Squamish council rejects bid to redesignate Cheema lands

Steven Chua
Western Investor

Property slated for residential development remains outside growth management boundary

 Cheema lands. Via District of Squamish report

For the third time in four years, District of Squamish council has turned down a proposal to include the Cheema lands within its growth management boundary. 

During its meeting on April 5, elected officials voted 4-3 to deny first reading of the proposal, which would have been the first step toward designating the lands for residential development.

Mayor Karen Elliott and councillors Doug Race, Jenna Stoner and Chris Pettingill voted to defeat first reading. 

Councillors John French, Eric Andersen and Armand Hurford voted in favour of granting first reading.

The Cheema lands, officially known as District lots 509 and 510, have been a point of contention within the municipality.

Developer Bob Cheema has proposed turning much of the area into a bustling residential community, but the land lies outside the district’s growth management boundary as outlined in the Official Community Plan (OCP).

The boundary serves as a dividing line between where developers can or can’t build. The idea is to keep growth within the boundary until certain conditions in the community are met.

Staff have reasoned that this will keep uncontrolled sprawl in check. The boundary, it is argued, prevents the need to encroach on greenspace, and maximizes the use of already-disturbed land and currently existing infrastructure.

District lots 509 and 510 are currently designated for future residential, but Cheema proposed designating the properties as an area suitable for development in the near term. 

The area has been considered for inclusion in the growth management boundary on two previous occasions since 2018.

The first time, it was deemed that the 22,500 population threshold for redesignating the lands had not been met.

The second time, the population threshold had been met but council decided that meeting the population threshold was not the sole criterion for granting the developer’s proposal.

The meeting on Tuesday marked the third time the Cheema residential project was considered and rejected by elected officials.

Aran Cheema issued a written statement on behalf of the Cheema family after council’s vote. 

“Even though the population has now surpassed the major goal post of 22,500, Mayor Karen Elliott, councillors Jenna Stoner, Chris Pettingill and Doug Race voted to reject our application on the basis that one minor policy is incomplete. Even if this minor policy is completed, the opposing councillors indicated that we should wait another decade,” reads the statement sent to The Squamish Chief.

The initial results of the 2021 Statistics Canada census show that Squamish’s population is 23,819.

The statement also noted that the Cheema family had been willing to pay for steep slope policy studies for the project, which could’ve saved taxpayers thousands.

District staff said a steep slope policy is one of the considerations for a development like the Cheema lands, but even with funding from the developer, there isn’t enough municipal staff to take on the workload for developing those regulations promptly.

However, the Cheemas appeared to take issue with the municipality’s views.

“We know the real reason why games are getting played,” their statement said. “Simply put, the District wants to maintain their leverage to hold us at ransom.”

The Cheema statement said the goalposts had been moved with the population threshold, and “now the goalposts are moving with completing this one minor policy.”  

Before the vote, district staff recommended that elected officials defeat first reading for the proposal to include the Cheema lands within the growth management boundary.

“[The recommendation] is that we do not proceed with an OCP amendment at this time. There’s still room in the growth management boundary to accommodate growth. And we still need to finish the list of policies that we’re working on,” said Jonas Velaniskis, director of planning.

Velaniskis highlighted that there were several municipal policies that would ideally be addressed before expanding the growth management boundary.

“Overall, while there is some compliance with the policies,” said Velaniskis. “The application is not able to address all of them at this time.”

Before considering a growth management boundary expansion, Section 9.2(g) of the OCP states there must be consideration of negative environmental, social or economic impacts, he said.

Secondly, he said, Section 9.2(h) states a suite of precursor policies must be addressed.

Some of those precursor policies have been taken care of, Velaniskis said; however, others, such as a brand asset inventory — accounting for what will happen to mountain bike trails in this case — and the steep slopes development permit area have yet to be addressed.

Speaking in favour of the development, Coun. Andersen said that there were a number of developments underway in town that did not fully address the issues Velanisikis had mentioned.

Andersen said there were already neighbourhoods built or in the process of being built that have concerns regarding 9.2(g).

“If we were to take those neighbourhoods and developments that are underway or in play, and put together a ledger and discuss 9.2, we have Oceanfront, Waterfront Landing, Scott Crescent, downtown, Ross Road, Loggers Lane East, Centennial Way, and the reason why I’m listing all of them is that… all of them have some issues with respect to 9.2,” he said.

“It is loss of employment lands on a large scale. We’ve lost tourist, commercial and industrial lands. We have parking and transportation issues that come up with some of these. We have habitat loss…We did not get affordable housing at all with one of these large-scale developments. And so, I am looking at that ledger. If we were to put that together, I think that we are treating lot[s] 509 and 510 unfairly. I’m not convinced that this is an inappropriate place for residential development.”

Coun. French was also supportive of the Cheema proposal.

“This is a property that’s above the floodplain, a property that has been logged a few times,” said French. “A property that offers an opportunity to build another needed roadway linking the Garibaldi Highlands to the Garibaldi Estates. And moving it inside the growth management boundary will allow us to start planning for smart construction once we have inevitably significantly filled in the developable land inside our current growth management boundary.”

