City of Vancouver Seeking feedback on Cutting Red Tape

[fredinno]

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanc...e-january-2019

It is a step in the right direction.


The City of Vancouver is one small step closer towards making necessary reforms to its regulations, policies, and processes for planning, development, and building.

Two open houses will be held on January 29 and February 2 at Vancouver City Hall to provide the general public and the construction and development industry with an opportunity to voice their concerns and issues with the current systems in place. Feedback can also be submitted online.

It is part of the municipal government’s review to simplify and clarify regulations, improve the consistency of regulations and policies, streamline permit review processes, ensure land use regulations align with new policies and priorities, and improve communication and information sharing.

In recent years, backlogs in building permits have seen approval times soar to nearly two years, resulting in real consequences to housing supply and the cost of construction.

For instance, delays have inhibited property owners from utilizing their properties for an intended revenue-generating purpose, while still paying for property taxes.

Long delays have also led to a mismatch in the original budgets set aside for construction, with years-long permitting delays sending development costs upwards due to the inflation in labour and material prices during this period.

When it comes to building policies, some of the city’s newer policies even conflicts with older policies, leading to confusion for both applicants and city staff.

Following public and industry consultation, staff will report to city council on recommendations for new policies and processes by this summer. If approved, the reforms could be implemented sometime in the third quarter of 2019.

[jlousa]

The city has no plan to cut red tape, they've been pretending to do so for well over a decade now. Instead we will see them declare a climate emergency and have staff report back how to solve it within 90days. And discuss free transit for kids and poor people like that falls under their jurisdiction. Was really hoping the new council would focus on running the city better but it's more of the same. *sigh*

[misher]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The city has no plan to cut red tape, they've been pretending to do so for well over a decade now. Instead we will see them declare a climate emergency and have staff report back how to solve it within 90days. And discuss free transit for kids and poor people like that falls under their jurisdiction. Was really hoping the new council would focus on running the city better but it's more of the same. *sigh*

Thats a really good point I forgot that Vancouver isn't in charge of transit.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The city has no plan to cut red tape, they've been pretending to do so for well over a decade now. Instead we will see them declare a climate emergency and have staff report back how to solve it within 90days. And discuss free transit for kids and poor people like that falls under their jurisdiction. Was really hoping the new council would focus on running the city better but it's more of the same. *sigh*

Council and Staff are separate bodies. Transit is their jurisdiction to go before the Translink mayor's council.

They're cleaning up the by-laws and simplifying the language used and redundancies. Cutting issues with and between needing rezoning applications and DP applications. After attending the stakeholder workshop it seemed like a good step of many. Like the City-wide plan. They also retained the duplex changes and are working with new programs and a new pilot to streamline rental housing. They've also changed some rules and language in the creation of new privately developed social housing.

Issues are a lack of staffing.

[jlousa]

Is the issue lack of staffing or that they have staff working on so many pet projects instead of running the city? Obviously for projects that align with the citys goals they can push them thru in an acceptable timeline. And if they don't like them they sit and anguish. Quite a few of our neighboring municipalities seem to be able to get thru their paperwork with much less staff on hand, but then again they aren't busy solving provincial/federal matters.
I welcome the cutting of redtape, I'm hope to be proven wrong but my suspicious tells me that we will see more of it soon and more costs passed on.
I completely agree that the staff of city hall aren't the issue, but they have less power then they used to and I don't think we will see that change soon.

[misher]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Is the issue lack of staffing or that they have staff working on so many pet projects instead of running the city? Obviously for projects that align with the citys goals they can push them thru in an acceptable timeline. And if they don't like them they sit and anguish. Quite a few of our neighboring municipalities seem to be able to get thru their paperwork with much less staff on hand, but then again they aren't busy solving provincial/federal matters.
I welcome the cutting of redtape, I'm hope to be proven wrong but my suspicious tells me that we will see more of it soon and more costs passed on.
I completely agree that the staff of city hall aren't the issue, but they have less power then they used to and I don't think we will see that change soon.

That and they really need to cut down on all the reading. They about how the building code went from one slim book to 40 thick ones 😂

[s211]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Issues are a lack of staffing.

Issue is not being able to keep staff, and when new people are on-boarded, the only training they get seems to be how to say "no". Not joking.

It gets tiring going through continual nos on what should be simple matters to address.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Is the issue lack of staffing or that they have staff working on so many pet projects instead of running the city? Obviously for projects that align with the citys goals they can push them thru in an acceptable timeline. And if they don't like them they sit and anguish. Quite a few of our neighboring municipalities seem to be able to get thru their paperwork with much less staff on hand, but then again they aren't busy solving provincial/federal matters.
I welcome the cutting of redtape, I'm hope to be proven wrong but my suspicious tells me that we will see more of it soon and more costs passed on.
I completely agree that the staff of city hall aren't the issue, but they have less power then they used to and I don't think we will see that change soon.

Not sure how planning staff or engineering for instance have pet projects that get thm in the way of reviewing multiple rezonings or dev permits. Burnaby also had / has a streamlined process and then they shelved some this election cycle because of the sstreamlined process. For example on a very broad level.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by s211

Issue is not being able to keep staff, and when new people are on-boarded, the only training they get seems to be how to say "no". Not joking.

It gets tiring going through continual nos on what should be simple matters to address.

