685 replies to this topic

[Downtownguy99]

Yes, I think so, we bought about 5 years ago, and I think they went condo a few years before that, but not exactly sure when, but I have heard stories about Devon running the building(s) as rentals since they were built. We have residents that have been here a long time.....

The units are aging a bit but nothing a renovation cant cure and they are big, they certainly don't build them like this anymore....

[VicHockeyFan]

Yes, I think so, we bought about 5 years ago, and I think they went condo a few years before that, but not exactly sure when, but I have heard stories about Devon running the building(s) as rentals since they were built. We have residents that have been here a long time.....

The units are aging a bit but nothing a renovation cant cure and they are big, they certainly don't build them like this anymore....

I lived in West, 5th floor. Our unit was owned by an individual we never met and managed by a small company at that time, that eventually became Hutton. We lived there right about the time they demolished the building that used to hold the Jungle Jim's restaurant. Now the CBC radio building.

[Downtownguy99]

Reminder to all those interested - the Community Meeting for this proposal is tonight at 6pm @ 3rd Floor - 915 Fort Street

[Mike K.]

Thanks for the update, Downtownguy!

[MarkoJ]

I went to this meeting tonight....lots of comments. Fred Rohani of Alpha Developments (building the Mondrian) was also there, he questioned the setbacks on the proposed building wedged in between the Mondrian and 1034 Johnson. Obviously this proposal is not good for the Mondrian. Residents from 1034 Johnson also voiced their concerns.

I am all pro-development downtown but the building on Johnson is a stretch in my opinion. Here are some photos I snapped with my phone...













View from my friend's unit...

[G-Man]

Yeah they have to lose the Johnson building.That said I love the Pandora one. It is very cool! I like the ground floor interaction and that inset section on the second or mezzanine section.

[VicHockeyFan]

Yeah they have to lose the Johnson building.That said I love the Pandora one. It is very cool! I like the ground floor interaction and that inset section on the second or mezzanine section.

Why though? Because the Mondrian got there first? Is it first-come-first-to-get-tall-buildings?[/I]

What I'm saying is, if this new proposal was built first, would you then say no to Mondrian?

I'm playing devil's advocate here a bit, but I'm not sure what is next door first should decide what you can do with your own property.

[G-Man]

It is an interesting question if this skinny building was already there, certainly a tall building could go up on the Mondrian site but it would have had to be narrower and taller than what is there now.

Of course those that were involved in the drive to get the Falls built will remember the big legal issues where the owner of the budget lot to the East of the Falls basically made this exact argument saying that because the Falls was built so close to the lot line and because they had not built anything yet that it was stealing their density.

[Holden West]

Basically it's first come first served. The City now has strict rules about distances between buildings in order to avoid the problems of living areas facing each other.

I always assumed height would go down toward the park, in other words, an ideal building on that site would be about half the height of Mondrian. Now it looks like they're going for a Central Park style, which means a tall building right up against the park.

I really like the look of those buildings. Very modern. I'm just not sure the massing fits comfortably. Who's the architect?

[jklymak]

I personally think the massing is nuts for both buildings. I'll be pretty mad if city hall approves this. There has to be some space between bigger buildings like this. If that means the city adopts some sort of "sky rights" compensation for neighbours, so much the better; I don't think "first-come-first-served" is particularly fair either. But this would just make me never want to buy a condo in DT Victoria if things are going to be shoehorned together like this.

[SamCB]

I think the slenderness of the Johnson building looks good! It is sandwiched pretty close in there, which sucks for whoever just bought the Mondrian units facing it, but I'm ok with it. It'd be nice to see that area looking more developed and with more people living there. Right now it has a real no man's land feel to it.

Thanks for all the pics, Marko!

[aastra]

I personally think the massing is nuts for both buildings.

I'm with you on this. It's not as if there's some shortage of good examples re: massing in tight spaces. Look at Chard's buildings, look at the Y-lot...

This idea that the last one to build is the one who should get the daylight and the views is nuts. It's so easy to do increased density in a more appealing and comfortable way.

Remember how Parc Residences was criticized by some people for resembling a fortress? So now we're thinking of putting a slightly larger version of Parc Residences at Pandora and Cook, sandwiched up against other buildings?

Also, the ground floor on the Johnson St. building would seem to be very short, as depicted in that image.

[jklymak]

Right now it has a real no man's land feel to it.

I'd argue that the new Mondrian will help with that. And developing the Mazda lot to the South.

[LJ]

I personally think the massing is nuts for both buildings. I'll be pretty mad if city hall approves this. There has to be some space between bigger buildings like this. If that means the city adopts some sort of "sky rights" compensation for neighbours, so much the better; I don't think "first-come-first-served" is particularly fair either. But this would just make me never want to buy a condo in DT Victoria if things are going to be shoehorned together like this.

Well you could always buy at Capital City Centre, I'm pretty sure your view wont be impacted there for the rest of your life.

[G-Man]

I'd argue that the new Mondrian will help with that. And developing the Mazda lot to the South.

What is your suggestion for the development of these two lots? If you were the developer how would you proceed?

[jklymak]

^ I think they could put something in on the Pandora side that went 4 stories or so. Otherwise, with the current system, I'm afraid the are SOL. If they were eager to develop, they should have beat the Mondrian to it.

[jklymak]

Well you could always buy at Capital City Centre, I'm pretty sure your view wont be impacted there for the rest of your life.

Views being impacted is one thing; I wouldn't mind if the lot across the way at the Mazda dealership was nicely developer. Views encompassing your neighbour's window 30' away are another case altogether.

[MarkoJ]

I don't think this is just a view issue...a lot of the units at 1034 Johnson and Mondrian would lose a lot of direct sunlight.

[G-Man]

^ I think they could put something in on the Pandora side that went 4 stories or so. Otherwise, with the current system, I'm afraid the are SOL. If they were eager to develop, they should have beat the Mondrian to it.

I don't think they are SOL under the current system. Perhaps on the Johnson part but on the rest it seems to fall right in line with the guidelines. I would like to see the justification for any decision to say the Pandora building cannot be built based on the new downtown guidelines. Of course the city will have to agree to their density bonus plan so they can get up to the 5.5:1 FSR.

Also this lot is not being used the Mazda lot is so it would make sense for this to be developed before the Mazda lot is.

[aastra]

The thing that bugs me about the Pandora building is that it's tall (13 stories, which is taller than allowed there, right?) but it's also very wide, filling out the entire lot. What's the justification for that? It's a perfect example of how a slimmer 14- or 15-story building would present a much better situation for all concerned. The podium could still fill out the lot at 2 or 3 stories, but the tower could be set back from Cook Street so as to not crowd the units on the northeast corner of the Mondrian, and also to take advantage of the gap along Johnson Street (which I'm suggesting could/should be left empty as some sort of semi-public space, or otherwise filled in with 3 or 4 stories at most).

Failing that, then maybe 6 or 7 stories on the Pandora side, filling out the entire lot, but with a decent setback on the top floor. Still not a good situation for the lower units in the neighbouring buildings, but folks in the higher units shouldn't have too much of a problem with something like that.

We've talked about this sort of thing before. For me it all comes down to this: there's a reasonable expectation of crowding and light/view issues on lower floors. If crowding and light/view issues are a big deal on higher floors (above the fifth or sixth floor, I'll say) then it indicates some significant problems with the massing of the affected buildings.