He added that staff noted it would take about eight years between the property being included within the boundary to the first housing unit being built.

French called that an optimistic prediction and said he believed this would take about 10 years or more.

“And this means we’d be a decade away from having another large school property ready for development, more than a decade away from a connector road that we need now, and more than a decade away from having dedicated parking and facilities for the thousands of mountain bike riders, who flock to the end of Perth Drive every year,” he said.

Coun. Hurford said that he would support first reading, with the hopes that it would elicit more information.

He said his intent is to spark further engagement from both the public and the developer.

“I’m looking to trigger a comprehensive public engagement process,” said Hurford. “The optimist in me says that that’ll give the developer an opportunity to wow us with exceeding all of our important policies and bringing forward a world-class development. It could also be that that’s not the case. Once this comprehensive public engagement process is underway, that can show the benefits and potential consequences of the proposed change.”

The remaining councillors, on the other hand, opposed granting first reading.

Coun. Stoner called some of her colleagues’ comments surprising.

“I’m a little bit concerned that some of my colleagues seem to have made up their mind [that] this land should already be within the growth management boundary. We’re at first reading of whether that should happen or not, so I was just a little bit surprised by some of my colleagues’ comments,” said Stoner. 

“I personally don’t know whether this land should be in or outside of the growth management boundary. And there are lots of things that need to be weighed in order to make that decision and lots of information and research that needs to be completed in order to inform that decision and inform the discussion that our community should have and when we’re making that important decision. But I went back and re-listened to the presentation that we got on this topic a year ago in March 2021. And I don’t think that much has changed between now and then with regards to where we’re at with the growth management boundary and the policies in the OCP.”

Coun. Race noted that many members in the community are concerned with the rate of growth in town.

He noted the extensive size of the land and wondered whether the community needed such a big addition at this stage.

“The fundamental issue is whether we need to grow with this property,” said Race. “This is a huge property; it’s not a small add-on here, add-on there. It is a huge property, and it brings huge growth issues with it. And so I’m not prepared to consider amending the growth management boundary until we are in a position where we actually need to grow.”

The Cheema lands total 422 acres. 

From the perspective of Coun. Pettingill, it was too soon to consider the matter.

“When I look at what we have ahead of us in terms of work and all the timelines together, and what is available within the growth management boundary, and what the OCP says about how we will develop, I don’t think we’re there yet in doing this,” Pettingill said.

Mayor Elliott, who also opposed first reading, said there was no rush to include the land in the boundary.

There are other things that need to be taken care of beforehand, she said.

She said there needs to be time for the affordable housing policy to mature; she called for the community to be included in the province’s empty homes and speculation tax zone; and she also wanted to see more of the “missing middle” housing the District has been working on.

The housing society also needs more time to help people achieve affordable homeownership, Elliott added.

There are also climate and environmental issues to consider, she said.

“It’s simply not just the OCP policies that we want to make sure we understand. But also our climate policies and how they’re shaping up,” said Elliott.

“You know, I heard one of my colleagues say, we need parking for the thousands of people that are mountain biking,” she said. “No — we actually need to rethink how people arrive in our community, how they participate in the activities here in order to mitigate climate change.”

 

© 2022 Western Investor

Dan Fumano: Will ‘downtown’ come to Broadway?

Dan Fumano
The Vancouver Sun

Analysis: Some Fairview residents argue 39-storey tower belongs downtown, not in their neighbourhood across the bridge. But in city hall’s view, “downtown” will be coming to them.

 This week, city council will consider local developer PCI Group’s pitch for a 39-storey mixed-use project above the South Granville subway station now under construction, proposing to stack several different elements of a neighbourhood in a single tall building: transit, retail, a grocery store, offices, and both market and below-market rental homes. Photo by Francis Georgian /PNG

A proposal to build Broadway’s tallest tower, set for debate this week at city hall, raises a tricky question for Vancouver’s future: what, and where, is “downtown?”

 

This week, city council will consider local developer PCI Group’s pitch for a 39-storey mixed-use project above the South Granville subway station now under construction, proposing to stack several different elements of a neighbourhood in a single tall building: transit, retail, a grocery store, offices, and both market and below-market rental homes.

The project has followed a somewhat unusual process to get to this point and is already generating strong feelings of both support and opposition, judging by the written correspondence sent to city hall so far.

“I live a very short walk away and this area is in DIRE need of developments like this,” begins one letter, while another calls the proposal “a disgrace to our city planning.”

 

“Keep your proposed 39 storey plans for the downtown area as it is not welcome in our south Granville neighbourhood,” one letter states. Another says: “We live in this neighbourhood because downtown is filled with these kind of towers.”

Sean Nardi, a member of the Fairview South Granville Action Committee, said something similar to Postmedia reporter John Mackie for a recent story. When Nardi and his neighbours learned a few years ago of a proposed 28-storey apartment building on West Broadway, two blocks east of Granville, he recalled: “All of a sudden everybody sat up and said, ‘Hold the phones here, we didn’t move to the neighbourhood to live downtown.’”

