Jump to content

      



























BUILT
The Dalmatian
Uses: rental, civic
Address: 1025 Johnson Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 11
The Dalmatian is an 11-storey mixed-use affordable rental tower in the 1000-block of Johnson Street in downtow... (view full profile)
Learn more about the Dalmatian on Citified.ca
Photo

[Harris Green] The Dalmatian | Victoria No. 1 Firehall | Rentals, office space | Completed - Built in 2023


  • Please log in to reply
785 replies to this topic

#441 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:24 AM

But like I say, when they come back with a revised version that addresses the "it's way too dense" concern, you can't complain that it's still way too dense, or switch gears to some other issue.

 

It's not red and everyone knows all firehalls everywhere must be red that's the rule


  • aastra likes this

#442 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:33 AM

I don't think it's the density per se that bothers the DRA, they allege the developer is asking for an unreasonable amount of density lift in return for what they are providing. And that the City is in conflict for both requesting and ruling on a plan that goes well above what the OCP allows.



#443 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:34 AM

You make a good point. I was thinking more along the lines of "the firefighters wouldn't have enough privacy" or "the trucks would be too heavy for Harris Green soil", etc.



#444 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 09:39 AM

130 very low to moderate income affordable homes: not good enough.
Fixed-price state of the art fire hall: not good enough.
Replacing surface parking lots with housing: not good enough.
Transforming auto-oriented land usage to housing: not good enough.
Heights equal to adjacent buildings: not good enough.
Public plaza and green space: not good enough.
More density and commercial spaces for the city centre: not good enough.

How can this project so reflective of the OCP be such a failure in the eyes of the DRA?

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


#445 baconnbits

baconnbits
  • Member
  • 235 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:05 AM

Whatever happened to that game of proposing too much and then scaling it back a bit?

 

 

Okay, if that's the case then don't approve it. I wouldn't shed any tears. I'm not in love with the style of it and for some reason the new firehall seems to be much less of an urgent need today than it was just a few years ago.

 

But like I say, when they come back with a revised version that addresses the "it's way too dense" concern, you can't complain that it's still way too dense, or switch gears to some other issue.

they aren't approving the design of the subsequent phases. this is a concept drawing showing the density. the buildings will look different after they seek their approvals and design review. this is a zoning / density approval outside of the fire hall.



#446 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:12 AM

I thought the firehall building was the actual design for that part? I liked the firehall levels but I didn't like the residential levels above. Anyway, I also wasn't keen on the massing of the whole thing.



#447 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 10:26 AM

It is the actual design for that phase, the initial phase.

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


#448 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 11:43 AM

I don't think it's the density per se that bothers the DRA, they allege the developer is asking for an unreasonable amount of density lift in return for what they are providing. And that the City is in conflict for both requesting and ruling on a plan that goes well above what the OCP allows.


But then the question comes up of why they care. It is not just about saying someone isn't following the rules. It is more but they don't want to say the why and that is what irks me.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#449 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 11:48 AM

What are you suggesting? If the rules had been followed to the letter we can assume they'd be very pleased to redevelop a parking lot with a new firehall and some affordable housing and condos, no?



#450 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 11:55 AM

That is what you would have to surmise! They did the same thing with the Northern Junk building. They didn't go in and criticize the building itself they went in and said the city should not sell public land for the development. It is a great way of seeming like you are on top of things without having to play your hand which you just know would be covered in gooey NIMBYism, but no instead we filed an FOI request because we are looking out for the poor citizens that are being done a disservice by a developer getting some sort of deal. That is all. If people would just follow the rules it would all be okay of course. 


  • Nparker likes this

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#451 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 03:47 PM

DRA:

 

This is a very aggressive project, and it will be the largest development of this density ever proposed, not just for Harris Green, but for the City of Victoria, exceeding the already generous OCP maximum of FSR 5.5:1 by 24% (6.8:1). The Hudson district is currently the most densely developed block in Victoria with a floor space ratio of 5.1:1, and there’s still two more 20 plus storey buildings yet to be built on that block to actually get to that density.

