Public Hearing — January 22, 2026 — Transcript
← Public Hearing January 22, 2026
Hello, Councillor Klassen. Can you hear me, Tina, in the chamber? Yes, Tina, I can hear you loud and clear. Perfect. And likewise with you. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Good afternoon, everyone. And I'm now going to call the reconvening public hearing of Thursday, January the 22nd, 2026 from January the 20th, 2026 to order. This meeting is being held in person and by electronic means. Council members and the public may participate by either method. Any council members joining electronically are reminded to enable video to confirm quorum. This meeting is being live streamed on the city's website on YouTube and meeting progress will be updated regularly on X at Van City Clerk. So in the case of an emergency, I'd like to highlight beyond the glass doors and to the left of the post there is an exit. Please use the stairs if that's obstructed for any reason whatsoever. There are four exits on the side of this chamber here. And you'll be guided accordingly. And if you need mobility assistance for whatever reason, please stay in place. And one of our super friendly security team members will help you get to a safe location. There's also a defibrillator at the end of the hallway. So if anyone needs it, just let us know. I'd like to acknowledge that we're hosting today's reconvening of the public hearing on the unceded territories of the Musqueamamamamam, Squamish and Squalor Tooth people. And I do want to thank them for their Generosity, hospitality, and love and care, they show this great land that we get to live, work, and play on. Clerk, can we please have roll call?
Yes, thank you. Mayor Sim is in the chair, and you do have a leave of absence today for civic business, 5 p.m. onward. Councillor Kerbion? Present. Councillor Domenato?
Present.
Councillor Bly has a leave of absence today for civic business from three to five. Councillor Frye, not here. Councillor Montague. Present. Councillor Klassen. Present. Councillor Meisner is not here and I hear he is unwell. Councillor Schell.
Present.
Okay, thank you very much. So before we begin a few announcements, please note that a new public speaker podium has been installed on the left side of the public gallery. And so it's right there in front of us here. Please feel free to, you know, increase or decrease the height of the podium so the microphone works. The public may speak in person or by phone or may submit written comments to Mayor and Council. Speakers may only speak once and will have up to five minutes to comment on the merits of the application. Please state whether you support or oppose the recommendations and if you are a resident of Vancouver. Those representing four or more individuals, including themselves, may speak for up to eight minutes. Each person being represented must confirm their name and presence in person or by phone and may not speak separately. Please follow the live stream or at Vancity Clerk on X to track meeting progress and know when your turn to speak is approaching. Please note the live stream does have a slight delay. Written comments can be submitted through the Mayor and Council Public Hearback Feedback Forum on the City's website and linked on X. If you are pre-registered with a presentation, say next to have the clerk advance your slides. A reminder, at public hearings, council acts as a quasi-judicial body and must focus solely on the merits of the rezoning or heritage application. Members may ask clarifying questions of our team members or speakers, including the applicant, but should reserve debate until the speaker's list has closed. After hearing from speakers, council may, one, approve the application in principle, two, approve the application in principle with amendments, Three, refuse the application. Or four, refer the application to team members for further consideration. Finally, if all speakers are not heard this evening, the public hearing will recess and reconvene on Tuesday, January the 27th, 2026 at 3 p.m. So CD-1 rezoning 426 through 428 West 14th Avenue and 3015 through 3027 Yukon Street. And that was item two, by the way. At the public hearing on January the 20th, 2026, council heard the team member presentation, asked questions of our team members and the applicant, heard from speakers and closed the speakers list and received public comments and asked additional questions of our team members. Council subsequently recessed and will now hear further from our team members in response to council's questions at the public hearing on Tuesday, January the 20th, 2026.
So, Councillor Kirby-Young.
Yeah, just procedurally confirming where we are, Mayor. So, we've asked questions. So, if Council wants to ask any further questions, we have to move the recommendations first to enable that to happen. Is that correct?
Thank you. So... We did finish questions to staff at the January 20th public hearing, and staff were going to respond to some of those questions at this point. Then we would move into debate and decision, assuming a motion gets put to the floor. So we are going to hear from staff first. yes okay thanks i just want to confirm that procedurally and then at that point if council has any further questions we would need to do that after the recommendations have been moved through that forum is that right um so yes we did finish questions but if you have questions after this presentations for clarity by all means So we, by all means, we do it after the recommendation is moved, or we can do it through another round of questions. That's what I'm looking for clarification on. After the recommendation is moved, it would have to be through points of information. Thanks for that point of procedure, Mayor. Thanks.