Nardi’s sentiment is likely shared by many in Fairview and elsewhere along the Broadway corridor, folks who strongly believe tall buildings belong downtown, not in their neighbourhoods two kilometres south across the bridge. If they wanted to live downtown, the argument goes, they would have moved downtown.

 

For those Vancouverites, it may come as unwelcome news that in the view of city hall’s planning department, downtown is coming to them.

 

Draft “Land Use Concept Map” for the Broadway Plan in Vancouver, showing the densities for the neighbourhoods in the plan.

The Broadway plan‘s most recent draft calls this corridor, along the subway route and north of 16th Avenue, “Vancouver’s second downtown.” The citywide plan draft released last week goes a step further, describing central Broadway not as a “second downtown,” but as part of a single “Metro Core,” a contiguous area encompassing both the downtown  peninsula and the Broadway plan area together envisioned as the city and Metro region’s “principle centre of business, employment, cultural and entertainment activity.”

City planners, politicians, and the Broadway plan’s critics and supporters alike all agree: one crucial consideration is minimizing the displacement of existing renters in that area, especially those long-term tenants paying well below market rent.

 

Mayor Kennedy Stewart has spoken positively of the Broadway plan, but recently told Postmedia his top priority was ensuring tenant protections were strong enough that when redevelopment and densification occurs, no existing tenants will be priced out of the area.

It remains to be seen if the plan’s policies will be sufficient to achieve that goal, or if they might change before the final version is approved.

PCI president Tim Grant says projects like his company’s 39-storey proposal, which would create 223 rental homes, seem to align with the kind of development city hall says it wants: mixed-use, transit-oriented development with an affordable housing component. Twenty per cent of the residential square footage would be permanently secured for below-market units for moderate-income households, defined as household incomes between $30,000 and $80,000. 

 

 

Provincial leaders, especially housing minister David Eby, also say they want significant commercial and residential density around transit stations, to maximize value for multi-billion dollar infrastructure investments like the Broadway subway, and reduce the need for people to rely on private cars for their daily needs and commutes.

Grant acknowledged to Postmedia that the “real concern around displacement of existing renters,” and said that’s one benefit of this project: it replaces what was previously an office building with more office space, and hundreds of new rental homes, without displacing any renters, even temporarily.

The 28-storey tower, now under construction on the former site of a Denny’s and a parking lot, is another example of adding rental homes without displacing any existing residents.

But while such projects add new rental homes, including dozens of below-market units, without displacing anyone, some residents oppose them for being too big, too tall, too “downtown.” Others argue this is exactly the appropriate and responsible kind of land use for a site near an urban subway station in the middle of the hub of a growing Metro region of 2.4 million people.

Uptown won’t transform into downtown overnight, but many current and future residents of the Broadway corridor will welcome the idea of a more urban future, with more people, jobs, variety, nightlife, and, indeed, tall buildings. Others clearly feel that type of thing belongs across False Creek, somewhere like the West End. But of course, the West End didn’t always look as it does today: a century ago, it was made up of wooden Victorian houses big and small, until city hall decided to change it, eventually allowing the high-rises that made it one of Canada’s densest — and most beloved — neighbourhoods.

“How can you lose? The lights are much brighter there,” Petula Clark sang in one of the most popular songs from 1965. “Things will be great when you’re downtown. No finer place, for sure.”

Clearly, not everyone agrees.

But when Vancouver city council considers PCI’s 39-storey proposal, they won’t only be weighing whether every resident in walking distance of Broadway and Granville supports it. The question is whether it’s good for Vancouver.

And very soon after the Granville decision, the same question will be on council’s minds at an even larger scale: the Broadway and citywide plans go to council for decisions in May and June, respectively. Soon after that, those plans’ visions for Vancouver’s future will be debated ahead of October’s election. Voters will be asked to choose which future they want.

[email protected]

twitter.com/fumano

More news, fewer ads, faster load time: Get unlimited, ad-lite access to The Vancouver Sun, The Province, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites for just $14/month or $140/year. Subscribe now through The Vancouver Sun or The Province.

© 2022 Vancouver Sun

Okanagan Falls industrial on 8.7 acres trades for $4 million

Re/Max Penticton Realt
Western Investor

With easy access off Highway 97 in B.C.’s Okanagan, the parcel includes a commercial building, caretaker’s residence, and RV and boat storage, with expansion potential.

Re/Max Penticton Realty, Penticton, B.C., for Western Investor

 

Type of property: Industrial

Location: 4850 Weyerhauser Road, Okanagan Falls, B.C.

Size of property: 382,456.8 square feet.

Land size, in acres: 8.78 acres.

Zoning: I1 (industrial).

List price: $4.29 million.

Sale price: $4.0 million.

Date of sale: March 4, 2022.

Brokerage: Re/Max Penticton Realty, Penticton, B.C.

