Replace parking with housing in James Bay? Not if the yokels can help it.

image from the Times Colonist Victoria

As I think I conveyed in my Bureaucracy vs. Balls post, I believe the democratic process has its limitations as a decision-making tool.

Why? Because most people are uninformed (ignorant) on most topics and just react with emotion when an issue might even seemingly affect them.

They durk ur jahbs!

Let's give an example:

Victoria City Council is considering an application from a James Bay apartment building owner that proposes replacing a parking structure to build more housing. (Thanks to Vincent at Vincent's Victoria for catching this one.)

An innovative (for Victoria), win-win idea in my opinion.

Proposal:

- Replace a two-story parking structure with a 4-story, 15-unit building.

- Reduce parking to 56 rather than the required 140 spots for 108 units.

 Why:

- The owner says that there is and only ever has been 81 parking spots. "Of that 81, a very large percentage sit vacant all day every day. So all we're basically saying is if we've got a vacant parking lot there that someone is not using for whatever reason, then would it not be better served for everyone if it was a building rather than an empty parking lot?"

Uhh... Yes? Of course.

-  To makes things better, though, the owner is offering initiatives such as 25 car-share memberships, parking for 47 bikes, and new co-op car to be located on site.

Great!

Not so fast.

Response:

- City staff recommended that the application be denied and is taking it to a public hearing.

- And, Victorians on timescolonist.ca are up in arms!!!!

 Purposely re-posted. Dey durk our parkin'!

 Here are some gems from those readers:

This Mayor and most of his council are totally off the rails... What next? Please give us an election before this council turns JB and Fairfield into ghettoes [sic].

First goes the parking, then come the gangs!

This one is more thoughtful (i.e., long) but equally illogical:

I lived on St. James Street [where this is] about 15 years ago and there was no parking then; this will only make it worse. Apartment building owners should have to provide parking for all units in their building FOR FREE!!

Note to Mr. Tinney....if there's nowhere to park; people will NOT rent your apartments. You're shooting yourself in the foot on this one.

...the James Bay Neighbourhood Association was formed to... keep the ambience of James Bay by keeping as many houses as possible and not destroy the "neighbourhood" feel by slamming up a bunch of boxes!!!!!

So, let's get this straight.

1. Someone else should have to pay for people's parking -- even if they don't have/use a car.

2. We should prevent this owner from 'shooting himself in the foot', because he obviously hasn't thought about what he's doing.

3. The ambiance of James Bay will be better served by a parking structure than a 4-story apartment building (with people inside) that encourage active transportation.

Yeah, that makes sense to me.

Well, sarcasm aside, I am going to try to leave this as a post about the news and the yahoos rather than getting too into a discussion on parking and its impacts on our city. However, I will end with the importance of a quote from Mayor Fortin re the proposal.

It's a precedent. How do we balance those interests of a local community -- liveable, walkable, affordable living -- [with] the need for cars?"

To me, this is the issue in a nutshell.

Needs of community vs. need for cars.

a) less cars = more livable, enjoyable, people-friendly communities

b) less parking and car infrastructure = shorter distances and so more walkable communities

c) less parking (adds at least 15% to real estate/rental costs) = more affordable community

Seems like a pretty obvious solution. People or cars?

Besides, we're talking about JAMES BAY: You're either really old and not shuffling past Thrifty's and Heron Rock, or you aren't really old and work downtown, which is approximately less-than-a-car-ride away.

--

A discussion of parking shall come soon, including how parking reduces density, increases distances, and so reduces walkability, bikability, transit-ability; increases development cost and so encourages sprawl; reduces affordability for buyers, renters, and business owners; encourages driving and restricts active transport; creates environmental problems (e.g., heat sinks, drainage, pollution run-off); ruins the streetscape and is aesthetically not-pleasing, etc...