95 replies to this topic

[zinkerled]

Why not sell the small, valuable piece of land and use the money to buy a large, cheaper piece of land (or better yet a current building) to use for subsidized housing? Wouldn't that help way more people? It's called efficient use of capital Ben Isitt. Why should Victorians pay subsidies and opportunity costs so that poor people can have a beautiful view of the harbour while hard working people in Tillicum/Gorge look on longingly?

[panamajack]

I urge the cynically minded who regularly post here to actually reach out and communicate directly with Councillor Isitt with your ideas - you might be pleasantly surprised. Compared to most politicians he's a straight shooter, but is definitely more pleasant when he's not being insulted. Trust me, he can get along with people he disagrees with and enjoys good debate.

From my conversations with the Councillor, I know that he like most on this forum favours the densification of Victoria, but not at the expense of selling off the last remaining bits and pieces of city owned land after what occurred in Vic West in the past 10 years. He sees particular opportunity in densifying the Douglas corridor to encourage the development of market & affordable rental housing - something that wouldn't contradict the longterm goals for rapid transit. But in the short-term, he sees rejuvenating the E&N corridor as the low-hanging fruit that could prove to the region that it can handle more substantial and much more capital intensive projects like a full-fledged LRT.

[Sparky]

Welcome to Vibrant Victoria panamajack.

[G-Man]

Could everyone please refrain from personal attacks on individuals especially those in public office. Whether you agree with the person or not I believe we are lucky to have a place where elected leaders are willing to engage directly with us. A well thought out debate will hopefully if we all have an open mind allow us to at least understand their perspective whether or not you agree with it.

If we can do this than it will encourage other public figures to also participate in our forum.

[Mike K.]

...but not at the expense of selling off the last remaining bits and pieces of city owned land after what occurred in Vic West in the past 10 years.

Reclamation and rehabilitation of ex industrial lands is now a problem? I'm literally a life long resident of Vic West and the Vic West of today is a tremendous improvement over the Vic West of decades past.

Surely the Councillor is not objecting to what has happened to Vic West, which, as far as myself and my neighbours are concerned, is a giant leap in the right direction.

[panamajack]

I'm certainly not in a position to speak for Ben, but I think while he enthusiastically welcomes the development of VicWest's former brownfield sites he would challenge how much value the city has received to date of its sale at rock bottom (certainly not market rates) of city owned land to developers who promised Council far more than they have delivered to date wrt affordable housing and other amenities.

It's an old story over in Vancouver, where countless promises to council NOT written in contractual blood were eventually reneged in favour of updated "market conditions" that provided developers with excuses as to why they couldn't afford to previously agreed to promises. Ben's committed to proactively working with developers (believe it or not some even contributed to his campaign!), but he won't negotiate behind closed doors only to have developers change their tune on social-enviro amenities years down the road. Obviously some deals have yet to be played out, but the Councillor wants to put the spotlight on previous deals made by the city and see if we can't learn from previous experience.

[jklymak]

^ I do not understand the philosophy that says "tax new homeowners for the cost of affordable housing", which is what affordable-housing deals essential do. Why not leave the new construction unencumbered, get more people living in Victoria, and pay for social housing using the broad tax base. Why should new owners be the only ones to pay?

[G-Man]

^ I had never considered it like that before. Interesting.

[mysage]

Anyone have any video links of Ben Isitt and his philosophies?

[Bob Fugger]

Anyone have any video links of Ben Isitt and his philosophies?

Posting that YouTube video is likely tantamount to a personal attack, I wouldn't risk it.

[mysage]

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Can you explain.

[G-Man]

As for Yaletown, it does have a few concrete canyons featured, which are not exactly a selling point. I bet many in Yaletown look accross the water with envy at the developments on the south shore of False Creek, that has more greenspace, more variety of architecture, more public amnenities, and generally is more of a magnet for shoppers and pedestrian traffic. The insistence on these sort of features has long reaching effects on a neighbourhood, and it is those on council that are in the front line of decision making. They should have the courage to transcend expediency.

Say what? Sorry a bit behind here but are you saying that South False Creek is more pedestrian friendly than Yaletown? I have to say I would strongly disagree. Yaletown has far more shopping and is much more pedestrian friendly than south false creek. There are many buildings in SFC that don't even have commercial on the bottom whereas Yaletown is back to back stores. If I could magically choose a condo in either I would choose Yaletown hands down without a thought.

[Phil McAvity]

^I agree. Were it not for the seawall, south False Creek would have almost nothing going for it whereas Yaletown is vibrant and bustling with pedestrians, cyclists, businesses and restaurants.

[AllseeingEye]

Have to say that makes it "me 3". I've lived in Vancouver twice over the past 20+ years and am over there routinely for business and cannot say I know or am aware of anyone living in Yaletown, and I know and have known plenty of people who did and continue to do so, and who has ever gazed wistfully across False Creek pining for the "south" False Creek.

As Phil states beyond the seawall SCF is primarily seen by cyclists and bladers and joggers as the area they pass through en route either to Granville Island or Science World going in the opposite direction. Otherwise its relatively sterile and barren.

Yaletown residents in fact generally live there by choice precisely because it is chic, vibrant and in the heart of a truly funky urban landscape - Victoria IMO would only be so lucky if some of the Yaletown 'vibe' could somehow be magically transported here. Wishful thinking I know considering we fight and bicker and resist to the bitter end any proposed 6-storey building or 29-slip marina because, you know, they are so HUGE.....

[Bernard]

Not council related, but something Ben Isitt has been working on

Victoria mutiny of 1918 revived in call for justice

Councillor leads charge to clear names of French-Canadian soldiers who refused to fight in Russia


Read more: http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz1hI90MbSZ

[Phil McAvity]

^I can't imagine the point of resurrecting that little bit of history. Were the soldier's grandkids and great-grandkids making an issue of this?

[Bob Fugger]

^I can't imagine the point of resurrecting that little bit of history. Were the soldier's grandkids and great-grandkids making an issue of this?

I'm sure it has nothing to do with the promotion of his book on the subject that came out last year. The man is a scholar, after all.

[Holden West]

^I can't imagine the point of resurrecting that little bit of history.

I heard him being interviewed on CBC the other day. I thought it was a fascinating story. What's the point of discussing any history?

I'm sure it has nothing to do with the promotion of his book on the subject that came out last year.

Yes, it's unacceptably outrageous for an author to draw attention to a book they wrote. I've never before heard of this outrageous behaviour and thank you for drawing my attention to this outrageous behaviour.

[G-Man]

Promoting a book and promoting a book using elected office are two very different things. As long as they are both kept seperate I am ok with it.

[Bob Fugger]

Yes, it's unacceptably outrageous for an author to draw attention to a book they wrote. I've never before heard of this outrageous behaviour and thank you for drawing my attention to this outrageous behaviour.

But he's not promoting his book. I haven't heard him say word one about it. This is all about restoring the honour these maligned French Canadians soldiers. That's why I was sure that it wasn't about his book. If it was, he would have been more explicit about promoting it, right? He'd go right out and state that he is an authority on the subject by virtue of his "critically acclaimed" book (that's right from his website) that came out last year. I'm saying he's not done that because his scholarly ethos prevents such salesmanship. Good for him.