Public Hearing — February 24, 2026 — Transcript
← Public Hearing February 24, 2026
reminded to enable video to confirm quorum uh the meeting is being live streamed on the city's website and youtube and meeting progress will be updated regularly on x advanced city clerk in case of the an emergency where we have to evacuate the uh the chamber please direct your attention to the glass doors you just walk past them past the pillar and hang a left and please walk down the stairs if that exit is obstructed for any reason whatsoever please note that there are four exits at the side of these chambers and if you need uh mobility assistance please stay in place and one of our super friendly team members will come and help you out of this place there's also a defibrillator at the end of the chamber here i do want to acknowledge that we are hosting today's public hearing on the traditional territories of the muscovite squamish and swilletooth first nations and i do want to thank them for their generosity hospitality and loving care they show this great land that we get to live work and play on i also want to acknowledge the immense contributions of our incredible team members throughout the city of vancouver who work hard every single day to make this place a better place so with that can
we please get a roll call yes mayor sim is in the chair councillor kirby young has a leave of absence civic business from 5 p.m onwards councillor dominato is not in the chamber councillor bligh has a leave of absence civic business from 6 p.m onwards councillor fry present councillor montague present councillor classen has a leave of absence civic business from 5 p.m onwards councillor mys
i'm present thanks councillor joe present councillor or councillor maloney is not in the
chamber we do have poor mayor great thank you very much okay so uh before we begin a few announcements uh the public may speak in person or in person if they have any questions
or by phone or may submit written comments to the mayor and council speakers may only speak once and we'll have up to five minutes to comment on the merits of the application please state whether you uh support or oppose the application and if you are a resident of vancouver uh those representing four or more individuals or groups 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 contact vancity clerk on x to track meeting progress and know when your turn to speak is approaching please note the live stream has a slight delay written comments can be submitted through the mayor and council public hearing feedback form linked on x if you pre-registered with presentation uh say next to have the clerk advance your slides a reminder that public hearings council acts as a quasi-judicial body and must focus solely on the merits of the zone sorry rezoning or heritage application members may ask clarifying questions of team members or speakers including the applicant but should reserve debate until after the speaker's list has closed after hearing from speakers council may one approve the application principle two approve the application in principle with amendments three refuse the application or four refer the application to team members for further consideration please note uh that a new public speaker podium has been installed on the left side of the public gallery to my right um at the moment podium heights cannot be adjusted to the public gallery by the clerk team members and public speakers please adjust the podiums as needed using the controls on your right hand side okay so the first item on the docket is cd-1 rezoning 2268 through 2294 west third avenue and 1902 through 1912 mine street so before we begin this agenda item if anyone believes that they have a conflict of interest now is the time to declare it seeing no one's hands up um we're now going to go to the clerk who will
read the application in the summary of correspondence received this is an application by marcon developments limited to rezone 2268-2294 west third avenue and 1902-1912 vine street from r3-3 residential district to cd-1 comprehensive development district to permit the development of a 22-story mixed-use building containing 207 rental units with 20 of the residential floor area for residential use and the building is currently under development for the below market rental units and commercial space on the ground floor a floor space ratio fsr of 7.1 and a height of 71.0 meters 233 feet are proposed the following correspondence has been received since referral to public hearing 27 pieces of correspondence and support 43 pieces of correspondence in opposition and zero pieces of correspondence regarding other aspects related
to the application this represents all correspondence received up to 5 pm today great thank you very much now this is the first call for speakers any speakers for this item who wish to speak to council please call toll free at one eight three three three five three eighty six ten followed by participant code one oh six one four four five pound before the close of the speakers list the phone number will be posted on x and displayed during the recess there will be an opportunity for new speakers and miss speakers to be heard at the end of the registered speakers list uh we do have uh team members from planning
urban design and sustainability here to present the application
and so welcome good evening council my name is oscar erickson and i'm the rezoning planner for this application located at 2268 to 2294 west third avenue and 1902 to 1912 vine street the site shown in red is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of third avenue and vine street the surrounding context consists primarily of apartment buildings with commercial or mixed-use buildings along west fourth avenue the site to the west outlined in yellow previously housed the safeway grocery store and is now undergoing redevelopment the subject site is currently developed with two rental buildings there are tenants on site eligible for protection under the tenant relocation and protection policy consideration of this application is enabled by the broadway plan the site is located in kidsilano north area b at the western boundary of the plan area at this location the plan allows for consideration of rezonings for 100 rental housing with 20 of the residential floor area as below market rental units buildings up to 20 stories and 6.5 fsr can be considered at this location minor increases in height and density can be considered for delivery of ground level local serving retail service uses additionally building heights up to 26 stories can be considered where additional building height helps achieve better urban design outcomes the application submitted in august 2024 and revised in july 2025 proposes a mixed-use building of 22 stories at