Suburban sprawl in the CRD

It is not proceeding (at the moment) because of general market conditions. The fact that it is stalled has nothing to do with you or your group. Your court action was a minor irritant at best and in my opinion you actually helped the developers by delaying their spend on the project in these tougher economic times.

I would like to hear your solutions to the pressures that the general public is putting on the Westshore infrastructure. Feel free to let us all know how you would realistically handle the desire from the public (not just the vocal fringe) to live out there.

the general public isn't always right. just because they want a 2000 sq ft house with a lawn twice as big doesn't mean they should be able to get it.

Your kidding right? Do you actually think that? Who on earth gives you the right to decide what others may or may not want? This statement goes right to the heart of why the vast, vast majority of people give no credence to those who think that they and they alone have the answer and need to save everyone else from themselves. The arrogance of that mind set is beyond comprehension.

I have that right because that kind of excessiveness leads to increased money for buildings new roads and other infrastrcture (my taxes), which leads to more air pollution because people are more spread out and have to drive farther (my health), and not to mention that the land they're building on (greenland) either helps aid in things like stopping soil erosion, capturing carbon or helping supplement the food supply (my health again). What gives people the right to negatively effect me (and everyone else) so they can have another garage for their SUV or a massive backyard used only to show off their wealth or any other senseless and completely selfish wastes of space and resources? Now, who are the arrogant ones?

I have that right because that kind of excessiveness leads to increased money for buildings new roads and other infrastrcture (my taxes), which leads to more air pollution because people are more spread out and have to drive farther (my health), and not to mention that the land they're building on (greenland) either helps aid in things like stopping soil erosion, capturing carbon or helping supplement the food supply (my health again). What gives people the right to negatively effect me (and everyone else) so they can have another garage for their SUV or a massive backyard used only to show off their wealth or any other senseless and completely selfish wastes of space and resources? Now, who are the arrogant ones?

In my opinion you have a very naive and simplistic view of life.

- The roads and infrastructure you complain about provide you with virtually all of your living needs.

-The air pollution that you complain about will not be eradicated until we find an alternative to fossil fuels that is readily available and economical for the common man. I would suggest that you spend your efforts in finding a solution to this and perhaps join us in working in some manner towards light rail transit in our area.

- Where would you suggest the public build if not on land? Your food supply is more threatened by a lack of people to purchase the farmers product than it is by the building of homes The ALR,while not perfect is one of the most important pieces of legislation ever brought forward in this province. If there are not enough people to support our farmers then you will be getting your food from all points of the world and the resulting pollution will be fa greater than you can imagine

- Your last point about people being "selfish" really just exposes your insecurities. I am sorry that you feel that people working hard ,paying taxes, (a lot going to those who cannot or will not work), contributing in positive ways to their communities and then reaping the benefits of their hard work upsets you.

As usual I hear no solutions - only naive ramblings.

In my opinion you have a very naive and simplistic view of life.

- The roads and infrastructure you complain about provide you with virtually all of your living needs.

Yes, the roads and infrastructure that are already IN PLACE. We shouldn't be having to spend money on more roads when the ones we currently have need major upgrades.

-The air pollution that you complain about will not be eradicated until we find an alternative to fossil fuels that is readily available and economical for the common man. I would suggest that you spend your efforts in finding a solution to this and perhaps join us in working in some manner towards light rail transit in our area.

Or people could stop being selfish and lazy and realize they don't need a massive SUV/truck to go everywhere. Encouraging density and making everything within walking distance and with good access to public transit will help relieve a ton of congestion and air quality problems. There have been numerous technologies that have been developed to replace the current reliance on fossil fuels, they just all seem to magically disappear.

- Where would you suggest the public build if not on land? Your food supply is more threatened by a lack of people to purchase the farmers product than it is by the building of homes The ALR,while not perfect is one of the most important pieces of legislation ever brought forward in this province. If there are not enough people to support our farmers then you will be getting your food from all points of the world and the resulting pollution will be fa greater than you can imagine

I'd suggest they build on land that is prime for redevelopment such as brownfields, empty parking lots, (or any empty lots for that matter), and SFD's. New development should be built in establishd areas that already have access to transit, shops, etc. The farmers matter is one of laziness again, why make the effort and spend a bit more money to support local farmers when you can to to Wal-mart and get it for cheap? You yourself are reiterating my point that the general public does not know what's best.

