Height of future downtown buildings.....

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby vinnied » Feb 22nd, 2018, 7:06 pm

two potential towers on what is now the parking lot in front of Prospera Place fronting Water Street.

where they heck are folks gonna park during games?
User avatar
vinnied
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2724
Likes: 84 posts
Liked in: 782 posts
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:51 am
Location: The Greater Kelowna Regional District

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby dle » Feb 22nd, 2018, 7:15 pm

JLives wrote:
dle wrote:It's not the height of the buildings that is a problem for me. My problem is their placement ON THE LAKE! I don't agree with that. The placements of proposed future possible sites are all fine with me - AT ANY HEIGHT - as long as they are back from the lake and spread out.


Who cares? Seriously. I own one of the closest residential properties to downtown. I still have to walk to the lake to see the lake. It will be just fine and it beats the heck out our hillsides covered in houses.


I CARE, and I don't think I'm the only one who does. Seriously. I want to see the lakeshore left for the pleasure of ALL OF US. I don't want to be restricted from any part of it. Your walk to the lake if you go by the Westcorp building will be restricted. If that's okay with you then we can agree to disagree but I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE LAKESHORE DEVELOPED. It should be for the enjoyment of all of us, without restriction, and that's the way it should stay. Move to Vancouver if you are so eager to see cement and glass development all over the waterfront - there's lots of that down there to make you happy.

2 people like this post.
dle
Übergod
 
Posts: 1243
Likes: 751 posts
Liked in: 1356 posts
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 1:29 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby dle » Feb 22nd, 2018, 7:18 pm

vinnied wrote:
two potential towers on what is now the parking lot in front of Prospera Place fronting Water Street.

where they heck are folks gonna park during games?


Yeah, what are they thinking eh?? It's tough enough as it is.....again, not a lot of foresight here....
dle
Übergod
 
Posts: 1243
Likes: 751 posts
Liked in: 1356 posts
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 1:29 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby JLives » Feb 22nd, 2018, 7:27 pm

dle wrote:I CARE, and I don't think I'm the only one who does. Seriously. I want to see the lakeshore left for the pleasure of ALL OF US. I don't want to be restricted from any part of it. Your walk to the lake if you go by the Westcorp building will be restricted. If that's okay with you then we can agree to disagree but I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE LAKESHORE DEVELOPED. It should be for the enjoyment of all of us, without restriction, and that's the way it should stay. Move to Vancouver if you are so eager to see cement and glass development all over the waterfront - there's lots of that down there to make you happy.


They're not closing the lakeshore nor restricting it. Your access will be affected 0% outside of the actual building process when temporary restrictions are likely. The building is going on the same spot the bank used to be where I would sneakily smoke cigarettes as a teenager. The city will be just fine and this building will add to it, not take anything away.
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

5 people like this post.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15756
Likes: 3191 posts
Liked in: 5684 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 11:53 am

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby Gilchy » Feb 22nd, 2018, 9:05 pm

I agree, JLives. People o. These forums are acting as if the new tower is built literally on the beach, not on a Parkin go lot. How exactly is lake access being restricted here?

2 people like this post.
User avatar
Gilchy
Übergod
 
Posts: 1110
Likes: 167 posts
Liked in: 516 posts
Joined: Nov 19th, 2010, 7:51 am

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby Anonymous123 » Feb 22nd, 2018, 9:09 pm

dle wrote:It's not the height of the buildings that is a problem for me. My problem is their placement ON THE LAKE! I don't agree with that. The placements of proposed future possible sites are all fine with me - AT ANY HEIGHT - as long as they are back from the lake and spread out.


JLives wrote:Who cares? Seriously. I own one of the closest residential properties to downtown. I still have to walk to the lake to see the lake. It will be just fine and it beats the heck out our hillsides covered in houses.


And soon you will have to walk down to the lake to see the mountains.
We See
We Judge
User avatar
Anonymous123
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2374
Likes: 1771 posts
Liked in: 1237 posts
Joined: Feb 8th, 2013, 5:02 pm
Location: The fine line between reality and fantasy

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby Even Steven » Feb 22nd, 2018, 11:06 pm

dle wrote:Move to Vancouver if you are so eager to see cement and glass development all over the waterfront - there's lots of that down there to make you happy.


Vancouver is full of condo towers yet none of them restrict access to precious water. In fact, they have a very picturesque Seawall for joggers and cyclists. Same will be in Kelowna - no restriction to your precious lake. Stop with your drama.

2 people like this post.
Even Steven
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2790
Likes: 183 posts
Liked in: 2018 posts
Joined: Mar 24th, 2015, 7:20 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby zerograv » Feb 23rd, 2018, 10:11 am

this building will actually be making the waterfront more accessible and a heck of a lot nicer.
Before giving someone a piece of your mind, make sure that you have enough to spare.

Omnitheo likes this post.
zerograv
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 968
Likes: 70 posts
Liked in: 271 posts
Joined: Mar 5th, 2009, 9:49 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby dle » Feb 23rd, 2018, 11:30 am

Even Steven wrote:
dle wrote:Move to Vancouver if you are so eager to see cement and glass development all over the waterfront - there's lots of that down there to make you happy.


Vancouver is full of condo towers yet none of them restrict access to precious water. In fact, they have a very picturesque Seawall for joggers and cyclists. Same will be in Kelowna - no restriction to your precious lake. Stop with your drama.


I can only speak for myself but my opposition is that I don't want Kelowna to become a smaller version of Vancouver. I don't find highrises along the waterfront all squashed together esthetically pleasing in the least. There is nothing serene about it for me...

