Jump to content

      



























APPROVED
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


  • Please log in to reply
652 replies to this topic

#161 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 12:23 PM

I still think small buildings like that would be the best way to redevelop the Wharf Street parking lots. They just need to be designed in such a way that the rooftops serve as spacious decks extending seamlessly from the Wharf Street sidewalks. Some on-site parking should be preserved but hidden under the decks against the Wharf Street wall.

 

Purists might complain that a sensitive redevelopment of the Wharf Street properties should necessarily involve a few stories of construction above street level as per the format of the old buildings that used to be there, but I'm assuming modern Victorians will put a priority on views from the street (because modern Victorians always put a priority on what you can see from your car as you're driving around, rather than on what you can see while walking around on foot).



#162 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 05:09 PM

So aAstra is keen on the Anderson Pavilion so long as the City is not involved? Ship point is more prominent but the plan that was just drafted for that area didn’t really consider buildings. Selling public lands for private gain was deemed a no go from the DRA and some councillors agreed... and a park would be just about the worse thing for that already languishing end of town. I think if you take a look at the real context- a civic building is the answer. There are numerous examples of where this has been done to great success and on even smaller foot prints. For the record - 5 storeys has never been too tall... and even 8 has been supported from a city perspective. I’m never sure if VV is just a gripe repository for City of Vic bashing or some place where ideas actually get discussed. Me thinks the former.

Edited by intheknow, 10 October 2019 - 05:17 PM.


#163 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 05:21 PM

The civic project was your idea! For crying out loud, I'm being respectful enough to entertain the notion that you floated.

 

 

5 storeys has never been too tall... and even 8 has been supported from a city perspective. I’m never sure if VV is just a gripe repository or some place where ideas actually get discussed.

 

Sigh. Is it crazy day here on VV? Get up to speed on the history of this project. Read through the threads. They're right there for you to read. You have no excuse.

 

 

Focus (September 2018)
...the southeast side of the Johnson Street Bridge, next to the Northern Junk buildings, is no place for a seven-storey development. This project must be radically redesigned or rejected, with the latter being the preferred option. The City is increasing in density and, to counterbalance this, we need more open public spaces. To sell these public lands off for the benefit of developers is a disgrace to the future of the Inner Harbour and the City of Victoria.

Drive down to the area and observe the current open spaces and imagine a seven-story building on the site.

Ken Johnson, President, Hallmark Heritage Society


Edited by aastra, 10 October 2019 - 05:54 PM.


#164 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 52,328 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 05:36 PM

“gripe repository” was actually the original working title for the forum in the concept stage but the url was already taken. so they went with vv.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 10 October 2019 - 05:38 PM.

  • aastra, Rob Randall and Nparker like this

#165 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 05:37 PM

For the benefit of ironically-named forumers such as intheknow and anyone else who might be lurking who isn't particularly familiar with the Northern Junk saga, the very first proposal for this site was indeed a mere 5 stories tall. The height has ranged up and down over the years through the various incarnations, which have ranged widely in size, style, and height.

 

 

Old Town proposal offers new life for old buildings; Condo-retail development planned for Northern Junk site
Times - Colonist
October 15, 2010

After decades of neglect, the derelict Northern Junk buildings are finally in line for restoration as part of a plan for a five-storey condominium and retail building...

...It would exceed that area's height guidelines by 3.5 metres.

Its ground floor... would be topped by four storeys of mid-priced condominiums....

Madoff said height is just one issue and has offered to meet with the developer for further discussion on the area's design principles and urban plans...

 

 

Northern Junk design scaled down from 12 storeys to five and seven
Times-Colonist
December 10, 2015

But the new Northern Junk proposal is still too high, said Coun. Pam Madoff, given the height guideline for new buildings in the area is 15 metres, no more than four or five storeys.


Edited by aastra, 10 October 2019 - 05:41 PM.


#166 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 05:45 PM

Just to put an exclamation point on this silliness, intheknow claimed the following:

 

 

5 storeys has never been too tall...

 

In fact, even the 5-story proposals and their modest heights were indeed criticized for somehow being too tall, despite the fact that numerous old town buildings were and are as tall or taller (some old town buildings were and are much taller, but good luck getting anybody to fess up about that).


  • Nparker likes this

#167 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 06:01 PM

I suspect a lot of people who joined the "it's too tall" crusade against Northern Junk were just going through the familiar anti-development motions, and they had no idea how short those early proposals really were.



#168 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 06:27 PM

“gripe repository” was actually the original working title for the forum in the concept stage but the url was already taken. so they went with vv.


Tis true.

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


#169 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 06:27 PM

The civic project was your idea! For crying out loud, I'm being respectful enough to entertain the notion that you floated.

 

 

Sigh. Is it crazy day here on VV? Get up to speed on the history of this project. Read through the threads. They're right there for you to read. You have no excuse.

Up to speed on the History of this project I am- if Ken Johnson represents the City's perspective, we're all doomed. The City has put forward reports that have been in support of an 8 storey rendition. 15m is 5 storeys too?!?1 See October 2018 report. The silliness lies in thinking the views at VV represent the City's. KJ's views are an extreme outlier.  A parking lot full of one storey buildings as proposed by Aastra is laughable. This will surely bring the masses. Talk about ambition. Have a look at these beauties:

Renzo’s Whitney NYC

Herzog & de Meuron’s Elbphilharmonie in Hamburg

Australian National Maritime Museum, Sydney

North Van’s new Polygon Art Gallery

D’Ambrosio’s Helsinki Art Gallery

Umeå's contemporary art museum, Sweden

 

Oh wait- we couldn't do this in Victoria could we?!?



