Frances Bula header image 2

Vancouver looking for a new chief planner again after only three years

August 3rd, 2015 · 25 Comments

This is a week old but I was in an internet challenged zone after I filed my story, so here it is: The Brian Jackson retirement/resignation, which I know many in this group will have thoughts on, especially about his remarks that ex-city staff were extraordinarily interventionist as they lobbied against various decisions of his department.

I should note that one group who was coming to have some respect for his work was developers, after he lobbied to have the community amenity contributions extracted by the city for rezonings set to a standardized level, at least along Cambie, so that property buyers (and sellers) would have some idea in advance of how much of the land lift they’d have to hand over to the city.

FRANCES BULA
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Sunday, Jul. 26, 2015 6:18PM EDT
Last updated Monday, Jul. 27, 2015 11:59AM EDT

Vancouver’s top planner is resigning only three years after being appointed to a job that has been at the centre of uproar over rapid development.

And Brian Jackson blames the unusual efforts former planning staff have made to increasingly contradict and oppose what his department is doing, at a time when the city is trying to accomplish a lot on many fronts. The previous planner was in the post for six years; the one before that did the job for at least 10 years.

“There were a variety of factors, but having a group of former planners criticizing council, criticizing the planning department, criticizing myself, was not particularly helpful,” said Mr. Jackson, who is 60, and retiring.

He said Vancouver, a place where he otherwise enjoyed his challenges and admired his staff, is the only city he’s known where that happens.

“It is a culture that has evolved here of planners eating their young.”

In recent months, one large group of former city planners has been making the case publicly that Mr. Jackson and his department should rethink the plans for a new tower and waterfront office district near the city’s train station.

Last fall, a former urban-design specialist, now working at the University of British Columbia, also created a minor sensation related to Mr. Jackson days before the November civic election. In a comment on a local blog, Scot Hein implied that Mr. Jackson pushed staff, against their wishes, to produce a plan for a cluster of high-density towers around the Commercial-Broadway station, in response to pressure from above him at city hall.

The proposed towers were part of a Grandview-Woodland area plan that had already provoked controversy in the left-leaning neighbourhood and prompted the ruling Vision Vancouver council to pour attention and apologies into the area in the months before the election.

Mr. Jackson also said that in addition to the difficult culture, the Vision Vancouver council’s agenda is so ambitious that it really requires someone to be “on top of their game 24/7.”

After a vacation away from Vancouver to decide whether he wanted to keep dealing with those two factors, he came back decided on no.

Mr. Jackson, a UBC graduate who had been a planner in Richmond, California and Toronto, was announced as the general manager of planning in July, 2012, from among more than 100 candidates, six months after the city fired its previous head planner, Brent Toderian.

Mr. Jackson walked into a city where angry resident groups had sprung up in several neighbourhoods to fight what they said were rezonings and plans that packed too much density into their areas.

For about 20 years, Vancouver had accommodated massive development without much controversy, in part because most of it was taking place on former industrial land on the fringes of the downtown peninsula.

However, as that land was built out, developers started looking at established neighbourhoods for new project sites. Then mayor Sam Sullivan also began promoting a concept called EcoDensity in 2006, which focused on how to generate a lot more density throughout Vancouver as a way of reducing urban impacts on the environment.

City council, planners, and developers appeared to be unprepared for the backlash that erupted, when the same kinds of towers that had been quietly approved for years suddenly began generating demonstrations at city hall, lawsuits and bitter complaints.

Mr. Jackson came in promising to be more consultative and to build on what Vancouver had done well – creating density that fit with neighbourhoods and was livable.

He was successful in getting new plans for the West End, the Downtown Eastside and Marpole passed, after lengthy consultations and major adjustments in communities that had originally mounted protests.

Behind the scenes, he could be called on to cut through bureaucratic knots that were stalling projects, sometimes private ones but also non-profit developments.

Councillors and the mayor’s office always defended his work. In the city news release, Mayor Gregor Robertson was quoted as saying Mr. Jackson was a “true leader” who made a significant impact on the city. City manager Penny Ballem said that what he’d been able to achieve in his time was “remarkable.”

However, his most persistent critics, a small but vocal circle, painted him as someone just carrying out the orders of his political masters.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Look Deeper

    I was encouraged by Mr. Jackson’s stated intentions to standardize CACs but I am unaware of any progress in this regard. Perhaps others more knowledgable can update us.

    I continue to be surprised by the gap between public expectations wrt to civic engagement in the planning process and the City’s interoperation of “progress”. I heard Mr. Jackson on CBC stating that he was proud of the improvements in the process of citizen engagement. Perhaps he has reason to be pleased re Marpole, West End, etc, I was not involved. I did participate in the recent Flats “planning process”. This is obviously at an early stage, but that said I have never been involved in a process that is more content free. The City continues to keep its information hidden from the public. For the average Joe the City’s position is that it does not have a plan for the Flats — no idea of what it is going to do (including the alignment of the sky train extension). How do they expect us to believe this stuff. We can draw our hopes and wishes on as many maps as Planners want — I don’t call this participation. I am not a planner. I don’t want to PLAN the Flats, what I want is chance to comment on City plans before they are cast in stone, have an input in to rezoning (or at least be aware of it), and to do both I need clear information on what the City is planning.