- Your last point about people being "selfish" really just exposes your insecurities. I am sorry that you feel that people working hard ,paying taxes, (a lot going to those who cannot or will not work), contributing in positive ways to their communities and then reaping the benefits of their hard work upsets you.

I never said I had a problem with anyone working hard and being successful; when they "reap" the benefits and it effects me, the environment, and everyone living here, I have a problem with that.

As usual I hear no solutions - only naive ramblings.

Greenbelt around most built up areas in the CRD, toll on HWY 1 (and possible on the Pat Bay) at 6 mile (for people coming off of 14 and 1) to help support the maintenance of current roadways and better transit, incentives for developers to maximize density on lots, set up a permanent local farmers market downtown and in the westshore, promote the advantages of eating locally (this is not done nearly enough), remove more streetside parking stalls, etc.

What are your solutions? Just keep on doing what we're doing because it's working SO well?

What are your solutions? Just keep on doing what we're doing because it's working SO well?

To your points:

- Surely you are not advocating that there be no more roads. built. While I agree that the current road system needs up grading they will never be able to handle the amount of traffic that will be generated as more and more people move to this area no matter how much they are upgraded.. Your position here makes no sense.

- I see more and more smaller cars & SUV/trucks on the road than ever before. I think that consumers are getting the message and are downsizing but I grew up in a family with 2 parents ,4 kids and a grandmother at home. No matter what we needed a station wagon (a different name for todays SUV).The car I drive today is an older mid sized 4 door (that is terribly average looking)that allows me to transport my kids soccer team and still pick up groceries. There are thousands and thousands of families just like mine (all with their own requirements). Are we being lazy and selfish?

_ Build on brownfields, empty lots and established neighbourhoods. Now this is more than a little naive. There are a number of issues that make this virtually impossible and impractical. First there is not enough of these lands to satisfy the demand for housing. Secondly who says the people that own them want to sell them and there are countless zoning and servicing issues and thirdly if you think for one minute "established neighbourhoods" are going to let others waltz right in and change their neighbourhood by increasing density you don't understand people very well.
Go to a zoning/planning meeting at your next council meeting and watch the fur fly.

I fully agree that we need to shop locally and not at Wal Mart etc but I would not pass it off as you do as only being lazy. The economics of the big guys" make buying there necessary for many. If you think that I am wrong go out to Langford and see the hordes driving all the way out to Canadian Superstore and Walmart and then go over to the Market on Millstream. Not even close to the same number of people and yet the distance is about the same. In todays economy every penny counts to many of us

A greenbelt while admirable in thought is completely impractical. All this does is make the lands not in the greenbelt more valuable and sought after by more and more people. If you think that Victorias housing is expensive now it would be astronomical. One only has to Look at NY, London, Hong Kong etc etc to see the effects of supply and demand.

If you think that all of these peoples decisions are effecting you do what I did - move. The difference is I moved here because it is far better than where I moved from. You have the same choice. Either that or change the world. Those seem to be the only choice that can work for you.

-Good luck with implementing a toll. If your "moving into established neighbourhoods" seems far fetched a toll is pie in the sky.

- More incentives to builders to build. Maybe but if you talk to builders they don't want incentives as much as they want less red tape in the buliding process. This is impossible of course as people expect to have their say on every development. What to you think Tracy Parks has cost the developers of Skirt Mountain in time and money? Whatever it is the consumer will pay for the delays. Such is our capitalistic system.

- Agree with you on the farmers markets. Not too sure where they will be held as most of the empty lots will have ben used up for higher density and not too sure how crops will get to market without proper roadways, but one thing I do now is that the product will be more expensive after the farmer has factored in his road tolls.

Oh well in Utopia theories abound. In the real world they have many limitations.

