|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:24:05 GMT -5
As discussions don't really fit in the Letters section on the main site I am moving them here. The order is earliest to latest.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:31:09 GMT -5
Sep 16, 2004 - Dave D.
How is it going? Are you going to send any more letters to the newspaper? If so you should respond to the comments about it blocking the lake and mountains. If you go one block away from the Lake right now you can't see the lake so it doesn't really matter if you have a one story building or a 28 story building, if your standing behind it, and same goes for the mountains. We are totally surrounded by mountains. Who goes downtown to look at the mountains anyways? If people want to enjoy the mountains why don't they climb one instead of walking around downtown asking themselves why they can't see them. And for the people who say they have lived here for 10 years and don't want to see Kelowna get any bigger, what gives them any more right to live here than anyone else. And if they don't want to see houses built all the way up the side of the mountains then the only other option is to build higher buildings. And as far as changing the downtown identity, what identity are they talking about because any time I see a postcard of Kelowna its usually of the dolphin towers or the Grand with the mountains in the background, not the Willow Inn. Just some things to think about.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:31:44 GMT -5
Sep 16, 2004 - Michael P.
In response to Lonnie's very opinionated Letter sent to supportthemegaproject@shaw.ca, I feel I must add a few of my own opinions.
I believe Lonnie is still stuck in the seventies. As one of Canada?s fastest growing cities, it is expected to have changes any other expectations is pure ignorance. We are talking about four residential projects with 60,000 sq ft of commercial space, if anything this will not change the already nasty drug and crime problem for that part of the downtown area, but it will not get any worse either. He makes mention to "ugly high-rise, half-empty condos", he may not be able to afford one but there are lots of people who can and if this project goes through I don't expect it to stay "half-empty" for long after completion. I must also ask how four "high-rise" buildings is going to make the streets dark at noon, even downtown Vancouver is plenty lit in it 30+ story downtown core. I also don't see how 4 buildings is going to cloud your view of the lake you know it is quite long, or the 360 degree view of our mountains after all we are in a small valley.
We are quickly running out of space to build out we need to build up like the bigger cities. I was on my way to Vancouver last weekend and coming through Chilliwack I saw they opted out of the building up and build out all the way up the mountain side, my opinion on building up mountain sides is simply it looks like a 3rd world country! It looks way worse than a few high-rises on the north end of the lake.
What about the Grand and the Dolphins? They are large and near the lake! No one is complaining about them and actually it is a very nice area since they were put up.
Lonnie is afraid to go outside because of the homeless, druggies, and pimps wandering the dim alleys? wake up! Kelowna already has this problem and I'd rather them in the alleys where the general public normally doesn't go than on the streets everyone already walks and drives on. Lonnie I wonder if you're against a new bridge too!
In ten or twenty years the lake may be polluted and it may not be but that will be the city's decision to make sure it doesn't happen and it may or may not happen whether the towers are put up or not. And we don't have to wait ten or twenty years to wonder why everyone is making minimum wage because that's happening now and will be worse if big industry keeps leaving Kelowna like Western Star.
I am very glad you have your opinion and thankfully we live in a democracy where this is possible, and now I have voiced my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:32:48 GMT -5
Sep 16, 2004 - Michael P.
Lets face it Kelowna is not the tiny town city hall thinks it still is. We need to refresh the aging Downtown core to something that is bright and clean and attractive to tourists and residents alike. I would love to see old run down building like the Willow Hotel gone for a newer nicer looking building. I say City hall do not be afraid to build up and up as space extending out is running at a premium these days the next logical step is to build up.
Something new is what we need as a growing city and this project is a great start
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:36:14 GMT -5
Sep 18, 2004 - Michael P.
Marvin S. wrote: "This will make Kelowna that same as other big cities...."
