Please don’t be one of these people. Bike lanes and more landscpaing requirements are not a UN conspiracy. You lose planners like me who could be your advocates when you advance this sort of hysteria. Most planners have no idea what Agenda 21 or ICLEI are.
Except for forest fires, grass fires, swamp methane, volcanoes, and large animal farting, most of what environmentalists call “pollution” or AGW contributors can be traced back ultimately to people.
So . . . since we cannot control plate tectonics, or lightning strikes, or herbivore grazing, we cannot eliminate or even reduce those factors. However, if we got rid of all communists, socialists, and Muslims, the human population of the planet would be cut by roughly half, with attendant and consequent reduction of pollution to similar degree.
I’m available for full-time switch throwing, pellet dropping, and trigger pulling.
If we throw these guys in wood chippers and use the output to fertilize trees, the following results will be obtained:
* They will stop emitting CO2 & methane, thereby reducing the output of those fearful greenhouse gasses.
* Trees will be nourished, and will in turn reduce the CO2 and increase the O2 in the atmosphere.
* Obnoxious, tyrannical, little busy bodies will be cautioned about trying to run the lives of people who are probably smarter and certainly more pleasant than they are.
PS: while by no means certain, it is possible that things like Agenda 21 are actually the shark jump of the environmental religionmovement religion.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 9, 2012 @ 11:02 am
Rio+20?
20 years already?
Shouldn’t half of us be dead or sumpthin’?
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 9, 2012 @ 12:56 pm
PatrickP – Assuming your assertion that most planners have no idea about these agendas, exactly how many planners out to control every aspect of our lives should there be before we make ourselves aware of it? 10%? 20%
I live in California – a planner’s wet dream state. Statewide building code, volume after volume, everything has to look the same and be built the same (mediocre), everything has to be approved, and the planners love annoying crap like “traffic calming” by speed bumps or “traffic circles” that create traffic jams, and they always seem to approve mall entrances on blind corners, which is also annoying.
So I’m pretty generally down on planners anyway, because it seems like they cater to their own whims rather than act as a check on bad ideas. Nothing personal.
P.S. ICLEI lists 134 California cities and counties as members, including mine, out of 533 total in the U.S. That includes LA, SF, San Diego and Sacramento.
Being a “member” just means some douche on a city council sent in a letter, pretty much.
California? Doesn’t need a UN initiative (or ridiculous hype about it on the internet) to decide to try and run your life, especially at the city level.
The problem is not “AGENDA 21″, but “people in the cities wanting Someone To Make That Stuff Happen”.
All of that crap the “planners” push? Is getting pushed because vocal local minorities are pushing it, and nobody’s pushing back. The UN is irrelevant.
(I know whereof I speak; here in the People’s Paradise of Portland, OR, we have all sorts of “renewable” this and “bike lane” that – and all of it’s is because we’re stuffed with self-righteous green bicyclists, and the majority doesn’t care much – or quite reasonably realizes that the Mayor is a damned Communist and won’t listen anyway.
Not because of a UN document with no teeth behind it.)
Sigival, have you ever heard of the Antiplanner or Debunking Portland?
Statewide building code, volume after volume, everything has to look the same and be built the same (mediocre), everything has to be approved, and the planners love annoying crap like “traffic calming” by speed bumps or “traffic circles” that create traffic jams, and they always seem to approve mall entrances on blind corners, which is also annoying.
Planners don’t enforce building codes.
Planners like design guidlines that llow architectural creativity.
Everything has to go through a process because the residents and elected decision makers in a city demand it. Most planners prefer objective development standards that a builder can simply comply with and submit plans for plan check without exhausting and expensive public hearings.
Talk to the traffic engineers about stupid driveways at intersections.
There are better ways to calm traffic than traffic circles.
Planners don’t generally advocate for speed bumps. RESIDENTS do. Usually freaked out parents who think that the traffic on their street is too fast.
Most planners have no idea what Agenda 21 or ICLEI are.
My County Supervisor does. As does most of the rest of the Board. [there's this one ... no on is sure he even knows where he is. BTNIN]
Your County Supervisors do. [at least I hope they do since they signed on to it]
My Planning Commission does. They redid our General Plan more closely in its guidelines — CACs and all. ['cept the part where they tried to "monitor/meter" private wells. Show up in force with a bunch of angry citizens and they back right off -- only to "fix" things in the "regulation writing process"]
I’ve never discussed it in particular with any of our Planners, but listening to their arguments… They may not know the name or the origin, which matters little, but they’re very clear in their dedication to its goals and principles. In fact they used the “this sort of hysteria” argument…
See also: the APA.
