Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Control and planning : a distinction with a difference, a case study of the central Okanagan White, Richard Henry 1982

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A8 W54.pdf [ 5.13MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095258.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095258-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095258-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095258-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095258-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095258-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095258-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095258-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095258.ris

Full Text

CONTROL AND PLANNING: A DISTINCTION WITH A DIFFERENCE ' A CASE STUDY OF THE CENTRAL OKANAQAN by Richard Henry White B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in .THE:-FACULTY 'OF GRADUATE' STUDIES THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING We accept th i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 19 8 2 Q -Richard Henry White, 1982 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of V J D V V > V \ A , U ^ I i ^ ""t V^^Lxr^eiX \ V«=^H The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date 27, DE-6 (3/81) — i i -ABSTRACT This thesis studies the decisions of the Kelowna, B.C. City Council to trace the development of land use control and planning i n the central Okanagan. I n i t i a l l y a review of planning l i t e r a t u r e i s conducted which supports the d i s t i n c t i o n between land use control and land use planning. For the purpose of t h i s thesis, "land use control" i s defined as reactive municipal by-laws or resolutions which r e s t r i c t development on a program or project basis, and "land use planning" i s defined as a municipal policy process which i s goal oriented guiding the long term development of the community. While early Canadian planning theorists and p r a c t i t i o n e r s advocated land use controls only as part of an o v e r a l l planning process, a review of planning history shows that Canadian municipalities have often favoured land use controls to the exclusion of land use planning i n i t i a t i v e s . S i m i l a r l y , the case study shows that Kelowna Council adopted land use control by-laws eschewing a committment to land use planning. The thesis shows that, although the l i t e r a t u r e provides no consensus on the underlying p o l i t i c a l or economic rat i o n a l e , i t contends that the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l process dominates land control and planning. The case study supports t h i s contention and provides evidence to show that land use controls were - i i i -p o l i t i c a l l y popular while land use planning was not. The study argues that the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l process does not support goals oriented, p o l i c y based planning because i t l i m i t s p o l i t i c a l power and f l e x i b i l i t y while requiring p o l i t i c a l committment. - i v -TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER I : LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE I n t r o d u c t i o n . 1 The Question of Planning and C o n t r o l 3 Canadian Land Use C o n t r o l and Planning 5 P o l i t i c s and Planning 7 Methods 11 CHAPTER I I : LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN TO 1918 E a r l y H i s t o r y 15 In c o r p o r a t i o n 22 The New C i t y and the Park 25 E a r l y R e s i d e n t i a l Considerations 31 CHAPTER I I I : LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN 1918-39 Post World War I Development 35 The Depression and the F i r s t Zoning By-Law 39 CHAPTER IV: LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN 1940-72 World War I I and and Postwar Reconstruction 45 The Advent of Regional C o n t r o l : The Kelowna Regulated Area... 57 The Boundary Extension Question 61 Heightening Urban C r i s i s : The High Rise Controversy 69 - v -PAGE Land Use C o n t r o l and Planning to 1972 i n C i t y and Region... 72 Conclusion 80 CHAPTER V: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CASE STUDY Land Use C o n t r o l and the Business Cycle 84 C o n t r o l and Planni n g : A D i s t i n c t i o n w i t h a D i f f e r e n c e 85 Land Use Planning I n i t i a t i v e s 87 Land Use Controls 89 Planning and L o c a l P o l i t i c s : Theory and P r a c t i c e Compared.. 93 Conclusion 98 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to extend my thanks to Professors Oberlander and Wiesman for t h e i r continuous support . In completing t h i s t h e s i s , I have b e n e f i t t e d considerably from t h e i r advice and c r i t i c i s m ; the shortcomings of. the work are s o l e l y my r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , however. Thank =:yo.U! planners of the c e n t r a l Okana>ganK past and present , for c o n t r i b u t i n g to my research... I wish to thank B;ev. Westbrook for her e d i t o r i a l and t y p i n g help and to thank S h i r l e y , Bonnie and. M i c h e l l e for. t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e . I a lso want to express my a p p r e c i a t i o n for the support so generously given by my parents , by Ruth., and by Anne M a r i e . F i n a l l y , I wish to thank Canada Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a -t i o n for g i v i n g me a. U n i v e r s i t y Scolarship which enabled me to complete t h i s t h e s i s . CHAPTER I : LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE I n t r o d u c t i o n A f f e c t e d by s o c i a l , economic, and p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s , land use pat-terns evolve over time. In most s o c i e t i e s , as d e n s i t i e s increased and communities developed, the t r a d i t i o n a l freedom of the i n d i v i d u a l to use land was l i m i t e d by the community f o r the communal good. This t h e s i s i s an a n a l y s i s of one community's land use c o n t r o l and planning h i s t o r y . Using the minutes and by-laws of Kelowna C i t y C o u n c i l as the primary source of date, t h i s t h e s i s w i l l t r a c e the e v o l u t i o n of land use c o n t r o l and planning and i t s e f f e c t on the development of the c e n t r a l Okanagan, and p a r t i c u l a r l y the C i t y of Kelowna, f rom the time of the f i r s t white settlement. Through t h i s h i s t o r i c a l case study, the t h e s i s w i l l show that there has always been community support f o r land use c o n t r o l (e.g. zoning) but that there has seldom been support f o r comprehensive land use planning (e.g. neighbourhood, community, or r e g i o n a l plan implementation). While many planning t h e o r i s t s and p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n c l u d e both "land use c o n t r o l " and "land use p l a n n i n g " under the general r u b r i c of "planning," the present chapter argues and the f o l l o w i n g chapters w i l l show that a d i s t i n c t i o n should'.be made between c o n t r o l and planning. Subsequently, "land use c o n t r o l " i s defined as r e a c t i v e m u n i c i p a l by-laws or r e s o l u -t i o n s which r e s t r i c t development on a program or p r o j e c t b a s i s , and "land use p l a n n i n g " i s defined as a m u n i c i p a l p o l i c y process which i s g o a l - o r i e n t e d and guides the long-term development of the community. There are many f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g the pace of land development, and t h i s complexity makes i t d i f f i c u l t , perhaps im p o s s i b l e , to determine the S t u d y A r e a P l a c e N a m e s POPLAR POINT OKANAGAN MISSION Source: National Topo Series B2 EJ4 - 3 -r a t i o n a l e u n d e r l y i n g any one, l e t alone a s e r i e s , of land use d e c i s i o n s . Because the study uses the d i s c u s s i o n s and d e c i s i o n s of a c i t y c o u n c i l as i t s primary source of research m a t e r i a l , i t f a c i l i t a t e s the a n a l y s i s of the p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s i n v o l v e d i n land use development i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. While growing reference to p r o f e s s i o n a l planning e x p e r t i s e and i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l governments were s i g -n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e s , t h i s t h e s i s w i l l show that l o c a l p o l i t i c a l agents were the masters of l o c a l land use c o n t r o l and planning. The Question of Planning and C o n t r o l There i s no consensus even w i t h i n the p r o f e s s i o n about the c o r r e c t d e f i n i t i o n of the term "planning." The Canadian I n s t i t u t e of Planners, w h i l e i t i s c u r r e n t l y reviewing the wording, defines planning somewhat r e p e t i t i o u s l y as "the planning of the s c i e n t i f i c , a e s t h e t i c , and o r d e r l y d i s p o s i t i o n of land w i t h a view to securing p h y s i c a l , economic and s o c i a l e f f i c i e n c y , h e a l t h and w e l l - b e i n g i n urban and r e g i o n a l communities" (CIP' 1979: 5 ) . A f t e r some rumination, H a l l "(1975) p r e f e r s a n o n - s p e c i f i c def-i n i t i o n — " p l a n n i n g as a generic a c t i v i t y i s the making of an o r d e r l y sequence of a c t i o n s that w i l l lead to the achievement of a s t a t e d goal or g o a l s " (p. 6 ) — a n d suggests that urban and r e g i o n a l planning can be d i s -t i n g u i s h e d from the generic because of i t s preoccupation w i t h s p a t i a l order. Friedmann (1973: 19), a noted planning t h e o r i s t , defines planning as the " a p p l i c a t i o n of a s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l i n t e l l i g e n c e to organ-i z e d a c t i o n , " but he goes on to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between a l l o c a t i v e planning which i s concerned "with a c t i o n s that a f f e c t the d i s t r i b u t i o n of l i m i t e d resources among competing .users" (p. 243) and i n n o v a t i v e planning which i s concerned "with a c t i o n s that produce s t r u c t u r a l change i n the guidance - 4 -system of s o c i e t y " (p. 245, emphasis i n . o r i g i n a l ) . W r i t i n g from a c r i t i -c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , Agger (1979: 71) i n v e s t i g a t e s contemporary planning i n s i x c o u n t r i e s , three i n the communist b l o c and three i n the west, and concludes that planning can now be defined as "a d i s c i p l i n e f o r c o n t r o l -l i n g the use of p h y s i c a l space. In other words, urban planning a f f e c t s or c o n t r o l s the way i n which human beings i n t e r a c t w i t h p h y s i c a l space...." Of the h i s t o r i c a l study of t h i s t o p i c which r e s i s t s an easy d e f i n i t i o n , Fishman (1980: 243) s t a t e s , " d i v e r s e i n i t s goals, experimental i n i t s methods, i n f i n i t e l y v a r i a b l e i n i t s s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a t i o n s , c i t y planning has r e s i s t e d a l l attempts to impose a s i n g l e d e f i n i t i v e h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r -p retation.":. McLoughlin (1973) contends that planning i n B r i t a i n i s concerned w i t h development c o n t r o l . Arguing that major p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n f o r the c o n t r o l of town and r e g i o n a l development began i n B r i t a i n w i t h the adop-t i o n of the B r i t i s h Housing and Town Planning Act i n 1909, McLoughlin v i r t u a l l y equates development c o n t r o l w i t h planning. S i m i l a r l y , the f i r s t major t h r u s t of p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the land use development process, i n the United States was f o r land use c o n t r o l . Zoning c o n t r o l s , o r i g i n a t i n g i n Germany, were adopted i n the United Sta t e s . I t i s argued that the f i r s t comprehensive zoning ordinance to c o n t r o l development, adopted by New York C i t y i n 1916, was passed to maintain property values and to prevent nuisance (Bassett, 1936; Moore, 1979: 318). With the sup-port of the j u d i c i a r y and a growing volume of case law, the United States Commerce Department d r a f t e d the Standard State Zoning Enabling A c t ; sev-e r a l s t a t e s passed zoning l e g i s l a t i o n and many m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and count-i e s adopted zoning ordinances based on t h i s model l e g i s l a t i o n i n the - 5 -1920's (Delafons, 1969: 25). As i n B r i t a i n , the emphasis i n the United States was to provide land use c o n t r o l s , l i k e zoning, which gave l o c a l government a t o o l to ensure order, s e c u r i t y , and q u a l i t y i n the urban environment. Other authors w r i t i n g more c r i t i c a l l y about the type of planning which has emerged i n western c o u n t r i e s would agree w i t h Agger that p l a n -ning can be equated w i t h the c o n t r o l of development, most o f t e n f o r the p r e s e r v a t i o n or enhancement of property values ( C a s t e l l s , 1978; Harvey, 1978; Jacobs, 1961). Goodman (1972), one of planning's most v i t r i o l i c c r i t i c s , claims that the planning p r o f e s s i o n i s a corps of " s o f t cops," enforcers of the d i c t a t e s of the "urban i n d u s t r i a l complex," the economic p o l i t i c a l e l i t e which c o n t r o l s planning to f u r t h e r i t s own i n t e r e s t s . Of more use to the present d i s c u s s i o n i s the a s s e r t i o n by K i r k (1980: 41) that land use p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n and implementation can be separated i n t o two streams "comprising both development c o n t r o l , which can be thought of as negative p l a n n i n g , and p u b l i c development, which can be thought of as p o s i t i v e p l a n n i n g . " K i r k ' s contention i n t h i s regard i s supported by t h i s author, who w i l l use the study of the e v o l u t i o n of planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan to support the hypothesis that the community's p o l i t i -c a l process supported land use c o n t r o l mechanisms, ( K i r k ' s negative p l a n -n i n g ) , but d i d not support comprehensive planning i n s t i t u t i o n s , (an aspect of K i r k ' s p o s i t i v e p l a n n i n g ) . Canadian Land Use C o n t r o l and Planning In the Canadian context, Gerecke (1974; 1976) produced two e a r l y s t u d i e s on the h i s t o r y of planning i n Canada, and although he was c r i t i c a l - 6 -of i t s evolution and product, he f a i l s to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the powers, both negative controls and p o s i t i v e planning, which were exercised through public i ntervention i n the land use development process. Other Canadian planning p r o f e s s i o n a l s , a l l c r i t i c a l (to a greater or l e s s e r degree) of the evolved state of planning i n Canada, do not d i s t i n g u i s h between land use c o n t r o l and planning (Clark, 1976; Spragge, 1975). Gunton (1979; 1981) p o s i t s that there are. three d i s t i n c t i d e o l o g i c a l approaches to plan-ning which developed i n Canada: agrarian r a d i c a l , urban l i b e r a l , and urban r a d i c a l . Canadian urban l i b e r a l planners, the group which Gunton claims dominated the development of planning i n Canada, are represented h i s t o r i c a l l y by Thomas Adams, the Commission of Conservation, and the Town Planning I n s t i t u t e of Canada. Urban l i b e r a l s favoured negative plan-ning processes such as zoning and exclusionary land use by-laws. Adams and the Commission did advocate zoning controls through t h e i r town planning l e g i s l a t i o n proposals which were presented to and adopted by most of the provinces (Armstrong, 1959; A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r , 1981a; Gunton, 1981: 111). The other c i t y - o r i e n t e d planning group, (urban radicals,.according to Gun-ton's typology), supported p o s i t i v e planning or public development options such as those proposed by the League f o r S o c i a l Reconstruction (1935), or even some of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Post War Reconstruction (1944). Canadian geographers have prepared a number of studies on the evolution of planning from the d e s c r i p t i v e treatment of the r o l e of successive town councils i n Edmonton (Dale, 1969) to a more p a r t i c u l a r and c r i t i c a l study of the development of zoning control as one aspect of the planning and growth of the C i t y of Toronto (Moore, 1979). H i s t o r i a n s , too, have made - 7 -v a l u a b l e c o n t r i b u t i o n s , from Weaver's 1979 study of the growth of the planning reform movement i n Toronto from 1880 to 1915, to the more general c o n t r i b u t i o n of A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r (1981b) w i t h t h e i r production of a comprehensive b i b l i o g r a p h y of Canadian urban h i s t o r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e . In a l l these works t h e r e , i s some consensus about the r o l e of land use c o n t r o l as part of the planning process. This t h e s i s attempts to add c l a r i t y to the breadth and depth of the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e by d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between land use c o n t r o l and land use planning through h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s . P o l i t i c s and Planning When land use c o n t r o l and planning were being i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d at the m u n i c i p a l l e v e l , zoning and planning commissions were recommended to d e p o l i t i c i z e the land use r e g u l a t o r y process (Bassett, 1936; Weaver, 1979). Planning commissions were to be the mechanisms which would f r e e the c i t y of development i n t e r v e n t i o n s based o n , p o l i t i c a l patronage. Van Nus (1979) contends that the C i t y E f f i c i e n t movement, which came i n t o prominence i n Canada a f t e r the end of World War I , promoted p r o f e s s i o n a l planning as an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , s c i e n t i f i c , and e s s e n t i a l l y a p o l i t i c a l a d v i s o r to l o c a l government. One of Canada's f i r s t p r o f e s s i o n a l planners, Thomas Adams, was a major proponent of t h i s type of s c i e n t i f i c p lanning. The study of urban reform and planning commissions r e v e a l s e a r l y and continuous c o n f l i c t between the plans of the reformers and the p o l i t i c a l w i l l and power of c i t y c o u n c i l s (McCarthy, 1977; Petshak, 1973). In f a c t , i n the United S t a t e s , where planning commissions are given considerable power and autonomy, com-missions and c o u n c i l s s t i l l b a t t l e f o r c o n t r o l of the development r e g u l a -t i o n process (Krumholz et a l , 1978). - 8' <-Much of the l i t e r a t u r e on planning methods comes out of t h i s e f f i -ciency t r a d i t i o n and describes the planning process as t e c h n i c a l e x e r c i s e (Chapin, 1965; I z a r d , 1979; Lynch, 1971). This l i t e r a t u r e i s based ..on the assumption that the planner i s a v a l u e - f r e e t e c h n i c i a n , expert i n a number of s c i e n t i f i c techniques which enable him to a r t i c u l a t e g o a l s , evaluate and s e l e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s , and propose a procedure f o r implementation, w i t h no concern f o r p o l i t i c a l context. I t was against t h i s p s e u d o - o b j e c t i v i t y i n planning and the unfortunate r e s u l t s f o r which i t was sometimes respon-s i b l e , ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n urban renewal), that a c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e has developed which discusses the e f f e c t of p o l i t i c a l values i n land use con-r. t r o l and planning (Goodman, 1972; H a l l , 1979; Jacobs, 1961). More recent books on planning methods are c a r e f u l to d i s c u s s the l i m i t of s c i e n t i f i c techniques i n the planning process (Kruckenberg and S i l v e r s , 1974). Never-t h e l e s s , a tendency s t i l l e x i s t s f o r planners to f a i l to "recognize them-selves as generators or preservers of knowledge or s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s or i d e o l o g i e s , but r a t h e r see themselves as simply middlemen b r i n g i n g news from the e m p i r i c a l sciences to complex, r e a l world s i t u a t i o n s . " (Moore-M i l r o y , 1981: 23). H i s t o r i c a l l y , , i n the study-of. public...administration, ..local government process has been considered as a p o l i t i c a l because of i t s n o n - l e g i s l a t i v e f u n c t i o n . In the American l i t e r a t u r e , l o c a l government has g e n e r a l l y been presented as a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , not p o l i t i c a l (Bollens and Schmandt, 1970; Stanley and B o l l e n s , 1968). Canadian s t u d i e s o f . l o c a l government, too, have presented c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as a p o l i t i c a l v . a n d r e g u l a t o r y ( P l u n k e t t , 1968; Rowat, 1969). I t i s only more r e c e n t l y that "municipal government has come to be recognized as more than a purely a d m i n i s t r a t i v e body concerned w i t h important, i f l i m i t e d , housekeeping f u n c t i o n s . . . l o c a l gov-ernment i s becoming recognized as an important p o l i t i c a l or community decision-making f u n c t i o n i n i t s own r i g h t . " (Plunkett and Betts,:1978: ;3). P l u n k e t t and Betts go on to suggest that the work of a . C i t y C o u n c i l becomes p o l i t i c a l at the po i n t where "a s i t u a t i o n a r i s e s (as i n e v i t a b l y i t must) i n which there i s disagreement as to what d e c i s i o n should be made." (p. 15). While t h i s t h e s i s w i l l show that the Kelowna C i t y C o u n c i l and other p o l i t i c a l agents were i n v o l v e d i n the r e g u l a t i o n of land use, much of the t h e o r e t i c a l and case study l i t e r a t u r e goes beyond the scope of the proposed a n a l y s i s and attempts to show the underlying r a t i o n a l e f o r p o l i t i c a l i n v o l -vement i n the land use development process. A major p u b l i c a t i o n which encouraged the re-emergence of p o l i t i c s as a recognized p a r t of the c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i v e process was Robert A Dahl's Who Governs? (1961). Dahl's work and the c o l l a b o r a t i n g evidence of two research a s s i s t a n t s (Polsby, 1963; Wolfinger, 1974) contend that the New Haven, Connecticut p o l i t i c a l system i s "dominated by many d i f f e r e n t sets of l e a d e r s , each having access to a d i f f e r e n t combination of p o l i t i c a l resources. I t was i n short a p l u r -a l i s t system." (Dahl, 1961: 86). The authors argue t h a t , w h i l e c e r t a i n a c t o r s i n the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l system had more i n f l u e n c e than o t h e r s , a dominant e l i t e no longer r u l e d New Haven. This t h e s i s was w e l l r e c e i v e d i n much of the academic community, and research began to appear which e i t h e r t e s t e d the existence of a . p l u r a l i s t l o c a l , government system or accepted o u t r i g h t the existence of such a system ( F l i n n and Stokes, 1970; G i l b e r t , 1972). In the planning f i e l d , other American authors began to look at the e f f e c t of the p l u r a l i s t i c p o l i t i c a l system on urban land use c o n t r o l and planning (Allensworth, 1975; A l t s h u l e r , 1965; Burby, 1968; L i n e b e r r y , 1970). I f the p l u r a l i s t approach to urban p o l i t i c s had been the only theory to emerge, there would be l i t t l e controversy about i t s r o l e i n the regu-l a t i o n of land use development; however, other t h e o r i e s soon developed, i n which i t was contended that access to p o l i t i c a l power i n the urban arena was l i m i t e d to the r u l i n g c l a s s . Based on the e a r l y work of Marx and, p a r t i c u l a r l y , Engels (Benevolo, 1971), the urban p o l i t i c a l process i n the s t r a t i f i c a t i o n or c l a s s p e r s p e c t i v e i s seen as a mechanism to maintain the hegemony of the e c o n o m i c / p o l i t i c a l e l i t e , the c a p i t a l i s t c l a s s ( C a s t e l l s , 1971; S h e f f i e l d , 1976). Planners w r i t i n g from t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e g e n e r a l l y r e j e c t the v a l i d i t y of an e l i t i s t urban p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e and argue f o r reform. Some authors suggest that working w i t h i n the e x i s t i n g c l a s s sys-tem can produce p o s i t i v e s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l change, as w e l l as produce a more e q u i t a b l e system of land use c o n t r o l and planning (Agger, 1979; K i r k , 1980). An important study was conducted by Paul Domhoff (1978) of the c i t y of New Haven, Connecticut. Using Dahl's o r i g i n a l data which supports the p l u r a l i s t argument, Domhoff develops a t h e s i s which shows that an e l i t i s t and s t r a t i f i e d system of urban p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l e x i s t s i n New Haven. Domhoffs study shows how d i f f i c u l t i t i s to prove the r a t i o n a l e under-l y i n g involvement i n urban p o l i t i c s . To f u r t h e r complicate t h i s review, Polsby (1980: x i i i - x i v ) has i d e n t i f i e d , somewhat f a c e t i o u s l y , nineteen categ o r i e s of t h e o r i e s on the system of p o l i t i c a l power i n urban areas. The f o l l o w i n g study w i l l not attempt to uncover which theory or t h e o r i e s apply to the c i t y of Kelowna; what i s important to note, however, i s t h a t , - 11 -w h i l e there i s no consensus on a. p a r t i c u l a r theory, there i s , i n recent l i t e r a t u r e , general agreement that the p o l i t i c a l process does command the development of land use c o n t r o l and planning. Methods This t h e s i s uses the case study method to show the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p o l i t i c a l process and the development of land use c o n t r o l and planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. The research approach used i s what A. F. J . A r t i b i s e c a l l s the " t r a d i t i o n a l manner" of s e l e c t i v e review and a n a l y s i s of primary documents supplemented and supported by secondary sour-ces. (Stave, 1980: 142). The major source of primary data on which the case study i n . t h e f o l l o w i n g three chapters i s based was drawn from the min-utes and by-laws of Kelowna C i t y C o u n c i l , from 1905 to 1972. A d d i t i o n a l primary m a t e r i a l i n c l u d e s : 1) the minutes of the Kelowna Advisory Planning Commission; 2) the c o l l e c t i o n of the Kelowna C i t y A r c h i v e s ; 3) the morgue of the Kelowna D a i l y C o u r i e r ; 4) the published statues and r e g u l a t i o n s of B r i t i s h Columbia; and 5) a s e r i e s of i n t e r v i e w s w i t h o f f i c i a l s i n v o l v e d i n the development and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of land use c o n t r o l and planning r e g u l a t i o n s . Furthermore, published secondary sources on the h i s t o r y of the c e n t r a l Oka-nagan c o n t r i b u t e d to the study, p a r t i c u l a r y those published i n the p e r i o d p r i o r to the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of the c i t y . The f o l l o w i n g paragraphs w i l l . d i s c u s s the major problems which were encountered i n the research and how they were r e s o l v e d . - 12 -F i r s t l y , because of the s h i f t i n g geographic focus of the l e g i s l a t o r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s concerned w i t h the c e n t r a l Okanagan, the a r e a l focus of the study a l s o s h i f t s . Although the t h e s i s uses the documents of