General Vancouver Updates

[GenWhy?]

This was neither a "heritage" designation nor was it a "preservation", from my earlier understanding. If I recall (could be wrong here) but holding the homes on-site was easier than relocation off then back on site. We typically remove heritage features (if there are any left) and re-install them to harmonize with the build to meet code / alternative solutions.

On affordability, these townhomes range in price from about $1,870,000 to $2,900,000 for 17 units from 1,111 to 2,121 sf. Which is fairly standard per the market rate for high-end for the product and location offered. Not sure why a developer would sell these for less than market rate if they saved a few grand on not keeping some homes on stilts.

If these were $1.5 m - $2.5 m as just plain old boxy townhomes and the character houses were thrown in the dumpster... what would be the benefit?

[GenWhy?]

Apologize if it looks like I'm splitting hairs here, but there are major differences legally, planning-wise, etc for these definitions.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

This was neither a "heritage" designation nor was it a "preservation", from my earlier understanding. If I recall (could be wrong here) but holding the homes on-site was easier than relocation off then back on site. We typically remove heritage features (if there are any left) and re-install them to harmonize with the build to meet code / alternative solutions.

On affordability, these townhomes range in price from about $1,870,000 to $2,900,000 for 17 units from 1,111 to 2,121 sf. Which is fairly standard per the market rate for high-end for the product and location offered. Not sure why a developer would sell these for less than market rate if they saved a few grand on not keeping some homes on stilts.

If these were $1.5 m - $2.5 m as just plain old boxy townhomes and the character houses were thrown in the dumpster... what would be the benefit?

Thank you for the info.

I think the point I was trying to make is that most reasonable people would likely agree that the character homes have already been thrown in the dumpster.

What's left is mockery of character retention.

I really enjoy your posts because you have an inside look at how the industry works; you have the practical knowledge of how and why decisions were likely made. I appreciate that.

But at the same time, I think, like any of us in our respective industry, you do have a bit of blinders on how the average observer might feel about the industry from the outside.

And to call it illogical, wasteful, and obtuse would be an understatement.

[GenWhy?]

Your post points out the distinction clearly, however. "Character" and "retention".

To a large degree both are saved - which is primarily the look and feel of a building and not necessarily the material itself. We argue to the City, "Why would we save a 100 year old house, replace the wood siding (which is in need of replacement anyway) with wood siding, which is a fire hazard when we could use hardie?" The biggest issue is fire issues, insulation, and structure. One house we fixed was sitting literally on a pile of large rocks.

Drafty windows replaced with new (look the same). 1950s door replaced with era appropriate 1910s door. Leaded windows saved. Sometimes these Frankenstein homes have little original elements remaining and the retention efforts make them... "more authentic". This particular project I am unaware of what was saved off-site. The reason the main floors and walk-out basements were ripped off is probably due to the slope and integration with parking / the main building's structure.

Sometimes I see mint older-looking homes and I cannot tell from the street if they are 1920s with a reno or 2020 home "retentions projects". Fixing Frankenstein homes that were brought to "the lab" in the 50s or 60s are a real code alternative solution roller coaster.

[GenWhy?]

The blinders keep me sane.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

Thank you for the info.

I think the point I was trying to make is that most reasonable people would likely agree that the character homes have already been thrown in the dumpster.

What's left is mockery of character retention.

I really enjoy your posts because you have an inside look at how the industry works; you have the practical knowledge of how and why decisions were likely made. I appreciate that.

But at the same time, I think, like any of us in our respective industry, you do have a bit of blinders on how the average observer might feel about the industry from the outside.

And to call it illogical, wasteful, and obtuse would be an understatement.

Here's a made-up story. The developer here had a choice; retain the three houses, or demolish them. The project is being built with a development permit - it's not a rezoning, so Council aren't involved. There's no bonus density; the Heritage Commission aren't consulted except later to look at the statement of significance for each house, telling its history, because they're going to be voluntarily added to the Heritage Register, although there's no bonus space being created.

