166 replies to this topic

[Casual Kev]

Urgh...

 

http://www.iheartrad...ilies-1.3910464

 

Lore has a vision for a more family friendly city, especially when it comes to more and better housing options. She is advocating for more townhouses, housing co-ops, suitable laneway homes, and garden suites.

 

Grace, if you're lurking - you do realize the City of Vancouver has permitted laneway houses since 2010, and the measure has been absolutely futile in improving affordability for families. If anything, it has kept any serious discussion about denser developments in single-family neighborhoods that could actually offer a larger-scale solution to modern families. For townhomes and laneways to make an appreciable impact in the wider housing market before we're all dead they would need to be built everywhere as they can only add 1-2 families to a given SFH lot. My apologies if I come off as hostile, but why are you and many other contemporary housing advocates so allergic to verticalization?

[spanky123]

That's a good question, Kungsberg. In provincial/federal elections I'd say it's definitively an implicit endorsement but as municipal elections are less partisan, lower profile and more accessible, I lean towards no. Actually seeing the candidates in flesh is probably the best way to figure out what they're like and what their platform is, whether you intend to support the candidate or not. 

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with it, but the question should be whether you want to be associated with her come voting time?

Edited by spanky123, 19 June 2018 - 06:02 AM.

[spanky123]

My only critique of Lore's platform/website was regarding the lack of any wording around fiscal responsibility, a few days back.

Someone tell me how that makes that anti-SJW or gender focused? She posted '100%', no?

 

Exactly. The suggestion that she was being singled out here because she is female is nonsense. Ask Gary how his ride was after he announced his candidacy.

 

I commented simply because she had made numerous public statements that I felt were inflammatory, hateful, and not representative of the character of a person that should be in public office. 

 

I was encouraged that she was willing to meet Nparker to provide more context, this latest stunt just shows that she is exactly the type of person whom is being portrayed.

Edited by spanky123, 19 June 2018 - 06:19 AM.

[Nparker]

...I was encouraged that she was willing to meet Nparker to provide more context...

I wish she had messaged me privately so that I could have seen and responded to her in a less public forum.

[spanky123]

I would wager Lucas will not seek re-election but that’s just one guy’s opinion.

Councillor Madoff is also getting to the point where another four years could be quite a commitment, but perhaps she doesn’t feel this term is the one to call it quits.

The last four years have been quite turbulent for council. I can see some of them seriously considering whether four more years in municipal politics is worth their effort.

Councillor Isitt may or may not be eyeing the federal side of the equation come 2019.

 

I think even if Ben was eying a run in 2019 he would still run for re-election. Why risk being out of the public eye. No need for him to step down if he doesn't win.

 

I think that the SJW crowd is a smaller subset of the population then people think, albeit it is one of the most vocal. There might be room for a newcomer if one of the SJW diehards leave, but I think that otherwise the vote might risk being split. 

[spanky123]

I wish she had messaged me privately so that I could have seen and responded to her in a less public forum.

 

That would have defeated the purpose of her post.

[Bob Fugger]

I was encouraged that she was willing to meet Nparker to provide more context, this latest stunt just shows that she is exactly the type of person whom is being portrayed.

I’m becoming more and more annoyed when the answer to a question about the candidate is the offer to get to know them over a casual cup of coffee. Really, I don’t care that much. Maybe you should be someone who I get to know like all the other candidates - from a safe distance. Just like a joke, if it needs explaining, it’s probably not all that good.

My time is valuable and affording it to a candidate nets me nothing out of it. If they are able to convince me, it’s all upside for them. What do I get? A local representative who is on my side until the precise moment (when you need them) that they’re not?

That’s a hard pass for me, dawg.

[spanky123]

I’m becoming more and more annoyed when the answer to a question about the candidate is the offer to get to know them over a casual cup of coffee. Really, I don’t care that much. Maybe you should be someone who I get to know like all the other candidates - from a safe distance. Just like a joke, if it needs explaining, it’s probably not all that good.

