3785 replies to this topic

[dasmo]

But eventually they will all be here. 

[Mike K.]

Ah! Ok, thank you.

[dasmo]

My letter is in there somewhere :-)

[Victoria Watcher]

The District of Saanich has been on board with the province’s plans to increase housing supply, but there is one housing hurdle it does not want to cross.

 

Council passed a series of amendments to align its land-use bylaws with new provincial housing legislation on Monday, but put the province on notice it does not want to allow secondary and garden suites outside the urban containment boundary.

 

Mayor Dean Murdock is expected to write to Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon and Premier David Eby to request an exemption that would allow Saanich to prohibit secondary and garden suites on rural property.

 

“Our hope is that we can convey to the minister that Saanich is on board with its aspirations, and that we have the common aspiration of creating more homes for people in our community,” said Murdock, adding, however, that the goal under the Official Community Plan is to keep growth compact.

 

“We’re going to grow around our centres, corridors and villages and in walking distance to services, high quality transit, schools, parks and shopping,” he said. “And we know that by growing outside the urban containment boundary, that’s not going to be the case.”

 

 

https://www.timescol...l-areas-8747253

 

 

 

 

I ask again, what is the point of the UCB?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 May 2024 - 04:49 AM.

[Sparky]

^ To contain the urbans.

[Victoria Watcher]

Well, I'll suggest it is to "maintain the rural character..." etc.  

 

And I guess that is noble and nice.

 

Can any municipality declare that?

[Sparky]

Saanich is trying to strike a balance by increasing density in it’s urban core and continuing to protect the rural environment.

[Victoria Watcher]

Protect it from what?

[Sparky]

I told you….the urbans

[lanforod]

Sparky doesn't want his neighbours adding a suite.

[Sparky]

^

[dasmo]

Shoot, they should just apply the GRADUAL CIVILIZATION ACT to us all again. Take away our culture and rights of self determination and remake our communities in their image….
I’m for anything that disrupts their plans. UCB, ALR, GFYS. Whatever it takes.

[dasmo]

Dear Mayor and Council, I am against the Missing Middle changes to the zoning laws of Victoria for the reasons so many of my
neighbours have already conveyed at the August 4, meeting, and more. Every few years I need to apply for a permit to prune the Garry Oak tree on my property and keep it healthy. The work costs a lot of money. The tree itself is a jewel that needs to be protected and
maintained. The district of Saanich recently concluded that several Garry Oak trees should be sacrificed for a housing block. Is that our future also? It took 25 years for me to finish paying the mortgage on my home and I love my neighbourhood and the people all around me who embody what is Victoria. Victoria is a wonder of beautiful nature and temperate weather
that everybody on the planet must envy. The Garry Oak trees and meadows and the Arbutus trees and deer with little fawns make our city an aspiration of peace and harmony. No amount of housing will ever satisfy the billions of people who would gladly move here. There was some concern expressed about the possible reduction of property value. I am more concerned about the opposite. These neighbourhoods are so beautiful that a newly built townhouse can fetch over $1.5 million
dollars. Old folks like me who live on single family lots will be harassed to sell and our assessments will go up
exponentially until we cannot afford to pay the property taxes on our own long-earned homes. Victoria is the last resort. The Missing Middle activism attack on homeowners is a plan to tax us out of our
properties for an urban concrete sea.

[dasmo]

Dear Council Members, Due to the controversial nature of this initiative, I believe it should be post-poned until after this fall‘s election so that the
council that will deal with it can have constructive input, and we as the voting public, can question individuals as to their opinions on it.

[dasmo]

I am completely in favour of increasing density
in Victoria.
We can certainly have a livable city with
increased density and we certainly need housing
that is affordable for people at all income
levels.
We especially need affordable rental housing.
I live in a small condo in Fairfield and so
missing middle housing will likely directly
affect me very little. Plus, being old, I will
likely croak before the full effects of MMHI are
felt.
Having said this, I do think that this
legislation needs to be more carefully
considered.
I read about missing middle housing in the paper
and online and primarily see developers pushing
for this legislation to be passed.

I don't see how this will help lower income folks
and renters have greater access to affordable
housing, I just don't see it.
I would rather see large coops with common rooms,
dining rooms, family spaces and space for
children than streets full of tall row houses
(which are frankly unfriendly spaces for any
folks with mobility or breathing challenges)
crammed together, which is what the developers
seem to want to do.
Singapore, has mostly organized condominium and
rental units in large organized estates is a much
better model than trying to fit row houses and
six plexes willy-nilly all over the city.
Large, well thought out multi-family spaces with
amenities is a much better model in my opinion.
It may be more challenging, but in the long run a
much more livable city would be the result rather
than letting developers essentially re-design the
city.
I urge you to let this legislation be considered
by the new council in a more thoughtful way.

