Community Centres Post-Disaster Amendment (Klassen)
Motion 23 · Standing Committee of Council on City Finance and Services, May 20, 2026
Summary
- Amendment by Councillor Klassen replacing the community centres seismic preparedness motion with a direction referencing the existing city-UBC seismic risk screening partnership (covering approximately 700 facilities over three years) and a more detailed assessment already underway at Hastings Community Centre.
- Klassen argued the amendment aligns council direction with existing evidence-based assessment work rather than creating a parallel or duplicative process.
- Confirmed that community centres are required to meet the current immediate occupancy threshold under the Vancouver Building Bylaw (not a higher functional occupancy standard).
- Councillors Maloney, Fry, and Orr opposed, arguing the amendment removed the urgency and the key policy ask for the higher functional occupancy standard.
Vote
Public comments
Read all 1 statements
Transcript
39 segments
Yeah, so the purposes amendment is just to recognize that the city already has a significant seismic assessment work underway and ensure that council's direction aligns with that process. The city is partnering with UBC on a comprehensive seismic risk screening and prioritization review covering approximately 700 civic facilities over the next three years. including community centers. In addition, a more detailed assessment is already underway for Hastings Community Center. Given that that work is proceeding, this amendment ensures that staff report back to council using consistent evidence-based analysis rather than creating parallel or duplicative process. It also affirms that community centers already meet the current immediate occupancy requirements under the Vancouver Building Bylaw. while acknowledging that moving to a higher functional occupancy standard would involve substantial additional costs and technical considerations that Council should properly evaluate through the capital planning process. So I think this amendment provides a more clear and coordinated path while supporting the broader goal of improving disaster preparedness and long-term resilience across our civic facilities.
Thanks.
Okay, Councillor Maloney.
I do not support this amendment. It completely misses the point of this motion. Vancouver's building code only requires that buildings meet the second highest standard of seismic safety, which protects life, but doesn't ensure that the building is suitable for ongoing use. So my original motion seeks that we upgrade the community centres to... support their function as ongoing shelters for Vancouver's residents by increasing their seismic preparedness to the highest level. If we are already opening walls and spending public money to renew these facilities, we owe it to the residents to at least consider the highest standards so these buildings will remain standing and functional during a disaster and long afterwards. I can't emphasise enough that any building constructed in Vancouver before the 1990s was constructed before the building code even recognised that we live in a seismic zone. That means that there are hundreds if not thousands of homes that might not be habitable or worse. So this is, I can't support this amendment and I think it's entirely regrettable. Okay, thanks, Consular.
Consular Orr?
Yeah, I don't think I can support this as well. The motion is pretty simple. Just looking for a bit more urgency on the matter and not throwing our hands in the air and saying that everything's already happening already. And this trend of completely removing any teeth and urgency in motions so that we can pretend we're already doing a perfect job I think is misguided, so I won't be supporting. Councillor Frye.
Yeah, I'm wondering, actually, Chair, if you might rule if this is in order. I know we can't opine on future resolutions, but my understanding is the mayor has a resolution to reduce the application of the Vancouver Building Bylaw later today. And so if this, in fact, is directing us to... Vancouver building bylaw requirements. Would this be redundant or frivolous? Okay. Assuming the mayor's motion will.
So which section in the procedure bylaws? I think it's 87F, maybe.
Dilatory, incorrect, frivolous, rude. Okay, so we're going to take five minutes recess to evaluate the point of order by Councillor Frye.
Okay, thanks, everyone. We have the quorum. Yeah, so after talking to the city staff, so I will rule this amendment in order because of, you know, there's no interdependency for the future motion, and this amendment is not frivolous. It's not dilatory. It's not incorrect. Of course, it's not rude, so I'll rule this one in order.
Okay.
Councillor Fry, please go ahead.
Oh, well, that was it. And I won't be supporting the strike and replace amendment, though. Okay, thank you. Councillor Maloney?
I think that there's an incorrect statement in the first part of this amendment. Perhaps I could ask a question of the city manager through the chair. It states that the City of Vancouver's community centres already achieved the minimum immediate occupancy threshold currently required under the Vancouver Building By-law, but my understanding was that not all community centres do reach that minimum occupancy threshold and that they need to go through seismic upgrades to reach that.
