399 replies to this topic

[LJ]

I think you refer to the Stores Building:

http://www.historicp...eu.aspx?id=2649

http://www.bcpcc.com...ance_stores.pdf

That's the place, thanks Holden.

[tedward]

I think you refer to the Stores Building:

Ah, CPR not HBC. Thanks for the link. A lovely little building.

[Hotel Mike]

Joni Mitchell:
"They paved paradise / And put up a parking lot"

You're so right Dasmo. The terminology defines the discussion. When opponents of the idea use the term "paving" they want people to think asphalt. I think they'll end up having to back off this part of the plan because of public protest.

[aastra]

But if it's literally the correct term, what term should they be using as an ethical alternative?

[Schnook]

Where did this stuff come from?

http://www.bingthoma...-harbour-study/

Oh... My... God. Talk about a recipe for disaster. Yeah, it would be very interesting to know where this came from. This needs to be hammered down FAST. If somebody has an urge to build more tickytacks, maybe they can do it over at Dockside, but for Heaven's sake, leave the Inner Harbour alone.

[Danma]

^ You mean encourage new businesses and residents to come to the city and improve our economy and diversity at the same time? Geez you must be from Vancouver or something. That is practically blasphemy in this city...

(By the way I agree completely)

Hear hear. I moved here from Calgary last year so I still can't wrap my head around why some folks here in town wouldn't want to have more places where people can, you know, work and make money and raise families? Because that's bad?

My person dream vision is for the CRD to grow to about 1 million+ people, with a monorail straight from Langford to the Ferry terminal, condos and townhouses all along Douglas and Blanchard and through the West Shore. Make Victoria a great tech capital. Great restaurants everywhere, bike-only roads across the entire CRD and the E&N bullet train delivering people up and down the island. One can dream...

(I'm sure the above description would make the NIMBYs lose their minds!)

[dasmo]

"what term should they be using as an ethical alternative?"

For example let's compare:
"ripping out the legislature lawn from the street to a point just past the giant sequoia tree and paving it."
with
"replacing part of the legislature lawn, the two sidewalks and the asphalt road with a contiguous public square that integrates both green elements improved public space design." One could also add to that "while reducing the long term financial and environmental impact of maintaining the lawn."

[G-Man]

Oh... My... God. Talk about a recipe for disaster. Yeah, it would be very interesting to know where this came from. This needs to be hammered down FAST. If somebody has an urge to build more tickytacks, maybe they can do it over at Dockside, but for Heaven's sake, leave the Inner Harbour alone.

And there I was thinking that it looked really good. Certainly better than a parking lot or three. It is a concept massing so it would be up for debate as to the make up of each building but I would love to see a master plan by the city that looked like this.

I plan on saying as much to the city when I get a chance. With the exception of the actual causeway the inner harbour is currently a giant heap of crap. The fact that we promote it so much is an embarassment.

Crap 1- Parking lots along wharf street
Crap 2 - Belleville Terminal and Clipper Terminal
Crap 3 - Northern Junk and connection past JSB
Crap 4 - Songhees (though I do like the OPR)

[baconnbits]

And there I was thinking that it looked really good. Certainly better than a parking lot or three. It is a concept massing so it would be up for debate as to the make up of each building but I would love to see a master plan by the city that looked like this.

I plan on saying as much to the city when I get a chance. With the exception of the actual causeway the inner harbour is currently a giant heap of crap. The fact that we promote it so much is an embarassment.

Crap 1- Parking lots along wharf street
Crap 2 - Belleville Terminal and Clipper Terminal
Crap 3 - Northern Junk and connection past JSB
Crap 4 - Songhees (though I do like the OPR)

Exactly. 100% agree. i broadly like that design (subject to a few alterations) on the basis that it is a mix of commercial, retail and residential (probably less resi than the others). as it stands, the inner harbour is simply full of potential. all along wharf street, until you reach the causeway, there is nothing to do. no way to take advantage of the beautiful location other than to sit on a bench and at one small portion, eat really good fish n chips. the harbor as is, is a waste. songhees is dead and filled with high end residential (much of which looks very dated). the roundhouse will go someways to bringing this area back to life.
fishermans wharf is a positive. once you get passed there and closer to the inner harbor proper, it is dead. the refurb of the wax museum building will hopefully partially address this. the undersea gardens is, to be honest, a relatively useless amenity that is only used by tourists (whose numbers are declining and who typically really only come from late spring to early fall).
the causeway is dead unless its the summer.
please - spare me and don't say we need to preserve the inner harbor. the inner harbor is in a long term state of decay precisely because people advocate 'preserving it'

[Schnook]

Fair enough. I hope my criticism isn't taken personally, especially since I agree with each of your points in retrospect. I repent.

In general, the little canyons of apartments slapped up behind OPR are a mistake. I know owners of beautiful units in the first waterfront complex who are disgusted by what followed. With the completion of Promontory, it will be hard to stuff many more people into the area unless developers start building up and out over the water. (Give 'em time - and better market conditions.)

