Summerland farm land development proposal

[Rosie Lee]

I think that Council could be in for a rough ride at the Public Hearing unless they can get the silent majority to turn out and speak in favour of the new proposal. I hope that the Mayor is as strong as she needs to be to deal with such a negative disruptive group. I am confident that this council will do the right thing and vote for what they think is right for the overall good of Summerland, but people with like mind really do need to counter the others at the meeting.

[Giants Head]

Why do you think that the Silent Majority would be backing your position on this issue?

[Captain77]

by Giants Head » 40 minutes ago
Why do you think that the Silent Majority would be backing your position on this issue?

Good question Giants Head. There are those who have made up their mind on the fundamental principle of saving every acre of ALR land - and those who believe the answer to dying Summerland is systematic growth from the downtown outwards.

There are also many in the middle, who can see it both ways. It is really hard to say which group holds the majority now, but given that the current mayor and council were elected on a growth platform, those voters are waiting for council to do what they were elected to do.

[Daspoot]

There are also many in the middle, who can see it both ways. It is really hard to say which group holds the majority now, but given that the current mayor and council were elected on a growth platform, those voters are waiting for council to do what they were elected to do.

Having talked to a few who signed the survey, I can tell you there are certainly some very uninformed signatures on there, but that would apply to both sides I suspect.

Any removal of land from the ALR should be carefully scrutinized for the motives, alternatives and objectives. Having radicals at both ends makes sure this happens. As with most things the right choice probably lies somewhere between the extremes.

[FSmith59]

Why do you think that the Silent Majority would be backing your position on this issue?

The "Silent Majority" is just a propoganda term, used by people trying to make "their" point of view to be the truth...whether it is, or not.

[fluffy]

The "Silent Majority" is just a propoganda term, used by people trying to make "their" point of view to be the truth...whether it is, or not.

In this, as in many public disputes, we have to be careful to weigh all the pros and cons ourselves. This is a more complex issue than some would have us believe. In my mind (or what's left of it) This tends to be a logical decision. Direct Summerland's "urban" growth to areas adjacent to those already devoted to residential purposes. Odours and chemical use associated with agricultural use become an issue in residential/agricultural interface areas, a willy-nilly mix of the two land uses leads to a greater amount of these interface zones than does a simple border. There is already a considerable incursion of residential developments in the areas proposed for exclusion, while the problem is virtually non-existant in the area slated for inclusion. It is also my understanding that the hilly south-facing slopes in the inclusion area make it prime for vineyard development, an industry that continues to flourish in the Okanagan.

It occurs to me that the anti-swap contingent is deliberately trying to make this an emotional issue as the logical arguments against exclusion are few, and those that do exist are weak, rooted more in a broader anti-growth agenda than the pro-agricultural stance that is being presented. I have to wonder what percentage of the exclusion area is currently under active agricultural use, and of the land not currently under that use how much can realistically be expected to see agricultural development in the future? I think we might find that the 200 acre figure does not accurately reflect the amount of farmland involved here.

[old boy]

They aren't only making this an emotional issue, instead of the planning/growth issue it should be, I think they are still licking their wounds from the 2008 election defeat of there slate of candidates and the subsequent RCMP investigations into the election strategies of their opponents, which were initiated by some of them. They also fail to remember that our current Mayor was elected in 2011 by acclamation, after her election to office in 2008.They have had no control over any issue,let alone the growth issue,having only barely elected one of their own in 2011.
The no growth crowd have managed to control Summerland for far too long and it hasn't gotten us anywhere.There has been enough other negative circumstances in the world,without getting the local help in bringing our community to an all time low on many fronts.

[Rosie Lee]

How right you are Old Boy!! I am a great believer in the fact that empty vessels make the most sound. Surely those Summerlanders who took an interest in the Summerland Hills Golf Course procedures with Council and the naysayers will remember how the 'no growth' ALR supporters claimed what wonderful agricultural use could be made of the land that they are now saying is not worth swapping. This is not about the ALR it is just as you put it Old Boy!!

[old boy]

In answer to Fluffy's question about how much of the 199ac is being actively farmed, my best guess would be in the neighbourhood of 160 to 170 acres. According to reported information about the 226 acres for inclusion, they say that there are 2 large agricultural operations that would like to acquire all that area to expand their business's into.
I have heard no planning reasons against this proposal. The only reason that is being touted against it is, save the alr lands at any costs, so that we could help feed the world, not a very compelling reason to nix this proposal.
The no growth crowd, seem to be focused on the 157 acres in the Quinpool/Blair St area, when there is another 42 acres across the highway that is part of proposed exclusion. This area should provide for a variety of zonings if it is excluded, which will be good for the community, as well as some great residential lake view lots.

[YellowBird]

My submission and answer to Summerland's Urban Growth proposal to release more ALR land for Affordable Residential use is not a viable one. We have to attract people to work and come to live here first.
What we do need is to awaken people of Summerland to help, act and get involved in a Solution to bring more growth to their town: Many of which are sitting on the fence with the attitude It doesn't involve me! but it does, perhaps not right now but in the future it will.
Our elected Council should encourage Industry, Manufacturing business to locate to Summerland with Tax incentives.
We should involve the Chamber of Commerce in providing Hotels, Motels and Bed and Breakfast's etc., with brochures of the many Tourist attractions Summerland has to offer.
This could be done by the many volunteer groups who would only be too pleased to help.
LASTLY: Summerland Council please STOP! spending on 'Big Town Initiatives' until such time our population increases.

[Rosie Lee]

Why do you think that the Silent Majority would be backing your position on this issue?

I cannot believe that there can be many more of the 'vocal minority' in the woodwork. In fact I think that includes the 'fence sitters' who have already signed up to something they have nothing no idea what it is. I would like to see John Arendt stop people in the street to see what they know on the subject and I'm betting that the comments would be a long list of 'I don't know much about it.' This is where electing the council that you trust to make informed decisions makes all the difference.

[Daspoot]

LASTLY: Summerland Council please STOP! spending on 'Big Town Initiatives' until such time our population increases.

I think you run into a "the chicken or the egg" circle on that one. Do people attract business or does business attract people to an area.

The best thing the city can do is to make it easy for business, development, expansion, agriculture and families. From what I hear, they are failing that on a number of levels.

[fluffy]

The best thing the city can do is to make it easy for business, development, expansion, agriculture and families.

That is the same problem facing just bout every town in BC right now. Exactly what could be done that Summerland council is not doing? Problems arising out of a weak economy on a provincial, national, even global level are not going to be swept away with a few strokes of a pen at city hall. What we need for local prosperity is a grassroots shift in the local mindset. If we want local business to thrive then we have to support local business. Summerland is basically a bedroom community full of people who consider out-of-town shopping as the rule rather than the exception. I'd be willing to wager that the bulk of the people here make it through the doors of Save-On or Superstore in Penticton two or three times as often as they make through the doors of IGA or Giant Foods. Westbank, Kelowna, even the US likely see more of Summerland's shopping dollar than Summerland businesses. If "somebody should do something" is the phrase of the day then that somebody has to be the consumer, the holder of the dollar that drives the machine.

Back to the issue at hand, something I haven't heard yet is a viable and superior plan for the placement of Summerland's future growth than the one currently being proposed by council.

[Daspoot]

I actually think the land swap is probably a positive. I'm unsure if it's an even trade, but I think it makes some sense from a few perspectives.

I'm not sure if there is any magic bullets Summerland's council could have pulled off to change up how things have gone. I think the town is in a tough location and is a difficult size. It's too close to both Penticton and West Kelowna, so it ends up being a bit of a bedroom community for both. It's not a big enough town for many of the big-box shops that draw many dollars for basics that are prevalent 20 minutes in either direction. The Town could probably use a strong sense of it's role in the location it is, then start to build on that. As a small quaint town it has the opportunity to fill a niche that neither West Kelowna or Penticton has. I always point to Nelson as a town that draws visitors because of it's character. Another town that would serve as a good example might be Coombs or even Tofino.

Good food, build on the wineries, and don't try to be a big city or compete with them for what they offer. Make it easier, and cheaper for business ideas to take form. Summerland should at least be cheaper and easier to set up a niche shop or eatery than the big cities which lie in either direction. Then it needs to attract creative minds to open shops, but for that there needs to be a better sense of character than gawdy Tudor theme (which I hear they have started to move away from).

Alas I fear ideas like that will never succeed in stuffy old Okanagan Valley though. It's not exactly what the out of town vacation home holders or the retirement set vote for, and both of those demographic don't miss too many chances to vote.

Tourism and Retirement don't tend to mix well, and most of the Okanagan has driven away much of the tourism it once enjoyed and replaced it with visitors from a different demopgraphic who suffer from Penquinism (ei: their arms don't reach their pockets.)

[rumrunner]

I agree with you daspoot...

The City of Summerland has to revisit its policies and procedures. It is well known that Summerland is a difficult place to have ideas and plans approved. Our reputaion has to change so we can build for the future, starting today.

We need more employment that pays better than minimum wage, Yes the tourists are important and we need them too, but we need to have a reason for them to come here.

Lets make Summerland a unique and thriving community To Live, Work and Play in.