Jump to content

      



























CANCELLED
Johnson Street Gateway
Uses: condo, commercial
Address: 1314-1324 Wharf Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 8
Condo units: (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR, 3BR, penthouse, live-work)
Sales status: in planning
The eight-storey Johnson Street Gateway/Northern Junk condominium and ground floor commercial development is c... (view full profile)
Learn more about Johnson Street Gateway on Citified.ca
Photo

[Downtown Victoria] Johnson Street Gateway (Northern Junk) | condos; commercial | 7-storeys | Cancelled in 2019

Condo Commercial

  • Please log in to reply
1740 replies to this topic

#601 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 07:34 AM

In this case the City has given us no choice but to object to the situation given Ken Johnson's position as president of a lobby group and chair of a City Hall advisory committee. He could refrain from participating due to a conflict of interest, yes?

I'm curious if the TC or other local media will run a story on this topic now that we've aired it?

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#602 Bob Fugger

Bob Fugger

    Chief Factor

  • Member
  • 3,190 posts
  • LocationSouth Central CSV

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:11 AM

Distasteful, but I'm unaware of any rules that disallow it. Committee members are drawn from the public and they are not expected to hold their tongue like Council or Staff are.


The principles of natural justice disallow, imho. It is clear to me that Ken Johnson ought to be disqualified from the HAC because of a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The rub for the judiciary would be defining "decision-maker." In this case, the Chair of an advisory committee de jure has no authority to make decisions: only to provide advice. De facto, as Chair of the advisory committee, his advice carries the weight of decision - or at least enough to sway decision-makers. If I was running Reliance Properties, I would move to have him recused because of his previously stated position on this issue.

#603 Ken Johnson

Ken Johnson
  • Member
  • 97 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:46 AM

Your thoughtful comments are appreciated.

The membership of the City of Victoria Heritage Advisory Committee draws upon various community stakeholders to advise on matters relating to the conservation of heritage resources. Among these is the Hallmark Society, local architects, community planners, historians and others with an interest in the preservation of historical buildings. I am sure the City would welcome additional applicants to sit upon this and other committees.

Within the area of the City known as 'Old Town", the Committee can also speak of the suitability of the design of new buildings as these must conform to the Design Guidelines; Old Town, Victoria, B.C. These can be viewed at "http://www.victoria.ca/common/pdfs/plnpln_hrtgd_final2.pdf#search="Design Guidelines Old town" .

It is easy to say that the proposed development meets the Guidelines in a general way (City of Victoria Planning Department) but the real question is: do they meet the intent? The Hallmark Heritage Society is of the opinion the design of the current proposal does not meet this minimal standard.

The Hallmark Heritage Society is in agreement with the Developer's proposal to rehabilitate the Gold Rush Warehouses and to provide access to to the foreshore, although there are some concerns regarding the parking lot entry on the south side of the building at 1314 Wharf Street.

On a general note, the Hallmark Heritage Society does not receive any funding from the City of Victoria. We are wholly dependent upon our membership and small, very small and occasional, grants from Gaming. The Society did not take any position regarding the replacement of the Johnson Street bridge as the preservation of municipal infrastructure is a difficult subject: Should we also preserve old roads, sidewalks, sewers? All infrastructure needs to be replaced as the City grows.
The Hallmark Heritage Society is not against high rise buildings or skyscrapers but we do feel that the have no place within Old Town or other areas with historical significance to how the City of Victoria came to exist.

#604 Greg

Greg
  • Member
  • 3,362 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:54 AM

The Hallmark Heritage Society is not against high rise buildings or skyscrapers but we do feel that the have no place within Old Town or other areas with historical significance to how the City of Victoria came to exist.


It always amuses me when people think battling to maintain the status quo is the greatest way to pay homage to those who built what is there by doing exactly the opposite. The history of how Victoria came to exist is filled with stories of adventure, risk-taking, building of trade routes, supplying the gold rush. It was written by men with a passion for change, with a desire to build something better. So by all means lets honour them by preserving some old buildings in stasis.

#605 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:54 AM

Thank you Mr. Johnson for your willingness to participate.

While I agree that the Hallmark Society is welcome to decide when and when not to oppose things, I think it would be hard to compare a heritage road or sewer to a bridge. In fact I think that similar groups have opposed the removal of similar items in Vancouver (Lions Gate), Portland and San Francisco just to name a couple.

However that is IMO now past and we are looking at this project.

My largest concern with the Society's objection, is the contention which you have brought up numerous times, that it is not good enough to meet the Old Town Guidelines, which were developed in consultation with the public and relelvant stakeholder groups over a long period of time, but instead have to meet your interpretation of the guidelines.

This is grossly unfair, not transparent and an insult to the consultation done with the public and the work of city staff on developing them.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#606 VicBooster

VicBooster
  • Member
  • 200 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:59 AM

Mr. Johnson, I believe the issue at hand is whether your position as Chair of the Heritage Advisory Committee and President of the Hallmark Society that is vocally against this project put you in a conflict of interest position?

