272 replies to this topic

[aastra]

I say "nobody" and "everybody" but of course I'm generalizing. The folks who live on the lower floors on the north side of Astoria don't have a view, nor do the folks who live on the back side of the Falls. But most of the people who live in buildings like that in locations like that are doing it for the view.

Vic West may be interesting but the Songhees itself? The Songhees is uninteresting by design. It's just a placemat.

[aastra]

Is that really good planning?

I don't think so. But I also don't think View Towers will be there forever. So the question is, do we maintain those buffer lots around View Towers or do we try to hasten the inevitable?

[piltdownman]

I think the most important thing about views is to set out a long term plan. Set those heights 'in stone' in the zoning. So if someone buys a view they know what the future holds for the lots around them. In victoria it seems to me that city likes to control each application on a case by case application. Cutting off height when they feel like it, and using spot zoning when they like an application.

[G-Man]

Harris Green is not the West End of Vancouver. If you had to compare it to any neighbourhood I would say it is closer to the Northern end of Yaletown. It is far from any water and really the greatest aspect of it IS the neighbourhood. I would hardly say that Yaletown is an example of poor planning and yet there are buildings next to one another. This is not creating a wall as there is even a large setback between the building and the View Towers that accomodates a pedestrian throughfare.

Are we saying that Old Town is an example of poor planning because each of the building are rght next to other literally creating a wall?

A wall for who from what is my question. If you bought a condo many kms from the waterfront with the idea that you would get to maintain a waterfront view than I am sorry that is ridiculous. If we want Harris Green to get the density needed to make it into a great urban neighbourhood we need to put buildings of substanstial size on the vacant lots of which there are far too many.

[VicHockeyFan]

I think the most important thing about views is to set out a long term plan. Set those heights 'in stone' in the zoning. So if someone buys a view they know what the future holds for the lots around them. In victoria it seems to me that city likes to control each application on a case by case application. Cutting off height when they feel like it, and using spot zoning when they like an application.

To their credit I have heard councillors say, at meetings, that their job is not to protect private views, but it is more so to protect views from public property.

Moral to the story? Don't buy 4th floor Astoria expecting 360 views for ever. Buy at the top of The Falls, and you might be OK.

[jklymak]

A wall for who from what is my question. If you bought a condo many kms from the waterfront with the idea that you would get to maintain a waterfront view than I am sorry that is ridiculous. If we want Harris Green to get the density needed to make it into a great urban neighbourhood we need to put buildings of substanstial size on the vacant lots of which there are far too many.

Views aren't just waterfront. I think spacing towers out somewhat so all anyone across the way has to look at is another tower is important. Even for the ground-level floors. Having the place across the way be four floors is a lot different from having it be 25 floors. If all the places across the street are 25 floors, you'll never have sunlight.

Are there cities with density like that around the world? Sure. But Victoria is nowhere near the density for that to be necessary, so why are we piling all the buildings into a few localized blocks?

[Baro]

View towers is pretty skinny, I really don't think there's a crowding issue on these sites. This was also a fantastic building, a "skyline amenity" worth bending over backwards to get approved. We'll end up with some bland piece of garbage on this site (if anything) but at least nothing seemed crowded! Although if they flipped the tower to the other side it would have eliminated any potential "crowding", although for some reason that's impossible as it may detract from the cheap Faux-tudor and run-down bland 1 retail buildings.

Once again suburban sensibilities enforced on an urban core and once again an open wound on the city's urban fabric is forbidden from healing naturally.

[G-Man]

Views aren't just waterfront.

Agree completely and the view of this building would have been nicer than any other in all of Harris Green.

[2F2R]

>>> Agree completely and the view of this building would have been nicer than any other in all of Harris Green <<<

I think the same ... but here we go again ... I think I'm going to cry ...

[jklymak]

Hmmm, we are in Harris Green, and have a view of the Strait, the Sooke Hills and downtown. I don't care what building you put up, its going to have trouble competing with the Olympics.

If we really want people to live downtown in dense condos, I think some recognition that that lifestyle is partly made attractive by having nice views would help encourage more development. The best views are to the South, in most people's opinions, so it doesn't make much sense to put the tallest building on the South side of HG right next to one another.

[G-Man]

I am sure that the buildings to the north such as the Manhattan are blocking southern views of someone else. It is just the way it is.

[jklymak]

Yes, and the Manhatan takes up less than a fifth of the block. I'm nto saying there shouldn't be any buildings in anyone's views, I'm saying large walls shouldn't be erected across blocks.

[jklymak]

Harris Green is not the West End of Vancouver. If you had to compare it to any neighbourhood I would say it is closer to the Northern end of Yaletown. It is far from any water and really the greatest aspect of it IS the neighbourhood. I would hardly say that Yaletown is an example of poor planning and yet there are buildings next to one another.

Not having been to Yaletown in a few years, I had another look at google maps. There are a few places where the buildings are quite crowded - maybe Smithe and Richards. But even there, there is always some space between towers. Elsewhere, the towers are quite spread out with lots of 4-6 story infill. I don't think there are many examples like that provided by 800-block Yates/View or how View st would look like if this proposal would go through.

I don't have anything against large buildings - lets have more of them. Of course they will partly obstruct someone's view. However, I don't buy the logic that says its OK to cram them together.

[gumgum]

The newest condo buildings in D/t Vancouver don't obstruct views -or should I say block views altogether (not including Yaletown). They are carefully spaced. They can do this because of height. The higher and skinnier the tower, the more it benefits everyone. I wish people wouldn't be so afraid of height and see the benefits.
What's more obtrusive: the current View towers, or one twice as tall and half as skinny? Picture every highrise built in, say, the last 5 years in Victoria. The sky would open up if they were twice as tall and half as skinny.

[jklymak]

I agree with that.

[phx]

I think the most important thing about views is to set out a long term plan. Set those heights 'in stone' in the zoning. So if someone buys a view they know what the future holds for the lots around them. In victoria it seems to me that city likes to control each application on a case by case application. Cutting off height when they feel like it, and using spot zoning when they like an application.

For sure the municipal governments like to micro-manage. I would like to see a zoning policy like this: For each block, if the average lot value exceeds the average building value by a factor of 3, then all the lots get automatically upzoned. That would be more predictable and also encourage efficient land use.

[LJ]

Welcome to the forum RMC, how do you like it so far?

[victorian fan]

By Roszan Holmen - Victoria News
www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/victorianews/news/95355364.html

Fourteen storeys is four too many according to neighbourhood guidelines. But when placed next to the sore thumb known as View Towers, most Victoria councillors seem willing to turn a blind eye.

But [...]

[Bob Fugger]

By Roszan Holmen - Victoria News
www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/victorianews/news/95355364.html

But [...]

"Coun. Lynn Hunter worried the rezoning could prompt the developer to flip the property for a profit."

Oh, the horror! Adding value to an asset by modifying its legal status and then selling it for (get this) more than you paid for it! The nerve of these evil profit-minded developers - won't someone please think of the children!?!?!?!

Well, someone did: Lynn Hunter could never let something like that happen in her oligarchical socialist paradise - not on her watch!

[VicHockeyFan]

"Coun. Lynn Hunter worried the rezoning could prompt the developer to flip the property for a profit."

Oh, the horror! Adding value to an asset by modifying its legal status and then selling it for (get this) more than you paid for it! The nerve of these evil profit-minded developers - won't someone please think of the children!?!?!?!

Well, someone did: Lynn Hunter could never let something like that happen in her oligarchical socialist paradise - not on her watch!

I hope Lynn Hunter sells her own home for the same or less than she paid for it when she sells...

What's wrong with the developer selling it? If he doesn't want to develop it, and someone else does, then that's good isn't it?