Okay. Can I just ask a clarifying question on that, just so I'm clear? Or do I have to get in the queue?
I'm noting that my timer is still going. It was just a point in procedure. Thanks, everybody.
So, sorry. Can I pause for a moment? Can I give a response?
Sure. Thank you. Okay.
Sorry about that.
That's the first time we've actually had this happen in like three years of me being an officer. Councillor Montague.
Yes, sorry, Mayor.
It was just a conflict declaration when you get to that point. Great. Thank you. If you can leave the proceedings and we'll connect with you after we're done. Item two.
Yes, I don't know if there needs to be clarification on that.
Yes, we have your conflict from the 20th. Thank you. Okay, thank you.
Okay, great. And so going forward, our team members are going to present their recommendations, findings, what have you, and then council will have an opportunity to ask questions. And then we'll follow the normal procedure after that.
So please go ahead. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Oscar Erickson, Resoning Planner. Further to Council's deliberations on item two from the public hearing on January 20th, Council asks staff to prepare a draft motion to provide additional protections for the street trees on West 14th Avenue identified in the referral report for this item. STAFF HAVE WORKED COLLABORATIVELY COLLABORATIVELY TO PREPARE A DRAFT CONDITION WHICH HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY LAW FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO ALL COUNCILORS AHEAD OF TIME. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE INVITED STAFF FROM THE PARK BOARD WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IMPACTING STREET TREES. THE STAFF TEAM IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE.
So just for point of procedure, before I start, this was my point earlier. We have to move. We can't ask questions at this point.
No, so you can ask questions. And so council will be allowed to ask questions at which time.
Okay.
All right. I'll go through reading the yellow memo. DISCLAIMER AND THEN BASICALLY SOMEONE'S GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE INTO RECOMMENDATIONS.
SUPER. THANKS. OKAY. I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THE TREE QUESTION. I RAISED THAT QUESTION DURING THE HEARING AND I SUBSEQUENTLY SENT E-MAILS TO STAFF AROUND COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO STRENGTHEN TREE PROTECTIONS AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE PROVIDED AND IT IS MY INTENTION TO TABLE AN AMENDMENT AND YOU PROVIDED SOME LANGUAGE THERE. I WONDER IF AT THIS POINT YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH. the background on that recommendation that was sent to all of Council pursuant to public hearing procedures around what materially that means in terms of additional language that Council could consider.
Thank you for the question, Councillor. I'm going to pass the question to Tina Fernandez from the Park Board.
Thank you. That's great. Thank you very much. So good afternoon, everyone. My name is Tina Fernandez. I'm a project manager from Park Board Urban Forestry Team. And I'm here to obviously speak to the revised motion. So what staff worked on collaboratively with planning and Park Board is... In addition to the proposal put forward in front of us where the applicant has in fact met or exceeded our minimum tree protection measures, we have added some additional conditions that we believe will provide additional protective measures for the street trees on 14th. some of which include providing an opportunity for the applicant to do root exploratory work in advance of their DP, which ideally will help inform their DP and detailed design, and will also identify whether additional mitigation measures would be required. for the long-term mitigation or protection of these trees through construction and post-construction. Some additional measures including, sorry, I'm just going to refer to the motion here so I have it. is limiting any staging or site access from 14th in an effort to reduce any construction activity on that street and protect those trees throughout construction and defer any construction activity and access to the back lane and, if required, Yukon Street. Although the applicant is already outlining that they've met the setback requirements for excavation, we are asking for additional project arborist monitoring throughout construction and additional watering and inspection of trees throughout construction, again, to help protect these trees.
Thanks. I appreciate that, and I have limited time. I know that this is a beautiful, leafy area of the city, and the character is important. There was some discussion around from some of the speakers wanting to see lower form. I think it was Councilor Domonato that asked a question in terms of missing middle or some of those three to four stories.
This council doesn't have the ability to impose something like that because of both the provincial requirements and the Broadway plan with the provincial requirement of eight stories. Is that correct? Yeah, can I defer to...
Thank you for the question, Councillor. Yes, this project is within some of the TOA areas, which would require a minimum... Do you want to take the TOA question, Tom? You're correct. This is in Tier 3 of the TOA, which does require a minimum of eight stories and three FSR. Okay, thank you. I'm at time.