We talked before about the possibility of integrating the marine terminals with the old CPR building. I still think that idea is wonderfully inspired, but haven't seen it mentioned in any recent coverage. Suppose there's not much interest because there would be little room for premium living or office space.

Northern Junk is terrible, but doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

[dasmo]

Agree, good bones there and it's riding on dem bones. If done right, maybe some of us locals might hang out in these areas...

[baconnbits]

Fair enough. I hope my criticism isn't taken personally, especially since I agree with each of your points in retrospect. I repent.

Northern Junk is terrible, but doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

wasn't after you personally there - was just pre-empting any potential 'preserve the harbor' comments.

i will add however to the 'paved paradise' cohort - if you're facing the potential public courtyard at the leg, turn around and look at the parking lots below you.

do you think the northern junk site as it stand is terrible or the proposal?
i quite like the proposal. there are aspects i would change (the johnson street side) but it can't be perfect and as the site currently stands, it is far from perfect...much further than the proposal.
the city got some altreations for the better, the more open courtyard and courtyard entrance.
the developer will improve the walkway connecting to the main part of the inner harbor, he will preserve and renovate the old buildings.
it is a good development and we should consider ourselves so lucky that, despite various members of council (cough ben isitt, cough) a developer has decided he would like to undertake a risky develpoment in the city, that will serve to improve a long neglected part of town.
let's face it, that area as is, despite its potential, is a terrible. it will improve with gentrification only and part of the way to speed up gentrification is to actively develop.
this site and the one across it are positives. if people complain that they detract from the views, blocking ones ability to see the harbor as you drive past in a car, then let its impending existence serve as the impetus for you to push the city to properly developing the harbor side of wharf street.

[aastra]

In general, the little canyons of apartments slapped up behind OPR are a mistake. I know owners of beautiful units in the first waterfront complex who are disgusted by what followed.

Are you seriously defending first-generation Songhees buildings while also criticizing the northern junk proposal? Before I go on a huge rant here I just want to make sure that I'm actually reading what I think I'm reading.

[Mike K.]

Songhees is a tragedy. I grew up watching each of those buildings getting built and even then wondered why the architecture was so bland and the neighbourhood so void of commercial activity, and therefore vibrancy.

Unfortunately the usual suspects also had their fingers in the Dockside Green pot which resulted in too little density, too much hype about how little density, and height, is needed to make a project viable. So take note, developers, they said. Unfortunately Dockside is now stuck in time and who knows when it will move forward.

Now the same forces that brought us the blandness of Songhees and decried density at Dockside are telling us Northern Junk is a travesty.

Enough already! This city doesn't deserve another bland, nondescript and muted waterfront blunder.

[aastra]

No time for a rant but for me it comes down to this: the northern junk proposal celebrates the old town and the things that make the city of Victoria unique and interesting. That proposal represents everything that Victoria SHOULD be doing with the inner harbour waterfront. It extends the old town format and atmosphere right down to the water.

As for the Songhees, the architecture and format of the Songhees is an affront to the old town and to all of the things that make the city of Victoria unique and interesting. The Songhees mocks Victoria. The Songhees is a big chunk of Saanich-style suburban blandness inserted right into the city core, forever giving downtown the proverbial finger. No offense to Saanich, but there's plenty of Saanich in Saanich. We didn't need a bunch of it on the inner harbour.

[aastra]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying Saanich stuff is somehow lousy by default. That's not what I mean. I'd gladly take the architecture of Sayward Hill in place of the older Songhees stuff. The overall format and atmosphere would still be the same (inappropriately suburban) but the buildings would be much more attractive.

[Hotel Mike]

I agree aastra. The lack of any activity on the Songhees makes it lifeless and far from being any kind of real neighbourhood. Not only did they build project after project, but when some plans called for a commercial element, the Songhees condo owners screamed bloody murder...just like they did with the marina. In fact they may have ultimately killed the marina, because there doesn't appear to be anything going on.

However, Shutters is decent looking. It would look good from the water if the ugly Pebble Beach condos weren't there.

[dasmo]

Songhees is a stain... Hopefully the Roundhouse will help round it out. Too bad it was built in the 90's. New Urbanism hadn't quite taken root. A mixed use community more like Selkirk would have been much nicer....

[amor de cosmos]

erickson in the colonist in 2004:

Elsewhere, he envisages an amphitheatre linking Wharf Street to the harbour in an area now used as a parking lot, with a covered arcade for pedestrians on the side of the street facing the water.

no arthur, that sort of thing should be in front of the legislature! holy schnikies, the bottlenecks at either end of the causeway there were really noticable last night. it was single-file going up or down.

[amor de cosmos]

emily carr drawing


http://www.bcarchive...87/pdp00649.txt

what's that building just to the left of those masts? could it be that church on gorge rd?