[Downtown Victoria] Northern Junk Complex | Condos | 5-storeys | Proposed

[Rob Randall]

The north side is a stark stone wall with little redeeming aesthetic qualities.

Historians believe the stones for that wall were originally ballast in sailing ships. I find that interesting. You sure can't build a wall like that with stuff bought at Home Depot.

Originally Posted by renthefinn

Hate to nitpick on your use of language, but as far as I know this is the only "thread" dedicated to this project, but it has over 700+ "posts". Sorry pet peeve of mine, bugs me almost as much as when someone calls a discussion forum a blog....

I admit that bugs me too. A while back I witnessed a minor car accident (and posted pictures of it here). Called in to court to testify as a witness, I was asked if I had in fact posted the photographs on this blog. I felt compelled to tell the court VV was a discussion forum, not a blog. Everyone in the courtroom looked at each other like I was speaking Latin.

[Dylan Leblanc]

Originally Posted by Rob Randall

Historians believe the stones for that wall were originally ballast in sailing ships. I find that interesting. You sure can't build a wall like that with stuff bought at Home Depot.

Yes the wall is interesting, but surely not so interesting as to leave a clear view to it from hundreds of feet away like there is now. A building built beside the wall, leaving room for a walkway between it and the wall, sounds good.

[MarkCB]

^ Totally agree. That north wall is actually best appreciated when viewed up close because of its unique materials and texture. The proposal would necessitate that. Those folks at Merrick Architecture actually know what they're doing.

[Rob Randall]

^I agree to. No need to see it from afar. It would look worse than the Whaling Wall nearby.

Those folks at Merrick Architecture actually know what they're doing.

Over the last few years I've had the privilege of meeting just about all the major local architects and some of the Vancouver ones, too. Paul Merrick gets this city and gets the site; his office is steps away. He is the guy I would trust to build it.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Rob Randall

Historians believe the stones for that wall were originally ballast in sailing ships. I find that interesting. You sure can't build a wall like that with stuff bought at Home Depot.

The granite for the Race Rocks lighthouse was cut and numbered in Scotland, and used as ballast in an outbound timber ship. The lighthouse was finished in 1860, just four years before the NJ buildings, so rock for ballast was a common practice back then.

I think the most interesting view of the NJ buildings is from the water side where you can the the two structures together. I also like the look of the natural rock going down to the water, and I think that area needs to be kept in view.

[Sparky]

There are a number of different types of rocks in these walls that look like they have had some remediation at different times.

[Jon S]

Back to Heritage Advisory Panel on Tuesday the 13th. Design committee on the 28th.

[Candarius]

I truly hope that SOMETHING happens with this site. I walk past it semi regularly and the crowd it attracts is...interesting.

From what I have seen of the plans for this development...why are people not falling over themselves to support it?

[gumgum]

^because this town has been taken over by aliens.

[Candarius]

Or maybe...there are enough of us humans here now that we can point out the sheer number of aliens that live here?

[Sparky]

Originally Posted by Jon S

Back to Heritage Advisory Panel on Tuesday the 13th. Design committee on the 28th.

Sorry Jon, I thought you were past the HAC process?

[dasmo]

This town has been burned many times. Think Eaton center. Its too bad because it has made some of the elderly very bitter towards development.
If they don't kill it (fingers crossed) all this push back might just make the design better anyway. In my experience when you take another look, you will improve it, If they don't kill it....please don't kill it....

[Jon S]

Originally Posted by Sparky

Sorry Jon, I thought you were past the HAC process?

They supported with suggestions the new building but ran out of time for a detailed review of the two existing buildings.

[Mike K.]

In my experience when you take another look, you will improve it, If they don't kill it....please don't kill it....

Unfortunately in Victoria the opposite happens. Many of the modern nondescript projects around town were muted aesthetically thanks largely to special interests telling architects what they should and shouldn't do. Design by committee has unfortunately become a refined art form in Victoria, and this is why Merrick must now bow to pressure by the heritage advocates who want the project to become a Disney-esque version of the current design in order to mimic heritage architecture (which we know always ends up looking fake and tacky, but the heritage advocates consider the changes as mission accomplished).