WHAT !!! four 28 storey buildings will make Kelowna like Vancouver or Toronto....NOT. Vancouver has hundreds of 28+ storey buildings, let alone Toronto which has even more. There is no reason why a city that is growing exponentially as one of Canada's best cities to live in, should not be "growing up".
Some may say "if we let this project go through it opens the door way to more high-rise buildings" I say why not it part of western culture to make big buildings when cities grow so why not Kelowna?
I saw an ad in the Kelowna Capital News yesterday about this project and it add a point not yet mentioned I apologize in advance to the author that I can not remember his/her name. They mentioned about all this yes no voting and NO ONE has mentioned anything about the environment. Building out destroys animal habitat and thus destroy our precious eco system for our valley's wildlife. Building up is much more desirable for our environment.
I hope that this project proceeds full throttle and look forward to walking down there after construction completes adn having lunch..
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:37:35 GMT -5
Sep 20, 2004 - Michael P.
Sep 19, 2004 - Roger W. WROTE: "My only question is this. How much is the developer paying you to set up this web site for you? Did they offer you a free unit? Cash? What's the deal. I can't honestly believe anyone would spend so much time on a web site with only the "public interest" at heart."
I am not the web developer for this site but do know one of them. Roger have you ever done something for someone for free and went out of your way to do it? Is it so hard to believe that some people want to support new ideas and not stick in the past... Trust me they have not been given any rewards for doing this site They just wanted a place where EVERYONE can be heard not just the "no's" on the local news.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:38:15 GMT -5
Sep 20, 2004 - Michael P.
Sep 19, 2004 - Bill L. WROTE "By making Kerry Park unpleasent for street people, you make it unpleasent for all people. What's next? Turming city park into a bunker? Do poeple here really want to live in another Hong Kong?"
Bill how is cleaning up that old rundown part of the downtown core going to make it unpleasent for all? New stuff is always nicer than old stuff and the cleanliness of a new set of buildings would be welcome for many of us.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:38:50 GMT -5
Sep 20, 2004 - Michael P.
Finally a place where the obvious "silent majority" can be heard.
"if you build they wil come" who you say? People with money to spend on our beautiful City and make it even better !!!
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:39:44 GMT -5
Sep 22, 2004 - Michael N.
In response to Jason R of the "No Camp":
>>Can anybody tell me how filling in a portion of the lake is environmentally >>sound? As I recall, that portion of the lake is currently occupied by the derelect Fintry Queen and a marine gas station. Please tell me how the current situation is more environmentally sound.
>>We all know of the shaky ground that the Dolphins and Lagoons sit on, why >>would we do that again? Yes, and it's been such a catastrophe that you are the first person that I have ever heard of it from. Judging by the continued demand for units in those buildings and their neigbours, it seems like people are willing to do what it takes to mitigate the problem if it exists.
>>Another note on the environmental impact, if the developer is still intent on >>having two stories below ground, what happens to the natural water table in >>the area, with those two stories below the natural lake level...can anybody >>say flood??? Does your environmental expertise extend to civil engineering as well? Why don't you ask your question of the people who will be designing these buildings? If they shrug their shoulders, then I will stand corrected.
>>What about the fact that we are replacing greenspace downtown with buildings?
The greenspace you refer to is tiny. The fact is, the 700 units to be constructed in this project represent 700 residential lots worth of green space that will not need to be destroyed by further sprawling subdivisions in North Glenmore, Rutland, the Mission, and the westside. Are you blind to the environmental disaster that is ongoing in those areas?
Further, the 1500 people who will live in this complex will have the opportunity to be the most environmentally-friendly people in Kelowna. They will not be commuting from the fringes of the city to work every day, they will not be contributing to commuter traffic on the bridge, and they will be living within walking distance of downtown stores and almost everything they need. I can't envision a more environmentally sound way of living in a growing city.
>>If the "environmental" argument is all that you can some up with, then there >>is something seriously wrong with your choice of supporting this development.
