1355 replies to this topic

[dasmo]

See for yourselves. 

https://imgur.com/a/wTsoBml

Edited by dasmo, 31 January 2025 - 11:17 AM.

[aastra]

Langford's entire history of population growth from nothing up until now is still a fair way off from Saanich's growth just during its boom years.

[dasmo]

Langford's entire history of population growth from nothing up until now is still a fair way off from Saanich's growth just during its boom years.

If we are going back that far I would start with the W̱SÁNEĆ then. Their growth peaked when the same entity legislating our way of life legislated their way of life away. The started out all over the area, population unknown. The used to summer to fish on James Island too. They were legislated into a a few tiny plots to make way for progress.... 

[aastra]

Just sayin... People like to make a big deal out of population growth in Langford, but Langford's situation isn't all that big a deal re: the history of population growth in Victoria. Pointing the finger at Langford is really just a deflection away from the errors made by Saanich, the 800-lb gorilla in Victoria's CMA.

Or put it another way: if Saanich had developed according to the Langford model rather than according to the Saanich model then Greater Victoria's developed footprint today would be considerably smaller than it currently is.

[aastra]

 

Oak Bay should just build a tower or two on one of these sites.

 

Times sure have changed. In the year 2025 Oak Bay is being pressured by outside levels of government to increase residential density, whereas back in the day Oak Bay was being pressured by outside levels of government to increase residential density.
 

 

Daily Colonist
August 24, 1962

High Rise or Park:
Oak Bay to Face Property Decision

Differences between Oak Bay and Victoria over the city's Mountain View Home property in Oak Bay will likely come to a head at the next meeting of Oak Bay council.

At that meeting (Oak Bay) council will consider a city (of Victoria) application to have the property rezoned from residential to permit high-rise apartment development.

The property is on Fort Street between Bowker and Christie. Value of the property would be increased greatly if it was rezoned to permit high-rise development.

City council decided yesterday to make its application to Oak Bay.

--
 

 

Daily Colonist
April 9, 1963

City Queries Turndown By Oak Bay

The city wants to know why Oak Bay turned down its request for rezoning of the four-acre Mountain View homesite for high rise apartment use.

Ald. Arthur Dowell, chairman of lands committee, said yesterday he would attempt to determine reasons for the stand that only apartments up to six storeys would be permitted on the city-owned property in Oak Bay.

"We're disappointed, of course," Ald. Dowell said. "I only hope that the decision wasn't influenced by the fact that city council turned down an Oak Bay request for a 20-foot strip at the rear of adjoining properties on Hampshire."

Before considering launching a formal protest with Oak Bay council, Ald. Dowell said city planners will be asked to report on the financial implications of the ruling.

Victoria plans to sell the property, demolishing the building which formerly housed the city's home for elderly men, and use the proceeds to carry out capital projects included in the civic beautification program.

FAVORS LARGE SITES

An earlier planning report said the best use to the 4.1 acre site was a 12-storey high-rise apartment building which could be of a size that would cost about $3,000,000.

[aastra]

 

Oak Bay should just build a tower or two on one of these sites.

 

Seriously, have we forgotten about the church parking lot redevelopment? What's the current status of that? 150 units! Crikey, just let it happen.

 

[aastra]

Also, what about Turkey Head?

 

Also, what about the surface parking lot on the south side of Oak Bay rec centre?

[aastra]

"But aastra! Those sites are precious! It would make much more sense to steal away chunks of Carnarvon Park!"

[aastra]

Etc.

[dasmo]

I'm not talking about development though. I am talking about government overreach that is mandating development. See the difference? I am pro development, pro affordable housing. I am pro many things but not government mandates that go beyond what should be their authority over us. 

[Victoria Watcher]

Murdoch told Black Press he wasn’t surprised by this news, citing a Dec. 17 letter Kahlon sent Oak Bay regarding its housing target progress report and the potential appointment of a housing advisor.

 

“The tone of both the original letter in December and the media interviews done by the minister after that made it pretty clear that they had decided to appoint an advisor and that the details of our response weren't going to impact that decision,” he said.

 

In a Jan. 15 reply sent in response to Kahlon's Dec. 17 letter, Murdoch said Oak Bay has zoning in place for over 15,000 potential additional housing units, adding that he was "disappointed by the tone" of the minister's letter and subsequent comments singling out Oak Bay for “not doing its part.”

 

 

 

https://www.oakbayne...oak-bay-7792919

 

 

 

15,000 eh?   Who knew OB residents don't want renters in their basement.

[aastra]

 

Oak Bay has zoning in place for over 15,000 potential additional housing units...

 

Just build a new house on top of every existing house in Oak Bay and you're done.

 

Come on. Can you imagine the city of Victoria or the city of Vancouver saying measures were already in place to more than double the population? Why does every darned thing about the housing controversy need to be so ridiculous?

 

If measures were in place to add 1,000 units in Oak Bay over 30 years methinks that would be pretty darned good for a small neighbourhood municipality that was probably already almost fully built out by ~1980.

[aastra]

I assume they must be calculating potential development at Camosun and/or UVic in that crazy figure?

[GaryOak]

It's probably more so allowing secondary suits

[Victoria Watcher]

https://x.com/Tepper...844268486254688

 

[GaryOak]

Wouldn't it also be a conflict of interest to tell his brother not to build in oak Bay?

[Mike K.]

Nope.

[Victoria Watcher]

Affordability was the promise; predatory luxury development is the reality.

 

There is a powerful social movement arising over Bill 44. The drums are beating steadily and getting louder.

 

Bill 44 is extreme. All communities in B.C. are entitled to design oversight over all proposals. Using that oversight to stall bad projects and in our case make Oak Bay less attractive to predatory developers. This legislation was justified to voters as an emergency measure addressing the “affordability crisis.” But is that what it’s really doing? Why is the government supporting developers who will be profiting millions by building luxury townhomes at the expense of communities and existing homeowners? This is not affordable housing.

 

The residents of Oak Bay are not up in arms because ugly triplexes and large apartments are going to be built in leafy heritage neighbourhoods, but because the proposals in our area are for luxury developments. All we really want is more reasonable limits: duplexes not quads; two-storey limits, not three storeys, etc.

 

Vague rumours had circulated for months. The residents assumed that Bill 44 would be applied as appropriate gentle densification. Zoning for luxury is not “affordable housing,” This premise has turned out to be a lie. In fact, districts like Oak Bay are being exposed by this legislation to predatory luxury development in the false name of “affordability.” There were better ways to craft Bill 44, if affordability really was the goal. We invite journalists and politicians to consult their own experts and put this legislation under a microscope.

 

 

https://www.vicnews....oak-bay-7821358

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 16 February 2025 - 06:51 AM.

[Mike K.]

This is likely to be repealed when government changes in future.

[Sparky]

The government is not going to change. They are supported by the people that have nothing and want to share it with everybody.

Otherwise we would have a balanced provincial budget.