425 replies to this topic

[johnk2]

Looks like a supersize skateboard park

[JohnsonStBridge]

^ Well that secures Loveday's support.

[Mike K.]

Has any thought been given to reflection issues that could affect the school building? The walkie talkie tower in London melted car parts on the street below when it was first built. A system of panels had to be installed over the curved glass facade to reduce glare and focused heat: https://www.bbc.com/...london-23930675

[aastra]

That proposal is for real? Why does it have to be goofy-tastic? Why do people always want to overthink this stuff in Victoria?

[aastra]

Victorians, I ask you: Why oh why can't new development simply be a contemporary extension of the established neighbourhood flavour?

 

New development doesn't need to involve a wipe-out, nor does it need to involve a radical reinterpretation.

Edited by aastra, 01 December 2020 - 02:16 PM.

[aastra]

It's like a self-fulfilling controversy. You can't do anything in a straightforward manner that celebrates what already exists, because if you did there would be no reason to flip out.

[aastra]

 

You can't do anything in a straightforward manner that celebrates what already exists, because if you did there would be no reason to flip out.

 

I should note, some people made an exception and flipped out anyway about the more straightforward proposals for Northern Junk.

[Victoria Watcher]

Historic Esquimalt home at risk of demolition

 

Esquimalt council is wrestling with whether to allow a developer to tear down one of the township’s oldest homes.

 

 

 

Large and Co. has applied to demolish 128-year-old Tyn-y-Coed, a two-storey home at 820 Dunsmuir Rd. built by Hans Price, a clerk at the naval dockyard who named the home after his parents’ place in England, says a report to council. The developer wants to rezone the property and put up townhouses.

 

https://www.timescol...tion-1.24259784

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 25 December 2020 - 05:28 AM.

[Rob Randall]

I'm really burning with anticipation to see what happens here.

[Victoria Watcher]

yes. what in blazes will all parties do now?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 25 December 2020 - 06:51 AM.

[Tom Braybrook]

it will be a disgrace to see this building go!

[Tom Braybrook]

esquimalt could use some of the millions they banked in poop money to save it!

[aastra]

 

We looked at moving the home to a different site to allow for more density on Dunsmuir, which would have funded the restoration, but in the end, staff declined this plan.

 

Every time this happens I think, just imagine if Victoria had a program to incentivize relocation of these houses within Victoria and restore them. It would have been the ultimate community amenity program re: new developments.

 

 

“We know that we have some very beautiful heritage buildings and we really have to come to grips with — are there ways that we can help others preserve those?”

“It isn’t something that we have fully considered to the point of giving tax breaks or those sorts of things, but maybe that’s an option.”

 

Yeah, maybe. But then again, it's only the year 2021. Full consideration sounds like a bother. Why rush into it? Those dilapidated 130-year-old houses are only 130 years old. It would make more sense to wait until they're 150 years old, you think?

 

Other cities say, "better late than never." Victoria says "better never than ever."

Edited by aastra, 25 December 2020 - 09:50 PM.

[Redd42]

I'm really burning with anticipation to see what happens here.

 

Funny - someone posted on the Oak Bay Facebook group a day or so ago, urging members to vote against the proposal for the property at Foul Bay and Quamichan. Over development, "vehicle load"....sigh. Most replies to that post said they were in favour of the development. Think the original poster got the opposite result of what they were looking for. Most wouldn't never have known we could vote on it.

 

I'm assuming you are referring to the fact that the old house that was there burnt down mysteriously about 5 years ago, when it was owned by Large. 

 

I'm really tired of looking at the construction fence. 

 

This is where you can vote BTW:

 

https://engage.victo...6EW-xMyzScIU7Nk

[Redd42]

Oh boy - folks in the neighbourhood who oppose the development have actually registered the address as a domain name. Uh interesting reading:

 

https://www.902foulbay.ca/

[Redd42]

And funny thing - Redfern St has 3 lane way houses. There are a bunch of properties that face on Cowichan but run right through to Redfern, close to the new proposed development. I wonder what opposition those folks got?

[Redd42]

Yet more:

 

https://ca.gofundme....igation-defence

[Rob Randall]

I'm assuming you are referring to the fact that the old house that was there burnt down mysteriously about 5 years ago, when it was owned by Large. 

 

Certainly not, I was merely using a common phrase and any alternate inference is co-incidental and unintended.

[rmpeers]

Capital Daily has an article on 902 Foul Bay. All I've gleaned so far is that if you oppose the proposed development you might be racist.

[JohnsonStBridge]

No details at this point but a motion but forward to Thursday's Committee of the Whole meeting would indicate there is life left in the previously considered for demolition Bank St School:

 

Bank Street School Building - Proposed Partnership Referred from the May 6 Closed Council Meeting "That Council requests that staff engage School District 61, to propose a partnership and offer municipal financial assistance to restore the Bank Street School building (1623-1625 Bank Street) for educational and community use."