Jump to content

      













APPROVED
Tresuh
Use: condo
Address: 607 Speed Avenue
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Urban core
Storeys: 14
Condo units: 245 (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR)
Sales status: in planning
Tresuh 14 and six-storey, 245-unit condominium complex between the 600-blocks of Speed and Frances avenues in ... (view full profile)
Learn more about Tresuh on Citified.ca
Photo

[Burnside-Gorge] Tresuh (Speed Avenue) | Condos | 14 & 6-storeys | Approved


  • Please log in to reply
120 replies to this topic

#41 nagel

nagel
  • Member
  • 5,751 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:38 AM

One of my first girlfriends lived on Speed.  I'm happy this development will tear her old house down.


  • Matt R. and jonny like this

#42 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:39 AM

I'd say it's more of a 21st-century version of the Princess Patricia apartments...

And that's a good thing how?



#43 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,157 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:47 AM

By that I meant the View Towers comparison wasn't so on the mark. We like to compare everything to View Towers, I know. The coffee that I'm drinking right now is much better than View Towers.

 

Upon further review, the lowrise block is a bit lacking in personality on the north side. The folks across the street might be happier if it was one level shorter and/or if the top level was set back some.


  • RFS likes this

#44 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,157 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:51 AM

 

Speed Avenue is a VERY SMALL street; you cannot build such buildings on such a small street. The parking is already ridiculous as of NOW. If the building is burning down, a fire truck cannot come to our building because of the parking issues, because cars are parked on both sides of Speed Avenue so a firetruck DOES not fit.

 

The CoV's chainsaw just started salivating. You know, in the service of public safety, etc.

 

post-4009-0-40197700-1552492869.jpg


  • RFS and Dr. Barillas like this

#45 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:52 AM

...The folks across the street might be happier if it was one level shorter and/or if the top level was set back some.

The folks across the street will only be happy if the entire project is scrapped in favour of a 12 units of low-rise townhouses surrounding a new park.



#46 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:54 AM

By that I meant the View Towers comparison wasn't so on the mark. We like to compare everything to View Towers...

The Princess Patricia apartments are just a waterfront version of VT.



#47 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:57 AM

Just to confirm, the two 12-storey towers are already approved. It looks like now the new plan is to consolidate most of the density into a single taller tower.

There’s a BC Housing component to this, isn’t there?

 

I believe it is an increase in number of units from 176 to 245 units and a decrease in parking from 262 to 181 (1.48 to 0.74).  I also believe the M'akola Housing society component was dropped from the original proposal.


  • Mike K. likes this

#48 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,665 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:58 AM

It looks very Olympic Village. Or a better downtown Richmond.

 

Princess Patricia and View Tower are eyesores in part because of poor maintenance and lack of development around them. They stick out. If you look at Olympic Village, the building height and form is similar, but because it's an entire neighbourhood built with the same urban design principles it looks good.

 

Hopefully this project is transformative, and hopefully future Councils don't get cold feet and roll back the height and density of the neighbourhood. Then we'll end up with another sore thumb tower, however well designed.



#49 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,157 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:00 AM

 

The Princess Patricia apartments are just a waterfront version of VT.

 

Disagree. As vintage widescrapers go it's at least one notch superior to View Towers.

 

1476128869_20140122-140711-edit-2.jpg
pic from https://www.itziar.c...icia-apartments

 

51_big.jpg


Edited by aastra, 13 March 2019 - 09:00 AM.

  • jonny likes this

#50 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:02 AM

...Hopefully this project is transformative, and hopefully future Councils don't get cold feet and roll back the height and density of the neighbourhood. Then we'll end up with another sore thumb tower, however well designed.

I agree. I appreciate the developer is attempting to come up with a project that will somehow appease the NIMBYs while being ham-strung by ridiculous height restrictions. Unfortunately this has resulted in a widescraper.



#51 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:04 AM

...As vintage widescrapers go it's at least one notch superior to View Towers...

 

Both are pretty dreadful and not a built form that should ever see a resurgence.



#52 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:07 AM

The folks across the street will only be happy if the entire project is scrapped in favour of a 12 units of low-rise townhouses surrounding a new park.

 

There is room for at least 50-70 units of development similar to Brizo 19 and Mayfair Walk.  Where else on the Douglas corridor have we seen that kind of housing built?  Old-town and Harris Green are the next closest I think.



#53 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 51,437 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:09 AM

PPP, can you comment on BC Housing's involvement with this project, if indeed that is still the case?


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


#54 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:11 AM

There is room for at least 50-70 units of development similar to Brizo 19 and Mayfair Walk...

Despite the local objections, this area of town really needs more density. I'd just like to see it in a more attractive built-form.



#55 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 51,437 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:18 AM

PPP, can you comment on BC Housing's involvement with this project, if indeed that is still the case?

 

Oops! I missed the half-ownership comment in the lowrise. All good.


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


#56 Mattjvd

Mattjvd
  • Member
  • 901 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 09:36 AM

Thanks for the update PPPdev!
  • Nparker likes this

#57 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 51,437 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 10:36 AM

The building definitely has a Yello vibe!


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


#58 Robb

Robb
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 11:37 AM

Despite the local objections, this area of town really needs more density. I'd just like to see it in a more attractive built-form.

 

I agree.  The old Toyota land and the former bowling alley are ripe for development also.

 

I'm really stuck on the parking for Speed/Francis though.

 

This particular lot is an old brickyard and the soil is soggy, which practically limits the parking to a single below grade level I believe.  Mayfair Walk (my building) and Brizo 19 were both built with ~1 parking spot per unit.  This means there are around 20 cars parking on the street.  That's just the reality.  This has caused actual problems, such that the Fire Marshall directed the city to make the south side of Speed no stopping (as of ~2 weeks ago).  Fire Trucks could not get down the street, we had an ambulance side-swipe a car up onto the curb, and garbage pickups were getting skipped because the trucks couldn't get down the street.  Modo Car share and free bus passes did nothing to help this.  We did both and neither one were used. (I got four years of bus passes instead of one out of that at least!).

 

I understand the theory of de-coupling parking stall purchase from the units.  Let's say that works really well and results in a 1:1 car ownership instead of the 1.5:1 we're seeing now.  That will still result in ~64 extra cars looking for parking on the surrounding streets.  Francis Ave is already a single lane during weekdays with full parking down both sides.  I imagine the Fire Marshall will feel the same way about access there with a 12-story building, so no parking down one side there also?

 

I do appreciate one taller building instead of two.  The shading would be much better.  Too bad taller and skinnier isn't an option.



#59 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 11:42 AM

...Too bad taller and skinnier isn't an option.

It would be an option if developers' hands weren't tied to absurd height restrictions. I appreciate that in this case, timber construction is also a factor in the truncated nature of this project, but if this "new" construction type results in more widescrapers then I say stick to traditional building methods.



#60 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,379 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 03:02 PM

BC just announced building code changes to permit 12 storey wood buildings province wide: https://www.cheknews...ldings-3-542838

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