Archive for December, 2003

Renters of residences can expect to pay more in the new year

Saturday, December 13th, 2003

Sun

B.C. residential landlords will be allowed to hike rents by 4.6 per cent in 2004 under new legislation taking effect Jan. 1, the provincial government announced Friday.

In future years, the annual allowable rent increase will be tied to the rate of inflation, or consumer price index, plus two per cent.

For manufactured home park tenants, the yearly allowable hike will be held to the index, with the 2004 increase being 2.6 per cent.

Unlike previous rules, tenants will no longer be allowed to dispute rent increases as long as they fall within government guidelines.

Under the new Residential Tenancy Act kicking in Jan. 1, landlords will also be allowed to charge pet owners an extra half month’s rent to protect against damage in a move designed to encourage more pets in rental housing.

Among other highlights, landlords who don’t return or file claims against security deposits within 15 days of the end of a tenancy agreement must pay the tenant double the amount of the deposit.

Landlords will be able to end a tenancy if the tenant is repeatedly late paying rent, fails to pay utility charges owed to the landlord, or refuses to obey an arbitrator’s order.

© Copyright  2003 Vancouver Sun

 

Buying a house easier today than in 1989

Friday, December 12th, 2003

Sun

$4-billion transit plan approved

Thursday, December 11th, 2003

10-year program includes two new rapid transit lines and new roads

William Boei
Sun

Councillor Fred Bass says the plan is too heavy with rapid transit projects, such as SkyTrain.

TransLink approved a $4-billion, 10-year regional transportation plan Wednesday, despite criticism of a new tax on free-parking spaces and a financial strategy that depends on the generosity of prime minister-designate Paul Martin.

The plan calls for an ambitious building program that includes two rapid transit lines, new roads, a new Fraser River crossing and a modest expansion of TransLink’s bus fleet, all by 2013.

Most TransLink directors saw the plan as the necessary first step in a fight against urban sprawl and traffic congestion in Greater Vancouver.

There were few quibbles about the plan itself but many about the financial strategy, which includes an increase in property taxes, the new parking tax and transit fare hikes tied to inflation to finance the first three years.

Some directors didn’t like the new parking tax, others complained that property taxes are an unfair way to fund transit, and some demanded that transit service be improved before fares are increased again.

But most voted for the plan, agreeing with chief executive Pat Jacobsen that turning it down risked plunging TransLink into another financial crisis like one three years ago that led to project delays and a four-month transit strike in 2001.

The plant counts on Martin to deliver a big chunk of federal fuel-tax revenue to pay for the last seven years.

If he fails to come through, TransLink will fall back on fare increases, the parking tax and delaying some programs, Jacobsen said.

“But our core strategy remains to secure the federal gas tax,” she added. “We will solicit the support of the municipalities and the business community to that end.”

Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell said he expects Martin to deliver.

“He is dedicated to helping municipalities,” Campbell said. “He recognizes that 80 per cent of the people of Canada live in municipalities, and that they need help with their infrastructure.”

Campbell won his fight against the proposed tripling of an existing tax on paid offstreet parking, which would have hit downtown Vancouver especially hard. Instead, the new tax will require the owners of free parking spaces at shopping malls and office parks to pay about $30 per parking space per year, or eight cents a day.

“We should not be carrying the weight of the whole TransLink system in the city of Vancouver,” Campbell told the board.

Some mayors of mall-rich municipalities, including Richmond‘s Malcolm Brodie, grumbled about the switch but accepted an assurance from Jacobsen that merchants and mall owners will be consulted, and that the tax will be implemented as painlessly as possible.

Later, Campbell told reporters that if the tax is the difference between a store’s success and failure, “they shouldn’t be in business.”

He said Greater Vancouver has no choice but to spend money on transportation infrastructure.

“You have to pay for it, that’s all there is to it,” Campbell said. “The option is to end up with complete and total gridlock here, where businesses can’t move and we can’t move goods.

“There’s no free ride here. I wish there was.”

Wednesday’s meeting appear-ed to widen a rift between Vancouver‘s TransLink directors, with Campbell and Councillor David Cadman on one side and Councillor Fred Bass on the other.

Bass said the 10-year plan pays too much attention to rapid transit projects and road-building at the expense of expanding the bus fleet. But his attempt to have each item in the plan put to individual votes was rejected by chairman Doug McCallum. Bass ended up voting against the financial plan, while Campbell and Cadman supported it.

Bass called the process undemocratic and the TransLink board “a kangaroo court.” As he spoke, Campbell folded his hands and bowed his head, as if praying.

