Housing is the critical issue in the City of Vancouver municipal election this year. Abundant Housing Vancouver sent a questionnaire to all candidates inquiring about their policies to address the housing shortage. We wish to thank all the candidates who responded. While we are expecting more responses to come in soon, we've received enough to warrant publishing those received thus far. Check back soon for more entries!

Responses we have received from independent candidates running for Council are posted in full below:

Jump to a Candidate:

Other Responses:

Penny Noble

1. The City of Vancouver prohibits apartment buildings on more than 75% of the city’s residential land via zoning. Do you support entirely or significantly eliminating the ban on apartment buildings in residential areas of the City of Vancouver?

Thanks for asking and for the work you do to help educate people on various options:
I noticed on your website you show photos of very nice looking heritage homes and neighborhoods and no apartments so I am not sure about the focus on apartments? To answer the question, is there really a “ban”?. Is it rather that certain areas were not historically zoned for apartments but this may change in the future perhaps? I favour a mix of housing types in neighborhoods-but only with thoughtful planning and this may mean more apartments in some areas-or not. In Kits, Dunbar, Kerrisdale, Main Grandview Woodlands, Cambie, and Dunbar for example there are lot of apartments interspersed with houses, townhouses, etc, Are more needed? And what kind are they? Are they mainly strata where often rents are not allowed? Or is there a mix of leasehold and coop for example? Or do we need to densify other types of dwellings? I think these are all things that need looking at in a planned and thoughtful way, listening to people in each neighborhood. Perhaps it is time to discuss with the Provincial government some changes to the Strata laws to encourage more rentals. This would need to be done very carefully. I favour a City wide plan, with consultation of neighborhoods and looking at various housing options .

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Is 3% the right target number? We certainly need to find ways to increase rental housing options-including looking at what already exists and either not available for rent, or is being demolished.
One way is policies to provide incentives to stop tearing down walk up rental apartments as is currently happening along W. Broadway, Main, Commercial etc. I would like an assessment to see how many of these units exist, what sort of rents people are paying for them- Assume much less than the new units that replace them- generally it has been 4 to 6 story condos or rentals, which are much more expensive that the ones removed. And as a side effect- the small local businesses, cafes, shops etc. in the ground floor where people are known by the proprietors, and make a community just that-a community are disappearing and walkable, friendly neighbour character is disappearing.
I would like to look at what we can do to retain and enhance and augment existing rentals not just what can be done to build new. Same with house demolition, close to1,000 character homes are demolished per year, many with main floor, top floor and basements as rentals. What currently replaces them are mostly very large houses with fewer people or no one living in them and certainly not “affordable”. I would like to see policies that favour and provide incentives to retention, as well as zoning changes so you can’t build a bigger single family house if you tear down an existing house- such zoning has worked in some neighborhood such as part of Kits.. Also to allow for example two secondary rental suites if a home is retained.

3. Currently, development of purpose-built rental buildings is concentrated along arterial roads, which have significantly higher levels of air pollution than non-arterials. What policies do you support to ensure renters have a healthy living environment?

First of all I am not a fan of rental only buildings. I don’t think that is a healthy way to live. I think it creates a “second class” citizen attitude towards renters. So firstly looking at other mixed use ways to have rentals and owners living together is a healthier way to live. I would like to look at what options there are for this-though I recognize in our culture this is a challenge. In Europe, London for example people treat their home as their own whether they rent or own, and look after it accordingly. Because this is not always the case here some people are reluctant to rent out their apartments or houses, or impose rules not to be allowed to rent such as with Stratas, as they have had bad experiences. As for the pollution, I would love to see the results of a study showing this to be the case and if it is then perhaps other locations need to be looked at. In terms of policies, there should always be enough green space, outdoor space, healthy air, with enough trees to absorb Co2, no matter if you live in an apartment, house, townhouse etc to ensure a healthy living environment.

4. It can take several years for the City of Vancouver to approve new construction, including purpose built rentals. What are your views on how we can more quickly approve and build needed rental housing?

