Transcript: Committee of the Whole - 2026/10/01

Councillor Coleman is way today, and so he is unable to join us. Today we have for consideration at committee a presentation. To land use matters and one item of new business. But of course, before we begin, we always like to take a moment to groan to ourselves in a recognition and expression of gratitude to the two nations on whose territories are city sits in its entirety. The Songs Nation and the GoSepsum Nation. It is well known to everyone, I think, who's been here in the City of the Extraordinary event that took place yesterday on September 30th on the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation and the Powell that occurred at Royal Athletic Park with the support of the City of Victoria and other municipalities. And I think the thousands of people who showed up during the day yesterday indicate growing awareness of the importance of building relationships with the nations from a municipal government perspective, but also on a personal and an individual perspective as

well. It's certainly throughout the day. There were so many different opportunities to learn and reflect and enjoy a variety of different offerings. It really was quite extraordinary. And another example of how important it is for all of us who have the ability to be partners and to look for those opportunities to build an understanding a common understanding of how useful, important. And I guess rewarding it is as kind of a funny way to say it for all of us to navigate whatever we can in creating relationships with the nations wherever we are. With that extraordinary example of what we can do together, it's important for us to start our meetings as we do every time.

Just acknowledging the stewardship of the two - nation's in particular on whose territories we sit and to note that our relationship as a city with COSOPSum and Song. He's in the La Quanten people in general has become very rich, very nuanced, and we appreciate the fact that they continue to be willing to work with us in so many different ways looking at different programs and projects and opportunities that we hope will benefit all of those of us who have the privilege of living here in these territories. And so as we always do, we like to say thank you and express our gratitude and respect by saying hi tricky CM or Archicasiem Nikhilia, which is the simplest terms to use, which most of us now know how to say just as to say thank you. And I honour all of those who are listening, who are here today, not just in this chamber, but throughout the city who take a moment each day to do one

simple act that perhaps will change the life of someone a little bit more for the better. I should guess you have an Aquilia. I would just note actually, briefly not charge your mark so much, it's just a note that today is October 1st is the beginning of small business month. And so we always have an opportunity to take a moment just to acknowledge how critical is the impact of our small businesses in Victoria. We have really an amazing array of unique small businesses, which are one of the things that attract people to visit us. And one of the ways that we have well - paying and family supporting jobs for all of our residents here, many of our residents here. And so we do a proclamation at the beginning of that month, every year. We've done so again this month, and I would urge all of our folks who are here either as residents or visitors to make sure that they take the time to

grow out and interact with and support and patronize all of the amazing small businesses that exist here in the City of Victoria. I'm not aware of any late items that need to be add to committee today. And so I would look then for someone to move approval of the published agenda. Thanks Councillor Loughton. Second did by Councillor Kim. Any comment on the public agenda. Let's go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. On July 30th, I asked for a list of organisations charged with attempting to get people on the streets and in our park support or supportive housing and organisations funded to monitor those on the streets or other organisations, which have been delegated the task of relationship building with those on the streets and in our parks.

And I asked for the amount of receive grant or contract funding by year for 2024 - 2025 and January up to June, 2026. And I was told this information would be provided with the September 3rd report. On September 3rd, I once again posed a question, was told that the information would be presented on October 1st. Today, but I don't see it on the agenda. I guess I would have to look to Mr. Rantucci. I believe that's intended to be part of the community safety well - being update next week, which would be the last regular public update of this term. Is that correct, Mr. Renticci.

Through the mayor, that's correct. That's correct. So that will be on next week's agenda. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anything else on the published agenda. Not seeing anything else, solo's in favor. Anyone opposed? That is unanimous. Thank you very much for that. There were two items proposed for the consented agenda, item G2, the request to discharge a statutory right away in covenant for the property at 1050, 1050 Pandora Avenue. And item H1, the appointment of a licensed inspector. Would anyone like to remove either of these or add anything else? Not seeing any of that. It's someone like to move the consent agenda. Thanks Councillor Kim, something about Councillor Thompson, all those in favor.

And I want to pose. That is unanimous. Thank you for that. That takes us up to our presentations. Item F, and I believe we have both, our manager accounting, and our external auditor present today. I'm wondering if both of those folks would like to come up to the centre table for any questions and presentations that they have. I believe that is Mr. Lynn and Mr. Sabo. Lovely to see you in person, Mr. Savo. You should be having you in a little tiny screen. Once you're settled, over to you. I think it's just me. Okay? All right. Mr. Lin, but that's fine. Let me just get.

Now if I recall correctly, this presentation is simply for information. There is no decisions here, correct? It is. Over to you then. And thank you very much for the opportunity to present. It's the planning report in respect of the audit. So it's nothing to report in terms of findings or activities yet. It's to cover our expected activities. So, um, I will move through the report and hit the highlights, hit the key items. Uh, there's a number of pages that are information and purpose. And so I'm not going to cover those, but I'm happy to respond to any questions in respect of those at the end.

Uh, so maybe just, uh, pass through to page four. Of the report. And as always, we provide our contact information, uh, for both management and council. If there's ever any need to connect with, uh, any of the people there, just so you have our direct lines and email addresses. Hopefully that never has to be the case. But, um, if there's ever any questions that need to be answered, uh, we're happy to answer questions as well. Uh, page five, uh, outlines the timeline of our expected activities. And this is very consistent with prior years. Uh, we're in our kind of scoping and planning phase right now.

I've had a few initial conversations with management. Just understand what activities are happening during the year and are coming up. Uh, so we're doing that planning work right now. We'll do some interim field work starting October 19th. And our final year end field work will begin March 15th. We'll wrap up sometime towards the end of March beginning of April. We'll have our clearance meeting with management in mid April. And then expect it to report back to Mayor and Council on May 6th. And then the financial statements and our auditors report will be released shortly after that well in advance of the deadline for filing. The next page six. Outlines the responsibilities that we have for the financial statements, the financial statements are managements. Um, just hit a pop up on my screen and I need to get rid of their managements to prepare and produce from the records. Our responsibility is to provide an independent auditor's report on them to indicate that they are materially

correct. And that we work with management to do so in a timely fashion. Um, we also provide what we call management letter points. Those are observations that we may have as a result of the work with recommendations and also managements, uh, responses to those recommendations. And then also to provide our significant findings to Mayor and counsel at the end of the process. The next two pages have to do with, uh, fraud. And I know it's a scary word, but we do have to address the risk of fraud and error in the financial statements. Uh, the prevention and detection of fraud is primarily a management responsibility together with council and establishing a system of internal controls that addresses risks of fraud. It's our responsibility to understand what that system is. Your interactions with management in that respect as well. And also understanding how management addresses it through day - to - day activities. So we do assess the risk of fraud in the audit. And there's

a particular point coming up that addresses that. Uh, but the audit is not designed primarily to detect fraud. Um, so I just want to make that clear. It's not, it's not something that we actively look for. It's something that we prepare for in our risk assessment. Page nine, and this is, this is the specific activities that we undertake in order to address fraud because quite often, in fact, almost always fraudulent activities are covered up by a series or one or more journal entries. And so we do address the risk of inappropriate journal entries that might be, um, undertaken in order to hide fraudulent activities. So we understand the process around, um, initiating and approving and processing journal entries. And we ensure that those process are in place. And then we do also, um, test a series of journal entries throughout the year, uh, to ensure that they have a basis behind them and also documentation to support them. Uh, the next page has a number

of items on it. And the one at the top is, uh, is just something that, uh, monitoring at this point, it hasn't actually started yet, but the, uh, the partnering agreement in respect of the housing project on City owned land. These partnering agreements often have some complex accounting, um, that results from them. So we are in discussions with management. And in various areas of the city to understand that agreement and to ensure that there's a process in place to account for it properly. I don't expect there to be anything perhaps some disclosure in the financial statements this year, but I don't expect there to be any. Actual accounting result from this in the current year.