I think it is about time that all of the developers, contractors,hard working people like a lot of us that live in the westshore that pay our fair share of taxes and truly appreciate where we live,hold groups like Vic Fan accountable for every last nickle that has been lost from the day they hung their monkey butts in the fir trees at the interchange to yesterday.
They have held up development far too long for my liking.I admit they probably don`t have a pot to P*** in.Maybe the people backing them could be held accountable,just a thought.

^ How would you go about doing that exactly?

The South Skirt Mountain developers should THANK us. We prevented them from throwing their investors' cash into a doomed project. Imagine if they'd gone ahead and started work, and THEN found out that Bear Mountain was bankrupt and they were stuck with the $30 million interchange debt?

^ How would you go about doing that exactly?

Oh,he is going to sue us, obviously. If I had a nickel for every time I heard that ...

Just once, maybe you guys could come up with an original, creative threat, instead of the same old lame-o intimidation tactics.

I think it is about time that all of the developers, contractors,hard working people like a lot of us that live in the westshore that pay our fair share of taxes and truly appreciate where we live,hold groups like Vic Fan accountable for every last nickle that has been lost from the day they hung their monkey butts in the fir trees at the interchange to yesterday.
They have held up development far too long for my liking.I admit they probably don`t have a pot to P*** in.Maybe the people backing them could be held accountable,just a thought.

Maverick,
Don't get too upset with Tracy. No one with any sense takes her or her group seriously. The general public either doesn't know who they are or don't care and the politicians and developers just write them off as "going with the territory". Small inconveniences but in the long run inconsequential to their goals.

I say that we start a grass roots movement to elect Tracy as the next Mayor of Langford. What do you think Tracy - up for the task?

No comment!

No comment? That's a first.

No problem tho, I understand why you wouldn't want to run.

To your points:
- Surely you are not advocating that there be no more roads. built. While I agree that the current road system needs up grading they will never be able to handle the amount of traffic that will be generated as more and more people move to this area no matter how much they are upgraded.. Your position here makes no sense.

I think the more practical method is to make people who insist on living in large-lot SFHs pay for the roads and the damage to the environment caused by their daily commutes. i.e. make developers put in the infrastructure, and increase the gas tax. If commuters paid the full cost of commuting, demand for sprawled development would take a large hit. The model you are advocating is greatly subsidized by the rest of society, and seemed like a good idea in the 50s, but the damage to both the environment and the fabric of our communities is pretty clear.

I think the more practical method is to make people who insist on living in large-lot SFHs pay for the roads and the damage to the environment caused by their daily commutes. i.e. make developers put in the infrastructure, and increase the gas tax. If commuters paid the full cost of commuting, demand for sprawled development would take a large hit. The model you are advocating is greatly subsidized by the rest of society, and seemed like a good idea in the 50s, but the damage to both the environment and the fabric of our communities is pretty clear.

Yeah lets raise the gas tax *rolls eyes* NO lets not. The knee jerk reaction anytime commuters are brought up is raise the gas tax, well on the LM they keep doing that (did you know that gas on the LM is up to 10cents/L more than on the Island and out in the Fraser Valley? Who does it hit the most and worst? The Contractors who have no choice but to drive all over the place, the transportation companies that deliver the goods that you buy, the couriers that run your companies packages back and forth. Does the company get to charge more? does the employee get reimbursed for more gas no? Lets stop the knee jerk reaction, if we didn't have urban sprawl the ridiculous cost of living in Victoria would get even higher because land would then be at an even higher premium

I think the more practical method is to make people who insist on living in large-lot SFHs pay for the roads and the damage to the environment caused by their daily commutes. i.e. make developers put in the infrastructure, and increase the gas tax. If commuters paid the full cost of commuting, demand for sprawled development would take a large hit. The model you are advocating is greatly subsidized by the rest of society, and seemed like a good idea in the 50s, but the damage to both the environment and the fabric of our communities is pretty clear.

An increase in the tax on gas does nothing more than drive up the cost of business and penalizes everyone no matter what you drive. I used to drive my kids soccer team to Nanaimo without a thought but now I have to ask myself -can I afford it?

