[Oak Bay] 2531, 2541 Estevan Ave | 3 stories | Canceled
Posted 15 April 2008 - 01:14 PM
The minutes aren't online yet.
Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:28 PM
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.
Posted 15 April 2008 - 06:18 PM
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?
-City of Victoria website, 2009
Posted 17 April 2008 - 10:29 AM
Posted 17 April 2008 - 11:24 AM
Posted 17 April 2008 - 12:49 PM
Posted 17 April 2008 - 01:30 PM
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.
Posted 17 April 2008 - 02:26 PM
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.
Posted 19 April 2008 - 03:06 PM
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.
Posted 20 April 2008 - 09:22 AM
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.
Posted 20 April 2008 - 09:29 AM
Posted 20 April 2008 - 10:57 AM
If the new building's footprint covers up that part of the alley, I'll be irritated.
Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:27 PM
Posted 21 April 2008 - 08:08 AM
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.
Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:14 PM
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?
Posted 21 April 2008 - 02:57 PM
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.
I'm assuming the proposed building would end where that while fence ends?
Posted 27 April 2008 - 01:07 PM
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.
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users