The VHF & Friends social housing project

[VicHockeyFan]

Just when you thought I was against social housing, I throw you a curve.

I use two common migration routes from my home to McDonalds, my home to Wellburns, my home to Logan's Pub etc., you get the idea.

I'm struck by the width of Balmoral Street all the way from Quadra to Cook, as well as Mason from Quadra to Vancouver.

And I have an idea.

I think it is a given that if land was free or cheap, we sure could build social housing on it and recover the mortagage on the improvements and upkeep from even modest rents.

I think we have the ability to take some roadway right-of-way from both these streets and covert them to residential lots on which social housing could be built.

Both streets are huge, and both are never likely to need their generous girth, it's not like they are to become major throughways in any type of future planning.

Also, both are adjacent or near a couple of different churches, churches whose congregations might well be interested in overseeing the units after build-out.

I honestly think there is enough room to build back-to-back somewhat narrow duplexes along the one side of the road, while even maintaining the existing sidewalk between them and the current buildings/lots on the street.

If I had some half-ass software to draw things, I'll do it once I take some measurements.

Any thoughts, anyone? I'd really like to do a little work on this then pitch it to the City.

Many years ago, Gene Miller mused about blocking some through streets, think like all those grid streets in Fernwood/Oaklands, and then building homes back to back where you have blocked them. This is a similar idea, but I think even less restricting to traffic flow.

I do have a question about current property owners' right to lot frontage, ie. if you have a commercial lot, like the Speedy Glass building backing onto Mason, do you owe them to always have access to Mason along their entire lot line, for future use? Or if you give them access to the existing rear doors they have now, is that enough? Or is this negotioable on a case-by-case basis, perhaps?

[Bernard]

I first came across the idea of blocking streets and adding back to back houses as the blockage in 1993 during the CityPlan process in Vancouver. It was an idea suggested by a number of students in architecture at UBC, they had a whole mock of a neighbhourhood with this idea.

I think it is something that has to be seriously considered because too much of out cities are owned by the city in the form of road right of ways. City owned property does not help pay for the costs of operating the city. Roads are also impervious surfaces.

I do not know the stat for the City of Victoria, but for the City of Vancouver, 45% of the area of the city is owned by the city.

Within the core of area of Greater Victoria, I suspect there are about 1000 locations where this could be done. Doing this would add 2000 residences and house about 5000 people. It would also transition about 270 acres of publicly owned roads into private single family homes. That is about 45 km of roads

The increase of non impervious surfaces would be around 100 to 130 acres.

This would also add in the range of $5,000,000 in property taxes.

Local governments would also average 2km fewer of road maintenance per year.

It would also dramatically improve street hockey options in the region with so many more cul de sacs.

This would increase density and create quieter neighbourhoods.

[sebberry]

Can you post some Streetview links to the roads you want to build on?

Shipping containers can be used too.. people make houses out of those and they'd be quite cheap.

[VicHockeyFan]

900 blk Balmoral.

1000 blk Balmoral.

900 blk Mason

Look at all the space there on the right, you could build right up to the fence-line of the apartment building parking lot.

[piltdownman]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Can you post some Streetview links to the roads you want to build on?

Shipping containers can be used too.. people make houses out of those and they'd be quite cheap.

Kinda like Container City (London, UK)

[Sparky]

I like the looks of this container house.

http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/09/25/...rbinger-house/

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by piltdownman

Kinda like Container City (London, UK)

Well it's certainly vibrant

[PulpVictor]

I've done a lot of research on containers. There is a plethora of them because of the economy. There are several companies in Vancouver that sell them. They have hardwood floors, and are structurally very strong (they travel the high seas after all). I have looked at several designs made from containers, and in Europe they get very creative. California, too. Problem is, they would probably have to go through some massive approval process. Getting anything done with the City (any city, except maybe Uclulet) takes a lot of work, persistence, and time. Who can afford to do that without getting paid? It makes more sense to me to find already residentially zoned land in Victoria, and cut a deal with the owner. A large (beautiful) high rise of affordable units (rental / condo mixture) is what I think has a better chance of approval. The city has grants for developers to build 'affordable' housing. We live in the 6th least affordable place on the PLANET!!! It's time for someone to build something in the downtown that makes sense.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by PulpVictor

I've done a lot of research on containers. There is a plethora of them because of the economy. There are several companies in Vancouver that sell them. They have hardwood floors, and are structurally very strong (they travel the high seas after all). I have looked at several designs made from containers, and in Europe they get very creative. California, too. Problem is, they would probably have to go through some massive approval process. Getting anything done with the City (any city, except maybe Uclulet) takes a lot of work, persistence, and time. Who can afford to do that without getting paid? It makes more sense to me to find already residentially zoned land in Victoria, and cut a deal with the owner. A large (beautiful) high rise of affordable units (rental / condo mixture) is what I think has a better chance of approval. The city has grants for developers to build 'affordable' housing. We live in the 6th least affordable place on the PLANET!!! It's time for someone to build something in the downtown that makes sense.

