UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Urban land development system : land speculation and other built-in problems (a case for public acquistion… Matharoo, Gurdarshan Singh 1974

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1974_A7_3 M38.pdf [ 9.22MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0099919.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0099919-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0099919-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0099919-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0099919-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0099919-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0099919-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0099919-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0099919.ris

Full Text

URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM: LAND SPECULATION AND OTHER BUILT-IN PROBLEMS (A CASE FOR PUBLIC ACQUISITION OF LAND AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL) by GURDARSHAN SINGH MATHAROO B.Arch.(Hons.), Indian Institute of Technology, India, 1967 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE in the School of Architecture We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1974 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e that t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d study. I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e H e a d o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a V a n c o u v e r 8 , C a n a d a D a t e ABSTRACT Since the m i d - s i x t i e s , and more p a r t i c u l a r l y , s ince the beginning of 1972, housing pr i ce s i n major urban centers across Canada have r i s e n so sharply that i t has become almost impossible f o r most Canadians to acquire adequate housing accommodation w i t h i n t h e i r means. The rate of increase i n the cost of land for housing, i n comparison wi th other housing cost components, has:been tremendously h igh . Why i s the cost of land and housing so high i n a l a n d - r i c h country l i k e Canada, and what could be done to c o n t r o l the r i s i n g cost of land and housing i s the concern of t h i s study. This thes is argues that the e x i s t i n g system, whereby, land i s owned, planned, s e r v i c e d , developed, and marketed, has b u i l t - i n drawbacks and weaknesses that give r i s e to many problems which contr ibute to the high cost of urban land for housing. I t i s suggested that the value of urban land mostly represents the value created due to the general growth of the urban community and p u b l i c development planning dec i s ions . The benef i t s from such value increments i n urban land rightlyab.elpng to the urban community. But i n the e x i s t i n g system, i n which land i s predominantly owned by p r i v a t e owners and developed at the w i l l of p r i v a t e owners and developers , these value increments i n urban land remain i n the hands of the p r i v a t e owners. I t i s argued that such p r o f i t s from incrementsxjin. land value due to community growth a t t r a c t a l l forms of specula t ive p r a c t i c e s that , to a very large extent are respons ib le for increas ing the cost of land for housing. This i s i a l s o r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the problem of c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t at a l l l e v e l s or p u b l i c development planning decision-making. I t i s f u r t h e r argued that i n the e x i s t i n g system a u t h o r i t y f o r p u b l i c planning and development c o n t r o l i s too fragmented i n the l i g h t of present-day r e g i o n a l urban r e a l i t y . I t i s i r r a t i o n a l , i n e f f i c i e n t , and c o s t l y to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t at l a r g e . The t h e s i s suggests that to c o n t r o l the high p r i c e s or urban land and housing, the e x i s t i n g system must be modified so that the b e n e f i t s from the s o c i a l l y - c r e a t e d value i n urban land can be channelled back to the advantage of the community i n s t e a d of being l e f t to the s o l e advantage of the p r i v a t e owners. I t argues that t h i s can be achieved by l a r g e -s c a l e p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land f a r i n advance of need f o r i t s develop-ment, comprehensive planning on r e g i o n a l s c a l e , s e r v i c i n g , and s e l l i n g or l e a s i n g of such p u b l i c land f o r development. A c q u i s i t i o n of land f a r i n advance of need f o r development by p u b l i c agencies w i l l e l i m i n a t e s p e c u l a t i o n and reduce the cost of urban land f o r housing. The t h e s i s presents a general d e s c r i p t i o n of the e x i s t i n g urban land development system w i t h p a r t i c u l a r reference to the Greater Vancouver Region i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The system i s i d e n t i f i e d as c o n s i s t i n g of two main components:. one being the p r i v a t e market mechanism i n which land i s p r i v a t e l y owned, developed and marketed; the other being the p u b l i c development pl a n n i n g , development c o n t r o l s , and development decision-making process. The r o l e of p r i v a t e development market and the r o l e of various p u b l i c agencies i n the development of urban land i s described. i i The e f f e c t s of p u b l i c development planning decision-making at the general urban growth on the value of land i s discussed. The problems of land s p e c u l a t i o n , c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t at a l l l e v e l s of p u b l i c development planning decision-making, and fragmented p u b l i c planning a u t h o r i t y and t h e i r e f f e c t s on the cost of land and housing described. The experiences of Edmonton, Red Deer, and Saskatoon w i t h p u b l i c ac-q u i s i t i o n and development c o n t r o l of land and t h e i r success i n keeping the p r i c e of land and housing under c o n t r o l are c i t e d . In con c l u s i o n the concept of p u b l i c involvement i n the ownership of land and i t s development i s recommended and some measures and steps to be adopted f o r s u c c e s s f u l implementation of p u b l i c land assembly, land banking, and development c o n t r o l s are suggested. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract i List of Appendices v i List of Tables v i i List of Figures v i i i Acknowledgement ix Chapter I — Introduction 1 A. Canada's Housing Crisis 2 B. Purpose of the Study 19 C. Outline of the Study 24 Chapter II — Urban Land Development A. Demand for Urban Land 30 B. Urban Land Development -Supply of Land for Urban Development . . . . . . . 33 C. Dynamics of Urban Land Values i n the Process of Urban Development 35 D. Public Controls on the Development of Urban Land 41 E. Municipal Government and Urban Land Development 43 F. Regional Government and Urban Land Development 49 G. Regional Government and Urban Land Development 57 H. Federal Government and Urban Land Development . . 59 via. Page Chapter III — Urban Land Development System and the Problem of Distribution of Development Values i n Land A. Urban Land Values and General Urban Growth . . . . . . 61 B. Urban Land Values and Public Development Planning and Decision-Making Process 63 C. Land Speculation - A Product of Existing Urban Land Development System 68 D. Conflict of Interest - A Built-in Problem in the Existing Urban Land Development System 81 E. Fragmentation of Public Development Planning Authority - A Problem i n the Face of Present Regional Urban Reality 87 Chapter IV — Public Acquisition, Servicing, and Disposal of Land for Development A. Public Land Assembly, Land Banking, and Development Control - A Viable Means to Control Urban Land Prices 97 B. Alberta and Saskatchewan 106 Chapter V — Conclusions and Recommendations 132 Notes 140 Bibliography 143 v LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A Residential Land Values in the Metropolitan Area . 149 B Part XXI, Community Planning, Municipal Act R.S.B.C. 1960, Chapter 255 152 C Objects and Powers of the Provincial Land Commission of British Columbia 166 D 1. General Land Development Approval Process (Typical G.V.R.D. Municipality Employing Section 702 A of Land Use Contracts . . . . 169 2. Approval Procedures for Rezoning Applica-tions in Various Municipalities in Greater Vancouver 173 E 1. Rezoning Application Costs and Requirements by Municipalities in Greater Vancouver . . . 176 2. Development Costs and Requirements by Various Municipalities in Greater Vancouver . . . . 178 3. Additional Development Costs and Requirements . 180 4. Impost Fees in the G.V.R.D. 183 F How to get Really Rich in Real Estate -Buying, Rent Raising, Remortgaging, Selling Brings Profits 186 (The Vancouver Sun, February 14, 1974) v i LIST OF TABLES Table Page I Average M.L.S. Sale Prices in Various Cities and Provinces Across Canada for 1972 and 1973 3 II Average M.L.S. Transaction Prices in the Greater Vancouver Area from 1960 to 1973 6 III Increase in Prices of Residential Lots in Various Municipalities in the Greater Vancouver Area Since 1967 14 IV Member Communities in the Greater Vancouver Regional District 53 V Development Areas - Greater Vancouver Regional District 55 VI Summary of Percentages for Proportion of Landowners to Land Areas 73 VII I n f i l l Statistics 75 VIII Rank of I n f i l l Potential 76 IX Summary of Land Availability and Units in Processing Stage - April 1974 91 X Alberta Housing Corporation Land Acquisition Schedule 116 XI Land-Bank Sales, City of Saskatoon 122 v i i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Average M.L.S. Transaction P r i c e s i n the Greater Vancouver Area, 1960-1973 . • 7 2 Increase i n the P r i c e of a House i n Vancouver's P o i n t Grey Area 8 3 Estimated Cost of New Single-Detached Dwellings Financed Under the N.H.A. f o r the Years 1961, 1971, 1972,and 1973 13 4. Comparative Rise i n Cost of Components of Housing and Consumer P r i c e s 15 5 I n t e r e s t Rates 16 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In submitting this thesis, I wish to express my sincere appreciation for a l l those whose interest and active help made this study possible I am greatly indebted to many members of staff at the following organizations for their generous help in providing me with necessary data and information for this study Planning Department -Greater Vancouver Regional District Planning Department -Corporation of the District of Surrey Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board. It is a privilege to extend my sincere gratitude to Professor Wolfgang Gerson and Mr.Donald Gutstein of the School of Architecture, U.B.C. for their constant interest, constructive criticism, and direction that were so valuable in the preparation of this study. ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 2 P a r t A. - CANADA'S HOUSING CRISIS Up u n t i l the e a r l y s i x t i e s , the problem of a c q u i r i n g adequate housing accommodation was confined mostly to the lowest income groups. Most Canadians could a f f o r d to buy adequate housing accommodation f o r them-selves on t h e i r own i n the f r e e market. I t appears that around the m i d - s i x t i e s that era came to an end and a new era of housing i n f l a t i o n began. I t was around the m i d - s i x t i e s that the housing p r i c e s took an upward turn and s i n c e then the p r i c e s have being going up at an alar m i n g l y high r a t e . The climb has been b r e a t h t a k i n g l y steep during the past two years. Table I c l e a r l y shows how sharply the o v e r a l l property values across Canada increased between 1972 and 1973. The average M.L.S. s a l e s p r i c e across Canada rose to $32,328 i n 1973, 22 per cent increase over the average f o r 1972. P r i c e increases ran above the n a t i o n a l i n provinces of Ontario and B r i t i s h Columbia. Ontario's average was up'26 per cent and B r i t i s h Columbia's average was up 23 per cent. A l l major c i t i e s had p r i c e i n c r e a s e of more than 10 per cent.with the exception of Montreal, where p r i c e s rose 5 per cent. Vancouver had the l a r g e s t jump, from an average of $31,465 i n 1972 to an average of $41,505 i n 1973. Vancouver was followed by Toronto where p r i c e s were up 29 per cent to an average of $44,105 from $34,078 f o r 1972. V i c t o r i a followed c l o s e behind w i t h an increase of 26 per cent, to $32,374 from $25,610 i n 1972. These record p r i c e increases were on top of records 3 TABLE I . AVERAGE M.L.S. SALE PRICES IN VARIOUS CITIES AND PROVINCES ACROSS CANADA FOR 1972 AND 1973 1972 1973 INCREASE Vancouver $ 3 1 , ^ 5 $41 ,505 32# Toronto $ 3 4 , 0 7 8 $ 4 4 , 1 0 5 29# V i c t o r i a $ 2 5 , 6 1 0 $ 3 2 , 3 7 ^ 26% Calgary $ 2 5 , 3 7 3 $ 3 1 , 2 5 6 \ 22,% Hamilton $ 2 7 , ^ 3 ^ $ 3 3 , 6 1 5 23% Ottawa $ 3 2 , 3 0 3 $ 3 9 , 3 0 9 22% Regina $ 1 7 , 2 2 0 $ 2 0 , 3 0 6 16% Edmonton $ 2 5 , 5 2 2 $ 2 9 , 8 2 7 17% S a i n t John $20,488 7 $23,723 16% Saskatoon $ 1 7 , 1 7 7 $19,802 15% H a l i f a x $ 2 3 , 5 7 2 $ 2 6 , 5 8 5 13% Winnipeg $ 1 9 , 5 7 9 $ 2 1 , 5 7 3 10% Montreal $ 2 5 , 0 1 5 $ 2 6 , 3 8 5 5% Ontario $ 2 9 , 2 1 7 ' $36o877 26% B r i t i s h Columbia $25,7^1 $ 3 1 , 6 6 5 23% A l b e r t a $ 2 5 , 0 5 6 $30,141 20% Saskatchewan $16,718 $19,188 15% Manitoba $19,488 ! $21,441 10% Quebec $ 2 5 , 7 1 3 $ 2 6 , 7 9 ^ k% Canada $ 2 6 , 5 0 0 $ 3 2 , 3 2 8 22% Sources Greater Vancouver Real E s t a t e Board 4 set i n 1972 over 1971. The a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n i n comparatively good r e s i d e n t i a l s e c t i o n s of our major c i t i e s i s much worse than that i n d i c a t e d by the average incre a s e s mentioned above. To show how f r i g h t e n i n g t h i s a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n i n the housing market of our major c i t i e s i s , i t i s important to p o i n t out some i n d i v i d u a l examples of r e s i d e n t i a l property value i n c r e a s e s . The f o l l o w i n g examples are not exceptions, i n s t e a d these represent the r e a l trend i n the housing market which i s very much prevalent i n urban Canada. In Toronto, a t y p i c a l three-bedroom house that fetched $21,360 when new i n 1966 rose to $29,490 i n 1970, to $40,603 by the end of 1973 and to around $57,000 i n May 1974. The s t a t i s t i c i s s t i l l d e c e p t i v e l y low; w i t h i n the boundaries of Metro Toronto, detached houses s t a r t at around $70,000. Another notable example i n Toronto of a five-bedroom house w i t h basement, b u i l t i n 1912 and s o l d to i t s f i r s t owners f o r about $3,000. In June 1972 i t was bought f o r $49,000. Estimated market p r i c e i n May 1974: $110,000. In Ottawa, a f i e l d s t o n e house w i t h cedar s i d i n g , four bedrooms, b u i l t i n 1962 f o r $19,800. In 1970, a $7,000 extension was added. Estimated market value i n 1973: $49,000. Estimated p r i c e i n May 1974: $52,000. In Montreal, the predominantly English-speaking western h a l f of the i s l a n d c i t y has recovered w i t h a vengeance from the r e a l e s t a t e slump that followed Quebec's 1970-71 p e r i o d of s e p a r a t i s t unrest. In the f i r s t 5 four months of 1974, house p r i c e s i n a l l of Montreal jumped ahead by 22 per cent for an average of $28,600. But i n the i s l a n d ' s Pointe C l a i r e d i s t r i c t , a t y p i c a l house changed hands for $50,000 i n May th i s year . A five-bedroom stone house that was purchased for $63,000 i n January th i s year so ld for $110,000 two months l a t e r . ^ In Vancouver, the ra te of housing p r i c e increase has become the highest i n Canada. Table II and Figure 1. show how property values i n Greater Vancouver area have r i s e n between 1960 and 1973. A simple house i n suburban Burnaby went from $17,500 i n March 1970, to $44,500 i n January 1974. More e laborate houses i n Vancouver climbed to around $75,000 i n A p r i l 1974 from $50,000 only three months e a r l i e r . A notable example i s of a 43-year o ld two-story house with three bedrooms and a f u l l basement, a l l on a 33 f t . by 115 f t . corner l o t i n Vancouver's Po int Grey area . The house was bought i n November 1965 for $16,800 and so ld i n March 1974 for $72,500-> F igure 2. i l l u s t r a t e s how the value of the house increased over e ight years . What th i s new era of housing i n f l a t i o n has done and i s doing for the people of Canada depends on whether you already own a house of your own or you are one of those unlucky young Canadians who are looking for buying a place of t h e i r own to l i v e . Those who already own t h e i r houses have experienced a f e e l i n g ak in to winning a l o t t e r y ; t h e i r a f f luence i s underwritten by the enormously increased value of t h e i r houses. For those l e f t out and for the n a t i o n , the h igh cost of housing has b i l lowed in to a f u l l - s c a l e c r i s i s , many-sided d i f f u s e and as fragmented as the r e a l estate market i t s e l f . 6 TABLE I I . AVERAGE M.L.S. TRANSACTION PRICES IN THE GREATER VANCOUVER AREA FROM i 9 6 0 TO 1973 YEAR AVERAGE PRICE INCREASE 0\ PRECEEDING 1973 $41,505 32.0% 1972 $31,^65 18.9% 1971 $26,471 9.2# 1970 $24,239 1969 $ 2 3 , 9 3 9 16.2% 1968 $20,595 15*5% 1967 $17,836 17*3% 1966 $15,200 8.9% 1965 $13,964 5*8% 1964 $13,202 k.5% 1963 $12,636 1.0% 1962 $12,518, l.k% 1961 $12,3^8 -5*7% i 9 6 0 $13,105 Source t Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board THE AVERAGE PRICES IN THE ABOVE TABLE ARE CALCULATED' BY DIVIDING THE DOLLAR VOLUME OF ALL RESIDENTIAL, BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL SALES THROUGH THE MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICES OF THE GREATER VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE BOARD BY THE NUMBER OF SALES. ALTHOUGH THE METHOD OF CALCULATING INCLUDES ALL TYPES OF REAL ESTATE SALES, MOST SALES ARE RESIDENTIAL. THE AVERAGE PRICE THUS CALCULATED REPRESENTS THE AVERAGE SALE PRICE OF HOUSES IN THE GREATER VANCOUVER AREA. 7 FIGURE 1 . AVERAGE M.L.S. TRANSACTION PRICES IN THE GREATER VANCOUVER AREA, 1960-1973* CALCULATED BY DIVIDING THE DOLLAR VOLUME OF ALL RESIDENTIAL, BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL SALES THROUGH THE MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICES OF THE REAL ESTATE BOARD OF GREATER VANCOUVER BY THE NUMBER OF SALES V O V O V O V O ^ O M D V b v O V O V O IS ! N N IN O N 0 N O N O N C ? \ O \ O N O N O N O N O \ O \ O N O N « H - r H « - < * - l * - l T - l T H r - l * H « - l T H t - 4 t - « r H YEAR Sources Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board 8 FIGURE 2 . INCREASE IN THE PRICE OF A HOUSE IN VANCOUVER'S POINT GREY AREA - THE HOUSE PRICE WENT UP $ 5 . 1 2 AN HOUR 75 70 65 60 55 to 50 p g ^5 o E H as ^0 M W g » o Q 30 2,5 20 io SOLD IN MA FOR $ RCH 1 7 2 , 5 0 9 7 4 . 0 1 r 7 2 , I / \ / - / 5 8,00C \ — 3 1 , 5 00 /If' 2 9 , 0 0 500 0 3 0 , 3 1 , 0 000 00 21,5C 500 00 0 ^ 1 9 , 6 5 0 0 500 BOUGH T FOR $ 1 6 , 800 IN~Nl" VEMBi R 196 5 . 1966 6 ? 6'8 6§ 7u :ARS 7 l ?2 73 74 500 Source 1 The Vancouver Sun, May 2 2 , 197^< 9 The problem of a c q u i r i n g adequate housing, that once was a problem experienced only by thealowest income f a m i l i e s has extended i t s e l f to almost a l l young Canadians who are searching f o r buying a house of t h e i r own to s e t t l e down. Across the country, thousands of these young Canadians have been shocked to d i scover that the p r i c e of even a modest house i s suddenly, w i l d l y beyong t h e i r means. Among these numerous young Canadians there i s a f e e l i n g of growing f r u s t r a t i o n and b i t t e r n e s s . For them owning a house has become a dream, which they f e e l , they may never be able to r e a l i s e . The p o l i c y of the Government of Canada fur ther contr ibuted to the housing p r i c e i n f l a t i o n . The government sought to dampen the housing p r i c e i n f l a t i o n through a p o l i c y of monetary r e s t r a i n t . The Bank of Canada has r a i s e d i t s prime lending ra te step by step from 43/4% i n February 1973 to 83/4% i n May, 1974. (91/4% i n J u l y 1974) This has r e s u l t e d i n a p a r a l l e l increase i n the mortgage i n t e r e s t r a t e s . As the mortgage rates went up more and more home buyers f looded the a l -ready i n f l a t e d housing market to buy houses i n a move to do so before the next hike i n p r i c e s . So the p o l i c y that was designed to curb housing p r i c e i n f l a t i o n by curbing the housing demand through higher cost of f i n a n c i n g , a c t u a l l y added to the e x i s t i n g rate of i n f l a t i o n throughout 1973 and the Spring of 1974. In May, 1974, the mortgage i n t e r e s t rates climbed as h igh as 121/2%. With that high i n t e r e s t rates i t j u s t does not seem economically sound to borrow money even for a house. The p o l i c y , thus has f i n a l l y forced 10 a cut back i n demand and consequently a slowdown i n the seemingly inexorable r i s e i n housing p r i c e s . This slowdown i s b a s i c a l l y because the p r i c e of houses and cost of f inanc ing have gone f a r beyond the reach of most Canadians. The grim ar i thmet i c of today's p r i c e l e v e l s means that the p r i v i l e g e of home ownership without government ass i s tance i s reserved to fewer than 6% of s a l a r i e d Canadians. Just what these r i s i n g i n t e r e s t rates mean can perhaps be i l l u s t r a t e d by the fo l lowing example: A 25-year $40,000 mortgage at 9% has monthly payments of $331.19 ( p r i n c i p a l plus i n t e r e s t ) . At 12%, the monthly payments go to $412.76. Add to th i s about $50.00 for taxes and the monthly payments come out to be $462.76. According to the r u l e of thumb that says accommodation should take no moreVttrtan one-quarter of income, th i s would requ ire an annual income of $19,000.00. While th i s c r i s i s i n housing p r i c e i n f l a t i o n has, without doubt, s p e l l e d out misery for a l l those unfortunate Canadians who f i n d themselves unable to purchase a decent home, the main concern of th i s study i s — 'WHY DO WE HAVE THIS CRISIS?' A simple explanat ion to th i s c r i s i s i n terms of economics of market i s that there i s far too much demand i n the housing market and there i s an acute shortage of supply of housing u n i t s . That there are f a r too many people looking for houses and there are f a r l e s s number of houses a v a i l a b l e i n the market. This imbalance between demand and 11 supply i n housing market i s p r i m a r i l y respons ib le for astronomical p r i c e s of houses. S t a t i s t i c a l l y speaking, there are two w e l l recognised reasons for the high demand f a c t o r . F i r s t l y , an increas ing number of young Canadians continue to migrate from r u r a l areas and smal l towns to major urban centres i n search for growth o p p o r t u n i t i e s . This represents an ever increas ing demand for more housing accommodation i n Canadian urban centres . Secondly, that large s e c t i o n of Canadians, who were born during the post-war baby boom p e r i o d , i s now i n the age group between 25 and 30 years . This has r e s u l t e d i n the present sharp increase i n the formation of family and non-family households. Most of them are now hunting for houses i n th i s h i g h l y i n f l a t e d market. While t h i s may account for the high demand fac tor i n the housing market, the causes of short supply are h i g h l y complex, v a r i e d and i n t e r - r e l a t e d . This being the subject matter of i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t h i s study, w i l l be dea l t with i n the subsequent chapters i n d e t a i l . In the present con-text of de f in ing the aims and object ives of th i s study, i t i s very e s s e n t i a l to have a fur ther look at the p r e v a i l i n g cost l e v e l s of various components of housing. There are three major components i n the cost of housing -a. Cost of l a n d , 12 b. Cost of cons truc t ion , and c. Cost of f i n a n c i n g . S t a t i s t i c s c l e a r l y po int out that i n most urban centres across Canada, the cost of serv iced land for r e s i d e n t i a l development has been i n -creas ing at a much higher rate than the increase i n the other cost com-ponents. F igure 3. shows how the propor t ion of land cost to the t o t a l cost of N . H . A . f inanced houses has r i s e n s ince 1961 i n major Canadian urban centres . Vancouver appears to be headed for overtaking c i t i e s l i k e Toronto, Ottawa, and Hamilton where housing and land p r i c e s have been higher than that i n Vancouver u n t i l 1971. In Vancouver, the r i s e i n p r i c e of land has been very steep i n the l a s t two years . An average home b u i l d i n g l o t i n the suburban areas i s now worth $25,000, up 525% i n the past decade — with about h a l f the i n -crease taking p lace i n 1973. Table I I I i n d i c a t e s how land p r i c e s , i n var ious -munic ipal i t ies i n the Greater Vancouver area went up between 1967 and 1973. Refer to Appendix A. a l s o . The eiiormous r i s e i n the p r i c e of l a n d , c l e a r l y , i s the l a r g e s t s i n g l e fac tor i n the r i s i n g housing p r i c e s . The ra te of increase . ! in the p r i c e of s erv iced land has been much more than the general i n f l a t i o n through-out the s i x t i e s and the ear ly sevent ies , i t has taken astronomical dimensions and has developed i n t o the present c r i s i s i n the land p r i c e s . F igure 4. shows how the cost of land went up i n comparison with other costs i n the Greater Vancouver area from 1967 to 1973. While the g r a v i t y of the problem of r i s i n g cost of land has been pointed out many F I G U R E 3e ESTIMATED C O S T O F N E W S I N G L E - D E T A C H E D D W E L L I N G S F I N A N C E D U N D E R T H E N . H , 1961, 1971, 1972, & 1973. OO jj. VO VO 7r> ON • CO ^ 0 M « CVJ CVJ c - ^ CM rH CVJ c n OH so •* * CVJ CM O V O o r H CO -=}• r H CM c n O CM O -«» ON CM O •3" CM cn cv | •*. •» CM ON |vO O N CM VO Ov O c n v o CM 00 * v o cn • CM CM CVJ c n c n «* vn • • m CM VTN O S v n cnj So GO CM CO ON c n ON CM ON 00 cn CM I I CM -* CM ON CM r H O r H Cn o - » • o -vn CM CM , 3^-3" SO. CO 9 ° CO; •. » V N J o CM cnl 3-00 v n o VO CO r H to p cnl c n | so vo. so cn r H O N ' at so I ON vo O -3" vo o- c n •* n CM CM CM VO •» VO CO OS 00. SO iVO ' '**[ ON c n CM O o-c n CM • ON vn ON r H cn CM » ^ r H » cn CO CM cn vo V N r H r H VT\ CO CVJ VTN, feC-cn cn 00 (vp « cn A . F O R T H E Y E A R S c n co co c n •> vn xr\ vo vn O N c n O N » * r H o c n cn CM O -v n vo ON CM O N a 1 CM vo vn » -3- c n v o s vo o cn CM CM cn cn co vo c n • r k*. c n o o r H ^ . * '•«% CM r H r 4 r H •69-c •H +> CQ o o So CM. cd o EH r H r H CM c n VO O - O - CN-ON ON ON ON r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO O O - O -O N O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO O - O - O -O N O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM C n VO O - O - O -Ov O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO C"- O- O -ON O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO O - O - O -Ov O N O N O N r-t t-t r-4 r-i r H r H CM Cn VO O - O - O -O N O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO O O - O -Ov O N O N O N r H r H r H r H r H r H CM Cn VO CV O - O -O N O N O N O N r-\ 1-4 r-t r-4 M O N T R E A L Q U E B E C W I N N I P E G C A L G A R Y E D M O N T O N V A N C O U V E R H A M I L T O N O T T A W A T O R O N T O HH-N O T E - " C H A N G E S I N L A N D C O S T S A S R E F L E C T E D T H R O U G H N . H . A . E X P E R I E N C E A R E N O T P R O P E R L Y R E P R E S E N T A T I V E A S N . H . A . A C T I V I T Y A C C O U N T S F O R A S M A L L P R O P O R T I O N O F S I N G L E F A M I L Y - H O U S E S I N M O S T M E T R O P O L I T A N A R E A S A N D I S C O N F I N E D L A R G E L Y T O O U T L Y I N G AREAS-'WHERE L A N D C O S T S T E N D T O B E M U C H L O W E R . " S o u r c e ? C a n a d i a n H o u s i n g S t a t i s t i c s - C e n t r a l M o r t g a g e a n d H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n 14 TABLE I I I INCREASE IN PRICES OF RESIDETIAL LOTS IN VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES IN THE GREATER VANCOUVER AREA SINCE 1967 I967 1973 INCREASE C i t y of Vancouver $12,500 $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 180 . 0 ^ Burnaby $ 8,000 $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 287.5% North Vancouver(City) $ 8,000 $ 2 5 , 6 0 0 162.5% North Vaneouver(Dist) $ 8,500 $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 V 253.0% West Vancouver $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 $ 3 6 , 0 0 0 260.0% Coquitlam $ 7.000 $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 5 9 . 0 ^ Richmond $ 6 , 0 0 0 $18 ,000 200.0% Surrey $ ^ , 6 0 0 $ 1 6 , 0 0 0 2k8.0% D e l t a $ 4 i 5 0 0 $16,500 267.0% Source! Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board ! 1 5 FIGURE 4. COMPARATIVE RISE IN COSTS OF COMPONENTS OF HOUSING AND CONSUMER PRICES Zk&fo L a n d Cost (Surrey) 1967 1973 Increase CONSUMER PRICE INDEX s 1 1 1 . 0 141.0 27% LAND COST» An average house lot in Surrey $lf,'6 00 $16 S000 248# Average N.H.A. financed bunglow lot in Vancouver $3 ,979 $12,531 213% CONSTRUCTION COSTs Per sq, : ft . $13.55 $18o67 3Qfo INTERESTS Stat ist ics Canada Index (1961=100) 125.5 240.5 93% HOUSE PRICEs Average M.L.S. sale $17*836 $41,505 133% Average N.H.Ao Bunglow $20,687 $ 3 6 , 0 6 7 75% 16 FIGURE 5. i INTEREST RATES — — Bank of Canada Prime Rate - Conventional Mortgage Loans N.H.A. Maximum Rate N.H.A. Insured Rate Sources Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board, Bank of Canada. 17 times by concerned i n d i v i d u a l s and var ious s tudies by experts and p r o f e s s i o n a l s , no concrete steps appear to have been taken. We have completely f a i l e d to c o n t r o l the r i s i n g land pr i ce s and the r e s u l t i s the present c r i s i s looming over the na t ion ' s head. The e d i t o r of the 'Canadian B u i l d e r ' , Mr. C l i f f o r d Fowke, wrote i n the December 1968 i s sue of the j o u r n a l : "Of a l l the problems fac ing the b u i l d i n g indus try today, sure ly that of land p r i c e s i s the most u r g e n t . . . . " . . . i n most areas the land p r i c e s have s p i r a l l e d simply because there i s not enough serv iced land a v a i l a b l e i n the places where i t i s needed most and l i k e any scarce product when i t i s i n demand, i t s cost c l imbs ." He fur ther remarked: "Because of the unnatura l ly high p r i c e of our biggest n a t u r a l resource , we are r e t a r d i n g our progress as a nat ion and b r i n g i n g misery upon a large segment of our p o p u l a t i o n . " There i s no doubt that the misery i s now upon that large segment of Canadians. In 1969, the Federa l Task Force of on Housing and Urban Development pointed out the g r a v i t y of the problem of land p r i c e s and suggested a number of recommendations. Since then there have been many studies done and conferences he ld at a l l l e v e l s of government and outs ide i t . The problem has d e f i n i t e l y become a n a t i o n a l i ssue and a matter of concern to everyone across the n a t i o n . The problem of high p r i c e s i s 18 the main concern i n th i s study. This study i s an attempt to seek answers to the fo l lowing quest ions . 1. Why i s the p r i c e of serv iced land for r e s i d e n t i a l development i n the urban areas so abnormally high despite the fac t that land i s our biggest n a t u r a l resource i n Canada. 2. Why i s the p r i c e of serv iced land for r e s i d e n t i a l development i n the urban areas increas ing as such an enormous rate? 3. What immediate and long-term steps are necessary to be taken to c o n t r o l th i s u n r e a l i s t i c r i s e i n the p r i c e of serv iced land i n our urban centres? 19 Part B. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study, primarily is to seek explanatory answers to the questions raised earlier. It can be argued, and there i s no doubt, that part of the increased price of serviced land i s , of course, nothing more than a reflection of generally increasing prices. Land and, more particularly, the labour and materials involved i n servicing i t are hardly immune from the overall effect of increasing costs throughout the economy i n this country and abroad. But the degree of increase i n land prices i s much too high and out of proportions and there seems more than general cost factors are at work in the area of land prices. In Fowke's opinion, the high prices or urban land i s the acute shortage of serviced land i n the market. But the fact is that land i s our biggest natural resource in Canada. Then why should there by a short-age of land for urban development in;;our urban areas? Findings of a 2 recent study by an independent planning firm shows that there are 57,000 acres of land within Greater Vancouver that are already desig-nated for urban residential development and are sufficient to accommo-date growth for the next 18 years at present densities. 65% of this is already serviced or i s in the process of being serviced. It shows that there i s no actual shortage of land for development; instead the shortage is a r t i f i c i a l l y created by holding the land from the market for development. The study points out that this a r t i f i c i a l l y created shortage or urban land by private speculative holding practices i s very 20 much responsible for the high cost of urban land and housing. It is the purpose of this study to show that speculative land holding practices are the outcome of the very system in which land i s presently owned, planned, serviced, developed, and marketed. It shows that the structure of the existing urban land development system, i n which land i s almost wholly owned by private owners and i t s development depends on the w i l l of the private owners and the private market for development, whereas the development planning decisions and development regulatory controls rest with the public agencies, encourages speculative practices and gives rize to other problems, such as, conflict of interest at various levels of public planning and development decision-making. The urban land values are created by the general growth of the urban community and public development planning decisions. With the present set-up of the system the socially-created value increments i n urban land go to the sole advantage of the private owners of urban properties. The lure of such windfall profits from the ownership of land attracts a l l forms of speculation in land and adds to the price of urban land. The system i n i t s present form does not have any means to channel back such socially-created increments in land value to the benefit of the urban community. The system, thus, works to the advantage of the p r i -vate interest at the cost of the community interest. The result i s ever increasing cost to the community i n terms of high prices of land and housing. Furthermore, in the existing urban development system, public development 21 planning decision-making and development controls are fragmented and totally irrelevant to the present urban reality. Major development planning decisions and development controls rest with the municipalities, whereas present urban areas extend beyond the municipal boundaries. Regional governments or metropolitan governments usually do not pos-sess the necessary powers over the municipalities to exercise effective planning controls on regional or metropolitan scale that the present urban reality demands. At least such i s the case intthe Greater Vancouver area. Given such a situation that surrounds our urban development, develop-ment planning cannot function at i t s maximum efficiency and be effect-ive in producing orderly and economic urban development for ithe urban community. The present system for urban land development w i l l continue to be taken advantage of for private gains resulting in ever-increasing cost to the community in terms of high land and housing prices and un-economic urban sprawl. The system must be changed i f we are to keep the land prices within reach of our people. If we are to control the prices or urban land and housing we must eliminate land speculation which so substantially adds to the cost of land for development. To eliminate the problem of speculation the existing land development system must be modified so that the value increments in urban land that result from the general growth of the urban community and public development and planning decisions could be channelled back to the community's benefit rather than l e f t in the 22 hands of the p r i v a t e owners. The study suggests that the most e f f e c t i v e way to accomplish th i s i s that,public agencies should a c t i v e l y enter the market for owning, s e r v i c i n g , and developing land i n a d d i t i o n to the e x i s t i n g r o l e of p u b l i c development planning and r e g u l a t i n g development through c o n t r o l s . I t i s suggested that p u b l i c agencies at r e g i o n a l or metropol i tan l e v e l should acquire land needed f o r urban growth s u f f i c i e n t l y i n advance of i t s need for urban development, prepare comprehensive plans at r e g i o n a l s c a l e , s e r v i c e , and market land for development enough to meet the demand i n the market at any time. This would e l iminate p r i v a t e monopoly over land ownership and the p r a c t i c e of specu la t ive ho ld ing of land for p r i v a t e ga ins . The e l i m i n a t i o n of specu la t ion would lower the land p r i c e s for urban development and also benef i t the community from economic and orderly, development of urban areas by subjec t ing the i d l e land held by speculators to i t s proper development. 23 HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY This study hypothesizes that: 1. The e x i s t i n g system, whereby land i s owned, planned, s e r v i c e d , and made a v a i l a b l e for urban development, has b u i l t - i n drawbacks and weaknesses that makes i t i r r a t i o n a l and i n e f f i c i e n t i n i t s i n -tended funct ions , and vu lnerable to misuse and e x p l o i t a t i o n s f o r p r i v a t e gains at the general expense of the urban community. These b u i l t - i n drawbacks and weaknesses give r i s e to problems that c o n t r i b u t e , d i r e c t l y as w e l l as i n d i r e c t l y , to the high cost of urban land and housing. 2. A system i n v o l v i n g p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land required for urban growth s u f f i c i e n t l y i n advance of i t s a c t u a l need for urban develop-ment, comprehensive planning on r e g i o n a l s c a l e , s e r v i c i n g , and s e l l i n g or l eas ing land for. urban development to meet the market demand can reduce the cost or urban land and housing. P u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land far i n advance of i t s need would e l iminate specu la t ion i n land which i s the main f a c t o r i n high cost of urban l a n d . 