Kelowna C i t y as i t s major source, the c i t y ' s i n t e r e s t i n land use c o n t r o l and planning o f t e n extended beyond the c i t y ' s boundaries. C h r o n o l o g i c a l l y , p r i o r to 1892, the geographic focus of the study i s the .Mission: (see --^ map on page 15) to the south of the Kelowna townsite. From 1892 u n t i l the end of World War I I , the townsite becomes the focus of the study, and t h e r e a f t e r , as the c i t y expanded, the research begins to have a greater r e g i o n a l emphasis. While concentrating on the d e c i s i o n s taken by Kelowna. C o u n c i l , t h i s t h e s i s i s more broadly t i t l e d because of the s h i f t i n g a r e a l concerns of C o u n c i l and other decision-makers i n v o l v e d i n land use con-t r o l and planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan, Secondly, stemming from the f i r s t problem of method i s the over-emphasis of the r o l e of C i t y C o u n c i l as r e g u l a t o r of land use i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. Because the d i s c u s s i o n s and d e c i s i o n s of C o u n c i l are used as the primary data source, the i n f l u e n c e of the p r o v i n c i a l govern-ment and i t s departments, of the c o u n c i l s of the D i s t r i c t M u n i c i p a l i t y of Glenmore, of the boards of the v a r i o u s i r r i g a t i o n d i s t r i c t s and, most importantly perhaps, of the p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t groups of l o c a l businessmen and other i n f l u e n t i a l c i t i z e n s may be underrepresented. T h i r d l y , the case study attempts to be c h r o n o l o g i c a l , but because of the concomitant e v o l u t i o n of some unrelated land use i n i t i a t i v e s , p a r t i c u -l a r l y i n the p e r i o d a f t e r World War I I , i t becomes d i f f i c u l t to provide c h r o n o l o g i c a l order. Because of the d e s i r a b i l i t y of showing the c o n t i n u -i t y of events c l e a r l y i n the development of land use c o n t r o l and planning - 13 -i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan, i t has been decided to present events and d e c i -sions l e a d i n g up to a p a r t i c u l a r land use i n i t i a t i v e i n sequence, occa-s i o n a l l y at the expense of the o v e r a l l chronology of the case study. F i n a l l y , a l l h i s t o r i c a l s t u d i e s have to r e s o l v e the problem of where to begin and where to end. In some s t u d i e s , the beginning and end date of the study can be e a s i l y determined; i n other s t u d i e s these dates are e s s e n t i a l l y a r b i t r a r y . The f o l l o w i n g case study f a l l s i n t o the l a t t e r category. While i t b r i e f l y reviews the e a r l i e r establishment of semi-permanent n a t i v e settlements, the study r e a l l y begins w i t h the f i r s t white settlement i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. The study ends i n 1972, j u s t p r i o r to the major and u n i l a t e r a l extension of the c i t y boundary and the expansion of c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n by the p r o v i n c i a l government, p r i o r to the i m p o s i t i o n of the A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve, p r i o r to the re-estab-lishment of the C i t y Planning Department and p r i o r to the emergence of the Regional D i s t r i c t of C e n t r a l Okanagan as a major f o r c e i n the p l a n -ning of the c e n t r a l Okanagan. A l l of these f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e to make 1972, arguably, the beginning of a new epoch i n the h i s t o r y of land use c o n t r o l and planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan, as w e l l as a reasonable place to conclude the forthcoming study. A f t e r the case study contained i n Chapter I I through IV, a f i n a l chapter analyzes the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p o l i t i c a l process and the e v o l u t i o n of land use c o n t r o l and planning i n the study area. The d i f -f i c u l t question of on whose behalf the p o l i t i c a l process commands land use c o n t r o l and planning i s not resolve d i n t h i s t h e s i s . Nevertheless, the f i n a l chapter shows that the d i s t i n c t i o n between land use c o n t r o l and land use planning, which emerged i n the l i t e r a t u r e review, i s a l s o :.:.  - 14 -m a n i f e s t e d i n t h e s t u d y o f t h e p r a c t i c e o f l a n d u se c o n t r o l and p l a n n i n g i n t h e c e n t r a l Okanagan. - i s -CHAPTER I I : LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN TO 1918  E a r l y H i s t o r y The Okanagan V a l l e y i s l o c a t e d i n the south c e n t r a l i n t e r i o r of B r i t i s h Columbia. The t h e s i s study area i s l o c a t e d i n the middle of the Okanagan V a l l e y on the eastern shore of Lake Okanagan, a long, narrow lak e which i s the major geographic f e a t u r e of the v a l l e y . As i n many areas of western Canada, f u r traders were the f i r s t white e x p l o r e r s of the Okanagan. Although the semi-arid Okanagan d i d not support many d e s i r a b l e f u r - b e a r i n g animals, i t d i d serve as a tr a n s p o r t route from the r i c h f u r - t r a p p i n g lands of northern B r i t i s h Columbia to the Columbia R i v e r i n the south. Ormsby (1931: 4) s t a t e s t h a t , "Kelowna was chosen as the s i t e of the f i r s t white settlement i n the v a l l e y because i t was a place where food could be produced i n abundance, where lumber could be obtained f o r dwellings and where stock could be turned out to pasture." (See map on f o l l o w i n g page). The f i r s t white r e s i d e n t s , Oblate m i s s i o n a r i e s , s e t t l e d w i t h i n what' i s now the C i t y of Kelowna i n 1859. The o f f i c e then r e s p o n s i b l e f o r land r e g i s t r y i n the area, the Gold Commissioner i n Rock Creek, records a pre-emption of 852 acres by Father Richard from the mission as a r u r a l land c l a i m "on the great l a k e and bounded on the east s i d e by the Ri v e r De L'anse au Sable'." (Ormsby, 1935). The s i z e of the pre-emption i s l a r g e r than the usual c l a i m of 160 acres granted to those who followed the mis-s i o n a r i e s onto the f e r t i l e Kelowna d e l t a . As i n most places i n Canada, the white man s e t t l e d on land taken - 1.7 -from the e x i s t i n g n a t i v e p o p u l a t i o n . Ormsby (1931) i n d i c a t e s that there were ten semi-permanent n a t i v e communities i n the Okanagan V a l l e y . Ind-ians from the Okanagan Nation, which had sp a r s e l y s e t t l e d the e n t i r e v a l - v l e y , had e s t a b l i s h e d w i n t e r quarters at three places i n the study area: Cone was] at. Kelowna, which meant " g r i z z l y bear" and r e f e r r e d to the s i t e of the present c i t y . In the same l o c a l i t y was Stakakwalinet. I t was s i t u a t e d east from Rutland near a s o l i t a r y , l a k e which has si n c e d r i e d up. East from Kelowna was another v i l -l a g e , Nor-kwa-stin. This name was a p p l i e d to Black Mountain from which the Indians obtained a hard b l a c k rock of the same name which they used f o r sharpening t h e i r arrowheads. (Ormsby, 1931: 9). The indigenous r e s i d e n t s d i d not welcome the white s e t t l e r s . An e a r l y r e s i d e n t r e p o r t s that "when the whites f i r s t a r r i v e d the Indians were opposed to t h e i r settlement on the lands, and some of them were very b i t t e r about i t . " (Lequime, 1937: 18). Native o p p o s i t i o n was not organized, however, and settlement c o n t i n -ued apace. Because of a boundary dispute between England the the United S t a t e s , the f u r t r a i l through the Okanagan was closed i n 1846. The com-munity which was growing around the M i s s i o n soon found or b u i l t other routes f o r the shipment of goods: i n 1874, a t r a i l south to P e n t i c t o n was opened to d r i v e c a t t l e to that southern community; i n 1875, a road from Vernon i n the north to Okanagan M i s s i o n , as the area had come to be > . known, was completed (Surtees, 1979a: 1). By t h i s time much of the graz-in g land on the d e l t a and the benches above Okanagan Lake was held i n l a r g e p a r c e l s by c a t t l e ranchers. The Lequime Ranch, f o r example, was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1861 w i t h a r u r a l land c l a i m of 160 acres; by the time i t was s o l d i n 1904, i t had grown to 6743 acres (Ormsby, 1935). In a d d i t i o n to ranching, E l i Lequime e s t a b l i s h e d a general s t o r e , the - 18 -only one between Kamloops and Osoyoos. This s t o r e and the M i s s i o n j u s t to the south were the commercial and c u l t u r a l centre of Okanagan M i s s i o n as the farming and ranching community grew i n the 1870's and 1880's. In a d d i t i o n to feed crops, farmers, p a r t i c u l a r l y those c l o s e to the creeks, were growing a wide v a r i e t y of vegetables and were beginning to e x p e r i -ment w i t h t r e e f r u i t s . Improvements to t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n the V a l l e y , w i t h the i n a u g u r a t i o n of Steamboat s e r v i c e on the Lake i n 1886 and the completion of the Okana-gan and Shuswap Railway (OSR) s i x years l a t e r , provided the c e n t r a l Oka-nagan w i t h much b e t t e r l i n k s to e x t e r n a l markets. George G. McKay accu-r a t e l y p r e d i c t e d the p o t e n t i a l of c e n t r a l Okanagan lands f o r orchard crops. He purchased a number of small ranches between M i l l and M i s s i o n Creek i n 1890 and subdivided most of the assembled land i n t o ten to f o r t y -acre p a r c e l s . The f o l l o w i n g year,. Lord Aberdeen bought a 480-acre p a r c e l from McKay. Aberdeen, who was l a t e r to become Governor-General of the Dominion of Can-ada, was the f i r s t c e n t r a l Okanagan farmer to attempt to grow f r u i t as a commercial e n t e r p r i s e w i t h the p l a n t i n g of two hundred acres of apples at Guisachan, as h i s farm and the area around i t came to be known. For a v a r i e t y of managerial and h o r t i c u l t u r a l reasons, Aberdeen was not success-f u l at Guisachan. Many of the o r c h a r d i s t s who followed Aberdeen to the McKay s u b d i v i s i o n persevered, however, and the c e n t r a l Okanagan was soon exporting f r u i t crops to other B r i t i s h Columbia and p r a i r i e l o c a t i o n s . The major c o n s t r a i n t on the expansion of the orchard i n d u s t r y at t h i s time was the shortage of i r r i g a t i o n water. The only method of i r r i g a t i o n - 19 -then i n use was the d i v e r s i o n of creeks to open d i t c h e s which served only those farms w i t h access to creek channels. As the use of i r r i g a t i o n water increased w i t h the s h i f t from ranching and dry land farming to orchards which r e q u i r e d i r r i g a t i o n , t h i s method of watering o f t e n proved inadequate. Buckland s t a t e s that "there was no storage.water. Creeks ran at f l o o d during the s p r i n g run o f f and d r i e d up i n J u l y l e a v i n g l i t t l e or no water f o r l a t e r crops..." (1966: 76). This was a time of great r a i l w a y growth i n the V a l l e y . OSR had o r i g -i n a l l y chosen Vernon as i t s southern terminus, and Vernon soon became the l e a d i n g v a l l e y town. An extension of t h i s l i n e to the Mission.. was pro-posed by the Vernon and Okanagan Railway Company. In a n t i c i p a t i o n of t h i s new terminus, a townsite was surveyed to the north of the M i s s i o n . I n t e r -est i n t h i s townsite soon s h i f t e d to the lakeshore when i t was decided to extend OSR to Okanagan Landing and the steamer s e r v i c e there, r a t h e r than b u i l d a r a i l l i n k to the c e n t r a l Okanagan. The steamboat s e r v i c e became the most important l i n k w i t h e x t e r n a l markets. Buckland w r i t e s that "Lequime, the M i s s i o n shop owner, r e a l i z -i n g the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n advantage now o f f e r e d on the Lake, arranged to have property he had acquired on the waterfront l a i d out as a townsite.... Map 462 i s the o r i g i n a l Map of the townsite of Kelowna and was deposited on the 13th day of August, 1982." (1966: 82). The o r i g i n a l townsite was l o c a t e d where the Kelowna c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t i s now l o c a t e d . The 1891 census shows that the p o p u l a t i o n of the Okanagan M i s s i o n area was only 348, and no more than a few dozen of that number would have been l i v i n g i n the new w a t e r f r o n t community i n 1892. The increased a c c e s s i b i l i t y of the c e n t r a l Okanagan, coupled w i t h the p o t e n t i a l of a h i g h l y p r o f i t a b l e and marketable orchard i n d u s t r y being e s t a b l i s h e d , l e d to a land s a l e s boom i n the area. McKay's e a r l y dev-elopment lea d was soon followed by other land companies: Kelowna Land and Orchard Company, Okanagan F r u i t and Land Company, Belgo Canadian F r u i t Land Company, L i m i t e d , among others. Organizations l i k e the K e l -owna Shippers Union (1898) were e s t a b l i s h e d to promote the c e n t r a l Oka-nagan (Clement, 1955: 4). Pamphlets and brochures produced by such groups as the A g r i c u l t u r a l and Trade A s s o c i a t i o n of the Okanagan. Mission. V a l l e y cast the c e n t r a l Okanagan i n a very favourable l i g h t . Such pamph-l e t s were d i s t r i b u t e d throughout Canada and i n many parts of B r i t a i n and Europe to a t t r a c t s e t t l e r s . The impact of the land companies on the development of the c e n t r a l Okanagan i s d i f f i c u l t to overestimate. The companies bought the l a r g e ranches which had been e s t a b l i s h e d i n the area and subdivided them i n t o small orchard p r o p e r t i e s . To provide the needed i r r i g a t i o n , the com-panies b u i l t dams on upland l a k e s , c r e a t i n g r e s e r v o i r s which, w i t h the i n s t a l l a t i o n of p i p i n g and flume systems, served the v a l l e y land below. The Okanagan F r u i t and Land Company, e s t a b l i s h e d by s e v e r a l l o c a l bus-inessmen, i n c l u d i n g D.W. Sutherland and F.R.E. Dehart, ( l a t e r to be the second and t h i r d mayors of Kelowna), bought the A.B. Knox ranch a d j o i n -i n g the townsite to the north and subdivided i t i n t o small acreages (Clement, 1955: 6). The C e n t r a l Okanagan Land Company dammed the lakes at the headwaters of M i l l Creek and, by 1912, were i r r i g a t i n g l a r g e areas of Rutland, as w e l l as 6000 acres of the Glenmore V a l l e y . The Belgo Canadian Company, owned by B e l g i a n r o y a l t y , secured water r i g h t s above M i s s i o n Creek and piped i t twenty mile s to land on the Kelowna d e l t a to - 21 -the east of the townsite (Surtees, 1979: 33-34). I n i t i a l l y the land com-panies found ready purchasers, o f t e n "remittance men" a t t r a c t e d from the B r i t i s h I s l e s , and the p r i c e of land rose q u i c k l y from $1 an acre i n 1898 to $150-200 an acre i n 1911, and one source i n d i c a t e s that c e r t a i n lands were f e t c h i n g $1000 an acre i n t h i s p e r i o d (Okanagan Basin C o n s u l t a t i v e Board, 1974: 22). The e a r l y h i s t o r y of the Kelowna Land and Orchard Company (KLO Co.), i n c l o s e p r o x i m i t y . t o the. Kelowna townsite, i s p a r t i c u l a r l y noteworthy. On March 14, 1904 Messrs. Ca r r u t h e r s , Pooley and S t i r l i n g purchased the Lequime Ranch of 6743 acres, s t r e t c h i n g , from M i l l . C r e e k , the southern boundary of the townsite, to M i s s i o n Creek, and i n c l u d i n g the western p o r t i o n s of the East Kelowna Bench (Kelowna C a p i t a l News, n.d.). The property, which included more than a m i l e of lakeshore frontage, was bought f o r l e s s than ten d o l l a r s an acre. A. l o c a l surveyor, Sam Long, q u i c k l y conducted a survey of the l a n d , r e g i s t e r i n g a s i x t y - s e v e n l o t s u b d i v i s i o n plan on May 10, 1904. The Company i n s t a l l e d an i r r i g a t i o n sys-tem to serve the new l o t s , drawing water from headwaters of Canyon Creek. The company had to b u i l d t h e i r own roads, i n c l u d i n g Pendozi S t r e e t (now Pandosy S t r e e t ) which remains the primary route south to the Okan-agan M i s s i o n area from the o r i g i n a l townsite ( N i g e l , n.d.). Lot 14 of Long's P l a n 186 was set aside by the company f o r a park, but they l a t e r donated most of the l o t to the Kelowna H o s p i t a l f o r a permanent s i t e . The northern p o r t i o n s of the KLO lands became par t of the o r i g i n a l incorporated C i t y of Kelowna, and the long s t r e e t s which run to the west from Pandosy Str e e t to the l a k e r e f l e c t the long narrow l o t s of the o r i g i n a l Sam Long survey. - 22 -I n c o r p o r a t i o n The Lequime brothers moved t h e i r commercial operations from P r i e s t ' s V a l l e y to the foot of Bernard Avenue near the f e r r y s l i p a f t e r the r e g i s -t r a t i o n of the townsite p l a n i n 1892 (see map on f o l l o w i n g page). The Leq'uimes a l s o b u i l t a sawmill across Bernard, on the lakeshore. The pro-v i n c i a l government d i d not c o n t r o l land use i n unincorporated areas at t h i s time, and the new town developed i n a r a t h e r haphazard f a s h i o n . A f i r e insurance map shows that a number of small houses were s c a t t e r e d among s e v e r a l s t o r e s and a h o t e l which was b u i l t soon a f t e r the townsite was e s t a b l i s h e d . A school was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1892, a new post o f f i c e opened i n 1893, and the f i r s t doctor, Dr. Boyce, a r r i v e d i n 1894 (Buck-l a n d , 1966) . Businessman David L l o y d Jones came to Kelowna from Summer-land i n t h i s p e r i o d and bought a h a l f - s h a r e of the. Lequime Saw M i l l , the name of which was changed to the Kelowna Saw M i l l . The m i l l was a very important p a r t of the community at t h i s time, p r o v i d i n g jobs f o r s e t t l e r s and good lumber f o r the r a p i d l y developing community. By mid-decade, Kelowna was a b u s t l i n g , unincorporated community of a few hundred, who were beginning to see the p o t e n t i a l of co-operative a c t i o n s and community s p i r i t . A new school house was b u i l t by the com-munity. The Okanagan V a l l e y Co-operative A s s o c i a t i o n was formed i n 1893. In. 1898, the Kelowna Shippers Union was brought i n t o being, to market cen-t r a l Okanagan a g r i c u l t u r a l products i n new l o c a t i o n s . In 1899 and again i n 1902, the.Kelowna Saw M i l l burned to the ground. With f i r e a constant t h r e a t to the community, the r e s i d e n t s of Kelowna responded by purchasing a small f i r e engine to supplement the bucket brigade which had p r e v i o u s l y served as Kelowna's f i r e p r o t e c t i o n . In 1903, w i t h the lake at record CITY OF KELOWNA ORIGINAL TOWNSITE DOYLE AVE. SAWMILL SITE JCIV1C CENTRE1947) Sourcei PDCO Compos Base No. 39 - 24 -high l e v e l s , M i l l Creek broke through i t s banks, f l o o d i n g the downtown area. These events, and othe r s , l e d some of the townspeople to c a l l f o r the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of the community of approximately. 600 people. An excerpt from the Kelowna Courier (February 23, 1905: 4) gives some i n d i c a t i o n of the f a c t o r s which l e d the community to p e t i t i o n f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n : The h e a l t h of the c i t i z e n s , the general appearance of the town, as w e l l as many other matters.of p u b l i c importance demand a t t e n t i o n . We expect a l a r g e i n f l u x of s e t t l e r s and v i s i t o r s i n the Spring so i t i s impera-t i v e that the place be made as a t t r a c t i v e as p o s s i b l e . Kelowna has not been able to r e t a i n a l l who have come . . here w i t h the i n t e n t i o n of s t a y i n g and the cause can be a t t r i b u t e d to a great degree to u n s u i t a b l e s a n i -t a r y c o n d i t i o n s . Get incorporated and cle a n up the town. In subsequent e d i t i o n s , t h e . e d i t o r of the r e c e n t l y e s t a b l i s h e d newspaper argued f o r the m u n i c i p a l i t y , once in c o r p o r a t e d , to c o n t r o l i r r i g a t i o n waters and to seek p r o v i n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e to lower the l e v e l of the l a k e . The p e t i t i o n f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n was forwarded to the province and on May 4, 1905 the B r i t i s h Columbia Gazette (pp. 927-29) records the issuance of L e t t e r s Patent f o r the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of the "Corporation of the C i t y of Kelowna", under S e c t i o n 3 of the M u n i c i p a l Incorporations Act (SBC, 1899, Chapter 55). The L e t t e r s Patent describe the metes and bounds of the new 1281-acre c i t y , an area l a r g e enough to i n c l u d e the o r i g i n a l Lequime town-s i t e and the northern l o t s of the KLO Company s u b d i v i s i o n , a s i z e Kelowna was to remain u n t i l 1960. The document a l s o provided f o r the e l e c t i o n of a mayor and f i v e aldermen, described the e l e c t i o n r e g u l a t i o n s , and appointed a r e t u r n i n g o f f i c e r . To save e l e c t i o n expenses which were to be borne by the new m u n i c i p a l i t y , the Courier c a l l e d f o r the acclamation of the s i x men best s u i t e d to represent the c i t y , although i t d e c l i n e d to name any candidates. On Thursday, May 18, 1905, s i x new c o u n c i l members were - 25 -acclaimed: Mayor H.W. Raymer, a l o c a l c o n t r a c t o r and businessman, and f i v e aldermen, i n c l u d i n g the postmaster, a rancher, and three business-men. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , of the f i r s t c o u n c i l l o r s , only Raymer's name appears on the February 27, 1905 p e t i t i o n f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n to the p r o v i n c i a l gov-ernment (BC Gazette, 1905: 421). The New C i t y and the Park As has been shown, at the time of i n c o r p o r a t i o n the c e n t r a l Okanagan was a rapidly-growing area, and Kelowna was at the centre of t h i s growth and development. The land companies were i n v e s t i n g l a r g e amounts of cap-i t a l a c q u i r i n g new l a n d , i n s t a l l i n g i r r i g a t i o n systems, and b u i l d i n g roads. New Businesses and p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s were being a t t r a c t e d to the area. Commercial and r e s i d e n t i a l , as w e l l as a g r i c u l t u r a l , land values were e s c a l a t i n g . The p o p u l a t i o n of the c i t y increased s i x f o l d between the. 1901 and 1911 census, w i t h the c i t y having 1663 r e s i d e n t s by the l a t t e r date. The KLO Company was p a r t i c u l a r l y s u c c e s s f u l , and by 1910, i t had an o f f i c e i n London to market i t s orchard la n d . At t h i s same time, a sur-veyor named R.H. Parkinson was preparing a s u b d i v i s i o n plan of the most n o r t h e r l y l o t s of the o l d Lequime Ranch property. The property, which was i n the new c i t y , was d i v i d e d i n t o s m a l l and l a r g e r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s . The s m a l l e s t l o t s (50'xl20') were l o c a t e d along Abbott St r e e t and Lake Avenue, l o t s w i t h i n easy walking .distance of downtown, and .were o r i g i n a l l y designed to appeal to lower-income households, who were not able to a f f o r d a horse or land f o r a s t a b l e ( N i g e l , n.d.). The f i r s t a c t i v i t i e s of C o u n c i l r e f l e c t e d the community's optimism. C o u n c i l had arranged to review by-laws from Kamloops and Revelstoke. - 26 -Kelowna's L e t t e r s Patent had provided f o r the appointment of a c l e r k , and f o r d i v i d i n g the c i t y i n t o wards. Enabling by-laws were passed f o r both of these a d m i n i s t r a t i v e items i n 1905. Other by-laws passed i n Council's f i r s t term i n c l u d e a Trades Licence By-Law (By-Law No. 2), a Pound By-Law (No. 3 ) , a By-Law Respecting P u b l i c Morals and Convenience (No. 4 ) , a By-Law Regulating S t r e e t s and Sidewalks and the T r a f f i c Thereon (No.6), and a P u b l i c Health By-Law (No. 8 ) . In a d d i t i o n to the c i t y c l e r k , both a con-s t a b l e and a medical h e a l t h o f f i c e r were appointed i n 1905, Dr. Boyce s e r v i n g i n the l a t t e r post. The f i r s t by-laws were r a t h e r s o p h i s t i c a t e d and may have b e n e f i t t e d from the examples provided by other m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , or from.the experience of C l e r k R.: Morrison, who. came, to t h e ' c i t y a f t e r f i f t e e n , years, of s i m i l a r -experience i n Manitoba. The Trade P r a c t i c e s By-Law r e q u i r e d only new businesses not p r e v i o u s l y l i c e n c e d by the p r o v i n c i a l government to o b t a i n a c i t y l i c e n c e and to pay a fee. C e r t a i n l i c e n c e s ( f o r i n s t a n c e , the l i c e n c e f o r pawnbrokers at $125 f o r each s i x months, compared to a t y p i c a l r e t a i l e r ' s fee of $5) were so expensive t h a t they must have been intended to have an e x c l u s i o n a r y e f f e c t . S e c t i o n 5 of the P u b l i c Health By-Law provided the medical h e a l t h o f f i c e r w i t h the a u t h o r i t y "to order to be destroyed" c e r t a i n b u i l d i n g s dangerous to the p u b l i c h e a l t h . This same by-law regulated the maintenance of s t r e e t r a i l w a y or tramway c a r r i a g e s , an obviously f a r s i g h t e d piece of r e g u l a t i o n f o r a community of s i x hundred i n h a b i t a n t s . In i t s f i r s t assessment of C o u n c i l , the Courier p r a i s e s the p o l i t i -cians f o r t h e i r f i s c a l r e s t r a i n t : " F o r t u n a t e l y f o r Kelowna a l l procedure has been c h a r a c t e r i z e d by moderation, no rash scheme to plunge the C i t y in.debt having been suggested." (June_15,.1905: 4). From the f i r s t days of i n c o r p o r a t i o n , the c i t y c o n t r i b u t e d to the maintenance of vacant, privately-owned land f o r c i t y park and r e c r e a t i o n purposes:' sports.ground f o r l a c r o s s e and soccer were l o c a t e d on vacant l o t s i n the downtown area, and the present Kelowna C i t y Park, which was then owned by one of the Lequimes, was being used by male bathers as a p u b l i c beach (Clement, 1955: 2). In the same June 15 a r t i c l e , the Courier went on to c a l l f o r the C i t y Fathers to ensure that an adequate supply of c i t y lakeshore be a v a i l a b l e f o r p u b l i c users. A major event occurred i n the c i t y before C o u n c i l could t u r n i t s a t t e n t i o n to waterfront access f o r the p u b l i c . In the winter of 1905-06, the Kelowna Saw M i l l was again destroyed by f i r e . The m i l l was s t i l l l o c a t e d at the f o o t of Bernard Avenue i n the heart of the commercial d i s -t r i c t , and i t was g e n e r a l l y f e l t that t h i s l o c a t i o n was i n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r i n d u s t r i a l use. In d i s c u s s i o n s . a f t e r . t h e . f i r e , Council-decided-to .encour-age the owners to r e b u i l d the m i l l away from Bernard. A s p e c i a l meeting of C o u n c i l was c a l l e d on May 4, 1906 to d i s c u s s the r e l o c a t i o n of the m i l l L l o y d Jones, now the f u l l owner, asked C o u n c i l to consider exempting the m i l l from property t a x a t i o n to make the move to a new l o c a t i o n more a t t r a c t i v e to the company. On October 16, 1906, C o u n c i l passed By-Law No. 16, which exempted the Kelowna Saw M i l l Company from property taxes f o r a p e r i o d of ten years. For i t s p a r t , the company moved the m i l l a block north from i t s o l d l o c a t i o n , where i t remained u n t i l 1945, at which time the m i l l once again became important to the development of Kelowna. This c o u n c i l d e c i s i o n marks both the f i r s t p u b l i c r e s o l u t i o n to a f f e c t the c i v i c p a t t e r n of land use and the c i t y ' s f i r s t use of a f i s c a l i n c e n t i v e - 28 -f o r i n d u s t r i a l development. The Tax Rate By-Law of 1906 (By-Law No. 12) shows an assessed value of land and property i n the c i t y of $276,000, a budget of $4,005 f o r the c i t y ' s general expenditure, $1,510 f o r school purposes, no budget f o r debt r e t i r e m e n t , a l l to be r a i s e d by a 20 m i l l assessment on the c i t i z e n s . In t h i s p e r i o d , the c i t y began to expend funds f o r major c i v i c improve-ments, s t a r t i n g w i t h board sidewalks, q u i c k l y progressing to water s e r -v i c e , an e l e c t r i c power p l a n t , and a modern h o s p i t a l f a c i l i t y . The c i t y r a i s e d funds f o r these purposes by s e l l i n g debentures—by going i n t o debt. By 1908, only two years l a t e r , the t o t a l m u n i c i p a l debt was reported to be $74,500 (Couri e r , February 11, 1901: 1 ) , a very r a p i d accumulation. In 1907, Mayor D.W. Sutherland was e l e c t e d , r e p l a c i n g Mayor Raymer, who returned to h i s c o n t r a c t i n g business f u l l - t i m e . Raymer l a t e r won a c o n t r a c t w i t h the c i t y to b u i l d the f i r s t permanent bridges across M i l l Creek on Abbott, Pendozi and R i c h t e r S t r e e t s (Council Minutes, V o l . 