#VanPoli | Save a Vote for City Councillor Mike Klassen Come October

Since 2004, Vancouver City Councillor Mike Klassen has acted in the role as webmaster of VanRamblings, the blog he created, commencing work over the holiday Christmas season in 2003, VanRamblings making its — perhaps inauspicious (but celebrated by the two of us) — début, on February 15, 2004.

“Raymond, you need a website,” Mike told me. “You have a voice that needs to be heard. You are one of the most opinionated people I know, and your opinions deserve a wider audience than just my ears, and the ears of your close associates. In the coming weeks, I will create a blog for you, in order that you might emerge as the difference maker you have long been over your many years working within Vancouver’s vibrant left community.”

And thus, VanRamblings was born.

I first meet Mike Klassen in 1991 through my friend, legendary Vancouver broadcaster J.B. Shayne, at J.B.’s request having Mike tag along with J.B. and I to restaurants my editor asked me to review that week — at the time, I was a Vancouver restaurant critic, each week writing a restaurant review for the long gone, but hardly lamented east side community newspaper, The Highland Echo, as well as other publications.

Mike lived nearby my housing co-op in west Kitsilano, where he resided in a shared house just inside the eastern border of the Point Grey neighbourhood.

Mike Klassen and I have remained close ever since.

I know Mike Klassen to be one of the most honourable, kind, and most dedicated friend to the citizens of Vancouver people I have ever met. There is not a mean bone in Mike’s entire body; he simply won’t allow meanness and malice to be a part of his life. Ever.

That’s not who he is, nor has ever been, or will be.

Daniel Fontaine and Mike Klassen, creators of the well-read and respected CityCaucus online journal

I recall in 2009. when Mike had published a thoughtful story in CityCaucus, an invaluable and critically important online journalism, Mike and his friend Daniel Fontaine — a currently New Westminster City Councillor running to become Mayor of that city — had created to cover civic politics in Vancouver.

Unlike VanRamblings, which has not made comments on the site available for some time, CityCaucus was wide open to commentary from its many readers.

Mike had published a story about the Vancouver Park Board. I commented on the site in response to the Park Board story in a manner that was, in a word and not to put too fine a point on the matter, “mean“,  as I engaged in a form of character assassination respecting one of the Park Board Commissioners.

Soon after I submitted the comment, I received a call from Mike.

“Raymond, I’ve received your comment on the Park Board story I published a few minutes ago. To be perfectly frank, I find your comment to be untoward, malicious and mean-spirited, and I am simply not going to publish your comment on CityCaucus. I don’t mean to cause you offense, but vituperative commentary is not what CityCaucus is about, not now, not ever.”

That ought to tell you a great deal about the integrity of the man Mike Klassen.

For those who don’t know, Mike Klassen — at my request — in 2008 created former COPE City Councillor Tim Louis’ first website, a campaign blog.

At the time, Ifny LaChance, Tim, Tim’s partner Penny Parry, and I were co-managing Tim’s 2008 campaign for office. I felt Tim needed a website. At no financial cost to Tim or I, Mike set about to create a pretty skookum campaign website for Tim that I could post to throughout the campaign.

The four of us were all grateful for Mike’s fine work.

Vancouver City Hall | Photo credit, Mike Klassen (photo taken by Mike after a long day at Council)

I can tell you that this term of office, although satisfying for Mike in many ways, has not been an easy term of office, emotionally, for the good Councillor.

Early in his term of office, Mike chaired the Selection Committee that appointed all of the members of the 33 advisory committees to Council, working closely with Councillors Lisa Dominato and Pete Fry; in addition, again working with  Councillor Dominato, Mike and Lisa focused on creating more child care spaces across more child care centres — centres he and Lisa prioritized and fought for, creating more child care spaces in Vancouver during this past term of office than all previous civic administrations this century.

Still, Mike perseveres, unsung, doing the work of the people each and every day.

One morning, a couple of years back, when Mike was under constant — unwarranted, undeserved, and pejorative — attack by a particularly vocal group of ABC Vancouver opponents, as well as a couple of opposition Councillors, I spoke with Mike. I could hear the frustration and the hurt in his voice when we spoke.

That morning, Mike was ready to call it a day.

