Now what? - The applicant must wait a minimum of one year before they can come back to the City with with the same proposal, or they can come back at any time with a different proposal. Several councillors noted that there really isn't much difference between the two motions being voted on other than the signal it sends.
City staff (and there were several that commented throughout the discussion, so we'll stick the generic noun) noted this is the first time they've presented an Issues Report to Mayor and Council stating "This is a new approach for how certain applications are processed when they are deemed too contradictory to City policies or in many cases proposals that would trigger an OCP amendment. As such the report before you and this presentation does not a comprehensive analysis of the application for Council's consideration but rather an early opportunity to consider if the application should proceed giving its notable contradictions with City policy.
After the opening presentation by City staff the councillors and Mayor had the opportunity to share their thoughts and ask questions, highlights below in chronological order:
Stephen Hammond - "In relation to land speculation, this is on page 3, if this were to go ahead could it reasonably have an impact on the value of land and therefore increase the assessed values of existing buildings which could get passed on to business leases?" City Staff replied "It's always a speculative matter to speculate on land speculation, that said when we.. you know approvals and the densities that are achieved on sites typically have an effect impact on land value and so those sort of impacts can resonate out from that. so it is typical or something you would see."
Dave Thompson
"Did we consult Transport Canada?" [regarding impact of building height on Victoria Harbour Airport]. City Staff: "Yes, through Mayor, we have." [No further elaboration was provided]
"Are we anticipating that there is going to a shortage of that type of office space in coming years?" [referencing Class A office space as Thompson previously mentioned reduced demand due to work from home]. City staff replied that they're looking at employment space in general, not just office space, and that Class A office space is still very desirable and they are working to have an interim policy on employment space before the summer.
"Apart from hotels are there significant employment uses expected in that area, like what kinds of employment might we see that are not office and not hoteL?"
City staff replied there are opportunities for arts and culture, shared work spaces. Also comments were made about new types of retail uses, for example, experiential retail (haunted mini-golf was provided as an example) that wasn’t even on the radar not very long ago. Staff noted we don’t want to become a bedroom community with people commuting to suburbs for their jobs.
Matt Dell - "In terms of height, that seems to be the biggest issues, I know you can't say yes or no, but essentially if this was 24 storey building, just eleven storeys reduced, is that what staff are asking for to allow this to be accepted? City staff response - "We are also looking for a better consistency with the mix of uses in terms of supporting employment uses in the downtown, or the CBD rather."
Mayor Marianne Alto
Asked about storey heights for future phases of Starlight's Harris Green, she thought it was 30 plus range and one was 32 storeys [correct]. Staff replied they did not know off hand but it was in the realm of 27-30 storeys, to which the mayor asked for confirmation.
Mayor Alto asked for clarification on the status of the Downtown Core Area Plan (DCAP) and the interim employment policy to which staff replied they were targeting June for the work plan for the DCAP and an interim employment policy to take them through while the work is done on the DCAP which won't be completed until next year.
"Have you considered the magnitude of what is about to be unleashed in the city? My understanding is that there are hundreds of thousands of square feet of Class A office space that will be released within the next 10 to 12 months. That is massive, and so other cities have begun to look with some risk with completely different repurposing of some of those sites including residential as well as other more, less traditional I guess uses as you explained earlier around experiential and what not. I really want an answer to the assurance that you have considered the magnitude of what's about to be unleashed, particularly in the downtown core."
City staff replied indicating they are planning for population growth which comes with employment growth, but flexibility is embedded in the Official Community Plan and the interim employment policy will be fine tuned and work will continue on DCAP. Staff also commented that once employment space is let go we're not going to get it back, while it's easy to go from employment space to residential.
Marg Gardiner - "Do we have any sense of how many home businesses there are now in the City of Victoria and whether there has been a change in that since the pandemic? Gardner explained her question was related to the design of the units to accommodate working from home. City staff indicated they did not have that information with them today.
Dave Thompson - Asked about Bayview's Roundhouse heights. City staff replied they didn't know for Bayview [they later confirmed it was 32 storeys] but for for Starlight's Harris Green development the masterplan envisioned up to 32 storeys but the rezoning capped the allowable height at 20 storeys; however, when development permits are applied for height variances will likely be requested at that time. Councillor Thompson then asked about the new Issues Report process and not presenting the benefits of a proposal to which City staff replied they are trying to save staff and applicant time and resources by not doing an in-depth review on something clearly against City plans but they are open and flexible to making changes.
Jeremy Caradonna - Put forward a motion to outright reject the application noting it was only the second time he's opposed a housing application this term. "This is not the right project for this location... I can’t think of a staff report in which staff demonstrated less support for an application than this one." “I think we need to be cautious to avoid an arms race on height”. "I am more cautious about overruling our OCP and zoning regs now that we have an updated OCP and an updated zoning regulation bylaw".
Marg Gardiner - Seconded the motion to reject. “Missing is value to the public.. the green space is not enough”. "The structure itself I don't think would be a signature building."
Krista Loughton - Not in support of outright decline and supports the alternative motion to go back to developer. "To lose 321 units of housing, especially 99 family oriented ones during a housing crisis is a setback that I don't think we can afford".
Dave Thompson - "I want to see more rental, I want to see commercial, I'm not necessarily concerned about height." "It’s a neighbourhood where we actually want more people. I'm very very unconvinced that we have a vision that would work for a primarily commercial building being occupied in that area or that anyone would come forward with a proposal for a primarily commercial building in that area, I just don't think it would sell." “I kind of think that skyline concerns are very niche. I haven't seen the public clamouring for any particular vision of a skyline. I have seen the public clamouring for housing and I've seen the public clamouring for vibrancy and safety on our seats”.
Stephen Hammond - "I want to give a strong council message to say to this developer this is far, so far out of line that don’t come back with another proposal unless it's even with the ballpark of our policies."
Susan Kim - "I will be voting to support the staff recommendation." "There is no actual justification [for the height in the documents]. "That to me, like speaks of a particular.. I'm going to say it - ego and lack of thoroughness that I really commend staff for saying we're not going to waste our time here. I really believe in the mantra lets work smarter not harder, and I, thank you for doing that."
Chris Coleman - “I just think this goes way too far.” "I will say that I find that if you're going to push the envelope on height come with signature piece of architecture. I found this one underwhelming from my perspective but that's not deliberative as I make up my mind I just think there's nothing there that inspires me so I'm quite happy to support the motion to decline."
Mat Dell - "The signal I want to send is we really need this, it needs some tweaks but we do need something here, so lets keep working on it and try to get there... We need to signal there is hope coming." 'I really like the public realm, I don't know who designed that current public realm which is a sunken plaza but like many things designed in the 60's and 70's it's the worst public space I've ever seen in my life."
Mayor Marianne Alto - "I'm curious and interested by the comments that are about it's an ugly design - maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. Certainly it would be nice to see something a bit more inspirational I think as someone mentioned, but that is actually the reason, one of the reason why I don't support the motion to decline. It's because we don't have enough information. It may be that on the policies that we have now, yes, it would appear that much more could be done with this than what is being proposed at this early stage is insufficient. I agree with that. On the other hand I don't want to send a message that says so because of that we don't want to talk to you anymore. And what I'd like to see always is for Council and the City in general to continue to bring the message forward that is we will always talk with you, there is always time for conversation."
Motion to reject is adopted by a 5-4 vote
There you have it dear readers. Now I have a lot of concerns around the process, the work and recommendations of City Planning in particular, but let's keep that for another day..
