General Vancouver Updates II

[Xelebes]

The thread is a continuation of the previous thread. Please proceed.

[madog222]

-snip-

[jollyburger]

I'm surprised at how deep the hole for that new Jaguar service centre around Fir/West 2nd. Around 6-7 sets of temporary stair levels to the bottom (counting each diagonal section as a set) . It's nothing like Gilmore Place but there seems to be some settling in the lane behind the site.

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/1601-w-2-ave

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

I'm surprised at how deep the hole for that new Jaguar service centre around Fir/West 2nd. Around 6-7 sets of temporary stair levels to the bottom (counting each diagonal section as a set) . It's nothing like Gilmore Place but there seems to be some settling in the lane behind the site.

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/1601-w-2-ave

They'll need lots of room for JLR repairs!

[Jimbo604]

Vaughn Palmer: End of the line for single-family neighbourhoods in most of B.C.
Author of the article:Vaughn Palmer Published Nov 01, 2023

Opinion: B.C. NDP unapologetically introduces legislation to abolish “outdated zoning” that puts most housing “out of reach for many people and families"

...Enter Bill-44, the Housing Statutes (Residential Development) Amendment Act.

Once enacted by the NDP majority in the B.C. legislature later this fall, it will give the provincial government the power to override municipal zoning through much of B.C.

Henceforth, municipalities will have to plan and zone in line with guidelines set out in a provincial government policy manual.

“The manual will set clear provincial expectations in terms of setbacks, height restrictions, parking and lot coverage,” according to the government’s power-point summary of the legislation.

However, the New Democrats did not release the policy manual. That will come later, when the Cabinet gets around to approving the guiding set of regulations.
...

The New Democrats are also waiving some requirements to provide parking.

“For projects closer to transit stops with frequent service, parking minimums will decrease. For projects that are within 400 metres of these transit stops there will be no minimum parking requirements and parking will be determined by home builders.”

The legislation also scraps public hearings for one-off and site-by-site developments. Instead, local governments will be required to hold public hearings on their overall community housing plans.

Once the plan is final, conforming projects will be subject to approval without further public hearings.


You can follow the progress of this bill [#44 Housing Statutes (Residential Development) Amendment Act, 2023] on this gov web page:
Progress of Bills - Current Session

The text of the bill is here: Bill 44 Text

Barring the unforseen(?) the bill should be passed by the end of this legislative session which is November 30th, four weeks today.

[MIPS]

I'll accept to this, hesitantly.
There will always be people who do not want (or cannot fit) into apartments or condos. The wording makes it sound like it would bar SFH in any suburban area, even if the density is unlikely to ever require it and not just tell Kitsilano to go pound sand.

[Changing City]

...

[jollyburger]

I wonder if there's a better system than strata councils for condo management. I mean if there are constantly issues on upkeep/end of life repair that seems like a huge issue coming down the pipeline.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by MIPS

The wording makes it sound like it would bar SFH in any suburban area

Yeah, the changes will simply open up existing SFH neighbourhoods to different types of housing. I expect many neighbourhoods will see very, very gradual changes (if any changes at all), while some may be unrecognizable in a decade or two.

Many of the existing masterplanned suburban communities won't change all that much (why would you want to live in a sixplex with no parking spot in a cul-de-sac with no transit service?), while some of Vancouver's core neighbourhoods may see a doubling in density over time. But that doesn't mean you won't be able to find a SFH at all, if you're willing to pay for it.

[whatnext]

Provincial government overreach, pure and simple. A shame BC United is in such disarray the NDP will likely win again.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Provincial government overreach, pure and simple. A shame BC United is in such disarray the NDP will likely win again.

Can't agree more on both these points. It's about time.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

I wonder if there's a better system than strata councils for condo management. I mean if there are constantly issues on upkeep/end of life repair that seems like a huge issue coming down the pipeline.

It will be a nightmare. But get rid of volunteer strata boards (the most thankless job ever) and who would oversee contractors/management companies?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Provincial government overreach, pure and simple. A shame BC United is in such disarray the NDP will likely win again.

A) 'Bout time - if the suburbs and small towns had done their job, this would never have been needed.