1, 260). Mayor Sutherland came to Kelowna i n 1892 as the school master, teaching f i r s t i n Lequime's H a l l and l a t e r i n the new school house b u i l t by Raymer (Buckland, 1966, 93). By the t u r n of the century, Sutherland had l e f t h i s teaching post and had entered the r e a l e s t a t e p r o f e s s i o n , purchasing and s u b d i v i d i n g the A.B. Knox farm i n p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h three others, i n c l u d i n g F.R.E. Dehart. Sutherland served as alderman on the f i r s t c o u n c i l . Dehart was e l e c t e d i n 1908 as an alderman. He was appointed chairman of the Finance Committee and was r e s p o n s i b l e i n t h i s p o s i t i o n f o r prepar-in g a statement of accounts f o r Council's review and approval, and f o r - 29 -i s s u i n g payment t h e r e a f t e r . The Courier of November 26, 1908 (p. 3) r e p o r t s a l i v e l y d i s c u s s i o n i n C o u n c i l regarding Dehart's payment without C o u n c i l a u t h o r i t y of a s m a l l account. Dehart i s l a t e r p u b l i c l y censured by C o u n c i l . Subsequent Courier numbers and C o u n c i l Minutes give no i n d i -c a t i o n of Dehart's f u r t h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n to C o u n c i l d i s c u s s i o n , and i t i s probable that Dehart chose not to r e t u r n to C o u n c i l . Not, that i s , u n t i l a f t e r the c i v i c e l e c t i o n s of 1909, at which time he contested and won the o f f i c e of Mayor. Although the incumbent, Sutherland, d i d not contest the e l e c t i o n , he was to r e t u r n to the mayoralty i n 1910, s e r v i n g the c i t y u n t i l 1929. Dehart's e l e c t i o n d i d l i t t l e to r e s o l v e the hard f e e l i n g s on C o u n c i l and, upon h i s e l e c t i o n , three aldermen resigned, to be replaced by three new aldermen who were e l e c t e d by acclamation. Other than the sparse record contained i n C o u n c i l Minutes, l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e about t h i s tumultuous time i n Kelowna's p o l i -t i c a l h i s t o r y . The causes which produced such dramatic p o l i t i c a l e f f e c t s are u n c l e a r . The major c i v i c i s s u e s at t h i s time,'however, were the c i t y ' s f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n and the s t r a i n that would be put on that p o s i -t i o n by the a c q u i s i t i o n of the C i t y Park property. I t may be that these i s s u e s c o n t r i b u t e d to the obvious p o l i t i c a l u nrest, i n a community which four years p r e v i o u s l y had been able to appoint a f u l l c o u n c i l w i t h -out d i s s e n t . From the f i r s t days of the townsite's i n h a b i t a t i o n , the acreage that was to become Kelowna C i t y Park had served a p a r k l i k e f u n c t i o n f o r the town's r e s i d e n t s , although i t was owned by the Lequimes. Soon a f t e r i n c o r -p o r a t i o n , C o u n c i l began to consider the p o s s i b i l i t y of buying the t h i r t y -s i x - a c r e s i t e . David Lloyd Jones i s c r e d i t e d by a l o c a l h i s t o r i a n w i t h - 30 -coming to the a i d of the c i t y , purchasing the s i t e from the Lequimes i n 1908, to prevent i t from being subdivided i n t o r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s . That same year, L l o y d Jones appealed to C o u n c i l f o r exemption from taxes because of the use of the s i t e f o r p u b l i c purposes (Council Minutes, V o l . 1: 292). Minutes from the f o l l o w i n g meeting record Council.'s d e c i s i o n to grant L l o y d Jones a p a r t i a l rebate on taxes paid (p. 293). At t h i s time, C o u n c i l was r e c o n s i d e r i n g purchasing the Park through debenture f i n a n c i n g . L l o y d Jones wrote to the c i t y i n d i c a t i n g that he would be prepared to s e l l the s i t e , g i v i n g the c i t y f i r s t o p t i o n and a discount of $1,000 on the asking p r i c e of $30,000: a p r i c e of n e a r l y $800 an acre (Minutes, V o l . 1: 293). The A g r i c u l t u r a l and Trade A s s o c i a -t i o n was i n t e r e s t e d i n s e l l i n g t h e i r . f a i r g r o u n d s to the c i t y a l s o at t h i s time, and R.H. Parkinson, the surveyor, wrote to the c i t y g i v i n g h i s pro^ f e s s i o n a l o p i n i o n that "the Park property i s a much more d e s i r a b l e s i t e f o r a park and r e c r e a t i o n ground than the A g r i c u l t u r a l and Trade A s s o c i a -t i o n f a i r g r o u n d s . " (Minutes, V o l 1: 309). Parkinson a l s o counselled the c i t y "to reconsider Mr. L l o y d Jones' o f f e r before the property passes to s p e c u l a t o r s . " During t h i s p e r i o d , major c i t y purchases r e q u i r e d the approval of the e l e c t o r a t e i n s p e c i a l l y - s c h e d u l e d referenda, and a f t e r the 1909 e l e c -t i o n and the acclamation of three new aldermen, C o u n c i l arranged to hold a vote on a purchase by-law f o r the C i t y Park (No. 54). An unprecedented meeting of c i v i c v o t e r s ( B r i t i s h land-owning males over twenty-one) and other i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s was held on the by-law question. The Courier reported that the c i t y ' s f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n was the main t o p i c of concern at the meeting. Although adm i t t i n g to budgetary excess i n the past, the - 31 -plan to acquire the Park was staunchly defended by aldermen i n attendance, as w e l l as by Parkinson. The proponents argued w i t h d i s s e n t e r s i n the crowd that p o r t i o n s . o f the new park could e a s i l y be subdivided and s o l d f o r r e s i d e n t i a l purposes, i f C o u n c i l desperately needed a d d i t i o n a l funds. A unanimous vote of support at the c i v i c meeting turned i n t o a referendum v i c t o r y f o r the pro-park C o u n c i l , w i t h 133 of 156 votes cast i n favour of the proposed purchase by-law. E a r l y R e s i d e n t i a l Considerations The debenture issued on the a u t h o r i t y of By-Law No. 54 r a i s e d $33,300, of which only $29,295 was needed to buy the land; the c i t y used the excess to make b a s i c park improvements w i t h the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a perimeter park d r i v e , a d r i v e which appears on.a 1912 survey p l a n of adjacent r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s , probable at t h i s time. The 1912 survey was r e g i s t e r e d by R.H. Parkinson f o r the small l o t s u b d i v i s i o n of the northernmost KLO lands. But f o r M i l l Creek, some of the new l o t s bordered on the new C i t y Park. While l e s s dramatic than the e f f e c t on r e s i d e n t a l land of C e n t r a l Park i n New York C i t y or Stanley Park i n Vancouver, there can be l i t t l e doubt that C i t y Park enhanced the value of s p e c i f i c r e s i d e n t i a l property and of the community as a whole. The Park served as evidence of the p r o g r e s s i v e and c i v i l i z e d nature of the l i t t l e town and was soon being touted,.along w i t h the polo and c r i c k e t teams, i n land company promotions (Surtees, 1979b, n.p.) . In the midst of the controversy surrounding the park a c q u i s i t i o n , By-Law No. 57 was passed w i t h no recorded p u b l i c r e a c t i o n . The by-law d e a l t w i t h "the e r e c t i o n and removal of b u i l d i n g s and the prevention of - 32 -f i r e s . " By-Law No. 57 was the f i r s t r e g u l a t i o n to exclude c e r t a i n uses from the g e n e r a l l y r e s i d e n t i a l area between Lawrence Avenue and M i l l Creek. That Secti o n 4 of the by-law s t a t e d , " i t s h a l l be unlawful to e r e c t , lease or otherwise o b t a i n any b u i l d i n g s or premises to be used as wash houses or l a u n d r i e s w i t h i n the boundaries heretofore mentioned...," excluding only those two uses i s perhaps more i n d i c a t i v e of zoning f o r r a c i a l r a t h e r than use e x c l u s i o n , the p r o p r i e t o r s of wash houses and l a u n d r i e s being almost s o l e l y Chinese. Kelowna was not alone i n t h i s type of r e g u l a t i o n . Indeed, the p r o v i n c i a l government had delegated a u t h o r i t y to l o c a l government as e a r l y as 1897 to c o n t r o l the l o c a t i o n of wash houses and l a u n d r i e s , . i n .the M u n i c i p a l Clauses Act (SBC, 1897: Chapter 144(91)). A review of other l e g i s l a t i o n shows that the province allowed muni-c i p a l i t i e s the r i g h t to review the l o c a t i o n of c e r t a i n i n d u s t r i a l uses, through an amendment to the M u n i c i p a l Clauses Act i n 1908 (RSBC, 1908: Chapter 50(141a)). In 1912 Kelowna C o u n c i l .passed the Business L o c a t i o n R e s t r i c t i o n By-Law (No. 107) which made use of t h i s delegate a u t h o r i t y . S p e c i f i c a l l y , C o u n c i l gave i t s e l f the a u t h o r i t y to c o n t r o l the f o l l o w i n g land uses which had the p o t e n t i a l to reduce "the value of a c c e s s i b l e property": breweries, s t a b l e s , sawmills, chemical works, lumber yards, p a i n t works, p i g g e r i e s , blacksmith shops, f o u n d r i e s , l a u n d r i e s and wash house b u i l d i n g s . " Perhaps more important than t h i s e a r l y a u t h o r i t y to c o n t r o l the l o c a t i o n of i n d u s t r i a l land uses was the p r i v a t e market d e c i -s i o n of Dr. Boyce, who bought the Lequime l o t s to the north of the new m i l l , l o t s which were "turned back from b u i l d i n g l o t s to acreages by con-sent of the p r o v i n c i a l land r e g i s t r y o f f i c e " (Clement, 1955: 2). W e l l -removed from the b e t t e r r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s , these l a r g e l o t s soon - 33 -became a t t r a c t i v e f o r canneries, packing houses, warehouses, and slaugh-terhouses. The r a p i d development of the Okanagan ranch land by a number of com-pet i n g land companies soon l e d to a g l u t of orchard land f o r s a l e and an overproduction of f r u i t crops. In many cases, poor land management a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d to a c o l l a p s e of the boom i n the e a r l y years of World War I (Okanagan Basin C o n s u l t a t i v e Board, 1974, 22). The e f f e c t of the war i t s e l f should not be discounted, as new and p r o s p e c t i v e o r c h a r d i s t s turned from a g r i c u l t u r a l p u r s u i t s i n the Okanagan to the war e f f o r t i n Europe, many never to r e t u r n . The d e c l i n e i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy at t h i s time a l s o had a d e b i l i t a t i n g e f f e c t on the C i t y of Kelowna's economy. F i s c a l conserva-t i v e s , who had warned of the p o t e n t i a l l y d i s a s t e r o u s e f f e c t s of debt-financed c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s , were shown to be c o r r e c t , and by 1915, the c i t y was i n such deep debt that c i t y employees, f e a r i n g c i t y bankruptcy and the l o s s of t h e i r j o b s , p e t i t i o n e d C o u n c i l f o r a r e d u c t i o n i n wages. Over-drawn s e r i o u s l y at t h i s time, the c i t y d i d not have the money to meet i t s current expenses (Kelowna A r c h i v e s , n.d.). By-Law No. 216 (March 10, 1916) records the c i t y borrowing $32,000 from the Bank of Montreal on the s t r e n g t h of unpaid taxes, i n order to meet the expenses of the c i t y which, at that time, included payments of $30,800 on i n t e r e s t and c a p i t a l f o r e a r l i e r c a p i t a l purchases. Then, as now, p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n gave m u n i c i p a l i t i e s the author-i t y to take land from r e g i s t e r e d owners.who were i n .d e f a u l t . o f tax payments and the i n t e r e s t thereon. By-Law No. 164 (August 14, 1914), a t a x - s a l e - 34 -postponement by-law, was i n d i c a t i v e of the c i t y ' s i n i t i a l h esitancy to make use .of t h i s power, postponing 1914 t a x - s a l e s to 1915. By the end of the war, the c i t y had becomed inured to the t a x - s a l e process and had become a major land owner. Many of the c i t y ' s new p r o p e r t i e s were vacant-b u t - s e r v i c e d r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s which the c i t y was able to s e l l i n ^ t h e years f o l l o w i n g the war. - 35 -CHAPTER I I I : LAND USE CONTROL AND:PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN 1918-39 Post World War I Development With the c e s s a t i o n of the c o n f l i c t i n Europe, the stage was set f o r the economic recovery of the c e n t r a l Okanagan. With the help of the Bank of Montreal, the C i t y of Kelowna had survived the f i n a n c i a l c r i s i s caused by the war and the a g r i c u l t u r a l market c o l l a p s e , and w i t h the help of Medical Health O f f i c e r Knox and three s p e c i a l h o s p i t a l s (one each f o r the whites, Japanese and Chinese), the c i t y s u rvived the Spanish i n f l u e n z e epidemic of 1918. Although many i n the community b e l i e v e d that r a p i d growth was soon to begin again, the c e n t r a l Okanagan was slow to recover from the s h a t t e r i n g events of the previous ten years. Overproduction and poor land management, which were e a r l i e r c i t e d as reasons f o r the c o l l a p s e of the land market i n 1912, continued to plague the the a g r i c u l t u r a l i n d u s t r y at t h i s time. Often unable to market t h e i r remaining pa r c e l s . o f . i r r i g a t e d . l a n d , now recognized a s . o v e r p r i c e d , the land companies began to increase fees .for the p r o v i s i o n of i r r i g a t i o n water to the e s t a b l i s h e d orchards, to t u r n a p r o f i t . Such an increase i n fees put a d d i t i o n a l pressure on o r c h a r d i s t s who were competing i n a g l u t -ted, and e s s e n t i a l l y f r e e , market f o r ..the. s a l e . of . t h e i r - c r o p . . The r e s u l t -ant f i n a n c i a l squeeze, caused by increased costs and reduced p r o f i t s , encouraged the o r c h a r d i s t s to form co-operative unions. Ormsby (1931, 90-98) describes the approaches used by Okanagan o r c h a r d i s t s to wrest c o n t r o l of i r r i g a t i o n systems from the land companies, u l t i m a t e l y having c o n t r o l and ownership s h i f t to a s s o c i a t i o n s of o r c h a r d i s t s . S i m i l a r l y , co-opera-t i v e marketing agencies, supported by. p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n , emerged i n - 36 -the 1920's to extend the markets f o r Okanagan f r u i t and to guarantee p r i c e s f o r producers (Okanagan Basin C o n s u l t a t i v e Board, 1974). During t h i s p e r i o d of readjustment i n . t h e orcharding i n d u s t r y , the composition of the p o p u l a t i o n was a l s o changing. E a r l y recruitment of s e t t l e r s by the land companies had taken place p r i m a r i l y i n the B r i t i s h I s l e s . Many of these e a r l y B r i t i s h s e t t l e r s were the s o - c a l l e d "remit-tance men" who had:.been a t t r a c t e d to the Okanagan by the somewhat deceiv-ing land company advertisements appealing to gentlemen farmers. These remittance men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s g e n e r a l l y possessed some f i n a n c i a l wealth from other sources and were o f t e n poorly prepared for,.and only m i l d l y i n t e r e s t e d i n , the hard work necessary to b u i l d a s u c c e s s f u l farming o p e r a t i o n . Ormsby (1931, 167) s t a t e s t h a t , a f t e r 1920, 870 s o l -d i e r s obtained loans under the Federal S o l d i e r s Settlement Act f o r farm-ing i n the Okanagan, but many of the s o l d i e r s a l s o had d i f f i c u l t y d e v e l -oping p r o f i t a b l e orchards, and by 1931, 430 of these farmers had allowed t h e i r property to be reclaimed by th S o l d i e r Settlement Board. Those who d i d come and prosper were uniformly hard-working and o f t e n d i s l i k e d by the e a r l i e r s e t t l e r s f o r t h e i r success and/or because of t h e i r Eastern or Southern European or A s i a n ancestry. The f a i l u r e of the land boom i n 1912 and the continued l a c k of sus-tained success f o r Okanagan orchard products i n e x t e r n a l markets l e d to a search w i t h i n the community f o r other p r o f i t a b l e export goods. In t h i s p e r i o d , market gardens and canneries f o r the processing of both garden and orchard produce became more prominent i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. The Kelowna Saw M i l l and other m i l l s i n .the v a l l e y began to ship p o l e s , t i e s , and lumber to other Canadian markets. The c o n s t r u c t i o n of a r a i l l i n k from Vernon to Kelowna, completed i n 1925 by the Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway, - 37 -gave the producers of the c e n t r a l Okanagan much e a s i e r access to p o t e n t i a l markets. The r a i l l i n k had i t s southern terminus i n Kelowna, and u n t i l 1973, r a i l access south to P e n t i c t o n and the K e t t l e V a l l e y L i n e (completed i n 1915) was p o s s i b l e only r a i l car barge. In 1973 even t h i s method was abandoned. The C i t y of Kelowna continued to grow a f t e r World War I , a l b e i t a t a reduced r a t e . In f a c t , a review of the 1921 census shows that the c i t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n grew from 1663 to 2520.between 1911 and 1921, a moderate annual growth r a t e of approximately four per cent. This r a t e of growth increased a f t e r 1921 and was high enough to e s t a b l i s h Kelowna as the l a r g e s t c i t y i n the Okanagan by 1928, w i t h a po p u l a t i o n of 4313, o u t s t r i p p i n g the C i t y of Vernon. Some r e s i d e n t i a l growth was o c c u r r i n g o utside the boundaries of the C i t y of Kelowna i n t h i s p e r i o d as w e l l , growth which l e d to the i n c o r -p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t M u n i c i p a l i t y of Glenmore i n 1922. Glenmore was s i t u a t e d on the eastern boundary of the c i t y and extended s e v e r a l miles to the east and north,: i n t o purely a g r i c u l t u r a l lands. C o u n c i l began to develop and adopt more development c o n t r o l s i n t h i s p e r i o d . While only c e r t a i n r e t a i l and i n d u s t r i a l uses had been regulated p r i o r to World, War .1, . i n .192.4, the . c i t y , passed a d e t a i l e d E i r e .Limits and B u i l d i n g Regulations By-Law (No. 398), which e s t a b l i s h e d seven b u i l d i n g c l a s s e s and then set l i m i t s and r e g u l a t i o n s f o r each type of b u i l d i n g per-m i t t e d . The by-law went on to describe by metes and bounds the area of the c i t y i n which each type of b u i l d i n g was permitted. The by-law a l s o c o n t r o l l e d the use of land i n c e r t a i n d i s t r i c t s : f o r i n s t a n c e , Class Four b u i l d i n g s were l i m i t e d to p r i v a t e d w e l l i n g s . Such use r e s t r i c t i o n s c l o s e l y resembled zoning c o n t r o l , which was not permitted i n B r i t i s h Columbia u n t i l - 38 -the f o l l o w i n g year, when the L e g i s l a t u r e would pass the Town Planning Act (SBC, 1925: Chapter 55). In other business the f o l l o w i n g year, C o u n c i l f i n a l l y recognized the contribution.made to the .control of p u b l i c h e a l t h by Dr. W.J. Knox, the c i t y ' s second doctor, who a l s o served as the medi-c a l h e a l t h o f f i c e r , and By-Law No. 407 provided Knox some f i n a n c i a l com-pensation f o r h i s e f f o r t s . Census records show that the c i t y began to grow more r a p i d l y i n the 1921-1931 i n t e r c e n s a l p e r i o d , the p o p u l a t i o n i n c r e a s i n g from 2520 to 4655, an annual growth r a t e of approximately 6.5 per cent. A d d i t i o n a l l y , the assessed values of improvements f o r t a x a t i o n purposes rose from $1,648,000 i n 1921, to $2,361,905 i n 1926, and to $3,071,000 i n 1931, n e a r l y doubling the value of improvements i n a ten-year p e r i o d . As the c i t y grew, the need f o r more s t r i n g e n t r e g u l a t i o n and c o n t r o l became more.apparent. C o u n c i l began to adopt more t e c h n i c a l r e g u l a t i o n s i n the areas of engineering and p u b l i c h e a l t h , and to give more a u t h o r i t y to appointed o f f i c i a l s to administer these by-laws. In co-operation w i t h the p r o v i n c i a l government, a f u l l - t i m e medical h e a l t h o f f i c e r was appoin-ted i n 1929 (By-Law No. 509). The C i t y Engineer began to i s s u e s e p t i c tank permits, not p r e v i o u s l y r e q u i r e d f o r new c o n s t r u c t i o n (By-Law No. 479). The Engineering Department a l s o assumed more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the r e g u l a t i o n of t r a f f i c on s t r e e t s and sidewalks (By-Law No. 514). C o u n c i l a l s o introduced and adopted the c i t y ' s f i r s t S u b d i v i s i o n C o n t r o l By-Law (no. 516) which reads i n p a r t : Before any s u b d i v i s i o n plan i s approved the C o u n c i l may r e q u i r e the owner of the land proposed to be sub-d i v i d e d to c l e a r and grade a l l roads and lanes shown on such plans f o r the f u l l width of the road and lane allowance, and to provide road and land drainage - 39 -f a c i l i t i e s i n c l u d i n g a l l necessary c u l v e r t work, and to have a l l roads contour graded and g r a v e l l e d or rocked i n accordance w i t h the plans and s p e c i f i c a -t i o n s recommended by the C i t y Engineer. The c i t y a l s o sought methods of t a x a t i o n i n a d d i t i o n to the property tax: i n 1928, the c i t y introduced a P o l l Tax of $5 on men over the age of twenty-one who were not property owners (By-Law No. 491); i n 1939, t h i s tax was supplemented w i t h a Road Tax on the same members of the c i t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n (By-Law No. 789). The Depression and the F i r s t Zoning By-Law The B r i t i s h Columbia Town Planning Act was the f i r s t p r o v i n c i a l s t a t -ute which delegated the a u t h o r i t y to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s to r e g u l a t e land use through zoning. As has been shown, Kelowna was excluding p a r t i c u l a r uses and r e g u l a t i n g the use of land i n a z o n i n g - l i k e f a s h i o n s e v e r a l years p r i o r to 1925. I f we t r y to r e c o n s t r u c t the general land use of the c i t y at t h i s time, i t i s apparent that the e a r l y e x c l u s i o n a r y by-laws, at l e a s t from the p o i n t of view of the m a j o r i t y of the property owners and v o t e r s , had more or l e s s s u c c e s s f u l l y shaped the development of the c i t y . Industry was l o c a t e d p r i m a r i l y to the north of the Kelowna Saw M i l l , and was g e n e r a l l y . b u f f e r e d from r e s i d e n t i a l development by vacant or commercial land. The 1925 r a i l l i n e was able to gain access to t h i s i n d u s t r i a l area without much d i s r u p t i o n of e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t a l land uses, p r o v i d i n g , i n t u r n , a f u r t h e r i n c e n t i v e f o r i n d u s t r i a l l o c a t i o n to the north of the bus^ iness d i s t r i c t . Bernard Avenue and the waterfront continued to be the focus of commercial growth, w i t h r e t a i l and o f f i c e growth o c c u r r i n g to the east on Bernard and to the north and south on p a r a l l e l avenues near the w a t e r f r o n t . E a r l y C o u n c i l i n i t i a t i v e , too, had secured Chinese shops and residences i n a s m a l l area near the commercial core j u s t to the south of - 40 -Bernard Avenue. Abbott and Pandosy St r e e t addresses came to be the most p r e s t i g i o u s f o r r e s i d e n t i a l l o c a t i o n , w i t h a d d i t i o n a l r e s i d e n t i a l cons-t r u c t i o n i n the KLO s u b d i v i s i o n and across M i l l Creek, i n the o r i g i n a l townsite to the east of the commercial core. The C i t y Park, now w e l l -t r e e d , was recognized by c i t i z e n and t o u r i s t a l i k e as a s i n g u l a r b e n e f i t to the community, a f e a t u r e which d i s t i n g u i s h e d Kelowna from other l e s s "well-planned" Okanagan communties (Cushing, 1981). The.year 1929 brought, the Great Depression and, once..again the s t a t e of the Canadian and world economies a f f e c t e d the economy of the c e n t r a l Okanagan which, attempts at d i v e r s i t y notwithstanding, remained essen-t i a l l y an a g r i c u l t u r a l economy. With the depression i n p r i c e s i n world markets and the f u r t h e r c o l l a p s e of the p r a i r i e wheat farming economy through drought, t r a d i t i o n a l markets f o r c e n t r a l Okanagan apples d r i e d up or became u n p r o f i t a b l e . The depression i n the f r u i t i n d u s t r y , i n t u r n , had a negative impact on the s e r v i c e and support i n d u s t r i e s i n the C i t y of Kelowna. For the f i r s t time s i n c e World War I , the c i t y began to take property i n the c i t y f o r non-payment of c i v i c taxes and, through tax s a l e s , owned 470 l o t s by 1938. The depression presented Kelowna. w i t h a . s e r i e s . o f .challenges. The c i t y was i n b e t t e r f i n a n c i a l c o n d i t i o n than other B r i t i s h Columbia muni-c i p a l i t i e s ; f o r i n s t a n c e , the C i t y and D i s t r i c t of North Vancouver and the D i s t r i c t of F e r n i e went bankrupt during t h i s p e r i o d . Nevertheless, s u b s t a n t i a l curbs had to be put on c i v i c i n i t i a t i v e s as the tax base dwin-dled through tax s a l e s and f a l l i n g property v a l u e s . The c i t y was a l s o faced w i t h growing r e l i e f payments, and the c i t y h i r e d a s o c i a l w e l fare o f f i c e r to administer the l o c a l w e l fare r o l l . This d i f f i c u l t p e r i o d pro-vided the c i t y w i t h two major pieces of parkland, however, as Dr. Boyce, - 41 -the long-time c i t y p h y s i c i a n and land developer, gave the c i t y w aterfront property on South Pandosy (now Boyce-Gyro Park) and the mountainous area to the north of the C i t y (Knox Mountain P a r k ) . C i t y records show that the assessed value of property had decreased between 1931 and 1936, w h i l e the assessed value of b u i l d i n g s had increased by some $250,000. Although a review of b u i l d i n g permits issues i n t h i s p e r i o d was not undertaken, i t appears that the l o c a l economy was exper-i e n c i n g a b i t of a r e v i v a l by the l a t t e r assessment date. With t h i s , minor recovery came new i n i t i a t i v e f o r land use c o n t r o l s i n the c i t y . A new F i r e L i m i t s and B u i l d i n g Regulations By-Law was adopted i n 1936 (No. 668). This by-law was i n many ways l e s s complex than the 1924 by-law which i t r e p l a c e d , r e g u l a t i n g the type of c o n s t r u c t i o n i n three, r a t h e r than s i x , c i t y b u i l d i n g d i s t r i c t s ; the by-law a l s o d i d not attempt to r e g u l a t e the use of land. At t h i s same time however, C o u n c i l was c o n s i d e r i n g the adoption of a more comprehensive and s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d zoning by-law as permitted under the Town Planning Act. In the o p i n i o n of the C a p i t a l News I l l u s t r a t e d of 1937, many of the c i t y ' s problems would be more e a s i l y solved i f a comprehensive p l a n and town planning commission were r e s p e c t i v e l y adopted and appointed. The e d i t o r of the C a p i t a l News s t a t e d , i n p a r t : Due to a l a c k of forethought i n some of the construc-t i o n of a few years ago and knowing what b e n e f i t s can be accomplished by proper planning, a Town Planning Commission has been suggested at many meetings. So f a r , l i t t l e has been done i n the matter, but i t i s evident that the day i s not f a r d i s t a n t when Kelowna w i l l have a Town Planning Commission which w i l l encour-age the c i t y to b u i l d to a p l a n r a t h e r than to keep on i n the more or l e s s haphazard way i n which i t has gone thus f a r . (Kelowna C i t y A r c h i v e s , 1981). Rather than support the p r e p a r a t i o n of a plan which had a h i s t o r i c a l - 42 -precedent i n B r i t i s h Columbia w i t h the Harland Bartolomew P l a n of Vancou-ve r , 1929, C o u n c i l opted f o r a comprehensive zoning by-law. The major proponent of.zoning on C o u n c i l was A i d . J.D. Pettigrew. He had obtained a copy of a model zoning by-law from the f e d e r a l government, which had r e c e n t l y become in v o l v e d i n m u n i c i p a l land use through the passage of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act i n 1938, (which w i l l be discussed i n more d e t a i l i n f o l l o w i n g pages). Committee of the Whole minutes ( V o l . 