425 replies to this topic

[G-Man]

If they have already raised $10k than we should definitely tear down the school I mean it's heritage value was closer $7k.

There is no reasonable reason not to try and save this building. It is a Victoria landmark it has even been in the movies!

[aastra]

From Vic High's website (no doubt soon to be scrubbed as per the JSB formula):

 

 

Welcome to the city of Victoria’s only high school! Vic High is located in the heart of historic Fernwood, an area renowned for beautiful Victorian era architecture and a thriving artistic community. Our towering building serves as a landmark and meeting place for our neighbours, students and alumni…

[tiger11]

im sure I am in the minority here, but I say tear it down.... Not worth the cost IMO and for such a stretched ministry I don't know where the funds will come from.  In an ideal world you'd save it but I just don't see that happening.

[Bingo]

There is no reasonable reason not to try and save this building. It is a Victoria landmark it has even been in the movies!

 

Many of the old brick schools have already been seismically upgraded, such as Monterey, Margaret Jenkins,Doncaster, Willows, Quadra and the beautiful South Park School.

I see no reason to stop the program when you get to the largest of the older schools like Vic High that has architectural value galore.

 https://www.sd61.bc....Information.pdf

[Dr.Strangelove]

im sure I am in the minority here, but I say tear it down.... Not worth the cost IMO and for such a stretched ministry I don't know where the funds will come from.  In an ideal world you'd save it but I just don't see that happening.

 

I'm with you on that one too, not only because it costs half the price to build a new school in comparison to restoring and seismic upgrading, but because it's vital that the school be expanded in size to accommodate the growing population of students. Restoration and Seismic upgrading would not address that issue, while building a new school would.

 

I will be going to one of the Public Sessions next month at the school to throw my support behind school replacement.

[aastra]

 

im sure I am in the minority here, but I say tear it down....

 

Are you kidding? As per the now familiar formula, your attitude will likely dominate without any serious contest, even (or maybe especially) among the supposed defenders of Victoria's heritage.

[aastra]

Just to remind us how inverted everything is, consider the past few years:

 

Jubilee Hospital South Block demolition - milquetoast response

JSB replacement - milquetoast response

Northern Junk restoration & revitalization - hysterical uproar, longstanding controversy

Vic High replacement - milquetoast response

 

I don't care how blinded a person might be by his/her fantastical political beliefs, if you have eyes & a brain then you should be able to discern the pattern and the double standards here.

 

Legitimate heritage preservation groups actually exist in other cities precisely because of things like the JSB-replacement agenda or the Vic High-replacement agenda. If you genuinely care about preserving local heritage and history and historic built form then these are the moments that you live for. Once in a lifetime stuff. Except in Victoria, where this sort of thing happens every few years and doesn't earn so much as a chirping cricket.

 

Are we really going to act surprised if City Hall appears on the menu next? It's been on the menu before, lest we forget. How about the Legislative Buildings? Maybe they're prepping the public with that preposterous ~$1 billion figure just for the heck of it?

 

Do we still not see how bogus it all is? The outrageous double standards? If the state wants to wipe out precious heritage then everybody stands down. It's good, it's necessary, it's unavoidable. Infrastructure! We need new infrastructure! The hospital is infrastructure, the bridge is infrastructure, Vic High is infrastructure, City Hall is infrastruct -- oh, sorry, we're not quite there yet. Meanwhile, try to build a new apartment building and you get grilled for years, even though such private-sector developments are the only ones that seem to be doing anything at all re: restoration & preservation.

Edited by aastra, 25 March 2018 - 11:28 AM.

[aastra]

FYI: I'm not trying to paint private-sector developments as 21st-century do-gooders or anything like that. The recent loss of the old school building at Pandora and Vancouver comes to mind. I'm pointing the finger at these public-sector projects because I just can't stand the faux principles and the lip service and the same manipulative ploy over and over. Genuine principles don't evaporate into thin air depending on the players involved.

[aastra]

Instead of always indulging the demolition fetish, how about some legitimate innovation? Build a new high school on the abundant property where the old tech buildings used to be, and sell the school building outright for residential conversion:

 

 

There aren't many places in Cincinnati where falling asleep in the principal's office or the gymnasium is OK.

Or where it's perfectly acceptable to write your shopping list or personal reminders on a classroom chalkboard.

One of Cincinnati's newest residences can offer that to tenants as Kirby Road Elementary School joins the ranks of historic school buildings that have been converted to apartments.

https://www.cincinna...ments/84531952/

 

 

Some of the residents at the new Dalrymple School Apartments found themselves marveling at how their lives had come full circle within the historic school building turned into affordable housing for senior citizens.

Built to educate children in 1920, the school building sat vacant for a number of years until the town of Winthrop turned it into housing. Some of its new residents once roamed its hallways as students.

http://masshousing.t...or-seniors.html

 

As with the case for preserving the JSB, there are actually quite a few successful precedents for something like this.

[lanforod]

Some stuff is iconic here, but there really isn't THAT much that absolutely should never be replaced for new. The Legislature buildings, Empress, Craigdarroch are probably the top 3, everything else fast lowers in importance. Pick your battles - if this school is really worth an extra $50 million to restore, then make it a battle, fine, but be sure thats a battle worth having.

 

I have no opinion on this one, having no connection to the school at all. This is provincial tax dollars though, so as always, spend wisely.

[aastra]

Why would we accept the premise that rehab would cost so much more? And why would we accept the premise of the either/or choice that they present to us? Seriously, do we never learn?