    “Mr. Jackson also said that in addition to the difficult culture, the Vision Vancouver council’s agenda is so ambitious that it really requires someone to be “on top of their game 24/7.” I have to wonder what this “ambitious agenda’ is and when Vision will share it with the lowly masses that actually live in this City. What is the City planning for the Broadway corridor? the Jericho lands? Future bike lanes? Granville Bridge re-purposing? Which neighbourhood is next on the list of being “redone”? So many things on the Vision wish list and to be sure the average Joe will be the last to know. (The one exception to Vision’s “keep them in the dark” tactics has been the viaduct lands. Here even tho I am not sure I support elimination of the viaducts, I acknowledge that Vision has given us several years to consider the concept of their elimination and alternate uses of the land.)

    Who knows why Mr. Jackson decided to retire now, and to be fair to him such reasons are probably varied ranging from the professional to the personal. Thai said, few people retire when they are having fun.

  • jolson

    Cities are key to reducing global warming since urban areas account for nearly three-quarters of human emissions. The planning community needs to get the message that planning the future of North East False Creek and False Creek Flats needs to be understood in terms of carbon emissions.

    We know that knocking down the Viaducts will increase emissions.

    We also know that completing the connection to Clark Drive via Malkin with flyovers at Prior and over the tracks at the eastern edge will reduce overall emissions significantly through out the entire road network.

    Connectivity rules not beautifications projects that create even more emissions.

    Mayor Gregor Robertson; “we can and must rise to the urgent challenge of climate change”.

  • Jeff Leigh

    “We know that knocking down the Viaducts will increase emissions.”

    How do we know that?

  • Big J

    I’m confused why you think building more automobile infrastructure will reduce emission. Decades of evidence suggests the opposite.

  • boohoo

    What’s missing from their analysis is time. Build a wider road? Yeah, you’ll have faster car travel time for a period of time in the short term, therefore less ghg. But of course over time, that becomes less and less true until it isn’t at all. Then you’re where we are now with our aging bridges, tunnels, viaduct, etc. Do we double down and do it again only wider or do we learn our lesson and do something different.

  • Lysenko’s Nemesis

    Tell us Frances; who really is the top planner?

  • jolson

    It is willful negligence on the part of the planning and engineering departments to support a beautification project that increases emissions while ignoring strategies that could reduce emissions.

    Lets see a traffic study that models the other side of the story; the Malkin Connector.

    Let’s have all the information so that a proper decision can be made.

  • jolson

    The duly elected Mayor is in charge of City employees, thus making him the top planner.

  • boohoo

    You keep saying things and when asked to back them up it’s crickets.

    And surely there’s more to the argument for or against than emissions?

  • Internet made me obsolete

    Technically it’s Council. His Worship has one vote. As I understand it, everyone else on the payroll reports to the City Manager (who is rumoured to be “on top of her game 24/7”).

  • Big J

    I would love to see your evidence that removing the viaducts will increase emissions. Please?

  • Big J

    That’s my understanding as well. But our friend jolson keeps saying otherwise and I’m hoping some day he might tell us why!

    (It couldn’t be that he just has no understanding of traffic patterns and emissions, right jolson?)

  • Lysenko’s Nemesis

    Your understanding is shared by others.

  • Richard Campbell

    And the way to really reduce GHG emissions is to reduce motor vehicle use. Reclaiming land from the viaducts to build new homes on will enable thousands of people to live within walking and cycling distance of work. That will likely reduce GHG emissions far more than any increased congestion.

    And, get a hybid or electric car if you must drive. That pretty much solves the idling issue.

  • 25hours!

    Scot Hein talks about the towers but he forgets his own connection to other tower projects. The 12 story ‘tower’ proposed for Commercial and Venables for the Kettle Society? Thanks Scot.

  • Scot Hein

    I need to correct this perception. The City’s Urban Design Studio, under my guidance, developed a viable mid-rise option for “The Kettle Site” at only partial 10 storeys maximum for a small northerly portion, with the majority of the site at lower heights achieved through blended density over the parcels north and south of the east-west lane. We included the lane into a consolidated, more efficient overall site area as the city was prepared to sell. We met the density sought by the proponents in a more contextual, incremental and appropriately human scaled strategy. I never supported a tall tower for the KFS site while appreciating the important role a new form of development might contribute in emphasizing the offset Commercial Drive road alignment. At the time of this work, and through meetings with the developer and their consultants, we generally understood that our proposal met the KFS programme and was potentially viable.

