increasing residential densities

[John Zeger]

I was asked recently on a radio talk show if CRCP was in favour of any development proposals. I can think of two residential projects that are examples of how residential densities can be increased without having to resort to high density highrise construction which conflicts with our natural surroundings and is socially alienating. First, the Cannery Lofts on Ellis Street. This is an innovative project that combines low rise construction (4 storeys) with ground floor commercial to create a mixed use development near the downtown. The second is The Bernard, another 4 storey mixed use project just acrosss the street where the notorious Centuria will be going up. What a contrast between good planning and bad! Regrettably, neither has made provision for affordable housing which should be included in all housing projects.

[John Zeger]

I was asked by Ryan A. elsewhere "Do you feel that a city's expansion should consist of lower density development? And when do you feel higher density should be implemented? Do you yourself feel that sprawling cities are a sustainable form of development?"

A city's expansion should be guided by a number of factors one of which is its natural surroundings. In a prairie city which does not have much natural beauty surrounding it erecting highrises does no harm to the aesthetic environment. The situation in our city is much different. We have priceless natural surroundings and this feature is one of the things that makes Kelowna unique. I strongly believe erecting highrises here is an assault on our environment which is a grievious as gobbling up a natural habitat. ( They also think so in Boulder, Colorado which has a building height limit of 55' in order to preserve residents' views of the Rockies.) I am not an advocate of urban sprawl but don't see high densisty development as the answer to sprawl. I believe the correct course for Kelowna is to place controls on population growth in order to slow its pace. In the meantime growth should be balanced between using the remaining land available in Kelowna designated as urban reserve and through the creation of town centres which are suitable places for medium density development. CRCP has no problem with medium density development, and defines high density as anything that exceeds 4 storeys or 50 residential units per acre. When you think of the latter, that's pretty dense. Some cities I know have density limits which are less than 25 units per acre. One more comment on high density development in Kelowna. While I'm not an advocate of this anywhere in the city, I would not be vocal in opposing it in the Orchard Park mall area where some are presently being erected. It is not a form of development which is conducive to social interaction among residents, but at least there it will minimize the obscuring of the natural environment. The lakefront is the worst possible place to put highrises.

[John Zeger]

At the city council meeting yesterday I heard possibly the most ridiculous argument ever for increasing residential densities downtown. Following a presentation by a representative of the Okanagan Regional Library where it was revealed that the circulation of library books, etc. had declined in the past year, a very concerned Councillor Colin Day said that circulation should increase again as population densities in the downtown increase. Yes, Councillor Day, because the overriding goal of urban planning in Kelowna is to ensure that the number of books checked out at the downtown library continually goes up. Councillor Andre Blanleil had similar concerns with library circulation. It seems that we have a city council that is obsessed with growth in everything which now includes library circulation. So what is wrong with stability?

[John Zeger]

There is a posting by Duane Tresnich on the Move Kelowna Towards Mediocrity site that states (not for the first time) that I advocated a population cap for Kelowna of 100,000 on CKOV. He also states that the New Urbanism supports high density development. It seems that Duane, the cable guy, only hears what he wants to hear and reads what wants to read. To set the matter straight once and for all I never said that I desired that Kelowna's population be capped at 100,00 but was merely quoting the leading urbanologist Wendell Cox who identified the ideal city size at being between 50,000 and 100,000. As for the New Urbanism supporting high density development, the New Urbanist school that CRCP subscribes to encourages an increase in densities as a prescription for an improved urban form but this is much different than supporting "high" density, but Duane doesn't seem to be able to handle this distinction which is totally beyond the comprehensive of someone who views the world in an all or none way. To quote the naturalist Aldo Leopold from the Sand County Almanac where Leopold describes the idea of a "biotic pyramid" and how all life fits together and should be valued as a whole. "The combined evidence of history and ecology seems to support one general deduction: the less violent the man-made changes, the greater the probability of successful readjustment in the pyramid. Violence, in turn, varies with human population density; a dense population requires a more violent conversion. In this respect, North America has a better chance for permanence than Europe, if she can contrive to limit her density. This deduction runs counter to our current philosophy, which assumes that because a small increase in density enriched human life, that an indefinite increase will enrich it indefinitely. Ecology knows of no density relationship that holds for indefinitely wide limits. All gains from density are subject to a law of diminishing returns."

Duane, you cannot adequately comprehend the New Urbanism by doing a five minute Google search on the subject. If you want to learn about the New Urbanist theorists who inspire CRCP go to our links page and read the articles under "Planning." But I must warn you that they use some pretty big words here and that, frankly, I think you wouldn't be able to understand it anyway as they express their ideas using subtleties and complexities which are totally beyond your simplistic comprehension of the world.

[ScratchingMyHead]

Mr. Zeger: " I think you wouldn't be able to understand it anyway as they express their ideas using subtleties and complexities which are totally beyond your simplistic comprehension of the world. "

Hmmm. I love how you enjoy attacking people personally. Me thinks you have a complex. Now throw you best back at me - good ahead attack me - I want a good laugh ;D

[andrew]

Is that not the very same reason why you and prodevelopment have signed up on this forum, to attack him?

[prodevelopment]

Andrew,

I take offense to that. I'm offering my opinion - simple as that. As a matter of fact it seems to me that John and I have similar views that differ in key areas, that's all. If you want to be a part of these boards, come in with intellectual conversation.

[ScratchingMyHead]

Hi Andrew!

It is nice to meet you. I see you are new to the forum - welcome. I can see how you came to that conclusion regarding me.

You see, it is just because I view Mr. Zeger's vision as very radical and it is Mr. Zeger’s tactics that irritate me to no end. So yes, I may “push the envelope” in respect to answering his posts but that is me and I only mirror a lot of his tactics to shed some light on his questionable crusade to save us from impending doom and destruction. According to Mr. Zeger we should all blindly follow his guidance to salvation. There is obviously no middle ground with him – it is his way or the highway.

Hope to hear more of your views on all these issues.

Cheers ;D

[bo916]

i came here because i hate to see people spreading flawed ideas, and i wish to stop it

[John Zeger]

Leon Krier who is considered to be the father of the New Urbanist movement said "excessive density leads to functional and general congestion of historic centers. Streets become gloomy, noisy corridors and private gardens shrink to dark service yards. The result is the degradation of the concept of the traditional city itself, justifying the exodus to the suburbs." Krier supports a maximum building height of five storeys and a maximum plot ratio (ratio of floor space to land area) of 2:1.

[Rick Shea]

I'm betting that the proposed 3.47 % tax increase in Kelowna will be another excuse for promoting further increases to residential densities, accompanied by the vague claim that this will help to keep taxes down.

What we won't be told, of course, is that this will still create additional traffic problems, this will still create demand for roads and road improvements (as the evidence is clear from elsewhere that there is minimal impact on increased use of cars), this will still create demand for more water and other services -- in short, this misguided attempt at social engineering will just lead to further tax increases in the future, while leaving Kelowna even more congested, crowded, polluted, covered in asphalt, and squabbling with each other and with other valley communities over resources.