6: 18) of Sep-tember 6, 1938 r e v e a l that the mayor and C o u n c i l g e n e r a l l y agreed that the model r e g u l a t i o n was "too cumbersome" f o r a c i t y the s i z e of Kelowna. Two aldermen (Messrs. Cather and W i l l e t s ) were appointed to a s p e c i a l com-mittee to r e v i s e the t e x t of the zoning by-law f o r c o u n c i l ' s e a r l i e s t con-s i d e r a t i o n . Pettigrew and the C i t y Engineer t r a v e l l e d to Vernon to d i s -cover how a s i m i l a r by-law was being rec e i v e d i n that c i t y and, on October 3, 1938, Pettigrew reported that Vernon C o u n c i l was "very e n t h u s i a s t i c and unanimously i n favour of the by-law being passed." (Committee Minutes, V o l . 6: 29). Pettigrew was able to speed up-the work of the r e v i s i o n committee and, at the next Committee of the Whole meeting, he read a d r a f t of the r e v i s e d zoning by-law to the mayor and aldermen. At t h i s same meeting, the by-law was r e f e r r e d to the c i t y s o l i c i t o r , and when an a f f i r m a t i v e r e a c t i o n was r e c e i v e d , C o u n c i l scheduled a p u b l i c meeting to consider the proposed by-law. Records of the c i t y show that l e t t e r s and p e t i t i o n s were rece i v e d from concerned c i t i z e n s regarding the p o t e n t i a l adoption of the zoning ord-inance, although C o u n c i l d i s c u s s i o n i n d i c a t e s that o p p o s i t i o n to the by-law pertained to s p e c i f i c areas and zonings i n the c i t y , r a t h e r than to the general concept of the by-law. On November 14, 1938, the by-law was r e f e r -red to C o u n c i l , and one week l a t e r i t was adopted. - 43 -The 1938 Zoning By-Law (No. 740) d i v i d e d the c i t y i n t o twelve d i s -t r i c t s , each described i n a metes and bounds schedule. Each d i s t r i c t was f u r t h e r described as being included i n one of eigh t zones! A — R e t a i l , . B - L i g h t Industry, C - I n d u s t r i a l , D - O i l Storage, E - A g r i c u l t u r a l , F -L i v e Stock, G - Apartment, H - R e s i d e n t i a l . Part Four of the by-law con-ta i n e d a number of uses a b s o l u t e l y p r o h i b i t e d , i n c l u d i n g the f o l l o w i n g : "slaughterhouse, the keeping or r e a r i n g of hogs, tannery, or glue f a c t o r y . " P a r t S i x of the by-law allowed C o u n c i l to i s s u e permits f o r s p e c i a l uses, i n c l u d i n g churches and government b u i l d i n g s . The by-law a l s o provided f o r expansion of s i n g l e - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l land uses w h i l e r e s t r i c t i n g the expansion of r e t a i l and commercial uses. Dispensing model zoning l e g i s l a t i o n was not the only instance of f e d -e r a l l e a d e r s h i p i n muni c i p a l land use c o n t r o l and planning during the depression. In 1938, Parliament passed the N a t i o n a l Housing Act (NHA), Pa r t I I I of which was of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t to Kelowna and other munici-p a l i t i e s throughout the Dominion. Park I I I allowed the f e d e r a l government to purchase s e r v i c e d l o t s i n m u n i c i p a l i t i e s on which to b u i l d modest ren-t a l housing. To make i t more a t t r a c t i v e to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , Park I I I a l s o guaranteed to pay property taxes on the newly-constructed housing. The program was welcomed both as a s o c i a l planning i n i t i a t i v e to provide hous-ing f o r many needy r e s i d e n t s , and as a secure source of property tax d o l -l a r s f o r the community. At t h i s time, the C i t y of Kelowna owned 470 l o t s which met the c r i t e r i a of the program, and the c i t y o f f e r e d 115 l o t s to the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of the NHA f o r the development of Pa r t I I I housing. To meet NHA requirements, a Housing By-Law (No. 746) was passed i n 1939. The by-law o u t l i n e d the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the c i t y and the f e d e r a l government f o r any NHA housing constructed. - 44 -The Housing By-Law was the f i r s t significant piece of federally-sponsored regulation adopted by City Council. While Council was very enthusiastic about the provisions of Part III of the NHA, there is e v i -dence to suggest that the city fathers were less concerned with the social welfare of the inhabitants of the central Okanagan when the municipal purse was involved. As early as 1932, delegations..of unemployed demanding aid were dismissed by Council. Land use controls established by .the ci ty had been able to keep squatter settlements from being b u i l t in the city and, by 1939, Council was demanding that the shacks b u i l t outside the city by unemployed or migratory workers be more s t r i c t l y regulated by the prov-i n c i a l government. Committee Minutes of January 30, 1929 (Vol. 7: 82) records t h e . f i r s t in a long series of submissions to the province seeking the extension of zoning and subdivision controls i n the unincorporated areas around the c i t y , to al leviate the "undesirable shack town conditions." - 45 -CHAPTER IV: LAND USE CONTROL AND PLANNING IN THE CENTRAL OKANAGAN 1940-72 World War I I and Postwar Reconstruction D e c l a r a t i o n of war cut short a l l government planning and land use i n i t i a t i v e s i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. Neither the m u n i c i p a l i t y nor the province pursued the matter of shack town suburban development c o n t r o l during the war. Nor d i d the f e d e r a l government construct any housing under Part I I I of the N a t i o n a l Housing Act. As a l l a t t e n t i o n turned to the war e f f o r t , the land use c o n t r o l and planning i n i t i a t i v e which Coun-c i l was beginning to.develop ceased to be a p r i o r i t y . By-laws to amend the c i t y zoning by-law to accommodate more r e t a i l development which: were i n evidence-before the outbreak of the war gave way to by-laws encourag-ing the c o l l e c t i o n of important war metals and a u t h o r i z i n g tag days to r a i s e money f o r the war e f f o r t . By 1942, C o u n c i l became in v o l v e d i n c i v i l defense programs, and proposals were passed from m u n i c i p a l i t y to munici-p a l i t y , o f t e n through t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e Boards of Trade, regarding the v a r -ious means by which Japanese-Canadians could be ' r e p a t r i a t e d ' to Japan. C o u n c i l had s e v e r a l heated d i s c u s s i o n s about the internment and p o s s i b l e p a t r i a t i o n of Japanese-Canadians, and i t i s c l e a r that some members d i d not support the internment nor the p o s s i b l e p a t r i a t i o n of a group of c i t i z e n s who had e s t a b l i s h e d t h e i r value to the community. The assessed value of land i n the c i t y f e l l almost $140,000 between 1936 and 1941, w h i l e the value of improvements increased over $750,000. The cause of the changes i n assessed value i s not c l e a r ; i t may be that the p r i c e of land d i d f a l l i n the c i t y or i t may be that the assessor chose to increase the value of improvements, taxed at 33.33 per.cent of v a l u e , more - 46 -r a p i d l y than the value of r e a l property, taxed at 100 per cent of value. A review of the po p u l a t i o n change between 1931 and 1941 shows that the c i t y grew from 4655 to 5118, an annual growth r a t e of only one per cent. Indeed, Kelowna grew so slo w l y i n t h i s p e r i o d that both i t s Okanagan r i v a l s , Pen-t i c t o n , at 5777 and Vernon, at 5209, grew l a r g e r . U n l i k e s e v e r a l m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n the province, Kelowna was able to manage i t s finances during the depression. In s p i t e of the pressures of r e l i e f payments and the r e c u r r i n g problem of non-payment of property taxes, Kelowna emerged from the depression i n 1941 paying l e s s money to finance i t s debt ($32,765) than i t had going i n t o the depression 1931 ($40,811). While the c i t y had obtained a .number of r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s through tax s a l e s , the 1941 Census r e v e a l s that the community's housing stock emerged from the economic hard times r e l a t i v e l y well-maintained and well-equipped. In 1941, .there were 1367 dwellings i n Kelowna; of that t o t a l , 1223 were s i n -g l e - f a m i l y homes, 834 were owner-occupied, and only 167 were i n need of r e p a i r . The average value of an owner-occupied home was $1,107, the aver-age household s i z e was 3.5, and the.average annual income of a wage-earning occupant was $1,107. At t h i s time, 95 per cent of the households had run-ning water; 84.5 per.cent, f l u s h t o i l e t s ; 99.3 per cent, e l e c t r i c l i g h t s ; and 61.3 per cent, telephones. 3 On March 25, 1942, Prime M i n i s t e r Mackenzie King rose i n the House of Commons and, s t a t i n g that a f t e r the war was won, a vast task yet l a y ahead of the f r e e nations of the world, announced the establishemnt of a S p e c i a l Committee on Reconstruction and Re-Establishment (SCRR). At the f i r s t meeting of t h i s parliamentary committee, the Hon. Ian McKenzie, M i n i s t e r of Pensions.and.National H e a l t h , .presented .this, assessment ..of the_committee':s - 47 -role : It i s extremely d i f f i c u l t , under present conditions, to project schemes into the future for as the days go by hypotheses,.lines of solutions of problems, . . . methods, trends, p o l i t i c a l philosophies, and even party programs with regard to this whole matter change... social order reconstruction involves so many variables that controversy is inevitable, and some would have us believe that there is some r isk of sabotaging the war effort by divis ion of our forces in this l i f e and death struggle by premature discussions. The demand, however, for an i d e a l i s t i c type of reconstruction exists . (SCRR Minutes, 1942, 19) Four subcommittees were established, and the Subcommittee on Construction Projects was given the responsibili ty for housing and planning. A special advisory committee of academics and researchers, under Prof. C. Curtis of Queen's University, was established to investigate housing and community planning issues. In June, 1942. Mr. K.M. Cameron, Chairman of the Con-struction Subcommittee, reported on .the i n i t i a l consensus of the Curtis group, stating that i t s members were in complete agreement "that adequate city and regional planning is absolutely essential as the basis for any eff ic ient housing program." (SCRR Minutes, 1942, 119). Cameron also -reported that "In the case of smaller c i t i e s , towns, or. regions, properly prepared town plans should be completely developed and adopted before any postwar housing development is f i n a l l y approved." It is important to remember that not only the war, but the depression was also very much on the mind of the members of the various reconstruction committee members. SCRR faced a major policy dilemma: whether to r isk recommending a Keynesian-New Deal economic program similar to that of the United States, or to r i s k returning to the prewar la issez- fa i re economy, a system which had led to economic collapse. To make their task easier, SCRR sought the advice of the business community, and provincial and - 48 -munici p a l governments. In a d d i t i o n to a g r i c u l t u r a l and resource concerns, the committee heard a great d e a l about the need f o r more housing construc-t i o n and community planning. The Canadian C o n s t r u c t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n advo-cated s i x areas of government support f o r the i n d u s t r y , i n c l u d i n g "a hous-in g program which w i l l employ a greater p r o p o r t i o n of s k i l l e d craftsmen." (SCRR Minutes, 1943, 744). The Canadian Federation of Mayors and M u n i c i -p a l i t i e s (CFMM) s t a t e d , " I f we have l e f t the matter of housing to the l a s t , i t i s not because that we regard i t i n that order. Rather we are convinced that a f u l l - s c a l e a t t a c k on the housing problem i s by a l l odds the ranking A - l p r i o r i t y f o r the tasks of peace." (SCRR Minutes, 1943, 873). CFMM c a l l e d f o r a bold n a t i o n a l p o l i c y to house low-income people, as w e l l as programs to r e c t i f y the problems of urban b l i g h t and slums. While SCRR was r e c e i v i n g a l l the de l e g a t i o n s , the C u r t i s Committee was busy conducting i t s own research. The report which emerged set the stage f o r postwar r e c o n s t r u c t i o n at the l o c a l l e v e l . Among the recommend-a t i o n s proposed was the need f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of community plans f o r small urban communities p r i o r to the end of the war, so that "work on sound housing p r o j e c t s can begin immediately the war ends." (Advisory  Committee on Reco n s t r u c t i o n , V o l . IV, 1946, 15). The C u r t i s Committee judged the inadequate supply of housing as one of the most se r i o u s prob-lems of Canadian postwar r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . The Report assumed that "the great bulk of housing, whether p u b l i c l y , p r i v a t e l y , or c o - o p e r a t i v e l y owned w i l l be b u i l t by p r i v a t e c o n t r a c t o r s and corporations'.' (p. 9 ) , w i t h the r o l e of government as p r o t a g o n i s t , co-ordinator and, i n the case of low r e n t a l schemes, owner. The repo r t c a l l e d f o r the c r e a t i o n of a Dom-i n i o n Town Planning Agency to encourage community planning at the p r o v i n c i a l - 49 -and m u n i c i p a l l e v e l , to educate the p u b l i c on the need f o r town planning,' and to support the t r a i n i n g of town planning personnel (pp. 16-17). Many of the recommendations of the 1944 C u r t i s Report were embodied i n the N a t i o n a l Housing Act amendments of that same year, i n c l u d i n g the encouragement of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n community planning i n P a r t V (Carver, 1975, 88). From the C u r t i s Report came the establishment of the Community Planning A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada, an o r g a n i z a t i o n of p r o f e s s i o n a l planners and other persons i n t e r e s t e d i n planning, and the establishment .of the Cen-t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), to co-ordinate the C u r t i s amendments to the N a t i o n a l Housing Act. In .the years immediately f o l l o w -ing the war, the f e d e r a l government, w i t h the support of p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l a u t h o r i t i e s , a g g r e s s i v e l y pursued the production .of housing, i n i t i a l l y through Wartime Housing L i m i t e d , and l a t e r through CMHC. In B r i t i s h Columbia, as i n other provinces, L e g i s l a t i v e Committees were e s t a b l i s h e d to develop p r o v i n c i a l plans f o r p o s t w a r ^ r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . One a c t i v e member of B r i t i s h Columbia's Postwar R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Committee was Mr. W.A.C. Bennett, then a r e c e n t l y - e l e c t e d Conservative backbencher, rep r e s e n t i n g the c e n t r a l Okanagan (South, 1982: Worley, 1971:39). A Reconstruction Bureau was e s t a b l i s h e d by t h i s committee, and the Bureau set about promoting postwar planning i n the various p r o v i n c i a l depart-ments and i n the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . C o u n c i l Minutes of March 19, 1945 ( V o l . 18: 48) records Kelowna C o u n c i l d i s c u s s i n g the p o s s i b l e c r e a t i o n of a Postwar Reconstruction Committee of i t s own, although the a c t i v i t i e s of t h i s committee, i f , i n f a c t , i t was ever e s t a b l i s h e d , d i d not become note-worthy. The stimulus of f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l postwar planning d i d have an impact on the c i t y , however, and the f o l l o w i n g pages of t h i s s e c t i o n - 50 -w i l l trace the development of two of the major postwar planning i n i t i a -tives in the City of Kelowna: the Civic Centre Plan and Wartime Housing construction. In addition to the major plans of Council, a series of smaller pro-grams and projects were introduced by Council in 1944 and, under newly-elected Mayor J . D . Pettigrew, i n 1945 and 1946. In conjunction with the provincial government, the city bought the home of David Lloyd Jones, converted i t into " a house of aged and infirm men and women" and estab-lished a board to oversee the operations of the home (By-Law No. 1117). In 1945, funds were raised by debenture to purchase a si te in Rutland for an a i r f i e l d (By-Law No. 1214). Council also resolved in 1945 to s e l l building lots not set aside for other purposes to veterans and widows of veterans for two-thirds of their market value (Council Minutes, V o l . 18: 358). The two planning i n i t i a t i v e s of Council within the boundaries of the municipality worthy of more thorough investigation are the decision to buy and develop the Kelowna Saw M i l l si te on M i l l Street as the Civic Cen-tre and the c i t y ' s decision to agree to build rental housing i n conjunc-. tion with Wartime Housing Limited. Regarding the former i n i t i a t i v e , in 1939, when the m i l l was destroyed by f i r e , S.M. Simpson Limited, the m i l l ' s owner, decided to move their expanding saw m i l l operation to Manhattan Beach, in the c i t y ' s northeast section. Council Minutes of June 12, 1939 record the completion of a new m i l l off ice for S.J . Simpson at Manhattan Beach, but the outbreak of war precluded the early reconstruction of a permanent saw m i l l f a c i l i t y at the new s i t e . During the war, S.M. Simpson Limited continued to buy land to consolidate the new s i te , including the - 51 -purchase and exchange of s e v e r a l city-owned p r o p e r t i e s (By-Laws No. 925 and 1013). With the move to the l a r g e r Manhattan Beach property underway, S.M. Simpson L i m i t e d was able to o f f e r the o l d s i t e f o r s a l e . During the war, the company o f f e r e d the o l d s i t e to the c i t y f o r $30,000,.and l a t e r a l s o o f f e r e d the c i t y lakeshore property immediately to the west for.$25,000 ( L e t t e r to C o u n c i l , November 25, 1944). Kelowna C o u n c i l envisioned the use of t h i s l a r g e s i t e adjacent to the downtown core as a c i v i c c e n t r e , u l t i m a t e l y to i n c l u d e s k a t i n g a n d . c u r l i n g r i n k s , a l i b r a r y , and a c i t y h a l l . On May 10, 1945, a vote of the c i t y e l e c t o r s was taken on the C i v i c Centre Purchase By-Law, 1945 (By-Law No. 1117). The vote was s u c c e s s f u l , and the by-law was adopted on May 21, 1945, a u t h o r i z i n g the $30,000 pur-chase of the o r i g i n a l m i l l s i t e . A C i v i c Centre Committee was appointed by C o u n c i l on May 21, 1945 (Minutes, V o l . 18: 126), and the committee soon recommended that the c i t y purchase the lakeshore property o f f e r e d by S.J. Simpson L i m i t e d . The committee a l s o recommended that the c i t y seek the advice of town planning p r o f e s s i o n a l s , s p e c i f i c a l l y Harland Bartholomew & A s s o c i a t e s of St L o u i s , regarding the s i t e , of the c i v i c centre. Mr. J.A. Walker, the Vancouver r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of Bartholomew et a l , met w i t h C o u n c i l on May 31, 1945 to d i s c u s s the proposed c i v i c centre p l a n . On J u l y 30, 1945 (Minutes, V o l . . 18: 213), C o u n c i l agreed to spend $1,500 to have Walker report on the f u t -ure use, not only of the property already purchased by the c i t y , but a l s o "the lakeshore from the n o r t h e r l y entrance to the C i t y Park to the C i t y ' s Power House." - 52 -On August 27, 1945, C o u n c i l r e c e i v e d a l e t t e r from Mr. Walker, i n d i -c a t i n g that consultant from Harland Bartholomew's o f f i c e would be v i s i t i n g the c i t y , and C o u n c i l advised Mr. L.R. Stephens of the Kelowna C i v i c Cen-t r e Committee of the consultant's a r r i v a l . In r a t h e r short order there-. . a f t e r , "A Report Upon a C i v i c Centre P l a n , Kelowna, B r i t i s h Columbia" was presented (September, 1945) f o r C o u n c i l review. Of the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a c i v i c c e ntre, the consultants reported that "One of the highest forms of m u n i c i p a l accomplishment' i s represented i n the c r e a t i o n of harmonious com-p o s i t i o n of s e v e r a l l a r g e b u i l d i n g s to form a c i v i c c e n t r e . " (p. 1 ) . On page 4 of the r e p o r t , the consultants s t a t e t h a t : there are four major and d e f i n i t e f a c t o r s which must be considered i n the s e l e c t i o n of a c i v i c c e n t r e . These are: 1. P r o x i m i t y to the main r e t a i l and general business d i s t r i c t ; 2. Character of the s i t e and surroundings; 3. The f o c a l p o i n t ; 4. Character of the b u i l d i n g s comprising the group. Basing i t s d e c i s i o n on the above c r i t e r i a , the r e p o r t , a f t e r c o n s i d e r i n g two smaller s i t e s as a l t e r n a t i v e s , recommended that the o l d saw m i l l s i t e , as w e l l as the lakeshore property and s e v e r a l other p r o p e r t i e s along M i l l Avenue would be the most s u i t a b l e f o r a c i v i c centre. In i t s concluding comments on page twelve, t h i s short study s t a t e s that " i n .the absence of a Town P l a n f o r Kelowna, i t i s somewhat d i f f i c u l t to make a thorough a n a l y s i s and produce accurate deductions regarding the f u t u r e business d i s t r i c t " and i t s p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t w i t h the proposed c i v i c centre. The suggestions f o r f u r t h e r town plan p r e p a r a t i o n went unheeded by M u n i c i p a l C o u n c i l ; however, the c o n s u l t a n t s ' recommendations regarding the purchase of adjacent.lands.were soon f o l l o w e d . On December. 17, 1945, Coun-c i l passed By-Laws No. 1212 and 1213, which r e s p e c t i v e l y a u t h o r i z e d the - 53 -purchase of the lakeshore l o t f o r $25,000 from the Kelowna Saw M i l l Com-pany and the exchange of other c i t y property f o r land included i n the C i v i c Centre p l a n area. C o u n c i l a l s o followed the general land use p l a n prepared by the Bartholomew planners f o r the general l o c a t i o n of b u i l d i n g s . By 1947, C i t y C o u n c i l was a u t h o r i z i n g the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a War Memorial Arena on the C i v i c Centre s i t e (By-Laws No. 1363 and 1413). By-laws to a u t h o r i z e the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a c i t y h a l l , a h e a l t h c l i n i c and a l i b r a r y soon f o l l o w e d . The planners' proposal to maintain an expanse of lawns across Water St r e e t from the s i t e of the c i t y h a l l to provide a v i s t a was soon r e j e c t e d i n favour of the exchange of t h i s p a r c e l f o r other prop-e r t y to a l l o w the province to construct a government b u i l d i n g and c o u r t -house there i n 1949 (By-law. No. .1449). The C i v i c Centre property a c q u i s i t i o n and b u i l d i n g program was the f i r s t major commitment of c i v i c funds i n the postwar p e r i o d . For planning h i s t o r y the i n i t i a t i v e was of consequence f o r two other major reasons: C o u n c i l used the advice of an ad.hoc advisory committee of appointed c i t i z e n s f o r the f i r s t time, and C o u n c i l h i r e d a p r o f e s s i o n a l planning consultant f o r the f i r s t time. Council's other major land use i n i t i a t i v e i n the c i t y at t h i s time was the c o n s t r u c t i o n of s u b s i d i z e d r e n t a l housing, i n co-operation w i t h the f e d e r a l government and Wartime Housing L i m i t e d (WHL). While C o u n c i l had agreed to have l o w - r e n t a l housing b u i l t under P a r t I I I of the NHA i n 1938, no housing had been constructed. WHL had been e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1941 by the f e d e r a l government to construct housing f o r workers in..urban war-time i n d u s t r i e s (Rose, 1981: 27-28). At the end of the war, WHL was pressed i n t o s e r v i c e to provide urban housing f o r r e t u r n i n g veterans, - 54 -t h e i r wives and f a m i l i e s . At the time Kelowna C o u n c i l was becoming con- . cerned w i t h the l a c k of adequate housing i n the c i t y (Minutes, A p r i l 23, 1945, V o l . 18: 101), WHL and the f e d e r a l government were s e l e c t i n g Kelowna as a s i t e to r e c e i v e s u b s i d i z e d housing. As a r e s u l t of tax s a l e s dudring the depression, the c i t y owned a con s i d e r a b l e amount of r e s i d e n t i a l l a n d . The c i t y must have been q u i t e s u c c e s s f u l s e l l i n g land during and j u s t a f t e r the war, because an uniden-t i f i e d c i t y o f f i c i a l reported i n 1945 to the P r o v i n c i a l Royal Commission on P r o v i n c i a l M u n i c i p a l R e a l t i o n s that the c i t y had only ten per cent of i t s tax s a l e property remaining uncommitted (Goldenberg, 1946: X50). Nevertheless, when approached by WHL, C o u n c i l agreed to supply one hundred l o t s at the p r i c e of $1 each. Gone from t h i s f e d e r a l housing i n i t i a t i v e was the r e s o l v e of the f e d e r a l S p e c i a l Committee on Reconstruction's subcommittee on housing and town planning to r e q u i r e "properly prepared town p l a n s " i n smaller c i t i e s before a l l o w i n g postwar housing developments. Indeed, the l o t s o f f e r e d by the c i t y and s e l e c t e d by WHL were i n the c i t y ' s north end, i s o l a t e d from the c i t y ' s other r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s by the i n d u s t r i a l d i s t r i c t and the r a i l w a y to the south (see map on f o l l o w i n g page). The 'North End', as the area came to be known, was adjacent to the new and expanding Simp-son Saw M i l l , however, and the prospect of employment i n , and i n p r o x i m i t y t o , the m i l l may have been j u s t as d e s i r a b l e a l o c a t i o n a l f a c t o r as the more t r a d i t i o n a l r e s i d e n t i a l character of the neighbourhoods to the south. By August, 1945, C o u n c i l had met w i t h Mr. James C. Grey of WHL to arrange f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of one hundred wartime housing u n i t s on the l o t s - 56 -o f f e r e d by the c i t y under the r e g u l a t i o n s of the Low Rental Housing Scheme (Minutes, V o l . 