#170 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,409 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 06:35 PM

Perhaps take a look at the population of the city's you mentioned above.


  • RoadRunner likes this

#171 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:00 PM

On the one hand you claim to be up to speed on the Northern Junk saga, but on the other hand you suggest something like the new Whitney? As tall as a residential highrise building, starkly modern and more than a bit goofytastic, and a price tag of several hundred million dollars? So it is crazy day here on VV, is this what we're saying?*

 

*I love musing about fantasy developments so I'm not meaning to give you a hard time about that. I'm merely pointing out yet again that there was strong resistance to the comparably modest NJ proposals for being too tall, too modern, too inappropriate, and even for not including a sufficient amount of open space (despite the fact that several of the proposals included a lot of open space).

 

Imagine those are Victoria's old town buildings on the right side of the pic below. I'm going to assume there wouldn't be too, too much enthusiasm from officialdom for a building like the new Whitney.

 

new-whitney-museum-new-york-piano-31.jpg
pic from https://www.inexhibit.com



#172 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:01 PM

Perhaps take a look at the population of the city's you mentioned above.

Umea Sweden 87,000

North Vancouver 53,000

Helinski 650,000

Hamburg 1.7m

and yes NYC and Sydney are huge. My point was that typically commentary is all about what we can't do, oh no not here- anywhere but here. Victoria is too old, too backwards, far too different in its dysfunction than any other City. The bizarre thing is that's what every City's forum gripers say and its exactly that that makes doing good things so difficult. Be FOR something not just against them.  Perhaps this is the wrong forum for that.



#173 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:03 PM

Methinks people would benefit from reading the old news items and reviewing the criticisms of the NJ proposals.


  • Nparker and Daveyboy like this

#174 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:03 PM

intheknow, you may also want to get up to speed on the Westbank/art gallery project and how the CoV received that.


  • Nparker and Daveyboy like this

#175 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:04 PM

On the one hand you claim to be up to speed on the Northern Junk saga, but on the other hand you suggest something like the new Whitney? As tall as a residential highrise building, starkly modern and more than a bit goofytastic, and a price tag of several hundred million dollars? So it is crazy day here on VV, is this what we're saying?*

 

*I love musing about fantasy developments so I'm not meaning to give you a hard time about that. I'm merely pointing out yet again that there was strong resistance to the comparably modest NJ proposals for being too tall, too modern, too inappropriate, and even for not including a sufficient amount of open space (despite the fact that several of the proposals included a lot of open space).

 

Imagine those are Victoria's old town buildings on the right side of the pic below. I'm going to assume there wouldn't be too, too much enthusiasm from officialdom for a building like the new Whitney.

 

new-whitney-museum-new-york-piano-31.jpg
pic from https://www.inexhibit.com

Did you look at the other examples? I agree the Whitney was a poor choice- its just on the waterfront that's all.


Edited by intheknow, 10 October 2019 - 07:08 PM.


#176 intheknow

intheknow
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:10 PM

intheknow, you may also want to get up to speed on the Westbank/art gallery project and how the CoV received that.

I'm not familiar with this one. When does this West bank art gallery project date from?


  • aastra likes this

#177 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:22 PM

 

My point was that typically commentary is all about what we can't do, oh no not here- anywhere but here.

Be FOR something not just against them.  Perhaps this is the wrong forum for that.

 

The forumers here tend to react honestly to development proposals and offer their own impressions. We agree and disagree and give each other high-fives and give each other hell. Most of the time we're not trading canned lines from a script. We're even allowed to change our minds. It's what I like about this board. So you may well be in the wrong place if you're looking for something different.

 

What we've learned about Northern Junk in particular (but many other sites as well) is that the CoV simply isn't interested in allowing anything even vaguely unconventional or avant-garde. They didn't even want to sell off their useless bit of property adjacent to NJ, how many times do we have to mention that? If that doesn't demonstrate hard resistance to trying something a bit out-of-the-box then I don't know what would.



#178 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:27 PM

The thread re: the art gallery concept for the Crystal Court motel site is here, but many of the old images are now broken:

 

Regarding the Crystal Court site, check out the following insightful comment that somebody made back in April, 2007:

 

 

...something will be built there whether we like it or not, so I hope everybody tries to focus their collective energies on making it the best it can possibly be.



#179 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:32 PM

FYI: we've also had threads for presenting crazy Photoshopping of hypothetical redevelopments and development fantasies, pasting buildings from other cities here and there around town to see how they would look. But again, a lot of the old images are now broken. I blame that ******* Mike K. and his never-ending forum "upgrades".


Edited by aastra, 10 October 2019 - 07:33 PM.

  • Mike K. likes this

#180 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,409 posts

Posted 10 October 2019 - 07:39 PM

...My point was that typically commentary is all about what we can't do, oh no not here- anywhere but here...

My point was even if Victoria could create some sort of world class civic structure on the spit of land adjacent to the NJ compromise, it shouldn't. The CoV's recent track record with large scale civic projects is poor to say the least. If you are in doubt and need evidence, perhaps review the Johnson Street Bridge thread or the saga of a new Crystal Pool. 


  • m3m 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