The next point has to do with revenue recognition. And we are required to assess the risk of fraudulent revenue recognition in every audit in a local government audit. It's the revenues are quite, um, they're standard. They're not really subject to manipulation. And so we have rebutted the risk of fraudulent revenue recognition. However, because the accounting standards are quite complex. There is still a risk of errors and inappropriate accounting. So we address those risks and make sure that the revenue particularly restricted revenues are accounted for in the proper period. So we do review a sample of funding agreements, other restricted revenues such as, um, development cost charges and those sorts of things that have restrictions on them and ensure that they are recorded in the proper period. And then the final item on that page, uh, is in respect of collective bargaining agreements whenever there's an expired collective bargaining agreement that has not been renegotiated and agreed to by the end of the year, there is

some element of retroactive payment that we'll have to be made if there is increases in compensation and benefits. So we also do discuss with management what their approach to estimating those amounts is and ensuring that that's accounted for properly as well. So maybe just pause at that point because that's a lot of information. And, uh, see if there's any questions. Does anyone have any questions so far. Go ahead and guns your cardinal. Thank you. Could you go a bit more, excuse me, into the complex and routine transaction of that, uh, I don't know if you can or if you're able to at this stage or to the housing project you're talking about and the type of agreement and where the risk may be. Uh, I actually can't yet because I don't have all of the details. I wanted to raise it as something that we're monitoring. Um, but what I do understand is that it is an agreement between the city and other, other government

organisations. And, uh, anytime that there is a partnering agreement like that, um, we have to make sure that the accounting is done correctly because there are specific accounting rules that gover partner with local governments or any government. I can probably provide more information at, uh, at the year end, uh, meeting in May. That's great. Thank you very much. Question to you mayor. Is this something that is under the delegated bylaw or is this something that will be coming through to counsel as we go through forward. Are you specifically asking for a particular partnership agreement? Yeah. For the one that he is identified under risk. Mr.

Zoba, did you specifically identify a particular partnership agreement as risk? Uh, this is, it is. It's the agreement. I believe it's with BC housing. Yes. Uh, and like I said, I don't have all the details yet on it. Um, I will probably within weeks or certainly a month, but it still won't allow me at that point to provide a definitive answer on the accounting. So like my role is, is with respect to the accounting, not necessarily with the risk to the city. I see CFO Thompson is leading in. Would you like to add something? Yes, Mayor, just to explain which property we're talking about. This is 9 30 Pandora. So the project Building Housing there and the agreements that the City has and will be entering into with BC housing and also obviously CRD housing is involved as well. So, um, council is already aware of that has already approved that, uh, this is just the accounting for those very, um, from an accounting standpoint

complex transactions. Thank you. Thank you. And I thought that was it, but I wanted to clarify by staff. Thank you. Yep. You're welcome. Any other questions at this time. Mr. Selby, you have more to add. Do you not? Thank you, Mayor. I don't have anything more to add on the risks in the audit. Um, I will flip to the next page 11, which covers our materiality. And as always, I have to caution that those numbers look big, but they are, doesn't mean that we don't look at, uh, items below those amounts. Uh, those are two guide our analytical procedures. And they also feed into our statistical sampling. And they did, they provided a termination of how many sample items we might choose in particular areas.

Uh, what they also provide is a guideline in terms of what amount of unrecorded or uncorrected misstatements that we can accept and still issue our auditor's report. I can safely, confidently say that there is never been anything and even approaching those amounts that I can recall. But they are there for our, uh, our guidance. The next page, 12 covers the work that, uh, that, uh, the actuary performs in respect of employee future benefits. So we do rely on the actuary's work in order to form our audit opinion. And so we do communicate with the actuary. Ensure that they are, um, abiding by the same independent standards that we are required to that they're using correct data. And that their assumptions make sense in the context of the current environment. Uh, the next several pages are, uh, informational and purpose. Uh, and so I'm happy to answer any questions in their regard. I don't, uh, I don't plan on going through them in detail. Uh, the

one page that I will refer to as page 18, as always, we do provide some links to our website where there is always updated information and a specific to the public sector and sometimes specific to local government as well. So I do encourage you to have a look at, uh, at some of those areas. And finally, an accounting change that is coming will be effective for your fiscal 2027 year is kind of a reorganization of the financial statements. Uh, right now, as, as you probably recall, the balance sheet is not really a balance sheet. So if you're familiar with private sector accounting and financial statements, uh, your balance sheet is, uh, ordered a little bit differently. What is going to happen is that the statement of financial position will reflect a little bit more closely what a private sector balance sheet looks like. There are some other changes in some of the other statements. Uh, I will say that there is, it will be quite

a bit different. It's not a lot of, uh, technical effort that's going to be required. But there will be some time required on the part of management to identify which accounts are going to be restructured and placed in different areas. So we will, um, discuss this with management as time goes on over the next year or so to make sure that they're on track and that we can properly audit those changes. I think that brings me to the end of the report. So I'm happy to respond to any additional questions. Thank you very much. Any questions from council for Mr. Zavo? Go ahead, Council Carter.

Thank you. And I am very interested in what your last slide was or what you stated, which is, we look more like the private sector ones. Is that a mandate of any kind? Or how is that coming about? Can you give us some of the background in that? Uh, it is, it is a mandate that comes out of the public sector accounting standards board or the public sector accounting board. It's, it's part of a, um, a refresh of the entire, uh, what's called a conceptual framework. And I guess it was just determined by the board that the current set of statements, the way they're presented now, sometimes causes a bit of confusion. And, uh, I know I've had discussions with various councils on, uh, on the format of the statements and how they are quite different from a traditional private sector set of statements. Uh, so this has been ongoing for, I would say probably about 10 years and it culminated in the release of,

uh, of this particular standard about two or three years ago. Um, it did provide a fair amount of time to address it. Uh, and then I guess, you know, what I can do is probably next fall when I come back for my planning report. I can provide, um, sample set of statements to show you what it might look like. It won't be necessarily your set of statements, but it will be a sample that can provide a difference between the two. So you won't be doing that this year or will you? No, that's not required for this year. It's required for fiscal 2027. Okay. And then perhaps we don't know who's going to be here, but we would, would it be possible at that time to have a, I'm going to say duplicate, not write word set so we can have transition so that people can see the difference, old and new without be possible at all next year? Uh, I can, I can possibly do

that. But I think it's probably actually, it's probably better for, uh, for management to assemble that comparative set of statements, um, if the time between now and then want to put and put them on the spot here, uh, but it's probably better for management to do something like that. I can certainly address what the changes are and why they're made. Um, but, but putting that set of comparative statements together for the city specifically is probably better for management to do. Thank you very much. Ms. Thompson, did you want to comment on that? Um, three year, Mayor. So that is probably something that we would do anyway because we have it all set up and we have to figure out how to transition into the new.

So, uh, without having looked exactly at what the new will look like yet, um, I don't see that to be a big, um, project. Thank you. Any other questions. I'm not seeing any other questions. As always, thank you Mrs. Abo. We look forward to working with you as we continue on through the year. And I'm certain, as always, when we get back to the actual statements, we'll have lots more questions. Thank you very much. Appreciate the time. And thanks for coming in person. That is our only presentation today. It was a section F. And so we move on to item G of our agenda today.

This is our, uh, first land use item. This is with regard to the Heritage Alteration Permit with variances application. And the Heritage Designation application for the building at 780 Blanchard Street. I believe we have multiple staff appearing for this. But I don't actually see our Heritage planner. Oh, there we are. There we are. Thank you. Good morning. Once you're settled, turn it over to you. Take your time.

