Association of Citizens for Summerland

Penticton Herald Editorial

2009-12-13T15:54:00.000-08:00

Citizens ask RCMP to investigate Summerland election donations

2009-12-13T00:24:00.000-08:00

The Vancouver Sun

Summerland News and Views

2009-12-13T00:21:00.000-08:00

Find a collection of recent news articles on the controversy surrounding the 2008 election in Summerland here.

Mark Ziebarth on CBC radio

2009-12-08T11:13:00.000-08:00

Mark Ziebarth talks about the Citizens for Smart Governance during an interview on CBC Radio Daybreak South.

Summerland Council In the News

2009-12-07T08:57:00.000-08:00

Summerland made the front page of the Vancouver Sun:

"Illegal donations mean Summerland has no legitimate council"

Election Questions

2008-10-13T21:06:00.000-07:00

Here are a few key questions it would be nice to ask every candidate.

According to Human Resources Development Canada, agricultural employment in the Thompson Okanagan grew from 5,500 employees in 2001 to 10,000 in 2005. This was the highest percentage rate of growth of any industry sector. Will you protect the ALR from development, and thus support our rapidly growing agriculture industry?

If elected will you put the needs and desires of existing Summerlanders ahead of the desires and demands of developers?

Kelowna's Development Cost Charges are approximately $20,000 more per home than Summerland's. If you are elected and, during your term, there is a need for additional taxes, will you increase Development Cost Charges or will you increase Property taxes?

Almost 1,500 taxpayers petitioned Council for a referendum vote on the sale of 300 acres of municipal lands to the Summerland Hills group. The petition was rejected by the existing Council. If you are elected, and you subsequently receive an equally large petition, will you support or oppose it?

Do you support or oppose the zoning change to allow seven storey buildings at Wharton Street?

Do you agree that no community, Summerland included, can grow and grow forever? If so, when in your opinion should Summerland stop growing? How large can Summerland become and yet retain its small town feel and quality of life?

Summerland Mayor responds regarding Water Treatment Plant

2008-10-02T21:20:00.000-07:00

Mayor Gregory has responded to an earlier post regarding Summerland's Water Treatment Plant. He points out that during his 2005 campaign, he was critical of the Water System Value Engineering Report and has had concerns since that time. Part of his platform included a section entitled, "Bad Engineering Reports produce Bad Decision Making". He promised and delivered in having the report posted to the District website in 2005, and reported so during his inaugural speech.

Summerland Mayor submits opinion on PIB Crown Land Consultations

2008-09-02T16:11:00.001-07:00

Through the Freedom of Information Act, citizens in Summerland have obtained copies of two letters sent by Mayor David Gregory with regard to the Summerland Hills Golf Resort and the consultations with the Penticton Indian Band. Both letters were signed David Gregory, Mayor and printed on District of Summerland, Office of the Mayor, letterhead.

These letters outline the Mayor's personal opinion on the PIB's claim to Aboriginal Title of the Crown Lands now within the District of Summerland's boundary. His personal opinion as a history buff, is not reflective of the sentiment of Council or of the Municipality of Summerland.

A councillor expressed concern (see item 8) that the Mayor's decision to contibute his personal opinion in this manner into the Provincial consultation process, was misguided and has jeopardized our community's positive working relationship with the PIB in the future.

Update, October, '08: Mayor Gregory has responded to this post by providing (quote) " a letter of request for information from the Provincial Government and a request for information from the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs. Both letters are addressed to 'Mayor Gregory'. "

Memo warned of issues with treatment plant

2008-09-02T16:11:00.000-07:00

A memo from the City of Penticton Water Quality Supervisor in May of 2005 warned Summerland Municipality of potential issues with the design chosen for our nineteen million dollar Water Treatment Plant. Specifically, this memo refers to the solids in our creek source water.

Our Mayor and Councillors are all long time Summerland residents, as well as much of the District Staff. Anyone who has lived here for a significant length of time knows that Trout Creek experiences turbidity, especially in the spring. How is it, then, that the Treatment Plant design chosen by our Municipality is not able to handle this? Even after warned by another City Water Supervisor, our Municipality chose to continue with this Treatment Plant design. Discussions must have taken place with regard to the solids and sludge. Was there ever a plan to deal with this issue?

It appears the taxpayers of Summerland have paid nineteen million dollars for Water Treatment Plant that only does the job for six months out of every year.

Developers and District chose to ignore PIB

2008-03-30T12:32:00.002-07:00

It is very important that the citizens of Summerland are aware that the Penticton Indian Band made their position on the Summerland Hills proposal, including their Aboriginal Title interest in the Crown Land, known to the both the developer and the District of Summerland in 2005, immediately following Summerland's boundary extension and the developers' Crown Land application.

The developers and the District undertook the past two and a half years of plans, negotiations, promotion, effort, time and expense with full knowledge of the PIB's clear opposition to this proposal. The Consultation and Accomodation process between the PIB and the Province is expected to take anywhere between 12 months and 5 years. Surprisingly, Randy Kowalchuk is quoted saying, "We are a bit of the victim". Summerland Mayor Gregory is quoted as saying he "regrets this turn of events and hopes the Crown Land issue will be resolved as soon as possible." The entire Summerland Hills Proposal has been based on speculation that the developers will acquire the Crown lands.

Through the Freedom of Information Act, citizens in Summerland have obtained correspondence between the Penticton Indian Band and the District of Summerland dated back to June 13th, 2005. This correspondence reveals that the CAO, the Economic Development Officer and the Mayor were all made aware of the PIB's postion. They just chose to ignore it.

PIB Letter to Hon. Bill Barisoff, copied to District, June 13, 2005

PIB Lawyer's Letter to Developers, copied to District, March 27, 2006

District of Sland Letter to PIB lawyers, March 29, 2006

PIB Lawyer's Letter to District, May 24, 2006

The Penticton Indian Band has followed proper legal process with regard to their concerns with this development proposal. Representatives of the PIB have publicly voiced their opposition at Public Hearings and Advisory Planning Committee meetings. The costly disappointment now felt by the developers and district is a result of their own failure to respect the importance of this legally required process.

Negotiations on Summerland Hills Put on Hold

2008-03-30T12:32:00.001-07:00

It has been well reported in the media over the last few weeks that negotiations between the District of Summerland and the Summerland Hills Development Group have now been deferred indefinately.

District of Summerland Press Release

Resort Driven Off Course - Penticton Western

Strong Arm Tactics- Penticton Herald

Suspension of Talks - Penticton Western

Wharton Street Development - Public Hearing

2008-03-30T12:32:00.000-07:00

WHARTON ST. PUBLIC HEARING

Amendments to the Zoning Bylaw and the Official Community Plan

7pm on Thursday, April 3, 2008
at Centre Stage Theatre,
9518 Main St. Summerland

Attend this Public Hearing to comment on this Landmark Development!

View more details on this Proposal!

Public Hearing - Summerland OCP Bylaw

2008-03-30T12:24:00.000-07:00

OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN PUBLIC HEARING
7:00pm Tuesday, April 1, 2008
at Centre Stage Theatre
9518 Main St. Summerland

Attend this important public hearing to comment on the document which will direct future growth in Summerland.

Review the January 2008 Draft OCP !!

OCP Workbook Available Now

2006-12-05T16:16:00.000-08:00

The municipality has asked for input into Future Growth Areas for Summerland by way of a Summerland OCP Workbook. This Workbook is available for pick up at Municipal Hall or a printable copy is available here.

Completed Workbooks must be returned by December 15th.

The community will benefit from a wide perspective of thoughts and opinions. Please pick up your copy and return your comments by December 15th.

Upcoming Community Events

2006-11-22T23:22:00.000-08:00

Monday Nov 27, 10:00am at Council Chambers, Caroline Lamont from the BHA Planning Group will be presenting the latest draft of the Lowertown OCP.

Council is using the 1996 OCP as a template and is considering amending only three sections: Lowertown, Future Growth Areas and Downtown.

The progress on the Lowertown section to date has included public workshops, a draft Lowertown OCP amendment and one meeting of Council's input (so far).

Tuesday Nov 28 at the Arena at 6:30 pm Community Workshops on Future Growth Areas will be held. Council has also made a request for public comment on the possible use of a roundabout at the intersection of Rosedale/Prairie Valley/Wharton. This roundabout would have a greater turning radius than Penticton.

The community is encouraged to take the time to attend and give input into these issues.

Public Information Circular

2006-11-15T19:17:00.000-08:00

The Municipality of the District of Summerland has prepared a public information release to answer some of the questions which have been raised surrounding the sale of Muncipal lands and the upcoming Development Servicing Agreement with regard to the Summerland Hills Development Proposal. Read here...

Mayor Gregory's Comments

2006-11-15T19:14:00.000-08:00

Mayor David Gregory has responded to some of the issues raised by the Association of Citizens for Summerland. He has written a letter outlining his position on the 1996 OCP and the Summerland Hills Development proposal, among other things. Read here...

Municipal Land Was Available for Anyone to Buy??

2006-10-27T20:32:00.000-07:00

Letter writer Buzz Smith, together with some former Councillors and at least two current Councillors, claim that the 300 acres of Municipal Land in North Prairie Valley was available to anyone to buy but only the Summerland Hills group came forward with a bid.
That is a distortion of the facts.
This parcel of land has never been advertised for sale. There was no proposal call, there was no advertising campaign requesting expressions of interest. What happened, we can only assume, was that one development group with local knowledge appoached Staff and the last Council with a proposal, and it took off from there.
How could developers without local connections have known that the property was available for sale?
When the proposed sale of the land to the Summerland Hills group became public knowledge (and before the land was taken out of the ALR) a local consortium with impeccable agricultural expertise and considerable financial backing made a proposal to purchase the land and use it for a vineyard, winery and agro-tourism project. They were told they were too late.
The crux of the matter is that this extremely valuable piece of real estate belongs to the people of Summerland, and if Council insists on selling it then at least it should be sold for the highest price possible. The normal way to get that highest price is to advertise extensively and solicit bids from every possible source, as any novice realtor knows.

Draft OCP Ignores Most Important Question

2006-10-08T20:25:00.000-07:00

Summerland's Draft OCP (like every other Okanagan OCP) sadly continues to ignore the most fundamental and difficult question, which is:- Growth cannot continue forever, that is a physical impossibility. so at what point must growth stop?

Do we just keep on growing until the Valley becomes an undesireable place to live and we run out of space and water? What kind of a third rate plan is that? If we want to preserve any of the qualities that brought us all here in the first place, we must address the question, "what is a realistic carrying capacity for the Okanagan Valley"? For example, pollution is mainly proportional to population density. How much pollution is tolerable in a valley with temperature inversions?

Okanagan OCPs only address the short term future - up to 20 years maximum. They plan for where to grow next. No Okanagan community has yet had the courage to come to grips with the basic problem of how much would be too much. We cannot ignore this question and just pass it along to our children and grandchildren to grapple with. By then it will be too late.

Our population is increasing at an ever accelerating rate, due to the inevitability of that darling of financial planners, compound growth. Instead of just letting our population accelerate along a rising curve, which is stupid to the point of imbecility, population growth should slowly taper off to nothing over many years so we end up with a steady state, sustainable economy and population level and no economic shockwave.

No doubt yet another person will cry "you can't shut the gates to newcomers!" May I remind that person that over the past 10 years 1,400 Summerlanders have died and a far greater number have moved away. Thousands have moved in to replace them. A steady state population still allows for lots of folk to move here every year. Only half of the folks in town today lived here 10 to 12 years ago. "Shutting the gates" is a nonsense. If we really did shut the gates Summerland would almost be a ghost town within 30 years or so. No one advocates that.

Council votes to discuss a Referendum

2006-09-25T21:26:00.000-07:00

Your Association of Citizens for Summerland formally presented the signed Petition to Council at the September 25th meeting. Speakers at the meeting were Amie Harbor, Michael Cooke and Gordon Boothe. Here is the verbatem presentation by Amie Harbor, Association Director:

Thank-you for the opportunity to address Council on this important issue. The Association of Citizens’ Petition as circulated, read as follows: The District of Summerland owns approximately 300 acres of land which has been identified for use by the Summerland Hills Resort and Housing Development. I, the undersigned, request that Summerland Municipal Council present to the voters of Summerland, through full referendum, the opportunity to support or reject the sale of our publicly owned land for this development. A referendum to ascertain the wishes of the majority of residents should end the division within our community regarding this project.

We are here tonight to present to you 1386 petition signatures. These are your friends and neighbours. These are the people who elected you. This number represents 33% of active voters and more than double the number of signatures required to bring an Alternative Approval Process to a full Referendum. We have accomplished this in a short time, with little publicity, and using only volunteer commitments. Whereas little interest was shown in the dated 1996 OCP document, there is unprecedented public interest now. Nearly 1400 residents are asking you for the opportunity to vote on the sale of their land for this project.

Information, discussion and debate surrounding this Municipal land sale has been scarce. We found many residents to be unaware that the development involves so much public land. The developers have done a good job publicizing and promoting their project, so good in fact, that much of the community believes it to be a done deal already. Why do we need to depend on paid advertising or Letters to the Editor for information about this mega project? Our community deserves a balanced and factual account of the issues, including true costs and realistic projections of what it might take to see this proposal become a reality publicized by Municipal Hall itself. With this information in hand, residents could decide whether or not to be supportive.

A referendum or plebiscite will encourage discussion of the facts. What is the true value of this land? Why is this the best choice for our public land? Fourteen hundred residents are asking you for this information and the opportunity to vote.Our Association is asking you to value citizen involvement in your decision making process. This 300 acre parcel of land is owned by the taxpayers of Summerland and the monumental decision now faced by six Council members and Mayor will affect every single resident of our community, today and into the future. We are requesting that a Notice of Motion be tabled tonight, asking that “a referendum question on the Municipal land sale for resort and housing purposes be posed to the community.” The best decision you could make tonight is to give the residents of Summerland a voice on this issue.

Council voted to discuss the option of posing a referendum question on the Municipal land sale at the November 14th meeting.

