No parking

[Urban Cowboy]

^^ Plenty of people in Vancouver don't have a car, yet work and are successful.

That's the demographic that building was intended for, not two car couples.

True, now lets compare differences in transit and alternative transportation options between Vancouver and here.

I'm not attempting to make a direct comparison, and you should understand we're talking about one building here.

That building is planted in a location that not only has a bus stop, but also gives the option of walking to downtown, and associated places of employment, as well as the Landmark area and it's opportunities, plus Capri is right there too, so I'd hardly view transportation as much of an issue for that development, provided of course that the target market is catered to.

[soupy]

Go up Wilden and houses have a 2 car garage with a driveway capable of holding 2 cars as well. And there still isnt enough parking.
Why?
Each basement suite has 1-2 cars, each main resident has 3. Plus they don't want to park in the driveway becasue they cannot then back out their car from the driveway. Street parking only available on one side.

But everyone complains after buying there still. It was known all along

[one wheel]

I'm sure people would use transit if it was convenient, I worked shifts & it didn't fit my schedule.

[my5cents]

Any development that scrimps on parking spaces ($ in the pocket of the developer) negatively affects the entire surrounding community.

People are asking for affordable housing ... parking is shown to increase the cost of housing ... so developers are forgoing parking to provide shelter that regular people can afford ... it's on us to understand that we get what we ask for but we should understand all the implications of that "ask"

We've asked for bigger roads, more lanes ... we get that but then complain that our taxes are increasing ...

What we were told we should have, "a car in every driveway", was a recipe for disaster that we bought into ... 50 years ago ... but now we're too addicted to change our ways so we blame anyone else

[note: when I bought my house 10 years ago I had 5 parking spaces adjacent to my lot plus an accessible single-car garage, through changes in the streetscape I have now have a single parking spot directly in front of my house and no vehicle access to my garage ... I welcome the changes and have made changes necessary so that I don't "require" more than I have now]

My point wasn't the saving for the buyers of the condos but the effect the lack of parking could have on neighbors. They didn't save anything on the purchase price, they just live nearby, and should be afforded the protection of city counsel.

[spooker]

How can they take away access to your garage? That'd be a fight'n scenario for me.

They asked ... we negotiated ... and then we found agreement ... I understood their reasoning for the request and it fit my own values, I just needed to not "give it away"

My point wasn't the saving for the buyers of the condos but the effect the lack of parking could have on neighbors. They didn't save anything on the purchase price, they just live nearby, and should be afforded the protection of city counsel.

I understand that ... but that's an example of our attitude towards parking ... I remember talking to a resident on Richter near Clement who had a real issue that the bike lane took away the parking in front of his house ... he took offence that the city had done that to him ... but it wasn't his to start off with ... nothing guarantees parking in front of your house ... at least they have parking passes that will make sure that people who are using your street on a regular basis are your neighbours and not random people going to a Rockets game ...

There's no "protection" that is called for outside of the property lines delineating our lot ...

[kgcayenne]

...
[note: when I bought my house 10 years ago I had 5 parking spaces adjacent to my lot plus an accessible single-car garage, through changes in the streetscape I have now have a single parking spot directly in front of my house and no vehicle access to my garage ... I welcome the changes and have made changes necessary so that I don't "require" more than I have now]

Wut.

You were compensated for that, right?

[my5cents]

I understand that ... but that's an example of our attitude towards parking ... I remember talking to a resident on Richter near Clement who had a real issue that the bike lane took away the parking in front of his house ... he took offence that the city had done that to him ... but it wasn't his to start off with ... nothing guarantees parking in front of your house ... at least they have parking passes that will make sure that people who are using your street on a regular basis are your neighbours and not random people going to a Rockets game ...

There's no "protection" that is called for outside of the property lines delineating our lot ...

That depends on the city. I'm sure many here are from the lower mainland, for example. In Vancouver parking in front of a residence (not talking highrise, just a residential lot) is restricted for non-residents to a maximum of three hours. In other areas where parking is at a premium such as near the PNE, the parking is restricted to residents with permits. So the residents do have a form of parking guarantee in those cities.

Most newer homes and all newer residential areas have off street parking for single family homes, but I can imagine in an older neighborhood where there is no off street parking, the arbitrary removal of parking would be an upset.

[JayByrd]

[quote="KevinJP"]IMHO, this is a dispute between the owners and strata. It sounds like the strata took away 20 spots away from the tenants and made them visitor spots. Make the visitors park on the street like I do in other developments. Parking seems to be secondary consideration to City Hall. Just build it.[/quote

The strata *is* the owners though. Strata council doesn't control the retail space.

The parking created by the developer turned out to be insufficient for the residents of the building. The addition of retail shops on the property will only make this worse. Additionally, the developer no longer owns the retail space in question. The developer can't do anything, the residents can't do anything, so their only shot is to get the City to block this retail spot from opening. And Council hasn't made any promises, but they seem sympathetic. We'll see if a compromise can be reached.

I don't blame the residents for being dissatisfied, whether they should have known better or not. I'm just not sure there's anything that can be done now.

[alanjh595]

^^^^^^^^agreed^^^^^^^^^ and, the purchasers were also sold on the idea of low strata fees when they signed up. Now that they see or unhappy with the level of service, they can have a vote and agree to pay extra every month for better service.