I recently returned from an extended stay in San Diego County, California where I visited the cities of Encinitas and Carlsbad before concluding my travels with a trip to Santa Barbara in the central part of that state. Not unlike Kelowna, each of these cities is in an incredible natural setting with an abundance of beauty, but their urban planning and response to growth has been markedly different from that of our city.
Rather than capitulate to the mindless notion promoted by the development community and its allies in the city administration, the media and at UBC-O that growth is inevitable and that the only logical response is to channel growth to high density urban centres, each community has successfully controlled growth in its own way. Encinitas has limited the number of building permits issued annually, Carlsbad has required that adequate infrastructure and public services are in place before allowing growth to occur, and Santa Barbara has controlled growth by adhering to strict zoning regulations. Furthermore, each of these cities has imposed sensible building height restrictions and has said “no” to highrises.
As a result, each has retained its community character and quality of life while Kelowna is losing its. Encinitas, for example, has recently built a new library with a magnificent panoramaic view of the Pacific Ocean. At one time, one could enjoy a splendid view of the mountains to the east from Kelowna’s downtown library, but now you cannot see the mountains from there for all of the highrises in the way. The construction of highrises would never be permitted in activist-oriented Encinitas as the majority of the public there is concerned about the preservation of its community character. In apathetic Kelowna, the majority of the public doesn’t care enough to vote in a civic election.
In Santa Barbara there presently is a vigorous debate over building heights but not over raising them as one might expect, but rather of lowering allowable heights from the present limit of 60 feet to 45 feet as many feel that even allowing too many 60 foot buildings threatens their community character. Although tourism is an important industry in both Santa Barbara and Kelowna, in the former city the business community is supportive of strict restrictions on development because it realizes that preserving community character is in its best interests. In Kelowna, however, the business community is short-sighted and blinded by its greed unable to see that the construction of highrises along the lakefront will kill the golden goose of tourism.
I am deeply disappointed by the lack of concern in Kelowna for preserving its community character and quality of life as it marches on seemingly hell-bent on destroying its uniqueness and becoming just another generic city full of highrises. One can only blame politicians for so long before one has to point the finger at those self-serving or ignorant residents who keep re-electing the people who are responsible for this state of affairs or electing others who are basically no different from them.
I am looking forward to spending more time in the future in the cities of Encinitas, Carlsbad, and Santa Barbara as the values of its residents are closer to my own. And when I’m there, I will make sure to spend lots of my retirement dollars to help support business people who appreciate their community character and have taken steps to preserve it. Although I will continue to reside in Kelowna, if there is any truth in the adage “home is where the heart is,” then my real home is elsewhere
Save Paradise 