Citizen's Association Press Release

2006-09-07T10:29:00.000-07:00

In response to public concern, the Association of Citizens for Summerland has initiated a petition calling for a referendum to gauge public sentiment before Council moves further on the Summerland Hills Golf Resort and Housing Development.

Last month’s public hearing on the Neighbourhood Plan for this project revealed a community divided. Council itself was also split during discussion and vote on this Plan, specifically with regard to affordable housing initiatives and the use of the Municipal Land.

During the Municipal elections last year, the City of Penticton posed a referendum question on the intended use of city owned land near Munson Mountain. The Association of Citizens for Summerland hopes their Council will follow suit and allow the community to cast a vote on whether 298 acres of Municipal Land should be sold, without any competitive bidding process, for this 780 million dollar project.

Amie Harbor, a director with the Citizens’ Association comments, “Because this is the last large piece of land held by the Municipality, and the consequences of this sale will be far reaching, the decision should not be made by Mayor and Council alone. Does the community support selling this parcel of land for this project? A referendum will settle the issue in the public’s mind.”

Director Gary Strachan adds, “The residential component of this project will involve significant costs to the community, including an additional water source and treatment plant, a new electrical substation and considerable road improvements. Any future borrowing for these projects would need to be brought before the public through an approval process, so why not ask the community up front if they are in support?”

The ACS is well underway collecting signatures for the Petition. They will be setting up signing stations in downtown Summerland over the next few week-ends as well as at the Summerland Fall Fair.
Diane Northcote, Association Treasurer comments, “If the developers truly believe the community is in support of using our Municipal land for their project, I invite them to support our initiative for a referendum.”

REFERENDUM PETITION UPDATE

2006-09-05T22:29:00.000-07:00

Completed petition forms are coming in thick and fast, and to date (5th September) we have just passed the 1,000 signatures mark. All signees declare that they are Summerland residents, over the age of 18, and registered voters.
In other words, roughly 15% of all eligible voters in Summerland have already signed.
At the Provincial level if 10% of voters sign a petition the Government is obliged by law to act upon it. If this was a Provincial matter we would be far in excess of the required number of signatures. Sadly no such legislation exists at the Municipal level - so Association members will continue to collect signatures. Look out for the booth at the Fall Fair.
The most surprising and gratifying fact coming to light is that the overwhelming majority of Summerlanders support this petition - very few people object or decline to sign. The Association has always felt this to be the case but it is so nice to see the proof.
In the light of the results we are seeing, how could Council possibly refuse to give voters a say via a referendum?

Petition for a Referendum

2006-08-18T11:41:00.000-07:00

The Association of Citizens for Summerland has initiated a petition asking Council to hold a general Referendum to guage support for the sale of approximately 300 acres of Muncipal land to the Summerland Hills Golf Resort and Housing Development.

Signing stations will be set up in Downtown Summerland on the week-ends of August 26th and 27th, September 2nd and 3rd, and at the Summerland Fall Fair on September 8th thru 10th.

We encourage residents to support this initiative, as a referendum would help to end the division in our community regarding this issue.

A REFERENDUM is warranted

2006-08-18T11:36:00.000-07:00

We don't all have to agree on what the eventual use of the municipal property might be. The municipality's intention to sell the entire 298 acre piece to one developer with no competitive bidding process and very little public input is the issue at hand. With this as the current direction of Council, a referendum is warranted, to gauge if the public is in support of this decision.

Here are some facts regarding the municipally owned land and some of the history to this point.

The 300 acre municipal land parcel has NOT yet been sold to thisdeveloper. The recent OCP amendment and Neighbourhood Plan approval in no way commits the Muncipality to selling this land parcel to this developer.

The sale of municipal land should go through a competitive biddingprocess to ensure the best deal for the taxpayer.

A serious agri-tourism proposal was submitted to the muncipality for this land in 2005.
During the 2005 Municipal elections, the city of Penticton posed areferendum question on the intended use of City owned land near MunsonMountain to determine if the community supported a ball park project.

The Summerland Hills Development, requiring 300 acres of Municipal Land, is a 780 million dollar project with a build-out population increase equalling the current size of Peachland.

Alternative uses for this land, with equal social and economic benefitand far less infrastructure costs, have not explored or considered.

The "alternative uses" comment points to the fact that, now that Council has decided to grow out in this direction, there has not been serious consideration given to any other plan than that of sale to and amalgamation with this 1000 acre resort development. If this land were opened to other bidders, an alternative use or alternative bidder might propose a tourist winery development, or an affordable housing initiative, or an agricultural university campus or any combination of uses. In fact, the 1988 North Prairie Valley Concept Plan by the RDOS had advocated sale for small holdings (2-5 acre) with rural designation. There are many possibilities. This area has long been designated as future growth. But with Municipally owned land, it should be a question of choice to ascertain the best and highest benefit for the entire community. Different ideas, choices or designs have not been compared and contrasted in a cost versus benefit manner.

Should this land be sold in this way for this development? This should be asked of our community.

A thought provoking letter re: Summerland Hills

2006-06-25T20:09:00.000-07:00

Dear Mayor Gregory,

I am a Summerland resident who has no vested interest in whether or not the new town proposal for Summerland Hills proceeds as an investment initiative. I have carefully considered the implications of the proposal and I feel strongly that the proposed new town should not be incorporated into our Official Community Plan.

In the short term there will be a handful of people who will strongly benefit from the proposed new town. The developers and some contractors will earn millions of dollars, but there will be no immediate benefit for the average Summerland resident. There will be moderate short term and heavy long term costs to the Summerland community. If we proceed, it will be too late to turn back when we are all affected by the long term costs.

We will have immediate bragging rights about the project. It will be flashy. There will be construction jobs. There will be tax revenues. Unfortunately, residential tax revenues typically do not offset the service costs. Unless the developer is levied with a huge initial cost, the eventual infrastructure costs will have to be borne by an overall increase in property and business taxes for Summerland. CMHC has estimated the infrastucture cost per housing unit to be approximately $40,000 per household, even in a large, efficiently operated development such as their Ottawa Carlton study.

Golf courses typically require the financial support of development profits from the community which surrounds the course. User revenue is usually inadequate to cover either long term capital development costs or short term operating costs. This means that in the long term, after the developers have taken their profits and gone, the community will have to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to maintain and operate a golf course in the new town.

We are presently (June 2006) in Summerland Stage one water restrictions at the end of an unusually wet spring season. The recent Thirsk Dam project contains no excess capacity for expanded water use in Summerland. It is barely adequate for present water use.

Climate change is no longer a hypothesis. It is reality. The Trout Creek water resource has been carefully studied and has been projected to decline in volume and to peak earlier in the spring. Water demand is projected to increase for both agricultural and domestic consumption. Summerland’s present requirement is barely being met by the Trout Creek system, therefore future expansion of water supply must be drawn from Okanagan Lake.

We will all be affected in the event of a water shortage, not just the new town. The lake as a water source is limited. In the event of a water deficit, it is the most recently allocated licences such as a new Summerland application that would be withdrawn to provide priority supply to older licences, such as Oliver and Kelowna. If Summerland were to expand their water supply by acquiring a new licence to pump from the lake, it would not only be the new town, but all of Summerland who would be rationed for water when the pumping licence is withdrawn. The declining Trout Creek resource will be the only water source for Summerland, when the Okanagan Lake licence is cancelled.. With climate change and population expansion in the Okanagan, valley wide water deficits are projected to occur within the proposed development duration of the new town. It will likely be impossible to complete the new town, even if it is approved.

The Summerland Hills developers have cleverly and successfully divided Summerland residents by proposing a controversial, attractive, modern, new town for the area. Their studies have not addressed the complete costs and eventual consequences of their actions. On examination, a new town centre for Summerland will create more problems than benefits.

I have only a vested interest as a resident of the community in which I live. I am not a NIMBY.

The developers have a vested interest in earning millions of dollars at our expense. If there is such a high priority to be placed on a new town, it should also be viable if placed into an undeveloped region with no infrastucture. In that event, the developer would be forced to pay the complete cost of establishing and operating the town, rather than paying for part of the cost and then transferring the long range costs and consequences to an existing community.

Sincerely,

Gary Strachan, BSA, SM

Costs of Community Services

2006-06-15T23:24:00.000-07:00

A Canadian Study

There has been a lot of research on Costs of Community Services in the United States in an attempt to better understand the implications of land use decisions. Here in Summerland, with regard to the Summerland Hills Golf Course and HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, it has been repeatedly said that municipal tax revenues will be bolstered by this project. Now a Canadian Study has just been completed revealing that, in Canada as well, Residential Developments do not pay for themselves. The city of Red Deer Alberta conducted this study and found that for every dollar of tax revenue collected, between $1.66 and $1.81 was spent on servicing that residential unit. The citizens of Summerland need to think long and hard about this figure, considering the substantial infrastructure implications association with the Summerland Hills Development Proposal. Do you like this proposal enough to subsidize it well into the future with your tax dollars?

Smart Growth and Regional Carrying Capacity

2006-06-14T15:05:00.000-07:00

What follows is a precis of an article called "Smart Growth: The Role of Carrying Capacity in Regional Planning" by Stuart M. Flashman, Ph.D., J.D.

Over the past several years, a new catch phrase has sprung up in the environmental community: “smart growth”. It arose as environmentalists struggled to find an attractive alternative to the low-density auto-oriented development that has become endemic to North American suburban areas. The latter is often popularly referred to as “suburban sprawl”.

What is smart growth? It is an attempt to direct growth into less environmentally damaging avenues. Thus, smart growth favors “infill” development (i.e., development within already urbanized areas) instead of development of previously undeveloped areas (Prairie Valley? - ed). Smart growth tries to minimize the increase in demand for limited resources, such as water, by promoting development that uses less of those resources.

Environmental groups, most notably the Sierra Club, have launched a major campaign in support of smart growth. The basic idea is that North America has been foolishly squandering its environmental resources on an inefficient form of development. The campaign appears to be paying off. Governmental agencies have begun to discuss smart growth as a better way to accommodate expected increases in population.
However, the success of the smart growth movement only serves to highlight what it fails to address – the long-term question of how much growth a region can reasonably accommodate. This issue has often been referred to as regional carrying capacity.

While regional carrying capacity has many components, the single most important is infrastructure – the various components needed to keep a human population supplied and functional. Among the major modern infrastructure components are water supply, treatment and distribution, wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal, solid waste disposal, energy supply and distribution, roadways, and public mass transit. Other components that tend to be less limiting, at least in terms of physical facilities, include education, public safety, and recreational facilities.

Most of the current discussion of smart growth takes the projected amount of future growth as a given. There is little discussion of what can or should be done to limit the amount of future population growth in a region. Yet, the amount of growth that will occur in a region is certainly affected by a variety of factors, including employment growth, the local economy, cost of living, availability of trained workforce, and availability of necessary infrastructure. Sadly, infrastructure limits have often failed to control growth

Part of the reason infrastructure limits have failed to control growth may be that such limits are often hidden. Thus, for example, water agencies are usually required to issue “will serve” letters before a development project is built. These letters are supposed to ensure that the water agency has sufficient supply and facilities to serve the new development. However, water agencies routinely issue will serve letters based on supplies and facilities that are only projected. The same often holds true for wastewater treatment and disposal. Other infrastructure components, such as roads and public transit, do not require any kind of review and approval prior to development approval, other than the general discussion that occurs during the environmental review process. More often than not, this process is seen as just one more hoop to be jumped through to get to development approval. Thus, Environmental Impact Reports all too often contain flawed or cursory analyses of traffic (and other) impacts.

As a result, development often ends up straining the capacity of the agencies responsible for infrastructure. Thus, development in the Santa Rosa area north of San Francisco has repeatedly outstripped sewage treatment capacity, resulting in overflows of raw sewage into the Russian River. Similarly, the inability of water supplies to keep pace with urban and suburban growth has contributed to California’s more and more frequent “water shortage emergencies”.
Recently, and for the first time, the California legislature has acknowledged the folly of cities and counties approving development projects while closing their collective eyes to the inadequacy of infrastructure to support those projects.

It should be obvious from the above discussion that without consideration of carrying capacity, such “smart growth” plans are little more than an exercise in Pollyanna planning, with little connection to what really will happen over the next twenty years. Indeed, if San Fransisco Bay Area planning efforts continue as currently envisaged, the most likely result is that far before their build-out is complete, Bay Area development will grind to a halt, stymied by the inadequacy of available infrastructure. The economic cost of such an unplanned economic “train wreck” will be colossal -- far greater than if carrying capacity had been taken into account and a gradual transition to a steady-state regional population and economy took place

The Perfect Project for Summerland – 14 Tests.

2006-06-12T19:52:00.000-07:00

The document that follows was delivered to the Mayor and every Councillor, as part of a package from the Association.

The Perfect Project for Summerland – 14 Tests.

The following questions could be used to determine the net benefit (or otherwise!) of a project to Summerland and Summerlanders.

1. Design and Financing: Does the project have an excellent design and is it well financed?
2. Compliance: Does the project comply with the letter and the spirit of the OCP?
3. Highest and Best Use: Does the proposal represent the highest and best use for the location and piece of property in question?
4. Smart Growth: How well does the proposed project comply with Smart Growth principles? Does the project reflect Smart Growth principles for Summerland?
5. Growth Rate: Does the project meet the wish of citizens to limit the population growth rate to a maximum of 2% per annum?
6. Quality of Life: What will the impact of the project be on the quality of life of most citizens?
7. Future Capital Expenditures: Will all consequent long-term capital project expenditures be financed directly by the project or by DCCs, and not by future property tax surcharges or increases?
8. Municipal Operating Costs: Will the project result in substantially increased operating costs for the municipality, and if so will the property taxes received from the project fully cover those costs?
9. Existing Infrastructure: Will the project make best use of existing infrastructure? Is it located within the sewer specified area?
10. Employment Ratio Impact: Will the project have a net positive impact on Summerland’s employment ratio, and will the jobs be skilled, well paid positions?
11. Downtown Benefits: How much will the project benefit the downtown business district, when compared to alternative but similar projects?
12. Affordable housing: If it is a residential development, does the project have an affordable housing component suitable for low-income households?
13. Parks: Will the project improve (or at a minimum maintain) the population to parks acreage ratio?
14. Adherence to Proposal: What likelihood or guarantees are there that the project will be completed as proposed, and by the proponents?

