Victoria sends rental project back to negotiating table
Victoria city council has asked its staff to try one more time to persuade a developer to commit to providing below-market housing in a small rental apartment project on Richardson Street.
Council voted 6-3 in favour of directing staff to meet again with developer Bart Johnson and Christine Lintott Architects to discuss including a legal commitment to provide below-market units in a 20-unit building proposed for 1042 Richardson St.
The project, a six-storey rental building, had been sent back for revision by the previous council in 2022.
This time around, city staff advised council to decline the application, as few changes to the project had been made.
Staff said it remains too big for the site and the below-market units promised in 2022 have been removed from the plans, rendering it no longer consistent with the official community plan.
The decision to refer the project for further discussion came after council made it clear it did not like the way the developer dangled an incentive the night before the project was to be discussed at committee of the whole.
The proponent told council members in an email that the project could include four units at below-market rates for 10 years, but city staff pointed out the proponent has repeatedly told the city it would not enter into a legal agreement to provide them.
“If we can’t secure it, there’s no guarantee it will happen,” said Karen Hoese, the city’s director of sustainable planning.
“People can promise to do all sorts of things. Buildings can change ownership. We’ve seen applications come in where they have secured things and they’re now trying to remove them.”
Mayor Marianne Alto said she also did not like the appearance of a developer trying to get around council’s normal process.
“It is highly inappropriate for there to be substantive material offers made through council immediately in advance of a decision-making body at the last minute without going through proper processes,” she said.
“It is highly inappropriate for us to be considering material changes to an application on the same day that we are considering the application itself.”
Alto and councillors Susan Kim, Jeremy Caradonna, Chris Coleman, Dave Thompson and Krista Loughton all supported referral.
“This is about the process for me — I have difficulty receiving emails from developers the day before,” said Loughton.
“The proponent needs to discuss this with staff in a more fulsome way and come back quickly with an answer for us. It’s not my intention to slow this down — it’s just to have some certainty for the city on this.”
Coleman said without being able to refer the motion he would likely have voted to kill the project.
“The motion to refer allows some latitude to bring it back and the affordability component is the issue, that’s the stumbling block,” he said.
Councillors Marg Gardiner, Stephen Hammond and Matt Dell opposed referring it.
Gardiner and Hammond said referring the issue to staff shifts the emphasis to negotiations over below-market units, rather than the fact city staff had recommended the project be declined.
“We are getting away from the substance of why this was suggested to be declined. And now we’re going about this little ‘bauble’ that’s being held above us as an enticement,” said Hammond.
“I don’t want to refer this — I want to defeat this.”
Dell, for his part, opposed referral because he thought the project had been around too long, and should be approved.
“I think it’s the best thing we can do is just get this project approved and move on as quickly as possible. And that will add to the most affordability.”