Brokers: John Green and Keith Jakes.

 

© 2022 Western Investor

Bosa Development takes Bosa Properties to court over its name

Tyler Orton
Western Investor

U.S., B.C. lawsuits allege use of Bosa name, similar branding are confusing the public

 Similarities between the logos of Bluesky Properties and Bosa Development have contributed to consumer confusion, lawsuits in Canada and the U.S. allege.Submitted

A cross-border battle of the Bosas is underway in B.C. and Washington state courts over the respective branding of two well-known West Coast real estate developers.

Bosa Development Corp. has filed suit against Bosa Properties Inc. on both sides of the border following the latter’s entry into the U.S. market at least two years ago.

Nat Bosa founded Bosa Development in 1986, while brother and former business partner Robert Bosa founded what would become Bosa Properties in 1991. Robert’s son Colin Bosa now serves as CEO of Bosa Properties and Nat’s son Ryan Bosa has served as president of Bosa Development since 2017.

Both firms have pursued real estate developments in B.C. for decades using the same family name. 

But tensions arose in 2020 when, according to allegations made in a lawsuit filed Thursday by Bosa Development, the Nat Bosa-founded firm discovered the Robert Bosa-founded firm had launched operations in the Seattle area and was pursuing business under the banner of a Bosa Family Company.

Nat Bosa’s Bosa Development has been operating in the U.S. since the late 1980s and specifically in Washington state since the early 2010s.

“Almost immediately after launching its new U.S. venture, consumers began confusing defendant’s [Bosa Properties] real estate services with Bosa Development’s real estate services that are offered in the same geographic region,” U.S. court documents allege. 

“For example, one subcontractor even contacted Bosa Development asking about a specific job under the assumption that the two companies were one in the same. Bosa Development has never been affiliated with defendant.”

Bosa Development claims Bosa Properties initially agreed in 2020 to stop using certain Bosa branding in its marketing before later doubling down on its use.

“The value of the Bosa [Development] mark is being diminished and consumers are likely to be, and have already been, misled and confused,” the lawsuit claims.

Bosa Development owns a trademark in the U.S. that makes use of the letter B, while Bosa Properties affiliate company Bluesky Properties has also used a logo featuring the letter B.

“The [Bluesky] website also advertises itself as ‘a Bosa Family company’ causing further confusion,” according to the lawsuit filed in Washington state, which repeatedly describes the use of Bosa Properties’ branding as “counterfeit.”

Court documents filed in B.C. list close to a dozen defendants, including nine organizations featuring the name Bosa.

The B.C. lawsuit alleges that in 2017 Bosa Properties began launching services in Canada using the Bosa name – a violation of a prior agreement with Bosa Development.

Bosa Development claims this has caused confusion over the types of services the different companies offer, leading customers to think the two companies share common ownership and history, and that Bosa Development is a subsidiary of Bosa Family Companies, the latter of which is operated by Bosa Properties.

Bosa Development is seeking a trial in Vancouver in an effort to stop Bosa Properties from using any trademarks or names that is claims could cause confusion.

The U.S. civil case seeks to stop Bosa Properties from using the branding in question, recover damages and recoup the cost of legal fees. Bosa Development is also asking the courts to either cancel the registrations for two websites affiliated with Bosa Properties websites or else assign those domains to Bosa Development.

“We regret that it has come to this between families. We see this as the only avenue to protect the integrity of our business and brand reputation that our patriarch Nat earned over decades of hard work, honesty and community giving,” Bosa Development said in a statement.

“We wish Bosa Properties all the success they have earned and deserve but we must preserve and defend our brand and identity.”

A representative speaking on behalf of Bosa Properties declined an interview request from BIV.

Instead, Jen Riley, Bosa Properties vice-president of brand, said in a statement the company is proud of its legacy.

“Both companies forged separate paths for the last 35 years and we have reached a time in our evolution that we are taking an opportunity to ensure we can continue to flourish for the next 50 years,” she said.

 

© 2022 Western Investor

Summerland 14.7 acres of lakeview land sells for $3.1 million

Re/Max Penticton Realt
Western Investor

Approximately 30 to 50 houses could be built on the former Okanagan vineyard, which is not in the Agriculture Land Reserve, under one of three development options.

Type of property: Land for development.

Location: 13610 Banks Crescent, Summerland, B.C.

Land size: 641,510 square feet.

Land size in acres: 14.75 acres.

Number of titles: 4

Zoning: A1

List price: $2.95 million.

Sale price: $3.1 million.

Date of sale; January 25, 2022.

Brokerage: Re/Max Penticton Realty, Penticton, B.C.

Brokers: John Green and Keith Jakes.

 

© 2022 Western Investor

What percentage of real estate agents fail and why?

Corben Grant
REP

The number of real estate agents is growing all the time as new agents begin in the field drawn by the promise of being their own boss, making their own schedule, and earning a high income. However, the reality in the current market is that there are simply not enough homes for agents to sell, meaning there is a lot of competition among agents. With all the new agents joining the field, some of them are bound to become the top performers while many others may not.

