Controversial housing project in Vancouver begins public consultations

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 5 сен 2024
  • A controversial housing proposal in Vancouver's West Point Grey neighbourhood begins public consultations this week.
    The Jericho Lands development, spearheaded by three First Nations, would double the population of the neighbourhood with the creation of about 13,000 new homes.
    As CBC's Yasmin Gandham reports, the project is meant to create more affordable housing, although some argue it would take away from the neighbourhood's character.
    Connect with CBC Vancouver online:
    Website: www.cbc.ca/bc
    TikTok: / cbcvancouver
    Instagram: / cbcvancouver
    Facebook: / cbcvancouver
    Twitter: / cbcnewsbc
    #CBCVancouver #housing #indigenous #affordable #CBCNews #BritishColumbia

Комментарии • 170

  • @Amir-jn5mo
    @Amir-jn5mo Год назад +69

    I went to the consultation. Can't fathom how this project is "controversial". Its one of the most beautiful and ambitious plans I've ever seen. It got everything. Tons of housing, tons of affordable housing, parks, community centre, surface retail and offices, transit connection, excellent bike infrastracture, mobi stations etc etc. Vancouverites have to be a fool to fight against this. Its disgusting how selfish people are trying to gatekeep land around it.
    Even all the neighbours who attended the event and had legitimate concerns were generally very optimistic about this project. Can't believe the loaded article you guys made on this to get rageclicks lol.

    • @keithwollenberg5237
      @keithwollenberg5237 Год назад +4

      Remembering that you will get your way, and this development, or something very like it, will get built, allow me to try to help you to understand, if you wish.
      Imagine that you already live in that neighbourhood, and have for many years. Imagine that you like it the way it is. Now imagine that someone wants to change it to something else that you believe you will like less. (It doesn't matter, if you're trying to understand, whether anybody else in a RUclips comment section would like it better, or think it is objectively superior.) You (or at least, most such people) would object to someone else degrading your home and lowering your quality of life.
      Yes, it is selfish, in the way that not giving all of one's money to charity is selfish. Most people desire to keep most of what they have. The developers are telling them much of what they have -- and, as I have explained, treasure -- will be forcibly taken from them. Can you understand now why they don't like that?

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +3

      @@keithwollenberg5237 , it is called endowment effect. Moreover, people are loss avers. On average people value potential loss of something they have twice as strong as the potential gain.

    • @lenadahling
      @lenadahling Год назад +1

      Let's revisit when the entire population of those complexes descend on Jericho Beach every Saturday. Then tell me how practical it is to continue squeezing people into sardine tins.

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +1

      When is the next consultation?

    • @pbilk
      @pbilk Год назад

      @@antonburdin9756 Exactly! I would see that nearby retail, bike infrastructure and community centre a huge gain if I owned a home near there.

  • @Harry-vh3dc
    @Harry-vh3dc Год назад +85

    What is controversial about building high density housing in a city that already has a housing supply issue?

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +3

      Projects like this will only further inflate land value making all housing less affordable. At the same time, such density brings city less taxes per capita (most of our property tax is de-facto land tax). Limiting 80% of the city land to the maximum of 4 units and then trying to overcompensate for it on the remaining land makes no economic sense.
      Development rights should belong to all land owners rather then being arbitrary distributed among selected few.

    • @ColonelPassTheCheese
      @ColonelPassTheCheese Год назад +34

      @@antonburdin9756 You really don't have to twist yourself into a pretzel to explain why this project is a bad idea because it's not. "tax per capita" is a truly odd measure, more people moving in will mean more people paying income taxes, more people paying consumption taxes, and more people paying property tax. It's the aggregate numbers that matter. You also don't need to police whether a project makes "economic sense" because that's up for the first nation that has it's money on the line, not you.

    • @ColonelPassTheCheese
      @ColonelPassTheCheese Год назад +20

      ​@@antonburdin9756 I also beseech you to point me to a single study that says building housing will somehow make housing less affordable, every single study conducted shows the exact opposite happening. It's housing scarcity that drives up costs and housing is desperately needed in a city like Vancouver where vacancy rates are in the single digits.

    • @keithwollenberg5237
      @keithwollenberg5237 Год назад +2

      People like it the way it is, and don't want it to change. I'm one of them.
      Just the same, as unfortunate as I think this development will be, it's probably still the best available option.
      "Invite the world!" they said. I suppose no one stopped to consider what would happen if the world showed up.

