[Burnaby] The Amazing Brentwood | 15 Towers | 186m | 56 flrs | U/C & Proposed

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

will all those SFHs ever be replaced with more density? it's kind of weird to see a huge development like TAB with a bunch of houses across the street and alleys.

Well maybe some low level townhouses but nothing close to the density of TAB.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by chowhou

The grand bargain at it's finest.

what does this even mean? i googled it, and it did not relate to anything involving Burnaby.

not everyone wants to live with no privacy, no peace, no quiet, or no smells. my friends neighbor, in his what is considered a high end condo, smokes a lot of weed. i cant even go to this place anymore because it reeks.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

what does this even mean? i googled it, and it did not relate to anything involving Burnaby.

Always happy to educate with an appropriate link.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

not everyone wants to live with no privacy, no peace, no quiet, or no smells. my friends neighbor, in his what is considered a high end condo, smokes a lot of weed. i cant even go to this place anymore because it reeks.

If you want to save up the money to buy a SFH in the suburbs, you have that right. If someone wants to develop their own property into denser housing, that should be their right too.

And speaking as someone who spends plenty of time in Vancouver backyards, having a SFH doesn't protect you from smokers next door.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

And speaking as someone who spends plenty of time in Vancouver backyards, having a SFH doesn't protect you from smokers next door.

Or worse. (Seems to be a thing in West Van).

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

will all those SFHs ever be replaced with more density? it's kind of weird to see a huge development like TAB with a bunch of houses across the street and alleys.

If those NIMBYs along Willingond between Lougheed and Hasting would agree to build 6 storeys multifamily houses with first floor as commercial there wouldn't be a need to build, as they call it, - "Giant Monstrosity TAB"...but NIMBYs are NIMBYs and now we have what we have...and kids of those NIMBYs will live forever in the basements of NIMBY parents...

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Always happy to educate with an appropriate link.

interesting read, i had never heard of it before. not what comes up on google.

Originally Posted by chowhou

If you want to save up the money to buy a SFH in the suburbs, you have that right. If someone wants to develop their own property into denser housing, that should be their right too.

to a point. if i am picking a place for its privacy, then my neighbour shouldn't be allowed to build a 6 unit apartment block destroying the whole reason i bought the place. that ruins the whole point of why i bought where i bought. people should be allowed and able to avoid the density. not everyone wants to live crammed in everywhere.

the caveat, though, being to expect density in some areas. such as arterials, skytrain stations, etc. example, commerical-broadway. that should be high density, etc.

Originally Posted by chowhou

And speaking as someone who spends plenty of time in Vancouver backyards, having a SFH doesn't protect you from smokers next door.

i haven't had this issue with mine. though CoV has some very tiny lots that i would avoid; some may as well be townhouses. the issue is much worse in a condo. i know family members and friends who have had issues with smells & noise, etc. i have in a condo. but i never have in a SFH. i can just go by my own experience and of people i know first hand. but i am also very particular to mitigate those issues as much as possible.

the more physical space you have from your neighbours, the less chances of noise, smoking, etc.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Or worse. (Seems to be a thing in West Van).

happens in condos as well it can happen anywhere these days.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

to a point. if i am picking a place for its privacy, then my neighbour shouldn't be allowed to build a 6 unit apartment block destroying the whole reason i bought the place. that ruins the whole point of why i bought where i bought. people should be allowed and able to avoid the density. not everyone wants to live crammed in everywhere.

When you buy a property, you buy the rights to that property. You do not buy the rights to the surrounding properties. If you want to make sure a neighbouring property doesn't densify, it's your right to offer to buy that property. I know people who have intentionally done this in rural BC to prevent people from intruding on their privacy. Otherwise, you shouldn't have a say.

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by chowhou

when you buy a property, you buy the rights to that property. You do not buy the rights to the surrounding properties. If you want to make sure a neighbouring property doesn't densify, it's your right to offer to buy that property. I know people who have intentionally done this in rural bc to prevent people from intruding on their privacy. Otherwise, you shouldn't have a say.

exactly!!!

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by chowhou

When you buy a property, you buy the rights to that property. You do not buy the rights to the surrounding properties. If you want to make sure a neighbouring property doesn't densify, it's your right to offer to buy that property. I know people who have intentionally done this in rural BC to prevent people from intruding on their privacy. Otherwise, you shouldn't have a say.

i disagree, but i know we wont agree on many things. and i doubt your views will end up happening in reality, so im quite happy with that.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i disagree, but i know we wont agree on many things. and i doubt your views will end up happening in reality, so im quite happy with that.

