Jump to content

      












Photo

CoV zoning density plan for "missing middle"


  • Please log in to reply
162 replies to this topic

#141 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,452 posts

Posted 13 May 2022 - 07:25 PM

Why is the city encouraging an under-supply of parking on private land, then? Shouldn’t it require developers to supply a ratio closer to 1:1 per unit?

I have always favoured a free market approach to parking on private land. If there is demand for parking, then developers will build it. If anything, putting a price on parking on public land increases the ability of developers to charge for parking and creates a more uniform free market. 

 

Nothing is stopping a developer from putting a 10000 stall parkade under their buildings, if there is demand it will be worth it. 


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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#142 max.bravo

max.bravo
  • Member
  • 642 posts

Posted 13 May 2022 - 09:19 PM

Do you really think this city council would approve so much parking if a developer wanted to provide? That much infrastructure to support cars will have the bike lobbyists in arms. There’s a war on cars; loss of parking is a feature not a bug to this council

#143 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,452 posts

Posted 14 May 2022 - 07:02 PM

I don't see why they wouldn't. All they have done is begin to remove parking minimums. I haven't seen any move to zone parking maximums.

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

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#144 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 69,411 posts

Posted 14 May 2022 - 08:13 PM

I think that’s a point of issue, according to the parking enforcement department. Planners and politicians don’t always do what the people down on the ground support or consider reasonable.

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


#145 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted 16 May 2022 - 04:35 AM

One of our members, for instance, has an average-sized property in Victoria with 20 mature trees on it. If her 1500 square-foot home were to be replaced by a six-unit houseplex, only two canopy trees would be required. And the six units would all be unaffordable.

How would that help to create a liveable community? How would that help us to increase the tree canopy? How would that address our climate obligation?

https://www.timescol...s-trees-5371274

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 16 May 2022 - 04:35 AM.


#146 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 03:16 AM

The brisk pace of development and change in the city over the last two terms is unlikely to let up through the rest of this year, with major initiatives on the council agenda like creating new housing types in existing neighbourhoods, and designing new neighbourhood plans to address the housing crisis.

Alto said she gets the sense that it might be time to step back and take a breath.

“I think that we need to reinvest a bit more into what I like to call city services,” she said. “Care and maintenance — potholes and sidewalks and gardens and baskets and all the things that I think people miss, because we were closed in during the pandemic.”

https://www.timescol...s-chair-5376090

Edited by Victoria Watcher, Yesterday, 03:16 AM.


#147 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 18,453 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:17 AM

^ I think that SA has an opening here. Helps is hell bent on ramming through her agenda before she leaves office. Alto has always supported Helps' initiatives but now seems to be recognizing that the polling is against her. Will see how she votes moving forward. 


Edited by spanky123, Yesterday, 05:17 AM.


#148 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:56 AM

So, last vote:

 

 

 

Council was split 5-4 on whether to go ahead with the change, with councillors Charlayne Thornton-Joe, Ben Isitt, Sharmarke Dubow and Geoff Young voting against.

 

 

 

If she moves over this thing could be defeated or watered down.  I do not think she can win mayor if she votes for 6-plexes throughout the city.



#149 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 69,411 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:59 AM

I don’t think so either. There’s just too much within the vote for the public at large to accept it, our (VV) views on density and more housing aside.

Someone asked me the other day, a relatively new developer in town, why four councillors objected. I can only imagine it’s the volume of described additional changes within that 2,000 page report that is making them second guess the agenda. That being said, it’s good it’s going to a public hearing.

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


#150 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:04 AM

Coun. Stephen Andrew, who voted to move the initiative forward, agreed the city has to do something, though he expressed concern about the effect of increasing density on some neighbourhoods.

 

Coun. Marianne Alto said creating new townhomes in traditional single-family neighbourhoods could free up units in lower-cost housing. “It does fit into that transitional piece, around the continuum of housing,” she said. “And while it may not be directly affordable, it will create some additional affordability in other existing units.”