a density of 7.1 fsr the proposal includes 207 rental units where 20 of the residential floor area is delivered as below market rental units in addition to the 6.8 above grade fsr specified for the sub area in the broadway plan the project includes an additional 0.3 fsr of proposed below grade commercial use as the added commercial floor area and the attraction kannst beshifted from this 4.1 above to a 15 fsr higher track this application has been approved to as per the contract with the it improves urban design outcomes. A virtual Q&A period was held in January 2025, and in total, 276 pieces of correspondence were received. Support was expressed for the contribution to the housing stock, including the delivery of below-market rental units, the added density given its proximity to transit, major arterials, and destinations such as Kitsilano Beach and downtown Vancouver. The attractive building design with ground floor retail enhancing the livability. Concern was expressed for the building height and scale of development, shadowing impact to views and access to daylight, strain on infrastructure and amenities, and displacement of long-standing tenants and loss of existing affordable housing. In response, staff notes that the building height and the scale of the proposal is consistent with the plan. The incremental changes to the neighborhood character also aligns with expectations of the plan. Future development must adhere to the future of the plan, and the future of the plan must adhere to the future of the plan. Thank you. The project aligns with the former development guidelines outlined in the Broadway plan, ensuring a contextual fit with the neighborhood's character. Further review of the former development will occur at the development permit stage. Regarding shadowing, the project aligns with the solar access guidelines outlined in the plan. The proposal complies with tower separation guidelines and other guidelines intended to ensure access to daylight and livability. The project does not impact any protected public views. City-funded amenities will be expanded in accordance with the public benefit strategy. The project will not impact any protected public views. The project does not impact any protected public views. City-funded amenities will not impact any protected public views. City-funded amenities will be expanded in accordance with the public benefits standard, to ensure it will be right at home to use and use the existing public% in the plan. The concept of shift 있기 worker responds explain higher historical workplaceusalemment trend that has establishedいる an electricity Bieber sparklel panel衣 Life IIT New Times. The city will continue to work with CoastalHealth, Solehtчит and Translink to facilitate the delivery of healthcare, education and transit services. The tenant relocation protection policy was adopted to minimize the impact of tenant displacements. Renovating theirJAEC subjects by Att Vera via the sale of land with equal With all 18 eligible tenants choosing to return, the development would result in a breakout which in a net increase of 187 new purpose-built rental homes to the city's housing stock. Expected DCLs and public art contribution is estimated to $2.3 million. Additionally, the project will deliver 164 market rental units and approximately 43 below-market rental units. In conclusion, this proposal aligns with the Broadway plan and advances the city's rental housing targets by delivering 207 rental units, of which 20% are below-market rental units. Staff recommend approval. Subject to conditions outlined in Appendix B of the report. Staff and the applicant team are available to answer questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to present the application? Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Nick Pallella with Marcon. I will not be making a presentation this evening, but I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. Great. Thank you. Are there any questions from Council to team members or the applicant noting that this is the only opportunity for the council to present a proposal to ask questions of the applicant? Councillor Meisner. Yeah, thanks. This is for the applicant. I'm just curious as to what you're envisioning for the retail space, given there's lots of retail nearby. Yes. One of the reasons that we were looking to create additional commercial space at this location
was that the ground plane is served by lots of different retail amenities on 4th Avenue, that we think that there's an opportunity
for wrapping that corner with, with retail and commercial that will add vitality, like food and beverage and lifestyle programming. And also particularly the below grade, we're finding that with 4th Avenue being such a popular corridor for commercial, that there's a number of uses that don't have the opportunity.
They're kind of competed out of the market because for the above grade space. And we think there's wellness programs and other types of facilities that could actually use below grade space to continue to operate and have business in the area, which is why we're looking at that. And that's why we have also proposed to integrate
that into this project. Okay. So something like a gym or something that doesn't necessarily. Wellness. Yes. Yoga studio. Yoga studios, wellness, you know, the cold plunge sauna type stuff. Okay. The, all these wellness amenities that this, this community does have, but they've been increasingly squeezed with just competitive
retail dynamics on 4th Avenue. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. This is the second call for speakers. If there are any speakers, any speakers for this item who wish to speak to council, please call toll free at 1 8 3 3 3 5 3 8 6 10, followed by participant code 1 0 6 1 4 4 5 pound. Before the close of the speaker's list, the phone number will be posted on X and displayed during the recess. We're now going to hear from the public, any registered speakers in the council chamber, please come forward to the left, the left podium. When your name is called phone and speakers will be unmuted. When your name is called speakers will have up to five minutes to make their comments and should limit their comments to the merits of the application being considered. So our first registered speaker is speaker. Number one, Jane McFadden, Jane on the line. No. Okay. Uh, speaker number two, Susan Davies. Yes. Hi. Good evening. Mayor Simon council. Thanks for giving me time to speak tonight. Please go ahead. Can you hear me? Yeah, we can hear you. Great. Please. Can you hear me? Okay. My name is Susan Davies. I'm a resident of Kitsilano. I'm also a medical professional. Who's worked in Kitsilano for the last 36 years. I'm speaking. In opposition to the proposal on west third and vine street.
