Well, the OCP process is gearing up with committees being selected, key development applications likely coming to council during the review and divergent viewpoints about the nature and location of growth and development still being discussed.
Below is a word cloud, a graphic representation, of the 2002 Salmon Arm OCP created through wordle.net. The 150 most often used words in the OCP document are represented with relative size indicating frequency of use. I’ll include Vernon’s OCP image in a later posting. What is notable is that the image of Salmon Arm’s current OCP is similar to images of more modern OCPs. That isn’t to say that updating and re-affirming aren’t necessary but the original OCP is a solid document. Abiding by the intent of the OCP apparently is a whole other matter.
At a minimum, I’d like to see “sustainability” reflected in the new OCP with social, environmental and economic indicators and targets. We need to start off with a definition of sustainability that most of us can embrace. Ideally, in my view of things, a Sustainability Charter should be the overarching policy document from which the OCP and other strategies (Smart Growth etc.) flow. I know that such a Charter is not on the agenda but I believe that we need to formalize our view of sustainability at the municipal level. What should sustainability look like for Salmon Arm and how do we get there in a measurable and planned manner?
How about you? What priorities and approaches does the new OCP need to reflect? How do we achieve consensus? Are you going to be involved in the discussion?
Tim Lavery
Guest Contributor
Ian Wickett
Don Sawyer
Bill Remphrey
Bill Grainger
2 responses so far ↓
Sittin' on the dock of the bay // June 10, 2009 at 11:35 am
A few quick comments from the dock
- any further variance application from SmartCentres (on the current site) should be turned down based on genuine environmental concerns and not fitting the intent of the current OCP. It is simply the wrong location for the good of the Salmon Arm bay.
- we need to look again at the 30th-to-30th boundaries and consider eastward commercial uses
- I agree on the need for a sustainabilty perspective
AJ Decker // June 15, 2009 at 11:34 am
Just a few comments on the official community plan. First, I believe that the community does care and has the capacity to force elected officials to properly debate critical issues in Salmon arm. This was evident during the Smart Center Debate and the 2008 minicipal election.
Second, I do not want the vision of Salmon Arm to be modelled after the urban sprawl, strip mall development in Kelowna. My fear is that development will continue at both the West and East entrances to our community which will lead to urban sprawl and trafic congestion. If you were to ask the citizens of Kelowna who sit in traffic everyday on their commute whether they would have been more involved in the city planning process, I wonder how they would respond? I do not want to become another Kelowna and I believe our community has the capacity to make informed choices to ensure we do not follow in Kelowna’s footsteps as we move
forward.
AJ Decker