18: 240). On January 1, 1946, C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), formed i n 1945, began to assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r f e d e r a l urban recon-s t r u c t i o n i n i t i a t i v e s (CMHC, 1970). Mr. Rex Lupton, l a t e r to become a r e a l e s t a te agent and land developer, was appointed the l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of CMHC i n Kelowna. .By A p r i l 8, 1946, w i t h some low r e n t a l housing already completed and rented, C o u n c i l sent a l e t t e r to Mr. Grey of WHL i n Toronto, urging him to complete t h e i r p o r t i o n of the c o n s t r u c t i o n agreement so that plans of s u b d i v i s i o n could be r e g i s t e r e d and i n d i v i d u a l p r o p e r t i e s l e g a l l y described f o r t a x a t i o n and accounting purposes'(Minutes, V o l . 19: 100). On June 5, 1946, C o u n c i l unanimously passed a motion o f f e r i n g t h i r t y - f i v e more l o t s f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of l o w - r e n t a l housing under the Wartime Housing l e g i s l a t i o n ( V o l . 19, 219-20). The f o l l o w i n g week, C o u n c i l f i n a l l y passed the Wartime Housing By-Law (No. 1297) which e s t a b l i s h e d the r e s -p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the va r i o u s p a r t i e s to the agreement, namely, the c i t y , WHL and His Majesty the King i n Right of Canada. The agreement read i n p a r t : And whereas there i s a serious shortage of housing accommodation w i t h i n the s a i d m u n i c i p a l i t y and the C i t y being desirous of t a k i n g steps to a l l e v i a t e such shortages has requested h i s Majesty to provide . a d d i t i o n a l housing accommodation w i t h the C i t y of Kelowna;.... The extent of the shortage was obviously determined to be l e s s severe by the f e d e r a l government than by the C i t y of Kelowna, because the c i t y ' s request f o r more l o w - r e n t a l housing was r e j e c t e d by the f e d e r a l govern-ment i n August, 1946 (Vol 19: 390). The Federal Advisory Committee on Reconstruction had been f i r m on the need to have adequately-sized (50'xl20') and adequately-serviced l o t s f o r postwar housing. Some of the l o t s the c i t y s o l d to WHL had to be r e p l o t t e d from 40' frontage to 50', to meet f e d e r a l standards. The c i t y a l s o had to extend s e r v i c e s to the WHL s u b d i v i s i o n , ..including s t r e e t l i g h t i n g , water, sewer, a n d . e l e c t r i c a l works to comply w i t h f e d e r a l s t a n -dards (Kelowna F i n a n c i a l Statements, 1946: n.p.). At t h i s time, another f e d e r a l i n i t i a t i v e , which was l a t e r to have an impact on the development of the c i t y , was a l s o being i n s t i t u t e d . Follow-ing the recommendations of the S p e c i a l Committee on Rec o n s t r u c t i o n , P a r l i a -ment adopted the Veteran's Land A c t , which authorized the establishment of a Veteran's Land A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (ALA) to purchase, subdivide and s e l l land at a t t r a c t i v e p r i c e s to r e t u r n i n g veterans. P a r c e l s , l a r g e enough f o r subsistence a g r i c u l t u r e , were made a v a i l a b l e by VLA near Kelowna, i n Glen-more to the east of the c i t y and i n Lakeview Heights on the west s i d e of Okanagan Lake. The Advent of Regional C o n t r o l : The Kelowna Regulated Area Postwar C o u n c i l Minutes record a number of emerging land use c o n t r o l and planning i s s u e s which l a t e r were to become major problems. The Min- utes show the emerging concern f o r sewage d i s p o s a l , r e c o r d i n g complaints about steaming, raw sewage f l o w i n g i n t o the lake i n an open d i t c h ( V o l . 19: 30-31). The zoning c o n t r o l s provided i n the 1938 by-law were proving to be inadequate. Amendment a p p l i c a t i o n s were approved which sought more land f o r apartment c o n s t r u c t i o n (By-Law No. 1369) and to provide suburban r e t a i l land to the no r t h , east and south of the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t . The - 58 -major i s s u e at t h i s time, however, was Council's concern f o r the estab-lishment of some form of land use c o n t r o l i n the r a p i d l y - d e v e l o p i n g u n i n -corporated areas adjacent to the c i t y . While the c i t y had i n i t i a l l y become concerned about the type of dev-elopment which was o c c u r r i n g i n areas adjacent to the c i t y during the depression, the r a p i d growth i n these areas f o l l o w i n g the war exacerbated the c i t y ' s concerns about p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y . The P r o v i n c i a l Bureau of R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e body e s t a b l i s h e d by the p r o v i n c i a l L e g i s l a t i v e Committee on Post War R e h a b i l i t a t i o n , a l s o recognized the need f o r b e t t e r planning o u t s i d e , as w e l l as i n s i d e , m u n i c i p a l boundaries. To t h i s end, the bureau e s t a b l i s h e d a Regional Planning D i v i s i o n to assemble "i n f o r m a t i o n necessary to undertake a plan aimed at securing a s t a t e of economic balance," as w e l l as " g i v i n g planning advice to small m u n i c i p a l -i t i e s " through a form of community planning which included zoning, r e c r e a -tion,., t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and s u b d i v i s i o n planning (Department of M u n i c i p a l  A f f a i r s Annual Report, 1951: 17). Co u n c i l d i d not see the need f o r planning w i t h i n the c i t y , an area which they f e l t to be well-planned and re g u l a t e d ; however, C o u n c i l sought out the Regional Planning D i v i s i o n to have them deal w i t h the unsan i t a r y and unplanned c o n d i t i o n s developing i n new s u b d i v i s i o n s adjacent to the c i t y . The May 21, 1945 minutes of C o u n c i l record a debate about l e t t e r s sent by C o u n c i l to t h e i r p r o v i n c i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , W.A.C. Bennett, regard-ing the c o n d i t i o n of b u i l d i n g s outside the c i t y ( V o l . 18: 123). A r e p l y from Bennett the f o l l o w i n g week i n d i c a t e s that the Premier and P r o v i n c i a l Secretary were awaiting a comprehensive review of the whole problem by p r o v i n c i a l o f f i c i a l s so that the appropriate a c t i o n could be taken. - 59 -Subsequent pressure was exerted by C o u n c i l on t h e i r MLA and the p r o v i n -c i a l government e a r l y the f o l l o w i n g year, to which the p r o v i n c e . r e p l i e d that no a c t i o n was yet forthcoming. Again,: i n May, C o u n c i l contemplated sending a l e t t e r to the Attorney General to b r i n g him up-to-date on the deplorable s i t u a t i o n i n the developing areas adjacent to the c i t y ( V o l . 19: 159). Co u n c i l was a l s o lobbying other m u n i c i p a l i t i e s ' r e g u l a t i o n of o u t l y -i n g areas, through a r e s o l u t i o n forwarded to the Union of B r i t i s h Colum-b i a M u n i c i p a l i t i e s (UBCM). The r e s o l u t i o n s t a t e s i n p a r t : Therefore be i t r e s o l v e d that t h i s C o u n c i l goes on record as a d v i s i n g that f u t u r e s u b d i v i s i o n i n organ-i z e d m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and unorganized d i s t r i c t s a l s o ... . :. be l a i d out i n l o t s of not l e s s than 50x120 f e e t , or not l e s s than about 6,000 square f e e t , and that not more than one t h i r d of the l o t area be b u i l t upon where p r i v a t e dwellings (one f a m i l y ) are constructed; ... ( V o l . 18: 113). This r e s o l u t i o n i n d i c a t e d that the c i t y was w i l l i n g to accept the minimum standards r e q u i r e d by WHL throughout the m u n i c i p a l i t y , but, more impor-t a n t l y , i t i n d i c a t e s that the c i t y wanted the support of other m u n i c i p a l i -t i e s f o r some land use c o n t r o l i n unincorporated areas. The c i t y a l s o presented a b r i e f to the Royal Commission on P r o v i n c i a l M u n i c i p a l R e l a -t i o n s , chaired by Mr. H. C a r l Goldenberg, and h i s r e p o r t , i n t u r n , sup-ported the concept of " r e g u l a t i o n i n areas adjacent to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s " (Goldenberg, 1947: X19). Before the Royal Commission could r e p o r t on p r o v i n c i a l - m u n i c i p a l r e l a t i o n s , however, the province passed B i l l 99 i n the 1946 s e s s i o n , an amendment to the Town Planning Act (TPA) which added Pa r t I I I — " S u b d i v -i s i o n s i n Unorganized T e r r i t o r y " (SBC, 1946, Chapter 75). The amendment allowed the Lieutenant Governor i n C o u n c i l to make r e g u l a t i o n s to c o n t r o l - 60.-land use i n unincorporated areas. On J u l y 15, 1946, Mr. A.G. Graham, Supervisor of the Regional Planning D i v i s i o n , met w i t h a Council-appointed committee, i n c l u d i n g Mr. W.A.C. Bennett; Mr. H.H. Stevens, the l o c a l Prov-i n c i a l Engineer; Dr. D.B. Avion, the Medical Health O f f i c e r ; A i d . J.H. Horn; and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from the D i s t r i c t of Glenmore, the Kelowna Board of Trade, and c i t y s t a f f . Stevens discussed the p o s s i b i l t i y of a regulated area surrounding the c i t y ( V o l . 19: 321). A tour was conducted by Mr. Graham, i n the company of the committee, to determine the bound-a r i e s of the unincorporated area to be regulated under P a r t ..III of the TPA. On October 17, 1946, P r o v i n c i a l Cabinet .approved a set of r e g u l a t i o n s under the TPA which e s t a b l i s h e d the f i r s t r egulated area i n the province i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan (B.C. Gazette, 1946: 3099-4101). The r e g u l a t i o n s provided f o r some b a s i c c o n t r o l of s u b d i v i s o n , b u i l d i n g , and land use: b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t i o n was r e q u i r e d , a l o c a l zoning board of appeal was crea-ted , and zoning c o n t r o l and amendment became the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the Regional Planning D i v i s i o n . Commissioner Goldenberg was very supportive of t h i s p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n , recommending i n the Royal Commission Report on P r o v i n c i a l M u n i c i p a l R e l a t i o n s : That the P r o v i n c i a l Government e x e r c i s e i t s a u t h o r i t y under the "Town Planning A c t , " as i t has already been done w i t h respect to the area adjacent to Kelowna, to r e g u l a t e unorganized areas adjacent to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and to p r e s c r i b e and enforce the necessary r e g u l a t i o n s w i t h regard to minimum b u i l d i n g standards. (X98), Goldenberg a l s o a n t i c i p a t e d the need f o r m u n i c i p a l annexation of a d j o i n i n g t e r r i t o r y because of the r a p i d growth of unincorporated areas, and he recommended that the M u n i c i p a l i t i e s I n c o r p o r a t i o n Act be amended to f a c i -l i t a t e such extensions. - 61 -In 1947, when the Bureau of Reconstruction was disbanded, the Reg-i o n a l Planning D i v i s i o n became par t of the Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f -a i r s . That same year a new, more d e t a i l e d , set of r e g u l a t i o n s was issued by Cabinet f o r both the Kelowna and the Vernon Regulated Areas (B.C. Gaz- e t t e , 1947: 2085-88). By 1951, there were eig h t regulated areas i n the province (Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s Annual Report, 1951: T17). With the a d d i t i o n of Part IV of the Town Planning Act i n 1948, the province provided f o r r e g i o n a l planning areas, f o r a n t i c i p a t o r y planning, r a t h e r than r e s t r i c t i v e land use c o n t r o l . Although the me t r o p o l i t a n areas of Van-couver and V i c t o r i a soon took advantage of t h i s r e g i o n a l planning l e g i s l a -l a t i o n , i t would be some time yet before the Okanagan e s t a b l i s h e d a reg-i o n a l planning board. The Boundary Extension Question The ten years a f t e r World War I I was a pe r i o d of r a p i d growth i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan, as i t was i n the r e s t of the province. The Census shows that the C i t y of Kelowna grew from 5118 to 8517 between 1941 and 1951, an annual growth r a t e of more than f i v e per cent. A pe r i o d of slow growth i n the c i t y between 1951 and 1956, when the po p u l a t i o n grew l e s s than one per cent a year to 9181, i s not i n d i c a t i v e of the growth of the c e n t r a l Okana-gan. The 1956 Census records that the o u t l y i n g areas (Glenmore, Okanagan M i s s i o n , Rutland, South and East Kelowna, Bankhead, Benvoulin, and Poplar P o i n t ) grew from 2812 to 5135 i n the preceding f i v e years. The combined t o t a l of the c i t y and the other enumeration areas i n the region shows a t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n of 14,316, an annual: increase of ;.abo.ut Jfive „perceent. This census review i n d i c a t e s that the major demographic trend which emerged a f t e r the war i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan (as i t emerged i n other non-metro-- 62 -p o l i t a n areas of B r i t i s h Columbia at t h i s time) was the growth of the unorganized areas outside the incorporated m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . Not only was a new p h y s i c a l landscape emerging, but at the p o l i t i -c a l l e v e l , the turbulence-of the preceding years was a l s o c r e a t i n g a new p o l i t i c a l landscape i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. The t r a d i t i o n a l l y Conser-v a t i v e farming community had been d i s r u p t e d by the economic depression. Mr. Owen L. Jones, a l o c a l f u r n i t u r e s t o r e owner, had j o i n e d the Co-oper-a t i v e Commonwealth Federation (CCF) soon a f t e r i t was formed i n 1933 and ran f o r the party i n the South Okanagan constituency, which included Kelowna and environs, i n the p r o v i n c i a l e l e c t i o n s that year (Worley, 1971, 28). Jones f a i l e d i n h i s b i d f o r a p r o v i n c i a l seat, but ran s u c c e s s f u l l y at the m u n i c i p a l l e v e l , s e r v i n g as alderman, as mayor from 1936 to 1939, and again as alderman. Jones was mayor when J.D. P e t t i g r e w championed the f i r s t zoning by-law, and a f t e r G.A. McKay served as mayor during the war, Jones sat as alderman under the m a y o r a l i t y of J.D. Pe t t i g r e w i n the p e r i o d of postwar c i v i c i n i t i a t i v e s . Jones was f i n a l l y s u c c e s s f u l i n the 1948 f e d e r a l b y - e l e c t i o n f o r Y a l e , when he defeated another Kelowna f u r n i t u r e s t o r e owner—W.A.C. Bennett. The l o s s of the f e d e r a l b y - e l e c t i o n by Bennett was one of the few setbacks i n a p o l i t i c a l career s i g n i f i c a n t to the development of the cen-t r a l Okanagan. Although he never served on C i t y C o u n c i l , almost from the day of h i s a r r i v a l e a r l y i n the depression, Bennett was a prominent p o l i -t i c a l i n f l u e n c e i n the community. There are many c h r o n i c l e s both of the p o l i t i c a l successes which l e d Bennett to the premiership i n 1952 and of h i s a c t i v i t i e s i n that o f f i c e f o r the next .twenty years (Robin, 1973; Wal-ker, 1969; Worley, 1971). What i s important f o r the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n - 63 -however, i s Bennett's impact on the development of the c e n t r a l Okanagan. Throughout the period of Bennett's r i s e to power from h i s e l e c t i o n to the l e g i s l a t u r e i n 1941, he worked hard for h i s c e n t r a l Okanagan con-stituency. As a member of the L e g i s l a t i v e Committee on Postwar Rehabil-i t a t i o n , Bennett was involved with the a c t i v i t i e s of the Bureau of Recon-s t r u c t i o n , and, p a r t i a l l y through the a c t i v i t i e s of that agency, one hun-dred wartime housing units were , b u i l t ::and two VLA subdivisions were deve-loped i n h i s constituency. Thanks, i n part, to Bennett's support, the Kelowna Regulated Area was the f i r s t established i n the province by the Regional Planning D i v i s i o n of the Bureau of Reconstruction. Bennett's business a c t i v i t i e s also assured him a high l o c a l p r o f i l e . His f u r n i t u r e business had expanded to several other v a l l e y communities. In partnership with Pasquale Capozzi, a l o c a l grocer and land developer, and James J . Ladd, a garage owner, Bennett invested i n Calona Wines Limited, which was to become a major l o c a l employer, supporting a growing l o c a l a g r i c u l t u r a l industry. Ladd, who had served as alderman from 1941, was elected mayor i n 1952, j u s t as Bennett rose to the premiership. Other Bennett confed-erates, including H.A. Truswell, also a garage owner, served on the School Board and Council. Kelowna Council's a c t i v i t y i n the f i r s t f i v e years a f t e r the war resulted i n a considerably d i f f e r e n t urban landscape. To the north, the Simpson Brothers Saw M i l l was i n f u l l operation on the Manhattan Beach s i t e , bordered on the east by the both f e d e r a l l y - s u b s i d i z e d and p r i v a t e l y -owned homes of working men. A small commercial area was permitted i n the c i t y ' s north end, as well as to the south and east of the c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t . The C i v i c Centre s i t e was soon graced by the Memorial Arena - 64 -(1948), C i t y H a l l (1950), Health U n i t (1952), to be followed i n the mid-f i f t i e s by the L i b r a r y (1955), and the P r o v i n c i a l Court House and O f f i c e s , opened by the Premier on August 11, 1955. The r e s i d e n t i a l areas of the c i t y of 9000 were being f i l l e d , and burgeoning r e s i d e n t i a l development i n the unincorporated areas was f i n a l l y being c o n t r o l l e d , a l b e i t i n a l i m i t e d way, w i t h both the i n s t i t u t i o n of b a s i c s u b d i v i s i o n , zoning, and b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t i o n i n the Regulated Area and the appointment of a c i t y alderman on the Regulated Area Zoning Board of Appeal. The c i t y had remained the same s i z e , but f o r the a d d i t i o n of an area of Okanagan Lake, s i n c e i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n 1950, and C o u n c i l was coming to r e a l i z e that growth was being l i m i t e d by the e x i s t i n g s i z e and zoning of the c i t y . Amendments to the zoning by-law i n the e a r l y - t o - m i d - f i f t i e s provided more apartment zoning and increased d e n s i t y (By-Laws No. 1662, 1778, 1814). While there was d i s c u s s i o n i n C o u n c i l f o r low r e n t a l housing f o r s e n i o r s under Sec t i o n 36 of the newly-adopted N a t i o n a l Housing A c t , 1954 (Minutes, V o l . 29, 197, 201, 208), the major s e n i o r government i n v o l -vement i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan at t h i s time was the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the Okanagan Lake f l o a t i n g b ridge. The S o c i a l C r e d i t government set a high p r i o r i t y on c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s and, supported by unprecedented sus-t a i n e d growth i n the p r o v i n c i a l economy, undertook major road b u i l d i n g programs i n B r i t i s h Columbia, w i t h the completion of a highway road l i n k through the Okanagan V a l l e y a major p a r t of t h i s program. Combined w i t h p r o v i n c i a l road b u i l d i n g was the completion of the Roger's Pass and the Trans Canada Highway, a j o i n t f e d e r a l / p r o v i n c i a l i n i t i a t i v e , which a l s o served to open up the i n t e r i o r of B r i t i s h Columbia. The impact of road and bridge b u i l d i n g on the c e n t r a l Okanagan i s - 65 -d i f f i c u l t to estimate. C l e a r l y , the increased a c c e s s i b i l i t y of the area made i t more popular as a t o u r i s t and r e c r e a t i o n a l area. A boom i n r e s i -d e n t i a l and r e c r e a t i o n a l s u b d i v i s i o n outside the c i t y on both sides of the lake i s : i n d i c a t i v e of the growing demand f o r Okanagan property. While some r e s i d e n t s are reported to have been upset about the c o n s t r u c t i o n of f l o a t i n g bridge j o i n i n g the eastern and western shores of Lake Okanagan at Kelowna (Parkinson, 1969, 1 ) , i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n was g e n e r a l l y welcomed by the business community and C o u n c i l . The June 13, 1955 Minutes i n d i c a t e that C o u n c i l was somewhat unhappy that Swan, Wooster and P a r t n e r s , the bridge design engineers, d i d not contact the c i t y p r i o r to surveying a road access to the bridge through the southern p o r t i o n of Kelowna C i t y Park ( V o l . 29: 371). Subsequent d i s c u s s i o n s r e v e a l that the mayor and C o u n c i l wanted to meet w i t h Highways M i n i s t e r , P. G a g l a r d i , to confirm the l o c a t i o n and timing of bridge c o n s t r u c t i o n . Coupled w i t h the buoyant economic c o n d i t i o n s and r a p i d growth i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan was the i n c r e a s i n g problem of congestion i n the C i t y of Kelowna. An a r t i c l e i n the May 3, 1956 Kelowna Courier charged that C o u n c i l was approving rezonings and s u b d i v i s i o n s under pressure from deve-l o p e r s , w i t h l i t t l e regard f o r the concerns of the owners of adjacent property. In response, A i d . M.A. M e i k l e , who was the chairman of the C o u n c i l Committee on B u i l d i n g , Housing, Land and A i r p o r t , as w e l l as a prominent land developer, rose i n C o u n c i l and read a statement answering the Courier's a l l e g a t i o n s , which states,: i n p a r t : The Courier's stand that the C i t y has i n j u r e d owners through subsequent rezonings i s t a k i n g a very narrow view of our f u t u r e development. We cannot s i t on the fence and do nothing or play the o s t r i c h s t u n t . Rezon-ing of apartments and d e a l i n g w i t h each a p p l i c a t i o n on i t s own merits i s good planning. (Minutes, V o l . 30: 438). - 66 -Subsequent to t h i s defense, C o u n c i l passed two by-laws a l l o w i n g higher d e n s i t y i n areas of the c i t y ; By-Law No. 1823, which created a D i s t r i c t f o r Hotel-Motel or Apartment Motels, and By-Law No. 1832, which permitted two new apartment d i s t r i c t s . C o u n c i l Minutes of August 27, 1956 record A c t i n g Mayor R.F. P a r k i n -son's telegram (he was soon to be f u l l - t i m e mayor) to Mr. H. Peter Ober-lander, s t a t i n g "the C i t y would l i k e h i s advice on plan ( s i c ) to extend present boundaries." ( V o l . 31: 148). C o u n c i l records show that the Deputy M i n i s t e r of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s was a l s o consulted regarding the p o s s i b l e extension of mu n i c i p a l boundaries, a type of mu n i c i p a l expansion which had become r e l a t i v e l y common i n other areas of the province by t h i s time. C o u n c i l arranged to have Dr. Oberlander r e p o r t to C o u n c i l on the p o s s i b l e extension of Kelowna's c i v i c boundaries. The Oberlander Report, e n t i t l e d "Should Kelowna Extend i t s Boundaries? A Study of the Planned Expansion of the C i t y of Kelowna" (1957), was w e l l r e c e i v e d by the mayor and C o u n c i l . Indeed, Mayor Ladd, i n an opening l e t -t e r to a l l c i t i z e n s , s t a t e s i n part t h a t : Your C i t y C o u n c i l takes pleasure i n presenting a comprehensive study on the problem of extending the boundaries of the M u n i c i p a l i t y . I r e s p e c t f u l l y request that you read t h i s r e p o r t thoroughly, approaching the subject w i t h an open mind, as t h i s r e p o r t w i l l undoubtably answer many of the per p l e x -i n g questions that have confronted us over the past s e v e r a l years (n.p.). The r e p o r t begins w i t h a general background on the c i t y and r e g i o n , i n c l u d -i n g i t s geology, c l i m a t e , p o p u l a t i o n , and economic base, and goes on to argue why and where should Kelowna extend i t s boundaries. The costs and procedures of expansion are reviewed and three a l t e r n a t i v e expansion schemes are presented, w i t h Proposal Two, an extension of 1701 acres, - 67 -being recommended ( v i i ) . The b u i l t - u p areas of Poplar P o i n t to the n o r t h , Glenmore and F i v e Bridges to the east, and Woodlawn, Cameron, M e i k l e , and North S t r e e t s u b d i v i s i o n s to the south, as w e l l as enough undeveloped lands so that the c i t y owuld not have to expand again f o r a "long time", were recommended to be included i n Kelowna's new boundaries. L i k e Bartholomew and A s s o c i a t e s i n 1945, Oberlander c a l l e d f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of a compre-hensive community plan to guide the d i s t r i b u t i o n of land use i n the c i t y (101-02). While the report was w e l l r e c e i v e d , there was a considerable delay i n the implementation of i t s recommendations. The report recommended the amalgamation of a p o r t i o n of the D i s t r i c t M u n i c i p a l i t y of Glenmore and the a d d i t i o n of s e v e r a l unincorporated areas, a l l of which r e q u i r e d the appro-v a l of the e l e c t o r a t e i n both the c i t y and the areas to be added. While the c i t y attempted to organize support f o r boundary extension, demand f o r development continued apace i n the c i t y . The Okanagan Lake Bridge was completed and the new Okanagan Highway brought more pros p e c t i v e r e s i d e n t s to the c e n t r a l Okanagan. To r e l i e v e some of the pressure on C o u n c i l to support higher d e n s i t y development, C o u n c i l appointed two com-mittees of r e s i d e n t s under the delegated a u t h o r i t y of the new M u n i c i p a l Act (SBC, 1957), a Zoning Board of Appeal was e s t a b l i s h e d to hear appeals on zoning changes (By-Law No. 1916) and an Advisory Planning Commission was created to advise C o u n c i l "on matters p e r t a i n i n g to zoning, s u b d i v i s i o n of land, and b u i l d i n g r e g u l a t i o n s " (By-law No. 1958). With t h i s new advice, C o u n c i l continued to support higher d e n s i t y , passing a s e r i e s of by-laws a l l p e r m i t t i n g m u l t i - f a m i l y D i s t r i c t I rezonings. (Nos. 1941, 1991 and 2088). - 68 -In 1960, the Kelowna Boundary Extension Committee d i s t r i b u t e d a pam-phl e t on "Boundary Extension F a c t s . " The committee was supportive of boundary extension and reported t h a t : For many years the C i t y of Kelowna has been a leader i n the planning and development of c i v i c e n t e r p r i s e s such as a h e a l t h u n i t and regulated areas. The r e s u l t of t h i s c a r e f u l planning by c i v i c leaders over the years supported by a l l the r e s i d e n t s of the C i t y can be seen and appreciated today in..the b e a u t i f u l parks and p l a y -grounds, p a r t i c u l a r l y the lakeshore development, a t t r a c -t i v e s t r e e t s and avenues and the c i v i c centre area con-t a i n i n g modern p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s and r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i -l i t i e s . In a d d i t i o n to these apparent and immediately p l e a s i n g f a c i l i t i e s , Kelowna has added a l l the f a c i l i -t i e s of a modern c i t y such as c h l o r i n a t e d domestic water supply, a complete sererage system, e f f i c i e n t f i r e and p o l i c e p r o t e c t i o n and many other improvements (n.p.). Decrying the l a c k of these f a c i l i t i e s i n the unincorporated areas, the Boundary Extension Committee argued f o r the a d d i t i o n of the urbanized area of Glenmore and a number of unincorporated areas, e s s e n t i a l l y the same l i s t recommended f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n the Oberlander Report. The perceived need f o r the extension of m u n i c i p a l boundaries was heightened by the t e r -mination of agreements r e s t r i c t i n g s u b d i v i s i o n i n VLA lands i n Glenmore and the i n c r e a s i n g a v a i l a b i l i t y of domestic water and community s e r v i c e s provided by i r r i g a t i o n d i s t r i c t s i n o u t l y i n g areas. Meetings were he l d between the c o u n c i l s of the c i t y and the D i s t r i c t of Glenmore i n 1960 to disc u s s amalgamation (Minutes, V o l . 