The Society did not take any position regarding the replacement of the Johnson Street bridge as the preservation of municipal infrastructure is a difficult subject: Should we also preserve old roads, sidewalks, sewers? All infrastructure needs to be replaced as the City grows.


With all due respect, rehabilitation of the existing bridge was an option. Where was the Hallmark Society when replacement was being pushed over rehabilitation?

The Society's involvement in nonsensical conservation of walls, failure to involve itself in a meaningful way over the Johnson Street Bridge replacement and now the opposition to this project, that so many Victorians support, further alienates it from the general population.

The Hallmark Heritage Society is not against high rise buildings or skyscrapers but we do feel that the have no place within Old Town or other areas with historical significance to how the City of Victoria came to exist.


Nobody wants skyscrapers in old town. This proposal is neither a highrise building nor a skyscraper.

#607 Ken Johnson

Ken Johnson
  • Member
  • 97 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 10:39 AM

I assure you that the Hallmark Society is not a group that resists all change. Recently, we wrote to the City of Victoria stating we were in favour of the proposal to add density to the rear of the buildings at 536 Pandora and Fan Tan Alley. Change is inevitable and necessary but in order to prevent the complete loss of our heritage, change must be managed.

New buildings within older landscapes require care in design. The creation of a large curved block with token inserts of brick masonry and minimal setbacks is not indicative of that care. I suggest the readers review some architectural designs from Europe and elsewhere where modern buildings are adjacent to heritage structures. Let you imaginations loose. Can we do this in a better way?

Will the new be heritage 150 years from now?

Many of you express appreciation for what Victoria is: would it be the same if we allowed poor architecture to dominate our city?

Go to http://www.tradition...m/webinars2011/ and watch Differences of Opinion: How Do You Balance 'Compatibility' and 'Differentiation' When You're Adding On to an Historic Structure?

The Old Town Design Guidelines are not prescriptive and need opinions.

#608 VicBooster

VicBooster
  • Member
  • 200 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 10:52 AM

I assure you that the Hallmark Society is not a group that resists all change. Recently, we wrote to the City of Victoria stating we were in favour of the proposal to add density to the rear of the buildings at 536 Pandora and Fan Tan Alley. Change is inevitable and necessary but in order to prevent the complete loss of our heritage, change must be managed.


But once again you are sidestepping the issue. The developer of this project is not destroying heritage buildings to build new buildings. You are making it sound like this proposal is doing away with heritage buildings when that couldn't be any further from the truth.

What is happening here is not loss of heritage, it is preservation of heritage. What we also gain is reclamation of an area of downtown that has attracted drug activity, and the addition of new architecture in our downtown core.

Old Town is not a museum. It is an evolving district with restored heritage buildings and modern architecture.

#609 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,974 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 02 February 2012 - 10:55 AM

The Society did not take any position regarding the replacement of the Johnson Street bridge as the preservation of municipal infrastructure is a difficult subject: Should we also preserve old roads, sidewalks, sewers?

With this sentence the entire purpose and utility of this group is washed away in ignorance. To compare a bridge to a sidewalk is absurd. And yes, in some places sewers of historical interest have been preserved. Oh, and I am pretty sure that a historic sidewalk just around the corner was preserved Mr Johnson. Perhaps you have heard of Waddington Alley?

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#610 Jon S

Jon S
  • Member
  • 227 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 10:56 AM

As applicant we are pleased that we have on our team the most respected Heritage Architect in B.C., Paul Merrick. We also have one of the most respected Heritage Conservation Consultants, Don Luxton and Associates preparing the Heritage Conservation Plan. It appears from the staff report that this team has been convincing to the professional staff of the City, both Planning and Heritage, that the applicable guidelines and Heritage Conservation objectives have been not only met but exceeded.
Jon Stovell
President
Reliance Properties

#611 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 10:58 AM

New buildings within older landscapes require care in design. The creation of a large curved block with token inserts of brick masonry and minimal setbacks is not indicative of that care. I suggest the readers review some architectural designs from Europe and elsewhere where modern buildings are adjacent to heritage structures. Let you imaginations loose. Can we do this in a better way?


The Old Town Design Guidelines are not prescriptive and need opinions.


You are making it sound like the Hallmark Society might be OK with the general massing of this building, but object to aspects of its design and finishing? If so, that would be helpful to state, rather than a general objection to the whole proposal.

#612 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,409 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 11:03 AM

...I suggest the readers review some architectural designs from Europe and elsewhere where modern buildings are adjacent to heritage structures. Let you imaginations loose. Can we do this in a better way...


I suspect we cannot. Europeans seem to have been VERY successful in incorporating very contemporary designs immediately adjacent to much older and more historical structures than we have in Victoria. We should try and emulate the European example rather than fight it every step of the way, as the Hallmark Society is doing with this proposal. I honestly feel the developer has presented a very evolved plan to retain/restore heritage alongside suitable new structures.

