8289 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

...but downtown has this to deal with what's in my picture. And quite frankly, coming from someone who spends most of his day downtown, this is pathetic, it's disgusting and it's not something that we can just pretend does not exist.

 

Not only is downtown brutally expensive for business owners, it's becoming more and more overrun by drug users, drug pushers, drunks, people with mental problems, and so on. If someone like me is starting to notice it just imagine what your average suburbanite or tourist must think when they encounter a panhander every 50 meters, drunks in doorways, drug pushers on street corners, and so on.

 

Last night was Welfare Wednesday. Do those of you who don't spend nights downtown have any idea what a freakshow last night was? How many fights could be heard? How many people were yelling well into the early morning hours? How many sirens were blaring at 4AM? It's unreal.

 

[dasmo]

The extra revenue from the added surface parking and patio space rental in my Government street proposal could pay for a couple of extra bodies on the street to help with this....

[sebberry]

But Mike, more people walking and bicycling around will reduce these nefarious activities naturally.  Just give the speed limits and bike lanes a chance, will ya?

 

There's a few parts to this equation.  Supply, demand and access. 

 

Access - Victoria seems to have made some improvements with regards to access.  The parking situation has become easier with more favorable rates in parkades and the mobile payment app saves people money at the meter.  But other factors such as the open drug use, needles, etc... are a big barrier for many people.  So I think in this regard, Victoria is not a very accessible city.  Personally I find the drive to Langford easier than dealing with those issues downtown. 

 

Downtown also comes off feeling cruddy.  Landlords don't seem to spend much (if any) effort on maintaining clean buildings.  Uptown is pretty much spotless, just like walking around a mall.  With Victoria being blanketed by bird dirt, spit, gum, cigarette butts and god only knows what else it's just not very clean.  I know we're trying to preserve heritage, but why are we trying to preserve the DNA of the horses that pulled buggies around in the 20's? 

 

Supply - Just too many holes in the wall for retail, and given the nature of developments there's little space for larger venues.  People only want to spend so much time shopping or sitting around with coffee and croissants.  What do we have for family-friendly entertainment venues down town?  I don't think the nightclub scene is for everyone. Rents are clearly an issue, but property tax breaks will do little to transform a retail space from expensive to affordable.  Simply put, I think there's an oversaturation of retail space in this city.  But with all the criminal and addiction issues, who wants to live in a ground-level condo?

 

Demand - People can only buy so much stuff.  And with homes becoming smaller and smaller they're buying less of it.  And with incomes where they are it wouldn't surprise me if people are spending carefully and looing for deals online. 

[jonny]

Not only is downtown brutally expensive for business owners, it's becoming more and more overrun by drug users, drug pushers, drunks, people with mental problems, and so on. If someone like me is starting to notice it just imagine what your average suburbanite or tourist must think when they encounter a panhander every 50 meters, drunks in doorways, drug pushers on street corners, and so on.

 

I must admit, this does appear to be getting worse lately.

 

___________________

Seb has summarized the issues succintly.

 

I'll just add again that, overall, the Canadian economy has been not great for 6+ years now. Combine that with the rate of change in the retail landscape, and yeah, we are bound to have some empty storefronts. Is it even a surprise that this problem has gotten worse? Probably not.

 

The answer, as it always has, lies in the establishment of a safe, desirable neighborhood downtown. The crackheads and junkies won't want to get bothered by residents who are giving them the stink eye and calling the cops every five minutes. Those who fight density tooth and nail hurt downtown rather than save it.

Edited by jonny, 29 January 2015 - 02:21 PM.

[jklymak]

^^ Parking, dirt, and undesirables have been the clarion call of the malls for the last 50 years.  But the trend of the last 15 years in North America has been the opposite - people are moving back into the downtowns as some come to appreciate that driving just to get a cup of coffee or buy a bottle of wine is a total bummer.  Is there more the city could do to make downtown more vibrant and more productive?  Sure, but trying to copy the appeal of malls is not the way to go.  Making a dense urban village where a mix of people can shop, recreate and live is.  

[jonny]

^^ Parking, dirt, and undesirables have been the clarion call of the malls for the last 50 years.  But the trend of the last 15 years in North America has been the opposite - people are moving back into the downtowns as some come to appreciate that driving just to get a cup of coffee or buy a bottle of wine is a total bummer.  Is there more the city could do to make downtown more vibrant and more productive?  Sure, but trying to copy the appeal of malls is not the way to go.  Making a dense urban village where a mix of people can shop, recreate and live is.  

