“When will it be too late for Vancouver?” Rob had asked during our regular Zoom meeting to discuss Vancouver happenings and politics. We had worked our way through the minefields of Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) and Development Cost Levies (DCLs), were now moving on to weightier subjects.
Rob observed, “So this CAC/DCL bait and switch may explain why neighbourhoods are confused and upset when they bear the costs of new or redevelopment, such as pressure on schools, parks and daycare, not to mention roads and transit. They may seldom see the benefits they assumed would flow to their neighbourhood from the CACs and DCLs charged for the privilege of adding new homes, offices or commercial development.”
“Got it in one,” I continued. “Until about 2009, the costs of running the city departments that grant Development and Building permits were pretty much covered by the fees charged for those permits—not the CACs or DCLs, just the development, building and trade permit fees for processing permits to design and construct, which are additional to CACs and DCLs. The detailed Development and Building permit fees, taken together, paid the cost of running the departments that managed the process. In fact, they often returned some excess revenue to the general city coffers. I hope you agree there is nothing wrong with a city department charging what it needs to cover its day-to-day operations, with a small rainy-day surplus to cover the lean years.” Rob nodded. “But that’s not how it’s turned out in the past decade.” I continued.
“By 2010, various city departments led by Planning started expanding their staff and programs dramatically, with their increased operational costs funded somewhat by increased property taxes, but mostly from the pot of CAC/DCL money, which had become general revenue in 2009 instead of being reserved for affected neighbourhoods. In just the past 5 years planning staff have increased by more than 200 full time positions—as a simple tax paying citizen, I can’t find out how many total staff they have, but 200 more is a lot!”
I was getting a head of steam now. “How to grow the pie to feed the staff and program proliferation? Grow the number and scale of projects, of course. And that’s been happening. In a recent analysis, I identified almost 32,000 new homes in various stages of development through rezoning, mostly comprised of mega projects—and I know I missed some, because folks keep telling me what I missed.”
Rob raised his Zoom hand, asked: “What’s important about the 32,000 number?”
I smiled. “32,000 more homes is what Metro Vancouver’s Housing Demand estimates as the City of Vancouver’s housing needs for the next decade.”
“So we’re good then?” Rob asked, now a bit timidly.
“We’re good if we’re okay with way over developing.” I was on a roll, kept going. “While these expensive mega projects proceed, more affordable incremental development under existing zoning also continues, but much more slowly, as city staff sets it aside to “follow the money.” The increase in city revenues from the four-storey redevelopment we would like to see to rejuvenate our existing commercial streets is chump change compared to most mega projects and big rezonings. And because formerly four storey developments are being routinely rezoned to six or twelve storeys or more, land originally zoned for four storeys immediately increases in value based on the greater potential development, whether it’s redeveloped now or later. This dramatically increases property taxes on the very mom and pop stores that makes a neighbourhood, driving them out of business. In short, we’re eviscerating our neighbourhoods, then approving and building way more housing than we will need at much higher densities and heights, which cost much more to build so will never be affordable. We’re approving a ton of really expensive homes.”
“So why isn’t this more widely known?” asked Rob, stepping right into the trap I’d set. I explained: “For more than a year, city staff have been unwilling to provide to City Council, let alone lowly taxpayers like us, basic, usable statistics about what’s happening in what they call “the development pipeline,” which includes both the mega project rezonings and the neighbourhood-scale projects. Nor can Council discover from planning staff what the city’s existing “zoned capacity is.” That’s planner-speak for “how much does the current zoning allow to be built—no rezoning or changes to zoning districts?” In my recent analysis, I estimated that about 11,000 new homes could be built within the zoned capacity of just the city’s neighbourhood commercial zones—that’s three storeys of cost effective wood frame housing above shops. Add to that a projected 4,000 laneway homes over the next decade and we are halfway to the housing growth that Metro Vancouver says we need without any rezonings. Add in incremental development in our residential neighbourhoods, something already permitted without rezoning, and we should be fine.”
“So,” I moved into my finale, “When will it be too late for Vancouver?”
“We will lose a bit of Vancouver as each view of our mountains and water is blocked.”
“We will lose a bit of Vancouver each time an older, affordable rental building is demolished in favour of a high-end high-rise condominium project, even with a pittance of so-called “affordable” rentals.”
“We will lose a bit of Vancouver each time we fail to consider neighbourhoods and their residents’ input—a local shop closes, never to return, to be replaced by boarded-over storefronts, or frost-fenced “community gardens” awaiting the glacial pace of rejuvenating development at any scale—or the wholesale abandonment of existing neighbourhood commercial areas in favour of creating entirely new commercial areas for the residents of mega projects instead of long-time residents.”
“We will lose a bit of Vancouver each time another former Vancouver child, now grown, leaves for afar. Perhaps they will be replaced by a high paid knowledge worker from somewhere else, who will wonder at the beauty of Vancouver and their luck in moving here—at least until their view, their access to light, their favourite local eatery, shoe repair shop or mom & pop convenience shop is shuttered by exorbitant rent or street parking fees or any of the unnecessary charges and changes that make Vancouver one of the highest cost cities in the world.”
“And somewhere along that sad way,” I concluded, “it will be too late for Vancouver. I just hope we still have time to change course and save our city.”
***
My original post stopped with the sad comments above. However, Part 1 of this Conversation elicited feedback that caused me to add the following coda. I’ve continued with Rob’s voice, even though the feedback came from another, who will recognize their words:
***
Rob absorbed my comments for a few moments, then responded: “I wonder if it’s already too late for Vancouver. Consider: there is already limited affordability to rent, let alone buy; there is no longer any meaningful citizen engagement that is actually listened to when it matters; almost every character neighbourhood is a shell of what it was even 5 years ago; and no one I know can offer even one sliver of hope—not one. What can you offer against that? By what metric can you say we still have time?”
Now it was my turn to pause. After a few moments, I summarized Rob’s thoughts: “Real affordability; citizen engagement; vital neighbourhoods—I think you’ve nailed in one…actually three.”
“Rob, my metric is hope. There are many Vancouverites concerned about exactly your points. They are beginning to come together with alternative approaches that will be shared leading up to the next civic election in late 2022. But I do agree with you that 2022 will be our last chance to save Vancouver for those who still call it home.”
***
Brian Palmquist is a Vancouver-based architect, building envelope and building code consultant and LEED Accredited Professional (the first green building system). He is semi-retired, so not beholden to any client or city hall. These conversations mix real discussion with research and observations based on a 40+ year career including the planning, design and construction of almost every type and scale of project. He is the author of the Amazon best seller “An Architect’s Guide to Construction.”