Planning and Summerland Hills

2006-06-12T19:50:00.000-07:00

Dear Mayor Gregory and Councillors,

Re: Planning and Growth Concerns, and the Proposal to Incorporate the Summerland Hills Plan into the New OCP

We are concerned that the evaluation of proposed projects for Summerland has not in the past been done on a sufficiently comprehensive basis, and so we have developed a suggested set of Planning Criteria. We have applied these criteria to the Summerland Hills proposal. A copy of the suggested criteria plus the application of them to the Summerland Hills development is included in the attached document. We ask you to give this work due consideration.

We are very concerned about the proposal to incorporate the Summerland Hills design into the New OCP for Summerland. In our view this plan does not represent progress for Summerland. Rather, we see it as a retrograde step that will steer the community away from steady, efficient and compact growth, and towards rapid and expensive sprawl. Further, we believe that the long-term consequential costs of this development will impose a severe financial burden on Summerlanders in the future. We ask you not to incorporate the SH plan into the new OCP.

We would ask you to also consider the following points before approving any major planning change or development for Summerland.

Summerland desperately requires that a fund to be established to finance future infrastructure when population growth demands it. This should come from DCCs. Current residents should not have to raise money on demand, when the need for infrastructure was created by developers who will have taken their profits and departed. Increased DCCs would be an incentive for quality development, and may also assist the municipality to maintain control of the growth rate.

We have a problem of declining air quality. During the spring and fall burning seasons, the air clearance index must be consulted on a daily basis for any major burns, and there are many times when there are temperature inversions or quiescent air. Any pollutants such as wood smoke or vehicle exhaust remain trapped. The increased population will not limit pollutants to burning season and cannot be expected to shut down when the clearance index is low. We can expect to have higher incidence of respiratory illness and asthma throughout the valley, directly related to population growth. We are not on a flat plain or in a maritime zone. We are in a deep mountain valley that is protected by inversions through many months of the year. It is the inversions and cloud cover that protect our fruit industry from winter low temperature injury but they also trap pollutants and particulates.

Our water supply is also a major concern. Climate change studies are shifting into high gear and Summerland would be foolish to grow quickly when making promises on water licenses and allocation. Runoff will decline and will occur earlier in the season, and the demand will increase both for agricultural and domestic consumption. Extrapolated conclusions are always risky, but the trend is very real and if we commit to serve an expanded population with inadequate assurance of a water supply, it will be a very costly mistake. We must have a drought management plan that deals with new development. If we go into a drought situation the insurance companies which sell to home owners and the agricultural community need to be assured of adequate water available during peak irrigation periods and fire season. The two go hand in hand

We are willing to meet with you at a time of your convenience to discuss these thoughts further.

Yours Sincerely - Board Members

Two Upcoming Meetings

2006-04-09T22:17:00.000-07:00

A Start-up Meeting for the Review and Update of the
District of Summerland’s Official Community Plan

Thursday April 20, 2006
Banquet Hall 8820 Jubilee Road East
6:30 pm - 8:30 pm

The community is invited to set aside a few hours on the evening of April 20th to get together with neighbours and participate in discussions concerning the future of Summerland.

The meeting format will be as follows:

6:30 - 7:00 pm Open House
(a series of displays summarizing the current status and possible directions for the future of Summerland)
7:00 - 7:15 pm Mayor Welcome with Staff and Consultant Team Presentations
7:15 - 8:30 pm Rotating Community Workshops (focusing on specific > community issues)

++++++++++

Public Open House
for the South Okanagan Regional Growth Strategy:

Thursday, April 27th
from 4:30-7:30pm at the Arena Banquet Room.

The Downtown

2006-02-02T21:53:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth principle #1 states "Mix land uses - neighbourhoods have a mixture of homes, retail businesses, recreational opportunities, etc."

Two Summerland specific questions were asked. "What practical actions could we take to encourage the re-development of our downtown core to include mixed retail/residential buildings?"

Encourage Urban growth and containment rather than sprawl.
Define a downtown development area
Introduce incentive policies for downtown redevelopment, e.g. tax breaks, zoning bonuses.
Review fire and licencing restrictions.
Support downtown businesses to create favorable business conditions
Encourage the formation of business cooperatives to assemble land parcels large enough to make mixed higher density development possible and economical
Provide for a mixture of spaces (residential and commercial) including smaller spaces to make rents affordable
Clean up the backside of buildings, especcially along Wharton Street, to improve the ambience of downtown
Expand the downtown improvement theme e.g. trees, street lamps, brick pavers to neighbouring and connecting areas
Make the downtown more pedestrian and scooter friendly
Develop people places, e.g. plazas

The second Summerland related question was "What forms of mixed use should be encouraged for Lower Town?"

Comments on this topic were:

Respect and maintain viewscapes - concern about unsuitable buildings.
Better trail/pedestrian connections to down town.
Perhaps some small tourist/boutique commerical.

Smarter Infrastructure? Green Buildings?

2006-02-02T11:38:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle #8 Says " Utilise smarter and cheaper infrastructure and green buildings"

Group C discussed this Summmerland specific question "How could we make our infrastructure smarter and cheaper?"

Build less expensively-utilize existing infrastructure more wisely.
Change bylaws to be more cost effective
More use of alternate energy sources---City to take the lead in this.
Incentive based taxes.
Inefficiency
Utility Grids

I assume that the first item relates to infilling within the sewer specified area and building where roads, water mains, gas and electric already exist

Could someone who took part in this discussion explain the thinking behind the comments "Inefficiency" and "Utility grids"?

A second question posed was "Should an extra development cost Charge be levied on new buildings that do not meet the highest efficiency standards?"

From the notes it appears that this group thought it would be more palatable to start DCCs at a high level and give a deduction to those who built to especially high efficiency standards, rather than charging a penalty for not meeting highest standards.

Transportation Choices

2006-02-01T17:20:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle 3 states "Provide a variety of transportation choices." The specific questions posed to Group C were:-

"Should neighbourhoods and the downtown be linked with cyclepaths and walkways? How could this be done? Who would pay?
Group C had two suggestions for cyclepath/walkway links, and one comment:-

Illahie Beach Camp Ground to lower town walkway/cycle path
Centennial trail to town is under construction/improvement
"Neighborhood" needs to be defined to answer this question

"Is public transport needed? How could it be made viable?"
These are the methods of private transportation that group C considered practical for Summerland

Walking & Cycling
Motorbikes & Mopeds
Cars

Public transit improvements considered viable for Summerland are

Enhance existing taxi service
Enhance handi-dart
Shuttle bus linking neighbourhoods

Which roads or areas of town should have cycleways and walkways?

Wherever practical nodals should be linked to the downtown - so all possible areas.
Existing roads and easements could be used to create cycleways and roadways

I'd like to pitch in here with another transportation idea. We have a high proportion of elderly citizens and the loss of a drivers licence is a real blow to them, especially as it often coincides with failing ability to walk any distance. Electric scooters are only a partial solution - they work for folk who live close to the downtown. I for one will be very reluctant to surrender my driving license when the time comes because of the huge loss of mobility.

Why not allow folk to use electric golf cart type vehicles, limited to roads within Summerland? This would be an in-between vehicle, giving more range and carrying capacity than a scooter but be limited to use within the town (not allowed on highway 97). I see these advantages

The special vehicles would make Summerland an especially desirable place to retire, and retirees with their safe pensions and higher health care needs are perhaps the best "industry" we could ever hope to have.
If they were fitted with side screens they would be relatively weatherproof
Their reduced speed and great manoueverability would allow folk with diminishing reaction time and reduced eyesight to continue to drive safely
They take up much less parking space than cars
Regular car drivers would spot these special vehicles easily and be able to allow for the driver's possibly reduced reaction times and all around vision.
Cheaper to buy and run than a car
More stable and safer than a scooter (I've seen 3 scooters topple over sideways during the last 12 months)
Can carry two people so an elderly couple could still go out together.

This idea works in posh golf resorts and in totally retirement oriented places like Sun City, so why not use it here?

Fostering a Unique Neighbourhood Identity

2006-02-01T15:47:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle 9 States "Foster a unique neighbourhood identity." Group D worked on this question.

The Summerland specific questions asked were "Which areas have a unique identity, and what makes them unique?"

Downtown tudor design
Fruit growing significance packing plant
Lakeside District is in flux
Garnet Valley is very rural
Pearch Orchard cooler and wetter
Happy Valley (wine)
Canyon View Hot and suitable for grapes

A general comment made by group D was "The above areas have remained unique because of lack of significant urban sprawl in these areas."

A second question posed was " How can Summerland maintain its unique identity yet provide the economic vitality needed for its residents?

Group D did not have time to address this question. Suggestions invited please, by means of comments to this post

Diverse Housing Opportunities

2006-02-01T15:27:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle #4 states: "Create diverse housing opportunities"

Summerland specific question: What type of housing is currently lacking in Summerland?

No rental apartment style housing
Encourage flex housing
Co-op housing

What height restrictions are appropriate for Summerland?
Four stories
Buildings must suit the terrain protect views
Height depends on design and location

To this list I would add housing that is specifically designed for single adults/small families. Today we have many people of 25 - 30 who are still unmarried, and we also have many people who were married but are divorced and living alone again (or with a child). In Europe developers serve this large market by building and selling studio and one bedroom units of 400 to 600 sq.ft., commonly in 2 storey blocks of 8 units each. Each building could easily be mistaken for one very large house (until you notice the number of front doors!). The small size keeps prices low, utility and taxes to a minimum, and means minimal housework for young guys (maybe the best advantage of all).

Japan goes further and their starter units are smaller still, but the quality is high.

Preserving and Creating Parkland

2006-01-30T12:07:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle 6 states: "Preserve open spaces, natural beauty, and environmentally sensitive areas". What follows are the results of the group B discussion.

Summerland specific question "As Summerland grows more parkland will be needed. What areas should become parkland?"

Cartwright and Rattlesnake Mt.
Dedicate Little Giant’s Head as a park
Link existing parks and trails. This could be done as contingent on future development approvals.
Walking trails along Highway 97
Establish a trust fund for future park purchases.

Do you agree with this list? Deletions? Additions?

Comments please

A second question was posed but there was not time to answer it. "What areas desrve special environmental protection??

To start this list, add a comment to this post

Well Designed, Compact Neighbourhoods?

2006-01-30T11:40:00.000-08:00

Smart Growth Principle 2 States: Build well designed compact neighbourhoods…work, shop, and play in close proximity.

One group discussed this principle. Here are the results of their discussion of questions geared to Summerland.

"What does Summerland lack to comply with this principle?"

Insufficient multi-family close to the downtown - more needed.
People are happy with the way the town is now
Summerland is too spread out for this principle to work
Lack of market demand
Lack of developers that are willing to take a risk
Insufficient affordable and compact housing
Lack of leadership from council

"How much densification is possible without losing our small town character, and where should densification occur?"

Quite a bit of densification is possible.
Up to 3 stories maybe 4, should be the densification limit. Beyond that we will lose Summerland's character.
Zero lot line development could be considered for some areas.

COMMENTS: The Smart Growth principles were developed with large towns and cities in mind so some do not adapt well to small towns. By city standards is Summerland just one neighbourhood? Or perhaps three, with Lower Town and Trout Creek being the other two?
Every principle deserves more discussion by more groups, but this is a good start. This is the result of concentrated thought by one group, (group B).

Do you agree with group B? Or disagree? What would you add?
Comments please!

What Would Make You Leave Summerland?

2006-01-28T12:34:00.000-08:00

Tom Lancaster got one group thinking about what was good about Summerland by posing the question differently. He asked the group to think about "What Drastic Change Would Make You Want to Leave Summerland?"

This hard hitting question provoked some soul searching, with the following results:-

Population increase
Downtown died
Water shortages
Uncontrolled ugly development
The urbanisation of areas that presently are rural
Easy access to wilderness was lost
Huge increase in traffic
Lawlessness - no safety
No employment available in the area

What Are The Negatives?

2006-01-28T12:26:00.000-08:00

Two groups went so far as to list what they saw as the negatives about Summerland.

The Negatives

Not enough walkways and bicycle paths - more needed
No hospital
Industrial areas are not used efficiently, they have low employment per hectare and are ugly.
There's not enough green space downtown
Some sectors of the business community are marginally viable due to the proximity of Kelowna and Penticton
Rural areas are becoming urbanised. we are losing our rural feel.
Existing bylaws and the OCP are not well enforced - developers seem to lead the way.
Rural/Urban conflicts are developing

When Does Summerland Become Less Desirable?

2006-01-28T12:14:00.000-08:00

The second question in the first workshop session was "At what stage does growth make Summerland a less desirable place to live?"

The combined answers from all the groups were:-

WHEN OR IF: -

The small town feel is lost/There’s too many people/Town becomes less compact/Town gets larger
There’s too many cars/Traffic congestion/Road safety declines
The citizens no longer have a say in the growth of their town/The rate of growth is fast
Air quality declines/Degraded environment/Loss of wildlife habitats
The downtown becomes less viable
Water restrictions or shortages occur/Water infrastructure becomes inadequate
Housing costs are not affordable
Building on hillsides/ Higher density housing which is ugly
Undesirable development occurs – development should be pretty, green, use small amount of resources, be unique.
Taxes become unreasonable and/or unaffordable
"Kelowna-ization" occurs/Strip malls are constructed/Highway development occurs
You can’t grow up and stay … or work and live in the same community
Walkability is reduced/Walkways and bike trails are lost
Loss of ALR, tourist campgrounds, post office, medical facilities,
Loss of greenspace, especially downtown/Decline in ratio of green space area to residents
When industrial land encroaches on green space
Land use mix changes - higher industrial proportion

What Should We Enhance?

2006-01-28T12:11:00.000-08:00

Some groups decided to split the first question (What makes Summerland a great place to live - and what must we enhance and preserve) into two parts.

What Should we Enhance?