24 Part C. OUTLINE OF THE STUDY Having defined the subject matter, the area of concern, and the purpose of the study, and having established the basic hypotheses, this study begins by presenting, i n Chapter II, a general description of the present system through which the development and redevelopment of land for urban use takes place. With a brief i n i t i a l " description of the universal process of urbanization and ever-increasing demand for urban land, the study identifies the basic structure of the present system responsible for the supply of land for urban development as composed of two main component sets of mechanisms operating simultaneously i n the development process. One component being the private market mechanism in which land i s predominantly privately owned, developed, and marketed like any other commodity. The other component is the public controls on i t s urban development through public development planning, public involvement in development, and public investment i n major development proj ects. Further, i t identifies the various stages through which land, from i t s original agricultural use to i t s f u l l urban development stage, passes, and the market c r i t e r i a on which the development from one stage to the next takes place. How the market value of land at various stages of development is determined and the c r i t e r i a on which private investment in the development of land i s made, i s explained. It is pointed out that the sole determinant factor private market i n i t i a t i v e to develop a particular piece of land is the profit that can be derived from 25 investment i n i t s development. Even i f the need f o r i t s development e x i s t s , the a c t u a l development w i l l not occur i f i t i s not p r o f i t a b l e to develop i t f o r urban use. As the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r c o n t r o l l i n g the urban development of land i s ex e r c i s e d by the p u b l i c agencies on behalf of the urban community, the study deals w i t h the r o l e of v a r i o u s l e v e l s of governments through i t s agencies and departments i n the urban land development process. A p a r t i c u l a r case of governmental o r g a n i s a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia and i t s r o l e i n the planning and c o n t r o l of urban development i s described as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a common form of government w i t h some v a r i a t i o n s i n r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , i n other provinces of Canada. Functions of m u n i c i p a l governments and the r e g i o n a l l e v e l of governments, t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and powers w i t h regard to development planning and c o n t r o l s through r e g u l a t i o n s i s discussed i n d e t a i l . Functions and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of r e g i o n a l governments, p a r t i c u l a r l y , the Greater Van-couver Regional D i s t r i c t , w i t h regard to urban planning and d i r e c t i n g the urban growth are described. F i n a l l y , the powers of the p r o v i n c i a l governments and t h e i r r o l e as par-t i c i p a n t s i n the development and planning of urban land and t h e i r l e g i s l a t i v e r o l e i n the area of land development i s described. L a s t l y the r o l e of f e d e r a l government as a major p a r t i c i p a n t i n development through investment i n l a r g e p r o j e c t s throughout the country and i t s f i n a n c i n g r o l e i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h p r o v i n c i a l , r e g i o n a l , and m u n i c i p a l governments i n the urban development programs i s described. I n s h o r t , 26 Chapter I I presents a general d e s c r i p t i o n of the s t r u c t u r e of the ex-i s t i n g system through which urban land development occurs . Chapter I I I deals with analys ing the funct ion ing of the system described i n Chapter II and the e f fec t s of i t s e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e and i t s f u n c t i o n -ing on the value of land i n the market for development. I t i s argued that the system i n i t s present form works to the advantage of p r i v a t e sector at the general expense of the urban community. I t i s argued that the general growth of the community and p u b l i c dec is ions regarding dev-elopment planning and investment i n development generate the value of the urban land and such apprec ia t ions i n the va lue of land belong to the urban community, whereas, i n the present system of p r i v a t e ownership of l a n d , these increments remain i n the hands of p r i v a t e owners. The system does not possess any e f f e c t i v e means through which such i n c r e -ments i n land values can be channelled back to the advantage of the community whose growth i s re spons ib le for the c r e a t i o n of such va lues . The study, f u r t h e r , argues that these increments i n land values that are enjoyed by the p r i v a t e owners of l a n d , and r e s u l t i n g from community growth and p u b l i c a c t i o n s , represent unearned p r o f i t s to the p r i v a t e owners and act as magnets for specu la t ive p r a c t i c e s i n the r e a l estate market. Speculat ion i n land and landed property i n a l l i t s forms are the major fac tors c o n t r i b u t i n g to the shortage of supply of land for urban development and the soar ing pr i ce s of urban land and housing. Various forms of specu la t ive p r a c t i c e s common i n Canadian c i t i e s are described i n th i s Chapter. 27 I t i s fur ther argued that the present arrangement of p r i v a t e ownership of land and p u b l i c development c o n t r o l s gives r i s e to c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t at a l l l e v e l s of p u b l i c development planning decis ion-making process . Such being the case the p u b l i c p lanning and development decis ions tend to favour the p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s and the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s that are supposed to be represented by p u b l i c agencies i n t h e i r r o l e as development planners and c o n t r o l l e r s of urban development i s gross ly undermined. This i t s e l f adds to the problem of specu la t ion i n land and u l t i m a t e l y to the r i s i n g cost of urban l a n d . I t i s pointed out that the t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e of m u n i c i p a l i t i e s as develop-ment planning and development r e g u l a t i n g agencies i s no more re levant to present urban r e a l i t y . Our urban areas have grown beyond the mu-n i c i p a l boundaries and r e q u i r e comprehensive p lanning on r e g i o n a l b a s i s . I t i s argued that the present reg iona l governments do not possess the necessary powers to exerc ise development planning and development c o n t r o l of the urban reg ion as a whole. E f f e c t i v e planning decis ion-making becomes extremely d i f f i c u l t when the p lanning author i ty i s i n d i v i d u a l l y exerc ised by 10 or 20 d i f f e r e n t m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n the same urban reg ion . Fragmented planning author i ty i s without doubt another fac tor that adds to the cost or urban development i n terms of i n e f f i c i e n c y and delays i n development decision-making at r e g i o n a l l e v e l . The study a l so points out that the present munic ipa l property assess-ment system discourages development of urban land to i t s f u l l e s t po-t e n t i a l and encourages specu la t ion r e s u l t i n g i n e v e r - r i s i n g p r i c e s of 28 urban l a n d and i t s development. The study argues that to c o n t r o l the p r i c e s of urban land and i t s development i t i s necessary to make some fundamental changes i n the present urban land development system which i s the source of most problems c o n t r i b u t i n g to the high cost of urban land. I n Chapter IV of t h i s study, the concept of p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land f a r i n ad-vance of i t s a c t u a l need f o r urban development i s presented. I t i s argued that p r i o r a c q u i s i t i o n of land by p u b l i c agencies w i l l e l i m i n a t e the major problem of s p e c u l a t i o n i n land and reduce the cost of land f o r development. Other measures such as p u b l i c involvement i n the management of r e n t a l p r o p e r t i e s i n the turban areas, more p u b l i c c o n t r o l on s a l e of urban p r o p e r t i e s , and comprehensive p u b l i c planning and c o n t r o l s a t r e g i o n a l and p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l are presented. The study c i t e s the experiences of the c i t i e s of Saskatoon, Red Deer, and Edmonton i n the provinces of Saskatchewan and A l b e r t a i n the f i e l d of p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land i n advance of urban developments, i t s serv-i c i n g , and d i s p o s a l f o r p r i v a t e development. T h e i r success i n c o n t r o l l -i n g the p r i c e of urban land and housing through p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n and development c o n t r o l i s presented i n support of the adoption of the con-cept i n other p a r t s of Canada. F i n a l l y i n Chapter V, some steps and measures i n the form of recommenda-t i o n are given, suggesting the changes r e q u i r e d i n the e x i s t i n g urban land development system to e l i m i n a t e the problems that c o n t r i b u t e to the high cost of urban land and uneconomic urban sprawl. CHAPTER II URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM 30 Part A. DEMAND FOR URBAN LAND The demand for urban land is essentially a derived demand in the sense that this demand depends upon the demand for satisfying the basic human requirement for shelter. This demand for developable land i n and around the urban areas is ever-growing as a result of the general growth in the population of existing urban areas coupled with constant migration of people from the countryside to the large urban areas. "Men come together i n cit i e s in order to l i v e . They remain together i n order to li v e the good l i f e . " 1 That was two thousand years ago. Aristotle was underlying for his audience the importance of the quality of l i f e as opposed merely to continued biological existence. At that time, his remarks were a commentary on the desirability of the then existing urban social system. Today, they are an exhortation. The good l i f e as he visualised may be questionable in the light or present-day urban reality; yet the urban centres a l l over the world continue to attract people from the countryside and the small towns in the pursuit of opportunity for growth and advancement, socially, culturally and economically. It i s because that is where the action i s . Throughout Canada i t is recognised that people are constantly migrating from the country and the small towns into the large urban areas. British Columbia is in a unique position with respect to this migration. 31 The trend of migrat ion i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s fur ther exaggerated by the migrat ion to th i s province from other parts of Canada because of i t s r e c o g n i t i o n as a des i rab le p lace to l i v e . The fo l lowing s t a t i s t i c a l forecasts c l e a r l y show th i s trend. Canadian B . C . Populat ion as Populat ion % Urban % of Canada 1971 21,516,000 76.1 10.2% 1981 25,362,000 85.4 11.1% 2001 33,801,000 94.1 14.1% ( S t a t i s t i c s from the T r i l e v e l Housing Conference-1973) Greater Vancouver continues to be one of the major urban centres of a t t r a c t i o n i n Canada absorbing t h i s m i g r a t i o n . There i s , thus, a constant demand for more and more development to accommodate the growing populat ion i n the urban areas . There i s demand for more undeveloped land to be brought under development. There i s demand f o r more i n -tensive development of the e x i s t i n g urban areas . To meet t h i s growing demand new development takes p l a c e . More undevelopmeht land on the outer per iphery of the urban area i s brought under development. Older low densi ty developments i n the v i c i n i t y of e s tab l i shed business and work centres undergo redevelopment to form high densi ty areas to meet the demand. This development and redevelopment of urban land takes p lace through a system,of p u b l i c and p r i v a t e d e c i s i o n s , i n i t i a t i v e s and a c t i o n s . This system i s r e f e r r e d to i n th i s study as the Urban Land Development System. This system i s respons ib le for supply of serv iced land for development to meet the growing demand. 32 This chapter deals w i t h i d e n t i f y i n g the Urban Land Development System as i t e x i s t s i n Canada w i t h p a r t i c u l a r reference to the Greater Vancouver Region i n the province of B r i t i s h Columbia. 33 Part B. URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM — SUPPLY OF LAND FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT In Canada, we have a system of p r i v a t e ownership of land and p u b l i c controls over i t s order ly development for urban usage. Most of the land i n the urban areas , r u r a l areas , and the a g r i c u l t u r a l product ion land around these areas i s p r i v a t e l y owned. In the process of develop-ment i t i s bought, s o l d , and b u i l t upon according to the ru les of the p r i v a t e market and w i t h i n the confines of the prevalent p u b l i c contro l s on i t s planning and development. The urban development of land i s a complex process and involves a m u l t i p l e x of dec i s ions on the part of many i n d i v i d u a l s arid agencies , p r i v a t e and p u b l i c . I t involves dec i s ions regarding investment, deaj'sLons regarding s e l e c t i o n , p u r -chase, and sa le of land for development, dec i s ions regarding p lann ing , b u i l d i n g design and construct ion and so on. Two sets of mechanisms appear to be operat ing i n the development of l a n d . a) Land development market mechanism: 2) P u b l i c decision-making and p u b l i c contro l s on planning and development. Together they form a system which i s respons ib le for the supply of serv iced land and i t s development for urban usage. In t h i s Chapter, the important aspects of both these mechanisms r e l a t e d to the cost and supply of serv iced land are descr ibed . 34 -LAND DEVELOPMENT MARKET MECHANISM The land development market i s composed of land owners, investors, and developers of land. They are private individuals and private companies as well as public agencies involved with the land development and investment i n land. The decisions to buy, s e l l , or develop land is based on an evaluation of costs and benefits. The costs of acqui-sition of land, processing, financing and holding of land as well as the cost of development i s compared against the potential returns. To understand the involvement of land development market, i t i s important here to consider what happens to the value of land i n the process of development. The value of land increases with i t s potential for urban development and with the actual development. 35 Part C. DYNAMICS OR URBAN LAND VALUES IN THE PROCESS OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT In p h y s i c a l terms, there are two d i f f e r e n t types of urban development of land that takes p lace i n a growing urban area . One i s the develop-ment of undeveloped land on the outer fr inges of an urban area and the other i s the redevelopment of parts of e x i s t i n g urban areas that occurs i n and around the business and work centres w i t h i n the urban areas . On the bas i s of a c t u a l land use, there are three stages i n the f u l l development of l a n d . 1. A g r i c u l t u r a l Stage: 2. O r i g i n a l Development Stage; 3. Redevelopment Stage. As the p o t e n t i a l of land for urban development increases , the land appreciates i n va lue . The va lue of land i s highest at i t s f u l l develop-ment stage. Market value of developed land i s many times the va lue at i t s a g r i c u l t u r a l use stage. In t h e i r a r t i c l e , "Land as a Growth Invest -ment", Ricks and Weston have i d e n t i f i e d f i v e stages i n the development 2 cyc le of land w i t h i n any given urban area that undergoes development. These are : 1. A g r i c u l t u r a l Stage; 2. Predevelopment Stage; 3. O r i g i n a l Development Stage; 4. Underdevelopment Stage; 5. Redevelopment Stage. 36 These stages are based on the economic determinants of land va lue ra ther than i t s a c t u a l use. Diagram I . shows the sequence i n the development stages of l and . The land may undergo redevelopment many times over the years i n the h i s t o r y of an urban a r e a . However, i n the context of th i s study, we are s p e c i f i c a l l y concerned with the f i r s t three stages shown i n the diagram. The economic determinants of land value at var ious stages of development d i f f e r s with each stage. R a t c l i f f and Hamilton, i n a study on "Suburban Land Development", have explained how the value 3 of land at var ious stages of i t s development i s determined. The value of the undeveloped, a g r i c u l t u r a l land i n Stage One, before other uses are considered, i s simply the c a p i t a l i z e d va lue of the i n -come obta inable from a g r i c u l t u r a l uses. During th i s stage, changes i n the p r i c e of land are inf luenced by any changes i n p r o d u c t i v i t y and/ or p r i c e changes for the f i n a l a g r i c u l t u r a l outputs . Assuming that farm p r i c e s are c o n t r o l l e d to a s i g n i f i c a n t degree through marketing boards, for example — land values would tend to increase gradua l ly over time. Land i s c l a s s i f i e d i n Stage One of the development c y c l e as long as the market value based on a g r i c u l t u r a l use equals or exceeds : the maximum p r i c e payable for some other use. Even with p o t e n t i a l urban use i n the foreseeable fu ture , the present worth of the land for develop-ment i s l ess than the a g r i c u l t u r a l v a l u e . I t i s the value generating use ra ther than the a c t u a l land use that d i s t ingu i shes Stage One and Two. A property may remain i n a g r i c u l t u r a l use w e l l beyond the po in t at which farming ceases to be p r o f i t a b l e simply because the farming revenue pays some p o r t i o n of the ho ld ing costs whi le the land i s r ipen ing for urban use. 1 . 2 . 5. ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT DIAGRAM I STAGES OF URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT LO 38 Land i n Stage Three i s character i sed by a c t u a l development, and i t s value i n the short run i s derived from the c a p i t a l i s e d value of the land's c o n t r i b u t i o n to income product ion as an urban proper ty . Since development may occur over some extended per iod of t ime, the a c t u a l boundary of Stage Three i s subject to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . For most pur -poses, however, i t i s s u f f i c i e n t to simply c l a s s i f y property as being i n Stage Three when income-producing improvements are provided on the s i t e . The value of land i n t h i s stage i s grea t ly enhanced due to the income producing capaci ty of the developed property as urban l a n d . I t should be noted that , u n l i k e Stage One and Two where the boundary i s determined by va lue generating cons idera t ions , Stage Two and Three are de l ineated by the presence of o n - s i t e income-producing improvements. The i n t e r i m p e r i o d , Stage Two, i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of p r i c e s r i s i n g above current a g r i c u l t u r a l use v a l u e , i n expectat ion of the future higher urban-use va lue . The value of land i n th i s stage depends almost e n t i r e l y upon the f ina luuse and the t iming of development. Unl ike a g r i c u l t u r a l land use or developed proper ty , the r e t u r n from the owner-ship of undeveloped land i n Stage Two i s not p r i m a r i l y income but rather c a p i t a l a p p r e c i a t i o n due to i t s p o t e n t i a l future urban use. Any income provided p r i o r to development i s usua l ly i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n r e l a t i o n to t h e ' c a p i t a l a p p r e c i a t i o n . The Market for undeveloped land i n Stage Two ex i s t s due to the demand for development i n the expanding urban area . The d e c i s i o n to develop 39 th i s land i s based on the r e t u r n to i t s developer from i t s development as urban property . I f the value of the developed property l ess the p r i c e of the land exceeds the cost of development, the developer w i l l proceed. I f , on the other hand, the d i f f erence between the value of the developed property and the p r i c e of land payable i s l ess than the cost of develop-ment, no development w i l l occur . S i m i l a r c r i t e r i a holds good for the redevelopment of an underdeveloped proper ty . A property i s considered to be underdeveloped when i t s ex-i s t i n g use i s no longer the best use for which the property has po-t e n t i a l . This s i t u a t i o n occurs i n the high demand areas i n the v i c i n i t y of business and worck centres of a metropol i tan are*a. 4() DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS DEMAND FOR DEVELOPMENT (CONSUMERS) FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND FEDERAL AGENCIES PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND PROVINCIAL AGENCIES REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS LOCAL COMMUNITY GROUPS AND ORGANISATIONS DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (ZONING, SUBDIVISION, LAND REGISTRATION ETC.) ADMINISTRATION OF POLICIES AND REGULATIONS POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LAND DEVELOPMENT MARKET PRIVATE LAND OWNERS, DEVELOPERS AND INVESTORS PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES PUBLIC INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES DEVELOPED LAND DIAGRAM I I URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM 41 Part D. PUBLIC CONTROLS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF URBAN LAND It i s a well-established practice in most urbanised communities to ex-ercise control on the development of urban land through public agencies. The structure of these public controls and the distribution of respon-s i b i l i t i e s at various levels of government depend upon the p o l i t i c a l effect on the quality of urban development and urban l i f e . These controls are exercised through a set of codes and statutory laws that regulate the development, planning, and subdivision of urban property. In Canada, with the distribution of powers under the British North America Act, the constitutional responsibility for the management of land i s vested in the provincial governments. Due to;ithis division of powers, the federal government does not have a direct role in the management of land; but, as i t w i l l be shown later, i t has a very defi-nite role i n the urban development process. Traditionally, i t has been the practice of the provincial governments to delegate their authority with respect to land use controls and urban development to the municipalities and the city governments. In British Columbia, with the establishment of regional governments i n the province, some powers to control and direct the urban development are given to the regional governments. These powers are delegated to the municipal and the regional governments through the Municipal Act, the very basis for the existence of these governments. The Municipal Act is undoubtedly the most important piece of legislation 42 regarding the development and s u b d i v i s i o n of land i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The other important and s i g n i f i c a n t p r o v i n c i a l a c t s are the Land R e g i s t r y Act, the Real E s t a t e Act, the C o n t r o l l e d Access Highways Act, the S t r a t a T i t l e s Act, the Health A c t , and the P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Act. One of the most recent pieces of l e g i s l a t i o n , and of s p e c i a l s i g n i f i -cance to t h i s study, i s the Land Commission Act of 1973, a b o l i s h i n g the P r o v i n c i a l Land Commission i n B r i t i s h Columbia. 43 Part E . MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT Munic ipa l government i s the most d i r e c t l y invo lved l e v e l of govern-ment with the planning and development of urban l a n d . Under the M u n i c i p a l A c t , the munic ipal governments are given the powers to p lan and c o n t r o l the development of land w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . The enabl ing s tatutes are set out i n Part XXI, Community Planning of the Munic ipa l Act R . S . B . C . 1960, Chapter 255. These s tatutes lay the foundations for the formation of p o l i c i e s , regulat ions and t h e i r admin i s t ra t ion with respect to urban land development by the m u n i c i -p a l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e i r t e r r i t o r i e s . These enabl ing s tatutes are grouped under the fo l lowing d i v i s i o n s that can be described as tools for planning and development c o n t r o l given i n the hands of m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . D i v i s i o n 1. O f f i c i a l Community Plan D i v i s i o n 2. Advisory Planning Commission D i v i s i o n 3. Zoning D i v i s i o n 4. Subdiv i s ion of Land D i v i s i o n 5. B u i l d i n g Regulations What these powers mean i n r e l a t i o n to the r o l e of munic ipa l governments -in the land development process i s presented h e r e a f t e r . In the context of t h i s study d i v i s i o n s 1, 3 and 4 have d i r e c t s i g n i f i c a n c e . 44 OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN The o f f i c i a l community p lan i s a medium through which the development w i t h i n a m u n i c i p a l i t y i s conceived. Under the M u n i c i p a l A c t , each m u n i c i p a l i t y i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s g iven the author i ty and the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to p lan and c o n t r o l the development w i t h i n i t s t e r r i -t o r y . The munic ipa l c o u n c i l i s authorised to have community development plans prepared and adopt by by-law any such p lan as or as part of the o f f i c i a l community p lan for the m u n i c i p a l i t y . The o f f i c i a l community p lan i s an expression of p o l i c y for the develop-ment w i t h i n a m u n i c i p a l i t y . I t sets the p o l i c y guide l ines f o r : a) use or uses of land i n c l u d i n g surfaces of water; or b) the pa t t ern of s u b d i v i s i o n of l and; e i ther or both may apply to any or a l l areas of the m u n i c i p a l i t y . See Appendix B. I t defines the general r e l a t i o n s h i p between land uses of d i f f e r e n t categories such as r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial, and i n d u s t r i a l and forms the framework w i t h i n which the.urban development i s allowed to take p l a c e . No development that i s i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n with th i s o f f i c i a l community p lan i s allowed unless the o f f i c i a l p lan i s appropr ia te ly amended by by-law by the munic ipal c o u n c i l . The o f f i c i a l community p l a n , how-ever, can be r e v i s e d and the changes can be incorporated by by-law to be adopted by the munic ipa l c o u n c i l . 45 I t may be noted that the o f f i c i a l community p l a n i s not a commitment f o r the m u n i c i p a l c o u n c i l or any other a d m i n i s t r a t i v e body to under-take any of the p r o j e c t s t h e r e i n suggested or o u t l i n e d . The o f f i c i a l community plan of a m u n i c i p a l i t y , however, must be i n c o n f i r m i t y w i t h the broad p o l i c y g u i d e l i n e s s e t out i n the o f f i c i a l r e g i o n a l p l a n of the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t of which the m u n i c i p a l i t y i s a member. 46 ZONING Zoning;is the l e g a l r e g u l a t i o n of the use of land and as such, i s one of the most important instrument w i t h which the fun c t i o n s of planning and development c o n t r o l of urban land i s performed. A p p l i c a t i o n of zoning i n the planning and development of urban land i n v o l v e s : a) The zoning p l a n - According to the zoning plan the area of the urban community i s d i v i d e d i n t o v a r i o u s zones i n which the land i s r e s t r i c t e d to c e r t a i n c l a s s i f i e d uses such as s i n g l e f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l zones, two-family r e s i d e n t i a l zone, m u l t i - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l zone, medium d e n s i t y zone, high d e n s i t y zone, commercial zone, i n d u s t r i a l zone, a g r i c u l t u r a l zone and so on. b) The zoning r e g u l a t i o n s or the zoning by-laws - 'These r e g u l a t i o n s d e f i n e the use of land, b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s allowed w i t h i n such zones. They set the standards for^'the p r o v i s i o n of f a c i l i t i e s i n each zone and a l s o the l i m i t a t i o n s upon the shape, s i t t i n g and bulk of b u i l d i n g s that occupy land i n such zones. c) The zoning procedures - These are the procedures that a m u n i c i p a l government f o l l o w s i n the event a change i s re q u i r e d to be made i n the zoning c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a piece of property. I n a growing urban com-munity these changes are o f t e n r e q u i r e d to be made from time to time to accommodate growth of tihe community. M u n i c i p a l i t i e s have complete powers to zone, r e g u l a t e the development 47 i n these zones, and to make the zoning changes as necess i ta ted and i n accordance with the framework set out i n the M u n i c i p a l A c t . Refer to Appendix B. The munic ipa l c o u n c i l i s given the author i ty to d i v i d e the whole or a p o r t i o n of the area of the m u n i c i p a l i t y in to zones and define each zone e i t h e r by map, p l a n , or d e s c r i p t i o n or any combination thereof . They regulate the use of l and , b u i l d i n g s , and s t r u c t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g the surface of water ,w i th in such zones. They have the power to p r o -h i b i t any p a r t i c u l a r use or uses i n any s p e c i f i e d zone or zones. They regulate the s i z e , shape, and s i t t i n g of b u i l d i n g s and s tructures w i t h i n such zones. These regu la t ions may be d i f f e r e n t for d i f f e r e n t zones and with respect to d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n a zone. With these powers they have the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to protec t and promote p u b l i c h e a l t h , we l fare , and sa fe ty . Zoning i s an e f f e c t i v e t o o l with which thevurban development can be con-t r o l l e d and d i rec t ed by the munic ipa l governments. I t s e f fect iveness depends upon the manner and fores ight with which i t i s used to achieve and des ired goals . I t s p r a c t i c e can produce comprehensively b e a u t i f u l urban communities and i t s care less a p p l i c a t i o n can produce monotonously d u l l developments evident i n the urban sprawl of most North American urban areas. 48 SUBDIVISION OF LAND S u b d i v i s i o n of land i s another area over which the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have c o n t r o l and i s d i r e c t l y l i n k e d w i t h the development and growth or urban areas. The m u n i c i p a l i t i e s are given the powers to make r e g u l a t i o n s that govern the s u b d i v i s i o n of land. Through these s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s they e x e r c i s e c o n t r o l over the area, shape, and dimensions of p a r c e l s of land; the dimensions, l o c a -t i o n and alignment and gradient of highways i n connection w i t h the s u b d i v i s i o n of land. They s e t standards f o r s e r v i c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y , water supply and sewage d i s p o s a l and roads. A l l s u b d i v i s i o n s have to be designed and s e r v i c e d i n conformity w i t h the m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s s u b d i v i s i o n r e g u l a t i o n s and re q u i r e the approval of the m u n i c i p a l i t y before s u b d i v i s i o n s can be r e g i s t e r e d w i t h the land r e g i s t r y o f f i c e . Any s u b d i v i s i o n has to be i n conformity w i t h the o f f i c i a l community pl a n of the m u n i c i p a l i t y . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have c a r r i e d a l a r g e share of costs f o r s e r v i c e s such as roads, curbs, lanes, sewers and water mains, e t c . The p o l i c y of r e q u i r i n g the developers and sub d i v i d e r s of land to car r y a much l a r g e r share or the f u l l cost of s e r v i c e s has become common w i t h almost a l l the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n the Greater Vancouver Region. 49 Part F. REGIONAL GOVERNMENT AND URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT British Columbia has a well-established system of regional government in the province. In 1965, the whole of the province was divided into regional d i s t r i c t s . The framework for the structure and functioning of regional districts i s contained in Part XXIV, Special Areas, Division 2., Regional Districts, of the Municipal Act R.S.B.C. 1960, Chapter 255. There are 28 regional districts in the province and the Greater Vancouver Regional District is the largest in terms of popula-tion and functions. The purpose of regional government is to tackle problems and provide essential services on a common and cooperative basis for region's growth. The role of regional government and i t s importance with respect to the development of urban land is discussed here and elsewhere in this study. In the present context the powers and authority of the regional districts in relation to the urban development and as provided for in the Municipal Act are described. The governing and executive body of a regional d i s t r i c t is the re-gional board. The regional board consists of the requisite number of directors appointed by the council or the trustees of each municipality from among i t s members and the requisite number of directors elected from the electorate areas i f any. No specific functions are assigned to the regional di s t r i c t s in the Municipal Act. Members of a regional district's board themselves are 50 allowed to decide on what responsibilities and functions to undertake. Not a l l member municipalities are required to participate in a l l the functions undertaken by the regional board. Moreover, an area-wide function becomes a regional responsibility when approved by two—thirds of the board's directors having two-thirds of the total votes and representing at least two-thirds of the individual member municipalities. The provincial government, by Letters Patent or supplementary Letters Patent, can assign additional powers, duties, and obligations to the regional d i s t r i c t s . At the request of the regional board, the prov-i n c i a l government can specify the member municipalities which are to participate and the basis for sharing the costs for each function. The provincial government can transfer to the exclusive jurisdiction of the regional d i s t r i c t , any powers, duties, and obligations of any member municipality. A regional d i s t r i c t i s given a corporate status and for the purpose of exercising i t s functions, has the f u l l powers to acquire, hold, and dispose of real and personal property and to contract for materials and services, both personal and otherwise. The operating costs for most functions and services of a regional dis-t r i c t are shared by the participating member municipalities and the electoral areas. With respect to the function of regional planning and development, the 51 regional board has the authority to prepare regional plans applicable to the regional d i s t r i c t and revise them as necessary. A regional plan is a general scheme without detail for the projected uses of land with-in the regional d i s t r i c t , including the location of major highways. The regional board has the authority to designate, by by-law, any regional plan as an o f f i c i a l regional plan with an affirmative vote of two-thirds of a l l the directors having among them two-thirds of a l l the votes on the regional board. This o f f i c i a l regional plan when adopted as mentioned above acts as a general guide within which municipalities prepare their own o f f i c i a l community plans. 52 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT The Greater Vancouver Regional District i s the largest regional d i s t r i c t in the province in terms of population and i t has assumed the most re-sponsibilities. It consists of seventeen member communities list e d in Table IV. Since i t s inception in 1965, the Regional District has taken over an impressive array of functions. It began by assuming re-sponsibility for hospitals and regional planning and over the years . has added sewage disposal, water supply, regional parks, housing, and air pollution control to i t s l i s t of functions. It has agreed to assume responsibility for public transportation and noise control. OFFICIAL REGIONAL PLAN In the area of regional planning and urban development the d i s t r i c t has adopted an O f f i c i a l Regional Plan for the entire Lower Mainland Plan-ning Area. The O f f i c i a l Regional Plan sets out the adopted objectives and policies to guide the overall pattern of urban, rural, industrial and recreational land development in the Lower Mainland area. The objectives for the comprehensive development of the region are set i n 4 the O f f i c i a l Regional Plan: 1. The orderly, staged, and diversified development of the Region, i t s communities and i t s resources. 2. An environment that provides for the health, safety, convenience, 53 TABLE IV. MEMBER COMMUNITIES IN THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT Member Community P o p u l a t i o n T o t a l Votes D i s t r i c t of Burnaby 1 3 0 , 0 0 0 7 D i s t r i c t of Coquitlam 5 8 , 0 0 0 3 D i s t r i c t of D e l t a 5 8 , 0 0 0 \ ,3 V i l l a g e of Lions Bay i 400 1 C i t y of New Westminster 4 4 , 0 0 0 3 C i t y of North Vancouver 3 4 , 0 0 0 2 D i s t r i c t of North Vancouver 6 2 , 0 0 0 3 C i t y of Port Coquitlam 2 3 , 0 0 0 1 C i t y of Port Moody 1 3 , 0 0 0 1 D i s t r i c t of Richmond 6 7 , 0 0 0 4 D i s t r i c t of Surrey 1 0 8 , 0 0 0 • 5 C i t y of Vancouver 4 3 2 , 0 0 0 22 D i s t r i c t of West Vancouver 3 8 , 0 0 0 2 C i t y of White Rock 1 1 , 0 0 0 1 E l e c t o r a l Area 'A»(University Endowment Lands) 3 , 5 0 0 I E l e c t o r a l Area 'B'(Ioco-Buntzen) 1 , 1 0 0 1 E l e c t o r a l Area »C,(Bowen I s l a n d ) 350 1 T o t a l 1 , 0 8 3 , 3 5 0 ' 6 1 Sources Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t 54 and satisfaction of the people l i v i n g , working, v i s i t i n g , and playing in the Region. 