But, what exactly divides the agents who succeed from those who fail? There aren’t any number of reasons why someone may fail in their new career – many of these will be external factors beyond their control. There are some things a realtor can do, or fail to do, that worsens their chances of success.

In this article, we will look at why agents tend to fail and what you can do to avoid these common pitfalls to be successful in your real estate career.

How many fail?

It’s hard to determine exactly how many new real estate agents fail as this figure is not commonly reported. If you look online, you may see the pervasive claim that “87% of real estate agents fail in the first five years”. This statistic is purported to originate from the National Association of Realtors (NAR) from around 2014, though a primary source for this statistic proved difficult to find.

If correct, this is truly a shocking figure, indicating that almost nine in 10 agents will fail to succeed in the real estate industry.

There is some data to back up this possibility as NAR does release data on realtor earnings. In their most recent report, they indicated that for the average real estate agent with two years of experience or less in real estate, the median income was just $8,500, far below what would be enough to support oneself. On the other hand, they also offer the statistic that 79% of realtors were certain they would remain active for the next two years, somewhat contradicting the high failure rate narrative.

Common reasons real estate agents may not succeed

Getting into real estate for the wrong reasons

One of the most common reasons that a new agent may not succeed in the real estate business is that they should not have gotten into real estate in the first place. For example, some new agents believe that the near limitless potential for earning as a real estate agent means that they themselves will be the highest earner around. Even worse – some take this to mean that it will be guaranteed. Any successful real estate agent will tell you this is absolutely not the case and anyone who gets into the field expecting easy money without hard work will be sorely mistaken.

Trouble following a routine and staying consistent

Another problem for new real estate agents is being able to manage themselves and hold themselves accountable for putting in the work. Some think that making your own schedule means you can schedule yourself for as many off days as you want. This is absolutely not true. In fact, the ability to make your own schedule is one of the hardest parts because no one is going to force you to show up. The drive to keep going and put in the work every day must come from within in order to succeed. For many successful agents, the idea of “making your own schedule” actually means working longer days, skipping weekends, and being constantly on call to best serve your clients.

Another thing that you need to hold yourself to is consistency. This can play a huge role when it comes to communicating with clients, marketing yourself, making appointments, and more. It’s not enough to market yourself once or provide good service when you feel like it. Successful real estate agents must consistently be able to perform at their best and hold themselves to high standards of consistency.

 

 

Poor people skills

Most people think that real estate agents just work with homes, but it’s even more than that – real estate agents work with people. Clients are putting a lot of trust in agents to help handle one of the biggest transactions of their lives and they aren’t going to want to work with a real estate professional who they simply do not get along with. As an agent, your people skills are crucial to your success. This includes being an agreeable and friendly person as well as coming off as honest and trustworthy. Another aspect is communication. Your clients need an agent who can communicate effectively and on time so they can get the information they need when they need it.

Not setting or following goals

One of the secrets of successful people is that they know exactly what they want and how they will get there. One of the quickest ways to lose your momentum in a new career is to lose sight of why you began and what you want to get from your work. In order to be successful, you need to set realistic goals, both long term and short term, and create actionable plans that you can follow to see your goals become a reality. This can help focus your efforts and provide a much-needed drive to keep at it when times get tough.

Can’t generate leads

It’s hard to succeed if you can’t make transactions and you can’t make transactions if you can’t reach clients. Developing a successful lead generation strategy early will take you far in real estate. You need to be diligent in your pursuit of new leads, always looking for new strategies and abandoning old techniques that don’t work. Failing to do so will make it hard for a new agent to find work, leading to failure.

Not marketing yourself

Another aspect of finding new business is how you market yourself to potential clients. In the world of online marketing, clients will make first impressions based on what they see before they even speak with you. If you fail to market yourself or fail to market yourself effectively, clients will move on before you even have a chance to reach them, causing you to lose business. Marketing is one of the biggest keys to success for a real estate agent and it’s something you should take seriously.

Poor money management skills

Working as an agent can be a rollercoaster with business coming and going at odd times. When business is good you can make good money, but you shouldn’t take this for granted. One of the biggest reasons most real estate agents quit is the need to go elsewhere for more consistent income. Having a sizable savings fund and managing your money properly when it’s coming in will help you through the slow times and allow you to keep working as an agent.

 

Lack of commitment to the job

Finally, too many agents get into real estate with the intent to really get serious once things start to work out. The hard truth is that you won’t get everything you can out of real estate without giving it your all. Some agents start out part-time until they have enough experience to tackle the job full time. This can be a good way to get started, but you can’t ever make it your full-time job without taking the jump. You give yourself the best chances of success when you are fully committed to becoming a successful real estate agent.

Conclusion

Anyone who gets started in a new role does so with the intent to succeed, however, sometimes despite your best efforts, things just don’t work out. The good news is if you are reading this now, you probably already have the mindset it takes to make yourself successful. Keep these tips in mind and learn from other successful agents in your network and you will go far.

