3079 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

...missing middle is nothing more than a well-marketed plan that fails to address a critical need: housing that is attainable for an average Victorian...

This.

[Victoria Watcher]

I'll disagree here. Missing Middle as it currently stands is not to the benefit of most current residents and pushing ahead on it at this time was an error - one that is likely to have lasting consequences, including an inability to make significant progress on the challenge of having affordable, reasonably accessible housing that is attainable by the average Victorian. Victoria needs both form AND function - but more importantly, Victoria needs to know that the fabric of this community will not be undermined - that the people who reside here and what they want for their city matters. Right now, I believe many need reassurance that Victoria will evolve rather than experience a wholesale transition, particularly a wholesale transition that lines the pockets of developers and property owners while displacing those least able to find alternate housing within their means. The idea that a neighbour "by right" could build up to 1.0 FSR, with payment of a very modest fee to the affordable housing fund ($10/psf above 0.5 FSR - ie $35,000 for the right to build an additional 3500 square feet on a 7,000 square foot lot), is selling out current residents for future residents and is not a good bargain for those who make their lives here. In short: missing middle is nothing more than a well-marketed plan that fails to address a critical need: housing that is attainable for an average Victorian.

 

Worse than that: the missing middle plan is likely to lift land prices, lift taxation on those who "hold out", and result in even less land being available for non-profit, co-op, and public housing. It will also increase competition for much needed construction labour and materials, again undermining the hope of realizing reasonably affordable housing in Victoria. 

 

I absolutely believe we need more housing in Victoria and the region as a whole - the proliferation of live aboard recreation vehicles on our streets is clear evidence that much more needs to be done to ensure reasonable housing can be attainable. A real estate strategy is not a housing strategy and missing middle at this juncture is merely a real estate strategy.

 

The move was getting the mailer and still a reasonable time between the info session and public hearing.

 

That's what he got us.

[dasmo]

It’s something. Now it’s up to Victorians to show up with the pitch forks and put a stop to rushing this through. That would get Stephen elected.

[Awaiting Juno]

It’s something. Now it’s up to Victorians to show up with the pitch forks and put a stop to rushing this through. That would get Stephen elected.

 

Show up with pitchforks on something that has been tremendously miscommunicated on, in the middle of summer? The problem is: its not just residents who show up - those who have a VERY vested interest in it also show up and they bring their friends. A one day public hearing and a one day open house and what a one-page mailer on the 2,000 page policy is somehow anything other than a quick gloss over of lipstick on this pig?

[Victoria Watcher]

It is what it is. We can’t force homeowners to take notice. Community associations - or any residents - are free to conduct their own awareness campaigns and rally residents.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 19 June 2022 - 04:22 PM.

[Nparker]

And again I ask the question (since I have yet to receive an answer), what is the urgency in getting this significant change in housing policy all wrapped up by August?

[Victoria Watcher]

Why wait? We have a housing crisis. We are told.

[Nparker]

And by potentially approving this change in August rather than November, the "housing crisis" will be once and forever resolved?

[dasmo]

Show up with pitchforks on something that has been tremendously miscommunicated on, in the middle of summer? The problem is: its not just residents who show up - those who have a VERY vested interest in it also show up and they bring their friends. A one day public hearing and a one day open house and what a one-page mailer on the 2,000 page policy is somehow anything other than a quick gloss over of lipstick on this pig?

That’s how they roll. The missing middle is being driven from a higher level. That’s apparent if you simply search the term and see it’s being rolled out everywhere right now. It’s nothing more than marketing up-zoning and community disruption to get it past resistance. That’s also evident when you read about it. It’s not new housing design. We have these forms already and have for a long time. They make sense. So does the concept of density and affordable housing. The issue is how blanket not up-zoning but increasing the allowable density in existing zoning will affect house prices immediately and how little it will improve inventory in practice.
The norm is apathy. So maybe, just maybe if something is different and people show up they might be forced to respond to the folks that live in these neighborhoods.

[Victoria Watcher]

And by potentially approving this change in August rather than November, the "housing crisis" will be once and forever resolved?

Helps says you lead by doing, not deferring.

You know I’m a big fan.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 19 June 2022 - 05:31 PM.

[Nparker]

Helps says you lead by doing, not deferring....

She's had almost 8 years to prove this thesis. 

[Victoria Watcher]

I laugh a bit because at one time I did see her schedule.
She certainly has lots of high level meetings with various groups and bodies every week.

But I can’t think of even a half dozen significant positive accomplishments in her 8 years.

And I bet I could come up with 50+ failures.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 19 June 2022 - 06:15 PM.

[spanky123]

And by potentially approving this change in August rather than November, the "housing crisis" will be once and forever resolved?

 

No but her backers will be happy and they will have made sure that the deal was finalized before a new council comes in.

[dasmo]

No but her backers will be happy and they will have made sure that the deal was finalized before a new council comes in.

and she will get her promotion to grand inquisitor.... 

[Sparky]

One of her backers is David Eby

[Victoria Watcher]

Maybe her next job will be with BC Housing.

[Nparker]

Maybe her next job will be with BC Housing.

The perfect place for her based on her track record in the CoV. (sarcasm font implied)

[spanky123]

Need a field of good people running for the right reasons who are bringing forward their best selves. I have not been a fan of this past administration for a variety of reasons that have been exhaustively articulated. Right now we have two real contenders for the mayor's chair - Mr. Andrew and Mrs. Alto. Many are likely finding this choice "not their cup of tea" for a variety of reasons. Many see Mrs. Alto as a non-resident Helps' lite who would likely continue the trajectory the city has been on. Many are also hesitant with the prospect of Mr. Andrew occupying the mayor's chair - with a recent shift in style.

 

The worse thing that can happen is for candidates to be elected who are genuinely "not as advertised" - candidates owe it both to themselves and the electorate to bring their authentic selves forward and to be honest with themselves as to whether or not they are truly the potential "right person" for the job they are running for - because some might be the "right person" for the job of council, but not the "right person" for the job of mayor. Further, being really clear on that might be the best thing a candidate can do for themselves with respect to whatever future political ambitions they may have, knowing "not now" is important.

 

I also worry about the apparent shift in approach. I understand that you need to appeal to a broad base in order to get elected but that doesn't mean you need to pander or flip-flop on important decisions simply because the direction of the wind changes.

 

What I was hoping we would get away from is the "strong Mayor" approach where the Mayor thinks it is their job to run the city and everyone else reports to them.  

[spanky123]

Stephen Andrew states that if elected he will hire an integrity commissioner to review and monitor the actions of council and committee members. 

 

https://www.stephena...good_governance

[Nparker]

How unbiased will someone be in this position? Will they really want to bite the hand that feeds them?