Jump to content

      












CANCELLED
Speed and Frances, west tower
Uses: condo, commercial
Address: 606 Speed Avenue
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Urban core
Storeys: 12
Condo units: 83 (loft, 1BR, 2BR)
Sales status: in planning
Speed and Frances, west tower, is a 12-storey residential building with 83 condos, six townhomes and ground fl... (view full profile)
Learn more about Speed and Frances, west tower on Citified.ca
Photo

[Burnside/Gorge] Speed and Frances towers | condos; commercial | 12 & 12-storeys | Cancelled


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
255 replies to this topic

#121 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:28 AM

Victoria city does not appear attractive to developers.


It appears attractive to me given the number of projects under construction and proposed. I suppose one could argue that it would be more attractive with less regulation, but then you might end up with a city like Houston TX (where I previously resided) which has literally no zoning and council has little control over what is built where.

Council certainly does some mind-boggling things, and many times the bureaucracy does seem to water things down, but I do agree with Counc. Madoff that this will set the tone for the neighbourhood to some degree; however, I would argue that the tone has largely already been set by the box stores, shopping mall and KFC.

I think twin towers at this location would be a mistake as there will be no other discernable height variations around. I would prefer something along the lines of the 14 and 8 storey buildings as previously proposed.

#122 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:29 AM

The community voted unanimously in favour of the project WITH affordable housing.


As a resident of the area I disagree with this statement. Recommendation of the BGCA board does not constitute unanimous agreement within the community.

#123 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 30,128 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:41 AM

...I do agree with Counc. Madoff that this will set the tone for the neighbourhood to some degree; however, I would argue that the tone has largely already been set by the box stores, shopping mall and KFC...


EVERY new building sets the tone for the future. Has PM even seen what currently exists in this location? Even this bland twin towers proposal is leaps and bounds ahead of its neighbours. Council should insist on quality exterior finishing materials, good interaction with the street, and perhaps some interesting roof details, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water even before the project gets started.

#124 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:47 AM

EVERY new building sets the tone for the future.


But not every building is created equally. The mall certainly has had a bigger effect on the "tone" of this neighbourhood than the Starbucks.

This is not a residential neighbourhood at this point. I would argue this proposed development will have a big impact on potential future residential developments, therefore it is important that it be a solid benchmark rather than something we think needs to be improved upon.

#125 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 01:01 PM

As a resident of the area I disagree with this statement. Recommendation of the BGCA board does not constitute unanimous agreement within the community.

It was not a board vote.

Affordable units included in proposal near Mayfair

Suzanne Cole, executive director of the association, confirmed a general vote at the last meeting with the developer in December showed 10 votes for the project and none against.
"The general view is that people support the increase of density in the neighbourhood," Cole said. "It isn't without its concerns, but generally density is viewed as a positive thing."


#126 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 17,284 posts

Posted 21 September 2012 - 01:19 PM

...this proposed development will have a big impact on potential future residential developments, therefore it is important that it be a solid benchmark rather than something we think needs to be improved upon.


Indeed.

#127 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 09:33 AM

Community Meeting at the BGCA:

Community Meeting: Potential rezoning of 605-629 Speed Ave & 606-618 Frances Ave | Burnside Gorge Community Association

#128 2F2R

2F2R
  • Member
  • 641 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 09:53 AM

I bet Victoria will help out the far flug areas by turning this down ... I think it is a great proposal in a great spot ... but I don't get a vote ... I live in the far flung area of the Capital Region!

#129 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 30,128 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:24 AM

I bet Victoria will help out the far flug areas by turning this down...


I'd take that bet but since there is only one possible outcome it seems like money taken too easily.

#130 2F2R

2F2R
  • Member
  • 641 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 01:26 PM

I'm always reading complaints about urban sprawl here and this seems like the perfect project for Victoria to do something ... but, I fear I know whats coming with this project!

PS, to the developer, if Victoria turns you down, come out to the Colwood, Langford area ... I'm sure you would be welcomed ... ...

#131 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 05 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

There will be a meeting at the Burnside Gorge Community Centre to consider this on October 15th at 7pm

#132 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 03:54 PM

There will be a meeting at the Burnside Gorge Community Centre to consider this on October 15th at 7pm


This is tonight for anyone who is interested.

#133 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 04:48 PM

This is tonight for anyone who is interested.


Thanks for the heads-up. :thumbsup:

#134 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,316 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:08 PM

I would go if I wasn't in Prince George looking forward to hearing the community thoughts and concerns.

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#135 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 08:53 PM

Good, but not huge turnout. I think the facilitator said 16 residents? and there were 10 at the summer meeting?

I didn't take great notes, the following were discussed but are likely heavily weighted by my own interest/opinion:

Height and density still a big concern (12 stories, 36.8m) Out of place, doesn't fit with OCP, shadowing of existing buildings across Speed, too massive for a small street. Over OCP height and density for Village Center.

No affordable housing component. Market rate with no rental restrictions. BGCA said no need for further subsidized housing in the area, need a better mix.

Traffic and parking. Lack of on street currently, impact of making one side no parking, another 19 unit building already under construction. Residential pedestrian access from Speed Ave, vehicle from both Speed and Francis. Need to have Speed Ave better signed as no exit. Proposal to have city make Francis one way. Proposed parking is at the minimum city requires.

Owner is intending to keep title on one tower for rental at market rate. Concern was expressed over his stewardship of the existing houses and lack of trust that future rentals would be well run.

Water table, possibility of flooding

Lack of green space, play area

Commercial component not pedestrian friendly

Lack of common spaces

Support was divided at the straw vote.


Wasn't discussed, but I'm still wondering about:
building sustainability (LEED standard?)
transit alternatives (starter bus pass for residents, Car Share membership?)
Design is ugly and uninspired, could be better
Commercial doesn't look pedestrian friendly, more like strip mall.
Is there a good reason for such a building in this location? I think something on the scale of Brizo19 or Mayfair Walk would be better.

#136 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 08:57 PM

No affordable housing component. Market rate with no rental restrictions. BGCA said no need for further subsidized housing in the area, need a better mix.


Really? That seems odd.
I would have liked to have gone but was not able to get there. Now I'm regretting it.

#137 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 09:03 PM

For such a big building, the developer should be bringing much more to the table. Things like exemplary design and leading edge environmental sustainability. The affordable housing component is a no-brainer because they could sell the lowest floor to BC Housing and they rent it out at reduced rates and everybody wins. The flooding comment is valid as I recall this area is prone to flooding.

Thanks for attending and reporting back.
"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

#138 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 30,128 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 09:06 PM

...I didn't take great notes, the following were discussed but are likely heavily weighted by my own interest/opinion...


Wasn't anybody thinking about the children? :squint:

#139 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 09:23 PM

Really? That seems odd.
I would have liked to have gone but was not able to get there. Now I'm regretting it.


Yeah, apparently. I was surprised too.

I guess they are having difficulty filling the current subsidized units (presumably you need to meet income requirements?)

There is also the desire to have a good mix of housing types in the area, which I guess is currently weighted more towards lower income and rental???

#140 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 09:30 PM

Yeah, apparently. I was surprised too.

I guess they are having difficulty filling the current subsidized units (presumably you need to meet income requirements?)

There is also the desire to have a good mix of housing types in the area, which I guess is currently weighted more towards lower income and rental???


Ok now I'm really upset I couldn't get there!

There's a huge waiting list for subsidized housing! Years wait! I'm really shaking my head right now!
:o:mad::confused:

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