[dasmo]

Dear Mayor Helps We have only recently learned of the City Council's "Missing middle initiative" and the proposal to rezone all residential
neighborhoods which allows for the potential to double the density on every residential lot. It allows for up to 6 units per
lot and up to 12 townhouse units at the end of any residential city block. City council seems to think this will result in
increasing the availability of affordable housing. However this will not be the case. As we can see by the newspaper
headlines, even condominiums are selling on average over $500,000.00. The multiplex housing that the council
proposes for the missing middle initiative would cost much more than this. Certainly these will not be in any sense of the
word, affordable.
Who will benefit from this missing middle initiative? Primarily developers who see the opportunity to make millions of
dollars tearing down heritage properties and building huge, ugly mutiplex housing, a good example being the
Rhodo. This oversized architecturally hideous development has resulted in the loss of many mature trees and is
completely out of character with the surrounding homes. The other people who will benefit from this initiative will be
wealthy foreigners or out of province immigrants who will have no troubles paying the high costs of these townhouses.
These will not help young families who cannot afford such properties.
Who will suffer from this initiative? The residents living in affected neighborhoods. They will face increased traffic, loss of
mature trees, and the loss of sunlight due to the increased heights allowed by this initiative. The multiplex housing
allowed by the missing middle initiative will be completely out of character from the surrounding single family dwellings.
We have lived in the same home in Fairfield for over 34 years. We have taken care of our 1940's home and have
contributed to the community. We enjoy the humble ambience of Fairfield and are appalled by the council's decision to
foist the missing middle initiative on the community with minimal consultation. If it was not for my neighbors, I would not
have been aware of the initiative. It would appear the council has not made a serious effort to inform the public, hoping
they could overthrow carefully considered documents such as the Fairfield Community Plan and slip in this damaging
initiative with little opposition. This is a very undemocratic action and shows a contempt for Victorian
residents. Democracy is fragile, and it is actions such as this which causes citizens to become cynical of their
governments, resulting in the breakdown of civil society. It is essential that there is true consultation with the residents of
Victoria at large.
I urge you to decide not to proceed with this initiative. Instead it is more appropriate to wait till after the October Civic
election at which time a new mayor and council can have true consultation with the residents of Victoria regarding major
changes to zoning bylaws.

[dasmo]

As a resident of Victoria I am opposed to the implementation of the Missing Middle Housing policy as it is currently documented. I believe there are a number of outstanding questions that need to be answered before the city officially moves forward. I have outlined my questions on the following blog post for your reference: https://susansimmons...ddle-questions/

[dasmo]

Dear City Council, I am writing this in regards to the public hearing meeting set for August 4 about the Missing Middle. I would like to say that I am wholeheartedly against this initiative. Being a person that lives pay check to pay check I understand the need for affordable housing. However, the prospect of churning up heritage properties makes my stomach turn. I am lucky to have found a little heritage gem in the heart of Rockland. The house itself and property has heritage
significance. Although, I live in a small bachelor suite the property around the house provides peaceful sanctuary for me, my neighbors
and the small animals that roam around. My landlady has proposed to rip apart this beautiful property to build condo units. This initiative would be exactly what she
needs to get her plans approved. Now knowing my landlady, she would be build hastily and cut cost where she could. Leaving cheaply made housing she
would likely profit from rents. The rent amounts increasing her pocket book and doing absolutely nothing for the current tenants of the building and property. Completely hindering our peace and enjoyment. I would have to move! Our Victoria heritage properties will become urban density. Destroying what really makes Victoria unique. I can not applaud this initiative. Please do not consider approving this idea.

[dasmo]

Mayor and Council, I am writing to strongly encourage Council to undertake more extensive consultation on the Missing Middle Initiative. The is a substantive initiative and yet details have only just recently been made public with no consultation
having been completed with respect to this important information. I think it is a fair assessment to say that the majority of public have little or no knowledge of this matter. Polling friends and neighbours, I found that very few were aware of the initiative until just recently. No one can dispute the existence of the housing crisis and the need to take action to address this critical problem. This
does not however the negate the importance of ensuring that the citizens of the city are aware of the initiative and have the opportunity to comment if they wish.
Given the imminent conclusion of this Council’s mandate, I urge Council to defer this important matter for consideration by a newly elected Council.

[dasmo]

Mayor and Council, I am asking that you postpone your decision until a newly elected Council can give this consideration. I am concerned that this will negatively impact Victoria's tree canopy which cannot easily be replaced. I do not agree with the parking requirements and am amazed that there will be no air conditioning when some of these proposed units are basically just over 300 square feet. I do not feel that the plan takes into account each neighbourhood and that the new builds will be built to minimum standards and will not fit in well with the existing architecture.