为什么大温哥华地区成了北美最难“啃”的房地产市场？
大温哥华地区是北美最难开发的房地产市场之一，不仅房价高企，价格亲民的租赁单元也严重短缺。尽管当地政府承认存在问题，但如果开发商想建造普通住房，则往往面临市政委员会和地方活动人士的抵制。
温哥华北岸有三个郊区市，其中西温哥华有多处面积达10000平方英尺的巨型豪宅；北温哥华有两个市区，一是紧靠海滨人口密集的北温哥华市，还有环绕其外以独栋住宅为主的北温哥华区。
当前的北温哥华区市政委员会为2018年选举后组建，其后开发多户住宅的提案都受到阻挠、推迟或否决，其中也包括出租住宅。当地开发商为在市政府阻挠下推动业务发展，面临艰难抉择。
安妮•麦克马林是城市发展研究所的总裁兼首席执行官，研究所主要维护不列颠哥伦比亚省住宅、商业和工业开发商的利益。她发现不少开发商已将重心转移到更适合发展的城市。该组织成员创造了约23万个工作岗位，每年为不列颠哥伦比亚省的GDP贡献220亿美元。
麦克马林比较担心阻挠开发造成的长期影响，特别是当前面临冠状病毒大流行导致的经济放缓。“面临危机，我们现在的处境大不相同。过去18个月（我们这块业务）业务已经放缓，要如何复苏？如果过去18个月里出现了巨大的回调，很多钱离开了不列颠哥伦比亚省，如何找回来？让人担心的是，钱一旦留出，可能需要几年才能流回来，因为钱已经花出去了。”
Darwin Group的总裁奥利弗•韦伯在北温哥华区长大，从小就在家族建筑公司工作，15岁进工地，后来担任建筑估计员。十年前，他在Darwin创立了新的开发部门。
韦伯说：“我们决定只关注一个市场，就是北岸。我们决定盯好后院，我这辈子基本上都住在那里。至少到目前为止，我们只在北岸买不动产。”
当2018年该地区选出现任市政委员会时，过于关注本地市场却成了阻碍。市政委员会多数新成员强烈反对开发，而且迅速表达了意见。“选举后，显然选民除了经济适用房和社会住房，对多户住宅并没有什么兴趣。”现任两届市政委员会成员的吉姆•汉森说。但似乎也没有人愿意支持低于市场价的住房。当选后的几个月里，每项商业提案均遭到市政委员会成员投票否决，非营利项目也被叫停，至于“价格亲民”的含义也不断争论。
Darwin Group等开发商发现，手上大型复杂的项目想取得进展不太可能。
停滞的项目之一是北岸创新区，之前的提议是兴建“办公、轻工业、支持就业住房、教育和娱乐设施、零售（和）社区便利设施”，还计划在45英亩的地块上新建了1100套租赁住房。汉森解释说，项目之所以被否决，是因为“破坏森林，影响交通和环境状况，而且西摩本地居民普遍认为项目不符合当地社区的愿景。”
第二个停滞项目是为附近的卡比兰奴大学学生和教职工建造350套租赁住房，第三个项目是Maplewood Gardens，其中包括58套低于市场价全新租赁住房，向已在该社区居住的租户提供。
当地租赁住房尤其短缺，2012年Coriolis咨询公司的报告称，大部分木框租用房都面临“重新开发的风险”。过去，低收入租户不得不“因装修搬迁”，原本价格亲民的住处拆除，更换为价格更高的房子。
韦伯表示，自己主导的项目希望避免类似情况。“项目将与BC Housing合作开发，提供低于市场全新租赁单元，取代58处老化的房屋。我们正在分阶段实施，如此一来，施工期间人们就不用搬走或者流离失所。”
目前，韦伯的态度是观望。“老实说，我们的方向并没有变，项目的愿景也没有变。”他说，“我们会坚持到底。然而现实是，现在的市政委员会几乎全是新人，新委员还需要点时间才能够跟上在之前已经实行10年的政策。”
他表示，Darwin的建筑业务可以帮忙熬过开发真空期。“从商业角度看，从事建筑业磨炼了我们的耐心，如果有必要，则可以长期持有土地。”
然而，Darwin Group等商业开发商是可以等市政委员会决议，遇到新任市政委员会终止前任委员会发起项目的情况，非营利机构Catalyst Community Developments Society面临的挑战则更艰巨。如果执行原计划，新的非营利机构原本可以在该地区出租的土地上建造80套低于市场价的出租屋，还有一处养老院。
“之前我们花了大概一年半时间，投了几十万美元。”Catalyst的副总裁罗伯特•布朗说。“社会得承受结果，资助过我们的人也得承受后果。项目取消后，机构面临严重的财务问题，几乎整个2019年都在收拾烂摊子。”
