1571 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

...Something that I find so disappointing is the 20-years that were spent limiting new construction to 15-storeys. Now that Victoria has matured into taller buildings a huge swath of the modern city has towers in the 12-15-storey range, and they look ridiculously short by comparison to the new generation of massing.

I've been thinking/saying this for years now.

[Brantastic]

I remember saying to an elderly coworker once that a 15 storey building was going to be built kitty corner from my place (Pandora and Vancouver). She instantly looked shocked and disgusted and said "WHOSE BRIGHT IDEA WAS IT TO APPROVE SUCH A MONSTER?". I then wondered if she had even been to Downtown Victoria at any point in the last 50 years or so.

[AllseeingEye]

Just teasing, ASE. I was surprised by the relatively positive feedback so far. Traditionally topics like this have echoed the sentiments you referred to.

Something that I find so disappointing is the 20-years that were spent limiting new construction to 15-storeys. Now that Victoria has matured into taller buildings a huge swath of the modern city has towers in the 12-15-storey range, and they look ridiculously short by comparison to the new generation of massing.

 

 

The best response by far is "NO not enough people in Victoria" whatever the heck that means....

 

Others include:

No!

Nope - too high

A Thumbs Down icon

......and NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

And yeah per RFS' comment re: OLD VICTORIA the replies there would be gold Jerry, GOLD I tell ya!

[Nparker]

I remember saying to an elderly coworker once that a 15 storey building was going to be built kitty corner from my place (Pandora and Vancouver). She instantly looked shocked and disgusted and said "WHOSE BRIGHT IDEA WAS IT TO APPROVE SUCH A MONSTER?"...

Why are so many people afraid of tall(ish) buildings? I seriously don't understand their thinking.

[Brantastic]

One comment said something along the lines of "not enough room for more people in Victoria". Doesn't the construction of 1600 units on a block and a half solve the problem of "not enough room"? There would be "not enough room" if we didn't construct more high-density housing.

Edited by Brantastic, 20 November 2020 - 02:06 PM.

[Nparker]

The best response by far is "NO not enough people in Victoria" whatever the heck that means....

Perhaps this person fears these "monstrous" towers will sit empty, due to a lack of tenants. I mean we have thousands of properties sitting vacant in the CoV now, right? 

[Nparker]

One comment said something along the lines of "not enough room for more people in Victoria"...

After all, the 90,000 or so current residents of the CoV are pushed cheek-to-jowl now.

[Casual Kev]

Put it another way: an interesting downtown (or any decent urban district) is about many different things all coming together. If one big complex injects a massive dose of one flavour, it can be a killer. That's why those big convention center projects and cultural center projects back in the misguided urban destruction renewal era tended to be so harmful. I'm not saying today's projects botch the fundamentals the way those old projects did. Obviously they do a better job nowadays. But the potential to introduce too much of one thing still remains.

 

FYI: That block of Yates is considerably larger than (for example) the average block in downtown Vancouver:

 

London Drugs block in downtown Victoria: 195 meters x 82 meters
Nordstrom block in downtown Victoria: 160 meters x 82 meters

 

I don't disagree with you, but considering many interesting designs get beaten into blandness or oblivion, the problem here is more that residents have an irrational fear of change rather than having genuine concerns over any given project. People preferring Northern Junk to be a literal embodiment of its name rather than any number of interesting choices sums up the city's attitude quite succinctly. 

Edited by Casual Kev, 20 November 2020 - 03:11 PM.

[KdogK]

Intersting how the traffic is coming out on view street,. Interesting that all new builds on yates have to bury their lines . . I feel like we are getting ready for a sky train down yates over to douglas. Those streets are the onlyones without a bikelane plan .. Firehall 1 being station 1 with the crystal pool  on the central school field . But love this design.. Amazing!!

[aastra]

Their design document is really good. Hits on many important considerations. But the images we've seen so far seem to only sort of live up to it.

[Brantastic]

I'm a bit confused by the proposed bike lanes shown in the drawings. It shows two-way buffered bike lanes on the south side of Yates for these two blocks. They call them "protected" bike lanes but drawings show them as painted buffered bike lanes. So will cyclists on Yates coming from Fernwood need to switch to the opposite side of the street for two blocks, then switch back for one block where the existing painted bike lane ends? 

Pages 32-32 here:
https://tender.victo...130143321572752

[Jackerbie]

I'm a bit confused by the proposed bike lanes shown in the drawings. It shows two-way buffered bike lanes on the south side of Yates for these two blocks. They call them "protected" bike lanes but drawings show them as painted buffered bike lanes. So will cyclists on Yates coming from Fernwood need to switch to the opposite side of the street for two blocks, then switch back for one block where the existing painted bike lane ends?

Pages 32-32 here:
https://tender.victo...130143321572752

Likely just there for looks (this is a design document after all, not the plans). Road works will be entirely decided by the City, not the developer.

[Brantastic]

That's what I figured, but thought it was still weird to include it. It refers to it as "the future separated bicycle lane along Yates" as if they are somehow in the know of some certain protected bike lane planned for this street, which wouldn't make any sense.

[UDeMan]

the views from the top floors will be amazing.  

 

although I don't know if could live that high up.  

[Casual Kev]

the views from the top floors will be amazing.  

 

although I don't know if could live that high up.  

 

Once you get woke about the elevator repair oligopoly, you will never want to live or work in a double-digit floor.

[grantpalin]

The anti-height comments are at it as already mentioned. A new-ish theme in comments is about the safety of tall buildings in earthquakes, though I'm aware modern seismic standards are very robust.

[Nparker]

...A new-ish theme in comments is about the safety of tall buildings in earthquakes, though I'm aware modern seismic standards are very robust.

The local anti-height brigade should focus their concerns on the rubble that will be Old Town when the big one hits.

[AllseeingEye]

The anti-height comments are at it as already mentioned. A new-ish theme in comments is about the safety of tall buildings in earthquakes, though I'm aware modern seismic standards are very robust.

 

 

Yeah typical BS nonsense by the "anti-everything" crowd in this town.

 

I have a good buddy who lived and worked in Tokyo for nearly 20 years including in one of the tallest buildings in that city. He experienced multiple earthquakes in his time there including the 9.0 monster in 2011. He steadfastly maintained the safest buildings by a country mile were and are the tallest and most modern structures in the city. It was the much older ones that always turned into what he referred to as 'pancake death-traps'....

 

https://www.bbc.com/...f an earthquake.

[AllseeingEye]

The local anti-height brigade should focus their concerns on the rubble that will be Old Town when the big one hits.

 

Not to mention the Legislative Building which decades after first being discussed and considered is still waiting to be properly retrofitted. If this region gets smacked one day, which we most assuredly will, the last joint in this town you'll want to be in, or anywhere near and particularly the "dome", will be that old stone and mortar death trap.....

[Brantastic]

The anti-height comments are at it as already mentioned. A new-ish theme in comments is about the safety of tall buildings in earthquakes, though I'm aware modern seismic standards are very robust.

Yeah, I've heard this excuse many times. Do they really think that engineers who've designed the thousands of skyscrapers accross Tokyo, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Manila, Jakarta, Vancouver, Seattle, San Francisco, etc. just never considered earthquakes before? Like they've figured something out that no one else thought of yet?