 

But Young said fears residents have about infill townhomes and multi-unit projects are justified, because in the past, the city has not adequately closed off loopholes and some developers, in turn, have exploited them to build bigger and more intrusive buildings.

 

“I think it will produce very large buildings that will, in a sense, exploit the public realm in that they will, in some cases, tower over the adjoining buildings and exploit the availability of street parking,” he said.

 

Isitt said he has “no interest” in moving forward on a missing-middle proposal that’s missing affordability.

 

Thornton-Joe said the fact the committee spent more than four hours asking questions about the proposal Thursday, shows there is still a lot to debate and it’s not yet ready for prime time.

 

 

https://www.timescol...ictoria-5364040


Edited by Victoria Watcher, Yesterday, 06:05 AM.


#151 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 18,453 posts

Posted Yesterday, 08:31 AM

^All good points but those councillors who voted to move things forward to get public opinion are either too stupid or too ignorant if they think that was what they voted for. Read Helps latest blog - done deal.

No affordable units, no material affordable housing contribution, no parking and apparently no room for developers to make any accommodations so take it or leave it. The net result will be that neighborhoods (other than where Helps and her supporters live) will be overrun with multiplexes that benefit the developers supporting Helps and Alto and few else.

#152 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted Yesterday, 02:15 PM

There is always a vote after public hearing, no? Why can't they vote no there? Why is it a done deal?



#153 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:20 PM

It’s not a done deal.

Yes, they will vote after the public hearing.

#154 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:23 PM

Here is Lisa Helps with a ridiculous comparison that leaves out all kinds of context:



Here is an example: On Pembroke Street, across from Central Park, there are two sixplexes under construction that will provide 12 homes likely to sell for $750,000 or $800,000. These homes had to go through a two-year development process with no certainty that they would be approved by Council, and added construction costs due to cost escalation during the approval process. In contrast, on Chandler Street, a single-family home was recently built. This home required no Council approvals and received staff approvals comparatively quickly. It was listed for $2.4 million.

https://lisahelpsvictoria.ca/



So the quick approval is $2.4 million. The 2-year process yields $800,000 homes. So accordingly, maybe a 6-year process would get it down to $400,000. What a ridiculous argument from a simpleton.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, Yesterday, 02:26 PM.

  • Nparker and lanforod like this

#155 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 8,578 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted Yesterday, 02:29 PM

I think her argument is trying to go the other way to get no requirement and a quick approval for the sixplexes, but yeah, not sure why thats any valid comparison. Perhaps the homes would have been done faster and sell for 50k less? I dunno. They'd still be 800k after 2 years.


  • Mike K. likes this

#156 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:32 PM

I’m guessing the Chandler home is higher finishing, and a whole lot larger than the 6-plex suites. So it’s a silly comparison. The area is also completely different.

#157 marks_28

marks_28
  • Member
  • 474 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:51 PM

Why is it a silly comparison? She's arguing against the status quo, stating that right now, there is very little red tape to replace an aging SDH with a brand new SDH, which will sell for a very high price tag and likely only house one family. Alternatively, a multiplex requires far more red tape, but could provide housing for more families and a far lower price. Which, in our housing crisis right now, is exactly what we need to be doign more of. Unfortunately the extra steps involved often disuade developers from going that route, and if it does get built, only adds costs on to the end product.


  • JohnsonStBridge likes this

#158 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:55 PM

It’s a silly comparison because per square foot, the Chandler house probably sells for less than the 6-plex.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, Yesterday, 02:56 PM.


#159 marks_28

marks_28
  • Member
  • 474 posts

Posted Yesterday, 03:19 PM

Sure? Don't think that is entirely relevant. 

 

The point she is trying to make is that building homes that make affordability even more out of reach is much easier to build than building housing that would actually help us reach out housing goals.



#160 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 31,563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 03:19 PM

Her example does not illustrate that.

Most builders/developers are not stupid.

On the other hand, Mayor Helps is lacking, intellectually.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, Yesterday, 03:27 PM.


You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users