Jump to content

      













Photo

New Development Impact on Neighbours 349/351 Kipling


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 arrgh

arrgh
  • Member
  • 7 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 08:40 AM

Hello,

 

I am curious what a development - such as the one in the initial works for 349/351 Kipling and 1400 Fairfield (8 townhomes between Fairfield and Thurlow- about 10 feet higher than current zoning) would do to property values in the neighbourhood especially those that are right beside it?   Is there compensation or possible concessions one can get from the developer?

 

Thanks

 

Arrgh



#2 jasmineshinga

jasmineshinga
  • Member
  • 171 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:32 PM

Why would you expect to get compensation for a development that (unless it were earmarked as a homeless shelter) would only cause property values to go up?


  • Nparker likes this

~ Jasmine ~


#3 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 3,298 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:36 PM

Hello,

 

I am curious what a development - such as the one in the initial works for 349/351 Kipling and 1400 Fairfield (8 townhomes between Fairfield and Thurlow- about 10 feet higher than current zoning) would do to property values in the neighbourhood especially those that are right beside it?   Is there compensation or possible concessions one can get from the developer?

 

Thanks

 

Arrgh

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAH OH NO NO NO NO NO


  • jasmineshinga likes this

#4 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher
  • Member
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:39 PM

you could ask the developer for money to write a support letter i suppose.  is that the same?

 

but seriously on the concessions you can certainly ask him to consider various items you bring up.


Edited by Victoria Watcher, 12 March 2019 - 02:40 PM.

  • Nparker likes this

#5 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 9,963 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:50 PM

You would need to demonstrate that the development would have a measurable negative impact. Developers have been known to kick in goodies for neighbours if they think it will grease the wheels of development.


"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#6 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,414 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:51 PM

Hello,

 

I am curious what a development - such as the one in the initial works for 349/351 Kipling and 1400 Fairfield (8 townhomes between Fairfield and Thurlow- about 10 feet higher than current zoning) would do to property values in the neighbourhood especially those that are right beside it?   Is there compensation or possible concessions one can get from the developer?

 

Thanks

 

Arrgh

 

The draft Fairfield Area Plan supports three-storey townhouses up to 0.85 FAR (ex. 12.0 m tall) on Fairfield Road and on corner sites. Expect property values to go up once the Area Plan is adopted, as development potential does play in to property assessments.

 

If this application were coming forward in Richmond, the City would be getting a community amenity contribution (built in to our Zoning Bylaw, so there's no negotiating that), and negotiating frontage improvements (rebuild sidewalk and grass boulevard, new street trees as required, new curb as required, etc.). Direct payment to neighbours rarely occur, and usually only if civil lawsuits are involved (in my own experience).



#7 Cassidy

Cassidy
  • Member
  • 2,491 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 12 March 2019 - 03:12 PM

In the COV these days, if the zoning allows for it ... neighbors taking their concerns to the public hearings with obvious worries about things like overt shading, massing, and just general "we don't want a giant apartment building right beside our house" ... those neighbors are generally given brief COV lip service, and are then promptly ignored.

 

Expect the development to go ahead, and expect that your concerns as you might express them at a COV meeting won't factor into Councils decision one iota.



#8 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,414 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 12 March 2019 - 03:17 PM

In the COV these days, if the zoning allows for it ... neighbors taking their concerns to the public hearings with obvious worries about things like overt shading, massing, and just general "we don't want a giant apartment building right beside our house" ... those neighbors are generally given brief COV lip service, and are then promptly ignored.

 

Expect the development to go ahead, and expect that your concerns as you might express them at a COV meeting won't factor into Councils decision one iota.

 

The zoning doesn't allow for the proposed use. The developer will have to rezone the properties. The draft Fairfield plan appears to be generally supportive of the proposed use, but the plan hasn't been adopted.



#9 arrgh

arrgh
  • Member
  • 7 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 03:19 PM

Thanks for the reasoned responses...not the smart-assed ones.


  • Matt R. and Victoria Watcher like this

#10 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,822 posts

Posted 12 March 2019 - 03:26 PM

Generally speaking, arrgh, property values tend to rise when an adjacent property(s) successfully receives a density uplift.

 

You might not necessarily see that uplift on your BC Assessment the year following approvals, but on the open market your property will now be viewed as a potential component of a land assembly, and therein is that added value.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#11 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,771 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 12 March 2019 - 11:11 PM

Generally speaking, arrgh, property values tend to rise when an adjacent property(s) successfully receives a density uplift.

 

You might not necessarily see that uplift on your BC Assessment the year following approvals, but on the open market your property will now be viewed as a potential component of a land assembly, and therein is that added value.

 

Not only that but even if there was no density uplift how can 900k townhomes next to you be a bad thing? It will make the old 900k SFH look more reasonable than before. 


  • Mike K. likes this

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#12 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,822 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 07:28 AM

^excellent point!


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#13 arrgh

arrgh
  • Member
  • 7 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 08:02 AM

The bad thing is mainly the long high roof line lording over your whole backyard where light came in before.  But I agree otherwise that there are benefits. 

 

As far as density benefits to value.  The current plan for that area is that buildings along Fairfield will see higher density but those on Thurlow will not.  So how could a Thurlow property that may have higher buildings on 2 sides but not be able to be densify itself be better....or is it generally the expectation that once this starts more density will follow even on quiet back streets? 

 

thanks

 

arrgh



#14 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,822 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 11:16 AM

More density will follow, exactly. Especially on the same block.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#15 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,414 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 13 March 2019 - 11:59 AM

More density will follow, exactly. Especially on the same block.

 

Depends on what happens with the draft area plan. "Traditional residential" lots would be limited to single-family homes with or without secondary suites, and duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes only considered in certain cases, ex. 16 m wide lot with rear lane.



#16 arrgh

arrgh
  • Member
  • 7 posts

Posted 13 March 2019 - 01:41 PM

FYI - The neighbourhood plan distinctly doesn't include this block of Thurlow in new density plans:

 

Capture.PNG

 

 



#17 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,414 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 13 March 2019 - 02:22 PM

^ Correct, Thurlow is part of "Sub-Area 1: General Traditional Residential." Redevelopment options are given on page 80-83 of the draft plan if you're interested.



#18 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,784 posts

Posted 14 March 2019 - 05:50 AM

But value is based on potential and city plans change all the time.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#19 arrgh

arrgh
  • Member
  • 7 posts

Posted 14 March 2019 - 08:07 AM

Agreed - "the only thing that is constant is change".  Although most of the lots along Thurlow are decent character homes on "small lots" so one must take the long view here I guess.  Fairfield will see the most change.

 

arrgh (a pirate arrgh not an angry arrgh)


  • Mike K. likes this

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users