text:
About Grandview Heights
History, Character, and Transition
GH City Planning Documents: the OCP & NCPs
North Grandview NCP 1999/2005
Morgan Heights NCP 1
Sunnyside NCP 2
Orchard Grove NCP 5A
NCP pending: Area 3
No NCP: Area 5
Parks and Passive Forest Walking Trails
Community Family Resources
Priority Concerns
Archived Development Applications/Priority Concerns
Application 14-0225 in non-NCP Area 5, 28th Ave/164th St
Area 5 – 164th St Infill: Morgan Crest
CitiWest – 26th Ave interface 7912-0323/August 2013- March 2015
Rural Designation for a section of Area 5
Tara Development/Hub Engineering 7914-0118 – 26th Ave interface, from 166St to 167th St
Tara Developments (Duplex) MEDIA
Orchard Grove 164th St and 26th Ave Interface
Active Development Applications in Grandview Heights
North Grandview NCP amendment: Chia Property 15-0352
Genex Multi-family proposal: Orchard Grove NCP/OG Park & Wildlife Corridor 7914-0354-00
South Surrey Operations Centre in Sunnyside NCP
Grandview Heights High School/Amenity Complex
South Campbell Heights Local Area Plan
South Campbell Heights Proposed Truck Parking/Maintenance Facility
Heritage Tree Designation & Passive Forest on 168th
Tree canopy/Tree preservation
Planning Terms
Quick link to Council Minutes, Videos & City Contacts
City Surrey Council Meeting Videos
2015-16 Council Minutes
2015/16 City Council Meeting Calendar & Upcoming Agenda Links
Mapping: Property Reports & Historical Imagery
City Sustainability & Biodiversity
"Target Hardening" Seminar Oct 2015:Crime Prevention for home & family
Grandview Heights Block Watch Groups
RCMP Stolen Auto Recovery initiative
RCMP Crime Mapping via Cosmos
Contact and Join us!
GHSA Blog
You are here: Home / GHSA Blog / Blog / The "Edge" and the "Wedge": more development into...
The "Edge" and the "Wedge": more development into rural/suburban Area 5
November 25, 2014 /in Blog /by Admin
Since the 36-lot 164th infill in Area 5 of Grandview Heights passed 3rd reading on June 23, 2014,( final adoption was passed by Council on December 1, 2014.) acreage property-owners who cherish a neighbourhood of quiet country character have been waiting for the other shoe to drop. Drop it did in the form of re-zoning application 14-0225 (16442 28th Ave) whose green sign was posted just days after the election. Click here to see the pre-notification and proposed lot layout).
Property looking west
Property looking east
This application needs to be discussed historically in the context of the 164th infill development as its genesis starts there. Hopefully you will bear with me because as the chronicle unfolds, we will be ping-ponging between Plannning and Council events in the spring and their interaction with/influence on the present situation. Its a great story: please stick around to read it.
The 164th infill is marked within the purple boundary beside the "164th St arrow." The new application 14-0225 is to the north, marked in red.
On March 11, 2013, Planning and Council recommended to a delegation of seven homeowners on 164th St that they could retain a consultant to proceed with a land assembly and urban infill development within Area 5 of Grandview Heights. This area is zoned RA Residential Acreage, (1-2 units per acre) in the Grandview Heights General Land Use Plan (GLUP 2005). In their appeal to Mayor and Council, homeowners cited lack of ability to sell their properties to due to their narrow configuration and asked for the City's help to solve their circumstances of personal hardship.
The infill application became active in the summer of 2013. Hundreds of hours of meetings, work, and letter-writing from the neighbours adjacent to this assembly over the period of a year was initiated, including a petition signed by 85 households against the development. This is because the property is located outside of an Neighbourhood Concept Plan Area (Area 5 of the General GLUP has no NCP and therefore planning lots with a density higher than 2 units per acre (1/2 acre) contravenes both the GH GLUP and the Official Community Plan which states that no development can occur in areas without Council-approved NCP. The two-stage NCP process, initiated when landowners have an appetite for development, takes years and considerable resources to accomplish. As soon-to-be-former Mayor Dianne Watts affirmed on September 8, 2014 during a public hearing regarding development in lands without an NCP, "All applications have to wait. It's a process and a policy that's been in place since we started the NCP process I think back in the 1980's. So nothing, there's no application that will come before council in Stage 1 that will get approved. It will not happen, it cannot happen, it has never happened." Well, a development that was not even in a stage one NCP area, the 164th St infill, was approved in June 2014 and it is evident that far from being a "one off," it was designed at the outset for further expansion into non-NCP Area 5.
If you are interested in the timeline of then 164th St infill, you can click here for all details of the neighbourhood's opposition to this proposal, links to City documents, press, and more.To learn more about the OCP, the NCP Process and the GH GLUP click here.
Below is a brief overview with a focus on the actual passing of the re-zoning and its ripple effect on to other properties which should, according to the OCP, be off limits.
Initially in 2013, the infill assembly consisted of seven property-owners represented by FirstCentury as developer and Hunter Laird as engineering consultant. One property, the most northerly at the corner of 164th St on 16442 28th Ave dropped out of the process. Nico River Developments (Brock Dorword and Dave Balsor) and Hunter Laird have now applying to rezone this seventh property to feature 7 lots on a one-acre property.
The First Century 164th infill rezoning application went to Public Hearing on April 28, 2014. It was referred back to Planning for further work and consultation with neighbours albeit with minimal changes. On June 23rd this development was passed in third reading at the Council's Regular Land Use Committee, with all members except Councillor Rasode in opposition because the area was not within an NCP and was therefore not appropriate for subdivision into lots less than 2 units per acre according to its GLUP zoning. The video and minutes of the proceedings can be viewed here.
The 164th infill is currently (Dec 2014) awaiting clearing (only 28 of 204 protected trees are being saved) and for the engineering to commence. Here is the approved plan for the 164th infill, with Morgan Heights to the east and Area 5 acreages to the east and south. And a few snaps of the mature trees that will be removed shortly.
Mature trees on 164th infill site
Rare grove on 164th infill site … a few of these trees are actually now within a tree protection fence
Why was this infill allowed?
According to File: 7913-0226-00 Planning Report Date: June 23, 2014, due to "unique circumstances." Click here to read the sections of the report which note them.
The long, narrow shape of the lots, the hardships suffered by the landowners and other concerns influenced Council's decision to grant the rezoning. City Long Range Planner Don Luymes noted in a June 17th, 2014 article in The Now Newspaper that
"the six properties are "a bit orphaned" and the city should have perhaps included them in Grandview 1 – Morgan Heights – which the properties are adjacent to on 164th Avenue.
"Hindsight is 20/20. What we maybe should have done, way back when, is drawn the line for 1 that included these properties because frankly, the configuration of the properties and the age and condition of the homes is such that redevelopment could have been anticipated, for sure."
Luymes said "the plan underway will limit development further into Grandview 5 and like Villeneuve, is confident it will reassure neighbours that their area will remain untouched. The reality is, subdivisions like (the adjacent properties of Area 5 and) Country Woods aren't built anymore," Luymes noted.
"That's why we hope to retain them…. Will new development be of that nature? No, it won't be, simply because of affordability and the viability of development," he said.
Interestingly, I distinctly recall being part of the neighbourhood Planning process to zone the western side of 164th in this exact location in 2004 during the public consultation period of the writing of the GH GLUP and recently came across archival documents such as letters and reports to the City as well as copies of the Open House comment sheets reflecting the views of neighbours, many still living here. Don Luymes is correct: these properties were considered to be annexed into Morgan Heights NCP1 in a way, as they were earmarked for "transitional density" early on in the GLUP process. Predictably, the same arguments I and those engaged in the process (including the late Ken Hall who was fighting for the (ultimately unsuccessful) retention of the lush majestic firs on both sides of 164th St as well as suburban designation for the east side of 164th, Gary Cameron and others) were making focused on maintaining the "status quo" of residential acreages in Area 5. Early GLUP plans earmarked the east side of 164th and the north side of 26th Ave as "transitional density" to buffer the existing RA acreage homes from Morgan Heights to the west and future Orchard Grove NCP 5A to the south of 26th Ave.
