a) acceptable
b) too fast
c) too slow
Choose a, b, or c. If you answered “b) too fast”, what steps do you think should be taken to slow our growth rate?
- Mike Beutle
“Steps need to be taken to make sure that the infrastructure is at pace with the growth.” - Gretchen Gebhard
Acceptable - Don Graham
Too fast. “It is necessary to follow the goals we set for our selves in the OCP. One of the goals states that the pace of growth should allow for the provision and maintenance of government services. We have fallen behind is roads and policing should slow down until we get these services functioning properly.” - Mary-Ann Graham
“cyclical – will slow down on [its] own” - Robert Hobson
“I would dispute your figures over a 5 year period – it is closer to 2.5 to 3%. This is acceptable to me; if it approached 5% on a sustained basis I would propose using timing of OCP changes and Sector Plans to discourage rural sprawl. - Ron Hockey
“First we have to be sure that these are facts. Where did this figure come from? Province? Federal? All are different. Crystal ball projections can’t tell us. - Charlie Hodge
“I do not believe that our growth number is greater than 5 percent – so I can’t answer this with your multiple choice. I do have concerns that we are growing rapidly with little regard for our environment and or lifestyle. I am more concerned with how we plan and where we place our ‘population growth’.” - Mark Kerwin
Too fast. “We should have an environmental impact assessment done by independent third party wildlife biologists/ environmentalists/green city planners who can examine the air, water and land quality and make proper recommendations as to areas that are endangered, threatened, etc. We should only build in certain areas, and increase the city’s green space and open, wild lands to 15% or more. We should consider denser mini communities where walking and biking are easy to work, play, live. - Rick Shea
Too fast. “growth controls in various forms, including restricting residential building permits and following the timeline of the OCP.” - Cheryl Stone
Too fast. “We must try to control our growth, by taking into consideration the long Term effects on our surrounding environment, air and water, social problems that come with a large population, open space, and agricultural lands. We must think about what we want our community to look like in 20 to 40 years from now. - Andy Thomsen
Too fast. “Roll back the 25% DCC (development cost charges) discount for high density development, insist all development meet the guidelines of our OCP (Official Community Plan), making sure that building of infrastructure is balanced with growth, regulate the number of building permit. - Cory Tjoswold
Acceptable. - John Zeger
Too fast. “place a limit on the number of residential building permits approved annually.”
Choose “yes” or “no.”
If you responded “no,” which among the following choices best represents your solution towards stopping continued suburbanization:
(1) increase residential densities
(2) limit growth
(3) moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth
- Mike Beutle
Increase residential densities - Gretchen Gebhard
No. Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth - Don Graham No. “We should confine ourselves to the city limits already established.” Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth.
- Mary-Ann Graham
No. Increase residential densities. - Robert Hobson
No. “The solution is both increase urban densities and discourage rural subdivisions.” - Ron Hockey
“We need densification of town centres using the best of new technologies to provide sustainable living. Which will save our resources in the future. Agriculture in particular.” - Charlie Hodge
“Again a question that a yes or no answer is not rational. We have boundaries to our city. If you are asking if I support and up not out concept the answer is in most cases. Location, type of land, potential for services etc. are what should decide development allowance.” - Mark Kerwin
No. “It is already an urban sprawl that is ugly and damaging to the environment. Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth. - Rick Shea
No. Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth. - Cheryl Stone
No. “If we do so, we would be connecting the three Okanagan Valley cities.” Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth. - Andy Thomsen
No. Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth. - Cory Tjoswold
Yes. - John Zeger
No. Moderately increase residential densities while limiting our rate of growth.
Do you think there is a desirable limit to residential densities? Answer either “yes” or “no.”
- Mike Beutle
100 dwelling units per acres or greater “with flexibility either way depending on area, i.e., urban or rural - Gretchen Gebhard
Yes. “I don’t have that expertise.” - Don Graham
Yes. “The desirable limit will vary as we move away from our urban centres.” - Mary-Ann Graham
Yes. - Robert Hobson
Yes. “However, the appropriate density will vary, based on the OCP and neighbourhood plans.” - Ron Hockey
“Economic factors will limit market demands; we should provide new policies, Bylaws and procedures to build the best. Kelowna needs to address future needs with solutions.” - Charlie Hodge
“I believe in different density numbers in different areas, dependent again on variable factors. I do believe in increasing density numbers in some areas, particularly downtown.” - Mark Kerwin
Yes. “Very dense residential densities (100 or more) must be complemented with great parks nearby, low crime rate, and easy bus access to open green space, recreation areas etc.” - Rick Shea
Yes. 40 dwelling units per acre. - Cheryl Stone
Yes. 20 dwelling units per acre. - Andy Thomsen
Yes. 20 dwelling units or less - Cory Tjoswold
No. - John Zeger
Yes. 40 dwelling units per acre
If you anwered yes, to how many storeys would you limit building heights?