We need to find ways to simplify and speed up the permitting and code process for all types of building. AS to how that is a challenge. A thorough analysis of the current numbers and skills of staff, the potential and costs of hiring/training more, simplifying the rules-what do other Cities do, why do our standards and methods seem to be so much more onerous- can they be simplified and still build/renovate healthy and safe structures? all need to be considered.

I would like to get everyone in the “room” at the same time and listen to various groups and individuals to come up with solutions. For example why is there a renters only committee? Why not have landlords, renters, owners, and builders all in the same group discussing needs and solutions? I would like to get ideas on how we can bring in policies to make existing housing available for rent before we start just building new everywhere. It is likely new will still need to be built. But what about repurposing buildings originally created for other uses? Such as churches and other buildings that are sadly no longer needed for their original use but can be re-created? There are several great examples of this in our City already.

5. The City of Vancouver announced their new housing strategy, “Making Room” earlier this year. One component of the strategy was to allow duplex housing and possibly other forms of housing in areas currently zoned for single family detached housing. Do you support this strategy? What would you change.

I was against the concept as it was presented. There was not enough consultation to see how it would actually work, though I am a fan of duplexes, and some alternate forms of housing, just not how this was presented. Also the planners said(to me at an open house) the only way to build a duplex was to demolish an existing house and build new. Very expensive, and eroding our neighbourhood character, outdoor green space, and cutting down hugely on natural light which we need for healthy living. I am not convinced it would make for lower cost housing. For who? What I would have changed? Allow for two secondary rental units in an existing house, and provide incentives and speed up permitting and some code relaxations so it is affordable and faster to renovate than build new.

And secondary units need not necessarily be basement suits. Currently many neighbourhoods such as parts of Kitsilano, Dunbar, Main, Cambie etc, are not really, “single family” most have one suite and many have laneway houses. If they could have two suites and a laneway, that is 4 units- 3 of which are rental on one property that can be created more quickly and with less impact on the neighborhood character and liveability than building large new duplexes without basement suites in them. And if you do the math, to buy such a property- with the prices as they are today, with all that rental income, is actually lower cost per month then the mortgage on a brand new duplex with no rent income. And less impact on the neighborhood in terms of construction and loss of character, landscapes etc.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?
I don’t have a problem with reducing parking though I know it may be a challenge for some. It is a story of “build it and they will come” If you build more parking spots, they will get filled. If you don’t have them we will just figure out other ways to get around. Such as some dedicated spots for car share or those who are disabled, as well as improved transit and access to the transit, even if it is close. Perhaps a shuttle bus service for elderly and disabled. Problem is transit and alternative transportation is not keeping up to population growth.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?
In addition to more incentives to retain, and convert existing homes, I would like to see what city planners through the Character House Zoning Review actually recommended and is called “downzoning”. This is in neighborhoods where currently you can demolish an existing character house that often has a suite, and now are allowed to replace it with a huge much bigger house- that provides much less and more expensive housing than what was there. With “downzoning” this would not be allowed. You would only be able to build a smaller or same size house, so not much incentive to demolish and build new. This “downzoning” exists and has worked well in the part of Kitsilano north of Broadway where you find many restored or renovated character and heritage houses that have been turned into duplex, tri or even four plexes and some with infill housing, most still with green, outdoor spaces and retaining character while providing denser housing options. But you do not see the huge new homes with almost no one living in them in that part of the City-and as a result it is also a livable, walkable area with many amenities.

I would like to a City plan takes into account the various distinct neighbourhoods in Vancouver-and provides for a mixture of housing types within each neighbourhood that is sensitive to that area and ensure we retain and create walkable pockets where people can walk to all the amenities they require for daily living. Where there are some apartments and more dense living spaces created, I would like to ensure policies for enough outdoor green play space, socializing and other “gathering spots” for healthy, vibrant living for people –the kind of reasons people choose to live in Vancouver-it is not a concrete jungle but it is in danger of becoming one. I also believe the co-housing concept should be further developed.