布朗很了解市政分区规划的实际情况，让他难过的是，虽然之前跟该区密切合作开发项目，但还是遭到否决：“政策是没变，但委员会变了。这是开发商都面临的最大问题，因为市政委员会并不一定会支持已经出台的政策。”
布朗也对Catalyst的遭遇感到不满：“非营利机构的目标只是收支平衡。如果总是要应对巨大的变化，我们比起赚过巨大利润的开发商要更难受。”
“最奇怪的是，我们走完了整个流程，最后还是否决了，而且地区政府从没有人给我们打电话或写信问：‘你们要讨论下吗？能修改提议么？’”他指出。
北温哥华区市长马克•利特尔在电子邮件中指出：“社区服务机构申请重新划分公共土地，这点很奇怪。机构想谈谈如何好好改造社区并利用空间，但附近居民并不太关心入口、出口、高度、密度还有其他影响。在此过程中，居民与可能非常有价值的社区服务总会出现冲突。”
Catalyst已经停止尝试在该地区开发项目，转而推进其他地区，包括北温哥华市的项目。
城市发展研究所的麦克马林也认为，很多开发商确实在撤离温哥华地区。“我们的会员在北美各地开发项目。”她说，“在过去几年中，有多家房地产开发商的业务出现了收缩，一方面是因为一些城市出现困难，另一方面也是因为省内出台了需求侧调整措施。”2016年，为了调控被视为失控的房地产市场，不列颠哥伦比亚省新增了外国购房者税，向购买住宅的非加拿大购房者征收20%房产转让税。
她指出：“老实说，就算我们的开发商算不上全球最优秀，在北美也是最成熟的。Cressey Development Group在西雅图建了很多租赁单元。Bosa Development基本上全权负责圣迭戈再开发。Onni Group位于洛杉矶，Intracorp Projects在得克萨斯州奥斯汀。我们在亚特兰大、菲尼克斯，到处都有业务。所以，钱是逐利而动的。”
麦克马林说，一直在与其他市政委员会开会，有望达成理想结果。她希望“审批程序缩短到六个月或一年，而不是五年……如果疫情最终过去，而之前18个月毫无进展，还得再等五年吗？”
利特尔则为市政委员会辩护。“法院已经确认，法律层面新的市政委员会不受前任委员会决定的影响。”他说。
“我们讨论的是，开发商要求公众批准改变房产规划的情况。”利特尔说。“不管什么时候，只要改变规划方向都要承担成本，出现浪费，虽然我对过程中另一方制造浪费不感兴趣，但他们将因为地产升值而受益。因此，假定由他们承担风险也不无道理。”
Catalyst和Darwin Group都表示，很关心市政委员如何平衡广大社区的需求和本地居民的邻避诉求。利特尔市长的立场很明确：“我们希望居民社区团结，加强认同。在社区里强制安排不适合的项目显然无法实现。”
尽管最近附近的White Rock和New Westminster法院判决判定，市政委员会有权取消申请重新分区规划，不列颠哥伦比亚省最高法院对市政审批行为提出了另一项挑战。2019年8月，温哥华Beedie Development Group对市政府提起诉讼，因之前在温哥华唐人街中心开发房产的申请遭市政府驳回，申请法院推翻该决议。起诉书称，温哥华开发许可委员会否决符合既有规划的小规模九层开发项目为越权行为。
不管是社区还是政界，唐人街地产开发都面临强烈反对。但2017年温哥华相关城市团体曾经建议批准该项目的小规模版本，各团体包括市政府工作人员、城市设计小组和开发许可顾问团。由于Beedie已经确保“遵守所有适用的规章制度、政策和指导方针”，预计项目将获得开发许可委员会的批准。
开发许可委员会最终驳回了申请，Beedie法院称驳回申请“超出了法定权限，也违反了职责”。如果Beedie最终成功，法院将裁定北温哥华区等地市政府不一定能否决符合各项要求的开发许可。
如果确实如此，Darwin Group、Catalyst等开发商可能会重燃勇气，前往北温哥华地区开发建设。（财富中文网）
译者：Feb
大温哥华地区是北美最难开发的房地产市场之一，不仅房价高企，价格亲民的租赁单元也严重短缺。尽管当地政府承认存在问题，但如果开发商想建造普通住房，则往往面临市政委员会和地方活动人士的抵制。
温哥华北岸有三个郊区市，其中西温哥华有多处面积达10000平方英尺的巨型豪宅；北温哥华有两个市区，一是紧靠海滨人口密集的北温哥华市，还有环绕其外以独栋住宅为主的北温哥华区。