    • @ColonelPassTheCheese
      @ColonelPassTheCheese Год назад

      @@antonburdin9756 Land value is already sky high in a city like Vancouver because the city is a highly desirable place to live but the way to get around that and make housing cheaper is to densify, which splits the land cost per dwelling. We shouldn't gate keep an amazing city like Vancouver because of some crackpot NIMBY nonsense.

  • @menikmati789
    @menikmati789 Год назад +61

    All the old rich white point grey NIMBYs will be dead / in old folks homes by the time this is completed; I don’t see what the problem is

    • @keithwollenberg5237
      @keithwollenberg5237 Год назад +2

      No one else will ever again be able to enjoy the same neighbourhood that they loved, either.
      Not that I was going to be one of them, but it does mean that the average Vancouver lifestyle is diminished.

    • @ColonelPassTheCheese
      @ColonelPassTheCheese Год назад +19

      @@keithwollenberg5237 Cities are not theme parks to be preserved in perpetuity.

    • @geman741
      @geman741 Год назад +3

      never have i seen a comment that reeks of broke victim mentality as much as this

    • @Toronto_Luddite
      @Toronto_Luddite Год назад +12

      ​@@keithwollenberg5237The average Vancouver lifestyle at the moment is constantly being on the brink of homelessness while the owner of your basement suit jacks up the rent

    • @keithwollenberg5237
      @keithwollenberg5237 Год назад

      @@Toronto_Luddite I was using "average" to refer to the mean. You are describing the mode.

  • @gopropeterchockey
    @gopropeterchockey Год назад +19

    Pro Tip: Don't follow the Little Mountain Housing Project planning model of endless cycle of delays, public consultation and plan revisions.

  • @maineusaMax
    @maineusaMax Год назад +23

    The very people that complain the most about seeing homeless on the streets, are the same one's who complain if they live anywhere near their house also.

    • @lenadahling
      @lenadahling Год назад

      WTF do the homeless have to do with Point Grey?

    • @logan4730
      @logan4730 Год назад

      homeless ppl are homeless for a reason. U can give them every mcmansion and a pension and they'd still rip all the copper out of the walls and cook meth. Gotta stop treating pests like humans. Ship them all off to texada or something and let them eat eachother.

    • @dylanc9174
      @dylanc9174 8 месяцев назад +1

      ​@@lenadahlingEverything. Homelessness is caused by Point Grey not densifying. The homeless are pushed into the city centre where they can find warmth and food.

    • @lenadahling
      @lenadahling 8 месяцев назад

      ​@@dylanc9174That's like saying there's homeless in LA because of Beverly Hills. Real nuanced thinking. 🙄

    • @loremasteringwion9930
      @loremasteringwion9930 3 месяца назад

      @@lenadahling We have a homelessness issue partly because of housing supply. We need to built way more houses so that prices can come down.

  • @CarFreeSegnitz
    @CarFreeSegnitz Год назад +7

    All those rich folk should be aware that by not densifying they’ll lose city amenities over time. Amenities locate themselves where people are. No one builds libraries and fitness centres in the wilderness. Let NIMBYs reject vertical development and see them get built elsewhere. Then see amenities get built where the population is denser. In 20-30 years they’ll whine that the city has abandoned them.

    • @keithwollenberg5237
      @keithwollenberg5237 5 месяцев назад

      Amenities like enough space on the beach and in park cannot be replaced by anything the city might construct.

  • @universalconquest4447
    @universalconquest4447 Год назад +8

    YES! Build! Also get rid of the lame and corny height limit for Vancouver buildings, we need taller buildings, especially in the downtown core! Also, start planning for a third bridge crossing from Deep Cove to Buntzen Lake area! And keep expanding the skytrain! It's time Vancouver gets serious about being a big city!

  • @TheRandCrews
    @TheRandCrews Год назад +5

    I believe they’re waiting for what will happen to the Jericho lands so that they can plan the further UBC extension of the Millenium after the Broadway extension. Practically would determine how much ridership of the proposed stations of UBC, Alma, Macdonald and seeing if the alignment will go have a station at Jericho or Sasamat.
    Seeing if they really densify the area the plan would go though due to not as dense as other parts of the line, will make the extension to UBC more feasible. I think that’s why they probably just stop at Arbutus for the meantime.

  • @nopeninja8883
    @nopeninja8883 Год назад +16

    Good looking forward to it

  • @robertbouchard6719
    @robertbouchard6719 Год назад +1

    50% will be allocated to Short term rentals

  • @Matt-YT
    @Matt-YT Год назад +9

    Let's put shovels into the ground! That new housing supply is critically needed!

