Jump to content

      













Photo

[Oak Bay] 2531, 2541 Estevan Ave | 3 stories | Canceled


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#21 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 01:14 PM

I'd like to know how many spoke against and how many for.
The minutes aren't online yet.

#22 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,934 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:28 PM

If I might take the NIMBY side for a moment, aren't all of the new buildings along the Victoria portion of Oak Bay Avenue less than four stories? Where's the sense in building below four stories on a major street if we're going to build four stories on Estevan? Make it three stories and the opposition wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

#23 FunkyMunky

FunkyMunky
  • Member
  • 416 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 06:08 PM

...a three-storey mixed-use grandfathered building built across Estevan Avenue in 1959 that evades C-2 zoning requirements.


That would be Liscombe Manor.



#24 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 15 April 2008 - 06:18 PM

^Ooh, a saucy romance novel!

Fairer Than She by Theresa Charles - 1968 -
A young woman feels forboding as she is about to marry the master of Liscombe Manor. What are the secrets of his scandalous past?


"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#25 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,816 posts

Posted 17 April 2008 - 10:29 AM

I live in Estevan village (behind the now-closing Arden & Grace). Vibrancy isn't actually needed, it is already there. The Village Cafe is pretty much busy all the time and there are plenty of dog walkers, strollers, etc. As for a grocery store, we already have one: Food Forum, it is only 1 block away. What we need is some different stores, a better ritzy clothing store (Arden & Grace was crap).

#26 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,659 posts

Posted 17 April 2008 - 11:24 AM

So I am unclear Coreyburger, are you for or against this proposal? In either case why?

#27 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 17 April 2008 - 12:49 PM

The place has charm, but it seem pretty dead to me. It could use a denser core imo.

#28 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,934 posts

Posted 17 April 2008 - 01:30 PM

I don't think increasing density has much relevance in a village like this. It is what it is, and trying to change it in any significant way would be a bad idea (I think).

The way I see it, we've got a couple of buildings that are lame ducks and otherwise not making much of a contribution to the village's atmosphere. I'm all for replacing them with something that will work better, something that will engage the sidewalk and enhance the streetscape in the same sort of way the village's more successful buildings work/engage/enhance.

#29 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 17 April 2008 - 02:26 PM

I agree there shouldn't be a significant density increase there or anything. But I wouldn't consider this proposal significant either.
Whenever I visit the area I find it surprising how many businesses seem to be succeeding based on the fact that there's very little foot traffic. It is because there is too much dependency on vehicular traffic in that little village. Encourage a slight increase in density in the area - develop a more a local village vibe, draw in more public transport, etc.
We shouldn't forget that this development will not profit unless it is granted a minimum density, or it won't get built. If it's not approved at this density or slightly less, this area risks stagnating, because it will turn other development opportunities away.
Council's are always so afraid of approving certain projects because they are afraid what precedent it will set for future projects. Little thought is put into what precedent will be set if certain project aren't approved.

#30 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,816 posts

Posted 19 April 2008 - 03:06 PM

I am very much for this project, with the caveat that they not remove the lane between Estevan and the lane behind.

Now, as for vibrancy, yes, there is some reliance on vehicular traffic. However, I live here. I have seen it at nearly every point of the year and every point of the day. There is a great deal of pedestrian traffic already. The traffic into the village is steady but not overwhelming. Busing is excellent already. 2A stops here and 11 is only a block away. Downtown in the morning with the 2A is about 15minutes and back home is about 25. 2A is rarely crowded, unlike the 11.

#31 Audrey

Audrey
  • Member
  • 60 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 09:22 AM

I'd really love it if a proper cafe moved in, to take over where The Village left off when they became a restaurant (they don't even have coffee to go anymore--but their eggs benedict is fantastic!) However, I know Village struggled to survive as just a cafe, so it's probably not going to happen.

More residential density in the area would be fine, I think, and it would be nice to get some more shops on the street. I'd be unhappy to see any major chain stuff to go in, but honestly, if a Starbucks moved onto the block, I'd probably sigh and start using it.

#32 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 09:29 AM

I'll have to see for myself what the back alley issue really is.

#33 Audrey

Audrey
  • Member
  • 60 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:57 AM

It's just a nice little path that runs parallel to Estevan. There's very light car traffic on it, and often people walking their dogs or kids playing on it. Calling it an alley makes it sound kind of dark and urban, but it's really just a nice little route past a lot of backyards. I live facing that alley, and I get in all kinds of conversations with neighbours as they walk past while I'm working (or lounging) in the yard. It's part of the neighbourhood charm.

If the new building's footprint covers up that part of the alley, I'll be irritated.

#34 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,816 posts

Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:27 PM

No, there are two lanes. The big one is parallel to Estevan. This refers to a smaller lane between the toy store and the blitz that goes from Estevan to the back lane.

#35 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 08:08 AM

Maybe one of you guys could take some pictures of this lane and the back of the building and post them here.

#36 FunkyMunky

FunkyMunky
  • Member
  • 416 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:52 PM

Maybe one of you guys could take some pictures of this lane and the back of the building and post them here.




^ View from the back alley looking northward to Liscombe Manor through Muffin Lane. The Blitz (2531) is on the right.




^View along back alley looking east towards Willows Beach. The proposed development is for the two buildings (2531 and 2541) behind the silver Honda Civic. The entrance to Muffin Lane is beyond (to the right of) the green cardboard recycling bin sitting in front of the car.

Given the length of the block and the lack of anything going on in the alley, is closing this walk-through really going to have a negative impact on anyone's life? I think not.

#37 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:14 PM

Thanks Funky.
So the proposed building wouldn't block that back lane at all. It would just close that Muffin lane in the first pic?
It hardly seems necessary to preserve it. Could you just walk around it the building if you want to get to the back lane? What's the biggie?

I'm assuming the proposed building would end where that white fence ends?

#38 FunkyMunky

FunkyMunky
  • Member
  • 416 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:57 PM

I'm assuming the proposed building would end where that while fence ends?

The D'Ambrosio Architecture & Urbanism rendering which appeared in the Times Colonist article a few weeks ago clearly shows the back alley (which runs parallel to Estevan) opening onto Dunlevy Street. So, yes, it should end at the end of the fence and not block the alley.



#39 Audrey

Audrey
  • Member
  • 60 posts

Posted 21 April 2008 - 08:56 PM

Tsk. That cyclist isn't wearing a helmet.

#40 yodsaker

yodsaker
  • Member
  • 1,280 posts

Posted 27 April 2008 - 01:07 PM

Hello all, I'm new here and happy to have found the forum as architecture/urban design has been a strong interest of mine for decades. I may as well start contributing/*****ing/praising now...
I liked the Estevan proposal, it would liven up a dead corner but apparently some change-is-death types have gotten in the way of what seems a decent sensible build. I heard they were going on about construction dust etc pls vehicular traffic increase menacing kids.

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