29 replies to this topic

[Victoria Watcher]

In what could be a first for Victoria, the city has narrowly supported moving forward with a six-unit houseplex in a residential neighbourhood that – sort of – won’t include any parking.

 

If approved at a future council meeting, the Vic West development would be a net increase of five homes on the property where a single-dwelling home currently sits at 633 Belton Avenue.

There’s a recognition that the overwhelming majority of Greater Victoria still sees roadblocks to suitable car-free living, but, for the proposal’s movers, the Vic West site has everything.

 

The location has a transit route along Craigflower Road half a block away, while a few peddles would connect a cycling resident of the houseplex from their front steps to the Galloping Goose Trail connection around the corner.

 

 

________________

 

 

Councillors, in a 6-3 split, went with an alternate option staff provided around advancing the houseplex during Thursday’s committee of the whole meeting. Those for and against agreed the project was creative and had a lot of upsides, but parking concerns and some Vic West residents opposing it swayed dissenters.

 

“This is a really fascinating and innovative proposal,” Coun. Jeremy Caradonna said before voting for a public hearing.

 

The two- and three-bedroom building includes secured adaptable units, yard space and a neighbourhood-reflecting pitched roof – aimed to reduce its mass . The city said it fits with Victoria’s goals for diverse housing types and aligns with objectives in community and neighbourhood plans despite some minor breaches.

 

The proposal needs parking, height and setback variances, with the latter for protruding stairs and side yard heat pumps. Overall staff said it came in under the site’s envisioned density allotment and called it a sensitive approach to infill development.

 

 

 

 

https://www.vicnews....t-for-victoria/

 

 

 

 

Although this is a small project I felt it deserving of its own thread since it's unique etc.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 20 January 2023 - 03:58 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

A six-unit houseplex and two townhouse projects that will replace single-family homes cleared another hurdle on Thursday, as Victoria council moved them forward despite a city staff recommendation that two of the applications be declined.

 

It was a strong statement that this council plans to lean into “gentle densification” in some areas and that details like parking requirements may no longer be barriers that hold up projects.

 

Staff had recommended against approving the six-unit houseplex on Belton Avenue in Vic West for a lack of off-street vehicle parking, and the seven-unit townhouse project on Shelbourne Street on the grounds that it was inconsistent with relevant guidelines, would affect the privacy of neighbouring properties and would create a vehicle-dominated environment, among other concerns.

 

A third application that had staff support — a redesigned nine-unit townhome project on Kipling Street and Fairfield Road — was also approved Thursday.

 

“I need a really good reason to reject housing during a housing crisis,” said Coun. Jeremy Caradonna of the Shelbourne project, noting minor design concerns and an outdated neighbourhood plan were not enough to dissuade him from approving the townhouse development.

 

 

https://www.timescol...ictoria-6408721

[Victoria Watcher]

I guess this is recognized as part of the trail now.

 

 

 

 

So maybe 170m away.

 

 

I did not know that.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 20 January 2023 - 06:55 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

 

 

I've never met anyone that can afford a car, that doesn't have one.

 

And yes, "more trees" doesn't square with these proposals.

 

Why are we adding street charging and car-shares if people want to be car-free?  Maye the car-share should at least park on the property.

 

 

 

 

Team those aspects with a large bike garage, adding two public electric-vehicle charging stalls on the street and boosting the neighbourhood’s current car-share uptake with a vehicle and memberships for the building’s residents and the application has won a public hearing.

 

 

 

 

If residents of this building are "car-free" what do they need on-street car chargers right out front?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 20 January 2023 - 07:11 AM.

[IPH]

screenshot-twitter.com-2023.01.20-10_03_13.png

 

 

I've never met anyone that can afford a car, that doesn't have one.

 

And yes, "more trees" doesn't square with these proposals.

 

Why are we adding street charging and car-shares if people want to be car-free?  Maye the car-share should at least park on the property.

 

 

 

 

Team those aspects with a large bike garage, adding two public electric-vehicle charging stalls on the street and boosting the neighbourhood’s current car-share uptake with a vehicle and memberships for the building’s residents and the application has won a public hearing.

 

 

 

 

If residents of this building are "car-free" what do they need on-street car chargers right out front?

In order not to have to meet the city's off street parking requirements in Schedule C, the developer has to employ some active transportation management methods, including purchasing a modo car.  By parking that car on the street, rather than behind the house, it is more accessible to all members of the public who have a modo membership. 

 

In theory, this should also encourage others on the street to go car-free, or for those that may have two cars to par down to one.  Only time will tell if this actually happens so it will be interesting to see what happens on this street if the project is ultimatly approved at a public hearing.

[Ismo07]

 

I've never met anyone that can afford a car, that doesn't have one.

 

And yes, "more trees" doesn't square with these proposals.

 

Why are we adding street charging and car-shares if people want to be car-free?  Maye the car-share should at least park on the property.