 

I could also ask, what other battles are we waiting for? The Driard is already gone, the Times is already gone, the Adelphi is already gone, the old post office is already gone, half of the old town is already gone, the 3rd Vic High is already gone, the 4th Vic High will soon be gone. Hundreds of fine old houses and mansions are already gone.

 

Victorians need to come to their senses. The major reason why people were so dismissive of heritage preservation is because it seemed unnecessary back when the collection was so large. The collection isn't so large anymore. It will never get larger. It gets whittled down a bit more every year.

 

In the 21st century we've seen the private sector paying much more heed to heritage issues. It's been really refreshing. The HBC building, the New England Hotel, the Janion... But unfortunately, in the 21st century we've seen the public sector going hard in the opposite direction. It's been really frustrating. And especially so in light of the lip service and the moralizing that we all know so well.

[Nparker]

...in the 21st century we've seen the public sector going hard in the opposite direction...

Perhaps because the public purse is constantly being raided for an endless series of "important" projects* and unfortunately the line often gets drawn at heritage preservation.

 

* i.e. money allocated for bike lanes, sewage treatment. homeless shelters (etc.), is not available for preservation of public buildings

Edited by Nparker, 25 March 2018 - 01:36 PM.

[aastra]

For everyone who likes to fall for this idea that the government only wants to demolish stuff in order to try (but ultimately fail) to lessen the wound to the taxpayer, how come they never want to sell off excess property to make it a win for everyone? If the JSB situation was glaring then the Vic High situation verges on the absurd. Just look at the real estate around Vic High. There's a multitude of possibilities here. The either/or choice is a false choice, like it always is.

 

 

 

[aastra]

 

Perhaps because the public purse is constantly being raided for an endless series of "important" projects* and unfortunately the line often gets drawn at heritage preservation.

 

If more money is needed then sell off valuable excess property. Folks, none of the excuses stand up to any scrutiny.

[Nparker]

If more money is needed then sell off valuable excess property...

Then it behooves those who share your concerns to put the pressure on all levels of government (school boards, civic, provincial etc.) to make this standard operating procedure.

[aastra]

In the very same neighbourhood there's excess property at Oaklands School. Just a few blocks away there's a ton of property at Lansdowne. You could literally sell off a city-block sized chunk of Lansdowne's field and most people wouldn't even notice that it was gone. How about Uplands School? You think some of that might be worth something? They care so much about the taxpayer's burden and yet they never clue in to this potential.

[aastra]

 

...to make this standard operating procedure.

 

It doesn't have to be standard operating procedure. There's only one Vic High in B.C. and only one Fernwood neighbourhood. It's a very exceptional case, to state the obvious. Selling excess land is a strategy that shouldn't be off the table by default. Exceptional strategies for exceptional circumstances.

 

The false a/b choice preys on popular ignorance. Do you want a punch in the face and a punch in the gut, or would you prefer just a punch in the face? We should prefer neither. Do something good, that works for everyone.

Edited by aastra, 25 March 2018 - 01:59 PM.

[johnk]

I've never understood why Lansdowne School needs so much land. My daughter went there for two years and said she never went near the Shelbourne end of the property (Hillside mall being more compelling).
As aastra said, sell off half and it wouldn't be missed. Prime residential land wasting when land values are at a premium in the core. The same goes for Uplands "campus", closed years ago and now used for the offices of the District 61 International Student Program.
Jeez, if the tall foreheads at SD61 are freaked out at selling why not do 99-year leases and at least get some cash flow to buy erasers and blackboard chalk.

[Dr.Strangelove]

In the very same neighbourhood there's excess property at Oaklands School. Just a few blocks away there's a ton of property at Lansdowne. You could literally sell off a city-block sized chunk of Lansdowne's field and most people wouldn't even notice that it was gone. How about Uplands School? You think some of that might be worth something? They care so much about the taxpayer's burden and yet they never clue in to this potential.

 

There are 6 properties that District 61 owns that I know of that are currently being leased out because the district didn't have enough students to justify using the properties for schools at the time. Uplands is used as an international school, Sun Dance & Lampson St. Schools are leased out to the French District  as Satellite schools for Victor Brodeur,,The Bank St. School building next to Sun Dance is leased by the Victoria College of Art, and Richmond school is currently leased by the Sides Program.  The district of course is very invested in Real Estate, so they hold on to those properties knowing that the student population fluctuates over the years.

 

It is my guess that Richmond (once all seismic upgrades) are done to the elementary schools will be re-opened as a fully functional school for the neighbourhood. Sun Dance, hard to say because it is such a small school. The Bank St. School next to it I think could merge with Sun Dance to serve as one school with two separate buildings, Lampson St. School is actually quite a lovely building, but I could only see it re-opening as an elementary if the population of Esquimalt grows bigger. Uplands......that could easily re-open right now as an elementary because Campus View & Willows, which are down the street from it are operating at OVER CAPACITY.  A 3rd elementary would work well or that that area.

[Cassidy]

Tearing down Vic High is only an option if you have zero connection to the City of Victoria.

 

If you do have a connection to the City of Victoria, then you already know that doing whatever is required to maintain the current structure is in the best interest of the City, and all who live here ... past, present, and future.

 

BTW, simply living in the City of Victoria doesn't automatically translate into being "connected" to it ... that takes a little bit of ones heart and soul.

 

Frankly, anybody who advocates tearing down Vic High in a public fashion at this early point in time is probably uninformed and disconnected ... as no logical mind would advocate such a thing before running every possible scenario as to how to keep Vic High for the next 100 and then 200 years.

 

To jump on the "tear it down" bandwagon so early in the process betrays a lack of connection to the City of Victoria, and renders ones opinion highly questionable in terms of motive, and actual deep understanding of the issue.