[Baro]

This entire thread is just victoria.txt

This thread, saved in a simple text form, will be all future anthropologists will need to read to get a full and total understanding of our city and it's political culture.

[dasmo]

You mean like the Songhees pre shutters...Please no...

[Bernard]

Originally Posted by dasmo

This town has been burned many times. Think Eaton center. Its too bad because it has made some of the elderly very bitter towards development.
If they don't kill it (fingers crossed) all this push back might just make the design better anyway. In my experience when you take another look, you will improve it, If they don't kill it....please don't kill it....

The Eaton Centre ended up being exactly what it promised to be. So I guess I trying to figure out what you mean by burned.

I opposed the Eaton Centre when it was proposed and would still do so today because it was a fundamentely dumb development.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Bernard

I opposed the Eaton Centre when it was proposed and would still do so today because it was a fundamentely dumb development.

I like the Bay Center. It has one of the cleanest parkades around for when I need to do other things downtown.

[G-Man]

I like the mall but dont like its looks on the outside.

[dasmo]

Its a while ago but I remember They promised to keep the facades and the walk through. They then leveled everything and put up vacuum formed facades and put doors on either end and called it a walk through.
IMO delivering on the promises would have produced a development more like the Sussex.

Anyway my point is over the years a lot of crappy developments have happened which is why I think the old guard is so anti development. Thankfully new urbanism is prevalent and the quality of at least the external sites seems way better these days. I think This proposal looks great and hopefully the developer has the fortitude to keep fighting for it to be a good design and not some faux heritage hodgepodge...

[Bernard]

The only thing I know the Eaton Centre (now Bay Centre) no longer offers is the 24/7 access through the building on what was Broad street. They had said they would have some there all the time to open doors to let people walk through in the middle of the night.

Many of the façades are the originals, though some did not survive and had to be reconstructed. They also made large sections of faux heritage for the walls they have no originals for.

So back to my point, the Eaton Centre is very close to almost exactly what was promised by Caddilac Fairview at the time. All the problems go back to it being a bad idea from the start. This is where Northern Junk is so different, there are no down sides to the design, it works on every level.

[dasmo]

OK fair enough, I was much younger back then and wasn't paying such close attention beyond them showing images of the original facades and keeping the walk way open. I agree, bad idea from the start so still a burn. I don't remember anyone I know thinking it was a good idea...The bitterness was just baked a little longer after it got approved and the entire site was leveled. I would have expected something more like where the union is going. Some bracing and the original facades there in place.

I didn't intend to paint this project with the same brush, I for the most part think what is being proposed is pretty darn good for this site, I was more commenting on perhaps why so many in this town are anti development....

[Baro]

The problem is that in the last 20 years it's the anti-development folks that are the cause of almost every instance of bad architecture and bad development, not greedy developers that just weren't regulated enough. Even the so called successful projects could have been much better if it wasn't for the city mutilating them. It's a horrible mix of too much power, biased anti-everything paranoia, economic ignorance, and awful awful taste.

This project I'm very curious about, it's an actual good development. I'd of course go bigger and bolder and more modern, but this is a true victoria-scale victoria style development but of a high quality. The city is showing that's not good enough, they seem to want something so small that's its economically impossible, and constructed out of some sort of space-age totally invisible brick that won't block the view (from cars) of these run down old throw-away buildings that happen to be old.

[Bernard]

Originally Posted by dasmo

I didn't intend to paint this project with the same brush, I for the most part think what is being proposed is pretty darn good for this site, I was more commenting on perhaps why so many in this town are anti development....

I think the main reason people are anti-development is because people in this city are fundamently conservative and hate all change

[Jon S]

Heritage Advisory Committee round 2 was postponed to April 10. Next step is design panel March 28.