And of course, once you are settled, if you would remind the public and council who you are just for the record, that would be most helpful. Good morning, Mary Council. My name is Charlotte Wayne, manager of neighbourhood development planning. And I'm here with Crystal Steveno, senior Heritage Planner, who's here to present this application. Thank you so much. What are you, Ms. Diveno. Good morning. Um, today I am joined today, Ms. Maine, manager of neighbourhood development and planning. Thank you. Today I'll be presenting a Heritage Alteration Permit and variances and a Heritage designation application for the property at 780 Blanchard Street. The property is outlined in red, an odd shape triangular site, located between Blanchard Street, Fairfield Road, and Burdet Avenue.

This application is for a Heritage Conservation Project and the proposal is to fully retain, restore, rehabilitate. Adaptively reuse, seismically upgrade in Heritage Designate the historic building. The application proposes a change of use to convert this office building into 126 room hotel with food and beverage services, including an appropriately scaled one - story rooftop edition. Here are some of the images of the subject property, the top images is from Blanthard Street. This is the location of the building's main entrance. And at this location, the building is two stories. The bottom image is a long fairfield road, and this Southwest facing side is four stories. So you can see there's a significant difference in grade on the site. From left to right, we have a three - story west - facing elevation on Bradette Avenue. And then the right image shows the South and East elevations at four stories. To understand the immediate neighbourhood context, we will move across the slide clockwise, starting at the top left

and across the street on Birda Av. We have the Chateau Victoria Hotel. Then at the corner of Burdet and Blanchard Street, we have the four - story office building, across the street, a single - family dwelling. And then at the corner of Blanchard and Fairfield, we have a nine - story residential building, two residential towers, and the Marriott Hotel on the opposite side of the subject property unfair - filled road. In accordance with 611 of the local government act, council may designate real property in whole or in part as protected property, and in accordance with Section 612, a public hearing will be required for Heritage designation. In accordance with Section 612 and 618 council may issue a Heritage Alteration Permit. The site is located within the core stork area of downtown and within the Heritage Conservation Area 1 commercial Heritage. Since this property is registered Heritage and Located within the HCA Commercial Heritage Guidelines Apply, as well as the best practices for Heritage Conservation, the

standards and guidelines for the conservation of historic places in Canada. The British Columbia Power Commission Building was built for the government of BC and completed in 1950 and designed by the architect Henry Whitaker in the Art Deco style. Its valued for its contribution to the City's history, and it holds architectural and aesthetic value. The character defining elements as outlined in its statement of significance are its location on the edge of the humble valley. Its four - story flat - roofed form and geometric massing, the architectural composition designed to accommodate the sloping site. And it's association with the BC Power Commission. All surviving art deco detailing relevant to its 1949 design, as well as the surviving interior fittings and fixtures related to its original design, including the spatial configurations and detailing of the third floor chairman's office. So now we'll move to the architectural drawings. Here's the site plan where you can see the grey hatched area at the top right, showing the front entrance and

drop - off area at Blanchard Street. And here we have the first story and the grade being at Fairfield Road. Programmatically this plan contains guest rooms and a fitness centre facing Fairfield Road as well as the hotel support spaces. Bike lockers, staff rooms, and to the far right, the loading and waste area on the exterior of the building. Here we have the second, oops, sorry. Uh, here we have the second story, which consists of mainly guest rooms. Level three is where the front entrance is located, and you can see that you would enter from the Blanchard Street north side, where you would have lounges and a restaurant on the left side, including the preserved chairman's office, a kitchen, and then the right side is mainly guest rooms. Level four of the historic building is all guest rooms. And on the roof of the historic building is the rooftop edition containing more guest rooms, and on the right side, the outdoor rooftop terrace. As you can

see in this drawing, it's set back from the historic roof parapet. And finally, the mechanical PEN house on the top of the addition also set back from both the historic parapet and the new rooftop edition Building Edge. In this drawing, we're looking at the Blanchard Street entrance and front elevation, showing the difference in the grades across the site. You can also see the non - original exit stare to the left and the one - story edition on the top. And the West Elevation and exit along Burdet Avenue. And here's the four - story South Elevation Along Fairfield Road. Here they've proposed to remove the original stair and replace it with a Juliet - style balcony where the fitness room is proposed to be located. And to the right, you can see the loading area and the waist structure. And here's the East Elevation where the loading bay and waste structure and the exit stair are.

So the materials of the addition are modern, but complement the historic materials. The historic materials include concrete decorative metal window grills, metal and glass fenestration, and corrugated glass panel screens. The intent of the addition was to use similar materials such as metal and fluted glass, but in different ways so that they are distinguishable from the historic building, but are quiet and let the architectural detailing of Whitaker's design standout. The intent is also to restore the facade to its original 1949 design and replace the existing windows which are in poor shape with similar units, but with higher efficiency and thermal properties. Here we have the landscape plan and the proposal is to remove some existing trees to enable the improvements to the frontage at the Blanchard Street entrance, but there are 13 trees being added. This image is showing the design intent for the outdoor rooftop terrace located on level 5, which is the rooftop of the Heritage Building. The following variances are being proposed. The

parking bylaw requires 68th stalls, but only two accessible stalls are being provided at the front entrance offblatured street. Historically, this building only had six stalls for the four - story office building. Due to the existing condition, the bike share and bike parking, end of trip facilities, location, walkability, and proximity to downtown amenities, transit and other ways to travel. Staff find the variant is supportable. The zone also does not allow for guest rooms to be located on the ground level. However, since this is an existing building and they active uses our located at the Blanchard Street side, the variance is supportable in this case. Um, due to the existing configuration of the building, the mechanical PENT house is not meeting the required setback at all elevations, but exceeding it at other elevations. So staff see this as supportable. And lastly, the zone only allows for one building on the site and a new waste area is being proposed and considered a second building. And due to

its small scale and the need for an appropriate waste area for this use, this building, or this outbuilding is supportable. This slide is showing a rendering of the Blanchard Street entrance and the newly clad exits stare to the right and the rooftop edition, which is scaled appropriately to the building. So that it does not take away from the historic art deco architecture. And here's a rendering showing of you a Fairfield Road with the addition at the top. Sorry. And lastly, the Birdette facing elevation and exit onto PENWELL green. This iconic art deco building is significant to our city's history in urban landscape, and it is a public benefit to have this building designated and adaptively reused to provide much - needed hotel rooms downtown and staff recommends support for this application.

Thank you. Very good, thank you very much. Let us start with questions. Councillor Heim, go ahead. Thanks Mayor. I think I've got three questions. We're part of them. Um, the first is through you, Mayor, if the 25 off - site spaces disappear, is there anything in this approval requiring the HOTEL operator to replace them? Menor Steveno. Through the mayor, no, I do not believe there is. Thank you. Okay, then follow up on that. If the 25 spaces do disappear, why would staff be supporting this application with only two on - site parking spaces? Through the mayor, the building historically has only ever had six parking stalls, and they were able to, um, work as an office building, um, with those six, as well as, um, there is no due to the configuration of the site.

There's no way to add more parking. And it's a Heritage Building. It's being seismically upgraded and there isn't a way to, you know, dig underneath, um, without jeopardizing the structure of the building. And there is, as you can see from the constrained lot, the world's to put them. Um, and there's also been a TDM package that was quite robust. Um, and we can ask the people in transportation to speak to that. Um, however, it's also really well located, um, downtown close to Okay, I can stop you there. Okay. I appreciate not the desire to put more on the building itself. But with the plan of the 25, can I ask through you, Mayor, um, knowing that this only had six parking spots before, presumably there was, or was there some arrangement with this office to have parking close by. The student, do you know that?