B) Overreach would be banning SFHs altogether. That's not happening.

C) The SoCreds Libs United FC will probably be out in the wilderness until Falcon, Coleman, de Jong and all the other old kleptocrats leave and the new faces of the party shift left to retake the suburbs.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

A) 'Bout time - if the suburbs and small towns had done their job, this would never have been needed.

B) Overreach would be banning SFHs altogether. That's not happening.

C) The SoCreds Libs United FC will probably be out in the wilderness until Falcon, Coleman, de Jong and all the other old kleptocrats leave and the new faces of the party shift left to retake the suburbs.

It's really sad how YIMBYs just meekly accepted they'll never be able to own a house and rather than blame those who created that situation, they blame those who do own a house.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It's really sad how YIMBYs just meekly accepted they'll never be able to own a house and rather than blame those who created that situation, they blame those who do own a house.

I do blame the people who created this mess: Christy Clark and all her minions, and Harland Bartholemew who shut density out of 90% of the city. They’re not in charge of anything any more, and now fixing this mess requires actual solutions, not just blame and gatekeeping. Can’t own a home when there’s no homes to own in the first place because zoning won’t allow them.

Quote the exact specific paragraph that says the NDP will forcibly evict all homeowners in BC from their detached homes and bulldoze them for multiplexes, and I’ll cede the argument. Homeowners will be fine - it’s just that some will have to get used to changes in their neighbourhood.

[hollywoodnorth]

CONCRETE is AGAIN being poured at the WESTBANK project at ALMA and BROADWAY ..... and it is starting to rise.

so ya .... good news there

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It's really sad how YIMBYs just meekly accepted they'll never be able to own a house and rather than blame those who created that situation, they blame those who do own a house.

I would have sympathy for your stance if cities allowed private land owners to add gentle density by building a fourplex on their SFH lot. But not only does restrictive zoning hurt prospective homeowners who would like to live in a townhouse or a low-rise apartment and find that none of those are available. But they also prohibit homeowners from moving into a newly constructed laneway suite so they can sell the main house and retire on their property, or parents from turning their SFH into a triplex so their two adult children can own homes beside grandma and grandpa.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I do blame the people who created this mess: ... Harland Bartholemew who shut density out of 90% of the city.

he cant really be blamed for any of this. he wrongly gets a bad rap. for one, he made his plan in the 1920s long before most people envisioned Vancouver would become what it did. and Vancouver didnt even become what it is now until Expo86 really. also, his plan was never adopted by the city. never. they never adopted it. he also did propose more density in his plan, but the city had different ideas on that. most of the problems stem from the 1970s when the city clamped down on mixed use zoning, etc. long after Harland.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

he cant really be blamed for any of this. he wrongly gets a bad rap. for one, he made his plan in the 1920s long before most people envisioned Vancouver would become what it did. and Vancouver didnt even become what it is now until Expo86 really. also, his plan was never adopted by the city. never. they never adopted it. he also did propose more density in his plan, but the city had different ideas on that...

Fair point...

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

... most of the problems stem from the 1970s when the city clamped down on mixed use zoning, etc. long after Harland.

... but those people and their motives are who whatnext doesn't want us blaming for some reason.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

... but those people and their motives are who whatnext doesn't want us blaming for some reason.

well do we know how old he is? if he's a boomer it could explain it.

the 1970s is when most baby boomers were in the housing market, when suburbs were expanding. its when most were voting for politicians who created a lot of these policies.

im not a huge fan of blanket up zoning of all SFH areas. i think its a detrimental policy. but i do agree with more transitional, gentle density. so high density around transit and then stepping down to mid-rises, low-rises, townhouses, SFHs. i also think moderate mixed uses are a good idea. like those small corner stores that some older neighbourhoods still have. i doubt those could be sustainable now with the cost of things though. as much as people like the idea, hard to compete price wise when people are barely scarping by.

blanket changes to things are never a good idea and will probably lead to unintended consequences we wont realize for awhile. its fascinating how many things in history were done for a good reason, and did the opposite. dynamite, the gatling gun, & freon are 3 that come to mind.