Mayor Keith Fielding
At a recent Advisory Planning Committee (APC) meeting set up to include an opportunity for public comment about the “form and character” of the proposed TNI building, emotions ran high.
The APC chairperson had a difficult task, but was right to insist that speakers stay on topic, to remind those present of the rules, and to discourage interruption, cheering and applause.
Nevertheless, for a variety of reasons (including perhaps that the APC may not have been the best forum to entertain public input on a matter that inspired such interest and emotion) it is clear that at the conclusion of the meeting all parties, the applicant, the committee, and many of those in attendance felt angry, dissatisfied and bruised by the experience.
Yes, we could now move on, arguing that there has been ample opportunity for public input, that there was overwhelming support for the building concept at the Open House, and that we should now ignore dissenting opinion on the basis that it is the inevitable outcome of a debate in which subjective views are brought to bear on the question of what constitutes a pleasant and “charrette-appropriate” building design. However, to do so when there is a simple mechanism for bringing objective, professional opinions, to bear on the issues would be to miss an opportunity to turn a festering “win-lose” controversy, into a constructive way forward.
For a minimal cost and minor timeline delay (possibly no more than two weeks) a three person panel including a representative from the UBC charrette team, an independent Okanagan Architect and a professional Planner, will review written comments from the public, consider them in the context of the charrette report and the Beach Avenue Neighbourhood Plan, and then formulate its own comments on building “form and character”.
The panel’s report will be available by mid-August, and while non-binding on the developer and the municipality, it will allow the parties to move forward, profiting from the considered professional analysis provided by this extra step in the approval process.
The UBC-led “charrette” process was an important exercise in community engagement; one that asked Peachland residents to help define the look, feel, and character of a future revitalized downtown. The community interest generated by the charrette process and the widely accepted vision and plan that emerged from it, clearly reflects the importance that residents place on “getting it right”. It is not surprising therefore that the “form and character” of the first proposed building in the heart of the redevelopment area would draw such interest.
As we all know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so we will never have a complete consensus on the appropriateness of any building design. However, if criticism of the design brings into question whether it is compliant with principles in a publicly generated vision and plan, that question needs to be addressed.
The contribution that TNI brings to Peachland’s economy cannot be overstated. It is our largest employer and by far the largest contributor to our commercial tax base. The company’s success is Peachland’s success, and notwithstanding the importance of public consultation and due process, it is clear that the public interest is best served when current tensions have been put into a proper perspective, the TNI project has been completed, and downtown revitalization has been energized.
Downtown revitalization has long been a Council priority — not just because a healthy and vibrant downtown serves to expand our tax base and sustain our economic well-being, but just as importantly because the downtown core is our commercial and social hub: the place to linger, enjoy the waterfront and experience a unique Peachland “vibe”.
The appropriate way forward is clearly charted, and I look forward to an early resolution of all problems threatening to impede rather than facilitate the realization of revitalization goals.
- Excited
- Informed
- Amused
- Bored
- Sad
- Angry
Sorry, G. Bell but I have to disagree with your comment about “two good responses”.
Firstly, Peachland Voice of Reason ticks off the Mayor and his “friends at the PRA”. To suggest that this relationship still exists is surely a joke. The PRA fought the curling club proposal tooth and nail and were at 100% odds with the Mayor and all of Council over that one. Now they are somehow on the same side? Get real! The Mayor has been on the record as 100% for the TNI proposal; some at the PRA seemingly against it. Maybe I’m missing something here but that comment just doesn’t make any sense.
Secondly, PVR makes the comment “clearly state that if elected they would not follow this plan for downtown redevelopment … “. I think this might be the very point that is debatable isn’t it? Residents should have had the right during the election to assume that the Charette plan was going to be observed since a lot of time and effort was put into its creation. In fact, they were entitled to assume candidates for all positions were going to observe it unless they stated specifically they were going to ignore it. None did as I recall. Now it seems, ALLEGEDLY– POSSIBLY (and I deliberately put those words in caps) — that the architect for TNI has deliberately chosen to ignore the Charette plan completely and the Council is content with that POSSIBLE decision on his part. If this is the situation, this review will say so and hopefully the architect and TNI can be persuaded to make the hopefully fairly minor changes required. Frankly, though, the architect’s apparent take-it-or-leave-it attitude throughout this has been viewed by many as arrogance at its worst and does not bode well for any sort of compromise.
However, if the review says “no problem”, then full speed ahead please. As the mayor said, a one or two week delay to placate the naysayers is not going to worry anybody. Big deal.
As to “Anon” the hypocrisy is incredible. In the second last paragraph he/she says he loves the direction Peachland is going but if you don’t like it, move away. Then in the last paragraph we have exactly the opposite sentiment. He/she doesn’t like the seniors housing project and on this one the Council is wrong so they must be stopped. Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. If you don’t like the Seniors housing project, then aren’t others fully entitled to respond, “if you don’t like it, move somewhere else?” Sheesh!!!
Bottom line. There are extremists on the loose in this town. One group wants all development stopped and will go to any length to stop it. At the other end are the big developers who POTENTIALLY wield so much economic power that they know they can run roughshod over Council and get them to ignore the OCP, Charette, and any another prior planning agreement for town development if they see it as standing in their way.
(Remember how the OCP said only one downtown area but how that was dropped when Ponderosa proposed a second commercial district next to the golf course? Developer gets what the developer wants)
The Chinese have a saying to the effect that “Diplomacy is the Art of Compromise”. Same applies to politics, perhaps, and it would be nice if all groups (naysayers, TNI, architect, Council) learned a little about how to compromise but I won’t be holding my breath.
