The Evolution of Hope

City Conversation #83: How the Vancouver election’s most hopeful promise came into being

September 29th 2022—an origin story about how TEAM develops policy collectively & carefully

“We can do better,” I thought as I reviewed TEAM for a Livable Vancouver’s policies around affordable housing & homelessness. They had been on our website pretty much unchanged since our policy conference almost a year ago. 

So much had happened since then. In October, 2021, all TEAM members were invited to refine policy in a dozen areas at a conference at the ANZA club, which was what we could afford with our modest membership fees and donor base. I had never been to a political party policy conference—it was very exciting, especially meeting masked but in person after so long in isolation with so many folks I respect so much. The level of expertise, the intensity of commitment, the worry about COVID were all palpable.

I chaired the Affordable Housing table at the ANZA conference, based, I guess, on my four decades experience as an architect and urban designer in Vancouver—plus I volunteered. Every policy committee chair was a knowledgeable volunteer. 

So much of what TEAM is comes from its completely democratic nature. Most attendees rotated between tables reflecting their areas of interest. Each table had a laptop open to Zoom, so those unable to attend in person in a pandemic were equally able to contribute and hear all suggestions made by those present in person. I and other table chairs kept detailed notes, organized them into policy statements as our homework. At our next group ANZA meeting, each accepted policy was ratified by vote. 

But that was a year ago. In the intervening months, candidates for Mayor, Council, Park Board and School Board had come forward, been vetted by a selection committee, then again voted on by the membership, a selection process apparently unique to TEAM, to my surprise. Not all of our candidates had even been identified by the time of our first policy conference. 

We were now in an election campaign, a much nastier one than any of our candidates had ever endured. Our decision to publish early the details of our twelve policy areas had opened us to relentless attack from various opponents whose platforms remain largely vague or opaque at this late date. But we were guided by our conviction that voters need to know the full range of our policies in order to make informed voting decisions.

Which brought me back to our Affordable Housing policies. We realized there were too many words, too many concepts for election communications. We needed to pull it together. The policy ideas were there, had always been there, but we needed to make them real for voters.

One of the most exciting aspects of how TEAM operates is how it attracts the brightest folks. They may not care about our transportation policies, but are passionate about safety and security, or arts and culture, or community representation, or parks, or climate, or reconciliation. My admiration for our candidates continues to grow—they know so much about so much. I am humbled by their broad knowledge and openness to learn, their ability to discuss so many important subjects, all the while partaking in a gruelling round of candidate meetings, main streeting and door to door canvassing.

Our affordable housing policies had attracted experts such as Professors Patrick Condon and Scot Hein, developer Arny Wise and more than a few others whose names I can’t share because it might cost them their jobs. These anonymous participants betrayed no confidences, simply made suggestions and acted as sounding boards for our evolving thinking about affordability. Such is the blood sport that elections have become that revealing their names might well be career ending for them.

From such expertise emerged our unique proposal for a $500 million City of Vancouver investment in affordable co-operative housing. First there were small group discussions with candidates and experts about what they were hearing, what they knew was or wasn’t working elsewhere in the world (“What about the Vienna model?” “They’re getting more affordable housing in Boston’s suburbs!” “The VLC model worked for a while, a variation might work again.”). Many ideas were filtered through Vancouver’s inherited social, governmental and legal structures: 

• “We can’t borrow $500 million without a referendum—that would be illegal—but we can develop a strong business case and take that to Vancouver’s citizens quickly—this is all urgent!”

• “We can do this quickly but not overnight—the city’s real estate department is not forthcoming with information about city-owned lands—we’ll have to dig and push!”

• “Different sizes of property will result in many different types of family home—everything from a triplex to mid-rise buildings—so long as we can build them all in wood or mass timber, which will be more economical and climate resilient!”

• “We must engage smaller, local builders and suppliers rather than the large development companies blatantly working to undermine us!”

• “There’s an existing network of seasoned and efficient co-operative project managers and operators—we don’t need to reinvent the wheel.”

• “There’s a well understood Vancouver social mix composed of equal thirds housing for low, middle and higher income families—that’s an opportunity for balance that we can’t ignore!”

We now have a proposal for lots of affordable housing that will work, that is not dependent on the largesse of large private developers, and is so much more than the left over micro suites at the bottom of climate-destroying and neighbourhood-busting concrete high-rises.

With support from Vancouver’s citizens we can make this happen. Let’s hope together. 

The Time for Action is NOW

TEAM for a Livable Vancouver is the only political party pledged to set aside the Vancouver Plan and the related Broadway Plan and bring back neighbourhood-based planning. Vancouver’s civic election is October 15th of this year. Lots more damage can still be done to our city before that date—and it will continue, and worsen, unless TEAM elects the next Mayor and a majority (6 of 10) City Councillors—less than 6 and not much will change for the better. A majority TEAM Park Board (4 of 7) will ensure our open spaces are integrated with the city rather than ignoring or fighting it. And our voice on the School Board will bring schools into sync with parks, open spaces and neighbourhood development.

If you are concerned that the City Conversations you’ve been reading are examples of what’s wrong with our city and want to bring back Vancouver’s livability, join TEAM and work with us to restore Vancouver as a place we can all afford to call home.

And please let me know what other subjects you are passionate about so we can have that conversation before election day, October 15th.

---

Today’s question: Do you like TEAM’s proposal for affordable housing? Why or why not? 

I read and respond to all comments made below. If you enjoyed this post, consider becoming a free subscriber to City Conversations at

 

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 for the moment, still teaching and writing, 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. City Conversations are generally congruent with TEAM policy, so if you like the ideas that I’m writing about, please consider joining TEAM.