Response to Council Press Release
Here is my response to the Press Release now on the Municipal website regarding the OCP rewrite and those opposed to the direction it is taking.
I am happy to hear from Mr. Cogbill that council is now listening. As he says, Council wants to incorporate the wishes of all those in the community. The results of their own public opinion polls have been in favour of a slow rate of growth and protection of the ALR lands, so I would expect the forthcoming third draft of the OCP to reflect that. The many growth projections that have been quoted recently do come from the second draft OCP, and as far as speculation goes, who would have thought the market could support a possible golf course and resort hotel next to a landfill? In the Okanagan, it appears that "If you build it, they will come".
Municipal Council and Staff have been receiving a fair bit of negative feed-back of late, and some have responded by painting those with an opposing opinion as afraid of change or simply wanting zero growth. I am not saying no to all growth. I am saying, slow down, make sure each and every development meets the highest standards of community sustainability and benefit to all. It's not NIMBY'ism, it's Smart Growth. It's recognizing the realities of climate change and a finite resource of water! It's recognizing the importance of BC's agricultural lands! It's recognizing that if we want Summerland to grow, it has to be more creative, higher and better, not bigger! I dare say that the current decision makers are suffering from "Head in the Sand'ism". It is they who are afraid of change, a changing world and changing expectations.
Summerland is the jewel of the Okanagan and the Okanagan is the jewel of BC. People want to live here because it is so special. We can afford to be choosy! We should be focusing our efforts on developments such as the Wharton Street initiative. How about attracting a sustainable community project such as that on Burnaby Hill at SFU to compliment our coming Agricultural University? Infill, densify, create multi-use buildings, let's be cutting edge! Leave the farmlands alone. The motivation for densification won't be there if we embrace and facilitate sprawl.
We need to plan for sustainability now. An economy based on continued and infinite population growth will ultimately collapse when we reach our topographical and water limitations . We shouldn't leave that mess for our children's children. I am hoping it is the old fashioned and out- dated status quo opinions that will eventually die their own bizarre death.
I am happy to hear from Mr. Cogbill that council is now listening. As he says, Council wants to incorporate the wishes of all those in the community. The results of their own public opinion polls have been in favour of a slow rate of growth and protection of the ALR lands, so I would expect the forthcoming third draft of the OCP to reflect that. The many growth projections that have been quoted recently do come from the second draft OCP, and as far as speculation goes, who would have thought the market could support a possible golf course and resort hotel next to a landfill? In the Okanagan, it appears that "If you build it, they will come".
Municipal Council and Staff have been receiving a fair bit of negative feed-back of late, and some have responded by painting those with an opposing opinion as afraid of change or simply wanting zero growth. I am not saying no to all growth. I am saying, slow down, make sure each and every development meets the highest standards of community sustainability and benefit to all. It's not NIMBY'ism, it's Smart Growth. It's recognizing the realities of climate change and a finite resource of water! It's recognizing the importance of BC's agricultural lands! It's recognizing that if we want Summerland to grow, it has to be more creative, higher and better, not bigger! I dare say that the current decision makers are suffering from "Head in the Sand'ism". It is they who are afraid of change, a changing world and changing expectations.
Summerland is the jewel of the Okanagan and the Okanagan is the jewel of BC. People want to live here because it is so special. We can afford to be choosy! We should be focusing our efforts on developments such as the Wharton Street initiative. How about attracting a sustainable community project such as that on Burnaby Hill at SFU to compliment our coming Agricultural University? Infill, densify, create multi-use buildings, let's be cutting edge! Leave the farmlands alone. The motivation for densification won't be there if we embrace and facilitate sprawl.
We need to plan for sustainability now. An economy based on continued and infinite population growth will ultimately collapse when we reach our topographical and water limitations . We shouldn't leave that mess for our children's children. I am hoping it is the old fashioned and out- dated status quo opinions that will eventually die their own bizarre death.
posted by Amie |
Permanent Link
7 Comments:
Well said, Amie. I love this focus on designing the best possible future for the town, rather than just trying to keep it the same way forever.
By
Jeremy, at 10:38 a.m.
Question?
You say you are for 'smart growth'.
Now, instead of generic rhetoric, be specific in terms of Smart growth for Summerland. Where? When? How? Densification in downtown is a no-brainer. Where else in Summerland do we grow? where? when? how?
By
Anonymous, at 3:33 p.m.
