3079 replies to this topic

[Victoria Watcher]

Lisa Helps has done nothing positive for the City.

She has, on the other hand, done lots to make it worse.

[Nparker]

Lisa Helps is not sustainable.

[dasmo]

She is part of the globalist UN agenda 2030 crowd. I used to like the slogan “think global act local” until I figured out what that meant. When you apply the doublespeak filter to agenda 2030 it’s no wonder there are so many theories about it….

As Mayor of Victoria, British Columbia since 2014, Lisa Helps was elected on a platform to use City Hall and city government as a to help unleash the potential of citizens and local business and to create inclusive, sustainable prosperity. As mayor, she takes inspiration from the UN Sustainable Development Goals, with a particular emphasis on Goal 11, Sustainable Cities and Communities.

https://socialvalue-...lue/lisa-helps/

What is Goal 11 you ask?

MAKE CITIES AND HUMAN SETTLEMENTS INCLUSIVE, SAFE, RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE.

The world’s population is constantly increasing.To accommodate everyone, we need to build modern, sustainable cities. For all of us to survive and prosper, we need new, intelligent urban planning that creates safe, affordable and resilient cities with green and culturally inspiring living conditions.

 

INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE URBANIZATION
By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries.

 

By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disaster risk

Edited by dasmo, 08 June 2022 - 08:57 AM.

[dasmo]

Perhaps she has loftier figures to please than those of us in this back woods human settlement.... 

[Mike K.]

Victoria's isn't just the metro area though... Victoria's metro area is tiny...  

 

What I'm saying is, if you want to make proper comparisons you have to compare cities on an even scale. If you include suburbs for Victoria's figure, you also have to include suburbs for Calgary's figure regardless of how large any individual municipality is.

[Mike K.]

What is Goal 11 you ask?

MAKE CITIES AND HUMAN SETTLEMENTS INCLUSIVE, SAFE, RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE.

The world’s population is constantly increasing.To accommodate everyone, we need to build modern, sustainable cities. For all of us to survive and prosper, we need new, intelligent urban planning that creates safe, affordable and resilient cities with green and culturally inspiring living conditions.

 

INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE URBANIZATION
By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries.

 

By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disaster risk

 

What interests me, is there appears to be a conscious departure from cities into more rural areas, perhaps for the first time in generations (historically we have seen a rural flight).

 

It's happening en masse in the US, where people are starting to flood out of cities to live in small towns and rural communities. It's not all because of COVID, it's a combination of crime, high cost of living, education, stress, cramped living conditions, and politics infringing ever further into choice and freedoms. COVID just hastened people's decisions and motivations.

[dasmo]

What interests me, is there appears to be a conscious departure from cities into more rural areas, perhaps for the first time in generations (historically we have seen a rural flight).

 

It's happening en masse in the US, where people are starting to flood out of cities to live in small towns and rural communities. It's not all because of COVID, it's a combination of crime, high cost of living, education, stress, cramped living conditions, and politics infringing ever further into choice and freedoms. COVID just hastened people's decisions and motivations.

It's what I did. 

[Victoria Watcher]

What interests me, is there appears to be a conscious departure from cities into more rural areas, perhaps for the first time in generations (historically we have seen a rural flight).

It's happening en masse in the US, where people are starting to flood out of cities to live in small towns and rural communities. It's not all because of COVID, it's a combination of crime, high cost of living, education, stress, cramped living conditions, and politics infringing ever further into choice and freedoms. COVID just hastened people's decisions and motivations.

Of course. Sane people flee the blue cities to head to the red suburbs and country.

[dasmo]

I even started listening to country music.... https://youtu.be/uIWotODqidE

[DavidL]

I'm not sure what people are getting excited about here.  The issue was that the public hearing process being proposed couldn't accommodate an open house, information sharing type event where the public could bone up on the proposal and have enough time to digest and then approach the public hearing from a more informed perspective, rather than just the low information single issue objections we're used to seeing.  That has apparently been changed and is the crux of Andrew's wanting to bring it back and move on to that phase.  It doesn't mean approval, just as a referral motion didn't mean it was dead.  It's not black and white.  You want to know what the public has to say, on the record, then move to the public hearing phase while having a strong informational piece in between.  There are issues that will be aired on the proposal and the ideal mechanism would be to take the information gathered and hone it, whether it takes one try or several tries. That's the purpose of the public hearing process and that's an example of good governance, so why anyone would be upset with this is confusing to me.  Moving to hearing is not moving to approval, it simply opens up an avenue for input that should be constructive and helps move away from the standard city directed "engagement" process.

