[Downtown Victoria] The Union | Condos | 5- and 5-storeys | U/C

[VicHockeyFan]

I agree Holden. Statements like saying it's not worth responding or debating don't seem right.

Let's debate, although I think Allan will be outnumbered on the pro side.

[Allan E]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

I agree Holden. Statements like saying it's not worth responding or debating don't seem right.

Let's debate, although I think Allan will be outnumbered on the pro side.

Thanks to Mr. Holden West for his suggestion promoting debate and discussion , rather than namecalling and kindergarten sandbox behavior. Also to Aastra
for her taking the time, to research and share some images of the area.
With all due respect,
perhaps I did stretch the figures about the loss of DIRECT SUNLIGHT , (note direct sunlight ) : for 2/3rds of the year; its more true probably to say 1/2 the year.
The images supplied by Aastra, as far as I can tell, are depictions of this area, perhaps in June or July, when the sun is much higher in the sky- the angles show this.
I'm was also particularily referring to the north side of Fisgard, from Store St to Govt St.
For half the year, the sun is much lower in the sky, from Sept/Oct. to say mid-March . Currently , during those times, there is sunlight from about 2pm until the rest of the day until sunset. During these times, with a five story building, this side of the street will be in shade ( although I could be wrong of course), Also , regardless of direct light, a good deal of light in urban spaces is bounced sunlight, sunlight hitting buildings higher than street level, ( creating ambient light), which, without question, will be reduced. I don't think there can be any question about that.
Also, of no interest probably to anyone , except those of us, who are lucky enough to live and work down here , the height of this project WILL eliminate the last 2-3 hours of the direct sunlight and sunset of all of us on west side of this development.In Chinatown.
We do enjoy the sunsets here, and its a natural response I think, to have feelings about the loss of that.
I have an extremely good friend, who is an expert on Chinese heritage, and one point he's made to me , which I think is extremely valid, is that , yes these buildings were constructed 100 to 140 years ago, and although the term " Urban Planning" didn't exist then , they were actually extremely intelligent about these very issues such as the height of a grouping of buidings and how it would affect the overall neighborhood. On an living basis. For those actually living there. There was actually a reason why they built these structures to a 3 storey height and limited it at that. They did have the means, obviously, to build 5 - 6 storeys. This was a conscious decision on their part. I think on some level, we assume that, although technology as such didn't exist at that time, there is an assumption that we know better now.
His point was , that this, truly, is,a huge aspect of Heritage. Our Heritage. How we respect that, or ignore it, is the legacy we , or in this instance, Anthem Properties,create our own Heritage.
I guess the point I was trying to make earlier, with all due respect to those interested in discussing this development, and Anthem Properties itself,
is that there seems to be a discrepency in their marketing psychology and concept , and the physicality of what they will be selling and building.
In relation to the neighborhood. What are , or could have been the alternatives ? I don't know , I do have some ideas ,but it doesn't matter now. Its a done deal. God bless the people here that are interested in discussing it; but its actually only academic at this point.
The backgroung to this property is to my knowledge :
There was a height variance 20 plus years ago, passed by City Council,when the land was owned by the city.... The City Of Victoria had plans to build a 7-8 storey parking lot ??? Yikes !..... and 20 years later, voila.
(PS - my spellchecks not working in case you noticed )-
Have a great weekend ! Allan

[Bob Fugger]

I think the best use for this lot is for it to remain an overgrown, fetid blight. You know, in perpetuity. Everybody wins - except the developer. But who gives a **** because all developers are always evil, like Rich Uncle Pennybags, Uncle Scrooge McDuck or some other plutocrat who happens to be some parent's brother.

[Nparker]

Originally Posted by Allan E

...[when] these buildings were constructed 100 to 140 years ago...there was actually a reason why they built these structures to a 3 storey height and limited it at that...

And today there is a deliberate need to build higher, not because of technology, but because anything of lower density on this site would not be profitable.

[Mike K.]

The backgroung to this property is to my knowledge :
There was a height variance 20 plus years ago, passed by City Council,when the land was owned by the city.... The City Of Victoria had plans to build a 7-8 storey parking lot ??? Yikes !..... and 20 years later, voila

.
10 years ago the city gave the green light for Bambu, a 7-storey project that fell through even though sales were strong. Anthem bought the property about 5 years ago, if not more, and spent years liasing with the community/city hall before settling on the project we now know as Union.

I've never heard of a variance being granted for a structure taller than Bambu at any point in time on that lot.

[G-Man]

I believe that the parking lot plan goes back to the Chinatown rejuvenation of the late 70s early 80s certainly by 20 years ago the plan had been shelved.

[Allan E]

Originally Posted by Nparker

And today there is a deliberate need to build higher, not because of technology, but because anything of lower density on this site would not be profitable.