My primary concern is not so much change itself. It's the lack of comprehensive and transparent mitigation plan for the
impacts of this project, because there are so many other proposals for high towers in this small geographic area. And so I believe this development can't be considered just in isolation.
There's dozens of additional high rise towers planned or underway within a
few blocks in the same area. And when you layer, the projects together, we're looking at a really dramatic increase of the population density, potentially thousands of new residents without a clear public plan, outlining how the infrastructure will keep pace infrastructure.
I mean,
roads, parking, the sewers, schools, parks, daycares, preschools, health services, and of course, emergency access. And as someone myself who works presently in health care, I can tell you that services in this area are already very stretched. Because I have limited time tonight. I'm just going to focus on one specific example, and that's the parking and traffic congestion. I read the report and the project proposes, as you said earlier, the 207 units, the parking is 88 parking spaces. So for this area, that would be about 200 to 400 residents in that one single building. Where are all the other people going to park? The report does state parking plans will be finalized. At the development permit stage. But to me, that leaves a lot of uncertainty. And the reality is that many residents will likely still own vehicles. People have to commute to work. Families drive kids to school and activities. And regardless of people are taking transit, they will be getting their daily deliveries by truck or by car. Trades and service providers will still require access as well as visitors and the ride sharing. And this is all added further, pressure. So if parking is insufficient on site, I think that the what's going to happen is vehicles will spill into the surrounding street areas that already very congested emergency vehicle access, the pedestrian safety and the quality of life I feel will be negatively impacted already. I hear I live just across the street, so I'm hearing ambulances blaring every half hour down fourth Avenue. And I'm wondering how will people get emergency care in a timely, fashion with further increased congestion. So, and this is only just the one building Safeway redevelopments already underway across the street at the very same intersection. So what we need to consider really is the cumulative effect, which could mean close to a thousand new residents just on that one little corner. So what I would like to see is the detailed publicly accessible plan that shows how the traffic flow is going to be managed. How will the sewers and utilities be upgraded? Or is 4th Avenue going to be permanently ripped apart for that? Or how will schools and health services be expanded? I don't see details in that and I think growth needs to be responsible coordinated. So I feel this proposal is quite premature and incomplete because the broader consequences of what I've just mentioned, haven't been addressed and I read a lot of the Broadway plan. I see the acronym to be determined TBD, many times, and I feel if you don't, you don't really have a plan if you have TBD repeated often. So in conclusion, this was just an example of congestion. Parking issue is just 1 of the many areas where there's no, in my opinion, the detailed plan to address the impact of its development. So I'm urging council to pause and require a more comprehensive infrastructure and mitigation strategy and make it clearly available. As well as easily accessible to the public before approving the further density at this scale in Kitsilano. Thank you so much for your time.
Great. Thank you. Thank you, Susan. Okay. Speaker number three. Davrin Lee. Son. Can you hear me? We can hear you. Great. Please go ahead.
Hello. Good evening, mayor and city councilors. My name, as you mentioned, is Davrin Lee son. And I've been the owner of the shoppers drug market at the corner of West fourth and Vine. Street. We're one block away from this proposed redevelopment. Now, I've been a pharmacist for 46 years, 36 of these in Canada, and I've been at this shopper's location for 20 years, which is a fair amount of time. And over the past two decades, I've seen Fourth Avenue change and grow into one of Vancouver's most popular and desired shopping districts for both residents and retailers. And it's a very trendy place to live, as you know. I've also not seen any new development in the last 20 years. You know, this proposal is located within the Broadway plan area and is fully policy compliant, providing over 200 new rental homes, including those below market, which is, you know, I think that's really important in a very popular area. It may seem that Fourth is already a busy shopping area, but as a longtime local business owner, I can tell you that all retailers along the street will gladly welcome an increased customer base, especially in this uncertain economy. In the 20 years I've been here, I've seen many businesses on Fourth open and close because it's such a competitive environment and with increased population, it will definitely help survival. I've also seen many seniors. I've seen many people who have been forced to relocate with increased rents. So with the rent controls and increased inventory, the rents might stabilize and make it more affordable for people. This project has my support. It brings new rental stock to the area, along with public benefits such as a family playground, retail shops, and a mid-block green pathway connection to the Whole Foods Plaza. Please consider improving this policy-compliant rental proposal in Kitsilano. Thank you for your time.
