Rutland has done its share....Castanet article

[Anonymous123]

The project on Gordon Drive across from Capri has been very successful.

Successful, in what? In this?
https://globalnews.ca/news/4326567/kelo ... opulation/
======================
Thomas Illichmann’s business is right across the street from the park. He said the neighbourhood has gone downhill in part because of a shelter called Inn From the Cold just up the street.
“I’ve been threatened. I’ve been threatened to have my house burned down, my business vandalized. I’ve been threatened with needles. Some other business owners have been assaulted,” Illichmann said.

The person who was assaulted is Carol Barron. She owns a dog grooming business just next to the shelter. She said she was attacked by a homeless man who was camped in front of her store.
“It scared the *bleep* out of me. I ran to the store and when I got there, I was so out of breath I just about collapsed because I thought the guy was chasing me,” Barron said.
======================
If this is an example of "success", how do those "less successfull" look like?

You are quoting an article that is 11 months old. Inn from the Cold is long gone from that area.

[Mike Br.]

You are quoting an article that is 11 months old. Inn from the Cold is long gone from that area.

Doesn't matter. None of these places is different.

[the truth]

You are quoting an article that is 11 months old. Inn from the Cold is long gone from that area.

Doesn't matter. None of these places is different.

and that's a fact

[dudemeiser]

Can anyone name me a single place where this "supportive housing" worked, and hasn't turned into drugs and petty crimes nightmares for neighborhoods? Why do our politicians keep pushing this failed model?
These people have to be isolated from the society, and subjected to involuntary rehabilitation, and hard labor. A walled rehab/work camp, somewhere in the middle of nowhere, whould be good. Then, only if and when they come clean, and demostrate solid work ethics, they would be reintroduced to the society. There is no other way.

The project on Gordon Drive across from Capri has been very successful.

I have heard 1st hand reports of drug use/sales as well as prostitution occurring on that site.

[the truth]

[qute="dudemeiser"]

Can anyone name me a single place where this "supportive housing" worked, and hasn't turned into drugs and petty crimes nightmares for neighborhoods? Why do our politicians keep pushing this failed model?
These people have to be isolated from the society, and subjected to involuntary rehabilitation, and hard labor. A walled rehab/work camp, somewhere in the middle of nowhere, whould be good. Then, only if and when they come clean, and demostrate solid work ethics, they would be reintroduced to the society. There is no other way.

The project on Gordon Drive across from Capri has been very successful.

I have heard 1st hand reports of drug use/sales as well as prostitution occurring on that site.[/quote]

you are correct,

[pieinthei]

I have heard 1st hand reports of drug use/sales as well as prostitution occurring on that site.

doesn't take much to see it.. just go to DQ and wait in the drive-thru line .. see what comes around..
i'm sure the employees there could tell a story or two also..

[vinnied]

Funny how pot shops are not allowed near schools, yet a wet facility with junkies oding on a daily basis is A-OK with Basran and his crew.

[the truth]

Funny how pot shops are not allowed near schools, yet a wet facility with junkies oding on a daily basis is A-OK with Basran and his crew.

great point............. why is it ok ,mmmmmmmmmmmmmm feel free to answer the question basran jhs bc housing journey home , we will be waiting

[pieinthei]

Funny how pot shops are not allowed near schools, yet a wet facility with junkies oding on a daily basis is A-OK with Basran and his crew.

go figure..

[normaM]

Capri Centre had to up their Security teams so I doubt it is successful.
The Senors sitting at A & W aren't the cause of the problem, no, from across the street.
I am sure there are examples of successful supportive housing site, those of course don't make the headlines
But I will protest with the Rutland area residents about this new project

[hobbyguy]

Why don't they throw a couple in Glenmore? Or maybe KLO/Mission area?
Oh, I think I know why.
Don't want to start "upsetting" anyone that lives above the "lower-middle class" demographic.

Just for the record, the proposed project is only 1/2 a block away from Rutland High School and the Middle school!

And before everyone starts ranting about "where the services are", Rutland does not have any "core" services
in the area.

Oh well, Rutland already has an undeserved "getto" reputation.
I guess the government is just trying to solidify it.

