Kelowna Construction

[Newstart]

Originally Posted by JayMi

Rezoning application submitted for City owned downtown site (380 Harvey Ave), formerly the old Husky site. Rezoning to add rental subzone. Rezoning application is to accommodate several apartment buildings on adjacent and kitty corner lots and a 40 storey tower. Development permit has not yet been submitted to the City.

The chances of this getting approved with the new Anti-Density Mayor is very low.

Urban In-Fill TH projects are getting pulled back by Staff already...a 40 storey tower? I wouldn't be betting my money that this gets approved under this new administration.

[The Great Scaper]

That's a shame that Kelowna's new mayor is anti development.

[uzi]

they are proposing 40 stories now because they want to make money.

[VantageHD]

So, is this the City of Kelowna rezoning City owned land? Or is this a developer rezoning City owned land? I'm confused when you say it's city owned land

[JayMi]

Originally Posted by VantageHD

So, is this the City of Kelowna rezoning City owned land? Or is this a developer rezoning City owned land? I'm confused when you say it's city owned land

City of Kelowna put out an RFP (request for proposal) last year and received several proposals. So the company awarded the rfp still needs to submit the application for the change in land use, with the City giving permission to submit the application. Zoning changes require bylaws which need council approval.

Below is the link to the application:

http://apps.kelowna.ca/CityPage/DevA...0St%201660.pdf

As to why 40 storey towers, that is the maximum height permitted in certain parts of downtown under the zoning bylaw. With the insane construction costs and high land prices not surprising to see applicants trying to maximize the zone.

[Metro-One]

Kelowna is a desirable place growing fast but with relatively limited land, I ‘m okay with them diving right into 40 story towers at this stage since in 20 years they will likely be necessary anyways.

[Metro-One]

128 meters, so tall but not that tall to get stressed over.

[VantageHD]

City of Kelowna put out an RFP (request for proposal) last year and received several proposals. So the company awarded the rfp still needs to submit the application for the change in land use, with the City giving permission to submit the application. Zoning changes require bylaws which need council approval.

Below is the link to the application:

http://apps.kelowna.ca/CityPage/DevA...0St%201660.pdf

That makes sense, and thanks for sending that link. I'm always curious how different consultants draft their reports.

[KelownaResident]

Not a fan of yet another massive podium that looks like it'll be for parking. Keep in mind this is on Pandosy/Water St. Basically our main entrances to downtown. Nothing says welcome to Kelowna better than a wall of concrete! Could look a lot better in my opinion. Unfortunately it won't because developers just want to maximize profit. At least the podium looks a bit like a ship's hull, so it's not totally square... I'm not against towers but man the architectural standard is so low. I'm hating where Kelowna is heading in terms of design.

[Twindragon]

Hey, I’m all fine for 40 stories. But council said that the only reason they approved water street by the parks 40 story because it was to clean up Leon and for ubc they said that that project was a special case because it’s ubc. This is a garbage looking highrise that’s too big and boxy. The architecture is uninspired. So I really can’t see them getting approval. I’d like to see some good looking buildings proposed

[rdave]

Agreed, definitely not the right vision for that lot.

Not everything in this city needs the go ahead simply because it's big and needs to be big because of the insane growth. Big isn't better.

How about having some more thought and planning put into where exactly these 40+ storey towers should be, instead of just plopping them all over the place?

We're finally at a point with development in this city where we can simply say "no, not good enough", and hopefully set a higher standard for all the newly generated interest and proposals.

[Sheener]

Central Green Final Phase:



Site Prep for Mission Group rental on Bertram:



SOLE Cawston:



Future UBC site with North End Skyline:





Bernard Block and Bertram rising:

[Sheener]

Aqua:





Caban (foreground) & Movala (background):

[KelownaResident]

Tom hasn't even begun serving and is already being labelled as "anti development". I think we can reasonably expect that with Tom and the new council red tape might be reduced but also developers will be held to a higher standard. If you can recall, Tom was part of the Kelowna Legacy Group, a group that was known for advocating smarter redevelopment of the former RCMP site. I don't like how Colin and council voted to turn a blind eye by Appelt group's bait and switch bid to redevelop the property.