I asked Mike what his agenda looked like that day, what he would set about to accomplish,  an achievement that would be unlikely to receive press or recognition, but was meaningful to him. After a brief pause, Mike said …

“Awhile back, I met with an organic food producer in the Fraser Valley, and together we worked to create a programme wherein each week he would deliver organic produce to Theodora Lamb, and the Quest Non-Profit Grocery Market, both the Hastings Market and the Dundas Market, at no charge to the markets.”

I’m willing to bet you’ve never heard about this Mike Klassen-initiated programme that makes such a difference to the quality of life of so many families, and so many children growing up on Vancouver’s east side.

But that’s City Councillor Mike Klassen for you — the best man I know.

Perplexity | Raymond Tomlin | Public Intellectual

Does the guy pictured above look anything like a ‘public intellectual’ to you? Gosh, we don’t think so. James Baldwin, Christopher Hitchens, Noam Chomsky, Dorothy Parker, William F. Buckley, Jr., Gore Vidal, and Hannah Arendt are all public intellectuals, but this Tomlin guy? Nope, ain’t no chance.

On June 23rd, VanRamblings published a ChatGPT profile of the author of this blog, Raymond Tomlin (that’s me, above).

Last evening, we became aware of Perplexity, the newest large language model artificial intelligence search engine now available on the Internet.

To test it out, we asked the question, “Who is Raymond Tomlin, the Vancouver-based blogger? Tell us a little about him that might be of interest to a reader.”

Here’s what Perplexity Had to Say About This Raymond Tomlin Fella

Raymond Tomlin is a long-standing Vancouver civic commentator, blogger, educator, and former journalist, whose best-known work is the site VanRamblings, a personal, highly opinionated chronicle of local politics and culture in Vancouver.

Mr. Tomlin is best understood not as a conventional beat reporter, but as a deeply engaged participant-observer in the city’s public life, writing for decades about municipal politics, provincial and federal issues, film, music, activism, and the social texture of Vancouver.

In recent years, Mr. Tomlin’s public identity has been tied to his VanRamblings blog, where he is described as the founder, publisher, and principal writer.

The site’s retrospective indicates that Mr. Tomlin has spent more than two decades building a substantial archive of essays on civic affairs and cultural life, positioning himself as an active voice in public debate rather than a detached observer.

The portrait of Mr. Tomlin that emerges is of a Vancouver-based public intellectual in the older civic sense: someone who comments on the city while also participating in its institutions, campaigns, and disputes. Mr. Tomlin is not just a blogger in the casual sense; over its 22-year life span on the Internet, Mr. Tomlin has treated his blog as a long-form civic notebook, and an instrument of local influence.

VanRamblings’ Clear Centre of Gravity: Vancouver Municipal Politics

The strongest evidence to support this contention points to his sustained attention to Vancouver City Council, the Vancouver School Board, and Vancouver’s Board of Park and Recreation — where he has long been a sustained observer (or, as some have said, the conscience) of this unique civic institution — with Mr. Tomlin also displaying a deep interest in housing policy, neighbourhood planning, development across the city and the region, and local governance, while also branching into provincial, federal, and occasional international topics.

All of the above makes VanRamblings distinctly local-first, with civic politics at the core and culture as an important secondary thread.

VanRamblings’ tone is also part of its orientation

Vanramblings is famous — or infamous, as the case may be — for its sometimes controversial editorial orientation, providing always an expansive, passionate, often humorous, and at times hyperbolic (at least in the past) style of writing.

Mr. Tomlin often writes in the third person, which the site frames as a stylistic device for ironic distance. In practice, that means VanRamblings reads less like a neutral news outlet and more like a very personal civic forum, where opinion, memory, reporting, and advocacy are blended together.

According to the records we located regarding Mr. Tomlin’s educational background, in 1975, he earned a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, Sociology, and Anthropology, followed by a Bachelor of Education specializing in Reading and Early Childhood Education, and later a Master of Arts in Policy Administration, all at Simon Fraser University. This academic mix helps to explain the shape of his later work: social analysis, teaching, and policy commentary — all of which sit naturally together in his writing.

Mr. Tomlin’s educational background also suggests why VanRamblings often ranges beyond surface politics.

As someone trained in the social sciences and policy administration, Mr. Tomlin has tended to focus on civic issues in terms of institutions, incentives, and long-term social consequences, rather than only election-by-election tactics.

