://goo.gl/maps/73YiS1zDc5ma9BwC6

    Same plan with catchbasins in bioswales off the road. Should drive down there and post some photos for me to tell me if it works.
    in case you want to see what the rec centre looks like (or looked like - i'm not sure how old this photo is or what it might look like now):



    as to your being the guy who designed it, i'm glad to have picked it originally as the "a lot more attractive" representative.

    hope things are going equally well in iqaluit...
    Actually that image isn't really a bioswale, that's the decorative pond out front. Some of the storm drainage drains into a tank (primarily roof drainage) and is pumped into the pond, and there is a weir so that it maintains a constant height. In fact, if the water level gets too low, it's filled with potable water. I have no idea if that's how they are actually operating it.

    The bioswales are primarily in the parking lots. But not the parks parking lots to the exterior, they went with traditional catch basin designs.

    Iqaluit is a different conversation (no bioswales here), but soon that'll be Halifax for me. Looks like I still haven't made it back 'home'.

  7. #2907
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hawks Ridge
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by csa1982 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Bioswale is in keeping with Blatchford's vision of a green and sustainable neighborhood. Remember these are early days for the project.
    true enough...

    but like most things it will depend on the execution and on the maintenance. it was part of the early vision for hawk ridge as well.

    I've lived in Hawks Ridge for almost 5 years now and that's the cleanest and best maintained I've ever seen the Bioswale. If I were to take a picture of that same spot today, it would be heavily overgrown with weeds, uncut grass and garbage. I'm pretty sure the developer has walked away from the area as there is nothing going on and minimal to no maintenance. The sales pitch and the original pictures we were shown when we bought sure made it look nice though lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    quite the contrast to 2016 - https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5860...7i13312!8i6656 weeds + standing water
    Quote Originally Posted by csa1982 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    quite the contrast to 2016 - https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5860...7i13312!8i6656 weeds + standing water
    This more accurately portrays what it looks like now just with larger trees and bushes mixed in. I thought the point of having a bioswale was to fill it with specific vegetation to help filter but it's only weeds in the Hawks Ridge one.

    Anyway, don't mean to derail this thread. Sorry.
    emphasis added.

    as originally noted, it will depend on the execution and the maintenance.

    the developer doesn't "walk away", the developer typically both executes and maintains for the first two years - even though it is public land - after which certificates are obtained and it is turned over to the city. from that point on maintenance as well as ownership is vested with the city. if the maintenance is or is not being done, it's no different than any other park or boulevard or bridge or building or sidewalk or street the city maintains on our behalf - i.e. don't blame the developer.

    Very interesting you say that Ken. I have spoken with the city about upkeep and maintenance of the area and was told it is the developers problem. The city said it has no control of the area at this time as the neighborhood has not been handed over to the city yet.

  8. #2908
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    ...

    Actually that image isn't really a bioswale, that's the decorative pond out front...
    it might not really be a bioswale but it is on the city's web site as an example of a bioswale.

    good luck with the rest of your stay in iqaluit and in halifax.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  9. #2909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    (...) - i.e. don't blame the developer.

    but...but....but...

    what am I now supposed to do with my pitchforks, flaming torches, and burning developer effigy? Those cost money you know!
    And if dry humour isn’t acceptable during wet spells, when is it acceptable?

  10. #2910
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    ^^^

    if it's been more than five years there's probably more going on than "the neighborhood hasn't been handed over to the city yet". there will be development agreements for which the cify should be holding some pretty substantial deposits and/or letters of credit ensuring performance. i have no direct knowledge or information but it doesn't sound like your getting the full story (and the person you talked may not even know the full story or the full back story). perhaps a councillor inquiry?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  11. #2911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    ...

    Actually that image isn't really a bioswale, that's the decorative pond out front...
    it might not really be a bioswale but it is on the city's web site as an example of a bioswale.

    good luck with the rest of your stay in iqaluit and in halifax.
    I’m still trying to understand the difference between a bioswale and a ditch.

  12. #2912

    Default

    ^ two differences
    The spelling of the words and
    $400,000
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 05-07-2019 at 12:40 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #2913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    ^ two differences The spelling of the words and$400,000
    A ditch with nice ornamental native grasses.