37, 61). Records show that some r e s i -dents of the c i t y were opposed to the boundary extension. The c i t y was not able to o b t a i n the necessary s i x t y per cent i n favour of boundary ext-ension i n the South Pandosy and F i v e Bridges unincorporated areas ( V o l . 37, 9). The c i t y was more s u c c e s s f u l i n other areas, and l a t e r i n 1960, a s e r i e s of referenda were put to the v o t e r s of Kelowna to u n i t e Kelowna and Glenmore (By-Law No. 2167) and to extend the c i v i c boundaries to - 69 -i n c l u d e the Knox Mountain Area to the north (No. 2168) and the Woodlawn and Cameron Su b d i v i s i o n s to the south (No. 2169). A subsequent referendum provided f o r the r u r a l , northern area of the D i s t r i c t of Glenmore to r e v e r t to unorganized t e r r i t o r y , r a t h e r than j o i n the c i t y . The amalga-mation of the c i t y and the D i s t r i c t of Glenmore was the f i r s t i nstance of two m u n i c i p a l i t i e s j o i n i n g i n B r i t i s h Columbia m u n i c i p a l h i s t o r y . L a t e r , by-laws authorized referenda to i n c l u d e F i v e Bridges and Benvoulin i n 1964 (No. 2611) and, i n 1965, a part of the l o c a l d i s t r i c t of Guisichan (No. 2679). In a d d i t i o n to the new M u n i c i p a l A c t , l e g i s l a t i o n was forthcoming i n 1957 f o r the r e g u l a t i o n of unincorporated areas. Under Pa r t 3 of the L o c a l Services Act (SBC, 1957, Chapter 34), Community Planning Areas could be e s t a b l i s h e d by r e g u l a t i o n to be administered by the Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . Before the c i t y could extend i t s boundaries, Cab-i n e t e s t a b l i s h e d Community Planning Area No. 1 i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan to r e p l a c e the Kelowna Regulated Area (Municipal A f f a i r s F i l e s , 1960). While both an Advisory Planning Commission and a Zoning Board of Appeal were created through t h i s r e g u l a t i o n , the f o r c e and extend of r e g u l a t i o n f o r unincorporated areas was not s u b s t a n t i a l l y increased. For i n s t a n c e , the new CPA r e g u l a t i o n s s t i l l permitted s u b d i v i d i n g l o t s of f i f t e e n thous-and square f e e t (100'xl50') w i t h no p r o v i s i o n of water s e r v i c e or sewage d i s p o s a l . Heightening Urban C r i s i s : The High Rise Controversy On the s t r e n g t h of boundary extension and continued immigration, the 1961 Census shows the p o p u l a t i o n of Kelowna rose to 13,188. Because of the boundary adjustment, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to determine the a c t u a l growth - 70 -of the c i t y i n t h i s p e r i o d . Comparing i t to other V a l l e y centres shows that Kelowna was l a r g e r than Vernon at 10,250 and smaller than P e n t i c t o n , which had a po p u l a t i o n of 13,859 i n 1961. By 1966, the Census shows that Kelowna had grown l a r g e r than both of i t s Okanagan r i v a l s , w i t h 17,006 people, compared to populations of 15,330 and 11,463 f o r P e n t i c t o n and Vernon r e s p e c t i v e l y . Between 1961 and 1966, Kelowna grew at an annual r a t e of approximately f i v e per cent, even w i t h allowance made f o r the pop u l a t i o n added through s e v e r a l s m a l l boundary extensions w i t h i n t h i s p e r i o d . The p r o v i s i o n of more r e s i d e n t i a l land w i t h i n the c i t y d i d not seem to s a t i s f y the d e s i r e f o r higher d e n s i t y housing. By-Laws No. 2252 and 2257 i n 1961 increased the amount of land a v a i l a b l e f o r apartment con-s t r u c t i o n . C o u n c i l decided to produce a new zoning by-law to provide zoning c o n t r o l f o r the expanded c i t y and to replace the dated and much-amended 1938 document. While Community Planning Consultants (Dr. Ober-lander 's f i r m ) was not able to convince C o u n c i l to prepare a comprehensive land use plan to guide them i n the production of a new zoning r e g u l a t i o n , or even to prepare a zoning map, the f i r m was able to prepare a new zoning by-law f o r Council's c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n 1961. C i t y of Kelowna Zoning By-Law, 1961 was adopted by C o u n c i l on October 30 of that year, i n accordance w i t h the new l e g i s l a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g to zoning i n the M u n i c i p a l Act. The f o l l o w -i n g was the st a t e d purpose of the by-law: The p r i n c i p a l purpose of t h i s by-law i s to guide the n a t u r a l growth of the C i t y i n a systematic and o r d e r l y way f o r the u l t i m a t e b e n e f i t of the community as a whole by ensuring that the v a r i o u s uses made of the land and s t r u c t u r e s i n the C i t y develop i n proper . r e l a t i o n s h i p to one another. - 71 -The new by-law provided f o r four new r e s i d e n t i a l zones ( s i n g l e - f a m i l y , s i n g l e - and two-family, m u l t i - f a m i l y , and motel and t r a i l e r c o u r t ) , three commercial zones ( c e n t r a l , l o c a l , and gas s t a t i o n ) , two wholesale d i s t r i -b u t i o n zones, and one i n d u s t r i a l zone. In conjunction woth the new zoning by-law, C o u n c i l passed a r e v i s e d Zoning Board of Appeal By-Law (No. 2317) which r e q u i r e d that surrounding r e s i d e n t s be n o t i f i e d i n the event of a rezoning a p p l i c a t i o n , p r o v i d i n g a forum f o r the appeal of Council's zoning d e c i s i o n s . The new zoning by-law d i d not r e s o l v e the i n c r e a s i n g l y contentious i s s u e of m u l t i p l e d w e l l i n g zoning, p a r t i c u l a r l y high r i s e zoning. In the f a l l of 1962, an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r rezoning was r e c e i v e d by the c i t y f o r three lakeshore l o t s near the park and the bridge (Community Planning Con-s u l t a n t s , 1964, 1). While the rezoning a p p l i c a t i o n requested R-3 m u l t i -f a m i l y zoning, the s c a l e of the proposed development was l a r g e r than any-th i n g permitted i n that or any other r e s i d e n t i a l zoning. In 1963, C o u n c i l asked Community Planning Consultants (CPC) to prepare a review of the zon-ing by-law, i n l i g h t of the a p p l i c a t i o n and other p o t e n t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r high r i s e zoning i n the c i t y . By e a r l y 1964, l o c a l concern about high r i s e development had become so great that l e t t e r s and p e t i t i o n s i n opposi-t i o n to such development were being r e c e i v e d by C o u n c i l (Minutes, V o l . 42, 10). On February 10, 1964, Mayor Parkinson reviewed CPC's rep o r t e n t i t l e d " R e s i d e n t i a l Landuse and Zoning Regulations f o r Kelowna, B.C." i n C o u n c i l (Minutes, V o l 42, 48). Regarding r e s i d e n t i a l high r i s e development, CPC recommended t h a t , w h i l e the lakeshore should be r e t a i n e d as s i n g l e f a m i l y , a s m a l l area of R-5 zoning of high d e n s i t y (1.7 to 2.5 f l o o r area r a t i o ) - 72 -and p o t e n t i a l l y high r i s e (no height l i m i t a t i o n s other than f l o o r area l i m i t a t i o n s ) bounded by Harvey Avenue, M i l l Creek, Abbott, and Water Street be created. The rep o r t a l s o recommended s l i g h t changes to the e x i s t i n g R-3 zoning and the i n t r o d u c t i o n of R-2A zoning f o r low de n s i t y or garden apartment m u l t i p l e housing to the east of Glenmore St r e e t i n the new c i t y . While the garden apartment zoning i n i t i a t i v e was w e l l -r e c e i v e d , the recommendation on the h i g h l y p o l i t i c i z e d i s s u e of high r i s e zoning was more c a r e f u l l y handled. At the same February 10, 1964 meeting, C o u n c i l adopted a zoning amend-ment by-law (No. 2569) which r e s t r i c t e d developments i n C - l , c e n t r a l com-m e r c i a l zones, to a f l o o r area r a t i o of 3.5 and a height of four storeys or s i x t y f e e t . V a r i a t i o n s of these r e s t r i c t i o n s were allowed only by spec-i a l c e r t i f i c a t e , and the f o l l o w i n g week, By-Law No. 2570 authorized the issuance of a s p e c i a l use c e r t i f i c a t e to Capozzi E n t e r p r i s e s to permit the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the s i x - s t o r e y C a p r i H o t e l at Glenmore St r e e t and Harvey Avenue. Once the C a p r i development was approved, C o u n c i l became much more d i f f i c u l t to deal w i t h regarding high r i s e rezoning. On March 2, 1964, Co u n c i l r e j e c t e d a request f o r the rezoning and development of a s i t e f o r an eleven-storey apartment. Although a by-law was passed to provide f o r R-2A zoning i n two areas of the c i t y (No. 2631), C o u n c i l d i d not f o l l o w the CPC recommendation f o r some high r i s e zoning away from the lakeshore. I t would be the mid-seventies before a high r i s e apartment would be b u i l t i n the c i t y , and then only a s e n i o r c i t i z e n ' s development, i n t e r e s t i n g l y on a s i t e o r i g i n a l l y zoned R-2A. Land Use C o n t r o l and Planning to 1972 i n C i t y and Region As e a r l y as 1948, p r o v i s i o n was made f o r the establishment of r e g i o n a l - 73 -planning boards and f o r the pr e p a r a t i o n of r e g i o n a l plans i n B r i t i s h C o l -umbia (SBC, 1948, Chapter 96). Only the me t r o p o l i t a n areas of the prov-ince took advantage of t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n at t h i s e a r l y date. Kelowna Coun-c i l , having s u c c e s s f u l l y p e t i t i o n e d the province f o r . t h e c r e a t i o n of regu-l a t e d areas i n the adjacent unorganized areas, i n i t i a l l y d i d not f e e l the need to pursue the establishment of a r e g i o n a l planning board i n t h e i r area. P r o v i s i o n f o r r e g i o n a l planning areas was c a r r i e d over to the omni-bus M u n i c i p a l Act i n 1957. The Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and the advisory Community Plan-: ning A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada, B.C. D i v i s i o n (BCCPAC) were i n t e r e s t e d i n developing a s i n g l e planning board f o r the whole Okanagan r e g i o n , but the t r a d i t i o n a l r i v a l r y between the V a l l e y centres (Vernon, Kelowna, Penticton) precluded any agreement on any i n i t i a t i v e to t h i s end ( C o l l i e r , 1972: 31; Sough, 1982). On August 22, 1960, C o u n c i l reviewed a l e t t e r from BCCPAC which suggested the establishement of a c e n t r a l Okanagan r e g i o n a l planning board and the s t a f f i n g of a planning o f f i c e f o r the board. Unable to over-come longstanding d i f f e r e n c e s , both the South Okanagan and the c e n t r a l Oka-nagan, i n c l u d i n g Kelowna, the D i s t r i c t of Peachland and the surrounding unorganized t e r r i t o r y , e s t a b l i s h e d t h e i r own planning boards i n 1963 (Mun- i c i p a l A f f a i r s Annual Reports, 1963). A board c o n s i s t i n g of one member from each member m u n i c i p a l i t y and a member appointed by the province was e s t a b l i s h e d to provide advice on the planning of the r e g i o n , although i t was not u n t i l March, 1964 that the province appointed a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , a l l o w i n g the board to convene (Minutes, V o l . 42: 105). One of the f i r s t d e c i s i o n s of the C e n t r a l Okanagan Regional Planning Board (CORPB) was to h i r e Mr. Vern J . Whieler, a UBC graduate - 74 -planner from Richmond, B.C., and Mr. C. Breckenridge, a planning tech-n i c i a n from the A l b e r t a Planning Commission, and to e s t a b l i s h o f f i c e s i n the r e c e n t l y closed t o l l o f f i c e at the western end of the br i d g e . CORPB's r o l e was purely a d v i s o r y : i n unorganized lands, zoning remained under the c o n t r o l of the Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s ; s u b d i v i s i o n was the r e s -p o n s i b i l i t y of the Department of Highways; b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t i o n , the r e s -p o n s i b i l i t y of the p r o v i n c i a l l y - a p p o i n t e d b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r . In the mun-i c i p a l i t i e s , of course, c o n t r o l of these r e g u l a t i o n s remained w i t h the el e c t e d c o u n c i l s . The 1963 M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s Annual Report foreshadows a s i g n i f i c a n t change f o r CORPB, suggesting that "there i s some apprehension that the Planning Boards w i l l have d i r e c t a u t h o r i t y to de a l w i t h land use c o n t r o l . " In 1965, under a new M i n i s t e r of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , the Hon. Dan Campbell, w i t h the support of the Deputy M i n i s t e r , Mr. Ever e t t Brown ( C o l l i e r , 1972: 32), l e g i s l a t i o n was passed enabling the establishment of r e g i o n a l d i s -t r i c t s , w i t h independent p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t y and the a b i l i t y to assume a number of r e g u l a t o r y f u n c t i o n s (SBC, 1965, Chapter 28). The t h i r d Okana-gan r i v a l , Vernon, and i t s neighbouring m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and t e r r i t o r i e s , were the f i r s t i n the province to be e s t a b l i s h e d as a r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t , i n 1965. In 1967,' the C e n t r a l Okanagan Regional D i s t r i c t (CORD, l a t e r to become RDCO) was e s t a b l i s h e d (BC Gazette, 1967: 2140). (See map on f o l l o w i n g page) The boundaries of CORD were the same as those of the school d i s t r i c t , s t r e t -ching from Oyama i n the north to Peachland i n the south, and from the height of land separating the Okanagan watershed from the other watershed to the east and west. The unincorporated areas of the d i s t r i c t were d i v i d e d i n t o - 76 -e l e c t o r a l areas, each one of which was allowed to e l e c t a board member f o r a two-year term. Kelowna and Peachland appointed c o u n c i l members to the Board, a l s o f o r a two-year term. Voting power on the Board was d i s t r i b u t e d by the p o p u l a t i o n s i z e of the area being represented, w i t h Kelowna dominat-ing because of i t s s i z e . With t h i s p o l i t i c a l arrangement, CORD assumed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r community planning i n 1969 (BC Gazette, 1969: 3866), . i n c l u d i n g under i t s c o n t r o l a l l the area which was formerly the Community Planning Area and a p o r t i o n of Vernon's CPA No. 2 to the north. Turning from r e g i o n a l government to m u n i c i p a l , i n the m i d - s i x t i e s , Kelowna C o u n c i l attempted to take advantage of f e d e r a l funding f o r urban renewal. C o u n c i l sought the advice of a f i r m of consultant planners, Robert W i l l i a m s and A s s o c i a t e s , to assess the p o t e n t i a l f o r urban renewal i n Kelowna. A p r e l i m i n a r y study was completed and a market a n a l y s i s under-taken (Robert W i l l i a m s , 1965; Watts Marketing Research, 1967), but the main study on the renewal of the Kelowna waterfront north of Bernard Avenue was never completed. At t h i s time, C o u n c i l a l s o began to use the s t a f f planning s e r v i c e s provided by the planners of CORPB. In 1965, the Advisory Planning Commission By-Law was r e v i s e d to permit the commission to r e c e i v e advice and a s s i s t a n c e from a p r o f e s s i o n a l planning s t a f f . The p r o f e s s i o n -a l i s m demanded s i x t y years before f o r p u b l i c h e a l t h through a medical h e a l t h o f f i c e r , and f o r t y years before f o r engineering through the C i t y •I Engineer, became necessary f o r land use c o n t r o l and planning only i n . 1965. In J u l y , 1965, the f e d e r a l department of Regional and Economic Expan-s i o n declared the Okanagan a designated area, making i n d u s t r i e s l o c a t i n g there e l i g i b l e f o r federal..economic i n c e n t i v e s . Most areas of the Okana-gan b e n e f i t t e d from t h i s program. In the c e n t r a l Okanagan study area, i n d u s t r i a l parks were e s t a b l i s h e d on the west s i d e and near the u n i n -corporated community of W i n f i e l d to the north of the c i t y . Kelowna Coun-c i l wanted to take advantage of t h i s f e d e r a l d e s i g n a t i o n , but there was not s u f f i c i e n t i n d u s t r i a l land s t i l l a v a i l a b l e i n the c i t y to a t t r a c t l a r g e i n d u s t r i a l development. Mayor Parkinson, A i d . E r n i e Winter and Mr. Jim Markle recognized the need f o r the c i t y to acquire a l a r g e p a r c e l of land near the r a i l w a y , i f the c i t y was to a t t r a c t DREE i n d u s t r i e s (Par-kinson, 1969: 1). To achieve t h i s g o a l , Parkinson and Markle went out and persuaded the owners of property between S p a l l and D i l l w o r t h Road, to the east of the mu n i c i p a l boundaries, to s e l l to the c i t y . To fi n a n c e the a c q u i s i t i o n of the property, A i d . Winter suggested the formation of a syn-d i c a t e of l o c a l businessmen to lend money to the c i t y to enable i t to buy the property. The syndicate was formed, and the c i t y bought 167 acres f o r $770,000. Subsequently, White Trucks, McGavin's Bakery, CP Merchand-i s i n g , and Richmond P l a s t i c s bought land f o r i n d u s t r i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n i n the park. In a d d i t i o n to the advice of the planners from CORPB, the c i t y decided to e s t a b l i s h a planning department of i t s own. In 1967, Mr. Greg Stevens was h i r e d as the Kelowna C i t y Planner. While Mayor Parkinson and the Co u n c i l were keen to have t h e i r new planner develop an urban design scheme f o r t h e i r r a p i d l y growing community, Stevens was i n i t i a l l y kept busy up-dat i n g the c i t y ' s e x i s t i n g r e g u l a t i o n s (Eaton, 1981). A major r e v i s i o n of the 1961 zoning by-law was adopted on June 10, 1968 (By-Law No. 3087). The r e v i s e d by-law provided f o r two p u b l i c and i n s t i t u t i o n a l zones, two motel zones, and an a g r i c u l t u r a l zone, as w e l l as the r e s i d e n t i a l , commer-c i a l , wholesale and i n d u s t r i a l zones already e s t a b l i s h e d . Stevens was - 78 -able to h i r e an a s s i s t a n t , Mr. B i l l Eaton, and together they completed and had adopted the c i t y ' s f i r s t zoning map i n 1968 (By-Law No. 3095). The Kelowna Advisory Planning Committee (APC) became a much more v o c a l p a r t i c i p a n t i n the planning process i n the l a t e s i x t i e s . With the support of the planning department, APC came to be a p r o - a c t i v e f o r c e i n the planning of the c i t y , and u l t i m a t e l y a thorn i n the s i d e of C o u n c i l . In the May 27, 1969 e d i t i o n of the Kelowna D a i l y C o u r i e r , A i d . R.J. W i l -kinson, Chairman of the Planning Committee, had the f o l l o w i n g to report about the a c t i v i t i e s of APC: APC i s an e f f e c t i v e bridge between C o u n c i l and the p u b l i c and between the e x i s t i n g s i t u a t i o n and b e t t e r planning. The planning department has used the A d v i s -ory Planning Commission as a sounding board i n a l l matters r e l a t e d to planning, zoning, e t c . The feed-back has been tremendous f o r which we thank them. The APC has a l i t t l e more so u l searching to do w i t h regard to terms of re f e r e n c e , aims, o b j e c t i v e s and members. They have a b i g job to do. The C o u n c i l must give them a l l the support i t can (9). The c i t y had expanded i t s boundaries to i n c o r p o r a t e the DREE-sup-ported i n d u s t r i e s w i t h l i t t l e p u b l i c controversy. S i m i l a r l y , the c i t y expanded to i n c l u d e Orchard Park, a r e g i o n a l shopping centre on Harvey Avenue, w i t h very l i t t l e , i f any, p u b l i c o b j e c t i o n (By-Law No. 3372). By 1971, the c i t y had grown to a p o p u l a t i o n of 19,425 and there was con-s i d e r a b l e pressure for. higher d e n s i t y development i n the c i t y and f o r r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n i n the surrounding unincorporated suburbs. Given t h i s r a p i d growth, i t is.perhaps s u r p r i s i n g that the i s s u e that r e c e i v e d the most a t t e n t i o n i n t h i s p e r i o d w i t h i n the c i t y was the p o t e n t i a l redev-elopment of C i t y Park. C i t y Park had long been recognized as an important community resource. - 79 -In addition to providing active and passive recreational services for the community on a year-round basis, the park had become the focus of the Kelowna International Regatta. A portion of the land purchased for the Kelowna Industrial Park had been designated as a community recreation cen-tre (Parkinson, 1969, 6), but when the Regatta's aquatic structure was destroyed by f i r e in 1969, Council began to promote City Park as the si te of a community recreation centre, to include a rebuilt aquatic structure and a senior c i t izen 's act ivi ty centre. APC, for i t s part, presented the following argument i n i t s 1969 Annual Report: It can be argued that the loss of the aquatic f a c i l i t i e s offers to Kelowna a golden opportunity to plan for the future and to encourage, i n fact to determine, where and what kind of private and public development should take place on present waterfront lands. This opportunity w i l l be missed i f i t is decided to take the most expedient route in using presently developed parkland for building purposes (APC Minutes, 1969, n . p . ) . The division between Council and APC on the location of the community centre was exacerbated when Council appointed an Aquatic Replacement Com-mittee with no representation for APC on the committee (APC Minutes, Dec-ember 16, 1970). In early 1971, a consortium of local architects presented Council with i t s report entitled "Kelowna Waterfront Study" which, among others, made the following recommendations: "that a Kelowna Community Com-plex be constructed in Kelowna City Park . . . and. . . that Kelowna City Park be replanned to accommodate the new b u i l d i n g . " (Hartley, Fulker, A l d i s , 1971). APC was opposed to the use of the City Park for the recreation centre, but the Commission had been effectively neutralized by Council, which chose not to refer planning matters to the Commission. On March 10, 1971, APC  Minutes records a long discussion "concerning the apparent lack of liason - 80 -between C o u n c i l and the Commission, w i t h Commission members expressing a r e a l d e s i r e to enter i n t o dialogue w i t h C o u n c i l . " By May 12, 1971 APC had become most unhappy w i t h t h i s s i t u a t i o n , s t a t i n g i n the Minutes that "members went on record as being completely d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the r o l e they were p l a y i n g — t h a t of mere l i p s e r v i c e and were more di s t u r b e d that Coun-c i l had given them a b s o l u t e l y no d i r e c t i o n . " While the Commission f e l t i t was not being an e f f e c t i v e v o i c e f o r the p u b l i c , and ceased meeting, the p u b l i c was doing a good job f o r i t s e l f on the park development question. V i r t u a l l y every meeting of C o u n c i l i n t h i s p e r i o d was attended by members of the Save Our Park Committee (SOPAC) and other i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s pro-t e s t i n g the development of Kelowna C i t y Park (Council Minutes, V o l 49). While C o u n c i l passed a by-law on March 29, 1971 a u t h o r i z i n g the construc-t i o n of the community r e c r e a t i o n centre (No. 3302), at t h i s same meeting, members of C o u n c i l passed a r e s o l u t i o n to i n v e s t i g a t e a l t e r n a t i v e l o c a -t i o n s f o r the community centre (Minutes, V o l . 49, 233). A compromise, which s t i l l d i d not s u i t SOPAC, was passed by C o u n c i l on May 17, 1971, a u t h o r i z i n g the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a " t e a h o u s e - p a v i l i o n " i n the park, a r e t i r e d c i t i c i z e n s ' a c t i v i t y centre north of the park and the community ~>< centre on the lands o r i g i n a l l y set aside i n the DREE i n d u s t r i a l lands f o r r e c r e a t i o n (Minutes, V o l . 