Green transit advocate Ray Straatsma agreed with Bass that the plan has weaknesses, but said it was a worthwhile compromise

“Do we like everything in the plan?” Straatsma asked. “No. Could it be better? Yes. But on balance, I think TransLink made a very important decision today, and its a decision in the right direction.”

Straatsma, policy director for Better Environmentally Sound Transportation (BEST) said challenges include the lack of firm financing for seven-tenths of the plan, and the need to come to grips with land use issues to prevent urban sprawl.

Former Vancouver councillor and TransLink chairman George Puil, who lost his seat in the wake of TransLink’s last financial crisis, said TransLink made the right choice Wednesday, although he predicted it may eventually have to reconsider a vehicle levy.

“You have to think of what’s best for the region,” Puil said. “I think they’re moving in the right direction.”

[email protected]

– – –

TRANSLINK’S 10-YEAR PLAN

The 10-year plan adopted Wednesday by TransLink, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority, includes:

– Completing the Richmond-

Airport-Vancouver rapid transit line before 2010.

– Working concurrently on a rapid transit line to fast-growing northeastern municipalities, and planning a third line west on Broadway.

– A new bridge over the Fraser River in the northeast sector.

– Twinning the Dollarton Bridge.

– A new North Fraser perimeter road.

-Widening the Fraser Highway.

– Expanding the U-Pass program from 60,000 students to 100,000 by 2007.

– Expanding transit pass programs to include employee groups who work near transit facilities.

– Boosting transit, cycling and walking as alternatives to driving.

– Increasing bus service capacity by one-third by 2013.

– More use of commuter ferries.

– Replacing aging SkyTrain cars and older buses.

© Copyright  2003 Vancouver Sun

TransLink OKs $1.9 billion capital plan

Thursday, December 11th, 2003

Frank Luba
Province

Upgrading of Pattullo Bridge and two others to cost $54 million. CREDIT: Colin Price, The Province

Residents of the Greater Vancouver Regional District will pay increased property taxes, higher transit fares and a controversial new parking fee to pay for $1.9 billion worth of roads, bridges and public transit approved yesterday by TransLink, the regional transportation agency.

Details of the parking fee have yet to be worked out but that particular proposal has incensed the owners of shopping malls and commercial buildings.

“It simply won’t get people out of their cars,” said Retail B.C. president Mark Startup.

TransLink board members were divided in their support for the ambitious plan for 2005-2007, to be paid for by new taxes, fees and fares that would raise about $100 million a year.

Board chairman Doug McCallum refused to allow the options to be separated for individual votes and debates.

Although challenged by Vancouver Coun. Fred Bass, the board supported McCallum’s ruling and eventually approved the plan.

McCallum acknowledged there were problems with the plan but hailed the final decision.

“We have parts of the plan that people don’t like and we need to work with those people as we go over the next few years . . . to listen to their concerns,” he said.

“I think it’s a historic day for transportation in our region, that we’re going to move ahead now.”

Bass voted against the plan, breaking ranks with his fellow COPE members from Vancouver: Mayor Larry Campbell and Coun. David Cadman.

Bass objected to the plan because of the financial risk involved in building the $1.5- to $1.7-billion rapid transit line proposed to link Richmond, Vancouver International Airport and Vancouver. TransLink’s plan includes a $370-million contribution to the cost of the so-called RAV line, with the remainder to be raised by the federal and provincial governments and a private partner.

Bass said the plan lacked support for buses, which carry more than 70 per cent of all transit users. He also objected to backing a plan that isn’t funded beyond 2007.

The $1.9-billion three-year plan is part of a proposed $3.9-billion package of transportation needs that TransLink is proposing for the next 10 years.

“To push through a plan that incorporates the biggest public project ever to be done [in the Lower Mainland] and to not have the money in hand, not know where it’s coming from, and to spend all our money on RAV and roads is wrong,” said Bass.

TransLink’s plan was supported by groups as diverse as the B.C. Federation of Labour — whose president Jim Sinclair spoke out in favour of it at the last public meeting on the plan — the B.C. Automobile Association and transit advocates Better Environmentally Sound Transportation.

But the board’s approval was a bitter pill for the Rethink RAV Coalition. The group fought the plan because it opposed the rapid transit line going down the Cambie Heritage Boulevard in the city of Vancouver when the Arbutus corridor would be less expensive.

Spokesman Don Toffaletto was “extremely disappointed.”