As long as the population of Vancouver continues to grow, the suburbs are only going to gradually become denser. It's been like pulling teeth, but in the long run municipalities aren't going to be losing density any time soon. It's just so sad to me that the potential of Vancouver is being stunted by selfish obstructionist "fuck-you-I-got-mine" NIMBYism.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Lexus

If those NIMBYs along Willingond between Lougheed and Hasting would agree to build 6 storeys multifamily houses with first floor as commercial there wouldn't be a need to build, as they call it, - "Giant Monstrosity TAB"...but NIMBYs are NIMBYs and now we have what we have...and kids of those NIMBYs will live forever in the basements of NIMBY parents...

Densifying Willingdon should be the absolute minimum. With Skytrain likely on that corridor in the next few decades and solid bus service now, and easy access to Metrotown, Burnaby Hospital, BCIT, and Brentwood, Willingdon should already be dense.

There are other, less obvious neighbourhoods that should have townhouses and multiplexes everywhere but I doubt it will ever happen. I am thinking specifically of Imperial to Rumble, between Patterson and Macpherson. Not only could anyone in those neighbourhoods get to Skytrain within a 15-minute bike ride but there is also great bus service on Imperial. And if we're truly entering a period of WFH, anywhere within a 15-minute walk and bike of a grocery store, park, and some restaurants should be up-zoned. Forget about having to commute to Downtown.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

to a point. if i am picking a place for its privacy, then my neighbour shouldn't be allowed to build a 6 unit apartment block destroying the whole reason i bought the place. that ruins the whole point of why i bought where i bought. people should be allowed and able to avoid the density. not everyone wants to live crammed in everywhere.

If I build four units on a plot of land next door how does that have any affect on your property? Your backyard hasn't shrunk, you still have a garage to park your car in, and you don't suddenly share walls with another unit. A lot of four- and six-unit multiplexes could be built on existing SFH lots with only minor tweaks to parking and lot coverage requirements.

And if you're planning to talk about the lack of street parking, you'll never convince me that a multiplex is any worse than a house that has 10 college students living in it or a multi-generation home with a dozen occupants.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

If I build four units on a plot of land next door how does that have any affect on your property? Your backyard hasn't shrunk, you still have a garage to park your car in, and you don't suddenly share walls with another unit. A lot of four- and six-unit multiplexes could be built on existing SFH lots with only minor tweaks to parking and lot coverage requirements.

but the whole aspect of privacy has died. its why i dont like laneway houses. you now have this much larger building that is directly overlooking your once private back yard. its forever ruined that space. the whole point of finding a SFH area is to get at least some privacy in the city still. some greenery. the larger floor plates, greater site coverage, taller building all takes away the privacy and desirability of being in a SFH area.

yes areas should be densified, but no, it shouldn't be blanket everywhere. we need to keep the integrity of SFH areas when the area isn't well served by transit. so stick density at the town centres, skytrain stations, on arterials, then taper down into the SFH. but it is important to keep the SFH area, for SFH and maintain that.

density everywhere, unable to get away from, will not make this place some utopia.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

but the whole aspect of privacy has died. its why i dont like laneway houses. you now have this much larger building that is directly overlooking your once private back yard. its forever ruined that space. the whole point of finding a SFH area is to get at least some privacy in the city still. some greenery. the larger floor plates, greater site coverage, taller building all takes away the privacy and desirability of being in a SFH area.

I mean, your neighbour could also build a treehouse or buy a trampoline and you would lose your privacy in the same way. And I have been in plenty of SFHs where the back patio is high and you can easily see over the neighbour's fence.

[chowhou]

Don't worry, SFHs are never going away. There is still plenty of acreage to be found in areas like Vanderhoof, Fort St. John, and 100 Mile. If privacy is so important to you like it is to a lot of people who choose to move to those places, that option is always there. Meanwhile, it's selfish to force your own preferences onto others in a city. Living in a city means giving a little to your neighbours, whether you like it or not. Personally, I think forcing your neighbours to kneel before your preferences is a very entitled mindset.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I mean, your neighbour could also build a treehouse or buy a trampoline and you would lose your privacy in the same way. And I have been in plenty of SFHs where the back patio is high and you can easily see over the neighbour's fence.

there is a difference between both a tree house, and a trampoline which are used intermittently, vs a permanent structure overlooking your yard indefinitely. you and i both know that's a ridiculous comparison. are treehouses even possible anymore? i have never actually known someone with one in the city, and i was born and raised here. im sure there's some bylaw forbidding it for damaging the trees or something.