The qualifier to your remark - "not be profitable " - should perhaps read "not as profitable."
There have been several developments here in Chinatown , particularily the live -work units in Dragon Alley , which exhibit a brilliant
architectural (SP) and design triumph , that mesh seamlessly into the surrounding urban space. I'm sure that project MUST have been profitable.
or it wouldn't have been undertaken otherwise.The units are also actually 5 storeys by the way.
A property as large as The Buckerfields lot, could potentially have , perhaps 100 units of that type of dwelling, and also be profitable, but, not as profitable .They would have been ( note , would have, as I mentioned, its a done deal), infinitely exciting as an urban space, sensitive to the surrounding environs. A warren to explore.
And yes,of course, the developer, as a property owner, has every right to construct whatever he wishes , within reason , with profitabity being perhaps a primary concern. As a delicate " intact" Heritage area , the second oldest in North America , and "intact" , I was simply pointing out , the ironic nature of their marketing concept, the name of the project itself , in relation to its height , and the potential impact of that height , to the Heritage neighborhood that surrounds it.
Also, my hats off to Anthem Propertities, as the land and soil itself , is contaminated , and will require considerable expense to remove , unlike the previous project,"Bamboo" which had 50-100 dumptrucks a day for 2-3 weeks, removing the soil , loading it into barges at the bottom of Swift St. which went ? where, ? - hopefully not dumped in the ocean. Only then, after 2-3 weeks of a stream of dumptrucks, the soil was then tested for contaminants, found to contain them, and the Bamboo project ground to a halt , due to the impact, perhaps ,to the profitabilty to the Bamboo project .
I could be mistaken about these turn of events, but not mistaken about the fact that the soil is indeed contaminated , and will require careful and costly removal. With all due respect, Thank you Anthem Properties .
Shortly thereafter, a mysterious fire broke out ,in the then abandoned and condemned heritage buildings on the Pandora side of the property : the fire was barely contained for some time ,extinguished by Victoria's Excellent Fire Department, as it was close to burning all of this side of Chinatown down, with the floating embers , and the nature of the roofs being so closely connected. My understanding is the owner/developer, was then able to collect considerable insurance from the damage to his property, although required by the city, to reinforce , the standing heritage facade, which is what we see today. Which will be incorporated in the Union design.
Just a little background on this property, and what we see there today.

Please feel free to correct me, I may be wrong, or mistaken on any, and all of these facts or events. I'd be interested to know.

[Mike K.]

Let's not be so quick to forget that many of Chinatown's properties are rat-infested, lower-end housing and retail spaces. Such living quarters are tolerated by a very specific clientele that don't mind the decrepit living conditions or retail spaces in need of upgrades.

As much as we all love Chinatown, let's not pretend that the current landowners aren't overly concerned with their profit at the end of the month. The condition of the buildings speak for themselves.

As for Union, it is a major step in the right direction on a massive downtown lot that has sat empty for decades. And just because the project is made up of two buildings and not a collection of individual edifices developed by different developers doesn't make it any less qualified or fitting for the neighbourhood.

[Candarius]

As someone who goes past this site regularly on my way home from work...please build. Soon. While I am not quite at the point where I will say 'Anything is better than the weed infested lot', from what I have seen of the current plans...they are good and will definitely be a massive improvement over the current wasted space.

Even if I did like the Bambu name better than Union :-)

[Bob Fugger]

It's funny how armchair urban planners come out of the woodwork only when a project manifests in own their neighbourhood. All of a sudden, they know what's best. However, up until then, they couldn't be bothered to discuss how other projects mesh and contribute to the vibrancy of the City. It's too bad, as people might otherwise take their comments on this particular project as informed and non-biased, rather than steeped in NIMBYism.

[Mike K.]

The groundbreaking ceremony for Union is scheduled for 11AM today.

[Linear Thinker]

Excavator and truck on site this morning...

[G-Man]

I will have to go see for myself but this makes my heart happy!

[jonny]

I can confirm that the site has been cleared of grass and debris and it appears as though excavation is commencing.

[gumgum]

This is the most important current development for d/t imo.

[Mike K.]

Excavation at the Union, photo taken early this afternoon.

[jonny]

Originally Posted by gumgum

This is the most important current development for d/t imo.

The Hudson development is more important IMO. It's larger and in a much more prominent location on two main arteries and adjacent to the stadium. People come into Victoria and see a mess and some big holes.

I do agree that ths site is important though. The Union is closely followed by the Era site and the motel by Crystal Gardens.

Dockside Green, while not technically downtown, needs to get going again too.

[G-Man]

The hole here is certainly a lot larger now. Looking forward to this being a real hold with a crane poking out. Got to wonder if they have found anything cool as this is a pretty historic area.

[concorde]

Originally Posted by G-Man

The hole here is certainly a lot larger now. Looking forward to this being a real hold with a crane poking out. Got to wonder if they have found anything cool as this is a pretty historic area.

I would highly doubt they would put a tower crane on 2 wood frame buildings

[G-Man]

Really? I thought I heard that was the plan... That's okay I would be happy to just see them pour some concrete for the garage.

[MarkoJ]

May 27th, 2012.

[Dylan Leblanc]

Wow, good!

[Mike K.]

This land isn't contaminated, is it?

[Sparky]

^^ Welcome to Vibrant Victoria Acorn.

[G-Man]

They would have to have done soil testing and if it was determined to be contaminated than they would have to leave the lot farrow for a number of years so that it could drain and then it needs to be disposed of in a specific way. That said from all the photos of this lot from the past it looks as if it had buildings similar to the rest of Chinatown rather than anything else.