Freedom's Door 50 bed facility at Rutland & McCurdy Rd

[foodsmith]

fyi they do not kick everyone out that has a relapse, empty rooms do not pay the bills, its simple math.

Your source for this one, Truthy?

Or are we just tossing out another "...my friend knows someone whose brother used to work there and they said that..." type of statement?

[foodsmith]

Google "Detox is not the answer for opiate addiction". Just listen. Tell me what you think of what you heard.

1. This is not a Detox Facility -- not in any way, shape, or form. Here is a quote, taken directly from Freedom's Door website's 'Program' page as reference: "...Our program best serves men who do not require detoxification. Men who require detox should contact a detox facilty..."

2. There are many types of 'addiction', and in no literature that I have reviewed does it say that Freedom's Door focuses specifically on recovery services for 'opiate-based' addictions only. Seems this program opens its doors to anyone living with a substance-based addiction who is seeking to make steps toward recovery and achieve and maintain positive change for themselves. Let's that fact, shall we?

3. Now, that being said: Is it the program you have a problem with, or the facility? Your posts are confusing as you argue against the location, but then argue against the delivery model as a whole -- and thus Freedom's Door itself...

[the truth]

*removed*

[book11]

So question for all of you who seem to think all is well putting freedoms door in rutland and right beside Rutland elementary, Pearson elementary, Rutland middle and Rutland high school ... would u be okay with it beside Anne mcclemont ( sp) or chute lake elementary or mission secondary or Knox mountain? Just curious

I realize it is a great facility but the placement has me confused? I realize it is drug recovery and not pedophiles ( although after speaking to some sources on this they definitely can have criminal records)

I just think if they could even move it three blocks down Rutland Rd so grade 2-7 kids don't walk directly by, it just would be more suitable. In fact I would welcome it!! Just too close to too many schools an right in the neighbourhood.

Just to let anyone know who is opposed, I spoke to some high up people and it is definitely going through they will not listen to us!! The next council meeting is sept 19, I urge everyone to be there!

[book11]

Thank you for your correspondence. It has been shared with City Council.

The application was before Council for first reading on August 28 and was advanced to a public hearing being held on September 19.

The City is the regulatory body that approves land use. In the Council report, staff outlined the reasons (from a land use perspective) whether to support or not support this application. The City does not discriminate against any citizen, resident, user, or any person, and private organizations such as women’s shelters, seniors care, and/or gender specific addict recovery facilities have the right to determine which population they wish to help and that decision is independent of the City’s regulatory land use controls. In this case, I understand that the proposal is for a ‘supportive housing’ land use and if approved, the applicant could have men only, women only, or mixed-gender recovery facility.

The Council report also outlines how the proposal fits within the City’s long term plan (e.g. the Official Community Plan).

The applicant is required to go through a public hearing process as part of the rezoning application. I would urge you to stay involved in the process and participate in this opportunity for public consultation on September 19 in Council Chambers. If you have further questions, please contact Adam Cseke, planner, at [email protected] or 250.469.8608.

Again, thank you for contacting me.

Sincerely on behalf of City Council,


MayorSignature (3)

Colin Basran
Mayor | City of Kelowna
250-469-8980 | [email protected]
Connect with the City kelowna.ca/connect

[Loki2u]

So question for all of you who seem to think all is well putting freedoms door in rutland and right beside Rutland elementary, Pearson elementary, Rutland middle and Rutland high school ... would u be okay with it beside Anne mcclemont ( sp) or chute lake elementary or mission secondary or Knox mountain? Just curious

I realize it is a great facility but the placement has me confused? I realize it is drug recovery and not pedophiles ( although after speaking to some sources on this they definitely can have criminal records)

I just think if they could even move it three blocks down Rutland Rd so grade 2-7 kids don't walk directly by, it just would be more suitable. In fact I would welcome it!! Just too close to too many schools an right in the neighbourhood.

