Jump to content

      













PROPOSED
1314-1324 Wharf Street
Uses: rental, commercial
Address: 1314-1324 Wharf Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 6
1314-1324 Wharf Street is a proposal to build a 47-unit, six-storey mixed-use rental complex with ground floor... (view full profile)
Learn more about 1314-1324 Wharf Street on Citified.ca
Photo

[Downtown] 1314-1324 Wharf Street / Northern Junk | Rentals; retail | 6-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
202 replies to this topic

#101 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,896 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 08:25 AM

I believe that council can still proceed but often says no due to this.

Jon - did they make a suggestion for what would conform?

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#102 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,682 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 09:23 AM

After so many iterations for this site I forget, how did the Heritage Advisory Panel feel about the 2012 proposal for the Northern Junk property?



#103 tiger11

tiger11
  • Member
  • 81 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 11:30 AM

Can someone please just accidentally drive a truck through these buildings... 



#104 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,581 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 11:43 AM

I think the plan is to hold out for the Big One.

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


#105 E2V

E2V
  • Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 11:54 AM

From the look of them, it might only take a little one.
  • Mike K. likes this

#106 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,970 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 12:10 PM

 

Can someone please just accidentally drive a truck through these buildings...

 

If I had donuts to bet, I'd bet quite a few that certain corners of officialdom would love to see it happen. Lest we forget, the old waterfront buildings right next door were deleted to create an awkward and problematic green space that officialdom has nevertheless made much effort to celebrate. The more I ponder it, the more I read old news items about it, the more I'm inclined to wonder if the introduced green space was (secretly) envisioned to cover more ground than it currently does.

 

Literally anything and everything has been proposed to rescue the Northern Junk buildings, and it's all been rejected. All very serious and considerate proposals; a wide range of sizes, styles and formats; all unacceptable. And with every passing day those extremely old and decrepit buildings become that much older and more decrepit. 

 

If these buildings end up getting demolished after so much effort to save them then I'd rank it as perhaps the most definitive moment of that ironic Victorian mission to "preserve" the city's heritage and history by butchering it and then reformulating it as something that it never was.


Edited by aastra, 15 September 2019 - 12:11 PM.


#107 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,682 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 08:18 AM

Victoria's alleged heritage "champion", Ken Johnson*, of the Hallmark Heritage Society has chosen to weigh-in publicly on the latest Northern Junk proposal - which, needless to say, he does not support.

...For more than nine years, the sites (sic) has been neglected while the developer continues to expend large sums to architects and designers creating plans that fail to meet the basic requirements for changes to heritage buildings in Old Town Victoria...

https://www.timescol...rses-1.23949420

He conveniently fails to mention that prior to Reliance's purchase of the site, it was left to decay by its previous owner for more than 3 decades. Where was Mr. Johnson then? It is implied that the neglect began only since the new ownership took place. At least Reliance is trying to revitalize the site. It is hardly their fault the city and so-called heritage advocates have shot them down on every proposal.  :mad: 

* and ironically Mr. Johnson resides in Colwood!



#108 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,581 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 08:19 AM

Meh.

 

Nobody reads that stuff anyways.


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


#109 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,970 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 09:19 AM

 

For more than nine years, the sites has been neglected...

Had these dollars been devoted to restoration of the buildings, the developer would have had a stream of income and the buildings would have had what they need most — use.

 

For more than nine years, a wide range of serious and considerate proposals have been rejected out of hand.

 

 

...leaving little other than facades to remind us what was once a bustling industrial site.

 

He must be absolutely steamed about the new bridge, or the little park on Wharf Street that was created by demolishing the old buildings of a formerly bustling industrial site.

 

Surely every Victorian understands that the Northern Junk side would have been fully restored and activated by now if not for the years of stalling? Surely every Victorian understands where the blame lies?


  • Nparker likes this

#110 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,970 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 09:29 AM

 

...leaving little other than facades to remind us what was once a bustling industrial site.

