Jump to content

      













Photo

[Downtown Victoria] 950 Fort Street | Office; commercial | 4-storeys | Canceled in 2017


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,535 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 12:52 PM

Further to the photo posted by VHF of Daisy Chain Florist's moving soon letter...

 

950-Fort-Street-development-de-Hoog-Kierulf.jpg

 

Four-storey office and retail development planned for the 900-block of Fort Street

http://victoria.citi...of-fort-street/

 

Big plans are in the works for a small property at 950 Fort Street in downtown Victoria’s Harris Green district, according to land owner de Hoog & Kierulf Architects.

 

A letter posted to the storefront window by the existing single-storey building’s sole tenant, Daisy Chain Florists, informs customers that the site is envisioned to become a four-storey multi-use building with retail spaces on the ground floor and office space above.

 

de Hoog & Keirulf purchased the site earlier this year with the intent of redeveloping the land into a new head office. The firm’s existing location is situated immediately across the street. [Full article]


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2 Hotel Mike

Hotel Mike

    Hotel Mike

  • Member
  • 1,784 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 02:43 PM

No heritage issues with the old house?


Don't be so sure.:cool:

#3 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,268 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 02:51 PM

Could they move the old house to a new location?


Edited by Kapten Kapsell, 26 September 2016 - 02:52 PM.


#4 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 02:53 PM

...plans call for the demolition of the existing building to make way for a multi-storey commercial development, and that the project does not include any neighbouring properties...

http://victoria.citi...of-fort-street/

It's a terribly wasted opportunity not to acquire the adjoining property to the west and develop something of more substance over both lots.

Capture.JPG



#5 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,957 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 03:32 PM

aastra wonders yet again why the properties that have a smidgen of character or that are quirky or interesting one way or another are the ones that seem to come up for redevelopment.* Maybe there's no sport in going after the empty lots, parking lots, & eyesores?

 

*If I mention it too many more times we might want to spin off a new thread.


  • Rob Randall likes this

#6 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,535 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 03:48 PM

My sense here is the small size of the lot and the condition of the existing structure made financial sense for an acquisition. Surface parking lots are often nicely cash positive, which drives up the price, are often quite large, which drives up the price, and have built-in costs for attainable future densities, which also drives up the price.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#7 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 06:56 PM

Nooo don't get rid of that ridiculous tudor castle.


"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#8 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 26 September 2016 - 07:03 PM

Nooo don't get rid of that ridiculous tudor castle.

You're in luck - it's staying!  :whyme:



#9 johnk

johnk
  • Member
  • 1,598 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:00 AM

Only four floors? That should sail through.

#10 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 07:09 AM

Is it any wonder that every development proposal in this city gets met with opposition? The negative spin by the local media starts even before any formal plans are made

tc.JPG

Why not something more positive like "Fort Street Property Poised for Revitalization" or "New Opportunity Coming to Historic Block". No, a word like "demolished" is deliberately chosen to suggest that any proposal for this site will be less welcome that what currently exists. This sort of slant doesn't need to be perpetuated by our daily newspaper; there are enough anti-progress locals who will come to this conclusion all on their own.

http://www.timescolo...ished-1.2352954



#11 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,957 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 09:11 AM

Any way you slice it, an 1895 house on Fort Street is going to be demolished. It's true. It's a fact. In the year 2016 I'm actually surprised that this would be their headline. The way things have been going recently I thought that whole "Victoria cares about heritage and history" thing had been tossed in the dumpster. I was expecting quotes from the usual suspects about how the house is not particularly special.



#12 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 09:39 AM

.... I was expecting quotes from the usual suspects about how the house is not particularly special.

Well it isn't. 



#13 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,957 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 09:43 AM

Are you working for the Hallmark Society now?



#14 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 09:57 AM

Are you working for the Hallmark Society now?

Me? Not in the least, but there is simply nothing about this particular structure that is worth preserving in the heart of the downtown business district. It would be the equivalent of saying - in 50 years time or so - that we need to save every example of 1970s suburban tract housing.

 

If this building is such an important piece of unique heritage, I am sure the new owners of the property wouldn't mind having someone buy it and move it to a more appropriate location at their own expense. Based on the description in the T-C article of the current condition of the building I doubt very much it would survive, but that would be the purchaser's concern.

 

I still hope a consolidation of lots will take place here before any significant proposals are presented to the city.



#15 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 12:01 PM

Councillor Madoff on CFAX around 2:30 today on this file.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#16 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,671 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 12:03 PM

Councillor Madoff on CFAX around 2:30 today on this file.

Gee, I wonder what she'll have to say?



#17 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,957 posts

Posted 29 September 2016 - 12:47 PM

My bet would be:

 

unfortunate, but

no compelling reasons to preserve it, and

developer will be sensitive to this and that

 

But maybe she'll surprise me.

 

Look, obviously this house is going to go eventually (we're all familiar with Victoria's track record re: preservation) and I suspect all of the small buildings on Fort Street will one day be the exception rather than the rule. But that's precisely why the old houses and some of the other little buildings are special. Because they're still standing on a major downtown street in the year 2016, and that downtown street has a unique village-style feel because of them.



#18 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,268 posts

Posted 22 March 2017 - 12:45 PM

Any updates on this project?



#19 Citified.ca

Citified.ca
  • Administrator
  • 1,598 posts
  • LocationVictoria, BC

Posted 20 October 2017 - 10:01 AM

This project is now canceled.

 

Redevelopment plans for historic Fort Street building nixed

http://victoria.citi...building-nixed/


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.

#20 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,489 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 22 August 2019 - 10:13 AM

Building Permit was issued on Tuesday for interior and exterior renovations. No idea who the tenant is at this point.



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