Yeah, thanks, Mayor. I just want to follow up a couple of questions that arose from residents and speakers. So there was the question about, you know, scale and density. But there was also questions about further than the tree. I won't go on the tree because we have to address that quite lengthy. But conditions related to an accredited builder being secured for such a development because this is a tower form. And I'm just, can you comment on that? Obviously, I have a very credible and accredited architect who's spoken and addressed some of the concerns that were raised by residents. But I can just speak to that request that was made as a condition added around that.
Yeah. Thanks for the question. I believe I responded generally at the last meeting as well. We don't have any policies or regulations limiting who the owner of a land might be. We certainly have standards that we apply, whether it be architects or engineers, when we receive submissions and architectural drawings, engineering submissions. But we don't have policies or regulations that limit who the owner of a piece of property might be. I fully expect that this owner might look to JV, a joint venture on a project. They may look to sell. It's generally up to them, and we don't regulate those things.
Right. Okay. Okay. And then just reconfirming, because it was late the other night, was I understood there was confirmation, there was questions raised around geotechnical considerations, that there will be further study done in advance of any kind of development if this is supported. Is that correct?
Thank you, Councillor, for the question. I will hand the question to Carol Yee in Engineering Department.
Hello, Mayor and Council. This is Carol Yee with Engineering. I would like to confirm that that is correct. Thank you for the detailed studies done. Okay.
Thank you.
I'll leave my questions there for now. Thank you, Mayor.
Yeah, this is a tree question. Could you speak about the approximate age and lifespan of these trees and possible impacts from construction or the form of the building and the impact on the health of the trees? Thank you. Through the chair to you, Councillor, thank you for the question. So we don't have an exact age of the trees. The city is very fortunate to have a number of large trees in our boulevards, and we do see some construction impact on them, but typically we don't see it until years after construction. So one of the additional recommendations we made was to add monitoring throughout. and post-construction in an effort to determine whether or not additional measures need to be put in place during or post. Do you have any feel for the cost implications for the project of these extra requirements? I don't offhand, but ideally with the early exploratory work, root exploratory work, that would actually inform the construction, any change in construction methodologies, and ideally assist in the applicant in being able to move through to detailed design. So they would definitely know earlier if and what that level of cost implication would be on their project. Right. Thanks very much. And... I've got a question about tenant protections. We heard some concerns about the carrying out of the requirements under the Broadway plan and can you speak to the guarantees, just for the benefit of the questions that were being, the issues that were being raised by speakers, how Tenants are going to be assured that they will receive what they're due for and what they nominate to receive under the TRPP. Thank you for the question, Councillor. I'm going to pass the question to Molly Blower, Housing Planner in the Housing Team.
Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Although the approved TRP policy and the bulletin clarifies the implementation requirements and intent of policy, and besides the fact that staff follow up with the applicant on a complaint basis when... a tenant directly reaches out to staff for support. The next mechanism we have approved under this current policy is a hold at the DP application stage through conditioning. And so it isn't until that time that we have a real hold. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Okay, seeing no one else in the queue, I will remind council that we need to move the recommendation for item two together with the yellow memo dated January the 13th, 2026 entitled CD-1 rezoning 426 through 428 West 14th Avenue and 3015 through 3027 Yukon Street. Amendments to one and two, recommendation A and three. Amendments modify rezoning conditions along with the report provided on January 22, 2026.
Okay, so Council, do I have to repeat that again? No, thank you. So Council will now make its decision on this application. Do we have a mover of the recommendations?
Great, thank you, Councillor Kirby-Young. Seconded by Councillor Zhoue. Thank you, Council. Is there any discussion? Councillor Kirby-Young.
Microphone's tricky today. I'd like to propose an amendment first before we get into material discussion of the application. If you want to move us to an amendment queue.
And I have sent that in to the clerk.
I'm wondering if staff can bring that up on screen.
Do we have the amendment?
We have a seconder for the amendment. Thank you, Councillor Domonato.
Okay. Can I go ahead and speak to it? Thanks, Mayor. So before Council gets into discussion on the sort of the broader nature of the application in front of us, I think that there was important dialogue and conversation with respects to the majestic street trees and boulevard trees along West 14th. And I think that is a big characteristic. of this area of the city and the neighborhood. They do provide cooling, as was noted by one speaker, and I think everybody kind of, you know, breathes a little bit slower and really enjoys it when they have a chance to stroll along or traverse along these streets. And so they do take literally decades to develop, and they are... incredibly difficult to replace and so while we had normal protections with a tree protection bylaw that were incorporating the application I felt and I think the mayor expressed this as well that an additional level of due diligence was helpful for this one and so as staff had outlined earlier I don't know if I'll need to read all of this it is available for the public but just Summarizing it, it was about putting in some additional protections around an arborist exploring the root system, being thoughtful about where the staging and the trucks are that are not on the main street, ensuring the appropriate setbacks, et cetera. And finally, the last one is that there is a requirement satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services for a deposit effective to the assessed ISA value of those trees.
as an additional mechanism to ensure that they are as we're taking every possible step to ensure that these beautiful trees would be maintained if council votes to advance this application. And so that's really the substance of it.