[dasmo]

It is simple. The motion for more public engagement isn't enough time for the public to understand or digest the issue. Or is the plan to have a debate at the start of the engagement workshop? Id the engagement going to ask the question: Does the community want this? or Should this decision be part of the election which is soon anyway. The platform of an election provides and excellent way to provide clear information and debate on the topic getting the information and plan out to more people so they might be motivated to engage with knowledge of the pros and cons of such a move. 

 

This is the motion:

At the May 26, 2022, Council Meeting, the following motion related to the “Missing Middle Public
Hearing” received majority support:
“That the matter be referred to staff, to convene a public engagement workshop and report
back to the Committee of the Whole by July 2022 with: (1) the results of that engagement,
(2) any additional public input received, and (3) any proposed amendments to the Missing
Middle program based on this input.”

https://pub-victoria...ocumentId=80904

 

IMO "Proposed amendments" sounds like it is happening regardless it is just about what concessions will be made....

 

Why not wait 3 more months? The election is October 15.

[Mike K.]

Council was asking questions of staff at one of the recent meetings that were very rudimentary. That council wasn’t aware of basic aspects after three years of planning, but officialdom expects the public to be after a couple of weeks of engagement, should be a concern for elected officials.

Has anyone received a mailer regarding missing middle? Where do you engage with the city on this matter, if you decide you want to engage?

[Nparker]

...That the matter be referred to staff, to convene a public engagement workshop and report back to the Committee of the Whole by July 2022

Is a maximum of 53 days (since no specific date in July is given) really enough time to gather public input and report back on an issue of this magnitude? What's the rush to have this to the CotW by July?

[Nparker]

...Has anyone received a mailer regarding missing middle...

I certainly haven't.

[Victoria Watcher]

Right. And when a developer-triggered rezoning application is happening, there is site signage and a mailing radius.

But this proposal, that is City-wide and on a massive scale has neither.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 08 June 2022 - 03:01 PM.

[Mike K.]

We still don't seem to have a clear path towards this engagement agenda. When does it start? How do you engage?

 

I visited my mum yesterday, in the CoV. I asked her what she knows about MM, and what changes it will deliver. Not a clue, and her son is 'this guy,' after all. I mean we've had conversations about it over the last couple of years but she hasn't received any mail, any info, nor does she understand the changes coming as her son can't answer her basic questions, either. She knows as much as her neighbours know, and they collectively know nothing as well.

[Awaiting Juno]

The city does not do engagement well. Anyone who actually did the missing middle survey found it filled with loaded questions - it seemed very disingenuous as a tool to diving the will of residents. The approach on this issue should be far more strategic and nuanced than it is and likely should not assume a "one size fits all neighbourhoods" solution.

[dasmo]

That’s because it feels more like it’s about selling a preordained vision and not defining the problem and seeking input to find a solution. Just Google missing middle housing and you see this exactly vision being enacted everywhere right now. That irritates me.
If you read the report you also get that impression. One part talks about the fact that Victorians own 1.1 cars. So the plan will reduce the parking allotment to .77 per person. This way they can reach their target of reducing car ownership by 30%. Perhaps that particular agenda should also be an election issue? Another thing that is not addressed in the report is the immediate increase in land prices. The report admits that new development will be modest and slow. The resulting equation should be front and centre and debated. Increasing development potential of all areas will increase the land prices instantly + development slowly adding more inventory over decades = affordable housing to retain valued workers now.

[Nparker]

The city does not do engagement well. Anyone who actually did the missing middle survey found it filled with loaded questions - it seemed very disingenuous...

I am sure you have noticed this is how EVERY CoV public "engagement" survey is written - to elicit predetermined results.

[spanky123]

That’s because it feels more like it’s about selling a preordained vision and not defining the problem and seeking input to find a solution. Just Google missing middle housing and you see this exactly vision being enacted everywhere right now. That irritates me.
If you read the report you also get that impression. One part talks about the fact that Victorians own 1.1 cars. So the plan will reduce the parking allotment to .77 per person. This way they can reach their target of reducing car ownership by 30%. Perhaps that particular agenda should also be an election issue? Another thing that is not addressed in the report is the immediate increase in land prices. The report admits that new development will be modest and slow. The resulting equation should be front and centre and debated. Increasing development potential of all areas will increase the land prices instantly + development slowly adding more inventory over decades = affordable housing to retain valued workers now.

 

Actually less than .77 per person as the focus on what parking is made available through MM will be on car share and accessibility spots and not for personal vehicles.