City Conversation #45: Mike Harcourt, former Vancouver Mayor & Premier of BC, outlines his concerns about Vancouver’s current planning, spot rezonings & the need to strengthen our communities.
In general, I agree with Mr. Harcourt's concerns and yours, Mr. Palmquist. I want to add a few of my own. First, accessibility is rarely mentioned and nearly all high-rises in Vancouver are stratas. Many of them are dangerously inaccessible or come with risks of entrapment for the vulnerable and the disabled. For instance, at our building the strata council, in its wisdom stopped issuing and re-issuing keys for the doors from the stairwell to the floors we live on. This is a problem for people who simply want to use the stairs for exercise, and to know that there are two routes to reach their home but the bigger concern is that these doors self-lock when they close. They close automatically as required by the fire code however the fire code does not require that they lock and locking them creates a significant hazard. The fire department can only enforce the fire code and it contains no terms, nor does it intend to address other potential hazards such as earthquakes, insurrection, building sink holes, sliding etc. The fire department may have 1000s of calls for a single event such as an earthquake and they may not be able to reach your building before many die. The strata council legally seems to have no jurisdiction to impose restrictions on access to one's privately owned strata lot but that doesn't prevent them from imposing their own rules.
It is a complete myth that stratas are fun democratically. They are, for the most part, feudal strongholds to be blunt and in fact the legislation designed in Mr. Harcourt's time, does not even allow for owners of these $million+ homes to dissent safely. There is no official opposition, nor any unofficial opposition and recent (past 4 or 5 years) case law has verified that an individual owner cannot hold to account the strata council member(s) who are making decisions such as to simply withhold the issue or re-issue of keys that would allow for access to one's floor. There is no rule or bylaw and any such rule or bylaw to prohibit access would be unenforceable as it would conflict with other laws such as property laws, human rights legislation and the residential tenancy act which requires that landlords give renters access to their homes via all routes, which is why realtors must make sure at the time of possession that a new owner has all keys to all locked doors. It should go without saying, right? Wrong! In most stratas there is little or no consumer protection and little or no safety from many types of abuse such as elder abuse, equity theft, etc. etc. These are communities within communities but they often do not provide for any type of actual, real community. They are hives at best.
To be clear we can get out of the building in a fire assuming the stairwells are not blocked by gas, fumes, fire, flames etc. The problem is that there is a cross-over floor every 5 floors but one cannot reach the cross-over floor if the stairwell is blocked say 2 floors down from your own floor. Worse, you cannot go back up and get back onto your floor and then try the other stairwell.... this is because the door closes, and LOCKS behind you as you enter the stairwell. So, your are trapped. The elevators shut down automatically in a fire or other disaster and in any case, some people do not want to use elevators at all. In no instance, would city hall tell the owner of a single family dwelling that they cannot use their back door, must lock it and give them the key. But the equivalent of that is happening in many stratas.
Worse, stratas are left to their own devices, and the assumption is you can just run for council and solve the problems once you are on council. But again, that is often impossible, because unlike city elections, strata elections are NOT DEMOCRATIC and even getting a secret ballot is next to impossible but more significantly anyone can gather as many proxies as they want from other owners because the legislation has done nothing to protect consumers from this horrific reality. Not anyone can vote in a municipal elections, but how the majority of owners (strata dwellers) in this city live, is often controlled by a very few people who self elect. You may say, well the proxy assignment documents are certified, right? Wrong... they just say there are but the legislation does not require these documents to be certified against any criteria nor does it specify who is to certify the document nor when. So, in some stratas the owners are governed by someone who has collected proxy assignment documents from anyone they can get them from. If it is a standing council member who is farming the assignments, they simply promise special assistance to those who hand across their proxy, then the councillor essentially self-elects or has their partner rotate through the council for them. It is tyranny in full bloom. The strata property act has no provisions to protect owners against fraud or corruption. Owners who seek to communicate with other owners are seen to be "out of line" and the council will use its powers to fully oppress them. In the first place most floors are secured one from the other and so it is not possible to connect easily with your neighbours other than the 3 or 4 who live on the same floor as you.
