95 replies to this topic

[G-Man]

Speaking at Advisory Planning Commission:

We often have discussion on here as to what can be discussed at APC with regards to a project. They have now listed the items that are open to discussion.

Remember APC is the only time that public input is allowed prior to public hearings.

Considerations and/or criteria for reference during APC review of land use
applications

The Commission compiled a list of potential considerations/criteria for APC review of land use applications as follows:
(a) economic health and development (jobs, incomes, multiplier effects, type and
level);
(b) protection and enhancement of our tourist industry;
© enhancement or recapture of Victoria’s role as administrative, office and
governmental centre (in the region and province);
(d) effects of new demographics in central area – absentee owners, part time
residents, recreational and retirement housing, young people, etc.;
(e) preservation and enhancement of our waterfront;
(f) preservation and enhancement of important public spaces, views and amenities;
(g) impacts and opportunities related to infrastructure (transportation, water, sewer,
waste disposal);
(h) impacts on troubled populations (street people, drugs, youth, aboriginal
population, etc.);
(i) expression of “green” values as a community;
(j) preservation and enhancement of “heritage” buildings, scenes;
(k) preservation and enhancement of urban design considerations such as active
streetscape/preservation of view corridors;
(l) enhancement of cultural activities;
(m) support of subsidized and/or low income housing;
(n) support of goals of neighbourhood plans;
(o) parking availability.

[Ms. B. Havin]

File in the FWIW department: APC wants to start setting its own agenda (v. being handed an agenda by planning). Hm...

I went to the CotW mtg yesterday. I thought the pro forma request was fair enough, insofar as it's required in Vancouver and council seemed concerned to have some mechanism in place that would cover their behinds in case there's any kind of public "outrage" over the height issue. My impression was that they are ALL really behind this project b/c they know it's one way they can get both the old building rehabbed AND get some residential built, too. I got the impression that everyone was very careful not to scuttle this.

Ironically, Madoff's question re. the transference of density from what will be taken out of the interior core of the old Bay Bldg and how that relates to the height bonus given to the new towers was described by Day as being "arithmetical." The reason this is funny is b/c several weeks agao, Madoff made a big deal about a developer in Rockland (Schuhuum / Caroline Macklem house) allegedly using a purely "arithmatic" approach to determine allowable increased density. Yet yesterday _she_ was doing it. ..."Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi," as the saying goes. (Latin for "what is permitted to Jove isn't permitted to the cow" -- remember Jove disguised himself as a bull to carry off Europa -- and in plain old English we'd probably just say s.th. along the lines of "do as I say and not as I do"...) Bah. (Or, "Moo"?)

[G-Man]

By the way welcome aboard!

I think that the pro forma will most likely help let this project go by.

However it may be setting the precedent for future projects downtown.

[G-Man]

Did not quite know where to put this. However since it deals with the outfall of the public hearing perhaps here is the best place.

Proposal for eyesore to get public hearing

Tuesday, October 10, 2006
A burned-out building at the corner of Quadra and Bay streets which has long been a eyesore for neighbours is inching closer to a spruce up.

Large & Co. Developers will get to roll out a plan to convert 2415 Quadra St. to three residential strata units at a public hearing.

City planning staff recommended the application for a rezoning be declined because the current zone prohibits conversions as a means of encouraging developers to assemble land in the area and build larger buildings.

However, adjacent neighbourhood associations wrote supportive letters for the project that would upgrade a boarded-up property that has been the site of a number of fires.

CITY WANTS TO LIMIT INDUSTRIAL ZONE

The city of Victoria is proposing that some heavy industrial zoned properties in the Rock Bay area get rezoned to prevent any expansion of businesses such as blast furnaces, fish packing and storage of damaged vehicles.

Such businesses currently operating in the area bounded by Store, Chatham, Pembroke and Douglas streets, would be allowed to continue as legally non-conforming.

The proposed zoning changes could curb conflict between neighbours and would place these properties in a "holding zone" until the ultimate direction for Rock Bay can be determined, a city report said.

COUNCIL GIVES NOD TO ROCK BAY BUS DEPOT

Rock Bay increasingly looks like the place the PCL Bus Depot will move to as more hurdles in the re-location fall.

Victoria city council gave the nod for the development permit for the depot plans at 516-518 Discovery St. although a public hearing on the rezoning of the land still has to be held.