Taq Bhandal

I supporting significantly eliminating the ban on apt buildings with certain caveats. For example, apt buildings would have to:

Consult community and match the ethno-culturally diverse architectural and artistic style of the neighbourhood (e.g. building in Punjabi Market, draw on and pay local South Asian artists for design work; building in Jericho lands, draw on and pay Indigenous artists for design work, etc.).
Safe spaces for people with a mix of incomes
Meet specific height restrictions
Have innovate solutions to rain and storm water drainage (to account for the plants and soil that will displaced).
Allow buildings close to the sidewalk, to open up court yard or back yard green spaces that promote social and environmental health.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Yes. Talking basic economics, there is a huge imbalance between supply and demand.

To increase supply, council will have to

Increase capacity of development permit board to reduce building permits wait times (currently at 1-3 years).
Support housing affordability so that trades people who are actually constructing our homes can live close to where they work.
Not use the term ‘developer’ so generically, so that council can create a healthy relationship with those that support the growth of our local community. There is a wide spectrum of people who buy land in MetroVan and build a building in it. This has been happening since the displacement of Indigenous communities, and the establishment of the settler-colonial City of Vancouver. As a daughter of the first Punjabi quantity surveyor in Canada, I have learned that today there are many, diverse, small scale local residents who are considered ‘developers’ and fund the construction process in Metro Vancouver.

As a researcher, my goal in the first 6 months of office will be to have a clear idea of what municipal policies can feasibly contribute to zero waste practices, and to support a decrease in dependance on burning carbon. Some ideas that I have so far include:

Supporting the affordability, safety, and growth of public transit.
Promote walk-to-work approach by favouring mixed use buildings in all neighbourhoods with accessible entrances (e.g. offices, homes, grocery store, cafe, health care centre, etc.). For 8 months of the year it is very very very rainy in Vancouver. Walking a short distance can be a more viable and healthy transportation option than driving, biking, or taking transit.
Support the growth of Vancouver’s bicycle culture.
Increase in electric vehicle parking spaces (Let’s face it, there are people with really ‘nice’ gas burning cars in Vancouver. Why not encourage them to go electric).

As mentioned above, increase the capacity of the development permit board to reduce wait times.
Also ensure diverse intersectional representation on the development permit board.

I support the strategy. Though, If elected I would promote more options for density. Duplexes are just one of many directions for re-zoning.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Within the first year of my term, I would like to do an in depth analysis of parking in Vancouver. Currently parking makes up a huge portion of ’assets’ in the city budget. I can answer this question with a more informed response at a later date.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

Leveraging city-owned land to support medium and high density developments with community focus.
Increase purpose built rental housing close to campuses for post-secondary students living in the City of Vancouver.
Stronger enforcement against units being used for short term rentals such as Airbnb.
Combination of mixed-use commercial buildings with purpose built rentals. Encourage environment where community-based development approaches such as social housing, non-profit, non-market rates, renewable resource management, and eco-friendly design can flourish.
Actually addressing homelessness rather than ignoring people who are currently without a stable safe space. This could include safe street sleeping beds, increase in femme and non-binary shelters in the city, grants for homeowners to turn garages into temporary shelters and/or smaller homes
Facilitate co-operative planning between city, province, and federal government for a holistic approach to housing and density.

Rob McDowell

I support easing the ban significantly. I believe that we need to distinguish between the types of "apartment buildings" we are talking about, and which neighbourhoods we are discussing as well. I support denser apartment buildings (i.e. 8-12 stories), for example, in areas with access to better transit options. I support more modest approaches (3-4 story apartments and townhouses) in areas that are more difficult to reach by transit.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Yes I would. We need to ensure that we have enough purpose built rental construction in order to reach the 3 percent vacancy mark and we need to invoke policies to encourage such construction to reach that goal. I would support policies which grow the stock of purpose built housing in the city. I would also support other forms of housing, including accessible co-housing and an updated co-op housing model.

I live downtown on a major arterial and completely understand this concern as it is my own lived experience. However, I am not sure how realistically this can be achieved without adding costs and effecting affordability. I do support establishing green space and parks and ensuring that our residents have access to healthy spaces for recreation and relaxation.

These delays not only delay housing options but make housing more expensive as carrying costs are passed on to renters and purchasers. I would bring back quick response teams for preferred housing types (PBR, duplex, laneway housing approvals) to ensure their approvals are done as expeditiously as possible.