No, I do not have the answer to that question. Mr. Kenny, do you have any information on that in a previous iteration with this building have provided off - site parking for their office workers at any time, do you know that? Yeah, through the merit, there's no known agreements. Um, in place regarding that offsite parking and, you know, possibly when the building was built in 1950 by the provincial government, there may be another parquet that they owned in the area that were being used by staff or others, but in terms of recent operating models, uh, were not aware of anything. Okay. So, so we don't know. All right. Thanks very much. And then, uh, shifting through you, um, are any existing historic windows or doors capable of rehabilitation rather than replacement and our staff satisfied that replacing all of them as consistent with the heritage value. Council is being asked to designate. Through the mayor.

The character defining elements of the windows are mainly its patterning and its profile. Um, which the applicant plans to replicate in the new windows, um, yes, there could be some restoration, but I think with the hotel brand, there's an ideal to just have them all the same and work very efficiently. I've been on site and the windows in many cases are not operable. Um, and don't function any longer. And are also causing water damage to the sills. Right. And so just to be clear, there's no indication that, uh, that a number of them are going to be, that are okay, are going to be retained or no. We haven't gone through, um, like a full assessment of every single window, um, so it's possible that some could be retained and restored. Thanks. And that would be up to them to make sure it looks consistent.

It doesn't look weird. Thanks. My third question is about the seismic upgrade. And for a change of use to 126 room hotel, what does 55 percent of current code mean in practical life safety terms? Is that the standard, the building code permits for this type of heritage rehabilitation and will the building permit process require anything further? Steven O, would you know that? I don't have the answer to that question. So I would have to rely on my colleagues for that answer. Mr. Doyle, I'm not sure if that's something that would come under your purview and engineering, or can you comment on the degree to which this plan accomplishes seismic upgrading. Uh, through the mayor, thanks for the question, not, not something that's part of our purview in the engineering department, nor my expertise. Yes, go ahead, Mr. Johnson. Thank you through you, Mayor. I think those are the types of details that would be worked out at the Building Permit stage. Okay. And, and again,

just through you, Mayor, just as a lay person, knowing nothing about this except what Jack and I do with our home, for example. Does anyone want to at least tell me that, Hey, 55 percent is great and that's good enough. I think the question is, do we believe that what's there is sufficient. PENSTON. Petter put. Who knows. To a certain extent, it sounds as if, um, I'm more careful analysis of that will come later in the application process. That's essentially. Yes. Through the mayor, I'm not a CODA expert. So I wouldn't be able to comment on that. But, uh, I do know that that type of analysis will be done at the more detailed sort of construction and then building permit stage. Um, and, uh, and so I would leave it to our experts in that field to determine whether it's meeting a sufficient level of safety for this type of use. Thanks. And then to follow up through that mayor, then is there any

opportunity if in the process coming down the road, somewhere to say, wow, this is not good enough. Would that make a change in this development? In other words, would the expectation be that they have to get it up to, let's say 73 percent or whatever might be appropriate. I know, Steveno. Through the mayor, um, we will be reviewing their seismic strategy, um, because they do plan to apply for a text incentive, um, for the tax incentive program. And so we will be looking at it then. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions. Council Carita? Yeah. I was through the mayor. I was going to ask also about the tax breaks, but I don't know if the point is there, is there any clarification that we could seek now or do we basically need to wait. Leonard Steveno. Um, they have not applied for the tax incentive program yet to be eligible. They have to be heritage designated. And that's, that's what's on the

table today is to be HERH to designate. So it's one step in the process. But see, sorry. And sorry if I'm just getting mixed up here, but there's, there's the tip, but then the tax break for hotels. Right. I'm talking about which are two separate programs. So can we maybe disagreegate and talk about how those two different programs might affect this application? Is that Mr. Johnston or Ms. Thompson? Summaire. I was just going to, um, I'll start and then maybe I'll hand it over to, uh, Ms. Thompson if she has something to add, but, uh, the, we have the direction from council to, um, develop a program for the tax incentive for hotels, but the details have yet to be worked out. So, uh, it'd be too early at this point to, to, um, to comment on, on how that would apply to this particular application. Okay. But just if I could just follow up on that though, I'm starting to try to clear out

the cobwebs of my brain about all this, this finer points of these policies, but if I'm, if I remember correctly, the tip essentially freezes property taxes for 10 years at where they are pre - rezoning. So whatever your baseline taxes are now, they won't go up if the rezoning or whatever land use changes are. If I'm remembering correctly, if that's wrong, then please tell me. I'm just trying to recall through the mayor. So it's the portion of the property that is eligible for the Heritage Exemption. So for example, if you build new, the new portion would not be eligible under the heritage because that's Heritage related exemption. So it's not the value that's frozen because the value will change every single year through BC assessment, but it's the proportion of it. So for example, if the whole building is heritage and there is nothing new, um, then it would be a hundred percent of the value if there is an addition or for whatever reason

something is not eligible completely under the heritage, then that proportion. So if you have a 10 percent new or something, um, also another note on the, um, uh, the hotel exemption that council will be considering later. That is a revitalization exemption. So that is only the municipal portion of the taxes that would be exempt for the portion that would be eligible. Uh, it is, as you know, for the creation of net new hotel rooms, um, and, uh, whereas the Heritage exemptions authorities that we love before. So including, you know, the school and, uh, transit and others. Okay. I think I understand that. And so is there a scenario in which they are duplicative or once the plants the other. Or because it's somewhat unique scenario if you have a building that's also a heritage asset.

Cause I don't know if the yet to be determined tax break system for hotels contemplates a situation like this when you're dealing with heritage acid. Ms. Thompson? Um, through the mayor. So you can't have two. You can only apply one exemption. It's not possible to do two. Um, so my assumption here is that the property owner would choose the one that is the most beneficial to them. Uh, if it can be the heritage one simply because it can exempt broader number of taxing authorities, uh, my assumption is that they would go with that one, um, but again, we haven't seen any applications, nor have we developed the program for the, uh, the hotel. But through the chair on the assumption that, uh, high percentage, our high portion of this tax is applicable for the tip because it's a Heritage Building. And assuming that the tax reductions apply to all the other taxes like school board CRD, et cetera, it is possible to imagine that this

building might end up going with the tip rather than the hotel tax brake program. Wis Thompson? Yes. Okay. Clear as mud, right? Um, I think I'll shift gear, sorry. Sorry, excuse me. Uh, I was going to shift gears and talk about the ART sub that's been there for a while and noting that we just received correspondence from, from the folks at Viva's indicating their support for this asset, uh, becoming Heritage designated and converting into a hotel. And I just want to talk about the background on that. I mean, just a reminder for the public. This has, this building has been operating as a sort of subsidized art sub for a number of years. The city gave, I think a two year grant equivalent to, um, the remind me what it was to your essentially to your tax breaker grant equivalent to a tax break to help keep that building subsidized, knowing it eventually it was probably going to run out. In the meantime, Vivas has

moved over and began to move over to a new location over on Cook Street in the former Volvo dealership. But I do recall, and this is maybe through the chair to staff, uh, and maybe City Manager, I don't know who handles this file, but we had a motion back in either 2023 or 2024 directing staff to work on creating a permanent ART sub downtown. And we had hoped that this would become it. And at one point they were trying to raise 13 million dollars to buy this building. Obviously that was just not possible to do. They've now moved temporarily over to the Volvo dealership. And so I want to get a sense. Does staff consider that. Direction to have been fulfilled. Or is it still ongoing to create a permanent ART sub and find a home not only for this group, but for other visual arts groups who are trying to find a permanent location.

