35 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

I'm not sure if we have anything going on this.  Esquimalt rejected something last night, perhaps one or two 10-floor towers, near West Bay.  Another application is expected.

 

EDIT:   http://www.vicnews.c.../119804034.html

 

EDIT:  http://www.timescolo...s-anchor-1.5017

[aastra]

I think I mentioned this once or twice in the "projects with no thread" thread.

 

Edit: Indeed I did. Nobody replied, which left me feeling sad and hurt, I'm sure.

 

 

Proposed development sparks look at changes to Esquimalt's view of West Bay
 

 

Brown developed a set of draft guidelines in recent months in response to a development proposal for a 10-storey residential tower with ground-floor commercial space.

 

...(the proposal) has generated outrage from neighbouring business owners and residents, who say it does not fit in with the commercial marine village feel of the neighbourhood...

 

"Not only is it a major departure, it is actually a threat to what exists here,"

 

http://www.vicnews.c.../161470845.html

 

******

 

 

West Bay Investments has gone to the municipality with a proposal to erect a 10-storey building — commercial on the ground floor, residential above that — on the Swallowed Anchor property and an adjacent parking lot. That would require rezoning and a development permit from Esquimalt, whose official community plan, the same one that speaks of West Bay as a marine hub, says council may consider a building as high as 12 storeys...

Read more: http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz234MADpCW

Comment:
 

The push now is to convince council that two ten storey towers casting shade on this amazing natural setting would have such a negative impact that it would ultimately be the demise of this gem known as West Bay...

Read more: http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz234NfU4C8

Edited by aastra, 24 June 2014 - 10:24 AM.

[aastra]

I'd say a couple of nice midrise buildings with some cafe space would be a terrific fit over there. I don't understand what the fuss is about.

[Nparker]

I'd say a couple of nice midrise buildings with some cafe space would be a terrific fit over there. I don't understand what the fuss is about.

That's easy to answer. This is greater Victoria and any building over 4 floors is considered a skyscraper. As we all know the construction of such monstrous buildings are an afront to the gods and a sure sign of the apocalypse. I am sure Dubai has only mere hours left before the hand of God or Allah smites the city back into the sand for the erection of its towering abominations. I sleep better at night knowing that the good citizens of Victoria have my best interest at heart by protecting me from such devine retribution.

[aastra]

Sure, but the skyscrapers over at Fisherman's Wharf and Dockside Green and the Selkirk waterfront seem to have worked out okay. I just wonder how someone could enjoy the scene at Fisherman's Wharf but get chills at the thought of something vaguely similar happening on the other side. Then again, I suppose we shouldn't get complacent because we don't know what the precise tipping point is re: angering the deities.

[Mike K.]

It's not like there are 9-storey buildings on a big rise overlooking the entire neighborhood. Had there been a precedent set I could understand approval but in this case...

[VicHockeyFan]

Some info here:   https://www.facebook...entsassociation

 

 

[amor de cosmos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzvxZ5LFc2w

 

The model looks way out of proportion at 1:10. I had trouble figuring out which street was which but I don't think it makes much difference though.

[VicHockeyFan]

In the video clip, developer heresay says the shadows move quickly, resident says shadows only move at one speed.   What's the truth?

 

I believe the EDGE of the shadows shadows of taller buildings do move quicker than short buildings.

 

Consider the shadow movement of a building just 2 inches tall, compared to 200 feet tall.  In all of the daylight hours the 2-inch building's shadow only moves like 1 or 2 inches, that's slow.  2 inches per day.  But the 200-foot building, that shadow travels hundreds of feet per day.  Fast.

 

But at the end of the day, it takes 12 hours or 16 hours or whatever, for the shadow to move from the one side of the respective building, to the other.

 

Then again, at absolute sundown, isn't EVERY shadow technically just short, or "approaching" infinity in length?  So then technically, the approaching infinity far end of it, is moving faster than light speed across objects, it's actually moving at a rate of "approaching infinity" miles per hour.  Or maybe this is only true for a flat earth.

[lanforod]

That image is also worst case scenario only. Shortest day of the year and it has to be sunny...

[D.L.]

Plus factor in all of the other shadows there would be. Most of that image would be a shadow caused by other buildings. Also, the only time of the year any parks would be in the shade of these towers is in the winter.