当前的北温哥华区市政委员会为2018年选举后组建，其后开发多户住宅的提案都受到阻挠、推迟或否决，其中也包括出租住宅。当地开发商为在市政府阻挠下推动业务发展，面临艰难抉择。
安妮•麦克马林是城市发展研究所的总裁兼首席执行官，研究所主要维护不列颠哥伦比亚省住宅、商业和工业开发商的利益。她发现不少开发商已将重心转移到更适合发展的城市。该组织成员创造了约23万个工作岗位，每年为不列颠哥伦比亚省的GDP贡献220亿美元。
麦克马林比较担心阻挠开发造成的长期影响，特别是当前面临冠状病毒大流行导致的经济放缓。“面临危机，我们现在的处境大不相同。过去18个月（我们这块业务）业务已经放缓，要如何复苏？如果过去18个月里出现了巨大的回调，很多钱离开了不列颠哥伦比亚省，如何找回来？让人担心的是，钱一旦留出，可能需要几年才能流回来，因为钱已经花出去了。”
Darwin Group的总裁奥利弗•韦伯在北温哥华区长大，从小就在家族建筑公司工作，15岁进工地，后来担任建筑估计员。十年前，他在Darwin创立了新的开发部门。
韦伯说：“我们决定只关注一个市场，就是北岸。我们决定盯好后院，我这辈子基本上都住在那里。至少到目前为止，我们只在北岸买不动产。”
当2018年该地区选出现任市政委员会时，过于关注本地市场却成了阻碍。市政委员会多数新成员强烈反对开发，而且迅速表达了意见。“选举后，显然选民除了经济适用房和社会住房，对多户住宅并没有什么兴趣。”现任两届市政委员会成员的吉姆•汉森说。但似乎也没有人愿意支持低于市场价的住房。当选后的几个月里，每项商业提案均遭到市政委员会成员投票否决，非营利项目也被叫停，至于“价格亲民”的含义也不断争论。
Darwin Group等开发商发现，手上大型复杂的项目想取得进展不太可能。
停滞的项目之一是北岸创新区，之前的提议是兴建“办公、轻工业、支持就业住房、教育和娱乐设施、零售（和）社区便利设施”，还计划在45英亩的地块上新建了1100套租赁住房。汉森解释说，项目之所以被否决，是因为“破坏森林，影响交通和环境状况，而且西摩本地居民普遍认为项目不符合当地社区的愿景。”
第二个停滞项目是为附近的卡比兰奴大学学生和教职工建造350套租赁住房，第三个项目是Maplewood Gardens，其中包括58套低于市场价全新租赁住房，向已在该社区居住的租户提供。
当地租赁住房尤其短缺，2012年Coriolis咨询公司的报告称，大部分木框租用房都面临“重新开发的风险”。过去，低收入租户不得不“因装修搬迁”，原本价格亲民的住处拆除，更换为价格更高的房子。
韦伯表示，自己主导的项目希望避免类似情况。“项目将与BC Housing合作开发，提供低于市场全新租赁单元，取代58处老化的房屋。我们正在分阶段实施，如此一来，施工期间人们就不用搬走或者流离失所。”
目前，韦伯的态度是观望。“老实说，我们的方向并没有变，项目的愿景也没有变。”他说，“我们会坚持到底。然而现实是，现在的市政委员会几乎全是新人，新委员还需要点时间才能够跟上在之前已经实行10年的政策。”
他表示，Darwin的建筑业务可以帮忙熬过开发真空期。“从商业角度看，从事建筑业磨炼了我们的耐心，如果有必要，则可以长期持有土地。”
然而，Darwin Group等商业开发商是可以等市政委员会决议，遇到新任市政委员会终止前任委员会发起项目的情况，非营利机构Catalyst Community Developments Society面临的挑战则更艰巨。如果执行原计划，新的非营利机构原本可以在该地区出租的土地上建造80套低于市场价的出租屋，还有一处养老院。
“之前我们花了大概一年半时间，投了几十万美元。”Catalyst的副总裁罗伯特•布朗说。“社会得承受结果，资助过我们的人也得承受后果。项目取消后，机构面临严重的财务问题，几乎整个2019年都在收拾烂摊子。”
布朗很了解市政分区规划的实际情况，让他难过的是，虽然之前跟该区密切合作开发项目，但还是遭到否决：“政策是没变，但委员会变了。这是开发商都面临的最大问题，因为市政委员会并不一定会支持已经出台的政策。”
布朗也对Catalyst的遭遇感到不满：“非营利机构的目标只是收支平衡。如果总是要应对巨大的变化，我们比起赚过巨大利润的开发商要更难受。”
