Taller building all about profit, not improving city’s landscape

Editor: Kelowna council recently approved a variance that raised the allowable building height on Sunset Drive from 22 metres to 119 metres above grade.

The developers, city staff and council over-zealously gushed that this was necessary because the buildings was iconic.

But an icon to what — to poor public policy, bad urban planning and greed?

Poor public policy creates zoning bylaws with loopholes developers can drive trucks through. In this case, the C7 zone has a density limit that allows a building to have a floor area nine times the area of the property it sits on.

The allowable floor area of this project was huge at 103,500 square metres. If fully built out into small suites, it would have created a number of density-related infrastructure servicing and parking problems in the downtown core, but the allowable height of 22 metres, or 7.5 storeys, would not have been an eyesore. But an eyesore is what we got.

Poor urban planning allows planners to support proposals from developers that reduce density by 41 per cent in exchange for a 500 per cent height increase that impacts the urban environment, sunlight and valley views.

Sensitive zoning bylaws contain realistic height and density objectives for neighbourhood building forms and discourage deals that allow developers to trade more height for less density.

Poor policy and planning creates a race to see who can build the tallest building in town and fails to protect views from other highrise projects.

Greed is the motive here. The extra height provides fewer residential units with terrific views and high market prices. This drives up unit prices and attracts foreign investors away from other condo markets. Here, they will park their money, flip condos for huge profits, charge high rents, leave units unoccupied, drive up local housing costs and move on.

Affordable housing is not profitable for foreign investors.

This building approval shows just how out of touch Kelowna council is with the needs of the community.

They were elected to serve taxpayers and to protect them from social, economic and environmental impacts created by bad public policy, bad planning and greed in the development industry.

They were elected to create a truly vibrant, dynamic and liveable downtown core — not foreign investment tools for the rich.

Council’s battle cry should be ‘We work for the little guy.’ They need to ask if tourism industry workers can afford units in the projects they approve. They also need to ask taxpayers if they can afford to continue to subsidize 28 per cent of the cost of new roads, parks, sewers and water infrastructure needed by this project.

Council needs to overhaul its zoning bylaws to create affordable buildings and housing forms that fit into the valley landscape — not dominate it — and that won’t sit vacant for years, block valley views or cast shadows on nearby homes.

Richard Drinnan, Kelowna