A lot of the comments in support of the positioning of this building refer to how great highrise density works, looks, is, in Vancouver - just further cementing my belief that waterfront congestion of buildings doesn't belong here, and if you let one be built, more and more will be allowed. Personal preference....
dle
Übergod
 
Posts: 1243
Likes: 751 posts
Liked in: 1356 posts
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 1:29 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby johnny24 » Feb 23rd, 2018, 12:26 pm

dle wrote:I can only speak for myself but my opposition is that I don't want Kelowna to become a smaller version of Vancouver. I don't find highrises along the waterfront all squashed together esthetically pleasing in the least. There is nothing serene about it for me...

A lot of the comments in support of the positioning of this building refer to how great highrise density works, looks, is, in Vancouver - just further cementing my belief that waterfront congestion of buildings doesn't belong here, and if you let one be built, more and more will be allowed. Personal preference....


Tons of lakes around. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find one that is more appealing to your preference.
johnny24
Board Meister
 
Posts: 412
Likes: 97 posts
Liked in: 254 posts
Joined: Jan 25th, 2011, 9:16 am

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby Gilchy » Feb 23rd, 2018, 12:34 pm

dle wrote:I can only speak for myself but my opposition is that I don't want Kelowna to become a smaller version of Vancouver. I don't find highrises along the waterfront all squashed together esthetically pleasing in the least. There is nothing serene about it for me...

A lot of the comments in support of the positioning of this building refer to how great highrise density works, looks, is, in Vancouver - just further cementing my belief that waterfront congestion of buildings doesn't belong here, and if you let one be built, more and more will be allowed. Personal preference....


Supply/demand. If the majority wants increased density downtown, and demand dictates proximity to lake, it makes sense to proceed.

Fact of the matter is we live in a very desirable area, and our populations continues to swell. There is a demand to be close to the lake, and as long as proposed developments don't encroach on public land or access to the lakeshore (which the new tower doesn't), I think it makes sense to allow them.

I truly don't understand the concerns of 33 vs 26 or 16 stories.
User avatar
Gilchy
Übergod
 
Posts: 1110
Likes: 167 posts
Liked in: 516 posts
Joined: Nov 19th, 2010, 7:51 am

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby gman313 » Feb 23rd, 2018, 12:37 pm

Gilchy wrote:
Supply/demand. If the majority wants increased density downtown, and demand dictates proximity to lake, it makes sense to proceed.

Fact of the matter is we live in a very desirable area, and our populations continues to swell. There is a demand to be close to the lake, and as long as proposed developments don't encroach on public land or access to the lakeshore (which the new tower doesn't), I think it makes sense to allow them.

I truly don't understand the concerns of 33 vs 26 or 16 stories.


I agree with everything you said. But the concern with 33 vs 26 or 16 might be linked to views. Views have an impact on value
gman313
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2688
Likes: 1122 posts
Liked in: 1229 posts
Joined: Sep 15th, 2008, 8:03 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby TMBOkanagan » Feb 23rd, 2018, 12:52 pm

lensbaby wrote:
Glacier wrote:There's a shortage of houses in Kelowna. Build the flippin' buildings 40 stories high if you want. Who cares what the NIMBYs say. Better to build up than out.


Until there's a fire!


You mean like the fire of 2013 that wiped out suburbia?

Concrete structures don't tend to burn - and towers need to be made of concrete.

Omnitheo likes this post.
TMBOkanagan
Fledgling
 
Posts: 129
Likes: 470 posts
Liked in: 76 posts
Joined: Aug 8th, 2016, 2:02 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby WalterWhite » Feb 23rd, 2018, 1:06 pm

gman313 wrote:
Gilchy wrote:
Supply/demand. If the majority wants increased density downtown, and demand dictates proximity to lake, it makes sense to proceed.

Fact of the matter is we live in a very desirable area, and our populations continues to swell. There is a demand to be close to the lake, and as long as proposed developments don't encroach on public land or access to the lakeshore (which the new tower doesn't), I think it makes sense to allow them.

I truly don't understand the concerns of 33 vs 26 or 16 stories.


I agree with everything you said. But the concern with 33 vs 26 or 16 might be linked to views. Views have an impact on value


Especially if you're in a 6 story tower now directly behind a 33 story one. Again, it comes down to managed growth, development and particularly massing:

2018-02-23 (1).png


- all of which were laid out after tens of thousands of dollars as well as years of consultation and design - which now thanks to Basran have been rendered practically worthless now since he feels he knows better than all those whose job it is.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Forget Cialis, Viagra, or Levitra. When you need to get it up fast - reach for new and improved Westcorp. Proud official suppliers of Basran's *bleep*

sublime likes this post.
WalterWhite
Übergod
 
Posts: 1850
Likes: 1486 posts
Liked in: 2338 posts
Joined: Jan 31st, 2017, 4:56 pm

Re: Height of future downtown buildings.....

Postby zerograv » Feb 23rd, 2018, 3:08 pm

WalterWhite wrote:
gman313 wrote:
I agree with everything you said. But the concern with 33 vs 26 or 16 might be linked to views. Views have an impact on value


Especially if you're in a 6 story tower now directly behind a 33 story one. Again, it comes down to managed growth, development and particularly massing:

2018-02-23 (1).png


- all of which were laid out after tens of thousands of dollars as well as years of consultation and design - which now thanks to Basran have been rendered practically worthless now since he feels he knows better than all those whose job it is.


It doesn't matter who knows better, his job is to listen to the citizens of the city....and the ones who seem to show up are the ones in favour of these buildings. :smt045
Before giving someone a piece of your mind, make sure that you have enough to spare.

Omnitheo likes this post.
zerograv
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 968
Likes: 70 posts
Liked in: 271 posts
Joined: Mar 5th, 2009, 9:49 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Central Okanagan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], MAPearce and 6 guests