1095 replies to this topic

[aastra]

 

...nobody mentions that we are in for “The Big One” any time now...

 

Is the writer new in town? Victorians have been trying to use the potential for earthquakes as an anti-development ploy since forever. Every time it comes up I ask why Victoria should have such inflated concerns even as California, Japan, etc. do not. Nowhere else in BC, either. Just Victoria. Just Victoria city. As if Uptown or Langford could never be affected by an earthquake.

 

Seriously, nowhere else in the world will you find such a localized "concern" about earthquakes.

[Mike K.]

From our very own PPPdev:

http://www.timescolo...hood-1.23368123

“Re: “Victoria’s densification process raises concerns,” comment, June 30.

Michael Bloomfield argues that many Victoria neighbourhoods eyed for densification have done their share of growth and should be left alone.”

[Nparker]

What exactly does "done their share" even mean in real terms?

Edited by Nparker, 17 July 2018 - 01:16 PM.

[Jackerbie]

What exactly is "done their share" mean?

 

It means they're full and we should raise the drawbridge (that's why we had to get a lifting bridge replacement, right?)

[RFS]

From our very own PPPdev:

http://www.timescolo...hood-1.23368123

“Re: “Victoria’s densification process raises concerns,” comment, June 30.

Michael Bloomfield argues that many Victoria neighbourhoods eyed for densification have done their share of growth and should be left alone.”

Solid article.  Great job PPPdev

[Nparker]

Solid article.  Great job PPPdev

My favourite line from Luke's article: "What Victoria are we trying to preserve? Victoria in 1910, 1950, 1976, 2000 or the day after the last person arrived?"

I have often asked this same question myself. Just exactly when is a city full and/or complete? It seems to me that cities hundreds of years older than Victoria still experience growth. Why should the CoV be exempt?

[PPPdev]

My favourite line from Luke's article: "What Victoria are we trying to preserve? Victoria in 1910, 1950, 1976, 2000 or the day after the last person arrived?"

I have often asked this same question myself. Just exactly when is a city full and/or complete? It seems to me that cities hundreds of years older than Victoria still experience growth. Why should the CoV be exempt?

 

Shoot man that is an amazing thought! "Imagine Barcelona stopped in 15 BC after the Roman's left, or Paris never allowed the Eiffel Tower cause it would have destroyed neighbourhood character" 

 

When is a city done?

[PPPdev]

What do you guys think of this: http://www.timescolo...elated_articles

To me, it’s an inspiring story of hard work and dedication. My trouble with it is the very pervasive mentality of ‘if you want to live in my neighbourhood, you have to live in a type of home that I say’.

Thoughts?

[Nparker]

It's just another take on NIMBY.

[Freedom57]

If our voting system changes to Proportional Representation, perhaps a new political party will emerge.  The NIMBY party.

[aastra]

Some funny examples here of how these familiar controversies happen everywhere, not just in Victoria:

 

*****

 

https://cityduo.word...rightening-udp/

 

 

...it was recommended that the granite from the existing retaining wall be incorporated into any new design. That said, the panel took issue with the replacement retaining wall, criticizing its height and effect on the public realm...

 

Fairfield's "heritage wall" is like an ancient work of fine art by comparison:
https://goo.gl/maps/AvG1M1YB3fF2

 

*****

 

https://cityduo.word...mes-on-renfrew/

 

 

Neighbours Fear of “Criminal” Renters To Result in Loss of up to 45 Rental Homes on Renfrew

...Those in attendance were mostly existing home owners complaining of lost views, greedy developers, and the traffic that these new homes would bring. There were also contradicting viewpoints, where individuals would criticize the rental housing as being unaffordable, only to turn around and complain that the new rental housing would bring criminals to the neighbourhood.

[Nparker]

For a good laugh read the following: http://www.timescolo...blem-1.23380712

[PPPdev]

Fairfield housing survey, take the 5min to fill it out!!!

