Rental—Streamlining or Steamrolling, Part 2
City Conversations No One Else is Having #11, Part2
Further and darker thoughts about what the report, “Streamlining Rental Around Local Shopping Areas,” might really mean. It’s now scheduled to be voted on by City Council on November 16th.
In Vancouver, 14 Storeys is now Taller than 17 Storeys—photo credit City Hall Watch
“What do you mean, they’re voting next week and it could be “game over” for much of the city?” My son was clearly taken aback by my sad face, slumped shoulders and resigned tone. I had told him I didn’t feel up to a bike ride, so we were camped at Brown’s for brunch. Besides, it was raining.
I tried to explain. “Originally, City Council was to vote on this Streamlining Rental report in mid-December, but they’ve moved it up a full month, calling it “unfinished business,” whatever that is. Sentiment at the public hearings seemed pretty split, although many in favour are active in the development industry. I’m worried that if this is rushed through, and contrary to the staff presentation, there will never again be a public hearing around rental rezonings—they will simply be approved by city staff without any reference to the public through the public hearing process.”
My son looked puzzled, offered: “But you told me that the Streamlining Rental policy means that each and every residential rental rezoning, both on and off major streets, what you call “arterials,” would require a public hearing so that the merits of each proposal could be presented to and commented on by members of the public—seems like a no brainer that folks in the affected neighbourhood at least would want a say.”
“That’s correct at this exact moment,” I responded, “but the provincial government is using its legislative majority to pull a fast one on BC communities—Vancouver is not currently covered by this this new legislation, only announced two weeks ago, but can ask the province to amend its charter to be consistent. And why would the province object to a change consistent with what it’s proposing everywhere else in the province?”
My son looked dumbfounded. “What’s the “fast one” the province is trying on?”
“It’s being cleverly packaged as a move to increase housing,” I answered. “But when you get into the details, it says they are updating the Local Government Act to, quote, “remove the default requirement for local governments to hold hearings that are consistent with the official community plan.” That’s huge.”
My son looked puzzled. “Seems innocent enough—what are you worried about?”
I sighed. “Well, outside of Vancouver, this means, for example, that if a municipality’s Official Community Plan (OCP) contemplates, say, high-rise development in an area that’s currently zoned low-rise, and someone applies to spot rezone a property in order to build high-rise, then it can be approved without any public hearing. Period.”
“But this is Vancouver, which you just said doesn’t have that rule. And I remember you telling me Vancouver doesn’t have its own OCP, so what’s the big deal?” He and I both smiled, he for remembering my previous ramblings, I because he was listening—well, sometimes.
“The big deal,” I replied, “could work like this: firstly, the city assures its citizens that any future development under Streamlining Rental would be considered at a public hearing—so on the basis of that, let’s say, Streamlining Rental is passed; secondly and separately, the city goes to the province and says, “Me too, please!” about the province’s Local Government Act changes, and the province obliges so for once Vancouver and the rest of the province are in sync; then finally, the next time and each time thereafter that a Streamlining Rental specific proposal comes forward, the city doesn’t even advise the neighbourhood—instead, city staff send notification postcards to the folks living within a couple of blocks of the proposal, then ignore or reinterpret their concerns as they have been taught to do, approving a project as they like it.”
“That’s a bit harsh,” answered my son. “What makes you suspicious that city staff would ignore neighbours’ thoughts?”
“Personal experiences,” I answered with a wry smile. “You remember that the never-at-home homeowner two doors down from us built a roof deck without permits—I queried this and city staff admitted to me the absence of permits long before construction was complete, and that they would investigate, but somehow it got built anyway. When I followed up, I was told their “protection of privacy” trumped my concern about illegal construction. I hear such things regularly—does not give me confidence neighbours’ concerns are heard or acted on, even when involving illegal construction.”
I continued: “You know the single-family home that’s slated to replace the character home next door to us?” He nodded. “I just discovered through my own searching of the city’s website that the proposal now includes significant changes as well as substantially ignoring my concerns about privacy and overlook—I was supposed to receive a copy of the co-called “prior to” letter, but that never happened. I guess staff were too busy to keep me advised of work proposed two meters from our home. Why would I think they would perform better on a proposed Streamlining Rental project?”
My son’s eyes had narrowed considerably, and his eyebrows were now knit together, even as his usual smile transformed into a frown, almost a scowl.
He asked: “So what does this mean for the other projects you are concerned about—the Vancouver Plan, the Broadway Plan, the Jericho Lands and the many others I’ve forgotten the names of?”
I smiled at his connecting the dots. “Got it in one! If these plans, which involve tens of thousands of largely high-rise homes with only a very small percentage of so-called “affordable” homes, are approved by City Council, they will be de facto OCPs. Thereafter, every project that would have involved a public hearing will be handled directly between city staff and applicants—the neighbours and general public will be entirely left out.”
I continued. “And let’s not forget my friend’s recent research into the Cambie Corridor, where individual projects do not require rezoning. He analyzed more than 50 projects in the Corridor, finding they were on average 13% (that’s 1/8th) above the maximum allowable building height, and all but three were over the maximum allowable floor space ratio. Not building my confidence about city staff’s management of individual projects.”
“And what were you saying,” he asked, “about some recent rezoning floor-to-floor heights?” I smiled again at his listening to my mutterings.
“Yes,” I replied, “a recent City Hall Watch Article noted how the city staff now refer to building storeys rather than building height. That’s how come a current building proposal described as 14-storey, but with 11 feet floor-to-floor heights, can be taller than a building described as 17-storey that has the more normal nine feet floor to floor. Another sleight of hand not designed to engender confidence in city staff. The Streamlining Rentals Table 2 already allows for 11 foot floor to floor storeys in the hundred of blocks it would affect, so this would appear to be a new normal—and not a good one.”
We ate the rest of our brunch in companionable, somewhat sad silence. The somewhat affordable three-storey walk-up rental building my son lives in is up for sale—the Broadway Plan will probably be its demise, especially if it can be replaced without a public hearing. He has talked about Vancouver’s unaffordability and how many of his friends have moved elsewhere.
“So whether I decide to leave or stay in Vancouver,” he mused, with a sad look, “I’ll not only need to be looking for a community and neighbourhood I like—I’ll need to research its OCP to see whether my neighbourhood character may be threatened in the future, with me having no recourse?” I nodded agreement. He continued, “So you, Mom, my friends and I will be in a constant state of uncertainty, pretty much forever? When all we want is to have a say as our neighbourhood evolves?”
I nodded as I paid the bill. “It more and more appears that streamlining how the city and province grow involves steamrolling over its citizens for the benefit and convenience of the politicians we elect and the city staff our taxes pay.” As was his custom, my son gave me a big hug before heading off—but a quieter, more wistful embrace than usual.
Brian Palmquist is a fully vaccinated 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.” He is also a member of team for a livable Vancouver, a new political party dedicated to restoring a livable Vancouver starting with the 2022 civic election.