This is not simply about “bike lanes and more landscpaing requirements” — which are good things. [mostly. bike lanes are dangerous as hell when the Bike Nazis [not normal people who ride bikes and follow the Laws of Physics] insist on trying to involve me in their suicide. BTNIN]
Re-examine those “liviable cities” “recommendations” — with the Smart Trains [which may be workable in the LA Basin, tho I doubt it], walkable neighborhoods, live over/work under [like Brooklyn - which are mostly empty 'round here] etc. Why do all the pilot projects look exactly the same? From Klamath Falls to Windsor to *some city in the desert I forget just where*? It’s not the same developer — I checked.
You may not be dealing with this so much in your entirely urban area [there's no unincorporated land left in The Basin, right?] LA could hve used some sensible, common sense planning — in 1930. Must be very difficult trying to make sensible decisions with it now.
Yes, where I am — as in Portland — these things are overtly pushed by Citizen Groups — “stakeholders” they actually call themselves, using A-21 language. That’s how ya tell the players; language. And goals.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — May 10, 2012 @ 6:30 am
Maria (7)
Reckon they can expect a lot of secret-service types, then.
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 10, 2012 @ 7:18 am
Patrick, we don’t have architectural creativity, objective and simple standards.
Sigvald – “It’s not the Party that’s the problem, it’s the members!” That makes no difference in the end.
Please don’t be one of these people. Bike lanes and more landscpaing requirements are not a UN conspiracy. You lose planners like me who could be your advocates when you advance this sort of hysteria. Most planners have no idea what Agenda 21 or ICLEI are.
Comment by PatrickP — May 9, 2012 @ 9:43 am
Except for forest fires, grass fires, swamp methane, volcanoes, and large animal farting, most of what environmentalists call “pollution” or AGW contributors can be traced back ultimately to people.
So . . . since we cannot control plate tectonics, or lightning strikes, or herbivore grazing, we cannot eliminate or even reduce those factors. However, if we got rid of all communists, socialists, and Muslims, the human population of the planet would be cut by roughly half, with attendant and consequent reduction of pollution to similar degree.
I’m available for full-time switch throwing, pellet dropping, and trigger pulling.
Comment by bocopro — May 9, 2012 @ 10:05 am
If we throw these guys in wood chippers and use the output to fertilize trees, the following results will be obtained:
* They will stop emitting CO2 & methane, thereby reducing the output of those fearful greenhouse gasses.
* Trees will be nourished, and will in turn reduce the CO2 and increase the O2 in the atmosphere.
* Obnoxious, tyrannical, little busy bodies will be cautioned about trying to run the lives of people who are probably smarter and certainly more pleasant than they are.
PS: while by no means certain, it is possible that things like Agenda 21 are actually the shark jump of the environmental
religionmovementreligion.Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 9, 2012 @ 11:02 am
Rio+20?
20 years already?
Shouldn’t half of us be dead or sumpthin’?
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 9, 2012 @ 12:56 pm
PatrickP – Assuming your assertion that most planners have no idea about these agendas, exactly how many planners out to control every aspect of our lives should there be before we make ourselves aware of it? 10%? 20%
I live in California – a planner’s wet dream state. Statewide building code, volume after volume, everything has to look the same and be built the same (mediocre), everything has to be approved, and the planners love annoying crap like “traffic calming” by speed bumps or “traffic circles” that create traffic jams, and they always seem to approve mall entrances on blind corners, which is also annoying.
So I’m pretty generally down on planners anyway, because it seems like they cater to their own whims rather than act as a check on bad ideas. Nothing personal.
Comment by Merovign — May 9, 2012 @ 3:15 pm
P.S. ICLEI lists 134 California cities and counties as members, including mine, out of 533 total in the U.S. That includes LA, SF, San Diego and Sacramento.
Comment by Merovign — May 9, 2012 @ 3:33 pm
Oy, in Rio … De Janeiro …!
(women in small bikinis, beaches, “favelas”, big shot drug dealers, corruption)
Those guys irk me!!!
Comment by Maria Edi — May 9, 2012 @ 3:48 pm
Being a “member” just means some douche on a city council sent in a letter, pretty much.
California? Doesn’t need a UN initiative (or ridiculous hype about it on the internet) to decide to try and run your life, especially at the city level.
The problem is not “AGENDA 21″, but “people in the cities wanting Someone To Make That Stuff Happen”.
