Jump to content

      













APPROVED
Rhodo
Use: townhome
Address: 1712-1720 Fairfield Road
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Urban core
Sales status: in planning
Fairfield Green is a proposal to build 20-units of townhomes in the 1700-block of Fairfield Road in the City o... (view full profile)
Learn more about Rhodo on Citified.ca
Photo

[Fairfield] | Rhodo | Townhomes | Approved


  • Please log in to reply
109 replies to this topic

#21 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 202 posts

Posted 09 August 2017 - 03:59 PM

MarkoJ: yes, the chargers are varied but the wiring design is such that they will be tied to assigned stalls and the perspective TH unit for direct billing.

#22 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,770 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 09 August 2017 - 06:01 PM

That's a good idea.  Would is also make sense to have that conduit go back so that the home might have a wall indicator of the charge too?  So you look on your wall inside your home and see that the car is charging and is 85% full etc.

 

No need as your app tells you how charged your car is.  It comes down to two basic concepts IMO; 220v power to the stall on stall a wall charger and the power consumption being tied to the unit hydro metering. 


Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#23 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:05 PM

A presentation on this project will be made at the Fairfield Gonzales Community Association Land Use Committee (CALUC) this Thursday (August 17) at 7 pm.  The community centre is located on Fairfield Road adjacent to Sir James Douglas elementary school (Moss is the nearest cross street).



#24 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 202 posts

Posted 17 August 2017 - 08:29 AM

^ That is correct, tonight is our final CALUC meeting (#3) for the townhouse project at 712/20 Fairfield Road. It would be great if there are some interested citizens/supporters out there that want to learn more about the project. 



#25 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 08:07 AM

A formal application for this development's rezoning has been filed with the city.



#26 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 202 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 01:02 PM

^

http://aryze.ca/property/rhodo/

 

Project details can be found here, click the "download site plan" button for a full project rationale document. We are really excited about this project and hope to bring more ground oriented projects like this to market soon.

 

:banana:


Edited by PPPdev, 25 October 2017 - 01:03 PM.

  • VicHockeyFan and Kapten Kapsell like this

#27 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 02:50 PM

Mods:  Let's rename the thread to the new name for the development:  Rhodo.

 

Thanks for the link PPPDev.

 

I assume it's too early to inquire about pricing...


  • Mike K. likes this

#28 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,307 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 03:19 PM

...the new name for the development:  Rhodo...

:blink:



#29 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,770 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 26 October 2017 - 12:11 PM

^

http://aryze.ca/property/rhodo/

 

Project details can be found here, click the "download site plan" button for a full project rationale document. We are really excited about this project and hope to bring more ground oriented projects like this to market soon.

 

:banana:

 

Nice drone work!


Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#30 grantpalin

grantpalin
  • Member
  • 528 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 01:41 PM

Nicely put-together PDF on that website. Covers sizing, distances, shadows, parking, and accessibility. It looks like a good location to add some density without significantly impacting the neighbourhood (does that mean the NIMBY brigade will be out for it?).



#31 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,342 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 26 October 2017 - 02:50 PM

Nicely put-together PDF on that website. Covers sizing, distances, shadows, parking, and accessibility. It looks like a good location to add some density without significantly impacting the neighbourhood (does that mean the NIMBY brigade will be out for it?).

 

NIMBY has lost its glamour. I prefer "CAVE People" (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) and "BANANAs" (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).  :banana:



#32 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,307 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:10 PM

...I prefer "CAVE People" (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) and "BANANAs" (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).  :banana:

Maybe it's our weather, but I think Victoria has more BANANAs per capita than just about any place on earth.


  • Jackerbie likes this

#33 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,342 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:21 PM

Maybe it's our weather, but I think Victoria has more BANANAs per capita than just about any place on earth.

 

Bananas do well in suburban environments, the lower the density, the better


  • Kapten Kapsell likes this

#34 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:42 PM

Wikipedia says we are the 7th densist city in Canada. We must have agreed to a few things in our back yard.
<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>

#35 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 202 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 08:47 AM

We've had great feedback to date. We of course have those in the community that want no change but to retain the qualities they love about their neighbourhood, some times you have to allow growth to retain those very aspects.


  • Kapten Kapsell likes this

#36 KBRO

KBRO
  • Member
  • 1 posts

Posted 04 May 2018 - 06:01 PM

Now, I have lived in Gonzales for a very long time, and contrary to the "We of course have those in the community that want no change but to retain the qualities they love about their neighbourhood" argument you use, change is fine, but...