Mike…So what exactly is it about this building that completely ignores the Charette? The only thing I can see is that is does take up a larger area. But the Charette does say to’ articulate buildings that are longer than 65ft’…which appears to be done. Oh, or do you think a boutique style hotel is a good business? Is it the style that you don’t like?
Mike
1) I am pretty certain that the members of the PRA that are making the fuss are still friends of Mayor Fielding. He is obviously taking the extra step to placate them by having this expert panel say that all is kosher. He has no hesitation in spending tax dollars so that his friends can leave this battle saving some face.
2) As much as the people with time on their hands that participated in the Charette thought that it was a Declaration of Independence calibre document it was never debated or even read in the community as a whole. Did you know that the post office and Library are being moved downtown according to the Charrette?
“B.7 Relocate civic amenities within new developments
downtown.
Relocate key civic amenities and services, such as the post office and library, back into Downtown Peachland.”
Since it is in the Charette it is a done deal?
What kind of document says that a piece of commercial property should only be developed as a boutique Hotel? Maybe in the old soviet union but unless the District wants to purchase the lot and go into the development business the Charette is just a useless waste of time and effort and tax payers dollars.
I stand by my statement that if the PRA wants to impose its vision on Peachland… come up with a vision, explain it and run for office. Having some amateur city planning document designed and snuck in in the back door without public consensus is just absolutely and totally wrong. During the election no one running for office came out and explained what the charrete contained.
3) Anon is not hypocritical in the least. He is for the much discussed and long awaited TNI privately funded re-development plan and he is against the secretive 100% publicly funded Subsidised Senior Housing complex.
For all we know Richard Smith may be partially correct: maybe a Casino is indeed being planned for downtown Peachland as part of the Senior Housing project.
There are absolutely no details on that expect that the Peachland taxpayer is likely kicking in $5,000,000 of prime real estate and have already entered into some secret agreements.
2 good responses…Wish people responding would identify themselves, though”’
Democracy is a messy process, particularly when there is a vociferous “anti-anything” minority, which is so prevalent here. There are just too many miserable old people with nothing to do but complain that Gas isn’t 10c a gallon anymore, as though complaining will make a difference.
Peachland is a mess of old, crappy buildings and an eyesore waterfront, and desperately needs revitalizing, and thank heavens TNI have stepped up with a vision. Everyone has a different view of what “looks nice” and it’s absurd to suggest that any kind of consensus could ever be reached on this subject. This is a case of who pays the piper calls the tune. The developer gets to build what they feel is commercially viable. Suck it up foggies, just because you liked Peachland when you moved here and now want to shut the door on development, doesn’t give you any rights to stop development or dictate terms.
The taxpayers of Peachland should not be paying for any “study” of the design. Nothing good will come of that. If the vocal minority want a building to look how they want it to look, they are welcome to find the money and build it. That is the essence of democracy, not vulgar cat-calling and nay-saying. They will find being a successful businessman is far more difficult than bellowing at councilors.
I love the direction Peachland is going, so to the naysayers; if you don’t like Peachland anymore; move away, and good riddance to you.
All this serves to draw attention to the much more serious issue of $5m worth of taxpayers land being allocated to welfare housing on the waterfront. The development of subsidized housing on Beach Ave MUST be stopped. There are better uses for this land and money, including higher tax-generating buildings, public space and public amenities.
Mayor Fielding.
All the process were followed and it resulted in council approving the new building.
The last 3 councils have made it abundantly clear that the District was looking for some private entity to Finance and manage the re-development of the Downtown area with District support in acquiring the land.
The correct actions to stop this was to have a have candidates for Mayor and council to clearly state that if elected they would not follow this plan for down town redevelopment…. that they thought it was a bad idea. If they got support they would be elected and TNI would not have wasted time and money acquiring and planning and working with council to rejuvenate the down town area. They would clearly know and understand that Peachland was an old decaying little village and the people liked it that way. TNI could have easily just moved down the road to West Kelowna.
How far do you have to go to give the appearance of providing public input on this well advertised / publicised direction that a few of your friend from the PRA think is wrong?
You have a fairly good idea that any experts are going to say that the TNI building is great, that it is 1000 % better than the current mess that is Peachland downtown.
Do you think that anything that comes out of this peer reviews will mollify your friends at the PRA?
Do they have so little respect for you and your judgement that it requires some outside “experts” to validate your opinion?
Should this panel of experts go rogue on you like and bring back unexpected results ( like the Economic feasibility study**) do you not think that the 90% of Peachlanders that approve of the redevelopment are not going felt betrayed and really really ticked off?
Does the District have a fund or some insurance that will be able to pay off TNI for their time money and effort that they have spent over the last 3-4 years putting this together working with council in good faith to be possibly thwarted by a change in procedures and rules? I am sure that TNI will not want to say anything to damage the good will they enjoy but I am equally sure that they have studied their legal recourse to get back their money should the PRA prevail and stop this project.
No mayor should have to have more than one humiliating public apology in their time as Mayor. Even though you were not a party to the Barone sculpture fiasco I am sure the public apology had to be a bad day for you to be mayor.
** The Mayor commissioned an Economical Impact study (at the urging of the PRA) to provide a reason to stop the New Monaco Development. The study came back and said that it is the developer’s money and risk and they are the best party to decide if it is the right time to build.