  14. #2914
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    ^^ ^^^

    and maintenance.

    everyone involved in one should be required to read this:

    https://www.epa.gov/sites/production...enance_508.pdf

    bioswales, when designed and constructed properly, are not just ditches but caution - and maintenance - is required if they aren't going to revert to ditches.

    they can be attractive, they can reduce the size and cost of other infrastructure, they can contribute to recharging local aquifers, and they can filter out sediment and pollutants.

    they also need maintenance with trash and garbage removal just the beginning. invasive species and weeds need to be controlled and they need to monitored for high levels of the contaminants they are meant to control. those adjacent to roadways can reach saline and phosphate and heavy metal concentrations that require soil removal to remediate before groundwater starts to be contaminated. that soil may even need to disposed of at a special facility as it can't be reused elsewhere and shouldn't go to regular land fill.

    don't get me wrong, we should probably be doing more if them, not less. but perhaps, like condos, each one should have a reserve fund set aside as part of the initial capital cost budget to pay for future maintenance. it would still make sense as the initial savings would still likely be higher.

    come to think of it, maybe all of our capital projects should be done that way... that way when we need to paint a rusting bridge or repair the roof of a composting facility or a theatre there would be monies available.
    Last edited by kcantor; 05-07-2019 at 03:38 PM.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  15. #2915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BalancedOP View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    ^ two differences The spelling of the words and$400,000
    A ditch with nice ornamental native grasses.
    Aka 'weeds'
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  16. #2916

    Default

    One mans ornamental native grasses is another mans weeds

  17. #2917

    Default

    Every bioswale (aka "creek" or "hazard" ) I've ever dumped a golf ball into on a golf course has been pretty well maintained. Maybe there's an idea there...
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  18. #2918

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BalancedOP View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    ^ two differences The spelling of the words and$400,000
    A ditch with nice ornamental native grasses.
    Yes but it’s hard to reproduce the amazing ditches you find in every rural development.


    Looks like swales are do old school

    Contour Hedges:

    The Permaculture Research Institute
    https://permaculturenews.org/2017/06...ontour-hedges/
    Last edited by KC; 05-07-2019 at 04:35 PM.

  19. #2919
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,691

    Default

    Massive spraying of herbicides?

  20. #2920

    Default

    Too bad we don't have many in-City examples of this infrastructure to show off.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  21. #2921

    Default

    I realize its putting the cart ahead of the horse, but when can we realistically expect the first commercial project in Blatchford?

  22. #2922
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,476

    Default

    Probably a year after the Station Pointe apartments open. I'm guessing Northlands redevelopment will proce

  23. #2923
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,476

    Default

    Probably a year after the Station Pointe apartments open. I'm guessing Northlands redevelopment will also follow the same fast paced design and construction schedule.

  24. #2924

    Default

    should see some residential starting this fall. more services being installed right now. NAIT should have plans for the new residential towers soon. The DEC should be operational by the End of July early August. systems are being cleaned as we speak.

  25. #2925
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    291

    Default

    It's crazy to consider the amount of land there is within Edmonton to really start getting some overall residential density. Blatchford, Rossdale, Muttart urban district, & Northlands to name a few. Kind of exciting for the prospect of the private & public amenities that could be made possible with all of that built out. Of course people need to want it which is of course the only way these projects really move forward.

  26. #2926

    Default

    The COE missed the unique opportunity to curb urban sprawl and make brownfield sites more appealing, if they mandated a greenbelt on land outside the AHD
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  27. #2927
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    571

    Default

    ^ LOL

  28. #2928
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    219

    Default

    ^^A greenbelt would be an absolute godsend for the city, but ultimately any greenbelt legislation would need to come from the province, the city can't really do it on its own. With the UCP in charge I don't really foresee it happening unfortunately.

  29. #2929

    Default

    It is way too late, the amount of development in Summerside, Heritage Valley, Ambleside, Lewis Estates etc, cannot be undone. Maybe they can protect the northern boundries
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  30. #2930

    Default

    The province needs to step in to set growth boundaries, but that said, the provincial empowered Edmonton Metro region board does have many growth boundaries aka Green belts for the region. Edmonton doesn't operate in it's own Vacuum, and Edmonton acting alone in a greenbelt would be really just shooting itself in the foot while allowing regional areas to slurp up that growth and just makes the problem worse.