I think it is just a small step to where we have to go. We are in the midst of a housing crisis and we have to look at policies that enable people to live and prosper in Vancouver. We need to do it urgently. I am a fan of data and evidence based decision making and hope that the CMHC data sets now becoming available will help to determine the best course of action on housing.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Yes I do. As a former car owner, I am aware of the ease (and savings) of life without a car. We are a global leader in car sharing, and I appreciate that we have convenient options (bike share, etc) that make car ownership less necessary. While recognizing that some residents (new parents, seniors) may require cars, we should grow our transit system, including car and bike sharing, to allow for more people to find that car ownership is not a requirement of life in Vancouver.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

We need to make life easier for people who live in Vancouver. Access to lively spaces to enjoy the arts and culture and restful places for recreation means that we can be more comfortable in our city, particularly when we live in a dense, busy, dynamic city. I would push for adequate park space for our population, as well as cultural and arts spaces to be expanded and flourish. We need to activate our unused land (the city is the largest land owner in the city) and leverage this land for PBR housing. We need to work with other levels of government to ensure that they are playing their parts too.

Graham Cook

I absolutely support significantly eliminating the ban on apartment buildings in residential areas. Reserving so much of our city’s residential land for detached homes, especially during a housing affordability and Vacancy Rate crisis, is one of the factors that continues to drive residents of all ages away from the city and deters others from coming.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

As a renter myself, I see first-hand how Vacancy Rates and Rent are inversely related. I am 100% committed to achieving at least a 3% Vacancy Rate. The number one way we can do this is to incentivize and legalize long-term secured Purpose Built Rental buildings across the city. While this is not a ‘silver bullet’ to addressing all of our housing affordability problems, this will go a long way towards achieving a competitive rental market and putting downward pressure on rental rates.

While development along Arterial Roads is not necessarily a bad thing, it is important to allow for Purpose Built Rental options on less polluted, quieter streets as well. The most important thing we can do to help achieve this is to allow for a greater diversity of housing options in the areas reserved for low density options (RS-1). The ‘Making Room’ proposal to allow duplexes in these areas was a great first start, but we will need fourplexes, row homes, and low-to-mid rise apartment buildings (among others) to truly move the needle.

We have some of the best and brightest staff in the world currently working for the City of Vancouver. While there are improvements that can be made to workflow processes (including digitization) and other areas to improve efficiency, I believe the approval time is a matter of prioritization. Given that we are experiencing an affordability and Vacancy Rate crisis, we should be giving a fast-track to projects that address these issues. Further, there has been a lot of talk about creating a new ‘Vancouver Special’ that matches a given set of criteria, allowing for a more rapid approval process. I certainly support this discussion and would love to see a model based on a four floor apartment building with an option for commercial/retail space.

I absolutely support this strategy as a first step and believe it will function well alongside so-called ‘demand side’ measures being introduced by other levels of government. The only aspect I would change is that it is not aggressive enough, we need to see at least Fourplexes allowed in order to create a significant increase in the Vacancy Rate and affordability.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Of course.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

While legalizing and incentivizing Purpose Built Rentals that are secured in the rental market for the long-term will be a huge step towards housing affordability across the city, I believe we can also achieve some ‘quick wins’ in the secondary rental market by aggressively pursuing illegal Short Term Rentals (AirBnbs) and Empty Homes. Getting even a portion of these units into the rental market can provide some degree of relief to the rental market in the immediate term. Specifically, I am in favour of tripling the Empty Homes Tax from 1% to 3%.

Katherine Ramdeen

I would want to go to each community and hear what the people are in favor of. I think in some communities it makes total sense to rezone, say in a primarily SFD area 4 story apartment buildings with a carshare port and great bike lockup areas. Near transit stations and exchanges there should be rezoning for high-rise buildings to utilize the easy access to transportation and less of a need for parking. Carshare ports would be good here too. We need densification, but we need to look at each community individually to understand what the people want and how to best preserve its character while being reasonable and rational about the need to build more AFFORDABLE living spaces for the people of Vancouver.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Yes! I think the empty homes tax is fantastic and would be interested in hearing ideas from the community on how policies like this and similar can be put into practice and help create more vacancies for Vancouver's people.

