99 replies to this topic

[Ms. B. Havin]

Amalgamation + Ward System = Possible Solution.

[2F2R]

Awesome old pictures ... they sure built some great buildings back then ... the best we have!

[Layne French]

Amalgamation + Ward System = Possible Solution.

I'm not a big fan of this idea, ward system with amalgamation could potentially have just as big of a negative factor. Since I live in this sort of system, and having experience with Victoria's system I tend to prefer the later.

[aastra]

... they sure built some great buildings back then ... the best we have!

And the best that we no longer have...

Just about every building was designed to impress. Not just the large ones but the small ones, too.

In my opinion we should have the exact same goal today. Merely ordinary buildings should be deemed unacceptable in the Old Town area.

[Bernard]

So, a return to councillors elected in wards? A century ago, Victoria used to have five wards, each represented by one councillor. We voted in a referendum to switch to the current "at large" system in 1921.

Wards might reduce influence of the CAs. And they would diminish the likelihood of councillors being elected by interest groups (e.g. heritage preservationists, cyclists, pot smokers). But they could create even smaller fiefdoms -- municipalities within municipalities -- than exist today.

A ward system means a first part the post electoral system, the second worst one on earth, the only one that is worse is the current "at large" electoral system we use.

Currently local governments can only use the at large system and can have no more than 8 councilors. Both of theses things need to change.

In an amalgamated "Core" Victoria, I would like to see 20-30 councilors. Local government is well suited to use STV to elect people. You split the region into five or six five member electoral areas.

[VicHockeyFan]

I'm sure most of us know this, but for any lurkers wondering, yes you can pick up a copy of this 183-pager at City Hall. I got one on Tuesday when I stopped in with Mike K.

[Rob Randall]

I doubt there will be any significant changes to the electoral system. Heck, the DRA participated in a year-long discussion at City Hall over changes to the one-page mailout that gets sent to neighbours around rezoning applications.

[VicHockeyFan]

Rob Randall is talking about this NOW on CFAX.

LISTEN.

[Baro]

How come the times on posts are all messed up, says you posted at 4pm today.

Ah it's saying my post is at 5, so I probably missed the radio thing. awww
... and now I figured out I had to set what time zone I'm in in my user CP.

[VicHockeyFan]

Rob Randall is talking about this NOW on CFAX.

LISTEN.

RANDALL COVERED:

Casino
Bridge
Marina
Bonus density
Oil tankers turning around
Barges vs. dumptrucks
Graves washing up

All in a days work. Then he drew a blank on the DRA web url.

That was a real good segment, Rob.

[Rob Randall]

The interview was arranged rather quickly this morning so sorry for not giving you the heads up. And sorry for not getting to the studio, I know it's more annoying listening to guests on the phone.

So yeah, we talked about the plan but ventured off into other topics as well. My main concern was following up on the Plan. I used the example of Bus Rapid Transit to show how a relatively simple concept can easily be destroyed by lack of leadership and noisy special interest groups.

Barges vs. dumptrucks was about the future development of Rock Bay. One barge carries stuff that dozens of dump trucks would so that's something to consider. I said that most people think retaining some industrial use in Rock Bay is a good long-term plan.

A caller said there was a plan in the 90s to put a marina in Ross Bay? This was new to me. I said the storms would mean a giant breakwater, recalling the old stories of how coffins in the cemetery were washed away before the sea wall was built.

Yep, and my mind went completely blank when I tried coming up with the DRA website. Of course, it's http://victoriadra.ca/

I mentioned Vancouver--what they do right and and what we can learn. They also have a heritage density program and some great old buildings were saved but so much new density was banked up by developers there was really nowhere to put it. And they are putting a big casino near BC Place. Do we really want to revisit this controversial issue? With big price tags attached to the bridge, sewage treatment and possibly the mega-yacht marina we might not have a choice.

[VicHockeyFan]

And they are putting a big casino near BC Place. Do we really want to revisit this controversial issue? With big price tags attached to the bridge, sewage treatment and possibly the mega-yacht marina we might not have a choice.

Does anyone know of any policing problem in View Royal? I don't see how it would be different if it was here, inside private property like a hotel annex.

[Baro]

A marina in ross bay??? have any of these people ever walked along the water during a windy day, let alone a storm? I was at the very sheltered Gonzales bay last night and the wind wasn't bad, but waves were getting all the way to the concrete back wall of the beach, never seen water get that far before.

[Bingo]

A marina in ross bay??? have any of these people ever walked along the water during a windy day, let alone a storm? I was at the very sheltered Gonzales bay last night and the wind wasn't bad, but waves were getting all the way to the concrete back wall of the beach, never seen water get that far before.

I think the marina was to go in Rock Bay. Even with a breakwater any marina in Ross Bay would get torn to shreds in a sou'easter or a westerly gale.

[Evan]

Three thoughts:

1. Plan is great in theory, but I fear its (lack of) implementation.

2. Re previous comments on parking:

We don't need underground parking to make up for lost above-grade parking. We need less parking, period. If we want a world class city, then parking downtown needs to become a huge pain in the ass.

3. What is the deal with the huge preoccupation (43+ pages) on site lines and views?

This is my favourite part of the entire thing:

[Baro]

Cycling should never be put above transit. Transit can move thousands quickly to and from the city, bikes only work for certain type of people. If given a choice between a street with tram tracks that might bother bikes, or a bike lane, the tram should win. Not that we can't have everything, but transit should be given priority over cycling infrastructure if the two ever come into conflict.

[Evan]

Cycling should never be put above transit. Transit can move thousands quickly to and from the city, bikes only work for certain type of people. If given a choice between a street with tram tracks that might bother bikes, or a bike lane, the tram should win. Not that we can't have everything, but transit should be given priority over cycling infrastructure if the two ever come into conflict.

I think I agree with all of what you're saying.

I think the point is that most people are capable of cycling, cycling networks are very inexpensive to accommodate, can cover a much... more fine-grained area than public transit (viably) can, and so we can focus our efforts and money on high quality transit that serves the right populations/areas.

I think the number of to-and-from city links are going to be pretty low and will not be dropped at the expense of cycling

[Dennis Carlsen]

A recent survey by the World Wildlife Federation indicated that most Canadians would give up just about anything including sex before they would give up their car. Maybe people that drive cars need to pay a sin tax.

[Baro]

They do, it's called huge gas taxes. Although I'd love to see some sort of progressive tax based on the fuel efficiency or weight of your vehicle, so long as it went towards transit.

[Hotel Mike]

The approach should be a carrot rather than a stick. Alternatives, such as cycling, walking and public transit should be made so attractive that people will want to get out of their cars. Instead many people advocate making life so miserable for drivers that they will finally give their cars up.