3079 replies to this topic

[JimV]

I think a better solution would be to return council terms to to two years.  Let the voters judge.  Yeah, I know, it’s provincial legislation.  Maybe Kevin Falcon could think about it.

[FogPub]

I think a better solution would be to return council terms to to two years.  Let the voters judge.  Yeah, I know, it’s provincial legislation.  Maybe Kevin Falcon could think about it.

The only problem with this as written is it means we'd have to elect Kevin Falcon.

 

No thanks.

 

Otherwise, I'm 100% on board with going back to two-year (or even three-year) terms.

[Midnightly]

Helps says you lead by doing, not deferring.

You know I’m a big fan.

 

unless it's one of her bad choices that people are asking... demanding to restore and fix her mistakes... then it's ears shut eyes closed nope let the next council deal with it (aka beacon hill park street closures, downtown street closures, the mess they made at clover point...)

[Spy Black]

The very concept of needing an "Integrity Officer" in a relatively small civic government certainly warrants a level of disgust.

 

How about having Council Members who will actually behave in a manner that serves their tax paying electorate, as compared to the current crop of Councilors (including the Mayor) who engage only in the fulfilment of their highly dubious, and highly personal agendas (an undertaking requiring the services of an Integrity Officer).

Edited by Spy Black, 21 June 2022 - 07:44 AM.

[spanky123]

Sounds like Stephen is taking advice from Richard Atwell!

 

The voters can decide if Ben's actions with the Red Cedar Cafe were ethical or not. We don't need to pay someone to intervene and tell us.

[Mike K.]

We are fortunate, though, that there is a media personality who did all of the legwork to bring that information to the forefront. I don’t think the public would have known much if it wasn’t for CFAX.

[Mike K.]

Mr. Dell wants an outdoor pool for Victoria. If the planning will be half as entertaining as the Crystal replacement, I’m in! - https://twitter.com/...6zIW6jdSUcg56ZQ

But on a serious note, it would be cool for a pool for have a sliding roof.

[Awaiting Juno]

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

 

We are in a housing crisis and what does the City of Victoria do:

* Does it look at the ADU policy and make it more workable? (It doubled the fees)

* Does it come down hard on AirBnB use of residential properties? (Again, it seems like AirBnB is more than alive and well)

* Does it advocate for changes to the Residential Tenancy Act to enhance the provision of residential rental supply? (Nope)

* Does it speed up the process of rezoning where appropriate (ie: bringing zoning in line with OCP)? 

* Does it speed up the process of having a building permit issued? 

* Does it examine the costs of building permits?

* Does it expedite the permit process for projects that add additional housing supply?

* Does it examine the variance process?

* Does it bolster the amount of staff manning the planning and development process?

* Does it look at the property tax system to give a break to those providing residential rentals?

* Does it have a policy addressing displacement and loss of affordable rental supply?

 

Nope - rather it seeks to rezone the entire city and undermine the neighbourhood CALUCs and engagement process...

[spanky123]

Mr. Dell wants an outdoor pool for Victoria. If the planning will be half as entertaining as the Crystal replacement, I’m in! - https://twitter.com/...6zIW6jdSUcg56ZQ

But on a serious note, it would be cool for a pool for have a sliding roof.

 

I love his assertion that pools are cheap and he knows that because he was a lifeguard!

[dasmo]

Sounds like Stephen is taking advice from Richard Atwell!

 

The voters can decide if Ben's actions with the Red Cedar Cafe were ethical or not. We don't need to pay someone to intervene and tell us.

True. Tabling recall legislation for local governments would be a better approach.  

[Mike K.]

We are in a housing crisis and what does the City of Victoria do:
* Does it look at the ADU policy and make it more workable? (It doubled the fees)
* Does it come down hard on AirBnB use of residential properties? (Again, it seems like AirBnB is more than alive and well)
* Does it advocate for changes to the Residential Tenancy Act to enhance the provision of residential rental supply? (Nope)
* Does it speed up the process of rezoning where appropriate (ie: bringing zoning in line with OCP)?
* Does it speed up the process of having a building permit issued?
* Does it examine the costs of building permits?
* Does it expedite the permit process for projects that add additional housing supply?
* Does it examine the variance process?
* Does it bolster the amount of staff manning the planning and development process?
* Does it look at the property tax system to give a break to those providing residential rentals?
* Does it have a policy addressing displacement and loss of affordable rental supply?

Nope - rather it seeks to rezone the entire city and undermine the neighbourhood CALUCs and engagement process...

Some of those points appear to be contradictory, or at least not really applicable to solving the problem.