I think rezoning in SFD areas will create more development that can provide Vancouverites with alternatives to more affordable units that are in less of a busy, deeply urban area - like the arterials described. But I think we need to be careful of what we allow to develop, to ensure that these new purpose-built rentals are affordable for the people that it essentially pushes out. I was just renovicted from my very old and in desperate need of renovation in Kits. I moved there because it was one of the cheapest rents I could afford with a pet. We need to make sure that our "displaced tenants" from this modernization of housing are looked after and have options. I think, again, talking with the community on these issues would be a smart idea.

That figure is simply horrific. If elected, I would immediately look into how the approval for new construction works and work with the rest of the incumbent to streamline it. The people of Vancouver don't have time to sit around while the slow wheels of bureaucracy turn! An audit of the system is necessary to find out what's taking so long!!

Firstly, I would demand that the community, each specific neighbourhood, be consulted and voices heard. From what people of the many communities of Vancouver have told me, is they don't feel they were heard on this issue. Council needs to listen to the communities to ensure that any development fostered makes sense for that area. I would push to repeal Vision's Duplex rezoning as it did not seek support from the community before becoming enacted. That's not to say I'm not in favour of densification, it just needs to happen in a more open dialogue with the communities it's proposing to change.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Heck yes!!! Also by investing in bike lanes, carshare programs at and near dense areas and making public transportation more accessible for all incomes, we can build a greener city!

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

WE NEED TO LOWER PROPERTY TAXES AND ENSURE THESE SAVINGS ARE PASSED DOWN TO RENTERS AS WELL.

When elected, immediately decrease property taxes. Find the money in the system by holding an city-wide government spending audit, with full public transparency. We need to know what we're spending money on, and why. Then we need to cut "superfluous" spending and set our priorities to what the community has voiced and council agrees on- making housing more affordable! I promise we will find the money by taking an in-depth look at our spending.

Erin Shum

We need more multi-family housing of all types in Vancouver in order to fill the "missing middle" in the housing market. I think we need to find the right balance in terms of zoning, and I think that needs to be done with substantial neighbourhood consultation. We need to stop pitting people against each other.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

We need to find the right balance that brings more rental onto the market, including purpose-built rental and secondary rental like basement suites. I think we can explore new ways to encourage multi-generational housing - there are so many seniors with spare basements and rooms which could be brought into the rental market.

3. Currently, development of purpose-built rental buildings is concentrated along arterial roads, which have significantly higher levels of air pollution than non-arterials. What policies do you support to ensure renters have a healthy living environment?

I will support policies that will ensure everyone - including renters - has a healthy living environment with a sense of safety. I think there are logical ways to build purposes-built rental housing in other locations. For example, we should definitely build sloped "density cones" around rapid transit. When it comes to larger buildings and higher density on non-arterials, I think we can definitely find the right places to do that, but we need to do so in ways that doesn't create conflict in our neighbourhoods.

4. It can take several years for the City of Vancouver to approve new construction, including purpose built rentals. What are your views on how we can more quickly approve and build needed rental housing?

The City is still using very old-fashioned paper-based processes for many approvals, and the delays and complications are unacceptable. I would like to see a comprehensive review of the permitting process, with more staff and more technology put in place to streamline approvals. It will cost money to make the process better, but it will unlock a whole lot of much-needed housing for Vancouverites.

5. The City of Vancouver announced their new housing strategy, “Making Room” earlier this year. One component of the strategy was to allow duplex housing and possibly other forms of housing in areas currently zoned for single family detached housing. Do you support this strategy? What would you change?

I agree with adding "gentle density" to neighbourhoods while retaining their character, but I do think the public process around the housing strategy left much to be desired. We need to find ways to have difficult conversations about housing in Vancouver without dividing people and pitting them against each other.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Yes. Overbuilding parking adds huge costs to residential construction. We should adopt more flexible parking requirements, we should continue to encourage developers to include parking but for car shares, charging stations, and bike racks and we should explore new ways to not force buyers to pay for a parking spot if they don't want one or need one.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

There's a housing crisis, but it's really a broader affordability crisis with a bunch of different factors all coming together. I'm running to build a Vancouver for families, with a focus on child care, seniors care, and safe streets. We need to build more of the right kinds of housing, but we need to do more than just that: we need to build complete communities where kids can play, businesses can flourish, and families can thrive. Let’s be creative in building complete communities lets build intergenerational homes, child care centers, senior centers, and small businesses as well.

