Jump to content

      



























Photo

[Colwood] Capital City Centre | Condos, offices, commercial | Up to 29-storeys | Construction cancelled in Sept 2013


  • Please log in to reply
1722 replies to this topic

#41 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 18 December 2006 - 10:36 PM

Dude, that's at least a $100 million bridge.
"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

#42 Scaper

Scaper
  • Member
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 18 December 2006 - 10:50 PM

and Victoria is worth every penny of it!!! :) Build it for tomorrow...for tomorrow Victoria will eventually be half a million people! better at todays dollars than when victoria will eventually need it!

#43 FunkyMunky

FunkyMunky
  • Member
  • 416 posts

Posted 18 December 2006 - 11:02 PM

Article about this project I believe but its locked: Colwood reaches for the skies. Times Colonist


Colwood reaches for the skies; [Final Edition]
Times - Colonist. Victoria, B.C.: Dec 16, 2006. pg. A.14

(Copyright Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006)
The plans for the shopping plaza site will help transform the community

A proposal to redevelop the centre of Colwood has put the community on a roll.

There will be no stopping the city now that it has started thinking big.

That might seem an overstatement, but it's not. Even if the proposal goes nowhere -- and there is no sign that it will fail -- it has created so much enthusiasm that renewal is inevitable.

The $850-million project will transform the Colwood Plaza and London Drugs properties.

Plans for the London Drugs site have not been completed, but the Colwood Plaza redevelopment is impressive.

There will be eight buildings, including a 29-storey residential tower, a 12- storey hotel and three four-storey assisted-living buildings. Condominium towers next to Sooke Road would be up to 15 storeys high.

The pedestrian-friendly development would have two levels of underground parking, rooftop gardens, green buildings using solar power and wind energy and underground utilities. And it would include office and commercial development, reducing the need of people to commute to other communities for work.

The first building, the hotel, could be open for business within two years.

The plan -- which has been approved by Colwood's planning and zoning committee, and will go to council Monday -- reinforces the need for another look at Colwood's official community plan. The city is planning a joint review with Langford, which makes sense. The two communities are so closely connected that what happens in one is bound to affect the other.

And, since so much of the region's development over the next few years is bound to occur in the West Shore communities, it's important to ensure that the community plan ensures sensible, co- ordinated development.

Together, the two communities have much to offer, from prime waterfront to wilderness to high-traffic commercial space and everything in between.

They should not be seen as simply bedroom communities any more -- they can stand on their own, with services and jobs.

That would be good, because it's logical to have jobs, shopping and residences as close together as possible, saving people time and reducing the negative environmental impact.

Still, we can expect that many of Colwood's new residents will need to go to downtown Victoria or Saanich for work -- and that will only increase the strain on the already overloaded highway system. Every new development will put more vehicles on the roads during peak traffic hours.

We need to start looking at ways to ease the traffic crunch as soon as possible.

We know that Colwood is being transformed, and we know the traffic is coming. Waiting for things to get worse is no solution.

#44 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 18 December 2006 - 11:10 PM

Last Saturday it was Downtown builders reach for the skies, this Saturday it's Colwood reaches for the skies.

Which municipality will "reach for the skies" in next weeks' T/C?

I say Metchosin. Old man Jenkins put a new attic on his bungalow and "reaches for the skies".
"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

#45 rayne_k

rayne_k
  • Member
  • 170 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 12:16 AM

I love the bridge concept , *but* cost aside:

DND might have issues with the positioning - the closest points pass through DND, and even if there were a ROW, chances are passer-bys would get a great eyefull of the base. Now even though they do offer tours I'm sure some of the security types might feel it exposes Naden and what is a significant chunk of Maritime Forces Pacific a little too much.

The flipside is that it would be a great reminder for residents of our military-side.

#46 Scaper

Scaper
  • Member
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 12:20 AM

I would love to see a bridge across there!!!

Also on the topic of munipalities reaching for the skies...Saanich is in the process of allowing ten to twelve story buildings now.

#47 Walter Moar

Walter Moar
  • Member
  • 166 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 06:18 AM

What is the point of a bridge, other than the "cool" factor? Shouldn't the train travel through populated areas, so people can get on/off it?

#48 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 07:24 AM

It could terminate at Western Exchange. This is just an alternate route for one that is already proposed along Hwy 1. This route is shorter and along one densely populated area (esq) and also would go to the base one of the largest employers. This route just makes sense.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#49 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 07:51 AM

^Sure, if money is not object.

#50 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:36 AM

I am sure that it would be close in cost because of the shortened route. The shorter distance means faster train travel which means higher ridership.

As I have said before I am much more in favour of LRT in the core area where the current ridership is already high. We have some bus routes that have higher ridership than a lot of LRT lines in North America. But if the money is going to be spent going out to the West Comms than it should provide the best service not the cheapest. Going cheap is a great way to reduce ridership.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#51 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:45 AM

We don't have the tax base for a bridge.
We don't even have a tax base for the LRT.
Besides, the line already exists through the "original route", it just needs upgrading. I think you're way off in guestimating that costs between the "original" route and a bridge route will be similar.
Besides it doesn't matter. DND would never allow it.

#52 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:48 AM

The planned LRT route and the E&N line are different entities entirely


Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#53 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:49 AM

Looks like it would be at least 30 to 40 percent shorter. Though you are right about DND.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#54 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:53 AM

Oh, I didn't know about the different lines thingy.

#55 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:55 AM

What's wrong with using E&N's line, other that taking away a barely used rail service?

#56 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:58 AM

Nothing but it does need to be double tracked if it will be used as an LRT line and not just a Commuter train.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#57 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 08:59 AM

The idea is that a bridge pillar will be built on either side of the harbour and a steel structure built locally at the dry dock will be towed over, swung into place then hoisted to the top of the pillars. The bridge will accommodate Light rail, pedestrians and cyclists. There is a tract of land on the south of Dockyard that is not security sensitive. A lot of this land is federally owned when it comes time for land acquisition.

#58 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 09:02 AM

There is no population density on the line parallelling the highway and besides that, the highway is right there anyway

#59 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 10:02 AM

^that's the key! The only density on the proposed LRT route is downtown and Langford. Much of the route is currently low-density zoning with single family dwellings and parkland. Even if density increases along the lines, I can't see enough of it to justify stations. As per one example, would View Royal allow 3,000 new residents near the Helmcken/HWY 1 overpass and an LRT station? Probably not.

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


#60 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 19 December 2006 - 12:05 PM

All excellent reasons to go with the bridge proposal.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


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