|
Post by John Zeger on Mar 23, 2005 8:34:21 GMT -5
Further to Andrew's comments, is it also a coincidence that recently there have been very few posts on the movekelownaforward forum page or have you boys been too preoccupied with your comments on our site? And how come you know all about the survey that CRCP did on the Centuria development? That never made it into the papers but was discussed at the public hearing on the Centuria project where, yes, Tresnich and Skrotski were in attendance. Hmmmm .... and good riddance!
|
|
|
Post by DuaneT on Mar 23, 2005 11:08:14 GMT -5
First of all I am not Prodevelopment, as you can see as I have now registered on your forum. I will and always have signed my name to any correspondences that have to do with development in Kelowna. So you will never have to guess or assume who is writing what. Also I expect an apology but I guess that will never occur as it is plain to see that you never admit when you have made a mistake. Secondly, as for Mr. Skrotzki, I do applaud his passion and I will talk to him and ask him to make his posts more professional but I will not attempt to stop his right to free speech. That is if he wishes to continue posting on your site. Sincerely Duane Tresnich (DuaneT) Founder www.movekelownaforward.com
|
|
|
Post by Kelowna Is MY Home on Mar 23, 2005 18:40:32 GMT -5
I have lived in the okanagan for 33.5 years, And I have lived in the Beautiful City of Kelowna for All of them. When I was born (in Kelowna) in 1971, the population of Kelowna was approx. 50,000 and in all of Central Okanagan about 70,000, consequently, 10 years later in 1981 the population of Kelowna was 60,679 and of Central Okanagan the population was 87,314. Then again, 10 years later, in 1991 the population rose to 77,900 and Central Okanagan's population was 114,673. And Yet again 10 years later, the population rose to 100,495 for Kelowna and Central Okanagan rose to 154,193. NOw i am not sure if anyone reading this has seen the pattern..... but it seems to be rising ... consistantly...
If you read these census reports you will probably see the same pattern in almost every popular City. Growth is inevitable for success. If we 'stop' the growth we are left with stagnation. Now we all know what happens to stagnant water.... If you are familiar with Alberta I am sure you will be familiar with stagnant water... We call those puddles, (usually called a Lake in Alberta) Slews, or Swamps. It usually smells bad, is unsitely and is a common place for bugs, and other undesireably outcomes, etc. Now Mr. Zeger (and anyone else who has the idea that stagnation is good) if you are so interested in 'stagnating kelowna's population, maybe you should move back to Alberta, closer to the stagnant slews that seemed to influence your desire for this stagflation of Kelowna.
KELOWNA IS MY HOME AND I AM HAPPY TO GROW WITH IT.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Mar 24, 2005 8:38:48 GMT -5
Duane, I am happy that you acknowledged that John Skrotzki of your MoveKelownaForward group was using the ID "scratchingmyhead." The motives for his postings are apparent and not simply for raising questions and promoting discussion but to discredit and insult me. As you are the head of that group you do bear some responsibility for what your members say and there is a difference between free speech and irresponsible speech. I would be happy to apologize to you when you name the other member of your group who was posing as "prodevelopement." If it was not you, it likely was Tony D'Andrea.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Mar 26, 2005 9:50:40 GMT -5
In response to Kelowna Is My Home, Kelowna is my home too and one doesn't have to have lived here for 33 years to make that claim. Roughly one-third of Kelowna's population has lived here for 10 years or less, for your information.
In regards to your statement that no growth equals stagnation, that is the old economics. The new economics (steady state or sustainable economics) acknowledges that we have enviromental limitations to endless growth and works within those parameters. Its goal is to have qualitative growth (cleaner industries, better paying jobs, growth in terms of culture, education, and individual self-fullfillment) without the need for a large increase in the population. Please click on our "myths of growth" page on our website. Also read Eben Fodor's book Better Not Bigger and E.F. Schumacher's Small Is Beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by GROW UP on Mar 29, 2005 0:54:43 GMT -5
I truly am sorry, but those few of you that agree with this site will lose this battle. I think that this site should be called JohnZegerForResponsibleCommunity Planning.com! Do you actually think that we still live in a time where the easiest way to get around is by horse and that Rutland is hours out of town? Kelowna is growing and the need for high density development is now. I really think its funny that you always talk about infrasturcture and green areas and such but really contradict yourself and sound like you don't know what you're talking about. I have been a Civil Engineer for 33 years and know the advantages of highrises as apposed to urban sprawl and they greatly out-weigh the disadvantages. Stop dragging Kelowna down and embarrassing yourself in the newspaper. Times change buddy!! P.S. We beat the Germans.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Mar 29, 2005 9:03:47 GMT -5
Please refer to my letter of January 30 posted on our "letters" page which states all the disadvantages of highrises. Please also check out the numerous articles on our "links" page written by leading academics regarding the negative social and environmental impacts of high density housing. Our site address is saveparadise.tripod.com . Unfortunately, as a civil engineer I think you see things only in terms of "physical" planning and as such you are very narrow in your perspective. Your myopic vision is also shared by our planning department and city council and is ruining our city. And what does this have to do with beating the Germans? I think you are embarassing yourself with remarks like that.
|
|
|
Post by CRCP on Mar 29, 2005 14:33:41 GMT -5
To John Skrotzki of the movekelownaforward group (aka "scratchingmyhead"):
When you signed onto this forum you agreed "not to post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing ..." As you have violated your agreement with us on several counts, your posts will continue to be deleted and you are no longer welcome as a member.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Jul 31, 2005 13:29:59 GMT -5
A New Urbanist Tale
"When people first began to live in towns, no one thought of town planning. They just put up their houses, shops and factories wherever seemed most convenient, and the cities grew higgledy-piggledy. Then along came someone who said: 'This is no good! We are not thinking about how we want our towns to look. Our lives are being ruled by chance! We need someone to plan our towns, to make them conform to our ideals of beauty and good living.' So along came the town planners, who bulldozed the old neighbourhoods and erected streamlined high-rise apartment buildings, surrounded by swathes of green lawns. Roads were widened and straightened, shopping centres were put in the midst of generous parking areas, and factories were carefully isolated from residential zones. Then the town planners sat back and waited for the people to thank them. But the people complained that from their high-rise apartments they could not watch their children as they played on the lawns ten floors below. They complained that they missed the local corner shops, and that it was too far to walk across all those green lawns and parking spaces to the shopping centres. They complained that since everyone now had to drive to work, even those new wide straight roads were choked with traffic. Worst of all, they complained that, now no one was walking, the streets had become unsafe and those lovely green lawns were dangerous to cross after dark. So the old town planners were fired, and a new generation of town planners grew up, who had learnt from the mistakes of their predecessors. The first thing the new town planners did was to put a stop to the demolition of old neighbourhoods. Instead they began to notice the positive features of the old, unplanned towns. They admired the varied vistas of the narrow, crooked streets, and noticed how convenient it was to have shops and residences and evern small factories mixed up together. They remarked on how these streets kept traffic to a minimun, encouraged people to walk, and made the town centre both lively and safe. Not that their admiration for the old unplanned towns was totally unreserved; there were a few things that needed to be tidied up, some particularly offensive industries were moved away from where people lived, and many old buildings had to be restored or else replaced with buildings in keeping with the surroundings. What the new town planners had discovered, however, was that the old cities worked; and it was this that had to be preserved, whatever tinkering might still be desirable."
Peter Singer, Hegel
|
|