3804 replies to this topic

[Kapten Kapsell]

That's quite a jump. The earlier proposal had 14-units.

Floors 2-5 will have 7 units per floor, all of which are studios and smaller 1-bedroom units.  I assume that the prior (strata) proposal featured larger units ...?

[Mike K.]

503-706 square foot units, one and two-bedroom floorplans. Those figures relate to the project being a rental as well, but an even earlier incarnation may have been a strata?

[Kapten Kapsell]

503-706 square foot units, one and two-bedroom floorplans. Those figures relate to the project being a rental as well, but an even earlier incarnation may have been a strata?

Yes, the developer originally had a community meeting (CALUC) in 2018 when the were intending to make this a 4-storey strata building.  Notes from that meeting are here:  https://fairfieldcom...ALUC-report.pdf

[IPH]

Meeting minutes are available now from the July 11 CALUC for 1015 Cook Street.  Highlights:

• The project has now gained an extra storey:  it will have a total of 5 (rather than 4) floors
• The project will be called The Charlesworth
• 31 market rental units are planned
• 3 on-site Modo car shares in lieu of parking (there will be a fourth parking stall for visitors)

There were some concerns about height, even though the proposal's height is lower than allowed limits and has a lower FSR. ratio.

 

Minutes are at https://fairfieldcom...-Mtg-Report.pdf .

The CALUC meeting minutes for this project state: 

"3 modo car shares for community valued at 1 modo equals 5 stalls = 15 stalls + 1 additional stall for visitors;"

 

Does anyone know what the "1 Modo equals 5 stalls" is based on?  Is this a City policy, or is there any published research to support this?      

[AllseeingEye]

It's great to see some action in this area. That Powerhouse District could become the happening place in town.

Totally concur: this is awesome and Chris LeFevre is a breath of fresh air. Give the man a Gold Star. Thank God someone not only had a vision but also has the will and the cajones to actually do something to make it come to fruition in a district of town that's been on minimal life support for decades.

 

While the CoV and certain "we hate everything new, real or imagined" mayors and councilors sat on their collective bums for about 60 years doing nothing while that entire area disintegrated, the smartest thing it could do now IMO is just let LeFevre have at it carte blanche and re-develop the whole area, heh (being facetious of course...but only barely). Leave it up to Victoria and they'll still be "studying" things for another hundred years.....

[IPH]

Have to agree as well!  Would be great to see something happen with the rest of the former Transport Canada land (now Songhees & Esquimalt FN), the BC Hydro property and all the surrounding vacant land.  When we started the first remediation project on the Rock Bay site in 2004 I never thought it would still be vacant land 15 years later. 

 

That site (plus all the area extending up to Douglas or Blanshard and North to Bay) is one of the most under utilized parts of Victoria.  With virtually no residential neighbours to mount NIMBY campaigns I don't understand why there isn't a Ton of building activity here (other than the OCP has it designated as Core Employment which wont happen).  It's closer to downtown than Fairfield, on the major N/S transit corridor, within a 2 blocks or less of the harbour, directly abuts the core historic district, etc.  It should be the next big "happening place"!     

[Kapten Kapsell]

Have to agree as well!  Would be great to see something happen with the rest of the former Transport Canada land (now Songhees & Esquimalt FN), the BC Hydro property and all the surrounding vacant land.  When we started the first remediation project on the Rock Bay site in 2004 I never thought it would still be vacant land 15 years later. 

 

That site (plus all the area extending up to Douglas or Blanshard and North to Bay) is one of the most under utilized parts of Victoria.  With virtually no residential neighbours to mount NIMBY campaigns I don't understand why there isn't a Ton of building activity here (other than the OCP has it designated as Core Employment which wont happen).  It's closer to downtown than Fairfield, on the major N/S transit corridor, within a 2 blocks or less of the harbour, directly abuts the core historic district, etc.  It should be the next big "happening place"!     

Technically, Fairfield extends all the way to the southeast corner of the Blanshard and Fort intersection (by the city's definition).  So the businesses on that site (including Starbucks, La Taquisa, B Love etc) are in Fairfield but right across the street (literally!) from downtown Victoria.  Thus, I'd have to argue that Fairfield is just as close, or closer, to downtown...

[IPH]

Fair enough, but even if they are just as close there is a ton more development activity in Fairfield than the south end of Burnside which is ripe for redevelopment.

[Kapten Kapsell]

The Vic West townhouse project is going to a public hearing: https://www.timescol...ring-1.23898009

[Kapten Kapsell]

Meeting minutes are available now from the July 11 CALUC for 1015 Cook Street.  Highlights:

• The project has now gained an extra storey:  it will have a total of 5 (rather than 4) floors
• The project will be called The Charlesworth
• 31 market rental units are planned
• 3 on-site Modo car shares in lieu of parking (there will be a fourth parking stall for visitors)

There were some concerns about height, even though the proposal's height is lower than allowed limits and has a lower FSR. ratio.

 

Minutes are at https://fairfieldcom...-Mtg-Report.pdf .

Here's a rendering of the 5-storey rental building proposed for 1015 Cook Street.

