ripley
My feedback
5 results found
-
Increase residential density to achieve efficient land use and high walking/cycling/transit mobility
32 votesAs the City reviews land use policy and development bylaws through Community, Central Area, and City-Wide planning programs, opportunities for increased residential density (particularly in walkable neighbourhoods with good transit connections) are actively pursued (in balance with concerns for neighbourhood character and community involvement in city building decisions at the neighbourhood level).
An error occurred while saving the comment ripley
commented
"Many European cities have densities much higher than downtown Vancouver without having any high-rises at all. Height limits exist for a reason; high-rises done poorly can have very dramatic livability impacts."
I completely disagree about the negative externalities of high-rises (Can you quantify them? Unlikely.), but putting that aside I agree that high-rises are not the only way to densify. 4-5 story apartments with minimal setbacks would be great, but zoning for most of Vancouver is nowhere near that.
"Being strategic about where we target higher densities is also important. (around rapid transit stations, near high concentrations of jobs, etc.) Putting a bunch of highrises out in the middle of nowhere won’t have any environmental benefits since their residents will still end up driving everywhere."
1) You're assuming that planners at City Hall are better able to plan where density is desired than market actors. I would question that assumption.
2) Also, this is Vancouver, a relatively small city in land area. There simply isn't anywhere that is too far from the city centre to benefit from increased density.
3) You're assuming that Vancouver exists in a vacuum. Not so, dense housing in Vancouver will likely accommodate people who would otherwise be living elsewhere in the Lower Mainland. Even if someone drives from their condo in South Van, they'll be driving less than they would from a condo in Richmond.
ripley
supported this idea
·
-
54 votes
Ecological footprint impacts of different food choices form part of the data gathering; examining the City’s regulatory and policy tools to encourage lighter footprint living is included as an action.
An error occurred while saving the comment ripley
commented
I completely agree that this is a good idea, but it's really not a municipal issue. Contact your MP.
-
404 votes
A critical challenge for Vancouver. Laneway housing, STIR, the 20% Inclusionary Zoning Policy, and other programs and policies are intended to help increase housing affordability— see http://vancouver.ca/housing. The draft Greenest City plan recognizes the importance of affordability and will review additional strategies, e.g. unbundled parking.
An error occurred while saving the comment ripley
commented
I feel like you're ignoring the most obvious way to accomplish this goal: stop limiting the housing supply through draconian zoning bylaws. Affordable housing won't exist until we stop pretending that single-family homes are an efficient use of land, anywhere.
-
334 votesripley
supported this idea
·
-
176 votes
The City has supported projects that have voluntarily unbundled parking (e.g. Spectrum), and is actively working to gain authority to require unbundling in new development — this requires changes to Provincial legislation. In 2008, the City proposed the Unbundled Parking Resolution to give BC municipalities the authority to require unbundling in new development. This was passed by the Union of BC Municipalities. Provincial response to date: The Ministry of Community Development will review the proposal and refer the issue to the Development Finance Review Committee for discussion.
ripley
supported this idea
·