This was opposed vigorously by residents, resulting in these lands maintaining their RA designation in the GLUP. However, it has always been a "wait for the other shoe to drop" situation, because here we now have RA lands on 164th becoming urban — not even true transitional lot size — with the approved 164th infill and now new application 14-0225. Meanwhile on 26th Ave, residents on the north side of the street are lobbying more than is reasonably imagined for taxpayers to do to ensure that the south side of the street in Orchard Grove is a proper gradual transition zone from the RA lots on the north side of the street as specified in the Orchard Grove NCP 5A, not the "buffer" between Orchard Grove and Area 5 properties to the north. Hence we have a complex and interconnected story of changes, policies, and resident expression of perceptions/expectations of neighbourhood realities which far from saying that higher density should not occur, maintains that it can only occur with sensitivity, observance of established land use guidelines, and extensive community consultation.
These documents are compelling reading and perhaps will be explored in a future piece, for but now, let's return to the return of the 164th infill as it proceeds further into Area 5 in the form of new rezoning application for 16442 28th St.
Details of the 164th Infill and how this new (and future) application(s) were always part of it
The plan for the 164th infill conveniently includes a half-road at the northern border (which you can see in the above site plan) that sets up the next phase of the build-out of that corner; city planners in their April 2014 staff report to Council (Page 9) were already anticipating that this will take place:
"Proposed 27A Avenue is a half-road, which would be completed if the properties to the north develop in the future. The applicant has prepared a concept plan which illustrates how the properties to the north can develop, with RF-12 lots fronting 164 Street and 27A Avenue, and large urban lots adjacent to the existing RA lots to the east."
Sure enough, the new application on the corner of 164th St and 28th Ave (14-0225) consists of the seventh lot of the original infill, which was at some point removed from the final 164th infill assembly and, when you look at the lot plan, you can't miss the observation the lot to its immediate east is also marked up for subdivision. This suggests that the subdivision layout drawn up by engineering consultants Hunter Laird for the 164th infill had already encompassed, at least conceptually, two more acres into unprotected Area 5 to continue the project.
Here is the 164th infill lot layout for the six properties passed by Council in June 2014 (YELLOW), new Application 14-0225 which features 7 lots on one acre (PINK) The suggestion of implied further development to the east can be seen on 28th Ave, which is currently a rental house (BLUE) and which already shows lot subdivision mark ups for five lots. The importance of including this in this plan will be seen below. The lot layout for the new application is also below so you can see it in more detail.
Back to the spring of 2014 and the 164th infill for a moment.
Several elements were at play during the April 2014 Public Hearing for the 164th infill:
The issue of the OCP being altered for the convenience of both the land assembly's owners and Planning's preference to develop urban housing on the east side of 164th north to blend into North Grandview NCP where vacant lots and houses are awaiting development. 85 residents who signed a petition against the development were not in favor of Council abandoning its own land use rules.
The concern – actually severe anxiety – of residents of one acre properties in adjacent Area 5 that if "piecemeal" spot zoning of urban infill development was to be approved on 164th, how could these residents have any future confidence that the character of their neighbourhood be preserved for the future in absence of any binding plan? Numerous taxpayers spoke to this issue. The GLUP after all is merely a secondary use plan, and not even an NCP.
Density of the infill too high, inadequate density buffering from adjacent 1 acre lots in a few places, amount of tree loss.
The further concern that aside from one resident who canvassed the neighbourhood far beyond the City's 100 metre notification boundary to spread information about the development, there was no greater public consultation because only residents living adjacent to the infill were invited to meetings with the developer and the City.
Several positive suggestions were made to make the development more palatable: Tree retention on the most densely treed lot for a "pocket park" was suggested, which would extend the walkway from 27th Ave in Morgan Heights across the street and provide a nice terminus to the path while saving significant old growth trees. And of course the most sensible solution of creating an infill development of ½ acre lots (dearly coveted in Grandview Heights) which would instantly solve the problem of amending the GLUP RA zoning.
When the file returned for third reading after being referred back to staff for several weeks, Mayor and Council had likely heard its fill from neighbourhood phone calls, letters and newspaper articles about the dissatisfaction that the City' own rules about land use were not being followed.
New residents to an area can have confidence that they are buying into an area that they like regardless of the type of home they are investing in because they see a developed immediate neighbourhood. Long-time and existing residents who see the infill precedent as a means of erosion of a country "rural" lifestyle, however, do not share this confidence and the stress it brings affects feelings of quality of life. Residents wonder "what next" and "when next" because there is no assurance of protective zoning.
What Council says about protecting the acreages of Area 5
At both the Public Hearing on April 28th and the Third reading on June 23 2014, certain Council members did thankfully comment on the need for Area 5 residents to feel some measure of security in their properties and way of life despite the infill. Below are some quotes from the City video of both meetings in chambers:
April 28, 2014 Public Hearing:
Councillor Villenueve: (This is) "an important one acre area in Grandview Heights."
Councillor Hepner: "I just want to be clear … that all the other properties that are zoned acreage in that area … would like to maintain their protection of an acreage zone would they stay simply fallow until at least half of them came forward and said we'd like to do something different … and the RA's that are surrounding this stay in that designated form?"
Mr. Lamontagne: "There wouldn't any changes per se because there would not be an NCP process that would be initiated so the status quo would remain."
Councillor Heppner: "The status quo would remain, thank you."
{RA's are residential acreage zone}
Councillor Villeneuve: "I love the area and preserving those acreage lots is important to me and I'm three generations living in South Surrey so it's an area that I really do treasure and so I want to make sure those residents feel confident about their investments and their ability to stay there…"
Councillor Hayne: "I'm very much in favour of identifying areas within Surrey that are going to remain one acre in perpetuity so that people can buy into these areas, and buy with confidence that their neighbours aren't going to all of a sudden put up the green development sign and here we go and the dominos start."
Councillor Hepner: "I think I agree with Councillor Hayne that there are areas in our city that we would like to see maintained as acres and this is certainly one of those cherished areas and I have friends who live there and I know they love their acreage."
Councillor Steele: "I really do support the one acre properties. I think it's really important that Surrey retain those."
June 23, 2014 – Regular Council Land Use re: 164 Street Infill 3rd Reading
Councillor Hayne: "The residents around this area (referring to the 164 Street development) want assurance that their acreages and their investments are going to be there for them and their families in the future and want assurance from the city that this isn't the thin edge of the wedge and some creep moving into this community. It's a beautiful community and I for one certainly wouldn't support any redevelopment through that area so I would like to see us shore up some of those assurances in that neighbourhood to ensure that their acreages are maintained not just in the short term but in the medium-long term as well."
Councillor Villeneuve: "If I sensed in this area that there was a big desire for some redevelopment or they wanted planning so they can develop over the next 5-10 years into smaller lots or townhouses to compliment what's in other parts of the area I would say yes to an NCP but clearly I've heard from people that they want this area untouched except for these properties (referring to the 164 Street development) neighbourhood."
Those, then, are the words from Council to residents of Area 5 in response to concerns that "piecemeal" spot zoning into the neighbourhood (without an NCP) would not occur. It was clearly pointed out that this infill was a "one off." It allowed a deep breath to be taken and confidence in the future of our properties restored … briefly.
Planning and Council further offered some procedural reassurance to residents of residential acreage property owners in Area 5 who abut the 164th infill during the 3rd reading of the infill application on June 23:
The Corporate Report to Council states
