278 replies to this topic

[aastra]

I still think the final concept was actually not a bad plan, assuming we're assuming View Towers would eventually be replaced and the issues re: separation, massing, and shadowing could thus be addressed.

[aastra]

Did we ever see this picture before?

 

There were a lot of things to like about it, especially considering how blah the original concept was. I really like the windows and the terraces on top of each of the levels. I like the ground level and the entrance area, too. What a change it would have been for that block of View Street.

 

Seriously, Just squeeze this concept to be one unit slimmer all around and I'd gladly chip in some of Mike K.'s salary to make it happen.

Edited by aastra, 17 February 2023 - 12:48 PM.

[aastra]

Although... the separation between this building and View Towers would seem to have been wider than I thought. Still not really the kind of space that any sane person would want to linger within, but decent enough for quickly passing through.

[Nparker]

Did we ever see this picture before?...

I don't think so. It's a shame it won't be happening.

[Nparker]

 

...Just squeeze this concept to be one unit slimmer all around and I'd gladly chip in some of Mike K.'s salary to make it happen...

Just add a few more floors to make up for the lost units.

[aastra]

I didn't give this project nearly enough credit. It was very refined and pretty darned good, considering the issues re: this particular site.

 

I guess I'll file this in the warehouse with all of the other documentation re: "Housing crisis? What housing crisis?"

[aastra]

It even works with the lowrise project for the corner of Vancouver and View. I actually feel better about that project when I see how they would have related to one another. Sigh.

[Nparker]

That was my thoughts about the low-rise as well.

[Citified.ca]

This proposal has been revised, and now is in the form of a 23-storey tower with the same density as it had in a 19-storey variant that was turned down by council, namely over setbacks. Now, the proposal includes zero parking, as part of a shift to supporting council's goal of building a car-lite housing stock in the downtown core.

 

This will be an interesting proposal to watch, politically speaking. And poetically, perhaps, is this project is planned for what is currently a surface parking lot.

 

Harris Green parking lot envisioned for 23-storey rental tower with zero parking

https://victoria.cit...h-zero-parking/

 

 

[Victoria Watcher]

Interesting.

 

What would be allowed under current zoning and how many parking stalls would it require?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 31 May 2023 - 09:30 AM.

[Nparker]

You can almost hear the butt-smooching from the developer:

...At the core of this project is a commitment to livability, affordability, and the acknowledgement of council’s forward-looking environmental goals as they relate to the automobile and human-powered transportation... https://victoria.cit...h-zero-parking/

As far as the design goes, I don't mind the podium and at least the rest would block View Towers from certain angles.

[GaryOak]

I feel like if we build more tall towers around View Towers, it won't stick out as much like the sore thumb it is.

[AllseeingEye]

You can almost hear the butt-smooching from the developer:

As far as the design goes, I don't mind the podium and at least the rest would block View Towers from certain angles.

 

No kidding; if only they could build a 19 storey "green fence" of sitka spruce and western red cedars all around View Towers "our long national nightmare" of having to look at that thing would finally be over

[Mike K.]

I thought R48, the Harris Green zone, doesn't have a parking minimum? It also has no density maximum, but a height limit of nine storeys or 10 with at-ground commercial.

[Mike K.]

You can almost hear the butt-smooching from the developer:

As far as the design goes, I don't mind the podium and at least the rest would block View Towers from certain angles.

 

It makes sense, though, doesn't it? This is what council wants, and the soil conditions at this site make parking a very costly affair. If there is any site downtown on which to pursue this sort of project, this just might be it.

[Victoria Watcher]

Oh yea it’s got that underground river nearby.

[GaryOak]

Can't seem to find this new application on the development tracker, will this project also be including the fort Street side of the parking lot?

[GaryOak]

Never mind found it
https://tender.victo...809111720510000

[Nparker]

Oh yea it’s got that underground river nearby.

Maybe the developer should supply boat parking.

[Nparker]

It makes sense, though, doesn't it...

I am not arguing the sense of the developer's proposal, just the sycophantic messaging.