Any properties which could accomodate supportive housing are virtually non existent in Glenmore. Compared to Rutland, Glenmore has scant services. Despite it's central location with good access, Glenmore lacks many of the services that are available in Rutland. A single convenience store is just not enough. The lack of a recreation centre or any other public meeting place is a major impediment.
Many of the homes in Glenmore are new and on small lots as compared to the many small old decrepit homes on larger lots in the Rutland Core so they are basically tear downs.
Much of Glenmore is ALR land so finding a lot large enough to accomodate a supportive housing unit is low.
Rutland is due for modernization and supportive housing is one good way to drive that.
I do not see that all people in Supportive housing (if any) are criminals.

Just for the record, your stereotype impression of Rutland is showing. The area where the NDP want to plunk one of their junkie resorts is an area of nice homes, low crime. Houses in that area generally sell at a premium price because of that.
A house just listed a couple blocks away is $700k - and very nice. It is nice, safe, family oriented area.

That is the real problem, the NDP and BC Housing are heck bent on pushing these junkie resorts into neighborhoods where they don't belong. Well guess what? That will drive down home prices in the area. Who pays for that? NOT BC Housing and the NDP with their incompetent mismanagement.

There are lots of problems with these facilities, and the property rights (the NDP don't believe in those) of residents are being ignored.

This is a case of the right project in entirely the wrong area. It is also a case of chasing after the horse after it has escaped the barn. It is high profile "we're doing something" nonsense.

The correct approach is to make sure people do NOT become homeless in the first place.

Part of that is addressing the mental health issues properly. Not warehousing people in residential areas.

Part of that is supporting people who are about to become homeless in efforts to stay where they are.

Part of that is addressing the issues behind why people become homeless.

Part of that is not accepting the freeloaders who see "free housing in BC" as a way to free ride on society.

Part of that is realizing that the $375/month welfare housing allowance will get you what? A garden shed somewhere?

There are many approaches to the issues that will reduce a lot of the problems to start with. I know it is controversial with far left advocates, but the notion of welfare as a debit card is playing out fairly well in other countries. Welfare $$ don't go to pay for drugs, booze etc. The cards are acceptable only at recognized grocery stores etc. and rents are paid directly to landlords.

This hastily conceived NDP nonsense of moving the problems into residential areas benefits nobody.

[jlk99]

Junkie resorts? Property values being driven down?

It's the same old BS from the small minded folk that spend way too much time here. There is no evidence whatsoever that supportive housing drives down property values. But, as our real estate market softens, I have no doubt that people will make excuses that it has to be the supportive housing. Because the free market has absolutely nothing to do with that. C'mon people.

Yes, there are examples of successful supportive housing in our community. Some are run by John Howard, some by CMHA, some by NOW Canada, and other organizations. We've been here before in our community. How may years ago did the 'wet' facility downtown stir controversy. How may years later is it? How much do we hear about that. How about the supportive housing next to the Old McDonald's downtown? Same story. How about when the Apartments on Tutt street were opposed because of 'parking'. Been there, done that.

If you want to see real live wet housing and crime in Rutland, just take a short drive down Hein Rd. That area has, and continues to be, ground zero, with crime, drug dealing etc...Go up to Prior Rd. South.....what's that? Same thing. Maybe check out 300 Nickel Rd. these days while you're at it. Wet facility, stolen bikes, goods, etc...None of these are government funded. They are homes in neighborhoods in our community. And they are allowed to operate. So let's stop a supportive housing site, and while we're at it, let's petition the city to level Hein Rd, and any other area where crime takes place. Ain't realistic, and ain't helpful.

And before you crap all over me, I live in Rutland, not far from the proposed McCurdy site. I'm okay with it, and I support it. I don't live in fear.

Take a look around. 'Those' people are already in our neighborhoods, and maybe. just maybe, with a roof over their head, some support, and yes, some structure, they have a chance.

[smaeh]

Junkie resorts? Property values being driven down?

It's the same old BS from the small minded folk that spend way too much time here. There is no evidence whatsoever that supportive housing drives down property values. But, as our real estate market softens, I have no doubt that people will make excuses that it has to be the supportive housing. Because the free market has absolutely nothing to do with that. C'mon people.

Yes, there are examples of successful supportive housing in our community. Some are run by John Howard, some by CMHA, some by NOW Canada, and other organizations. We've been here before in our community. How may years ago did the 'wet' facility downtown stir controversy. How may years later is it? How much do we hear about that. How about the supportive housing next to the Old McDonald's downtown? Same story. How about when the Apartments on Tutt street were opposed because of 'parking'. Been there, done that.