So just before any stuff, try to answer that question. I will note that it's not actually germane to what we're considering today, given that we're considering heritage designations. Um, but as always, did a spirit of generosity. If then anyone who'd like to spawn to that, you're certainly welcome to do so. From a staffing perspective. But it is not what we're considering today and not once before us is when you're leaning in, did you want to add something. Thank you to you, Mayor. We did communicate with, um, stuff in arts and culture and they unfortunately weren't available to be, um, online at this meeting. But they did share, um, so information that I'm happy to bring up at this meeting. Obviously, as counsellor, Carorano has mentioned, Vivo says that they are actively looking for a long - term arts hub. The city has supported Vivers with a number of grants, including cultural infrastructure grants. And so I think we don't, I can't answer your direct question

in terms of whether that council memotion has been fulfilled. But there have been a number of initiatives to support the group who are currently using this building. So it's more contextual information, but, um, I wouldn't be able to, to answer your question directly about the specific council member motion. Sure. And to the chair, when it's appropriate, I would like to have that information back to council to know where arts and culture at in helping to set up. Because when we first developed that motion a couple of years ago at an early version of it actually mentioned 780 Blanchard, but I think now in hindsight, wisely did not, because this one didn't work out. But the idea is to find an art sub somewhere in the city. Uh, so that these arts groups aren't constantly being displaced through redevelopment. Councillor Cardona, I've noted the city manager is taking notes on that inquiry again. So can you reform your questions specific to this application? Sure. Um, what

would the timeline be if, if this project is approved and can we have any additional information on what it will mean for the current tenants there? Ms. Wayne, Ms. Juvenue. It's a timeline on this to start with through the mayor. I believe their timeline is to start construction in mid 2027. I don't think I can answer the rest of the question. Ms. Wayne, anything that you can add? Okay, just through you, Matt, just further contextual information, uh, through our colleagues was that, um, and the information provided by the applicant was that the least that the current user group have been, um, operating in there has been extended number of times. So I think it's, it's already been, um, uh, their awareness of the timeline, um, has not come as a surprise. And the happiness operating for longer than originally envisaged. Thank you. Mr. Johnson, yes.

Just to add to that, um, just with the correspondence we've received from the applicant, they continue to, um, have sort of open lines of communication with the group and, uh, the society and have, um, continue to try to support them in finding a new locations. Thank you. Okay. Thanks. I'll leave it there. Thanks for those answers. Thank you. Councillor Cardner. Thank you. Thank you. This is a very interesting, um, proposal. And I must say that something that I'm going to ask first is about that mural, the biodiversity mural. And I'm going to preface that by saying this one comes down the hill. That is the most visible, beautiful thing that we all see. There's no question. As you come down the hill, it is so visible. And I understand in the, uh, document before I said it's going to be just disappeared. And I'm still not sure from what you said. Is it really going to be just the cladding? What's going to look like. Hopefully not just like that. I mean, what's it

going to look like? I don't have a sense of what's supposed to be substituting that beautiful artwork this air now. Steven O. Through the mayor, the plan is to restore the facade to its original state. Um, so it's painted concrete and it will be painted in its original colour. There was a Heritage Consultant that provided a historic colour palette analysis. And, um, they determined what the original colour was. Um, and it will showcase the original sort of very simple and streamlined modern art deco features of the facade. And what colour is that? It's through the mirror. It's a buff type colour. I would have to just quickly look up the exact colour for you. It would be essentially what you're showing in this rendering. Correct.

Council Cronur. Okay. Um, okay. Um, decap by downtown CORRAP plan. The DCAP, the upper floor is supposed to be set back at three metres. Whereas this proposal is half that. And I was a bit confused when you just spoke on your earlier slide, uh, which we could see there. Whoops. We could have seen it the one you had. You talk about the penthouse edition. That's just for the elevator or is that a, what's there? And that top little story. Steven. The sixth story, shall we say through the mayor, um, yeah, the sixth story is the pentose mechanical penthouse. Just mechanical only. Correct. Okay. Um, and.

The fifth story is supposed to be residences with the outside garden space. Through the mayor, um, it's guest rooms for the hotel and a terrorist. As we're being consideration of setting it back to what the guidelines say, which I understand, in other words, the three metre setbacks, because then actually you'd have more garden space even. There has had been any consideration of that. Steven. Through the mayor, um, the penthouse is set back, um, several metres, um, from many of the elevations except for where it pinches at the sort of the top north there. Um, so it should be three metres all the way around, but in those two cases, or sorry, three cases, um, so fair field. And the Blanchard side, they're pinched at 1.

57. That's due to the configuration of the original building. Um, but because it is a small scale rooftop edition, we, we do not feel that it is going to impact negatively on the Heritage Building. You're talking the fifth story. Sorry, this is the sixth. I'm looking at the fifth. Cause the fifth is supposed to be three metres back by the guidelines, correct? Correct. So that's my question there. So was there consideration of actually, um, respecting the guidelines. Through the mayor. Um, there's always a bit of flexibility when it comes to the guidelines. So three metres is a general rule because this is a four story elevation being set back less than three metres does not negatively impact the heritage, uh, character. Okay. There's mention of the, uh, what was it called now? The stone is a guideline. So the conservation of historic places in Canada.

What do they say about this kind of thing about the setbacks or anything else when you're adding a story. The standards and guidelines do not provide exact setback amounts, um, just general rules guidelines to ensure that the, the overall character inheritage value of a place is not negatively impacted by any alteration or addition. PENNES Okay, in your report, uh, it states that there's, it's generally consistent with decap. Are there other specs? Are there aspects of DCAP beyond the setbacks which are not respected. Steven O. S through the mayor. I do not believe there is. Do we know. I think that would be interpreted as no.

Okay. Uh, but it was compared to decap, other aspects. It meets the DCACAP guidelines. For Heritage Buildings. Except for the setbacks. Okay. Um. In correspondence from the proponent who sent to, which was sent to council last night, references made to the HOTAL brand. Is this hotel to be part of an existing change of hotels? Is it to be a local hotel? Do we know that. Through the mare, I do not have that information. Steven, that would not be a material consideration for this application, would it? No, it would not. The proposal, not me mentions or last night, the information we got says hotel brand. And I'm just trying to figure out what that was meant by the proponent. Nevertheless, that is not a material consideration for this application for council. Might be to the taxpayers.

Okay. Reducing the parking has been dealt with somewhat. Where is staff supposed to park. And are we assuming that no guests will bring cars. Steven O, I believe in the material there were some information about an arrangement within nearby public parking parquet, is that correct? Just temporary. Correct. Through the mayor, the applicant has an agreement with, I think, the province to provide 25 stalls at a nearby parking lot. I believe it's the public library on Broughton. Thank you. And, uh, if people do bike to work and they have to be in quite a hygienic thing since they're going to be clingy and doing other things with food, are there full lockers and showers for staff on psych. Through the mayor, yes, there is a full facility in the, um, ground floor off of Fairfield. Sorry.

There is showers, change rooms, lockers. Just for staff? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Um. Okay. I think different comes from ask a question about you don't have the numbers yet, of course, cause they haven't applied. I think I saw my questions for now, Mayor. Great. Thank you. Anybody else with questions, Councillor Loughton. Good morning. And through you, Mayor, I just have one quick question. And that's about, um, the chairman's office that's going to be a, just a second. I lost by the conference room, I think. Or there was also mention of it maybe being a restaurant, just clarification. And really what I want is the capacity of the conference room if you have that information. Through the mayor, um, the chairman's office, which is also been referred to as the conference room is an historic room that has been retained. They, from what I understand about the program of this space that they, they would like to turn it into sort of like a bookable room,

um, I don't know the number capacity. Um, I don't believe it's necessarily going to be used for conference room necessarily, but maybe like an event space or like they had it set up as a listening room, but that might be more of like a lounge that's like associated with the sort of bar and kitchen restaurant. Okay. Okay. Thanks. That's it for me. Thanks, Mayor. Any other questions. I had one question. I was referenced to obliquely a little earlier. Uh, the current mural that's on the outside of the building was not part of the original design. Is that correct? That is correct. It was designed and painted in 1994. Right. And so it is not considered heritage, is that correct? That is correct. It's not considered, um, a character defining element of the original building. Okay.

