To encourage transparent and accountable government.

This is not an official transcript but an effort to put text to the city council discussion on the motion concerning redevelopment of five properties in the Cook Street Village. Click here if you wish to listen to a recording of the councilors comments.(MP3 file; 8.65 megabytes; 37 minutes, 49 seconds long)

Public Hearing Cook & Sutlej September 16, 2004

Motion to approve the rezoning amendment: Councillor Thorton-Joe

Councillor Holland: I find it difficult to separate my comments in relation to the zoning. First of all I want to thank everyone for coming and for your time and your interest. Its too bad those other people left, they missed the final event. I want to thank you for the clarity and the information that has been provided by Lindsay and the planning department as late as this afternoon some of my colleagues on council met with Lindsay one more time to make sure we understood and now I’m not so sure – Charlayne is shaking her head. I think it was really important to me to be reminded that this is a new application and that it needs to be considered on that basis as its very easy to confuse everything that has happened last year that staff consider this as a new application and dealt with it in that light and responded, I think to it in an innovative approach. I think there are components to this project that have a lot of merit and I remember the comment made of the mass has been softened. And however what I was hearing from some of you is that you don’t want the develop. We have to listen to everybody; it includes the developer and includes the advisory planning commission and design panel and very professional staff. I feel very excited in barrier free and adaptive housing and in this climate living in this world we are living in the increase demographic of seniors. An important develops in the future affordable housing which could create fourty units of housing is a remarkable achievement. All of council recognizes the unique character of Cook Street and it doesn’t take someone who lives in that neighbourhood because I know there’s a lot people in the city of Victoria who feel that the Cook Street village is unique. I always regret the conflict in a difficult application and this project fits into that criteria I particularly regret conflict produced inflammatory and rude print material. It does not speak well by yourselves or by us. Any development has a component of economic reality I don’t see that this is a reason to vilified the developer and council. I have to consider all the information provided by the developer by the architect by the planner and by you and advisory planning commission, advisory design panel and professional staff and a lot of dialogue with my colleagues in arriving my decision and my decision is to support the project. Some of you the evening referred to leadership, and you know leadership is a process not an event and whenever we make a decision a part of leadership there will be a lot of people who disagree and I hope you look at anyone of us in light of the total and the work that is done as a part of the leadership process

Councillor Fortin: I appreciate that you came and voiced your opinion. First to start: Tonight I’ve heard several speakers speak against the consultation and said they felt they weren’t heard and the second speaker was highly critical of the whole consultation process. In another community, the development would be put in the newspaper and the community shows up. There has been a complete community consultation and city council honouring the neighbours and honouring the community associations. You have a council that truly supports community consultation. We have sponsored and paid for a facilitated meeting last year. I hate to say that community consultation is only good if your point is heard. All views are heard and we try to work towards consensus. The has been a lot of time and great input into the amenity package. On to the merits of the application: For myself we start to talk about affordable housing we know that it’s a critical need in the city of Victoria. We did a citizens survey that says its the number one thing to deal with. To set up a municipal trust fund is extremely exciting for me for the city to actually take action. The set up of a municipal trust fund which is mentioned in this city to take action we can be critical of senior funding. Recently we’ve heard a downtown core softening and the major cause is the relentless suburbanization of the outlying communities and that we need to look at densification and control growth in outlying municipalities. Densification and control of growth in the city maintains Smart Growth and very important to our social welfare, environment and economic. Those all need to put in consideration and in caution. This does not mean that every single proposal that comes forward is approved for those reasons. I find caution with those who don’t agree with my political points but start to use what I would say. So Smart Growth principals must also be put into context. We need to say why we like all those things or otherwise we are being blackmailed and otherwise we are compromising our values. Tonight I have heard a couple of descriptions of the project radically inappropriately and towards the destruction of the village. This is a very controlled growth and very slow growth description of the project it is a controlled growth okay with Shoal Point only took 30% and this is 200% and we would not put Shoal point on this corner. Its just a small increase. Aesthetically I realize its beauty in the eyes of the beholder - I like the look of the place I think it will age well and people will in 50 years say, “ itsn’t that a great old building there!”. I think this will add the vitality in Cook Street if you look at it as important and controlled. If you look at one of the better neighbourhoods in greater Victoria – Uplands- was successful because it was preserved from destruction due to slowly being built out and you will see different times built, fortunate that war interfered. A healthy neighbourhood because it was not all built at once. There is a renewal, but it is the people that give character to the village - and the trees. If you took those trees away there isn’t a whole lot of great looking architecture there. So I want to say that I will support the rezoning and I will support the amendment development permit with the one-meter setback. I will not support getting rid of the rooftop gardens. I think frankly that what we do we don’t count in the elevator shafts, air-conditioning and I don’t think we should count in the stairwells and I think for me I really don’t have any concern about the developer having it more profitable. The people who live in these places need their own private greenspaces. Everyone cherishes their own backyard at the same time it adds to the urban environment so I support the community gardens I mean rooftop gardens and green roofs are extremely important both to this project and the rezoning. So to conclude I will support the Development Permit with the one meter setback.

Councillor Savoie: I will speak first about the zoning regulations bylaw. And I think tonight we’ve been reminded by many speakers of the unique character of this village and I feel a great responsibilities about what is going to happen here and the impact. I can support the bylaw as it reads and the set backs are important to the village there has been a lot of confusion amongst ourselves that we sought clarification on that this afternoon and obviously many members of the public questioned why set up the zoning bylaws and proceed to identify the different elements allowed misunderstanding to grow even for the chair of the land use committee. The issue of the garden and whether it’s a three storey or a four storey I think has become a moot point. I will be supporting the rezoning amendment but I will be proposing to Development Permit when we come to that.