3. The ut i l i z a t i o n of land in the Region for i t s most suitable use. 4. A transportation system that provides for the efficient movement of goods and people between the many parts of the Region. 5. A sound regional economy including a broad range of employment op-portunities throughout the Region. As As i t s development policy, the District has divided the entire Lower Mainland Region into Development Areas on the basis of overall land use. These Development Areas are classified in five broad categories as listed in Table V. The O f f i c i a l Regional Plan sets out general policies with respect to the overall development of the Region and policies for each Develop-ment Area — Urban (Established and Developing), Rural (Acreage, Upland, and Lowland), Industrial (Developing and Potential), Park (Established and Potential), and Reserve (Limited Use, Institutional, and Unde-termined) . The Individual member municipalities are responsible for development of detailed policies with respect tbjzoning, subdivision and servicing within these Development Areas. The purpose of the Development Areas is to designate lands in the Region 55 TABLE V. DEVELOPMENT AREAS - GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT General C l a s s i f i c a t i o n S p e c i f i c C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 1 . Urban 2. Ru r a l 3» I n d u s t r i a l k0 Park 5» Reserve E s t a b l i s h e d Urban (URB-1 Developing Urban (URB-2 Acreage R u r a l , (RRL-1 Upland R u r a l (RRL-2 Lowland R u r a l (RRL-3 •Developing I n d u s t r i a l ( I N D - 1 P o t e n t i a l I n d u s t r i a l (IND-2 E s t a b l i s h e d Park (PRK-1 Developing Park (PRK-2 Limi t e d Use Reserve (RSV-1 I n s t i t u t i o n a l Reserve(RSV-2 Undetermined Reserve (RSV-3 S o u r c e s G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s 56 best suited for each type of development as classed in the Development Area Classification. The Regional Dis t r i c t keeps a Long Range Plan Map and a Current Stage Plan Map. As the Region develops, the development areas shown i n the Current Stage Plan Map may by modified by plan amendments, in keeping with the Regional objectives, the general policies, the Long Range Plan Map, and the Area Modification Policies of the o f f i c i a l Regional Plan. 57 Part G. PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT Constitutionally, the provincial governments in Canada are responsible for the management and control of land. They exercise this control by enacting legislation that forms the basis for public control on land development in the provinces. They control the use and sale of public lands. They set planning and land use regulations. They control forestry and agricultural practices and govern the practice of real estate industry. In British Columbia, the province exercises the responsibility for planning and development of urban land through municipal governments and the regional governments described earlier. The most important pieces of legislation with respect to the development of land i n British Columbia are: the Municipal Act, the Land Registry Act, the Real Estate Act, the Controlled Access Highways Act, - the Strata Titles Act, - the Health Act, - thee Pollution Control Act, and the lik e . Recently, the provincial government has been more actively involved i n bringing out legislation that has great significance to the urban land development in the province. The most important legislation has been 58 the freeze on farm land followed by the Land Commission Act of 1973. This Act e s tab l i shed the P r o v i n c i a l Land Commission wi th the express purpose to preserve land f o r var ious uses and encourage the e s t a b l i s h -ment of land banks and land reserves f o r these uses. The objects and powers of the Commission are s tated i n Appendix C. The p r o v i n c i a l government, l a s t year , created the M i n i s t r y of Housing, which i s a c t i v e l y involved i n developing programs for housing i n the prov ince . The p r o v i n c i a l government a f f ec t s the development of urban land through var ious incent ives and grants to i n d i v i d u a l s and the i n d u s t r y . The province of B r i t i s h Columbia gives grants for home-ownership. Recent ly , i t brought out l e g i s l a t i o n — the Real Property Tax Deferment A c t , which gives tax incent ives for housing c o n s t r u c t i o n . In short , the p r o v i n c i a l government have a l l the powers to exert f u l l c o n t r o l on the process of land development. 59 Part H. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT Due to the division of powers in the British North America Act, the federal government does not act as directly as the provincial govern-ments with respect to urban development. In the long run, however, i t does have a very significant role i n the development process. It influences the land development process i n many ways through i t s various agencies and departments; such as the Department of Transport, Depart-ment of Housing and Urban Affairs, Department of Defence, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canadian National Railway, National Harbours Board and the lik e . It acts as a large land owner and developer. It builds airports. It builds seaports. These activities have direct impact on opening up of new territories for development and affecting the growth of existing urban areas. Its major role is as a large nationalffinancial institution. It a l l o -cates funds for various industries in the country. It participates i n financing major projects like bridges and tunnels which have a profound effect on the development and expansion of urban areas. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation administers a whole range of programs connected with housing. Under the National Housing Act, C.M.H.C. participates in the financing of a variety of housing and urban renewal programs throughout Canada. Federal government's role can be described as one of proding, inspiring and financing. CHAPTER III URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM AND THE PROBLEM OF DISTRIBUTION OF DEVELOPMENT VALUES IN LAND 61 Part A. URBAN LAND VALUES AND GENERAL URBAN GROWTH The market value of a piece of property i s directly related to i t s potential to respond to the social and economic needs of the urban community. Its location within the urban agglomeration and in rela-tion to other community f a c i l i t i e s , such as, shopping center, business or work center, transportation route, school, recreational f a c i l i t i e s , hospital and so on, determine i t s market value to a large extent. It is for the existence of such organised f a c i l i t i e s and services within the urban community that urban property i s so much desirable and in demand. This is why urban land is so inherently more valuable than the agricultural land in the countryside. It i s for such reasons that the value of a piece of property close to the urban center i s much more valuable than a similar piece of land in the suburban area. A residen-t i a l l o t may cost more merely because i t is close to a shopping center, or a school, or a bus route, or a recreational park, than another which may be farther away from such community f a c i l i t i e s . In fact, the value of a piece of urban property i s largely determined by factors that are exclusively social. Furthermore, as the community grows, more development and redevelopment takes place. More community f a c i l i t i e s are bu i l t ; transportation routes are extended; new highways and major roads are bu i l t ; trunk services are extended; more shopping and recreational f a c i l i t i e s are built and so on. A l l this urban expansion and growth due to development and re-development and the addition of more community f a c i l i t i e s affect the 62 value of urban p r o p e r t i e s . The urban land values a r e , i n a very r e a l sense, created by the urban community and i t s growth. However, as has been described i n Chapter I I , development and r e -development of land takes place w i t h i n the framework of the Urban Land Development System. I t would be important to examine how t h i s system and the f u n c t i o n i n g of va r i o u s development processes w i t h i n the system a f f e c t the value of urban property. S p e c i f i c a l l y , i t i s per-t i n e n t i n the context of t h i s study, to show how the p u b l i c planning d e c i s i o n s and development c o n t r o l s a f f e c t the value of urban property; to r e l a t e how the p u b l i c d e c i s i o n s to i n v e s t i n development and .re-development p r o j e c t s a f f e c t the p r i c e of land i n development areas. The problems that a r i s e out of the s t r u c t u r e of the e x i s t i n g develop-ment system are discussed i n t h i s Chapter. The i m p l i c a t i o n of these problems to the cost and supply of land f o r development are examined and a l t e r n a t i v e s to e l i m i n a t e these problems are discussed i n subse-quent chapters. 63 Part B. URBAN LAND VALUES AND PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Public development planning i s at the hub of the urban land development system. A l l development,small or large, involves decision taken by the public planning authorities. No development, whatsoever, takes place without having had the approval of the public planning authorities. The major function of public development planning i s to foresee the trends in the growth of the urban community and pave the way to ac-commodate this growth. It i s the job of the public planning o f f i c i a l s to study the status quo in the urban land uses and prepare proposals about how the existing land uses should be changed to allow more develop-ment and redevelopment to accommodate the growth of the urban community. On a continuous basis they collect information and data regarding the existing urban land uses. They collect data regarding the growing mar-ket needs for each type of land use due to the growth of the community. On the basis of this data they formulate proposals about which particu-lar undeveloped land should be allowed for development and which particu-lar existing urban areas should be allowed for redevelopment into a higher land-use or a different land-use such as from existing low den-sity residential to medium density residential, or from-existing me-dium density residential to high density residential or a particular residential property to commercial use and so on. These proposals include proposals for new civ i c works and community f a c i l i t i e s and services' needed to make these new land use changes 64 possible. Such proposals are represented through various plans, which, when adopted by the civic authorities, form part of the o f f i c i a l develop-ment policy for the area. The f i r s t in the hierarchy of such plans at the municipal level is the o f f i c i a l community plan. The o f f i c i a l community plan indicates broadly the changes in land uses proposed for the municipality or the city i n -cluding the important new public works and other community f a c i l i t i e s and services whose construction w i l l be needed to support the new growth due to development and redevelopment proposed i n the plan. How-ever, as in the major urban centers, where metropolitan or regional form of governments exercise planning authority over a large number of municipal territories, the municipal o f f i c i a l community plans are pre-pared, where required, within the framework of a metropolitan plan or a regional plan which, in fact, represents land use plan for the whole metropolitan .area or the whole- region. The extent to which a metropol-itan plan or a regional plan is detailed and the degree of authority they have over the municipal o f f i c i a l community plans depend upon the degree of responsibility assumed and the extent of powers exercised by the metropolitan or the regional government. In Alberta, with a strong and well-established regional planning base, municipal of-f i c i a l plans are even optional. Regional plans are detailed to a great extent and act as guide for the municipalities in their land development programs. On the other hand, in British Columbia,with relatively new regional d i s t r i c t s , detailed land use planning i s s t i l l carried out at municipal level. The Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , 65 the largest and the most organised regional d i s t r i c t in the province, has adopted an O f f i c i a l Regional Plan which,as noted i n Chapter II, is a very broad land use plan within which the municipalities are respon-sible to prepare their own detailed land use plans or the o f f i c i a l com-munity plans. These land use plans show proposed new sewer and water systems, propo-sed new highways and roads, transportation and other public services to be coordinated with the proposed new land use changes. On the basis of these land use plans further detailed plans, usually referred to as zoning plans, are prepared. These zoning plans show in detail whichpparticular group of properties or areas are to be'allowed for what particular type of development or redevelopment. A l l these planssrepresent o f f i c i a l development policy and proposals for develop-ment and redevelopment that confirm to these plans are normally given permission to proceed. There i s , however, no commitment on the part of the public authorities, particularly in British Columbia, to undertake any development pro-jects proposed i n such plans. It i s l e f t to the private developers to come up with development or redevelopment proposals. Private proposals for development and redevelopment are examined with respect .to the land use permitted i n o f f i c i a l plans. The approval is given i f the proposal confirms to the land use allowed in the o f f i c i a l plans. Many times, a new development proposal submitted by developers for the 66 approval of the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s does not confirm to the permitted zoning i n the o f f i c i a l plans and requ ire a change i n the zoning to permit the proposed new land use. Usua l ly permiss ion i s sought to al low a higher or d i f f e r e n t land use than i s permitted by the of-f i c i a l l y designated zoning. Such proposals are examined by the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s i n accordance with set procedures. An example of such rezoning approval procedures common i n the Greater Vancouver area m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i s g iven i n Appendix D. The proposal i s genera l ly assessed on the bas i s of p lann ing , engineer-i n g , environmental and p o l i t i c a l cons iderat ions . The proposal i s e i t h e r re jec ted or approved or approved subject to changes s p e c i f i e d by the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s . Usual ly approval i s given and a zoning change i s adopted by by-law by the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s concerned. In short , what the p u b l i c p lanning process does i s to regulate the supply of land for new uses e i t h e r for development or for redevelop-ment by adminis ter ing land use changes. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of p u b l i c development planning dec is ions with respect to the value of urban land i s qui te obvious. I t creates and d i s t r i b u t e s value through land use changes. The p o t e n t i a l for development of areas that are designated for development or redevelopment to h igher land uses^ increases to a great extent and so does the market value of such p r o p e r t i e s . The a g r i c u l t u r a l land that may be designated for urban development jumps i n p r i c e i n s t a n t l y with such planning dec i s i ons . The market value of propert ie s with e x i s t i n g low densi ty r e s i d e n t i a l 67 development increases suddenly when p u b l i c planning a u t h o r i t i e s designate the area f o r medium den s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l or high d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l development. The increases i n value of urban p r o p e r t i e s that accompany the land use changes by the p u b l i c development planning d e c i s i o n s are very substan-t i a l . Since such d e c i s i o n s are n e c e s s i t a t e d by the growth of the com-munity, such increases i n value, by any s t r e t c h of l o g i c a l thought, should belong to the community at l a r g e . In our system of p r i v a t e ownership of land only the owners of urban p r o p e r t i e s and other lands p o t e n t i a l f o r urban development reap the b e n e f i t of such increases i n the value of t h e i r p r o p e r t i e s . The urban land development system does not, i n i t s present form, have any e f f e c t i v e means of capturing such community created values f o r the b e n e f i t of the community to which they r i g h t l y belong. 68 Part C. LAND SPECULATION — A PRODUCT OF EXISTING URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM The implications of Such gains to private property owners from public development planning decisions and the general growth of the urban com-munity are far-reaching and serious when looked at i n the light of many undue practices i t gives rise to i n the real estate market. Specula-tion in land, in a l l i t s forms, i s the result of the expectations for such "windfall" gains from the ownership of land. The very possibility of making such gains from the private ownership of land in and around the urban areas acts as a magnet which attracts a l l forms of speculative practices in the market for real estate. It i s the very structure of our urban land development system, with private ownership of land and landed property on one hand and the public development planning decision-making on the other, that gives rise to undue speculative practices i n land and landed property in urban areas. This undoubtedly contributes to the rising cost of land for urban development. Most studies done in the recent past concerning housing and urban land development are unanimous in pointing out the problem of speculation i n land as a major factor i n rising land costs in most of the urban centers across Canada. The Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Development, i n it s report, put i t very boldly that 'undue speculation has contributed both to rising land costs and uneconomic and wasteful urban development patterns'. Land speculation exists i n many forms, both at small as well as large 69 scale in most urban centers across'Canada. However, there are four general forms of speculation that have been observed existing in Canadian c i t i e s , the fourth having come to light very recently i n Greater Vancouver. The f i r s t type of land speculation is the speculative investment in i t s simplest form. A company or individual buys land, usually a short distance beyond the fringe of present urban development, and then merely waits for those socially-created increments to catch up with his investment. The urban area expands. Land which when purchased may have been l i t t l e more than unworked farm property suddenly becomes a prime site for development. The speculator, whose only cost has been the marginal taxes charged against "farm land", sells out to a developer and reaps a profit often many times theujrLginal investment. The developer i s l e f t to service the land, build on i t , and pass his inflated land cost on to the eventual purchasers of his houses. In some cases the developer himself may be the speculator who might have bought the land for his future development activities and thus reaps the enormous amount of profit for himself. In other cases, speculator's role may be performed by an investment company that may be a subsidiary of a large development company. In either cases the large profit from the development of land remains in the hands of private owners. Large and small investment companies and development companies control large tracts of land in and around major urban centers i n Canada. Recent studies have shown that most of the land 70 needed for residential development for the next decade in most Canadian cities is held by half a dozen or so big development companies. The second type of speculation practice i s similar totthe f i r s t but differs in i t s scope in the sense that i t involves the purposeful holding of urban land from the market for development and thereby con-tributing to the shortage of land in urban areas. An individual or an organisation of various individuals buys land in the already designated urban areas for speculative holding. They hold the land from develop-ment market with the hope of making large profits later on by selling at highly increased prices. Widespread practice of this in i t s e l f creates shortage of land available for residential development which results in rapid rise i n the value of urban land due to high demand. In the present urban development system i t is l e f t to the private owner of the land whether to build on i t or not. In addition the taxes charged against vacant land are much less than the taxes charged against the developed property. The investor speculators thus have an additional incentive i n the system for keeping the land idle, contribute to the shortage, push the prices higher and higher, and reap high profits later by selling at inflated prices. This type of speculator includes resident hoarders with large holdings using only a portion for actual residential purpose, non-resident individual speculators, professional land holding and land development companies, and other land investment companies. Apart from i t s effects on pushing the land prices up, this form of speculation has given rise to "leap frog" development and created the urban sprawl that is so much evident in most Canadian as well as American ci t i e s . 71 Greater Vancouver is a typical example, i l l u s t r a t i v e of the results of such unchecked speculative practices in urban land market. The evi-dence with regard to the existence of such speculative practices is contained in the findings of a recent study, prepared by a local planning firm for the Greater Vancouver Regional District, that deals with the potential of i n f i l l land in the Greater Vancouver area for residential development."'" This i n f i l l land i s the vacant land within the already designated urban areas of Greater Vancouver that is suitable for residential development. According to this study, there are over 57,000 acres of i n f i l l land within the already designated urban area i n the Greater Vancouver Regional District. This i n f i l l land is the vacant land suitable for residential, development. The study points out that i f a l l this potential i n f i l l land was developed at existing densities, i t would accommodate the expected urban growth for the next 18 years. This projection assumes that approximately 65% of the development w i l l continue to occur on vacant land and the remaining 35% of the develop-ment w i l l occur through redevelopment of existing residential areas. Most of this i n f i l l land has been apparent held off the market for development by the speculators for the purposes of making large profits. They have without doubt succeeded in inflating the prices by creating the shortage and have succeeded in maximizing profits for themselves. Analysis of the 25 sample i n f i l l sites has indicated that 'land with 72 high p o t e n t i a l f or economic r e t u r n c e t e r i s paribus was owned or con-t r o l l e d by speculators and p r o f e s s i o n a l land development companies. 26% of the i n f i l l land was found to be c o n t r o l l e d by non-res ident speculators and p r o f e s s i o n a l development companies. Owner hoarders were found to be present i n p r a c t i c a l l y a l l sample areas and occupied somewhere between 6% and 81% of the lands i n the sample areas . See Table V I . The i n f i l l s t a t i s t i c s c l e a r l y point out that the i n f i l l land under government c o n t r o l i s comparatively n e g l i g i b l e . The d i s t r i c t of Surrey with 27,979 acres of i n f i l l land — almost 50% of the t o t a l i n f i l l land i n the Regional D i s t r i c t has no government-owned l a n d . Refer to Table VII and Table V I I I . The t h i r d form of land specu la t ion involves o lder areas i n and around the center of the urban area where a redevelopment i s overdue. I t i n -volves not a lack of use of land , but i t s ser ious and purposeful under-use for specula t ive purposes. I t f inds i t s r e f l e c t i o n i n t r a c t s of prime urban land on which d i l a p i d a t e d s tructures s i t i d l e or near i d l e . These t rac t s of urban land are usua l ly designated f o r higher land use development from i t s e x i s t i n g use. As the market for redevelopment of such proper t i e s e x i s t s , t h e i r market va lue continues to increase . The owners, u s u a l l y absentee owners, continue to hold t h e i r proper t i e s from redevelopment i n the hope of ge t t ing even l a r g e r p r o f i t s i n the future from the sa l e of t h e i r p r o p e r t i e s . A s i n g l e such property may even withhold the redevelopment of the adjacent proper t i e s i f i t happens to 73 S U M M A R Y O F P E R C E N T A G E S , , ^ j T A B L E V I . F O R P R O P O R T I O N O F L A N D O W N E R S T O ' L A N D A R E A ( W i t h i n S a m p l e A r e a s O n l y ) S o u r c e s G . V . R . D . T Y P E OF L A N D O W f J E R • R E S I D E N T A B S E N T E E C O M P A N Y ' G O V E R N M E N T C I T Y D E V E L . O W N E R O W N E R O W N E R O W N E R T A X S A L E MUNICI- S E R I E S % of % of % of % of % of % of % of % of % of % of PALITY N U M B E R Owners A r e a Owners A r e a O w n e r s A r e a O w n e r s ; A r e a Owners Area BURNABY B37.1 70% 37% - 17% 18% 10% 27% 3%. 18% B46.1 64% 47% 14% ^  15% 18% 28% 4%. 10% • B18.3 42% 20% 36% 24% 19% 43% 3% 13% COQUITLAM." C23.4 86% ' 59% 10% 17% ' 2% 6% . 2% 18% DELTA DL1.3 80% 43% 0% 0% 20% 57% 0% 0% DG9.3 69% 55% 28% 40% 3% 5% 0% . 0% " DA9.2 81% 23% 17% 4% 2% 73% 0% 0% N E W WEST-MINSTER NW0.3 64% 36% 18% 19% 18% 47% 0% 0% NORTH VAN (CITY) N32.4 68% 6% 30% 2% 0% U/o 2% 92% '• NORTH VAN N22.1 77% 63% 21% 20% 1% 1% 1% 15% (DISTRICT) N42.1 71% 50% 25% 15% 3% 17% 1% 18% PORT COQUITLAM C74.4 66% 15% 15% 25% 15% 14% 4% 46% PORT MOODY C34.1 69% 25% 17% 4% 11% 44% 3% 27% RICHMOND R56.2 88% 80% 8% 5% 4% 15% 0% 0% R22.1 70% 40% 18% 273 9% 19% 3% 14% R34.2 86% 81% 13% 17% 1% 2% 0% 0% • SURREY S14.2 40% 37% 59% 58% 1% 5% . 0% 0% S52.4 43% 10% 25% 10%- 32% 80% 0% 0% S30.4 72% 27% 17% 19% 11% 54% 0% 0% S23.3 36% 19% 28% 43% 36% 38% 0% 0% S122.1 ' 72% 63% 28% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% VANCOUVER V10.3 49% 34% 44% 37%' 6% 17% 1% 2% 10% V38.1 67% 40% •• 24% 15% u. 8% "11% 1% 5% 29% * i . e . For Burnaby (B37.1) Resident Owners make up 70% of n i l landowners and own 37% o f a l l land ( e x c l u d i n g roads) w i t h i n sample area. 75 INFILL STATISTICS 1971 TABLE V I I . P o t e n t i a l P r o j e c t e d E x i s t i n g I n f i l l Number of Number of Number % Growth Area i n I n f i l l Re-devel. of U n i t s t o Acres U n i t s * U n i t s * * 1972 C a p a c i t y BURNABY 5,013 2 0,845 14 , 5 7 0 36,295 56% COQUITLAM 2,413 7,737 7,472 12,749 28% DELTA 5,102 17,181 180 1 2 , 0 5 9 128% NEW WEST'R 579 2,865 8 , 4 8 7 13,738 19% N. VAN. CITY 357 2,138 4 , 7 0 9 1 1 , 4 0 3 18% N. VAN. DIST. 4,215 1 5 , 8 0 7 3,163 15,433 100% PORT COQUITLAM 2,803 8,854 4 , 8 3 0 4 , 5 3 9 19k% PORT MOODY 875 3,867 395 2,799 iko% RICHMOND 4,047 12,506 4 , 0 0 0 15,223 82% SURREY 27,979 71,926 4 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 6 0 285% VANCOUVER 1,632 13,868 2 6,657 1 3 9 , 3 0 8 10% WEST VANCOUVER 2,118 5 , 0 6 9 1 ,500 9,319 55% WHITE ROCK 214 1,109 4,801 4,758 25% 57 , 3 5 2 183,772 84,764 302,683 * P o t e n t i a l based on p r e l i m i n a r y p r o j e c t i o n of land use and land consumption by G.V.R.D. p l a n n i n g department* ** P r o j e c t i o n from forthcoming study of Redevelopment P o t e n t i a l , T e c h n i c a l Planning Committee/ of G.V.R.D. Sources G.V.R.D. I n f i l l Syudy, December 1973 76 RANK OF INFILL POTENTIAL 1 9 7 1 TABLE V I I I . I n f i l l P o t e n t i a l Ranked by Percent Future Growth I n f i l l P o t e n t i a l Ranked by Number of D w e l l i n g U n i t s Redevelopment P o t e n t i a l Ranked by Number of Dw e l l i n g U n i t s 1 SURREY 285% 1 SURREY 71,926 1 VANCOUVER 26,651 2 PORT COQ. 19^% 2 BURNABY 2 0 , 8 4 5 2 BURNABY 14 , 5 7 0 3 PORT MOODY lkO% 3 DELTA 1 7 ,181 3 NEW WEST'R 8,487 4 DELTA 128% 4 N. VAN. .'. DISTRICT 15,80? 4 COQUITLAM 7,472 5 N. VAN. DISTRICT 100% 5 VANCOUVER 13,868 5 PORT COQ. 4 , 8 3 0 6 RICHMOND 82% 6 RICHMOND 1 2 , 506 6 WHITE ROCK 4,801 7 BURNABY 56% 7 PORT COQ. 8 , 8 4 5 7 N. VAN. CITY 4,709 8 WEST VAN. 55% 8 COQUITLAM 7,737 8 RICHMOND 4 , 0 0 0 9 COQUITLAM 28% 9 WEST VAN. • 5,069 • 9 SURREY 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 WHITE ROCK 2h% 10 PORT MOODY 3,867 10 N. VAN, DISTRICT 3,163 11 NEW WEST'R 19% 11 NEW WEST'R 2 , 8 6 5 11 WEST VAN. 1,500 12 N. VAN. CITY 18% 12 N. VAN. CITY 2,138 12 PORT MOODY 3 9 5 13 VANCOUVER 10% 13 WHITE ROCK 1,109 13 DELTA 180 183.772 84, 7 6 4 Sources GoV.R.D. I n f i l l Study, December 1973 77 be the key i n the assembly of land for a redevelopment scheme to be f e a s i b l e . The owners of such proper t i e s reap the bene f i t of s o c i a l l y created value increment when p r i v a t e developers pay a large p r i c e f o r put t ing the land to the kind of p o s i t i v e use i t s p o s i t i o n w i t h i n the •• community demands. Such a p r a c t i c e draws i t s s trength from munic ipa l property assessment procedures based more on what i s on the land than the land i t s e l f . Taxes on such proper t i e s are charges on i t s e x i s t i n g land use rather than the land use i t i s zoned f o r . Thus i t i s much cheaper tax-wise . f or the owner of a slum property to keep i t i n i t s under-use s ta te than to develop i t for i t s p o t e n t i a l capac i ty . Holding costs for him are marginal compared with the easy and huge amount of p r o f i t that he can get i n the future j u s t by ho ld ing on to i t . The assessment system i t -s e l f gives r i s e to such speccula t ive p r a c t i c e s that cost the community i n the long run . Most s tudies dea l ing with the problem of specu la t ion i n land are unanimous i n p o i n t i n g out that the present assessment system i s an i n -cent ive for such specula t ive p r a c t i c e s and needs to be overhauled. The Canadian Research Committee on Taxat ion has o u t l i n e d the concept of "s i te value taxat ion" to dea l with the problem of land s p e c u l a t i o n . According to t h i s concept the property taxes should be based on the p u b l i c a l l y created value of land rather than the p r i v a t e l y created value of the b u i l d i n g on i t . In essence, the owner of a p iece of urban land would be taxed on what he could do with the proper ty , given i t s p lace and demand wi th in the community and not on what he has done wi th 78. with i t , be i t good, bad or indifferent. The Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Development, in i t s report, has upheld the use of "site value taxation" as a means to discourage speculation in land. The logic behind this concept is no doubt indisputable. However, i t cannot 5be considered as the sole means to control the practice of speculation in land. In a market of shortage of land for development, speculators can easily add such increases i n taxes to the f i n a l price of the property. In such a market the profits made by the speculators are so high that increased taxes do not make any dent i n their f i n a l returns from ultimate sale of the withheld land. This may even inflate the prices further i n the absence of other effective measures to i n -crease the supply of serviced land for development and elimination of speculative attractions within the urban land development system. So as such, the concept of "site value taxation" is a valid concept when accompanied by other measures such as public land assembly and public ownership on a scale compatible with the private ownership. The fourth type of speculation in the real estate market i s yet the most vicious form of speculation that has recently come to light i n Vancouver. This form of speculation takes advantage of the existing shortage i n the housing market to make quick profits from frequent sales of properties between inter-related individuals and companies while inflating the housing prices and rents in the market furthermore. In this, basically, money i s made by buying a property, remortgaging i t for a higher amount because of rising market values and taking out a 79 profit involved in remortgaging or resale. Rental housing i s commonly purchased, usually for resale to a related company, with rents in some cases being raised to justify the securing of' a higher mortgage. In i t s simplest form, a speculator buys a rental property, maybe a house or an apartment building. He, then, raises the rents for i t s tenants as high as reasonably possible. In a tight market of housing inflation when vacancy rates are almost n i l , i t i s much easier for the owners of rental properties to charge more rents. Once the rents are raised, the value of the property increases proportionately too. The appraised value of a revenue property i s based on the amount of revenue that can be derived from i t . The speculator, thus, is ready to s e l l his rental property for a much higher price than he bought i t for. He makes a quick profit from the resale. But i f he sells the property to a company that he owns with another of his associates or relatives, he draws his profit from the remortgaging of the property while s t i l l retaining his ownership interest in the property. The profit made from such sales can be .reinvested into similar activities for making more profits i n a market of high demand and shortage of housing supply. Based on this, repeated sales of a property between a number of inter-related companies i s used to push the price of the property as high as possible, while drawing profit from remortgaging at every sale and s t i l l retaining the property under the control of such related companies. The use of inte-related companies makes such sales easier and quicker while disguising the interests of individuals involved. This i s nothing but 80 the purposeful use of market mechanism to make quick p r i v a t e p r o f i t s while i n f l a t i n g the already i n f l a t e d p r i c e s of land and housing. The people who suf fer are the tenants who pay the i n f l a t e d r e n t s . The a c t i v i t i e s of one such chain of i n t e r - r e l a t e d companies i n v o l v i n g two r e a l estate salesmen and t h e i r f r i ends and r e l a t i v e s has been discovered i n Vancouver as a by-product of a rout ine i n v e s t i g a t i o n by the Attorney General 's department in to p o s s i b l e breaches of the Real Estate A c t . The s tory of t h e i r operations appeared i n the Vancouver Sun and i s reproduced i n Appendix F . T h i s , however, i s c l ear case of misuse of the system f o r p r i v a t e gains at the cost of the community at l a r g e , p a r t i c u l a r l y those who by c i r -cumstance or choice must rent to l i v e . The fac t remains that the ex-i s t i n g system i s weak enough to al low such misuse of i t f o r p r i v a t e gains at the cost of the general p u b l i c . 81 P a r t D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST - r - . A BUILT-IN PROBLEM IN THE EXISTING URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM Given the b a s i c s t r u c t u r e of the e x i s t i n g urban land development system, where the land f o r urban development i s almost wholly owned p r i v a t e l y and i t s development depends upon the w i l l of the p r i v a t e owners and the p r i v a t e market f o r development, there e x i s t s a more fundamental problem inherent i n the system. This i s the problem of c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t at a l l l e v e l s of p u b l i c decision-making regarding development, development pla n n i n g , and development c o n t r o l s . P u b l i c o f f i c i a l s , e l e c t e d or ap-po i n t e d , who are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r making development and planning d e c i s i o n s on behalf of and i n the i n t e r e s t of the urban community, are themselves p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s having t h e i r own p r i v a t e i n g e r e s t s i n the l o c a l i t i e s they make planning and development d e c i s i o n s f o r . Most e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l s on c i t y c o u n c i l s , who are supposedly re p r e s e n t a t -i v e s of "the people", are only partfe'time p o l i t i c i a n s and o f t e n have p r i v a t e business or p r o f e s s i o n a l i n t e r e s t s of t h e i r own i n the l o c a l i t i e s they represent. Many of them a r e , p r i v a t e l y , p r o f e s s i o n a l s or businessmen i n v o l v e d i n p r o f e s s i o n s or businesses r e l a t e d to the r e a l e s t a t e i n d u s t r y , and so are o b l i g a t e d by a s s o c i a t i o n to the i n t e r e s t s of r e a l e s t a t e i n -dustry. Canada^s c i t y c o u n c i l s are f u l l of r e a l e s t a t e lawyers, r e a l e s t a t e agents, and r e a l e s t a t e insurance agents. The other prominent group of occupations i s connected w i t h c o n s t r u c t i o n i n d u s t r y , a r c h i t e c t s , small c o n t r a c t o r s , b u i l d i n g supply company people, engineers and so on. According to a recent study, approximately 30% to 70% of members on c i t y 82 councils are usually from professions or businesses related to the real estate industry. These members on city councils do not abandon their business interests and forget their special concern for the real estate industry. They usually carry on their private business activities and remain firmly attached to the interests of their private business and the real estate industry. While as members of city councils they are responsible for making decisions in the public interest, they are at the same time con-cerned about their private interests and are influenced by pressures from their friends and associates in the real estate property business in their decisions regarding development and planning. Apart from city councils, there are other municipal bodies, such as, the advisory planning commissions, design panels, technical planning boards, boards of variance and other technical committees, that assess the private development proposals and advise the city councils on design and planning usually in cases of proposals requiring rezoning. Members on such committees and panels are often private professionals having their private business interests related to real estate industry. They, in their judgement and decisions,are .very much concerned about protect-ing the private interests for the sake of protecting their own private business interests. The rezoning decisions are usually in the favour of private developers unless there i s insurmountable public opposition. The public interest is perhaps easier to perceive than to define. The private interest of an individual i s obviously much easier to evaluate. 