Kelowna Construction - Page 149

Sheener · #**2961** Posted **Nov 6, 2020, 9:51 PM**

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelown...ant-lot#315608

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelown...-Harvey-Avenue

Couple mid rises going before council soon.

giallo · #**2962** Posted **Nov 6, 2020, 11:01 PM**

While I have no issue with the design of the seniors housing, that's not a good location for it. The lot was supposed to be a four storey retail/office building before the financial crisis killed that proposal. It should still be an office building or, at the very least, a mixed use development. The corner of KLO and Lakeshore is at the heart of Pandosy Village, and should have something more substantial than housing that's restricted to only a portion of the population.

rofina · #**2963** Posted **Nov 9, 2020, 6:52 PM**

Will be interesting to see the future of Clement - cool warehouse vibe mixed housing mix going up in that neighborhood. Could make for great neighborhood character. Bit of a Yaletown type mix with breweries and whatnot. I like it.

H2O · #**2964** Posted **Nov 10, 2020, 2:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by giallo

While I have no issue with the design of the seniors housing, that's not a good location for it. The lot was supposed to be a four storey retail/office building before the financial crisis killed that proposal. It should still be an office building or, at the very least, a mixed use development. The corner of KLO and Lakeshore is at the heart of Pandosy Village, and should have something more substantial than housing that's restricted to only a portion of the population.

It is mixed-use, and appears to have a significant amount of ground floor retail.

giallo · #**2965** Posted **Nov 10, 2020, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

It is mixed-use, and appears to have a significant amount of ground floor retail.

I realize there is retail. I guess I'm more critical of the fact that it's a prominent location reserved for one segment of the population only.

giallo · #**2966** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 1:11 AM**

KLO Neighbourhood Association concerned about massive growth
Over-development concern
Wayne Moore

Massive development and growth within the Pandosy-Lakeshore area has raised a red flag within the KLO Neighbourhood Association.

So much so they have called a news conference for Monday morning to air their grievances.

In a news release Friday, the association believes the city has over-developed the region without an updated plan on both density and traffic impacts.

According to the release, residential developments completed, active, planned and probable amount to nearly three-and-a-half times the 1,600 units proposed within the current 2010-2030 Official Community Plan.

More here:
https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelown...-growth#316364

araman0 · #**2967** Posted **Nov 17, 2020, 12:50 AM**

I filled out their survey. With my preferences of course. ;-)

http://www.imaginepandosy.org/pick-your-pandosy

giallo · #**2968** Posted **Nov 18, 2020, 2:56 AM**

KelownaNow seems to be very engaged in how Kelowna is growing. It's interesting to hear what a member of the KLO Neighbourhood Association has to say about Pandosy Village's densification. Members of the community give their opinions as well.

• Video Link

rofina · #**2969** Posted **Nov 20, 2020, 1:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by giallo

KelownaNow seems to be very engaged in how Kelowna is growing. It's interesting to hear what a member of the KLO Neighbourhood Association has to say about Pandosy Village's densification. Members of the community give their opinions as well.

• Video Link

I love development, obviously, look at the online community were all on.

But I have to admit this gentleman has great points - in particular affordability.

If anything has been proved by the high-rise boom in our major cities across the country over the past near 2 decades, is that high rise construction definitely does not lead to affordable housing.

The land value lift alone guarantees that it becomes untenable to building anything but high rise once a lot price reaches a certain point - or you have to build a luxury Townhome at million each to justify costs.

Soft density; infill housing, duplex, fourplex, laneway homes, row homes.

These are the options that need to be exhausted first - then lets look to higher forms of density.

Massive part of the housing conversation in Vancouver right now is what's called the "missing middle." And that's exactly the housing forms I mention above,

The issue in Vancouver is the cats been out of the bag for decade plus - its hard to provide affordable housing when lot values are over a million and by the time you build anything its multi million, or needs to be high density to break down costs into affordable chunks.

The architecture and high rise nerd in me wants, taller and cooler in Kelowna.

The Vancouverite in me wants to see Kelowna blaze a different path in neighborhoods outside of Downtown, we know what doesn't work - look to Vancouver. Don't repeat that pattern unless you want nearly unsolvable housing problems.

Metro-One · #**2970** Posted **Nov 20, 2020, 1:57 AM**

For Kelowna I would say high rises are appropriate in three spots currently, the downtown core of course, along the lakeshore and around the Landmark district.

Talking about tower, when does the next phase of the Bernard Block start construction? Last I heard that were near sold out?

csbvan · #**2971** Posted **Nov 20, 2020, 5:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rofina

I love development, obviously, look at the online community were all on.

But I have to admit this gentleman has great points - in particular affordability.

If anything has been proved by the high-rise boom in our major cities across the country over the past near 2 decades, is that high rise construction definitely does not lead to affordable housing.

The land value lift alone guarantees that it becomes untenable to building anything but high rise once a lot price reaches a certain point - or you have to build a luxury Townhome at million each to justify costs.

Soft density; infill housing, duplex, fourplex, laneway homes, row homes.