49, 358). Proponents of SOPAC f e l t that the p a v i l i o n , which contained space f o r a restaurant as w e l l as change rooms and a snack bar, was an excessive and unwarranted development f o r the park (Eaton, 1981; Jones, 1981). Conclusion Perhaps i t i s appropriate that t h i s phase of the h i s t o r y of the dev-elopment of planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan ends w i t h an i s s u e i n v o l v i n g - 81 -the c i t y park, the establishment of which was one of the f i r s t major p l a n -ning i n i t i a t i v e s of the incorporated community of Kelowna. In the two years a f t e r the l a t t e r park debate, major changes would occur i n the p l a n -ning and p o l i t i c a l scene i n the c i t y , r e g i o n , and province. With the e l e c -t i o n of a new "reform"-oriented C o u n c i l (Eaton, 1981), an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of C i t y H a l l was accomplished w i t h Mr. Doug Herbert, f o r -merly Comptroller-Treasurer and C o l l e c t o r , being made C i t y A d m i n i s t r a t o r , w i t h powers to " c o n t r o l the day to day a f f a i r s of the C i t y " and to "sus-. pend any department head, o f f i c e r or o f f i c i a l of the m u n i c i p a l i t y . " (By-Law No. 3263). Planner Stevens l e f t the c i t y , and Mr. Eaton j o i n e d Mr. Fraser Shotten w i t h the RDCO planning department, now under the d i r e c t i o n of Mr. Don Barcham. The planning department of the c i t y was c l o s e d , w i t h the c i t y c o n t r a c t i n g planning s e r v i c e s from RDCO w i t h Miss Jane Fleming assuming r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r much of the c i t y ' s planning. Under the d i r e c -t i o n of Barcham, the d i s t r i c t began an ambitious program of community and r e g i o n a l planning, producing community plans f o r the M u n i c i p a l i t y of Peach-land and the unincorporated areas of Westbank, Lakeview and Winfield-Oyama, and a r e g i o n a l plan f o r the d i s t r i c t . At the p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l , w i t h the e l e c t i o n of a New Democratic govern-ment, major changes i n p o l i c y and program p r i o r i t i e s were soon underway. In 1973, the Land Commission Act was passed, which r e s t r i c t e d the develop-ment of a l l a g r i c u l t u r a l land i n the province, sharply c u r t a i l i n g the dev-elopment of r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n s ( s t i l l r egulated by the Department of Highways) i n the unincorporated areas of the province. The New Democrats a l s o acted u n i l a t e r a l l y to increase the s i z e of the C i t y of Kelowna, from about e i g h t , to eight-seven square m i l e s , b r i n g i n g most areas of suburban growth (Rutland, Okanagan M i s s i o n , and the Glenmore V a l l e y ) under the - 82 -c o n t r o l of an expanded c i t y c o u n c i l . In.conjunction w i t h t h i s boundary extension, the c i t y undertook a community plan and r e h i r e d a planning s t a f f . The major changes of 1972 and 1973 make i t a watershed p e r i o d i n the planning h i s t o r y of the c e n t r a l Okanagan, beyond which the present study w i l l not go. The events of t h i s p e r i o d heralded a new era i n planning i n the r e g i o n , w i t h strong p r o v i n c i a l c o n t r o l i n a g r i c u l t u r a l areas, w i t h greater c o n t r o l of development i n the c i t y and r e g i o n , and w i t h a growing commitment i n the RDCO Planning Department f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n and adop-t i o n of land use planning r e g u l a t i o n . - 8^ -CHAPTER V: AM ANALYSIS OF THE CASE STUDY. Land Use C o n t r o l , and the B u s i n e s s C y c l e T h i s t h e s i s must go beyond, a c h r o n o l o g y o f i m p o r t a n t e v e n t s i n o r d e r to e v a l u a t e c a u s e - a n d - e f f e e t and a n a l y s e the e v o l u t i o n o f l a n d u • use c o n t r o l , a n d . p l a n n i n g i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. A h i s t o r i c a l case s t u d y such as t h e one p r e s e n t e d has the p o t e n t i a l t o i l l u m i n a t e the m a r g i n between, p l a n n i n g t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e . The case s t u d y seems to I n d i c a t e t h a t the e v o l u t i o n , o f l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n f o l l o w e d the l o c a l and r e g i o n a l b u s i n e s s c y c l e . F l u c t u a t i o n s i n . the b u s i n e s s c y c l e a f f e c t e d b o t h l a n d use c o n t r o l , w h i ch has. been d e f i n e d as r e a c t i v e m u n i c i p a l b y - l a w s or. r e s o l u t i o n s w h i ch ^ r e s t r i c t development, on a program o r p r o j e c t b a s i s , and l a n d use p l a n n i n g , w h i ch has been d e f i n e d as a m u n i c i p a l p o l i c y p r o c e s s w h i c h i s g o a l o r i e n t e d g u i d i n g t h e l o n g term development o f the community. The case s t u d y shows t h a t the p r i m a r y r e a s o n f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n was the r a p i d growth o f the u n o r g a n i z e d t o w n s i t e and the need f o r community c o n t r o l o v e r the d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s o f t h a t growth.. At f i r s t , the demand f o r c o n t r o l s was r e l a t e d to p u b l i c h e a l t h , n o t l a n d u s e : the f r e e r u n n i n g o f a n i m a l s , the d i s p o s a l o f garbage and sewage, and the r e g u l a t i o n o f s t r e e t t r a f f i c . As some l a n d use c o n t r o l a u t h o r i t y was d e l e g a t e d to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s by the p r o v i n c i a l government i n the p e r i o d a f t e r W o r l d War I., the c i t y a d o p t e d b y - l a w s f i r s t to r e g u l a t e t h e l o c a t i o n o f l a u n d r i e s and wash houses, and l a t e r to c o n t r o l o t h e r p o t e n t i a l l y n o x i o u s o r n u i s a n c e i n d u s t r i a l uses.. As development a b r u p t l y s l owed a f t e r the 1i.9.l3^:ec.0.n6»i£Adeci£nerand-.dTiring - 85 -the war, the c i t y introduced no f u r t h e r land use c o n t r o l s . True to the emerging p a t t e r n , as the community began to grow again i n the 1920's, development c o n t r o l by-laws, i n the form of F i r e L i m i t s and B u i l d i n g Regulations and, l a t e r , s u b d i v i s i o n and s e p t i c tank regu-l a t i o n s were adopted. The l o c a l economic c o l l a p s e brought on by the Great Depression once again stopped bo.th the r a p i d growth of the commun-i t y and the need f o r f u r t h e r development c o n t r o l s . A comprehensive land use c o n t r o l , the 1938 Zoning By-Law, was passed as development pressure returned to Kelowna; however, World War I I intervened, and another d e v e l -opment h i a t u s ensued. A f t e r the war, the c e n t r a l Okanagan entered a per-i o d of r a p i d and sustained growth which continued u n t i l the end of the study p e r i o d , during which the c i t y continuously and i n c r e a s i n g l y became inv o l v e d i n the r e g u l a t i o n of land use, both i n s i d e and outside the c i t y ' s boundaries. Gunton (1981: 337) suggests t h a t , i n g e n e r a l , Canadian planning a c t i -v i t y reacted to and lagged behind the c y c l i c a l booms i n the economy. This h i s t o r i c a l study shows that the process of development c o n t r o l i n the cen-t r a l Okanagan was indeed r e a c t i n g to community growth, but was able to keep pace w i t h that community growth. From a general h i s t o r i c a l perspec-t i v e , then, the e v o l u t i o n of land use c o n t r o l s i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan was a r e a c t i o n to i n t e r m i t t a n t periods of r a p i d economic growth which, i n t u r n , spurred the p h y s i c a l development of the community. Co n t r o l and Planning: A D i s t i n c t i o n w i t h a D i f f e r e n c e The p a r a l l e l ebb-and-flow of economic growth and of land use r e g u l a -t i o n seem obvious once compared. Less i n t u i t i v e l y obvious i s the emergence .- 86 -and subsequent divergence of the trends of land use c o n t r o l and land use planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan. An e a r l y w r i t e r on the theory and prac-t i c e of land use c o n t r o l w r i t e s that "zoning i s pa r t of the c i t y p l a n , and as planning commissions become more numerous they w i l l undoubtably be sub-s t i t u t e d f o r the present temporary zoning commissions'." (Bassett, 1936: 35). In a s i m i l a r f a s h i o n , Gunton (1979: 181) w r i t e s that Thomas Adams of the Commission of Conservation b e l i e v e d that a zoning by-law was a very important p a r t of the c i t y p l a n , but only a part which should come between the c i v i c survey and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n plan and the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s , parks, and s u b d i v i s i o n c o n t r o l i n the c i t y planning process. However, other Canadian planning h i s t o r i a n s show:that land use c o n t r o l or zoning, q u i t e apart from c i v i c surveys and the planning of p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s , became the pre-eminent t o o l f o r r e g u l a t i n g land use i n Canadian m u n i c i p a l -i t i e s (Moore, 1979; Van Nus, 1979). L i t t l e i n t e r e s t was shown i n other f a c e t s of the planning process advocated by Adams and the Commission of Conservation. This t h e s i s has argued that the l i t e r a t u r e of planning theory makes a worthwhile d i s t i n c t i o n between land use planning and land use c o n t r o l as p r e v i o u s l y defined. In support of t h i s hypothesis, s e v e r a l planning theor-i s t s have been c i t e d (McLoughlin, 1973; Agger, 1979; C a s t e l l s , 1978). I t has a l s o been shown that K i r k (1980: 41) supported t h i s hypothesis, d i v i d -i n g the general process of land use planning i n t o "negative planning" or development c o n t r o l , and " p o s i t i v e p l a n n i n g , " which she c a l l s p u b l i c dev-elopment. The f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n w i l l disaggregate the major p u b l i c land use i n i t i a t i v e s of Kelowna C o u n c i l i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s ' — l a n d use c o n t r o l , and land use p l a n n i n g — t o show t h a t , w h i l e p o l i t i c a l support e x i s t e d f o r - 87 -land use c o n t r o l s , seldom was there support f o r other than o c c a s i o n a l land use planning i n i t i a t i v e s of a s i t e - s p e c i f i c or non-comprehensive nature. Land Use Planning I n i t i a t i v e s There were p u b l i c planning i n i t i a t i v e s from thh f i r s t days of the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of Kelowna. The f i r s t i s Council's 1906 d e c i s i o n to forego property taxes f o r the owners of the Kelowna Saw M i l l f o r ten years, i f they would r e l o c a t e away from Bernard Avenue. The r e l o c a t i o n of the m i l l provided land use consistency f o r the commercial core: t h i s d e c i s i o n i s an e x c e l l e n t example of the c i t y f a t h e r s planning f o r the future, land use of the c i t y . The major land use planning r e s o l u t i o n i n t h i s p e r i o d , how-ever, was the purchase of the c i t y park s i t e i n 1909. The c i t y was anxious to buy the property before i t was subdivided f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development and, once purchased, C i t y Park proved to be a v a l u a b l e p u b l i c resource f o r the community. The land companies a l s o saw the value of the park, and i t became a major fea t u r e i n t h e i r land s a l e s promotional l i t e r a t u r e . The most i n f l u e n t i a l land use planners i n the c i t y p r i o r to World War I were land owners operating i n the p r i v a t e market. The d e c i s i o n to estab-l i s h the townsite was made by the Lequime b r o t h e r s , who owned the r e l e v a n t property and needed the w a t e r f r o n t l o c a t i o n f o r a f e r r y l a n d i n g . The K e l -owna Land and Orchard Company a c t i v e l y sought to have a p o r t i o n of t h e i r lands, south of M i l l Creek, included i n the new c i t y . E a r l y entrepreneurs made the f i r s t r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n d e c i s i o n s : N i g e l (n.d.) r e v e a l s that the KLO Company decided to develop s m a l l l o t s near the downtown which, because of t h e i r s i z e and l o c a t i o n , were a t t r a c t i v e to low-income buyers. - 88 -Clement (1955) s t a t e s that Dr. Boyce bought the Lequime l o t s to the north of the commercial core, and c o n s o l i d a t e d them i n t o l a r g e l o t s so that they would appeal to i n d u s t r i a l users. Through these and other ad hoc d e c i s -i o n s , the p r i v a t e developers were the most i n f l u e n t i a l planners i n the e a r l y development of Kelowna. A f t e r the c o l l a p s e of the r e s i d e n t a l and a g r i c u l t u r a l land market i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan re g i o n i n 1913, land use planning, both p u b l i c l y -and p r i v a t e l y - i n i t i a t e d , became l e s s noteworthy. While the c i t y became a major land owner through property tax d e f a u l t s during World War. I , no plans were made f o r the d i s p o s i t i o n of t h i s property. Again, i n the Great Depression, the c i t y increased i t s stock of r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s , as w e l l as adding to i t s park lands, when Dr. Boyce gave the c i t y Gyro and Knox Moun-t a i n Parks, r a t h e r than be pressed f o r the payment of property tax. The 1938 N a t i o n a l Housing Act's p r o v i s i o n f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of f e d e r a l l y - s u b s i d i z e d housing was a major land use planning program sub-s c r i b e d to by the c i t y . While the c i t y o f f e r e d 115 l o t s and passed the necessary by-laws to accommodate the new c o n s t r u c t i o n , no housing was b u i l t p r i o r to the outbreak of World War I I . A Wartime Housing P r o j e c t replaced the pre-war housing p l a n , and one hundred low r e n t a l houses were b u i l t i n 1945 on many of the same l o t s o f f e r e d i n 1938. Other ad hoc planning i n i t i a t i v e s were developed by C i t y C o u n c i l a f t e r the war. The most s i g n i f i c a n t was the C i v i c Centre P l a n prepared by Harland Bartholomew and A s s o c i a t e s and adopted by C o u n c i l . Although both the f e d e r a l govern-ment, through the S p e c i a l Committee on Reconstruction, and the p r o f e s s i o n a l planners r e t a i n e d by the c i t y , recommended the p r e p a r a t i o n of a land use plan to guide f u t u r e development, C i t y C o u n c i l had no d e s i r e to have such - 89 -a plan prepared. Such was s t i l l the case when the c i t y had planning con-s u l t a n t s prepare a report on boundary extension i n 1956. Once again, while the c i t y f o l l owed the immediate advice of the c o n s u l t a n t , the longer term advice recommending the p r e p a r a t i o n and adoption of a comprehensive land use plan went unheeded. In 1958, C o u n c i l e s t a b l i s h e d an Advisory Planning Commission to . . advise C o u n c i l on matters p e r t a i n i n g to the development of the c i t y . Through the a c t i v i t y and advice of the p r o v i n c i a l government and the B r i t i s h Columbia D i v i s i o n of the Community Planning A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada, a C e n t r a l Okanagan Regional Planning Board was e s t a b l i s h e d to advise the c i t y and the p r o v i n c i a l Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s on r e g i o n a l and l o c a l planning concerns. CORPB h i r e d a planning s t a f f who provided pro-f e s s i o n a l advice on matters r e f e r r e d to i t by C o u n c i l . However, aside from a number of s m a l l boundary extensions, p a r t i c u l a r l y one to i n c o r p o r -ate the c i t y ' s new i n d u s t r i a l park, no s i g n i f i c a n t f u t u r e - o r i e n t e d p u b l i c planning emerged as a r e s u l t of the establishment of these advisory bodies. From as e a r l y as 1937, when the C a p i t a l News I l l u s t r a t e d c a l l e d f o r a land use p l a n , formal and i n f o r m a l requests were made f o r the prep-a r a t i o n of land use plans f o r Kelowna; however, i t was not u n t i l the end of the study p e r i o d (1972), and the c r e a t i o n of the new l a r g e c i t y , that a community plan was prepared. Land Use Controls In sharp c o n t r a s t to the ad hoc development of planning i n the c e n t r a l Okanagan, land use c o n t r o l s were e a r l y recognized and continuously r e a f -firmed as a necessary p a r t of the c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Immediately a f t e r - 90 -i n c o r p o r a t i o n , C o u n c i l adopted trade r e g u l a t i o n s which had the e f f e c t of excluding c e r t a i n u ndesirable commercial uses. In 1909, the Kelowna by-law to exclude l a u n d r i e s and wash houses p a r a l l e l s c o n t r o l s being adopted a l l along the west coast of North America, to exclude these uses and t h e i r owners, g e n e r a l l y Chinese, from r e s i d e n t i a l areas (Delafons, 1969: 19). In 1912, the by-law adopted to exclude p o t e n t i a l l y - u n d e s i r a b l e i n d u s t r i a l uses i s a l s o i n d i c a t i v e of the z o n i n g - l i k e c o n t r o l s being adopted through-out North America before World War I (Bassett, 1936). A f t e r the war, but before the passage of the Town Planning Act i n 1925, C o u n c i l adopted F i r e L i m i t s and B u i l d i n g Regulations, which c o n t r o l l e d the type of land uses i n c e r t a i n b u i l d i n g d i s t r i c t s , once again having the e f f e c t of zoning. These development c o n t r o l s were a l l adopted w i t h no recorded o p p o s i t i o n , and the standards adopted served the community w e l l i n the next few years prevent-ing the encroachment of the shack developments which appeared outside the c i t y during the depression. Although the c i t y was given the a u t h o r i t y to introduce a zoning by-law a f t e r the passage of the Town Planning A c t , i t was not u n t i l 1938, w i t h the c i t y t r y i n g to take advantage of the f e d e r a l housing program, that the c i t y adopted a comprehensive zoning ordinance. Using a model by-law s u p p l i e d by the f e d e r a l government, a committee of C o u n c i l prepared the c i t y ' s f i r s t zoning of s p e c i f i c areas; t h i s land use c o n t r o l by-law passed q u i c k l y . By 1938, w i t h development i n the c i t y w e l l - c o n t r o l l e d , C o u n c i l began to be i n c r e a s i n g l y concerned w i t h the "undesirable shack town c o n d i t i o n s " j u s t beyond the c i t y boundaries, and p e t i t i o n e d f o r the extension of land use c o n t r o l s o u t side m u n i c i p a l boundaries. Kelowna C o u n c i l can take some c r e d i t f o r i n i t i a t i n g p r o v i n c i a l . - 91 -l e g i s l a t i o n c r e a t i n g land use c o n t r o l i n unincorporated areas of the province. A f t e r World War I I , C o u n c i l began to p e t i t i o n i t s Member of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, the p r o v i n c i a l government, the Royal Commis-s i o n on P r o v i n c i a l M u n i c i p a l R e l a t i o n s , and other m u n i c i p a l i t i e s support-i n g the extension of zoning and s u b d i v i s i o n c o n t r o l s outside m u n i c i p a l boundaries. The Regional Planning D i v i s i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l Bureau of Reconstruction e s t a b l i s h e d a b a s i c zoning r e g u l a t i o n to c o n t r o l develop-ment i n the unincorporated areas surrounding Kelowna i n 1946, the f i r s t such r e g u l a t i o n i n the province. Boundary extension was a l s o seen as a method of extending the c i t y ' s development c o n t r o l , p a r t i c u l a r l y as the c i t y began to run out of land s u i t a b l e f o r development i n s i d e i t s boundaries, and as the regulated-area concept proved to give the c i t y l e s s i n f l u e n c e over the development of unincorporated t e r r i t o r y than was o r i g i n a l l y a n t i c i p a t e d . Under the pres-sure of r a p i d p o p u l a t i o n growth, exacerbated by the completion of the Oka-nagan Highway, the c i t y , the D i s t r i c t of Glenmore, and some unincorpor-ated areas were amalgamated i n 1960. A new zoning by-law, prepared w i t h -out the b e n e f i t of the land use plan suggested by Communtiy Planning Con-s u l t a n t s , was adopted i n 1961 f o r the enlarged c i t y . The high r i s e zoning i s s u e which emerged i n 1963 i s another example of the c o n t r o l which C o u n c i l e x e r c i s e d over the c i t y ' s land use, i n t h i s case c l e a r l y w i t h p u b l i c support. While many other c i t i e s were passing by-laws to a l l o w high r i s e development, Kelowna's d e s i r e to maintain e x i s t -ing land uses on the waterfront and near the park triumphed over the plans of p r i v a t e developers. As the pace of development quickened, the c i v i c boundaries were f u r t h e r extended and more zoning amendments were adopted. - 92 -I t i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of Council's preoccupation w i t h land use c o n t r o l t h a t , when the c i t y f i r s t h i r e d a planner, h i s f i r s t d u t i e s i n v o l v e d s u b s t a n t i a l amendments to the zoning by-law and the p r e p a r a t i o n of a new zoning map. The preceding a n a l y s i s shows that comprehensive land use c o n t r o l s were long supported and used i n the C i t y of Kelowna, w h i l e planning was only o c c a s i o n a l l y supported. A c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between land use c o n t r o l and land use planning i s made i n the e a r l i e r l i t e r a t u r e review, but the c e n t r a l Okanagan study shows that the d i s t i n c t i o n i s o f t e n b l u r r e d i n prac-t i c e . While land use c o n t r o l through zoning was the pre-eminent concern of the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l process, i t would be u n f a i r to say that no f u t u r e -o r i e n t e d planning r e s u l t e d form zoning by-law implementation. In a l l the major comprehensive land use c o n t r o l s passed from 1924 to the end of the study p e r i o d , C o u n c i l planned the f u t u r e land use p a t t e r n of the c i t y . C o u n c i l c o n s i s t e n t l y provided f o r more s i n g l e - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l develop-ment through the rezoning of a g r i c u l t u r a l or vacant land. Furthermore, vacant land i n the North End was i n d u s t r i a l l y - z o n e d to provide a d d i t i o n a l lands f o r r e t a i l and m u l t i p l e - f a m i l y zones. While these more controver-s i a l uses were g e n e r a l l y supported, Council's support came only i n r e a c t i o n to p r i v a t e l y - s p o n s o r e d rezoning a p p l i c a t i o n s . Gunton claims that L i b e r a l planning's f a v o u r i t e t o o l s f o r implementation were negative r e g u l a t i o n s such as zoning and s u b d i v i -s i o n c o n t r o l . The s t a t e was not expected to play a major e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l r o l e i n shaping the s p a t i a l order of the c i t y . (1981: 332) In 1968, the Report of the F e d e r a l Task Force on Housing and Urban Devel- opment , which reviewed the " s t a t e of the a r t " i n Canadian pl a n n i n g , claimed that r e a c t i v e c o n t r o l , r a t h e r than p r o a c t i v e planning, was s t i l l the - 93 -unfortunate preoccupation of Canadian planners. The f o l l o w i n g statement i s i l l u s t r a t i v e : So much of i t planning work was a negative s c r i p t u r e w r i t t e n i n "thou s h a l t not's," when the s i t u a t i o n c r i e d out f o r p o s i t i v e thoughts and i n i t i a t i v e s . The Task Force found r u l e s upon r u l e s to e s t a b l i s h the widths of s t r e e t s , yet i t found hardly a s i n g l e community w i t h a long term plan and a design f o r b a s i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s . I t found a m u l t i p l i c i t y of r e g u l a t i o n s at a l l l e v e l s to set minimum requirements and h a r d l y any-one to s p e l l out maximum o b j e c t i v e s . The c l o s e r examination of a p a r t i c u l a r community affo r d e d by t h i s study r e v e a l s that a c e r t a i n amount of n o n - c o n t r o v e r s i a l p o s i t i v e planning was a l s o c a r r i e d out by Kelowna C o u n c i l through t h e i r land use c o n t r o l by-laws. Nevertheless, although o f t e n advised to undertake a comprehensive land use p l a n , C o u n c i l chose not to become inv o l v e d i n o v e r a l l , p o l i c y -o r i e n t e d planning. Planning and L o c a l P o l i t i c s : Theory and P r a c t i c e Compared In the l i t e r a t u r e on the r o l e of p o l i t i c s i n planning, which gener-a l l y i n c l u d e s land use c o n t r o l and planning under the general r u b r i c of planning, no consensus e x i s t s or i s l i k e l y to emerge on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between planning and p o l i t i c s . Had t h i s t h e s i s proceeded w i t h the pur-pose of uncovering t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p , i t i s probable that more than one type of r e l a t i o n s h i p (e.g. p l u r a l i s t or e l i t i s t ) could have been proposed and supported through h i s t o r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n . I t i s c l e a r , n e v e r t h e l e s s , that u n l i k e many instances i n the American experience, where urban r e f o r -mers attempted to separate land use planning from the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l pro-cess, c i v i c p o l i t i c i a n s i n Kelowna have maintained t h e i r command over l o c a l planning. L i k e most of the l i t e r a t u r e a v a i l a b l e i n Canadian planning h i s -t o r y , from Armstrong (1959) to Gunton (1981), the previous case study has - 94 - ; shown the continuous involvement of the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l process i n land use planning. In h i s a n a l y s i s of the e f f e c t s of the 1848 r e v o l u t i o n s on European town planning, Benevolo (1975: 105) s t a t e s that "a systematic study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p o l i t i c s and town planning does not yet e x i s t , and thus h i n t s and hypotheses, which can only be confirmed by f u r t h e r research, must be the b a s i s f o r any d i s c u s s i o n of the s u b j e c t . " In a s i m i l a r f a s h i o n , w h i l e t h i s h i s t o r i c a l review i s l e s s than a "systematic study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p o l i t i c s and town planning," the h i n t s and hypotheses which can be derived from the case study provide a wealth of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the a n a l y s i s of the p o l i t i c a l process i n land use con-t r o l and planning. L o c a l c o u n c i l members were the f i r s t p u b l i c planners i n Kelowna, and they represented an e l i t e of the community: B r i t i s h land-owning males over teh age of twenty-one were the only townsfolk allowed to vote i n 1905. Co u n c i l supported the i n t e r e s t s of t h i s e l e c t o r a t e who, i n the e a r l y days of the c i t y , were predominantly l o c a l businessmen. The e a r l y c o n f l i c t between A i d . Dehart and C o u n c i l , p r e v i o u s l y described, i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of the f a c t t h a t , w h i l e C o u n c i l may or may not have been committed to re p r e s -enting c l a s s i n t e r e s t s e x p l i c i t l y , such commitments d i d not overshadow personal a n i m o s i t i e s . I t i s a l s o important to note that market c o n d i t i o n s determined the e a r l y land use i n the c i t y , w h i l e C o u n c i l only undertook the task of preventing unwanted development. A u t h o r i t y was delegated by the p r o v i n c i a l government f o r C o u n c i l to c o n t r o l land uses, and the h i s t o r i c a l evidence shows that the l o c a l p o l i -t i c i a n s were not prepared to give up t h e i r command of the land use c o n t r o l - 95 -process as s e n i o r government i n t e r v e n t i o n and p r o f e s s i o n a l planning advice increased. While the f e d e r a l C u r t i s Report suggested that small urban communities develop comprehensive land use plans as a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r any postwar r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , i f any such request was made to Kelowna C o u n c i l , no a c t i o n was taken. S i m i l a r l y , p r o f e s s i o n a l planners contracted by the c i t y uniformly recommended the p r e p a r a t i o n of a comprehensive, land use plan to a i d i n the r e s o l u t i o n of other planning assignments, but C o u n c i l c o n s i s -t e n t l y disregarded proposals f o r o v e r a l l plans. A comprehensive p l a n d i r e c t i n g the f u t u r e development of the c i t y was not p o l i t i c a l l y a t t r a c t i v e to Kelowna C o u n c i l . F i r s t l y , w i t h p o p u l a t i o n growth and commercial f l o o r space p r o j e c t e d , and e x i s t i n g and proposed land uses and t r a n s p o r t i o n c o r r i d o r s mapped, C o u n c i l would have had much l e s s f l e x i b i l i t y as decision-makers. Because of small e l e c t o r a t e s , short terms of o f f i c e , and non-partisan e l e c t i o n s , l o c a l p o l i t i c i a n s o f t e n demand that land use d e c i s i o n s remain adaptable so that t h e i r p o l i t i c a l response can account f o r changing circumstances i n the community, and a land use plan could l i m i t that f l e x i b i l i t y . In.the case study, Kelowna C o u n c i l was w i l l i n g to plan f o r n o n - c o n t r o v e r s i a l land uses l i k e s i n g l e - f a m i l y d w e l l -ings by rezoning vacant land. For more contentious land uses, m u l t i p l e -f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l , f o r i n s t a n c e , C o u n c i l was much more i n c l i n e d to reserve t h e i r r i g h t to review each a p p l i c a t i o n on i t s own m e r i t s . Secondly, the adoption of a plan t r a n s f e r s some a u t h o r i t y from Coun-c i l ' s p o l i t i c a l sphere to.the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e sphere of an appointed p l a n -ning commission or a h i r e d planner. Once l i m i t e d by a p l a n , the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l process may be f u r t h e r emasculated by these a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e l e -gates. The case study shows t h a t , w i t h no- land use plan committing i t to a p a r t i c u l a r development p o l i c y , C o u n c i l was able to be adaptable and to maintain i t s p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t y when questioned by i t s appointed a d v i s o r s . While i t was e s t a b l i s h e d to advise on planning matters, the study shows that the Advisory Planning Commission was c o n s t a n t l y ignored by C o u n c i l . With no land use p l a n e s t a b l i s h i n g c i t y p o l i c y , APC was not able to con-t e s t C o uncil's development proposals. F i n a l l y , once adopted, a land use p l a n can become a device to measure the p o l i t i c a l s u i t a b i l i t y of a c o u n c i l . I f a c o u n c i l adopts a land use p o l i c y which provides considerable land f o r i n d u s t r i a l development, the community's i n d u s t r i a l and business s e c t o r s may support c o u n c i l , w h i l e the community's r e t i r e d r e s i d e n t s may not. With no land use p l a n , the develop-ment p o l i c y of a c o u n c i l need not be a r t i c u l a t e d nor, indeed, developed at a l l . In the study, Kelowna C o u n c i l eschewed the p r e p a r a t i o n of a land use p l a n , thus f o r e s t a l l i n g any judgment of C o u n c i l f o r development programs and p r o j e c t s not yet undertaken. Making no commitment to a comprehensive p l a n , C o u n c i l provided no device f o r the e l e c t r o a t e to assess Council's land development p o l i c y . Land use c o n t r o l s , on the other hand, can be p o l i t i c a l l y a t t r a c t i v e . Development of the c i t y was good f o r business and the community as long as i t d i d not c o n f l i c t w i t h e x i s t i n g uses. Gunton (1981: 333) r e i n f o r c e s t h i s a s s e r t i o n , c l a i m i n g that l i b e r a l planning which favoured negative c o n t r o l s over p o s i t i v e plans " e s s e n t i a l l y r e i n f o r c e d the s t a t u s quo under the banner of the p u b l i c good." A zoning by-law and a zoning amendment procedure gave Co u n c i l the a b i l i t y to consider change i n c r e m e n t a l l y . As A i d . Meikle s a i d : "Rezoning of apartments and d e a l i n g w i t h each a p p l i c a t i o n on i t s own merits i s good pl a n n i n g . " (Minutes, V o l . 