Wade Grant

I support significantly eliminating the ban on apartment buildings in residential areas of the City of Vancouver.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

This is a great goal. We should work towards this. We can add rental only zoning and percentage rental requirements to various buildings and neighbourhoods. This is a key to getting affordable housing for those who work in Vancouver.

I also hope to lead in working with the city and the three local first nations to co-develop rental projects that benefit all and provide affordable rental.

I would support rental in all neighbourhoods where it makes sense. Many parts of our city are significantly under developed and under restrictive zoning. In terms of health, I believe in community living where neighbourhoods come together to ensure healthy living environments for all. One of the things that matters to me is embracing diversity so part of that healthy living is having diverse incomes and diverse people in the same neighbourhood.

Reducing the permit wait times is key. I would work to do this right away.

Yes I support it. I would think bigger and look at where more zoning changes could be made in the many neighbourhoods that need it.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Yes, I support reducing them.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

I support building rental housing on city owned land. I also support making some new town centres around skytrain stops, the new St Pauls hospital and Hastings park (perhaps elsewhere) with a good mix of housing and amenities.

Marlo Franson

Development restrictions are constantly being lifted for new areas, such as the Cambie Corridor that went from single/duplexes to apartment building due to the skytrain. When these lands allocated for apartments run out it is likely new areas will be approved on a case by case basis. In other words, growth depends on densification and apartment buildings will continue to be built in Vancouver to contend with our population growth. I support growth along main arteries for now but interior residential apartment building requests will need to be reviewed to change the land zoning.

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Any increase from 0% is a positive thing, this allows new comers to enter and live in our city without worry but we are an attractive city so it will be a hard battle to get the market open to this value. It is important to keep the market open, so I would create a policy that empty residence must be occupied or the city will take over management of property and charge the holders for all charges (ie repairs) on property taxes. I would end corporate ownership, and out of country ownership (speculation buying). I would fast track apartment residences on approved lands and try and create shipping container homes to house more people.

I would ensure different height buildings to create better air flow. Tree growth along the roadway is also important and Plant a Tree Day will become a thing in Vancouver. I have a great transportation idea to start boring underground tunnels throughout Vancouver which can carry all the goods and service eliminating trucks from the roads in Vancouver. In the short term, we need to increase transit with more electric version, hopefully promoting less driving.

There needs to be a way to fast track proposals when it comes to the housing issues, we should have most construction information on hand and with a very experienced work force there should be no question on moving quicker with permits. This may include hiring more permit officers and cutting some of the red tape that slows down proposals for housing, especially if they wish to build social or low income housing, the fast track system is the answer. Also as stated before we should try Container homes for a quick easy build.

There should be a review process for each new housing application to change to a duplex/townhome which may include neighbourhood contact. We already know most older homes have already split up into multiply units so we need to ensure a certain community is not over populated. The idea to restore vitality and affordability to these areas via duplexes is a positive mark vs building apartments. Duplexes are easier to build, look similar to the areas housing and can bring back families to these areas. I like this strategy but more consultation with the public will be handy to know how better to proceed for each area.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

Unless there is a plan to get cars off the streets, such as introducing a 24 hour parking only law, we should not be placing tons of restrictions around these areas. It is help out those who are using transit by allowing them to park nearby. Residential parking signs are good in limited quantities in these areas but we need to allow people to park freely.

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

I want to offer fast tracking social housing and affordable housing construction and we could offer a 1 for 1 incentive to get developers on board to build this type of housing along with their for profit housing. Freezing corporate ownership and preventing money laundering are great steps to open the housing market back up the Vancouverites. I like the idea of City Hall adopting a business model to become a property manager for empty homes. Instead of charging a tax on empty homes the City takes control of these homes and rents them out on behalf of the owner. We would have to pass rules that empty homes are not acceptable and must be rented out via the City Hall property management team or the owners choice. I would like to try container homes as an cheaper building method and quicker for those who need homes fast.