“We think it’s time property owners and renters that are going to be hit with this [increased costs] started some kind of revolt,” said Toffaletto.

Besides Bass, board members who opposed the plan were Pitt Meadows Mayor Don MacLean, New Westminster Mayor Wayne Wright and North Vancouver City Mayor Barbara Sharp.

Leading the group in favour of the plan were McCallum, who is mayor of Surrey, and Surrey Coun. Marvin Hunt, who will now have to steer the proposal through approval for property tax increases by the GVRD board, where he is the chairman. Also in support were Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Langley City Mayor Marlene Grinnell, Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini and Port Coquitlam Mayor Scott Young.

WHERE ALL THOSE MILLIONS ARE GOING TO BE SPENT

Some highlights from TransLink’s $1.9-billion capital plan approved yesterday:

ROADS

:: Major roads, $105 million (a further $125 million accumulated in earlier years).

:: Minor roads, $60 million.

:: Transit-related roads, $9 million.

BRIDGES

:: Rehabilitation of Pattullo, Knight Street and Westham Island bridges, $54 million.

:: New Fraser River crossing between Langley and Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows, $600 million (to be paid for with tolls).

TRANSIT

:: Contribution of $370 million to Richmond-Airport-Vancouver rapid-transit project (which costs between $1.5 billion and $1.7 billion).

:: Northeast-sector rapid transit, $400 million (contribution toward estimated final cost of $900 million if SkyTrain technology is used).

:: Replacing 492 bus and custom vehicles (including new trolleys), $312 million.

:: Maintaining infrastructure, including new depots and new maintenance centre, $200 million.

:: Expanding bus and HandyDart fleet by 156 vehicles, $59 million.

:: Payments toward 34 new SkyTrain cars, $84 million.

:: New West Coast Express station and spare locomotive, $10 million.

:: Cycling infrastructure, $15 million.

:: SeaBus retrofit, $5 million.

HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2005

:: PROPERTY TAX :: TransLink will raise $56 million to $58 million annually from property tax by charging an extra $20 per $100,000 of assessed value.

That works out to another $61 on the average assessed value of $309,000, from which TransLink already takes about $89.

:: TRANSIT FARES :: These fares, which rose in 2002 by 25 cents for single-zone and 50 cents for two- and three-zone rides, will go up by about six per cent to raise another $11 million to $15 million annually.

Exactly how that will be done hasn’t been determined but it basically works out to about 10 cents more on a single-zone fare, which is currently $2.

:: PARKING TAX :: Since discussion began about TransLink’s new plan, the proposal focused on increasing parking taxes on off-street pay parking from seven per cent to 21 per cent in order to raise $25 million to 26 million annually.

Because of widespread opposition from downtown Vancouver, where the bulk of pay parking exists, the other option has been chosen — a tax on either the parking-lot area or number of parking stalls across the region, which would cost about $28 per stall.

This has raised great opposition from shopping malls and commercial buildings. Exact details on the stall tax have yet to be worked out but the seven per cent on off-street pay parking will be retained.

© Copyright 2003 The Province

Limo Operators wary of proposed changes

Thursday, December 11th, 2003

Sun

Unbuilt condos nearly sold out

Thursday, December 11th, 2003

Sun

Helicopter return trip to Whistler $300/person

Sunday, December 7th, 2003

Sun

Tallest Tower Means Big Payback For City

Saturday, December 6th, 2003

SKYLINE I Benefits would include 57,000 new trees

Frances Bula
Sun

Vancouver‘s first 600-foot tower isn’t just setting a height record.

The proposed 57-storey tower at 1120 West Georgia is going where no tall building has gone before when it comes to payback for the city, with the richest package of public gifts ever contributed through a single building.

It’s also unique in that it has generated almost no public controversy.

After a series of tussles in the past five years over tall buildings in the city — the Wall Centre tower on Burrard, the much-debated Bing Thom design for a “sparkling glass crystal spike” on Howe Street, and a recently rejected design for a 400-foot building at 550 Bute — there has been barely a murmur of opposition to the proposed hotel-live/work-apartment tower as it heads to public hearings next week.

Added to that, the city will be getting an unprecedented $16.5 million from the tower’s developers, which will go to an unusual list of benefits to the city, including a sculpture garden, 57,000 trees to be planted somewhere in a B.C. forest to compensate for the building’s carbon-dioxide emissions, the $4.5-million restoration of a 1913 church next door, and $2.3 million for the city’s affordable-housing fund.

Developer Ian Gillespie acknowledges that it’s a big chunk of money, more than has been asked of developers in the past, and that other developers might have fought the city over it.

