1947 replies to this topic

[shoeflack]

My guess is that both the pool and firehall are on ice until the next term. Too much political risk for Helps at this point, she won't want to hurt her odds for her next gig.

Firehall is actively proceeding. Jawl is going through the development approval process, but has everything in place to get shovels in the ground as soon as they get approval.

[Mike K.]

Approvals were supposed to be in hand by April. What do you think could be the cause of the delay?

[rmpeers]

My guess is that both the pool and firehall are on ice until the next term. Too much political risk for Helps at this point, she won't want to hurt her odds for her next gig.

Mayor Ben can put it on the current police station site after he abolishes the VicPD.

[shoeflack]

Approvals were supposed to be in hand by April. What do you think could be the cause of the delay?

Jawl was expecting the public hearing to happen this summer, but that hasn’t been the case. Perhaps the City is deliberately holding it up, but in the meantime Jawl has been putting everything in place to get shovels in the ground the second it gets approved.

[Mike K.]

I guess that’s where spanky is coming from, that the City is holding it up for reasons that are not public. With ever day that passes the budget risks being inflated, and what was a ~$35M commitment from the City may now need to be adjusted.

If we recall the opposition to this project materialized via the DRA’s concerns over a lack of green space in the core, the rapid densification of downtown and the question of appropriateness of a firehall at that site.

[shoeflack]

I believe one of the primary challenges that the developer was facing was finalizing the housing agreement, which was a requirement the City set out to be completed prior to public hearing being set. I know as of June, Jawl still had to meet some of the stipulations set out by council.

[Mike K.]

Can you elaborate on that? I thought Pacifica would be managing the building. Or do you mean for the remainder of the property?

[spanky123]

There are lots of rumours swirling, but one major issue that we now as fact came from the February COTW meeting that reviewed the project. Apparently staff determined, after the contract had been signed, that the Jawls were under no obligation to actually build any affordable housing after the property was rezoned. The recommendation by staff was to create a site specific bylaw that reduced density allowances if affordable housing wasn't built. I am sure that the bylaw is a big sticking point and perhaps what Shoeflack is referring to. 

 

I haven't seen any updates to the project tracker since the Feb meeting and according to the latest City report, the project was supposed to have been to public hearing in June. 

Edited by spanky123, 22 August 2019 - 08:59 PM.

[spanky123]

As an aside, my reading is that the Jawls are under no obligation to build a firehall either. Looking at the redacted contract (provided by Focus) that Mayor Helps signed with the developer, the developer can decide on their own and without penalty not to build the firehall and use the unused density in other parts of the project.

[Nparker]

Before I have to whip out my big rubber stamp, perhaps the mods could re-direct the firehall posts to the appropriate thread?

[Victoria Watcher]

latest:

 

https://www.victoria...nt-project.html

 

On June 13 Council directed staff to develop a plan to revisit the objectives, scope and schedule of activities for the new facility, and to apply a new set of principles that focus on equity and affordability.  As we continue to develop this plan we will invite partners and neighbourhood representatives to collaborate with the project team on the priorities for the new facility.

 

 

how much more easy and efficient it would be if the directive was simply to "fix the pool".

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 23 August 2019 - 02:22 AM.

[rmpeers]

latest:

https://www.victoria...nt-project.html


how much more easy and efficient it would be if the directive was simply to "fix the pool".

But that would make sense and would not bring the Trumplike sense of grandeur that the CoV govt needs to get through the day.

[Victoria Watcher]

 

Victoria city staff start from square one on Crystal Pool project

Victoria staff need direction on revised plans for the Crystal Pool and Wellness Project

 

 

 

Now, city staff are asking council for more details as they start from scratch. According to a report coming to the committee of the whole on Thursday, these details will include no less than project objectives, scope, budget and scheduling.

 

 

https://www.vicnews....l-pool-project/

 

 

how about this time don't spend any money until we have all the pool money to go forward.  if that's "never" so be it.

[Victoria Watcher]

Crystal Pool keep-up a costly affair



By Brennan Clarke
Victoria News
Jan 12 2007


City councillors not anxious to throw good money after bad

The rising cost of maintenance at Victoria’s aging Crystal Pool has some councillors demanding progress on plans to build a new recreation centre in the city.