My time is valuable and affording it to a candidate nets me nothing out of it. If they are able to convince me, it’s all upside for them. What do I get? A local representative who is on my side until the precise moment (when you need them) that they’re not?

That’s a hard pass for me, dawg.

 

I have had the odd coffee or lunch with a politician. My main expectation from a politician is that they listen and then act reasonably in considering different viewpoints. On some items we will agree and others we will disagree and that is ok as long as discussion is a two way street. I have no time or respect for those who have an predetermined agenda and refuse to compromise.

Edited by spanky123, 19 June 2018 - 09:40 AM.

[John M.]

I would wager Lucas will not seek re-election but that’s just one guy’s opinion.

Councillor Madoff is also getting to the point where another four years could be quite a commitment, but perhaps she doesn’t feel this term is the one to call it quits.

The last four years have been quite turbulent for council. I can see some of them seriously considering whether four more years in municipal politics is worth their effort.

Councillor Isitt may or may not be eyeing the federal side of the equation come 2019.

Lucas has already started putting a campaign team together 

[Cassidy]

I don't want to meet ANY politician over a cup of coffee.

 

Sorry, but I'm not looking for a new friend ... and if you can't lay out your platform in writing such that folks will immediately understand it ... then there's no reason to expect that  you'll be that much more effective if you happened to get elected.

The concept of "meeting over coffee" so I can lay out my platform, and explain my inflammatory past social media posts isn't a concept that I'm ever going to support.

 

I VOTE for you, I don't need to know you personally ... I just need to know that you can do the job you were elected to do (if you happen to get elected). That's all ... beyond doing your job I've got no need to ever interact with you.

 

Further, anybody running these days that doesn't have the foresight to understand that their previous social media postings will be combed over with a fine tooth comb probably isn't too savvy to begin with.

[Mike K.]

Lucas has already started putting a campaign team together 

 

Ok, well then there we have it!

[Baro]

The core of her "vision" page seems to be about housing, specially the "missing middle" which I've always been passionate about seeing expanded greatly in Victoria.  The key question, the absolute key, is how she plans to accomplish this.  Nearly every councilor will say we need more housing, more affordable housing, more family housing.  The question is if they are willing to butt heads with the nimby's and associations to allow single family homes to be demolished in favour of row houses and garden apartments.

 

Her campaign certainly resonates with me.  We decided not to have kids and one of the primary reasons being that we doubt we'll ever be able to afford a 2 bedroom apartment ever again let alone owning something stable.  But the question is, how is she going to solve it?  City politicians so rarely give concrete policies, just nice-sounding inoffensive statements.

 

I'm not interested in yet another candidate who uses all the right progressive buzzwords, talks big about affordability, working class issues, and housing, but will always fold the moment a rich homeowner says "ah yes I agree we need more housing, just not in MY neighbourhood ok?"  I'm not interested in yet another candidate who will do years of intensive community engagement to come up with yet another meaningless do-nothing plan or community vision statement.

 

I want someone who will do something bold like blanket upzone all of james bay and half of fairfield to allow the duplexes and townhouses our city desperately needs.  Someone who isn't afraid to put hyper-local interests 2nd to the interests of the city as a whole.  

Edited by Baro, 19 June 2018 - 09:17 PM.

[Mike K.]

Just a few years ago the narrative from city hall was to pursue densification in the downtown core and along major corridors, particularly in “villages.” The theme during the 2011 OCP was “concentrate development downtown, keep single family traditional neighbourhoods as they are.”

So it’s not that “rich home owners” are necessarily objecting to densification, it’s that they were sold on a different bag of carrots as part of a comprehensive OCP created and pushed by the city. But now the row of 10 homes they live among could be turned into six houses and 15 townhomes, with the potential for other lots to
be consolidated into higher density? You can see how people might feel like they didn’t realize that they’d be walking into that reality. And they’re right, the neighbourhood will change and change very quickly.

