Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
So with higher zoning, Vancouver would never have filled out the downtown peninsula... but somehow would've filled out Broadway? And Christy's Liberals would've seen that growth and just given us the SkyTrain money without a referendum? The first is contradictory, the second is just ridiculous. Rather, what's happened is that Broadway has been growing as if it were a town centre, in spite of not having SkyTrain access.
The Olympics came along, Vancouver started getting tons of condo money, Burnaby and Surrey got envious and wanted in on the action; once Coquitlam got SkyTrain, so did they. Why does Vancouver need to join the race? We've already made it, we can grow at our own pace.
Same reason the developing world grows faster than the developed world. North America and Europe/Russia and East Asia have absolutely no reason to catch up to themselves.
Once again, you sound like 6 year old me playing SimCity 4: plopping down landmark towers and high-density zones until the money ran out, and then wondering why the "city" was rotting away. Unsustainable growth is how you get a Chinese ghost city.... or worse, Dubai.
- Without rental-only zoning and a government that gives a damn, high density in a free market means more condos and more demovictions.
- Without an adequate population size, retail either leeches customers from successful retail somewhere else, or just never takes off.
- Without a metro line (and a Premier that doesn't have a grudge against the city), the street doesn't support large amounts of people.
We only got all of those arranged in recent years. Now we can zone for towers on Broadway.
As for gentrification, Chinatown and the DTES has plenty. What we need is more housing, more facilities, and a crackdown on the PRC gangs propagating fentanyl. A purely "tough on crime" approach was tried last century - all we ended up with was gangsta rap.
Er, we just landed an Amazon and Apple office. The ones finding it difficult are small businesses, and denser zoning hurts them even more.
---
That's the Fraser Institute. BC's Heritage Foundation. The same kind of Victorian crony capitalism that got us into demovictions, foreign-owned condos and the housing crisis in the first place.
Once we reach Paris' population (or at least Los Angeles') then we can start comparing ourselves to the big boys. Our league is Seattle and Chicago and Toronto, and in that regard we're already ahead of the curve.
|
Downtown Vancouver and West Broadway would easily have been filled out already if not for all the stupid mumbo jumbos like viewcones, shadowing, setbacks, and other nimby policies in the first place.
If landing one Amazon is a big deal for you, then I digress. Go to a major city around the world and see what types of companies or corporations are headquartered there, or at least hold significant real estate there to function as regional headquarters, research/training centres, etc., and when you realize how small we really are, then we will resume our conversation regarding this.
We've already made it, LOL
*face palm*
I guess you rather the "Sim City" be built far from downtown Vancouver, which is happening this instance. Again, wonderful! Well, get ready for more commute time, traffic congestion, packed trains/buses, and way more transit related costs in the future. Don't give me the sustainable city BS when what you are suggesting is only causing more urban sprawl.
Please explain how the Fraser Institute "got us into demovictions, foreign-owned condos and the housing crisis in the first place". Your statement doesn't make any sense. The article pointed out the fact that Canadian cities are not in the least dense like many here like to think, so what does that have to do with what you just said?
Threaded Mode