Commenting on proposed annual maintenance costs in excess of $900,000 for the coming fiscal year, Coun. Geoff Young suggested the money would be better spent building a new pool and recreation centre.

“This is now a major expenditure program of close to $1 million a year,” he said Tuesday during the first of three special council meetings held to examine the 2007-08 municipal budget.

“My fear is that at some point we’re going to have to say ‘this is ridiculous.’ We’re going to say ‘we can’t afford to do this.’

“At some point it’s going to be cheaper to hire a taxi to go swimming in Saanich.”

The city recreation department unveiled a redevelopment plan for Crystal Pool in 2004, but the proposal called for the closure of several Victoria community centres and met with stiff opposition.

Since then the recreation department has conducted several rounds of consultation, but made precious little progress. Last spring, the department hired a consultant to help organize a community forum in June and “collate” the feedback with the goal of developing a plan some time in the fall.

Recreation director Donna Atkinson told council a steering committee is slated to hold further meetings beginning in February.

Coun. Helen Hughes warned that rushing into another ill-conceived plan would be a mistake.

“The steps need to be taken extremely carefully or else we do not carry the rest of Victoria along with us,” she said.

mailto:bclarke@vicnews.com

 

^ january 2007

 

 

 

october 2019:

 

Victoria city staff start from square one on Crystal Pool project

 

 

13 years later.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 16 October 2019 - 07:04 AM.

[Nparker]

And how many of my civic tax dollars have been spent so far to achieve precisely nothing? 

[Cats4Hire]

If they just closed the current one or quit bowing down to everyone who whines about temporary loss of green space old people would probably be lining up for their aquatic fitness time at the rebuilt pool now.

[aastra]

 

13 years later.

 

And in that 2007 article it says the first redevelopment plan dates from 2004! The facility at Central Park was ~32 years old in 2004, and since then we've spent ~15 years talking about replacement.

 

Meanwhile, apparently it took 4 years from start to finish to plan and build the Central Park pool. I nominate the pool replacement issue as perhaps the definitive example of how "the more Victoria changes, the more it stays the same":

 

 

Daily Colonist
February 28, 1971

The Story of a Pool

When the first water enthusiasts dive into Victoria's new swimming pool in September, it will be exactly four years since city officials dropped the first hints of a new pool to replace Crystal Garden.

The new aquatic complex in Central Park, Quadra and Queens, will not only be Victoria's most beautiful recreational facility, but also its most expensive one.

The end product... will cost a whopping $1.8 million, more than twice as much as intimated four years ago...

...(in 1967) Ald. Percy Frampton said the city could build a brand-new facility comparable to the Crystal Garden for an estimated $750,000, but that figure was never mentioned again.

One year later...the cost of a new swimming pool was estimated at "close to $1 million;" that figure, too, disappeared from the scene.

Critics of the project have never denied that the new pool will be beautiful, and will add considerably to the city's recreational aspect, but they have voiced objections to the location and the cost.

They have objected to "cutting Central Park in half." They have objected to the lack of parking facilities at the site. They have pointed out that Saanich is building a swimming pool for less than $500,000.

Supporters of the project have countered... The question of parking, they have claimed, is irrelevant, because there is no provision for parking at the Crystal Garden either.

(Some parking spaces will be provided at the nearby curling rink.)

As for cutting the park in half, defenders of the new pool have pointed out that by putting a roof over part of a park, the city isn't reducing recreational space.

Edited by aastra, 16 October 2019 - 10:23 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

The end product... will cost a whopping $1.8 million, more than twice as much as intimated four years ago...

 

 

$11.6m in today's money.  yet we are trying to build a $80m one.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 16 October 2019 - 10:25 AM.

[G-Man]

The current one just needs to be fixed up. It is fine.

[aastra]

I have no problem with replacing it even though I have a lot of nostalgic affection for it (both for how it was originally and how it is now after the various modifications). Pools don't last forever, and pool facilities and our expectations thereof have changed a lot over the decades (similar to how our expectations have changed re: stadiums and arenas).

 

But (as always) I have a problem with the politics that have contaminated the process.