  31. #2931
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The COE missed the unique opportunity to curb urban sprawl and make brownfield sites more appealing, if they mandated a greenbelt on land outside the AHD
    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    ^ LOL
    because that worked so well in the lower mainland where they paved more than the area preserved so you could commute all the way from chilliwack.

    on the other hand, similar restriction imposed by calgary may have worked better in calgary, at least for okotooks and airdrie and rocky mountain and chestermere.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  32. #2932
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The COE missed the unique opportunity to curb urban sprawl and make brownfield sites more appealing, if they mandated a greenbelt on land outside the AHD
    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    ^ LOL
    because that worked so well in the lower mainland where they paved more than the area preserved so you could commute all the way from chilliwack.

    on the other hand, similar restriction imposed by calgary may have worked better in calgary, at least for okotooks and airdrie and rocky mountain and chestermere.
    Do you really think that the land used by slight highway expansions is equivalent to what was saved by restricting development there? The ALR doesn't only apply to Vancouver, it applies to all of BC. Chilliwack has more room to grow, but it still has restrictions. Even if you look at the suburbs of Vancouver you can see the effects it has had. The City of Surrey has a density of over 1,600/km2, and that includes the 35% of the city dedicated to the ALR. Within the urbanized areas the density it is ~2,400/km2. Considering that Surreys development patterns where very similar to Edmonton's fairly recently, that ~35% of farmland would not exist. That density that Surrey now has would not exist without the ALR, and there would be no farmland left within the city limits at this point. You can see this by comparing it to Edmonton's urban density of 1,800/km2 (1,300/km2 within the city boundaries). Without the ALR the City would have continued to sprawl similar to Edmonton. Instead we are seeing the development of the City Centre, multiple Town Centres, and townhomes replacing low density neighbourhoods.

    There are plenty of problems that come with an ALR/greenbelt, but in Vancouvers case it has worked extremely well at ensuring productive land is maintained. Highway and road expansion in the region have eaten up some land, but it is absolutely miniscule to the amount of land preserved because of it.

    Edit: In addition, the highway from Langley to Chilliwack is still a two lane highway, so it's not like they've been expanding the highways like crazy in the far reaches of the region.
    Last edited by seamusmcduffs; 09-07-2019 at 02:24 PM.

  33. #2933
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,138

    Default

    Langley to chilliwack has been four lane divided for decades

  34. #2934
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,357

    Default

    Sorry, that's what I meant. But yeah it hasn't been expanded was my point.

  35. #2935

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    The COE missed the unique opportunity to curb urban sprawl and make brownfield sites more appealing, if they mandated a greenbelt on land outside the AHD
    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    ^ LOL
    because that worked so well in the lower mainland where they paved more than the area preserved so you could commute all the way from chilliwack.

    on the other hand, similar restriction imposed by calgary may have worked better in calgary, at least for okotooks and airdrie and rocky mountain and chestermere.
    Right...

    Vancouver is such an excellent comparison. They are surrounded by water and mountains, just like Edmonton. Right...

    Anyway, since you brought up that as a comparison,Vancouver's density from Wiki
    • Density 5,492.6/km2 (4 times Edmonton's)
    • Urban density 2,584/km2 (1.4 times Edmonton's)


    Edmonton
    • Density 1,360.9/km2
    • Urban density 1,855.5/km2



    Whatever Vancouver is doing about urban sprawl, its working...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  36. #2936

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Edit: In addition, the highway from Langley to Chilliwack is still a two lane highway, so it's not like they've been expanding the highways like crazy in the far reaches of the region.
    To be fair, Edmonton is surrounded by several 4 lane highways as well and the highway you talk about is the Trans Canada which is also handles a lot of freight for the Port of Vancouver and the only significant highway link to the BC interior and the rest of Canada.

