A Vancouver-based developer has been granted more time to get shovels in the ground for a four-tower project in Kelowna香蕉视频直播檚 North End.

At a public hearing on May 13, council voted 6香蕉视频直播�2 to re-approve development and variance permits for the project by Ledingham McAllister, located at 1070 Ellis Street. The original permits were approved in July 2023. The project was first proposed in 2021.

香蕉视频直播淧rojects of this scale are extremely complicated and costly because of the integrated nature of the design,香蕉视频直播� explained Ryan Smith, the city香蕉视频直播檚 divisional director of planning and development services. 香蕉视频直播淚 think that both economic conditions and the complexity of the building have contributed to the time and us being back here for a re-approval.香蕉视频直播�

The project will include four towers of 36, 34, 32, and 28 storeys, and required five variances, including setbacks at the street level and upper floors, as well as podium height adjustments.

Several residents spoke at the hearing to voice concerns about the project's height, density, and potential for increased traffic congestion.

A resident from the neighbouring Waterscapes condo complex on Sunset Drive urged council to follow the Official Community Plan (OCP) and zoning bylaws, suggesting the city was acting unlawfully.

香蕉视频直播淏y any miracle, should that happen, this project be reduced to two towers of 26 storeys,香蕉视频直播� he said. 香蕉视频直播淪top approving project after project with so many variances.香蕉视频直播�

During the meeting, Smith responded to those concerns by clarifying that the development 香蕉视频直播渋s compliant with our zoning bylaw and our OCP in terms of density.香蕉视频直播�

Two other Waterscapes residents also criticized their strata council香蕉视频直播檚 letter of support for the project, claiming unit owners were not consulted.

However, Mike Martin, president of the Waterscapes strata council, addressed council directly.

香蕉视频直播淚 think I have a pretty good handle on the owners香蕉视频直播� pulse. The renderings I香蕉视频直播檝e seen do a good job of integrating the Waterscapes community with a new development. We think it香蕉视频直播檚 going to be the jewel of the city.香蕉视频直播�

Waterscapes was also built by Ledingham McAllister. Speaking on behalf of the company, executive vice-president Dan Giordano addressed the requested variances.

香蕉视频直播淲e could follow every bylaw to the 香蕉视频直播榯香蕉视频直播�, but you get a worse project,香蕉视频直播� he explained. 香蕉视频直播淭hat香蕉视频直播檚 why we香蕉视频直播檝e taken the harder route, and talked to council to explain why this makes sense香蕉视频直播攚hy it香蕉视频直播檚 good for Kelowna.香蕉视频直播�

Councillor Luke Stack responded to the resident香蕉视频直播檚 comment that council was acting illegally.

香蕉视频直播淥ne of our speakers tonight suggested that we are breaking the law香蕉视频直播攖hat is absolutely not the case.香蕉视频直播�

Coun. Loyal Wooldridge, who previously supported the project, reiterated his position.

香蕉视频直播淢y only ask is that we see some shovels in the ground and this project come to fruition in the very near future.香蕉视频直播�

Coun. Mohini Singh highlighted that the developer will contribute $2.2 million to the city香蕉视频直播檚 Housing Opportunities Reserve Fund through a density bonus.

香蕉视频直播淭his goes directly to help those in our city get a roof over their heads,香蕉视频直播� she said.

Councillors Charlie Hodge and Ron Cannan opposed the re-approval. Cannan argued the variances strayed too far from city design guidelines.

香蕉视频直播淚mpacting both livability and character of the area,香蕉视频直播� he said. 香蕉视频直播淚 think as a council member it香蕉视频直播檚 important to weigh whether these variances serve the public good香蕉视频直播攏ot just the goals of the developer.香蕉视频直播�

Mayor Tom Dyas closed the hearing by reminding council their decision was solely on the requested variances.

香蕉视频直播淭he idea of density and what is on that particular site is a factor of rules and regulations that are in place. It does not stop any developer from coming in and building something that is substantially bigger, wider, chunkier in order to accommodate all of that particular growth.香蕉视频直播�

Councillor Maxine DeHart recused herself from the discussion and vote, citing a conflict of interest due to owning an apartment in a nearby building.