Jump to content

      













PROPOSED
926-932 Pandora Avenue
Uses: condo, commercial
Address: 926-932 Pandora Avenue
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 10
Condo units: 143 (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR, 3BR, townhome, 1BR + den, 2BR + den)
Sales status: in planning
926-932 Pandora Avenue is a proposal for a 10-storey condominium and townhome development with ground floor re... (view full profile)
Learn more about 926-932 Pandora Avenue on Citified.ca
Photo

[North Park] 926-932 Pandora Avenue | Condos, commercial | 10-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#61 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 22 November 2018 - 10:01 AM

Using that formula I am 5'9" (on a big hair day)

 

Put on a big enough hat and you could be 6'2"!

 

Back on topic, this application is currently being discussed at COTW. Livestream is here if you're interested. https://pub-victoria...72-e34e1b8ab34e


  • Nparker likes this

#62 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 22 November 2018 - 02:19 PM

Did this advance to a public hearing?



#63 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 22 November 2018 - 04:23 PM

Did this advance to a public hearing?

 

I didn't catch the end of the meeting, but from the discussion I assume this one went forward.

 

Most of the discussion was about where to direct the amenity contribution fee, not the actual development itself. There were some questions about who was going to operate the 10 below-market rental units, the stepping back of the building along Mason Street, logistics of garbage pickup across the bike lane, and whether or not the application should be sent to Heritage Advisory Panel due to proximity to other heritage assets (which it shouldn't, and I think that sentiment was quickly brushed away by other council members).



#64 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 22 November 2018 - 04:30 PM

...proximity to other heritage assets  :confused:

926.JPG



#65 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 22 November 2018 - 04:32 PM

^ Something I learned today: Relish is a heritage building.

 

There's also the churches and Conservatory in the neighbourhood.



#66 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 22 November 2018 - 04:33 PM

^ Something I learned today: Relish is a heritage building...

:whyme:



#67 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 22 November 2018 - 09:14 PM

Looks like it will go to a public hearing.

TC article on today’s discussion:

https://www.timescol...ring-1.23507244
  • Baro likes this

#68 Promontory Kingpin

Promontory Kingpin
  • Member
  • 94 posts

Posted 03 February 2019 - 03:50 PM

Any updates on the potential approval for this? Is this going to get off the ground soon?

#69 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 03 February 2019 - 04:57 PM

As per development tracker: https://tender.victo...Number=REZ00605

 

I still think this would make more sense as a rental project.



#70 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 04 February 2019 - 09:01 AM

Any updates on the potential approval for this? Is this going to get off the ground soon?

 

The developer is working on the "prior to's" required before a Public Hearing will be scheduled, as per the Council minutes: https://pub-victoria...ocumentId=29119



#71 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,069 posts

Posted 18 April 2019 - 06:12 PM

5A0C9AAC-A797-4ED3-A6F8-CB2AAACFFEE6.jpeg

Here’s an image from the April 4 revision. The project is going to Public Hearing on Thursday, April 25.
  • jonny likes this

#72 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 18 April 2019 - 07:55 PM

The North Park NIMBYs are probably going to eat this one alive. The fact that it's not a rental project will probably seal its fate regardless.



#73 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,670 posts

Posted 18 April 2019 - 08:01 PM

I am not so sure. This is a difficult part of town and any life there would be an improvement. 


  • jonny and Victoria Watcher like this

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#74 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 18 April 2019 - 09:52 PM

...This is a difficult part of town and any life there would be an improvement. 

I absolutely agree, but doing the right thing isn't really the modus operandi of the "influencers" in North Park or a deciding majority on council.



#75 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 18 April 2019 - 10:25 PM

I am not so sure. This is a difficult part of town and any life there would be an improvement. 

Couldn't agree more however the way this city has empowered and enabled our very own homeless 'cottage industry' I'm uncertain whether "improving" the Pandora area is really all that high on the back-room SJW agenda.

 

There are now lots of agencies and shelters - and <cough> jobs - all now geared to "homelessness" and I'm not convinced a nice looking, non-rental building like this fits the mold, not to mention image, desired by certain CoV elements, for this neighborhood. Would love to be proved wrong of course......



#76 threePs

threePs
  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 10:13 AM

The project is going to Public Hearing on Thursday, April 25.

 

Does anyone know how this one fared? Minutes are not yet up on the website. 



#77 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 30 April 2019 - 10:30 AM

Referred back to staff



#78 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,812 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 10:53 AM

Referred back to staff

Reasons?



#79 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,097 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 30 April 2019 - 11:02 AM

Reasons?

 

The minutes aren't up yet and I didn't feel like watching the entire archived stream, but from the snippets I saw there were outstanding concerns with the building massing and a perception that the community was not as involved in the process as they could have been. Part of the referral is for the developer to go back and do additional public consultation. What exactly they are expected to consult on, I do not know.

 

More airing of grievances.



#80 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 30 April 2019 - 11:11 AM

I am not sure who would want to buy a condo across the street from Our Place and ground zero for the homeless that use any green space to camp out on


  • jonny likes this

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