… it is recommended that Council pass a resolution to re-confirm and establish the properties to the east and south of the subject site (the 164th infiill) as one-acre by re-designating these lands from "Suburban Residential (1 to 2 upa)"to "Suburban Residential (1 acre max.)" in the Grandview Heights GLUP (Enclosure IV)
The property owners of acre age properties to the east and south have indicated a desire to maintain their estate homes with no intention to redevelop in the foreseeable future.
Here is the map which shows this added layer of protection. Note that the new application on 28th Ave and the property to its east, which sit atop the 164th infill property, are excluded. Compare these maps side by side. What do you see?
It is somewhat comforting to see this "1 acre max" designation, and in combination with the words of several of the Councillors, one might think that the boundary of the 6-property assembly was done. Not so. Two properties in Area 5 were left out of this designation. A Corporate report to Council March 31, 2014 had already stated:
As previously noted, the land use designation of "Suburban Residential (1 to 2 upa)" for the two (2) properties to the north of the subject site, at 16442 and 16446 28 Avenue, is not proposed to be amended. The proposed subdivision layout includes a half-road at the north end of the site, which would be completed if the properties to the north develop in the future.
Because of this circumstance, further consideration of development may be entertained for these two properties, subject to a development application review process. Click here for map.
In other words, the 164th infill was essentially a two-part plan. Part 1 was the 6-property assembly passed in exception to the OCP and GLUP in an area not governed by an NCP in June 2014. Part 2 are the two properties that were left out of the "1 acre max" designation. We are seeing the first element of Part 2 in application 14-0225 because three days after the November 15th election, the green development application sign for 16442 28th Ave went up and pre-notification letters including the preliminary site plan were sent out on the next day.
This new application uses the northern road way of the 164th infill property and "finishes" off the corner of 164th and 28th . The property across the street to the north, on the other side of 28,th is located in North Grandview NCP and is zoned RA (1-2 units per acre), but little imagination is required to speculate that the lots fronting 164th will be, down the hill, also smaller urban size like the lots on 164th. Homes in this zone are a valuable product in the Surrey housing market. Since North Grandview has an NCP and amendments are allowed, increasing density is something that is allowed in the process. Increasing density in lands without an NCP, however, is against the OCP.
Thus when Councillor Hayne perceptively references the "thin edge of the wedge" and the "creep" of urban into a rural acreage area (the homes on the south side of 28th Ave and everything to the east and south of them), the lot which is at the corner of 164th and 28th and the one to its east with the markup already on it is just that.
The subject property at 16642 28th Ave is not long and narrow, hence unsellable, like the "challenging" properties of the 164th infill were perceived to be. A wide one-acre property with a generous frontage, it could easily be rejuvenated as the site of a new home, as what is being seen in other parts of Area 5. It is not a property owned by a resident under hardship who is selling because of dire necessity or old age as was the case with the 164th infill land assembly owners. This is a speculative investment property. The same argument exists for the property to its east on 28th Ave (shown below on right)
In fact, this next property (which although is not part of this development application is by virtue annexed to the subject property by Planning's grouping the two together in the GLUP amendment and map) is really the thin edge of the wedge. If there was an NCP in place, one could rationalize that finishing off the corner of 164th and 28th is a good idea.
But heading eastwards into Area 5? Not only does the development of these two properties (because you know the application of the second one will appear at any time) again contravene the GH GLUP and the OCP, it also contradicts everything our City Councillors said at council meetings about the 164th infill of being an exception, a "one-off."
You can see how these two (soon to be three) lot elements were designed as a unit from the beginning. Very tidy with the edge and a little transitional density. But wait, this is intruding further along a street, 28th Ave, that didn't factor into the 164th infill in the first place and which is home to well-loved beautiful, aging but well-kept acreage homes on a quiet street. These are homes predominantly lived in by invested owners who like where they live. This will evolve on the north side of 28th eventually as sewer services enable the build-out of the North Grandview NCP, but for the most part, even that NCP zoning is half acre suburban lots fronting 28th Ave. The point is that Area 5 is not meant to be the transition zone to any other NCP as stated in the GH GLUP; other NCP's have to transition zone to Area 5.
Bucolic 28th Ave, looking east
If Council supports the new application into non-NCP Area 5, then are their statements of support for keeping Area 5 acreages intact contradictory?
Where does this leave residents of Area 5 who live along 28th Ave and in the 165th St cul-de-sac? Where does it leave anyone who lives in Area 5 who sees development "nibbling" along the edges? Where does it leave all residents of Surrey who have heard their Council vocally support the uniqueness of a neighbourhood yet remain anxious and unsure about everything from their way of life, erosion of property value, and most fundamentally, the trust in those who decide the shape of neighbourhoods?
I know I want to believe that our respected City Councillors who spoke out in favor of preserving a rare-form of lot size which, as Don Luymes confirms, will not be developed in the future, will support what they have said. When people are willing to buy a home on an acreage lot, tear it down and build new, you know the neighbourhood is in demand and has enduring value. What does it take to enable a neighbourhood to evolve and change without the threat that certain parts of it, which should be protected by the OCP, are not constantly subject to erosion and uncertainty?
Evidently, this application for 16442 28th and the inevitable application for the property to its east which have been planned from the start of the 164th infill to be part of it is a tug-of-war between two concepts: the edge and the wedge. "Edge effects" are ways of finishing a development, street or area with a consistent built form and look. The "edge" is tidy, pleasing, and good planning. The "wedge" is what happens when small changes grow into large ones, by eventually and invasively changing and destroying what was originally there. No one, least of all me, wants to or can stop higher density development in Grandview Heights. Like everything, it has its place in a sustainable mixed-density community. It brings many benefits to a vibrant neighbourhood. However, until Planners and Council take a second look at the creep of growth into a low density area without an NCP, no one who lives there rests easily.
What is coming next?
By Victoria Blinkhorn
Tags: Area 5, community planning, Development, Land Use guideline compliance, Land Use Plans, Tree preservation
The Gift of Trees
Destroying to Create
Infrastructure lagging! Can Grandview function?
Invasive Species and Humans: Lessons from nature about building Communities
"The mosaic of little places": what do neighbourhoods and residents add up to?
GHSA Mayoral "Virtual" Forum
Guest Blog by Bob Ransford: "Multi-generational Community Planning"
GHSA "Virtual" Non-incumbent Council Candidate Forum
Area 5 City of Surrey Community consultation community planning demographics Development economics Election 2014 Environmental stewardship Grandview Heights unliveable Health benefits infrastructure Land Use guideline compliance Land Use Plans Little Campbell River NCP amendments parks pocket parks Quality of life runoff sidewalks South Campbell area Stewardship sustainability traffic traffic accidents traffic congestion Tree preservation tree retention urban life
Grandview Heights gets a new NCP! Area 3
A Commentary on Surrey's Sustainability Charter
Working with the City of Surrey as a resident/advocate
Join our Information Network
Interested in perserving and enhancing the character of your neighbourhood? Learn More > (ironically the link to the newsletter signup form is not working at the moment! Please email info@grandviewstewardship.org for now. Thx)
Grandview Heights is not just a location, but a community of semi-rural, suburban character, more recent urban housing additions, schools, amenities and shopping. The forested, quiet areas of acreages co-exist with the vibrant new areas of dining, shopping, and socializing.
Infrastructure lagging! Can Grandview function?February 7, 2017 - 10:37 pm
Grandview Heights gets a new NCP! Area 3September 2, 2016 - 8:26 pm
A Commentary on Surrey's Sustainability CharterMarch 23, 2016 - 12:27 am
Grandview Heights Stewardship Association
Email: info@grandviewstewardship.org
© Copyright - Grandview Heights Stewardship Association | Terms & Conditions
GHSA Mayoral "Virtual" Forum How much Grandview water goes into Rivers?