Thank you very much.
Sorry. Yeah, thanks. Thanks to staff for putting this wording together and I appreciate also the extra information from staff from the Park Board and I'm happy to support this amendment. I think it will be good for the applicant to know early on what might be required to protect these very valued and beloved trees. So thank you to Councillor Kirby-Young for moving this amendment.
Thank you very much. Okay, so seeing no one else in the queue, we will call the vote on the amendment.
right and that that passes with um councillors uh bligh fry meisner and or absent and uh well councillor montague on um uh declared conflict thank you right so thank you very much okay so um
Okay, perfect. Thank you. Okay, so council, is there any other discussion?
Okay, well then, with that, I'm going to call the vote. A reminder that any council member participating virtually whose video is... Sorry, Councillor Kirby-Young, is that for after or...?
So are we now able to speak to the application itself?
Yep.
Okay. Yeah, thank you. This one, I think, we had a number of speakers that came out from the neighborhood that are passionate about it. I listened very intently to everything that was said. I want to provide a bit of context. This council has been pretty bullish on delivering new housing and particularly supporting housing rental housing. There is a lot of change coming to neighborhoods and I know that some welcome it and others are not as enthusiastic about it. As was referenced earlier, this particular location for this housing falls within the provincial TOA or transit oriented area guidelines. I know there's a lot of lingo in the planning speak, and council doesn't have the ability to do anything less than an eight stories in this particular area. I know that there was an expression that perhaps this was a better location for lower rise, et cetera. I think that what we see in this rendering, and I'm familiar with this particular architect, I think there were comments made that there is some consideration that was given to recognizing sort of the character of the area, the two-story podium, doing tan houses at grade to sort of fit in with some of the character there. But it clearly seems there's an opportunity to refine some of the design as it goes forward to the DP process. And I did hear that as and when that might happen, that that would be an important consideration to do that. And I'm going to trust, I'm aware of this particular architecture and a lot of projects have been in front of council that they hear that feedback. I think we heard some thoughtful responses to some of the points that were raised there. I think there was a good dialogue, as was mentioned, with respects to the street trees and recognizing some of the character of the neighborhood. And I think what we want is people that are not only supporting new housing and delivering on those needs in the city, but are also thoughtful to the context and the neighborhoods in which They are delivering that and placing it.
So I think on balance and looking at it, it does align with the Broadway plan. It is close to transit oriented. It does contain 20% of below market units. I know some of the speakers expressed concern that they felt that those were not supported in perpetuity. I know that was clarified. that they do remain as BMR below market units, minus 20% to citywide averages upon turnover. They are secured for the life of the building. And so hopefully some of that information has been helpful to clarify as we've gone through the process there. But in looking at the policy statement, the requirements from the province and some of the other considerations on balance, I do think that within the quasi-judicial process and the policy guidelines that we have in place, This application does meet policy, and so therefore I don't see any reason not to support it and approve it. And I would look forward to seeing some sort of, I would say, growth perhaps in the articulation of the building or some of the finishes and materials that would advance and be thoughtful to some of the feedback that the neighbors have shared.
So thank you.