But he said the group of people he works with decided that wasn’t the approach they wanted to take.

“We looked at this project as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build a truly world-class building,” he said. “You make a little bit less money but you have a chance to do something like this. Wouldn’t it be a shame if you dug in your heels over $1 million and it never got built?”

In spite of that attitude, one that they’ve taken since the beginning of the project, Gillespie and his development partner Ben Yeung had more than a few surprises in the negotiations over the final package of city benefits.

Gillespie found out earlier this fall, on one particularly dispiriting day, that the new Vancouver city council had decided to increase the rate for development cost levies — a fee that builders pay in order to help the city cover the cost of things like transportation, housing, parks and daycare as residents are added to the city — from $2.50 a square foot to $6 a square foot and that his building would be caught by the change because the council had decided on a relatively short grace period before the new rates came into effect.

That added $2,341,092 to the cost of a project that is already in the $200-million-plus range, bringing the cost of DCLs for the building to just over $4 million.

Then, in the more recent stages of negotiations, when the public-benefit package was being calculated — that’s money over and above the standard DCL charges that certain special projects are asked to pay — one staffer suggested $3 million might be a nice amount of money to contribute to the affordable-housing fund, on top of the $1.3 million already going in through the DCL. That was also in addition to $11.5 million being put into the heritage church, the sculpture garden, the $50,000 worth of trees and other already-agreed-on benefits.

That floater was quickly quashed once central-area planner Larry Beasley, who has the last word on the city’s major-project deal-making, returned from an out-of-town trip.

At that point, the city’s real-estate department scrutinized the project’s pro forma (the estimate of costs and revenues) and accepted the argument that a 600-foot building actually costs more than twice as much money to build than a 300-foot building because of the cost of building a stronger core and hauling materials up a higher distance.

Beasley says the two sides agreed the project was gaining about $13.7 million from the “land lift” it would get when the city allowed it to add the extra height and density it was asking for. The area is normally zoned for what’s called, in planning lingo, 9 FSR, which means the building’s floor space can be nine times the square footage of the lot. (Residential houses in Vancouver get .6 FSR or 60 per cent of the lot.) If approved, the building will have 12.81 FSR.

The city will get back 91 per cent of the $13.7 million created by that land-value increase, which is considerably higher than the 50 to 60 per cent that has been negotiated on other buildings in the past.

“That’s a very good benefit for the city,” Beasley says in his understated way, although he also points out that the developers still get their margin of profit — generally about 15 per cent, Gillespie said — on all the extra units they’ll be building.

Beasley made the case with his own staff to allow the project to hang on to some of that profit.

Beasley says he wanted to leave the builders some room for the risk they’re taking. Gillespie says that Beasley also understands that, if the city wants a landmark building as it says it does, “you’ve got to leave enough on the table that the guy can build a landmark.”

The project still has design revisions to go through on its way to being a Vancouver landmark.

At an urban-design panel review in June, several panelists stressed that the building has to be more than just a conventionally lovely piece of architecture.

One comment: “Whether you like it or not, this building will be iconic. It will give identity to the city. Think seriously about it because it will be seen around the world.”

Some also added that it looked more like a slightly better version of the existing towers in the city, instead of being a symbol of a new phase in the city’s architectural future.

Architect James Cheng said there’s more design work to do even if and when the building is approved at the public hearing.

It’s already been an architectural challenge, because it had to be designed so that it doesn’t intrude on one of the city’s view cones — the sight lines that city planners established in the 1970s to protect views of the mountains.

One face of the building is actually on a diagonal because of the way the view-cone line slices the lot.

Cheng, whose design was also praised by some panelists as a “good start” towards creating an exquisite, subtle spire, has already altered some aspects. He’s introduced a crystal cube two-thirds of the way up the Georgia and Thurlow corner of the building, something that “breaks the simplicity and creates more of a focus.”

In spite of the architectural demand for a more distinctive building, the general public has been largely positive at two open houses held so far.

City rezoning planner Phil Mondor says the main concerns have been from the relatively few number of local residents on Melville and Alberni, who are concerned about shadowing or noise impacts.

As for city staff, they’re fully supporting the project.

“These proponents have approached this in what I would say is the right way,” says Beasley. “Rather than starting a fight about view corridors, they shifted their design. It’s been founded on working with public policy, rather than challenging it.”

© Copyright 2003 Vancouver Sun

Staging your Home with Furniture

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2003

Sun

$2B Rapid Transit

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2003

Sun