Well, you convince the City to do the work. And the land is FREE, better than any deal with a private landowner, right from the get-go.

[Dennis Carlsen]

A few logistics that would have to be overcome. The City has designated Balmoral as a major street connecting traffic between Cook and Quadra. (explains why it's so wide). The process for closing the street and creating a lot is a long and complicated process. The City generally needs the approval of adjoining property owners or offer the land to them first.
Balmoral Road likely has underground services which couldn't be built over.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by Dennis Carlsen

A few logistics that would have to be overcome. The City has designated Balmoral as a major street connecting traffic between Cook and Quadra. (explains why it's so wide). The process for closing the street and creating a lot is a long and complicated process. The City generally needs the approval of adjoining property owners or offer the land to them first.
Balmoral Road likely has underground services which couldn't be built over.

Hmm. Well, it's not a major street and can't see how it ever will be. Maybe back in the day they thought it might be. And the services, well, they can move them over, still plenty of street to bury them under once we plunk down the houses. My low-slope roof bungalows are going to need a bit of a basement for the kids rooms, so I'll have a digger on site. I've got time to see it take two years to happen. I can see that some of the adjoining properties are old churches that aren't going anywhere and on the 800 blks, commercial that might be easy (ie. no-nonsense) to deal with. The 900blk of Balmoral might pose more of a negotiation problem with several residential lots adjoining.

[Coreyburger]

Closing off the streetgrid sounds like a great idea, but if you close non-motorized traffic off as well, you merely make driving more attractive. This is one of the reasons why suburbs are so car-centric.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ I'm not closing any grid, I'm making two 4-lane streets into two two two-lane streets. The thingy Bernard describes still has pedestrian/bike thru access.

[PulpVictor]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

Well, you convince the City to do the work. And the land is FREE, better than any deal with a private landowner, right from the get-go.

Nothing is really free. And, nobody works for nothing.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by PulpVictor

Nothing is really free. And, nobody works for nothing.

Two Johnson Street bridge communications people don't work for free, but we are paying them to do nothing, is that the same thing?

Volunteers work for nothing.

No, the land isn't free, well, hold on, it is really. No one ever paid for that Balmoral street land.

[Ms. B. Havin]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

Two Johnson Street bridge communications people don't work for free, but we are paying them to do nothing, is that the same thing?

Ziiiiinnnnggg!

(Sorry, couldn't resist. Resume regular programming now.)

[G-Man]

VHF this is a great idea. There are a lot of streets that are far wider than they need to be. North Park could easily be brought down to two lanes. As could Balmoral and Mason but all over the city there are places where it seems that the original intention was to allow 737 taxi clearance rather than alternating traffic.

The city could make deals with current property owners to give them the option of purchasing the sq footage in front of their property for a larger development as well.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by G-Man

VHF this is a great idea. There are a lot of streets that are far wider than they need to be. North Park could easily be brought down to two lanes. As could Balmoral and Mason but all over the city there are places where it seems that the original intention was to allow 737 taxi clearance rather than alternating traffic.

The city could make deals with current property owners to give them the option of purchasing the sq footage in front of their property for a larger development as well.

Balmoral is funny. It has "angle parking Sundays only". OK, and Sunday is probably the busiest day on that street, with the two churches nearby. So why is it only angle parking in Sundays? Let it be angle parking other days, and even with my new housing units we might not even lose any street parking.

Yes, as I've previously posted somewhere, Rithet Street in James Bay is super-wide, someone pointed out it was a street-car terminus back in the day. Now it's just a super-wide road, ithcing for some nice back-to-back bungalows and other niceties to make the street come alive in flora. It's one block long, one block off Dallas Rd. No one can say this street needs to be so wide.

Street-view of Rithet.

Rithet has apartment buildings all along the north side, so I think we can jam my bungalows along that side of the road, still leaving a nice sidewalk between them and the apartment buildings' front lawns.

[G-Man]

There is of course Rithet Street in James Bay which was originally planned as an A380 assembly yard.

It must 6 cars wide

[G-Man]

Simul-post jinx!

[gumgum]

I think St. Laurence is even wider.