    Few people work in Vancouver and commute to the City of Vancouver. It is more leapfrog commuting. Live in Chilliwack and work in Abbotsford or Langley. Live in Abbotsford and work in Langley or Surrey, live in Langley or Surrey and work in Burnaby and Vancouver.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  37. #2937
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    6,027

    Default

    ^^ Um, density ... Vancouver - is that the City of Vancouver or the GVRD? 'Cause there might be a huge difference depending on what jurisdiction you're talking about.

    Whereas Edmonton city is about 75% of the metro population, Vancouver city is about 25% of the GVRD.
    ... gobsmacked

  38. #2938
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,357

    Default

    I touched on that in my post. Even the most suburban cities in Metro Van such as Surrey are more dense than Edmonton, when you account for actual urbanized area.

  39. #2939
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,652

    Default

    Blatchford’s exciting vision is to be a carbon neutral neighbourhood that is powered entirely by renewable energy. So, how do we get there and where do we start? Building a truly sustainable development like Blatchford means taking an ambitious, creative and innovative approach to energy use in the community.

    An important step in the journey was understanding where Edmonton’s greenhouse gas emissions come from. With 20% of greenhouse gas emissions produced from residential buildings and 20% of the emissions produced from commercial buildings, Blatchford needed to look at how to provide heating, cooling and hot water to homes and businesses differently. The made-for-Edmonton solution? A District Energy Sharing System.

    Blatchford’s District Energy Sharing System is a high-efficiency energy delivery system that will replace traditional furnaces, air conditioners and boilers in homes and buildings. It is a centralized system that distributes and shares heating and cooling energy between all types of buildings throughout the entire neighbourhood.

    While district energy systems are a proven technology used all over the world, we are leading the way in creating a renewable energy system of this size in the region. The first stage of the District Energy Sharing System uses a geoexchange field, which harnesses the shallow geothermal energy below the earth’s surface, as its main renewable energy source. With 570 boreholes, Blatchford’s first geoexchange field is one of the largest in Canada!

    https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/summer-2019-newsletter/
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  40. #2940

    Default

    Any houses under construction yet?
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  41. #2941
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    ^^

    as always, the devil is in the definitions, the execution and the details.

    starting with definitions, our natural gas and our power distribution networks are already highly efficient energy delivery systems. their "district" is simply larger than blatchford's.

    will blatchford's replace traditional furnaces, air conditioners and boilers? maybe. but certainly not completely in any building i built. or at least not without sufficient alternative backup systems to operate the building without the district energy being available because it is pretty much guaranteed that over the life-span of the system or the life-span of the building there will be periods during which it will be unavailable. so the question is whether the incremental differences in both capital and operating costs make the district energy investment worthwhile.

    the results of a system failure or delivery interuption in our climate are simply too catastrophic when it's -35 to be completely reliant on outside sources so every building will still need a similar initial capital investment - you can't compare one to the other because it isn't either/or, it's both. yes, district energy exists all over the world but i'm not sure how much of that is directly relevent to what's being done at blatchford.

    firstly, the consequences of a system failure here are much different and more problematic than in vancouver.

    secondly, buried underground distribution is much different and more problematic than systems - like those at the u of a or the airport - that are distributed through tunnels and everything is available not just for emergency repairs but for monitoring and repairing before failure and refurbishment, all in a temperature controlled setting.

    while i support the end objectives, i'm not convinced that when they say blatchford is leading the way in creating a system of this size that they're not leading the way for good reason and not in a good way. economy and efficiency when it comes to energy distribution seems to be best delivered at a large scale (power generation whether from non-renewables or renewables) or at the micro scale (individual buildings designed to minimize consumption and/or generate their own requirements).

    i hope it works - or that at least it doesn't turn out to be a catastrophe - but from my perspective the monies being invested here on energy's missing middle would probably have provided a greater return being invested on either of the other ends of the scale.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  42. #2942
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    6,027

    Default

    Really Ken, CoE and catastrophe in the same sentence?