All of that crap the “planners” push? Is getting pushed because vocal local minorities are pushing it, and nobody’s pushing back. The UN is irrelevant.
(I know whereof I speak; here in the People’s Paradise of Portland, OR, we have all sorts of “renewable” this and “bike lane” that – and all of it’s is because we’re stuffed with self-righteous green bicyclists, and the majority doesn’t care much – or quite reasonably realizes that the Mayor is a damned Communist and won’t listen anyway.
Not because of a UN document with no teeth behind it.)
Comment by Sigivald — May 9, 2012 @ 3:59 pm
Sigival, have you ever heard of the Antiplanner or Debunking Portland?
Statewide building code, volume after volume, everything has to look the same and be built the same (mediocre), everything has to be approved, and the planners love annoying crap like “traffic calming” by speed bumps or “traffic circles” that create traffic jams, and they always seem to approve mall entrances on blind corners, which is also annoying.
Planners don’t enforce building codes.
Planners like design guidlines that llow architectural creativity.
Everything has to go through a process because the residents and elected decision makers in a city demand it. Most planners prefer objective development standards that a builder can simply comply with and submit plans for plan check without exhausting and expensive public hearings.
Talk to the traffic engineers about stupid driveways at intersections.
There are better ways to calm traffic than traffic circles.
Planners don’t generally advocate for speed bumps. RESIDENTS do. Usually freaked out parents who think that the traffic on their street is too fast.
Comment by PatrickP — May 9, 2012 @ 5:01 pm
“from my cold dead hands, motherfuckers”.
Comment by JoeBandMember® — May 9, 2012 @ 6:37 pm
Bitterly clinging, here, boss.
Comment by JoeBandMember® — May 9, 2012 @ 6:39 pm
My County Supervisor does. As does most of the rest of the Board. [there's this one ... no on is sure he even knows where he is. BTNIN]
Your County Supervisors do. [at least I hope they do since they signed on to it]
My Planning Commission does. They redid our General Plan more closely in its guidelines — CACs and all. ['cept the part where they tried to "monitor/meter" private wells. Show up in force with a bunch of angry citizens and they back right off -- only to "fix" things in the "regulation writing process"]
I’ve never discussed it in particular with any of our Planners, but listening to their arguments… They may not know the name or the origin, which matters little, but they’re very clear in their dedication to its goals and principles. In fact they used the “this sort of hysteria” argument…
See also: the APA.
This is not simply about “bike lanes and more landscpaing requirements” — which are good things. [mostly. bike lanes are dangerous as hell when the Bike Nazis [not normal people who ride bikes and follow the Laws of Physics] insist on trying to involve me in their suicide. BTNIN]
Re-examine those “liviable cities” “recommendations” — with the Smart Trains [which may be workable in the LA Basin, tho I doubt it], walkable neighborhoods, live over/work under [like Brooklyn - which are mostly empty 'round here] etc. Why do all the pilot projects look exactly the same? From Klamath Falls to Windsor to *some city in the desert I forget just where*? It’s not the same developer — I checked.
You may not be dealing with this so much in your entirely urban area [there's no unincorporated land left in The Basin, right?] LA could hve used some sensible, common sense planning — in 1930. Must be very difficult trying to make sensible decisions with it now.
Yes, where I am — as in Portland — these things are overtly pushed by Citizen Groups — “stakeholders” they actually call themselves, using A-21 language. That’s how ya tell the players; language. And goals.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — May 10, 2012 @ 6:30 am
Maria (7)
Reckon they can expect a lot of secret-service types, then.
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 10, 2012 @ 7:18 am
Patrick, we don’t have architectural creativity, objective and simple standards.
Sigvald – “It’s not the Party that’s the problem, it’s the members!” That makes no difference in the end.
Comment by Merovign — May 10, 2012 @ 2:55 pm
Worst of all, California’s radical housing and transportation strategies are unnecessary. The unbalanced and one-dimensional pursuit of an idealized sustainability damages both quality of life and the economy. This is exacerbated by other issues, especially the state’s dysfunctional economic and tax policies. It is no wonder California is exporting so many people and jobs. California’s urban planning regime under SB 375 is poised to make it worse.
Comment by PatrickP — May 10, 2012 @ 3:35 pm
You see, I’m actualy more in agreement with you than you think. You need to climb aboard the ICLEI express to convince many planners.
Comment by PatrickP — May 10, 2012 @ 3:36 pm
Sorry, you DON’T need to climb aboard.
Comment by PatrickP — May 11, 2012 @ 10:26 am