Links:
https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/n...93c109017.html

https://infotel.ca/newsitem/legacy-g...oposal/it66577

[Newstart]

Originally Posted by KelownaResident

Tom hasn't even begun serving and is already being labelled as "anti development". I think we can reasonably expect that with Tom and the new council red tape might be reduced but also developers will be held to a higher standard. If you can recall, Tom was part of the Kelowna Legacy Group, a group that was known for advocating smarter redevelopment of the former RCMP site. I don't like how Colin and council voted to turn a blind eye by Appelt group's bait and switch bid to redevelop the property.

Links:
https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/n...93c109017.html

https://infotel.ca/newsitem/legacy-g...oposal/it66577

unless you have specific knowledge of Appelt original intentions to bait and switch thats fluff that Tom and his buddy Les Bellamy were touting.

Real Estate Development changes, market dynamics change, the dynamics of Kelowna changed dramatically in the span of time. In addition the original proposal was a Fat Scraper. The revised proposal was much much better Urban built form.

The Kelowna Legacy Group is spilled milk that they didn't get their way. now they have their mayor and things are going to get setback for Urban Development.

Planning is already reversing decisions and direction to applicants on urban infill. Towers and height are nextk.

[JayMi]

Originally Posted by Newstart

unless you have specific knowledge of Appelt original intentions to bait and switch thats fluff that Tom and his buddy Les Bellamy were touting.

Real Estate Development changes, market dynamics change, the dynamics of Kelowna changed dramatically in the span of time. In addition the original proposal was a Fat Scraper. The revised proposal was much much better Urban built form.

The Kelowna Legacy Group is spilled milk that they didn't get their way. now they have their mayor and things are going to get setback for Urban Development.

Planning is already reversing decisions and direction to applicants on urban infill. Towers and height are nextk.

What do you mean by “ Planning is already reversing decisions and direction to applicants”? The new council hasn’t even been sworn yet. A new OCP and zoning bylaw were just adopted focusing on infill, density and height. I’m still full steam ahead.

[Newstart]

Originally Posted by JayMi

What do you mean by “ Planning is already reversing decisions and direction to applicants”? The new council hasn’t even been sworn yet. A new OCP and zoning bylaw were just adopted focusing on infill, density and height. I’m still full steam ahead.

Infill projects that were pushing the envelope are getting pulled back by planning and/or undiscussed roadblocks are all of a sudden appearing.

[drto]

If any of you are interested, Holar Developments, which is working on creating the vision for the former Tolko lands in north downtown, have a page where you can join in the discussion and submit your ideas for the site.

https://www.kelownamillsite.ca/conversation/

[KelownaResident]

How is it not bait and switch that part of the tender process developers had to propose what they will build, but then when it comes to DP they propose something completely different? And the city just accepts that? If they can no longer fulfill what they proposed they were going to get built, the project should go back to tender, so the city can field what's best for its residents.

I think you said it right, things change. So if they can no longer hold their end of the bargain then they don't deserve the privilege of developing this prime property.

I'd rather a council govern with transparency and for its residents. Didn't mind Colin too much but trying to attach negative labels to Tom before he even sets foot in office is disingenuous.

[Chrissir]

How is Dyas going to curb traffic and what’s his deal with new developments? I tried looking through his website but it’s just a thank you message and a link to donate to him. I see you guys are saying he’s pulling back on infill projects, I think it’s a real setback if he’s anti-development, it’s crazy the amount of old people in Kelowna who hate progress, they aren’t the ones who are just finishing their degree and looking for a place to buy… I’m in trouble lol (time to move to Calgary?). If he’s for progress but is going to be strict on the form and character, I’m for that. Hopefully this is the case, but like i said, can’t find anything on what his stance is on these developments. I would love to stay here and get a good paying job and a nice condo for my first place.