Easier walking and cycling on regular arterial and collector roads
Walkability generally, plus provide wider sidewalks for scooters
Pathways connecting neighbourhoods
The tax base by infilling in existing areas for greater tax dollars per hectare
Affordability of housing – encourage low cost housing
Focus on and redevelop the downtown as the key shopping area, and support local businesses
Daycare
Put more emphasis on desirable downtown living
Medical facilities – including the hospital – essential for retirees
Encourage people to come in

What makes Summerland a Great Place to Live?

2006-01-26T20:15:00.000-08:00

The Smart Growth Workshop on Wednesday 25th was a great success, thanks to the help and guidance from Tom Lancaster of SmartGrowthBC, a lot of volunteer work by the Board of the Association, and the ten volunteer facilitators. Many thanks to everyone.
It was both encouraging and refreshing to see our new Mayor David Gregory and Councillors Bennest, Waterman and Finnis participating along with their fellow citizens. Several senior staff members from Municipal Hall also attended and their presence was very much appreciated by the participants.

The first Question was "What makes Summerland a great place to live?" Answers from all five workshops were compiled into one master list. The participants were given 5 votes each to prioritise the great things about Summerland.

NOTE: Don't make the mistake of assuming that only the items that received high votes are important. They are ALL important - that is why participants raised them in the first place - but when forced to pick only five, some become more important than others.

High Votes Section, Most Votes First

Proximity to nature/natural amenities/walking and cycling trails.
Viable agriculture, agriculture close to town, "farm feel" to community
Walkability and compactness/viability of main street/main street theme
Small town atmosphere
Green space/natural setting/views/"see the stars at night"
Air and water quality
Volunteerism/community activity/sense of community
Good community services/good access/sports facilities/websites and newspaper
No big box stores/no emphasis on highway development
Climate
Safety and low crime rate
The fruit and wine industries

Medium Votes Section, Most Votes First

History and culture
Friendly faces/know many people
Family orientation, family activities, family support, SADIE
Agricultural Research Station
ALR and availability of locally produced food
Seniors amenities and services/ assisted living
Population age diversity
Vibrant cultural community
Lack of congestion/lack of traffic lights/easy driving and parking
Economic opportunities
Schools centralised, can locate anywhere in town and have access.
Unique name
Unique character with off-highway downtown, hilly terrain, country feel

Lower Votes Section

Dog friendly
Proximity to Vancouver and other places

MORE RESULTS WILL FOLLOW AS SOON AS THEY ARE COMPILED - WATCH THIS BLOG!

Workshop Questions for Wednesday 25th

2006-01-23T16:48:00.000-08:00

General Questions - Every group will answer these two questions
1. What makes Summerland a great place to live – and what must we enhance and preserve?
2. At what stage does growth make Summerland a less desirable place to live?

Smart Growth Questions - Each group will answer some of these questions
The ten Smart Growth Principles suggested by SmartGrowthBC ® are as shown below, with Summerland specific questions following in italics

SG Principle 1.
Mix land uses --- neighbourhoods have a mixture of homes, retail business, recreational opportunities etc.
1.. What practical actions could we take to encourage the long term re-development of our downtown core to include mixed retail/residential buildings?
2. What forms of mixed use should be encouraged for lower town?

SG Principle 2.
Build well-designed compact neighbourhoods...work, shop, play in close proximity.
1. What does Summerland lack to comply with this principle?
2. How much densification is possible without losing our small town character? Where should densification occur?

SG Principle 3.
Provide a variety of transportation choices.
1. Should neighbourhoods and the downtown be linked with cycle-paths and walkways? How could this be done? Who would pay?
2. Which roads, or areas of town, should have sidewalks and cycleways?
3. Is public transport needed? How could it be viable?

SG Principle 4
Create diverse housing opportunities.
1. What type of housing is currently lacking?
3. What height restrictions are appropriate for Summerland?

SG Principle 5
Encourage growth in existing communities …developments should not use up new land.
1. Where should new housing be built first?
2. How can we better utilise existing industrial areas?

SG Principle 6
Preserve open spaces, natural beauty, and environmentally sensitive areas.
1. As Summerland grows more parkland will be needed. What areas should become parkland?
2. What areas deserve special environmental protection?

SG Principle 7
Protect and enhance agricultural lands.
1. What practical steps should we take to protect our remaining farmlands?
2. What will this mean for further growth of Summerland?

SG Principle 8
Utilise smarter and cheaper infrastructure and green buildings.
1. How could we make our infrastructure smarter and cheaper?
2. How should growth be balanced against air and water quality, and the consequent health issues?
3. Should an extra development charge be levied on new buildings that do not meet the highest efficiency standards?

SG Principle 9
Foster a unique neighbourhood identity.
1. Which areas have a unique identity, and what makes them unique?
2. How can Summerland maintain its unique identity yet provide the economic vitality needed for its residents?

SG Principle 10.
Nurture engaged citizens.
1. What are the most effective methods of engaging citizens? Prioritise them.

Smart Growth Workshop Program - 25th Jan 2006

2006-01-21T18:38:00.000-08:00

6:30 Start - at Centre Stage

6:30 - 6:35 Introductions and welcome

6:35 - 6:55 Smart Growth. Power Point presentation/review by Tom Lancaster.

6:55 - 7:05 Explain questions, organise groups

7:05 - 7:15 Break

7:15 - 8:10 Workshops, smaller groups, in school classrooms.

8:10 - 8:20 Break.

8:20 - 9:10 Workshops continue, same smaller groups, in school classrooms.

9:10 - 9:40 Groups report back, Conclusions in Centre Stage.

Article 6 - Downtown (updated on 18th)

2006-01-17T16:14:00.000-08:00

Summerland is so lucky to have a downtown located off the highway. Whenever I drive through Westbank on Highway 97 it reminds me of that line from a popular song from childhood, "the railroad goes through the middle of the house". I had a long conversation with Alan Fabbi in November about the downtown and the downtown merchants. It really got me pondering. Here's some thoughts, in no particular order:

Summerland is in an unusual situation with the big towns of Penticton and Kelowna nearby.
Towns like Nelson support a complete range of downtown shops and services because they don't have the competitive problem of quick access to large town facilities.
Why not expand the downtown revitalisation theme to include the complete downtown area?
Stores on the South side of main street could be double sided, or small cafes could be on the Wharton street side, facing memorial park. The "backside" of the present stores is not a pretty sight!
Trying to compete head to head with Penticton is futile, because of sheer size. We open a new Penny Lane, they open a London Drugs and a Winners.
Underground parking plus housing above ground floor stores would be the ideal long term aim, but the individual properties are too small for this. Redevelopment will require consolidated lots and larger buildings (which could be designed to have a small scale feel), and is a multi million dollar project. This is beyond the financial scope of downtown merchants. A long term redevelopment plan for the entire downtown is needed.
Downtown merchants have one big advantage over their competitors in malls like Cherry Lane - far lower rents.
Downtown merchants pay considerable property taxes. If we don't support them and they go out of business, the rest of us will have to pick up the shortfall.
Retired folk are a great group of shoppers to aim for. They don't enjoy driving, especially in the dark (many do not drive at all). Retired folk generally shop during the daytime, so shorter opening hours work for them. Their incomes may not be high but they are steady.
Many Summerland businesses are just as good and efficient as their equivalents in larger communities, and they seem to do well. A few don't provide good service and don't deserve success.
I sometimes start out intending to shop in Summerland but end up in Penticton because I cannot find a commonplace item on my "to buy" list in stock in Summerland.
People used to come from far and wide to shop here on those days when the old 5 to a dollar store had special sales events. The right draw can work.
We have many artisans and craftspeople in town. How about a place where they can work together and display and sell their wares? I'm thinking of a visitor centre, complete with cafe, where you can go and watch a potter, a jeweller, a painter, a woodworker practicing their craft, then buy a piece of their work.
Folk who live within easy walking distance of the downtown are more likely to shop there. Once you are in your car, carrying on to Penticton is too easy!
Downtowns are a disadvantage to malls when it comes to shopping in bad weather. Cashmere near Wenatchee has an interesting partial solution to this with its continuous canopies covering sidewalks and crossings. Downtowns must make the most of their counter-benefit, a short walk from car to store.
One of the best things about our downtown is the angled parking and the consequent narrow roadway. The narrower roadway forces traffic to travel slowly. Pedestrians feel safer.
Many of the newer stores in our downtown focus on low price or secondhand goods. This is great for locals, but out-of-town shoppers will only be drawn to Summerland if specialty items are for sale here that cannot be found elsewhere in the valley. Rather than battling with Penticton and Kelowna, a better plan might be to accept that "our" shoppers go there for everyday goods and to draw "their" shoppers here with specialty items, for example artworks, antiques, etc. An extreme example of that idea in action is Leavenworth.

Article 5 - Industry in Summerland?

2006-01-17T14:37:00.000-08:00

This e mail arrived from Barrie Karner the other day. Barrie raises an important discussion topic.

"If possible I would like to see some discussion around industry and what proportion of a community should be provided for industry or does anyone even know the answer to that question. Industrial lands are becoming increasingly scarce, in the Okanagan and the lower mainland as well as across Canada. A lot of people think it's better to not have industry but that's a bit like letting everyone else vaccinate their kids so you don't have to worry about vaccinating your own. I think a healthy community is an economically healthy community and that usually means economic diversity and I don't think that issue gets much serious consideration from a lot of people."

Thanks,
Barrie Karner

Barrie's words raise many interesting questions. Here's a few.

Should the Okanagan region attempt to be fully diversified economically or should it focus on existing areas of employment such as agriculture, tourism, wineries, providing retirement services, healthcare, etc?
We have an unusual climatic situation here with frequent temperature inversions that produce rapid pollution build-up at times. How much industry, and what type of industry, could the Okanagan Valley take?
Is it a good thing or a bad thing for Summerlanders to commute to industrial jobs in Penticton and Kelowna, as opposed to having industry here in town?
Should Summerland concentrate on retirement services, healthcare for the elderly, agriculture, etc.? or should we strive for full economic diversification?

Article 4 - Good Redevelopment, Poor Redevelopment

2006-01-16T11:56:00.000-08:00

This article is intended to promote discussion prior to the Smart Growth workshop.

Redevelopment is a great way to revitalise and to create jobs and ongoing wealth without population growth. That is why, despite having relatively small population growth over the past 100 years or more, many small European towns are pleasant and prosperous places to live.

One of the best redevelopments Summerland has seen over the past 25 years was the Downtown Revitalisation project. Cracked sidewalks, a delapidated air, few shoppers and numerous unoccupied storefronts on Main Street were a sign that something had to be done! I one day counted 10 unoccupied storefronts on Main Street alone. It is easy to forget, but there were so few shoppers that, even at busiest times, there was always lots of parking available (even though the parallel parking of those days provided half as many spaces as today's angled parking does).
The downtown merchants had the courage and foresight to put up with months of disruption for better future prospects. Nowadays the downtown is an attractive place to be. Whilst there is still much that could and should be done to further support the downtown, the revitalisation project was a great success when the strictest test is applied, i.e gains v losses. Summerland gained a great deal, permanently, and lost nothing except some short term discomfort and temporary business stress.

For an example of a poor redevelopment, consider the replacement of McDonald school by the new middle school. The new building is functional and no doubt more healthy and comfortable than the old one. Having said that, the project managed to get almost everything else wrong plus it created problems where non existed before. Here's the sad score card.

Historic building of character, with design sympathetic to the downtown theme, replaced by a cookie cutter building designed with one thing in mind - lowest cost.
Jubilee road between the Dunham fields used to have a tight 90 degree bend that automatically kept traffic slow in the school zone. The sweeping curve in the new road alignment encourages higher speeds.
A staggered junction that worked well was replaced by a cross roads that immediately became a difficult junction to use.
The Dunham fields had a parklike feel, and they were enjoyed by all sorts of casual users. You could pull your car off the road and enjoy a walk, or play with your children for a few minutes. Today's flat, feaureless fields with their ugly chain links fences are unattractive and get little casual use. Phsychologically Summerland lost a downtown park when the Dunham fields disappeared.
The lower (northern) Dunham field, with its shade trees and grassy bank alongside the road, made a natural tiered seating area for spectators watching sports events.

Article 3 - What Kind of Growth?

2006-01-15T10:03:00.000-08:00

This article is intended to provoke thought and discussion prior to the Smart Growth workshop on 25th January

It seems that the majority of Summerlanders either want growth or accept the inevitability of growth. I think most would also say that growth is good. But what kind of growth do they mean when they say that? Do they want growth that is primarily physical, or growth that is primarily economic? Or do they want both? All permutations are possible.

Physical growth is forever. There's no going back. This occurs when the primary focus is on building new subdivisions, industrial areas, shopping malls, etc. The end result is a doubling of everything. Jobs double, job hunters double, the population doubles, business competition doubles, the tax base doubles, municipal expenditures double, traffic and pollution doubles, and so on. Witness Kelowna

What are the benefits of physical growth?

Some people make money, e.g realtors, bare-land owners, developers and contractors.
More construction jobs
Big town facilities such as movie theatres, nightclubs and hotels move in.
The population meets franchise target levels so new retailers and big box stores move to town, providing more competition, lower prices and more variety.
Existing businesses have an oportunity to expand - if they are efficient enough to beat back the new competition.
Specialists such as dance schools and camera shops have a bigger population base to draw from.

Growth which is primarily Economic is very different. This occurs when the focus is on increasing wealth with little population increase. Examples would be a high tech employer moves to town, providing good jobs for existing citizens; or a new winery and vineyard is built on fallow land, creating ongoing income and wealth where none was before; or an existing facility is re-developed and rejuvenated.

What are the benefits of economic growth?