The transportation issue has many facets. It can only be solved by mass transit. We the taxpayers must be willing to fund a combination of bike,rail,ferry and bus infrastructure costs. And we the public must be willing to change our travel habits.Our politicians are "scared" to do what they must for the future as they come under such vehement attacks that it is easier to do nothing and pay lip service to an idea than it is to actually deal with the problem straight away - as painful as it may be. (think the Blue Bridge and the Spencer Road interchange as examples).

We are running out of developable land and density is going to become the norm but even density does not solve the transportation issue. We must have mass transport and incentives to use it. Incentive by way of benefits not incentives by way of punishments.

I think the more practical method is to make people who insist on living in large-lot SFHs pay for the roads and the damage to the environment caused by their daily commutes. i.e. make developers put in the infrastructure, and increase the gas tax.

Are you serious? I think you've been reading a little too much Karl Marx there.

Yup its the fault of all those folks that live in those big houses on those large lots, lets punish them! Sounding a little jealous IMO.

BTW you know fine well the developer is required to pay significant development cost charges plus install infrastructure.

Please use this thread to discuss suburban sprawl in Greater Victoria and the CRD.

@mysage: yes, that is what I'm advocating. adding more and more roads to alleviate congestion makes NO SENSE. we need to instead encourage people to take public transit, bike, walk, and densify areas that are already built. read this: http://en.wikipedia..../Induced_demand

I agree, some people need cars to help them do their daily activities. however, what if you lived in a place where you could walk a block to get groceries, and take public transit 10 blocks to your kids soccer game? what would you need a car for then? so yes, people are being selfish and lazy. they are putting their own ridiculous need for space and extragavance over being sensible and living in a compact urban area.

I agree with the part about the rezoing process and community leagues, but that's why more people need to be educated on the benefits of true urban living. They need to stop being afraid of everything and realize that density will only improve things in the long run. it will make neighbourhoods safer, more diverse, and much more convenient.

Again, education. People don't understand how this adversely effects the local economy and environment.

Victoria has nowhere near the demand or size of those places and won't EVER. if there are benefits for developers to develop affordable MFD's we will be able to fit a lot more people int he sapce we have. The Victoria metro could easily double it's population without increasing it's border or building out.

Good luck with a toll? thats your arguement?

You sound like you're living in the 60's still where people weren't able to grasp the idea that we don't have unlimited resources and land. I suggest you should go back to one of the fine institutions in this city and take a basic geography class and realize just how naive you and most in this thread sound.

@Maverick: first off, learn how to form proper sentences. what are you even trying to argue? your post is barely comprehensible. you don't understand that developments like Skirt Mountain NEGATIVELY effect your taxes because of the maintenance of new roads, sewers, etc. The people who are accountable for this awful mess are those who started it in the first place.

@guyinthesky/mysage in regards to the gas tax: this is riduculous. you can't afford to drive your kids soccer team to Nanaimo but I'm sure you can afford a TV, cable, a computer, internet, a house, etc. maybe think about how many things we have and don't need and then see if you can afford it. guyinthesky, maybe a gas tax would encourage companies to start looking at buying more fuel efficient vehicles or using the vechicles only when necessary or a few million less dollars for some CEO's salary. business wouldn't be hurt by a gas tax, it would only hurt some greedy tyrants wallet.

@rjag: first off, do you have any idea who Karl Marx is? what was that even a reference to? Yes, it is those people fault. They insist on living out there, driving their cars, and living very materialistic. the jealously comment is unbelievable. you're a sad, pathetic person if you think that the "things" someone has its what important. materialistic and pathetic.

Are you serious? I think you've been reading a little too much Karl Marx there.

Yup its the fault of all those folks that live in those big houses on those large lots, lets punish them! Sounding a little jealous IMO.

BTW you know fine well the developer is required to pay significant development cost charges plus install infrastructure.

No, I'm not saying to "punish them". I'm saying stop subsidizing them. Unfortunately the market doesn't regulate destruction of common property (the environment), so society has to. If you want to call that socialism, you are welcome to - its not a dirty word, despite what Rush or Glenn think, its decisions society makes for the common good.