rapid growth shows no sign of slowing

[CRCP]

Member's posts follow:

[John Zeger]

The announcement by CMHC that Kelowna had a record high of 2,805 housing starts in 2007 and the third successive year of housing starts in excess of 2,500 (“Boom keeps on rolling,” Daily Courier, Jan. 11) isn’t all good news. That rate of housing growth has been associated in the past with annual population increases in excess of 3%, one of the fastest rates of growth in the province. At that rate, Kelowna’s population will double in only 23 years – a rate of growth that is not socially or environmentally sustainable and comes at great cost in terms of a decline in our quality of life.

That decline is manifested as increased traffic congestion, higher taxes, a stubbornly high crime rate, and a loss of our sense of community. Furthermore, as there is only a small amount of land that remains undeveloped here, there is increased pressure to channel this new growth into high density, high-rise urban centres with tall structures that defile our beautiful natural setting and obscure our views of the mountains and lake.

But as the members of the present city council are all puppets of the local urban growth machine comprised of developers, builders, and related business concerns whose only interest is the short term profits that can be realized from this growth, the public cannot expect coucil to take any steps to slow this rapid rate of growth and protect our environment and quality of life. As 2008 is an election year, local residents should be prepared to take action to preserve what quality of life we have left by removing all incumbents from office and electing an entirely new city council.

[John Zeger]

I am somewhat puzzled by Graeme James’ letter about my recent comments on some city issues such as our rapid growth and Kelowna city council’s lack of meaningful action to create more affordable housing as I am not sure what the point of James’ letter is. Is it to defend the uncontrolled growth policies that city council is following or their weak response to our affordable housing crisis? Or is it simply a misleading diatribe against me in order to attract support in another likely bid by him for a city council seat?

I am particularly concerned about the misinformation that James is spreading. In his letter he states that I am “eager to shut and lock the gate” to newcomers. While I do not believe that endless population growth is sustainable, I am not proposing that we slam on the brakes now but only that we slow our torrid pace of growth which is achievable by modestly limiting the number of building permits issued annually as has been done in cities such as Brampton, Ontario.

In regards to the city’s crisis of affordable housing, I have also done more than criticize, as James claims, having advocated for years that the City adopt an inclusionary housing bylaw where between 15% and 25% of the units within any new residential project are set aside for affordable housing. I believe that this is a better solution than James’ proposal of trading away our quality of life and community character by offering developers increased density in exchange for money to be used for affordable housing elsewhere. Such policies have been a failure in other cities as they have resulted in increased traffic congestion while the funds generated have been used to build slum-like public housing projects if they have been used to create affordable housing at all.

[John Zeger]

In its attempt to provide the public with all the news, occasionally the media misses a very important story. Such was the case when BC Statistics recently reported that Kelowna’s year end population for 2007 was 116,479 which amounts to an increase of 4,677 residents from the previous year and an annual growth rate of 4.2%. Perhaps the media is just getting tired of reporting on the city’s rapid growth, but these figures merit special attention because never before in the city’s history has it grown by so much in one year. Furthermore, the 2007 figures come on the back of growth rates of 3.2% and 3.0% for 2005 and 2006, respectively, and show that Kelowna’s growth is not slowing as some had forecast but accelerating.

Why should this be of concern to us? If our growth continues at last year’s rate, the city’s population will double by the year 2025 which is clearly unsustainable as it puts serious strains on our community. The most obvious strains will be on our infrastructure, in particular our road network as more vehicles are added increasing an already serious problem with traffic congestion. Also such a torrid rate of growth weakens our social networks as new residents cannot be assimilated that quickly into the community. Finally, it portends large future tax increases in order to provide for the public services needed by the expanded population such as policing.

Some communities elsewhere have identified that an annual growth rate beyond 2% is clearly undesirable and have taken steps to limit their growth to that amount. I would suggest a 2% solution to Kelowna’s rapid growth as well and that such a growth rate cap be incorporated into the city’s Official Community Plan which will be revised over the next two years. However, what is still needed is a city council that has the will to implement such a policy as our present mayor and council are lacking the vision, courage, and determination to act in the best interests of the majority of residents as opposed to those sectors of the community (such as developers and builders) that benefit from rapid growth.