 

© 2021 Rep Magazine. All Rights Reserved.

Federal budget gives development groups little to cheer

Peter Mitham
Western Investor

Policy trumps spending as Ottawa pares new investments

 Spending commitments in the April 7 federal budget delivered by finance minister Chrystia Freeland left development groups unimpressed.

Restrained spending in the federal budget on April 7 still adds up to more than $452 billion in expenditures, but development groups in B.C. are finding little to cheer about.

“The federal budget falls short on investments in critical infrastructure that is essential for the health and well-being of all Canadians,” Chris Atchison, president of the B.C. Construction Association, told Western Investor. “BCCA welcomes investments in labour mobility and training, and improvements in municipal permitting systems, but these are small commitments that will not help to build the strong foundation needed to ensure Canada remains resilient.”

Primary industries will benefit from new spending, including $3.8 billion to implement Canada’s first Critical Minerals Strategy, which aims to secure domestic supplies of nickel, copper, cobalt, rare earths and uranium.

The budget also allocates $2.6 billion over five years for a new investment tax credit to encourage investment in carbon capture and storage in the oil and gas sector. The credit gives businesses a tax break of up to 60% on the purchase of eligible equipment. The real spending, however, will have to be done by business not government.

By far the biggest amount of new spending is on housing, with Ottawa flagging the role of infrastructure funds in supporting new affordable housing development across the country through the Canada Community Building Fund and other initiatives. A further $4.4 billion is allocated for construction of 6,000 units of new housing through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. and the repair and renewal of 17,800 existing units through the National Co-Housing Investment Fund.

But similar to the oil and gas sector, many of the budget’s measures focus on policies rather than pots of government money.

These include a ban on foreign investment in Canadian housing and the implementation of an “underused housing tax” for non-residents and non-Canadians who leave residential property vacant.

Speculative purchases will also be subject to new taxes.

The budget document says any profit that accrues to owners of properties purchased and sold again within 12 months will be taxed as business income, unless the sale was due to a change in life circumstances, such as a birth, death, divorce or other significant transition. A public consultation will be undertaken to determine the details.

All assignment sales of new homes will also be subject to GST/HST as of May 7, closing a loophole that allowed “speculators to be dishonest” about their reasons for purchasing a residence.

The budget estimates the two new tax measures to garner $114 million in additional revenue over the next five years.

Similar tax measures have been implemented on a regional basis in BC. But the prospect of new national measures drew little comment from the Urban Development Institute, Pacific Region.

The organization did not issue a statement on the budget, and chapter president Anne McMullin was not available for interviews.

 

© 2022 Western Investor

Developer of downtown Richmond property seeks creditor protection

Peter Mitham
Western Investor

April 25 court date set for a proposal to satisfy Alderbridge Way LP’s largest creditor

 Building permits for the Atmosphere development expired and the company has now sought creditor protection.Richmond News file photo

The developer of a high-profile site in downtown Richmond is seeking protection from creditors.

Alderbridge Way LP sought protection April 1 under the Companies Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) to restructure its operations. The company faces $346.1 million in obligations, while assets total slightly more than $351.4 million.

The largest amount, $175.3 million, is owed to Romspen Investment Corp. of Toronto. A smaller amount of $76.7 million is owed to unit holders including R. Jay Management Ltd., J.V. Driver Investments Inc., MNB Enterprises Inc., G. Wong Holdings Inc., Gatland, REV, Voth Developments Ltd., Inland Consulting Ltd., Dennis Schwab and Lesley Schwab, and South Street LP. Most of the unit holders are also limited partners of Alderbridge.

According to court documents, the limited partners are proposing an arrangement that would convert a portion of the amount owed them into equity, thereby strengthening the developer’s balance sheet and allowing it to repay Romspen.

The proposal will go before B.C. Supreme Court on April 25 for approval. If it is not approved, company assets could be sold.

The court has appointed Alvarez & Marsal Canada Inc. of Vancouver to monitor the company’s affairs. It is also working with the developer’s general partner, Alderbridge Way GP, and its wholly owned subsidiary, 0989705 B.C. Ltd.

Alderbridge Way LP is the developer of Atmosphere, a stalled mixed-use development at Alderbridge Way and No. 3 Road opposite Lansdowne Centre.

Construction began in 2019 with plans for an office tower and 824 residential units in six towers. Five of the towers were to be sold as condos, while one tower would have 112 market rental units and 38 affordable rental units.

A portion of the project was to have been purchased by Global Education City (Richmond) LP, an affiliate of CIBT Education Group Inc., for school facilities and student housing.

But court documents indicate that construction halted in September 2020 following challenges to secure construction financing during the early months of the pandemic. Cushman & Wakefield was retained to sell the property in May 2021, and 31 parties were contacted. Two letters of intent were received and negotiations with “a well-known property developer in British Columbia,” moved forward. However, the negotiations ended in January 2022 without a deal.

