Kelowna Construction - Page 64

rapid_business · #**1261** Posted **Mar 17, 2017, 7:33 PM**

That screening on the podium, masking what I assume is a couple levels of above-grade parking, needs a bit of work. Otherwise it looks fine.

Sheener · #**1262** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 12:48 AM**

Sopa update. 12 floors up, 2 to go!

Metro-One · #**1263** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 4:12 AM**

Thank you!

Such a breath of fresh air to see a new tower in Kelowna actually taking shape.

giallo · #**1264** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 6:49 AM**

Fantastic. The Mission's first high-rise.

Sheener · #**1265** Posted **Mar 25, 2017, 12:21 AM**

1151 Sunset Update:

Metro-One · #**1266** Posted **Mar 25, 2017, 10:31 AM**

I don't believe my eyes! Two towers actually under construction at the same time in Kelowna.

Yes, they are two projects that have been stalled for ages, but two eyesores will now actually add to the skyline.

Thanks for the pics guys!

Hope that hotel gets off the ground...

Kelowna needs more reputable developers.

Phil McAvity · #**1267** Posted **Mar 25, 2017, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aastra

Why does everything have to be so ambitious only to fall through? It reminds me of Langford/Colwood (Victoria's suburbs) or Nanaimo. (To a degree... I realize that Kelowna has actually completed some major buildings recently, but you get my point.)

Would smaller projects just not be viable? I ask this same question about Langford and Nanaimo.

There have been a few 6 story buildings go up in Langford starting with Reflections but yeah, for some reason high-rises always fall though in the westcoms.

vicdevelopments · #**1268** Posted **Mar 28, 2017, 12:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

There have been a few 6 story buildings go up in Langford starting with Reflections but yeah, for some reason high-rises always fall though in the westcoms.

I was looking forward to those towers in Colwood it's to bad they fell through. There is a new 12 story building proposed in Langford now though.

vicdevelopments · #**1269** Posted **Mar 28, 2017, 12:33 AM**

Same with Kelowna does anyone have a recent skyline photo of Kelowna that anyone can share? It's cool to see a couple of developments going up.

Emtee · #**1270** Posted **Mar 28, 2017, 2:10 PM**

Second crossing alignment options. Much more in the following documents:

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads...splays-web.pdf

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads...-2017-rweb.pdf

Metro-One · #**1271** Posted **Mar 29, 2017, 1:38 AM**

Umm, okay, what is the deal with the crazy alignment on the west shore?

I hope that is just showing "a range" of where it would connect and not a real snake alignment like that.

The document itself has a lot of good stuff and i am happy that interchanges / free flow through Kelowna is what is being considered.

Also neat to see trenched or elevated express (free flow) lanes being proposed (the main city near where I live does this along its main corridor).

Some of the new alignments proposed for the alternate route seem a little wasteful and connect at bizarre points around West Kelowna.

What is being proposed for Kelowna and out to Vernon is much more solid though.

I don't like the Kelowna Downtown North End alternate corridor option because it will cut into Knox Mountain Park. That is a pretty valuable park in the Kelowna community.

I wish the timeline wasn't "40 years plus." May as well say never.

At the longest this entire corridor should be a three phased project over a 20 year time line.

Personally I wish it were a two phased project to be completed in 15 years out, but oh well...

Emtee · #**1272** Posted **Mar 29, 2017, 11:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Umm, okay, what is the deal with the crazy alignment on the west shore?

I hope that is just showing "a range" of where it would connect and not a real snake alignment like that.

One of several potential alignment options on the westside:

Phil McAvity · #**1273** Posted **Mar 30, 2017, 12:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Umm, okay, what is the deal with the crazy alignment on the west shore?

That's what I thought.

Insanity

Metro-One · #**1274** Posted **Mar 30, 2017, 3:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emtee

One of several potential alignment options on the westside:

Yes, I read through the entire document, but option 2A is the only one that would tie into a new bridge.

using 2B would involve upgrading the existing 97 through Kelowna with elevated or trenched free flow express lanes.

I really hope that the 2A diagram is simply showing "a range" of where it would meet the potential second crossing, and would not actually have that incredibly long and silly switch back.

Emtee · #**1275** Posted **Mar 30, 2017, 4:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yes, I read through the entire document, but option 2A is the only one that would tie into a new bridge.

using 2B would involve upgrading the existing 97 through Kelowna with elevated or trenched free flow express lanes.

I really hope that the 2A diagram is simply showing "a range" of where it would meet the potential second crossing, and would not actually have that incredibly long and silly switch back.

As I understand it, 2A & 2B are potential reroutings of the highway as a bypass to West Kelowna - not necessarily solely for the new bridge. There is still the option of using the existing highway corridor to connect to the location of the new bridge, rather than building a full bypass of the existing corridor (I think using the existing corridor would make far more sense than 2A).

To be honest, I'm not sure it's worth building a second crossing location. It seems that it would just create another rift in the city, like the existing Harvey Avenue corridor does. Not to mention degrade the existing north end neighbourhood and Knox Mountain Park.

speedog · #**1276** Posted **Mar 30, 2017, 11:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emtee

As I understand it, 2A & 2B are potential reroutings of the highway as a bypass to West Kelowna - not necessarily solely for the new bridge. There is still the option of using the existing highway corridor to connect to the location of the new bridge, rather than building a full bypass of the existing corridor (I think using the existing corridor would make far more sense than 2A).

To be honest, I'm not sure it's worth building a second crossing location. It seems that it would just create another rift in the city, like the existing Harvey Avenue corridor does. Not to mention degrade the existing north end neighbourhood and Knox Mountain Park.

Option 1 seems the best to me - Knox Mountain Park would hardly be affected as it is pretty much all above the area in question and there wouldn't be much in the form of communities being too adversely affected. The current situation just is not adequate and will only get worse - option 1 could very well be at a freeway standard which would also help quite a bit.

KevD · #**1277** Posted **Mar 31, 2017, 2:04 AM**

For anyone interested in further details on the bridge/new freeway plan. I've supplied a link for the PDF download of the "consultation companion" that we were given at the open house here: https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads...-2017-rweb.pdf

Also, they are asking for community input on the proposals. They even have 3 different questinaires that are specific to each region. I'm going to submit my recommendations tonight. Here is the link for that: http://engage.gov.bc.ca/okanaganseco...feedback-form/