1571 replies to this topic

[downtownlurker]

That last minute amendment was such a stupid call. Sorry Caradonna, but this utopian vision of Victoria being some cobble stoned little European city with no cars sounds great, but is has no bearing in reality. People would be less reliant on cars if we had robust transportation systems and other enablers for people to move around quickly and cheaply. I get we can take steps to make Victoria less reliant on cars, but it's not gonna happen by axing a huge amount of parking at what I presume will be the largest rental complex in town.

 

To hit this home, I am in Yates on Yates and parking has been a real pain point and underscores the need for residential parking in the downtown core. There are 24 units in Yates and 67 in Vivid that do not have parking and we have 15 visitor stalls. These stalls are regularly full with peoples partners, and sometimes peoples second cars when they can get away with it. To avoid violating our parking rules many will park on the street during the free hours and many are renting a spot in the public parkade portion. There are a bit over 260 units, and many units with second cars, so amplify this to the scale of Phase 2 and 3 and you are very likely to have the same issues we have, but worse. I absolutely agree with Starlight shooting this amendment down.

[Nparker]

Note that Caradonna has parking for at least one, and probably two vehicles in his far-from-net-zero home.

[Mike K.]

To hit this home, I am in Yates on Yates and parking has been a real pain point and underscores the need for residential parking in the downtown core. There are 24 units in Yates and 67 in Vivid that do not have parking and we have 15 visitor stalls. These stalls are regularly full with peoples partners, and sometimes peoples second cars when they can get away with it. To avoid violating our parking rules many will park on the street during the free hours and many are renting a spot in the public parkade portion. There are a bit over 260 units, and many units with second cars, so amplify this to the scale of Phase 2 and 3 and you are very likely to have the same issues we have, but worse. I absolutely agree with Starlight shooting this amendment down.

Yes, this is a real issue.

[Nparker]

Note that Caradonna has parking for at least one, and probably two vehicles in his far-from-net-zero home.

How about this little gem on the street outside his home?

[DavidSchell]

How about this little gem on the street outside his home?

 

I noticed he was out for dinner the other day with his family ... I was tempted to ask him if they all got on a  bus or if he drove.

Edited by DavidSchell, 03 April 2023 - 08:46 AM.

[Barrrister]

Cardonna is part of the elite and deserves more.  You peasants should stop complaining and be thankful for what you get. Your kids will get less since they are overprivileged to start with.

[GaryOak]

Do we know if council has responded to what starlight is planning on doing or have they still not officially brought it to council.

[Mike K.]

It goes before council this Thursday after CotW.

[Sparky]

Mike, good info on the CTV news tonight.

Next time you should do a live interview…that’s assuming you can get to town on the bus.

[Mike K.]

If it's before 7:40AM, I'm in!

[Mike K.]

Here's what I think will happen.

 

Council will agree to Starlight's terms, to have phases 2 and 3 follow the City's own zoning bylaw, and not be limited to an arbitrary request from council.

 

What the City will do, is move on amending the zoning bylaw, to reduce the parking minimums stipulated within the bylaw and perhaps introduce a parking maximum, but this way, the process is open, and the rules applicable to every proposal. And because this will be handled through input from developers, a common ground will be determined, whether its .4 or .3 or lower, but at least the parties will have the chance to actually talk about the issue.

[Victoria Watcher]

I’m not sure the City council will change an important aspect of a current zoning classification.

[spanky123]

Here's what I think will happen.

 

Council will agree to Starlight's terms, to have phases 2 and 3 follow the City's own zoning bylaw, and not be limited to an arbitrary request from council.

 

What the City will do, is move on amending the zoning bylaw, to reduce the parking minimums stipulated within the bylaw and perhaps introduce a parking maximum, but this way, the process is open, and the rules applicable to every proposal. And because this will be handled through input from developers, a common ground will be determined, whether its .4 or .3 or lower, but at least the parties will have the chance to actually talk about the issue.

 

That would make sense but then I look at another motion of the table this week which is to accelerate implementation of the net zero emission targets and I think that council isn't interested in compromise or what makes sense.

 

Even if you are right though, there is no guarantee that council would actually listen to any other opinion. That certainly hasn't been their path to date.

Edited by spanky123, 05 April 2023 - 08:11 AM.

[Mike K.]

If Starlight walks from this proposal, it will send shockwaves across the industry.

Council went too far, and now they have to walk it back, if they want 1,500-rentals on those two blocks.

[Mike K.]

I mean, it has already jolted the industry. Nobody* wants to buy land downtown right now, or in downtown Langford.

*dealmakers tell me until starlight is resolved, the big bucks aren’t closing deals.

[Nparker]

Making an opportunity for government to swoop in and "solve" the housing crisis. There are no accidents.

[spanky123]

I mean, it has already jolted the industry. Nobody* wants to buy land downtown right now, or in downtown Langford.

*dealmakers tell me until starlight is resolved, the big bucks aren’t closing deals.

 

Nobody wants to own land period at the moment. I am hearing that there are dozens of projects being reviewed as developers look to ride out the economic storm.

 

Even if Starlight passes, the fact that zoning will eventually be changed to reduce parking and costs will skyrocket due to the net zero changes will keep developers on the sidelines for these larger projects. 

[spanky123]

Making an opportunity for government to swoop in and "solve" the housing crisis. There are no accidents.

 

With Chard and the BC Government taking over the Jawl/Pollen projects one has to think that there are other similar partnerships ready to move as properties become available and/or unfriendly developers can be squeezed out of the picture.

[Mike K.]

There are deals closing every day, just not downtown.

30 on-market commercial deals in March, then there’s off-market acquiring going on that never gets reported on by VREB.

But downtown is suddenly tricky, given what’s going on politically. That can’t be good.

[Mike K.]

BC government is involved in 1050 Yates?