It’s not just the fate of the property that’s hanging in the balance. Court documents indicate that 288 units in the development have been sold since 2019, resulting in $48.4 million worth of deposits being held in trust. Many purchasers have been left in limbo while the financial and legal process has played out.

Alderbridge Way LP acknowledged the hardship to buyers in a statement released to media April 1.

“Alderbridge Way LP, the owner of Atmosphere, wants to assure our presale buyers that their deposits are held in trust and protected, and our priority is to work towards maintaining their contracts and advancing the project,” it said. “It is disappointing that we reached this point, and we understand and apologize for the frustration this has caused to people who have pre-purchased strata units and invested in Atmosphere. We assure you that we are moving forward with your best interests in mind.”

CIBT, for its part, announced in its latest annual report that it “expects to fully realize all amounts based on the value of collateral securing the deposit.”

Alderbridge Way LP acquired the property through its numbered subsidiary in 2017 for $113 million. It was acquired from UEM Sunrise (Canada) Alderbridge Ltd., which had paid $70.2 million for the property in 2014 with ambitious plans for a mixed-use development on the site.

 

© 2022 Western Investor

Housing was the focus of today’s federal budget

REBGV Staff
REBGV

Today’s Federal Budget 2022 had a significant focus on housing for Canadians. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland laid out how the government is planning to address housing affordability by adopting policies in three categories: building, saving and anti-flipping/foreign investment. 

“This was a housing-focused budget and there’s considerable detail within the document that we need to analyze and better understand,” REBGV Chair Daniel John said. “We support the government’s recognition that we need to create much more abundant and diverse forms of housing supply in the country. We also support actions to help young people save for a down payment in Canada.”  

“Where we urge caution is in policy measures that insert the government into the sale of private property. That kind of intervention should be done seldomly, carefully and with the rights of all parties in mind,” John said. “We look forward to being involved in the ongoing conversation around improving housing affordability and how these measures will be implemented.”

Read a summary of the Federal Budget 2022.  

Read the Federal Budget 2022 (304-page pdf). 

Our Government Relations team has begun a comprehensive review of today’s housing policy announcements. We’ll provide more information and analysis as we complete this work. 

Here’s our initial summary of the housing measures announced today. 

Building

The goal is to double housing construction by 2032. This will require investments and changes to existing systems that prevent more housing from being built, including: 

• A new Housing Accelerator Fund: $4 billion over five years, starting in 2022-23. This will provide support to municipalities, such as an annual per-door incentive or up-front funding for investments in housing planning and delivery processes that speed up housing development. 
• Extension of the Rapid Housing Initiative: $1.5 billion over two years, starting in 2022-23 to create at least 6,000 new affordable housing units, with at least 25 per cent of funding going towards women-focused housing projects. 
• A new Multigenerational Home Renovation Tax Credit: provides up to $7,500 to support construction of a secondary suite for a senior or an adult with a disability, starting in 2023. 

Saving

• A new Tax-Free First Home Savings Account: first-time home buyers can save up to $40,000 tax-free. Like RRSPs, contributions would be tax-deductible, and withdrawals to buy a first home, including investment income, would be non-taxable, like a TFSA. Tax-free in, tax-free out. 
• First-Time Home Buyers’ Tax Credit: double the amount to $10,000, providing up to $1,500 in direct support to home buyers, applying to homes bought on or after January 1, 2022. 
• Home Accessibility Tax Credit: double the qualifying expense limit of the to $20,000 for 2022 and subsequent tax years. This tax credit of up to $3,000 is an increase from the previous tax credit of up to $1,500 for important accessibility renovations or alterations.

Anti-flipping/Foreign investment

• Flipping tax: anyone selling a property they’ve held for less than 12 months will be taxed on their profits as business income, applying to residential properties sold on or after January 1, 2023. There will be exceptions for Canadians selling their home due to life circumstances such as a death, disability, the birth of a child, a new job, or a divorce. 
• Foreign ownership restrictions: to prohibit foreign commercial enterprises and non-Canadian citizens or permanent residents from acquiring non-recreational, residential property in Canada for a period of two years. This will apply to detached homes and stratas. Permanent residents, foreign workers, foreigners buying their primary residence, and students will be excluded from the new legislation.  

The government will have the power implement penalties for non-compliance. 

• Review of housing as an asset class: to better understand the role of large corporate players in the market and the impact on renters and homeowners, the government plans to look at options and tools, including potential changes to the tax treatment of large corporations investing in residential real estate.  

Affordable housing

• $1 billion for the construction of affordable housing units; and 
• $2.9 billion in loans and funding for co-op housing to accelerate the creation of up to 4,300 new units and the repair of up to 17,800 units. 

Protecting Canadians from money laundering in the mortgage lending sector

 

To help prevent financial crimes in the real estate sector, the federal government plans to extend anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing requirements to all businesses conducting mortgage lending in the next year. The goal is to limit the exploitation of the real estate market by criminals, which can affect housing affordability across the country.