My point is that the sub-communities within these more and more massive stratas are alien to the main community, they are separate and apart by definition. Even the police will not assist often and just say "that is a strata issue" .... same with nearly all services. These private corporate communities are the norm and they are highly oppressive and certainly not viable on a long term basis. Costs to insure these buildings are skyrocketing first and foremost because government has done nothing to require that building codes are changed to prevent flooding (the main risk). So instead of requiring developers to water proof floors more effectively and give them a tiny slope and include a drain hole (in all wet rooms such as kitchens, laundry rooms and bathrooms, the legislature favours the developers as always and doesn't want to upset them, so practical, preventive measures that would save billions of dollars annually, simply do not happen. Instead of only one unit being affected in a small way, as all the water goes promptly down the drain, what we have is the regular occurrence of 10 or 20 units suffering massive destruction and people are out of home sometimes for up to 2 years. This is unsustainable but government does nothing! They have known what to do for more than 20 years and yet there is no change! The reason is simple, they don't want to disturb the developers in any way, as they proceed on their path toward covering every square inch of our city with mega high-rises run by an often corrupt few and/or by the PM companies who are often owned by the developer under a different name. Meanwhile, Ontario is taking significant steps forward to address their similar situation, but BC as always does little or nothing and changes that do happen, to the legislation (or as are slipped in via the BC Strata Property Regulations) are to the benefit, not of those who own and live in the buildings but to the advantage of property management companies and developers. Please don't tell me about the BC Law Institute's proposed changes... they fit the bill as described above and in the first place those reports are old, dusty, and never recommended much of anything in the first place.
This may be different than the community issue to which you have given rise, but the point is that the sub-communities within the 23 larger communities exact more controls on our lives than the municipality or the provincial government and even the BCCA has stated that strata is not government nor does it provide government like activities, so owners are not even protected by the constitution. Ask Mr. Tim Louis about this and get him to make comment!
Strata legislation has designed out of community, any version of community as we knew it when living in single family housing. It does not allow for many groups. If a young woman gets pregnant while living in a strata that has decided by vote (using these proxies as above) in age restrictions and suddenly kids are not allowed, she and husband are forced to move, not just out of the home they own but out of the community they live and likely work in.
So, for all of the above reasons, I say before building more of these bee hives, limit the number of units in a big way, and make major changes to the legislation to protect human rights, civil liberties and to allow for communities to exist at all. Plus, the impact of high-rises on the climate and on climate change is WAY BEHIND. They are hugely wasteful.
Brian, don't forget the massive Oakridge Transit station lands off 41st, and lying vacant for a decade, that is slated eventually to be on the scale of another Oakridge.
And strata home owner, yes, there needs to be a revamping of the SPA and Regs as you are correct, the big ones become a self contained community. Try the Civil Resolution Tribunal if the council in your building is not following the rules. And I believe every 3rd floor in an evacuation stairwell must be a passage set without key.
The transit station lands development never starts mainly because the City changes the allowable development density every year or so to the benefit of the developer. Why start if you may get more density next year. Your land value just keeps going up.
Congratulations on an a thorough analysis of the situation. The numbers certainly speak loud and clear: there is just way too much proposed density. Which leads to a question: when does density become too much? When does increased density destroy the character of a city?
It seems to me that the wonderful character of this City has come about due to the BALANCE between density, and public open space and amenities. Vancouver is recognized worldwide as an incredibly livable city, for this reason. So, the question arises: at what point do the current citizens of Vancouver protest the proposed massive increase to population? I suggest that the answer is: when our existing public space is being sacrificed in favour of a commercial property development. An example of this state of affairs is the Senakw project, being developed by a joint venture of the the Squamish Nation and WestBank.
I noticed in mid 2021 that an access road through Vanier Park was part of the Senakw project, and have since tried to bring this to the attention of the City Councillors, Park Board, local MP Dr. Hedy Fry, as well as the Minister of Public Works - all to no avail. An article was however published in the Vancouver Sun on 23rd August 2021 by John Mackie regarding this proposed road. In addition, I have distributed protest signs in Kits Point, which has generated a following of 250 protesters. I also host a website nosenakwroadway.com that highlights in detail the proposed roadway.