The houses are old, but there aren't many of them left in that part of Mount Pleasant, so retaining them in some way keeps the heritage and 'character home' crowd happier, (and it might help with marketing the project). Keeping them isn't straightforward though; they're in rough shape as they've been rentals for decades. Until they're dismantled, there's no way of knowing whether any of the frames have any integrity - they could be rotten throughout. However much of the frames can be saved, the new homes have to be brought up to 21st Century code for fire prevention, energy efficiency etc. etc. By keeping the frames on site, it means they retain the correct dimensions when they're reclad after being dropped back onto concrete foundations (and the underground parking beneath that). Some of the detailed woodwork can probably be retained and reinstalled. If it's in poor condition it can be replicated accurately. There's nowhere to leave the houses at the back of the site, and too many street trees and wires to take them conveniently off site temporarily, but you can stick them on a steel platform high out of the way. That might help with marketing too.

And for the most part it all works out fine. The frames weren't in great condition, and the sheathing was a mess, but they stayed in one piece through a few rainstorms, and should be straightforward to reconstruct. All but four of the development's units have sold, even before the original houses are dropped back onto the new foundations and returned to 'as new' appearance.

[Feathered Friend]

Frances Bula @fabulavancouver
The latest from Vancouver Mayor Kennedy Stewart on the city's clogged permitting system.


12:36 PM · Jul 7, 2021·Twitter Web App

https://twitter.com/fabulavancouver/status/1412858034066378754?s=20

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

If it makes the dinosaurs on the Commission happy and lets the thing proceed, I say go for it.

Of course, home buyers here are always way too loaded to willingly shell out more cash for absurdities. Our money here grows on trees.

Originally Posted by rofina

Exactly - the primary character in heritage would be the exterior finish, cedar shake patterns I imagine, stained glass, along with any neat plaster details on the interior.

It seems anything of the character that would be worth preserving has already been lost.

I don't mean to hate on the idea of preservation, but this seems pretty absurd to me. Its not rooted in reality.

Too many of our heritage houses here were built of wood and they do rot with time. Many wood panels are only held up by the paint, and when they are being assessed for heritage conservation, a lot of the rotten wood is found to be too rotten to be preserved. Might as well build new structures to look like heritage houses IMO. On the other hand, those buildings of real value, ie. many found in Gastown and DTES, are condemned when they are turned into slums by our governments. Again you are right about the absurdity of the whole affair.

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://twitter.com/fabulavancouver/status/1412858034066378754?s=20

Moonbeam did pledge to end homelessness by 2020. Nothing but mere rhetoric from yet another lame duck mayor, but I will be more than glad to be proven wrong on this.

[GenWhy?]

Ya... the "Policy Enquiry Process: Approach and Criteria" (if that's what his Tweet references) could either go decently well... or horribly wrong.

I don't see it lessening the time it takes nor the available staff hours to process.

[Marshal]

As tired as I am repeating this, when Vin implies that wood structures always eventually rot, he is WRONG. If wood is properly protected from moisture it will virtually last forever. There are wood structured buildings in Europe that are centuries old. Any rot found in Vancouver is the result of deterioration of the building envelope. Any wood building that has been properly maintained will not have rot in the framing.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Marshal

As tired as I am repeating this, when Vin implies that wood structures always eventually rot, he is WRONG. If wood is properly protected from moisture it will virtually last forever. There are wood structured buildings in Europe that are centuries old. Any rot found in Vancouver is the result of deterioration of the building envelope. Any wood building that has been properly maintained will not have rot in the framing.

Yup. Old Vancouver woodframe was meant to be torn down and rebuilt in a decade or two - these ones have to last.

[Ailurus]

Originally Posted by Marshal

As tired as I am repeating this, when Vin implies that wood structures always eventually rot, he is WRONG. If wood is properly protected from moisture it will virtually last forever. There are wood structured buildings in Europe that are centuries old. Any rot found in Vancouver is the result of deterioration of the building envelope. Any wood building that has been properly maintained will not have rot in the framing.

So true.

Like, some people think the construction industry came out of the multi-billion dollar leaky condo crisis with no lessons learned? It literally fundamentally changed how the industry designs & builds buildings.

Almost as stupid as the "wood frame is dangerous because wood is flammable" nonsense. Lol no. Don't get me started on that.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Ya... the "Policy Enquiry Process: Approach and Criteria" (if that's what his Tweet references) could either go decently well... or horribly wrong.