 

New taxes

 

GST/HST on assignment sales: Budget 2022 proposes to make all assignment sales of newly constructed or substantially renovated residential housing taxable for GST/HST purposes, effective May 7, 2022. The federal government wants homes to be lived in and not commodities to be traded and profited upon by housing speculators. The GST/HST has not been applied if the buyer initially intended to live in the home, which may have led to speculator dishonesty and the uneven application of GST/HST to the full and final prices of new homes. 

Two new tax measures are expected to raise $6.1 billion over five years:  

• Canada Recovery Dividend: a new, temporary, one-time 15 per cent surtax on banks and insurance companies on taxable income above $1 billion for the 2021 tax year. It will be paid in equal installments over five years.  
• Corporate income tax rate increase: the government will permanently increase the tax rate by 1.5 percentage points (to 16.5 from 15 per cent) on the taxable income of banking and life insurance groups above a threshold of $100 million. This is expected to raise $445 million ongoing. 

If you have questions about the federal budget, contact Harriet Permut, manager of government relations at [email protected]. 

© 2022 REBGV

VGH’s fundraising charity makes $100m acquisition of Vancouver property

Chuck Chiang
Western Investor

Deal gives VGH & UBC Hospital Foundation an income property, moving its fundraising beyond traditional methods

 VGH & UBC Hospital Foundation bought this 1.4-acre site on West 12th Avenue in Vancouver for $100 million.Submitted

The primary non-profit fundraising partner for Vancouver Coastal Health has entered the real estate investment market, acquiring a 1.4 acre Vancouver property for $100 million.

The VGH & UBC Hospital Foundation said the deal – which closed on March 29 on a property on West 12th Avenue (across the street from Vancouver General Hospital) – is the largest of its kind in B.C. The deal, officials say, will also signify a new way for non-profits like the Foundation to raise funds to support their causes beyond traditional fundraising means.

Currently, the acquired site comprises the 14-storey long-term care facility Windermere Care Centre (with 207 beds) and a three-storey, 26-unit rental apartment building. The previous owners of the property were Dan McDonald and Margaret Marchiol.

Although no formal plans have been announced for the future development plans for the property, Foundation president/CEO Angela Chapman said one of the keys to the deal was that Windermere will be leased to VCH for operation, turning the partially private facility into a wholly public one.

“One risk with the fact it was a private provider that was operating Windermere is that they could have sold to another private provider, probably a national chain,” Chapman said. “… That is a prime piece of real estate that – for anyone who bought it from a real-estate perspective – they may have wanted to sell it for a different purpose.

“They may have wanted to take those beds out of the public system – or maybe even remove the property completely from long-term care,” she added. “So we’ve now made sure those beds – in a very good facility… in a prime position next to Vancouver General Hospital – are now secured as long-term beds in the [public] system.”

Chapman noted that VCH, the Foundation and Windermere are working “to ensure a seamless transition for residents, their families, staff and vendors. 

Plans are less clear on the rental apartment front. Chapman noted that city bylaws mandate that any new development must at least replace the existing 26 units, but whatever the Foundation decides to build will likely involve increased density due to the site’s proximity to both VGH and a major artery like Oak Street.

“From the perspective of density, it is an under-utilized area of the city…,” she said. “Our objective will be over the coming years to redevelop that [land] in support of Vancouver Coastal Health and their space needs for providing health care for all British Columbians.”

The Foundation, however, said there is no firm redevelopment plan yet.

The process of planning what will become of the on-site residential units will be a multi-year process, officials noted. In the meantime, the Foundation has hired a property management firm (through a proper request-for-proposal process) to manage the building and address tenants’ needs.

“Our goal is to ensure that we protect the asset that we have,” Chapman noted. “Now that this is an asset, we will make sure it continues to be a functional place for people to live, as long as we are operating that current building. It is an investment at the moment.”

The announcement comes as the non-profit fundraising sector faces increasing challenges, which have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated economic uncertainty.

Even before the pandemic, there have been signs of trouble for the industry. In 2019, a federal Special Senate Committee on the Charitable Sector report found that a combination of shifting Canadian patterns for donating and a lack of long-term federal program funding was concerning for the industry’s future.

Given that a charity mainly relies on three sources of funding (government support, donations and earned income), having two of those sources put under stress means that the third – earned income – should be explored in developing “innovative approaches… to ensure the future viability” of funding sources, the report said.

Among the report’s recommendations is an item that implores Ottawa to “provide greater clarity on permissible revenue generation activities for registered charities,” and – in that sense – Chapman said the VGH Foundation’s real-estate decision is a reflection of a new potential way for non-profits to generate funds for its causes.

She added that while the Foundation will be busy with developing this property in the next few years (thus ruling out any other forays into real estate in the near future), there is no reason that the real-estate investment avenue won’t be revisited years down the line if the Windermere Care Centre venture proves successful.

“One of the things that every foundation and not-for-profit [group] grapples with is an aging donor base and how to maintain its sort of revenue,” she said. “And I think this is just one example of getting creative with assets that you have in order to realize the revenue to support your cause.”

 

© 2022 Western Investor