Jump to content

      













PROPOSED
Pacific House
Uses: condo, commercial
Address: 899 Esquimalt Road
Municipality: Esquimalt
Region: Urban core
Storeys: 15
Condo units: 54 (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR, townhome, 1BR + den, 2BR + den)
Sales status: in planning
Pacific House is a proposal for a mixed-use condominium and ground floor commercial tower along Esquimalt Road... (view full profile)
Learn more about Pacific House on Citified.ca
Photo

[Esquimalt] Pacific House | 15-storeys | Condos, commercial | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 48,631 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 08:29 AM

Ah, gotcha.


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


#62 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 3,217 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 08:32 AM

West Bay neighborhood association which is apparently a thing had mobilized against it, writing letters and speaking against it and such

#63 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,049 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 08:36 AM

I've said it before and I am sure I will say it again, but neighbourhood associations often create as much harm as good to an area. Look no further than how the DRA attacked the Northern Junk proposal(s) and of course the seemingly eternal battles raged by the NPNA.



#64 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,049 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:08 PM

The Township of Esquimalt has asked the developers behind a proposed 12-storey building to seek out more public input before the project is approved. During council on Monday evening, council heard from representatives of Lexi Development, which proposed a 12-storey project at 899 Esquimalt Rd., hoping a height variance could be granted if they prioritize the first two-floors as a 24/7 urgent primary care clinic...Ultimately council voted to put the process on hold until Lexi conducted further consultation with the public. Council also voted, however, to encourage Lexi to demolish the current building on site as soon as possible...


https://www.vicnews....opment-on-hold/

So the developer is being encouraged to incur demolition costs with no guarantee that Esquimalt will grant the height variance. Nice way to do business E-town. 



#65 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 48,631 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:10 PM

Doesn’t a demolished building generate less tax dollars for the municipality?

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


#66 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,049 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:12 PM

Doesn’t a demolished building generate less tax dollars for the municipality?

Presumably, but if I were the developer I'd want a guarantee of lower taxes from the municipality before demolition would begin.



#67 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,634 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:05 PM

 

...council voted to put the process on hold until Lexi conducted further consultation with the public. Council also voted, however, to encourage Lexi to demolish the current building on site as soon as possible...

 

Eagerness to fast-track a demolition, paired with a general distaste for redevelopment. Sounds like a winning formula.


  • Nparker likes this

#68 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 8,925 posts

Posted 09 July 2019 - 07:29 PM

One lady was complaining that there were only going to be 8 parking spots for whatever retail(clinic) was going in, and people would be parking on side streets.

Presumably in front of her house.


Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#69 E2V

E2V
  • Member
  • 8 posts

Posted 10 July 2019 - 03:19 PM

Perhaps the two sides will find some common ground. A couple of those against mentioned 8 floors as a compromise. Most others were stuck at 6. The developer might point out that two blocks away are 9 and 10 floor, if you count the ground level garage, condo buildings.

#70 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 13 July 2019 - 06:20 PM

This being Greater Victoria, replete with on a per capita basis perhaps one of the largest agglomerations of whiners and complainers anywhere relative to its modest population, here in part is the inevitable "letter to the editor" decrying this "monolith" proposal:

 

........Another member of council suggested that one need only look to Manhattan for proof that a livable quality of life and a strong sense of community are easily attainable while living among monolith structures. Seriously? My neighbours and I do not choose to live in a Manhattan-like environment. If these individuals like tall buildings and the level of community offered in New York City, I question how they will be able keep their personal biases at bay.

 

This proposed 12-storey structure has been deemed a “signature building.”

 

For whom is this over-sized architectural concept a sense of pride? Not for the residents of the West Bay and nearby neighbourhoods. I would suggest that that it is the pride of some local politicians hoping to leave a legacy, a legacy that has the precedent-making potential to change the face of Esquimalt forever...."

 

I would opine in response that 1) compared to what their ancestors were used to over the previous 10,000 years, when they were built 100+ years ago structures like the BC Legislature and the Empress Hotel were pretty damn "monolithic" for FN peoples living in what is now downtown Victoria, Vic West and Esquimalt. Clearly therefore they must go! Bring in the bulldozers immediately....! Damn monoliths.....

 

Closer to Esquimalt I'm pretty certain from a Songhees FN historical perspective the Esquimalt Arena has no earthly business existing and is incompatible with FN building forms and architecture, therefore....monolithic! Plow it under!! Ditto the CFB navy base - uber-monolithic!!! Seeya you terrible monolithic nightmare homage to militarism!!!

 

And 2) given I have a very good memory of Esquimalt circa the late 60's up to the mid-1990's - when it finally started to grow into something semi-decent - "changing its face" is frankly a hot damn good idea.

 

As a teen I recall in particular the Esquimalt Road from the 1970's: a tasteless mish-mash strip of pavement comprised of tacky, grotty little pawn shops, greasy spoon pizza and other totally bland, uninteresting fast food joints, not to mention the proliferation of stale beer and cigarette-smelling booze hangouts. That IMO is a "face" that needed (and still needs) changing. Bring on the Changes............


Edited by AllseeingEye, 13 July 2019 - 06:22 PM.

  • Nparker likes this

#71 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,634 posts

Posted 13 July 2019 - 06:43 PM

 

Another member of council suggested that one need only look to Manhattan for proof that a livable quality of life and a strong sense of community are easily attainable while living among monolith structures.

 

It's funny, instead of looking all the way over to Manhattan for positive examples, maybe try considering the many examples in... Victoria itself? Swallow's Landing is right there in the same frickin' Esquimalt neighbourhood! The old Princess Patricia apartments have been standing at the Vic/Esquimalt border for ~50 years.

 

Is there a strong sense of community in Victoria or isn't there? Is there livable quality of life in Victoria or isn't there?

 

It's the year 2019. Are people really still afraid of Victoria being like (gasp) Victoria?



#72 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 14 July 2019 - 10:41 AM

It's funny, instead of looking all the way over to Manhattan for positive examples, maybe try considering the many examples in... Victoria itself? Swallow's Landing is right there in the same frickin' Esquimalt neighbourhood! The old Princess Patricia apartments have been standing at the Vic/Esquimalt border for ~50 years.

 

Is there a strong sense of community in Victoria or isn't there? Is there livable quality of life in Victoria or isn't there?

 

It's the year 2019. Are people really still afraid of Victoria being like (gasp) Victoria?

C'mon seriously: isn't it obvious that if Victoria starts becoming, like........you know......."Victoria 2019" then its a mere hop, skip and a jump to becoming <gasp> a "mini-Vancouver". Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh - storm the monoliths now!!!!!!


  • aastra and Nparker like this

#73 E2V

E2V
  • Member
  • 8 posts

Posted 14 July 2019 - 01:31 PM

It will be interesting to see which way this goes. I doubt Lexi will be interested in six floors. It’s my understanding they purchased this property before the town plan was changed to impose the height limitation. Esquimalt town council has been pro development recently, as shown by their support for the new construction at the Old English Inn site in the face of neighbourhood opposition. Their attitude seems to have come as a shock to the Times Colonist letter writer.

#74 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 14 July 2019 - 03:19 PM

It will be interesting to see which way this goes. I doubt Lexi will be interested in six floors. It’s my understanding they purchased this property before the town plan was changed to impose the height limitation. Esquimalt town council has been pro development recently, as shown by their support for the new construction at the Old English Inn site in the face of neighbourhood opposition. Their attitude seems to have come as a shock to the Times Colonist letter writer.

Good: IMO there are far too many people here who are apparently "shocked" its no longer 1952, that we aren't sucking on Britain's boob any more, and that wee innocent little 'olde Victoria' is fast growing up. Frankly they could use a little shock treatment. To those people I say welcome to the third decade of the 21st century.....



#75 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 3,217 posts

Posted 14 July 2019 - 03:21 PM

Their attitude seems to have come as a shock to the Times Colonist letter writer.


I think normally pro development council was caught off guard by the amount of opposition to the project

#76 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 48,631 posts

Posted 14 July 2019 - 05:05 PM

Esquimalt had set a limit of 12-storeys, which is what this proposal is from the Esquimalt Road side. The developers are not reaching, they’re doing what they believed the community had agreed upon.


  • Nparker and sdwright.vic like this

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


#77 E2V

E2V
  • Member
  • 8 posts

Posted 14 July 2019 - 07:52 PM

I think normally pro development council was caught off guard by the amount of opposition to the project


A large part of the opposition came from residents of Wollaston Street, directly below the development, and around Highrock Park where they don’t want to see this rising into their sight lines.
  • Mike K. likes this

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users