BTW I also feel there is an air of conflict of interest regarding Mr. Johnson's participation on the Heritage Advisory Council and this proposal. He should take himself off the HAC for the discussions based on his clear bias toward Northern Junk project.

#613 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 11:21 AM

I have started a new thread titled "What is Heritage".

#614 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 21,503 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 02 February 2012 - 11:39 AM

Herritage is a collapsed brick wall after a moderate earthquake.

I agree with VicBooster - Old Town is not a museum. The Hallmark Society should be elated that a developer wants to incorporate the Northern Junk buildings into a new development and refurbish them into useful buildings.

At first I was against the JSB replacement. Now that I see how this area as a whole can be improved with the new development and relocation of the bridge I think this is a fantastic proposal.

Delaying or outright disallowing this development isn't doing the city any good. This is the best proposal we have seen to date and likely the best we'll see for a long time to come.

The area around the buildings is a wasteland of people of questionable character and illegal activity. I sure don't see the value in preserving that.

Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#615 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 11:53 AM

Seb has hit the nail on the head. This area is a wasteland. So is the Janion property. Frankly, this part of the city is run down, ugly and depressing. It's full of abandoned shopping carts and empty beer cans when there should be stores, restaurants and residents.

We should be jumping for joy that a developer has worked so diligently to put together such a well thought out and smartly designed project, on what should be a prime, vibrant piece of property.

This project will bring life, color and residences to a key area of the city while preserving heritage. It will fit in beautifully with old town and the new bridge.

Reliance has put together a proposal that is a home run and the hallmark society and city councillors who oppose this development need to give their heads a shake.

#616 SamCB

SamCB
  • Member
  • 665 posts
  • Locationvictoria

Posted 02 February 2012 - 12:05 PM

Thanks for being willing to join the discussion, Ken.

Does the heritage advisory committee typically make suggestions on how specific aspects of the proposed design can be improved, making it more in line with the perceived intent of the city design guidelines? Or do they keep the criticisms very generalized (as we've seen so far) and proceed with a yes/no vote?

I think both sides of the camp can agree that the current state of the buildings and the land surrounding them is less than ideal. I really want to know in what specific ways should this proposal be amended to make it more in line with your perception of the intent of the old town design guidelines?

#617 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 01:24 PM

Seb has hit the nail on the head. This area is a wasteland. So is the Janion property. Frankly, this part of the city is run down, ugly and depressing. It's full of abandoned shopping carts and empty beer cans when there should be stores, restaurants and residents.


Tourists see this. Many locals not so much. The swath of empty land between the Janion and the Northern Junk is derelict, un-inviting and by night scummy and potentially dangerous (I've personally seen an assault on the parking lot beside the Janion).

The problem with aesthetics and the current state of things is we can can get very used to living in and engaging among very derelict quarters if that is what one sees on a daily basis.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#618 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 02:06 PM

This proposal fits the design guidelines for old town infinitely better than the weird, gigantic grassy traffic median, parking lot and unused buildings that are currently on this site.

#619 Greg

Greg
  • Member
  • 3,362 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 03:38 PM

I'd be thrilled to see the alternate proposal that the Hallmark Society surely must have. If it is better than the Reliance proposal I'm sure most of us would be glad to support it.

But if for some reason the society does not actually have an alternate proposal, and is just sitting on the sidelines bashing the one that has been brought forward, then the obvious comparison is between the Reliance proposal and the current state of the property. And I genuinely don't see how anyone arguing in favor of the current state of the property can package their argument as pro-Victoria, pro-heritage, pro-tourism or really anything else other than anti-change.

#620 Ken Johnson

Ken Johnson
  • Member
  • 97 posts

Posted 02 February 2012 - 03:51 PM

1. No one within the Hallmark Heritage Society is attempting to preserve the grassy median.
2. The Hallmark Heritage Society has stated previously and continues to state their support for the work the Developer is doing to rehabilitate the heritage designated buildings at 1314 and 1316/1318 Wharf Street. These designated buildings are not at risk for demolition.
3. No member of any committee or any City Councilor comes to the table as a blank sheet. We all have opinions. At the committee stage, the developer will present his proposal (his opinion) and, after discussion, the Committee will present its opinion in the form of a recommendation to Council.
4. The Committee does not have a design function. that problem rests with the Developer's Architects and the constraints the Developer places upon them.
5. The Hallmark Heritage Society is of the opinion that the current proposal does not meet the Old Town Design Guidelines. It certainly does not meet the Official Community Plan or the Harbour Plan.
6. I am a representative of the Hallmark Heritage Society on the Heritage Advisory Committee. Other members of the committee are Hallmark members as well. Members of the City of Victoria planning department staff may well be members. As far as I know, we have no members of the Skyscraper Society on board but it is not to late.

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users