Adrian Crook

Open Response (PDF)

SPIKE

A seat on council would put me in a position to make some decisions that some folks may find unpopular. That being said in the Vancouver that I want to represent there w be a proper consultation with all stakeholders before any decision of this magnitude was ever implemented. Once all voices are heard, all of the pros and cons clearly discussed, if it made social and economic sense, then a decision to build a higher building could be implemented. What is not going to happen with me on board, is surprise high rise hijackings shoved down the peoples throat to build! The developers would not be the only ones deciding the path of progress in our fair city. They have decided quite enough thanks!

2. Will you commit to enacting policies to increase the rental vacancy rate in Vancouver to at least 3%? If so, which policies would you enact?

Any and all housing option that are safe hygienic and affordable, and that meet a minimum standard of housing would be considered. Application process for suite, laneway dwellings and social housing builds would be streamlined. i would advocate for a social housing component be attached to every single build ion our city. If developers ant to build here, they should have to build our way!

Protection of green space would have to be paramount. This with bike lanes and parks that might include playgrounds, as well as skate parks might go an awfully long way towards keeping Vancouver healthy. Participation is also a necessary action to that end!

Sorry but the best way to speed things up is to stay ahead of the red tape. Whatever the process is now, it isn't working! We need to revamp it allowing special attention to affordable housing solutions. It's COLD outside! Let's get our people indoors.

6. Do you support reducing or eliminating parking requirements for new residential construction located near frequent transit?

7. Are there any other policies you support to address the housing crisis?

The answer to all three of these questions, once again, comes down to public consultation. No decision of this magnitude would be made with my involvement ior support, without a complete consultation process with all stakeholders! Then and only then can we make decisions that make the most sense for all.

The lack of affordable and accessible housing options is on the mind of all Vancouverite’s.

Spike’s approach to increasing housing options:

Establish a basic set of standards that all rental properties are required to meet.
Develop incentives allowing private owners to build basement suites, rental properties, etc.
Increase rent control and supports for renters.

HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

Residents of Vancouver need little reminding of the ongoing housing crisis in the City. So many of us live in unpredictable situations, where we are are at the mercy of exploitative landlords, an increasingly inaccessible housing market, and have resigned ourselves to the prospects of being eventually ‘priced out’ of the city. Last year a former United Nations housing expert referred to the wealth gap in Vancouver as that of an “apartheid city”. Put simply, this is unacceptable.

Once in office, Spike will fight for housing policies that prioritizes destigmatization, housing for all, protecting and expanding residents’ rights and personal dignity, and financial accountability for the unethical financial interests responsible for the present crisis.

DESTIGMATIZATION

For too long has stigma played a role in determining who has a right to housing. Indigenous people, the LGBTQ2S+ community, people who use drugs, people who live in conditions of poverty, mental illness, and other marginalized groups are too often forced to choose between living on the street, in shelters with limited space, or face financially exploitation without hope of recourse. We say that everyone is entitled to a living space that respects both their humanity and dignity. If people need more help and resources than others, then we will make sure they and not wealthy developers get such help.

HOUSING FOR ALL

To ensure that class does not determine one’s access to the city, we pledge to prioritize the construction of social and affordable-rental housing. New large-scale developments will be required to include a minimum percentage of both social-housing and income-dependent affordable-rental homes.

Current efforts that have proved successful in providing affordable housing options such as co-operative housing and densification projects (e.g. mixed-income laneway home construction) will continue to be supported and expanded upon.

Homelessness is pervasive in our city. Many of us are familiar with past promises to end homelessness within a decade: we believe that the failure to address the core causes of the housing crisis have led to the failure of such promises. We say that the best solution to homelessness is obvious: build and support sufficient homes for everyone! As City Councilor, Spike will work to ensure that enough temporary modular housing is built and maintained to accommodate everyone who is currently or may potentially become homeless. No one in Vancouver will be ever again forced to sleep without a roof over their head. During such units’ planning, innovative construction methods (such as those used in the Atira Women's Resource Society’s container-unit housing project) will be explored to determine how to more efficiently build temporary low-cost homes that prioritize both residents’ safety and personal dignity.