  • @ruff5050
    @ruff5050 Год назад +2

    West Point Grey has a popular of 13k people. The developers want to add 13k people in the Jericho lands area alone. The current schools in the area can't support the current number of students going to them now as they are over crowded. To do this development it will need more than housing, especially since they will tear down a school to do it.

    • @loremasteringwion9930
      @loremasteringwion9930 3 месяца назад

      This sort of thinking is exactly what is holding Canada, and western civilization back. No, we don't want to improve our neighborhoods and build better communities

  • @user-uz1si3fu1i
    @user-uz1si3fu1i 4 месяца назад

    Homes In Canada Are currently being built for the first time ever in its history

  • @ON-YT
    @ON-YT Год назад +2

    Brilliant need more of it

  • @antonburdin9756
    @antonburdin9756 Год назад +4

    What is projected property tax per unit?

    • @ethimself5064
      @ethimself5064 Год назад +2

      Attend the future consultations

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +3

      @@ethimself5064, I was passing by just today - have not noticed any signs. Do you know when is the next one?

  • @pizzalog4695
    @pizzalog4695 Год назад +3

    Why do we now have numbers on our yt usernames?

  • @SLIDEWAYSLIDEWAY
    @SLIDEWAYSLIDEWAY Год назад +14

    The supporters of the homeless now realized the problem is moving next door and don't want it there. The irony!!!😂

  • @pecopeco5907
    @pecopeco5907 5 месяцев назад

    the view will be quite nice if they are not building more in front of it.

  • @HamidA-to8vy
    @HamidA-to8vy Год назад +3

    The target was making Vancouver the most green City in the world, not block of concrete. New developments should go to Surrey, Langley and beyond . Any gene open area inside the city should not be touched

  • @NorrthStar
    @NorrthStar 2 месяца назад

    Wow

  • @downhillupside
    @downhillupside Год назад +3

    "although some argue it would take away from the neighbourhood's character." - Given that the neighbourhood is dying due to the shrinking population, I'm not sure what part of the 'character' of the neighbourhood is being 'taken away'. NIMBYs would have the entire peninsula become a gated community if they could.

    • @lenadahling
      @lenadahling Год назад

      Spot on. Let's exhume Mountain View Centenary - it's prime real estate right in the middle of the city!! Supply! Supply!! Supply!!! What do old bones need land for?! Just dump them in the ocean! Stupid NIMBYs!!

  • @Simply_Simian
    @Simply_Simian Год назад +3

    Remove the gatekeepers and get the project done. The need for this is so blatant it boggles the psyche to even need to explain it. How is there resistance to this? Dissonance is rife in Vancouver.

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +1

      I have recently attended public hearings in city hall on a topic of missing middle. I have asked city staff: why is proposed FSR is limited to 1.0 (currently up to 0.86), why can’t we build more? The reply was, that we don’t have enough infrastructure (sewage in particular). However, here we are offered to build with the FSR of 3.5 - more than doubling population of the neighborhood. Suspicious, isn’t it?
      Moreover, if you wish to add units to your RS lot (single family zoning), you will be subject to DCLs, CACs and Density Bonusing (all in all combined it comes in hundreds of thousands per unit cost). On contrast, Senakw payed less than 7 200 CAD per unit. The total of 43 million for 6000 units - less than a single school (Henry Hudson Elementary School costs 45 million).
      Is it OK to deprive all small land owners from the development rights, call them NIMBY the same time and then arbitrary grant those development rights to somebody else?
      Who is real gatekeeper here?

  • @giftedfooljjhg1981thepasmb
    @giftedfooljjhg1981thepasmb Год назад +1

    We blah blah money money

  • @PatHand-og9yd
    @PatHand-og9yd Год назад +6

    Developers all speak from the same songbook, indigenous or not: turn greenspace into profit. Dress it up with a few cherry trees here, some social housing there, get that density bonus approved, and voila: money in the bank.

    • @realtorjeremy
      @realtorjeremy Год назад +1

      What's wrong with providing value and receiving a profit? We need more housing

    • @PatHand-og9yd
      @PatHand-og9yd Год назад +2

      @@realtorjeremy When greenspace is gone, it is gone forever.

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +2

      @@realtorjeremy Perception of value is not universal. It depends on many factors. If I had home overlooking Jericho Lands - the proposed project would have negative perceived value.

    • @dylanc9174
      @dylanc9174 8 месяцев назад +1

      ​@@PatHand-og9ydThere is plenty of greenspace, and it isn't gone forever. When the housing crisis is averted we can rezone the land, and return the wilderness. What we can't get back are the lives lost because you want slightly more parks in the city.

    • @sanderstar1000
      @sanderstar1000 5 месяцев назад

      People need shelter to live. Simple.