Originally Posted by chowhou

Don't worry, SFHs are never going away. There is still plenty of acreage to be found in areas like Vanderhoof, Fort St. John, and 100 Mile. If privacy is so important to you like it is to a lot of people who choose to move to those places, that option is always there. Meanwhile, it's selfish to force your own preferences onto others in a city. Living in a city means giving a little to your neighbours, whether you like it or not. Personally, I think forcing your neighbours to kneel before your preferences is a very entitled mindset.

comments like these show how unrealistic you are. i say we need a mix of housing options. ranging from things like the West End - SFH, to you know, give options to people.

you argue for making everything homogeneous and then say im the one trying to force preferences on people. would that not be you? i am being realistic, balanced, and weighing everyones wants and needs in a growing city. there is enough space in this place to manage my approach. youre just like "f--- you, GTFO!"

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

comments like these show how unrealistic you are. i say we need a mix of housing options. ranging from things like the West End - SFH, to you know, give options to people.

you argue for making everything homogeneous and then say im the one trying to force preferences on people. would that not be you? i am being realistic, balanced, and weighing everyones wants and needs in a growing city. there is enough space in this place to manage my approach. youre just like "f--- you, GTFO!"

I'm the one arguing for freedom of choice and democratic choice for housing options; You're the one arguing for authoritative control of your personal preferences of housing types.

I believe if someone wants 100m clearance between their home and the next property then they should have the right to buy or build a SFH, buy as much land as they want, and pay the appropriate land taxes. This is exactly what people like Michael Buble have done in Burnaby.

I believe if someone doesn't want a big house or pay the market rate for a SFH they should be have the right to buy or build a duplex, multiplex, or condo wherever it makes sense for them.

Not once have I ever argued for forcing homogeneity in any part of the city, you're the one arguing for homogeneity in your personal protection bubble.

Unfortunately though, I agree with your core thesis; You are being realistic because you've explained the core nature of zoning policy in Vancouver. It's the grand bargain. Special protections for the little boxes on the hillside made of ticky tacky. Density allowed only where suburbanites aren't offended by. It's pretty gross.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Special protections for the little boxes on the hillside made of ticky tacky. Density allowed only where suburbanites aren't offended by.

and there it is! i knew you sounded like someone from reddit.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

there is a difference between both a tree house, and a trampoline which are used intermittently, vs a permanent structure overlooking your yard indefinitely. you and i both know that's a ridiculous comparison. are treehouses even possible anymore? i have never actually known someone with one in the city, and i was born and raised here. im sure there's some bylaw forbidding it for damaging the trees or something.

I really don't think it's a ridiculous comparison, because my point is creeps will be creeps and the built form of a SFH vs. a multi-plex has little to do with privacy. From my in-laws back patio I can easily see into four of their neighbours' back yards. My wife used to rent the above ground floors of a SFH and we could easily spy on the neighbours from the kitchen window. I really don't think the suburbs offer that much privacy unless you put up a tall privacy fence or grow a number of trees around the perimeter of your yard, neither of which would be disallowed under relaxed zoning bylaws. And if you want total privacy and no noise, the only place I have experienced that is on my parent's 80 acre acreage in Saskatchewan. Good luck finding something like that within a 30-minute commute of DT Vancouver though.

I think when you say you want privacy, you really mean you are against density on your block. And it's not really my business if that's your stance, but I think you should be honest about what you are actually against. Some people who are against density have practical reasons: a lack of street parking, increased noise, more shading, busier sidewalks, the "neighbourhood character", etc. But I also think a lot of SFH owners are against letting people who can't afford their own SFH into the neighbourhood. This could be because of racism or classism, or it could be a hazing perspective (i.e., I went through this suffering - pinching pennies for a SFH in this case - so you should too). Again, it's not my business why someone is against density, but I wish more people would be upfront about their reasons.

Just to clarify, I am not accusing you of anything. If anything, your perspective represents that vast majority of Canadians. But I think in NA we have been convinced that the suburbs offer pricy, peace and quiet, and safety, while a lot of suburban neighbourhoods in fact offer nothing of the sort.


source: Google Maps

For example, do you really think these SFHs from Surrey have any more privacy than a four-plex? Do you think the bouncing of the basketball on that backyard court is any quieter than having one neighbour living above you? Do you think a backyard fence would prevent a pervy neighbour from watching you from their second-floor patio?

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

and there it is! i knew you sounded like someone from reddit.

And you sound like an authoritarian American conservative what's your point?

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

And if you want total privacy and no noise, the only place I have experienced that is on my parent's 80 acre acreage in Saskatchewan. Good luck finding something like that within a 30-minute commute of DT Vancouver though.

Not exactly true, Buble acquired 2.3 acres in central Burnaby for his private estate. I think it's awesome that he's able to do so (and great that he's willing to pay the land tax to keep a mansion like that). Having a property like that in the middle of a city is a privilege, not a right, and he's willing and able to pay for that privilege. I think that's pretty cool. What I don't think is cool is that people willing and able to pay for less are told that their standard of living is "cramped, privacy-less, tenements" by suburbanites and told to GTFO.