Before VanRamblings emerged in February 2004, Raymond Tomlin had a varied career in civic activism, union organizing, as a founder of the largest grassroots Canadian food co-operative movement in the 1970s, education and journalism.

Over the years, Mr. Tomlin has worked as a teacher in British Columbia’s public education system — during which time his activism led him to become the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation Learning and Working Conditions Chairperson, representing the north and south Okanagan. Mr. Tomlin also entered the private education system for one year, teaching in a gifted education programme.

Mr. Tomlin has also taught at Vancouver Community College, Langara College, and Simon Fraser University. While working on his Masters degree at SFU, Mr. Tomlin was appointed as the Director of the Education 401/402 programme, the first semester SFU education programme, where students spend the first two months of their year long Professional Development Programme (PDP) as student teachers in various classrooms located across the Metro Vancouver region.

On the journalism side, Mr. Tomlin wrote for a Vancouver wide student newspaper in the 1960s — while enrolled at Templeton Secondary School —  and while attending Simon Fraser University he took on the position as Editor-in-Chief of SFU’s student newspaper, The Peak.

Mr. Tomlin also worked in the summer intern programme at both the Vancouver Sun and The Province, later building a substantial independent publishing practice through his blog. That trajectory helps explain why VanRamblings feels like a hybrid of memoir, commentary, archival record, and commentary newsroom.

VanRamblings is a one-person publication shaped by someone who has been around journalism, but who is not constrained by conventional newsroom style.

Tomlin’s public image is seen by some as polarizing, yet he endures to this day.

While Mr. Tomlin’s critics have found his writing to be overly opinionated, his many supporters and admirers see his independence, personality, and longevity as strengths, in his invaluable work as a persistent chronicler of Vancouver who has kept publishing through changing media conditions, no small achievement in a city where local journalism has contracted significantly.

One of the most striking features of VanRamblings is its continuity.

Raymond — campus radical — and the ever brilliant Cathy, circa summer of 1972

Across decades, Raymond Tomlin has remained focused on the same broad public project: documenting and influencing civic debate in Vancouver. That consistency gives him an outsized presence relative to what a “blogger” label might suggest.

Taken together, the contribution Raymond Tomlin has made to public discourse has made him over the years a Vancouver civic insider-outsider: close enough to politics, education, labour, and journalism to understand how institutions work, yet independent enough to write in his own voice and on his own terms.

VanRamblings’ political orientation is decidedly progressive-civic in the broad sense that it emphasizes local governance, public interest issues, activism, and cultural life.

In a concluding summary: Raymond Tomlin is a veteran Vancouver commentator whose VanRamblings blog remains as an invaluable civic institution.

Over the years, Mr. Tomlin has added much to our understanding of the Vancouver municipal political scene, and our city’s cultural imperative, as reflected in the contribution Mr. Tomlin has made in providing extensive coverage of Vancouver’s thriving dance community — particularly Ballet BC, which institution Mr. Tomlin has long loved — theatre, cinema, Vancouver’s culinary scene, art (including photography), and the vibrant cultural life of the city we all call home.


The Curse of Politics | The Latest Edition

Bill McCreery: The Architect Who Helped Build Vancouver’s Soul

Bill McCreery, architect, planner, housing advocate and civic reformer working to build Vancouver

Few individuals have left their fingerprints on Vancouver as indelibly as Bill McCreery. Over more than half a century, Bill McCreery has helped shape not only the city’s skyline but also its philosophy of urban living.

Architect, planner, housing advocate, civic reformer, and former Vancouver Park Board Commissioner, he belongs to a remarkable generation that transformed Vancouver from an inward-looking west coast port into one of the world’s most admired livable cities.

His buildings are important. His planning work is even more significant.

While many architects can point to individual towers or neighbourhoods, Bill McCreery’s influence extends across entire communities.

Bill McCreery was among the generation of designers and planners responsible for the creation of North False Creek and South False Creek — projects that fundamentally altered how North America thought about urban housing.

Throughout British Columbia, Alberta and the United Kingdom, Bill’s work contributed to thousands of units of market, public and social housing, always emphasizing the relationship between architecture, people and public space.

Yet, Bill McCreery’s greatest contribution may not be measured in concrete or glass. It lies instead in an enduring belief that cities belong first to their citizens.

