![]() | BUILT The Jukebox Uses: condo, commercial Address: 1029 View Street Municipality: Victoria Region: Downtown Victoria Storeys: 9 Condo units: (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR, 1BR + den) Sales status: sold out / resales only |
Learn more about the Jukebox on Citified.ca

[Downtown Victoria] Jukebox | Condos; commercial | 9-storeys | Built - completed in 2019
#21
Posted 07 August 2010 - 05:50 PM
At least it's only going to be 6 stories tall...
#22
Posted 07 August 2010 - 06:31 PM
I remember reading your decision to buy here. I would have mentioned the lot behind, but I just assumed you knew.
As for the agent that helped you find the place, I wouldn't work with him/her again. He/she shouldn't have assumed anything. Likely the person just didn't care.
- Barrrister likes this
#23
Posted 07 August 2010 - 09:52 PM
Yeah I can say I'm not too impressed that the realtor didn't mention the development of the lot. I'm almost more surprised that I didn't notice it.
#24
Posted 31 August 2010 - 11:32 PM
#25
Posted 01 September 2010 - 06:48 AM
#26
Posted 01 September 2010 - 06:58 AM
Yes, this is extortion.

#27
Posted 01 September 2010 - 12:56 PM
If it conforms to existing zoning, then I suppose the developers need only to apply for a development permit?
#28
Posted 01 September 2010 - 08:29 PM

There will probably be some changes to the exterior, including a slight setback in the middle of the building (the City wants the building facade to be broken up so that it kind of looks like two buildings).
Does the proposal conform to existing zoning? I know that it is definitely *shorter* than what is allowed, I'm just not sure if the density exceeds the allowance for the lot.
If it conforms to existing zoning, then I suppose the developers need only to apply for a development permit?
The building is under the height and density limits. No rezonings or variances are being requested.
#29
Posted 01 September 2010 - 08:37 PM
#30
Posted 01 September 2010 - 08:40 PM
And those dark squiggly things hanging at the top of the blank west-facing wall: they are...? iTunes Gargoyles? (Just curious - being a sculptor and all...)
#31
Posted 01 September 2010 - 09:10 PM
The form/esthetics are much too solid and bulky. It's as if we're rejecting a west coast vibe for an Ontario/Quebec thing. Why so little glass?
Hard to tell what's going on with the ground floor. Tall windows & tall main entrance = good but what's with those little flights of stairs?
The curved bit is interesting but again it looks too solid. All in all it strikes me as a wider, cheaper version of this building:
http://maps.google.c...,82.27,,0,-0.94
(a building in Vancouver that was plenty wide and not particularly fancy to begin with)
Fatscraper rant:
So is the plan to turn View Street into one solid wall of incredibly long buildings? We still haven't learned anything from View Towers or the Tara Place Apartments?
You could build two Corazons on this site and space them out nicely from one another AND from Tara Place and STILL preserve decent view channels through that block to the towers across the street and beyond.
#32
Posted 01 September 2010 - 09:23 PM
There's a TON of BS in that rendering, if you ask me. Check out what I assume is the u/g garage entry on the right: it is TINY. We're supposed to believe it'll actually be that petite when built? Would be nice, but somehow I doubt it...Hard to tell what's going on with the ground floor. Tall windows & tall main entrance = good but what's with those little flights of stairs?
But then again, maybe it's not the entry to an u/g parking garage. From the scale, I'd say the dumpsters are behind that door.
#33
Posted 01 September 2010 - 09:28 PM
I just think it's a case of a building trying too hard. Sort of like how Castana tried too hard, or how this building in Langford tried too hard:

picture from http://www.suitehome...cent_Sales.html
#34
Posted 01 September 2010 - 10:10 PM
Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network
Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams
#35
Posted 01 September 2010 - 10:44 PM
We've talked about if before re: the proposal for the parking lot beside View Towers but I'll say it again: Harris Green needs lighter, glassier buildings, and a lot of them.
The older residential buildings around there are just so heavy. View Towers, Chelsea on View, the Manhattan, SVDP...
New buildings should be encouraged/required to mitigate the bunker esthetic. Where's the city's design panel when you need them?
Edit looking back in 2019: Legato ended up working out well as a lighter, glassier building in Harris Green. And the Jukebox itself ended up looking much more colourful and much more interesting than your typical wide/long apartment building. Which I suppose proves that bulk isn't necessarily bad if the architecture isn't bland.
Edited by aastra, 17 January 2019 - 06:28 PM.
#36
Posted 02 September 2010 - 08:15 AM
Also it's UNDER the current limits?? Build to the max, go over, or go home.
#37
Posted 02 September 2010 - 09:43 AM
Also, since that the building conforms to zoning/density regulations (thanks Rob for that information) we can assume that the developer probably won't ask for a variance re: parking requirements (one stall per suite).
#38
Posted 02 September 2010 - 09:57 AM
#39
Posted 02 September 2010 - 11:58 AM
1 unit per suite in a small-unit building with 200 units?? On this size lot that would be two and a half levels of underground parking, so it's doable just very expensive. With the small size of units in this building, expect 25% of your purchase cost going towards your parking.
Maybe they can buy the Radius or Silkwood hole on the cheap.
#40
Posted 02 September 2010 - 03:46 PM
There will probably be some changes to the exterior, including a slight setback in the middle of the building (the City wants the building facade to be broken up so that it kind of looks like two buildings).
But it already does look like two buildings. Why is the city so insistent on setbacks all the time? Didn't we learn our lesson with the Wave on Yates St?
Anyways, I like this building. What I don't like though is the inconsent streetscape around it caused by the Tara apartments and the Regent towers across the street. But the streetwall formed by this building is good.
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