  • @johnnyboyvan
    @johnnyboyvan Год назад +4

    Looks ridiculous for that area.

  • @billpetersen298
    @billpetersen298 Год назад +1

    I love the words sustainable, environmental, organic!!
    Like buying a Chinese (brown coal) made Tesla, or BYD.
    We’re just digging a deeper hole, for ourselves.

  • @DavidTa2
    @DavidTa2 11 месяцев назад

    Eat the rich

  • @f.s.155
    @f.s.155 Год назад +11

    You can kiss Jericho beach goodbye. It's already overcrowded. Another beautiful area of Vancouver ruined by riff raff.

    • @JJJJ-vn1ix
      @JJJJ-vn1ix Год назад +16

      You live in a city. What do you expect?

    • @VijayKumar-dn4pz
      @VijayKumar-dn4pz Год назад

      It's exactly because of this NIMBY non-sense that Canada has a housing crisis. Sounds to be that the Jericho beach is about to have a lot of successful businesses.

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +3

      @@JJJJ-vn1ix , I expect equal development rights for all land owners in the city. Why, does some people supposed to pay for infrastructure for other people to benefit from it with no benefit for the payer. We are not talking charity - this is for profit project.

    • @penstateftw422
      @penstateftw422 Год назад

      @@antonburdin9756 in your home country they build for expanding population cant come to another country and think they only care about current owners. its all about the future. your investment is a small small small % of anything in 100 yrs. where a big development is actually something

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +3

      @@penstateftw422 , what do you mean by “my home country”?

  • @lenadahling
    @lenadahling Год назад +9

    On one hand, they're just doing what everyone else has done, and taking their turn cashing in. On the other, building those monstrosities by the beach will totally kill the beach vibe, and make it even more difficult to access those busy public parks. While the social housing aspect is great, when people say "density" I don't think they understand what "density" means - are they actually advocating for, okay with, and enjoying people living in sardine tins on top of each other, fighting for already scarce and expensive parking, and sitting in traffic congestion? Do they actually believe it's feasible to live in North America, outside of NYC, without a car? Canada added a million people last year, and driving around this Saturday, in traffic - on a Saturday - really hits home just how much this unfettered population explosion is costing us. Both the city planners and the federal government have lost the plot. They're out of any actual economic development ideas, so they've resorted to immigrants' money for growth, while regressing our social development to that of overpopulated, under-served third world countries. Great plan to move Canadians' quality of life forward, while sourcing slaves to work for corporate owners. It's all going to pot.

    • @lenadahling
      @lenadahling Год назад +2

      P.S. This isn't about NIMBYism, but about anti-YIMBYism. Just because you don't want to build everywhere to the max, doesn't mean you don't want to build AT ALL. What happened to the PLANNING aspect of planning? I hope they come to a reasonable proposal that develops some, but without obstructive monstrosity.

    • @ruzzianbot
      @ruzzianbot Год назад +5

      We have plenty of room for new immigrants, we just mandate building low density car centric development and block new developments to the point where any new development will be massive towers to fill demand. Vancouver is a big city and having single family homes just outside the city centre is ridiculous, we need more housing, and plans like these are good for the city.

    • @fallingpizza11
      @fallingpizza11 Год назад

      you have no idea what your talking about.
      living like sardines? are you out of your mind? sounds like you need to chill and make friends with your neighbors and talk to strangers. maybe then you'll be less worried about more people living around you.

    • @antonburdin9756
      @antonburdin9756 Год назад +2

      @@ruzzianbot , I would disagree with you on the conclusion. It makes no sense to limit 80% of the land to the maximum of 4 units and then going crazy on 1% of the land. Projects like these will only further inflate land value for everyone while bringing very small property tax per resident (most of our property tax is land tax). Allowing mixed use missing middle development all over the city would be much better solution. Development rights should be distributed among all landowners rather then given to selected few.

    • @MrAlen6e
      @MrAlen6e Год назад

      Is people like you have have completely destroyed missing middle housing for the middle class with this outdated zoning laws of post war suburbia. If anything your the past, any urban planner around the wold will tell you the current suburbia model is not only unsustainable, is environmentally damaging and a drain to taxpayers. The planning aspect IS to create communities no the monsters that suburbia has created.

  • @2and20
    @2and20 7 месяцев назад

    NIMBYism at its finest.

  • @Goobycraft
    @Goobycraft 10 месяцев назад

    GOD DAMN NIMBYS!

  • @user-uz1si3fu1i
    @user-uz1si3fu1i 4 месяца назад

    Homes In Canada Are currently being built for the first time ever in its history