We find the opposite to be true in our work and projects. Best Planner we had was new from a lower role in Richmond. Though the DTES has very precise guidelines on that project.

I'll have to see what they came back with at the open house to see hoe comprehesive this is but it's piggy-backing off the SF home permit expediting pilot that just wrapped up. Rental 100 has been a great streamlining process.

[s211]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

We find the opposite to be true in our work and projects. Best Planner we had was new from a lower role in Richmond. Though the DTES has very precise guidelines on that project.

I'll have to see what they came back with at the open house to see hoe comprehesive this is but it's piggy-backing off the SF home permit expediting pilot that just wrapped up. Rental 100 has been a great streamlining process.

That's interesting to hear because the time to get a simple permit for work at a commercial property has skyrocketed from weeks to several months to obtain. Insane demands to code-upgrade an entire office tower just because some simple work was being done to a staircase, that kind of garbage.

And forbid that you ever have to deal with the city's lawyers these days. If I hear "we can't agree to that because we'd be fettering elected officials from deciding otherwise on an issue" one more time... Items that were never an issue are now ignorance-driven showstoppers.

I'm so glad I no longer have to deal with the City. It's enough to suck the life out of someone who lives and breathes real estate.

[Vin]

How about getting rid of the viewcones.

That alone would already cut down on lots of red-tape and wasted time.

[GenWhy?]

Definitely when one is doing a Tenant Improvement there can be a few more stringent up-to-date Code hickups but if they can be avoided with some maneuvering or an Alternate Solution then it's not so bad. Those are not in the realm of this study as far as I know, yet.

Viewcones are not necessarily "red tape", but a very clear guide on height maximums and setback requirements. It becomes more of an issue if you wish to fight the limitation, as with any request for a relaxation. In the realm of this study with permiting and bylaws, the red tape becomes the issue with the amount of grey areas in planning and the lack of fully updated guidelines and bylaws for development (eg: rezonings, old community plans)

[logan5]

How about some pre approved designs? A 21st century Vancouver Special. A 4 plex that’s easy to build and enough FSR to entice small developers.

[misher]

Originally Posted by logan5

How about some pre approved designs? A 21st century Vancouver Special. A 4 plex that’s easy to build and enough FSR to entice small developers.

A standard design would help housing supply be built quicker and cheaper. However, it would give many in Vancouver a heart attack as it isn't diverse/artistic.

Even our modular housing isn't standardized.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Vin

How about getting rid of the viewcones.

That alone would already cut down on lots of red-tape and wasted time.

That's not going to happen.

What I would like to see is for the 'duplex everything' thing to go a step further, into allowing ambitious 5-6 story medium density across Vancouver. They're doing this near Skytrain, outside of the Town centres, but that's probably too limiting, and overkill for medium density.

Less NIMBY issues in general, as people tend to be more in favor of smaller buildings, and it would still provide plentiful space.

Densification on the 41 Ave B-line would be a good start, but Even Victoria and Arbutus could host TODs of this fashion without straining the infrastructure too much.


Not sure if I should send something like that to them, considering I don't live in Vancouver proper.

Originally Posted by misher

A standard design would help housing supply be built quicker and cheaper. However, it would give many in Vancouver a heart attack as it isn't diverse/artistic.

Even our modular housing isn't standardized.

Yeah, it would die for the same reasons as the Vancouver Special itself.

[scryer]

What I would like to see is for the 'duplex everything' thing to go a step further, into allowing ambitious 5-6 story medium density across Vancouver. They're doing this near Skytrain, outside of the Town centres, but that's probably too limiting, and overkill for medium density.

Less NIMBY issues in general, as people tend to be more in favor of smaller buildings, and it would still provide plentiful space.

Densification on the 41 Ave B-line would be a good start, but Even Victoria and Arbutus could host TODs of this fashion without straining the infrastructure too much.

I think that they are doing some of these 5-6 storey buildings near Surrey Central/Gateway (like past KGB) but did you notice any other stations where this is happening? Just curious .

There are plenty of examples around the world of decent standard designs, specifically I'm thinking Europe, that has mid-rises such as:

https://www.tradingfloor.com/posts/m...ations-9075039

I doubt that Vancouver would achieve the same quality but midrises like that could be made to be completely sustainable and appeal to the NIMBYs. So long as they aren't designed to look like commie-blocks, and with enough sea-foam spandrel anything is possible .

[Galaxy]

In Bhutan the buildings are limited to 6 floors as per the government. The main reason is the high risk of an earthquake. The government also likes the uniform esthetics of only having 6-floor buildings.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nick_h...tle/6844900103

The government also requires a cultural aspect to be infused into the buildings so that it follows the overall aesthetics of all the structures in the country. They do balance the modern needs and technologies with traditional really well there. I am not saying we in Vancouver should copy them but there are places where height is set and all the structures can only be built to that height and look.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

In Bhutan the buildings are limited to 6 floors as per the government. The main reason is the high risk of an earthquake. The government also likes the uniform esthetics of only having 6-floor buildings.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nick_h...tle/6844900103

The government also requires a cultural aspect to be infused into the buildings so that it follows the overall aesthetics of all the structures in the country. They do balance the modern needs and technologies with traditional really well there. I am not saying we in Vancouver should copy them but there are places where height is set and all the structures can only be built to that height and look.

Aka Richmond 😘 I think every tower maxes at ~13 floors