Just to let anyone know who is opposed, I spoke to some high up people and it is definitely going through they will not listen to us!! The next council meeting is sept 19, I urge everyone to be there!

It appears to me the answer to your question was answered in your follow up post in the letter from the city:

"The City does not discriminate against any citizen, resident, user, or any person, and private organizations such as women’s shelters, seniors care, and/or gender specific addict recovery facilities have the right to determine which population they wish to help and that decision is independent of the City’s regulatory land use controls."

Seems pretty straight forward to me

[the truth]

seems to me the city has already decided this project will be a go, regardless of what the people of rutland have to say so --------- so yes the city does discriminate ------

[the truth]

public hearing twomorrow people, will they let hundreds of us in or will they do what they do best lock us out

[Bpeep]

It will go ahead regardless what the public wants or says.

[the truth]

and thats a fact,could those oppose too this raise some money to get a lawyer and stop it from going ahead ? drag it in the law courts, everyone else does it, why not the people of rutland

[Bpeep]

and thats a fact,could those oppose too this raise some money to get a lawyer and stop it from going ahead ? drag it in the law courts, everyone else does it, why not the people of rutland

It's a local lawyer who owns the thing.
Good luck getting his brothers to try to negate it.
But they will take the money.

[BigBearBruno]

It's truly a sad day when the welfare of children is tossed aside in favor of addicts who chose to start doing drugs. The kids are the future and most will be contributing lots to society. These addicts contribute absolutely nothing. Kelowna's priorities are completely out of whack!

[khutchi]

The kids are the future and most will be contributing lots to society...

Kids sure must have changed a lot since i grew up...

[WalterWhite]

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#206911

A full house is expected at city council chambers for a controversial rezoning application Tuesday evening.

The public hearing will determine whether a piece of property at the corner of McCurdy and Rutland Road is appropriate for a four storey apartment building.

The apartment, if approved, would house a 49-unit supportive housing development for graduates of the Freedom's Door drug and alcohol program.

Residents of the area are not happy with prospective clientele, and it's anticipated they will show up en masse Tuesday night to voice that displeasure.

However, they may not get that opportunity.

When council gave initial approval three weeks ago, triggering the public hearing, it was reminded only the zoning could be discussed, meaning only whether the land was appropriate for an apartment.

At this point in the process, council was told they could not, as per the Local Government Act, determine an outcome based on who will reside on the premises.

"There is no policy regulating where supportive housing should be distributed within the city," said city planner Adam Cseke at the time the application was first presented.

"The city analyzes apartment buildings based on their land use and the form and character merits, not based upon the users of that building."

That also means those speaking out against the project would presumably have to keep their comments to zoning issues, such as parking and traffic impact, not the purpose of the building.

That debate would come at a later date.

As of Friday afternoon, the city had received 54 individual letters, 38 in support and 16 against.

It had also received a petition with more than 700 signatures opposing the apartment.

The property is the current site of the Knights of Columbus building.

At the time of initial approval, some on council suggested they had some concerns but wanted to hear what both sides had to say at a public hearing.

Well, Adam Cseke - maybe it's time council/city staff consider implementing a policy to deal directly with situations such as this, as there certainly was no time wasted in creating policy to regulate the permitted location of medicinal marijuana dispensaries. What a total cop-out - but what else is to be expected of this current council and planning department. My personal stand on this matter notwithstanding - pulling legislation out in an effort to "mute the public" in cases such as this is completely against what those in elected civic positions were put there for in the first place - to represent their constituents.

[lightspeed]

These addicts contribute absolutely nothing. Kelowna's priorities are completely out of whack!

True but some of them were a something before they lost the plot. To get them back on track as functioning, contributing citizens is the goal. Some of them go on to do remarkable things and more than a handful contribute a lot to help others get past their addictions and life challenges.

There's a tendency in this forum to paint groups of people with a huge broad brush. It's not fair and it's not reasonable.

FWIW I think the proposed location is awful. And I have no stake in the matter at hand.