I conclusion I do hope that by shedding more light on the Senakw project, the issue of excessive density will become a major issue in the upcoming Mayoral election.
In general, I agree with Mr. Harcourt's concerns and yours, Mr. Palmquist. I want to add a few of my own. First, accessibility is rarely mentioned and nearly all high-rises in Vancouver are stratas. Many of them are dangerously inaccessible or come with risks of entrapment for the vulnerable and the disabled. For instance, at our building the strata council, in its wisdom stopped issuing and re-issuing keys for the doors from the stairwell to the floors we live on. This is a problem for people who simply want to use the stairs for exercise, and to know that there are two routes to reach their home but the bigger concern is that these doors self-lock when they close. They close automatically as required by the fire code however the fire code does not require that they lock and locking them creates a significant hazard. The fire department can only enforce the fire code and it contains no terms, nor does it intend to address other potential hazards such as earthquakes, insurrection, building sink holes, sliding etc. The fire department may have 1000s of calls for a single event such as an earthquake and they may not be able to reach your building before many die. The strata council legally seems to have no jurisdiction to impose restrictions on access to one's privately owned strata lot but that doesn't prevent them from imposing their own rules.
It is a complete myth that stratas are fun democratically. They are, for the most part, feudal strongholds to be blunt and in fact the legislation designed in Mr. Harcourt's time, does not even allow for owners of these $million+ homes to dissent safely. There is no official opposition, nor any unofficial opposition and recent (past 4 or 5 years) case law has verified that an individual owner cannot hold to account the strata council member(s) who are making decisions such as to simply withhold the issue or re-issue of keys that would allow for access to one's floor. There is no rule or bylaw and any such rule or bylaw to prohibit access would be unenforceable as it would conflict with other laws such as property laws, human rights legislation and the residential tenancy act which requires that landlords give renters access to their homes via all routes, which is why realtors must make sure at the time of possession that a new owner has all keys to all locked doors. It should go without saying, right? Wrong! In most stratas there is little or no consumer protection and little or no safety from many types of abuse such as elder abuse, equity theft, etc. etc. These are communities within communities but they often do not provide for any type of actual, real community. They are hives at best.
To be clear we can get out of the building in a fire assuming the stairwells are not blocked by gas, fumes, fire, flames etc. The problem is that there is a cross-over floor every 5 floors but one cannot reach the cross-over floor if the stairwell is blocked say 2 floors down from your own floor. Worse, you cannot go back up and get back onto your floor and then try the other stairwell.... this is because the door closes, and LOCKS behind you as you enter the stairwell. So, your are trapped. The elevators shut down automatically in a fire or other disaster and in any case, some people do not want to use elevators at all. In no instance, would city hall tell the owner of a single family dwelling that they cannot use their back door, must lock it and give them the key. But the equivalent of that is happening in many stratas.
Worse, stratas are left to their own devices, and the assumption is you can just run for council and solve the problems once you are on council. But again, that is often impossible, because unlike city elections, strata elections are NOT DEMOCRATIC and even getting a secret ballot is next to impossible but more significantly anyone can gather as many proxies as they want from other owners because the legislation has done nothing to protect consumers from this horrific reality. Not anyone can vote in a municipal elections, but how the majority of owners (strata dwellers) in this city live, is often controlled by a very few people who self elect. You may say, well the proxy assignment documents are certified, right? Wrong... they just say there are but the legislation does not require these documents to be certified against any criteria nor does it specify who is to certify the document nor when. So, in some stratas the owners are governed by someone who has collected proxy assignment documents from anyone they can get them from. If it is a standing council member who is farming the assignments, they simply promise special assistance to those who hand across their proxy, then the councillor essentially self-elects or has their partner rotate through the council for them. It is tyranny in full bloom. The strata property act has no provisions to protect owners against fraud or corruption. Owners who seek to communicate with other owners are seen to be "out of line" and the council will use its powers to fully oppress them. In the first place most floors are secured one from the other and so it is not possible to connect easily with your neighbours other than the 3 or 4 who live on the same floor as you.