    Oh, right. Station Pointe ...
    ... gobsmacked

  43. #2943
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    it was interesting to see this the morning after my lost:

    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...-in-swan-hills

    and yes, i know all about transmission loss and that it's not always a zero sum game...
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  44. #2944

    Default

    Heritage Festival's Executive Director thinks Blatchford is a good future site for the event. Hawrelak Park will be closed (at least partially) beginning in 2023 for maintenance work, and at that time a new site will be needed:

    https://globalnews.ca/news/5729192/e...al-blatchford/

  45. #2945
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    I skimmed through the artical. Lots to digest and time is not my friend today. If Blatchford (still in development) and Heratige days set to possibly move in, doesn't make sense to have both at the same time in the same space. At a glance it looks like Blatchford could be delayed long term. Confusing.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  46. #2946
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    I skimmed through the artical. Lots to digest and time is not my friend today. If Blatchford (still in development) and Heratige days set to possibly move in, doesn't make sense to have both at the same time in the same space. At a glance it looks like Blatchford could be delayed long term. Confusing.
    The housing is quite a way from Blatchford field. There's lots of parking there. Did you ever see ( or know where) the stallion shows were? I forget their name. Thats the end they are thinking of for heritage days. It's better than Northlands.
    Animals are my passion.

  47. #2947
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    ^ Another good location for Heritage days (probably mentioned already) is just North of Clareview station. Clareview campus.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  48. #2948
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    ^ Another good location for Heritage days (probably mentioned already) is just North of Clareview station. Clareview campus.
    Is there a lot of grass there? We saw many people sitting .
    Animals are my passion.

  49. #2949
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    6,027

    Default

    Heritage Fest -- Borden Park?
    ... gobsmacked

  50. #2950
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    Too many trees
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  51. #2951
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    5,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    ^ Another good location for Heritage days (probably mentioned already) is just North of Clareview station. Clareview campus.
    If the LRT is immediately accessible that should move to the front of line as an option.

  52. #2952
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by McBoo View Post
    Heritage Fest -- Borden Park?
    I think Borden park would be a good option. The trees would be a positive. Loved it when porkapalooza was there.

    Or shut down river valley road from 105 st to the golf course and have it along the road and at victoria park.

  53. #2953
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Virginia Park
    Posts
    219

    Default

    In another world, what would be seriously cool would be closing that segment of 112th avenue and utilizing Stutchbury Park together with Borden. Of course that would never work in reality, for obvious reasons.

    I digress. Back to Blatchford discussion & rumours.
    I will beat the dead horse back to life.

  54. #2954
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    I posted the questions below on the Blatchford Facebook page that talked about using heat pumps instead of furnaces and am awaiting a response.

    Wouldn't it take electricity to power the heat pumps? If so, how is the electricity being generated? Will homes and businesses in Blatchford be hooked up to the provincial electricity grid?

    In driving by the site today, I'm also curious about why a show home hasn't been built to demonstrate all the sustainability features that are being marketed?

  55. #2955

    Default

    It’ll be like what my father-in-law in Sweden. It takes about 2kW to run his heat pump system but it provides close to 7kW in heat/cooling. So it’s 350% efficient compared with direct-connected electric heat.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #2956
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    It’ll be like what my father-in-law in Sweden. It takes about 2kW to run his heat pump system but it provides close to 7kW in heat/cooling. So it’s 350% efficient compared with direct-connected electric heat.
    is that connected to a central distribution system or to his own field? if it's to his own field, then he will have the capitalized cost of constructing the field to recover on top of the energy required to run the pump system.

    in regard to blatchford, each homeowner won't have their own field to construct and capitalize but, as far as i know, in addition to the power needed to run their pump system, is there not an additional cost from that "city owned utility" that is likely to be on a par with energy purchased from any other distributed provider of energy elsewhere whether power or natural gas for connecting to and drawing heat from or shedding heat to their system enabling them to capitalize their cost? that cost might not claw back all of that "350% efficient" operating efficiency but my guess is it will take a good percentage of it.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  57. #2957
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    It’ll be like what my father-in-law in Sweden. It takes about 2kW to run his heat pump system but it provides close to 7kW in heat/cooling. So it’s 350% efficient compared with direct-connected electric heat.
    Can this efficiency ratio be maintained in the dead of an Edmonton winter?