    I was surprised to see the proposed tower form of development submitted for re-zoning as we believe we had achieved emerging consensus for a more thoughtful mid-rise approach with the proponents, while also appreciating the important work of the KFS. This mid-rise option was not released in the FOI materials earlier this year. Hope this clarifies our work, and design attitudes, on this file.

    Scot Hein

  • 25hours!

    Sounds nice but I’ll stick with the facts that are out there in the community. All one has to do is ask.

  • boohoo

    I have no dog in this fight, but this is an interesting comment. You have an explanation from the person you are accusing of something, from his own mouth, yet you dismiss it and would rather believe ‘facts’ that sound like rumour mongering.

    Why is there such distrust out there of everything? How can you/we/anyone move forward with any kind of change if you dismiss out of hand anything anyone says?

  • Roger_Kemble

    Well Boo I have no skin in this fight either. But for some it’s life or death!

    With grotesque retail nodes, Oakridge,
    dowsed by teen-age tinsel, Surrey Centre’s beached WWll U-boat and Metro town’s
    phallic stalks-of-wrath, like willow-the-wisp lanterns in an ancient bog, still
    attracting under-water slitheries, slowly eroding and no vision of where the
    whole mess is headed and Minister Fassbender about to go on a fast bender a
    thorough reassessment of what the city is ain’t gonna happen: it’s just too
    painful!

  • Roger_Kemble

    http://members.shaw.ca/webmaster-nonpareil/Thu%20Horror/thu.horror.html

  • Roger_Kemble

    The Globe and Mail yesterday published . . . http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/home-and-garden/real-estate/foreign-buyers-snatch-vancouver-land-with-no-immediate-plan-to-develop/article25973695/

    . . . for the first time a mea culpa revealing, indeed IMO the damage, foreign, i.e. Chinese, investment is inflicting on Vancouver’s family housing.

    That local realtors, that Mayor Robertson’s housing task force deliberately down played this sordid condition reflects badly on the integrity of the Mayor and the Real
    Estate cohort, and indeed local blogs and many of Metro’s professional organizations!

    DENIAL by any other name!

  • jenables

    My understanding is, the problem is solely foreign money as much of the investment is by millionaire migrants who can’t rightly be called foreign. I’ll never forget the visceral outrage I witnessed on another popular municipal blog when a commenter was musing about the likely unsavory origins of this money.

    The task force was comprised of industry insiders and as we can clearly see, has done nothing to address the root causes of affordability – because that’s not how they make money. It is fitting that the mayor lent his title to this group, because he is one and the same, and those people were not selected by accident.

    They’d still have you believing cost of living skyrocketed past what the local economy could support because “it’s so desirable here”. I’m sad that so many people fell for that.

  • Roger_Kemble

    Expediency is the top planner in Vancouver!

  • A Taxpayer

    Prime Minister Harper is committed to tracking the foreign purchases of real estate when he is re-elected in October as well as increasing the amount first time buyers can tap into their RRSP’s to $35,000.

  • Lewis_N_Villegas

    The question of who is or who is not the DoP in Vancouver has been a moot point for some time now.

    I regret that it has taken this long for the nickel to drop. But I am now more inclined to see the next 2 decades belonging to the revitalization of the suburbs than to making the central city ‘sustainable’.

    Vancouver has really ‘given it all away’ and there is really no way of telling how long it will take to unwind all this damage. There were two ‘visions’ for how we were to evolve into the next century and right now it appears as if China won.

    In Vancouver politics the run away profits of the condo towers rule—at least that’s the only reasonable conclusion to draw from the last three local elections.

    Further out, there is plenty of evidence of ‘tower contagion’. I can point to City of North Van; New Westminster; Burnaby TOD; Richmond; … and to keep Roger in the loop—Nanaimo. There are others, but why bother? These facts are ‘concrete and glass’ and we can now only account for them not dispute them.

    The neighbourhoods lost. Capital outflows from China won. Our politics now hang in the balance. It’s too early to say which way they will tip. Will corruption set in?Or do we have sufficient checks and balances in the Canadian system to smoke the scoundrels out?

    PS

    There is one ray of hope that I can offer. By pure luck I was staying at a hotel (not a BnB!!) 2 blocks from Syntagma Square on the day the Greek Parliament voted down Greek-exit. The scene was uncanny. Save for the citizens lining up at the ATMS two, three and sometimes four people at a time—not 20 as some international press reported—there was no sign of panic or anxiety in Athens or the Peloponnese. The agitation was all imported. No one that I talked to seemed much concerned.

    The Greek authorities had sprang into action—all public transportation was free in Athens. I couldn’t pay for a bus fare from the airport or a subway token no matter how much I tried. The only discussion that seemed to matter was that the wi-fi service nation-wide could stand an upgrade.

    The Greeks have learned how to live well for three millennia and they do not appear too worried about what may happen next. In the long run they can fall back on their culture, agriculture, road systems, perfect weather, etc.

    If there was one lesson to be had at the various archaeological sites was that unplugging from the grid was still an option in the land of Pythagoras and Aristotle.