Total wealth created per capita increases.
Small town feeling is retained
More jobs with little population growth means more opportunity for existing Summerlanders
More locals can work in town as opposed to commuting.
More opportunity for young Summerlanders (very few of them are interested in a career in the construction trades, which is an oft quoted benefit of population growth)

What Makes a Summerlander - Encore

2006-01-15T09:44:00.000-08:00

Something light hearted for Sunday morning. I savoured the Cream concert on PBS late last night. . Clapton, Baker and especially Bruce are looking old these days but their music is as fresh, powerful and driving as ever. Ginger Baker's lyrics to "Sweet Wine" struck home

"Who wants the worry, the hurry of city life?
Money, nothing funny, wasting the best of our life"

"Sweet wine, hay making, sunshine, day breaking, we can wait till tomorrow"

A Message from Mayor Gregory - Municipal Council's Goals and Objectives

2006-01-13T12:16:00.000-08:00

Our new Mayor, David Gregory, kindly provided the following for publication.

In December Summerland’s Municipal Council promised to make public their “draft” goals and objectives for 2006. The intent of this draft was to allow the public to comment on these goals prior to adopting the final document.

Council met on two occasions to develop these goals. In the first meeting Council identified 21 defined goals with defined timelines to have these goals completed. Council also met with Municipal staff and together the group developed four vision statements of where the Municipality should focus its energy and resources.

On Jan 9th 2006 all of Council attended a workshop in Penticton with parliamentarian Eli Mina as the speaker. Mr. Mina recommended to Council that Council should initially adopt simple draft vision statements to permit public comment. Mr. Mina called this process developing a “Macro Agenda”. Following input from the public, these vision statements plus public comment would be submitted to municipal staff. Staff would then develop specific, well defined, goals objectives and a method to measure outcomes. He called this a ‘Micro Agenda’.

With this in mind, these are the four key vision issues that the Municipality should focus on :
1. the water system
2. Other infrastructure issues
3. Growth management
4. Communications

Council looks forward to any comments from the public on these four vision issues. Public comments can range from opinions on these broad statements to detailed concerns in each category. Any comments are appreciated.

Respectfully submitted
David Gregory

Comments and discussion are invited here, but please also be sure to send them directly to Mayor David.

Article 2 - Growth Pressures

2006-01-12T22:17:00.000-08:00

This article is intended to provoke thought and discussion prior to the Smart Growth workshop on 25th January

Summerland is facing physical growth pressures (which doesn’t necessarily mean economic growth – more on this later) like never before. These pressures will continue into the forseeable future. What is driving this pressure for new subdivisions, new condos? Lots of factors have come together in an unprecedented way. Here are some of them.

Kelowna has grown very rapidly and is predicted to double in size again in 20 years. Folk who retired to Kelowna several years ago, thinking they were moving to a relatively small, peaceful city, now find Kelowna too big for them and they are looking for a smaller town to move to.
The 4 laning of Highway 97 will make Summerland much more accessible to Kelowna.
As Kelowna grows, and travel times within the city get longer and longer, a 35 minute commute along a 4 lane highway doesn't look bad.
The Coquihalla connector has made the Okanagan seem much closer to the lower mainland (just look at the recent growth in Westbank!)
The great success of the wine industry has brought a more affluent class of tourist to the Okanagan. Lots of them see it as an attractive place to live, or to have a holiday home.
The boom in oil prices has created a lot of very wealthy people in Alberta and in parts of BC. Those are the folk who buy second and third homes. They see the Okanagan as a great place to have a holiday home.
The explosive growth of lower mainland communities will continue, in part due to the 2010 Olympics. This will create more escapees looking for a quieter lifestyle.
Kelowna has grown into a mid-size city, and now provides shopping and other facilities to match those in the lower mainland. One traditional reason for not moving to the Okanagan has disappeared.
The internet and communications revolution allows many folk to work from home. Commuting to an office building is a dying concept.
Some of our realtors are promoting Summerland in far away places like California. A new breed of buyer is being added to the traditional list.

What does this all mean? It means opportunity and it means risk. We can "sieze the brass ring" by setting very high design standards, raising development cost charges to truly cover the long term costs of development, and picking and choosing the type of development we want (and how much development we want). Or we can say "full steam ahead and damn the torpedos" as Kelowna and Westbank did.

Article 1 - What Makes A Summerlander?

2006-01-11T15:18:00.000-08:00

This short article is intended to provoke discussion and thought prior to the Smart Growth workshops.

People instinctively (sometimes unknowingly) sort themselves into like-minded groups. A common sorting method is choice of place to live. In other words, Summerlanders and Vancouverites are different. Summerlanders are (mostly) folk who chose to live in a small town rather than bigger places like Penticton, or Kelowna, or Vancouver. They are people who place more value on the benefits of small town living than they do on the advantages of city life.

What are "Summerland values" and the benefits of small town living? I suggest the following:-
1. A sense of community, of belonging. You know folk when you walk down Main Street.
2. Feeling safe. Summerland is too small to attract organised crime, prostitution rings, etc.
3. Lower property taxes
4. Few traffic problems. Few parking problems. No parking meters!
5. Compactness. Almost everyone is within a seven minute drive of the Downtown. For many, the Downtown is but a short walk.
6. Community involvement. A goodly percentage of Summerlanders volunteer, belong to churches or service clubs, etc.
7. Clean air. No industrial pollution to speak of.
8. A human scale. No multi-story towers or malls you can get lost in!
9. The benefits of strip malls, big box stores and industrial areas close by in Penticton and Kelowna, without the disadvantages that come with them such as heavy traffic, pollution, an ugly urban landscape, etc.
10. No rat race.

We have chosen to move here or to stay here. We forego the materialistic advantages of city living, such as higher salaries and better promotion prospects, for that small town quality of life.

Comments and discussion please!

Smart Growth Workshop Date Announced

2006-01-11T13:41:00.000-08:00

The first Smart Growth workshop, led by SmartGrowth BC staff, will take place on the evening of Wednesday 25th January. The workshop will start at Centre Stage Theatre, then we will move into the High School to discuss specific topics in smaller groups. Each group will have a facilitator. All Summerlanders are invited to participate.
The focus of this first workshop is to determine the collective vision that Summerlanders have for the future of their town, and to discuss opportunities for Smart Growth principles to work in Summerland; a starting point, rather than a decision making tool. Later workshops may strive to find concensus on critical issues.
All information collected will be compiled, published, and given to Council and staff for consideration. Hopefully the new Official Community Plan will incorporate collective ideas.

The Association gratefully acknowledges the support of Council in this endeavour.

Please take part and help us to guide Summerland to a bright future!

New Council to Set Goals and Objectives

2005-12-16T19:56:00.000-08:00

Dec. 16 from the Penticton Herald

Summerland Council Waits for Public Input

Summerland-----Community members will have an opportunity for input into the COUNCIL’S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES for the coming year.
Mayor David Gregory announced on Monday that councillors and municipal department heads will meet to develop the goals and objectives.
Dr. Larry Thomas, a former school district administrator, will facilitate the exercise. Thomas provides similar assistance to boards and councils throughout the province.
“Following completion of the report, it will be adopted in draft form by council and placed on the municipal website for public comment.” Gregory said.
Council will adopt the plan following input from the public.

Canadian Farm Income Report

2005-12-15T10:56:00.000-08:00

Source: SmartGrowthBC from StatsCan2003

For the first time since 1990, families with relatively large farm operations relied on off-farm sources for more than half of their total income - joining the ranks of families with small- and medium-sized farms who have relied on off-farm income for the majority of their income for several years. Families operating Canada's largest farms are now the only ones that continue to rely on farm sources for more than half of their total income.

Families operating small farms, that is, those with revenues from $10,000 to$49,999, have consistently relied on off-farm sources for most of their total income. Between 1990 and 2003, the percentage of total income from off-farm sources ranged from 87.1% to 92.6%. Families operating medium-size farms (with revenues from $50,000 to $99,999) have also relied on off-farm sources for most of their total income.

From1990 to 2003, medium-size farms have grown increasingly reliant on off-farmincome. Off-farm income represented 66.3% of the total income of these families in 1990, but 90.0% in 2003. For families with large farm operations (annual revenues from $100,000 to$499,999), the portion of total income from off-farm sources has also grown steadily. In 1990, 37.3% of income came from off-farm sources. By 2003, 52.1% of total income came from off-farm sources.

Families with the very largest farms (with revenues of $500,000 and over) are the sole exception to the trend. The proportion of these families'annual incomes from off-farm sources has remained relatively stable, rangingbetween 25.9% and 33.5% since 1990.

In 2003, average total income of farm families operating large farms declined for the second time since the beginning of the data series in 1990. The drop occurred because the 1.8% increase in average off-farm income andthe 39.6% jump in average net program payments were not sufficient to offset the 42.0% drop in average net market income. Among the main factors behind the drop in average net market income were back-to-back droughts in 2001 and 2002, and the closure of the border to live cattle exports after the diagnosis of the bovine spongiformencephalopathy (BSE) in a cow in northern Alberta in 2003.

Once adjusted for capital cost allowance, average net market income of farm families operating large business-focused farms dropped to a deficit of $6,843. Other factors behind the drop in net market income include higher expenses for fertilizer and lime, pesticides, custom work and machine rental,machinery fuel, machinery repairs, licenses and insurance, and higher netinterest expenses.

Note: The analysis in this release pertains specifically to families operating business-focused farms. The release of these aggregate administrative data and its companion analysis are funded by Agriculture andAgri-food Canada to complement survey-based sources of farm financial income. Although administrative-based data are released later than their survey-based counterparts, these data help provide a more comprehensive picture of farm operations and provide additional annual historical insight into changes over time in farm family reliance on off-farm income.

Comment on the Agriculture Plan Wanted

2005-12-10T22:36:00.000-08:00

While at the Agriculture Open House on Thursday the 8th, I spoke with both Keith Duhaime and Dave Whiting, consultants for this Agriculture Plan. I felt public participation and comment could be facilitated by making the large amount of information available through this blogsite, and allowing further comments to be forwarded directly by e-mail. Both gentlemen agreed that this would be beneficial to their work for the District.

So, you are welcomed and encouraged to read the following material:

Summary Poster Boards Displayed at Open House

Agricultural Plan, Full Document, Draft 4

Agricultural Plan Backgroud Report

Agricultural Plan Issues and Opportunities Report

And for a great view of Summerland's vast and varying agricultural industry, take a look at this map, Land Use by Commodity.

Your comments will be considered by the consultants and help them in preparing a final draft that represents what is important to this community. These are the issues they would like feed back on:

During the planning process, a vision was articulated for agriculture in Summerland. This vision, in turn, has guided the development of the plan. The current vision reads:

“The vision for agriculture in Summerland is that of a sustainable and environmentally sensitive agricultural industry that is a showcase for rural-urban cooperation. “

Do you support this vision? If not, how would you rewrite it?

The following broad goals have been articulated during the planning process to guide the Summerland community toward the vision, including the development of the agricultural plan. Do you support these goals as currently written?

Goals:

1. An Economically Viable and Sustainable Industry
2. Harmony between Rural and Urban Residents
3. Participative Planning for Sustainable Agriculture
4. Planning for Environmentally Sensitive Agriculture

If not, how would you rewrite them?

When implemented by the District, will this strategy effectively contribute to meeting the vision and goals of the Summerland Agricultural Plan? (see summary of vision and goals below as well as panel display)

How could this strategy be improved to make it more effective in meeting the vision and goals of the plan?

Does this strategy contribute towards addressing the issues identified by the community regarding land, water, economic viability, community awareness, urban-rural conflicts, and environmental/wildlife factors? (see panel displays on issues for additional information)

Comments and Answers to these questions can be forwarded to:

kduhaime@facet.com

Thanks for all input!

Agricultural Area Plan Open House

2005-12-06T21:07:00.000-08:00

There will be an Open House at Council Chambers-Muncipal Hall, Thursday December 8th, from 5pm to 8pm. All members of the public are encouraged to drop in to view the latest draft of the Agricultural Plan and give their comments and input. This plan is being developed by Facet Decision Systems in consultation with the Agricultural Advisory Committee. It is roughly 65 pages long and comes with a price tag of around $55,000. This plan will be referred to or incorporated into Summerland's new Official Community Plan.

This Agricultural Plan is a very important document. Please take the time to review it. Your comments and input will be welcomed at the Open House on Thursday.

The minutes of the Agricultural Advisory Committee are also now available.

America is Thirsty.....says Macleans Article

2005-12-05T14:08:00.000-08:00

A recent Macleans article (November 24th, 2005) discusses the water issues that are changing economies around the world. The implications for Canada and the U.S. are huge. It is clear that B.C. needs to implement ground water legislation to regulate and protect this most precious natural resource.

All across the U.S., communities are drying out. Drought has cut the flow
of the Missouri River by a third, and intensive farming in the Midwest has
substantially drained the enormous Ogallala aquifer that stretches from South
Dakota to Texas. Even in northern climates like Wisconsin and Illinois,
residents are dealing with dry wells that have failed to keep pace with soaring
demand. When the U.S. government surveyed the 50 states in 2003, more than
two-thirds said they expect to face some sort of water shortage within the next
10 years. The situation is even worse in the developing world. The United
Nations estimates that by 2025, two-thirds of the world population, or almost
5.5 billion people, will face chronic water shortages, and scientists expect
global warming will only make things worse. Full
Article here:

PIB Chief's Comment on Summerland

2005-12-04T21:34:00.000-08:00

The Penticton Western News ran an illuminating interview with Penticton Indian Band Chief Stewart Phillip this week, covering issues at all levels, including Summerland's recent boundary extension:

"PWN: You mentioned the possibility of confrontation. Can you point to one local issue that could lead to confrontation?
Phillip: Here locally, we are concerned about issues around the (RDOS) regional growth strategy. It encompasses the encroachment of so-called Crown land, which has an underlying aboriginal title and rights interest. You have a similar situation where the District of Summerland has arbitrarily extended their boundaries to encompass the proposed Summerland Hills Resort Golf Course, which represents a substantial encroachment on our aboriginal title and lands. You have the Apex ski resort contemplating doubling the boundaries of their resort. You have a proposed uranium exploration announced here on the western borders of our reserve land basis. So you can see that just here locally, there are significant examples of what you call the dichotomy that manifests itself ... and there are flashpoints like this that are more significant in the north dealing with energy development, oil and gas."

Urban Planning For Kids

2005-12-01T09:01:00.000-08:00

In today's (Dec 1) Penticton Herald there is an interesting article on page A3 about how cities and towns play an important role in children's development.