text:
<project xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation=" http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0 http://maven.apache.org/xsd/maven-4.0.0.xsd">

  <modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>

  <parent>
    <groupId>com.github.lstephen</groupId>
    <artifactId>basepom-scala</artifactId>
    <version>1.18-SNAPSHOT</version>
    <relativePath>../scala</relativePath>
  </parent>

  <groupId>com.github.lstephen</groupId>
  <artifactId>basepom-scala-rspec</artifactId>
  <packaging>pom</packaging>

  <name>basepom-scala-rspec</name>
  <description>A base POM for Scala/Java projects using RSpec for testing from https://github.com/lstephen</description>
  <url>${github.site}</url>

  <repositories>
    <repository>
      <id>rubygems-releases</id>
      <url>http://rubygems-proxy.torquebox.org/releases</url>
    </repository>
  </repositories>

  <properties>
    <jruby.version>1.7.21</jruby.version>

    <gem.rspec.version>3.3.0</gem.rspec.version>

    <plugin.rspec.version>1.0.10</plugin.rspec.version>
  </properties>

  <dependencies>
    <dependency>
      <groupId>rubygems</groupId>
      <artifactId>rspec</artifactId>
      <version>${gem.rspec.version}</version>
      <type>gem</type>
      <scope>test</scope>
    </dependency>
  </dependencies>

  <build>
    <plugins>
      <plugin>
        <groupId>de.saumya.mojo</groupId>
        <artifactId>rspec-maven-plugin</artifactId>
        <version>${plugin.rspec.version}</version>
        <configuration>
          <specSourceDirectory>src/test/rspec</specSourceDirectory>
          <jrubyJvmArgs>${argLine}</jrubyJvmArgs>
        </configuration>
        <executions>
          <execution>
            <phase>test</phase>
            <goals>
              <goal>test</goal>
            </goals>
          </execution>
        </executions>
      </plugin>
    </plugins>
  </build>