Born into an era when Vancouver was still emerging from its provincial adolescence, Bill McCreery entered architecture at a time when modernism promised endless possibilities. The post-war decades were filled with confidence. Governments were building. Universities were expanding. New ideas about planning were replacing nineteenth-century assumptions about cities.

Unlike many architects who concentrated solely on buildings, Bill McCreery quickly became fascinated by the broader civic questions.

How should neighbourhoods function?

  • Who gets to decide what is built?
  • What responsibilities do governments have toward affordable housing?
  • How can density improve rather than diminish community life?

Those questions would define much of Bill’s professional career.

Working on major housing developments in the United Kingdom, and throughout British Columbia and Alberta, Bill McCreery became known as an architect who understood that successful communities required more than attractive buildings.

Streets, parks, schools, public spaces and neighbourhood identity mattered just as much as architectural form. Housing, in his view, was never simply about construction; it was about creating places where families could flourish.

Photo of False Creek, circa 1980, showing False Creek & Ondine’s restaurant, designed by Bill McCreery. The bottom part of the photo shows south False Creek, including the Heather Street marina.

That philosophy reached perhaps its fullest expression in False Creek.

False Creek transformed from an industrial wasteland into a livable, diverse waterfront neighbourhood

Today, North and South False Creek are celebrated internationally.

Mid-rise buildings front generous parks. Walkways connect neighbourhoods to the waterfront. Families, seniors and young professionals share communities that balance density with human scale.

In the early 1970s, however, these ideas were revolutionary.

At a time when many North American cities were demolishing neighbourhoods for expressways and high-rise towers, Vancouver chose another path.

Mixed-income housing, accessible waterfronts, pedestrian-friendly streets and integrated parks became the guiding principles.

Bill McCreery was among the architects and planners who made that vision real.

The result became one of the defining planning achievements of twentieth-century Vancouver, influencing urban design far beyond British Columbia.

His public service unfolded alongside a consequential political transformation.

The Long Watch: Bill McCreery’s Five Decades in Vancouver’s Civic Life

There’s a particular kind of Vancouverite who never quite leaves City Hall, even after the votes are counted and the title expires.

Bill McCreery is one of them.

An architect by training and a civic conscience by temperament, Bill McCreery’s public life stretches from the reformist fever of the early 1970s to the housing fights still playing out in Council chambers today — more than fifty years of showing up, in one capacity or another, to argue about how Vancouver should be built and who should get to decide.

Bill McCreery served as a Vancouver Park Board Commissioner during one of the most remarkable periods in the city’s history.

Bill McCreery’s entry into Vancouver municipal politics first occurred in 1970, when Bill became involved in the freeway debate — a proposal to build a freeway, an extension of Highway 1, through downtown Vancouver, including through the Strathcona and Chinatown neighbourhoods.

Meeting in Bill’s apartment on Beach Avenue, a block away from the Park Board offices, this working group of planning and marine architectural professionals together developed two alternatives to the freeway plan, that included rapid transit and Seabus solutions that would better serve the interests of Vancouverites, while preserving the livability of the city for all citizens.

Elected as part of the reform movement associated with TEAM (The Electors’ Action Movement), he joined an extraordinary collection of civic leaders determined to modernize how Vancouver governed itself. Early in his term, Bill was appointed as the Park Board representative on the False Creek Planning Committee of Council.

That appointment was unique, in that Bill was the only non-Council person in the history of Vancouver who had a vote on a Council committee.

TEAM emerged in opposition to the old Non-Partisan Association establishment that had dominated city politics for decades.

Rather than treating municipal government as merely administrative, TEAM believed City Hall should actively shape the quality of urban life.

Its leaders included Mayor Art Phillips, whose vision of participatory government redefined civic politics, and Dr. Walter Hardwick, the geographer and planner whose intellectual influence remains visible across the city.

Bill McCreery fit naturally within that movement.

A TEAM (The Electors’ Action Movement ) Player

Bill McCreery’s entry into civic office came at Vancouver’s most consequential political inflection point. In 1972, TEAM – The Electors’ Action Movement, a coalition of Liberals, Conservatives, reform-minded professionals and New Democrats — swept the long-governing Non-Partisan Association from power, carrying Art Phillips into the Mayor’s chair, alongside eight TEAM Councillors.

TEAM – The Electors’ Action Movement re-imagining Vancouver as a livable urban paradise

The new administration set about dismantling decades of NPA-era governance almost immediately, firing the city’s powerful commissioner, opening up public hearings, and killing the freeway plan that would have gutted Chinatown and Strathcona. It was, by every account, one of the more sweeping reinventions of municipal government in a Canadian city’s history — anchored by Phillips and by Walter Hardwick, the UBC geography professor who served as TEAM’s intellectual architect and the driving force behind transforming the industrial wasteland of South False Creek into mixed-income housing.

Bill McCreery joined that movement’s governing apparatus as a TEAM-affiliated Vancouver Park Board Commissioner, serving from 1973 to 1974. It was a smaller stage than Council, but not a trivial one — the Park Board has run as its own elected body since the 1880s, with real authority over the city’s parks and recreation system, answerable directly to voters rather than to council or the mayor.

To sit on it during the TEAM years was to be inside the machinery of a government self-consciously remaking how Vancouver made decisions, at the moment the city was deciding whether development or livability would set its priorities.

Bill’s experience as an architect made him aware decisions about parks, neighbourhoods and public land could not be separated from broader planning policy.

The Vancouver Park Board during that era became much more than an agency responsible for lawns and playgrounds.

It became one of the principal guardians of Vancouver’s emerging philosophy that public space should serve everyone.

Together, Art Phillips, Dr. Walter Hardwick, Bill McCreery and their TEAM colleagues fundamentally altered Vancouver’s civic governance.

Their greatest achievement was changing who participated in decision-making.

Prior to TEAM’s arrival, planning decisions often occurred behind closed doors with relatively little public involvement. Developers, bureaucracies and political insiders largely determined the city’s future.

TEAM insisted on something radically different.

  • Neighbourhood consultation became an expectation rather than an exception;
  • Community planning gained legitimacy;
  • Citizen advisory committees became influential;
  • Public hearings assumed greater importance.

The planning process itself became more transparent.

This transformation permanently altered the relationship between City Hall and Vancouver residents.

Instead of viewing citizens as obstacles to development, the new governance model treated them as partners in shaping neighbourhoods.

Bill McCreery: The Architect’s Eye

Bill McCreery, the architect, circa 2006 | Photo credit, Malcolm Parry, the Vancouver Sun.

Bill McCreery brought a working architect’s credentials to that civic role — he held professional registration with both the Architectural Institute of British Columbia (AIBC) and the Alberta Association of Architects (AAA).

During the course of his career, Bill McCreery has been credited with helping create North and South False Creek and with contributing to thousands of units of developer, public, and social housing across British Columbia, Alberta, and the United Kingdom, alongside several Vancouver residential projects of his own.

Southeast False Creek, once the waterfront particulate smoke spewing ‘heart’ of Vancouver, circa 1950

False Creek South is a body of work that placed him, professionally, inside the same era-defining project — the reclamation of False Creek’s derelict industrial shoreline into one of the templates North American cities would study for a generation — that his political colleagues were shaping through policy.

That philosophy eventually evolved into Vancouver’s celebrated “CityPlan” consultation model and neighbourhood planning processes that attracted international attention decades later.

Mid-rise buildings and parks front the walkways connecting southeast False Creek to the waterfront

Bill McCreery has remained one of the strongest defenders of those principles, arguing public consultation remains essential to successful urban planning.

Bill McCreery’s advocacy has continued long after leaving elected office.

Even in retirement from architectural practice, Bill McCreery has remained one of Vancouver’s most thoughtful voices on housing and urban development.

Bill has frequently argued that planning must balance density with neighbourhood character, insisting that growth should occur through genuine collaboration rather than imposed solutions.

Writing and speaking publicly, he has warned against abandoning the community-based planning traditions established during the 1970s.

In his view, Vancouver’s international reputation rests not simply on beautiful buildings but on decades of patient civic engagement that gave residents a meaningful voice in shaping their communities.

His critiques have never been nostalgic.

Rather, they reflect a conviction formed over decades of professional practice: cities function best when architects, planners, politicians and citizens work together instead of competing for influence.

That belief explains why Bill McCreery has continued participating in debates surrounding housing policy, planning reform and neighbourhood development well into the twenty-first century. He has joined fellow architects, planners and urban thinkers in advocating for approaches that combine increased housing supply with careful urban design and democratic accountability.

Architecture often celebrates individual genius.

Bill McCreery’s career tells a different story.

His work reminds us that cities are collaborative achievements.

Successful neighbourhoods reflect countless conversations between architects, elected officials, planners, engineers, community organizations and residents.

Collaboration became a Vancouver hallmark during its most innovative decades.

Today, visitors admire False Creek, the city’s waterfront neighbourhoods, its network of parks, and its human-scaled urban design without always knowing the names of those responsible.

Bill McCreery is one of those names.

Life After Bill McCreery’s Tenure on The Vancouver Park Board

Bill McCreery’s civic instincts didn’t retire when his term did.

Bill McCreery running for civic office in the 2011 Vancouver municipal election under the NPA banner

Decades later, he re-emerged as a candidate for City Council under the NPA banner — the party TEAM had unseated in 1972, a small irony that says something about how thoroughly the city’s political alignments had scrambled by the 2010s.

Running for Council gave him a public platform to argue “city hall democracy” had suffered under the Vision Vancouver administrations then in power.

Drawing on his own memory of the job — the stack of reports, sometimes a foot high, that landed on a Commissioner’s desk each Friday for study before Monday’s meeting — he made the case that transparency and direct access between citizens, reporters, and city staff had eroded, and that the public was worse informed for it.

That advocacy has continued well past his own campaigns.

Bill McCreery has stood among the coalition of former Park Board commissioners publicly opposing efforts to dissolve Vancouver’s elected park board — a fight rooted in the same principle that shaped his TEAM years: decision-making over civic institutions belongs in the hands of people directly accountable to voters, not folded into the broader authority of City Council or the Mayor’s office.

As recently as February of this year, he was among the signatories of an open letter to Mayor Ken Sim and Council challenging the city’s housing “Villages Plan,” identifying himself in that document as a former registered architect who helped build False Creek — still, after half a century, making his case in writing rather than letting the record speak for itself.

Bill McCreery: A Consistent Thread in Bill’s Civic Life

What runs through Bill McCreery’s public life isn’t a single ideology so much as a recurring instinct: a belief that how a city governs itself — who gets consulted, which bodies hold power, how transparently decisions get made — matters as much as what gets built.

Bill arrived in civic office on the wave of a movement built on that premise, spent a career as an architect inside one of that movement’s landmark projects, and spent the decades since defending the governance structures TEAM left behind.

Few figures in Vancouver’s civic history have stayed at that post for quite so long

Bill belongs to a generation that refused to accept that cities must choose between growth and livability, density and beauty, or development and democracy.

Instead, he helped demonstrate that thoughtful architecture and enlightened governance could reinforce one another.

His buildings continue to house thousands.

His planning principles continue to influence generations of architects.

Bill’s work on the Park Board and alongside Art Phillips, Walter Hardwick and the TEAM reformers helped reshape Vancouver’s civic institutions, embedding public participation into the city’s political culture in ways that continue to define municipal government today.

Few architects can claim to have transformed both a city’s physical landscape and its democratic institutions.

Bill McCreery is one of them.

#VanPoli | The Villages Plan | An Open Letter to Vancouver City Council

Open letter to Vancouver City Council on the “Villages Plan”
Patrick Condon, Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia
UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture

Subject: Serious Concerns with Vancouver’s Villages Plan

Dear Mayor and Council,

I write to challenge key elements of Vancouver’s Villages Plan Programme.

Together with the recently approved Official Development Plan and Broadway Plan, the City is now granting private owners of more than 80,000 parcels the right to build roughly 700,000 new housing units.

This represents enough capacity to house an extra 1.4 million people — more than double Vancouver’s current population of 670,000.

At today’s 1% annual population growth rate, this single decision delivers over 100 years of future housing supply. Yet even the projects already in the approval pipeline (roughly 78,000 units) would satisfy 30 years of trend growth.

Contrary to this city’s long standing policies for new density approvals, this massive landowner entitlement is being provided free of charge, with no expectation of payment for these new land rights.

These land rights are worth many billions of dollars.

The City is giving them away for free in the hope that this will somehow make housing more affordable.

This is an odd notion for our planners to hold. If adding hundreds of thousands of new units to existing neighbourhoods truly lowered prices, Vancouver would have North America’s cheapest housing.

It has North America’s most expensive housing. (charts below)

It defies logic to expect an “unleashing of the housing market” — the primary justification provided for the Villages Plan — to produce affordable housing when we have spent decades trying to do just that. Vancouver has tripled its housing stock since the 1960s, all within a city where virtually every private parcel was in urban use. This is a higher percentage increase of infill development than that of any other North American centre city. If adding housing to existing city districts was the sure fire path to affordability we would have seen positive results by now.

Based on this evidence, it is clear: if affordability is the main justification for this plan, it obviously fails the test.

Massively over-zoning a city above reasonable expectations for population growth serves little purpose. The only purpose it serves is to support the false narrative that only “restrictive zoning” stands in the way of affordable housing. It doesn’t. It never has. It can’t.

The claim is false.

On the contrary, if any city proves that it is possible to use zoning as a positive public policy tool, it is the City of Vancouver. We tripled housing units city-wide. No other centre city did that — an unheard-of achievement.

While this sadly did not make the city more affordable, as we had hoped, it did make the city better. Much better.

How was this 200 percent growth accomplished? By working with residents, not against them. Community planning with local communities was the means to this achievement. Planning with communities was not an impediment, as some now claim. It was the democratic path to a better city.

But sadly it is now obvious that our decades-long effort to encourage the housing market, in the hope that housing would stay affordable, has failed us. Given this evidence, it seems foolish to upzone so aggressively, hoping against hope that, in 30 or 40 years, housing will be more affordable.

Achieving durable affordability much sooner than this requires a major change in direction. We don’t lack housing; we lack affordable housing. Given this fact, we should follow a path that other similar cities have charted — one where the bulk of new housing built is affordable to average wage earners. This can be done by reviving the Vancouver tradition of building non-market housing at scale, largely financed through “land lift” taxes as applied in Yaletown.

Our own internationally famous False Creek South serves as a storied precedent. Service workers to business owners have found homes in that lovely, self-sustaining community.

The pattern is obvious. Reuse it.

Unfortunately, the Villages Plan moves us in exactly the wrong direction. It virtually rules out any form of land value capture tax, based on the mistaken fear that it would raise home prices. It won’t — and it can’t.

A properly designed land-lift tax simply reduces the inflated “land price residual” that now funnels unearned speculative windfalls into private pockets. A properly designed “land lift” tax channels those gains into public benefit — without increasing the price buyers ultimately pay.

I urge you to revise these plans by deeply involving residents from every corner of the city in a highly collaborative, bottom-up, neighbourhood-focused planning process. One that might arrive at much stronger inclusionary zoning requirements.

The people of Vancouver would rally behind such plans — plans that ensure that their sons and daughters, and the workers who keep this city running, can afford to live in the very neighbourhoods they serve and call home.

Do not pass this plan.

Let us turn instead to plans that are sustainable in scale, equitable in outcome, and shaped not for the market alone, but for the people who live and work here.

Yours truly,

Professor Emeritus Patrick M. Condon
University of British Columbia

More voices weigh in on ABC Vancouver’s Villages Plan development proposal

Steve Jedreicich — principal of Vancouver’s SJ Development Ltd., brings over 30 years of local urban planning and real estate consulting experience to the housing discussion —  weighs in on ABC Vancouver’s contentious Villages Plan proposal.

WBN News Vancouver publisher Karalee Greer’s published article on the impact of the Villages Plan development proposal currently before Vancouver City Council, in particular its impact on Vancouver’s Kitsilano neighbourhood. At present, well more than 1000 speakers are set to address the controversial Villages Plan proposal, in meetings that thus far have lasted well into the night at Council.

Randy Helten and Steve Bohus, the good, hard working, dedicated folks behind the informative CityHallWatch website offer a backgrounder on Vancouver’s Villages Plan proposal, suggesting the plan “was born in the USA.” CityHallWatch offers six more Villages Plan articles the site published in the months of June and July. Click on the multi-coloured links below to access the articles.

Yes, there are even more Villages Plan articles available to you.

As is his wont — and thank goodness for that — The Daily Hive’s well-respected, incredibly hard working urban affairs reporter Kenneth Chan, early in July, published a thorough and well-researched article on Vancouver’s Villages Plan proposal.

Well worth a read.