...partners in our prosperity...
But who said anything about prosperity? Politicians are heroically trying to cure people of any and all expectations re: prosperity.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 10:23 AM
...partners in our prosperity...
But who said anything about prosperity? Politicians are heroically trying to cure people of any and all expectations re: prosperity.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:08 AM
They expropriated.
The point is, they wanted it gone. This new crusade they're declaring today against other SFD neighbourhoods is just the latest chapter of the same program. For crying out loud, everything today is just the latest chapter of the same program from yesterday. But dressed up in contemporary verbiage to satisfy contemporary delusions.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:20 AM
I doubt she reads beyond looking for wokeness to feed her ideology.
That was exactly my earlier point. Anyone spending 30 seconds to actually read the references Mayor Helps was referring to would see that she was misinterpreting them. Obviously she believes that her supporters won't make that effort and will accept whatever pablum she feeds them.
Edited by spanky123, 11 December 2021 - 11:37 AM.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:28 AM
But the word "classist" doesn't trigger people the same way as racist does. It also doesn't evoke nearly enough white guilt nor demonstrate one's wokeness.
100 years ago we had policies that were discriminatory. The Chinese, the Japanese, East Indians, Jews and many other ethnic groups were targeted. There is no denying that. Where the Mayor's claims fall apart however is the simple fact that those cohorts are now amoungst the wealthiest in the country and certainly in Victoria. If historical racism has kept various ethnic groups from succeeding then it certainly hasn't shown with the groups the Mayor and her friends have selected. In fact I would argue that exactly the opposite happens. When an individual or group is disadvantaged, they work that much harder to gain success. The exception is that when we give them a reason not to work (ie GMI or subsidies, etc) then they fail to improve.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:36 AM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:44 AM
This is a very dangerous time for our City. IMHO Helps is on tilt trying to ram through policies to build her legacy before she leaves office. The vast majority of her aspirational, image building initiatives (such as Smart Cities and the Ocean Hub) have failed. while files such as homelessness, affordable housing and opiod overdoses have become much worse under her watch.
I fully expect that over the next few months we will see a series of "Hail Mary's" at whatever political and social cost necessary to make her mark.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:51 AM
But who said anything about prosperity? Politicians are heroically trying to cure people of any and all expectations re: prosperity.
Except for themselves.
So if Helps and Co are successful, some $70K a year bureaucrat will make all decisions (subject to customary behind the scenes political interference) related to redevelopment. Do you think that a proposal that comes across his/her desk for a site on their street, their boss' street, or one of their friend's street will get approved? Of course not. It will be the working class sods in Burnside-Gorge, Scott St, etc that will get the density and have their streets turned into parking lots.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:58 AM
This is a very dangerous time for our City. IMHO Helps is on tilt trying to ram through policies to build her legacy before she leaves office. The vast majority of her aspirational, image building initiatives (such as Smart Cities and the Ocean Hub) have failed. while files such as homelessness, affordable housing and opiod overdoses have become much worse under her watch.
I fully expect that over the next few months we will see a series of "Hail Mary's" at whatever political and social cost necessary to make her mark.
Hopefully the community associations all rise up against this zoning thing. That should should cause enough awareness to stop it. It does fly completely in the face of all the detailed and laboured-over OCPs.
Edited by Victoria Watcher, 11 December 2021 - 11:59 AM.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 11:58 AM
...Obviously she believes that her supporters won't make that effort and will accept whatever Pablum she feeds them.
Why shouldn't she believe this? It has worked VERY well for her over the past 7+ years. Throw the right catchphrases out to her woke followers and they salivate like Pavlovian dogs.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 12:04 PM
Hopefully the community associations all rise up against this zoning thing. That should should cause enough awareness to stop it...
Or at least postpone further advance of the issue until after the next civic election, where it rightfully belongs.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 02:32 PM
Not if they are called racists for speaking up. That’s the beauty of this bullying approach.Hopefully the community associations all rise up against this zoning thing. That should should cause enough awareness to stop it. It does fly completely in the face of all the detailed and laboured-over OCPs.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 03:50 PM
If you have not already read this since it was posted above it is worth a full read on this topic.
https://viewpointvan...y-zoning-in-bc/
Posted 11 December 2021 - 04:29 PM
Perhaps expressing this issue within an equity framework would be better place to start?
From a long Edmonton city report,
18
EDMONTON’S
ZONING BYLAW
UNDER THE LENS OF
EQUITY IN URBAN PLANNING
Equity is a prominent theme in many scholarly debates over the fundamental goal and purpose
of planning. The equity matter revolves around whether planners should serve the interests of
(a) the state, such as politicians and decision-makers; (b) capital, such as corporations,
landowners, and real estate developers; or © the public. The spatial justice and inclusion
scholars argue that planning should overcome social and economic inequalities and serve the
needs of socially and economically disadvantaged communities in cities.39 Therefore,
establishing and propagating equity, and making cities inclusive, are fundamental tasks in
planning................................................................................
Zoning, the primary legal tool deployed by municipalities to control land use and manage land
development, is widely accepted as inherently exclusionary and discriminatory in the academic
literature.49 It typically separates land uses—such as industrial, residential, and commercial—as
well as regulates built form details like lot sizes, setbacks, and building forms and heights. While
discriminating between potentially incompatible land uses is generally accepted as appropriate,
contributing to the public good, zoning has been shown to be discriminatory towards specific
segments of the population in numerous cases. For example, the CoE, in its report on the
history of zoning, states that “Zoning Bylaw regulations requiring very large minimum lot and
house sizes, and specifying a narrow range of housing types, often limited choices and kept
low-income populations from certain areas.”50 Striving for equity in zoning means removing
discrimination against those who have experienced such forms of marginalization.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 04:36 PM
I stopped reading at "spatial justice and inclusion scholars".
Posted 11 December 2021 - 04:39 PM
For example, the CoE, in its report on the history of zoning, states that “Zoning Bylaw regulations requiring very large minimum lot and house sizes, and specifying a narrow range of housing types, often limited choices and kept low-income populations from certain areas.
I agree. But I find nothing wrong with it.
I think it's good to have "rich parts of town" and poorer parts. That's diversity. You can set your goal to work hard and sacrifice to earn a spot in the nice area, if you want.
Socialism just delivers the shitt*est parts of town, right to your doorstep, in the name of inclusion.
Edited by Victoria Watcher, 11 December 2021 - 04:44 PM.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 04:43 PM
I could have edited but I prefer to let peoples words speak for themselves.
Too bad it lost you. The basic concepts are relevant to general zoning bylaws and this issue in Victoria.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 04:46 PM
Central to all of this are the corporations, land owners and real-estate developers. All three are required to develop land.(a) the state, such as politicians and decision-makers; (b) capital, such as corporations,
landowners, and real estate developers; or (c ) the public.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
Posted 11 December 2021 - 06:34 PM
Quote:
The equity matter revolves around whether planners should serve the interests of
(a) the state, such as politicians and decision-makers; (b) capital, such as corporations,
landowners, and real estate developers; or © the public
I read this as each a, b , c all as as being factors one needs to consider in zoning rather than a + b vs c and not as a socialistic/comunistic perspective. There is always tension between different groups in society. Part of the issue around equity is who has the power and who makes or influences the decision making and who do the decisions benefit.
This equity focused framework suggests that there are elements perhaps missing or a lack of awareness in current zoning laws that should be discussed.
It suggests asking the question of who benefits from the suggested change or their rejection to the limited area sfh zoning change? Does the change increase equity? (One can argue what equity is)
Posted 11 December 2021 - 06:37 PM
0 members, 15 guests, 0 anonymous users