“最奇怪的是，我们走完了整个流程，最后还是否决了，而且地区政府从没有人给我们打电话或写信问：‘你们要讨论下吗？能修改提议么？’”他指出。
北温哥华区市长马克•利特尔在电子邮件中指出：“社区服务机构申请重新划分公共土地，这点很奇怪。机构想谈谈如何好好改造社区并利用空间，但附近居民并不太关心入口、出口、高度、密度还有其他影响。在此过程中，居民与可能非常有价值的社区服务总会出现冲突。”
Catalyst已经停止尝试在该地区开发项目，转而推进其他地区，包括北温哥华市的项目。
城市发展研究所的麦克马林也认为，很多开发商确实在撤离温哥华地区。“我们的会员在北美各地开发项目。”她说，“在过去几年中，有多家房地产开发商的业务出现了收缩，一方面是因为一些城市出现困难，另一方面也是因为省内出台了需求侧调整措施。”2016年，为了调控被视为失控的房地产市场，不列颠哥伦比亚省新增了外国购房者税，向购买住宅的非加拿大购房者征收20%房产转让税。
她指出：“老实说，就算我们的开发商算不上全球最优秀，在北美也是最成熟的。Cressey Development Group在西雅图建了很多租赁单元。Bosa Development基本上全权负责圣迭戈再开发。Onni Group位于洛杉矶，Intracorp Projects在得克萨斯州奥斯汀。我们在亚特兰大、菲尼克斯，到处都有业务。所以，钱是逐利而动的。”
麦克马林说，一直在与其他市政委员会开会，有望达成理想结果。她希望“审批程序缩短到六个月或一年，而不是五年……如果疫情最终过去，而之前18个月毫无进展，还得再等五年吗？”
利特尔则为市政委员会辩护。“法院已经确认，法律层面新的市政委员会不受前任委员会决定的影响。”他说。
“我们讨论的是，开发商要求公众批准改变房产规划的情况。”利特尔说。“不管什么时候，只要改变规划方向都要承担成本，出现浪费，虽然我对过程中另一方制造浪费不感兴趣，但他们将因为地产升值而受益。因此，假定由他们承担风险也不无道理。”
Catalyst和Darwin Group都表示，很关心市政委员如何平衡广大社区的需求和本地居民的邻避诉求。利特尔市长的立场很明确：“我们希望居民社区团结，加强认同。在社区里强制安排不适合的项目显然无法实现。”
尽管最近附近的White Rock和New Westminster法院判决判定，市政委员会有权取消申请重新分区规划，不列颠哥伦比亚省最高法院对市政审批行为提出了另一项挑战。2019年8月，温哥华Beedie Development Group对市政府提起诉讼，因之前在温哥华唐人街中心开发房产的申请遭市政府驳回，申请法院推翻该决议。起诉书称，温哥华开发许可委员会否决符合既有规划的小规模九层开发项目为越权行为。
不管是社区还是政界，唐人街地产开发都面临强烈反对。但2017年温哥华相关城市团体曾经建议批准该项目的小规模版本，各团体包括市政府工作人员、城市设计小组和开发许可顾问团。由于Beedie已经确保“遵守所有适用的规章制度、政策和指导方针”，预计项目将获得开发许可委员会的批准。
开发许可委员会最终驳回了申请，Beedie法院称驳回申请“超出了法定权限，也违反了职责”。如果Beedie最终成功，法院将裁定北温哥华区等地市政府不一定能否决符合各项要求的开发许可。
如果确实如此，Darwin Group、Catalyst等开发商可能会重燃勇气，前往北温哥华地区开发建设。（财富中文网）
译者：Feb
Greater Vancouver is one of North America’s toughest housing markets, with expensive real estate and a significant shortage of affordable rental units. Even though local governments acknowledge the problem, the property developers who want to build multiple-unit housing often face pushback from municipal councils and local activists.