I don't see it lessening the time it takes nor the available staff hours to process.

An acquaintance is at 15 weeks wait for a simple CRU improvement permit. Some minor back of house, closets, new ceilings, etc. No structure work.

Her lease is up end of month, and no way the work can get done in 3 weeks. They had planned this for months, gave adequate time for construction, but no one imagined it would take 15 weeks (so far) for work that in my mind probably shouldn't even require a permit to begin with.

This is a real issue, affecting real business. Shes a small business owner paying a lease on two places, for weeks on end, while the City burns time with no accountability. The inquiry process is a joke. Non responsive and to date has offered nothing.

This cant be allowed to continue, its having a meaningfully negative impact on residents and the community at large.

Especially coming out of Covid, with news business and old business maybe relocating this should be front page news and council and Mayor should be hung out to dry for allowing the building department to become an a complete joke.

I am so frustrated with bureaucrats losing sight of what rules and regulations are for. A review of her project would take 30 mins - no structural work, minor plumbing relocation, 2 new closets, non structural steel stud, and new t-bar ceilings.
How can that take 15 weeks?

So frustrating and so unacceptable, but there is no way to hold these idiots accountable!

[jlousa]

And what is happening is an increase in work being done without permits/inspections due to frustrations in the delays instead of just cost costing like the old days.

[GenWhy?]

As far as I know they've been understaffed for almost a decade. And the above mentioned / linked motion has nothing to do with permits moving quicker - it's quite a different ball of wax. There has not only been a large amount of applications of all kinds made within the year but also COVID screwed things up, so, to your acquaintances issue, it could be simply bad timing.

[s211]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

As far as I know they've been understaffed for almost a decade.

Maybe, or perhaps they have a limited work ethic. Public sector unions will do that to ya.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by s211

Maybe, or perhaps they have a limited work ethic. Public sector unions will do that to ya.

That is not the case. If you had more work than you could handle I doubt the answer would be "well just work harder". I work with these people.

[s211]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

That is not the case. If you had more work than you could handle I doubt the answer would be "well just work harder". I work with these people.

When their union won't permit them working more than banker's hours, you know where the root issue is. In Calgary in the latter 90s, city hall would lock its doors around 4-4:30 PM and all staff was supposed to be out of the building by then.

I've busted my hump to complete time-sensitive work all my career and if it took extra hours in a day, you do that. You perform. I'd kill to see what metrics the public sector's performance is based upon: the number of "don't give a fxcks" expressed per day? They still get paid, lifting a single finger or not.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by s211

When their union won't permit them working more than banker's hours, you know where the root issue is. In Calgary in the latter 90s, city hall would lock its doors around 4-4:30 PM and all staff was supposed to be out of the building by then.

I've busted my hump to complete time-sensitive work all my career and if it took extra hours in a day, you do that. You perform. I'd kill to see what metrics the public sector's performance is based upon: the number of "don't give a fxcks" expressed per day? They still get paid, lifting a single finger or not.

I don't think encouraging overtime pay is the solution (it's expensive). I also don't think advocating everyone work overtime is a solution, nor healthy.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

That is not the case. If you had more work than you could handle I doubt the answer would be "well just work harder". I work with these people.

What would you say to the accusation that the sprinkler permit department in particular is not approving permits during regular hours and instead burning time to do so on OT hours? In the process delaying sprinkler permit approvals and putting lives at risk?

Apparently this is a well known scam going for years - this I heard from more than one person, and more recently heard the same from someone who works for the CoV. Where there's smoke there's fire.

If even 25% of the accusation I hear about corruption in the building department are true, it justifies a purge of the system.

Its so tiring to always have a reason why Vancouver has to be bad at something.

If other Cities can figure out how to get a permit to owners in 2-4 weeks. I don't give a sh*t the reason, Vancouver needs to do the same.

If that means hiring 3 times the people - fine.

But I suspect it means empowering the people already there to make common sense decisions, and getting rid of a vast amount of redundant and unclear regulations.

The worst it, there's no way to complain or get any sort of accountability out of these people. Residents want action. Not useless platitudes and taxes going up at 4X inflation rate.