The environmental aspect is only one of many good reasons to proceed with the general densification of downtown. Lawson's Landing is a huge positive step toward that ideal.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:41:20 GMT -5
Sep 27, 2004 - Michael P.
I am disappointed in the polls on this web page.
People say ‘no’ but they don’t say why
It appears that for no particular reason people do not want this project to go through, but as for ‘yes’ letter to ‘no’ letters ration there are way more ‘yes’ letters than ‘no’ ones.
I think a great idea would be that have it required to write a letter supporting your ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote before the poll allows you to post.
From what I have read in the ‘no’ section there has not been one intelligent reason as to why this should not go through. There have been letters written that say “I don’t want to live in another Toronto, Vancouver, Hong Kong” I laugh when I hear this as a reason since, those cities have one thing in common that Kelowna doesn’t a population of MILLIONS of people with Kelowna’s roughly 100,000 people, it will not be in anyone’s lifetime that Kelowna will be in the millions of people, the Valley is geographically capable of holding that many people anyways. The Best reason for the yes I have heard stems from building up is more environmentally friendly since building up destroys less animal habitat than growing out.
Letters stating that having four ‘puny’ towers will block out the sun are written un-intelligently and not thought out. Other letters state that high-rises are a haven for drugs and crime. The Kerry park area is ALREADY a haven for drugs and crime. New buildings no matter what the size usually move the drugs and crime to another area.
The Drugs and Crime is a separate issue and should be discussed on another forum and directly with City Council
I can’t see any logical reason why not to go ahead with this project and clean up and revitalize the downtown core, which is seriously lacking in looks and cleanliness as it stands now.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:41:59 GMT -5
Sep 27, 2004 - Michael P.
In quick response to David B.'s Sept 27th letter Referring to "...would indicate that there is a very vocal minority of people that supports the project."
Well this may be a site to blow off steam but 88 intelligently written Yes letters to 19 un-intelligently written No letters (yours makes 20 and yes yours make some valid points and is written intelligently), hardly makes us a minority.
One of the most valid points David B. made was: roads. Through my contacts in construction The Kerry Park area has ample Sewage and Water ducts back from when the Grand and Dolphins were developed they installed larger than normal for future growth.
Roads although lacking right now may very well be addressed before the construction finishes.
I still believe this will be a very beneficial part of Kelowna’s “new” historical view And look very forward to seeing a 1500 unit building that’s both affordable and still has a great view of the lake and mountainside.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:42:40 GMT -5
Sep 27, 2004 - Sebastian J.
"The point is that you cannot build four highrises housing 1500 people without an adequate infrastructure in place--notably water, sewage and roads."... David B.
If you haven't heard the building would be almost self sufficiant. It could get water from the lake. And Kerry Park already has a sewage line.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:43:13 GMT -5
Sep 28, 2004 - Sebastian J.
Just found out why the NIMBY's are doing so good in the polls. It's called double-polling.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:43:55 GMT -5
Sep 28, 2004 - Mike N.
John Z. wrote:
"I have already had the big city experience that you haven't and seem to be yearning for and want to turn Kelowna into that big city in order to satisfy your desires. Why don't you just go after what you want and move to Vancouver instead of trying to turn Kelowna into Vancouver and destroying this city for the rest of us. That way everybody wins."
I've been waiting for a comment that would provide a succint example of the selfishness that is at the root of the anti-growth argument, and this would have to take the cake.
My grandparents, my parents, and I have spent a combined total of over 200 years in Kelowna, during which time Kelowna has grown by a factor of ten times. Clearly, my family is living proof that to some people, Kelowna has been more than just a retirement community and tourist destination.
I grew up in Kelowna for 18 years before doing exactly as John Zeger advises -- I moved to Vancouver. On behalf of all the young people who would love to live and work in Kelowna if not for the lack of opportunity, I'd like to thank Mr. Zeger and the people he humbly refers to as "the rest of us" for encouraging Kelowna's young to get the hell out of his newfound home.