Sandra Singh, Deputy City Manager. I am not, I was trying to inquire as to whether or not that was accurate. I can't speak to it. I'm not confident that it is.
I'm fairly sure that it's inaccurate.
Okay, so you're asking on point of order or what?
I would like to ask the clerks what my options are when an amendment contains inaccurate statements.
Perhaps I could have a recess for a couple of minutes to sort that out.
Challenged.
Okay, but she's not asking about water.
Listen, don't worry about it. I'm going to be voting against this for many reasons. Firstly, that it, as for the reasons I stated, that it completely changes the meaning and intent and effect of the motion. But secondly, because the first statement is inaccurate and in that... the community centres don't all reach the immediate occupancy threshold.
So I'll be voting against it.
I think they thought we're going to take a recess.
Okay, I'll advance Council Classen first. Chair, noting the comment from Councillor Maloney, I'm happy to make a friendly amendment to my amendment, which is to say that community centers are required to achieve the minimum immediate occupancy, rather than say already required to.
Okay, so I'll move you to the amendment Q2. Please send the amendment to the council.
Yeah, did you?
Okay, so we need a seconder for the amendment to amendment. Second by Councillor Domenato. All right, so anything else? Councillor Klassen?
Councillor Maloney?
Nothing further. Good. All right, so now let's move on to the vote for the amendment to amendment.
Councillor, please register your vote.
Okay, so the amendment to amendment passed with Councillor Bligh, Frye, Orr and Maloney in opposition. Okay, back to amendment Q1. Councillor Claston? Good?
Okay, thanks.
Okay, Councillor Maloney? Yes, I will still be voting against the amended amendment. Okay.
All right, so let's go to the vote, Council. Voting on the Councillor's amendment as amended.
Please register your vote.
Statement Watch
All right, is anyone else cold in here? Because I definitely am. But good morning, everyone. Good morning, council members and our mayor. My name is Samaya Adam. I am a black Muslim woman, and I'm grateful to be here with you all today. I'm a community builder. However, I am here on behalf of Foundation for a Path Forward. So on foundation, I serve as their board member. And, you know, sometimes you got to do dutiful, do the full things and come and support your community. So that's why I'm here today. However, the foundation's work is really focused on strengthening communities and advancing anti-racism work across local, national, and global contexts. It is in partnership with Resilience BC under the Attorney General's office. Our work is really grounded in collaboration and practical community-led solutions to build stronger, safer, and healthier communities. And so with that, we are here today for a proclamation recognizing Eid al-Hadha. Eid al-Hadha, also known as the Festival of Sacrifice, which you also graciously shared, it is one of the most significant holidays and celebrations in the Muslim faith. It is rooted in generosity and sacrifice, and it is deeply connected to the values our community cares. So our community really values community care. It is rooted in service. and support. And so when we think about sacrifice, there has to be this willingness to do that. And so at the same time, we cannot ignore the sober context of next month. So this June actually marks five years since the devastating attacks on the Afzal family in London, Ontario, where three generations of Muslim families were taken from us in an act of Islamophobic violence. Even today, we continue to see that rise in Islamophobia. However, moments like today should remind us that while Muslim communities are celebrating, many of us are also navigating anxiety and grief from our day-to-day experiences. So while today is a very symbolic day and a recognition that is so needed, it is an opportunity to deepen our understanding of one another, as well as to build solidarity. And so, thank you for... convening us today because the importance of coming together across differences is what really builds healthier, stronger communities. And so I'm really grateful for the city of Vancouver for creating the space for its residents, opening seats at the table, and really instilling a sense of dignity, shared responsibility through power, shifts, dynamics, all of that. And so this is a place we all call home. And so again, I'm just going to say thank you for giving us the space.
All right. Thanks, everyone. Thanks for... Alright, so this is the plan for the day. We're going to break at noon for lunch and return at 1pm to continue to deal with the remainder of the agenda. If needed, we need to recess at 5pm for a dinner break and reconvene at 6pm to complete the agenda. Okay, so now the committee member will consider the matter adopted on consent. We have report number one on the consent agenda for the committee's consideration. We will hold report two and three to hear from the speakers.