Dear Editor:
There’s been lots of talk from both sides recently as the heritage debate heats up.
Everyone agrees that plenty of Queen’s Park heritage is worth saving: we’re actually on the same side. But we disagree on how to accomplish it.
Meanwhile, the city rushes to complete their Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) policy before the one-year control period expires in mid-June.
Lost in all of this are the hard lessons the City of Vancouver learned when they imposed a harsh and restrictive HCA on the residents of First Shaughnessy in September 2015.
There, owners of pre-1940s homes were stripped of their property rights against their will. They sued Vancouver. And lost. It feels like the B.C. Supreme Court is OK with cities stripping property rights from owners – and not allowing for compensation – as long as it’s done in groups (HCAs), as opposed to one at a time (heritage designations).
The City of Vancouver did buy First Shaughnessy owners dinner, so to speak, before having their way with them, in the form of incentives. Owners there were given a table full of main-course incentives (increased square footage allowances, secondary suites, ability to convert houses into multiple units, coach houses) to help take the sting away.
It didn’t work. Owners there have had to sit back helplessly as their relative land values have dropped 17 per cent so far, according to the B.C. Assessment Authority. This was data collected last July, before the foreign buyers’ tax was implemented. Who knows how much further it’s dropped in the 10 months since.
With all the backlash, value drops and lawsuits surrounding First Shaughnessy in 2016, you’d think New West would’ve taken note. Well … we’ve pressed on with our own Shaughnessy-like HCA, only minus all the incentives. This makes New West’s incentive-free HCA even more unfair for Queen’s Park owners. In fact, it borders on cruel.
More recently, the City of Vancouver has made it known that stripping owners of property rights wasn’t the right way to preserve heritage. Vancouver now says the right way is to: let owners keep their property rights; use mandatory design guidelines; offer plenty of incentives to entice heritage home owners into keeping and maintaining their homes. This is best practice. This is the right way to conserve and enhance heritage, where everyone wins and no one is punished.
Will New West take the free lesson and learn from its neighbour? We believe this can be a win-win for everyone: for property rights; for enhanced heritage; for a community of people, not just houses. Does the City of New Westminster? Do you?
Kyle Davison is a Queen’s Park resident.