Thank you for that. That's clarifying. Any other questions. If the other questions, does anyone have any interest in moving the staff recommendation? Thanks Councillor Thompson. The councillor Dell's seconding. Councillor Thompson. How do you thank you Mayor? And through you, thanks very much for the report. I did want to mention for members of the public that there was a correspondence provided, uh, in the publicly available materials online, uh, which was only one letter, um, there were another four letters that council members received, um, we received them too late for the, uh, staff to add them to the agenda. But I'll just, uh, indicate they're from the downtown Victoria business association, the Chamber of Commerce, uh, Vancouver Island Visual Art Society and Destination Greater Victoria all in support of this application. For my part, um, consider this to be a beautiful, amazing Heritage Building. If anybody is listening now and hasn't seen it yet, I would really urge you to go and, uh, take a look at

it. Bear in mind, when you're looking at it, the buildings don't maintain themselves. Uh, owners maintain them. And generally only if they're being used, uh, so I'm glad to see that this is going to get a new use. So it will be preserved and revitalized as has been discussed today. Um, if buildings become underused or vacant, the risk is of course that they get under maintained and go at derelict and end up getting torn down. So really important that we, um, make sure that our heritage buildings are actually being used. Um, as far as the parking spaces go, if those parking spaces disappear, I would assume that the hotel owner can enter into an agreement with somebody else to provide nearby parking. Um, I don't think we need to hold the hands of business owners about how many parking spaces their guests need or where those are located. I think they configure it out and make sure that they're maximizing their profits. Um, again, I

just think it's a, it's a great, uh, reuse of the building. Happy to see this go forward. Thanks. Thank you very much. Councillor Dell is the secondary. Yes. I'm happy also to support this. There's a lot to say. Maybe I want to comment on the arts angle. I know a few folks in the arts community are going to be upset. This is a hotel. Um, and speaking as an arts advocate, I think the arts community understands, um, this was very, very generous of the, of the property owner to give this the arts community. They've had a wonderful, few years there. And they're moving on. I think that type of, uh, appreciation from the arts community is what's going to allow more people to give buildings to the arts community in the future while they're, you know, slated for development. So, um, I just wanted to read the letter from Logan Ford really quickly. It says who's from Vivas. It has always been our understanding that

the use of 780 Blanchard is an arts help was temporary. We're a grateful to reliance properties for allowing us. And the broader arts community to use a building for considerably longer than what's originally anticipated. So as much as we do need to look for permanent space, I really appreciate developers who can take empty buildings and just hand them over to the arts community. There's a lot more buildings in the city that are sitting vacant and owners aren't nearly as generous as this one has been. So I hope others will step up and give to the arts community. I also like this because I think in many ways, our heritage realization can make buildings even nicer.

There's one photo of the power court building back in 1950. And that we're going to say it looks, it looked pretty ugly back then. Um, I think in many ways, the arts community has done a better job and the plans from the proponents will make it even nicer than it was before. So I know the few folks out there with a super strict interpretation of Heritage where it has to be exactly as it was with no variances, no changes. And I think that's just not the right way for a growing city to, um, support heritage. So I think this has been a thoughtful, thoughtful response.

Um, and I'm not worried about the parking at all. Most times I travel with my family. We don't have a car. Uh, and I like staying in hotels that don't have big parking lots all over the place. Um, I don't understand why we're always obsessed with parking at hotels. Cause you know, there's, if you need, if you need a hotel with parking, you can actually search that on, on expedia and look for one with parking. Uh, you don't have a demand that every downtown hotel has parking lot associated with us. So that's not really a consideration for me. People will figure that out based on their own needs. And overall, this is, this is great.

So I'm happy to support this today. Thank you very much. Councillor Cardano. Thanks very much Mayor. And I recognise that, uh, the ART sub is not material to the decision. Uh, I do support this moving forward. I will just note that. It was, it is on some level of shame that the ART sub can't stay there. Uh, I think probably all of us around the table at one point or another have gone to their open houses. I think pretty much all of us went there. They're an absolute blast. It was really cool to see a vibrant arts community in this city downtown having sub access to subsidized space and going back to my comments earlier.

I think that to my mind that work is ongoing to create a permanent ART sub. I think the ideal outcome here would have been that they somehow managed to fundraise 13 to 15 million dollars and buy the building and keep it as an ART sub, but that just wasn't in the cards. It's just way, way too much capital to try to raise. I think the second best outcome is this outcome. That the Heritage Building is retained and enhanced and upgraded and becomes a hotel. That thousands of travellers and tourists will come and stay out and get to appreciate. And I think the rooftop amenity will really enhance what's already there. So my gratitude to the proponent for sticking with this, I know it's been a really long. Path and a long journey. And I'm appreciative that they did make space for the ART sub for at least a few years, which I thought was very generous. But these hotel projects are complicated. And I think

some on some level actually kind of risky. So I'm appreciative that there is anyone who wants to take this on. And that we're not dealing with some kind of a proposed demolition of this building. The ideal outcome either way is that this Heritage A set remains a part of downtown and humble valley. So given the realities of where things are at, um, qualms about supporting this moving forward. And I think it's, it's a pretty good outcome based upon all the different factors that have played out of the last few years. Thank you very much. Councillor Hammond. Thanks Mayor. Uh, if I could get legislative services to pull up an amendment that I would like to propose. Just wait for that.

And where would this go. Councillor Hammond. Oh, geez. I was hoping someone would tell me. You can look to our able Heritage staff to determine where this would properly make sense. I think. I would probably be under the permit with variances, I would think. Is that right, Miss Stevenau? Was that where you would put that? This is pertaining to an extended agreement for parking. Through the mayor, yes, I would put it underneath Heritage Alteration permit with variance's application. Probably be a new VII number eight, I think under A, one A, eight, I think. Because it does relate sort of to parking. Just suggest. Does that make sense? Do you miss Divono just from a logical perspective of where it fits? It's through the Mary, yes. Okay. So just to make sure that it was in the right place. That's all I want to do is there is seconder for that amendment. Thanks, Councillor Carter.

Go ahead, Councillor Hemid on your amendment. Yeah. Thanks, Mayor. And I promise I'm not obsessed with barking. However, it was the, it's the proponent who actually put this forward. The interesting thing is I think had just come to us with the amount of stalls that they had that I wouldn't be concerned about this. But obviously when, when the proponent is bringing this forward, I got to assume that their plan is that they will be needing some offsite parking. And so I thought this was just reasonable, um, so that it, uh, it would continue in that way. Thank you, Councillor Gardner, on the amendment. Anything to add. Thank you. And I quite appreciate the amendment. I think it's important to know that, uh, you can pretend everyone's going to use a bike, but a lot of staff won't be. And staff in the hotel, especially this one, which sounds, um, that it will have, of course, amenities, restaurant and what have you, which is very, very

positive. But it means the staff aren't working, uh, should we say banking hours. And so I think a lot of them will want to use a car. Uh, just from a safety perspective, uh, especially if they have to travel nighttime after restaurants are closed, what have you. So therefore, I think, uh, again, because the proponent is actually suggested this, at least at the short term, that it's obviously something recognised as being necessary. Thank you. Thank you very much. Just before I go to Councillor Thompson, Ms. Steven, I just want to ask the question about whether or not this has any unintended impact on the rest of the provisions. I just want to make sure that we're not creating a conflict with the other requirements. Through the mirror, I do not think there's any conflict. Great.

Super. Councillor Thompson. Thank you, Mayor. Just a question about this, actually. Um, given that the mover in seconder, uh, mentioned the proponent's desire to have this parking as the rationale for the amendment. I'm just wondering if anyone has actually taken the time to check with the proponent wherewith staff about whether this is desired. Ms. TV, no, do you know if this has been part of the conversation. Or Ms. Wayne either? Through the mayor, I have not discussed this with the applicant. Okay. Thank you, Richard. That's all we can do. I know that they don't have to answer, but I will ask you through you, Mayor, if the mover or secondary wish to answer that question.