Thanks, Mayor. I'll start by just acknowledging and thanking all of the residents and speakers who came and stayed late the other night with us to share their perspectives on this proposal and to our staff. I guess a couple of reflections we've had a real shift in the conversation around housing when I first ran we were talking about the need for housing for young families exponential growth in the region immigration things that were driving the need for housing and I think where there's been an even greater shift and pivot has been with the introduction of provincial legislation mandating greater density around transit centers. And we're not seeing that just in Vancouver. We're talking, you know, here. It can be in Broadway, but we are seeing this across the region, wherever there is a SkyTrain station or a major transportation hub, of trying to encourage density so that people don't have to have vehicles. And so I think it's laudable, and we're trying to do that in a whole bunch of places. It's been long known that we needed to increase rental in the city. This proposal includes not only a secure rental but below market component, which is, again, something we've been aspiring to. Proof will be in the pudding as to whether this rezoning, if it's approved. leads to that, whether it's the applicant here that fulfills it or not. Because we do know, I just want to balance acknowledge that we are increasingly hearing that that is very difficult to achieve. It's 20% below market within these projects. I want to acknowledge some of the residents who probably one of the best prepared group of residents who have come and spoken to council in terms of presentation and concerns and Everything from we heard concerns about the school size and capacity, which is a legitimate concern, but it exists in not just this area but other parts of the city around schools being at overcapacity. So very legitimate concern there. Concerns about the geotechnical and aquifers as well as the... tree canopy, which I appreciate the amendment brought by Councillor Kirby Young to try to sustain that because it is very difficult to replace. The proposal, there's pretty limited displacement. There is some displacement because there are tenants in these homes now. But where I'm going with this is that I am conflicted over this proposal. It does stem from, I think it does seem, we heard, I think probably the biggest concern I heard throughout the thread of the residents' concerns was around the scale of this project and how it fits with the neighborhood, the heritage of the neighborhood. I appreciate that the architect who, I guess, is very reputable has proposed, you know, the... townhomes at the base to sort of fit more with the existing developments. Also, there's a need for townhomes. It's an area of the missing middle that we were trying to achieve last term that we haven't, I would argue, is still a part of the housing spectrum that more people would like to have. They can't afford a detached home. They don't want to live in a condo or a rental. So that's a bigger policy conversation about how to inspire that. I appreciate that this is, I think, for this area, a significant change, albeit that when you do look a little bit to the west and you do see, I think, staff weren't able, I think, to present that information as part of this. Typically, I've seen sort of a here's the existing buildings of a similar size and a scale and what we anticipate coming in the future. But there is development coming. And again, the proximity to the And the Broadway line is partly, I would say, a compelling piece is that we do want to have support housing near transit. But suffice to say, I think that there were some really valuable points raised throughout this public hearing. And it certainly left me conflicted, but I also see that we need a need for housing. And there is a mix here, including family units. So I'll leave my comments there, Chair.
Great. Thank you very much.
Council, any other discussion?
Okay. A reminder that council, any council member participating virtually whose video is disabled will be marked absent for the vote pursuant to section 14.13 of the procedure bylaw. So I'm now going to call the vote. If everyone can please register their vote.
Okay, and that passes with Councillor Bly, Fry, Meisner, and Orr absent. Okay, so that completes item number two, and I'm actually going to request a five-minute recess, a 15-minute recess.
Can you enable your video? Is Councillor Montague on there as well?
Sorry, and Councillor Montague, if you can enable your video. All right, we're going to get started.
Councillor Montague, if you can enable your video, that'd be great.
Okay. The next item is item number three, CD-1 rezoning, 2260 through 2266 West 2nd Avenue. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes that they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to disclose it. Does anybody wish to disclose a conflict of interest? Councillor Klassen.
Thank you, Mayor. Out of an abundance of caution due to a potential perceived conflict, I will be recusing myself from both item three and four today. Thanks.
Thank you, Mayor. Out of an abundance of caution and due to a connection to the applicant, I am recusing from items three and four of this public hearing.
Thank you very much. And myself, once again, out of an abundance of caution due to a perceived conflict, I will be recusing myself from this vote as well.
So if I could pass the chair to Councillor Zhoue.
No, and they just...
Yeah, there's a personal relationship, so great. Just give me two minutes. Let me reset up the computer.
Councillor Montague, are you on the line? Could you please turn your video on for quorum?
Can we double-check who's online?
Okay, Councillor Montague, we have one, two, three, four, five. We only have five members.
Okay, can we check other councillors? Maybe call them because of Councillor Fry did not submit any leave of absence, right? So he should be available.
You want to take a 10-minute recess? We can try to find.
Okay. Okay. So far, only Councillor Blight submitted leave of absence, right? Okay, so let's try the Consular Meissner and the Consular Fry. I know Consular Meissner is sick, but maybe Consular Fry is available so we have the quorum. Let's take 10 minutes recess and click we'll call Consular Fry.
Five minutes or 10 minutes? How much do you need?
Okay, so let's take 10 minutes recess just in case. Hopefully we can reach out to Consular Fry.
for this public hearing.
So this meeting is recessed until Tuesday, next week, January 27th, 2026, at 3 p.m. here in Council Chamber and electronically to continue with item three. I will also remind Council that it is very important you do not engage in any discussion or correspondence in regard to the remaining applications. Okay, this meeting is recessed now. Thanks, everyone.