    Even if heat pumps can provide all heating/cooling needs with minimal electricity required, what will power all the other appliances, electronics and lighting that will be in the home? Wouldn't homes in Blatchford still need to be connected to the electricity grid to meet those needs?

  58. #2958

    Default

    Cross-ref. to more information:

    Cold Climate heat pumps

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...ate-heat-pumps

  59. #2959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    is that connected to a central distribution system or to his own field? if it's to his own field, then he will have the capitalized cost of constructing the field to recover on top of the energy required to run the pump system.
    Home system is under the family land they’ve been on for 300+ years. FIL is also a technician on the regional system, which is centralized akin to Blatchford. The cost of installing the heat pump system at the farm was far less than servicing the land for NG & installing a gas-fired set up, which while not directly comparable in costs is also a similar situation to the mostly-unserviced airport lands.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  60. #2960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post

    Can this efficiency ratio be maintained in the dead of an Edmonton winter?

    Not sure, Edmonton gets far colder than the vast majority of Sweden.

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Even if heat pumps can provide all heating/cooling needs with minimal electricity required, what will power all the other appliances, electronics and lighting that will be in the home? Wouldn't homes in Blatchford still need to be connected to the electricity grid to meet those needs?
    Of course. Blatchford was never conceived of or proposed as an off-grid community, just a more sustainable model than the status quo.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  61. #2961
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    ^At one time, Blatchford was definitely proposed to be off-grid. There was even a proposal for a wood burning power plant to be located on the site.

    So you are saying the current vision of Blatchford being powered entirely by renewable energy is false or at best misleading? See here: https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/sustainability/

    I suppose property owners could be required to purchase their external power from marketers like Bullfrog Power as a way of not violating the vision.

    Should buildings in Blatchford be connected to the power grid this would allay one of my major concerns about this development. Unless you know for sure, I will await confirmation of this from the city.

  62. #2962

    Default

    From your own link, they state renewable-only is a "vision", not the plan.

    • Conservation: Blatchford’s energy conservation strategy mandates the construction of high performance buildings to reduce the amount of energy needed for heating and cooling.
    • Efficiency: After reducing the amount of energy needed, the energy that is still required for heating, cooling and providing hot water to buildings will be delivered through an energy efficient system called a District Energy Sharing System (DESS).
    • Renewables: Renewable energy sources, like geoexchange and sewer heat exchange, will tie into the DESS. For the first stage of residential development, a geoexchange field consisting of 570 boreholes is located under the first stormwater pond. Future solar PV installations will also be used to offset the electricity needed to run the DESS equipment.
    All of the info I can find about Blatchford being "off grid" was for heating only, not electricity. Biomass has been off the table for 5+ years. The electrical grid modifications for tying Blatchford in are long underway, with a brand new 240/72kV substation.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  63. #2963
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^At one time, Blatchford was definitely proposed to be off-grid. There was even a proposal for a wood burning power plant to be located on the site.

    So you are saying the current vision of Blatchford being powered entirely by renewable energy is false or at best misleading? See here: https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/sustainability/

    I suppose property owners could be required to purchase their external power from marketers like Bullfrog Power as a way of not violating the vision.

    Should buildings in Blatchford be connected to the power grid this would allay one of my major concerns about this development. Unless you know for sure, I will await confirmation of this from the city.
    Not off-grid, but certainly carbon neutral.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  64. #2964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^At one time, Blatchford was definitely proposed to be off-grid. There was even a proposal for a wood burning power plant to be located on the site.

    So you are saying the current vision of Blatchford being powered entirely by renewable energy is false or at best misleading? See here: https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/sustainability/

    I suppose property owners could be required to purchase their external power from marketers like Bullfrog Power as a way of not violating the vision.

    Should buildings in Blatchford be connected to the power grid this would allay one of my major concerns about this development. Unless you know for sure, I will await confirmation of this from the city.
    Yes power will be supplied by EPCOR.

    The central plant has solar panels on the roof but those are only for the DEC.

    HP are effective and have been used here for some time now. All depends on the Envelope.

    Big concern as I've been told is some of the developers were trying to develop a parking structure. That would have taxed the district energy system. I think the local Sustainability group is doing tours of the DEC this week.