Several councillors remain disappointed with the proposed location because it won't be easy for passengers to connect with public transit and it could result in PCL buses rumbling down narrow, busy streets to get to the depot.

An earlier deal for PCL to buy land in the 2100-block of Douglas across from the Times Colonist fell through.

Meanwhile, Empress hotel owners have been meeting with city officials to discuss the future of the current bus depot at Douglas and Belleville, which it owns.

© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2006

[G-Man]

More planning items at CotW this week: Oct 19, 2006 9:00am Council Chambers

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT

2) 1048 Johnson Street, Development Permit No. 000036

Volvo lot is back for another round. Hopefully this time we wil have them move forward and the city can lose another parking lot.

3) 740 View Street, Heritage Alteration Permit Application No. 00044

No idea possibly Central Bar and Grill?

4) 1007 Johnson Street, Heritage Alteration Permit No. 00041

The 3 Point motors project in the old house on Johnson. Word on the street is the building next door is causing problems.

[Scaper]

Which building is this???

[G-Man]

Well the Volvo lot is probably the best known of the three projects going forward.

[Scaper]

I knew that, I meant which building is causing trouble for this development....or did I read this wrong.

[G-Man]

The one with the excercise place in the bottom on Johnson. Across from the Tax office.

[Holden West]

The Bossi House on Johnson just east of Vancouver--beside the Moxie's parking lot. Apparently the condo next door doesn't like the idea of the addition to the back of the old house.

As it was and how it is planned to be again:

[Scaper]

hmmmm 4 some reason I can't visualize this....

I am driving down there tonight I will have look at this.

[FunkyMunky]

Hmm. 4 some reason I can't visualize this.

From [url=http://www.threepointproperties.com/johnson.htm:9480d]Three Point Properties' website[/url:9480d], I think we're talking about this one:

[G-Man]

Yup and it is the Brown building seen behind it there that is causing trouble. Thanks Funky

[Scaper]

I see.... So is the owners that are causing the problems or is a councilor or two that are using this building as a reason to keep a car lot live longer days?

[D.L.]

The residents of the condo next-door believe that their ownership of space extends beyond it's legal limits.

By fighting the building of an addition to the back of their neighbours house they feel that they have a right to impose their will upon their neighbour by restricting what their neighbour can do with his property, apparently because they are not happy with the proxmity that this addition will be to themselves, even though they have done the same to their neighbour with their own house.

The residents of the condo building who are fighting for this are both greedy and hypocritical.

[Walter Moar]

740 View is the big church on the corner of Blanshard

[G-Man]

Hmm wonder what they are changing?

[G-Man]

Advisory Planning council today at noon

2. 732 BROUGHTON STREET
Development Permit 000062
Application of de Hoog & Kierulf Architects
Zoned CA-4
Proposed Mixed residential and commercial
For recommendation to Council
de Hoog & Kierulf
Architects

3. 385 WATERFRONT CRESCENT
Development Permit 000063
Application of Lark Group
Zoned CD-1
Proposed residential care facility
For recommendation to Council

[gumgum]

385 Waterfront Cres:
[url=http://imageshack.us:af731][/url:af731]

[G-Man]

November 23 Council Meeting:

1. Development Permit Application No. 00057 for property known as 808 – 826
Yates Street
1. Development Permit Application No. 000057
The Council of the City of Victoria will consider issuing a development permit
for the land known as 808 and 826 Yates Street, in Development Permit Area
8 (Heritage Conservation), Harris Green and North Park, for the purpose of
subdivision, and varying the following requirements of the Zoning Regulation
Bylaw: Section 5 of Part 6.8 of Schedule B; Side yard setback varied from
4.5 metres to 0 metres (for 826 Yates Street).
Legal Description of the Land: Lot 1 of Lots 368, 370, 371, 372, 383, 384,
385, 386, and 387, Victoria City, Plan VIP
65118 and Lot 369, Victoria City.
2. Motion – Approve Development Permit
That Council authorize the issuance of a Development Permit in accordance
with:
1. Subdivision meeting all bylaw requirements with the following
variance:
Section 6.8.5 Side yard setback relaxed from 4.5 m to nil (for existing
Telus building).
2. Final subdivision plans to the satisfaction of the Director of
Engineering.