Jump to content

      












PROPOSED
1314-1318 Wharf Street
Uses: rental, commercial
Address: 1314-1318 Wharf Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 6
1314-1318 Wharf Street is a proposal for a six-storey mixed-use rental complex with ground floor retail space ... (view full profile)
Learn more about 1314-1318 Wharf Street on Citified.ca
Photo

[Downtown] 1314-1318 Wharf Street / Northern Junk | Rentals; retail | 6-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
430 replies to this topic

#421 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 34 posts

Posted 07 May 2021 - 03:06 PM

Hearing the councilor’s commentary at this COTW just made me angry. Thorton Joe basically said that she has been convinced that heritage redevelopment should be a labour of love, and not an exercise that results in a return for the developer. Wow, so are we now only going to accept benevolent benefactor’s development proposals for the seismic restoration and protection of the City’s heritage assets? That is like saying owning a local book store should only be the gambit of retired investment bankers or something like that. You know, its no way to make money, they’re boutique- like heritage restoration. What a weird privileged thing to say… or to think. Old Town has got to have something like 100 plus heritage registered buildings that are not seismic upgraded. Yeah lets wait for gifts from developers to protect these?

 

And then Councilor Young saying that he would still prefer to flog the dead horse that was some 8 other proposals for the land adjacent? Yeah, like any of those got any traction with the heritage community either. This position seems more like some sort of internal feud with councilor Isitt because, seemingly, Isitt got his way to force the developer to no longer consider the use of public lands.

 

In both these cases, this seems like a negligent use of the extraordinary power and privilege that comes with being a City of Victoria Councilor. Here we have a derelict piece of land with crumbling buildings at one of the most conspicuous locations in the city. A location that is noted as a priority development location in the official community plan. This is a literal eye sore for the city of Victoria and the linchpin to making a contiguous waterfront pathway. And we have councilor’s saying that they are either only willing to entertain a development that would make no financial sense for the developer or that they are willing to wait for something better to come along. It has been 22 years since the first proposal for this property was considered and over 40 years since this piece of land was used for anything other than a urinal. Councilor Potts nailed it imho. This proposal is a beautiful building, it retains, rehabilitates and seismically upgrades two of the City’s oldest heritage buildings. It provides one of the last pathway connections required for a contiguous waterfront walkway and releases land to the north to complete this amenity. It adds public realm improvements and provides 47 purpose built rental homes. And it finally addresses this eyesore that is emblematic of a city unwilling to make visionary/ progressive/ hard to make decisions. Lets get on with it.


  • Mike K., Greg, grantpalin and 4 others like this

#422 DavidSchell

DavidSchell
  • Member
  • 513 posts

Posted 07 May 2021 - 03:51 PM

It still amazes me why people keep voting for Ben as all he does is say no to any development that comes before him.

 

Being positive and looking at the glass half full can do wonders for your mental health as well as help solve many of the pressing issues facing our city/


  • Danma, A Girl is No one and Victoria Watcher like this

#423 max.bravo

max.bravo
  • Member
  • 286 posts

Posted 07 May 2021 - 08:27 PM

If it’s not gonna turn into condos for normal citizens within our lifetime then BC housing should just buy the site for $60M and turn it into another free housing for addicts project. Their flagship project maybe.
  • Victoria Watcher likes this

#424 A Girl is No one

A Girl is No one
  • Member
  • 1,993 posts

Posted 08 May 2021 - 07:52 PM

Ben would likely be all in for that option

#425 jstovell

jstovell
  • Member
  • 95 posts

Posted 10 May 2021 - 04:51 PM

https://www.cbc.ca/l...8-on-the-island



#426 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 63,327 posts

Posted 13 May 2021 - 07:37 PM

Did I hear that right? It's going to a public hearing?


  • DavidSchell likes this

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


#427 jstovell

jstovell
  • Member
  • 95 posts

Posted 20 May 2021 - 02:21 PM

Another dream.....

 

https://www.timescol...ight-1.24321098

 

This gentlemen has missed or ignored the fact that while simply recirculating our previous themes as a new ideas, that the heietage community opposed these schemes as well and that Victoria City Council has recently formalized their position that they will not sell us the land.

 

Perhaps this former City Manager can arrange to have the current City administration and Council issue a permit for one of these two concepts involving ours and the City property and they we would be happy to commence negotiations with them on a partnership.

 

Until then dealing in reality vs fantasy is probably a better plan to deal with this critical but dead part of the City.

 

Jon Stovell


  • m3m likes this

#428 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 29,067 posts

Posted 20 May 2021 - 02:27 PM

Roughley lost me at "Reliance should be required to buy the adjacent city-owned lands". Does he know nothing of the history of this development proposal over the past decade?


  • tiger11 likes this

#429 Rob Randall

Rob Randall

    BIG TEXAS FORUMER

  • Member
  • 15,759 posts

Posted 20 May 2021 - 02:54 PM

^To be fair, the project has consumed 110 forum pages and 2,170 posts over 11 years. It's the Beowulf of development stories.


Edited by Rob Randall, 20 May 2021 - 02:55 PM.

“I mean I just don’t understand the big Texas part, like maybe he’s from Texas? I want to know the back story.”


#430 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,719 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 21 May 2021 - 09:18 AM

So... Can anyone mail in development proposals to the TC with demands that Council review them, or is that avenue reserved for former staff?
  • Nparker likes this

#431 Rob Randall

Rob Randall

    BIG TEXAS FORUMER

  • Member
  • 15,759 posts

Posted 21 May 2021 - 09:37 AM

Roughley was City boss during the arena construction controversy. Roughley and Monday's Russ Francis were Victoria's version of Mailer/Vidal.


  • Mike K., DavidSchell and Victoria Watcher like this

“I mean I just don’t understand the big Texas part, like maybe he’s from Texas? I want to know the back story.”


 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users