Suzanne Crowhurst Lennard will be giving a seminar tonight at 6:30pm at the Penticton Health Centre, 740 Carmi Ave, (free admission) on how effective urban and rural planning can promote healthy child development.

The Small Town Project

2005-11-25T10:43:00.000-08:00

This site received an interesting comment to our recent post, "Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development". John Feeney from Iowa wrote to congratulate us on our efforts and to let us know that the small towns of Mount Vernon and Lisbon are in much the same situation as ours.
John publishes an excellent website dedicated to preserving and enhancing the best of those two towns. His website makes excellent reading. They have the same problems as we face, and just the same solution - concentrate on economic development instead of on physical growth.
Log on to www.smalltownproject.org

Civilised Election Campaigns

2005-11-20T22:01:00.000-08:00

We ordinary citizens of Summerland owe all the candidates a big vote of thanks. It was a sign of a decent, caring community that so many people were willing to run for office. The campaigns appeared to be very cleanly run, and there were no tales of signs being vandalised or other underhand tricks.
Candidates were almost entirely respectful of each other and stuck to the issues.
Politicians at the Provincial and Federal level could learn a lot about decency and civility from our local candidates.
Many thanks from all Association members (and surely also from the general public) to every single person who ran for office

Coldstream Citizen Takes Council to Supreme Court

2005-11-20T18:23:00.000-08:00

It has been a controversial development proposal from the start. Now there is a legal challenge to a major expansion of a senior's facility in the north Okanagan. The owners of the 'Coldstream Meadows' have been given the go-ahead to expand the 60 unit housing complex into a 270 unit 'campus of care'. But many Coldstream residents oppose the expansion, complaining the development is too big and there aren't sufficient services like roads and sewer. Now one of those residents is asking the BC Supreme Court to overturn Coldstream council's approval of the expansion. Don Henry alleges the re-zoning was not done properly and other approval processes were also legally flawed. The District of Coldstream says its lawyers are reviewing the matter.

Election Comment

2005-11-19T22:23:00.000-08:00

Association Members, you should all be very proud of the work we have done over the past months and of the consequent election results. Three of our members, Lorraine Bennest, Peter Waterman and David Finnis, are now councillors. They are articulate, informed and intelligent people who will do a great job for the community. Amie Harbor, another member, came so so close! What a shame she was not elected.

There were some clear messages in the Summerland voting results.

1) Janice Perrino was forthright and passionate in her statements and this, added to her already high profile in the community, gave her more votes than any other councillor candidate.

2) Of the incumbents, Rick Cogbill and Elaine Spittlehouse took the strongest pro growth, pro - Summerland Hills stance, and they received very few votes.

3) Peter Hamilton had everything going against him (he lives in Faulder, was unknown to Summerlanders going into this election, he spent less than any of his opponents, he was working full time so had little time for campaigning) yet he did very well. Peter took a strong position in favour of slow growth, fiscal responsibility, and rigid standards for approval of the Summerland Hills development. He was the only one to say outright that a Referendum on such a huge development was appropriate. 1247 voters liked his message.

4) The Mayoralty race results were stunning, to say the least. David Gregory got almost twice as many votes as his opponents combined. Carla Wright took a more inclusive position than Rick Cogbill did, she provided information for everyone to read on this site, and in return received three times as many votes.
Surely the main message was that voters were very disappointed with Council's performance over the past three years and they trust David Gregory to put Council back on track.

2005 Election Results

2005-11-19T21:43:00.000-08:00

Summerland election results are in:

Mayor

Gregory, David

Councillors

Bennest, Lorraine
Finnis, David
Hallquist, Bruce
Perrino, Janice
Roberge, Ken
Waterman, Peter

School Trustees

Denesiuk, Connie
Van Alphen, Linda

Compare the Candidates, Vote Saturday!

2005-11-18T23:57:00.000-08:00

The Board is providing unfiltered information to help members and the general public make a wise choice on 19th November.

These are the platform statements and answered All Candidates Questions we have received so far:

Mayoral Candidates:
David Gregory & Carla Wright, Answers Head to Head

Councillor Candidates:
Lorraine Bennest, Answers
Peter Hamilton, Platform Statement, Answers
George Redlich, Answers
Peter Waterman, Platform Statement
Amie Harbor, Platform Statement, Answers
Jim Kyluik, Platform Statement, Answers
David Finnis, Platform Statement, Answers

School Board Candidates' Answers:
Terry Locke
Connie Denesiuk
Linda Van Alphen

A few people have asked if the Association Board is endorsing candidates whose platforms are posted on this site. It is not. Association members will decide for themselves which candidates best represent the philosophy and objectives of the Association.
Every candidate who is running for office has been offered the opportunity to post a "platform statement" of around 250 - 300 words. Every statement received so far has been posted.
Every candidate has been sent the unanswered questions from the All Candidate's Meeting of 26th October. Every candidate who responds with answers will have those answers posted on this site.

Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development

2005-11-17T21:13:00.000-08:00

"There are plenty of ways to develop an economy without growth"
"Successful communities are those that accept neither unquestioned growth nor the inevitability of decline"
For a thoughtful and well researched paper from the Rocky Mountain Institute explaining how sustainable development offers jobs without the problems of growth, whilst primarily physical growth (i.e a subdivision tract) has a negative economic and social impact on a community, just log on to this web page.

www.rim.org/images/other/EconRenew/ER96-15_Paying4Growth.pdf

Kelowna Development Cost Charges to Rise Again

2005-11-17T19:41:00.000-08:00

Rumour has it that Kelowna will soon increase its DCCs. The DCCs for a single lot, single residence in the Mission are presently $19,930. They will soon be over $21,000 according to reports. The increases are needed to cover the growing cost of providing services.

Why are Summerland's DCC's less than half of those in Kelowna?

Amie Harbor's Platform

2005-11-17T19:19:00.000-08:00

I will bring a new perspective to Council. I am enthusiastic and creative and I know that Summerland can change in ways that are both prosperous and responsible, unique and exciting. I would like to see a newly elected Council consider new urban planning ideas, as many of the old paradigms for growth can't be relied upon anymore.

Sustainability should be considered seriously and put into actual practice. I am prepared to do that. If I am elected to Council, these are the issues that I will make a priority:
 I will advocate sustainability through the investigation and support of Smart Growth principles.
 I will advocate for the protection of our farmlands through an OCP which recognizes that agriculture is not only our heritage, but is intrinsic to our future.
 I will enhance a vibrant and dynamic downtown through the participation with organizations such as Okanagan Partnerships and the Chamber of Commerce. I would work to improve sidewalks and trails that link our downtown with the rest of the community and encourage local shopping.
 I will strive to protect our environment by stressing that our OCP reflects the importance of Summerland's natural habitats.
 And most importantly, I will always encourage, facilitate and nurture public dialogue on major projects. We need improved communication and early participation to ensure that the best interests of all members of this community are served.
Sustainable community planning is not a sacrifice! Towns and cities planned this way are cleaner, healthier, less expensive and more economically secure. Let’s take the time to explore all the possibilities and make careful, informed decisions. A balance must be reached while considering the carrying capacity of this beautiful valley we call home.

I am ready to explore the possibilities and meet the challenges of shaping Summerland in the years to come. Please elect me, Amie Harbor, to Summerland's Muncipal Council.

Dr. David Gregory Supports Workshops

2005-11-17T11:53:00.000-08:00

"I would support Smart Growth workshops in Summerland. I have concerns about Smart Growth though and I want to be ‘up-front’ with the concerns. The nine principles of Smart Growth can not all be successfully applied to small communities (reference Sprawl 2004 Report). Two points to consider. Firstly the notion that Summerland can significantly densify the downtown core because that is where the services already exist: is flawed. Our infrastructure is weak in the downtown core; specifically roadways. Our narrow streets can not support high density growth. Moderate density growth I agree with."

"Secondly, prime agricultural lands border on the downtown core. Too much densification of the downtown core would place some of Summerland’s best and oldest farm land at risk. This concern was a prime factor when the OCP was written in 1996.'

NOTE: Dr. Gregory raises thoughtful questions about Smart Growth. The Association has always recognised that Smart Growth Guidelines were originally developed with large towns and cities in mind, and must be carefully adapted to suit Summerland's needs. This is precisely the reason for the concensus building Workshops starting in January,

COUNCIL CANDIDATES SUPPORT ASSOCIATION SMART GROWTH WORKSHOPS

2005-11-15T17:12:00.000-08:00

Five Candidates have already written to the Association to support the SmartGrowthBC ® workshops we will run in January. Your Board hopes that others will also express their written support. Comments we have received so far:
Lorraine Bennest: "With true Smart Growth, our planning process will better prepare us for increased population, climate change and water shortages. One severe drought would trigger enormous costs.”
Amie Harbor: “An engaged citizenry is the cornerstone of a healthy community. The workshops offered through SmartGrowthBC will help define a collective and inclusive vision for Summerland”
Peter Hamilton: “Development Cost Charges typically don’t cover the full cost of new infrastructure. Smart Growth encourages development in the currently serviced areas in town, avoiding unnecessary tax hikes”.
David Finnis: “Growth should meet the needs of taxpayers rather than taxpayers meeting the needs of growth”
Peter Waterman: “Agriculture is a vital component of the Summerland economy. Smart Growth will retain farmland, ensuring a strong contribution by agriculture and a strong mix for tourism and Summerland’s rural setting.”

Your Board hopes other candidates will also support this initiative. We look forward to receiving their support, and we will publish additional supporting quotes if we receive them.
Please encourage other candidates to support the workshops.

Association Brings Smart Growth to Town

2005-11-15T16:44:00.000-08:00

The Association, together with SmartGrowthBC ®, will run Summerland’s first Smart Growth ® workshops, starting in early January 2006. The provisional date for the first workshop is 5th January. It is expected to last about 3 hours. The workshops will be directed by SmartGrowthBC ® staff. All Summerlanders will be invited to participate.

Members were disappointed that Council recently rejected the Association’s invitation to jointly sponsor the Workshops. “It was an opportunity for Council and the ACS to work hand in hand for the betterment of Summerland” said Board member and former Councillor John Tamblyn. “We hope the new Council will join us in this vital project, but we will proceed alone if need be.”

The workshops could result in a plan to enhance all that is good about Summerland, without sacrificing the very essence of the community. The Association expects that hundreds of Summerlanders will want to take part in these workshops.

“Some people want no growth, some want lots of growth, and some think that slower, wisely chosen development is appropriate. We will try to bring everyone together, find common ground, and build consensus”, said former Councillor and Board Member Sheila White.

Association Objectives

2005-11-13T19:52:00.000-08:00

The Association currently has about 300 members, they all love Summerland and they are prepared to donate money and time to improve their community. They believe that Summerlanders enjoy a very special quality of life, and they are working to preserve and enhance that lifestyle. They recognize that the vitality of Summerland does not depend on growth and development.

The Association will support development and change if it enhances and improves Summerland’s small town character, friendly ambience and rural nature.

The Association’s objectives are:

1. To advocate a rate of growth whereby the essence of the community is not sacrificed.
2. To support the concept that growth forever is impossible, so at some point a well-planned transition to sustainability will be required.
3. To advocate policy which recognizes that Summerland’s water is a limited resource.
4. To protect the Agricultural Land Reserve (the ALR).
5. To inform the membership and the public of pertinent and important issues.
6. To be a cohesive citizen’s voice.
7. To support and encourage agriculture, agri-tourism and related businesses.
8. To encourage a prosperous, healthy and vibrant downtown area.
9. To restrict commercial development of Highway 97 within Summerland’s boundaries.
10. To encourage the development of recreation facilities, parks, public open spaces, the arts, the library and cultural activities.
11. To demand fiscal responsibility, with tax increases limited to increases in the Consumer Price Index.

If this represents your view of Summerland, please join us. Together we can ensure that Summerland has a great future!

Page Hits Approach 36,000

2005-11-13T19:45:00.000-08:00

Members, you will be pleased to know that page hits on this website were over 35,000 as of Monday!

Open for Comments

2005-11-10T16:20:00.000-08:00

The Board of the Association has decided to re-open the site for comments by readers. We ask that people comment in a civilised manner, stick to the issues, and engage in rational discussion. In the event of personal attacks the site will again be closed to comments.

Inadequate Engineering Reports?

2005-11-09T22:52:00.000-08:00

At Monday's SCEDT All Candidates Forum David Gregory said something like "To me, one of the biggest problems in this town is lousy engineering reports." I asked David for an example of his concerns. What follows is, I am told, a sample part page from the recent Water Separation Study - with worrying part emphasised. Let's hope major decisions are not being made on the basis of such work!

District of Summerland - Water Separation Notes

Estimate the required storage tank volume

The total residential MDD (including lawn sprinkling) for the potential lake zones I. approximately 6,1 ML/day.

Assume only low density residential fire flow requirements.

• Fire Storage — 5000 Lpm x 106 mm • 525 cu.m.
• Peaking Storage m 6100 ou.m x 0.25 a 1525 cu.m.
• Emergency Storage 0.25 x (525 + 1525) • 512 cu.m. Total tank storage (TF.4) .525 + 1525 + 512 • 2563 ou.m. Use 2560.

Note: The water model has become unsynchronized with its database, and for some reason, It will not correct itself. Therefore, it’s necessary to go back to an older version that is synchronized.
Therefore the following models have been put into a historical folder and a copy of
SummerlandGZ’20050541 .wcd was saved as Summ,rlandGZ.2005.06’~03,Wcd. SummerlandGZ~2005~06’01 .wcd
SummerlandGZ.2005~06’02.WOd
This means that two day’s worth of work has been lost, Including the elevation update.1 2005-0603
South Giant’s Head — Potential System
b~ G/en Zachari I

Terry Locke Answers

2005-11-09T18:29:00.000-08:00

Q: What aspect of school district operations do you think need to be changed?
I believe the budget process should be changed to a committee of stakeholders for input from October to March of each year.