This is easily one of the ugliest developments I've ever run into, that has absolutely nothing in common with any properties in Gonzales whether close to it, or further out.

These are "box buildings" that represent the cheapest possible design and building costs, clearly meant to generate the highest return for the developer while giving the least ascetic options for the neighbours and neighbourhood.

Why were box buildings" decided that the developer seems to say blend in with the existing architecture of the neighbouring properties, when in reality, their design is entirely at odds with any properties within Gonzales?

I would question the developers statements that they have received "great feedback" as the neighbours I have spoken to have expressed serious questions regarding the design in its entirety. It contains nothing that could be considered "Gonzales" in look (changing the siding to look more driftwood colour doesn't actually change the look of the project to be "Gonzales").

Directly across the street is an older apartment complex, and while being of a different layout and age, the proposed development fails to blend into those existing buildings in any form. 

This is a development that is using the cheapest designs (boxes with vertical exterior walls are much cheaper to build than an ascetically appropriate exterior style) and after looking at the layouts of the units, these will not be "affordable" properties for people entering into property ownership, and offer zero rental opportunities for young people or families who are looking to move to Gonzales.

Seventeen units of two to four bedrooms each, with what appears to be off street parking for 6-8 vehicles at most, resulting with 8-9 units having to park on street. Now, as they are 2-4 bedrooms, it can be easily concluded there will be some 45 people living there, with 30 plus adults, and as most work elsewhere, most of those 30 will have a car, leaving close to 15 plus cars parking on Fairfield Road as there is no other option.

Putting it bluntly, there isn't available parking for an additional 15 cars on Fairfield Road on a permanent basis (there will be more vehicles as those extra bedrooms will also have young drivers as well or soon).

So no, people aren't against change, people want something that blends into the neighbourhood (box's don't blend), and adding this level of extra parking to an area that is notoriously difficult for parking (Fairfield Plaza employees already use every available space to park for work) simply isn't a design that respects the neighbourhood or neighbours.

This is simply a development that is intended to generate the higher profit for the developer (if it weren't, the design would have fewer units and include at least one off street parking space for each owner, but that doesn't generate the same profit return).

No, people don't mind change, what they object to is a developer who puts profit above respect for the existing residents of Gonzales.



#37 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 05 May 2018 - 01:44 PM

Your statement about parking is incorrect. Per the developer’swebsite:

“The project concept is composed of six 2-bedroom houses, two 4-bedroom townhouses and nine 3-bedroom townhouses. We've hidden cars and bicycles in a single storey of underground parking, providing dedicated storage for 22 cars and 41 bicycles.” That means that there will 17 units (total) and 22 parking stalls. And I imagine that the majority of the families/individuals residing in this development will have just one vehicle as is standard/common amongst residents of strata properties.

#38 SamCB

SamCB
  • Member
  • 637 posts
  • Locationvictoria

Posted 05 May 2018 - 01:52 PM

Your argument is basically that you don't like a modern aesthetic (ascetic is a different word), and you assume all buildings should have a similar style in Gonzalez?

You assume the developer made these homes a boxy style to maximize profits. Yet you think it looks ugly.... how would an "ugly" project maximize profits?

I'll take 100 of these boxy modern units over post war stucco bungalows any day.
  • Nparker and jonny like this

#39 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 05 May 2018 - 02:06 PM

This is a development that is using the cheapest designs (boxes with vertical exterior walls are much cheaper to build than an ascetically appropriate exterior style) and after looking at the layouts of the units, these will not be "affordable" properties for people entering into property ownership, and offer zero rental opportunities for young people or families who are looking to move to Gonzales.

 

 

Appropriate to who?

 

I'm sure the developer is not using the cheapest possible exterior finishing, that would be common vinyl siding.

 

If you want cheaper housing (rental opportunities for young people), it'll need to be denser, you do understand land values in Gonzales, right?   So it'll need many more units.  You will also oppose that.

 

And indeed, not sure what every building in Gonzales should have a similar design, most new houses there do not look like 40s and 50s homes.


  • Nparker likes this
<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>

#40 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,706 posts

Posted 05 May 2018 - 05:06 PM

I'm not crazy about it but for me it all comes down to how it looks. It seems dark and rather stark and featureless. I don't have any insight into the greed of the developer and I don't think I would care even if I did.

 

I've said it many times but if people want more interesting buildings -- different forms, different styles, different massing, different materials, different colours -- then they should demand it. For some reason when we open our mouths to complain, all that comes out is "too much / too big / too tall / too greedy".

 

Do we have any photo images of the cladding that they're going to use? Sometimes renderings really don't get the visual effect across.



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