 

This has been the trend in Victoria, too. It's not an intense wave of new residents, but the trend has been unmistakable.

[dasmo]

Don't forget these ones!

[Nparker]

.... Those who fight density tooth and nail hurt downtown rather than save it.

This X 1000.

[gumgum]

VV needs to foster new movement that appeals to the powers that be and the general leftist that opposes development (coming from left leaner myself) and the condo tower and new development overall.  This movement fosters the idea that embracing the condo tower and density is not only good for business, but it is generally a more environmentally, economic and socially sustainable model for an urban core.

 

For far too long the left have resisted new development because of its loose affiliation with capitalism and elitism. So many can't go beyond that association. Add that to the strange ideology that somehow green space/ new development should be 2:1 as somehow these extra people living downtown and the building will end up a detriment to downtown.

 

A concept in one tidy soundbite needs to be developed to point out the vast benefits to density that will appeal to your average Victorian.

Edited by gumgum, 29 January 2015 - 03:21 PM.

[dasmo]

Density doesn't simply mean skyscrapers though. IT also requires making habitable space. The Era is a good example of an A so far. View towers, an F....  

[gumgum]

^I realize that, but towers are what most are afraid of.

[jonny]

Victoria is never going to have skyscrapers.

We don't even get all up in arms about mid-rises or even the few high rises that have gone up. We get all pissy about 5 floor buildings in CSV or 7 floor buildings on Pandora. If you take a step back and look at the big picture, it's absurd.

The problem with how things have gone is that the City of Victoria has
a) Scared away developers (some have left, vowing never to return);
b) Put developers through such a rigrmarole that what we end up with is not as dense as it could have been (see St Andrew's School property); and/or,
c) Placed an unreasonble economic burden on development. The city effectively taxes developers through this micro-managed, everybody gets input, approval process. Those costs are ultimately passed on to buyers and renters.

Edited by jonny, 29 January 2015 - 05:14 PM.

[Nparker]

Well said jonny.

 

I might add that SO much energy goes into fighting the big bad height monster (TM pending) that things like street-level interraction, finishing materials and overall aesthetics often get little attention.

Edited by Nparker, 29 January 2015 - 04:44 PM.

[LJ]

jklymak, on 29 Jan 2015 - 3:20 PM, said:

^^ Parking, dirt, and undesirables have been the clarion call of the malls for the last 50 years.  But the trend of the last 15 years in North America has been the opposite - people are moving back into the downtowns as some come to appreciate that driving just to get a cup of coffee or buy a bottle of wine is a total bummer.  Is there more the city could do to make downtown more vibrant and more productive?  Sure, but trying to copy the appeal of malls is not the way to go.  Making a dense urban village where a mix of people can shop, recreate and live is.  

I think when people think of moving downtown they think of moving into a neighbourhood. Like Cook St., Fairfield, James Bay etc. Places that are "downtown" but outside the normal range of drunks, homeless, crack addicts and hookers. The trick is trying to change the core into a "neighbourhood". I guess that until gentrification, more police presence, more facilities for the "undesirables" that won't happen. Adding more folks in the core will help but how are you going to convince them to come in droves until those endemic ills are corrected.

[Mixed365]

VV needs to foster new movement that appeals to the powers that be and the general leftist that opposes development (coming from left leaner myself) and the condo tower and new development overall.  This movement fosters the idea that embracing the condo tower and density is not only good for business, but it is generally a more environmentally, economic and socially sustainable model for an urban core.

 

For far too long the left have resisted new development because of its loose affiliation with capitalism and elitism. So many can't go beyond that association. Add that to the strange ideology that somehow green space/ new development should be 2:1 as somehow these extra people living downtown and the building will end up a detriment to downtown.

 

A concept in one tidy soundbite needs to be developed to point out the vast benefits to density that will appeal to your average Victorian.

I think you guys are missing what gumgum is saying. 

We need to re-educate the leftist people on their views towards development from that of fright of elitism to the obvious environmental, social and economic benefits that density creates. 

It's a good point. Sure, I get very riled up at the plethora of resident associations who raise their hands at quality developments and then raise their hands, yet again, at lack of affordability, lack of services etc., but it is not a benefit to me, or to the development I want, to yell at them. 

Fire against fire folks...

 

[Nparker]

...Adding more folks in the core will help but how are you going to convince them to come in droves until those endemic ills are corrected.

Some people are just going to have to be brave. I have lived without incident on the edge of the"downtown ills" for more than 15 years and I can't imagine calling anywhere else home.