  65. #2965
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^At one time, Blatchford was definitely proposed to be off-grid. There was even a proposal for a wood burning power plant to be located on the site.

    So you are saying the current vision of Blatchford being powered entirely by renewable energy is false or at best misleading? See here: https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/sustainability/

    I suppose property owners could be required to purchase their external power from marketers like Bullfrog Power as a way of not violating the vision.

    Should buildings in Blatchford be connected to the power grid this would allay one of my major concerns about this development. Unless you know for sure, I will await confirmation of this from the city.
    Not off-grid, but certainly carbon neutral.
    "certainly carbon neutral"???

    without both a definition and a means to achieve, that's a meaningless statement. the most energy inefficient pig of a building around can still be "carbon neutral" simply by purchasing enough credits.

    even phrases like net zero should note whether their reference is only to annual consumption (which is typically the case) or life cycle costing and replacement of the equipment (which is typically never the case).

    don't get me wrong, many of the things being done are potentially net positive in terms of our individual and collective foot-prints but there is so much jargon bandied about with little or no regard for accountability that it's hard to ascertain whether the benefits are real or just imagined.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  66. #2966
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    While it's a relief to know Blatchford will be hooked up to the Alberta grid, the claim of Blatchford being entirely powered by renewable energy is definitely not true.

    Link to current sources of Alberta electricity generation here: http://ets.aeso.ca/ets_web/ip/Market...DReportServlet

  67. #2967
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^At one time, Blatchford was definitely proposed to be off-grid. There was even a proposal for a wood burning power plant to be located on the site.

    So you are saying the current vision of Blatchford being powered entirely by renewable energy is false or at best misleading? See here: https://blatchfordedmonton.ca/sustainability/

    I suppose property owners could be required to purchase their external power from marketers like Bullfrog Power as a way of not violating the vision.

    Should buildings in Blatchford be connected to the power grid this would allay one of my major concerns about this development. Unless you know for sure, I will await confirmation of this from the city.
    Not off-grid, but certainly carbon neutral.
    "certainly carbon neutral"???

    without both a definition and a means to achieve, that's a meaningless statement. the most energy inefficient pig of a building around can still be "carbon neutral" simply by purchasing enough credits.

    even phrases like net zero should note whether their reference is only to annual consumption (which is typically the case) or life cycle costing and replacement of the equipment (which is typically never the case).

    don't get me wrong, many of the things being done are potentially net positive in terms of our individual and collective foot-prints but there is so much jargon bandied about with little or no regard for accountability that it's hard to ascertain whether the benefits are real or just imagined.
    "Carbon neutral" is a poor choice of terminology. There are plenty of ways to obfuscate what that actually means and it can become more of a shell game than a meaningful exercise in energy management.

    The poster could have used the term "net zero" which has a more definitive and clear meaning, with variables that are far easier to measure and quantify. If the development is indeed going to be net zero.

  68. #2968

    Default

    There is a tour from 5-6:30 tonight of the district energy centre offered by the Alberta chapter of the Canada Green Building Association. Not sure if there is still space, but info is available here:

    https://www.cagbc.org/CAGBC/Events/E...4-de62b4606664

  69. #2969
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,398

    Default

    To those discussing heat pumps, it seems from the discussion that there is little realization that there are many different types of heat pumps and configurations of the systems. This explains that a bit here: https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/h...t-pump-systems

    A couple posters seemed to be talking about air-source heat pumps. Those will almost certainly not be used at Blatchford, or really anywhere else in Alberta, because they can't really cope with our cold temperatures. They basically turn in to electric resistance heaters once you get much below -15C or so, although they do continue to improve. I'm fairly sure that various types of water-source heat pumps will be used, and the water-source is the district energy system. In a more typical apartment/condo building, there would be a boiler for heat injection and a chiller or cooling tower for heat rejection out of the water loop, depending on the balance of energy demand in the system (in shoulder seasons the water loop can move heat from South facing units to North facing ones, with no net input from the heat injection/rejection sources).

    There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of these installed in various apartment and condo projects in the city.

Page 30 of 30 FirstFirst ... 202627282930

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •