102 replies to this topic

[aastra]

I don't know about you guys, but the reference to new "secondary park space" in the heart of Harris Green scares the hell out of me. I have to give their visionaries credit; is there a worse spot in all of Victoria for a useless mini-park? I suppose Store Street would be worse. But not much. Actually, Bay & Douglas might be worse. What do you know? They envision a park there as well.

Yates Street needs storefronts and townhouses along its entire length. If you want an open field you'll walk a couple of blocks east or north or south. I swear, this ongoing mission to contain and/or dilute downtown is disaster in the making.

Also, what's the deal with the building heights and sizes in those summary illustrations? They're way out of scale in Option 3. That very tall building on the Monday Magazine site is about the same size as a ~30-story office tower. Are we really thinking a candidate for the tallest office building in BC is going to be built there? They haven't built an office building that size in Vancouver in the past 25 years. There are several other hypothetical buildings in the north part of downtown there that are much taller than the city's current tallest buildings. Is that really what they have in mind? Or does officialdom have no clue whatsoever?

[aastra]

There are some straightforward choices -- build taller buildings and accommodate more people in a smaller area, for example, or opt for low-rise development spread over a wider area.

The only problem with this straightforward choice is that it isn't nearly so straightforward. The densest areas of Victoria are the lowrise apartment districts.

[aastra]

Tall buildings might bring shaded streets and a skyline some find unattractive. But they also allow for cheaper, more effective public transit...

And they also might bring less shade overall and a skyline that some find attractive. But why mention that?

[aastra]

The increased population would support bus service and reduce development pressure on the existing core.

I consider myself to be rather pro-development (pro good development, anyway), but I still have a problem with the claim about reducing development pressure in the existing core. Fact is, development pressures in the old town might actually increase if north downtown is transformed into something more attractive and appealing. In the very least, we should we aware of this potential, because dismissing it out of hand could be a terrible mistake.

[G-Man]

^ Good point I mean who knew 10 years ago that the two areas of focus would be the humboldt valley and the north end of downtown. Let alone Vic West. It was always assumed it would be James Bay and Harris Green. So things change.

[Mike K.]

That's right, things do change, but these plans try to stifle any natural/organic change and predetermine the needs of the community decades into the future.

These plans are all about limits and have absolutely nothing to do with potential. If they were about potential, we wouldn't have density limits, height limits, development "zones," pre-conceived areas for parks, preconceived areas for development sites, what uses for land must be eradicated or introduced, etc.

[Lover Fighter]

I must admit I am very impressed with how much work has already gone into this.
My take:

Option 1: This isn't really an option now, is it? It's exactly the same as what is happening as far as I can tell.

Option 2: I really like this option except that nothing happens in Harris Green, but I guess that's why they made the next option.

Option 3: Overall, the best option. You get a dynamic skyline in 2 directions and I think it will look best from the waterfront. Old town is obviously preserved even just looking at the 'possibility sketches' Victoria feels like a better-structured REAL city.

Option 4: Tempting, but stretches everything out too far. And I think the Rock Bay 'bookend' concept should be looked at as a possibility in the long term, not until after the Design District is created.

[UrbanRail]

I must admit I am very impressed with how much work has already gone into this.
My take:

Option 1: This isn't really an option now, is it? It's exactly the same as what is happening as far as I can tell.

Option 2: I really like this option except that nothing happens in Harris Green, but I guess that's why they made the next option.

Option 3: Overall, the best option. You get a dynamic skyline in 2 directions and I think it will look best from the waterfront. Old town is obviously preserved even just looking at the 'possibility sketches' Victoria feels like a better-structured REAL city.

Option 4: Tempting, but stretches everything out too far. And I think the Rock Bay 'bookend' concept should be looked at as a possibility in the long term, not until after the Design District is created.

The options were pretty flaky on transportation options, besides walking and cycling. There was no mention of rail connections, like a downtown streetcar network (well ok there was one picture of a modern streetcar), or the use of the E&N as a commuting option from Duncan. The BRT was mentioned for north/south connections, but as far as east/west connections, like along Fort, Yates, Pandora and Johnson, there was nothing there.
An inner transit circular route was talked about, but that was about it.

[G-Man]

^ Well the whole point of the excercise is to make Downtown better not commuter options for people in the West Comms or Duncan. If they are stuck on the highway sweating away their lives too bad for them. Two of the options (2 & 3) are have build out around the BRT stations.

[UrbanRail]

^ Well the whole point of the excercise is to make Downtown better not commuter options for people in the West Comms or Duncan. If they are stuck on the highway sweating away their lives too bad for them. Two of the options (2 & 3) are have build out around the BRT stations.

I wasnt talking about the West Comms, I was refering to better transit connections within the core municipalities, like a inner streetcar network. Besides we have to think regionally, not just one municipality at a time.

