Jump to content

      



























Photo

Non-City of Victoria projects with no threads


  • Please log in to reply
1440 replies to this topic

#801 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:20 AM

Was this proposal ever shared here?
http://lexi.house/projects/elegance/

 

Thanks for the heads-up! A thread is now here: https://vibrantvicto...rcial-proposed/

 

The design has been changed to some degree, and further refinements are coming soon.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#802 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,390 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 11:50 AM

It seems everyone is concerned about housing affordability in our region until it means more density in their neighbourhood:

...Oak Bay United Church proposes 80 to 150 rental units to replace several smaller, run-down buildings on its large corner lot, while preserving the original 1914 church. But some neighbours fear the church's plan is too dense and will overwhelm the existing streetscape of mainly early 20th-century character houses...a group of critics who have launched the Concerned Citizens Network are unconvinced by what they've seen so far in neighbourhood consultation meetings...


http://www.cbc.ca/ne...4510391?cmp=rss

Every. Single. Proposal.  :whyme:



#803 Brantastic

Brantastic
  • Member
  • 924 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 10:38 AM

While riding the bus to UVic this morning, I noticed a development permit sign at the old Shell site at Shelbourne and McKenzie. I didn't catch any details. Anyone know what's going here? That area is going to look a lot different soon with the University Heights redevelopment and the new CIBC building.



#804 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 03 February 2018 - 12:30 PM

While riding the bus to UVic this morning, I noticed a development permit sign at the old Shell site at Shelbourne and McKenzie. I didn't catch any details. Anyone know what's going here? That area is going to look a lot different soon with the University Heights redevelopment and the new CIBC building.

 

78 unit apartment, mostly studios, two commercial spaces at ground level. Elevation are here: http://www.saanich.c...dec2817elev.pdf

 

Capture.PNG


  • Rob Randall likes this

#805 grantpalin

grantpalin
  • Member
  • 804 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 12:48 PM

No room for surface parking from the looks of it. Seems like the north side has a vehicle access point next to the bus stop, which is an interesting location.



#806 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,390 posts

Posted 03 February 2018 - 12:56 PM

78 unit apartment, mostly studios, two commercial spaces at ground level...

Currently this

s&m.JPG

and it reminds me a bit of this

t&b.JPG

 

Should be a good fit here.



#807 Brantastic

Brantastic
  • Member
  • 924 posts

Posted 05 February 2018 - 07:39 PM

Looks good. I've been waiting for something to finally happen here. Certainly a welcome improvement over the current pit! It'll be interesting to see all of these big changes to that intersection over the next few years.



#808 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 06 February 2018 - 11:10 AM

Thanks Jackerbie! The thread for this project is now here: https://vibrantvicto...oreys-proposed/

 

Btw, the developer is Abstract Developments' rental subsidiary, NVision.


  • Jackerbie likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#809 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 5,444 posts

Posted 17 February 2018 - 11:36 AM

Does anyone know whats going in on the old island highway at the site of the old view royal fire hall? The lot was for sale but has recently sold and there is activity there now

Edit: nevermind, figured it out
https://www.goldstre...fire-hall-site/

37 unit 4 storey apartment building

Edited by RFS, 17 February 2018 - 11:38 AM.


#810 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 17 February 2018 - 11:40 AM

Cool.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#811 Kach

Kach

    SteveK

  • Member
  • 277 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 12:10 PM

New application at 3819 Shelbourne to convert SFHs behind the existing apartment buidling to apartments - 6 and 4 stories.  According to the Shelbourne Valley Plan, this block recommends a 4 story limit.  Curious to see how this plays out as the application is inconsistent with the plan.

 

Capture.PNG



#812 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 01:06 PM

^Tough call because if you say yes than it's open season on any SFD within a block of Shelbourne with that huge zoning uplift.



#813 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 01:09 PM

I think you ask what community benefits come from the 6-floor then make the decision based on that.
  • Nparker likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#814 Kach

Kach

    SteveK

  • Member
  • 277 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 02:15 PM

How much did existing infrastructure play into the Shelbourne Valley Plan height limits?  Or are the limits more subjective around form and massing...and visual quality.  For instance, does a 6 story building here put to much pressure on the existing infrastructure's future ability to "pipe the poop"?



#815 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 02:19 PM

How much did existing infrastructure play into the Shelbourne Valley Plan height limits?  Or are the limits more subjective around form and massing...and visual quality.  For instance, does a 6 story building here put to much pressure on the existing infrastructure's future ability to "pipe the poop"?

 

They are all 4 now, so maybe they should stay 4 is likely the reason, notwithstanding we can make 6-floor wood buildings now.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#816 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,390 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 02:37 PM

They are all 4 now, so maybe they should stay 4 is likely the reason, notwithstanding we can make 6-floor wood buildings now.

The existing buildings are likely 4 floors since that was the limit of wood-frame construction until quite recently. I am not convinced that previous building code limitations are a valid reason to dictate the structure of future development.



#817 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 23 February 2018 - 02:45 PM

The existing buildings are likely 4 floors since that was the limit of wood-frame construction until quite recently. I am not convinced that previous building code limitations are a valid reason to dictate the structure of future development.

 

Shelbourne plan was only just adopted last year, so deviating from that plan already will be a tough sell for the developer.


  • Rob Randall likes this

#818 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,390 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 02:48 PM

Shelbourne plan was only just adopted last year, so deviating from that plan already will be a tough sell for the developer.

Oh I am sure it will be. I am just suggesting that faulty reasoning was likely behind recent decisions regarding height limits in the Shelbourne plan.



#819 tiger11

tiger11
  • Member
  • 163 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 05:09 PM

New application at 3819 Shelbourne to convert SFHs behind the existing apartment buidling to apartments - 6 and 4 stories.  According to the Shelbourne Valley Plan, this block recommends a 4 story limit.  Curious to see how this plays out as the application is inconsistent with the plan.

 

 

I could be wrong. but did this plan get proposed previously or a similar proposal on the site? I remember reading it a while back... May have been from work tho



#820 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,390 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 07:01 PM

I could be wrong. but did this plan get proposed previously or a similar proposal on the site? I remember reading it a while back... May have been from work tho

I have definitely read about this proposal at some point before.



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users