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8DHX3TC

[rsnxmt]

What do you guys think of this: http://www.timescolo...elated_articles

To me, it’s an inspiring story of hard work and dedication. My trouble with it is the very pervasive mentality of ‘if you want to live in my neighbourhood, you have to live in a type of home that I say’.

Thoughts?

 

It's a bit of a straw man argument: nobody is arguing they didn't work their butts off to build their own houses. It seems also like an implied judgement on people today with young families that they aren't working their butts off or their values are wrong if that's not what they're willing to do.

 

Agreed that it is another take on NIMBY indeed. They bought a house and not the city or the neighborhood. The city is growing in population, economic factors change people's behavior and values with time. Where the author 20-30 years younger and in the same economic position as the same people today they may have made very different decisions with their lives and housing options.

[DavidL]

Is it just me or does "gentle density" bother anyone else as a term?  Every time I read or hear it I feel like I'm being talked to like an idiot.  I suppose "Conscious Land Re-Purposing" and "Mindful Structure Recycling" is coming soon.

[Nparker]

Is it just me or does "gentle density" bother anyone else as a term?  Every time I read or hear it I feel like I'm being talked to like an idiot...

Although I know it is not, Gentle Density seems like such a "made in Victoria" term. Its goals may be laudable, but they still don't seem to satisfy the most ardent of the NIMBY crowd.

[Casual Kev]

It's a term used frequently in Vancouver, too. Technically speaking, it's allowing different kinds of ground-based developments without detracting too much from detached SFH. That's usually townhomes, row houses and laneways. But NIMBYs often apply the term in a planning context to mean that introducing this sort of "density" in "their" neighborhood means they're "doing their part" in terms of allowing development, hence any more loosening of their rope would be setting up their neighborhood to become vertical ghettos. The terminology is very important because it makes NIMBYs believe they're advocating for meaningful, "manageable" density when all they're really doing is doubling down on low-density and still having immense power over whether any new development happens and if does, what it will look like and how it will function.

[Mattjvd]

Fairfield housing survey, take the 5min to fill it out!!!

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8DHX3TC

I took the survey. Kind of bizarre that the maximum density option was 3 story apartment buildings. I wrote in the comments section that land fronting the major roads (Cook st, Fairfield, etc.) should have much higher density, at least 6 story apartment and condo buildings. 

 

The "low height charm" that these neighborhoods developed in the 60s and 70s was largely in part to our building codes allowing 4 floors as the maximum for wood framed buildings. If we want lower cost apartments now, there is no reason to not build 6 floor wood-framed buildings.

[Casual Kev]

I took the survey. Kind of bizarre that the maximum density option was 3 story apartment buildings. I wrote in the comments section that land fronting the major roads (Cook st, Fairfield, etc.) should have much higher density, at least 6 story apartment and condo buildings. 

 

The "low height charm" that these neighborhoods developed in the 60s and 70s was largely in part to our building codes allowing 4 floors as the maximum for wood framed buildings. If we want lower cost apartments now, there is no reason to not build 6 floor wood-framed buildings.

 

It boggles the mind why new 4-6 wood frame apartments aren't welcomed, let alone encouraged in neighborhoods like Fairfield. Like, that type of housing stock already exists in significant amounts and clearly it doesn't do any meaningful harm to other neighborhood residents. Developers wouldn't be trying to fit in condo high-rises wherever they can if low-rise apartments were being built as they were 4-5 decades ago. 

[jonny]

It boggles the mind why new 4-6 wood frame apartments aren't welcomed, let alone encouraged in neighborhoods like Fairfield. Like, that type of housing stock already exists in significant amounts and clearly it doesn't do any meaningful harm to other neighborhood residents. Developers wouldn't be trying to fit in condo high-rises wherever they can if low-rise apartments were being built as they were 4-5 decades ago. 

 

It's impossible to be "gentle" if a building is over 3 floors.