</project>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Did a price analysis on Bitcoin on June 3rd, 2018, and wanted to push that out for archival reasons and also so that people can scroll back in the future and see the updates that I have made on Bitcoin.
Disclaimer: This is not financial/investment advice of any sort, this is merely just information for you to use.
Please note that this analysis was originally curated June 3rd, 2018, so this is the full, non-redacted version. Any charts+statements in the present tense were made at that point in time.
Okay, so Bitcoin broke out of the short-term downtrend it was in on the 1D chart.
Pardon the messy chart, got like a million overlays on it right now.
So, that golden arrow at the bottom shows the potential price action that I thought we may get stuck with. The gold boxes show how the price had nudged against this line before and got rejected before continuing the decline downward.
So, now that it's broken on that upside on the daily, I can feel a little more secure that there may not be a violent whipsaw to Bart us downward.
All the lines you see on the chart above are resistance/support points that I've plotted over the course of time.
I determine these points by watching the price of Bitcoin. If I notice that it takes forever for the price to move below or above a certain threshold (i.e., if the price is stuck at like $8.1k-8.2k for like 3 days in a row), then I draw a line there and I deem that a support resistance.
This has been a REALLY valuable strategy for me because these points have really held true and whenever the price re-tests the line that I drew at a later time, I notice that it still acts as a support/resistance. So, it allows me to better anticipate pivots.
I'm sure most of you know this but, every line can be a support OR a resistance.
If the price is above, it becomes a support (meaning that there's a wave of buying power that will hinder price movement downward).
If the price is below the line, then it is resistance (meaning that there is a wave of sellers at that price that will hinder price movement upward).
That's important for me personally, because there are times where the price of Bitcoin will randomly surge upward or downward without warning (whipsaws). But, knowing that the $7.5k will serve as a strong support most likely gives me more confidence as well, because I feel that the $7.5k will act as the 'stop' for price movement downward.
The more times a trendline or support/resistance point is tested, the more 'reliable' it becomes.
Looks to me like $8.1k is the next point of resistance. I anticipate price action continuing to that point. Perhaps there may be a intermediate re-test of $7.5k before getting there though.
But I don't think 'panic' or scrambling into short positions is warranted unless it sinks below $7.5k and holds that point for a decent amount of time (few hours at least).
Let me get to a cleaner chart and start looking at what some of the overlays are telling me.
So, we've established that Bitcoin is looking mad bullish on the 1D TF. I've been using this TF because trends that emerge on the 1D are a lot more predictive of future price action than what you see on the lower TF (like the 4H for example).
Now, let me get to the part on why I felt a long on BCH was better than a long on $BTC.
Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. Just outlining my personal thoughts & my personal strategy for selection. I'm not saying you should go long/short/divest of anything. Everything is your choice. I'm posting this under the assumption that you consider this to be a platform for sharing ideas rather than advice on what course of action you should take.
Remember when I mentioned the $8.1k as a point of resistance? There are a lot of converging indicators that corroborate this assumption.
Ichimoku agrees that the price resistance = $8.1k as well.
I didn't mention this in the chart itself, but I imagine that the conversion line (that red line that you see in the cloud) will more than likely come down to $8.1k if or when Bitcoin hits that $8.1k.
Folks don't mention this often but the conversion line (blue line on my chart) and the base line (red line on my chart) for the Ichimoku can both serve as support and resistance points because they are MA (math formula not as straightforward as 'typical' MA indicators).
Conversely, when the price rises above one of these lines, it's a bullish/buy signal. As you can see on the chart I posted of the Ichimoku, the price rose above the conversion line on June 1st. The next candle (Heikin Ashi) opened entirely above the line the next day (June 2nd), which confirmed this buy signal for me.
Here is the EMA-50 + EMA-200 (1D TF) for $BTC. We already discussed the death cross that occurred in May. So, I won't get too much into that at this point.
I showed this because EMA indicators serve as pretty reliable support/resistance points.
As we can see on that chart above, we can see that the EMA-50 = $8.2k.
I imagine that it would more than likely drop down to $8.1k by the time Bitcoin gets there (if it gets there). So, that too would be yet another resistance point.
I think you all get the gist of what I'm saying. $8.1k will be a beast for Bitcoin to climb over and I'm not sure that there's enough in the tank for it to get that far when we look at the volume.
I mentioned this in the Discord a few days ago, but I believe (not financial advice) that Bitcoin serves as a better benchmark than trading opportunity because of the extremely low volatility on the coin.
We established that the maximum upside here is probably $8.1k.
Right now, it's trading at $7.7k.
So, that's a +$400 gain?
400/7700 = .0519 = 5.1% potential upside.
If I were trading stocks, I'd love this. But, since we're in crypto, this potential upside with the risk being whipsawed out of 2.6% (assuming a re-test of $7.5k & an entry $7.7k, a $200 drop; 200/7700=.0259=2.59%) this just doesn't feel like the best allocation of resources in the space.
I mentioned before that altcoins have been getting drilled in this market and that the outflow/inflow of money into altcoins was BY FAR the primary reason for the fluctuations in market cap of crypto during the month of May.
Much of this was mentioned in my Market Capitalization analysis that I performed for the month of May.
In terms of indicators, I'll be using the Average True Range (ATR), which shows the exact amount of volatility on a quantitative level.
Here's the zoomed out version of ATR though, for reference.
That concludes what I wrote about Bitcoin on June 3rd, 2018. Once again, this is just to keep an accurate reflection of the numerous updates from the CryptoMedication regarding the potential future movement of Bitcoin and other coins.


text:
Education: Opening the Debate
The seminar Education: Opening the Debate was presented by Architects for Health following the AGM on 30 November 2006 at the new Libeskind Lecture Space at the London Metropolitan University.
With rare exception, healthcare facility planning and design is not taught in schools of architecture in the UK. This absence on the curricula has a direct effect on the perception that students, staff and the profession have of the skill base and competences which flow into practice.
Professor George J Mann – AIA, is the Skaggs-Sprague Endowed Professor of Health Facilities Design at Texas A&M University, USA. He has published numerous articles, and research reports giving presentations of his findings on both national and international levels. Biography
http://archone.tamu.edu/faculty/gmann
Professor Bas Molenaar – professor of architectural design & healthcare at Eindhoven Technology University, Netherlands. Biography
http://www.bwk.tue.nl/ade/index.php
Professor Ake Wiklund – professor of architectural design & healthcare at the School of Architecture at Chalmers University of Technology, in Gothenburg, Sweden. Biography
http://www.chalmers.se/arch/EN/
Leo Care – Design tutor at the University of Sheffield. Biography
http://www.shef.ac.uk/architecture
Robin Nicholson – Senior member of Edward Cullinan Architects. Biography
http://www.edwardcullinanarchitects.com
Welcoming from London Metropolitan University
Professor Graeme Evans – director of the Cities Institute, a multidisciplinary research institute working across sustainable urban environments and design, transport, housing and regeneration. Biography
http://www.citiesinstitute.org
Sponsored by Drager Medical
PrevPreviousIntegrated art: issues in the design of healthcare facilities
NextJohn Radcliffe Hospital OxfordNext
AfH at IHEEM 2021
Architects for Health was delighted to attend the hybrid IHEEM conference this year, with a stand in the main hall and a series of online
Scandinavian Patient Environments
In April, we were delighted to 'virtually' gather over 150 guests from 21 countries for a session focused on Scandinavian patient environments, comparing and contrasting
BEYOND THE BRIEF: LEVERAGING THE VALUE OF LANDSCAPE – A REVIEW
As we reached the end of March, saw a glimmer of spring and I think all started to 'unfurl' a little, it seemed only fitting
2018 Study Tour to Northern Ireland
Architects for Health Study Tour – Northern Ireland 4-6 July, 2018 Health Infrastructure for the NHS in Northern Ireland has followed a distinctive path from

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A good impregnation significantly improves the wearing comfort of functional clothing. Only an impregnated outer fabric of textiles has the optimal breathability, stays dry longer and does not become cold. There is much less condensation on the inside, the clothing feels noticeably drier. Fibertec impregnating agents are specially developed for treating modern functional textiles.
Fibertec offers the right tool for each claim.


