“Development required multiple steps, and every step meant one more chance for something to go wrong.” - Sam Zell, Am I Being Too Subtle? Development isn’t for the faint of heart, but it can be rewarding when navigated with precision. While market demand and building costs set the foundation for any project, entitlement risk remains one of the most volatile development variables. To an outsider, entitlement feels like a binary "yes or no" outcome, but in reality, it is a graduated staircase of legislative and administrative hurdles where risk is systematically removed at every milestone. Since the passage of Bill 44 on November 30, 2023, the entitlement risk profile in BC has shifted. While a massive development slowdown has temporarily masked the benefits, the impact is structural. Public hearings, a major component of entitlement risk, are now prohibited for residential projects that align with an Official Community Plan (OCP). In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we examine the interaction between OCPs and Zoning Bylaws. We map out the legislative processes that a development goes through and the precise moments where entitlement risk ‘steps down’, information that a savvy investor can use to evaluate the risk and reward of a development deal at any stage of the process. OCP and Zoning Bylaw The interplay between an OCP and a Zoning Bylaw is a relationship of vision versus law. The OCP serves as a high-level, long-term strategic map that outlines the city’s future intent for land use, density, and community character in various areas of a City. However, it is the Zoning Bylaw that provides the granular, legally binding rules for every specific parcel of land, including permitted uses, height limits, and setbacks. For a development to proceed, s. 478 of the Local Government Act requires that its zoning must be consistent with the OCP. If a project aligns with the OCP’s vision but the underlying zoning does not yet allow for it, the Zoning Bylaw must be amended, though a public hearing is no longer required. If the project doesn’t align with the OCP however, it significantly increases the ‘height’ of the entitlement risk. The Entitlement Staircase When legislative hurdles are mapped onto a timeline, we see that the entitlement process is a series of discrete events where varying levels of risk come off the table at each step:
Introduction "It was never my thinking that made the big money for me. It was always my sitting. Got that? My sitting tight!" - Jesse Livermore “The big money is not in the buying and the selling, but in the waiting” - Charlie Munger It’s easy to feel unconfident as an investor today. We are currently operating in a market of ‘brittle optimism’, where major indices flirt with all-time highs while headlines warn of trade wars, a potential AI bubble burst, and the destabilization of institutions. For many people, the natural instinct in the face of volatility and future uncertainty is to protect what they have by taking defensive positions, hedging, or selling altogether until the future feels rosy again. But that doesn’t appear to be what the wealthy are doing. In this edition of the Bird’s Eye View, we consider the data from three wealth reports ( Tiger 21 , Knight Frank , and Capgemini ) to see how different cohorts of the wealthy are positioning their portfolios, and how their portfolio construction is changing in response to uncertainty. Asset Allocations by Investor Profile The table below represents the most recent reported weightings and rankings across the three major cohorts. Note that while Tiger 21 and Capgemini provide percentage-based portfolios, the Knight Frank data reflects rankings by weight within institutional family offices.
“The provincial government has provided local government with only two options to build infrastructure: development cost charges and property taxes. And I will always be on the side of property taxpayers, and we will look for developers and ‘growth to pay for growth’ as a principle.” - BC Mayor, Oct 9, 2024