Councillor Hughes: Thank you to all for staying here because I think we’ve come to a fairly good resolution or coming to it. I think that the kind of drawing by Robert Amos was very helpful of whether or not the rooftop garden has extra storey. The design panel has been advocating that there be rooftop gardens in buildings and in my view it is good to have that amenities that will not only environmentally friendly but will certainly add enjoyment for those who live there. So I will be supporting the reasoning and also the important housing trust fund in our region but is certainly remarkable that that is the beginning of our trust fund.

Councillor Fleming: Thanking the public for coming out in such great numbers and waiting patiently to voicing their views and providing council many views. I will be supporting the rezoning it is informed by the Fairfield Community Plan and is not a departure of the Cook Street guidelines and clarifies the three meter setback and sets a precedent on the variance in regards to the building significant. What we were discussing a couple months ago we were talking more about the Sutlej more so then the massing issues that has been lowered by a storey and the density on that has also been reduced considerable on the Cook Street building. We have heard more about this evening we have some changes we need to highlight and will be examined and do so in a moment. We are talking about a two storey the building as it appears on Cook Street and a three storey overall and the building has a smaller footprint then the neighbouring store and is a new site coverage on a surface parking lot. I look at the buildings objective between low and medium density calls for 1.5:1 / 1.25:1 / 2.1:1 blended together we are hardly talking about doubling or tripling but hardly a radical departure from what is allowed under current zones already. I support $420,000 being contributed in the reserve housing fund in a density affordable housing a in a reserve fund then try to maintain two rentals . The $420,000 will go further on the site in Fairfield non-profit housing than two units leverage funds density bonus applications. I think one of the points of importance of public space on Cook Street with setbacks issues some people prefer three meters but even two meters with grass and tree boulevards visually an area that is far away from the roadway that has ample the over hang affirmative with the applicant that they think that can be done with the next motion reduce the overhang and you will not have a shadowing or encumbered of the columns long process of consultation that we have has made the changes so far. I support the project.

Councillor Coleman: I thank you to all of you and show your passion and concern for your community and I think its appropriate to give a special thanks to Molly and Robert and Blair for the extraordinary help in the process, and thank you to Robert for his rendering because it is very helpful to us. A number of you said to send the developer packing as you did eleven months ago. And if you remember eleven months ago we didn’t spend a lot of time on the Bohemia building on Cook Street and in fact we said we were quite impressed at that building and the cause of the concern was the density on the Sutlej side it was suggested that a diminished parking units because of smart growth principles massive reduction of parking for 79 units would be a lot more cars on the street and clogged up Sutlej this proposal has 46 units without a lot of parking variances and addresses more appropriately the principles of Smart Growth. DPA with respect of the setback issues and yet the contribution addressing affordable housing $420,000 . Mr. Kamp says 40 – 50 units contributes to mortgage basis there is an opportunity to leverage with senior government contribution both to the Cook Street Village and the city of Victoria.

Councillor Thornton-Joe: We went to staff for clarification it was very clear and through this evening the clarity was not always there. The fact that you‘re still here and the fact that many of you have traveled far to here speak to your passion. And its that passion what is the character of village it is more than bricks and mortar but of the people who live there. Mr. Harris asked “Is it right for the Victoria?” and he meant “Is it right for the village?”. I think this development is a welcomed addition for the village and I would love to see anywhere in the city. Someone mentioned the amenity package but we must be supportive of the proposal without considering the amenities. I heard the voices say about precedents. The weight was would it change the character of the village? I agree with the Sutlej side I will support the rezoning and look forward to the further discussion on the Development Permit.

Mayor Lowe: Looking at what we went through in the last year and looking at what we looked at last year and the concerned we had for the project was that the Sutlej Street was too big. We looked at the Bohemia building was fine and it was the Castana we had concerns with and the developer went back and worked with the members of the FCA board which was palatable got into trouble with interpretation with the communication people thought. The planning staff started using different definitions and I believe last year had roof decks which would have made it higher building as well. We called it a storey at that time. Now here we are, so it’s just what the definition it is. I look at it as well I feel a lot more comfortable yet some people still do not like. I do believe many people do support this. I think it will not be a blemish along Cook Street. I would not try to do anything to ruin the Cook Street Village. In looking at this as well we had concerns about setbacks and we will deal with that later. Last year the value of the amenity package Community Arts area in the basement and we wondered if there is value there and we had differences with different values. The amenity package has gone long ways we do have a number to work with the various amenity packages are top priorities. And in closing I think as we look at the closure of that lane as well and even though we are closing the lane to put the underground parking there it will still be accessible through a covenant and for fair market value we actually gain - because the lane will be owned by the developer but we have total control over it.

Motion is carried unanimously.

Master development agreement is not registered and postponed fourth reading.

Development Permit Variances cannot be voted on until after the fourth reading of the Master Development Agreement and is referred to the Committee of the Whole for a report on the clarification to increase setbacks of one meter on the second storey on Cook Street and three meters on the ground. (Fleming recommending on the second storey one meter setback Savoie recommending the three meter ground floor setback).

Motion: To set up a community amenity fund - carried