text:
SFGATE Homepage
Baseball history expert Jules Tygiel dies
Why the Pacific Ocean turned pink off an area of the Calif. coast
Good news, bad news for 49ers running backs before Eagles game
After a violent 49ers game, the Eagles opened a stadium jail
NFL looking at rule change after Jimmie Ward broke Cowboy's leg
A trip down the most mysterious road in California
ESPN pundit: Purdy is 49ers' QB, Trey Lance pick a 'mistake'
Lenticular cloud atop Calif.'s Mount Shasta puts on day-long show
This Bay Area county lost the most people last year
Coldest temperatures of the year so far are coming to Bay Area
News // Bay Area & State
Jill Tucker, Chronicle Staff Writer
Jules Tygiel, national expert on Jackie Robinson and San Francisco State University, died Tuesday. He was 59.Courtesy of the Tygiel family/2006 photo
Jules Tygiel loved history and he loved baseball.
Putting his two passions together, the San Francisco State University professor became one of the country's leading experts on the game and its role in American history.
Professor Tygiel, who wrote what many consider the pre-eminent book on baseball icon Jackie Robinson, died Tuesday after a nearly three-year battle against cancer. He was 59.
Professor Tygiel first published "Baseball's Great Experiment: Jackie Robinson and His Legacy" in 1983, with multiple reprints in the years that followed, including a 25th anniversary printing earlier this year.
He received the Robert F. Kennedy Book Award for it, and Sports Illustrated in 2003 named it one of the top 50 sports books of all time.
The manuscript was a labor of love for Professor Tygiel, who grew up on Brooklyn Dodgers baseball in the 1950s and considered Robinson a hero.
"He had a visceral and intellectual love for the game," Richard Zitrin said of his longtime friend. "Jackie was his favorite player."
His 1983 book was less of a biography than a historical account of Robinson and his role as the first African American player in modern major-league baseball.
That's what Hall of Fame second baseman Joe Morgan loved about it.
"I though it was fabulous because it wasn't someone's opinions and stuff," Morgan said Wednesday after learning of Professor Tygiel's death. "His book showed us exactly how we got to where we were."
Robinson's widow, Rachel, considers it the best book on her husband, Morgan said.
The book pieced together what happened in those post-World War II days of integration in America's favorite pastime. Morgan said once he got his hands on the book, he couldn't put it down.
"There have been lots of books written about Jackie Robinson," he said. "This is my favorite one."
Professor Tygiel was born in 1949 in Brooklyn, N.Y. He graduated from Brooklyn College in 1969 and later received his master's degree and doctorate from UCLA.
He taught a year each at the University of Tennessee and the University of Virginia before joining the faculty at San Francisco State in 1978, focusing his research and teaching on California history.
He published two more books on baseball as well as several books on California history, including the 2004 book "Ronald Reagan and the Rise of Conservatism."
He married Luise Custer in 1982, and the couple had two sons.
Friends said it was an honor to attend a baseball game with Professor Tygiel, who had strong opinions about anything related to the game, from the differences in umpire calls to the steroids scandal, which he considered a "tempest in a teapot," Zitrin said.
But it was Professor Tygiel's work on Jackie Robinson that has stood the test of time, ensuring Robinson's place as not only a ballplayer, but a civil rights leader as well, Zitrin said.
"The appreciation for Robinson wouldn't have been what it is," he said. The book "put him in the right firmament."
"Jules Tygiel's death is a great loss for the University," said San Francisco State provost John Gemello. "Jules was a superb teacher and a renowned scholar who was able to pull off the double play of combining his two loves, history and baseball, to become the foremost baseball historian in the United States today."
Professor Tygiel is survived by his wife, Luise, of San Francisco; sons Charles Tygiel of Santa Cruz and Sam Tygiel of San Francisco; and his mother, Rose Tygiel of Tucson.
Jill Tucker
Reach Jill on
Jill Tucker has covered education in California for 22 years, writing stories that range from issues facing Bay Area school districts to broader national policy debates. Her work has generated changes to state law and spurred political and community action to address local needs.
She is a frequent guest on KQED's "Newroom" television show and "Forum" radio show. A Bay Area native, Jill earned a master's degree in journalism at the University of Colorado, Boulder and a bachelor's degree from the UC Santa Barbara. In between, she spent two years as a Peace Corps volunteer teaching English in Cape Verde, West Africa.
Place an Ad / Classifieds
SF Marketplace Classifieds
Market Client Articles


A school's code of conduct is a set of rules that governs student behavior on campus. This includes the regulation of academic behavior (e.g. plagiarism, cheating, academic dishonesty), as well as nonacademic behavior (e.g. alcohol or drug violations, hazing, harassment, sexual assault).
Courts view codes of conduct as contracts between students and colleges and hold that students agree to the terms of these contracts when they enroll.
The terms can be surprising and regularly catch students off guard. Unfortunately, many students usually don't read the "contract" until after they have been accused of an infraction.
Students implicitly sign this contract when they step on campus and pay tuition. The code may not be delivered directly to the student and may live online where the educational institution directs students to view it.
It does not have to be signed, but students and schools are bound by the code. Codes of conduct can regulate some off-campus activity.
Courts have held this to be a proper extension of the school's jurisdiction so long as the school properly identifies the prohibited, off-campus behavior in the code of conduct and there is some connection between the behavior and campus.
For example, colleges may impose sanctions for out-of-control parties (in which other students attend), stalking or harassment of another student off-campus or actions that demonstrate unprofessionalism.
Students accused of violating a code of conduct can usually elect to proceed to a hearing. The hearing may be held in front of a panel or before a single school administrator, sometimes at the student's choice.
If a hearing is selected, both the student and the university (through a professor, T.A., or other university administrator) may present evidence and documents, identify witnesses and have witnesses attend the hearing.
Regardless of the alleged conduct, the "preponderance (greater weight) of the evidence" standard is universally applied during code of conduct hearings.
This means that it is more likely than not that the alleged violation occurred. This is different than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in courts in order to determine guilt that most people are familiar with.
Very little evidence may be used to find a violation. This can be a rude awakening, especially for students charged with violations that may result in a substantial suspension or dismissal.
Dismissed students can be left holding hefty student loan debt with no corresponding degree, all based on a panel's determination that it was "more likely than not" that a violation occurred.
Some schools impose monetary fines for code of conduct violations. Fines can range from nominal amounts to several hundred dollars.
Schools cite fines as a deterrent to unwanted behavior, although the practice has raised some ethical questions in the last few years.
Students can appeal a code of conduct violation finding, but the time to appeal a panel decision can be very short, often between three and seven days.
You may lose your right to an appeal simply by taking too long to check your mail or consult with an attorney.
Generally, students can consult counsel, but codes of conduct may limit the use of an attorney.
Even for public universities, courts have determined that students do not have an absolute right to counsel in code of conduct proceedings.
Your school may allow you to use an attorney, but in an "advisory capacity" only.
This means that the attorney can advise you, but cannot speak on your behalf. This is commonly called "potted plant" representation.
Attorneys may not be allowed at all for purely academic issues (e.g., grade appeals). Private schools may also prohibit the use of attorneys because certain constitutional due process protections may not apply.
In such circumstances, it may seem that hiring an attorney is futile.
But an attorney can help in a number of ways: he or she can help you understand the risk involved in requesting a hearing versus accepting responsibility; help you prepare questions and evidence; identify additional protections that may exist (e.g., protections for disabled students, minimal constitutional due process standards, etc.); and provide guidance throughout the hearing itself.
There are also several factors to consider if you are facing a pending criminal charge in addition to a code of conduct violation. When procedural errors do occur, attorneys can help students properly identify the errors and file an appeal.