 



#452 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 04:47 PM

Wrong.

There is a single tower remaining to be built on that block.
  • Nparker likes this

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


#453 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 05:31 PM

How are they defining "block"? You can circle any space to get to the number you want. Add in the West half of the block and I would bet we would be in the 1.5/1 FSR territory.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#454 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 05:35 PM

The auto dealership is going to get redeveloped eventually, like it or not (and we should like it, because it's essentially a parking lot as is and it could be a million times better). The site also seems like a very workable one re: the firehall partnership. Even the current firehall site wouldn't work as well, since you wouldn't be allowed to build downtown-style density up there and a considerable amount of density would be needed to pull it off.

 

I still think scooching* things over and down a bit would make this concept much more palatable for people. Less density, improved views and daylight/shadowing... heck, less profit for the developers if that floats your boat.

 

*architect's jargon

Firehall_Remassing_Hypothetical.jpg



#455 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 20,976 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 05:56 PM

The sense I've gotten sitting on a downtown strata near this project is that while there are a group of dissidents on the DRA and on other downtown stratas that vehemently oppose this project (for whatever reason), those in opposition essentially believe this has been a green lit project from the City since day one, so are basically just trying to raise a stink as high as they can knowing that it's going to get approved regardless.

 

Whether you like it or not, the DRA is only very solid footing here in my opinion. There is recent legal precedent in Vancouver where the courts have overturned a rezoning decision based on facts very similar to this. You simply cannot ignore the OCP and residents association to push through whatever special deals you want.

 

Should be an interesting meeting. May come down to the Mayor casting the deciding vote even though she was the one who signed the contract with the developer. I would think that given this and the role the Jawl family took supporting her re-election campaign (hosting her campaign launch) she should recuse herself.


Edited by spanky123, 22 October 2019 - 06:13 PM.


#456 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,650 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 05:57 PM

 

How are they defining "block"? You can circle any space to get to the number you want.

 

Would you object to a lower-density concept? Here's the Y-lot block compared to the Mazda dealership property:

 

Y-lot_compared_to_mazda_lot.jpg

 

**********

 

And here's a more straightforward/informative comparison between the 900-block and the Mazda dealership property (the red outline has been flipped vertical, no resizing):

 

900-block_compared_to_mazda_lot.jpg


Edited by aastra, 22 October 2019 - 06:12 PM.


#457 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 06:14 PM

Looking at the DRA’s Hudson statement a little closer, the density on that property is artificially lower due to the old Hudson’s Bay building, so they’re comparing apples to oranges.

Furthermore, nearly half of the Jawl property is under the R-48 zoning and qualifies for more density than the OCP envisions.
  • Nparker likes this

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


#458 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 20,976 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 06:16 PM

Looking at the DRA’s Hudson statement a little closer, the density on that property is artificially lower due to the old Hudson’s Bay building, so they’re comparing apples to oranges.

Furthermore, nearly half of the Jawl property is under the R-48 zoning and qualifies for more density than the OCP envisions.

 

The argument is that the developer wants to transfer unused density from one property to an unrelated one. Allow it here then why not allow developers who own parking lots in Rock Bay to build 20 story buildings in Fairfield?!



#459 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,409 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 06:17 PM

Under-densifying a site like this in the heart of downtown will be seen as a huge mistake in the years to come.



#460 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 20,976 posts

Posted 22 October 2019 - 06:19 PM

But even if they don’t, that doesn’t imply anything nefarious. The deal could be tied to an NDA.

The City is getting a fire hall on budget. 130 very low to moderate income affordable homes, and a major uplift in taxation revenue from that one building alone. It’s a win on so many fronts.

 

Other than a staff report, I haven't seen any commitment from BC Housing or Pacifica to offer very low or low income housing. In fact I keep hearing the term "workforce housing" being tossed around which is completely different. I can't see the developer wanting very low income housing right next to the condos that they want to sell at a premium. 



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.
 



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users