If you want to see real live wet housing and crime in Rutland, just take a short drive down Hein Rd. That area has, and continues to be, ground zero, with crime, drug dealing etc...Go up to Prior Rd. South.....what's that? Same thing. Maybe check out 300 Nickel Rd. these days while you're at it. Wet facility, stolen bikes, goods, etc...None of these are government funded. They are homes in neighborhoods in our community. And they are allowed to operate. So let's stop a supportive housing site, and while we're at it, let's petition the city to level Hein Rd, and any other area where crime takes place. Ain't realistic, and ain't helpful.

And before you *bleep* all over me, I live in Rutland, not far from the proposed McCurdy site. I'm okay with it, and I support it. I don't live in fear.

Take a look around. 'Those' people are already in our neighborhoods, and maybe. just maybe, with a roof over their head, some support, and yes, some structure, they have a chance.

The only studies I have seen to show examples where property values have NOT been negatively affected are where these types of housing have been built in "derelict neighbourhoods" where there is an existing population of homeless who are gathered up and housed resulting in an "improvement" to the neighbourhood. NOT the case at 280 McIntosh and NOT the case on Agassiz Road - these are NOT derelict neighbourhoods! These areas are having a drug problem inserted into their neighbourhoods! There are condos selling here for only 80% of assessed value now...and that's BEFORE the drug addicts move in...no one wants to touch this area. These neighbourhoods are prime locations for the Middle-Income Rentals that have been announced by BC Housing to be built downtown...with local conveniences like a couple of Wineries, a Brewery, SunRype and, oh yes...the RCMP Headquarters! Don't you think these 'Middle Income Families would far more appreciate access to Grocery Stores, Doctors, Dentists, Banks, Insurance Offices, Theatre, Restaurants, Transit Hubs, Public Library, The Greenway, Parkinson Rec...? Do you really think the residents of these Wet Facilities need these conveniences or even recognize them as important? Are these qualities in Rutland and in the Aggasiz Rd neighbourhood not being squandered on those who ONLY require a roof? Is that the best "Gold Medal Community Planning" that Colin Basran and our City can do!?!

Give them their roofs, meals and free cash for drugs if you must and the support (if THEY choose) to access help to get them off the drugs....but NOT in the middle of SAFE neighbourhoods! The City wants to build a Kids' playground only 65 feet from the Wet Facility on Aggasiz...directly across the street from it...simply because it's been planned for years...THEY don't even recognize what they have done by approving this Wet Facility...families won't move here now...no one wants to move here now!

There needs to be a moratorium on these Wet Facilities and guidelines drawn up about how far away from residential areas they should be...in a few years all of Kelowna will be a disaster if we continue this way.

[Graphite]

i have cameras everywhere, and it does help (from what i can tell).. its a deterrent, along with motion detecting flood lights.. work like a charm.

Doesn't work in my area of Rutland

[Graphite]

Junkie resorts? Property values being driven down?

It's the same old BS from the small minded folk that spend way too much time here. There is no evidence whatsoever that supportive housing drives down property values. But, as our real estate market softens, I have no doubt that people will make excuses that it has to be the supportive housing. Because the free market has absolutely nothing to do with that. C'mon people.

Yes, there are examples of successful supportive housing in our community. Some are run by John Howard, some by CMHA, some by NOW Canada, and other organizations. We've been here before in our community. How may years ago did the 'wet' facility downtown stir controversy. How may years later is it? How much do we hear about that. How about the supportive housing next to the Old McDonald's downtown? Same story. How about when the Apartments on Tutt street were opposed because of 'parking'. Been there, done that.

If you want to see real live wet housing and crime in Rutland, just take a short drive down Hein Rd. That area has, and continues to be, ground zero, with crime, drug dealing etc...Go up to Prior Rd. South.....what's that? Same thing. Maybe check out 300 Nickel Rd. these days while you're at it. Wet facility, stolen bikes, goods, etc...None of these are government funded. They are homes in neighborhoods in our community. And they are allowed to operate. So let's stop a supportive housing site, and while we're at it, let's petition the city to level Hein Rd, and any other area where crime takes place. Ain't realistic, and ain't helpful.

And before you *bleep* all over me, I live in Rutland, not far from the proposed McCurdy site. I'm okay with it, and I support it. I don't live in fear.

Take a look around. 'Those' people are already in our neighborhoods, and maybe. just maybe, with a roof over their head, some support, and yes, some structure, they have a chance.

They had to level Pasnak, maybe some of you are familiar with the house there with the meth lab from 6 or 7 years ago. Or the constant drug dealers and grow ops. Take a spin down to the capri area one day and see poor old Pasnak. Leveled.