text:
Development assistance in Vanuatu
Improving community safety and resilience in Vanuatu
Building resilient infrastructure and an environment for economic opportunity in Vanuatu
Improving early education and essential health services in Vanuatu
Supporting cyclone recovery and reconstruction in Vanuatu
Australia Awards in Vanuatu
Australian Volunteers program in Vanuatu
Vanuatu and Australia: standing strong together infographic
Australia's commitment to climate change action in Vanuatu
Vanuatu country brief
Stepping-up in Vanuatu
Australia has worked with Vanuatu to build more effective legal institutions and improve police services for over 17 years. The Governments of Vanuatu and Australia established an integrated policing and justice program in 2014 to strengthen the sector as a whole and build the capacity of agencies in the formal and informal justice sectors. Australia is also a partner of the Vanuatu Women's Centre (VWC), which provides legal assistance and counseling services to survivors of violence.
Vanuatu Australia Policing and Justice Program
Up to $24 million, 2017-2020
The Vanuatu Australia Policing and Justice Program integrates Australia's investments in policing and justice and builds on previous program of support. It provides targeted support for the policing and justice sector, including community services agencies. The program is implemented jointly by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), providing expert policing advice to the Vanuatu Police Force (VPF), and a managing contractor. The program works closely and collaboratively under the direction and oversight of DFAT.
The Program aims to achieve the following outcomes:
The VPF, justice and community services agencies and targeted non-state actors demonstrate strengthened service delivery capacity, particularly in their handling of cases involving women, children and youth that will see:
strengthening of policing, justice and community services institutions through targeted skills development including through key advisers to the VPF, the Ministry of Justice and Community Services (MJCS), the Public Solicitor's Office (PSO), the Office of the Public Prosecutor (OPP), the State Prosecutor's Department (SPD), and the Courts, leading to improved service delivery
women's professional participation enhanced in the sector
sector agencies improving their evidence and knowledge base and are using this to inform decision making about service delivery
support for strengthened human and financial management in key sector agencies, in particular the VPF
coordinated reductions in delay of cases in the state policing, justice and community services system.
Women, children and youth are increasingly able to access state policing, justice and community services in targeted locations that will see:
sector agencies delivering more services, including expanding the reach of services to targeted provincial locations
targeted communities better understand the policing, justice and community services system and how to use it
targeted non-state actors better understand the law and human rights and are acting more consistently with these standards as community conflict managers.
The VPF, justice and community services agencies and targeted non-state actors demonstrate improved quality of service delivery to women children and youth in targeted locations that will see:
sector agencies and targeted non-state actors responding more effectively to cases involving violence against women and children
sector agencies and targeted communities working together to respond more effectively to juvenile justice issues
sector agencies responding more effectively to the needs of persons with disabilities.
Related documents*
Name of document
Policing and Justice Support Program – justice element – Progress Report July-December 2014 2015 Progress report
Policing and Justice Support Program – justice element – Progress Report January – June 2015 2015 Progress report
Policing and Justice Support Program Review and Management Response 2016 Review report and management response
Conflict Management and Access to Justice in Rural Vanuatu 2016 Research report
Vanuatu Australia Policing and Justice Program (2017-2020) Design Document 2016 Design
Vanuatu Ministry of Justice and Community Services
Vanuatu Police Force
Vanuatu Women's Centre
Up to $6 million, 2016-2021
In 20 years, with support through a long-term partnership with Australia, the Vanuatu Women's Centre (VWC) has grown from a small Port Vila-based organisation to a highly valued and respected national organisation. In addition to its Port Vila premises, the VWC has five provincial branches and 42 island-based committees. While counseling and support to women and children at risk of domestic violence are central to its services, the VWC now has a much broader mandate that covers human rights, legal and policy advocacy, community education and research.
Key outcomes sought are:
up to 30,000 women and children in Vanuatu supported with counseling, legal assistance, emergency accommodation and/or referral to other services
education and awareness-raising for 80,000 people leading to broader acceptance that violence against women and children violates human rights and changes gender norms, attitudes and behaviour
legal advocacy, lobbying and human rights training for 650 male advocates, committee members and law and justice officials, leading to reduced discrimination and improved gender equality
Vanuatu Women's Centre operating from a permanent, purpose-designed premises in Port Vila.
Mid-term Review of the Vanuatu Women's Centre Phase 5 2010 Review
Vanuatu National Survey on Women's Lives and Relationships, May 2011 2011 Research
Vanuatu Women's Centre – Program Design Document 2012-2016 2012 Design document
Vanuatu Women's Centre – Program Progress Report 1 2012 Progress report
Vanuatu Women's Centre – Annual Plan Year 2 2013 Annual plan
Vanuatu Women Centre – Program Progress Report 3 2014 Progress report
Vanuatu Women's Centre – Activity Completion Report 2012-2016 2016 Completion report
Vanuatu Women's Centre: Phase 7 Progress Report 1 (July to November 2016) 2016 Progress report
Vanuatu Women's Centre – Annual Plan for Year 2 (July 2017 – June 2018) 2017 Annual plan
Wan Smolbag Community Partnership
Up to $4.3 million, 2018-2021
Australia provides funding to Wan Smolbag, a Vanuatu civil society organisation that runs three youth centres located in Port Vila, Luganville (Santo), and Haulua (Pentecost). The organisation has grown from a theatre group of 15 voluntary actors in 1989 to a prominent civil society organisation delivering a range of activities on social issues, such as governance, climate change and health. Wan Smolbag's work aligns with the objectives and priorities of the Australia-Vanuatu Aid Partnership Arrangement 2016-2019, particularly its work on community safety and resilience and improving access to essential health services. They have a strong focus on young people and on the inclusion of people living with a disability. Wan Smolbag facilities on the outskirts of Port Vila also serve as an official evacuation centre for the surrounding peri-urban population in times of a disaster.
The Wan Smolbag Community Partnership is jointly financed with the New Zealand Government. Additional funding for core costs and activities is also provided by other donors, including Oxfam and World Vision. Key outcomes of the partnership are:
primary health services to peri-urban poor
key social improvement messages delivered through the support of Wan Smolbag's theatre and television drama programs.
Wan Smolbag Mid Term Review Report 2012 Review
Wan Smolbag Mid Term Review Report - Management response Review response
Wan Smolbag Theatre Annual Report 2014 2014 Annual report
Wan Smolbag Investment Design Summary 2018-21 2018 Design Document
* The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) is committed to high standards of transparency and accountability in the management of the Australian aid program through publishing information on our website, including policies, plans, results, evaluations and research. Our practice is to publish documents after the partner government and any other partners directly involved in the delivery of the initiative have been consulted. Not all material published on this site is created by the Australian aid program and therefore not all documents reflect our views. In limited circumstances some information may be withheld for reasons including privacy and commercial sensitivity.
Last Updated: 9 February 2018


