In June 2006, the City of Vancouver Social Planning Department released a report entitled: "Special Needs Residential Facilities in Vancouver: Record of Public complaints on the operations of the facilities." 1, 2
Supportive Housing Providers for addicts should not reference this City of Vancouver report nor should they make any claims from this report that there are no crime and safety concerns from supportive apartments for drug addicts.
Because the report does not investigate, research or analyze neighbours' concerns. Nor is there a meaningful attempt at researching and analyzing crime statistics in the neighbourhoods surrounding these facilities.
Here's a "non profit" drug addiction housing provider, referencing the City Report and making claims that there are no crime, nuisance or safety issues with large "abstinent based" supportive housing for drug addicts.
"In Vancouver, a review of complaints filed with the City’s Licenses and Inspection Department and the Vancouver Police Department by neighbours of facilities similar to that being proposed by Turning Point [drug addiction treatment provider], showed that concerns regarding personal safety, increased property crime, drug activity or noise have not been substantiated." 3
The City of Vancouver's report does not do this, despite all the claims made by the potential supportive housing provider that it does. The "analysis" is simply a list of calls to either the City of Vancouver or Police where the caller complained specifically about the facility.
Despite listing the concerns of neighbours 4 in the report, it does not address neighbours' concerns.
- There is no analysis of property values. (Learn more »)
- There is no "research" about "disruption of neighbourhoods" as a result of these facilities.
- There is no analysis of crime rates in neighbourhoods near these facilities.
- There is no data on traffic or parking.
- There is no research about social problems in the area comparing before and after the facilities were opened.
An example of how this counting of complaints about the operation of the facility works is contained in the report itself on page 8, under title: Mental Health Facilities
"Home #4: a general observation by Police that quite a few cars in this block are broken into, and stolen vehicles recovered." 5
Even though there is clearly a problem with crime outside this facility, this is counted as only one complaint. If the police had not made the "general observation", none of this crime would have been in the report at all.
What this means is that crime, nuisances, disturbances or complaints in the neighbourhood of a facility are not considered in this report unless the facility is specifically mentioned in the call to the city or to the police.
For example, if you lived 4 blocks from a facility and your house was broken into, would you think to call the Police or the City Permits and Licensing Department to complain about the operation of the facility? Not likely. You would call and report a break and enter. Even if the crime was solved — an extremely rare event for property crimes — and the criminal was found to be a resident at the supportive housing facility, it would not be considered a complaint in this report.
How does increasing the number of drug addicts in a residential neighbourhood by opening a supportive facility for drug addicts or mentally ill drug addicts 6 affect the crime rate in the neighbourhood?
Research shows that neighbours concerns about drug addict facilities are legitimate.
"Substance use disorders are notoriously difficult to treat, as evidenced by high relapse rates." 7 Neighbours are correct when speaking out about high relapse rates in treatment. Supportive housing tenants in addiction treatment would be no different.
"Neighbourhoods with the most drug-related nuisance were those with the most facilities [addiction care including methadone services, drug consumption rooms and shelters] for substance users." 8
The Journal of Urban Affairs analysis on supportive housing and crime "... it was the set of seven large facilities, each housing 53 or more residents that was associated with the negative crime impacts… Indeed, they suggest that total crime reports near these large supportive housing facilities increased by about 30% of the sample mean each year after opening; the comparable figure for violent crime reports was 40%." 9 (Learn more »)
This report: City of Vancouver Social Planning Report: "Special Needs Residential Facilities in Vancouver: Record of Public Complaints on the Operation of the Facilities." (June 2006) should not be used by any group trying to justify building any facilities for drug addicts in residential neighbourhoods.
Published October 23, 2007.