The North Shore of Vancouver is home to three suburban municipalities: West Vancouver, with its 10,000-square-foot monster mansions, and the two North Vancouvers: the densified City of North Vancouver, nestled against the waterfront, and the largely single-family suburban District of North Vancouver which surrounds it.
The current North Vancouver District council was elected in 2018, and since then every proposal for multifamily housing, including rental, has been defeated, postponed, or rejected. Local developers are making hard decisions to keep their businesses moving forward at a time when the municipality is blocking every housing development that comes before them.
Anne McMullin, president and CEO of the Urban Development Institute, an organization that represents residential, commercial, and industrial developers in British Columbia, has seen developers shifting their focus to cities that seem more amenable to development. The organization’s members create roughly 230,000 jobs and contribute $22 billion annually to the British Columbia GDP.
McMullin is worried about the longer-term impact of barriers to development, especially with the economic slowdowns related to the coronavirus pandemic. “We’re in a very different situation right now with the crisis that we’re in. [Our sector] had already slowed in the last 18 months, so how do we recover? And if we had a huge pullback in the last 18 months, and a lot of the money left British Columbia, how do you bring it back? The fear is that once the money’s left, it may take a couple of years to get it back, because the money’s been spent.”
North Vancouver District is home to Oliver Webbe, president of the Darwin Group. Webbe grew up employed in his family’s construction business, working on job sites from age 15, then as a construction estimator. Ten years ago he created a new development division within Darwin.
“We decided to just focus on one market—the North Shore,” Webbe says. “We decided to stick to our own backyard, where I’ve lived pretty much my whole life. And the only place we’ll buy real estate is the North Shore. For now.”
That local focus became a handicap when the district elected its current council in 2018. A majority of the new council members were strongly opposed to development and quickly made their feelings known. “After the election it was apparent that the electorate had no appetite for multiunit housing, except for affordable and social housing,” current two-term council member Jim Hanson says. But there doesn’t seem to be an appetite for supporting below-market housing, either: In the months that followed their election, council members voted down or blocked not only every commercial proposal but also halted nonprofit projects while waiting to redefine what “affordable” meant.
Developers like the Darwin Group have found themselves with large, complex projects that are unlikely to move ahead.
One stalled project is the North Shore Innovation District, which proposed “office, light industrial, employment-supportive housing, educational and recreational facilities, retail, [and] community amenities” as well as 1,100 new rental homes over a 45-acre site. Hanson explains that this project was rejected because of “traffic, environmental degradation in the form of forest devastation, and a general sense by residents of Seymour that the project was out of step with their vision of their local community.”
A second project would build 350 units of rental housing for the students and staff of nearby Capilano University, and a third, Maplewood Gardens, would include 58 new below-market rentals for tenants already living on the property.
Rental housing is in especially short supply in the area, and a 2012 Coriolis Consulting report described the majority of older wood-frame rental stock as “being at risk of redevelopment.” In the past this has led to “renovictions” of low-income tenants to allow for the demolition and replacement of affordable rental housing with new, more expensive units.
Webbe says his project wants to avoid that. “This project will replace 58 aging existing rental units with new below-market rental units that are going to be developed in partnership with BC Housing. We’re phasing it so that nobody will have to move out or be displaced during the construction.”
For now, Webbe is adopting a wait-and-see approach. “In all honesty, it hasn’t changed our direction or what our vision is for our projects,” he says. “We’re staying the course. The reality is when you’ve got a considerably new council, it’s going to take a bit of time for them to get up to speed with policies that had already been in place for 10 years before they were elected.”
The construction side of Darwin’s business can carry them through the development drought, he says. “From a business perspective, the construction business allows us to be patient and allows us to hold land for a very long time, if we have to.”
But where a commercial developer like Darwin can wait out the council, the nonprofit Catalyst Community Developments Society faced a larger challenge when the new council stopped a project that was initiated by the previous council. A new nonprofit facility would have built 80 units of below-market rental housing and a seniors’ respite facility on land leased from the district.