Q: What or which position did you support during the recent teachers’ strike?
I took the position that the government created the entire mess by not bargaining in good faith. They did this knowing that they would pass legislation taking away the teacher’s rights to bargain.
I support the teachers on this issue as the government fully anticipated that the only reaction left to the teachers was to strike.d

Q: Do you feel there are too many special needs children in a class room? What will you do to be sure these children receive the help they need?
I believe that Special Needs includes a number of categories. I believe we have to research the model we are currently using for the delivery of education to all the categories and make sure it works for the classroom in general.

What are your priorities in dealing with a system which is under funded?
I believe Trustees should be continually lobbying government for proper funding which would include a funding formula that works. We have to get back to some targetted funding and not have any flexibility on targetted funds.

Q: What plans do you have to help dilute the current tension between the School Board and the Teachers Association?
I think most of the tension is again created by government through their bargaining association, BCPSEA. I commend the principals for their understanding and goodwill shown at the picket lines. This will help to settle the situation.
The provincial government directed School Boards not to spread the days of lost wages over a number of months. Unfortunately, School Boards acccepted this mean-spirited directive. I truly believe that this represents a lost opportunity to show compassion and support to our outstanding teaching staff.

Q: How will you communicate to the broader public and appease their concerns?
I believe we should create a Trustee’s Newsletter and send it home every two months.

Q: Do you have any comments on the report recently released by Vince Ready? What impact do you think it will have on you as a School Board Trustee?
I don’t believe the Ready Report and the recommendations were up to the high standards expected of him. If the government was serious about the concerns put forward by teachers, they would have appointed Mr. Ready as an Industrial Inquiry Commissioner with binding arbitration authority.

Q: The present bargaining process between the government, school boards and teachers obviously does not work well. What are your major goals for a new bargaining process?
All the trouble in education started with provincial bargaining protocols that meant the government had to approve everything that school districts did at the bragaining table through their agent, BCPSEA.
My view is that we should bargain regionally with our employer groups and BCPSEA should be disbanded.

Jim Kyluik's Platform

2005-11-09T15:53:00.000-08:00

I am Jim Kyluik and I am for:
- a dependable well planned water system for now and in the future
- improving the infrastructure, smart development and improving the business climate

I am a Certified Professional Purchaser, I have my business administration from the University of Saskatchewan. I have taken about 50 or 60 courses over the last 20 years to keep me up to date on the latest technology.

I am not an accountant. I am in Purchasing, I do contracts, negotiations and getting the best value for your dollar. I have been involved with projects valued at over $750 M. I just completed a project in Mongolia, worth over $80 M. With these projects I negotiated water, sewer, landfill, roads, equipment, maintenance, buildings, transportation etc. Pretty well everything that would be involved in the District of Summerland. I have worked for the City of Edmonton as a Senior Materials Management Specialist.

My platform is sound money management, whether it is infrastructure, development, or getting maximum value for your tax dollars.
My goals are to be part of the finance committee and satisfy the citizens of Summerland with cost savings, eliminating red tape, stabilizing taxes and promoting the business climate in Summerland, but not forgetting the community spirit we all love and want to keep.

I feel I have the education and Professional Experience in various projects, contracts and problem solving management teams to provide the Leadership and common sense approach in moving forward in a positive way on issues that concern the community. Yes, we live here in Summerland, the jewel of the Okanagan, where there is a town center with a soul and community spirit, friendly people and a “small town” atmosphere. My wife and I love it here.

The Big Myths About Growth

2005-11-05T07:00:00.000-08:00

Here are some excerpts from the book "Better Not Bigger", by Eben Fodor. New Society Publishers, 1999. Just a sampling, and a precis of some of his points. This book inspired the "better not bigger" bumper stickers. Not a light read, but a worthwhile read!

"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." - Edward Abbey

Statements such as "we have to grow or die", or "we have to grow to get new tax revenue" are repeatedly made to justify growth. They are usually made in an unqualified manner with no supporting evidence.
We are urged to make concessions and sacrifices for development to gain alleged benefits such as new jobs, a bigger tax base, or some vague promise of economic prosperity. We are told that slowing growth would be disastrous and that even if we wanted to slow growth, it would be impossible.
But where is the analysis to prove those claims? It is important to get beyond the rhetoric and base decisions on objective information.
The biggest myths are about taxes, jobs, economic prosperity and housing.

Myth: Growth provides needed tax revenues.
Reality Check: Growth tends to raise local tax rates. The direct and indirect costs of urban growth place new and greater demands on local resources. According to empirical data, becoming a larger town increases the tax burden.

Myth: We have to grow to provide jobs for people in the community:
Reality Check: We can’t grow our way out of local employment problems. Growth just makes the problem bigger. The real question is not whether growth creates jobs, but whether it reduces local unemployment.

Myth: If we try to limit growth, housing prices will shoot up.
Reality Check: Growth controls can produce many benefits for a community and may even result in a better distribution of affordable housing than market driven growth. Towns and cities with rapid growth usually have the highest housing prices.

Myth: Growth is inevitable. Growth management doesn’t work and therefore we have no choice but to continue growing. You can’t put a fence around your town.
Reality Check: You can establish limits to growth and you can create a "railing" around your community. Saying that "growth is inevitable" implies that we are helpless victims of change, that we must accept whatever growth is thrust upon us, and that our only choice is the manner in which we accommodate it.
We can rein in growth without fences. We can set limits of growth and even cap the ultimate size of our community. We can adopt policies that discourage undesirable kinds of growth. The idea of unlimited, or forced, growth is repulsive. It implies a horrible sickness, like a cancer.

Myth: If you don’t want growth you’re a NIMBY.
Reality Check: NIMBYS have valid concerns! Negative labels are used against concerned citizens to neutralize opposition to growth. However, a NIMBY is more likely to be someone who cares enough about the future of his or her community to get out and protect it. Great NIMBYS of the past kept hazardous waste dumps, major polluters and other nuisances out of their communities.
People who want slow growth tend to be those who really care very much about the future of their communities and want to protect what they value for generations to come. Is it more accurate to refer to such a person as anti-growth or as pro-community?

Myth: Most people don’t really support growth management or environmental protection.
Reality Check: Most people recognise the importance of environmental protection and the need to manage growth.
In numerous studies, on average, over 70% of respondents believe that maintaining a quality environment is more important to economic growth than relaxing environmental standards. In areas that have experienced rapid growth, public opinion surveys consistently show that a strong majority of the public will support policies to curb growth. In 1988 a survey of LA residents showed that 75% favored slowing or stopping growth. We all know how well the politicians listened to that.

Myth We have to "grow or die". Growth makes the economy strong and creates better paying jobs.
Reality Check: The short term benefits of additional growth may not outweigh the longer-term costs.

Myth: Vacant or undeveloped land is just going to waste.
Reality Check: Open space and farmland are valuable and irreplaceable assets that contribute significantly to every community. We all feel regret at the loss of a particular area of open space. What was that land contributing that makes us miss it? A relaxing view, a sense of comfort, tranquility, an oasis of nature, a buffer? Perhaps we’re also disturbed by the permanence of the loss. The farmer’s cows will never graze the pasture that has sprouted a golf course, a mall, or a housing development.

Myth: A persons visual preference is no basis for objecting to development.
Reality Check: The beauty of the land is priceless and its destruction is permanent! That pleasing view may be one of the most significant qualities of a community. Too many people tend to dismiss the benefits of natural landscapes. A 1994 study by the National Association of Home Builders found that the single most important factor affecting the market value of a home was the surrounding environment. When visual preferences carry such a price tag, they can hardly be dismissed as trivial.

Myth: Building more (and bigger) roads will solve the problems of traffic congestion.
Reality Check: Build it and they will come

Myth: Bigger (or More) is better.
Reality Check: Small is beautiful and enough is enough.

Myth: Change is good.
Reality Check: Change is inevitable, but not necessarily good.

These abbreviated excerpts are a sampling of Fodor's work

RIP ALR

2005-11-01T11:49:00.000-08:00

The ALC today released its report stating that "Area 11" - all 154 hectares, is released from the ALR. The full text is available for viewing here.

Evaluation Was Flawed

2005-11-01T10:03:00.000-08:00

Letter to ALC follows:
Dear Mr Collins,
I have heard a rumour that the ALC is expected to grant the application for removal of ALR land for the proposed development in the northwest corner of Summerland. The rationale for granting the request is that the sector was identified as non arable in the OCP of Summerland almost ten years ago. At that time the land had not been carefully evaluated, was considered to be marginally arable, and it was considered appropriate to remove it from the ALR.

Since that time two things have happened. Firstly, the wine industry, which thrives on marginal soils, has developed exponentially. Secondly, we have the benefit of climate change. This has allowed us to expand the boundaries of agriculture beyond the historic limitations.

The previous evaluation upon which the Summerland OCP was based was flawed and the decision was wrong. If you continue the process of land removal, you will also be wrong to conclude that the land is not economically arable. You have the ability to correct the previous error but it will not be corrected by allowing the land removal.
Sincerely,
Gary Strachan

Summerland Hills and the MOA - Answers to Common Questions

2005-10-29T11:33:00.000-07:00

Is the Memorandum of Understanding binding on the District of Summerland?
"This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is not a contract and is not binding on the District of Summerland (the "District") or 3093467 Nova Scotia ULC ("Brandenburg/Agur"), but reflects the desire and wishes of both parties to study,explore, discuss, negotiate the development of a master planned destination golf resort community in the District of Summerland"

"Brandenburg/Agur and the District, by entering into the MOU, do not intend to exclude consideration of any matter not herein referred to, and fully intends in good faith to diligently proceed to work towards the realization of the Project so long as each remains satisfied of the desirability of the Project."

will the District Pay for Offsite Utility and Roadway Improvements?
"a commitment by the District to use its best efforts and resources to support the contemplated Project in several ways, including; (i) show its intent to participate in funding arrangements for offsite utility and offsite roadway improvements;"

If the Land is Sold to Brandenburg but the Project Does Not proceed, What Happens?
"such agreement may include a requirement that Brandenburg/Agur grant an option to the District to repurchase the District Land for the same purchase price should Brandenburg/Agur fail to proceed with the Project within 120 months"

Full House at All Candidates Meeting

2005-10-27T18:06:00.000-07:00

The all candidates meeting was open to all, a great success, and enlightening for the capacity crowd. Moderator Peter Schierbeck was superb. Many written questions were submitted by the audience. They have been forwarded to all candidates. When we get answers they will be posted.

ALC to Release Land

2005-10-26T13:13:00.000-07:00

Reliable sources say that the ALC has decided to approve Council's application for the removal of over 320 acres in North Prairie Valley (Area 11) from the Agricultural Land Reserve, despite all the solid arguments against this application. The fact that this land is earmarked for development in our Official Community Plan seems to have been the clincher. Apparently the ALC is waiting for a suitable time to release the news.
Even though the land will not be in the ALR, that does not mean it cannot be used for agriculture and agro-tourism and must be used for housing.
The big question now is whether the new Council elected on 19th November will deal solely with Summerland Hills and continue to exclude all other interested parties, or will it invite competitive bids for this land through an open tendering process?
Will the multi-faceted agricultural, winery, visitor centre and agro-tourism proposal for "Area 11" which is now before Council be given an opportunity to compete and bid for this land?
Will cost/benefit/risk analyses be done on the new proposal and on the Summerland Hills subdivision proposal (and any others yet to be received) for this parcel of land, to determine which is best for Summerland?

All Candidates Meeting - Wednesday 26th at 7:00 pm

2005-10-21T10:35:00.000-07:00

Be sure to attend the All Candidates Forum. The issues for Summerland this election are huge.
Controlled growth or rapid growth?
Continue to emphasise physical growth, or focus instead on development providing economic growth with less physical growth?
Fiscal responsibility and due diligence? - or build first, calculate the total costs to the community later?
Pay due regard to input from the public or disregard it?
Keep Development Cost Charges low to compete for developers, or raise them to cover the true costs to the community (short and long term) resulting from development?
Sort out the water supply, dump relocation, road widening and other problems and costs first - or start developing North Prairie Valley right away?

ALL SUMMERLAND VOTERS INVITED

Naramata Citizens Association Message.

2005-10-18T19:46:00.000-07:00

The Naramata Citizens Association is having a panel discussion tomorrow evening in the Naramata Community Church hall on the environmental protection measures proposed in the revised Area E (Naramata) official community plan and zoning bylaws. They have a panel of speakers including Monty Horton a planner from the RDOS and Lora Neild from the MOE. All ASC members are invited to attend.

Exciting Proposal for "Area 11"

2005-10-14T21:09:00.000-07:00

At the ALC hearing on Wednesday I referred to an offer made to the Municipality some time ago for the 152 hectares of ALR land in N. Prairie Valley. I will provide more information when I have obtained the approval of the investment group to release it, but I can tell you now this is a very innovative proposal from serious investors with a proven track record and strong credentials. At least one of the principals has been involved in agriculture and agribusiness development projects in over 50 countries worldwide. The group offers to pay fair market value and to match or exceed the price offered by Summerland Hills.
The proponents say the development will include a diverse array of crops and livestock opportunities. This is a large, integrated project, apparently making use of all of the land with agricultural potential - and yes, exactly as the professionals (Peter Waterman and Gary Strachan) stated, some of the class 6 and 7 land is suitable for grapes due to the special climatic conditions on that particular property.
The project would include cherry production, a goat meat and dairy operation, a vineyard and winery, cheese manufacturing, a visitors centre and restaurant, and agro-tourism initiatives (more on this later).
This appears to be a very serious offer from a group which blends local and international agricultural experience. It could be a wonderful opportunity for Summerland.
Experts including Peter Waterman months ago provided detailed analysis proving that "Area 11" had considerable agricultural and economic potential. Why did our Agricultural Advisory Committee recommend the removal of these lands from the ALR?
Our Mayor and Council have been very proactive in supporting the Summerland Hills Group, jointly engaging consultants to push through the ALR removal process. This effectively precluded any other parties from proposing alternatives.
Let us hope that Council and staff are not so fixated on having a giant subdivision built on this agricultural land that they ignore this opportunity.

