Supportive housing for Kneller Road, in Rutland

[mexi cali]

*removed*

[Lady tehMa]

The development would consist of a four-storey building with 40-units of supportive housing for the Kelowna Women's Shelter.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

The second project, adjacent to the first, would feature a five-storey, 48-unit apartment complex owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society.

The building would include 15 market rental units and 33 offered at rents below market rate.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland

Capture 1.jpg

I think supportive housing for women & children is a great idea. I don't think wet housing is a good idea, so I am quite pleased with this proposed development. What I really like, is this:

Office space for six employees of the women's shelter would also be included.

According to the presentation, the facility would serve as second stage housing for women and children for between six and 18 months.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

"The proposed office use is small-scale and directly connected with the provision of supportive housing and is unlikely to adversely impact the adjacent residential neighbourhood."

This development has a remarkable note of common sense - which begs the question of how it survived government handling?

[the truth]

I'd be ok with it if it were in my neighborhood IF the "supportive" part meant STRUCTURE for the residents .

If those who need these homes were actually taught what it takes to keep a home and be a proper neighbor , I doubt many would oppose .

exactly.................

[the truth]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland

Capture 1.jpg

I think supportive housing for women & children is a great idea. I don't think wet housing is a good idea, so I am quite pleased with this proposed development. What I really like, is this:

Office space for six employees of the women's shelter would also be included.

According to the presentation, the facility would serve as second stage housing for women and children for between six and 18 months.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

"The proposed office use is small-scale and directly connected with the provision of supportive housing and is unlikely to adversely impact the adjacent residential neighbourhood."

This development has a remarkable note of common sense - which begs the question of how it survived government handling?

i am totally ok with this type of housing, it is needed,

[DarbyD]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland

Capture 1.jpg

I think supportive housing for women & children is a great idea. I don't think wet housing is a good idea, so I am quite pleased with this proposed development. What I really like, is this:

Office space for six employees of the women's shelter would also be included.

According to the presentation, the facility would serve as second stage housing for women and children for between six and 18 months.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

"The proposed office use is small-scale and directly connected with the provision of supportive housing and is unlikely to adversely impact the adjacent residential neighbourhood."

This development has a remarkable note of common sense - which begs the question of how it survived government handling?

The common sense is because both are owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society with some financial help from BC Housing for the Kelowna Women's Shelter building. The second building is totally owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society who for several years have owned and operated a 4 story apartment building on the corner of Hwy 33 and Kneller. Also of special note this not a Journey Home project.

[alanjh595]

The second project, adjacent to the first, would feature a five-storey, 48-unit apartment complex owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society.

The building would include 15 market rental units and 33 offered at rents below market rate.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland

[the truth]

I think supportive housing for women & children is a great idea. I don't think wet housing is a good idea, so I am quite pleased with this proposed development. What I really like, is this:


This development has a remarkable note of common sense - which begs the question of how it survived government handling?

The common sense is because both are owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society with some financial help from BC Housing for the Kelowna Women's Shelter building. The second building is totally owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society who for several years have owned and operated a 4 story apartment building on the corner of Hwy 33 and Kneller. Also of special note this not a Journey Home project.

thank god its not a journey home project

[DarbyD]

I'd be ok with it if it were in my neighborhood IF the "supportive" part meant STRUCTURE for the residents .

If those who need these homes were actually taught what it takes to keep a home and be a proper neighbor , I doubt many would oppose .

Totally agree. "Supportive" needs to be defined, not just generic wording to "sell" the development. There should be a means of verifying that the supports in "supportive" truly are those needed by the residents whatever their struggles, to help them live peacefully in society and be healthy.

Put another way:
Purpose built housing for people who have specific needs should have the appropriate supports for those residents. If it is purpose built and the advertised PR is "supportive housing" it needs to be more than just a roof, it must really have the supports needed for the residents to be healthy and living up to their full potential as law abiding members of the broader society.

[erinmore3775]

[url] https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland ]/url]

This project should be fast tracked by the new Council. This is the type of project that Kelowna needs and its backers have the experience to make it work.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

"The proposed office use is small-scale and directly connected with the provision of supportive housing and is unlikely to adversely impact the adjacent residential neighbourhood."

The second project, adjacent to the first, would feature a five-storey, 48-unit apartment complex owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society.

The building would include 15 market rental units and 33 offered at rents below market rate.

Those non-market rentals would be guaranteed through an operating agreement with BC Housing, a condition of receiving BC Housing funding for the project.”

It will be interesting to see how this Council reacts to a proposal that is supported by the current OCP, has community organization support, and support from BC Housing. It should be a no brainer!

[DarbyD]

[url] https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/3 ... in-Rutland ]/url]

This project should be fast tracked by the new Council. This is the type of project that Kelowna needs and its backers have the experience to make it work.

"The proposed supportive housing use is consistent with the OCP policy which encourages the provision of supportive and subsidized housing in the core area," planning staff state in a report supportive of the rezoning application.

"The proposed office use is small-scale and directly connected with the provision of supportive housing and is unlikely to adversely impact the adjacent residential neighbourhood."

The second project, adjacent to the first, would feature a five-storey, 48-unit apartment complex owned and operated by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society.

The building would include 15 market rental units and 33 offered at rents below market rate.

Those non-market rentals would be guaranteed through an operating agreement with BC Housing, a condition of receiving BC Housing funding for the project.”

It will be interesting to see how this Council reacts to a proposal that is supported by the current OCP, has community organization support, and support from BC Housing. It should be a no brainer!

Anything with BC Housing needs to be looked at very closely and not blindly accepted. They have hoodwinked us more than once with no thought to the larger community they are affecting. The only reason I possibly support this project is the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society already have a good reputation for housing in the area.

[erinmore3775]

The proposal is being submitted by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society and they have an excellent reputation for housing and community support in the area. They have secured the financial backing of BC Housing, which is similar to other community projects in the Okanagan Valley. The fact that BC Housing is giving support to the project should not be held against it. In fact I would like to see the City reduce taxes on this and similar projects for a 10 year period.

[MAPearce]

The proposal is being submitted by the Okanagan Metis and Aboriginal Housing Society and they have an excellent reputation for housing and community support in the area. They have secured the financial backing of BC Housing, which is similar to other community projects in the Okanagan Valley. The fact that BC Housing is giving support to the project should not be held against it. In fact I would like to see the City reduce taxes on this and similar projects for a 10 year period.

Let's consider the FACT that BC Housing raised my rent illegally this year..

How can I trust what they say ?

[Lynn K]

Let's consider the FACT that BC Housing raised my rent illegally this year..

If the increase was illegal, you have options.
What have you done about it?

[MAPearce]

Let's consider the FACT that BC Housing raised my rent illegally this year..

If the increase was illegal, you have options.
What have you done about it?

I'll do it next year .. They know

But just because it`s BC Housing doesn`t make it right ..

DON`T trust them

[nucksRnum1]

I am almost afraid to reply....but....I think that the decisions of the municipal council to put facilities that serve everyday people in Rutland is a positive thing. And will backfire because they are burying the societal issues somewhere else. I know the drug rehab place was a sore spot - but Bridges was at that end of town for eons already. Why am I suggesting it is a good thing? Because bit by bit downtown is getting more plastic and fake. Made of the modern 1 percent Joneses. Whereas the facilities in Rutland are intended to help people - with staff that are there to serve. That kind of humanity and service is what a real community is all about. And sure....the Gospel Mission is downtown - but how much longer do people think that is gonna last?