My point is that the sub-communities within these more and more massive stratas are alien to the main community, they are separate and apart by definition. Even the police will not assist often and just say "that is a strata issue" .... same with nearly all services. These private corporate communities are the norm and they are highly oppressive and certainly not viable on a long term basis. Costs to insure these buildings are skyrocketing first and foremost because government has done nothing to require that building codes are changed to prevent flooding (the main risk). So instead of requiring developers to water proof floors more effectively and give them a tiny slope and include a drain hole (in all wet rooms such as kitchens, laundry rooms and bathrooms, the legislature favours the developers as always and doesn't want to upset them, so practical, preventive measures that would save billions of dollars annually, simply do not happen. Instead of only one unit being affected in a small way, as all the water goes promptly down the drain, what we have is the regular occurrence of 10 or 20 units suffering massive destruction and people are out of home sometimes for up to 2 years. This is unsustainable but government does nothing! They have known what to do for more than 20 years and yet there is no change! The reason is simple, they don't want to disturb the developers in any way, as they proceed on their path toward covering every square inch of our city with mega high-rises run by an often corrupt few and/or by the PM companies who are often owned by the developer under a different name. Meanwhile, Ontario is taking significant steps forward to address their similar situation, but BC as always does little or nothing and changes that do happen, to the legislation (or as are slipped in via the BC Strata Property Regulations) are to the benefit, not of those who own and live in the buildings but to the advantage of property management companies and developers. Please don't tell me about the BC Law Institute's proposed changes... they fit the bill as described above and in the first place those reports are old, dusty, and never recommended much of anything in the first place.
This may be different than the community issue to which you have given rise, but the point is that the sub-communities within the 23 larger communities exact more controls on our lives than the municipality or the provincial government and even the BCCA has stated that strata is not government nor does it provide government like activities, so owners are not even protected by the constitution. Ask Mr. Tim Louis about this and get him to make comment!
Strata legislation has designed out of community, any version of community as we knew it when living in single family housing. It does not allow for many groups. If a young woman gets pregnant while living in a strata that has decided by vote (using these proxies as above) in age restrictions and suddenly kids are not allowed, she and husband are forced to move, not just out of the home they own but out of the community they live and likely work in.
So, for all of the above reasons, I say before building more of these bee hives, limit the number of units in a big way, and make major changes to the legislation to protect human rights, civil liberties and to allow for communities to exist at all. Plus, the impact of high-rises on the climate and on climate change is WAY BEHIND. They are hugely wasteful.
Brian, don't forget the massive Oakridge Transit station lands off 41st, and lying vacant for a decade, that is slated eventually to be on the scale of another Oakridge.
And strata home owner, yes, there needs to be a revamping of the SPA and Regs as you are correct, the big ones become a self contained community. Try the Civil Resolution Tribunal if the council in your building is not following the rules. And I believe every 3rd floor in an evacuation stairwell must be a passage set without key.
The transit station lands development never starts mainly because the City changes the allowable development density every year or so to the benefit of the developer. Why start if you may get more density next year. Your land value just keeps going up.
Congratulations on an a thorough analysis of the situation. The numbers certainly speak loud and clear: there is just way too much proposed density. Which leads to a question: when does density become too much? When does increased density destroy the character of a city?
It seems to me that the wonderful character of this City has come about due to the BALANCE between density, and public open space and amenities. Vancouver is recognized worldwide as an incredibly livable city, for this reason. So, the question arises: at what point do the current citizens of Vancouver protest the proposed massive increase to population? I suggest that the answer is: when our existing public space is being sacrificed in favour of a commercial property development. An example of this state of affairs is the Senakw project, being developed by a joint venture of the the Squamish Nation and WestBank.
I noticed in mid 2021 that an access road through Vanier Park was part of the Senakw project, and have since tried to bring this to the attention of the City Councillors, Park Board, local MP Dr. Hedy Fry, as well as the Minister of Public Works - all to no avail. An article was however published in the Vancouver Sun on 23rd August 2021 by John Mackie regarding this proposed road. In addition, I have distributed protest signs in Kits Point, which has generated a following of 250 protesters. I also host a website nosenakwroadway.com that highlights in detail the proposed roadway.
I conclusion I do hope that by shedding more light on the Senakw project, the issue of excessive density will become a major issue in the upcoming Mayoral election.