A proposed eight-storey condominium project that would replace the Admiral Inn in James Bay has been granted another development permit, almost 14 years after it was first approved.
The 35-unit residential project at 257 Belleville St. was first green-lit by Victoria council in 2011.
While council voted unanimously on Thursday to move forward the stalled project with its fifth development permit, many councillors weren’t happy about it.
“I dislike everything about this project — I think the city has gotten played,” said Coun. Jeremy Caradonna. “I think if this [project] were to come to us today as a rezoning — which it’s not — but if it were, we would be handling it very differently.”
Because the site was rezoned in 2011 to accommodate the proposed eight-storey condo project, council had no ability this week to require increased amenity contributions or anything else. The 34-unit Admiral Inn, whose semi-furnished rooms are rented out on a weekly and yearly basis, has been on the site for 69 years.
Caradonna conceded council was not “here to re-litigate the rezoning from 2011.”
“I do hope that as a council and as staff we’ve learned some lessons here that there has to be more teeth in these agreements and we have to do more to ensure that developers are going to build what they say they’re going to build,” he said.
According to a City of Victoria staff report, the project, which got its first development permit in 2011, had that permit renewed three times between 2013 and 2018.
Many councillors argued replacing the 34-unit inn with a 35-unit condominium project was a poor trade-off.
“This isn’t more housing and it’s important for the public to understand that it’s replacement of affordable housing by housing that is going to be very expensive,” said Coun. Dave Thompson, who noted when council sees a proposal for higher-end housing that replaces affordable units, it usually comes with increased density.
“The applicant could take this back and rethink it and come back with a proposal that has a lot more housing. We should probably be looking at something that’s much bigger,” he said.
“And given the fact that this has been sitting on the books since 2011 and under the current owner since 2015, I’m not seeing a huge urgency. This is probably a good time to go back to the planning table and figure out how do we make this into 80 or 100 units.”
Mayor Marianne Alto, who was on council when the project was first approved in 2011, said she regrets that the project is not larger, adding 35 units isn’t enough.
In a letter to council, project architect Alan Lowe did not go into why the project has been delayed, noting only that proponent ADZ Properties has reviewed its target market and believes it’s now time to move forward.
According to Lowe, ADZ purchased the project in 2015.
Lowe pointed out the only changes made to the project since the city last considered it is a second level of underground parking, which will now provide 78 vehicle stalls and 77 bicycle parking spaces.
The building is designed to terrace back from the waterfront, with each storey above the third stepped back from the water.
The developers, who have already contributed $74,000 to the construction of the city’s Harbour Pathway, will have to provide $433,000 in community amenity contributions.
While it is not required to have a tenant assistance policy, the project will provide existing tenants with relocation support, the option to take the furniture in their semi-furnished suites and free rent or monetary compensation for up to four months, depending on how long tenants have lived in their units.
Coun. Matt Dell said the project is not ideal, but he argued it’s important that the city send a message to developers that council will stand by its commitments.
“If we actually want new housing in the city, we need to give the development industry some assurance that when things come forward, we’re going to support that,” he said. “Developers aren’t going to build in Victoria if they’re worried that we’re going to change the rules every time a project comes forward.
“Is it the perfect building for me? Perhaps not. But given that this is a 14-year-old project, I think we need to create stability in our housing cycle and we need to make sure that we’re replacing older housing that is increasingly costly to maintain with newer housing.”
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