 

 

[AllseeingEye]

Good grief...."shadow analysis?" I'm in Calgary and Edmonton for business routinely. I have never heard the term in either city, ever. I'm certain its probably a legitimate architectural concept however usually applied to, ahem, actually tall buildings. I lived in Vancouver twice in a period spanning the late 80's through to 2000, and never ever heard the term in a region that has a couple of hundred real "towers"; and I never did until I moved back to Victoria in 2000. I could understand it if we're talking 30 stories proposed right on the edge of a subdivision, but for a 10 storey structure that isn't even worthy of the term 'tower'.....really?

We sort of accidentally (re)-discovered the old-new Princess Mary restaurant about 18 months ago in West Bay and I found the area to be somewhat dull, architecturally drab and generally not very interesting aside from the water & boating activity in the marina proper. IMO something like this development could do nothing except improve the atmosphere, inject some life and of course provide more services for local residents. However as we know some as yet undefined deity would probably wreak its almighty vengeance on all of us in the event we had the temerity to build anything higher than four floors. Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

[amor de cosmos]

What did the neighbours think of the nearby Swallows Landing buildings when they were proposed. They're both 9 stories & right there on the north side of the harbour. Not that I'm gung-ho for this current project I'm just wondering if the neighbours made such an issue of that building at the time. Swallows Landing has 102 units & I think these marina towers will have something like 85. There are also some older apartment buildings on the north side of the harbour.

Edited by amor de cosmos, 25 June 2014 - 09:25 AM.

[aastra]

I'm very unimpressed by the design and also by the massing. What's the point of having two separate buildings if the gap between them is so narrow and the orientation is such that they effectively merge into a widescraper anyway?

 

Slim the buildings down a bit, add some windows, set back the top floor(s), and stagger the heights a bit more.

[Coreyburger]

Good grief...."shadow analysis?" I'm in Calgary and Edmonton for business routinely. I have never heard the term in either city, ever. I'm certain its probably a legitimate architectural concept however usually applied to, ahem, actually tall buildings. I lived in Vancouver twice in a period spanning the late 80's through to 2000, and never ever heard the term in a region that has a couple of hundred real "towers"; and I never did until I moved back to Victoria in 2000. I could understand it if we're talking 30 stories proposed right on the edge of a subdivision, but for a 10 storey structure that isn't even worthy of the term 'tower'.....really?

 

Shadow analysis is very common, even for single family houses.

[Mike K.]

Could this be another rezoning flip? Sure looks like one.

[amor de cosmos]

I'm very unimpressed by the design and also by the massing. What's the point of having two separate buildings if the gap between them is so narrow and the orientation is such that they effectively merge into a widescraper anyway?
 
Slim the buildings down a bit, add some windows, set back the top floor(s), and stagger the heights a bit more.

Maybe two towers aren't even necessary. Since the project seems to take up that whole triangular block why not 4 stories along the length of Lyall across from the barracks and the tower on the northern corner, across from the marina? I also think a setback would make sense, since it would lighten the look of the building. I think it would be possible to design it in such a way that its 10 stories would only be apparent from a distance & when standing right next to it it might only seem like 6 or something. People get so hung up on just the number of stories without even considering what they look like. Or if there are still two towers but of different heights keep the shorter one on the Lyall side.

[SamCB]

A friend of mine was very active in organizing the opposition to this project. He told me most of his neighbours would be in favour of 3-5 storeys with mixed use. They would welcome it in fact.
ASE, google "right to light" - shadow analysis legitimate. You and I both would be very interested in the effects of this tall building on received sunlight if our homes and yards had existed there for 100 years in the present condition.

[amor de cosmos]

if the tower were on this corner at gore & head it would create a cool flatiron-type view at the south end of this marina area, instantly making this the coolest corner in town (the gore-head or head-gore corner):
http://goo.gl/maps/VALWB

(didn't anyone else notice that?)

There's already that apartment building on one side & the marina on the other so a tower there doesn't seem way out of line. That's why I think 4 stories along Lyall makes more sense with the lower-density housing on the base across the street.

[Mike K.]

If you're across the street a five storey building will impact you no less than a 10-storey building. In fact even three properties away you'll still be impacted.

See, the issue here is this location makes sense when building highrise and high density. Anyone who has moved into that hood in recent years should have taken this into account, particularly ever since Swallows Landing was built.