[Lover Fighter]

I wasnt talking about the West Comms, I was refering to better transit connections within the core municipalities, like a inner streetcar network. Besides we have to think regionally, not just one municipality at a time.

I'm not sure what you're looking at, but all 4 options have what's called a 'local circulating transit' route that I interpreted as a streetcar line or something like it.

-In option 1 it's going up and down Government & Wharf, connected at the north end by Pembroke.
-In option 2 it's going up and down Douglas & Wharf, connected by Belleville & Pembroke.
-In option 3 it goes along Gov't, then east along Fort, up Vancouver to Pandora, then up Blanshard to Pembroke.
-In option 4 it's doing basically the same as 3 except along View & Fisgard instead of Fort & Pandora.

I like option 2's circuit best and mentioned that in the survey, even though I liked option#3 best overall.

[Caramia]

Damn I didn't notice that when I was filling out the survey. I like the route from option 2 also.

[UrbanRail]

Yeah I do see the circulating transit routes. Perhaps one could interpret them as either as streetcar or bus (hopefully streetcar)
I was surprised that there was no mention of the 1992-93 Streetcar Study in the Downtown Plan.

I like option 3 the best.

[Holden West]

City unveils vision for future downtown
By Keith Vass - Victoria News - November 14, 2007

(small photo of option 4)

Four options will guide city core development, says senior planner

The shape of downtown Victoria is going to have to change to fit in as many as 15,000 new residents in the next 20 years.

City planners last Wednesday presented to the public four visions of what Victoria’s core could look like.

Lindsay Chase, senior planner for the city, and her team spent five months developing the options.

The models, unveiled at City Hall last week, are based on the principles identified from a 2004 round of consultations, and the Regional Growth Strategy goals of keeping downtown the region’s major residential, cultural and employment hub.

“All of the options will in different ways meet the vision principles and goals, it’s just that they have some different strengths and weaknesses embedded within each one,” said Chase.

Some features are common to all four options. All are centered around the planned Douglas Street Busway, tying land use to access to transit.

All would leave the historic Old Town and Chinatown areas untouched. The New Town area around Blanshard and Fort Streets would add some density, but keep its current mix of residential and commercial uses.

Option 1 calls for the least change overall – adding some residential density to Harris Green, boosting commercial space and height along north Douglas Street, and encouraging more commercial space and moderate height increases in the Design District around north Government Street.

Option 2 looks to Douglas Street to become the focus of higher density. Towers up to 24 storeys tall with a mix of residential and commercial space could sprout up along central Douglas Street. Farther north, moderate-height, mixed-use buildings would up density on both sides of the street. Harris Green would stay static.

Option 3 spreads more of the increased density into Harris Green, creating growth along two “spines” of high-density, mixed-use growth. The plan would actually add more density than current forecasts say is needed.

Option 4 is the most horizontal approach, shunning highrise towers in the core in favour of converting industrial land in Rock Bay into residential. Densities would kept moderate throughout the downtown, but it’s not known how much cleaning up contamination in Rock Bay could cost or what the economic impact of losing the industries there would mean.

The plans and an online survey form are on the city’s website at www.victoria.ca, then click on Downtown Plan Update. Planners will use the feedback to develop a final option to present to city council in the spring.

The survey lets the public name their preferred option, and say how the view the relative strengths and weaknesses of all four.

Chase said if one of the options gets broad support, it may go forward with minor tweaks. But features could be blended together, depending on public feedback.

“We’re certainly willing to create a hybrid option that takes the best elements from the options that we’ve presented and also the best ideas that come back to us from the public.”

The survey will be online until Nov. 30.

kvass@vicnews.com

[aastra]

The shape of downtown Victoria is going to have to change to fit in as many as 15,000 new residents in the next 20 years.

There's that big number again. Who's the source for that? That's 750 new residents (or about five new Corazons) per year. It's an unrealistic (dare I say impossible) target.

[G-Man]

I agree. The whole hudson project is only around 500 peeps I mean we would have to see a growth spurt in cionstruction to levels far higher than what we are currently seeing. Though I have to say I don't mind them planning and zoning for that kind of influx.

[Mike K.]

Unless of course they're hoping that the homeless migrants (which the TC claims arrive by the hundreds per year) will pad the market residential development.

[amor de cosmos]

The whole southeast False Creek project is supposed to house 16,000 people when it's all done & the olympics are over. It's going to be a bunch of towers up to 14 stories high on 80 acres of False Creek waterfront. Does Victoria have about 80 undeveloped acres to build towers on?

[G-Man]

^ probably more. Probably 20 acres in Harris Green alone. Then throw in all the underutilized space in the North End it would be way more.

[amor de cosmos]

Well good, something should be done to encourage development downtown then. Like I've said before, it's fine that Langford is getting cleaned up but I really think it should be happening a lot more downtown.