Do either the mover or second or know whether or not that's actually been a conversation? No. Okay. That's fine. All right. Uh, just a second. I've got, um, going back to that. Nope. Yep. Council Caridona councillor alone. Go ahead. On the amendment. Yeah. Thanks. In the absence of knowing what the proponent wants and also not one to find their hands, but also acknowledging that parking could be an issue. I'd like to amend this one to simply make it a consideration. That they can work on. But if they don't want to do it, they don't have to. So I would just propose this become a consideration.

Perhaps changing the word require to something else. You could say urge the owner or require supposed to require. It's up to you. Uh, I could maybe use some help from staff on that. Miss Wayne. Through the mayor. Um, just looking at the language in this amendment, um, given that it does refer to a legal agreement, it probably is best. Relocated under one B. Yes, I see what you mean. Steph, could you pull this green up slightly so that we can see the rest of this. Right. Just before we move that though, Mswane, I think that the, um, the councillor with and meant to the amendment is suggesting less about the location of it than diminishing the requirement to a suggestion. So I'm not sure that makes any difference to where it's located. Through the minute, it doesn't make a difference to the location. I think if the amendment

Just, I think it does make more sense just a second, Mr. Johnston. To start with. And then Mr. Johnson, did you wish to speak to the location or to the potential amendment to the amendment, which hasn't yet been clarified. Thank you. I was going to speak to the location, um, just suggesting that perhaps because this is, one B is specifically preparing and executing legal agreements. Um, and if this is potentially a consideration of an additional legal agreement, it might be best to have it as a new number two, like separate from number one altogether. Right. Yeah. I can see that as well. Okay. Um, that does make sense to me because it is separate. So again, with your indulgence count, Councillor Hammond, uh, we'll just take an unchanged number seven that's there. And actually, if you can take that out, pull our screen up so we can see the very bottom of this whole section.

So it'll be a brand new number two, which will push two and three down to become three and four. Mr. Johnson, is that what you were intending or suggesting? Yes. Yes. Okay. That's what I was suggesting. Okay. Okay. Let's just get that cleaned up. And then I'm going to go back to Councillor Cardona for some language on an amendment to the amendment. Okay. That makes sense now as far as location. So now Councillor Caradona, you were suggesting, I believe, if I understood you correctly that you wanted to change the requirement to, that staff discuss what the proponent. Yes. Okay. So that would be, um, yes, that. After the word that, that stuff discuss with the proponent. And then rest of that is fine until you get to, so the determinant. Then you'd say.

If I understand you correctly, Councillor Cartier, you want to actually delete the phrasing after that. Through the conditions of the Heritage Alteration Probably amended to require that the staff discuss with the proponent. Maybe something like the idea of maintaining access. Yeah. So delete everything right true to the word hotel. In the second line. And then you can add in before two. You would say the staff discussion. The option two. The option to maintain access. The rest of it's still there. Election two, nine, 10. Yes, there you go. Okay. I think that's what you're describing. Is that correct? Okay. So there is an amendment to the amendment. Is there a second or two? The amendment to the amendment. Councillor Thompson is doing that. Council Cardona on your amendment to the amendment. Yeah. I'm trying to split the difference here a bit. Uh, I mean, I think that the proponents obviously pay really close attention to these conversations. They've heard some concerns around parking. And this gives

some direction to staff to actually have an explicit conversation with them about ensuring that they're sufficient offsite parking. And that can be a consideration of their business plan. But it also doesn't bind their hands if for some reason they don't want to do this or it's not in their business plan or whatever. It's not an obligation, but at least it becomes an explicit conversation and a consideration for them moving forward. Coach Thompson, an amendment to the amendment. Thanks, Mayor. Yeah. I think this is a good response to the question I raised about whether this had in fact been discussed with the proponent. I would suggest not an amendment, but a typo type change options to maintain perhaps. If the mover is comfortable with that or is it? Yes. I think that would be sufficient. Okay.

Just stick an S on it. Um, yeah, no further motivation. Thanks. On the amendment to the amendment, Councillor Loton. Thanks and through you mayor. I'm just curious if this had been discussed. And why it wasn't part of the recommendation league. Is there a reason why this didn't? I blew stuff already coming to that it hasn't been discussed. But was it, um, is there a reason why I wasn't part of the recommendation? Steven O. To the mayor. I think as Ms. Steven O mentioned a presentation that staff was satisfied that the, uh, transportation demand management package was sufficient to offset the parking variants and the including the location of the Heritage Building, the lack of ability to include parking on the site and the, uh, and of use, uh, trip facilities for staff. Okay. Okay. Thanks.

Okay. Anything else? Yes. Councillor Gardner on the amendment to the amendment. Yeah. Thank you. And I'm just going to follow up on the question because it's very appropriate question. Does staff aware of any hotels in downtown core like that within the city or elsewhere that that many units with no parking. Is Wayne, Mr. Johnston, would you know that. The top of your head. Ah, yes, but you can't. Yeah. Through the mayor. Um, so I think this is one of the, you know, issues of parking and hotels in the downtown. So, uh, for example, the Bedford Hotel on government street doesn't have any access to vehicle parking. And I believe they utilise, uh, one of the Robin's parcades. Similarly, the best Western on Johnson Street utilises City Parque for parking. So, um, you know, we knew now that existing hotels, I believe the magnolia as well has quite limited on - site parking. So again, they look to other parkades available. And, you know, use valet

parking or their websites to drive customers to where they need to be as far as we understand. Great. What's the closest? Remind me City Parking Lock to this one. I believe it's 400 metres and then it's the library parquet. Half a kilometer. And will there be a valet service. Uh, through the mayor, that would be for the business to decide. You know, I think we would see many hotels that do provide that service. Yeah, but this proponent doesn't that we know of, right? Um, I believe, you know, they're, again, I can't speak to the business model, but, um, I would anticipate that they would likely provide that service. But I was discussed by staff with them. Through the mayor, no, it was not discussed. Okay.

Councillor Hammond. Go ahead. Thanks very much. Just to be clear, you know, I can, I know not, I can from what questions I've asked, I will support this, um, uh, this proposal, uh, it's not that far from my place. And I don't mind saying when it comes to parking, it's no skin off my nose, whether they got parking or not. And being that staff had said they didn't think it was necessary. And yet the proponent came up with the 25 stalls. I got to assume they figured there was a reason. So I just thought, okay, if the reason, um, then why not, then why not put it, um, in legal agreement. It doesn't seem to be too difficult. They could pivot and find something else if necessary. Uh, and again, I can with the changes, if this goes ahead, I'll agree to the, to it.

Um, I just think that if I were the proponent, I'd probably be saying, look, we want the 25 spaces, we've got them, um, but I'm not going to tie my hands to that. And so I was just thinking it's probably not a big deal, um, that we ask them to just come up with that. So I'll oppose this, um, but, uh, if this goes ahead, I would even be fine with the amendment as is. Thank you very much. Anybody else on the amendment to the amendment. And that would be to add the underlined language and delete the struck through language in the bold number two.

Anybody else? Nope. So in favor of the amendment to the amendment, all those in favor. Councillor Dell, councillor Kim, council record on it, Councillor Loton, Councillor Thompson and myself in opposition. Counts your gardener and Councillor Hammond noting that Councillor Coleman is not with us today. So the amendment to the amendment is adopted. And so we'll just give staff a moment to clean that up for us. So that we know what we're discussing. Very good. And so we're now back on the amended amendment and Councillor Caridoni. You still have the floor. Anything else? Councillor Loughten, you're up next. Now the amendment. Um, three married nothing else for me. This makes sense for anyone else on the amendment. Councillor Del. Yeah. I'll oppose amendment. It's just, it's just counsel totally overreaching into a private development. This is what hotel operators do. They'll have a valet. They'll biparking this 25. They might buy more. They might buy less.

