Interesting Twist on an Existing Situation

[Anonymous123]

Diamond mountain? Thats funny. Dead tress and dusty ponderosa pines. Needles a foot thick ready to burn.

Isn't that a Diamond in the rough?

[WalterWhite]

Diamond mountain? Thats funny. Dead tress and dusty ponderosa pines. Needles a foot thick ready to burn.

Isn't that a Diamond in the rough?

Lol - I dunno - as the saying goes, "you can polish a *bleep*, but it's still a *bleep*."

[alanjh595]

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

OR..... zone it as "temporary" for mobile housing. The land could still support community gardens and have access to public transit if there is a need.

[Catri]

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

That site is not suitable for housing of any kind.

[gordon_as]

Staff hope to work with the developer to mitigate the effects.

Why should the taxpayer be on the hook to mitigate anything ? The developer bought the land on speculation that they might be able to make a fortune developing it. Pretty sure they knew it was next to a garbage dump. Tough luck Renee.

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

That site is not suitable for housing of any kind.

Neither is the south end of Wilden off Union, the steep hillside.. yuck..

[Grandan]

Why Castanet - does this headline indicate the landfill is a "bad neighbor" when it's been in the same location for decades, and even the city's own planning department recommends not allowing this development to go through for obvious reasons:

The applicant, Troika Developments, is proposing a full build-out of about 1,000 residential units on the 88.8-hectare site.

A staff report set to hit the council table Monday suggests the development would be negatively impacted by visual, odour, noise and dust nuisances created by the landfill and composting operations.

"This is likely to result in complaints to council and the Ministry of Environment, adding pressure to either spend significant tax dollars on modifications, relocate or close city facilities," the staff report states.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/2 ... -neighbour

It should be pointed out that when the dump expanded several decades back, the city bought all the houses that were along Glenmore Rd across from the dump.
The whole issue of odour can be mitigated through covenant. Affordable housing, yes. The odour is always worse on winter when cold wet air drags the stench along Curtis and then along the Brant's Creek corridor rather than to the lofty heights of Diamond Mt.

[Urban Cowboy]

So just keep filling the valley with garbage. It's almost full.

If you're referring to my suggestion, which isn't entirely clear, then it would come off as more than a tad NIMBYish.

I for one would rather see tiny homes on that hillside, than all the makeshift tent towns and sleeping in alleys that's going on now.

Since as the story indicates, allowing regular type expensive homes to locate there, is just inviting constant complaints to the City of Kelowna staff, it makes good sense to go a different direction, and address an ongoing problem in the process.

Strikes me as a win win situation.

As far as your remark about garbage goes, it's safe to point out you've contributed to it too.

Do you have a better idea, or someone peed in your cornflakes, and this was the first opportunity to vent?

[Urban Cowboy]

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

That site is not suitable for housing of any kind.

So how were they going to construct around 1000 homes on it as the story indicates?

I guess you aren't familiar with Wilden, given there are homes sitting on far more challenging sites.

[normaM]

Well of course the Owners are going to say the smell/dust etc never bothered them. Back home there was an area that the stench from the refineries and the gray cloud was awful - or as people said " you get used to it" er, no.
Doubt they will offer it up for use as community yards.

[Catri]

So how were they going to construct around 1000 homes on it as the story indicates?

I guess you aren't familiar with Wilden, given there are homes sitting on far more challenging sites.

I meant because of the landfill proximity, not the lay of the land. It's a little offensive to suggest we should warehouse the poor there as if they aren't entitled to breathe clean air.

[Urban Cowboy]

So how were they going to construct around 1000 homes on it as the story indicates?

I guess you aren't familiar with Wilden, given there are homes sitting on far more challenging sites.

I meant because of the landfill proximity, not the lay of the land. It's a little offensive to suggest we should warehouse the poor there as if they aren't entitled to breathe clean air.

Well there are homes in a much higher price range, than what I suggest, sitting on Capistrano Peaks Road overlooking the landfill, and from experience I can assure you that on a hot summers day, with the wind moving in the right direction, the aroma can get interesting to say the least.

Do you seriously think someone sleeping in an alley, would be offended by having to sleep in a tiny home near the dump, where there may or may not be a smell?

I'm sure if you're willing to offer up some prime real estate for such an endeavor, they'd send you a thank you note.

All I'm trying to do is offer possible solutions to a problem, and I'm well aware we live in an area with a high degree of NIMBYism in play, hence I agree with the thinking of City staff, and am simply suggesting a solution that might well keep everyone happy.

[Catri]

I was going off this quote:

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

which seems to suggest low income, affordable housing, not housing for the homeless. There's a world of difference. In any case, I don't think it's realistic to think you can shepherd the homeless into a prefab slum far from any services.

[Urban Cowboy]

I was going off this quote:

That's exactly the type of location that should be looked at to provide low income housing.

Zone it for example to allow tiny homes, and simply place a caveat on the title, that the owner acknowledges that the dump is across the street, and forfeits any right to complain about smell or noise, in exchange for getting low income housing land.

which seems to suggest low income, affordable housing, not housing for the homeless. There's a world of difference. In any case, I don't think it's realistic to think you can shepherd the homeless into a prefab slum far from any services.

Had you paid attention to all my posts on the topic, you would have noted I suggested government also build some tiny home communities to house the homeless, thus I was addressing both sectors.

The location in question is close to services, and far less distance than one observes these people pushing a shopping cart in a day.

With your throwing around terms like prefab slum, perhaps you should cough up some prime real estate and hand it over to the less fortunate. After all anything less, and you're just paying lip service, with no solution, and saying these folk can keep sleeping on the streets.

We need solutions not criticism from the high and mighty!

I'd also add that I'm quite certain there are folks in the US, who have embraced the tiny home trend, that would take offense, to your classifying their dwellings as prefab slums. My money is on you being another proud NIMBY!

[Catri]

There's nothing NIMBY about it, I live in a neighbourhood where there is a diversity of housing types and income levels and I like it. I just think it's inappropriate to house anyone literally next to a garbage dump and apparently CoK staff agree with me. As for your suggestion that I should donate land, that's a bizarre and presumptuous response to criticism. Flattered that you think I'm high and mighty though, thanks!