 

[Kapten Kapsell]

The CALUC meeting minutes for this project state: 

"3 modo car shares for community valued at 1 modo equals 5 stalls = 15 stalls + 1 additional stall for visitors;"

 

Does anyone know what the "1 Modo equals 5 stalls" is based on?  Is this a City policy, or is there any published research to support this?      

From the Developer's letter to Council:

 

The project requires a parking stall count of 18.6 stalls and proposes a 16 stall equivalent reviewed and deemed acceptable to COV Transportation. By the design outcome of this parking facility the mature tree trees are preserved and the traffic volumes entering and leaving the site lessened from its current commercial uses (high frequency short term commercial parking use) and their current 7 stall parking configuration. In neighbourhood consultations an expressed concern over parking opportunities and traffic flow from local properties on to and off of Cook Street was stated. This proposal appears to reduce this concern. And provides a service of Modo Car Shares to the community. A 3 Modo Car Share proposal means three distinctly different cars are being proposed: one compact hydrid, a larger volume sedan or SUV, and the third that might be a minivan. Each able to serve different needs. The proposal requires 31.25 bike stalls and provides 33 in a full featured ground floor ride-in bike room with covered entry, maintenance bench and bike wash station. Electric bike charging is provided. Facilities for oversized bikes are provided.

[Kapten Kapsell]

931 McClure has morphed from an 8-unit townhouse development to a 16 unit condo development.  Height is now five storeys, and they are 6 one-bedroom units and 10 two-bedroom units.  The modern design aesthetic of the earlier proposal has been retained.  

 

 

Attached Images

• 

[Nparker]

931 McClure has morphed from an 8-unit townhouse development to a 16 unit condo development....

This is a rather cool looking po-mo/MCM homage*, although I am not entirely keen on the parking area. For context here is the existing building on site.

 

The NIMBYs are going to eviscerate it.

Edited by Nparker, 30 July 2019 - 07:53 AM.

[Kapten Kapsell]

NParker, I agree with you re: the parking area, I generally think that underground parking would make for a stronger first floor (and stronger overall development).  Perhaps there are site challenges that would prevent the provision of underground parking...?

[IPH]

From the Developer's letter to Council:
 
The project requires a parking stall count of 18.6 stalls and proposes a 16 stall equivalent reviewed and deemed acceptable to COV Transportation. By the design outcome of this parking facility the mature tree trees are preserved and the traffic volumes entering and leaving the site lessened from its current commercial uses (high frequency short term commercial parking use) and their current 7 stall parking configuration. In neighbourhood consultations an expressed concern over parking opportunities and traffic flow from local properties on to and off of Cook Street was stated. This proposal appears to reduce this concern. And provides a service of Modo Car Shares to the community. A 3 Modo Car Share proposal means three distinctly different cars are being proposed: one compact hydrid, a larger volume sedan or SUV, and the third that might be a minivan. Each able to serve different needs. The proposal requires 31.25 bike stalls and provides 33 in a full featured ground floor ride-in bike room with covered entry, maintenance bench and bike wash station. Electric bike charging is provided. Facilities for oversized bikes are provided.

Thanks Kapten,
would be interesting to know what COV Transportation staff used to decide the 3 care share stalls are equivalent to 15 regular stalls. I agree that having 18 stalls/cars coming and going directly onto Cook Street is problematic although given the expectation that these 3 care share spots replace 15 regular spots it may be that there are just as many vehicle trips in and out of the stalls directly onto Cook regardless.

From the rendering above it looks like the building may have crept slightly forward. That along with the landscaping & Brick wall may create poor visibility and make it difficult to exit the parking even if restricted to right turns only into the North bound lanes?

[IPH]

931 McClure has morphed from an 8-unit townhouse development to a 16 unit condo development.  Height is now five storeys, and they are 6 one-bedroom units and 10 two-bedroom units.  The modern design aesthetic of the earlier proposal has been retained.

This is starting to look a lot like Aryze's Parry street project with two buildings pushed out to the front and rear but tied together at the base by the parking. This provides somewhat of a court yard feel and more light to the units but I expect the neighbours wont like the tall blank walls on the east and west elevations. Even has the same Architect.

[Nparker]

...I expect the neighbours won't like the tall blank walls on the east and west elevations...

I expect the neighbours won't like anything that doesn't look exactly like what is already there.

[IPH]

NParker, I agree with you re: the parking area, I generally think that underground parking would make for a stronger first floor (and stronger overall development).  Perhaps there are site challenges that would prevent the provision of underground parking...?

It's a small site and the space needed for the ramp would likely eliminate at least 2 of the parking spots. Underground would also add about $50K per unit to the cost as well.

The driving aisle also doesn't look wide enough to turn the cars in the two end stalls around without a 10 point turn. So they may have to back all the way out from their parking stall to the street. if this was underground that would mean having to back up the ramp which would be a huge PITA, and I suspect wouldn't meet Schedule C.

[IPH]

I expect the neighbours won't like anything that doesn't look exactly like what is already there.

Too True, LOL!

[DustMagnet]

I expect the neighbours won't like anything that doesn't look exactly like what is already there.

 

What makes you think they like what is already there?