[gumgum]

I think you guys are missing what gumgum is saying.

We need to re-educate the leftist people on their views towards development from that of fright of elitism to the obvious environmental, social and economic benefits that density creates.

It's a good point. Sure, I get very riled up at the plethora of resident associations who raise their hands at quality developments and then raise their hands, yet again, at lack of affordability, lack of services etc., but it is not a benefit to me, or to the development I want, to yell at them.

Fire against fire folks...

Thank you Mixed. That's exactly what I am saying. We need to brand and box the indirect benefits for individual developments and overall density - to draw the connection between a crane going up and how it affects positively your average person that lives or frequents the core. Economically, socially and environmentally.
I just think the concept hasn't be properly packaged. And it should, because it's truth.

[gumgum]

But I also don't think those opposed to this idea are the enemy. I just think a there's a bunch of people that haven't had to opportunity to think about it from a different angle because it hasn't been pointed out to them as an idea.

[Mixed365]

But I also don't think those opposed to this idea are the enemy. I just think a there's a bunch of people that haven't had to opportunity to think about it from a different angle because it hasn't been pointed out to them as an idea.

It's true, and too, I'm really tired of left/right wing & anti/pro development partitions. It is about intelligent and informed decisions - not about one "ideology" versus the other.

In terms of urban growth/development/renewal etc. I believe more of a conversation needs to happen between different parties. Leave the fear-mongering, name calling, and headline-only reading opinions out of it. 
 

The amount of hatred I see towards developers is despicable. These are people who are building our city and paying the majority of our taxes through the abominable commercial tax rate (it is 3.5:1 in comparison to residential taxes). In addition, they don't even get to vote for the property they own. After all of that, they are demonized and deemed inhumane. Word starts to spread that a "developer will come and gentrify the area", all of a sudden, everyone starts to put up their fists and name call this human who is willing to put down an insurmountable amount of money, time and effort to help change a neighbourhood and give humans what they want. How do they know they want it? They pay for it. People vote with their dollars and that is OK - that is a fact, that is Economics. 

Paralleling the same vein, I am disgusted by the hostility people who are right-wing/pro-development, whatever that even means, towards those with opposing views. Do we not forget that those who are deemed "hippies" are the ones supplying the farmers markets we crave for that urban vitality, do we forget that those "artsy fartsy folk" creating those pieces of art are the ones fuelling the niche studios and start ups in town? Do we forget that those "stupid hipsters" are the ones enabling niche stores like Four Horsemen, Still Life etc. to survive? These people are creative and are constantly making our city and spaces more interesting to the eye and interesting to experience. We need to listen and respect their opinions. 

It is about working together and that needs to start now. Mayor Lisa Helps spoke about "one city" in her inauguration speech and I hope that is turned into a reality. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Here is a great interview with Bob Rennie from CBC. It starts at 2:50 and has him discussing the vacant condominiums in Vancouver and affordable housing situation. He says it is a community issue and instead of fighting each other, we should work together to find solutions. 

http://youtu.be/Th5qxYOSrpk?t=2m50s

Here to is an exert from Robert Jawl that was posted on Mayor Lisa Help's website. She attended the Urban Development Institute: Capital Region's Under 40 breakfast, and he had this to say:

"Developers should have positive, collaborative working relationships with the comunities in which they build. It's important that the community see new buildings as enhancements to the community and that residents feel as if they've played a key role in creating these enhancements. As Robert notes, "because (as local developers) we're members of our community there are far more important criteria to be met than whether something is a 'good (financial) deal' or not. In the long-term, projects that are embraced as community enhancements also create long-term economic return." Too often it feels as if the process of development is adversarial and a zero-sum game: if developers win the public loses; if the public wins, developers lose. With the Jawl's and other developers sensitive to the needs and the desires of community residents, this doesn't have to be the case. Lesson number one for building Downtown Victoria: collaboration is key."



 

Edited by Mixed365, 29 January 2015 - 09:26 PM.

[spanky123]

But I also don't think those opposed to this idea are the enemy. I just think a there's a bunch of people that haven't had to opportunity to think about it from a different angle because it hasn't been pointed out to them as an idea.

 

No doubt that there are people opposed to development for ideological reasons but there are also a lot of people opposed to development for demographic reasons. If you are 80 (or about 90% of the population in Fairfield), you don't want noise, hustle and bustle or change. You like things the way they are and you elect people who will keep it that way regardless of political stripe.