And not every homeowner is “rich.” Regular folks who got into the market when prices were much lower only a few years back are now house rich, yes, but if they sell what can they buy but not exactly what they sold (minus transaction fees), if not having to secure several $100k’s to pad their mortgage?

[Mike K.]

My point isn’t to suggest I personally oppose the movement to densify single family neighbourhoods, btw.

I’m just highlighting how a lot of the opposition to that agenda materializes among folks who were sold a certain lifestyle and who will object when someone wants to change it. That’s just human nature and especially so when we’re talking about very expensive neighbourhoods with high property taxes and a community with a high cost of living. People in those situations are less likely to quietly accept change considering what it costs them to maintain the lifestyle they’ve chosen.

You also have to look at the resentment angle. Folks living in older homes (heritage and heritage identified) are less affected by this push because few developers will ever touch character homes out of fear they’ll be bogged down in years of controversy. So folks living in 50’s+ era rows of houses in the City of Victoria know their blocks are the targets, and yet on the flip side right across the border in Oak Bay there is virtually no pressure to have the same level of development occur. Does that frustrate people? You bet it does. Does that create entrenched NIMBYISM? Absolutely.

[Cassidy]

There's no reason to destroy single family home neighborhoods in the COV (or anywhere else for that matter), not when the entire North end of the COV is still essentially one big wasteland of surface parking lots and semi-industrial warehouses.

The North end of town is far closer to the downtown core than far Gonzales or far Fairfield.

 

Densification of the North end of town holds the potential for tens of thousands of home/condo owners, and an equal number of rental suites.

Destroying the historical fabric of James Bay or Fairfield simply isn't required to solve the problem that the South Island is experiencing. To focus on James Bay or Fairfield is to completely miss the problem ... and the solution.

 

All one has to do to see the potential is look at what they built on the old B.C. Forest Products site, and then imagine the same level of development (with taller buildings) in all of Rock Bay - West of Government St and South of Gorge Rd.

 

For those who want to live in an 800 square foot, 2 bedroom condo or apartment ... AND have it located in James Bay or Fairfield ... the simple answer is "tough ... that's an area of single family homes - your new neighborhood is Burnside and North Downtown".

 

If folks are proposing to think outside the box in terms of densification in the CRD ... then think outside the box.

Don't look at a wonderful old neighborhoods of single family homes and start demanding they be torn down to accommodate you.

[rmpeers]

I agree. For those of us who years ago chose to live in James Bay or Fairfield, why is it wrong that we should want the area to retain the appeal that made us put down the money to buy a home there. Yes, yes, nimbyism blah blah blah; but is it really such a bad thing for a person to have some hope that their neighborhood won't substantially change? I get that developers may not feel this way but it bugs the hell out of me when "nimbyism" gets bandied about so readily.

[Nparker]

...is it really such a bad thing for a person to have some hope that their neighborhood won't substantially change?...

Perhaps it is not so much a "bad thing", as it is unrealistic. Cities change and grow. That is just a fact. 

[Casual Kev]

I've seen the "stick everything in commercial and light industrial" tape played a million times in the Lower Mainland. The result of that approach is that one, it severely limits the location of denser development (duh). But the worst part is the kind of development it encourages. With develop able land at a serious premium, builders absolutely need to milk every penny from their lot - so theres a tendency for luxurious builds and not much else. Then the imperative of protecting SFH areas from development has led to many older, cheaper multi-family rental sites being sold and replaced by higher end condos, with again little other type of stock being built. That's a major impetus behind progressives opposing development in general, btw. Urban development follows the path of least resistance.

You don't need to turn Fairfield/James Bay/Fernwood into Yaletown, or even the West End. But developers should absolutely be able to build multi family at a meaningful rate. Even 2-3 low rise projects every year or so would do a lot.

[Rob Randall]

Poor Gary Beyer is like, "Hey guys, you can talk about this over in my thread!"

[Nparker]

Poor Gary Beyer is like, "Hey guys, you can talk about this over in my thread!"

And all I can see it another thread going off-topic.