Vancouver Civic Election 2018

[WoodlandCritter]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Looking at the list of mayors it’s pretty shocking how Eurocentric it is. At least Surrey council does a better of reflecting that city’s makeup but it doesn’t look as though Vancouver will.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by misher

What people don't understand is that even if we open up zoning everywhere we don't have the construction capacity to utilize it. We're currently maxed construction-wise with little to no usable workers unemployed, just drug addicts and the mentally ill.

So the push to urbanize the West side is more of a PR stunt than a requirement. We likely could leave the West side alone and keep densifying everywhere else for 20+ years at full capacity. If we really needed the space we'd be building towers instead of low-rise and townhouses everywhere. We still have tons of room around arterials like Hastings, Kingsway, Broadway, 12th, etc. to build. We also have a lot of space in Marpole, along East Marine Drive, and Boundary.

It honestly doesn't make sense from a transportation and infrastructure perspective to density neighborhoods that lack nearby skytrain stations, nearby major arterial rods, and are a distant drive from urban centers. We still have a ton of lowrise/deatached around skytrain stations in East Van+Broadway+Marpole+Cambie+Hastings+Kingsway to upgrade that's going to occupy us for the next 20-30 years minimum. We also have a ton of room around UBC we're converting to condos for students and campus workers.

The saying is "if you build it they will come" but the question is who is available to build it and once it's built how are we going to get people from there to where they need to be?

How can you argue in one thread that more supply is needed for affordability, and then turn around here and say we don't have the labour to build that supply?

There's a slew of land assembly parcels for sale along Oak and Granville. Their sitting on the market because developers know there isn't the demand and the lots are too expensive.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Any sources, aside from the NPA platform? I'm actually curious on this one.

This is a reality when it comes to contactors, sub-trades, architects even... then there is available land, costs with that land (what is able to be rezoned or built economically), City Staff capacity, and of course developer capacity.

We barely have enough "okay" skilled everything to build a good project. We recently had some major issues with a contractor due to being too busy and causing some headaches and delays. Architects denying work that is too time consuming. Contractors denying work that is slightly too complicated, timing isn't right in Phase of Development, or the project isn't $$$ enough.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

How can you argue in one thread that more supply is needed for affordability, and then turn around here and say we don't have the labour to build that supply?

There's a slew of land assembly parcels for sale along Oak and Granville. Their sitting on the market because developers know there isn't the demand and the lots are too expensive.

All of your questions answer themselves and it will be the crux of political decisions needed to be made soon by a new mayor and council. Our ear is to the ground for sure.

Certain categories of supply are needed? Yes.
Is there a labour shortage for the work out there? Yes.
Is lot assembly too expensive and sometimes not economical for certain development in certain areas of town? Yes.

[scryer]

Well Vancouver is at a boiling point here so unless we see some real solutions start to manifest, we are going be one hell of an angry city. Personally I wouldn't want to be at the forefront of an angry city but hey, if Kennedy Stewart and the rest of the city council members want the job then they better not run when it gets crazy.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by scryer

Well Vancouver is at a boiling point here so unless we see some real solutions start to manifest, we are going be one hell of an angry city. Personally I wouldn't want to be at the forefront of an angry city but hey, if Kennedy Stewart and the rest of the city council members want the job then they better not run when it gets crazy.

I doubt Vancouver is at a boiling point, given your low election turnouts. Most seem to not care but such is life when it comes to Canadian politics...

[scryer]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

I doubt Vancouver is at a boiling point, given your low election turnouts.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Random thought: any chance of Metrotown Mall being spared (or at least kept mostly intact) now that Corrigan's gone?

Mods, feel free to relocate this to the relevant thread.

[misher]

Originally Posted by scryer

Well Vancouver is at a boiling point here so unless we see some real solutions start to manifest, we are going be one hell of an angry city. Personally I wouldn't want to be at the forefront of an angry city but hey, if Kennedy Stewart and the rest of the city council members want the job then they better not run when it gets crazy.

People are less interested than before. Just people who complained before now have stronger social media presences. If you look at stats our unemployment and homeless percentages are low compared to other major cities.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Random thought: any chance of Metrotown Mall being spared (or at least kept mostly intact) now that Corrigan's gone?

Mods, feel free to relocate this to the relevant thread.

The mass demoviction next door to Metrotown station / mall is over now that Corrigan is gone and Hurley's in charge. Breaking the mall apart was far in the future but if enough people complain I wouldn't be surprised if they backtrack on it.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Sheba

The mass demoviction next door to Metrotown station / mall is over now that Corrigan is gone and Hurley's in charge. Breaking the mall apart was far in the future but if enough people complain I wouldn't be surprised if they backtrack on it.

I breaking the mall apart something the mall owner wants to do? Is it some idea that city hall came up with?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by casper

I breaking the mall apart something the mall owner wants to do? Is it some idea that city hall came up with?

The city’s idea, the mall is one of the most profitable shopping centers in all of Canada.

