Jump to content

      













PROPOSED
1025 Johnson Street
Uses: rental, civic
Address: 1025 Johnson Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 12
Johnson Yates Block, phase 1, is a proposal to build an 12-storey mixed-use rental tower along the 1000-block ... (view full profile)
Learn more about 1025 Johnson Street on Citified.ca
Photo

[Harris Green] Johnson Yates Block (Victoria Mazda property) | Victoria Fire Hall | Rentals, condos, retail space | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
292 replies to this topic

#41 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 48,233 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 08:13 AM

So this proposal is announced six months before plans are submitted, which are to be submitted just days ahead of the election, but the Apex Site remains shrouded in secrecy. Weird.


  • Nparker likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#42 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 20 March 2018 - 08:24 AM

then what zoning can they switch it do with out going thru public consultation, I know it exists on the property.  I remember them telling me, but don't recall the details

 

Legally, Council has the authority to waive the Public Hearing requirement for a rezoning bylaw if the proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies contained in the Official Community Plan (the Mazda site is designated "Core Residential"). Whether or not Council wants to exercise that authority is another question entirely.



#43 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,517 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 08:49 AM

 

....he even admired the Bosa towers just down the street and thought that was a good fit for the site...

 

What are we referring to? The Manhattan?

 

I don't know... with some of the names involved I'm wondering if highrises might be off the table altogether for this property. That might not even be a bad thing.



#44 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,861 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:08 AM

...I'm wondering if highrises might be off the table altogether for this property. That might not even be a bad thing.

It would be a terrible shame to end up with short buildings in one of the few areas of the city where there isn't an all-out battle to achieve more density through height.



#45 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,517 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:21 AM

It depends on how they're planning to do it.



#46 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:25 AM

Did this project go to tender?



#47 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:31 AM

There was a market sounding, in camera meetings and pressbly decisions, then various checks. Sounds fine to me.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 20 March 2018 - 09:31 AM.

  • jonny likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#48 Greg

Greg
  • Member
  • 1,605 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:44 AM

This whole story may end up being one of those things that goes on the list for "we could do worse than Helps."



#49 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:58 AM

For sure. Crystal Pool could nullify the gain though. If money does not come through her opponents could use that failure (and the money spent already) against her.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 20 March 2018 - 09:59 AM.

<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#50 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 20 March 2018 - 09:58 AM

Bringing this up in case anyone is interested, since Vancouver just went through this process for the replacement of Fire Hall #5, which includes affordable housing on top. The project website is here: http://vancouver.ca/...ire-hall-5.aspx

 

fire-hall-5-new-building-illustration.jp


  • VicHockeyFan and grantpalin like this

#51 baconnbits

baconnbits
  • Member
  • 125 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 10:12 AM

R-48
Fire hall with office or housing atop fits in that zoning and then it seems like the rest of the land where Mazda is occupying will also go to r-48 (same as some of the adjacent lands)
Good step in the direction of car dealerships out of the core

#52 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 4,987 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 20 March 2018 - 10:29 AM

There was a market sounding, in camera meetings and pressbly decisions, then various checks. Sounds fine to me.

 

 

When it comes to spending $36 million or thereabouts there should have been an RFP at the very least. Market soundings and in camera meetings do not hold up to accountability or scrutiny. 



#53 shoeflack

shoeflack
  • Member
  • 1,726 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 10:36 AM

When it comes to spending $36 million or thereabouts there should have been an RFP at the very least. Market soundings and in camera meetings do not hold up to accountability or scrutiny. 

 

The COW report does indicate that an RFQ was completed.


  • rjag likes this

#54 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 10:44 AM

When it comes to spending $36 million or thereabouts there should have been an RFP at the very least. Market soundings and in camera meetings do not hold up to accountability or scrutiny.


As Helps said, somebody else is gonna run this project. That in and of itself is good.
  • rjag and shoeflack like this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#55 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,861 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 11:16 AM

I was hoping Jawl Residential might have some additional information on their plans for this site, but their website doesn't really offer anything substantial

Capture1.JPG

Capture2.JPG

Capture3.JPG



#56 baconnbits

baconnbits
  • Member
  • 125 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 11:24 AM

There was. City website outlines he process. Multiple
Proposals were submitted. They elected to go further down the path of negotiations with the best fitting proposal - this one which allows for the use of the existing fireball till
The new one is complete is surely the best. Particularly given location
  • rjag likes this

#57 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 11:29 AM

So, in all of this, does the City say what becomes of the Yates property? In a correct world it’s sold to the highest bidder to go towards the new $35M cost. In our likely world the City keeps it. When the City should not be looking at gaining more property.
  • Nparker likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#58 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,861 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 11:34 AM

The 1234 Yates property most definitely should be sold.



#59 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 01:01 PM

Legally, Council has the authority to waive the Public Hearing requirement for a rezoning bylaw if the proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies contained in the Official Community Plan (the Mazda site is designated "Core Residential"). Whether or not Council wants to exercise that authority is another question entirely.

Not for this site, the way it was explained to me by the them is they can tell the City to effect "we are changing the zoning of the site as per our built in option"  no council meeting, no nothing.  Now what their specific zoning option was I don't remember.  Now if they need to change it to a further different zoning outside that option then they need a rezoning application.

 What are we referring to? The Manhattan?

 

I don't know... with some of the names involved I'm wondering if highrises might be off the table altogether for this property. That might not even be a bad thing.

no the two towers at the corner of Yates and Vancouver, sorry I don't know the name or address



#60 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,073 posts

Posted 20 March 2018 - 01:09 PM

Not for this site, the way it was explained to me by the them is they can tell the City to effect "we are changing the zoning of the site as per our built in option"  no council meeting, no nothing.  Now what their specific zoning option was I don't remember.  Now if they need to change it to a further different zoning outside that option then they need a rezoning application.

no the two towers at the corner of Yates and Vancouver, sorry I don't know the name or address

Are you referring to Regents Park?



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users