These are the options that need to be exhausted first - then lets look to higher forms of density.

Massive part of the housing conversation in Vancouver right now is what's called the "missing middle." And that's exactly the housing forms I mention above,

The issue in Vancouver is the cats been out of the bag for decade plus - its hard to provide affordable housing when lot values are over a million and by the time you build anything its multi million, or needs to be high density to break down costs into affordable chunks.

The architecture and high rise nerd in me wants, taller and cooler in Kelowna.

The Vancouverite in me wants to see Kelowna blaze a different path in neighborhoods outside of Downtown, we know what doesn't work - look to Vancouver. Don't repeat that pattern unless you want nearly unsolvable housing problems.

Kelowna is doing some innovative things in its single-family areas, surprisingly. The RU7 infill zone is pretty great. I would love to see it move beyond the old residential neighbourhoods though, and to the inner-ring suburbs, like Rutland.

DKaz · #**2972** Posted **Nov 20, 2020, 9:41 PM**

In Rutland, they're replacing old single family lots with 12 townhome units. The only thing is that there is still a dire lack of pedestrian infrastructure there, moreso than a lot of other older Kelowna neighbourhoods.

csbvan · #**2973** Posted **Nov 20, 2020, 10:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DKaz

In Rutland, they're replacing old single family lots with 12 townhome units. The only thing is that there is still a dire lack of pedestrian infrastructure there, moreso than a lot of other older Kelowna neighbourhoods.

Yes, on both fronts. They really do need better pedestrian infrastructure, and more walkable retail. I was thinking a bit deeper into Rutland in respect to RU7 zoning (or a variation of compatible with the lack of laneways). Most of the Rutland density is happening right along Highway 33, but it would be good to see some medium-low density a bit deeper into the residential areas.

araman0 · #**2974** Posted **Nov 21, 2020, 6:07 AM**

Regarding high rises and unafordability, isn’t it a bit of a chicken and the egg game? Are the high rises leading to unafordability, or is unafordability creating the conditions that spawn high rises? If one of these towers absorbs demand for hundreds of units, that’s hundreds of people that are no longer fighting for the existing housing stock. When searching for units for sale in Vancouver, the cheapest units always seemed to be in the older high rises, not necessarily single family homes or flats / townhomes in the same neighborhood. I believe these new Kelowna high rises will serve a purpose in adding supply and easing demand on the older, existing housing infrastructure.

rofina · #**2975** Posted **Nov 23, 2020, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by araman0

Regarding high rises and unafordability, isn’t it a bit of a chicken and the egg game? Are the high rises leading to unafordability, or is unafordability creating the conditions that spawn high rises? If one of these towers absorbs demand for hundreds of units, that’s hundreds of people that are no longer fighting for the existing housing stock. When searching for units for sale in Vancouver, the cheapest units always seemed to be in the older high rises, not necessarily single family homes or flats / townhomes in the same neighborhood. I believe these new Kelowna high rises will serve a purpose in adding supply and easing demand on the older, existing housing infrastructure.

High rise works in firmly defined areas, on a long time scale.

High rise leads to two things;

1. Massive increase in per square foot building costs. In Vancouver, excluding land, building mid or high rise is running around $300-450 sq/ft. That means 1000 sq/ft 2 bedroom excluding land is $300-$450,000. Land here adds another 300-450 on top. So you have built in guaranteed cost of $900,000ish for 1000sq/ft. That's before profit and soft costs. In other words, impossible to build affordable.

2. Massive land lift as prices increase to justify highest and best use. This is why zoning for high rise and sticking firmly to it is so important. What a City should want to avoid is the lift in land costs on the speculation that high rise might be permitted. When Cambie in Vancouver got rezoned to mid rise, house prices went from 1.2million to 3 million because of assembly value for a mid rise lot. What this also did is made building anything but that mid rise untenable due to land economics. This must be avoided if other forms of building are to be ever constructed at relatively affordable levels.

I'm definitely not opposed to building out Downtown Kelowna with high rise, but I would strongly question using the build form as a primary was to deliver housing elsewhere in the city.

Nray · #**2976** Posted **Nov 27, 2020, 10:39 PM**

Leon Avenue development

Back in front of council next week, this time with staff recommendations to approve. Looks like they may have an issue with the facade on the podium but are willing to trade that off for density. They have removed the short term rentals, added some office space and retail units plus changed a number of units to 3 bdr, thereby lowering parking requirements. In my opinion, this is a very smart move as there is now a much larger market to draw sales from. Will be interesting to see which stand council takes.

Phrescata · #**2977** Posted **Nov 28, 2020, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nray

Leon Avenue development

Back in front of council next week, this time with staff recommendations to approve. Looks like they may have an issue with the facade on the podium but are willing to trade that off for density. They have removed the short term rentals, added some office space and retail units plus changed a number of units to 3 bdr, thereby lowering parking requirements. In my opinion, this is a very smart move as there is now a much larger market to draw sales from. Will be interesting to see which stand council takes.

Really hoping it gets approved this time! This area of downtown is in dire need of revitalization and this development will do just that.