URGENT, URGENT

2005-10-08T23:00:00.000-07:00

It appears the Summerland Hills Golf and Residential Development proponants are gathering forces for the upcoming ALC Public Hearing. They will be hosting a "pre-hearing" reception at their Main Street headquarters at 5:00pm the evening of the 12th.

As quoted from their invitation for support~

"Help is Needed.
Please bring a friend with you and join us for plenty of food and refreshments. As well, brief remarks will be made from the Summerland Hills Golf Resort team. Thereafter, we will head over to Center Stage Theater to insure seating for our supporters."

I am sorry to inform those opposing the removal of this ALR land, that the Association of Citizens for Summerland has neither the venue or the funds to host a reception complete with refreshments. However, let me assure you that it is critical that there be a huge show of support for the PRESERVATION of this ALR Land. Contrary to what has been reported regarding this ALR parcel, Paul Christie, contracted agrologist, refuted the remark by the application agent that this land is practically non-aerable or un-usable. He reiterated at the first ALC hearing that nearly 30% of this parcel is considered aerable, meaning Classes 1-4. He reported it may be especially suited to the growing of certain grape varieties, having the benefit of a south facing slope. I know this because I was there.

The ALC has responed to our request for the community to give further input. We absolutely have to show up.

Date and Time details:

ALC PUBLIC HEARING
WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 12th
7:00 pm (show up early!)
Centre Stage Theatre

ALL INVITED!

ALC Public Information Meeting, Change of Venue

2005-09-30T17:53:00.000-07:00

The Public Information Meeting to be held by the ALC will now be held at Centre Stage Theatre. This change was made to ensure that there is room for all who wish to attend.
So, date and time:

Centre Stage Theatre
9518 Main Street Summerland
Wednesday October 12th, 7:00pm

Please attend to voice your opinion on the ALR exclusion application, West Prairie Valley, intended use, Summerland Hills Golf and Residential Resort.

ALC to Hold Public Information Session

2005-09-29T09:10:00.000-07:00

Thank-you to all who have written to the ALC with concerns regarding the exclusion application in West Prairie Valley. The ALC has responded. This notice was received yesterday afternoon.

Dear all,Thank you for your interest in the above-noted application. As was noted at the exclusion meeting of September 23, 2005, the Commission has several options open to it to gather information on the application. The Commission has decided to hold a public information meeting from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.onWednesday, October 12, 2005 in the Municipal Hall Council Chambers,located at 13211 Henry Avenue, Summerland, BC. All interested parties are welcome to participate. An official notice will be included in the October 2 edition of theSummerland Bulletin and the October 6 edition of the Summerland Review.

As I understand it, the public will be allowed to give verbal presentations to the commissioners. It appears they are seeking further input into this important decision, and this is good news!

Smart Growth Workshops Being Discussed

2005-09-18T11:48:00.000-07:00

The Guiding Principles of SmartGrowth are:

1. Protect Wildlife habitat, green space and farm lands

2. Build compact, mixed- use neighbourhoods

3. Work within natural systems

4. Employ environmentally-relevant design

5. Provide a variety of transportation choices

6. Create diverse affordable housing options

7. Connect jobs to homes

8. Embrace community identity

9. Nurture engaged citizenship

Tom Lancaster has advised us on two workshop possibilities.

1. A voter education workshop is held. All candidates for council are invited. There would a presentation on Smart Growth principles. The audience would then submit written questions for the candidates which would be asked to each candidate. The questions would be vetted to avoid over lapping or repeat questions. After which there would be a discussion on the candidates positions and how they would apply the smart growth principles to Summerland. This proposal would not involve breaking into workshop groups and Center Stage theater would be suitable.

2. Groups of 6 to 8 people are formed which meet in people's homes, cafes orother locations to discuss a preset list of questions. The questions would be linked to smart growth principles as in the following examples -

Smart growth includes ALL 9 of the principles listed, but every communityhas several that are most relevant to their local context.What are the three most relevant principles to Summerland?
How would these three principles change planning/decision-making inSummerland?
What are the three most important issues that Summerland is facing?
How do you see smart growth being relevant to Summerland planning processes?
Do you see smart growth in Summerland requiring more regional planning?
How would smart growth in this community affect you individually(positively,negatively)?

Tom and others would travel around the groups to help with the discussions and there would be background material on the principles to assist the discussion. The results of the discussion groups would be compiled and a meeting scheduled to develop concensus and report back to the community. The concluding meeting would require Center Stage theatre.
Alternatively, if we could find a venue that would accomodate many small breakout groups, we could do it all in 1/2 a day .

These ideas will be discussed at our Sept. 19th board meeting.

Workshops have or will be held in the following comunities; White Rock, Mission, West Vancouver, Smithers, Prince Rupert, Comox,Abbottford, Creston, Kaslo, and RDof Shuswap.Mayors and Councils are involved in most of them.

Give us your thoughts.

Board Elections for Association

2005-09-17T07:40:00.000-07:00

Wednesday, September 21st, 7:30, Association of Citizens for Summerland Public Meeting, being held at Centre Stage. Our speaker will be Lisa Scott, a local biologist, discussing the Protection and Recovery of Species at risk in Summerland, and the impacts of development on the environment. We will also be holding our first Board Elections. The current directors were serving on an interim basis and we hope many of them will consider running for a full year term. We also hope others will volunteer to serve on this board. Review our Draft Constitution. Your participation would be greatly appreciated. The offices on the board for the Association of Citizens for Summerland are as follows:

Chair
Vice-Chair
Treasurer
Secretary
Director of Communications
Director of Publicity
Director of Research
Assistant - Research
Director of Membership
Director of Fundraising
Director of Elections, Board/Municipal
Director of Council Meeting Committee

This is YOUR blog!

2005-09-16T08:41:00.000-07:00

Because I have been making some pretty strong statements lately, I want to remind Association members and visitors to this blog that I am not trying to represent the entire membership or even the Board of the Association of Citizens. I am the 'acting' administrator of this blog, but my posts and comments are strictly my own (and I'll stand behind them!)

This blog is a gathering place for information and ideas. If you have something to say, say it! Comment on existing posts, or if you would like to post something directly, e-mail me and I'll get it up there. I'm not in the business of editing or deleting, unless something is truly inappropriate.
As for the "Anonymous" nature of a lot of recent comments, and some very nasty ones, this blog no longer accepts "Anonymous". I don't mind debating the issues, but I wonder why some aren't willing to put a name to their opinions.

So, I encourage you to speak your mind. Let's discuss the issues. And remember, I don't want this to be MY blog, it's yours. I just seem to be the most prolific writer at the moment!

2005-09-14T13:10:00.000-07:00

A recent Anonymous comment (Sept. 9) posed the question, "Shouldn't we assume that our local golf courses ARE as important as orchards in that they offer similar [if not greater] numbers of full & part-time employment? In addition, significant tourist dollars are spent throughout Summerland during the short golf season". I am glad to answer and debate, I only wish I knew who I was debating with.
I don't think anyone should assume that golf courses are as important as orchards and farms. Never mind the philosophical difference between the primary importance of food production versus the expensive recreational experience for the relatively wealthy; I also take issue with the assertion that golf courses are more economically significant.
If you check the SCEDT website on economic indicators in Summerland, you will see that the BC Fruit Growers Co-operative has the second largest number of employees in Summerland, at 100. Only the School district employs more. Our two local golf courses employ less than 20 people each, according to SCEDT.
How about the fruit stands, vineyards, wineries, and agri-tourism operations such as Summerland Sweets and Dickinson Family Farm? These land based, water dependant, agricultural operations employ many, many people.
In addition, there are 473 properties in Summerland which claim Farm Status. These farms are all providing, at minimum, a supplementary income for the proprietor, and for many, the primary income. These water dependant farms provide far more seasonal employment opportunities than another golf course would.
I also believe that you are over stating the tourist draw of Golf. The Okanagan is first and foremost renowned for its lakes and weather, FRUIT and WINE. Golfing is, maybe, a blip on the radar screen. In fact, according to Fox Sports News, the sport peaked in the 1990's and has been in decline ever since. In the US, sixty-three golf courses closed last year, double the number in 2001. Food production and agriclulture will never go out of style, unless people stop eating.

So to sum up, No, I don't think Golf Courses are anywhere near as important as agriculture, and a project which uses viable land and puts current farm operations in jeopardy of lacking for water, is not a suitable endeavour for Summerland.

Report sent to the ALC

2005-09-11T15:49:00.000-07:00

Tony has written an incredibly comprehensive report outlining why Summerland should not be considering ANY agricultural lands for growth purposes. He makes very good arguments and I hope the ALC will consider his submission very seriously. Please take the time to read it.

It appears that the ALC commissioners will be meeting on September 23rd in Summerland to consider the James Lake ALR exclusion application. It is possible that they will be considering the West Prairie Valley application at that time as well. From what I gather, the public may be permitted at this meeting, but will not be allowed to address the panel. I will try to find out more about this planned meeting.

"Water Monsters"

2005-09-09T10:58:00.000-07:00

Submitted by Caroline:

Sept. 9, 2005

OGOPOGO FOUND DYING IN SUMMERLAND

The famed water monster of the Okanagan may die a slow agonizing death in Summerland. A new more powerful "water monster" is looming and rearing its’ ugly head. The children and teens of Summerland, grades 1–12 will be introduced to and taught to recognized water monsters. Apparently our Water Conservation Officer has contacted the B.C. Teachers Association and a curriculum will be prepared to initiate water issues and awareness. I wonder if the first lesson might include popping open the local newspaper. The new water monster is screaming out loud and clear, let me live here. "I will suck up your pressure liquid gold but I will spit out prosperity into the streets of your cute town. I promise to spawn 650 short term rentals, fast food take out, gift shops, cafes and boutiques. I am a huge water monster and I do have the potential to fracture your town core, but what the heck lets spread the wealth, let’s embrace sprawl.
Another great part of me is I will always look good. Granted I do need a lot more care, not like that fake Virtual Lawn that the Summerland Chamber of Economic Development & Tourism (SCEDT) put in. That lawn required absolutely no water! Me, once green, I get to stay green no matter what the WATER SITUATION may be in your town. Bylaws are already in place, my two other buddies also get to stay green, the law says so, ha-ha." Summerlanders may soon have 3 huge water monsters that are disguised as golf courses! Mr. Anderson of Virtual Lawn has stated that the typical lawn watering is 500 % percent greater than the average daily total household water use for drinking, taking showers, flushing toilets, cooking and cleaning combined. Also the current mayor loves grass. He speaks out loud and clear, rip up the wheatgrass, chew up the sheep fescue, get rid of the natural xeriscape, lets do something or we will look like we are doing nothing. Let us appease the money gods, move forward in a hurry!

Item number 8 on the Works and Utilities Meeting held on Sept.7, 2005, potential litigation; unusual words for a Utilities Meeting?

Page 19 local paper dated Sept. 8 words by our grass loving mayor “first, the vision”... now the stink.

Regards,
Caroline

Still Waiting for Answers

2005-09-09T10:29:00.000-07:00

I am patiently waiting for these questions to be answered. These questions were posed to Mayor and Council first on August 23rd. I again sent these questions on September 8th, but have not yet received an answer.

Dear Mayor and Council Members,

I am again, respectfully asking my well-thought out questions regarding the process planned for the golf-course and residential project. I truly hope you will take the time to answer. These specific questions have not yet been addressed.

***Who decides how to proceed with a development such as this? Does Council or Staff make the decision to pursue one bylaw for all three issues or a separate OCP amendment bylaw, followed by a zoning/neighbourhood plan bylaw?

***Has this decision been made yet?

***How does the acceptance of the Neighbourhood Plan affect this process?

***Can Council now decide to pursue a separate bylaw on the OCP amendments and zoning amendments, allowing full and open dialogue on the intended use of these lands, prior to the neighbourhood plan bylaw?

***Was every member of Council fully aware of the consequences of accepting the neighbourhood plan, in that legal advice dictates there be no more formal, public, discussion on the Golf Course Proposal until the public hearing?

Mr. Mayor says council encourages citizens to participate and to ask well-thought out questions. I am respectfully asking Mayor and each member of Council to take the time to respond to these questions. The process used to deal with this proposal is of utmost importance.

Thank-you for your time,

~~~I'll keep you posted.

This just in!

2005-09-07T22:40:00.000-07:00

Through the Freedom of Information Act, an Association member has obtained the "in camera" minutes of the discussions and negotiations between your Council and LGH (Murphy Bros & Said) regarding the Land Swap deal for Little Giant's Head parkland. You will find these discussions very interesting. I am quite surprised that so much negotiating and agreements in principal can take place before ANY public consultation process begins. Council and staff will tell you that "this is just the way it's done." I completely disagree, as I feel OCP amendments and zoning changes can be considered and deliberated on BEFORE actual real estate deals on public lands are discussed. Call me crazy, but I just think is a more sensible way to proceed. I am hoping another Association member will consider obtaining all of the "in camera" minutes regarding the proposed golf course/residential deal. I am sure the stack is pretty thick.

Smart Growth in Summerland

2005-09-01T21:13:00.000-07:00

Tom Lancaster, our speaker from Smart Growth BC at the August Meeting, was kind enough to send over the pdf file of his presentation. If you missed his presentation, you can view it here. It's not quite the real thing, lacking, of course, Tom's interesting and informative commentary, but you can at least view the main points and images. Thank's again, Tom!

Association to join Smart Growth BC

2005-08-28T09:17:00.000-07:00

On Wednesday the membership voted for the Association to become a member of Smart Growth BC. Director John Cuthbert is paving the way for our application, (is "paving the way" an acceptable Smart Growth term?) in consultation with Tom Lancaster and your Board.
The Association will benefit from a workshop led by Smart Growth BC staff. We hope to fix a date for this workshop very soon. It will most probably be on a Saturday.
Your Board proposes to invite Mayor Johnston, current and prospective Councillors, plus key municipal staff members to attend and participate - or if they prefer, to attend as observers. The Board and Smart Growth BC staff both feel it is important to make this workshop as inclusive as possible. With good will on all sides, true Smart Growth principles could be embedded in our OCP. Members, please post comments to let us know how you feel about this.