83 The public decisions almost invariably tend to be in favour of the private interest. W.L.C. Weaton's paper on "Public and Private Agents of Change i n Urban Expansion" gives some valuable insights. He set out to analyze the role of investment and development decisions in the processes of urban change and concluded from his findings that 90% of the decisions are taken in the private sector or in the favour of the private sector. Thus, the public decision-making process i n the urban land development system favours the private interest in most cases and i t is obviously at the expense of the public interest. The system ultimately works to the advantage of private gains at the cost of public interest. Since the private interests tend to control the public decision-making process at the municipal level, i t works to the advantage of the private sector's speculative a c t i v i t i e s . Furthermore, land use planning studies and proposals are continuously prepared and evaluated by the public planning o f f i c i a l s at the city planning departments. Proposals for future growth directions are pre-pared. It becomes necessary to keep important planning information confidential to prevent, i f at a l l , premature speculation by private sector. But how can the information be kept confidential when most planning proposals and studies involve many public o f f i c i a l s in various municipal departments and the members of the city councils before the fi n a l decisions to adopt such proposals i s taken. As most public of-f i c i a l s themselves have private professional and business interests 84 related with the real estate industry and are connected by professional and business associations to the private development industry, i t i s absolutely impossible to maintain any kind of effective confidentiality. This kind of confidentiality only keeps the general public from knowing about the planning a c t i v i t i e s , whereas the information invariably reaches the people involved in development and speculative investment business. Planning information is the key to the success of developers and speculat-ive investors and i t is not uncommon to find agents of developers and „ speculators frequenting the city halls sniffing whatever information they can obtain. The system without doubt favours the private interest. The direct involvement of public o f f i c i a l s in real, estate i s generally not so apparent since their involvement i s usually disguised. Many public o f f i c i a l s help their friends and relatives by information i n their speculative investment business. The information about the interests of public o f f i c i a l s in the real estate market emerges occasionally by accident. In 1973, %he Province of British Columbia's government conducted a 3 public inquiry into the alleged involvement of members of Council, of-f i c i a l s or employees of the Corporation of the District of Surrey i n land transactions, rezoning applications, and disclosure of confidential planning information for private advantages. A number of aldermen were found to be directly or indirectly involved i n land deals helping friends and associates i n private business concerned with real estate. The Com-missioner, Donald S. White, in his report to the government did not, how-ever, find anything i l l e g a l in their activities within the framework of 85 the established system. The report does, i n fact, very explicitly point out to the presence_of conflict of interest situations and 4 . recommends many measures, most important of which are restrxctions on the direct involvement of public o f f i c i a l s i n real estate business with-in the municipality except their own residential places to eliminate the problem of conflict of interest. But the fact remains that such restrictions w i l l not be able to prevent information from reaching the private real estate business industry whose speculative practices i s the main problem in the system. This w i l l not prevent the public of-f i c i a l s from indirectly involving themselves i n the business through associates and friends. The inquiry also found out that a former planning o f f i c i a l i n the Surrey Planning Department was involved jointly with a private real estate salesman friend i n a speculative deal i n the area during his term of office in 1971-72. In this deal, a property i n an area i n Surrey that was to be designated for future development was purchased jointly by the planning o f f i c i a l and his friend for $2,000, each having an investment of $1,000 i n the deal. Later the property was sold for $20,000 giving each a profit of $9,000 i n a period of less than a year."* In the present form of urban land development system this sort of specur-lative practices are bound to exist, rather encouraged, unless some basic changes are made in the system so that the development value i n -crements in land are funeled to the advantage of the urban community that generates such land values. One way to eliminate the problems of speculation and conflict of interest would be to replace the private 86 ownership of urban land w i t h p u b l i c ownership so th a t the s p e c u l a t i v e p r o f i t s w i l l go to no cither than the community i t s e l f where they r i g h t l y belong. But p o l i t i c a l l y t h i s i s bound to be an unacceptable s o l u t i o n i n a f r e e e n t e r p r i s e system. Another a l t e r n a t i v e of p u b l i c involvement 4 i n the management and development of urban land on a s c a l e competitive w i t h the p r i v a t e s e c t o r seems to be a more acceptable form of reform w i t h i n the system which i s p r e s e n t l y h e a v i l y i n favour of the p r i v a t e market and has proved c o s t l y to the p u b l i c at l a r g e . This a l t e r n a t i v e i s discussed i n the next chapter. 87 Part E. FRAGMENTED PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AUTHORITY — A PROBLEM IN THE FACE OF PRESENT REGIONAL URBAN REALITY Much of the urban land development planning and development controls Is carried out by the municipal governments in most parts of Canada. Even though almost a l l studies i n the relevant fields of economics, sociology, ecology, urban geography, and the like recognize that the process of urban growth is a.regional one, operating on a relatively broad geographical basis stretching out from the core of the country's major urban conglomerates, the essential powers of planning and develop-ment in these major urban areas rest in the hands of not one, not two, but up to 10 or 15 different local governments. Each of these local governments admits that i t s problems and concerns do not end at i t s municipal boundaries, yet each of them i s reluctant to cede to a larger government sufficient authority for i t to exercise the necessary over-view on the growth of the urban area. This fragmented public planning authority makes overall urban development uneconomic and irrational and is a major obstacle in the development of comprehensive programs and policies to solve our urban problems. A National Commission on Urban Problems i n the United States, in i t s report, commented that much of the urban problems in that country "spring from using 19th century controls and attitudes in an attempt to mold and contain 20th century cities faced with 21st century problems." The same comment could be offered in respect of several elements within the Canadian urban structure and is much more applicable to the kind of 88 p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e on which we r e l y f o r the planning and development of our urban areas . They are indeed 19th century s t ruc tures attempting to deal with 21st century problems. In terms of p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , Canada, s t i l l , seems c l o s e r to the wal led c i t y concept of ancient Greece than to the urban world of the 20th century. Although, i n the recent past , there has been a movement towards the establishment of r e g i o n a l forms of government i n many provinces across Canada, with B r i t i s h Columbia and Ontario being i n the fore front to do so, these reg iona l governments have not , y e t , been able to assume any e f f e c t i v e l e v e l of c o n t r o l on planning and development on r e g i o n a l s ca l e . The progress i n the assumption of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for planning by the r e g i o n a l governments ha&e been slow due to the re luctance of m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n the acceptance of r e g i o n a l government a u t h o r i t y . In B r i t i s h Columbia, the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t has been the f i r s t to assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the reg ion ' s o v e r a l l p lanning . As we have noted i n Chapter I I , the O f f i c i a l Regional P lan for the Of-f i c i a l Regional Plan for the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t d i v i d e s the e n t i r e Lower Mainland Region in to very broad land-use c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , such as , urban, r u r a l , i n d u s t r i a l , park, and reserve (see Table V ) . D e t a i l e d land-use p lann ing , and s e r v i c i n g are l e f t to be c a r r i e d out by i n d i v i d u a l m u n i c i -p a l i t i e s of which there are 17 i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t a lone. This i s a very loose form of p lanning c o n t r o l , s ince the "urban" category can inc lude anything from a v i l l a g e to a h i g h - r i s e apartment and commercial development; as long as no d i s t i n c t i o n i s made between 89 d i f f e r e n t types of urban development, r e g i o n a l planning can hardly funct ion at maximum e f f i c i e n c y . The dec is ions regarding where to permit what type of urban development, r e s i d e n t i a l or commercial, how much of d i f f e r e n t categories of r e s i d e n t i a l development, what community f a c i l i t i e s to b e ; b u i l t remain to be taken by i n d i v i d u a l m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . Such being the case, the o v e r a l l land and housing requirements for the reg ion can hardly be accurate ly estimated and much less provided for to meet the demand. Furthermore, there i s a tendency with the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s to r e s t r i c t the growth i n t h e i r areas and th i s p a r o c h i a l a t t i t u d e of d i f f e r e n t m u n i c i p a l i t i e s makes i t fur ther d i f f i c u l t to cope wi th the demand for serv iced land for housing development and to r e l i e v e the s i t u a t i o n of shortage of housing i n the market. This p o l i c y of r e s t r i c t e d growth adds to the e x i s t i n g shortage r e s u l t i n g i n ever i n c r e a s i n g p r i c e s of land and housing. The a t t i t u d e of paroch ia l i sm r e f l e c t e d i n the p o l i c y of r e s t r i c t e d growth by i n d i v i d u a l m u n i c i p a l i t i e s shows complete d i s r e -gard for and i n a b i l i t y to understand the o v e r a l l needs of the urban reg ion as a whole. In the Greater Vancouver area those m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , with the l arges t p o t e n t i a l for accommodating new growth, seems- to be the ones with most r e s t r i c t i v e growth p o l i c i e s . Surrey, D e l t a , and Coquitlam, having the greatest p o t e n t i a l to accept new development have the most time-consuming and complex development approval process r e f l e c t i n g a p o l i c y of r e s t r i c t i n g the growth of these areas . P r o p o r t i o n a t e l y , they seem not to be c a r r y i n g t h e i r share of the burden of permi t t ing new 90 development (see Table I X ) . This p o l i c y i s a l s o r e f l e c t e d i n the high impost charges, development and b u i l d i n g permit c o s t s , and high standards of s e r v i c i n g r e q u i r e d and other charges f o r approval i n these m u n i c i p a l i t i e s (see Appendix E). Other problems that a r i s e out of fragmented planning j u r i s d i c t i o n i n a l a r g e urban area are, the m u l t i p l i c i t y of planning and zoning r e g u l a t i o n s , the m u l t i p l i c i t y of s e r v i c i n g and b u i l d i n g standards and requirements f o r other f a c i l i t i e s , which i n d i r e c t l y add to the cost of development. Each m u n i c i p a l i t y has i t s own zoning bylaws and b u i l d i n g bylaws and d i f f e r e n t sets of approval procedures r e s u l t i n g i n c o mplexities that the developers have to cope w i t h i n o b t a i n i n g the development approvals. I t i s a very common complaint that our m u n i c i p a l development approval procedures are too complex, cumbersone, time-consuming and u t t e r l y i n e f f i c i e n t . A general development approval process, most commonly used i n the Greater Vancouver area m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , i s shown d i a g r a m a t i c a l l y i n Appendix D. These d i f f i c u l t i e s and problems that a r i s e out of the fragmented p u b l i c planning a u t h o r i t y and by any measure c o s t l y to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t at l a r g e can beramet by planning at a s c a l e having r e a l i s t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p to the whole urban area. That i s by the assumption of d e t a i l e d planning r e s p o n s i b i l i t y by the r e g i o n a l government. Urban growth i s a r e g i o n a l process and demands r e g i o n a l planning. Regional government must have the a u t h o r i t y to c o n t r o l urban growth and development through zoning at a r e g i o n a l l e v e l and s c a l e . They must be given power over the munici-p a l i t i e s to make r e g i o n a l planning e f f e c t i v e . At the same time they TABLE IX. SUMMARY OF LAND AVAILABILITY AND UNITS IN PROCESSING STAGE - APRIL 1974 Due to lack of ava i lab i l i ty of information regarding totals of servicable land, this table can only be considered to indicate a very general idea of municipal housing performance. Housing Starts ^Residential Units **Normal C.M.H.C. Statist ics currently i n the Process Area in Acres = = : Development Time in G.V.R.D. Statist ics 1972 1973 Approval Process Months Total Vacant including Multi- M u l t i -BURNABY 22,520 7, 818 5,013 COQUITLAM 29,985 20,920 2,413 DELTA 45,984 12,900 5,102 NEW WEST'R 3,775 639 579 N . VAN. CITY 2,879 393 357 N. VAN. DIST. 40,693 27,3^5 4,215 PORT COQUITLAM 6,79^ 4,164 2,803 PORT MOODY 3,357 1,595 875 RICHMOND 32,480 9,489 4,047 SURREY 79,317 35,502 27,979 VANCOUVER 28,680 1,915 1,632 W. Vancouver 22,503 16,250 2,118 WHITE ROCK 1,281 214 214 Totals 320,248 138,930 57,3^7 496 450 1,729 21 36 402 289 23 718 1,070 601 139 108 1,119 555 96 149 516 427 64 996 1,420 1,936 • 183 347 544 524 1,^52 19 12 521 282 38 1,529 1,158 699 165 77 Family Lots Family Lots Family 1,027 426 2,562 2i -6 4-6 188 400 390 3-9 3-9 21 1,505 0 3-12 -742 0 411 - 3 660 9 220 - 3-9 675 75 621 3 3-8 150 556 9-12 9-12 "78 224 31 6 6 336 1,659 5,097 6-8 12-18 989 1,^50 212 6-12 8-12 2,610 200 1,059 6 6+ k? • 0 114 - 3-5 492 0 17 3 6 5,982 7,808 7,020 7,865 6,098 11,290 Does not include units approved or under construction. VC (—' A l l municipalities commented that the processing time depended on accuracy and completeness of the developer application. Surrey, Delta, Richmond and West Vancouver had project applications dating back to 1972 and pr ior . 92 must set up common development standards and regulat ions for the e n t i r e reg ion as a whole to make development procedures more e f f i c i e n t and economical. In B r i t i s h Columbia, we have already es tabl i shed a frame-work of r e g i o n a l governments, what i s needed i s fur ther more planning r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and powers to make r e g i o n a l p lanning e f f e c t i v e and e l iminate the problems of fragmented author i ty that ex i s t s i n the present set up. 93 SUMMARY The fundamental weakness of the e x i s t i n g urban land development system appears to l i e i n the very bas i c s t r u c t u r e on which the system funct ions and i s b u i l t upon. On one hand, the land for urban development i s almost wholly under the ownership of p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s and p r i v a t e companies and i t s development depends upon the w i l l and a b i l i t y of the p r i v a t e owners and the p r i v a t e market for development. On the other hand, the development planning decis ions and development regulatory contro l s are exerc ised by the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s . The process of urban development growth, and the p u b l i c development planning and p u b l i c development and investment dec i s ions c o n t i n u a l l y generate development values of the urban l a n d . These value increments i n the urban proper t i e s under p r i v a t e ownership under the present system are re ta ined e x c l u s i v e l y by the p r i v a t e property owners, where, i n f a c t , these increments created by the community growth and p u b l i c dec is ions r i g h t l y belong to the urban community. The p o s s i b i l i t y of making large gains from the p r i v a t e ownership of land due to the i n e v i t a b l e increments i n urban land values from community growth and p u b l i c p lanning and development dec i s ions gives r i s e to many forms of specu la t ion which r e s u l t i n ever r i s i n g p r i c e of urban land and housing. The system further gives r i s e to the problem of c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t at a l l l e v e l s of p u b l i c development p lanning decision-making and works to the advantage of the pr ivate , i n t e r e s t anJthe general cost of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . T h i s , at the same time, adds to the specu la t ive elements 94 in the land development market. The existing system does not have any effective means to channel the socially-created development values of land back into the community whose growth creates these increments in value. Our system of municipal assessment, being based on what is actually ex-isting on land rather than i t s potential for development, discourages i t s f u l l development, creates land and housing shortage in the market, encourages land speculation practices, and, thus, adds to the land and housing price inflation. Fragmented public planning authority in our large urban areas makes ef-fective regional planning, so necessary in the present urban reality, d i f f i c u l t . The conflicting interests at the municipal level and the regional level makes i t d i f f i c u l t to arrive at decisions regarding develop-ment programs and projects affecting the entire region. Parochial a t t i -tudes of the municipalities make development process slow and inefficient to meet the market needs for land and housing development. This also results in the multiplicity of standards and development regulations in the same urban region. The bureaucratic inefficiency in the development approval process without doubt adds to the cost of development and u l t i -mate cost to the home buyers. The regional governments, specifically in British Columbia, do not possess the necessary powers to have planning and zoning controls on the develop-ment of the regions. Without zoning controls i t i s not possible to direct 95 the development of the region on an e f f e c t i v e b a s i s so as to meet the needs of the region f o r s e r v i c e d land f o r development and so a f f e c t the p r i c e of land and housing. I n s h o r t , the e x i s t i n g system i s h e a v i l y i n favour of the p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t and so weak to be e a s i l y misused f o r p r i v a t e advantages. P u b l i c i n t e r e s t remains at a gross disadvantage. This r e s u l t s i n i n -f l a t i o n of land p r i c e s and increased o v e r a l l housing cost to the p u b l i c . CHAPTER IV PUBLIC ACQUISITION, SERVICING, AND DISPOSAL OF LAND FOR DEVELOPMENT Part A. PUBLIC LAND ASSEMBLY, LAND BANKING, AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL — A VIABLE MEANS TO CONTROL URBAN LAND PRICES From our ana lys i s of the e x i s t i n g urban land development system i n the l a s t chapter i t becomes c l e a r l y obvious that i n i t s present form, where land for urban-idevelopment i s almost wholly owned p r i v a t e l y and i t s development r e l i e s upon the w i l l of the p r i v a t e owners and the market, the benef i t s of the s o c i a l l y - c r e a t e d value of the urban land r e s u l t i n g s o l e l y from the growth of the urban community and p u b l i c development planning d e c i s i o n s , remain i n the hands of p r i v a t e owners of the urbanidesignated land . The value of urban land i s mostly created by the urban growth of the community and as such should r i g h t l y belong to the urban community at l a r g e , but i n the present system i t benef i t s only the owners of urban property . The system, i n f a c t , t r a n s f e r s the community-generated c a p i t a l to the p r i v a t e owners of property and, thus, works to the benef i t of p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s at the cost of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . This i t s e l f i s the root-cause from which a l l forms of specu la t ive p r a c t i c e s that have plagued the land and housing market stem. Speculat ion i s the product of the e x i s t i n g system and a major f a c t o r i n the enormously high pr i ce s of land i n the urban areas. I f we are to succeed i n c o n t r o l l i n g the r i s i n g p r i c e s of urban land for r e s i d e n t i a l development, we must, f i r s t , f i n d ways and means to e l iminate t h e . p r a c t i c e s of specu la t ion . As we have recognised that specu la t ion i s the outcome of the e x i s t i n g urban land development 98 system i t s e l f , the s o l u t i o n must, then, l i e i n changing the system and making necessary reforms so that i t no longer can be used for p r i v a t e specu la t ive gains from the ownership of l a n d . Speculat ion i s a ser ious problem and must be dea l t with by e l iminat ing i t s causes that obviously l i e i n the system. As Claude B. Le Gros r i g h t l y puts i t : "Problems are not solved on the l e v e l of problems. Analys ing a problem to f i n d i t s s o l u t i o n i s l i k e t r y i n g to res tore freshness to a l e a f by t r e a t i n g the l e a f i t s e l f ; whereas the s o l u t i o n l i e s i n watering the r o o t s . " We must modify the e x i s t i n g system so that s o c i a l l y - c r e a t e d increments i n the value of urban land f o r development can be d i s t r i b u t e d back to the advantage of the urban community rather than l e t t i n g i t remain i n the hands of p r i v a t e land specu la tors . Furthermore, such a s o l u t i o n must be such that i t i s a p p l i c a b l e and f e a s i b l e i n the l i g h t of the p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l , economic, and mental a t t i t u d e of the people of the country. One a l t e r n a t i v e to the present urban development system would be to e l iminate the p r i v a t e ownership of land and b r i n g a l l land under p u b l i c ownership. This would solve the problem of d i s t r i b u t i o n of development values of land s ince any increment i n the land value w i l l remain with the p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s f o r the o v e r a l l b e n e f i t of the p u b l i c . Speculat ion w i l l be automat ica l ly e l iminated with the e l i m i n a t i o n of p r i v a t e ownership of l a n d . But such a s o l u t i o n would be t o t a l l y un-acceptable and i m p r a c t i c a l i n our f r e e - e n t e r p r i s e system i n which 99 p r i v a t e ownership i s so much valued and p r i v a t e property r i g h t s so j e a l o u s l y guarded. This would, without doubt, be branded as "Marxist" s o l u t i o n . So i t would be more p r a c t i c a l and l o g i c a l to consider other so lu t ions to e l iminate specu la t ion and can func t ion w i t h i n our f r e e - e n t e r p r i s e system and s t i l l preserv ing the much valued i n s t i t u t i o n of p r i v a t e property ownership. In dea l ing with the problem of specu la t ion we are concerned with sa fe -guarding the pub l i c i n t e r e s t from being overrun by the p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t . In the present system, where most of the urban land and other p o t e n t i a l development land i s owned p r i v a t e l y , pub l i c i n t e r e s t i s c l e a r l y over-looked and taken advantage of by the p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s . To safeguard the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , p u b l i c en terpr i se i n land ownership and develop-ment must be made compatible with the p r i v a t e ownership and p r i v a t e enterpr i se i n land development. I t can be argued that to pro tec t the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n the development market i t must be made strong enough to deal with those market forces that tend to take advantage of i t f o r pure ly p r i v a t e purposes, i . e . , specu la t ive p r a c t i c e s . I t can be done only i f l a r g e - s c a l e land ownership by the p u b l i c i s combined with the e x i s t i n g planning and development c o n t r o l by p u b l i c a u t h o r i t y . P u b l i c ownership of land and i t s c o n t r o l on development must be at a sca le at which i t can have a c o n t r o l l i n g e f f ec t i n the p r i v a t e market to protect the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 100 The theory of land assembly i n advance of development has been suggested and s trongly recommended by many studies to c o n t r o l speculat ion and check uncontro l l ed and uneconomic urban sprawl . The exhorbitant p r o f i t s of p r i v a t e land speculat ion would be turned to p u b l i c b e n e f i t s , f i n a n c -ing a d d i t i o n a l p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n of land i n advance of need. Two recent s t u d i e s , the report of the Federa l Task Force on Housing and Urban Development i n Canada, and the Dennis r e p o r t , are unanimous i n recommending p u b l i c land assembly and development of urban land at munic ipa l and r e g i o n a l l e v e l to solve the problem of high land p r i c e s and urban sprawl . " M u n i c i p a l i t i e s or r e g i o n a l governments, as a matter of cont inuing p o l i c y , should acqu ire , s e r v i c e , and s e l l a l l or a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n of the land ac-quired for urban growth w i t h i n t h e i r b o u n d a r i e s . . . . " Being aware of the fac t that such an operat ion i s out of the a b i l i t y of the munic ipa l or r e g i o n a l governments as f ar as f inanc ing i s con-cerned, they fur ther recommend that : "The f e d e r a l government should make d i r e c t loans to m u n i c i p a l i t i e s or r e g i o n a l governments to a s s i s t them i n assembling and s e r v i c i n g land for urban growth. These recommendations are repeated and e laborated upon i n the Dennis r e p o r t , which states that a large sca le land-banking program: "would e n t a i l the a c q u i s i t i o n of a s u f f i c i e n t supply of land to meet a l l urban r e s i d e n t i a l requirements for a ten-year p e r i o d , although the land would be marketed over a longer per iod of time (at l e a s t twenty y e a r s ) . The p u b l i c land banks would market from one-quarter to one-half 101 of the land required i n any given year and thereby set the p r i c i n g p a t t e r n . They would be i n a p o s i t i o n i n any given year to f lood the market and depress p r i c e s . The Dennis report a lso suggests that the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s should have greater c o n t r o l over the assembly and development of land and should be given increased grants and loans by the p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l governments as w e l l as increased munic ipa l revenue sources . F i n a l l y , 3 heavier taxes on l and- sa l e p r o f i t s are recommended. S i m i l a r suggestions have been put forward i n many studies and reports done i n the United States . During the l a t e 1960s s evera l major reports of n a t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e deal t i n some way with p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n and d i sposa l of l a n d . A summary review of f i v e major oreports by David Heeter stated:: "One of the most important recommendations of the reports i s that l o c a l governments should be em-powered to intervene d i r e c t l y i n the development process by purchasing or condemning land and s e l l i n g or l eas ing i t to p r i v a t e developers , subject to c o n d i t i o n s . . . . "The technique recommended by the reports i s com-monly r e f e r r e d to as land banking: the a c q u i s i t i o n of land severa l years i n advance of u r b a n i s a t i o n . However, most of the reports would apparently not l i m i t temporally the power to acquire and dispose of land; they would al low l o c a l governments to acquire and market land at any time to achieve al lowable objec t ives ."^ John W. Reps, Professor of C i t y and Regional Planning at C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y , at the 1967 ASPO Conference presented a paper i n which he proposed that: 102 "land at the urban f r i n g e which i s to be developed f o r urban uses should be acquired by a p u b l i c agency. A c q u i s i t i o n , i n f a c t , should run w e l l ahead of a n t i c i p a t e d need and i n c l u d e the purchase or condemnation of i d l e or a g r i c u l t u r a l land w e l l beyond the present urban l i m i t s . The p u b l i c agency, t h e r e f o r e , should be given t e r r i t o r i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n which not only i n c l u d e s the present c e n t r a l c i t y and the surrounding suburbs but a wide b e l t of un-developed l a n d . " ^ Recognising the present urban r e a l i t y of l a r g e urban agglomerations, he f u r t h e r r e i n f o r c e s h i s proposal by suggesting t h a t : "Land scheduled f o r e a r l y development should be designed i n d e t a i l , confirming to a gen e r a l , comprehensive, and long-range m e t r o p o l i t a n growth pl a n . The p u b l i c agency, d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y , should i n s t a l l a l l s t r e e t and u t i l i t y improvements and r e t a i n a l l s i t e s needed f o r such p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s as parks, sc h o o l s , and other neighbor-hood and community needs. The remaining land should then be disposed of to p r i v a t e b u i l d e r s by s a l e or l e a s e , the aggregate p r i c e to r e f l e c t f u l l a c q u i s i t i o n and improvement costs but no p r o f i t . The terms of the s a l e or lease should i n c l u d e ade-quate safeguards to i n s u r e development only i n conformity to the d e t a i l e d plans prepared f o r the a r e a . " 6 The l i s t of quotations from v a r i o u s sources i n favour of the p u b l i c land assembly, land banking, and development c o n t r o l can run to a great l e n g t h , but they a l l , i n v a r i a b l y , p o i n t out that to c o n t r o l the high cost of urban land and i t s o r d e r l y and economic development p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the market f o r land and i t s development i s e s s e n t i a l and t h i s must be at a s a l e l a r g e enough to be able to c o n t r o l the market. Most experts concerned w i t h the urban la n d development, such as, urban planners, e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s , and the l i k e , argue that land i s too 103 precious a resource to be l e f t to the vagaries of the private market. A committee of planners, in a statement on behalf of the Town Planning Institute of Canada, entitled "The Role of Town Planning i n Canada" puts forward i t s view that: "To the landowner and to the developer, land is a commodity. To the planner i t is a resource. If land is regarded as a commodity, then the concern for i t s best use becomes secondary aspect to the conditions of i t s sale and purchase."' The truth of this statement is evident in the mess our cities represent and is without doubt the result of the private markets treatment of land as a commodity. Profit motive is the dominant determinant in dealing i n land and i t s development in the private market. The unsatisfactory en-vironment of our urban areas reflects the dominance of that "commodity" view of our urban land. The committee further states that: " i f land i s regarded as a resource, then the f i r s t concern in any change in land use must be to see that land i s put to i t s wisest use, and that in whatever development is car-ried out i t follows the highest standards of economic and social well 8 being and aesthetic satisfaction." Private market for land development is too fragmented to be concerned with looking at land as a resource and being able to conceive any develop-ment at a scale that would be to the total benefit of the community, socially, economically, and aestheticallyt>satisfying whole. This is a task that can be only taken up by the higher public authorities, municipal, regional, provincial and federal combined. 104 W i l l i a m J . Nicoson, i n h i s a r t i c l e on "Land Use Contro l s" , s tates that ' l i k e a l l va luable and f i n i t e resources , land should proper ly be the subject of intense p u b l i c concern and i t s uses the subject of 9 close p u b l i c s c r u t i n y . ' The concept of p u b l i c land assembly, land banking, and development c o n t r o l i s not new nor r a d i c a l and has been s u c c e s s f u l l y used i n European countries such as Sweden with a democratic p o l i t i c a l s e t -up, and also i n the Canadian provinces of A l b e r t a and Saskatchewan. The r e s u l t s of t h i s concept i n use have confirmed that i t helps i n order ly and economic development and i n keeping down the p r i c e s of urban land and housing. Commencing i n the 1950s, the C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion of Canada i n i t i a t e d f e d e r a l f i n a n c i a l ass i s tance programs for munic i -p a l land-assembly projec t s under Sect ion 40 of the Nat iona l Housing Act and l a t e r , i n the 1960s, under Sect ion 42 of the A c t . Sect ion 40 provides for munic ipal land-assembly and development for both p u b l i c and general housing under a f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l p a r t n e r -ship:/. Seventy-f ive per cent of the c a p i t a l cost of the l a n d - a s -sembly pro jec t i s covered by the f e d e r a l government and 25 per cent by the p r o v i n c i a l government. Most provinces ask the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the prov inces ' share of cos ts . Losses and p r o f i t s are d iv ided on the same percentage bas i s as the costs among the three governments. The f e d e r a l government r e t a i n s 75 per cent ownership of the p r o j e c t . 105 Secti o n 42 provides loans at p r e f e r r e d i n t e r e s t r a t e s equal to 90 per cent of the c a p i t a l cost to the province f o r the assembling and s e r v i c i n g of l o t s f o r p u b l i c and general housing. The province pays the remaining 10 per cent of the cost and i s f u l l owner of the p r o j e c t . F i f t y per cent of the operating l o s s e s are s u b s i d i z e d by the f e d e r a l government and the province pays the r e s t . These programs, however, have not been used mainly f o r reasons of strong developer o p p o s i t i o n to these programs and inadequate f e d e r a l funding. CMHC funds f o r land-assembly programs over the past two decades have been only two per cent of i t s loans expended f o r housing. The only provinces that have made use of these programs to a l i m i t e d extent are A l b e r t a , O n t a r i o , and Saskatchewan. B r i t i s h Columbia has p r a c t i c a l l y remained out of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n these programs. The provinces of A l b e r t a and Saskatchewan, p a r t i c u l a r l y , used programs under S e c t i o n 42 and S e c t i o n 40 to f i n a n c e t h e i r land assembly, land banking, and development p r o j e c t s to a very great extent and have been s u c c e s s f u l i n c o n t r o l l i n g the urban development and keeping the p r i c e s of land and housing down. The experience of these two provinces i n land assembly and land banking w i t h development c o n t r o l s i s discussed h e r e a f t e r . 106 Part B. ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN The longest term Canadian experience i n p u b l i c land assembly and development has occurred i n A l b e r t a and Saskatchewan, where munic ipa l land banking has been p r a c t i c e d s ince the 1930s. M u n i c i p a l ' l a n d banking emerged l a r g e l y from h i s t o r i c a l acc ident when the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n these two provinces acquired a s u b s t a n t i a l amount of tax-del inquent land during the Depression. The land was subdivided and some of i t was developed as part of a "make-work" p o l i c y prevalent then. Subsequently, a strong munic ipa l r o l e i n land development began to take shape. Over the years acceptance of p u b l i c land ownership and experience i n management and development of tax lands have made p o s s i b l e e f f e c t i v e large sca le munic ipal land development i n these two prov inces . In s evera l munic i -p a l i t i e s , munic ipa l land a c q u i s i t i o n and land banking, coupled with land development c o n t r o l s , have been u t i l i z e d to reduce r e s i d e n t i a l land cos t s . By prov id ing semi-developed land at lower than p r e v a i l i n g market pr i ce s and by encouraging o r d e r l y , compact, lower cost land development, land p r i c e i n f l a t i o n seems to have been reduced e f f e c t i v e l y and high q u a l i t y urban development has been achieved for a broad range of income l eve l s with a good range of serv ices and amenit ies . The two provinces have experienced rap id populat ion growth i n the past two decades and expect approximately a 45 per cent fur ther increase i n populat ion during the present decade. This popula t ion growth w i l l increase considerably the demand for r e s i d e n t i a l land i n the urban centers , where most of the growth i s 107 expected to take p lace . Urban growth p o l i c i e s , according ly are d i rec t ed toward achieving in tegrated urban growth by combined programs of land banking, annexation, staged development, and, more r e c e n t l y , metropol i tan-wide t r a n s p o r t a t i o n development. Although large sca le munic ipa l land a c q u i s i t i o n and development p r a c t i c e s have been i n existence i n both provinces f o r s e v e r a l decades, i n A l b e r t a they have been operat ing w i t h i n one of the most s o p h i s t i c a t e d planning systems i n Canada. A l b e r t a ' s p lanning l e g i s l a t i o n provides a strong base f o r comprehensive and coordinated planning and development at the r e g i o n a l and l o c a l l e v e l s of government, whereas Saskatchewan's planning l e g i s l a t i o n provides l i t t l e bas i s f o r concerted p lanning or even contact between l e v e l s of government except i n Regina and Saskatoon. The planning system of A l b e r t a merits a t t e n t i o n s ince i t has been ins trumenta l /over the years i n p r o v i d i n g m u n i c i p a l i t i e s the experience of d i r e c t involvement i n the urban development process , p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t r e l a t e s to the l o c a t i o n , c o n t r o l , des ign, and pace of urban develop-ment. A l b e r t a ' s experience explains i n part why the province and i t s m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have p a r t i c i p a t e d to a greater extent i n the Sect ion 42 program of f edera l loans for land a c q u i s i t i o n than any other prov ince . They have not p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the Sect ion 40 program of f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l partnership for land a c q u i s i t i o n . Saskatchewan wi th a l e ss developed planning system has used only the Sect ion 40 program to a l i m i t e d extent. The l e g a l bas i s of A l b e r t a ' s planning system i s the Planning Act of 1913 This l e g i s l a t i o n f i r s t became important i n shaping urban growth during the 108 mid-1940s, when large o i l resources were discovered. Much of the r a p i d urban expansion that occurred took the form of u n a t t r a c t i v e , uneconomic, f r i n g e area development. Between 1949 and 1954, the populat ion of many smal l towns jumped 20 per cent. In some ins tances , town populations doubled. A l b e r t a ' s two major metropol i tan centers , Edmonton and Calgary , experienced the highest growth rate of and Canadian c i t i e s . The p r o v i n c i a l government, recognis ing that some l o c a l governments could not cope with land development that often went beyond t h e i r boundaries , strengthened t h e i r planning l e g i s l a t i o n , p r o v i d i n g admin i s tra t ive machinery for the in tegrated planning of urban and r u r a l land uses through comprehensive planning on the l o c a l , r e g i o n a l , and p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l s . The A l b e r t a l e g i s l a t i o n provides for reg iona l p lanning commissions which develop r e g i o n a l plans for t h e i r p r i n c i p a l planning areas , i n c l u d i n g the major c i t i e s and communities w i t h i n a 50-mile r a d i u s . The preparat ion of munic ipi lm plans i s o p t i o n a l ; but , i f they are used, they must be prepared w i t h i n the framework provided by the r e g i o n a l plans and must s ta te how developable land w i l l be used during the next 15 to 20 years . A s i g n i f i c a n t feature of the p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n i s i t s emphasis on the achievement of "orderly and economic development of land". Munic ipa l plans must i n c l u d e : a schedule s e t t i n g out the sequence i n which s p e c i f i e d areas of land may be developed or redeveloped and i n which p u b l i c serv ices and f a c i l i t i e s . . . s h o u l d be provided i n s p e c i f i e d areas and proposals r e l a t i n g to the f inanc ing and programming of p u b l i c development projec t s and c a p i t a l w o r k s . . . b e undertaken.10 109 The other feature i s the p r o v i s i o n of r e p l a t t i n g schemes s u c c e s s f u l l y used i n A l b e r t a to promote good development i n accordance with m u n i c i p a l p lans . Where development i s hindered by poor ly designed layout and there i s p u b l i c and p r i v a t e ownership, r e s u b d i v i s i o n may be c a r r i e d out by r e -p l a t t i n g . The munic ipal c o u n c i l pools a l l the parce l s of land i n v o l v e d , a l l o c a t e s 35 per cent of the land to munic ipal uses ( i . e . , p u b l i c reserves , and f a c i l i t i e s ) , then r e d i s t r i b u t e s the remaining 65 perceent to the owners so that each re ta ins a contiguous group of l o t s or parce l s p r o p o r t i o n a l to h i s o r i g i n a l h o l d i n g . Before a r e p l a t t i n g scheme can be drawn up, consent of 90 peri.cent of the landowners involved must be obtained. The munic ipal c o u n c i l then prepares a r e p l a t t i n g scheme which can be implemented only with the approval of owners of 60 per cent of the land i n the scheme. Approval i s usua l ly obtained through negot iat ions with the landowners. However, i n the case of a nonconsenting landowner land can be purchased compulsor i ly . The amount of compensation awarded i s spread on a f r o n t - f o o t bas is among the other landowners involved i n the scheme.^ The emphasis on comprehensive planning and staged development i n the A l b e r t a Planning Act and i t s p r o v i s i o n for munic ipa l involvement i n planning design has provided s o l i d bas i s for development planning by m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . By a f f o r d i n g them strong planning and implementation techniques and by reducing the number of problems which can a r i s e from m u l t i p l e j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the Act has made p o s s i b l e severa l success fu l munic ipal e f f o r t s to curb' land specula t ion and to increase the supply of 110 r e s i d e n t i a l l a n d t h r o u g h l a r g e s c a l e a s s e m b l y a n d d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e c a s e s o f E d m o n t o n a n d R e d D e e r i n A l b e r t a a n d t h e c a s e o f S a s k a t o o n i n S a s k a t -c h e w a n a r e c h o s e n t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f p u b l i c l a n d a s s e m b l y , l a n d b a n k i n g , d e v e l o p m e n t c o n t r o l s . I l l EDMONTON Edmonton i s a northern p r a i r i e c i t y which has experienced r a p i d and excessive populat ion growth and has achieved a very good q u a l i t y of development with a high l e v e l of amenities and l i t t l e urban sprawl . The metropol i tan area , 4,000 square m i l e s , has met urban development land need by wel l -p lanned i n f i l l of o l d e r , p a r t i a l l y developed areas , and, more r e c e n t l y , by munic ipal land a c q u i s i t i o n and development. During the 1960s, the populat ion of Edmonton increased by 50 per cent; i t i s expected to increase at about the same rate dur ing the 1970s. In 1968, the expansion ra te of 12,500 res idents per year required 350 acres of new r e s i d e n t i a l l and; 200 acres for indus try ; 200 acres for 12 new roads; and 60 acres for parks , schools , and other f a c i l i t i e s . Edmonton has a lengthy experience i n land-use c o n t r o l through p u b l i c land ownership and development which began i n the 1930s, when 3,000 acres of tax-del inquent land were acquired by the c i t y . A f t e r the f i r s t large o i l d iscovery i n the province i n 1947, there was an increase i n demand for land . Many city-owned l o t s were so ld f o r p r i v a t e development. Much of th i s land had been subdivided but owned by the c i t y i n large contiguous b l o c k s . Where city-owned land was scat tered wiMi in terven ing p r i v a t e ownership and where s u b d i v i s i o n designs and/or open space and community f a c i l i t y prov i s ions were below contemporary standards, the r e -design that was necessary was achieved by r e p l a t t i n g schemes as provided under the Planning A c t . In 1949, the c i t y of Edmonton began preparing i t s munic ipa l p l a n . The 112 document was r e f e r r e d to in formal ly as the "Evolving General Development P l a n , " s ince many of i t s prov i s ions were adopted o f f i c i a l l y p r i o r to the o f f i c i a l adoption of the p lan i t s e l f . The munic ipa l p lan inc luded a design for munic ipa l neighborhood u n i t s , the s i z e and boundaries of which were determined by the area requirements of a p u b l i c elementary schoo l . Where area requirements of a neighborhood u n i t invo lved a r e -p l a t t i n g scheme, the required approval of 60 per cent of the landowners was made eas ier to obta in by c e r t a i n b u i l d e r s who bought up large blocks of land i n the proposed neighborhood u n i t . In doing so these b u i l d e r s automat ica l ly committed themselves to the scheme, thereby assur ing that 13 the 60 per cent c r i t e r i o n would be met. During the l a t e 1950s, general urban, i n d u s t r i a l , and r e l a t e d development was using up a g r i c u l t u r a l land at the ra te of 2,200 acres a year . In 1957, a major amendment to the Planning Act required munic ipa l conformance to the r e g i o n a l p l a n of the Edmonton Regional Planning Commissions, which u n t i l then had been p r i m a r i l y adv i sory . Subsequently, p r i v a t e land development was subject to a large number of r e s t r i c t i o n s , which s t i l l ex i s t today. Among these r e s t r i c t i o n s are munic ipal ownership and p r o v i s i o n of a l l u t i l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g telephone and e l e c t r i c s e r v i c e s . Other r e s t r i c t i o n s under the r e g i o n a l p lan require that areas surround-ing the c i t y , and some areas w i t h i n , the c i t y , be zoned for a g r i c u l t u r a l use only; s e p t i c tanks and wel l s are not permit ted; and development p e r -miss ion i s not given unless u t i l i t i e s equal to the munic ipal standards are provided by the developer. Because of these r e s t r i c t i o n s , urban land development was confined p r i m a r i l y to land so ld by the c i t y to 113 developers; between 1945 and 1960, 90 per cent of the city's develop-ment took place on such land. By the mid-1960s, the net result of the city of Edmonton's involvement in land development through public ownership of land and the enforcement of land-use controls was compact, orderly, land development. But the supply of land serviced by the city was dwindling and the cost of land was rising rapidly. In 1960, the price of rural land was $6,000 an acre and, by 1970, i t had increased to $14,000 an acre. Both privately owned and city-owned lots i n 1960 sold for $3,500, including $1,700 for u t i l i t i e s . In 1970, private lots were selling for $6,000 without services; with services, from $8,500 to $9,000. In the late 1960s, Edmonton developed a municipal plan i n i t s effort to combat residential-land price inflation as well as to meet, the continuing need for well-planned residential expansion. This plan proposed a program of residential expansion on a neighborhood unit basis and added a framework of residential acres of much larger scale served by such f a c i l i t i e s as senior high schools, health c l i n i c s , branch libraries, and major commercial centers. Included i n the proposals was a freeway system which would link these residential areas to the down-town area of Edmonton as well as to recreational areas beyond the metro-politan area. They w i l l also be served by the Edmonton Transit System. MILL WOODS CITY EXTENSION Five of the areas which have been designated for residential expansion 114 already ex i s t as major growth areas and are s a t e l l i t e communities w i t h i n easy commuting distance of Edmonton. The s i x t h a r e a , M i l l Woods, a l so w i t h i n commuting d i s tance , i s a c i t y expansion comprising 5,500 acres i n a 9-square-mile p lanning area which w i l l accommodate housing for over 120,000 people or 35 per cent of Edmonton's r e s i d e n t i a l growth during the next 20 years . In a d d i t i o n to i t s s i z e , the M i l l Woods t r a c t of land i s notable for i t s l o c a t i o n . I t i s the f i r s t p u b l i c l y approved major land-assembly pro jec t i n Canada to be acquired i n c lose proximity to the c e n t r a l c i t y - o n l y f i v e miles from the c e n t r a l c i t y business d i s t r i c t . The M i l l Woods p r o j e c t was i n i t i a t e d by the c i t y of Edmonton i n January 1970! f o r the purpose of crea t ing a p u b l i c land bank large enough to curb r i s i n g r e s i d e n t i a l land costs i n the Edmonton area . The c i t y requested that the p r o v i n c i a l government of A l b e r t a purchase the land under the A l b e r t a Housing A c t . ''This Act provides for p r o v i n c i a l land assembly for r e s i d e n t i a l development with f e d e r a l ass i s tance as provided for under the Nat iona l Housing A c t . In the summer of 1970, an agreement was reached between the c i t y of Edmonton and the A l b e r t a Housing Corporat ion , to achieve the fo l lowing o b j e c t i v e s : The maintenance of a continuous and adequate supply of land for housing so that the trend to s p i r a l i n g cos ts , p a r t i c u l a r l y for l a n d , may be reversed; and The progress ive s e r v i c i n g of land i n the area (within the framework of the A l b e r t a Housing Act of 1968, the Nat iona l Housing A c t , and the Planning Act (each as amended) to provide p u b l i c and p r i v a t e housing of good q u a l i t y at minimum cost .14 115 The agreement a l s o s t a t e s that marketing techniques designed to meet program o b j e c t i v e s are to be agreed upon by the c i t y and the Corporation. A c q u i s i t i o n of land f o r the M i l l Woods s i t e was commenced by the A l b e r t a Housing Corporation i n J u l y 1970 and was completed i n two months' time. Land p r i c e s were reasonable. Since the M i l l Woods s i t e was o u t s i d e the c i t y l i m i t s ( i t subsequently has been annexed), i t comprised a g r i c u l -t u r a l l y zoned land which was purchased by the Corporation at a g r i c u l t u r a l land p r i c e s . The lowest p r i c e was $600 an acre. The average p r i c e was a l i t t l e more than $2,000 per acre. H i g h - l e v e l cooperation between the c i t h of Edmonton and the A l b e r t a Housing Corporation was a c r i t i c a l element i n the purchase of land at low p r i c e s . R e l a t i v e l y few o f f i c i a l s from Edmonton's C i t y Planning Department, only two or three o f f i c i a l s from A l b e r t a Housing Corporation, no one from the C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporation knew about the l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n p r o j e c t during the n e g o t i a t i o n s . S e v e r a l p r i v a t e s o l i c i t o r s negotiated the purchases, most of which were cash t r a n s a c t i o n s . The t o t a l cost of land acquired was $9,000,000 From t h i s land bank, the c i t y w i l l buy land i n stages over a 15-year p e r i o d i n accordance w i t h the schedule of p r o j e c t e d land cost l i s t e d i n Table X. P r i c i n g of l o t s by the c i t y w i l l be r e l a t e d t o : the e f f e c t p r i c i n g p o l i c i e s w i l l have on other areas; the generation of funds f o r other land programs; the l o c a l economic s i t u a t i o n w i t h regard to a v a i l a b i l i t y of mortgage funds; the volume of s e r v i c e s and s e r v i c e a b l e land f o r housing i n the c i t y ; the demand f o r housing of v a r i o u s types; and the economic c a p a b i l i t i e s of the home buyers and tenants.15 ALBERTA HOUSING CORPORATION LAND-ACQUISITION SCHEDULE TABLE X. O r i g i n a l Accumulated Cost Purchase Cost (With I n t e r e s t ) Year Acres T o t a l Per Acre T o t a l Per Acre 1971 391 . 5 0 $1 , 420 ,283 $3,630 $ 1 , 541 , 0 0 7 $3,950 1972 4 5 1 . 0 0 1 , 198 ,932 2,560 1 , 4 1 1 , 1 4 3 3,130 1973 241 ,41 669,929 2,780 855 ,499 3,560 1974 160,00 656 ,000 4,100 909 ,124 5,670 1975 383,62 1 ,304 ,475 3,390 1 , 9 6 1 , 4 7 8 5,110 1976 320.00 429 ,600 1,340 700 ,677 2,210 1977 502,81 1,074,320 2 , 140 1 , 9 0 1 , 5 4 6 3 , 800 1978 239.00 285,320 1 ,195 5 4 7 , 9 8 7 2,295 1979 314 . 9 0 499 ,292 1 ,585 1,040,025 3,300 1980 237.00 172 ,609 730 390,266 1,650 1981 4 3 5 . 0 0 522,500 1,200 1 , 281 , 780 2,950 1982 226„91 424 ,438 1,870 1 ,129 ,720 4,980 1983 160.00 264,000 1,650 762,413 4,760 1984 .. _ 219.72 453,300 2,070 1 ,420 ,372 6,450 1985 383.00 390 ,028 1,020 1,325,995 3,475 4 , 6 6 5 . 8 5 $9,765,026 $ 2 , 1 0 0 * $17,179,032 $ 3 , 6 8 0 * * Average annual cost T o t a l average cos t s per acre over the 15-year p e r i o d are expected t o be $ 3 , 6 8 0 , i . e . , the average annual amount which must be recovered from land s a l e s . SOURCE 1 American S o c i e t y of Pla n n i n g O f f i c i a l s , Planning Advisory Service Report No. 284 , Canadian Land Banks, 1 9 7 2 . 117 The c i t y of Edmonton's p r i n c i p a l purpose i n p u b l i c ownership of land i s i s not to maximize returns but to lower housing costs . There are severa l p o t e n t i a l benef i t s to home-owners and renters a r i s i n g from p u b l i c land ownership and development. Lower land p r i c e s w i l l permit res idents tohhave higher q u a l i t y housing, s ince more of the housing budget can be a l l o c a t e d to the b u i l d i n g i t s e l f ; o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y , because of lower land cos t s , a l a r g e r percentage of Edmonton's popula-t i o n w i l l be able to purchase new housing. The c i t y hopes to achieve these ends by development of a l a r g e b lock of land with munic ipa l s e r v i c i n g and planned access to tifcher c e n t r a l c i t y by r a p i d t r a n s i t and freeway. To curb the increase i n r e s i d e n t i a l land values i n the Edmonton area , the c i t y w i l l o f f er M i l l Woods s i t e s at lower p r i c e s than the p r e v a i l i n g market p r i c e s for large blocks of private ly-owned land holdings s i m i l a r l y located at the periphery of the c i t y . F u l l munic ipal c o n t r o l over the extension of u t i l i t i e s and ap-p r o v a l of developments i n a l l developing areas provide added con-ro l s on the metropol i tan area urban land supply. As the r e s u l t of economics of sca le and lower returns on investment, by 1972, the c i t y was able to o f f e r s ing l e - fami ly - lo . t s at p r i c e s between $2,475 and $3,300 — about one-hal f the p r i c e of p r i v a t e l o t s . The average p r i c e of a s erv iced l o t was $105 per front foot . Cost of land for m u l t i p l e housing was $2,000 per gross acre . Lowdland costs for m u l t i p l e housing w i l l permit a sub-s t a n t i a l increase i n the supply of p u b l i c housing, most of which w i l l be constructed as m u l t i p l e housing u n i t s . The c i t y i s committed to provide 5 per cent of the land for p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s and other 118 p u b l i c purposes. The p lan f o r M i l l Woods c a l l s f o r a mixture of s i n g l e - f a m i l y houses, duplexes, terraced housing, apartments and p u b l i c housing. In 1972, the c i t y was o f f e r i n g f i f t y - f i v e foot l o t s for $5,940 i n c l u d i n g s e r v i c e s , whereass p r i v a t e market p r i c e was about $9,500. The c i t y was o f f e r i n g land for terraced housing at $27,000 per acre whereas the average p r i c e i n other parts of the c i t y ranged between $40,000 and $50,000 per acre . S i tes for walk-up apartments were being o f fered at $34,400 an acre whi le the p r i c e s for s i m i l a r development i n other parts of the c i t y ranged between $55,000 and $70,000 an acre . In order to prevent p r o f i t e e r i n g on s ing le - fami ly -house l o t s marketed by the c i t y at low p r i c e s , an agreement i s required of land purchasers regarding resa le costs and b u i l d i n g commitments. Apartment s i t e s may be s o l d to developers who w i l l guarantee that they w i l l maintain a c e r t a i n rent l e v e l for a f i xed per iod of y e a r s . This i s a negot iable item which would be considered i n competit ive b ids f o r s i t e s . P r o f i t -eer ing on increment i n land value by house owners a lso w i l l be d i s -couraged by prov i s ions i n the terms of sa le which w i l l prevent M i l l Woods' homeowners who s e l l t h e i r homes from purchasing another home i n the development area for a per iod of f i v e years . Current plans c a l l for sa l e of the land i n fee s imple , i n c l u d i n g com-m e r c i a l l a n d . The reason expressed f o r not cons ider ing leases i s that a large organ i sa t ion would be required to administer leasehold t r a n s -act ions and the m u n i c i p a l i t y i s i n t e r e s t e d mainly i n achiev ing lower 119 cost, high-quality urban development rather than returns from long-term -management. Development of the f i r s t neighborhood (Richfield) is now underway. The i n i t i a l offer of single-family-house lots was made in the spring of 1972. Seventy per cent of the lots were offered to individuals and thirty per cent to builders. Disposition of lots was made by drawing rather than on first-come-first-serve basis. All. :lots were full y serviced. The city expected about 400 applications for the lots but 1,041 applications were received. Multiple-housing sites were sold to builders with the best proposals i n terms of economic feasib-i l i t y and amenities. Over the 30-year period of M i l l Woods' development and maturation, i t is estimated that approximately one b i l l i o n dollars w i l l be saved by homeowners and/or renters through the elimination of speculative profit by. the land-development process. Beyond this, some modest return i s expected by the city from i t s land sales. Some of this return w i l l be used to establish a land-bank program for the purchase of additional lands both at the edges of the city and in central city areas which require redevelopment. Revenues from land .sales also must cover a l l interest charges on (borrowing as well as capital borrowed for major trunk services. • Edmonton's past experience i n land assembly, land banking, and develop-ment control should contribute much towards i t s present capabilities to achieve the objectives which i t has established for the M i l l Woods 120 project. However, Edmonton's long experience in land banking, land assembly, and land development clearly points out that: - public acquisition of land far i n advance of need for i t s urban development and on a continuous basis is an effective way to eliminate land speculation resulting in lower land costs for urban development. - public acquisition and servicing of land coupled with public develop-ment controls and coordinated planning across municipal boundaries and at the provincial and local levels results in compact and orderly development in addition to i t s effects on lowering the land costs for urban development. 121 RED DEER Experience i n the development of the cityhof Red Deer through public acquisition, subdivision, and sale of land i s similar to that of Edmonton. Red Deer is located halfway between Edmonton and Calgary (100 miles from either c i t y ) . Like other Canadian towns in the Prairie Provinces, i t grew rapidly, increasing from 4,000 population i n the 1940s to 23,000 in the 1960s. It was i n the early 1950s when Red Deer public o f f i c i a l s decided that the city should not continue to grow in a haphazard fashion. Its growth gave no indication of abating. Existing u t i l i t i e s and public f a c i l i t i e s were overburdened; land speculation was uncontrolled. Under the direction of the newly formed Red Deer Regional Planning Commission, a 20-year plan was prepared calling for municipal acquisition of "land for residential and industrial expansion to ensure the orderly and economic development of such lands." Once agreement was reached on the "land that could be most economically and suitably serviced with u t i l i t i e s , " three quarter-sections of land were acquired quietly, and by negotiation only, i n order to avoid land speculation. Sewers were installed; and individual lots, as well as commercial, school, and church sites, were sold to private individuals and developers on a very limited basis. Since the beginning of this process, approximately 750 acres have passed through the minicipal ownership servicing and land-sale 122 procedures. An a d d i t i o n a l 300 acres are now being prepared f o r develop-ment i n the southwest quadrant, annexed to the c i t y i n 1958. This s i t e i n c l u d e s land f o r a j u n i o r c o l l e g e . Only lands which w i l l be needed f o r development w i t h i n a p e r i o d of 12 to 18 months are subdivided and s e r v i c e d at any one time. The c i t y has been able to purchase land i n r u r a l areas adjacent to boundaries f o r p r i c e s between $750 and $1,200 per acre. Some of the land i s leased f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l use during the p e r i o d before develop-ment. In some cases, the c i t y has options f o r purchase of p r i v a t e l y -owned land that run as long as seven years. The c i t y of Red Deer maintains an inventory of s e r v i c e d l o t s w i t h p r i c e s lower than those planned f o r the M i l l Woods c i t y extension. I t i s the c i t y ' s p o l i c y to keep an inventory of s e r v i c e d l o t s and to provide choices to b u i l d e r s and i n d i v i d u a l s by l o c a t i n g them at opposite s i d e s of the urban area. Ten per cent of the l o t s a v a i l a b l e at any given time are a l l o c a t e d on a f i r s t - c o m e - f i r s t served b a s i s tojindividuals. The remaining l o t s are s o l d to b u i l d e r s w i t h the "best" development proposals. B u i l d e r s cannot s e l l the land undeveloped and must s t a r t to b u i l d w i t h i n 12 months. The city, r e t a i n s t i t l e to the land u n t i l the b u i l d e r has met these requirements. R e s i d e n t i a l land has been s o l d at p r i c e s averaging $1,500 per acre. Improved s i n g l e - f a m i l y l o t s have been s o l d at p r i c e s ranging between $50 and $75 per f r o n t f o o t . The s a l e p r i c e f o r such l o t s i n c l u d e s a share of a l l s e r v i c e s i n the s u b d i v i s i o n , i n c l u d i n g water, s a n i t a r y and 123 storm sewers, underground e l e c t r i c i t y s e r v i c e s , and land and s e r v i c e s f o r schools and playgrounds. The c i t y , thus, has the market advantage of c o n t r o l over the extension of u t i l i t i e s . Between 1958 and 1972, the c i t y has spent $1,300,000 on land a c q u i s i -t i o n and $3,700,000 on improvements. I t s land s a l e s during t h i s p e r i o d was more than $9,000,000 and funds from u t i l i t i e s prepayment t o t a l more than $3,700,000. These returns from land s a l e s are r e i n v e s t e d on a continuous b a s i s to acquire more land i n advance of the c i t y ' s need. R e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e of the expansion of the c i t y of Red Deer i n the past 16 years has been c a r r i e d out ou t s i d e the development process described above. New r e s i d e n t i a l areas are of high q u a l i t y i n terms of design and adequacy of p u b l i c s e r v i c e s . Land costs to housing developers have been lower than i n comparable p r i v a t e l y developed areas, reducing the o v e r a l l cost of housing. There has been a l s o s u b s t a n t i a l saving i n the cost of p u b l i c s e r v i c e s . R e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e of the present water and sewerage trunk l i n e and treatment p l a n t c a p a c i t y remains unused. Among the b e n e f i t s of Red Deer's land a c q u i s i t i o n and development program, former planning d i r e c t o r Dennis Cole l i s t s the f o l l o w i n g : 1. Expansion does not i n v o l v e c i t y borrowing s i n c e the cost of s e r v i c i n g i s recovered each year and i s r e i n v e s t e d i n more lands and s e r v i c e s . 2. The program meets the approval of b u i l d e r s , who don't have to t i e up c a p i t a l i n land or s e r v i c e s and are assured of adequately s e r v i c e d l o t s at no greater p r i c e than i s pa i d by t h e i r competitors. 124 3. C i t y ownership of land provides more generous open space, parks , and school s i t e s as w e l l as improved design layout . 4. Since the c i t y has large land h o l d i n g s , i t can design 150 to 200 acres of land at one t ime, thereby in troduc ing innovations which could not be achieved by regulat ions or bylaws. 5. Land specula t ion i n r e s i d e n t i a l development has been a l l but e l iminated . 6. Development has been focused on f i l l i n g the vacant f r i n g e areas of the c i t y , thereby prov id ing a c l e a r demarcation between urban and r u r a l areas . 7. Land i s not taken out of a g r i c u l t u r a l use u n t i l needed for development. 125 SASKATOON The c i t y of Saskatoon i s a major r e g i o n a l center i n a r u r a l area where a g r i c u l t u r a l mechanisation and the growth of indus try have brought about an acce lerated populat ion flow from farm to c i t y . I t has experienced r a p i d urban growth s ince the 1940s. I t t r i p l e d i n s i z e from a popula-t i o n of 46,000 i n 1945 to 130,000 i n 1972. To combat the diseconomies of sca t tered f r i n g e area development, the c i t y has exerc ised succes s fu l l y over the past three decades a munic ipal r o l e i n land a c q u i s i t i o n and development c o n t r o l . The c i t y acquired tax-de l inquent land during the 1930s and i n i t i a t e d a formal land-bank p o l i c y which has maintained a continuous supply of land for urban development. The land banking p o l i c y was prompted by postwar pressures on land development and the need to combat specu la t ive elements i n the land market as w e l l as to insure future o r d e r l y growth. As the c i t y developed i t s "tax l a n d s , " i t acquired new land to r e p l e n i s h i t s land bank. Funds from the sa l e of t a x - t i t l e proper t i e s f inanced new purchases. A c i t y c o u n c i l r e a l estate committee was es tab l i shed to carry out these land p o l i c i e s . In 1954 the committee was given a d d i t i o n a l as-s i s tance by the formation of a Munic ipa l Planning Department. In 1955 and 1956, the c i t y annexed 6,367 acres of adjacent land that subsequently was purchased from the r i v a l m u n i c i p a l i t y i n which i t was l o c a t e d . Agree-ments wi th one of the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s c a l l e d for l i m i t a t i o n of fur ther development, the e f fec t of which was to confine urban growth w i t h i n the c i t y ' s new boundaries . In 1967, under the f e d e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l l a n d -assembly program (Sect ion 40 of the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t ) , the c i t y 126 purchased for i t s land bank approximately 1,100 a d d i t i o n a l acres of l a n d . Under the arrangement, the c i t y and province contr ibuted 25 per cent re spec t ive ly ) and the f e d e r a l government, 75 per cent . To date , the c i t y of Saskatoon has purchased 5,350 acres , 4,500 of which are for r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n and 850 f o r i n d u s t r i a l development. Although i t s land sales have been l a r g e , t o t a l i n g $9,460,900 (see Table X I ) , the c i t y has enough land i n i t s inventory to meet r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial, and i n d u s t r i a l needs. C u r r e n t l y , the c i t y provides about 75 per cent of the r e s i d e n t i a l s i t e s . ^ The e f fec t of Saskatoon's l arge land holdings has been to lower land p r i c e s . This seems also to have contr ibuted to an a c c e l e r a t i o n i n housing cons truc t ion . Between 1945 and 1970 over 26,000 un i t s were b u i l t , with a peak number of 2,383 i n 1968. The program has lowered housing costs a l so ; they are among the lowest i n Canada. Between 1972 and 1973 house p r i c e s i n Saskatoon rose 15% whereas the increases i n Vancouver and Toronto were 32% and 29% r e s p e c t i v e l y . (See Table I ) . Unserviced l o t pr i ce s ranged between $16 and $30, with an average p r i c e of $18 per front foot . Serviced l o t s were a v a i l a b l e for less than $3,500. Saskatoon also provided a s u b s t a n t i a l amount of f e d e r a l l y subs id ized housing. In 1970 the c i t y reduced i t s land pr i ce s to $10 per front foot for q u a l i f y i n g fami l i e s i n a new f e d e r a l low-income-housing program. The c i t y has been e s p e c i a l l y success fu l i n producing low-cost housing under the f e d e r a l "Assisted Home Ownership Program" f o r f a m i l i e s with incomes under $7,000. I t i s among the few Canadian c i t i e s that have LAND-BANK SALES, CITY OF SASKATOON TABLE XI. Year I n d i v i d u a l s Contractors I n d u s t r i a l 1958 $ 148 ,917.10 $ 425 ,643 .43 $ 125,574.50 1959 184 ,173.08 563,051.02 115,035.00 i 9 6 0 149 ,377.16 313,569.27 220,283.80 1961 156,277.57 352,623 .24 7,939.00 1962 7 7 . 1 5 0 . 8 7 " 310.437.80 6,635.90 1963 72,629o92 229 ,442.59 64 ,223.00 1964 82 ,552.25 186,714.78 64 ,115.00 1965 84 ,736.80 407,517.32 515,517.90 1966 80,820 .32 147 ,033.00 176 ,124 .00 1967 259 ,933 .65 443,355 .00 85,929.00 1968 166,767*50 344,067.00 116,091.00 1969 91,331.51 589,934.00 153,121.10 1970 4,555 .81 95 ,468 .00 31,067.00 - $ 1 , 5 5 9 , 2 2 3 . 5 4 $4 ,409 ,056.45 $1 ,681 ,656.20 Churches, schools,clubs, Commercial roadways, e t c . T o t a l & 65,523 .00 $ 62,076.20 $ 827,734.23 78,836.00 112,910.01 1 ,054,005 .11 60,265 .00 32 ,693.50 776,188.73 17 ,600.05 65,006.91 559,446.77 22,643.00 116,355.87 533,223 .44 49,104.78 54,119.50 469,519.79 8 ,251 .00 56,363 .00 397,996.03 316,110.00 37,780.50 1,361,662.52 12 ,470 .00 34,387.05 450 ,834.37 19,800.00 85,420.00 894,637.65 6,632.50 125,320 .00 758,878.00 62,785.00 295,134.00 1,192 ,305 .61 13,396.00 144,486.81 $720,020.33 $1,090,962.54 $9,460,919 .06 SOURCE 1 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Pl a n n i n g Department,"Land P o l i c y i n Saskatoon", Saskatoons 1972 128 made extensive use of t h i s program. The a v a i l a b i l i t y of low cost housing uni t s may be a t t r i b u t e d i n part to lower r e s i d e n t i a l land costs and i n part to reduct ion of some of the l o t s - f r o m 5,000 square feet to 4,000 square f ee t , the minimum s i z e permitted under f e d e r a l mortgage programs. With the reduct ion i n land costs and house s i z e , a b u i l d e r could b u i l d a house that s o l d i n 1971 i n the $11,000 to $13,000 p r i c e range with l o t inc luded . An important e f fec t of Saskatoon's l arge land bank i s that the c i t y i s i n a dominant p o s i t i o n i n regard to land development a c t i v i t i e s . Eighty per cent of the r e s i d e n t i a l development and 95 per cent of the i n d u s t r i a l development have taken p lace on city-owned l a n d . P r i v a t e land development has been undertaken i n only f i v e major p r o j e c t s , and i n a l l of them the c i t y has requ ired that serv ices meet c i t y s tandards. Saskatoon's strong p o s i t i o n i n land development a c t i v i t i e s strengthens i t s a b i l i t y to implement the long-range comprehensive planning p o l i c i e s of i t s master p l a n , which i s administered as o f f i c i a l law. The c i t y provides f a c i l i t i e s for each neighborhood. Some f a c i l i t i e s are shared among neighborhoods. In tegra t ion of development planning provides op-por tun i ty for neighborhoods to complement each other i n terms of amenities and f a c i l i t i e s . " L e a p - f r o g ™ ' development i s avoided because large b locks of land are not he ld out of development for specu la t ive purposes. Although r e p l a t t i n g schemes can be used to implement munic ipa l development c o n t r o l , they are not of ten necessary. When they are , the land bank frequent ly contro l s enough city-owned land toromake up the necessary two-thirds of the land area and two-thirds of the land 1 2 9 a s s e s s m e n t i n t h e s c h e m e t h a t w o u l d o t h e r w i s e a l s o r e q u i r e t h e c o n s e n t o f t h e p r i v a t e o w n e r s . W h e n c o n s e n t i s n e c e s s a r y , h o w e v e r , i t i s u s u a l l y o b t a i n e d w i t h o u t d i f f i c u l t y . T h e c i t y h a s s e l d o m h a d t o p a y c o m p e n s a t i o n t o n o n - c o n s e n t i n g l a n d o w n e r s . F i n a l l y , b e c a u s e o f i t s l a r g e l a n d h o l d i n g s , t h e c i t y h a s b e e n a b l e t o s e t a s i d e a m p l e l a n d f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l n e e d s , o p e n s p a c e s a s n e c e s s a r y a n d r e q u i r e d , a n d f o r s e v e r a l p u b l i c h o u s i n g p r o j e c t s . S a s k a t o o n ' s a b i l i t y t o f i n a n c e m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s o n a l o g i c a l p r o -g r a m m e d b a s i s i s c o n s i d e r e d t o b e c r u c i a l t o i t s s u c c e s s i n e x e r c i s i n g c o n t r o l o v e r t h e p l a n n i n g o f i t s u r b a n g r o w t h . T h e c i t y p r o v i d e s a l l i m p r o v e m e n t s e x c e p t t h a t i n s s o m e c a s e s i t d o e s n o t p r o v i d e p a v i n g a n d s t o r m s e w e r a g e d r a i n a g e . I f a s u b d i v i s i o n i s p a r t i a l l y o r w h o l l y i n p r i v a t e h a n d s , t h e c i t y c h a r g e s t h e c o s t t o t h e d e v e l o p e r . I n d i s p o s i n g o f l o t s , t h e P l a n n i n g a n d D e v e l o p m e n t C o m m i t t e e ( w h i c h h a s s u p e r s e d e d t h e R e a l E s t a t e C o m m i t t e e ) r e c o m m e n d s t o t h e c i t y c o u n c i l t h e p a r c e l s t h a t c a n b e m a d e a v a i l a b l e f o r s a l e a n d t h e s a l e p r i c e . C i t y c o u n c i l c o n f o r m s o r a m e n d s t h e s e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s . A s i n R e d D e e r , A l -b e r t a , a c h o i c e i s g i v e n t o b u i l d e r s b y p r o v i d i n g l a n d a t o p p o s i t e s i d e s o f t h e c i t y . B u i l d e r s a r e a l l o t t e d a c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f l a n d p a r c e l s s o t h a t n o o n e g e t s a l l o f t h e h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e l o t s w h i l e a n o t h e r b u i l d e r i s g i v e n l e s s d e s i r a b l e l o t s . L a n d i s s o l d t o b u i l d e r s u n d e r l e a s e o p t i o n a g r e e m e n t s w h i c h r e q u i r e t h a t t h e y b u i l d w i t h i n o n e y e a r . S i n c e t h e c i t y r e t a i n s t i t l e u n t i l t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f c o n s t r u c t i o n , t h e l a n d c a n n o t b e r e s o l d d u r i n g t h i s t i m e . T h i s d e v i c e h a s d i s c o u r a g e d 130 spiraling land prices by preventing quick resale of development land. Builders who use city-owned land have not made excessive profits, since there is considerable competition among them. In spite of Saskatoon's success i n land banking and development, i t i s challenged by c r i t i c s in the private sector, who claim that the city plays a monopolistic role in land ac t i v i t i e s . Although there i s general agreement that there should be public involvement, controversy arises over the scale of operation, sale of developed land, use of profits, price for which land i s sold, and some details of the prepara-tion and servicing of lands. Though some minor controversy may exist over the city of Saskatoon's involvement in the land market and land development, the record cannot be ignored. Saskatoon has succeeded in driving down land costs and producing a substantial number of low-cost housing units. It has been successful in preventing land speculation which has driven the cost of land i n other cities sky-rocketing. It has also guided i t s rapid growth in an orderly economic fashion. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND"RECOMMENDATIONS 132 CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is evident from the study of our existing urban land development system in which the land i s planned for urban usage, developed and marketed i s highly favourable to the private interests of private landowners. It is also clear that in i t s present form i t is weak enough and vulnerable to be misused by private interests to private advantages at the cost to the urban community as a whole. Most of our urban land and the land needed for immediate future urban development development is owned privately by individuals and companies.' The planning of urban development and development regulatory controls are exercised by the public authorities. Public authorities also carry out major development projects such as highways construction, bridges, and the like, involving heavy public investment. The general growth of the urban community, public planning decisions regarding land-use changes from less profitable to more profitable uses, and the public decisions to invest in urban expansion projects, such as, major highways, bridges, airports, seaports, and other community services and f a c i l i t i e s generate increment in the value of urban land subject to growth and expansion. Such value increments i n urban land are considerable and are created by the growth of the urban community. The benefits of these increments in value due to community action should rightly belong to the community. But in the present system these value increments remain the sole possession of private owners of urban land. 133 The l u r e o f such p r o f i t s f r o m t h e i n c r e m e n t i n t h e v a l u e o f l a n d due to community a c t i o n and growth t o t h e p r i v a t e owners o f l a n d i s t h e r o o t cause o f s p e c u l a t i o n i n u r b a n p r o p e r t y and i s w i d e s p r e a d i n our u r b a n a r e a s c o s t i n g t h e u r b a n community m i l l i o n s o f d o l l a r s i n terms o f i n -f l a t e d l a n d p r i c e s . S p e c u l a t i o n i s t h e major f a c t o r i n the r i s i n g c o s t o f u r b a n l a n d and h o u s i n g and t h e p r e s e n t s y s t e m does n o t p o s s e s s any e f f e c t i v e means t o check t h e s e s p e c u l a t i v e p r a c t i c e s . The s y s t e m o f p r i v a t e o w n e r s h i p o f l a n d and p u b l i c p l a n n i n g and development c o n t r o l s f u r t h e r g i v e s r i s e t o t h e p r o b l e m o f c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t s a t a l l l e v e l s o f p u b l i c development d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . P r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s t e n d to dominate p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , t h u s , c o s t i n g t o t h e community a t l a r g e I t works t o i n c r e a s e s p e c u l a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n c o n t r o l i t . T h i s r e s u l t s i n i n f l a t e d l a n d p r i c e s f o r urban development. The p r o b l e m t o d e a l w i t h r e a l l y i s t h e p r o b l e m o f e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f v a l u e i n c r e m e n t i n l a n d . Our u r b a n a r e a s have grown i n t o l a r g e u r b a n a g g l o m e r a t i o n s composed o f many m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and d i s t r i c t s w h i c h tend t o be p o l i t i c a l r i v a l s i n t he same l a r g e u r b a n a r e a . T h i s p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e i n w h i c h the p u b l i c development p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n i s p e r f o r m e d by i n d i v i d u a l m u n i c i -p a l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e narrow l i m i t s o f t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n a l b o u n d a r i e s makes i t h i g h l y d i f f i c u l t t o p l a n e f f e c t i v e l y f o r t h e whole u r b a n r e g i o n and have any e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l on i t s development. Where r e g i o n a l governments a r e e s t a b l i s h e d , as i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , they do n o t , y e t , 134 possess the necessary powers over the municipalities to be able to do detailed planning and have necessary control on the development and growth of the whole urban region. This fragmented planning authority has given rise to -multiplicity of development planning regulations and standards, causing delays in development decisions concerning the entire region, time-consuming and lengthy development approval proce-dures, and resulting i n additional costs of development and the cost of land and housing to the urban community. To deal with the problem of high land prices we must deal with the problem of speculation, and to deal with the problem of speculation wedhave to tackle the problem of inequitable distribution of development value increments in urban land resulting from community growth and urban expansion. The present system of urban land development must be modi-fied so that the value increments i n land resulting from community'action should be channelled back into the community. To deal with the problem of fragmented public planning authority in the present public development planning structure, regional government must assume responsibility and be given powers to prepare detailed land-use and zoning plans for the urban regions and authority to implement such plans. They must have authority over the municipalities i n decisions regarding development planning of the region as a whole. Experiences in the province of Alberta and the province of Saskatchewan, specifically, Edmonton, Red Deer, and Saskatoon, show that a system whereby land is acquired by the public authority far i n advance of the 135 need for i t s urban development combined with public development and planning controls i s effective in controlling undue speculation and thereby reducing the prices or urban land and housing. The increment in land values resulting from i t s development are, thus, retained for the benefit of the community instead of being l e f t to the speculators. The system of public acquisition of land, i t s planning, servicing, and disposal for development has also worked well in producing compact, orderly, and economic urban development in Saskatoon, Edmonton, and Red Deer. There exists a substantial evidence in literature related to urban development, land and housing development costs, and urban planning that supports the concept of public ownership of land on a scale compatible with private ownership so as to have control on i t s development in the proper interest of the urban community, thus, preventing speculation in land, keeping the prices of land and housing under control by controlling the supply of serviced land and housing, and preventing the urban sprawl. Conclusively, i t appears that to control the prices of land and housing development, and to direct the urban development in a planned, orderly, economic, and aesthetically pleasing urban environment, large-scale public involvement i n land ownership, i t s planning and servicing for urban development, and the marketing of serviced land and fu l l y developed land are necessary. A substantial public control on urban and urbanizing land and i t s development is central to have control on 136 development o r u r b a n a r e a s , t o c o n t r o l t h e c o s t o f l a n d and i t s development, and t o p r o t e c t t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t f r o m b e i n g t a k e n advantage o f by p r i v a t e s e c t o r o f t h e market f o r l a n d and development. I n c o n c l u s i n g t h i s s t u d y , some g e n e r a l s t e p s and measures a r e recom-mended below t h a t seem n e c e s s a r y to be a d o p t e d t o overcome t h e weak-ne s s e s and drawbacks i n t h e e x i s t i n g u r b a n l a n d development s y s t e m and t h a t can remedy t h e problems a r i s i n g out o f t h i s s y s t e m and c o n t r i b u -i n g t o t h e h i g h c o s t o f u r b a n l a n d and i t s development. Recommendations a r e m o s t l y g e n e r a l i n k e e p i n g w i t h £h),e?nature o f t h e t h e s i s . 1. As a m a t t e r o f c o n t i n u i n g p o l i c y , l a n d r e q u i r e d f o r u r b a n d e v e l o p -ment and growth s h o u l d be a c q u i r e d under p u b l i c o w n e r s h i p e i t h e r by r e g i o n a l governments o r by p r o v i n c i a l governments t h e m s e l v e s o r by p r o v i n c i a l a g e n c i e s , such a s , t h e A l b e r t a H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n o r t h e newly e s t a b l i s h e d Land Commission i n B r i t i s h Columbia f o r th e p u r p o s e s o f f o r m i n g l a n d banks and l a n d r e s e r v e s . F e d e r a l l o a n s f o r l a n d a s s e m b l y , a v a i l a b l e under S e c t i o n 40 and S e c t i o n 42 of t h e N a t i o n a l H o u s i n g A c t , s h o u l d be e x t e n s i v e l y made use of f o r t h i s p u r p o s e . A c q u i s i t i o n must be f a r i n advance o f t h e a c t u a l need f o r i t s development, p r e f e r a b l y 20 t o 25 y e a r s . T h i s s h o u l d i n c l u d e l a n d a t t h e u r b a n i . f r i n g e s and beyond i n c l u d i n g i d l e as w e l l as a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d . 2. Land f r o m t h e s e l a n d banks and l a n d r e s e r v e s s h o u l d be r e l e a s e d t o m u n i c i p a l o r r e g i o n a l governments who w o u l d s e r v i c e , and d i s p o s e o f l a n d f o r development t o p r i v a t e b u i l d e r s t h r o u g h s a l e o r l e a s e t o 137 meet the demand i n the market. Sale or lease of s erv iced land for development must be at or below the market p r i c e s Sale or lease of land for p r i v a t e development must carry condi t ions such as that development must occur w i t h i n a s p e c i f i e d time from the date of sa l e or l ease . This would prevent specula t ive ho ld ing by keeping the land undeveloped. S e r v i c i n g of land and i t s market-ing for development must be s u f f i c i e n t so as to prevent any shortagi of s erv iced land i n the market. Government should r e t a i n the r i g h t to buy back the land i f i t i s to be s o l d without development by the developer at a p r i c e at which i t was so ld to the developer. P u b l i c agencies at munic ipal or reg iona l l e v e l should a c q u i r e , b u i l d , and manage r e n t a l proper t i e s on a s ca l e so as to c o n t r o l the r e n t a l accommodation market. To e l iminate specula t ive p r o f i t e e r i n g from quick sales of r e n t a l and other proper t i e s i n a market of housing shortage, government should consider p u t t i n g a time l i m i t between sales of a property . In cases where a quick sa le becomes necessary the government should have the r i g h t to purchase i t . A time per iod of 5-years minimum i s recommended between the sa les of a r e n t a l property and a minimum of 3-years i n case of other r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s . As a matter of p u b l i c p o l i c y , p u b l i c l y - s e r v i c e d and developed land and publ ic ly-owned r e n t a l proper t i e s should be leased ra ther than so ld so as to r e t a i n p u b l i c ownership i n - o r d e r keep the benef i t s of increment i n land values for the p u b l i c purpose. 138 7. Regional governments should take over the responsibility for detailed land-use planning, zoning, and servicing of urban land. They should be given powers to do so at a regional level and regional plans and policies must be made -mandatory for the municipalities to follow. 8. The assumption of responsibility for detailed land-use planning, zoning, and servicing by the regional governments should be accompanied by standardization of development regulations, requirement for services and other community f a c i l i t i e s , municipal development approval proce-dures, and requirements for registration,etc. This would make the development process efficient and economical in the long run. 9. The present basis on which the properties are taxed should be revised. A property should be assessed on i t s potential value for development rather than on i t s actual land-use value. In other words i t s tax should be based on what could be developed on the property, given i t s designated zoning and demand for i t s development in the market, and not on what i s already existing on the property as is the case with present assessment system. This would encourage maximum use of urban land rather than used as speculative investment. Most of the above recommendations are neither new nor revolutionary and they have been suggested in many studies and successfully used to reduce . the price of urban land and controlling i t s development in orderly and economic fashion. These measures have had success i n cities such as Edmonton, Red Deer, and especially in the city of Saskatoon. In British 139 Columbia, a framework f o r implementing the measures suggested has already been e s t a b l i s h e d i n the form of r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s and the newly e s t a b l i s h e d Land Commission. What i s needed i s that the r e g i o n a l governments should take over the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d e t a i l e d land-use planning and zoning and should be given more powers to implement t h e i r p o l i c i e s and plans. The operations of the Land Commission i n as-sembly of land i n t o land banks and land reserves should be expedited and i t s operations be encouraged by p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l funding to achieve the d e s i r e d goals. 140 FOOTNOTES Chapter I """"Housing1; Will the Bubble Really Burst?", Time (Canada) , May 27, 1974, pp. 8-14. Greater Vancouver Regional District, I n f i l l Policy Exploration, A study prepared for the G.V.R.D. by Thompson, Berwick, Pratt and Partners, (Vancouver: December 1973), pp. 2-4. Chapter II Simon R. Miles, Metropolitan Problems, (Toronto: Methuen, 1970), p. XVI. R^. Bruce Ricks and J. Fred Weston, "Land as a Growth Investment", Financial Analyst Journal,Vol. No. July/August 1966, pp. 69-78. 3 R.U. Ratcliff and S.W. Hamilton, Suburban Land Development, Summary and Recommendations based on a Research Project prepared for the Union of B.C. Municipalities, 1972, pp. 9-13. 4 Greater Vancouver Regional District, O f f i c i a l Regional Plan: Draft Consolidation, (Vancouver: G.V.R.D., 1973), pp. 3-14. Chapter III Greater Vancouver Regional District, I n f i l l Policy Exploration, A study prepared for the G.V.R.D. by Thompson, Berwick, Pratt and Partners, Vancouver: December 1973, pp. 2-4, and pp. 11-16. James Lorimer, A Citizen's Guide to City Politics,(Toronto: James & Samuel, 1972), pp. 95-128. 141 3 Donald, S. White, "A P u b l i c Inquiry Re: The Corporat ion of the D i s t r i c t of Surrey", Report of the Commissioner to the Lieutenant -Governor i n C o u n c i l , Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a , January 1974. 4 l b i d . , p. 113, pp. 116-117. ' ' i b i d . , p. 14. U . S . Nat iona l Commission on Urban Problems, B u i l d i n g the American C i t y , (Washington, D . C . : U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1968). Chapter IV ^"Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Design, Report, p . 43. 2 Dennis and F i s h , Low Income Housing, p . 20. 3 I b i d . , pp. 20-21. 4 David Heeter, Toward a More E f f e c t i v e Land Use Guidance System: A Summary and Analys i s of F ive Major Reports , Planning Advisory Service Report No. 250 (Chicago: ASPO, September/October 1969), p . 58. ^John W. Reps. "The Future of American Planning: Requiem or Rennaissance?" i n Planning 1967, (Chicago: ASPO, 1967), p . 49. 6 I b i d . ^Town Planning I n s t i t u t e of Canada, "The Role of Town Planning i n Canada", P l a n , V o l . 3, No. 2, 1962, p. 92. I b i d . 9 W i l l i a m J . Nicoson, "Land Use C o n t r o l s : In Search of the P u b l i c Interest" , Urban Land, February 1972, p . 11. 142 ^The Alberta Planning Act, Revised Statutes of Alberta, Chapter 276, .§ 95(c)(IV)(V)(1970). n i b i d . , §§32-43. """^ Walter B. Walchuck, "Planning Edmonton's Future", Community  Planning Review, 19, No. 1 (1968), p. 5. 13 Noel Dant, "Edmonton: Practical Results of Planning Measures Since 1950", Community Planning Review, 4, No. 3 (1954), p. 35. 14 Edmonton, Alberta, City Planning Department, M i l l Woods: A  Development Concept Report, (Edmonton: 1971). 15T, ., Ibid. 16 "Land Development", Canadian Builder, December 1968, pp. 41-42. ^Godfrey L. Spragge, "Public Involvement in Land Development", pp. 83-87. 143 BIBLIOGRAPHY A l b e r t a Housing and Urban Renewal Corporat ion , A S a t e l l i t e Community Study f o r the Edmonton arid Calgary Areas , Edmonton, A l b e r t a , 1969. "Alber ta ' s D i s t r i c t Planning Commission", Community Planning Review, 12, No. 4, 1962, pp. 34-43. A l b e r t a Task Force on Urbaniza t ion and the Future , Choices for Metro- p o l i t a n Growth, Edmonton, A l b e r t a , 1972. A l b e r t a Task Force on Urbanizat ion and the Future , The Role of  Regional P lanning , Edmonton, A l b e r t a , 1972. American Society of Planning O f f i c i a l s , Canada Land Banks, Report No. 284, Chicago, Oct . 1970. American Society of Planning O f f i c i a l s , Problems of Zoning and Land  Use Regulat ion , A Report to the Nat iona l Commission on Urban Problems, Research Report No. 2, 1968. Basford , Ron, "Land and New Communities", statement by the M i n i s t e r of State for Urban A f f a i r s , F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l Conference on Housing, Ottawa, January 22-23, 1973. Beveridge, Ian L . , "The Land Development Process As I t Af fec t s the Supply of New Housing w i t h i n The Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t " , A Report prepared for the Greater Real Estate Board, Vancouver, 1974. Bryant , R . W . G . , Land: P r i v a t e Property , P u b l i c C o n t r o l , Montrea l , Harvest House, 1972. Burroughs, Roy, "Should Urban Land be P u b l i c l y Owned?", Land  Economics, 42, No. 1, February 1966. Carson, John, "Proposals f o r a Non-Escapist Nat iona l Urban Growth P o l i c y " , C i t y , January-February 1972. Centra l Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion , "Short-Term Land Require-ments", i n Urban Canada: Problems and Prospects , A. Goraz, I . L i t h w i c k , and L . O . Stone, Ottawa, 1971. Clawson, Marion, "Urban Sprawl and Speculat ion i n Suburban Land", Land Ecoriomics, v o l . XXXVIII, Madison, Wisconsin , May 1962. Co le , Dennis, "The C i t y of Red Deer", H a b i t a t , 6, No. 4, 1963, pp. 27-33. Cox, Lawrence, "Usefulness of a Land Bank", In Hearings Before the Nat iona l Commission on Urban Problems, V o l . 1, Washington, D . C , U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1967. 144 Centra l Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion , CMHC and the Nat iona l  Housing A c t , Ottawa, 1972. Centra l Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion , F e d e r a l - P r o v i n c i a l Land  Assembly, Ottawa, 1971. Dant, Noe l , "Edmonton: P r a c t i c a l Results of Planning Measures Since 1950", Community Planning Review, 4, No. 3, 1954, pp. 31-40. Dennis, Michae l , and F i s h , Susan A . , Low Income Housing: Programs  i n Search of a P o l i c y ; Summary and Recommendations, Ottawa, Centra l Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion , 1972. Diamond, A . E . , "Housing i n the 1970s - A View from the P r i v a t e Sector", Ottawa, Canadian Housing Design C o u n c i l , 1970. Edmonton, A l b e r t a , C i t y Planning Department, M i l l Woods: A Develop- ment Concept Report, Edmonton, 1971. Fowke, C l i f f o r d , "Land Development", Canadian B u i l d e r , December, 1968, pp. 34-42. G a l l i o n , Arther B . , and E i s n e r , Simon, The Urban P a t t e r n , Toronto, D. Van Nostrand Company (Canada), L t d . 1963. G e r t l e r , Leonard, "Some Economic and S o c i a l Influences on Regional Planning i n A l b e r t a " , P l a n , 1, No. 2, 1960, pp. 115-121. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , Greater Vancouver Regional  D i s t r i c t 1972/73, Vancouver, 1973. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , O f f i c i a l Regional P l a n : Draft  Conso l ida t ion , Vancouver, 1973. Grimmer, Dennis McLean, "The Expansion of Urban Fr inge Communities: A Case Study of the Lower Mainland Region", Master's T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1965. G u t s t e i n , Donald, "Towards a Modal of the Urban Development Process", Master's Thes i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1972. Hagman, Donald G . , "Publ ic A c q u i s i t i o n and Disposa l of Land", Land  Use P o l i c i e s , J . W . Reps, E d . , A . S . P . O . , 1970. Heeter, David , Toward a More E f f e c t i v e Land Use Guidance System: A Summary and Ana lys i s of F i v e Major Reports , Planning Advisory Service Report No. 250, Chicago, September/October 1969. I l l i n g , Wolfgang M. "The R i s i n g Cost of Housing and Problems of F inanc ing" , The Right to Housing, ed i ted by Michae l Wheeler, Montrea l , Harvest House, 1969. 145 Jordan, J . , "The Case f o r P u b l i c Land Assembly", Housing and People , Canadian Counci l on S o c i a l Develop,ent , Oct . 1971. Kamm, Sylvan, Land Banking: P u b l i c P o l i c y A l t e r n a t i v e s and Dilemmas, Washington, D . C , Urban I n s t i t u t e , 1970. Leary , Robert , " C a p i t a l on the Ottawa", Town Planning Review, 41, No. 1, 1970, pp. 3-14. L i t h w i c k , N . H . , Urban Canada: Problems and Prospects , Ottawa, CMHC, 1970. Lorimer, James, A C i t i z e n ' s Guide to C i t y P o l i t i c s , Toronto, James Lewis and Samuel, 1972. Lower Mainland Regional Planning Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, Regional  D i s t r i c t s i n the Lower Mainland, New Westminster, 1968. Lower Mainland Regional Planning Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, Land for  L i v i n g - The Outlook for R e s i d e n t i a l Development i n the Lower  Mainland, New Westminster, 1963. (A general ized summary of four sub-s tud ies . ) Lower Mainland Regional Planning Board of B r i t i s h Columbia, Dynamics  of R e s i d e n t i a l Settlement, Supplementary Study 2 to "Land for L i v i n g " , New Westminster, 1963. (An examination of the urban growth process and i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to land v a l u e s . ) McKay, Angus, "Government Land Development for P r i v a t e Housing", P l a n , 3, No. 1, 1962, pp. 30-35. Mandelkar, Danie l R . , The Zoning Dilemma, B o b b s - M e r r i l l Company, I n c . , 1971. M i l e s , Simon R . , Metropo l i tan Problems, Toronto, Methuen, 1970. Mumford, Lewis, "A B r i e f H i s t o r y of Urban F r u s t r a t i o n " , The Urban  Prospect , New York, Harcourt , Brace & World, I n c . , 1968. Nicoson, W . J . , "Land Use Contro l s : In Search of the P u b l i c Interes t" , Urban Land, 31, No.2 , February 1972. Parsons, Kermit C , "A Land Development program for New Communities" i n New York State Looks at New Communities, Proceedings of a Conference Sponsored by the New York State Urban Development Corporat ion and Urban America, Inc . June /Ju ly 1969, New York, 1969. Passow, S . S . , "Munic ipal Land Reserves i n Sweden: Key to Planning Success", Master's T h e s i s , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1969. 146 Pearson, Norman, "New Towns i n A l b e r t a " , Town and Country P lann ing , 34, No. 10, 1966, pp. 473-477. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, M u n i c i p a l A c t , R . S . B . C . 1960,Chapter 255, V i c t o r i a , Queen's P r i n t e r , 1972. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, Land Commission Act - B i l l 42, V i c t o r i a , Queen's P r i n t e r , 1973. R a t c l i f f , R . U . , and Hamilton, S .W., Suburban Land Development, Summary and Conclusions Based Upon a Research Pro jec t for the Union of B . C . M u n i c i p a l i t i e s , A p r i l , 1 9 7 2 . Rav i s , D . , Advance Land A c q u i s i t i o n by L o c a l Government: the Saskatoon  Experience , Saskatoon Planning Department, June 1972. Rawson, Mary, Property Taxat ion and Urban Development, Washington, D . C , Urban Land I n s t i t u t e Research Monograph, No. 4. "Regional Government", Community Planning Review, 19, No. 4, 1969, p . 12. Report of the Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Development, Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1969. Reps, John W. , "The Future of American P lanning: Requiem or Renais-sance?" Planning 1967, Chicago, A . S . P . O . , 1967. Richardson, Boyce, "Saskatoon: the C i t y as Landowner", Canadian Forum, May 1972. Richardson, Boyce, "Land and Who Should Own It" , The Future of Canadian  C i t i e s , New Press , Toronto, 1972. Richardson, Boyce, The Future of Canadian C i t i e s , Toronto, New Press , 1972. Rose, A l b e r t , "Housing P o l i c y i n Canada", The Right to Housing, edi ted by Michael Wheeler, Montrea l , Harvest House, 1969. Royal A r c h i t e c t u r a l I n s t i t u t e of Canada, Report of the Committee of Inquiry in to the Design of the R e s i d e n t i a l Environment, Ottawa, RAIC, 1960. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Planning Department, Land P o l i c y i n Saskatoon, Saskatoon, 1972. Schmid, A. A l l a n , "Suburban Land Apprec ia t ion and P u b l i c P o l i c y " , A . I . P . J o u r n a l , 36, No. 1, January 1970. Shoup, Donald C , and Mack, R . P . Advance Land A c q u i s i t i o n by L o c a l Governments, New York, I n s t i t u t e of P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , August, 1968. 147 Spragge, Godfrey L . , "Chapter "V. A System of P u b l i c Involvement i n Planning and Development Through M i n i e i p a l Land Purchase: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan", i n P u b l i c Involvement i n . L a n d Develop-ment: London, O n t a r i o , and Saskatoon, Saskatchewan", Master 's Thes i s , C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y , 1969. Stanley , Thomas Brock, "An Eva luat ion of the Ef fec t iveness of the P r i o r A c q u i s i t i o n of S i tes f o r P u b l i c Use as a Technique to Guide the Pat tern of Urban Development", Master's T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1965. Town Planning I n s t i t u t e of Canada, A Committee of the,"The Role of Town Planning i n Canada", P l a n , 3, No. 2, 1962, pp. 91-102. Urban Land Research Analys i s Corporat ion , M u n i c i p a l Land Banks: Land  Reserve P o l i c y for Urban Development, F i n a l Report No. 2, Lexington, Mass . , 1969. U . S . Nat iona l Commission on Urban Problems, B u i l d i n g . t h e American C i t y , Washington, D . C , U . S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1968. Van A l s t y n e , C a r o l , E d . , Land Bank Handbook: Advance A c q u i s i t i o n of  of S i tes for Low and Moderate Income Housing, Greensboro, N . C , Piedmont T r i a d Counc i l of Governments, 1972. The Vancouver Sun, February 14, 15, 1974. Walchuk, W a l t e r - B . , "Planning Edmonton's Future", Community Planning  Review, 19, No. 1, 1968, pp. 5-9. Weissbourd, Bernard, " S a t e l l i t e New Communities: Proposals for a New Housing Program", Center Magazine, January-February 1972. Wheaton, W . L . C , "Publ ic and P r i v a t e Agents of Change i n Urban Expansion", Explorat ions i n t o Urban S t r u c t u r e , Me lv in Webber, E d . , P h i l a d e l p h i a , U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvania Pres s , 1964. W i l l i a m s , A . J . , "A Case of M u n i c i p a l E n t e r p r i s e i n Land Assembly: L o c a l A u t h o r i t i e s as Entrepreneurs - Comprehensive Development i n Glamorgan", Housing and Planning Review, May-June 1972. White, Donald S . , "A P u b l i c Inquiry Re: The Corporat ion of the D i s t r i c t of Surrey, B r i t i s h Columbia", Report of the Commissioner to the Lieutenant-Governor i n C o u n c i l , Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a , January 1974. 148 APPENDIX A RESIDENTIAL LAND VALUES IN THE METROPOLITAN VANCOUVER AREA R E S I D E N T I A L L A N D V A L U E S I N T H E M E T R O P O L I T A N V A N C O U V E R P o i n t G r e y , D u n b a r O a k r i d g e K e r r i s d a l e S h a u g h n e s s y S . V a n . & C a m b i e F r a s e r v i e w - O l d - N e w C h a m p l a i n H e i g h t s K i l l a r n e y , J o y c e R d R e n f r e w H e i g h t s E a s t H a s t i n g s G r a n d v i e w N E W W E S T M I N S T E R C i t y L i m i t s B U R N A B Y N o r t h S o u t h E a s t C e n t r e N O R T H V A N C O U V E R P . M . D e e p C o v e L y n n V a l l e y B l u e r i d g e D e l b r o o k C a n y o n H e i g h t s N O R T H V A N C O U V E R C I T Y O l d e r A r e a s U p p e r L o n s d a l e T y p i c a l f r o n t a g e 1967 • f e e t $ 33 - 50 ' 9 , 5 0 0 - 1 2 , 5 0 0 58 1 5 , 0 0 0 - . 2 0 , 0 0 0 33 - 50 9 , 5 0 0 - 1 2 , 5 0 0 60 - 70 1 5 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 33 - 50 8 , 5 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 33 - 40 8 , 5 0 0 — 1 0 , 0 0 0 45 - 50 7 , 8 0 0 — 1 2 , 0 0 0 42 — 64 33 - 45 6 , 5 0 0 - 8 , 5 0 0 33 - 50 6 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 0 0 0 33 6 , 5 0 0 - 7 , 5 0 0 33 6 , 0 0 0 — 7 , 5 0 0 33 - 50 f e w o r n o s a l e s 33 a . 66 5 , 5 0 0 _ 8 , 5 0 0 33 - 66 5 , 5 0 0 - 9 , 5 0 0 33 - 66 5 , 0 0 0 - 6 , 5 0 0 5 0 - 60 5 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 0 0 0 60 4 , 0 0 0 - 4 , 5 0 0 33 - 60 3 , 5 0 0 - 5 , 0 0 0 60 5 , 5 0 0 -66 8 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 5 0 0 66 8 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 5 0 0 50 4 , 0 0 0 - 5 , 0 0 0 60 6 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 0 0 0 A R E A , 1967 , 1 9 7 1 , 1972 A N D 1 9 7 3 . P r i c e s o f T y p i c a l L o t s  1971 $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 - 2 2 , 5 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 5 , 0 0 0 - 2 2 , 5 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 3 , 5 0 0 - 2 1 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 2 , 5 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 b f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 - 1 3 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 9 , 0 0 0 - 1 2 , 0 0 0 7 , 0 0 0 - 1 1 , 0 0 0 7 , 0 0 0 - 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 1972 $ 1 6 , 5 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 7 , 0 0 0 - 2 7 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 5 , 0 0 0 - 2 2 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 4 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 5 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 00Cy 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 1 2 . 5 0 0 - 1 6 , 5 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 - 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1 2 , 5 0 0 - 1 8 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1973 $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 2 2 , 5 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s f e w o r n o s a l e s 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 2 , 5 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 7 , 5 0 0 2 1 , 5 0 0 - 3 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 f e w o r n o s a l e s 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 4 , 0 0 0 1 8 , 0 0 0 - 2 7 , 5 0 0 1 8 , 0 0 0 - 2 2 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 7 , 0 0 0 - 2 4 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 1 , 0 0 0 - 2 4 , 0 0 0 2 3 , 0 0 0 - 3 0 , 0 0 0 2 3 , 0 0 0 - 3 0 , 0 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 - 9 , 5 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 - 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 5 0 0 1 7 , 5 0 0 - 2 2 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 T y p i c a l frontage P r i c e s Of T y p i c a l Lots 1971 1972 1973 f e e t & WEST VANCOUVER B r i t i s h P r o p e r t i e s £ ac.av..11,000 - 15,000 Cypress Park 80-100 8,000 - 10,000 Bayridge odd shapes $ Older Areas 5 0 COQUITLAM Average s i t e s 60 - 66 B e t t e r S i t e s 60 - 75 RICHMOND New Home Areas ( f u l l y s e r v i c e d ) 66 I n d i v i d u a l Lots sewered 66 unsewered 66 8 , 7 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 - 9 , 5 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 3 , 0 0 0 60 - 66 60 - 66 3 , 0 0 0 2 , 2 0 0 SURREY North - sewered - unsewered Newton- C e n t r a l Surrey sewered ( 1 9 7 3 ) Ocean Park - South l a r g e l o t s Surrey unsewered up t o one acre 2 , 0 0 0 DELTA North - sewered .. Ladner - sewered Tsawwassen-sewered ( 1 9 7 0 ) 66 - 75 66 - 75 3 , 0 0 0 3 , 3 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 14,000 1 3 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 18, 000 1.5,000 1 5 , 0 0 0 14 , 5 0 0 16,000 14,000 3 0 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 18 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 000 3 6 , 0 0 0 3 6 , 0 0 0 3 8 , 0 0 0 2 7 , 5 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 - 5 , 0 0 0 8 , 0 0 0 - 1 0 , 0 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 - 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 6 , 0 0 0 - 18 , 0 0 0 5 , 5 0 0 - 7 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 5 0 0 - 14 , 5 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 - 2 5 , 0 0 0 5 , 5 0 0 - 6 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 1 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 0 0 - 1 3 , 5 0 0 1 7 , 5 0 0 - 1 8 , 5 0 0 60 - 66 1 , 2 0 0 -6 , 0 0 0 4 , 5 0 0 4 , 6 0 0 3 , 5 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 3 , 5 0 0 4 , 5 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 7 , 5 o o 7 , 0 0 0 5 , 5 0 0 4,ooo 6 , 0 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 5 , 5 o o 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 9 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 7 , 0 0 0 -/iSjOoo 1 1 , 0 0 0 1 6 , 0 0 0 - 1 7 , 0 0 0 8, 000 6 , 5 0 0 5 , 5 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 8 , 0 0 0 8 , 5 0 0 8 , 000 9 , 000 8 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 5 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 66 - 75 3 , 5 0 0 - 1 0 , 0 0 0 6 , 5 0 0 - 1 3 , 5 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 4 , 5 0 0 - 1 6 , 0 0 0 12 , 0 0 0 - 14 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 6 , 0 0 0 - 3 0 , 0 0 0 14 , 5 0 0 - 1 6 , 5 0 0 E 1 3 , 5 0 0 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 0 18 , 0 0 0 - 2 0 , 0 0 0 Sourcet Real E s t a t e Trends - Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board. 151 APPENDIX B PART XXI , COMMUNITY PLANNING MUNICIPAL ACT R . S . B . C . 1960, CHAPTER 255 \ i I 152 By-laws not to apply to certain land. Interpretation. Part, " com-Preparatlon of plana. Designation. Plan para-PART XXI COMMUNITY PLANNING I 604. No by-law adoptcd pursuant to this Part, excepting!Division (5), applies to land designated in a tree-farm licence, or to land constituting a forest reserve pursuant to the Forest Act, or to land designated in a tree-farm certificate under the Taxation Act so long as the landj continues to be so designated or reserved. 1971, c. 3 8, s. 50. Division (1).—Official Community Plan 695. In this Part or in any by-law adopted under this munity plan " means an expression of policy for (a) any use or uses of land, including surfaces of water; or (Z») the pattern of the subdivision of land; j and either or both may apply to any or all areas of the municipality. 1957, c. 42, s. 692; 1958, c. 32, s. 304; 1961, c. 43, s. 36. 606. The Council may have community plans prepared or revised from time to time, and they may be expressed in maps, plans, reports, or any combination thereof. 1957, c. 42, s. 693; 1961, c. 43, s. 37; 1968, c.33,s. 164. ] 697. (1) The Council may, by by-law adopted by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the members thereof, designate any community plan prepared under section 696 as the official community plan or as a part of the official community plan. j (2) A by-law adopted under subsection (1) docs not come into force and effect until it has received the approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. 1957, c. 42, s. 694; 1958, c. 32, s. 305; 1961,! c. 43, s. 38. 605. (1) The Council shall not enact any provision or undertake any works contrary to or at variance with the official community plan or a plan adopted under Division (6) of this Part. (2) Subsection (1) does not empower the Council to impair, abro-gate, or otherwise affect the rights and privileges to which an owner of 3247 * 153 CHAP. 2 5 5 MUNICIPAL 9 E L K . 2 land is otherwise lawfu l l y entit led, s. 39 . 1957 , c. 4 2 , s. 6 9 5 ; 1 9 6 1 , c. 4 3 , Plan not a committal. Minister may assist Council. Establish-ment of Commission. Expenses of Commission. Zoning. Regulating uses in zones. 