I agree with anonymous, I'd like to hear some specifics as well. Where? What kind of housing? Higher density housing can be great, but is this sort of housing going to turn into high density rentals down the road? This could change the face of Summerland if this happened and not into a desirable way - how would you propose avoiding this?
By
Anonymous, at 4:33 p.m.
I usually don't like to respond directly to those who choose to post anonymously, but since you have accused me of "generic rhetoric", this is my opinion, more specifically.
The Wharton Street re-development opens up opportunity for many new "flat" style apartments and possibly town-house/condos, especially if it goes three to four stories high.
When the tenders go out for the new Agricultural College, developers should be sought for a scaled down and similar version of the UniverCity, Burnaby Hill development. This type of development would offer affordable housing to students and others, and done carefully, could connect with the town core through walking and biking paths.
Land that is available, and currently being developed, within or adjacent to the sewered areas, such as the new Rock Garden Estates and Victoria Court should be developed to their FULL POTENTIAL. Large single family dwellings take up a lot of space but don't provide the quantity or affordability we need.
ALL new buildings downtown should incorporate housing above commercial (ie: Penny Lane???). Jeremy wrote a great post about a month or more ago which outlined a fantastic vision of Summerland's downtown. Check it out at http://headspacejblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/good-to-great.html
There are many proposed developments underway right now that will increase Summerland's population considerably, such as the Gartrell Property in Trout Creek and the Little Giant's Head area near Glenfir and Pollock Terrace. Smart Growth principles should be applied in these developments ~~And these are just the big ones, I'm sure there are more.
With the possibility of the new College, and housing development, the area of Cartwright Vistas could be explored more closely. It is very close to the sewered area, doesn't include any ALR land, and is within walking/biking vicinity to town. Done with environmental sensitivity, and preservation of biking/hiking trails, I would consider this to be Smart Growth, indeed Much Smarter, than what is proposed with the West Prairie Valley plan.
These developments alone should keep Summerland busy for the next 10 years! How much growth do we need!!!!
A very, very, interesting site is found here: http://www.wcel.org/issues/urban/sbg/casestudies/
There are case studies of Canadian cities and towns that have incorporated Smart Growth into the very fabric of their community. Of specific interest is the town of Okatos, AB http://www.town.okotoks.ab.ca/sustainable_okotoks.html with a similar population and water issue as Summerland. This community has even gone so far as to set a cap on the population. Ah ha. Planning for sustainability. A new concept.
I'm just getting started in my quest for information regarding sustainable community planning. Does this move me beyond "generic rhetoric"? ~~I really think it can be done.
By
Amie, at 9:56 p.m.
Great response, Amie. I'm thrilled to see how you're researching positive alternatives to the status quo development methods.
To the anonymous comment writers, please post your name. Otherwise your comments appear to be empty provocation. At the very least, bring something to the table yourselves -- what's your vision for growth in Summerland? Please elaborate, rather than baiting with your critical tone. Are you closeted supporters of Dumb Growth and don't want to admit it publicly?
Amie, you mentioned the new Penny Lane building. I talked to someone involved in that project and they said that they were totally committed to putting a second-story suite above the store....that is, until they found out what a regulatory/cost nightmare it would be to go down that road. It sounded like there were significant barriers to this type of building downtown, which is so unfortunate.
You'd think Council and staff would be doing everything in their power to make this kind of mixed use as pain-free as possible for business owners and developers. Wouldn't the downtown business owners and SCEDT be thrilled to have another couple of hundred people living right downtown, both for increasing their customer bases and enhancing security in the evenings?
There seems to be this sense that there is no political will redevelop and infill the downtown properly. I'd be curious to hear how others in the association feel about downtown -- leave it alone, or triple the population down there over the next 10 years?
By
Jeremy, at 1:15 p.m.
Jeremy, having additional people live downtown does sound like a nice idea, particulary because it does work so well in large cities. But there are a few things that large cities have that would support the notion of a large population living downtown.
First, the majority of urban downtown dwellers work in the downtown core and thus walk to work or take transit - the majority of them do not own vehicles. Here in Summerland we do not have public transportation. Where would all the cars go? Do we really want to a)be digging up the streets for underground parkades or b)build ugly above ground parkades.
Either way, this would make our little town seem way to big city, which I for one am not in favour of. I do not want to see ugly parkades in our downtown.
By
Anonymous, at 2:58 p.m.
Well said, Amie. I think having more people in the downtown core could possibly stop a lot of vandalism, having "ears and eyes" to so speak, but this also necessitates quick response by the police. Anyway Amie, keep up the good work.
By
Anonymous, at 1:18 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home