A middle ground would be best. Maybe break the mall up a little at street level as new tower projects are made, but have the mall connected via walkways on the 2nd and 3rd floors.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

A middle ground would be best. Maybe break the mall up a little at street level as new tower projects are made, but have the mall connected via walkways on the 2nd and 3rd floors.

You mean take it back to the way it used to be before they added the lower hallway that connects Eaton Centre to Metrotown Centre (as they used to be called).

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

You mean take it back to the way it used to be before they added the lower hallway that connects Eaton Centre to Metrotown Centre (as they used to be called).

I wouldn't go that far. Should be enough to tower-fy the Sears and parking lots, run a four-lane through the Build-A-Bear/Banana Republic section and leave everything else the way it is.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Sheba

The mass demoviction next door to Metrotown station / mall is over now that Corrigan is gone and Hurley's in charge. Breaking the mall apart was far in the future but if enough people complain I wouldn't be surprised if they backtrack on it.

I think you're being a little bit too overly optimistic and getting way ahead of yourself.


A lot of the projects proposed for the Metrotown area ("Demoviction central" in the part just south of the Skytrain line and north of Imperial) had already had their rezoning application processes and Design development permit applications pushed through or at least in process by the time the election rolled around.

The election results and the new administration are unlikely to change any of that or rollback any granted approvals unless they want to risk getting sued.

The only change I would foresee would be the city pushing the developers of some of those projects to include or increase non-market and rental components of those projects.
Any new project applications going forward in the area are the ones most likely to be affected by any new administration policies.

And as for breaking up the mall, once again, a lot of people getting too gung ho about something that has way too many moving parts and isn't likely to happen anytime soon.
As someone else mentioned, it's one of the most profitable retail centers in all of Canada and the most trafficked mall in all of the GVA and indeed all of BC probably second only to West Edmonton Mall in all of Canada in terms of the number of visitors and shoppers it receives each year.
Those kinds of numbers give you a hell of a lot of clout when it comes to these sort of discussions and I doubt even Hurley and the new administration will want to ruffle the feathers of one of the biggest commercial property tax payers in the entire region.

Simply put, the mall is not getting broken up any time soon unless IvanHoe Cambridge are fully behind the idea, and right now I don't see the upside for them in such a move.
And the current court fight they're having over the Concord-Pacific/Sears project (which they're likely to lose) isn't likely to make them any more amenable to the idea either.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

A lot of the projects proposed for the Metrotown area ("Demoviction central" in the part just south of the Skytrain line and north of Imperial) had already had their rezoning application processes and Design development permit applications pushed through or at least in process by the time the election rolled around.

The election results and the new administration are unlikely to change any of that or rollback any granted approvals unless they want to risk getting sued.

The only change I would foresee would be the city pushing the developers of some of those projects to include or increase non-market and rental components of those projects.
Any new project applications going forward in the area are the ones most likely to be affected by any new administration policies.

This is indeed what is happening and has happened.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

A lot of the projects proposed for the Metrotown area ("Demoviction central" in the part just south of the Skytrain line and north of Imperial) had already had their rezoning application processes and Design development permit applications pushed through or at least in process by the time the election rolled around.

The election results and the new administration are unlikely to change any of that or rollback any granted approvals unless they want to risk getting sued.

The only change I would foresee would be the city pushing the developers of some of those projects to include or increase non-market and rental components of those projects.
Any new project applications going forward in the area are the ones most likely to be affected by any new administration policies.

Corrigan 'saw the light' and started pushing for rentals. From the latest Major Development Projects for Metrotown:

Initial Report April 16th

Rez 17-27 6444 - Willingdon Avenue and 4241 Maywood Street
Construction of a single high-rise apartment building with street oriented townhousing, and a low-rise non-market rental building
347 market and 30 non-market

Rez 17-28 - 6075 Wilson Avenue
Construction of a single-high rise apartment building with street oriented-townhousing, as well as a non-market housing component
347 market and 32 non-market


Initial Report TABLED June 11th

Rez 17-39 - 6444 Silver Avenue
High-rise apartment building with townhouses fronting Silver Avenue

REZ 17-10000 - 5868 Olive Avenue
High-rise apartment building with townhouses fronting Olive Avenue

REZ 17-10004 - 4330 Maywood Street
Single mid-rise apartment building and a small commercial tenancy fronting Maywood Street.

REZ 17-10008 - 5777 Willingdon Avenue and 4475 Grange Street
High-rise apartment building with a low-rise market rental apartment building

[Migrant_Coconut]

So like a high school kid who began their project only a weekend before presentation day - with similar results.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So like a high school kid who began their project only a weekend before presentation day - with similar results.

[GenWhy?]

The non-market components were in discussion with Staff and Council for some time prior to the election, well before, and Staff wasn't too keen to give more density at all, even if it went towards non-market. They were just firm on density as-is. Many low-rise components had or were applied with non-market but it was never that much, as you can see above, with the profits in the high-rise portion.

Hopefully more density is in the works for non-market units in addition to what the plan says. Then some real replacement units for the units torn down can be brought online.