text:
Social Media: How Young is Too Young?
By Chloe Nordquist
Social media. It seems like everyone has an Instagram profile, Twitter account, and Facebook these days. Businesses, friends, pets, you name it.
But how do you decide the right age for your kids to be online?
"They're exposed to so much stuff on Facebook and Instagram and all the other social media," Edita Kulichova, a licensed marriage and family therapist, said.
Most social media platforms require kids to be at least 13 years old. But is that even too young?
"I think 13 might be cutting it too soon because kids are kind of developing their personalities and who they are going to be in the world right and there's a lot of bullying on social media," Kulichova said.
And what's online may not be what it seems.
"There are people on Facebook and other platforms and social media that aren't real and that are predators. It's really scary out there," Kulichova said.
Sites like Facebook do not allow people under 13 to have a Facebook account.
A representative with Facebook sent us the follow statement on underage social media use:
"Our policies around minors remain the same and you can find that information in our terms of service. This is an operational update that allows for our content reviewers to action on content reported regardless of what it was reported for."
Part of that news release said the following:
We do not allow people under 13 to have a Facebook account. If someone is reported to us as being under 13, the reviewer will look at the content on their profile (text and photos) to try to ascertain their age. If they believe the person is under 13, the account will be put on a hold and the person will not be able to use Facebook until they provide proof of their age. Since the program, we have been working to update the guidance for reviewers to put a hold on any account they encounter if they have a strong indication it is underage, even if the report was for something else.
Reporting by Tianna Jenkins


Colours of the Rainbow: A Multicultural Journey is an imaginative adventure that will spark your child's curiosity for other cultures. This book uses multicultural literature, as well as colourful illustrations of well-known land marks, customs and cultural references, as a medium to explore diversity through recognizing commonalities and embracing differences.
Lucy is nervous about fitting in on her first day of school. These fears are magnified by the cultural diversity that she sees in her classmates. Fortunately, Lucy's fears are soon quelled as she is introduced to 10 new friends, with 10 distinct backgrounds. Upon each introduction, Lucy travels with her new friend on an imaginary journey to their homeland. Through her "travels" Lucy learns fun new facts about each country and its people.


A Molotov cocktail and a bomb threat in two different places of worship shook Indonesia on Monday, November 14.
A Catholic church in Kota Batu, East Java, received a threatening phone call at 8:15 am, November 14. Security guard of Good Shepherd Catholic Church (Paroki Gembala Baik) Agus Susanto was on duty when he received the bomb threat. According to him, a woman's voice spoke of Allahu Akbar detonating the bomb.
Per protocol, Susanto called the bomb squad, and the police led by Chief Superintendent Leonardus Simarmata arrived at the scene. They cleared the church of people to allow the bomb squad, which came at 11:37 pm, to search the area thoroughly. Three hours after, the squad found no bomb and the church was declared safe.
However, the church's pastor Michael Batu Agung expressed concern about the incident. He urged his parishioners to continue being vigilant. He also called for prayers of peace by the church and other religious groups. Simarmata, on the other hand, recommended implementing a one-way gate system to keep track of people's movements and whereabouts.
Meanwhile, two motorcycle-riders reportedly threw petrol bombs (Molotov cocktails) at a Buddhist monastery in Singkawang, West Kalimantan, at 3:00 pm.
The bombs hit the outer walls of the Budi Dharma Buddhist Vihara Monastery, causing only minor damage, said Police Chief Inspector General Musyafak in Tempo. Police noted no injuries or casualties.
The attack felt similar to the bombing of a Protestant church in Samarinda, East Kalimantan, last Sunday, which killed one child and injured three others. However, Musyafak denied the connection between the incidents. Instead, he considered politics.
"I suspect that they were trying to cause commotion ahead of the mayoral election," he said, as reported by Tempo.
Musyafak assured the public that a special intelligence team has already been formed and that investigation and coordination with religious communities will continue.


Overall Dental Practice Rating ★★★★★ 5 / 5 based upon 2 reviews.
Posted On: 03/19/2016 ★★★★★ My family of four has been under the care of Dr. Holm for over 10 years. He has a caring, professional manner and provides comfortable, pain free treatment. We have also had nothing but warm, caring, and professional care by their dental hygienists, office staff, and dental assistants.
Posted On: 05/12/2010 ★★★★★ So happy about everything at Courtyard Dental. The most professional, honest, and just plain great dentistry like I have never seen before. I thought i'd try another dentist, but came right back after being reminded why I hate going to most dentists. Courtyard doesn't believe going to the dentist should hurt. There is just no reason for it today.
Congrats to everyone there. See you again soon for my permanant bridge!!! Can't wait.


text:
/*
 * Author      : Matthew Johnson
 * Date        : 21/May/2013
 * Description :
 *
 */

#pragma once

namespace mage
{

	class FrameRateControl
	{
	protected:
		FrameRateControl();
	public:
		~FrameRateControl();

		static FrameRateControl& GetInstance();

		void OnUpdate();
		inline int GetFPS() const;
		inline long GetTotalFrames() const;

	private:
		// Singleton
		static FrameRateControl msFPSControl;

		double mLastTime;
		int mFrames;
		int mFPS;
		long mTotalFrameCount;

	};

#include "FrameRateControl.hpp"

}


text:
Q: How to find size of a List of WebElements? I want to find the total number of radio buttons in group1, I tried with the below code, but the system is throwing an error and suggesting me to use getSize() instead of Size().
System.out.println(dr.findElement(By.xpath("//input[@name= 'group2']")).size());

A: You can use findElements() method and extract the size invoking the size() method as follows :
System.out.println(driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group2']")).size());

A: Find the radio buttons by path and store them in a list
List<WebElement> radioGrp01 = driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name= 'group1']"));

System.out.println(radioGrp01.size());

A: WebDriver driver=new ChromeDriver();

//WebDriver driver=new FirefoxDriver();

driver.get("http://www.echoecho.com/htmlforms10.htm");

//driver.findElement(By.xpath("//input[@value='Milk']")).click();

int count =driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group1']")).size();

System.out.println(count);
for(int i=0;i<count;i++)

{

//driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group1']")).get(i).click();

String text=driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group1']")).get(i).getAttribute("value");

if(text.equals("Cheese"))

{

driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group1']")).get(i).click();

}
}

A: In Findelement we dont have Size().
You need to use:
driver.findElements(By.xpath("//input[@name='group1']")).size();

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange