the new urbanism

[John Zeger]

The Village of Kettle Valley has won Canada's highest residential building award as it was voted best community development at a Canadian Home Builders' Association ceremony in St. John's, Nfld. Kettle Valley has been promoted as a neo-traditionalist new-urbanist neighbourhood. Marketing manager Mark Flett commented "People are always telling us how much they love the colourful architecture, the parks, the hillside setting with a lake view, the feeling of connectivity within the community." CRCP has endorsed the neo-traditional new urbanist planning style. This does not mean that Kelowna should strive to attract another 100,000 people and that all the neighbourhoods be planned like this. It simply means that whatever growth Kelowna accepts in the future should be pedestrian friendly, mixed use, and of a low-rise type of architecture like Kettle Valley which does not violate our beautiful surroundings.

[prodevelopment]

Wow. You're covering all your bases, aren't you John! In one hand, you say that you are in favour of the new urbanist style of living - that Kettle Valley is the way that Kelowna should be built. But on the other hand, you're saying that all the neighbourhoods in Kelowna should not be built like this. Which is it? You can't be wishy-washy as head of an organization that believes in low-rise buildings.

By reading this, it sounds like you're all for urban sprawl - when the population of Kelowna gets too big, we have to push everyone outwards in low density buildings. You talk about violating our beautiful surroundings now! Wait until sprawling happens!

I believe that you can still have a pedestrian friendly, mixed use type of architecture around Kelowna and still have a high-rise type of architecture. I don't feel that highrises in certain areas of Kelowna violates our surroundings. Sure - build areas like Kettle Valley - it's beautiful and I'm all for it. But what do you do when the population grows? John - we can't stop it.

Vancouver still looks great with it's beautiful downtown skyline and the quaint areas of Kitsilano and North Vancouver. Kelowna is allowing high-density buildings in certain areas of town - not all over the place. To say that Kelowna should be all low-rise buildings really won't work with the increase in population that we're going to receive. Even you must know that this is inevitable...

[John Zeger]

In saying that all neighbourhoods do not have to be like KettleValley, I was inferring that they don't all have to be high priced in order to be new urbanist. And then you fall into the same old argument that I keep hearing from folks like you namely, that we only have a choice between high density and sprawl. How simplistic and unimaginative you are! You say that we can't stop growth but have you ever taken a look at all the cities in California that have taken steps to do exactly that?Do some research on Carlsbad which implemented a population cap in the 1980's by public refendum. Recenlty Brampton, Ontario has also taken steps to set a maximum annual growth rate as well as an ultimate population cap. The question I would like you to answer is do you think the capacity for growth in Kelowna is unlimited? Do you think we have adequate water resources to sustain unlimited growth? Finally, you seem to advocate the Vancouverization of Kelowna and use the neighbourhood of Kitsilano as an example. Are you aware that Vancouver has rezoned Kitsilano so that no more highrises can be built there? Please do your research. I have.

[prodevelopment]

So you're telling me that you're going to be able to cap the population of Kelowna?

How can you compare Carlsbad and Brampton to Kelowna? Carlsbad is a city North of San Diego that is like most other cities up that Western coastline - nothing new and exciting. And Brampton is on the outskirts of Toronto. Both lovely cities, I'm sure. But nothing out of the ordinary for the area - unlike Kelowna.

Even you must understand what Kelowna has to offer - you just recently moved here and it must have been for a good reason. Kelowna is the 4 seasons playground - the Palm Springs of the North. What we have in Kelowna is unlike anything geographically around us. We are surrounded by mountains making it a destination A LOT of people want to move to. Basically, I'm saying that putting a population cap on Kelowna won't work. It has too many amenities and desirable things for all ages. Is the capacity for growth in Kelowna unlimited? Of course not - there's a limit for everything. Do I believe that you can stop people from moving here? No way. So we have to find a way to allow people to live in this town. Sprawling them out across the hills is not a good idea. Allowing high density construction in certain areas is a good idea.

So don't go on about your "sustaining unlimited growth" speech. That's a carefully worded statement to sway people in your favour much like the "survey" that you did opposing Centuria. Look where that got you...

Now if you had actually read my previous post, you would have noted that I like the fact that Kitsilano is a quaint area much like Kettle Valley and I didn't make any notion to building high-rises there. I simply can see the Vancouver:Kelowna and Kitsilano:Kettle Valley ratio working here.

Instead of jumping ahead with your "high-and-mighty-put-words-in-my-mouth-all-righteous" position that you feel everyone should take, please take time to understand and actually read another person's position. I have.

[John Zeger]

It's good of you to admit that the there are limits to how many people Kelowna will be able to accommodate in the future, but it appears that you are not ready to back up that admission with any action, much like our mayor. So what do you propose we do? It sounds like you want to take the passive approach and just cram in as many people as possible while allowing our roads to become more congested, our air quality to continue to deteriorate, and our water supplies to run out. And then when the quality of life here gets so bad, maybe the newcomers will stop coming or existing residents will leave so that the population stops growing. I'd rather be more proactive and protect our quality of life by implementing a population cap before all those negatives become our reality as is rapidly occurring.

[ScratchingMyHead]

So, according to you we should have capped the population a few years ago. To bad we didn't - this way we wouldn't have to listen to you whine about highrises and growth in Kelowna. Then we also would not have had the need to build the current highrises we have. And all that "housing for high income transients" would not be needed either. Wow you are brilliant!!!!

"Sorry Mr. Zeger! You can't move here because us in our wisdom have decided to cap our population and there is no room for you. So find another city to move to. Sorry again - no hard feelings - hope you understand. Have a good one!"

[prodevelopment]

Let me touch base on johnzeger's comments. Yes, the population of Kelowna could very well hit a cap and "end"- everything "ends" - and that "end" extends out to everything from our pets to our vehicles to our own lives. Everything has a cap. That said, what to do? Hmmmm...

Definitely a tough situation. Since we can't control growth in Kelowna as I believe that it is too difficult due to the beauty of this city, we have to create high-density living, assisted living AND, and you call them, "high income transient" living. How do we get them all into Kelowna? Put high density where high density is due - downtown. Also, let's create family oriented communities like Kettle Valley - city hall is doing both. As for roads and such, the income that will be derived by a revitalized economy will help in these areas. Kelowna will always be kept a beautiful area. As for water - sure, I can see that being a problem. So let's nip that in the butt right now by putting restrictions on usage AND the kinds of planting that we have on our lots. For example, cedars and other water hungry foliage are not native to a desert climate. Rock gardens can be a beautiful creation. People have to understand that we're living in a desert. But I divert - that is fodder for another topic.

My point is that Kelowna is going to grow so let's find ways to deal with it. Put the high density downtown and put some more Kettle Valleys around Kelowna. Then maybe some of this pent up energy around this forum can be put towards saving things like loss of water - something that, unlike development, doesn't have to be an inevitable forthcoming.

[John Zeger]

So you say that we can't stop growth because Kelowna is a beautiful city and people will want to move here. Your plan is build highrises downtown and elsehere (?) until is ceases to become a beautiful city at which point people will just stop coming here. You want to be egalitarian to those who live elsewhere to the point that it destroys the quality of life for the current residents. You are being very fair to others but not very considerate to the present population. But then I think money not beauty is your overriding objective. That's the real reason why you and your friend are so "pro-development." It shows in your comments that Carlsbad is like every other coastal California community. You've obviously never been there. For one thing, there is no such thing an an ordinary coastal California city. They are all unique. And Carlsbad is one of the most beautiful and best cared for in Southern Cal. Why? Because in the '70's the residents there were wise enough to recognize that if their beautiful city were to continue to grow at the rate it had that it wouldn't be beautiful for much longer, so pro-actively they established a population cap for the city. The tallest building in that city of 90,000 plus is three stories and their premier ocean-front hotel is only two stories high. Carlsbad and Kelowna do have a lot else in common as both a tourist and retirement destinations and both are considered as high income areas. The main difference is that their politicians and planners had the sense to establish meaningful priorities for their community and not subordinate everything to generating profits. Incidentally, the last time I was there and told them of the Lawson Landing project planned for Kelowna they were aghast that anyone could be so stupid as to destroy a beautiful city like ours.

[prodevelopment]

Yes, I agree that it is difficult to stop growth in Kelowna. Also be careful not to put words in my mouth (though you like to twist things in your favour) by saying that I want highrises everywhere. Re-read my last posts - that's not what I'm saying.

With my view of Kelowna with highrises, I believe that it will increase the quality of life in Kelowna, not decrease it. But we can banter back on forth on this issue for ages. It's like criticizing fine art - two people's opinions where oft times neither are correct.

In regards to your comments about money, I don't appreciate comments like that. I haven't led anyone to believe that I'm in it just for the money and I'm simply going to ignore that comment as most of your comments are rebuttals anyways - of course twisted in your "favour".

As for Carlsbad, I'm sure all towns like Carlsbad in California are unique - just like Kelowna. The difference is that there are TONS of small beautiful cities in the 100K population range along the western seaboard. There is really only one 100K "vacation, retirement, and family oriented" community between Vancouver and Calgary and that's Kelowna. My point exactly why Kelowna is a target for growth.

Your final comment about talking to the people in Carlsbad about Lawson Landing holds absolutely no water, as no one here has ANY idea how you were asking the question (judging by your Centuria "survey" I don't believe anyone here will believe you anyway) or if you even really asked it. Furthermore, most of the people you asked probably don't know where Kelowna is nor have they visited our fair city.

On that note, I'm sure City Council (along with everyone else in favour of Lawson Landing and developments like such) would not appreciate being called "stupid". Though like your "high income transient" comments you continue to prove that you simply have no skills in dealing with people.

Anyway, I'm not going to belabour a point here. I believe that since you love Carlsbad so much, you would do everyone a favour, including yourself, by moving there where you would feel right at home.

[John Zeger]

We agree on one thing, Duane, that Kelowna is a unique and beautiful city, but we differ on how to keep it that way. You say that to keep it beautiful we should not attempt to control growth but rather to direct it to high density housing. To me that is the very thing that will destroy the beauty that we enjoy, but you don't seem to see that. You keep suggesting that I move -- either to Penticton or Carlsbad, but as I said before it seems that you not me is the one that doesn't belong here as you keep advocating growth to improve things. I think you are just one of those people that will never be content with their life as you will just want more and more until you realize that you have been blind all along to the most precious things which you had all along but which you just weren't appreciative of. As you are the mismatch, not me, give serious consideration to that move to Vancouver. As that is your model for Kelowna, I think that is where you belong.

[prodevelopment]

Who is Duane? Now you're naming me?

And I see you're twisting things around again and doing the "high and mighty - I'm right, you're wrong" posting again.

And you say that I'LL never be content with my life? Take a look at yourself! You're just a little man who's stepped into this great city and imposed your views upon everyone here. I don't believe you have a right living here for only 2 years to tell everyone who's been living here nearly all their lives what to do. Everyone has a right to their own opinion but you like to twist everything into your favour, leaving people struggling to understand where you're coming from.

Again, your Vancouver comment is a simple mirror of my comment to you to move to Carlsbad. Seriously, you've got decent educational credentials but that's it. Your people skills are atrocious and your "street smarts" are non-existent. I tire of this conversation which started as decent communication. When times get tough, you lash out desperately - all in order to get attention. Negative or positive, if you're not in the limelight, you're not happy.

But it doesn't matter. Keep up your insistent babbling - City Hall is in favour of development and things are going to progress as such. And when they do, we'll see who will be moving.

[ScratchingMyHead]

Yes, it is interesting this "need" Mr. Zeger ( a 2 ½ year resident ) has to save us all ( all us Kelowna long-term residents ) from ourselves! It seems Mr. Zeger is lacking something in HIS life with this persistent preaching. There is a hobby, there is a mission, then there is an obsession.

How many cities have you lived in Mr. Zeger? Have you tried to "sway" each of them to your “philosophies”? I bet! And when you couldn’t you move on and try again.

[John Zeger]

For those of you that are wondering who "prodevelopment" and "scratchingmyhead" are, they are none other than Duane Tresnich and John Skrotski from the movekelownabackward site. Since nobody ever visits their site (can you blame them?) these boys (and I use the term literally) are looking for some fun and think they have found it here. Not having anything meaningful and intelligent to say, they must always resort to personal insults and character assassination. Boys, if anyone is obsessed it's you. You are obsessed with me. Read your own posts. You can't get a paragraph out without something nasty to say about me. You've had your fun and now I think it's time for you to crawl back to your own site and amuse yourselves with one another's banter as no one else will be reading you there.

[prodevelopment]

Another incredible delivery by Mr. Zeger. Let's get this picture straight. I'm not "John" or "Duane". I'm just a citizen of Kelowna that heard about both sites in the newspaper and decided to come on here to compare sites. I am pro-development, so I wanted to start here to see what your position was, Mr. Zeger. Unfortunately you've only spent time demeaning me. I tried to start a simple, basic conversation as you can see from my initial posts. The following posts were again what I figured to be normal conversation. No instigation - just answering your comments and suggestions. That's it. Too bad you've disrespected me. I am beginning to see that it's an ongoing thing with you to attack people that don't believe in your ideas.

However, to set the record straight, I went to the other site and I did a comparison on how many letters your CRAP site has to the MoveKelownaForward site. There are 157 (136 "yes" and 21 "no") letters on their site and only 12 on your CRCP site. And 9 of the 12 of them are written by you! Wow. And most aren't actual opinions of whether the writer is for, or against, development.

I think you have a narcissistic issue, Mr. Zeger. Why else would you post a site where you can say anything you want? But look what happens when someone else comes on here to try and learn your position and put my own opinion in. I get rediculed.

I have emailed these postings to the MoveKelownaForward site so that they can read your post. I hope that they get back to you. As for "character assassination" - you've just done that to me. As for your "obssessed with me" comment - that proves my narcissistic point above.

Anyway, I'm done with your site Mr. Zeger and it's too bad you never gave me the chance to understand your ideas. I was honestly interested but due to these insults I can't back a little man that can't handle someone else's opinion and thrives on putting others down.

[andrew]

So then it is a coincidence that both of you signed up on this forum, 22 minutes apart from each other, with the same opinion.