6 0 0 . ( 1 ) A n off ic ia l commun i t y p l an does not commi t the C o u n c i l o r any other administrat ive body to undertake any o f the projects therein suggested o r out l ined. ( 2 ) T h e adopt ion of a commun i t y p l an does not author ize the C o u n -c i l to proceed wi th the undertak ing o f any project except i n accordance w i th the procedure and restrictions l a id down therefore by this o r some other A c t . 1957 , c. 4 2 , s. 6 9 6 ; 1 9 6 1 , c. 4 3 , s. 4 0 . 7 0 0 . T h e M in i s t e r may , u p o n request by a C o u n c i l , furn ish advice o r assistance i n communi ty p lann ing matters. 1957 , c. 42, s. 6 9 7 . Division (2).—Advisory Planning Commission 7 0 1 . ( 1 ) T h e C o u n c i l may , by by-law adopted by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of a l l the members thereof, establ ish a n A d v i s o r y P l ann ing C o m m i s s i o n , whose members sha l l serve wi thout remunerat ion and who shal l advise the C o u n c i l o n such matters com ing w i th in the scope of this Pa r t as m a y f r o m t ime to t ime be referred to the C o m m i s s i o n by the C o u n c i l . ( 2 ) I n the by-law establishing the Commis s i on there shal l be set out (a ) the composi t ion of the Commis s i on and the manner i n w h i c h the C o u n c i l sha l l appoint the members thereof; (b) the procedures governing the conduct of the C o m m i s s i o n . ( 3 ) T h e C o u n c i l sha l l inc lude i n its annua l budget such sums as are necessary to defray the expenses of the C o m m i s s i o n . 1957 , c. 4 2 , s. 698 . Division (3).—Zoning 702. ( 1 ) T h e C o u n c i l may by by-law (hereinafter referred to as a " z o n i n g by-law " ) (a ) d iv ide the whole o r a por t ion of the area of the munic ipa l i t y into zones and define each zone either by m a p , p l an , o r d e -scr ipt ion, or any combinat ion thereof; (b) regulate the use of l and , bui ld ings, and structures, inc lud ing the surface of water, w i th in such zones, and the regulations may be different for different zones and fo r different uses w i th in a zone, , and for the purposes of this clause the power to regulate includes the power to proh ib i t any part icu lar use o r uses i n any specif ied zone or , zones ; ( c ) regulate the size, shape, and sit ing of bui ld ings and structures w i th in such zones, and the regulations m a y be different f o r different zones and w i th respect to different uses w i th in a zone ; (d) w i thout l im i t ing the generality o f clause (b), requi re the owners o r occupiers of any bu i ld ing i n any zone to prov ide off-street pa rk ing and load ing space f o r such bu i l d ing , a n d may 3248' 154 \ 1960 ^  MUNICIPAL CHAP. 2 5 5 classify bui ld ings and differentiate and discr iminate between classes wi th respect to the amount of space to be p rov ided , and may exempt any class o f bu i ld ing o r any bu i ld ing exist ing at the time of adopt ion of the by-law f rom any of ,the requ i re -ments of this clause. | ^ u o n s c o n ? 1 " ( 2 ) I n mak ing regulations under this sect ion, the C o u n c i l shal l have p u b u c f d u e regard to the fo l low ing cons ide r a t i ons :— j (a) T h e p romot ion of heal th, safety, convenience, and welfare of the pub l i c : I (b) T h e prevention of the overcrowding of l and , and| the preser -vat ion of the amenities pecul iar to any zone : ( c ) T h e secur ing o f adequate l ight , a i r , and access: (d) T h e value of the land and the nature of its present and p ros -pective use and occupancy : j. ( c ) T h e character of each zone, the character of the bui ld ings already erected, and the pecul iar suitabi l i ty of the zone fo r part icular uses: (/) T h e conservat ion of property values: (g) [Repealed. 1971, c. 38, s. 51.] 1957, c. 42, s. 699; 1958, c. 32, s. 306; 1961, c. 43, s. 4 1 ; 1968, c. 3 3 , s. 165; 197Q, c. 29 .S.20; 1971, c. 38, s. 51. p««iopmeat 7 0 2 A . (1) In exercis ing the provis ions of this sect ion, the C o u n c i l shal l have due regard to the fo l low ing considerat ions i n addi t ion to those referred to in subsection (2) of section 702:— ) (a ) T h e development of areas to promote greater efficiency a n d qua l i t y : I (b) T h e impact of development on present and future pub l i c costs : ( c ) T h e betterment of the env i ronment : j (d) T h e fulf i lment of communi ty goals : and ( e ) T h e prov is ion of necessary pub l i c space. j (2) T h e C o u n c i l may , by by-law, amend the zon ing by-law to des ig -nate areas of land w i th in a zone as development areas, but a pub l i c hear -i ng under sections 703 and 704 is not requi red. j (3) U p o n the appl icat ion of an owner of l and wi th in the development area, o r his agent, the C o u n c i l may , by by-law, notwithstanding any b y -l aw of the munic ipa l i t y , o r section 712 o r 713, enter i n t o ' a land use contract conta in ing such terms and condit ions fo r the use and deve lop -ment of the land as may be mutual ly agreed upon , and thereafter the use and development o f the land sha l l , notwithstanding any by-Jaw o f the munic ipa l i t y , o r section 712 or 713, be in accordance wi th the l and use contract. I (4) A contract entered into under subsection (3) shall have the force and effect of a restrictive covenant running with the l and and shal l be registered in the L a n d Registry Office by the munic ipa l i t y . (5) T h e C o u n c i l may , by by-law, prescr ibe the procedure by wh i ch the mun ic ipa l i t y m a y enter in to a l and use contract a n d the f o r m a n d considerat ion of the contract, v 3 2 4 9 treat. 155 CHAP. 2 5 5 MUNICIPAL 9 E L E . 2 (6) The Council shall not enter into a land use contract until it has held a public hearing, notice of which has been published in the manner prescribed in subsection (1) of section 703, and except upon the affirma-tive vote of a-major-ity of'ail the' members of the Council, j (7) The provisions of section 703 apply, with the necessary changes and so far as are applicable, to a hearing under this section. I (8) Nothing in this section restricts the right of an owner to develop his land in accordance with the regulations of the municipality applying to the zone in which the land is situate who does not enter into a land use contract with the Council. (9) A land use contract is deemed to be a zoning by-law for the pur-poses of the Controlled Access Highways Act. 1971, c. 38, s. 52; 1972, c. 36, s. 28. Hearing re-quired before zoning by-law pasted. Amendment or repeal of zoning by-law. Buildings or structures under con-struction. 70? ( c ) . J&. (1) The Council shall not adopt a zoning by-law until it has held a public hearing thereon, notice of which stating the time and place of the hearing has been published in not less than two consecutive issues of a newspaper published or circulating in the municipality, with the last of such publications appearing not less than three days nor more than ten days before the date of the hearing. (2) The notice of hearing shall ' (o) identify the land or lands deemed affected; j state in general terms the intent of the provisions of the pro-posed by-law; and state where and the days and hours during which a copy of the proposed by-law may be inspected. (3) At the hearing all persons who deem their interest in property affected by the proposed by-law shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard on matters contained in the by-law. (4) The hearing may be adjourned from time to time. (5) The Council may without further notice, in the zoning by-law as adopted, give such effect as it deems fit to representations made at the hearing, except that any change subsequent to the hearing shall not alter the substance thereof. 1957, c. 42, s. 700; 1958, c. 32, s. 307; 1961, c.43,s.42; 1968, c. 33, s. 167. 7 0 4 . ,(1) No zoning by-law shall be adopted, amended, or repealed except after a hearing.undcr section 703, and except upon the affirmative vote of a-iiiajority of all the members of the Council. (2) A member of the Council who was not present at the public hear-ing may vote on the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a zoning by-law, provided that an oral or written report of the public hearing has been given to him. 1957, c. 57, s. 701; 1961, c. 43, s. 43; 1972, c. 36, s. 30. 7 0 5 . (1) A building or structure lawfully under construction at the time of the coming into force of a zoning by-law shall, for the purpose of that by-law, be deemed to be a building or structure existing at that time. i 3250 I 156 1960 MUNICIPAL CHAP. 2 5 5 Non-conform-ing use. Extension of non-conform-ing use. Damaged or destroyed structures. Change of. tenants of no effect. Zoning by-law no cause for compen-sation. Building per-mit withheld pending adop-tion of plan or zoning by-law. Council to consider ap-plication for building per-mit withheld. ( 2 ) A lawfu l use of premises exist ing at the time of the adopt ion of a zon ing by-law, although such use does not con fo rm to the provis ions of the by-law, may be cont inued; but if such non-conforming use is d i s con -t inued fo r a per iod o f thir ty days, any future use o f those premises sha l l , subject to the provis ions of this sect ion, be in conformi ty wi th the p r o -visions of the zon ing by-law. :,(3) A lawfu l use of a bu i ld ing or structure exist ing at the t ime of the adopt ion of the zoning by-law, a l though such use docs not c o n f o r m to the provisions o f the zon ing by-law, m a y be extended throughout the bu i ld ing or structure, but no structural alterations except those requi red by Statute or by by-law or those a l lowed by the B o a r d of Va r i ance sha l l be made therein or%here to . (4 ) Where any bu i ld ing or structure the use of wh i ch does not c o n -f o rm to the provis ions o f an appl icable zon ing by-law is damaged o r destroyed to the extent of seventy-five per centum o r more of its va lue above its foundat ions, as determined by the bu i ld ing inspector, whose decis ion shal l be subject to review by the B o a r d o f Va r i ance , i t sha l l not be repaired or reconstructed, except for a con fo rming use i n a c co rd -ance wi th the zon ing by-law. (5 ) A change of tenants o r occupants of any premises o r bu i ld ing o r structure shal l not be deemed to affect the use of the premises o r bu i ld ing o r structure wi th in the meaning of this sect ion. 1957 , c. 4 2 , s. 7 0 2 ; 1958 , c. 32 , s. 3 0 8 ; 1968 , c. 3 3 , s. 168. 706. (1) P roper ty shal l be deemed not to be taken o r in jur ious ly affected by reason of the adopt ion of a zon ing by-law under this D i v i s i o n , o r by reason o f the amendment o r repeal o f a zon ing by-law. (2 ) Subsect ion ( 1 ) does not apply when land is zoned exclusively for pub l i c use. 1957 , c. 4 2 , s. 7 0 3 ; 1958 , c. 32 , s. 3 0 9 ; 1962 , c. 4 1 , s. 2 9 ; 1965 , c. 2 8 , s. 2 0 . 707. ( 1 ) P r i o r to the adopt ion of a zon ing by-law, o r o f an off ic ia l communi ty p l an , o r of an amendment to a zoning by-law, o r of an alterat ion, addi t ion, o r extension to the off icial communi ty p l an , the C o u n c i l may cause to be withheld the issuance of a bu i ld ing permit fo r a per iod of thirty days f r o m the date of the appl icat ion. ( 2 ) Where any permit is so wi thhe ld , the appl icat ion therefor shal l be considered by the Counc i l w i th in the said per iod of thirty days ; and if in the op in ion of the C o u n c i l the development proposed in the app l i c a -t ion wou ld be at var iance o r i n confl ict w i th an off icial communi ty p lan i n the course of preparat ion, o r wi th an alterat ion, add i t ion , o r extension i n course of preparat ion to an off icial commun i t y p l an , o r wi th the zoning by-law in course of preparat ion, o r wi th an amendment in course of preparat ion to the zon ing by-law, the C o u n c i l may w i thho ld the permit f o r a further sixty days, o r the C o u n c i l may impose such c o n d i -t ions on the grant ing of the bu i ld ing permit as may appear to the C o u n c i l to be i n the pub l i c interest. ' . | N . 1 3251 157 CHAP. 2 5 5 MUNICIPAL 9 E L E . 2 Damages for excessive de-lay in grant-ing building permit. Appeal to the Minister. Board of Variance. Restriction. 3252 (3) In the event that the Council does not within the said period of sixty days adopt any such plan or by-law, the owners of the land in respect of which a building permit was withheld pursuant to this section arc entitled to compensation for damages arising from the with-holding of such building permit, and the provisions of Division (4) of Part XII shall apply. (4) Where the provisions of this section have been invoked, the Council may withhold the issuance of a business licence for a period not exceeding ninety days. 1957, c. 42, s. 704; 1968, c. 33, s. 169. 707A. Where, subsequent to the acquisition of land by a person, a zoning by-law is adopted or amended so that no use of the land is per-mitted, that person may, if not granted relief by the Board of Variance, appeal to the Minister who may, by order binding on the municipality, grant such relief as he considers proper. 1972, c. 36, s. 31. Board of Variance 70S. (1) Where a Council has adopted a zoning by-law, there shall be established by by-law a Board of Variance constituted as follows:— (a) Where the population of a municipality is twenty-five thousand or less, (i) one person appointed by the Council; (ii) one person appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council; and (iii) one person appointed by the other two appointees: (b) Where the population of a municipality is more than twenty-five thousand, (i) two persons appointed by the Council; (ii) two persons appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council; and (iii) one person appointed by the other four appointees; and the members of the Board shall elect one of their number as Chair-man. (2) Each member appointed shall hold office for a term of three years or until his successor is appointed, but a person may be reappointed for a further term or terms.: (3) No person who is a member of the Advisory Planning Commis-sion of the municipality or holds municipal office or municipal employ-ment in the municipality is eligible to be appointed or to sit as a member of the Board of Variance for the municipality. (4) A majority of the Board is a quorum. (5) The Chairman may from time to time appoint a member of the Board as Acting-Chairman to preside in the absence of the Chairman. (6) In the event of the death, resignation, or removal from office of any member of the Board, his successor shall be appointed in the manner 158 I960 . M U N I C I P A L CHAP. 2 5 5 in which such member was appointed, and until the appointment of his ' • • _ successor the remaining members constitute the Board. (7) The appointee of a Council may be removed at any time by the Council concerned, and the appointee of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may likewise be removed at any time by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council; the Chairman may be removed at any time by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Council. (S) In the event of the death, resignation, or removal from office of a member of the Board, other than the Chairman, die Chairman shall x continue to act in that capacity, and the provisions of subsection (1) \ relating to the appointment of Chairman shall not apply. (9) In any by-law adoptcd under the provisions of subsection (1) there shall be set out the procedures to be followed by the Board of Variance, including the manner in which appeals are to be lodged with the Board and the giving of notices required under section' 709. 1957, c. 42, s. 705; 1958, c. 32, s. 310; 1968, c. 33, s. 170. } Duties of 709. (1) The Board of Variance shall hear and determine any appeal j (a) by a person who is aggrieved by a decision of any official charged with the enforcement of a zoning by-law or a by-law under subsection (5) of section 711 in so far as that decision relates to an interpretation of the by-law or by-laws or any portion thereof; and i (b) with respect to matters mentioned in subsection (4) of section 705; and (c) by an applicant for a permit who alleges that enforcement of a zoning by-law with respect to siting, size, of shape of a building or of a structure would cause him undue hardship, in which case the Board may, to the extent necessary to give effect to its determination, exempt the applicant and subse-quent owners of the building or structure from the applicable provisions of the zoning by-law; and | (d) with respect to matters mentioned in subsection (3) of section 705 and subsection (7) of section 711. j (2) Notification of the appeal shall be given by the Board to the owners and occupiers of all real property located adjacent to'the property, with respect to which the appeal is being heard, and public notice of the hearing shall be given if the matter is deemed by the Board to be of sufficient importance. ; (3) The decision in writing of all or of a majority of the| members of the Board is the decision of the Board. (4) An appeal lies to a Judge of the County Court from a decision of the Board under clauses (fl) and (b) of subsection (1), but all other decisions of the Board are final and binding. 1957, c. 42, s. 706; 1958, c. 32, s. 311; 1960, c. 37, s. 30; 1961, c. 43, s. 44; 1962,|c. 41, s. 30; 1968, c. 33, s. 171. 3253 159 CHAP. 2 5 5 MUNICIPAL Expenses of Board. 9 ELIZ. 2 710. (1) No member of a Board of Variance shall receive compen-sation for his services other than allowances for actual expenses neces-sarily incurred in the discharge of his official duties. (2) The Council shall include in its annual budget such sums as are necessary to defray the expenses of the Board. 1957, c. 42, s. 707; 1968, c. 33, s. 172. Division (4).—Subdivision of Land \ renaming* 7 1 1 . (1) The Council may regulate the subdivision of land, and for / ?onCet!5and ^ PurP°se may by by-law * N ' highway*. ^ r e gu] a t e jj- ie a r e a ) shape, and dimensions of parcels of land and the dimensions, locations, alignment, and gradient of highways in connection with the subdivision of land, and may make different regulations for different uses and for different zones of the municipality; | (6) prescribe minimum standards with respect to the'matters con-tained in clauses (a) and (J); j (c) require that a proposed subdivision (i) be suited to the configuration of the land being sub-divided; and (ii) be suited to the use to which it is intended; and (iii) shall not make impracticable the future subdivision of the land within the proposed subdivision or of any adjacent land; (d) require that the highways within the subdivision be cleared, , drained, and surfaced to a prescribed standard, but excluding v the construction of sidewalks and boulevards; (t?) where the municipality has a sewage-disposal system, require that a sewage-collection system be provided in accordance with standards set out in the by-law, make provision for • the connection of the system with the established sewage-• disposal system of the municipality, and provide that the lands included in the subdivision shall be exempt from, but only from, the charges imposed in the municipality for works of a like nature for a period of time calculated to be sufficient to amortize the actual cost of the collection system computed at an interest rate not exceeding four per centum per annum; but if the municipality requires that any main of such collection system be of a diameter in excess of that required to service the subdivision, the municipality shall assume and pay the cost providing the excess capacity; (/) require that the subdivision be provided with a community \ water supply system, or that it be connected to an existing v system, or that each parcel in the subdivision have a proven source of potable ground water. 3254 160 1960 MUNICIPAL CHAP. 255 (2) Subject to section 713, the owner of land being subdivided shall provide, without compensation, land for highways in accordance with a by-law under subsection (1). (3) Every approving officer shall give due regard to and take cog-nizance of any official community plan when dealing with applications for the approval of any plan of subdivision. (4) The approving officer may refuse to approve a subdivision plan if he is of the opinion that the cost to the municipality of providing public utilities or other municipal works or services would be excessive. (5) Notwithstanding clause (e) of subsection (1), in addition to any other powers exercisable or exercised under this Act, the Council may by by-law require that where the nearest boundary of any land proposed to be subdivided is two thousand feet or more in distance, or such greater distance specified in the by-law, from an established trunk water-main or a trunk sanitary sewer, or both, provision be made by the owner of the land for the installation of water-mains or sanitary sewers, or both, in-cluding trunk water-mains or trunk sanitary sewers, or both, from such established trunk water-main or trunk sanitary sewer, or both, in and to the proposed subdivision, according to minimum standards prescribed in the by-law. (6) A by-law under subsection (5) may provide for the sharing of the cost, or any portion thereof, of any trunk water-main or trunk sani-tary sewer, or both, between the municipality and the owner of the land . proposed to be subdivided. (7) Where land proposed to be subdivided is in an area of the municipality zoned for agricultural, rural, or industrial use, an appeal lies to the Board of Variance from the enforcement of any provisions of a by-law enacted under subsection (5), and the provisions of clause (c) of subsection (1) of section 709 shall, mutatis mutandis, apply. (8) In this Division, " approving officer " means a person appointed as an approving officer under the Land Registry Act. 1957, c. 42, s.708; 1958, c. 32, s. 312; 1960, c. 37, s. 31; 1961, c. 43, s. 45; 1962, c. 41, s. 31; 1964, c. 33, s. 67; 1969, c. 21, s. 25; 1970, c. 29, s. 22; 1-972, c. 36, s. 32. Elimination. 7XXA. (1)( Where a physical examination of lands is required, the approving officer may, at the cost of the owner of the land proposed to be subdivided, personally examine or have an examination or report made on the proposed subdivision, but the owner shall not be charged an amount greater than ten dollars for each parcel within the subdivision. (2) If the subdivision plan is not approved, the owner is not liable to be charged. 1962, c. 41, s. 32; 1970, c. 29, s. 23. Parcel front-age on highway. 712. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Council may by by-law prescribe the rmnimum frontage which any parcel of land in any pro-posed subdivision may have with respect to the highway upon which the parcel fronts, but, whether so prescribed or not, no parcel of land in any ' 3255 1 6 1 CHAP. 2 5 5 MUNICIPAL 9 ELEZ. 2 proposed subdivision shall have less than one-tenth of its perimeter fronting on such highway. Exemption. (2) The Council may, by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the members thereof, exempt a person proposing to subdivide land from any prescribed minimum frontage or from the limitation provided under subsection (1). (3) The Council may, by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the members thereof, delegate its powers under subsection (2) to the approving officer. 1957, c. 42, s. 709; 1959, c. 56, s. 53; 1972, c. 36, s. 33. »™w&?ng 713. (1) Where land is being subdivided, the owner shall not be of highway*, required on subdivision to provide without compensation . (a) for the purpose of a highway allowance within the subdivision, land exceeding in depth sixty-six feet; or j (£) for the purpose of widening a highway that is less than sixty-six feet in width and that borders or is within the, subdivision, land of a depth exceeding thirty-three feet or the difference between sixty-six feet and the width of the highway, which-ever is the lesser. ! (2) Where, in the opinion of the approving officer, terrain and soil conditions are such that a roadway having a width of twenty-four feet cannot be adequately supported, protected, and drained within the widths specified in subsection (1), land sufficient to support, protect, and drain such a roadway may be required without compensation s.710; 1972, c. 36, s. 34. 957, c. 42, Residence ' for relative. 713A. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of any by-law under this Act, or any regulation under the Local Services Act, the approving officer appointed under this Part may approve a subdivision of any parcel of land that has been owned by the person applying for the subdivision for a period of not less than five years prior to the application, for the purpose of providing a separate residence for the owner, or for the father, mother, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, or grandchild of the owner; but each subdivided parcel of land shall be not less than two acres, unless a lesser area of not less than one-half acre is approved by the medical health officer. j (2) This section does not apply where the parcel being subdivided is classified as farm land for the purpose of real property assessment and taxation, and the remainder of the parcel, after subdivision, would be less than five acres. i (3) Except as permitted under zoning or rezoning by-laws, where land is subdivided under this section the subdivided parcel is restricted to residential use for a period of five years and the use o f the remainder o f the parcel shall not be changed for five years. 3256 j 162 i 1960 MUNICIPAL CHAP. 2 5 5 Regulations. Construction and demoli-tion. Installation of plumbing and oti>er services. Fire limits. Seating In public buildings. Permits. Inspections and charges. Moving of buildings. ( 4 ) N o t more than one parce l shal l be subdiv ided f r o m any parce l under the provis ions o f this section i n any five-year pe r iod . 1 9 7 2 , c. 3 6 , s. 3 5 . Division (5).—Building Regulations 714. T h e C o u n c i l may , for the heal th, safety, and protect ion of pe r -sons and property, and subject to the Health Act and the Fire Marshal Act and the regulations made thereunder, by by-law 1 (a )fregulate the construct ion, a l terat ion, repair , o r demol i t ion of .^bu i l d i ngs and'structurcs; \(ify)' regulate the insta l lat ion, a l terat ion, o r repa i r o f p l umb ing "' '$ ( inc lud ing septic tanks and sewer connect ions ) , heat ing, air-|: condi t ion ing, electr ical w i r i ng and equipment, gas o r o i l p i p -ing and fittings, appl iances, and accessories of every nature $ and k i n d ; •Mc) establish areas to be k n o w n as " fire l im i t s , " and regulate the * construct ion o f bui ld ings i n each of such areas i n respect of precautions against the danger of fire, and discr iminate and differentiate between the areas as to the character of the b u i l d -ings permitted i n each o f them; (d) regulate the seating arrangements and seating capaci ty of churches, theatres, hal ls , skating-rinks, and other places of amusement o r pub l i c resort ; (*?) require contractors, owners, o r other persons to obta in and ho ld a va l id permit f r o m the C o u n c i l , o r f r o m the proper author ized off ic ia l , before commenc ing and at a l l times dur ing the construct ion, erect ion, excavat ion, insta l lat ion, add i t ion , repair , o r alteration of gas or o i l pipes and fittings, p lumb ing , heating, sewers, septic tanks, drains, electr ical w i r ing , tents, signs, oi l-burners, tanks, pumps, and a l l l i ke works , fittings, and things, and bui ld ings and structures of the k i n d , desc r ip -t ion , o r value described i n the by-law; (/•) prescribe condit ions generally respecting the issuance and va l id i ty o f permits and the inspect ion o f works , things, b u i l d -ings, and structures, and prov ide for the levy ing and col lect ing of permit fees and inspect ion charges; (g) regulate o r proh ib i t the m o v i n g o f any bu i ld ing into o r f r o m the munic ipa l i ty , o r the mov ing of any bu i ld ing f r o m one p r o p -erty to another i n the munic ipa l i t y ; (h) require the fencing o f pr ivate swirnming-pools o r other , types of pools , exist ing o r prospect ive, according to specif ications set out i n the by-law; (/) regulate the construct ion and layout o f trai ler courts , mobi le-home parks , and camping-grounds, and require that such courts, parks , and grounds prov ide faci l i t ies specif ied i n the by-law; 3256-1 j 163 1960 MUNICIPAL CHAP. 255 Demolition. Appeals. Regulating doors and emergency exits in public buildings. Doors of public build-ings to open outward. (/) provide that no trailer or mobile home may be occupied as a residence or office unless its construction and facilities meet the standards specified in the by-law; (k) require that, prior to any occupancy of a building or part thereof after construction, wrecking, or alteration of that build-ing or part thereof, or any change in class of occupancy of any building or part thereof, an occupancy permit be obtained from the Council or the proper authorized official, which permit may be withheld until the building or part thereof complies with the health and safety requirements of the by-laws of the municipality or of any Statute. 1957, c. 42, s.! 711; 1958, c. 32, s. 314; 1964, c. 33, s. 68; 1968, c. 33, s. 173. 715. (1) The Council may by by-law authorize (a) the demolition, removal, or the bringing up to a standard spe-cified in the by-law of a building, structure, or thing, in whole or in part, that is (i) in contravention of any by-law; or, (ii) in the opinion of Council, in an unsafe condition; or (Z>) the filling-in, covering-over, or alteration in whole or in part of an excavation that is (i) in contravention of any by-law; or (ii) in the opinion of Council, in an unsafe condition. (2) A by-law adopted under subsection (1) shall provide for thirty days' notice of the contemplated action to be given the owner, tenant, or occupier of the real property affected. (3) An appeal lies to a Judge of the County Court having jurisdiction against the contemplated action under any by-law aforesaid. (4) Notice of an appeal under subsection (3) shall be given the municipality within ten days from the date of the notice given under the by-law to the owner, tenant, or occupier of the affected premises. (5) The Judge shall hear and finally determine the matter, making such order as seems meet to him. (6) At the expiration of the thirty-day period mentioned in subsection (2), it shall be competent for the proper authorized official to proceed in accordance with the by-law or the decision of the Judge, as the case maybe. 1957, c. 42, s. 712; 1958, c. 32, s. 315; 1961, c. 43, s. 46. 716. (1) Subject to the Fire Marshal Act and regulations made thereunder, the Council may by by-law compel the provision of and regulate the location, number, style, and size of doors and emergency exits in churches, theatres, halls, skating-rinks, or other buildings used as places of public resort or amusement, and the posting therein of notices of such emergency exits. (2) All by-laws passed under subsection (1) shall provide that all doors in churches, theatres, halls, skating-rinks, and other buildings used as places of public resort or amusement shall be so hinged that 3 2 5 7 164 CHAP. 255 MUNICIPAL 9 ELIZ. 2 they may open freely outwards, and that all gates, or outer fences, if not so hinged, shall be kept open by proper fastenings during the time such buildings are publicly used to facilitate the egress of people in case of alarm from fire or other cause. 1957, c. 42, s. 713; 1958, c. 32, s. 316. Liability of trustees holding buildings. Penalties under a, 713. Adopting National codes. 717. Congregations possessing corporate powers, and all trustees holding churches or buildings used for churches, and incumbents and church wardens holding or using churches or buildings used for churches, are severally liable for the acts and omissions of any society or con-gregation in respect of the matters mentioned in section 716. 1957, c. 42, s. 714. 718. Every person owning or possessing any church, theatre, hall, school, or other building used for public meetings, or as a place of public resort or amusement, who violates the provisions of section 716 or of any by-law adopted thereunder is liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty not exceeding fifty dollars; and the person so convicted is liable, on summary conviction, to a further penalty of five dollars for every week thereafter during which the violation continues. Any penalty so imposed is a charge upon the lands and real property of such person, and may be levied, collected, and recovered in the manner provided for the levy, collection, and recovery of taxes upon lands or real property. 1957, c. 42, s. 715. 710. (1) The Council may, to the extent not inconsistent with this Act, either in place of or supplementary to any regulations made under this Division, by by-law adopt as regulations (a) either in whole or in part the National Building Code or the short form thereof; (b) subject to the Electrical Energy Inspection Act, either in whole or in part the Canadian Electrical Code; (c) subject to the Gas Act, either in whole or in part the standards of the Canadian Gas Association; (d) subject to the Fire Marshal Act, either in whole or in part the National Fire Code of Canada. (2) Any code or standard, or short form thereof, or part thereof, referred to in subsection (1) may be adopted by reference to any par-ticular date of issue or any specified issue of any such code or standard. 1957, c. 42, s. 716; 1961,; c. 43, s. 47; 1964, c. 33, s. 69; 1966, c 31, s. 20. •APPENDIX C OBJECTS AND POWERS OF THE PROVINCIAL LAND COMMISSION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 166 LAND COMMISSION ACT - OBJECTS AND POWERS OF THE PROVINCIAL LAND COMMISSION 7. (1) I t i s the object of the commission t o | (a) preserve a g r i c u l t u r a l land f o r farm use; , (b) encourage the establishment and maintenance of family, farms, and land i n an a g r i c u l t u r a l land reae^ye, f o r a use compatible w i t h the p r e s e r v a t i o n , ^. o f ^ f a m i l y farms and farm use of the l a n d . • (c) preserve green b e l t l and i n and around urban areas; (d) encourage the establishment and maintenance of la n d i n a green b e l t land reserve f o r a use compatible w i t h the p r e s e r v a t i o n of a green b e l t ; (e) preserve land bank land having d e s i r a b l e q u a l i t i e s f o r urban or i n d u s t r i a l development and r e s t r i c t s u b d i v i s i o n or use of the land f o r other purposes; ( f ) encourage the establishment and maintenance of land i n a land bank land reserve f o r a use compatible w i t h an u l t i m a t e use f o r i n d u s t r i a l and urban development; (g) preserve park land f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l use; '(h) encourage the establishment and maintenance of land i n a park land reserve f o r a use compatible w i t h an u l t i m a t e use f o r r e c r e a t i o n ; and ( h i ) advise and a s s i s t m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s i n the p r e p a r a t i o n and pr o d u c t i o n of the land reserve plans r e q u i r e d f o r the purpose of t h i s A c t ; and, f o r these o b j e c t s , i t has the power and c a p a c i t y , by i t s e l f , or i n cooperation w i t h the Government of Canada, or any of i t s agencies or c o r p o r a t i o n s , or w i t h any other department of Government, or w i t h a m u n i c i p a l i t y or r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t t o ( i ) purchase or otherwise acquire land, except by ; e x p r o p r i a t i o n , on such terms and c o n d i t i o n s as may be n e g o t i a t e d , and hold such land f o r the purposes of t h i s A c t ; 167 ( j ) dispose of, by s a l e , l e a s e , or otherwise, commission land and Crown land that i s i n an a g r i c u l t u r a l l a nd reserve, a green b e l t land reserve, a land bank land reserve, or a park land r e s e r v e , s u b j e c t t o such terms and c o n d i t i o n s as the commission may determine; (k) accept g i f t s of land s u b j e c t t o such terms and c o n d i t i o n s as the commission may determine; / (1) acquire and hold p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y and dispose of \ personal property by s a l e , lease or otherwise; and / (m) i f au t h o r i s e d by any other A c t, purchase or otherwise a c q u i r e , hold, a d m i n i s t e r , and dispose of land, i n c l u d i n g Crown l a n d , f o r the purpose of t h a t other A c t . ^ (2) For the purpose of t h i s s e c t i o n , the commission may (a) purchase or acquire l a n d , except by e x p r o p r i a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g Crown l a n d , the present c o n d i t i o n or fu t u r e p o t e n t i a l of v.'hich merits p r e s e r v a t i o n by reason of i t s a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y or i t s l o c a t i o n i n or around urban areas, as green b e l t l a n d ; (b) purchase or acquire land, except by e x p r o p r i a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g Crown l a n d , having d e s i r a b l e q u a l i t i e s f o r urban urban or i n d u s t r i a l development or redevelopment, as land bank l a n d ; and (c) purchase or acquire land, except by e x p r o p r i a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g Crown l a n d , having d e s i r a b l e q u a l i t i e s f o r , or f u t u r e p o t e n t i a l f o r , r e c r e a t i o n a l use as park l a n d ; and upon be i n g so purchased or acquired, the green b e l t l a n d , land bank land , or park land i s e s t a b l i s h e d as (d) a green b e l t land reserve; or (e) a land bank land r e s e r v e ; or ( f ) a park land r e s e r v e , as the case may be, and s h a l l be s u b j e c t t o t h i s Act and the r e g u l a t i o n s . j I \ \ 168 APPENDIX D 1. GENERAL LAND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS ( T y p i c a l G.V.R.D. M u n i c i p a l i t y employing 'SECTION 702A of Land-use Contracts') 2. APPROVAL PROCEDURES FOR REZONING APPLICATIONS IN VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES IN GREATER VANCOUVER P R O V I N C I A L & R E G I O N A L I N V O L V E M E N T D E V E L O P M E N T S T A G E M U N I C I P A L D E P A R T M E N T S A N D / O R C O N S U L T A N T S I N V O L V E D I N T R O D U C T I O N T O P O T E N T I A L P R O P E R T Y P R O V I N C I A L & R E G I O N A L D E P T S . A S R E Q U I R E D F O R 1 , 2 , 3 , & k B E L O W P R E L I M I N A R Y I N V E S T I G A T I O N O F D E V E L O P M E N T P O S S I B I L I T I E S P R E P A R E ' C O N C E P T U A L P L A N S A N D / O R P E R S P E C T I V E D R A W I N G S P L A N N I N G D E P T . - Z O N I N G 1. F A R M L A N D 2. H I G H W A Y A C C E S S 3 . F L O O D P L A I N 4 . R E G I O N A L P L A N . , - S E W E R • - W A T E R - D R A I N A G E T H E L A N D D E V E L O P M E N T P R O C E S S - - v {_. ON ( T y p i c a l G . V . R . D . M u n i c i p a l i t y - e m p l o y i n g ' S E C T I O N ?02 A o f L a n d U s e C o n t r a c t s ' ) P R E L I M I N A R Y A P P L I C A T I O N F O R S U B D I V I S I O N O R R E Z O N I N G A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N Hi"'1 I i li, | | Im HI 'i (Ij P L A N N I N G D E P T . M A N A G E R L A N D A G E N T E N G I N E E R I N G 3 U I L D I N G P A R K B O A R D S C H O O L B O A R D B . C . H Y D R O 4 C O U N C I L C O M M I T T E E S P L A N N I N G P A R K S & R E C R . P U B L I C W O R K S H E A L T H A N D W E L F A R E A N D / C O N S U L T A N T S C O U N C I L A M E N D S Z O N I N G B Y - L A W C R E A T E S D E V E L O P M E N T A R E A o B . C . T E L E P H O N E G . V . S . & D . D . & P . C . B . - S E W E R D O F H - W A T E R B . C . H . & P O W E R - P O W E R - G A S S O L I C I T O R P R E P A R E S D E V E L O P M E N T A G R E E M E N T ( S B O N D I N G C A L C U L A T I O N A R C H I T E C T U R A L & L A N D S C A P E . P L A N S E N G I N E E R I N G P L A N S - R O A D S & S E W E R S E T C . L E G A L S U B D I V I S I O N P L A N S & E A S E M E N T S P L A N S C H E C K I N G & A M E N D I N G W A T E R , S E W E R R O A D S , L A N E S D R A I N A G E , P O W E R S T R E E T L I G H T I N G B U I L D I N G \ P R O V I N C I A L S I G N A T U R E S A S R E Q U I R E D H I G H W A Y S L A N D C O M M ' N A P P R O V A L P R O C E D U R E F O R R E Z O N I N G A P P L I C A T I O N S I N V A R I O U S M U N I C I P A L I T I E S I N G R E A T E R V A N C O U V E R B U R N A B Y P L A N N I N G D E P T . - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L C O Q U I T L A M P L A N N I N G D E P T . - C O U N C I L - D E S I G N P A N E L - A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - . C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L D E L T A P L A N N I N G D E P T . - C O U N C I L - D E S I G N P A N E L & D E L T A A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L N E W W E S T M I N S T E R P L A N N I N G D E P T . - C O N S U L T A T I V E C O M M I T T E E O F A R C H I T E C T S - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L ^ N O R T H V A N C O U V E R / ( C I T Y ) C I T Y C L E R K - E N G I N E E R I N G D E P T . , - L A N D A G E N T , A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L - • N O R T H V A N C O U V E R ( D I S T R I C T ) C I T Y C L E R K - E N G I N E E R I N G D E P T . , L A N D A G E N T , A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - D E S I G N P A N E L - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L P O R T C O Q U I T L A M P L A N N I N G D E P T . - P L A N N I N G & Z O N I N G C O M M I T T E E - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L P O R T M O O D Y P L A N N I N G D E P T . - P L A N N I N G . C O M M I T T E E ( C O N S U L T A N T P L A N N E R . ) - .COUNCIL. - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L R I C H M O N D P L A N N I N G D E P T . - E N G I N E E R I N G D E P T . - P L A N N I N G C O M M I T T E E - D E S I G N P A N E L - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L c o n t S U R R E Y P L A N N I N G D E P T . - A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L V A N C O U V E R P L A N N I N G D E P T . - Z O N I N G P L A N N E R - Z O N I N G & R E A L E S T A T E B O A R D - T E C H N I C A L P L A N N I N G B O A R D - B O A R D O F V A R I A N C E - V A N C O U V E R C I T Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L W E S T V A N C O U V E R C I T Y C L E R K -. C O U N C I L - A D V I S O R Y P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L W H I T E R O C K C I T Y C L E R K - P L A N N I N G C O M M I T T E E - C O N S U L T A N T P L A N N E R & A D V I S O R Y D E S I G N P A N E L - C O U N C I L - P U B L I C H E A R I N G - C O U N C I L S o u r c e : G . V . R . D " . ' I n f i l l S t u d y , D e c e m b e r 1 9 7 3 175 APPENDIX E 1. REZONING APPLICATION COSTS AND REQUIREMENTS BY MUNICIPALITIES IN GREATER VANCOUVER 2. DEVELOPMENT COSTS AND REQUIREMENTS BY VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES IN GREATER VANCOUVER 3 . ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS AND REQUIREMENTS 4. IMPOST FEES IN THE G.V.R.D. R E Z O N I N G A P P L I C A T I O N C O S T S A N D R E Q U I R E M E N T S B Y M U N I C I P A L I T I E S I N G R E A T E R V A N C O U V E R C o s t o f A p p l i c a t i o n v . • A p p r o x i m a t e P r o c e d u r a l W a i t i n g P e r i o d N u m b e r o f S e t s o f P l a n s R e q u i r e d B U R N A B Y $25.00 $ 2 5 . 0 0 M i n i m u m $ 1 . 0 0 / 1 , 0 0 0 s . f . o f . l a n d t o b e r e z o n e d 3 M o n t h s 2 S e t s + L e t t e r o f I n t e n t + A u t h o r i s a t i o n B y O w n e r C O Q U I T L A M $35.00 S e t F e e 4 M o n t h s 1 S e t D E L T A $ 5 0 . 0 0 J c 5 5 0 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t 50.000 s . f . 51 . 0 0 / 1 , 000 s . f . O v e r T h i s 3 M o n t h s 5 S e t s N E W W E S T M I N S T E R $ 5 0 . 0 0 { < 550.00 f o r F i r s t 50.000 s . f . 5 1 . 0 0 / 1 , 000 s . f . O v e r T h i s l i M o n t h s 3 S e t s + R e n d e r i n g N O R T H V A N C O U V E R ( C I T Y ) $75.00 { < 575.00 M i n i m u m 5 2 . 0 0 x N o . o f D w e l l i n g U n i t s 3 M o n t h s 2 S e t s N O R T H V A N C O U V E R ( D I S T R I C T ) $75.00 « 575.00 M i n i m u m ? 2 . 0 0 x N o . o f D w e l l i n g U n i t s k M o n t h s 2 S e t s P O R T C O Q U I T L A M $ 5 0 . 0 0 S e t F e e ( C o v e r s R e z o n i n g A p p l i c a t i o n a n d L a n d U s e C o n t r a c t . F e e ) l i M o n t h s 1 S e t c o n t i n u e d o n n e x t p a g e C o s t o f A p p l i c a t i o n A p p r o x i m a t e P r o c e d u r a l W a i t i n g P e r i o d N u m b e r o f S e t s o f P l a n s R e q u i r e d P O R T M O O D Y $ 5 0 . 0 0 $ 5 0 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t 5 0 , 0 0 0 s . f . $1 . 0 0/1 , 0 0 0 s . f . O v e r T h i s k M o n t h s 1 S e t R I C H M O N D N o C h a r g e 3 M o n t h s 3 S e t s S U R R E Y $ 5 0 . 0 0 $ 5 0 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t 5 0 , 0 0 0 s . f . $1 . 0 0/1 , 0 0 0 s . f . O v e r T h i s 6 M o n t h s M i n i m u m 2 S e t s V A N C O U V E R $ 7 5 . 0 0 - S e t F e e 3 M o n t h s 3 S e t s W E S T V A N C O U V E R $ 5 0 . 0 0 . S e t F e e 3 M o n t h s 3 S e t s W H I T E R O C K N o C h a r g e • 3 M o n t h s 3 S e t s D E V E L O P M E N T C O S T S A N D R E Q U I R E M E N T S B Y V A R I O U S M U N I C I P A L I T I E S T N G R E A T E R V A N C O U V E R D E V E L O P M E N T P E R M I T B U I L D I N G P E R M I T T y p e C o s t P e e R a t e F e e f o r a H y p o t h e t i c a l $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 R e s i d e n t i a l D e v e l o p m e n t A v e r a g e P r o c e s s i n g T i m e f o r B u i l d i n g P e r m i t B U R N A B Y N o t R e q u i r e d $102.50 f o r F i r s t $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 + $ 1 . 0 0 / $ l , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s $ 1 , 0 5 2 . 5 0 2 W e e k s C O Q U I T L A M N o t R e q u i r e d $ 4 9 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 1 . 5 0 p e r $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s ( t o b e r a i s e d ) $ 1 , 5 2 6 . 5 0 1 W e e k D E L T A D e v e l o p m e n t A g r e e m e n t - $ 5 5 . C O f o r F i r s t $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 2 . 0 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s $ 2 , 0 3 5 . 0 0 I W e e k N E W W E S T M I N S T E R N o t R e q u i r e d . $ 9 8 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 1 . 2 5 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s $ 1 , 2 8 5 . 5 0 2 W e e k s N O R T H V A N C O U V E R ( C I T Y ) L a n d U s e C o n t r a c t $ 3 0 0 . O O / A c r e + L e g a l F e e s $235.50 f o r F i r s t $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 + $ 1 . 5 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s $ 1 , 5 8 5 . 5 0 3 W e e k s N O R T H V A N C O U V E R ( D I S T R I C T ) G o i n g O n L a n d U s e C o n t r a c t S y s t e m - $ 2 3 5 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 + $ 1 . 5 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O v e r T h i s $ 1 , 5 8 5 . 5 0 3 W e e k s c o n t i n u e d . o n . n e x t p a g e DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BUILDING PERMIT Type Cost Fee Rate Fee f o r a H y p o t h e t i c a l $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 R e s i d e n t i a l Development Average P r o c e s s i n g Time f o r B u i l d i n g Permit PORT COQUITLAM Going on Land Use C o n t r a c t System $ 3 6 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 1 . 0 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 1 , 0 2 1 . 0 0 1 Week PORT MOODY Going on Land Use C o n t r a c t System $ 1 0 0 . 0 0 $49 .00 f o r F i r s t $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 1 . 5 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 1 , 5 2 6 . 5 0 / 1 Week RICHMOND Land Us e C o n t r a c t No Charge $ 5 5 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 2 . 0 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 2 , 0 3 5 . 0 0 1 Week SURREY Land Use Co n t r a c t Cost Included i n " P u b l i c Space Fee" $ 5 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t $1, 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 4 . 0 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s (to be r a i s e d ) $4 , 0 0 1 . 0 0 2 Weeks VANCOUVER Development Permit Required $ 5 . 0 0 1-Family D w e l l i n g ; $18 . 0 0 f o r 1st 1 2 , 0 0 0 s q . f t . ; $ 1 . 5 0 / 2 , 0 0 0 s q . f t . Over T h i s $105.25 f o r F i r s t $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 1 . 1 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 1 , 1 5 0 . 2 5 3 Weeks WEST VANCOUVER Land Use Co n t r a c t $ 2 0 0 . 0 0 $235.00 f o r F i r s t $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 + $ 1 . 5 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 1 , 5 8 5 . 5 0 . 1 Week WHITE ROCK , Land Use Co n t r a c t $ 3 0 0 . 0 0 ( L e g a l and A d m i n i s t r a t i v e $ 6 0 . 0 0 f o r F i r s t 310 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p l u s $ 2 . 0 0 / $ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Over T h i s $ 2 ,040 . 0 0 1 Week 180 ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS AND REQUIREMENTS BURNABY Deposit equal to cost of servicing (held for one year) Demage deposit $200.00 (refundable) $ 1 6 0 . 0 0 water connection fee $ 7.50 sewer connection fee Inspection fee k% of cost of servicing COQUITLAM Performance bond equal to tota l cost of servicing and landscaping (held for one year) (Considering $ 3 0 0 . 0 0 damage deposit) $140.00 water connection fee $ 1 3 0 . 0 0 sewer connection fee. (for other than local improvement areas) Inspection fee kfo of cost of servicing DELTA Development bond equal to 5f° of servicing costs (held for one year) Security bond $ 2 5 0 . 0 0 (refundable) Public U t i l i t i e s Tax Single family dwelling $ 3 0 0 . 0 0 / l o t (varies) Multiple dwelling 1 $100.00/unit $100.00 water connection fee $150.00 sewer connection fee Inspection and legal fees equal to kfo of estimated site costs NEW WESTMINSTER Performance deposit equal to 1% of value of construction (minimum $400.00) (held u n t i l completion) $140.00 water connection fee sewer connection fee $ 1 5 . 0 0 / f t . from main to property l ine (minimum $200.00) (for other than local improvement areas) ! 181 NORTH VANCOUVER (CITY) No performance "bond r e q u i r e d Parks t a x $ 5 0.00/dwelling u n i t $100.00 (approx.) water connection fee $179.00 sewer connection fee NORTH VANCOUVER (DISTRICT) No performance bond r e q u i r e d Landscaping bond equal t o 50$ of landscaping costs Damage deposit $100.00/dwelling (refundable) No charge f o r water connection $220.00 sewer connection fee PORT COQUITLAM Performance bond equal t o t o t a l cost of s e r v i c i n g (held u n t i l completion) Damage depo s i t $100.00/building (non-refundable) $130.00 water connection fee $140.00 sewer connection fee In s p e c t i o n fee $ 5 0.00/dwelling u n i t PORT MOODY Performance bond equal to t o t a l cost of s e r v i c i n g (held u n t i l completion) Water and sewer connection fee $400.00/dwelling • . ! \ RICHMOND ' Development bond equal t o $0% of cost of s e r v i c i n g and landscaping (held f o r one year) $ 85.OO water connection fee $150.00 sewer connection fee In s p e c t i o n fee ( v a r i e s ) 182 SURREY Landscaping & s e r v i c i n g bond equal to cost of landscaping & s e r v i c i n g (held u n t i l completion) Maintenance hold-back $% of s e r v i c i n g costs held f o r one year a f t e r completion of c o n s t r u c t i o n P u b l i c Space C o n t r i b u t i o n $ 5 3 0 . 0 0 / d w e l l i n g ' ' . ::. •', $ 7 2 0 . 0 0/unit ( m u l t i p l e f a m i l y ) |420 . 0 0/unit (mobile home) $440.00/acre f o r acre p a r c e l s which req u i r e new connections t o water & sewage l i n e s $ 1 1 5 . 0 0 water connection fee $ 1 5 0 . 0 0 sewer connection fee $ 1 0 . 0 0 f o r Plumbing I n s p e c t i o n fee VANCOUVER A l l s e r v i c i n g c o s t s must be paid i n advance Damage deposit $ 5 0 . 0 0 / d w e l l i n g (refundable) $ 2 3 0 . 0 0 water connection fee $ 5 0 8 . 0 0 sewer connection fee $ 8 . 0 0 plumbing i n s p e c t i o n fee WEST VANCOUVER Performance bond equal to cost of s e r v i c i n g & landscaping (held u n t i l completion) Damage deposit $ 1 0 0 . 0 0 / d w e l l i n g (refundable) < >140.00 water connection fee >450.00 sewer connection fee WHITE ROCK Performance bond equal to the cost of s e r v i c i n g a n d . u t i l i t i e s (held u n t i l completion) Excavation bond $ 3 0 0 . 0 0 (refundable) $ 1 0 0 . 0 0 water connection fee ;$155»00 sewer connection fee -183 IMPOST FEES IN THE G.V.R.D. AS OF MARCH 18, 1974| INTRODUCTION j | Surrey, D e l t a , White Rock and Port Coquitlam arei the f o u r G.V.R.D. m u n i c i p a l i t i e s c u r r e n t l y charging'impost f e e s . No other m u n i c i p a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s c o n s i d e r i n g the i m p o s i t i o n of such fees at t h i s time. Surrey has the gr e a t e s t experience w i t h impost fees and the most complex formula. White Rock a p p l i e s an impost fee to apartment and condominium u n i t s only. D e l t a a p p l i e s an impost fee to a l l r e s i d e n t i a l and i n d u s t r i a l development. D e l t a has one uniform fee f o r a l l r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s and a d i f f e r e n t fee f o r i n d u s t r i a l u n i t s . Port Coquitlam a p p l i e s ' one standard per u n i t fee t o a l l types of development. I PORT j DELTA SURREY COQUITLAM '.WHITE ROCK RESIDENTIAL s \ Per U n i t . o r A d d i t i o n a l Lot Created SINGLE FAMILY $. 760 - $1,555 to $2,205 . $ 300 None DUPLEX •$ 760 $1,9^5 $ 300 None APARTMENT $ 7 6 0 $1,9^5 $ 3oq $1 ,000 CONDOMINIUM $ : 760 $1,9^5 . $ 300 $1,000 FARM HOUSE $ 760 $2,205 but $ 1 , 4 4 0 on 2nd u n i t $ 300 None 1 ACRE SINGLE FAMILY $ 760 $1,415 $ 300 None MOBILE HOME $ 760 $1,460 t o $2,110 $ 300 None INDUSTRIAL $4,930 per acre $ 2 , 1 5 0 / 20,000 sq. f t . $ 300 per u n i t None COMMERCIAL None ' $ 3 , 8 5 0 / 20,000 s q . f t . $ 300 None continued on next page 184 PORT DELTA SURREY COQUITLAM WHITE ROCK INSTITUIONAL None $. 335, $ 300 None per bed per u n i t NOTES ' 1. D e l t a R e s i d e n t i a l Impost Fees ' Of t h i s $ 7 6 0 , $420 i s dedicated t o parks and r e c r e a t i o n and $330 t o p u b l i c works such as drainage. 2. D e l t a I n d u s t r i a l Impost Fees Of t h i s $4 , 9 3 0 , $840 i s dedicated t o the p r o v i s i o n of - p u b l i c open space and $4,090 t o o f f s i t e s e r v i c e s . 185 APPENDIX F HOW TO GET REALLY RICH IN REAL ESTATE — BUYING, RENT RAISONG, REMORTGAGING, SELLING BRINGS PROFITS (The Vancouver Sun, February 14, 1974) 186 ^ • The VANCOUVER SUN: Thur., Feb. 14, 1974 i By HALL LEIKEN Sun City Hall Reporter ! A routine investigation by • Hie attorney-general's depart-ment into possible breaches of the Real Estate Act could ex-plain the escalation of real es-tate prices and rents in Van-couver. :'- The investigation is'the sub-: ject of a suit by the company .'involved. Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown. 777 Hornby, which • seeks a-Supreme Courfinjune-• tion to stop the investigation j and damages against the in-' vestigators. -; Defendants in the action are the attorney-general of B.C., • superintendent of insurance ' Thomas Cantell, who adminis-; ters B.C.'s Real Estate Act, , his deputy, Don Anderson, and insurance department • employees M. E. Kitchen and i Dirk S. Doornberg. Cantell said the action is, to i his knowledge, the firs! at-• tempt lo block an investiga-! tion by his department. "' He said the current Real Estate Act was introduced in 1958 and he joined the depart-, meiit in 1959. .-' The subject matter of the • investigation is confidential. But there are, documents on the public record which show the success of two Fullbrook, 'Bertram and Brown salesmen in the rising real estate mar-ket. The two salesmen, Stanley Silverman and Edward Walm-sley, operate a network of companies involving associ-ates, friends and relatives. ' Basically, their method of making, money consists of buying a property, remortgag-ing and taking a \ profit t h r o u g h the remortgaging , process or through resale. Rental housing" is the princi-pal form of purchase, usually to be resold to a related com-pany. Rents are raised to in-crease the mortgage value of tfie property. Some examples: An apartment property at 1200 West Fifteenth was pur-chased on June 28. 1973, for '$03,000. It was resold Jan. 17, ' 1974, for $85,000. with $13,000 extracted in .profits and com-missions through reiiiorigag-ing. A house at :»622 Point Grey went from $37,730 to $63,000 in less than 10 months, yielding $21,750 in profits and commis-sions along the way. The iwo properties are still , retained in the ownership of two Walmsley-Silverman-rela-ted companies. A house on a double lot at 3160 Dunbar, bought for S63,- . 000 on May 2-1. 1973. was sold Aug. 1 for §73,000. The mort-gages on the property total $70,000. That represents $7,000 gain over the original pur-chase price in remortgaging profit and a $15,000 gross pro'f-. it in two months for the insid-er who first bought into the property. A double lot at 2175—77 West Fourth, sold in Febru-ary] 1972~br ~ $45.1)00. u as split, and each lot sold b i t year for $45,000. A house at 1323 Walnut i n u i rented for $250 before being sold was advertised recently for a $600 rent. ' A property at 1335-3" Wal-nut, sold for $42,325 on April 30. 1973. was resold for $59,500 on Dec. 18. 1973. In the meantime, mortgage? on the property were boosted to $53,500, a gain"of $11,175 on the original transaction. The effect on rents of these increased prices is obvious. Kpnts must rise. In mortgaging of revenue houses, ihe major factor in determining appraised value (on which the amounts of mortgages are based j , is the amount of revenue derived from them, says John Iseli. manager of the Broadway-Blenheim branch of the Van-couver City Savings Credit Union. 187 Those who can afford the in-creased rents can stay on. Those who cannot must go. "I'm not a charitable insti-tution," Walmsley said in an , interview. "I'm in this business to make money, to make a fair return on my money. It's not up to me to provide housing for those who can't afford my rents. I sell space to live in. Those who can afford the going rate are welcome. Those who can't have to get out." Silverman said that on at least four occasions he has personally rolled back rents . on properties he owns where he determined the proposed in-creases would work a hard-ship on tenants. He also points out that prices are rising at a fast clip in all sectors of the economy. . "Go into your supermarket and see what's happened to . the price of food," Silverman, said. "Nobody's calling the supermarkets speculators. ' N a m e o n e t h i n g ' "Name me one thing that went down fin price) last • • year. I don't think people can .-expect real estate to go •. down either." Both Silverman and Walm-sley denied they are specula- -tors or that their activity is a • factor in rising housing costs. • They say their activities would have little general ef- • feet if compared to the activi-. ties of large real estate firms. "As far as inflating the , value of properties, all we do is offer our properties for sale from time to' time for the market; value," said Walm-sley. "You get the price you can for it. Would you sell your own ; house for what you bought it ; for two or three years ago?"- > It must be stressed that '. there is nothing illegal in the selling and reselling done by , the companies. ; However; the morality of such business activities is questioned by Aid. Mike Har-court, chairman of council's housing committee, . „„,...„ H a r c o u r t believes such transactions have a direct ef-fect on housing costs and rents. "Whether they are doing it with specific intentions or not, it's happening and we intend to stop it.," he said. "I look on it (such activity) as F look on land speculation where nothing is done but turning property over for-profit.. They add nothing to . the city. I despise it." Harcourt. said he has had a number of reports of single-family houses being coverted by the Walmsley-Silverman group into suites and said he considers this equally repre-- hensible. R e p a i r s n e e d e d "We have to retain occupier . ownership in the city or our neighborhoods are going to go down the drain," he said. Harcourt. also referred to alle-gations that the group fails to keep houses it owns in a prop-1. er state of repair. "I haven't heard their side of it. yet, but. they are the one group in town I get the major-ity of complaints on that they're not fixing up,^ ' he said. Told that Silverman and Walmsley claim their man-agement arm, Silver Lane Management Ltd., does re-spond quickly to tenants' com- : • plaints of disrepair, Harcourt said: "They can say they're fix-ing up until they're blue in the' face, but I'd like to see some evidence of it." Council hopes this legisla- -tive session to get a charter amendment, that would cm-power the city to fix up pre-mises below a certain stand-ard of repair and to charge the cost to the owner of the properly on his tax bill. "I think you can just tell these people to beware of the-Ides of March," Harcourt said. Julius Caesar was stabbed in the back by his fellow Ro-mans on the Ides of March. But it seems unlikely this fate will befall Silverman and i Walmsley. Edward Clarence Walmsley, 29, lives in an opulent water-front home at 5240 Marine, West Vancouver. One associ-ate puts its worth at $.100,000. According to large newspa-per ads placed by his compa-ny, Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown Ltd., Walmsley. in the first nine months of 1973, sold $3.5 million worth of revenue and residential property. The only othe'r salesman in, Walmsley's league at FBB — again according to company ads — is Stanley Hugh Silver-man. He was also a $3.5-million man in the first nine months of 1973. T w o a d d r e s s e s Silverman, also in his late 20s, sometimes lists his home address as 1993 Quilchena Crescent and sometimes uses . the address 1603 Matthews. Both are clean-cut, highly presentable men. Walmsley wears a mous-tache that gives a certain added authority to his tanned face. Silverman is a curly-headed individual who gives the im-pression of being a university student rather than one of the hottest real estate salesmen on the West Coast. Between them they control or have interest in 12 holding companies and are connected in various ways to a number of others. The Vancouver Sun's study of their activities comes from assessment and tax roll rec-ords, records of the registrar of companies, the land reg-istry office and real estate records. These records show over the „past year or so a pace of . buying and selling real estate, inter-company trading, mort-g a g i n g and remortgaging, that can only be described as dizzying. Besides the 12 companies Walmsley and Silverman con-trol outright or have director-ships in. two other companies •' they deal with are controlled by relatives. 188 Two other companies in-volve fellow employees 2!. F u 11 b r 0 0 k, Bertram and Brown. And, at least three other companies show up on real es-tate records as regularly deal-ing with Silverman's and Walmsley's companies and associates. A number of other com-, panies and individuals crop up consistently in connection with properties that Silverman and Walmsley deal with or have dealt with, but. the precise re-lationships are difficult to de-termine. Definite trend But. a definite trend recurs throughout, the relationships. Once a property is acquired, the appraised value must be driven up as quickly and as high as possible. In that way the amount of. mortgages on a property can rise well above the initial price paid by the group. Anything above the initial price in the way of mortgages can either be taken out as profit or used.as the down' payment for further acquisi-tions. The simplest' way to con-vince a mortgage company, that a property has a high value is to get as much reve-nue out of it as possible. This : means as much rent as possi-ble. And, the higher the annual rental revenue that can be shown, the higher the ap-praised value. There is a rough rule of thumb used in the mortgage trade to determine appraised jvakie^_The method consists of taking the yearly income otY the property and multiplying/ lit by a factor of between 8.5J \ancl^ j 0. - — ~ — — . "Thus, a rooming house with an Income of $10,000 a year would roughly be appraised at. $85,000. If the appraiser were ' an easygoing type, and the risks were right, the property might be appraised as high as $100,000. . . ' ,,. . Thus one can postulate a rough formula for becoming a successful investor in rental housing: High rents equal high mort-gages equal high profits. And, of course, higher rents mean higher mortgages, mean high-er profits still. There seems to be three ways of going about it. First, by mortgaging and remortgaging a property by way of repeated sales through the various companies until the rents and the mortgages have been driven as high as they can reasonably be ex-peeled to go. Second, by getting a good buy and then selling it off for a quick capital gain. Third, by a combination of the first two. ' The first method would seem to be the most attrac-tive. It has the advantage of generating profits that can either be taken out or rein-vested, at the same time re-taining control of the property and the possibility of making more profits in the future. • The Walmsley-Silverman property at; 3622 Point Grey '* Road will illustrate how the system works. .; From Jan. 19, 1973, to Nov. 2,' 1973, it was sold and resold ; ' at least five times. At least four of the transactions were between Silverman-Waimsley 1 companies. The property rose from an , initial price of $37,750 to $63,-000. At present, there is a first mortgage outstanding of $48,-. 000 and a second mortgage of $11,500, for total mortgages of $59,500. • \ Thus, between the original selling price of $37,750 and the present mortgage, there is a difference of $21,750. This can be regarded as the profit that has been taken out of this property so far. Number of deals However, the first resale in-volved someone who, while he has had a number of dealings w i t h Walmsley-Silverman companies, may not be a member of their circle. . The property first came into clear control of Walmsley-Silverman on April 9, 1973, when Silverman bought it for $45,000. From $45,000 to $59,500 is • $14,500. That means that Walmsley-Silverman and their associates had at, least $14,500 to plow back into other prop-erties or take as profit. And they still own the property. Another property at 1423 Walnut was bought on May 23, 1973, for $50,000. It has mort-gages totalling $52,500, a mod-est increase of $2,500. The property is now on the market for $69,500. T h e. Silverman-Waimsley holdings aroused the interest of Barry Holmes, a 22-year-old University of B.C. student, when Holmes was working last October as a volunteer for the Kitsilano Area Re-sources Centro. Holmes found a high number ; of tenant compldints against Silver Lane Management Ltd., . the management company used by Silverman and Walm-sley. Holmes tried to get some . tenant relief and, in the proc-ess, stumbled on the fact that a large number of apparently unrelated companies whose .. properties were managed by Silver Lane were, in fact, owned by Silverman, Walm-sley, business associates and persons connected with them. Some of the research for this article was done by Holmes, who brought the sit-uation to the attention of The Vancouver Sun. Walmsley and Silverman re-' fused in an initial, three-hour interview on Jan. 29 to' say specifically how many proper-. ties they have an interest in • i n the city. When S i l v e r m a n was ' contacted for an additional interview, he said he would *. make no more comment on the matter and neither would Walmsley. He said he was "somewhat sore" that a number of his clients had been contacted by The Vancouver Sun in connec-tion with gathering material for the article. 189 "T'll wait for it to come out, to let them make their allega-tions and then I intend to fight fire with fire." he said. Silverman and Walmsley are both modest about their suc-cess. "There are plenty of organi-7.ntions that are bigger than ours in this field," said Silver-man. Government records show 560 property transactions car-• ried out through Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown in 1973, 80 involving company em-ployees as principals. • The lineup of companies connected with FBB em-ployees, Walmsley and Silver-man, is like a pyramid. At the top are Silver Lane Holdings Ltd.. and S and W Investments Ltd. They are controlled by Walmsley and Silverman alone. Immediately below are a 1 number of other companies that involve either or both of the principals along with vari-ous associates. These, together with their directors, are: Market owner Blacklane Investments Ltd. \ Walmsley, Silverman, and Peter Black, of 4033 Delbrook, North Vancouver, owner of a meat market. Greater Vancouver Holdings Ltd.: Walmsley and his wife, Lynn. Ma'goo Invesments Ltd.: Sil-verman, Walmsley, Michael McCleery, a real estate sales-man for Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown, and Barry. Dunn. Lincoln H o l d i n g s Ltd.: Walmsley and Ian McFarlane, manager of Zephyr - Mercury Sales. Westfield Holdings Ltd.; Walmsley and John Laxton, lawyer and former provincial • president of the New Demo-cratic Party. Marian Holdings Ltd.:- Sil-; verman and Ian G. and Mar- . yanne Belcher, of 2620 West Thirteenth. Kawi Holdings Ltd.: Silver-man, Walmsley, Brian Heard, of 1004—777 Cardero. Mandy Holdings Ltd.: Sil- ' verman, Patricia and Andrew Krieger, of 4772 Narvaez , Drive. Napoleon Enterprises Ltd.: Silverman, Walmsley, M i -chael and Lois Gurvin of 2450 Palmerston, West Vancouver. Serin Holdings. Ltd.: Silver-man and his wife, Mary Jane. Two other companies that can be said to be directly con-nected to Silverman are Mishigana Investments Ltd. a n d Rosmore Investments Ltd. S i s t e r , l a w y e r ' Mishigana directors a r e Gerald and Karen Lecovin. ' Mrs. Lecovin is Silverman's sister. Lecovin also acts as a lawyer for several of the com-panies. Rosmore Investments' di-rectors are Mrs. Lecovin and Silverman's mother. Rose Pearl Silverman, of 7241 Cam-bie. Two other companies con-nected to Silverman and Walmsley through Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown, are Ex-celsior Investments Ltd. one of whose directors is Ron Boulter, an FBB salesman; and Magnexx Holdings Ltd. Magnexx directors are Fred James Walker, FBB sales-man, Robert J. B. Skinner ' and Jerald Weitzel, a dental ; surgeon. Another, company that can be related to Walmsley - Sil-verman t h r o u g h FBB is James B. Speiran Ltd., one of whose directors is J. B. Speir-an, of 7625 Heather. Speiran owns various prop-erties together with Geoffrey, -Mook, of 5761 Sprott, Burna- . by; R. J. Soden of 1650 Bir-chlynn. North Vancouver; and -John Fullbrook, of Fullbrook, Bertram and Brown. Another man who had had extensive dealings with Walm-sley - Silverman is Robert Wayne Scott, a director of Sil-ver Lane Holdings until Oct. 29. 1973. Scott, owns property togeth-er with Evelyn Dunning, of 5347 Oak. Scott, uses the ad-dresses 5347 Oak and 817 Pi-gott, Richmond. Bearing in mind these vari-ous companies and personali-ties, it is possible to get a pic-ture of how the system works . by following a number of transactions involving various properties, using available records. First, the property at 3622 Point Grey Road. On Jan. 19, 1973. T. A. Streiling, of Hollywood. Calif., sold the property to William Brian Harrison, of 5460 Gilpin, Burnaby, for $37,750. On April 9, Harrison sold to Silverman for $45,000. On some date in September, Silverman sold the property to . Silver Lane Holdings for an apparent sum of $45,000. The land registry office data is fuzzy on this point. Again, on some inclerlimi-nate date between September and Nov. 2r Silver Lane Hold-ings sold the properly Io Westfield Investments f o r $55,000. On Nov. 2. Westfield sold to Napoleon Enterprises for $63,-: 000. One of the interesting things about these deals is that, in addition to profits they make on sales as owners, Silverman and Walmsley also make com-. missions as agents for Full-, brook, Bertram and Brown. Lawyer laxton said he was unaware Walmsley had sold to another company, in which he, Walmsley, was involved. Laxton said he was told by Walmsley that the house had been sold at. a profit of $8,000 which, after the $3,000 com-mission, left a net of $5,000, or . $2,500 for each Westfield part-ner. Laxton said he had intended to go into long-term property investment. He has taken steps to sever the business relationship with Walmsley since finding out that the venture is more spec ulative than long-term, Laxton said. , However, he said that, so far as he was aware, nothing wrong "either legally or mo-rally" has been done in any Westfield transaction. The property at 3160 Dunbar was bought by Silverman's brother-in-law, Lecovin, on April 24 for $63,000. Lecovin said he transferred it. as dis-'. tinct from selling, to Mishiga-na, the company he and his 190 wife are directors of, and then sold it on Aug. 1 for $78,000 to a consortium that includes Serin Holdings (Silverman and wife). Greater Vancouver Holdings (Walmsley and wife) and Ron Boulter. Sold in 1973 The property at 1933 Balac-lava was sold some time in .July. 1973, to R. W. Scott for $42,000. On Aug. 21, Scott sold it to Silver Lane Holdings, . again for $42,000. On Nov. .8, 1973, Silver Lane sold it to Magnexx Holdings for $49,000. The property at 1200 West Fifteenth was bought by James B. Speiran Ltd., on June 28, 1973, for $63,000 and sold on Jan. 17, 1974, for $85,-000 to Westfield. It is now mortgaged for $76,000. Silver Lane Holdings bought the property at 1335-37 Walnut on April 30, 1973, for $42,325. Silver Lane then sold toBlack (of Blacklane Investments) for $52,500. Black sold to Franz and Lauraine Lajcik, of 1337 Wal-nut, . for $59,000. And they, in turn, sold to F. and L. Hold-ings Ltd., a company of which they are directors, for $59,500. Mortgages totalling $53,500 exist against the properly. That means $11,175 has been extracted since the original sale in April, 1973. Walmsley bought 1628 Ste-phens for $50,000 on March 30, .1973. He sold it to Silver Lane Holdings on May 8, for $60,000 and Silver Lane then resold it for the same amdunt, $60,000, on May. 10. However, it had picked up mortgages of $54,000 — $4,000' above the original purchase price. $8,900 profit On April 3, 1973, R. W. Scott ' bought 2525 York for $74,000. It has mortgages against it of $62,900 and $20,000. That leaves a profit of $8,900. Three properties in the 300 block West Twelfth have gone through a number of transac-tions that, to the outsider, ap-pear most contorted. The properties arc 334 West Twelfth, 344 West Twelfth and 354-64 West Twelfth. Mrs. A. M. F. Chouinard' bought 334 West Twelfth in December, 1.971, for $30,000. She acquired the two neigh-boring .properties in May, 1973, for an apparent $44,500. . She sold 334 West Twelfth to Serin Holdings on Aug. 20, for $57,666.67. Serin sold the prop-erty two days later to S. and • . W.'investments for $58,000. The property at. 344 West Twelfth was also sold by Mrs. Chouinard to Serin for $57,-666.67 on Aug. 20. and. four .days later. Serin sold to Lin- \ coin Holdings for $60,500. Mrs. Chouinard sold 354-64 West Twelfth to Serin, also on Aug. 20. for the same odd sum, and later in the month, Blacklane Investments bought it for $60,500. A sophisticated observer of real estate trends contacted by The Sun wondered why Walmsley and S i l v e r m a n . wanted to disguise their own-ership by acting through four different companies. No large immediate profit was made on those deals — perhaps $5,000 with another $4,800 in commissions. But the group now has as-sembled valuable land in the middle of a block. Exactly the kind of land a developer would want. Why all the different com-panies and why all the differ-ent individuals? Silverman and Walmsley re-fuse to talk about it. Presumably., there are two reasons, says a real estate ex-pert. Involvement can be dis-guised by dealing through a variety of apparently unrelat-ed companies. Secondly, working capital is brought in by outsiders like 'Black. Gurvin and Laxton to keep the wheels of the opera- .' tion greased. Walmsley said in an inter-view that he is merely some-one who advises clients with money they want to invest-Why all the trading between related companies? Walmsley says it. often hap- . pens that one partner wants to sell a property and the other one does not. Thus it goes to a company in which the partner who wants to re-tain a piece of the action is in-volved. What about the moral nup.s-tion raised by Aid. Harcourt? Silverman and Walmsley talked at. length in the inter-• view about the right, to make a profit and free enterprise. They saw nothing wrong with it, they said. Michael Gurvin, of Napole-on Enterprises, a part owner of Gurvin Jewellers. 86fi Gran-ville, was asked if there was anything morally wrong with making a profit by raising rents in a house from $250 to $500 a month. He said he did not think so. Ironically, he said similar re-sale activity on the building where he has his business has resulted in his commercial rent rising to $3,750 a month from $950. "I think that is criminal," he said. Given notice Gurvin has T>een given no-tice to vacate by his new landlord and is selling off all his stock. Lecovin said he sympa-thizes with people whose rents are raised, but. said he does not know what the answer to the problem is. "Is it wrong for the price of housing to rise but not wrong when it's the price of oil or food?" he said. "Can you expect the cost of housing and rents not to rise when the rest of the economy is expanding? I don't know what the answer is." He. said the only thing Sil-verman and Walmsley have done is that they have seen an opportunity and taken advan-tage of it. "I guess they are faking ad-vantage of their know-how and of their realization of what is happening in real es-tate in Vancouver." he said. "They gambled, perhaps,' while the rest of us were more conservative," Lecovin said. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0099919/manifest

Comment

Related Items