This is how they run their business. So it's just us getting involved in the nitty gritty of their details, which we don't need to be doing. We knocked, we approved a parcade reduction a couple of weeks ago and the hotel across the site and I inquired about it. And they said, Oh yeah, parking is not an issue. We actually have about five parking rentals. We rent all across the city. We have a valet. It's not a concern. So that's how these hotels operate. I mean, this is, this is almost on par with getting involved in the menu and the restaurant and making sure it has vegetarian options or something ridiculous like that. So I think we need to stay out of this type of business and I can oppose this on that principle. Thank you.

Anybody else on the amendment? Councillor Thompson. Thanks Maria. I agree with the rationale that councillor Dell just outlined. I am going to support the amendment though as I think that the applicant can look at it and say, sure, or no. Um, and, uh, that this doesn't materially slow down the proposal. If it had materially lace loaded down, I would probably oppose it. Thank you. Well, just remind council that our procedures by law prevents us from directly quoting or referencing other members of council by name. I would appreciate it if you would remember that. Anyone else on the amendment. So you're also in the amendment, all those in favor of the amendment. Councillor Thompson. Councillor Gardner, Councillor Hammond, myself, Gulfster Loaton, Council Caradona, Councillor Kim in opposition, Councillor Dell. Noting one and opposition, that amendment is adopted. So let's stop, get that there. And coming back to then the main motion as amended. Councillor Hammond, you had the last week. You have another chance to speak

if you wish. And then it's Councillor Loven after that. Anything else, Councillor Hammond? Yeah, I know I'm going to note something. Okay. Yeah. Here we go. Uh, I'll be sporting this application. Um, this is a significant heritage building and the current proposal is much more modest project than the earlier tower proposed. Uh, it was, it would retain and rehabilitate the former BC power commission building. Formally designated, um, formerly designate it for Heritage Protection and convert it into a 126 room hotel with a restaurant and one story rooftop edition. There are a number of variances, most noticeably parking, but staff have explained why they arise from the constraints of reusing the existing Heritage Building. I see this as a practical way to put an important building back into Active Use while protecting is Heritage Value. Thanks very much. Thank you. Councillor Lotner. Thanks. And through you, Mayor. I'm supportive of this project. And I think that the heritage work on this is just so important. The

project meets the intent of the standards and guidelines for conservation of Heritage Places in Canada. And that's really important. And the seismic upgrades. And adaptive reuse. I can't see this happening in another way or this is a very good way for this to happen. And as I was reading the report, it made me think of some of the conferences I've gone to with the Canadian Capital Cities organisation. And we, there's different conferences that capital cities host every year. And this would be the kind of project that we would gather around to look at and learn from one another. And I think that this is going to be a symbol of pride for downtown Victoria once it's finished. And for the years to come, and it's, it's incredibly important to maintain these buildings as part of our history and our, and our civic pride. So I just want to, you know, tip my hat to staff and to the proponent for, for bringing this forward in

this way. Um, also this is 126 hotel rooms that are going to contribute to that 1500 unit target that we've been, that has been set. So that's also really important for the vibrancy and vitality and all the things that need to happen, um, downtown right now. And then just finally, I wanted to make a comment about, uh, the, the vivis that's been happening here for the arts community in the last few years. And that it really was special. Like touring the vivous site made me feel like I was in Montreal or Berlin. It was that kind of level of, um, my colleague here saying, cool.

But just the thriving, the way that when artists come together, because a lot of times artists can't afford places to work and be. And so to have, you know, 20 or 30 or 40 different arts, modes and forms of creation all happening under one roof is incredibly special. It, it, um, it creates like an incubator. It's a space for artists to thrive and create together. So my hope is that, um, the next council, whoever's sitting around this table can really focus on where the building like this can be recreated somewhere else in a permanent home in Victoria. And I know it's not germane to what's in front of us today. But I think it's really important to remember that that is also something that would be a source of pride. It would also be something that if, if we were hosting a CCCO conference that we would tour people through as something that's really special about Victoria. So, um, just wanted to say that. And

again, just thanks for everyone involved in this and really happy to support it today. Thank you, Councillor Gardner. Thank you, Mayor. 7780 Blanchard is a very visible building. More visible than most due to the location while driving down the hill into the humble valley. And over the past many years, I've watched from a distance the earlier visions offered for this site. It is a really difficult site with challenges. And I appreciate how the proponent has had to really think and rethink and rethink for this site. It is very difficult. Well, I would like to sit back on the fifth floor to meet the guidelines of three metres. From the schematic showing, the tall billings to the South already offer or alter the roof line. And that's, they are now, it's the reality. I also appreciate that the taxpayers funding, uh, or taxpayers provide a significant funding, as mentioned by other councillors, uh, of a grant equivalent to almost two years taxes for the ARCOP to

be established there. And we also, of course, have the arts and innovation district that has been approved. And, uh, that will bring forward, we hope. More opportunities in the years ahead. And finally, do I want that beautiful artwork to disappear? No, I certainly don't. It's just stunning. I just appreciate it every time I see it. But that is not the decision before us today. This is going to be, um, prominent restoration project from the outside and inside. So I will be approving this project. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else. Just briefly at a couple of things, um, the one thing about this that I do find regretful is the loss of the mural and the exterior because it was added at a time, uh, when the messaging around its content was really important and unique.

Um, having said that, uh, because of the other reasons that this is being redeveloped. And I think back to the beginning of the presentation from staff where they used three really critical words, retain, restore and rehabilitate. And having the ability to do that with a building like this, which is so unique, is an opportunity, I think, that we can't miss. The parking issues I think will resolve themselves. It's a downtown hotel. There is nearby parking. I can't imagine a hotel whoever this might be not having valet parking in a downtown core. That's something for them to decide in the future. The hotel rooms has been commented as well. And it is already surrounded by taller buildings somewhat overshadowing them. So the fact that this can retain this really unique original design is quite spectacular. I actually think that's the right word. I think it's kind of spectacular to be able to see this sitting where it is surrounded by the buildings that do surround it.

In a way which will cause, I think, pedestrians, both residents and visitors alike to really be struck by house stunning. It is when it's redeveloped, when it's rehabilitated, when it retains its original look, it may seem a little out of place in this time, but in the 1950s, Whitaker design was truly stunning. And if this comes to be what the images portray, uh, it will be not just unique, but, uh, really startling and incredible addition to the architecture of the downtown core. So I have no reservations about this other than the loss of the external mural, but in that it's easy to support. And thank you, Staff, for a very thorough analysis and examination and report. With that, it has been moved in seconded and slightly amended. All those in favor. Councillor Thompson, Councillor Gardner, Councillor Hammond, myself, Council Security Councillor Lawton, Councillor Kim and Councillor Dell. That is, I believe, unanimous. Noting, of course, the Councillor Coleman is away. Thank you so much, Steph.

That deals with item G1. That would take us on to item G2. But that was, as you may recall, placed on the consent agenda. And so that will return to us at a future daytime council meeting. Uh, that would also take us to item H1, an item of new business. That two was on the consent agenda and we'll return to us for final consideration at a future council meeting. We do not have any matters of closed business at committee today. And so I would look for a motion to adjourn. Thank you, Councillor Kim. Second of my Councillor Hammond. All those in favor. Anyone opposed. That is unanimous counsel. I suggest we went a little over when we usually take a break, but it seemed logical given our agenda. Let us take a break until 950.

945 1045, I'm sorry. 10 to 45, 1045. Let's try and do that. I know Councillor Hemmon that you have something else to do that, see what we can get through. Let's do 1045 when we will resume with our daytime council meeting.