RESIDENTS’ RIGHTS

As a City Councilor, Spike will work to safeguard and expand the rights of all of our city’s residents. We pledge to use municipal powers to enact rent-controls, as well as lobby for provincial rent-control legislation specific to Vancouver, and an immediate provincially-mandated rent-freeze.

Vancouverites across all neighborhoods are too familiar with being forced to pay exorbitant rents for poor living conditions, only to find themselves displaced through ‘renovictions’ or ‘demovictions’. Spike will work to ensure that tenants will either be guaranteed an equivalent space in the new development (at equivalent or reduced rates if previously excessive), and/or owner must arrange for new stable housing for tenants during renovations or following demolition.

We agree with COPE’s proposals to prioritize enforcement of housing maintenance standards, as well as institute a process of inspection to ensure that tenants citywide have recourse and protection if their landlord/manager has neglected such standards or otherwise disinvested. Refusal to comply with such standards would lead to fines, legal injunction, and ultimately seizure of rental properties if not paid. We also their support proposals to create and support city-wide tenants’ unions, as well as other means of ensuring public and private accountability.

All single-residency occupancy (SRO) hotels will undergo immediate inspections planned and conducted in close collaboration with residential peer-liaisons who are trusted within their community. Following inspection and community consultation, the properties will then be subject to mandatory sale to either the City or an approved non-profit/equivalent organization. The purchase properties will then be converted to a mix of social and affordable-rental housing; present tenants will be guaranteed the option of remaining at affordable rates, or having adequate arrangements made for them elsewhere at the previous owner’s expense.

A general amnesty policy will be enacted for informal residences such as vehicle dwellings, tents/homeless camps, and occupants of otherwise unoccupied buildings. Although we must do more to provide better options, people should not be criminalized for simply living where they are able to. Law enforcement efforts against such residence will be deprioritized.

CONSULTATION ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

Past consultations and collaborations with the communities of Vancouver have too often been a mere formalities. We must move past ceremonial acts of acknowledgement and ensure that communities are given a leading voice in decisions that will determine their futures. Moreover this must be done in a manner based on equity and comprehension.

POLICY FUNDING AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY

In order to fulfill these proposals, we propose a range of taxation, regulatory and lobbying actions at the municipal and provincial levels. We support the BCGEU’s proposed Plan for new property taxes and regulatory reforms that emphasize “restoring fairness and equity” and accountability for profit-seeking behavior at the public’s expense.

Speculation and irresponsible financial lending practices are prolonging the present crisis. Once elected, Spike will lobby for an expanded provincial speculation tax and municipal levy for such transactions in Vancouver, and to work to increase the minimum rental time needed to be applicable for development cost exemptions (presently only 3 months). We also call for a provincial land-value capture tax for developers and speculators, a ‘mansion tax’ on luxury properties, and an ‘empty homes’ tax on chronically vacant properties.

We endorse OneCity’s proposal for a “flipping levy” for immediate flipping by real-estate speculators, as well as their proposed residential up-zoning that would increase land-value and accompanying capture such value via a “windfall tax”. Additionally we support COPE’s calls to lobby the Province to return provincial real-estate tax revenue from Vancouver back into municipal housing funds; to draw on existing municipal assets (such as money from the Vancouver Property Endowment Fund) in funding public housing; and foster appropriate and accountable investment opportunities.

More broadly, we must also redefine what is “affordable” in our City. $1,730 for a single bedroom in East Van is not affordable by any stretch. We refuse to let unscrupulous developers dictate what renters can afford. We therefore call for an immediate lowering of the definition of affordability with regards to development cost waivers and shifting such waivers to favor affordable housing. If the City is going to fund for-rental developments, then these funds must be allocated to building affordable homes.

Do you like this post?

Vancouver Election Housing Questionnaire 2018 - Independents for Council

Penny Noble

Taq Bhandal

Rob McDowell

Graham Cook

Katherine Ramdeen

Erin Shum

Wade Grant

Marlo Franson

Adrian Crook

SPIKE

HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

DESTIGMATIZATION

HOUSING FOR ALL

RESIDENTS’ RIGHTS

CONSULTATION ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

POLICY FUNDING AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY