Bill M216 has the backing of the association that represents B.C. developers, as well as the Greater Vancouver of Trade.DARRYL DYCK/The Canadian Press
A B.C. bill that has passed second reading in the legislature is raising the ire of planners and other housing experts who say it will erode local governance – and give project approval power to developers.
If Bill M216 passes third reading, a housing project submission approved by certified engineers and architects who’ve been hired by developers would get rubber-stamped without city staff review. The only exception, according to the bill, is if the submission is incomplete. There would also be a dispute process through the province.
Currently, city staff review project proposals, including work by third-party professionals, to ensure they meet development permit requirements. If the bill passes, local governments would be required to accept architectural drawings as meeting design guidelines, according to a staff report from the City of Coquitlam. In a letter from the Planning Institute of B.C., the broad scope of the bill could cover not just development permit applications, but rezoning applications. Rezonings normally involve planners who ensure a proposed zoning change fits with policy and community guidelines. The role of the planner could be lost.
The bill’s aim is to fast-track housing construction, according to NDP MLA George Anderson, who proposed the bill. The bill is at the committee stage and is up for public feedback until Dec. 2.
Vancouver rental builders, facing slowing demand, say government support needed
In a statement, Christine Boyle, Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs, said housing delivery is a priority and debate on new ideas is welcome.
“It is understandable that municipal governments and housing stakeholders have feedback on MLA Anderson’s proposal, and we encourage them to participate in the upcoming consultation on this bill,” she said.
The private members’ bill, called the Professional Reliance Act, has the endorsement of the Urban Development Institute, which represents developers in B.C. It also has the backing of the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade. Those opposed include a coalition of housing practitioners, the Planning Institute of B.C. and the Union of B.C. Municipalities, which represents local governments throughout the province.
“UBCM doesn’t regularly comment on private members’ bills, but we’ve never seen a private members’ bill that proposes to fundamentally restructure the local planning approval process,” said UBCM president Cori Ramsay. “Mandating certified professionals contracted by developers to sign off on every development submission in the province, for us, is a bad idea that puts homeowners and taxpayers at risk, and UBCM is taking the position that this should be defeated at the next possible opportunity.”
Ms. Ramsay cites safety concerns that could arise if a building submission isn’t vetted by municipal staff.
But there is also a broader implication that involves land use decisions. Many zoning decisions, for example, are conditional, or subject to conditions set by a director of planning, which could involve building height or setbacks, depending on the project. Critics fear that planning and urban design, as well as safety measures, will be lost in the process.
Ten charts that explain Canada’s messy and complicated housing markets
The law firm Lidstone & Co. has advised its clients in a bulletin that “local governments will be firewalled from due diligence” involving building design and construction, geotechnical site issues, subdivision, infrastructure design and construction,” and other land use matters.
“This legislation could increase the costs and timelines for development approvals, result in potentially unprofessional ‘approvals’ by consultants with no applicable expertise, increase risk for local governments and homeowners, and cause many local governments to abandon regulation altogether due to seriously increased risk and liability,” said the letter, provided by the UBCM.
The UDI and Greater Vancouver Board of Trade wrote a joint letter in support of Bill M216, citing “government-imposed measures” contributing to the high cost of construction, such as long review times. However, they also acknowledged that urban design requirements “may be better suited for review by local governments.”
In an open letter to Premier David Eby and MLAs, 30 housing practitioners – including former co-director of planning Larry Beasley and University of B.C. emeritus David Ley – charge that the bill amounts to a “quiet revolution in local governance” by the provincial government. They accuse the province of “rewriting the relationship between local democracy and development.”
“When certified professionals hired by developers are empowered to approve the very projects from which they earn their income, the integrity of the system collapses,” said the letter. It continues: “Step by step, the tools of local planning – zoning, permitting and density decisions – are being centralized under provincial authority, justified by the widely felt urgency of the housing crisis.”
Rather than improving affordability the bill would “hand over unprecedented control to private actors and provincially appointed officials.”
“I am very surprised that my government, the government that I represented, would want to upload zoning and development to the province from cities, rendering cities virtually unnecessary – because 90 per cent of what cities do is land use,” said Darlene Marzari, one of the 30 signers of the letter. Ms. Marzari is a former social planner for the city of Vancouver, former city councillor and former NDP minister of Municipal Affairs.
“I dread the fact that we would have a group of senior bureaucrats, officials and developers planning all major developments in British Columbia that would basically demolish the Vancouver as we know it, which is already being demolished by existing zoning. And to carry the same ethos throughout every other municipality in the province.”
Ms. Marzari compares the move to the “Ontario model,” where the provincial government is looking at standardizing municipal community plans as part of its controversial Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act. A community plan is an official planning document that determines how a municipality will grow, and the Ontario government says these documents have become too complicated.
Ms. Marzari’s fear is that B.C.’s government will follow suit and eventually amalgamate local governments and take control of zoning, which dictates land use. She also opposed Bill 13, passed this year, which allowed the province to override municipal bylaws and zoning to meet housing targets.
Developer, planner and retired architect Michael Geller has waited for approvals since 2018 for a North Vancouver project, so he knows that delays are a problem. But the proposed bill is too broad and overreaching, said Mr. Geller, who also signed the letter to government. In Vancouver, certified professionals who know the building code already help with building permit approvals, he said.
“What this bill is saying is, let’s allow the equivalent type of certified professional to get involved in approving all aspects of the development approval process – rezonings, development permits, and so forth. Right down to reviewing the design and determining whether the design is in accordance with the official community plan,” he said.