I've lived in Vancouver now for four years and I feel as at home here as I do in Kelowna. But I resent the attitude of people like Mr. Zeger, as I don't see any reason why people like me should have no option but to move out.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:44:25 GMT -5
Sep 28, 2004 - Sebastian J.
"Why don't you just go after what you want and move to Vancouver instead of trying to turn Kelowna into Vancouver and destroying this city for the rest of us" John Z.
Hey get your facts right. How will one building in Kelowna make it turn into a Vancouver? How many people does Vancouver have? Jeez. And why the hell would you tell people who like large buildings to get out of "your" city?
And if you don't want Kelowna to grow, why don't you move to some little town like Enderby.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:44:59 GMT -5
Sep 29, 2004 - Michael P.
Sep 28, 2004 - John Z. - CRCP Wrote:
"Why don't you just go after what you want and move to Vancouver instead of trying to turn Kelowna into Vancouver and destroying this city for the rest of us. That way everybody wins."
Well John the same could be said to you and anyone who feels the same way here's an idea: How about if this project goes through you move to Winfield or BX or Okanagan Falls if you want the same "small town" feel since Kelowna will continue to grow no matter what ANY of us say. Up is better than out!
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:45:35 GMT -5
Sep 29, 2004 - Michael P.
Sept 28th John Z. wrote:
"The type of growth that Kelowna has been attracting and will continue to attract with projects like Lawson Landing will only create a few more low paying service sector jobs."
Yes Kelowna has a lot of low paying Job's I know I was in the low paying sector for years with various job's until the last couple of years. May I ask how YOU KNOW what kind of businesses will be attracted to 60,000 Square feet of Commercial space Lawson Landing will provide? (Also may I add that Lawson Landing will be new and high-tech as opposed to the grungy old buildings that exist now) They may be low paying, they may be high paying, and fact is depends on several factors. High Paying business is usually attracted to larger cities, since the loss of Western Star and the almost loss of Riverside the economy has slandered here in Kelowna. I have worked at several places that have shut down either permanently or moved to larger cities.
Why do businesses move to larger cities? Because population density is attractive for any business due to the potential sales of products and services that business provides. Having a Large residential district downtown is needed to provide economical stability for existing and future business in the downtown core both low and high paying.
Mr. Zeger you also say " I would be the last person to suggest that our youth leave Kelowna...” But no jobs will cause our youth to leave more than some jobs. Even if the businesses that occupy the Commercial space are seasonal for our extremely hot and gorgeous summers here, there is at least summer jobs for our growing student population especially with our newly announced UBC Okanagan and expansion for 500 more students means we need more jobs no matter what, part time, full time, high paying, low paying, permanent and seasonal.
If City council reads this please don't hold Kelowna back, we need fresh new ideas for City expansion as we are growing up and old village ideals must be retired like some of the residents to our beautiful city.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:46:15 GMT -5
Sep 29, 2004 - Michael P.
Sep 27, 2004 - Jason R. wrote: "By the way, how bad does the yes side look when they cannnot even get support in a poll on their own website!!! "
In response to that statement it is mentioned that the polls are broken and cannot be measured as an acurate form of the visitors of this web site's real opinion on this project. I have talked to one of the co-developers of the site and he has seen logs of the same IP addresses repeatedly clicking the "no" vote every hour or so. This in itself says there is a small group of "no" sayers that have got together and are exploiting a flaw to gain an advantage in the poll. I believe the web hoster should remove the poll all together until fixed (and reset it) and this is being considered from what I'm told. I ignore the poll and go by the shear amount of supporting letters written even though I myself have posted a letter more than once as oopsed to the nay sayers numbers.
