Quote:
Originally Posted by chowhou
It's entirely possible that soon the urban condo populus of Burnaby will crack the political dominance of the suburban SFH populus and that will change. Let's be optimistic!  |
It doesn't have to be all or nothing (although sometimes it is that way for sure).
I know that in Coquitlam, some of the single family neighbourhoods have a majority of people who want the city to upzone their hood as much as possible so they can cash out. See this article for example:
https://www.tricitynews.com/local-ne...tments-5231923
"On Monday (April 4), Silvano Padovan asked council-in-committee to change the land-use designation for the northeast sector of Whiting–Appian from townhouses to medium density for condo units.
"We firmly believe that this pocket wasn’t designated properly," he said at the meeting.
Padovan said he and his neighbours haven’t been able to convince city staff on a higher-density approach despite the surrounding area changing rapidly with high-rises and apartment blocks.
He claims, despite being close to SkyTrain, developers aren’t as eager to touch properties set for townhomes compared with parcels that are permitted for more growth.
Last year, Padovan and his neighbours petitioned the city; a follow-up letter was sent in February.
Made up primarily of single-family [ed: single-elderly-couple] houses, the Whiting–Appian pocket is located north of the former Coquitlam College building and within the Burquitlam–Lougheed Neighbourhood Plan."
...
"At the Feb. 7 meeting, Don Luymes, Coquitlam’s general manager of planning and development, told council that city staff are assessing the "development capacity" within existing pockets to ensure a balance, but "not to have so much oversupply of land for high-density development that development activity results in destabilization of currently stable neighbourhoods," he said, "or a scattered or inefficient pattern of development."
"Staff is proposing to somewhat slow down and defer phases of planning for additional pockets beyond the three in southwest Coquitlam," Luymes said.
Meanwhile, Coun. Brent Asmundson told Padovan that council looks out for the best interests of the community and not the financial interests of land owners.
And while council will review Padovan’s request and petition, he said city staff have 236 active applications before them."
I found it amusing, sort of the bizarro world version of the usual development politics, but anyway, the point is, not all single elderly couple dwelling (SECD) neighbourhoods are created the same, so you might not need a wholesale turnover of council (although that would certainly help), you might just need enough chunks of land with enough owners who are willing to take the money and run.
I suppose if we wanted to compare how skyscrapery each municipality is, you could assign each resident one point for how many floors above ground level their front door is (living on 21st floor gets 20 points, top level of stacked townhouse gets 1 pt, etc.) and divide by the number of residents. I suspect New West or North Van (City obv.) might rival Vancouver on that measure, but I am not planning to do the math.
Prev
Long ways to go.
Linear Mode