- Mike Beutle
25 - Gretchen Gebhard
Yes. “That would depend on the location of the building.” - Don Graham
Yes. “somewhere in the 15 storey range.” - Mary-Ann Graham
Yes. - Robert Hobson
Yes. “However, this will also vary based on conditions in different parts of the city – view corridors, shadowing, location on major arteries are just three factors affecting height. - Ron Hockey
“We need to have all buildings verified by a second professional opinion so that citizens are safe in their new homes. Each building should be fully vetted before approval.” - Charlie Hodge “I believe in controlled height restrictions and support the step back approach for the downtown area especially. Once again though I do not believe in the best interest of the environment and livability of the community that as blanket number is what is needed.
- Mark Kerwin
Yes. “Our skyline and surrounding areas should be viewable by anyone from Anywhere. 15 stories at the most, but maybe extend to 20 stories in extreme circumstances.” - Rick Shea
Yes. Four. - Cheryl Stone
Yes. 7 to 10 storeys. - Andy Thomsen
Yes. Residential 4 storeys - Cory Tjoswold
No. - John Zeger
Yes. 4 to 6 storeys in most cases with a few exceptions.
Answer “yes” or “no.”
- Mike Beutle
150,000 - Gretchen Gebhard
No. - Don Graham
“150,000 as long as the ALR remains in effect” - Mary-Ann Graham
Yes. - Robert Hobson
Yes. “We can probably accommodate around 200,000 over the next 25 years.” - Ron Hockey
“Do you thing [sic] the world’s population will strop growing?? NO, how we solve this dilemma [sic] will take the best plans and minds. To make a positive decision for all. -
Charlie Hodge
“Not sure why you insist on number out of a hat. If one ever sits on a City council then one comes to understand the complexities of such issues. I am not privy to what the experts advice [sic] our capacity population is that our resources canhandle, but that is the number I would be seeking. Until I am inside the glass house I won’t really know those numbers. - Mark Kerwin
“Yes, assuming we don’t amalgamate, which I oppose. I would say 150,000, Although if we take a smart growth strategy seriously then 200,000 depending on 15% park land and green space. - Rick Shea
Yes. 150,000 - Cheryl Stone
150,000 - Andy Thomsen
Yes. 150,000 - Cory Tjoswold
No - John Zeger
Yes. 150,000
a. public housing
b. providing incentives to developers
c. make creating affordable housing a requirement of developers
d. other
- Mike Beutle
Other. “Public and Private partnerships including incentives for developers.” - Gretchen Gebhard
public housing and providing incentives to developers. - Don Graham
providing incentives to developers - Mary-Ann Graham
Other. “all of the above.” - Robert Hobson
“All of these options are necessary (public housing, incentives, a requirement to provide affordable housing as part of major projects), as are partnerships with senior levels of government and non profit groups.” - Ron Hockey
“To reduce our problem we should increase our potential as world leader in tourism and technology. Jobs that pay more benefit all. We can see that across the lake 99 leases make a difference in ownership. Perhaps we should for a community that has already found this solution.” - Charlie Hodge
Other. “a combination of the other three plus encouraging projects such as the Iridian Project (housing for youth and young adults). - Mark Kerwin
Make creating affordable housing a requirement of developers. “Put the ball in the developers [sic] court. Demand better parks facilities to go with any development at the cost of the developer. Many places like Vienna, Austria, have very interesting architecture for their affordable housing projects and this in turn draws tourists and city planners, thus earning revenue and addressing housing problems all at once.” - Rick Shea
Make creating affordable housing a requirement of developers. - Cheryl Stone
“make ‘creating affordable housing’ a requirement of developers or support Publicly subsidized housing for those living at or near the poverty level – Adequate temporary shelter space for homeless.” - Andy Thomsen
“Making affordable housing a requirement of developers, combined with housing by non-profit groups and Co-op housing - Cory Tjoswold
Make creating affordable housing a requirement of developers - John Zeger
Make creating affordable housing a requirement of developers
- Mike Beutle
“No, they need to scale back the development to free up the existing greenspaces, back to the drawing board.” - Gretchen Gebhard
No - Don Graham
No - Mary-Ann Graham
(no response) - Robert Hobson
“Not if it includes buildings on city parkland.” - Ron Hockey
“This development is still forming different ideas, comprise, commitment and construction will give Kelowna citizens the best alternative to choose. I will look forward to helping Kelowna’s future grow. Park lands are for all people.” - Charlie Hodge
“At this point no, but there is much more discussion to go on this project and some potential. I would not be overly quick to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is a long long way to go for that project and if it ever is to fly council will have a significant say on that plan.” - Mark Kerwin
No - Rick Shea
No - Cheryl Stone
No - Andy Thomsen
No - Cory Tjoswold
No - John Zeger
No
- Mike Beutle
“No I have not accepted any donations from any developers or, development companies, but I would accept donations from any private citizen.” - Gretchen Gebhard
No - Don Graham
No - Mary-Ann Graham
Yes - Robert Hobson
No - Ron Hockey
“Supporters and voters have their own personal reasons why they contribute to our democracy. What is your agenda??” - Charlie Hodge
No - Mark Kerwin
“No, I have accepted only $50 from a close relative who is not a developer, and have not accepted any other contribution from anyone. Running should not be an issue of who has the most signs and the most money to spend to try and convince people into voting for them with a deluge of advertising.” - Rick Shea
No - Cheryl Stone
No - Andy Thomsen
No - Cory Tjoswold
No - John Zeger
No