[dasmo]

I look at the list in it's essence. Basically we need to look at this in a hyper local fashion. Not in a global monocrop fashion. Affordable housing IS a problem.  It may or may not be fixable by policy however policy makers could actually be looking at the problem in a real way and if their policies are at least making things worse and how policy could affect change.  

[Mike K.]

The problem is that we're looking at it in a hyper-local fashion.

 

You are not going to solve anything across 19 sq. km. much of Canada wants to live in. You have to think bigger, and you have to walk back policies limiting the availability of land.

[dasmo]

The problem is that we're looking at it in a hyper-local fashion.

 

You are not going to solve anything across 19 sq. km. much of Canada wants to live in. You have to think bigger, and you have to walk back policies limiting the availability of land.

I get your point there but.... 

This is a global trend or globalist agenda depending on your bias. It is not being looked at with a local lens. This point is made by your comment where we have a lot of land that can be developed in this fashion without disrupting existing long established neighbourhoods.

Just google it...

https://www.google.c...bih=475&dpr=1.5

[Mike K.]

The densification is the global trend, I agree. But we have proven to ourselves multiple times now that densification can no longer be considered a path towards affordability, unless we define it as relative affordability (i.e. a $400k condo versus a $1.4M house).

 

In short, urbanism has become too popular, and its housing too in demand for our cities to adapt to it if we expect our cities to maintain their present-day character, and yes, that includes neighbourhoods predominantly made up of SFDs (i.e. that's why the urbanists want density there, because of their pre-sent day character and appeal).

 

Like I've said before, if you want Victoria to look like central Paris, go for it. But be up front about it.

[dasmo]

The densification is the global trend, I agree. But we have proven to ourselves multiple times now that densification can no longer be considered a path towards affordability, unless we define it as relative affordability (i.e. a $400k condo versus a $1.4M house).

 

In short, urbanism has become too popular, and its housing too in demand for our cities to adapt to it if we expect our cities to maintain their present-day character, and yes, that includes neighbourhoods predominantly made up of SFDs (i.e. that's why the urbanists want density there, because of their pre-sent day character and appeal).

 

Like I've said before, if you want Victoria to look like central Paris, go for it. But be up front about it.

This isn't densification. That is already happening naturally. There are almost no single families living in Fairfield. I have lived there. Once for seven years in an illegal suite. Then for a year in a house we were going to rebuild. We sold and then a mega mansion with a few suites was built there. At least half of the houses on my street had suites. A few were character homes converted to mini condos.

Their own report says this will have little affect on inventory. 

What it is is blanket up-zoning of established neighbourhoods disguised by not changing the zoning name itself but changing single family zoning to allow for greater density. That is what this is. It is being sold by it's assumed and projected results of this policy change. But that's what it actually is is policy change. 

Edited by dasmo, 21 June 2022 - 11:08 AM.

[spanky123]

We only ever measure rental units in purpose built rental buildings but I wonder how the secondary market is reacting. Are more people renting their suites as prices have come up? Anecdotally I hear of lots of people with 1-2 bedroom suites paying $1,200 a month or less but  perhaps that is because that part of the market just wants stability and the right tenant as opposed to maximizing profit. 

[Mike K.]

LandlordBC says small time landlords are leaving the industry “in droves.”

So you might have suites in lots of Fairfield homes, but their availability is at the whim of one individual and not the market. MMI wants to place that density into a predicament where it is always on the market.

[Mike K.]

This isn't densification. That is already happening naturally. There are almost no single families living in Fairfield. I have lived there. Once for seven years in an illegal suite. Then for a year in a house we were going to rebuild. We sold and then a mega mansion with a few suites was built there. At least half of the houses on my street had suites. A few were character homes converted to mini condos.
Their own report says this will have little affect on inventory.
What it is is blanket up-zoning of established neighbourhoods disguised by not changing the zoning name itself but changing single family zoning to allow for greater density. That is what this is. It is being sold by it's assumed and projected results of this policy change. But that's what it actually is is policy change.

Illegal suites remain illegal suites, even if not actively pursued by the municipality for permitting, etc.

But just one complaint changes that. And poof, suite is gone if the owner does not or cannot bring it up to code.

[dasmo]

Illegal suites remain illegal suites, even if not actively pursued by the municipality for permitting, etc.

But just one complaint changes that. And poof, suite is gone if the owner does not or cannot bring it up to code.

Built in community building! I experienced this. We had a party once. The landlord had a talk with us. They were operating a business illegally out of the main floor and really didn’t want to draw any negative sentiment from the neighbors. We got a pass because she had heard about us shoveling the neighbouring missing middle apartment roof from snow saving it from major damage.