He must be absolutely steamed about the new bridge, or the little park on Wharf Street that was created by demolishing the old buildings of a formerly bustling industrial site.

 

Not to mention the Wharf Street parking lot where the HBC warehouse used to be. I assume he's pushing hard for the redevelopment of that property. Right now there's little other than a surface parking lot to remind us of what was once a bustling industrial site.


  • Nparker likes this

#111 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 10,226 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 10:00 AM

Johnson wishes (assumed? dreamed?) that Kramer had sold the property to Reliance for a tiny sum, enough for the new tenant leases to cover the cost of renovations with no new construction needed.

 

The reality is that Kramer got a price based on the old buildings being part of a comprehensive development and the City was open to the idea. If new construction was off-limits, City planners would have said so.

 

Johnson needs to walk away from Dreamland and criticize the project based on the financial reality of the site.


Edited by Rob Randall, 18 September 2019 - 10:01 AM.

  • Nparker likes this

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#112 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,682 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 10:13 AM

Johnson needs to walk away from Dreamland and retire to quiet contemplation in suburban Colwood. His non-resident opinions of the CoV are about as valued as his personal property tax contribution to the city's revenue.



#113 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,896 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 10:32 AM

That letter is everything that is wrong with the mindset of the supposed champions of heritage in the city. First the original proposal did actually fit every context of the heritage guidelines but was shuffled off for using city land (which the city had agreed to back in the day). Second the current proposal fits the design guidelines for heritage buildings that are are being saved just changing them as required since the city has changed their tune with allowing the sale of the land next door. 

 

This is a blatant attempt now that they can see the damage to the buildings, to plant the blame for their eventual collapse on the developer and not on the process that has held up their redevelopment for the past decades or on the Hallmark Society themselves. 

 

To suggest that the developer should have known that there would be such a significant backlash to all 9? 10? proposals in the city and that instead they should have piled the money they have spent on architectural work into just fixing up the buildings is perhaps the most insane statement I have ever heard from any anti-development person ever. I am at a loss for words.


  • Nparker and DougG like this

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#114 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,581 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 11:02 AM

Not only that, but Reliance has a proven track record of heritage preservation in Vancouver and our own city, and had originally hired an architectural firm acutely aware of the demands of heritage restoration undertakings. It was an all-star ensemble that was politically curtailed.

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


#115 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,970 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 11:16 AM

You don't agree that the ideal fate of those buildings would have been a bit of basic remediation work and then several more decades of languishing in irrelevance? Maybe housing a Halloween store for a few weeks each year but otherwise just as isolated and ignored as they are right now?

 

If the mission were legitimate it would be all about heritage preservation, restoration, revitalization and re-activation, and subsequent celebration and appreciation. Instead it's about opposition to development and redevelopment in any form.... even when (sometimes I think especially when) heritage preservation is the main component.

 

For crying out loud, the tremendous success story of the Janion is right frickin' there for all to see. Every last drop of fear-mongering was proven false.


  • Nparker, Hotel Mike and grantpalin like this

#116 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,682 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 11:19 AM

a

Not only that, but Reliance has a proven track record of heritage preservation in Vancouver and our own city...

The Hallmark Heritage Society even presented Reliance with awards in May of this year

award.JPG

award2.JPG



#117 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,581 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 07:21 PM

And they misspelled Michael Williams. Doh!
  • Nparker likes this

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


#118 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,682 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 07:39 PM

They used the heritage spelling.



#119 shoeflack

shoeflack
  • Member
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 20 September 2019 - 10:08 AM

The four story additions to the existing heritage buildings (1314-1318 Wharf) goes to Advisory Design Panel next week.



#120 jstovell

jstovell
  • Member
  • 72 posts

Posted 21 September 2019 - 02:48 PM

Something to build our Heritage Cred.....

 

https://www.dropbox....0 2019.pdf?dl=0


  • lanforod likes this

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