hmm is it just lazy to click the no vote every hour or actually spend time on a well thoughout letter??? me thinks its the poll that is the lazy way to "win" HA i laugh at your cheating ways whomever is doing it.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:46:42 GMT -5
Sep 29, 2004 - Mark J.Sept 20 Deborah S. “High buildings have no genuine advantages, except in speculative gains for banks and land owners. They are cheaper, they do not create open space, they destroy townscape, they destroy social life, they promote crime, they make life difficult for children, they are expensive to maintain, they wreck the open spaces near them, and they damage light and air and view.” (Quote from A Pattern Language.Town.Building.Construction by Christopher Alexander. how funny is that with the key word being near the end "TOWN" I think Christopher Alexander needs to write a new book for City's. Kelowna is no longer considered a town it is a city citys have high rises and can look just as beautiful as natural lanscapes (but everyone has their own opinion on that) heres one definition of a city as provided by www.dictionary.com"A center of population, commerce, and culture; a town of significant size and importance." My comment: Kelowna has some of the best wine in the world and is reknowned for it. and another quote from the dictionary "City n 1: a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts; "Ancient Troy was a great city" [syn: metropolis, urban center] 2: an incorporated administrative district established by state charter; "the city raised the tax rate" 3: people living in a large densely populated municipality; "the city voted for Republicans in 1994" [syn: metropolis]" My Comment: We may not be as big as Troy but we sure are great I say build and let build water fron property is at a prime and to have condos and a hotel that are water front property will bring much needed "rich blood" into the downtown core.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Nov 18, 2004 17:51:39 GMT -5
Sep 30, 2004 - Michael P.
My Response to Sep 29, 2004 - Jason R.
Jason R. I do not have those degrees but I must say what you said about why companies move to larger cities doesn’t sound right. I may not be an Economics major but to quote two specific things you said
“The types of businesses that will be attracted to the 60,000 sq. feet of commercial space will not be small to mid-size companies. They will be large corporations that will put the small businesses surrounding them out of business, and will pay their employees no more than minimum wage.”<br> This implies that all large businesses pay their employees minimum wage and all local businesses do not. I disagree I have worked for several large companies and some were minimum wage and some were not. It is the small businesses I have worked for that all pay minimum wage. Look at every single minimum wage increase we have had in the last 15 years and every time small business owners say they can’t afford to raise their employee’s wages even 14 years ago before there was a Walmart or Home Depot. There is a definite need for any growing city to have a balance of local business owners and corporate business. I will give an example to support my statement I used to work for a small local ISP. I was getting barely over minimum wage they eventually shut down the Kelowna office and moved everything to Victoria, not because they were looking for highly trained employees we were already there. They were looking for a way to cut down expenditures and since Victoria was head office they could keep their staff there and run the entire company from Victoria.
Another quote you stated was:
“…and will pay their employees no more than minimum wage. The business world is tough,…”
Yes the business world is tough there is no doubt about that. The 60,000 square feet of commercial space is not all in one spot it is spread out for Lawson Landing plans, so there is no guaranty that only Large Corporations will move into this space, and if they do it will still depend on the company to pay their employees the appropriate wage for their employment. Not all positions in Walmart or Home Depot pay minimum wage, so depending on the companies that move in will depend on the wages made by employees in the Lawson Landing commercial space. But wouldn’t you agree that this would add more jobs than take away? Right now there is a parking lot where part of the proposed hotel would be and local businesses will only become stronger with increased sales from out of town guests staying at this new hotel not to mention the jobs created from part of an old parking lot.
“Business relocates due to “uneducated”/”untrained” base to choose from”, I can’t believe that is an accurate reason. What is the sole purpose to be in Business? To make money and grow. Higher population densities mean more gross product or service that can be potentially sold, so having a higher population density downtown should increase all around sales for everyone, helping to increase confidence in our local economy. I think those same business leaders you have spoken to are giving you a politically correct reason for the relocate.
Western Star may have moved for financial reasons but definitely had nothing to do with un-educated or un-trained staff since some of those guys had worked their 20+ years!
|
|