Fairfield Block

Some interesting musings on the potential redevelopment of the Fairfield Block on Douglas Street:

 

Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps is pondering the kind of carrots needed to attract creative developers to buy the historic Fairfield Block in downtown Victoria. She is floating the idea of incorporating low-income rooming house units in a new development also containing condominiums... As a heritage building, the Fairfield Block would remain, she said. Redevelopment could “potentially add height and density to the existing footprint and incorporate those single-room-occupancy units as part as any new development.”

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.hwQlGr9j.dpuf

Why the focus on this particular property?

Why the focus on this particular property?

Perhaps due to the fact that the property is for sale for the first time in its history...?

Why the focus on this particular property?

And the proximity to centennial square, city hall and some marquee new developments - 1515 douglas and The Hudson district. It's jammed right in the middle of a revitalization.

It's great that she wants to encourage something to happen there. I wish they'd do more re: incentives. But if I'm handing out a carrot on this corner I'd probably be backing up a produce truck at the corner of Caledonia and Douglas.

Perhaps due to the fact that the property is for sale for the first time in its history...?

I saw that in the TC article. Has it really had the same owner (passed down through a family?) since it was built? Or could there have been private sales along the way? Anyone have any intel on who owns the building?

What type of incentives would the city offer a developer in this case to keep a portion of the building as single-room occupancy / affordable housing?    

What type of incentives would the city offer a developer in this case to keep a portion of the building as single-room occupancy / affordable housing?    

The city has numerous way to incentivize development.

They could offer more density through additional FSR/Height etc, basically allowing the construction of more profitable units to offset the cost of the SRO units. (This is what is often referred to as 'Density Bonusing').

Similarly the city can provide a density "credit" of a certain value, which the developer could potentially apply to a different site they have, IF the density would be more appropriate at that location

They can waive any/all of the plethora of municipal fees that a developer pays during development (I.e. Development Cost Charges)

They can provide partial/total relief of property taxes for a certain amount of time.

Basically development hinges on a financial "Pro-forma"(a total account of Costs, Revenue, Profits, and Land), Assuming the project wasn't already wildly above the necessary profit margins, financial trade-offs need to be given to keep a project feasible.

You will notice that "Land" was one of the key variables, the hard part now is preventing the land owner from "speculating" on the potential value of the land via whatever financial incentives the city provides. The more value the land owner wants...the less effective any financial incentive becomes. 

Hope that helps~

What type of incentives would the city offer a developer in this case to keep a portion of the building as single-room occupancy / affordable housing?    

Also.. if you are a particularly enlightened developer you will know that finding a way to make projects like these work give you the special sauce known as "social capital", which can have numerous often unaccounted for benefits if handled right.

This can come in the form of free marketing/press, community support/buy-in as well as future support/trust for other projects

This can come in the form of free marketing/press, community support/buy-in as well as future support/trust for other projects

Legally/technically speaking council cannot consider a development proposal based on the merits of a prior proposal/project. All projects start with a clean slate irrespective of the developer's history with City Hall.

Legally/technically speaking, of course...

Legally/technically speaking council cannot consider a development proposal based on the merits of a prior proposal/project. All projects start with a clean slate irrespective of the developer's history with City Hall.

 

Legally/technically speaking, of course...

Council sure, the public can be influenced all it likes! 

Also city council is pretty far down the process, don't forget the vital and far more involved role planners play in the process leading up the point at which it ever sees council's eyes

I will give an example with giving names, of a Former top planner in Vancouver, and a major developer. Said developer repeatedly went above and beyond to facilitate social benefits in Vancouver...so when they decided to do their first major project in Toronto the developer simply asked if the planner could contact his counterpart in Toronto to help set up a meeting on the basis that the developer does "good work", the planner obliged and a quick meeting ensued.

I know that was super vague and sounds kind of silly, but i assure things that are very valuable and can save months off a project

Edited by kdasilva, 08 September 2015 - 10:50 AM.

Welcome to VibrantVictoria kdasilva and Skycap.

Reliance Properties is studying an option to fix up the fairfield block and maintain its current use for affordable market housing as well as maintaining its heritage status. 

Thanks, Jon. Does Reliance have an option to purchase this property?

Yes.

Thank you. Would you consider building an additional floor or two, or more, as part of this project?

Nothing to the building in terms of massing.

There will be more coming forward in the coming weeks.

That's fantastic, Jon, it's great to hear you may be at the reigns here.

Reliance Properties is studying an option to fix up the fairfield block and maintain its current use for affordable market housing as well as maintaining its heritage status. 

While I understand and appreciate and complexities in developing a site like this. Its current use is not "affordable market housing" it is as a SRO hotel. Which are miles apart of the affordability spectrum, and serve very different social and communal purposes. Retaining something like this is obviously much more difficult, but can be done. (However not without a lot city support/incentives)