admin by Colin Ruffles | 18 Oct 2020
Topics:
Green Streets & Public Spaces

Avoid tall buildings close to the South side of both Beacon and Bevan Avenues.

Discuss this idea...

6 comments
Sort by
Avatar
Richard FitzZaland on 2nd Nov 2020

surely this is not an either/or issue? I suspect that ignoring parking when we have made no real progress in LRT, or other public transit improvements is hopeless. So, we need to work together to figure out a realistic plan that meets the real needs of people who currently depend upon their car, while building infrastructure that can reduce dependency on cars. AND, in the meantime, also pay attention to spaces that make living and working here more comfortable, like courtyards, and walkways, and all-weather public spaces. I suspect we are collectively clever enough to figure this out.

Avatar
Idea author Colin Ruffles on 18th Oct 2020

Sunshine during late autumn, winter and early spring only penetrates Beacon and Bevan Avenues in places. Tall buildings fronting these avenues on the south side could them into wet, windy, cold unattractive places. When the sun shines make sure it penetrates!

cnewcomb@sidney.ca

Hi Colin, did you know that the current Downtown Local Area Plan has specific height suggestions for the south side of Beacon Avenue?

Check out page 38 of the LAP: http://www.sidney.ca/Assets/Development+Services/Bylaws/1920+OCP+-+Sch+A.pdf

Do you support this current plan, or do you think it needs to be changed?

Avatar
Eric T on 18th Oct 2020

While it is true that during the winter months shading is an issue in the winter, in the hot summer sun, the shade is welcome.
In terms of developments, we should be building places that have courtyards instead of parking lots, balconies and awnings instead of blank walls, Permitting things to be built more incrementally.

cnewcomb@sidney.ca

But Eric, where will the vehicles park if there are only courtyards? Most residents still expect a parking space to be provided with their dwelling unit.

Avatar
Eric T on 16th Nov 2020

      Corey, this is outdated thinking.  People these days are more concerned with finding an affordable place to live. Besides, I dont think you give people enough credit. If they can find a place to live without a parking space, people are resourceful, besides,  required parking  contributes negatively to the affordable housing crisis that we are currently in.    The answer is to price the street. Either through meters or through a permit auction system, or a combination of the two. Better yet, put the residents and business owners in charge of what happens to the net gains of the parking through the creation of Parking Benefit Neighbourhoods/ Districts.        The fact that the town subsidizes on street parking by providing it AND to add insult to injury, requires all land uses to provide parking for cars. This has the effect of undermining the price that private property owners can charge for providing the service of parking.  The town is preventing small business opportunities by having these two policies in place.     Another fact is, in order to comply with  the Climate change accountability act, Sidney, along with many other municipalities must :-“Under the Act, B.C.’s GHG emissions are to be reduced by at least 40 per cent below 2007 levels by 2030, 60 per cent by 2040, and 80 per cent by 2050. ” I would ask, how are we doing on that one???     Transportation is the largest emissions source in BC. In order to do this, a serious mode shift away from driving has to occur. The town has a number of policies that it could change to assist in this mode shift.  For example zoning. There are many things within the zoning code that could help with this. Of course the other one is eliminating parking requirements. A change to tax policy to a Land Value Tax  (LVT) also would help, but I believe that would require changes at the provincial level.