With the June 30 deadline fast approaching, BC municipalities, including Vancouver, are scrambling to adopt new rules regarding land use and planning authority — forced on them by the BC Provincial government.

If you recall, last September Premier David Eby announced the new Provincial Supply Act after consulting with a panel of “external experts.” The panel, we learned, was made up of individuals from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, a left-leaning Canadian think tank, Abundant Housing, (the name gives it away: a group supporting mass housing across BC), housing lobbyists, and developers. The panel identified municipalities not meeting the new supply targets, and those jurisdictions were put on a “naughty list.”

In Vancouver, so-called “NIMBYs” were often blamed for slowing development by speaking out against new construction at public hearings. Those residents have now been silenced following the NDP Government’s 2023 prohibition of public hearings for residential redevelopment projects, so long as the projects comply with an official community plan.

And what about the many residents directly affected by these sweeping legislative changes who were not involved in any type of public consultation? We have seen instances of how upzoning leads to housing unaffordability and escalating property taxes that affect both tenants and owners alike.

These are only some of the questionable moves the Province has made in its rush to boost housing. According to a report released this month, Vancouver has failed to provide enough housing to meet its targets (based on a six-month interim report). High interest rates, prohibitive cost of materials has forced some developers into insolvency. So far, only 11 of the 1,500 below-housing units demanded by the Province have been built to date. Many believe the numbers won’t change unless both the provincial and federal governments make significant additional investments in housing.

This month, Vancouver City Council heard a staff presentation of the housing statutes Bill 44 (housing needs), Bill 46 (development financing), and Bill 47 (transit-oriented development) that outline the provincial changes.

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods has serious problems with both the June 30 deadline, calling it “unrealistic,” and the overall lack of citizen input. Moreover, in a May 21 letter sent to City Council, CVN objected to the City’s endorsement of the provincial changes to the Vancouver Charter, noting that land use planning authority should be under the control of local governments, not the Province. See their letter below:

May 26, 2024

City of Vancouver

Dear Mayor Ken Sim and Councillors,

Re: Referral to Public Hearing Reports – Rezoning to Comply with BC  Bill 44

Agenda 2024-05-28: https://council.vancouver.ca/20240528/regu20240528ag.htm

Referral Report 1: Amendments to Restricted Zones (RT-7, RT-9, CD-1 371 and CD-1 463) to Comply with Bill 44 – Provincial Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (SSMUH) Legislation

https://council.vancouver.ca/20240528/documents/rr1.pdf

Referral Report 2: Amendments to the First Shaughnessy District Schedule and Heritage Conservation Area Official Development Plan (HCA ODP) to Comply with Bill 44 – Provincial Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (SSMUH) Legislation

https://council.vancouver.ca/20240528/documents/rr2.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) strongly opposes referring these two reports to public hearing since they are proposing to rezone entire neighbourhoods without ANY advanced public consultation process.

Report 1 rezones Kitsilano (RT7 & RT9) and Report 2 rezones all of the First Shaughnessy Heritage District, without opportunity for meaningful input from the public, the FS Advisory Design Panel, or the Heritage Commission. These proposed rezonings remove all character and heritage disincentives for demolition, without adequate incentives for retention options or guidelines.

Hours before these reports were posted online, 2024-05-22, CVN sent Council a letter advising that we have many concerns regarding the new provincial legislation, Bills 44, 46 and 47. We find the current June 30, 2024 schedule for local and city-wide rezoning to be completely unrealistic, as it will neither allow for any legitimate public process nor a proper infrastructure review. We requested an extension to at least the end of 2024 or preferably spring 2025.

See our previous letter attached and posted online at:

https://coalitionvan.org/posts/20240522-response-provincial-legislation-bills-44-46-47/

https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2024/05/23/citywide-opposition-bills-44-46-47-june30-deadline/

The two Referral Reports 1 & 2 above, coming forward without any public consultation process, only proves our point that the current schedule for rezoning of June 30 is completely unrealistic for any kind of legitimate planning process.

As we pointed out in our previous letter, the City confirmed that Vancouver already exceeds the provincial five year targets based on the record number of developments currently in the pipeline. However, current  market conditions have put many new already approved projects on hold, so there is no imminent pressure to rush further rezoning without a proper public consultation process.

The City of Vancouver is also likely already exceeding infrastructure capacity. It is crucial that an infrastructure review be undertaken as part of any further planning for more rezoning.

Therefore, we request that the proposed Referral Reports 1 & 2 be instead referred back to staff for a proper planning process with public consultation, with direction to staff to advise the Province that the current schedule of June 30, 2024 for local and city-wide rezoning is unrealistic for Vancouver, so should be extended to at least the end of 2024, or preferably spring 2025, in order to have a legitimate public process and an infrastructure review.

Sincerely,

Co-Chairs Larry Benge & Dorothy Barkley
CVN Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

*NOTE: At yesterday’s Council meeting, the two referral reports to Public hearing mentioned above were held by Cllr. Sarah Kirby-Yung to ask questions of staff and have further discussions.

Vancouver Character Housing Network Responds to Provincial Changes

The Character Housing Network of Vancouver says that “adding additional density by introducing new multiplexes should not, and need not come at the expense of our heritage and character houses and streetscapes.” The Network has a petition on Change.org signed by more than 10,000 people. It calls for, among other things, taking “…immediate action to remove from zoning and building code bylaws any biases favouring demolition and new construction over retention.”

Two New Towers Proposed for Kitsilano:
2226 W. 8^th and 2415-2421 Yew St. and 1885 W. 12^th

A 23-storey tower near 8^th Ave. and Yew street has been proposed and, if approved, will replace a 35-unit apartment building at 2226 W 8th Ave under the Broadway Plan. The proposal includes two heritage houses that were built in 1912. The owners plan to incorporate the houses into the tower where they will be used as amenity spaces. You can view the plans and leave comments on the City’s shape your city site.

Another application for 1855 W 2^nd Ave has been received by the City of Vancouver. Plans are to rezone

the site from RM-4 (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District to allow for the development of a 20-storey, mixed-use building with 171 secured rental suites. See more details on the shape your city site.

Park Board News

Park Board Commissioner Tom Digby called Premier David Eby’s announcement this month that he supports the dissolution of  the Vancouver Park Board “devastating news.” “We were thinking the premier was at least going to do consultations,” he said.

This Sunday, June 2, current Park Board Chair Brennan Bastyovanszky will speak about the future of the Park Board in a one-hour event hosted by the Vancouver Unitarian Church, located at 949 W. 49^th Ave, Vancouver. The forum will discuss if Vancouver needs a Park Board. Since the Park Board is an elected body, should it go to a public vote first?

Watch online at: https://vanu.ca/event/forum-should we keep the vancouver park board/