“We had about a year and a half of our time invested, and we’d invested several hundred thousand dollars,” Catalyst vice president Robert Brown says. “The society had to absorb that, and the people who fund us had to absorb that. The cancellation caused a major financial problem for our organization, and it took pretty much the whole of 2019 to deal with it.”
Brown understands the realities of municipal zoning and is frustrated that despite working closely with the district in developing the project, it was turned down: “Even though the policies hadn’t changed, the council had. That’s the biggest problem that any developer has, where council doesn’t seem to consistently support policy that’s already in place.”
Brown is unhappy with how Catalyst has been treated: “As a nonprofit, we’re designed to break even. If we run into a situation where things change dramatically, it’s more difficult for us to absorb that than it is for a market developer who’s made significant profits.
“The strangest thing about this is that we went through that process, it got turned down, and we have never received a single phone call or correspondence from anybody at the district to say, ‘Would you like to discuss this? Would you like to revamp the proposal?’” he notes.
In an email, district Mayor Mike Little says: “I always found it strange to have a community service agency as the applicant for a rezoning on public land. The agency wanted to talk about the amazing things they do in the community and could do with the space, but the neighbors have very real concerns about access, egress, heights, massing, and other neighborly impacts. That process always put the neighborhood at odds with what may be a very worthy community service.”
Catalyst has stopped attempting to develop projects in the district and has instead focused on projects in other areas, including the City of North Vancouver.
The Urban Development Institute’s McMullin agrees that many developers are choosing to invest away from the Vancouver region. “Our members build all over North America,” she says. “Many of them have retreated over the last couple of years, both because of the difficulties in some municipalities, but also because of the demand-side measures that the province brought in.” In 2016, in response to what was seen as an out-of-control real estate market, British Columbia implemented a new foreign-buyers tax that imposed an additional property transfer tax of 20% on all residential property purchases by non-Canadian buyers.
“I would honestly say that our builders are some of the most sophisticated in North America, if not the world,” she says. “Cressey Development Group built a lot of those rental units in Seattle. Bosa Development has, essentially, been responsible for redeveloping San Diego. Onni Group is in Los Angeles, Intracorp Projects is in Austin, Texas. We’re in Atlanta, Phoenix, and all over. So, you know, money moves.”
McMullin says they’ve been meeting with other municipal councils, and she’s hopeful. She wants to get the “approval process down to six months or a year rather than five years…Because if we come out of the pandemic, and there’s been nothing over the last 18 months, will we have to wait another five years?”
Little defends the council’s actions. “It has been affirmed by the courts that new councils are not legally encumbered by the decisions of previous councils,” he says.
“We’re talking about situations where developers are asking for the public to give them permission to change the zoning of the property,” Little says. “There’s cost and waste anytime you make a change of direction, and though I have no interest in creating waste for another party in the process, they’re going to be the benefactor of the uplift in that property. So it’s not unreasonable to assume that they’re going to be the ones that hold the risk.”
Both Catalyst and Darwin raise concerns about how the council is balancing the needs of the broader community with the NIMBY objections of the local neighborhoods. Mayor Little is clear where he stands: “We want neighborhoods to have a community character and identity. And you don’t get that by forcing something into a neighborhood that doesn’t fit.”
Even though recent court decisions in neighboring White Rock and New Westminster have established that a council is entitled to back out of rezoning applications, another challenge to municipal approval practices is coming before the British Columbia Supreme Court. In August 2019, Vancouver’s Beedie Development Group filed a lawsuit against the City of Vancouver asking the court to overturn the rejection of an application to develop property in the heart of Vancouver’s Chinatown. The suit alleges that Vancouver’s Development Permit Board overstepped its authority when it rejected a scaled-down nine-story development that fit the existing zoning.
The Chinatown property faced intense community and political opposition, but in 2017, a smaller version of the project had been recommended for approval by all the relevant City of Vancouver groups: city staff, the Urban Design Panel, and the Development Permit Advisory Panel. Since Beedie had ensured “compliance with all applicable bylaws, policies, and guidelines” it was expected that the project would be approved by the Development Permit Board.
The Development Permit Board rejected the application, an action that Beedie’s court filing states “exceeded its legal authority and breached its duties.” If Beedie is successful, the court will rule that municipalities like North Vancouver District can’t necessarily refuse a development permit for a project that checks all the boxes.
If that happens, Darwin, Catalyst, and other developers may once again feel welcome to build in the District of North Vancouver.