30: 438). Such a r e a c t i v e procedure was - 97 -recognized as the p o l i t i c a l l y - e x p e d i e n t course to take when land use d e c i s i o n s were p o t e n t i a l l y contentious. The p o l i t i c a l l o n g e v i t y of Kelowna c o u n c i l l o r s i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of the cl o s e and harmonious r e l a t i o n s h i p which g e n e r a l l y e x i s t e d between the e l e c -t o r a t e and the e l e c t e d . Mr. David Sutherland sat as mayor f o r a t o t a l of s i x t e e n years between 1907 and 1929; Mr. O.L. Jones, Mr. J.D. P e t t i g r e w , Mr. W. Hughes-Garnes, Mr. J . J . Ladd, and Mr. R.F. Parkinson a l l rose to become mayor a f t e r long terms as alderman, w i t h Parkinson s e r v i n g as mayor f o r eleven years between 1959 and 1969. L o n g - l a s t i n g c i v i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s o suggests that l o c a l p o l i t i c i a n s were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the e l e c t o r a t e and that the community had a consensus of op i n i o n regarding the management of c i v i c a f f a i r s . An example of the breakdown of t h i s long-evident consensus occurs near the end of the study p e r i o d . Some observers i n d i c a t e that the e l e c t i o n of Herbert Roth as mayor in.1970, r e p l a c i n g Parkinson, was an attempt to i n t r o -duce reform and modernize c i v i c p o l i t i c s and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n (Eaton, 1981; Jones, 1981). That Roth and h i s c o u n c i l generated one of the biggest u p r i s i n g s of negative p u b l i c o p i n i o n ever witnessed i n Kelowna w i t h t h e i r support of the proposal to develop the park ( H a r t l e y , F u l k e r , A l d i s , 1971) i n d i c a t e s that t-he Roth C o u n c i l d i d not have a good understanding of the h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of maintaining the park's c h a r a c t e r . The develop-ment i n i t i a t i v e was r e j e c t e d by many of the c i t y ' s r e s i d e n t s , j u s t as they had r e j e c t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a high r i s e apartment near the park only eig h t years p r e v i o u s l y . The value of an undeveloped park must have been obvious to many of the deposed aldermen, as i t was obvious to the Advisory Planning Commission, the Save Our Parks Committee, and many other Kelowna - 98 -r e s i d e n t s . The f o r c e o f p u b l i c o p i n i o n was soon f e l t by C o u n c i l , and a l e s s c o n t r o v e r s i a l s i t e was s e l e c t e d f o r t h e new r e c r e a t i o n c e n t r e . C o n c l u s i o n A t t h e end o f t h e s t u d y p e r i o d , w h i l e l e g i s l a t i o n may have p r o v i d e d more d e l e g a t e d a u t h o r i t y t o C o u n c i l , w h i l e more f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l p rograms may have e x i s t e d t o s h a r e f i n a n c i n g and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r l o c a l p l a n n i n g p r o g r a m s , and w h i l e more a d v i c e may have been p r o v i d e d by com-m i t t e e s , c i t i z e n s and s t a f f , C o u n c i l r e m a i n e d i n command o f t h e l o c a l p l a n -n i n g p r o c e s s . And t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s t h e y commanded was e s s e n t i a l l y a s e r i e s o f r e a c t i v e l a n d u se c o n t r o l s w h i c h were p o l i t i c a l l y a c c e p t a b l e b e c a u s e o f t h e i r f l e x i b i l i t y and becau se o f t h e c l e a r a u t h o r i t y t h a t C o u n -c i l had t o amend and a d j u s t t he c o n t r o l s . E x p l i c i t commitment t o c ompre -h e n s i v e l a n d u se p l a n n i n g was and r ema i n s u n a t t r a c t i v e t o l o c a l p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Over t h e a l m o s t s e v e n t y - y e a r s t u d y p e r i o d , Ke l owna C o u n c i l r e p e a t e d l y r e a c t e d t o l a n d u se deve l opment p r e s s u r e w i t h l a n d u se c o n t r o l s . D e l e g a t e d a u t h o r i t y t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e deve l opment p r o c e s s i n c r e a s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e s t u d y p e r i o d , and t h e l o c a l p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s u sed t h i s f u r t h e r a u t h o r i t y t o a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l s . The c i t y was q u i c k t o r e s p o n d t o f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l p rograms and p r o j e c t s (WHL, DREE) , b u t l i t t l e t h o u g h t was g i v e n t o t h e l o n g - t e r m i m p l i c a t i o n s o f s uch ad hoc i n i t i a t i v e s . C o u n c i l was c o n -t e n t t o d e v e l o p c o n t r o l s on a p rog ram o r p r o j e c t b a s i s , w i t h s c a n t c o n c e r n shown f o r o v e r a l l l a n d u se p o l i c y s t r a t e g i e s o r l o n g - t e r m deve l opment t r e n d s . A s i d e f r o m t h e p r o v i s i o n o f f u r t h e r l a n d f o r n o n - c o n t r o v e r s i a l u se s i n s u c c e s s i v e z o n i n g b y - l a w s , C o u n c i l d i d l i t t l e l a n d u se p l a n n i n g . C o u n c i l - 99 -c o n t i n u a l l y avoided the pr e p a r a t i o n and implementation of a po l i c y - b a s e d , g o a l s - o r i e n t e d land use pl a n . Despite advice from s e n i o r government a d v i s o r s , as w e l l as contracted planning c o n s u l t a n t s , C o u n c i l d i d not pur-sue an o v e r a l l planning process. Because of t h i s hesitancy to pl a n i n the p o l i t i c a l forum, p r o f e s s i o n a l planners h i r e d by the c i t y were d i r e c t e d to devote most of t h e i r e f f o r t to the a r t i c u l a t i o n of land use c o n t r o l s , w h i l e long-term land use p o l i c y was ignored. This t h e s i s has argued that land use c o n t r o l s are p o l i t i c a l l y popular, p r o v i d i n g m u n i c i p a l p o l i t i c i a n s w i t h a development r e g u l a t o r which i s f l e x -i b l e and adaptable, and p e r m i t t i n g C o u n c i l to maintain i t s a u t h o r i t y over the development process. Conversely, i t has been argued that land use planning, which i s by d e f i n i t i o n dedicated to a c o n s i s t e n t , long-term p o l -i c y , i s not p o l i t i c a l l y a t t r a c t i v e . Land use planning l i m i t s the f l e x i b i l -i t y of l o c a l p o l i t i c a l decision-makers, committing them to a p a r t i c u l a r development s t r a t e g y . Land use planning a l s o l i m i t s a c o u n c i l ' s p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t y , t r a n s f e r r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to pl a n a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , (such as an appointed advisory planning commissioner and h i r e d planning s t a f f s ) . In c o n c l u s i o n , t h i s t h e s i s argues that d i s t i n c t i o n can be made between land use c o n t r o l s and land use planning. I t has a l s o been argued that land use c o n t r o l s have come to predominate urban planning. A.review of the l i t - ^ erature of planning theory and h i s t o r y supports these arguments, and the case study i n t h i s t h e s i s adds f u r t h e r support. An a n a l y s i s of the case study a l s o provides evidence to suggest why land use c o n t r o l s are con s i d -ered to be expedient by l o c a l m u n i c i p a l p o l i t i c i a n s , w h i l e land use p l a n -n i n g , w i t h i t s e x p l i c i t statement of development p o l i c y , i s p o l i t i c a l l y menacing and, t h e r e f o r e , l e s s d e s i r a b l e . - 1 0 0 -B i b l i o g r a p h y General Sources Agger, Simona Ganassi, 1979: Urban Self-Management: Planning f o r a New Soc i e t y. White P l a i n s , N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe Inc. A l l e n s w o r t h , Don T., 1975: The P o l i t i c a l R e a l i t i e s of Urban Planning. New York: Praeger P u b l i s h e r s . A l t s h u l e r , A l a n , 1965: The C i t y Planning Process: A P o l i t i c a l A n a l y s i s . I t h a c a , N.Y.: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press. B a n f i e l d , Edward C , 1961: P o l i t i c a l I n fluence. New York: The Free Press. Ba s s e t t , Edward M., 1936: Zoning: The Laws, A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and Court Decisions During the F i r s t Twenty Years. New York: Russel Sage Fdn. Benevolo, Leonardo, 1971: The O r i g i n s of Modern Town Planning. Trans. J u d i t h Landry. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. B o l l e n s , John C. and Schmandt, Henry J . , 1970: The M e t r o p o l i s : I t s People P o l i t i c s and Economic L i f e . New York: Harper and Row. Boothroyd, P e t e r , 1980: "Issues i n Socio-Economic Impact Assessment." Environmental Impact Assessment Issues. Edmonton: A l b e r t a Environment. Burby I I I , Raymond J . , 1968: " P o l i t i c s and Planning: Towards a M o d e l of Planning Related P o l i c y Outputs i n American Urban Government." Ph.D. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a , Chapel H i l l . B u r c h e l l , Robert W. and S t r e n l i e b , George, e d i t o r s , 1978: Planning Theory i n the 1980s: A Search f o r Future D i r e c t i o n s . New Brunswick, N.J.: Centre f o r Urban P o l i c y Research. - 101 -Canadian I n s t i t u t e of Planners, 1979: "Charter By-Laws and Code of P r o f e s s i o n a l Conduct." Ottawa. C a s t e l l s , Manuel, 1971: "Neo-Capitalism, C o l l e c t i v e Consumption and Urban C o n t r a d i c t i o n s : New Sources of I n e q u a l i t y and New Models f o r Change." Ecoles P r a t i q u e s des Hautes Etudes. 1978: C i t y Class and Power. Trans. E l i z a b e t h Lehas. New York: St. Martin's Press. Chapin, F. S t u a r t , 1965: Urban Land Use Planning. 2nd ed. Urbana, 111.: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s P r e s s . Cherry, Gordon E., 1970: Town Planning i n i t s S o c i a l Context. London: Leonard H i l l . e d i t o r , 1980: Shaping an Urban World. London: M a n s e l l . C u l l i n g w o r t h , J.B., 1973: Problems of Urban S o c i e t y : The S o c i a l Framework of P l a n n i n g , V o l . I . Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press Dahl, Robert A., 1961: Who Governs: Democracy and Power i n an American C i t y . New Haven, Conn: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press. Delafons, John, 1969: Land Use C o n t r o l s i n the United S t a t e s . 2nd ed. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. Domhoff, G. W i l l i a m , 1978: Who R e a l l y Rules: New Haven and Community Power Re-examined. New Brunswick, N.J.: T r a n s a c t i o n Books. E v e r s l e y , David, 1973: The Planner i n S o c i e t y : The Changing Role of the P r o f e s s i o n . London: Faber arid Faber. Fishman, Robert, 1980: "The A n t i - P l a n n e r s : The Contemporary Revolt Against Planning and I t s S i g n i f i c a n c e f o r Planning H i s t o r y . " In Cherry, e d i t o r , 1980, pp. 243-252. F l i n n , Thomas A., 1970: L o c a l Government and P o l i t i c s . Glenview, 111: S c o t t , Foreman & Company. - 102 -Friedmann, John, 1973: Retracklng America: A Theory of Transactive Planning. Garden C i t y , N.Y.: Anchor. G e r t l e r , L.O., e d i t o r , 1968: Planning the Canadian Environment. Montreal: Harvest House. G i l b e r t , C.W., 1972: Community Power S t r u c t u r e . U n i v e r s i t y of F l o r i d a . . Press. Gladstone, F r a n c i s , 1976: The P o l i t i c s of Planning. London: Temple Smith. Goodman, R., 1972: A f t e r the Planners. New York: Simon and Schuster. Growth and Transformation of the Modern C i t y , 1979. Proceedings of the Stockholm Conference. U n i v e r s i t y of Stockholm. H a l l , P e t e r , 1975: Urban and Regional Planning. Harmondsworth: P e l i c a n Books. 1979: "Great Planning D i s a s t e r s . " In Growth and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , Proceedings, 1979, pp. 271-278. Harvey, David, 1973: S o c i a l J u s t i c e and the C i t y . London: Edward A r n o l d . 1978: "On Planning the Idealogy of P l a n n i n g . " In B u r c h e l l and S t e r n l i e b , e d i t o r s , 1978, pp. 213-233. I z a r d , Walter, 1960: Methods of Regional A n a l y s i s : An I n t r o d u c t i o n to Regional Science. Cambridge, Mass: .The MIT Press. Jacobs, Jane, 1961: The Death and L i f e of Great American C i t i e s . New York: Vintage Books. K i r k , Gwyneth, 1980: Urban Planning, i n a C a p i t a l i s t S o c i e t y . London: Croom Helm. Krueckeberg, Donald A. and S i l v e r s , Arthur A., 1974: Urban Planning  A n a l y s i s : Methods and Models. New York: John Wiley and Sons. - 103 -Krumholz, Norman et a l , 1978: "Make No Big Plans...Planning i n Cleveland i n the 1970s." In B u r c h e l l and S t e r n l i e b , e d i t o r s , 1978. L i n e b e r r y , Robert L. and Sharkensky, I r a , 1974: Urban P o l i t i c s and P u b l i c P o l i c y . 2nd ed. New York: Harper Row P u b l i s h e r s . Lynch, Kevin, 1971: S i t e Planning. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. McCarthy, Michael P., 1977: "On Bosses, Reformers and Urban Growth." J o u r n a l of Urban H i s t o r y . V o l . 4. No. 1. pp.29-35. McLoughlin, J . B r i a n , 1973: C o n t r o l and Urban Plann i n g. London: Faber and Faber. McKay, David H. and Cox, Andrew W., 1979: The P o l i t i c s of Urban Change. London: Croom Helm. Moore-Milroy, Beth, 1981: " C r i t i c i s m and the P l a u s i b l e P l a n : Theory and Method." Ph.D. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Mumford, Lewis, 1961: The C i t y i n H i s t o r y . New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Myrdal, Gunnar, 1969: O b j e c t i v i t y i n S o c i a l Research. New York: Pantheon Books. Petshak, K i r k R., 1973: The Challenge of Urban Reform: P o l i c i e s and Programs i n P h i l a d e l p h i a . P h i l a d e l p h i a : Temple U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . P l u n k e t t , Thomas J . , 1968: Urban Canada and i t s Government: A Study of M u n i c i p a l O r g a n i z a t i o n . Toronto: Macmillan. and B e t t s , G.M., 1978: The Management of Canadian Urban Government. Kingston: Queen's U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Polsby, N.W., 1963: Community Power and P o l i t i c a l Theory. New Haven, Conn: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press. -.104 -1980: Community Power and P o l i t i c a l Theory. 2nd ed. New Haven, Conn: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press. Rowat, Donald C , 1969: The Canadian M u n i c i p a l System: Essays on the Improvement of L o c a l Government. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. S c o t t , Stanley and B o l l e n s , John C , 1968: Governing a M e t r o p o l i t a n Region: The San F r a n c i s c o Bay Area. U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley. Stave, Bruce M., 1980: "Urban H i s t o r y i n Canada: A Conversation w i t h Alan F.J. A r t i b i s e . "Urban H i s t o r y Review. 8. pp. 110-143. S u t c l i f f e , Anthony, 1979: "Conference Reports: H i s t o r y of Planning Seminar, Edinburgh, 15-18 March, 1978." Urban H i s t o r y Yearbook. 1980: The Rise of Modern Urban and Regional Planning. London: M a n s e l l . Wolfinger, Raymond E., 1974: The P o l i t i c s of Progress. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l Inc. Canadian Planning H i s t o r y Sources Advisory Committee on R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , 1944: Housing and Community  Planning: F i n a l Report of the Subcommittee. V o l . IV. Ottawa: King's P r i n t e r . A r t i b i s e , A.F.J, and S t e l t e r , G.A., e d i t o r s , 1979: The Usable Urban Past:  Planning and P o l i t i c s i n the Modern Canadian C i t y . Toronto: Macmillan. 1981a: "Conservation Planning and Urban Plann i n g : The Commission of Conservation i n H i s t o r i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e . " In K a i n , e d i t o r , 1981, pp. 17-36. - 105 -1981b: Canada's Urban Past: A B i b l i o g r a p h y to 1980. Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Press. Armstrong, Alan H., 1959: "Thomas Adams and the Commission of Conservation." P l a n Canada. V o l . 1. No. 1. pp. 35-43. Carver, Humphrey,. 1975: Compassionate Landscape: Places and People i n a Man's L i f e . Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press. C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 1973: "Housing i n Canada 1946-70: A Supplement to the 25th Annual Report of CMHC." Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r . C l e r k , Ron, 1976: "The C r i s i s i n Canadian C i t y P l a n n i n g . " C i t y Magazine. V o l . 1; No. 8. pp. 17-24. Dale, Edmund Herbert, 1969: "The Role of Successive Town and C i t y Councils i n the E v o l u t i o n of Edmonton, 1892-1966." Ph.D. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a . Gerecke, Kent, 1976: "The H i s t o r y of Canadian C i t y P l a n n i n g . " C i t y  Magazine. V o l . 2. No. 3/4. pp. 12-23. 1974: "Toward a New Model of Urban P l a n n i n g . " Ph.D. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Gunton, Thomas, 1975: "Canadian Housing L e g i s l a t i o n . " Unpublished Mimeo. 1979: "The Ideas and P o l i c i e s of the Canadian Planning P r o f e s s i o n 1909-1931." In A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r , e d i t o r s , 1979, pp. 177-195. 1981: "The E v o l u t i o n and P r a c t i c e of Urban and Regional Planning i n Canada 1900-1960." PhD. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Ka i n , Roger, e d i t o r , 1981: Planning f o r Conservation. London: M a n s e l l . Moore, Peter W. "Zoning and Planning: The Toronto Experience 1940-1970." In A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r , e d i t o r s , 1979, pp. 316-341. - 106 -Report of the F e d e r a l Task Force on Housing and Urban Development, 1969: Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r . Research Committee of the League f o r S o c i a l R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , 1935, 1975: S o c i a l Planning f o r Canada. Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s . Rose, A l b e r t , 1980: Canadian Housing P o l i c i e s 1935-1980. Toronto: Butterworth. S p e c i a l Committee on Reconstruction, 1942-1944: Minutes of. Proceedings and Evidence, V o l . 1-4. Ottawa: King's P r i n t e r . Spragge, Godfrey L., 1975: "Canadian Planners' Goals: Deep Roots and Fuzzy T h i n k i n g . " Canadian P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n V o l . 18. pp. 216-234. Van Nus, Walter, 1979: "Towards the C i t y E f f i c i e n t : The Theory and P r a c t i c e of Zoning: 1919-1939." In A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r , e d i t o r s , 1979, pp. 226-246. Weaver, John C , 1979: "The Modern C i t y R e a l i z e d : Toronto C i v i c A f f a i r s 1880-1915." In A r t i b i s e and S t e l t e r , e d i t o r s , 1979, pp. 39-72. B r i t i s h Columbia Planning H i s t o r y Sources B r i t i s h Columbia Gazette. 1905-1972. C o l l i e r , Robert W., 1972: "The E v o l u t i o n of Regional D i s t r i c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia." B.C. Studies. No. 15, Autumn, pp. 29-39. Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , 1951-1955: "Report of D i r e c t o r : Regional Planning D i v i s i o n . " Annual Reports. Goldenberg, H. C a r l , 1947: P r o v i n c i a l M u n i c i p a l R e l a t i o n s i n B r i t i s h Columbia: Report of the Commissioner. P r i n t e d by the A u t h o r i t y of the B r i t i s h Columbia L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. - 107 -M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s F i l e s , 1970: "Community Planning Area Number 1 Regulations, 1960." Unpublished t y p e s c r i p t . Robin, M a r t i n , 1973: P i l l a r s of P r o f i t : The Company Province 1934-1972. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1897-1972. Walker, R u s s e l l R., 1969: P o l i t i c i a n s i n a Pioneering Province. Vancouver: M i t c h e l l Press L t d . Worley, Ronald B., 1971: The Wonderful World of W.A.C. Bennett. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Kelowna and C e n t r a l Okanagan Planning H i s t o r y Sources Advisory Planning Commission, 1971: Minutes. A g r i c u l t u r a l and Trade A s s o c i a t i o n of Okanagan M i s s i o n V a l l e y , 1898: Kelowna and i t s Surroundings i n the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia,  Dominion of Canada. Vancouver: The Province P u b l i s h i n g Co. L t d . Buckland, F.J.' 1966: Ogopogo's V i g i l , n.p. City, of/Kelowna, 1950-1972: By-Laws. 1905-1973: C o u n c i l Minutes. 1945-1965: C o u n c i l Minutes. Clement, J . Percy, 1955: "Pre-Incorporation Days Reviewed." Kelowna  C o u r i e r , May 2, 1955. pp. 2, 4, 6. Community Planning Consultants, 1974: "A Program of R e s i d e n t i a l Landuse and Zoning Regulations f o r Kelowna, B.C." Unpublished r e p o r t . Harland Bartholomew and A s s o c i a t e s , 1945: "A Report Upon a C i v i c Centre P l a n : Kelowna, B r i t i s h Columbia." St. L o u i s , Miss. Unpublished r e p o r t . -.108 -H a r t l e y , Gordon et a l , 1971: "Kelowna Waterfront Study." Unpublished r e p o r t . Kelowna C i t y A r c h i v e s , n.d.: " E a r l y H i s t o r y F i l e . " C o l l e c t i o n of loose documents. Kelowna Boundary Extension Committee, 1960: "Kelowna Boundary Extension F a c t s . " Pamphlet. Kelowna C a p i t a l News, n.d.: "Carruthers and Mei k l e h i s t o r y a l l i g n e d w i t h C i t y . " Undated newspaper a r t i c l e on f i l e i n the Kelowna C i t y A r c h i v e s . Kelowna C o u r i e r , 1950-1982. Lequime, Bernard, 1937: "Over the P e n t i c t o n T r a i l . " Okanagan H i s t o r i c a l S ociety Reports. V o l . 7. pp. 17-20. N i g e l , n.d.: personal correspondence i n the Kelowna C i t y Archives " E a r l y H i s t o r y F i l e . " Oberlander, H. Peter and Cave, R.J., 1957: "Should Kelowna Extned i t s Boundaries? A Study of the Planned Expansion of the C i t y of Kelowna." Unpublished r e p o r t . Okanagan Basin C o n s u l t a t i v e Board, 1974: The Main Report of the . • .. . C o n s u l t a t i v e Board. P e n t i c t o n : O f f i c e of the Study D i r e c t o r . Ormsby, Margaret A., 1931: "Study of the Okanagan V a l l e y of B r i t i s h Columbia." M.A. Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1935: "Pre-emption Claims i n Okanagan V a l l e y . " OHSR. V o l . 6. pp. 177-184. Parkinson, R.F., 1969: " P r e s e n t a t i o n Ceremony—Order of the Ogopogo H.M. Bridger and J.A. McMahon." Types c r i p t of February 21, 1969 ceremony. - 109 -Regional D i s t r i c t of C e n t r a l Okanagan, 1978: "Department of Regional and Community Planning: 5 Year Report 1973-1977." Robert W i l l i a m s and A s s o c i a t e s , 1965: "Kelowna Waterfront Renewal A P r e l i m i n a r y Review." Unpublished r e p o r t . Surtees, U r s u l a , 1979a: Sunshine and B u t t e r f l i e s : A Short H i s t o r y of E a r l y F r u i t Ranching i n Kelowna. Kelowna: Regatta C i t y P r e s s . 1979b Kelowna: A P i c t o r i a l H i s t o r y . 2nd ed. Kelowna: Centennial Museum. Watts Marketing Research L t d . , 1967: "A Market A n a l y s i s and Land Use Study: C i t y of Kelowna, B.C." Unpublished r e p o r t . W i l k i n s o n , R.J., 1969: "Report of the Chairman of the Planning Committee." Kelowna D a i l y C o u r i e r , May 27, 1969. Interviews Browns, Dwight. Economic Development O f f i c e r , Regional D i s t r i c t of C e n t r a l Okanagan. Kelowna. December 23, 1981. Cushing, Alan . Former P r o v i n c i a l B u i l d i n g Inspector f o r the Kelowna Community Planning Area and B u i l d i n g Inspector, RDCO. Kelowna. December 23, 1981 1 Eaton, B i l l . Former Kelowna C i t y Planner and D i r e c t o r of Regional Parks. RDCO. Kelowna. December 16. 1981. Fleming, Jane. Former A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r of Pla n n i n g , RDCO and Consultant Planner, P l a n i s t i c s . Kelowna. December 24, 1981. Hilmer, A x e l . Planner, RDCO. Kelowna. December 16, 1981. Jones, A l f r e d . Former Member of Kelowna Advisory Planning Commission and Prof e s s o r of Geography, Okanagan Coll e g e . Kelowna. December 14, 1981. - 110 -Marsh, Leonard. E d i t o r of V o l . IV of the F i n a l Report of the Advisory Committee on Reconstruction. Vancouver telephone i n t e r v i e w . February 3, 1982. Oberlander, H. P e t e r . Former Consultant Planner f o r the C i t y of Kelowna. Vancouver. January 14, 1982. Parchumchuk, B i l l . Secretary and Treasurer, Okanagan Basin Water Board. Kelowna. December 23, 1981. Pendakur, V. Setty. Former Department of Transport Engineer, Kelowna A i r p o r t . Vancouver, January 7, 1982. Shotton, F r a s e r . Former Planner f o r the C e n t r a l Okanagan Regional Planning Board and Planner, RDCO. Kelowna, December 14, 1981. South, Donald. Former D i r e c t o r of the Regional Planning D i v i s i o n , M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . V i c t o r i a . February 2, 1982. T a s s i e , W i l l i a m . Senior Advisory Planner, M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s . V i c t o r i a . February 2, 1982. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095258/manifest

Comment

Related Items