 

 

 

 

Team those aspects with a large bike garage, adding two public electric-vehicle charging stalls on the street and boosting the neighbourhood’s current car-share uptake with a vehicle and memberships for the building’s residents and the application has won a public hearing.

 

 

 

 

If residents of this building are "car-free" what do they need on-street car chargers right out front?

 

I think there are people who can afford but do not own their own car, or at least couples who have trimmed to one car with the ability to utilize car share and other modes.

 

Personally I am very close to being car free.  A little later this year that will happen.  Kids are older now so I barely drive.  If I have the ability to walk, use a car share model or two, maybe rent a car from time to time for my very few car trips why would I need to own and store an expense I barely use.  Hey and I'll be able to rent my parking space that would pay for my limited car use.  Once people wrap their heads around owning less cars (not necessarily no cars), there will be more that do it.  Having said that, yeah in neighourhoods this might not be as tenable.  I'm downtown so a few more nearby services...

 

I guess adding the EV chargers is more for the community as a whole....

Edited by Ismo07, 20 January 2023 - 11:15 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

I can agree with you on *less* cars.

Just not sure about no cars in the entire family.

There is still something great about being able to go on a local road-trip? No?

[Ismo07]

I can agree with you on *less* cars.

Just not sure about no cars in the entire family.

There is still something great about being able to go on a local road-trip? No?

 

Exactly families just need a car at least...  What I am seeing is the issue of these developments.  They are really meant for folks with no cars.  There are so many places to rent with no parking space and many more that the parking space is unbundled to rent meaning you pay an extra $30 - $200+ for the space depending on location.  Many times in these instances people will decide on forgoing the space and take their chances..  More often than not I get a call asking for a street permit that is not offered.  It has become increasingly common these days.  On top of that many managed buildings will rent the unused spaces to commuters, logically to get the revenue for the space.  At times new tenants can't get a space because there isn't one.  It's very odd times and a lot of pains.  10-15 years ago tenants (and owners) would rent or by the unit with a space whether they needed it or now.  In the beginning this unbundling made sense, why pay for a space when you don't need it.  Problem is the next person might.  One thing is certain, if you own a car, you should get a residence with a space for it.

[aastra]

 

...a few peddles would connect a cycling resident of the houseplex from their front steps to the Galloping Goose Trail connection...

 

They're really trying to sell the idea, you think?

[Ismo07]

They're really trying to sell the idea, you think?

 

The access is just in from of the Y there.  Across from Pine St. pretty close.

[Nparker]

A rendering for those who may not see the links above.

[Victoria Watcher]

Looks like a bit of a barn from the side.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here is the "no-car contract":

 

 

 

 

[Kilo95]

Still a net increase of 5 units, which I'd say is a plus... with or without parking spaces

[Mike K.]

Why do buses even have seats? You’d fit so many more people on them if you didn’t have all of those seats taking up so much room.

Do people have to sit while on the bus? It seems archaic and wasteful, to have to run two buses while one could satisfy the passenger demand if we didn’t have seats.

Like have a couple of seats for people with disabilities. Maybe four per bus. But take the rest of them out.

[Ismo07]

Here is the "no-car contract":

 

That's an interesting contract..  I'm not sure I've seen anything like that.  Not clear new owners would either.

 

 

Why do buses even have seats? You’d fit so many more people on them if you didn’t have all of those seats taking up so much room.

Do people have to sit while on the bus? It seems archaic and wasteful, to have to run two buses while one could satisfy the passenger demand if we didn’t have seats.

Like have a couple of seats for people with disabilities. Maybe four per bus. But take the rest of them out.

 

Haha that is funny...  Apple, meet Orange.

Edited by Ismo07, 20 January 2023 - 01:33 PM.

[IPH]

Why do buses even have seats? You’d fit so many more people on them if you didn’t have all of those seats taking up so much room.

Do people have to sit while on the bus? It seems archaic and wasteful, to have to run two buses while one could satisfy the passenger demand if we didn’t have seats.

Like have a couple of seats for people with disabilities. Maybe four per bus. But take the rest of them out.

In Tokyo they employ pushers at the train stations to literally push more people on to the train.  So if you have a seat on the train, you likely also have someone's a$$ in your face!  Guess that's the downside to living in a place where more people want to live than we have space for.

[Mike K.]

When you stand on the bus, you might also have an ass in your face, but you’re all much more relaxed knowing you’ve made more room for other riders.

[Mike K.]

That's an interesting contract.. I'm not sure I've seen anything like that. Not clear new owners would either.



Haha that is funny... Apple, meet Orange.

Apple and Orange will make a cute couple.

[aastra]

 

Looks like a bit of a barn from the side.

 

From the broad side?

[phx]

re: Car-free contract

 

Haha, is that a joke?

 

Why would the developer make any effort to enforce the contract?