This can't be Good for a new development

[Urban Cowboy]

Well stated.

[LANDM]

Anywhere else,
in any other country,
this would be an issue.

Welcome to the Wonderful World of Plastic Bubbles, called The Okanagan !!!

This is no more than a fart in the tub.
This will be cleaned up.
The engineers will be paid for signatures.
The project will commence.
Hundreds of millions will be made.

The greed lives on.

Interesting viewpoint that is certainly coloured by your outlook on things here.

It is an issue here. Why you think it isn’t is not clear. It just happened.....what do you expect the response to be? People heading to the developer's office with pitchforks and torches?

Should the engineers apply their signatures, stamps, and knowledge for free? Why should they not be paid?

The project *should* commence. Why do you state this as though you are implying it should all be shut down?
Finally, as for greed and profit, that is the precise business that the developer is in. As someone else pointed out, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. The developer owned the land and worked on this for a long time. On a previous development, he basically broke even so they are very aware of the risks, but the intent is certainly to turn a profit.

[lightspeed]

These "developments" are generally an eyesore.

The Lakes, Lakestone, Kirschner, the one cutting off the top of Black Mtn, Highpointe. Kettle Valley the kitsch, tragic Wisteria Lane of Kelowna populated by smug insecure snobs. Yuck.

Grotesque eyesores ruining the land, destroying beautiful vistas, inhabited by grotesque people with no taste.

The feast that is the ruination of Kelowna continues - amply provided by developers, and greedily consumed by the gormless, tasteless masses.

Architecture students should be sent to Kelowna to learn how not to do things.

[Scrobins94]

To the person above me: which in your opinion are the neighborhoods that have been tastefully developed?

I somewhat agree in that too often all the focus is on the houses and finishes without much consideration of the land and surroundings. So as a result you see these new neighborhoods that have all these huge houses crammed on little lots. The end result is that you see these big houses without much of green areas or open spaces and that IMO looks very distasteful.

[alanjh595]

To the person above me: which in your opinion are the neighborhoods that have been tastefully developed?

I somewhat agree in that too often all the focus is on the houses and finishes without much consideration of the land and surroundings. So as a result you see these new neighborhoods that have all these huge houses crammed on little lots. The end result is that you see these big houses without much of green areas or open spaces and that IMO looks very distasteful.

The other aspect of what is nice to look at and what is not is only important to new visitors to the neighbourhood. After driving through a couple of times, you do so with blinders on and just don't care any more. For the residents, it's a matter of just getting home and inside where the true beauty is and they spend 98.3% of their time anyways. Times and lifestyles are changing very quickly. Who would have ever considered a Natural Gas fireplace on a send story deck, 20 years ago. I used to have a firepit in the back yard and I was the cool one.

[Urban Cowboy]

To the person above me: which in your opinion are the neighborhoods that have been tastefully developed?

I somewhat agree in that too often all the focus is on the houses and finishes without much consideration of the land and surroundings. So as a result you see these new neighborhoods that have all these huge houses crammed on little lots. The end result is that you see these big houses without much of green areas or open spaces and that IMO looks very distasteful.

So with all due respect, as someone who works in construction, I have to ask you if you've perhaps considered that some developers are targeting a specific market?

There are people out there who have zero desire to own a place with a yard that requires mowing and much maintenance, and they are quite happy to live in places such as you described.

You also need to remember that beauty is subjective and in the eye of the beholder so just because you don't like something does not mean that everyone else feels the same way.

Were that the case these developers would have no clients.

[WalterWhite]

I have a question for those of you making statements about greedy developers raping the land all for profit etc - where do you live? Pretty much anywhere there is housing and development - once upon a time a developer raped the land your very abode sits on, and likely those previously rooted there said things much along the lines of what is being said now.

[alanjh595]

The good thing about the Killarney Beach project is that the land is not good for much else. You can't farm it, you can't see most of it, and it is so steep that the mountain goats didn't use it.

[jasond_71]

All these "eyesores" are built on steep land. Steep land is the only place left that is not farmland.
So the only options are destroy all the farmland or stop building which would make all other prices skyrocket.
The other option is density which means very tall buildings which people will complain is an eyesore.
So what ban people from moving here?

[Scrobins94]

To the person above me: which in your opinion are the neighborhoods that have been tastefully developed?

I somewhat agree in that too often all the focus is on the houses and finishes without much consideration of the land and surroundings. So as a result you see these new neighborhoods that have all these huge houses crammed on little lots. The end result is that you see these big houses without much of green areas or open spaces and that IMO looks very distasteful.

So with all due respect, as someone who works in construction, I have to ask you if you've perhaps considered that some developers are targeting a specific market?

There are people out there who have zero desire to own a place with a yard that requires mowing and much maintenance, and they are quite happy to live in places such as you described.

You also need to remember that beauty is subjective and in the eye of the beholder so just because you don't like something does not mean that everyone else feels the same way.

Were that the case these developers would have no clients.

I am pretty sure all if not almost all of these new houses have a yard.

But that said it is true that beauty is subjective. But there is also the option of a xeriscaped yard (say a larger one) which can be done very tastefully. I think when the building mass occupies too much of the footprint of the lot then things can look a bit crammed.

[dodgerdodge]

Lakestone. You can pay over a million for a nice lake view (well not all have it) but don't expect a drive long enough for your truck and almost zero visitor parking, oh but you can lean over and shake your new neighbours hand from your deck.

Wilden, some nice narrow streets in parts, little visitor parking and just buy a Honda civic because at least it will fit the drive.

Lots of new townhomes going in all over and so many have pretty much no drive at all, i've seen people park their trucks sideways on the drive as its the only way not to hang over. What gives? The pick up truck is the best selling vehicle in North America and we cannot build homes with drives big enough to park one? Lol

[Urban Cowboy]

I am pretty sure all if not almost all of these new houses have a yard.

But that said it is true that beauty is subjective. But there is also the option of a xeriscaped yard (say a larger one) which can be done very tastefully. I think when the building mass occupies too much of the footprint of the lot then things can look a bit crammed.

I guess that depends on ones definition of a yard.

A friend just moved into Lakestone and there is no grass. It has a steep slope in the back which will be planted with a couple of things, I suppose xeriscaped applies, and a few plants along the front sidewalk to the front door.

The main point to take from it is that it's not usable due to the slope.

I'm not saying they are all like that but I've seen quite a number.

I don't believe I've noted a lawn yet, and frankly my definition of a yard entails some sort of area with grass.

[Dizzy1]

I have a question for those of you making statements about greedy developers raping the land all for profit etc - where do you live? Pretty much anywhere there is housing and development - once upon a time a developer raped the land your very abode sits on, and likely those previously rooted there said things much along the lines of what is being said now.

Years ago, there was the guy who was whining and complaining that someone was building a house in front of his and compromising his view. Someone spoke up and asked him if the people he built his house in front of and compromised their view, whined and complained as much. He pretty well shut up after that.

People are funny that way.

[WalterWhite]

If you want to talk “crammed” in regards to residential developments - spend a little time in any suburban area of Ontario.
Markham Ontario

[Urban Cowboy]

Appears they have an aversion to trees too in Markham. That truly is ugly.