The Kentville Advertiser reported Kings County council lowering its energy targets for its new municipal complex on August 4.
I voted against lowering energy efficiency targets. Here's why.
I believe it was fundamentally the wrong direction for municipal leaders to head towards not only because we were provided with so little information to base the decision on, but also because we were presented with only one option for reducing the already climbing cost to build a new municipal complex.
And no, the design below isn't what Kings County is being presented with... It's the Mosiac Centre, an energy efficient building completed to the "net zero" standard in Alberta last year. It presents an interesting contrast to what's going on in our neighbourhood.
This beautiful 30,000 square foot building was completed for the all inclusive original budget $10.5 million dollars. We are currently at $8 million for a 24,000 square foot building and an unambitious energy efficient target of 10-15% below 2011 National Building Code standard. We'd started at 40% under the Model National Energy Building Code. We haven't even seen a building design yet, but are being told it will take another $2 million to reach an energy efficient target of 25%.
You can read more about the Mosaic building in the Huffington Post.
It is my opinion that ALL municipal councils across Canada need to do their bit to address climate change. Raising not lowering energy efficiency targets is what 2016 decisions call for.
Canada's current goal of limiting increasing temperatures to a 1.5 C rise is ambitious given the lack of action over prior years by our nation.
Without immediate and ongoing action from ALL Canadian leaders at ALL governement levels success is not possible. We will also need personal buy-in from citizens to make the big changes needed. Sadly, at this same council meeting, a motion to establish a Property Accessed Clean Energy program for the county's ratepayers was defeated in a 7 to 4 vote.
I voted against lowering energy efficiency targets. Here's why.
I believe it was fundamentally the wrong direction for municipal leaders to head towards not only because we were provided with so little information to base the decision on, but also because we were presented with only one option for reducing the already climbing cost to build a new municipal complex.
And no, the design below isn't what Kings County is being presented with... It's the Mosiac Centre, an energy efficient building completed to the "net zero" standard in Alberta last year. It presents an interesting contrast to what's going on in our neighbourhood.
This beautiful 30,000 square foot building was completed for the all inclusive original budget $10.5 million dollars. We are currently at $8 million for a 24,000 square foot building and an unambitious energy efficient target of 10-15% below 2011 National Building Code standard. We'd started at 40% under the Model National Energy Building Code. We haven't even seen a building design yet, but are being told it will take another $2 million to reach an energy efficient target of 25%.
You can read more about the Mosaic building in the Huffington Post.
It is my opinion that ALL municipal councils across Canada need to do their bit to address climate change. Raising not lowering energy efficiency targets is what 2016 decisions call for.
Canada's current goal of limiting increasing temperatures to a 1.5 C rise is ambitious given the lack of action over prior years by our nation.
Without immediate and ongoing action from ALL Canadian leaders at ALL governement levels success is not possible. We will also need personal buy-in from citizens to make the big changes needed. Sadly, at this same council meeting, a motion to establish a Property Accessed Clean Energy program for the county's ratepayers was defeated in a 7 to 4 vote.
Kings County simply does not have sufficient council members that take climate change seriously. I hope that will be changed after the October 15 election. In addition to the need to address climate change there is great opportunity in developing a green energy economy right here in Kings County.
In the case of needing a new complex we do have options. The rush to build a new complex on expensive land in Coldbrook Village Park is inexplicable and has caused the majority of council to lose sight of all other options. Here are some of the things we didn't get to discuss:
In the case of needing a new complex we do have options. The rush to build a new complex on expensive land in Coldbrook Village Park is inexplicable and has caused the majority of council to lose sight of all other options. Here are some of the things we didn't get to discuss:
- Does the Province of NS really need the current building vacated on the original timeline?
- Do we absolutely need a building of this size? Many staff work "in the field". Desks are vacant at many points in the day.
- Why can't we go back to the public for recommendations on a broader set of questions and build a better more inclusive vision?
- Otherwise, the public deserves to know what the rush is.
The real deal is does the Justice Department really need the space the municipal building offers. Rumour floating about the Judges will not be relocating to the renovated space (the current ) building affords. Also local knowledge is that the Crown Prosecutors want to be removed from the policing and courts that presumably will fill most of the building.
ReplyDeleteIf true what a mess, the tax payers are called again to build a $10M building to satisfy an ill conceived plan to pull all elements of the Justice Department under one roof.
So what we have is a municipal government having no control over the building costs; having no sense what the implications are for reducing the energy goals. Plus no idea what the change in goals will imply.
Then to further complicate or make riskier, wanting the CAO to manage the building construction who has no project management experience. Yet, we know he is impulsive, makes decisions with minimal research or concern for public input.
This project should be stalled until the October election and when we have a full grasp of all the issues.
Pauline hit the nail on the head when she penned "the public deserves to know what the rush is." Perhaps John offered a clue when he suggested the CAO "makes decisions with minimal research or concern for public input." Through the UARB debacle, he taught us that he's prepared to undertake rather amazing contortions to actually intentionally cloak or hide the genesis or authorship of key pieces of information from both the public and many members of council. And we're leaving this significant project in his hands?????
ReplyDelete