Great. Thank you very much. Speaker number four, Alex Downey. Please come in. Yes, please.
Hello, Mayor and Council. Thank you for your time tonight. My name is Alex Downey. I live at 1910 Vine Street in Kitsilano. We are directly impacted by this development. I'm here with my wife, Barbara Downey, to voice our opposition to this rezoning. We are also here to ask you to consider enhancements to the tenant and protection relocation plan to consider the impact on those of us that are in the area. I'm Alex Downey. I'm the director of the Kitsilano. I'm the director of the Kitsilano Residence. I'm the verflem for the Kitsilano Residence and I work in the area exec U号 collection. Where we live, most of our neighbors are displaced from townhomes. This is why even more prominent and prominent target residents are either displaced or displaced from townhomes. Most of our neighbors are opposed to this building. Having a tower on this site, the referral report confirms this with, I believe, 69 percent of respondents against it. But you know that already. Who are we? We are long-term Vancouver residents. We raised our family in our Kitsilano townhome for the past 25 years. Our family lives in this townhome now. As recent retirees, we now live on a fixed income so we have to consider that. to consider that and a little bit about our townhouse complex it's a 20 unit townhome complex that was completely renovated in 1990 comprised of 15 two-bedroom and five three-bedroom units we're in one of the three-bedroom units these are all large 1200 to 1400 square feet units with unfinished basements they're row houses with front and rear porches level entry to the street our townhouses are livable functional and affordable family oriented units what do we stand to lose if this goes through if you voted through i will lose the unfinished basement space we use for storage laundry area and recreation space we'll lose privacy and quiet because we only have neighbors on two sides now above and below the loss of possible home office space loss of potential sublet income because it's allowed in our current lease the ability to age in place by using a bedroom to house a live-in caregiver in the future and of course the loss of the community we have helped to build over the past quarter century in looking at the different tenant protection policies for municipalities nearby vancouver and burnaby comes to mind both of course allow a rate of return to a unit in the new building however there's some important differences one of them is that national housing standard is applied to reduce the number of bedrooms in the returning unit for certain people the moving allowances are greater in burnaby by 400 and in vancouver we're paid a moving allowance once of a thousand dollars for a three-bedroom unit but not to return to the new building ironically so that's a hidden expense in addition to the increased damage deposit that was required to be paid to the new landlord in burnaby developers must post a bond to ensure that the project is completed so the rent top-ups can continue for up to 36 months vancouver has not made this a requirement um basically the bottom line is that burnaby does not apply the national housing standard you get like for like for number of bedrooms and just yesterday surrey announced a major project in surrey central by ani which is one of the major developers to replace 321 units and part of the stipulation is that they will replace them with like for like bedrooms for displaced tenants so what do we stand to go from a three bedroom 14 foot square hundred 1400 square foot townhouse possibly to a 388 square foot one bedroom apartment in the new tower that just doesn't seem fair so as townhome tenants what we'd like to see happen is that tenants displaced from rental townhomes be allowed to return to a unit in the new building with the same number of bedrooms as before that the moving allowance be increased to 1400 to match what burnaby pays and also to cover inflation since vancouver hasn't raised moving allowance since 2015 when the policy came into effect and also that a second moving allowance be paid so the tenants that do elect to return to the building have some assistance to move back into the new building there are some precedents for this the city was relaxed was changed to relax the national housing standard for single persons returning to new buildings they can return to a one bedroom instead of a studio as before and in 2021 the city allowed tenants of townhomes in the ashley mark co-op in south vancouver to return to new units with the same number of bedrooms they had before with two moving allowances paid so why should the city agree to our request citizens of vancouver especially long-term tenured tenants deserve to be treated fairly the cost to demolish our complex is lower than for a typical three-story walk-up building with an underground parking lot some of these savings could go to helping tenants compensation compensation should consider the type of dwelling renters are being displaced from applying a one-size-fits-all is neither fair nor equitable to conclude we don't think it's fair that our standard of living should be reduced markedly to improve developers profitability i would like to ask council to instruct planning staff to include as policies similar to burnaby and surrey to require the developer to provide the number of bedrooms in the replacement units thanks for your time thank you very much for
coming in alex um speaker number five oh sorry uh counselor or i have a question for the speaker
um i have a question for you yep i'm just i'm trying to find did you send um you send over a powerpoint presentation yes i did but i sent it two hours late so no oh yeah it's fine i'm just
just making sure it's alex downey right yes i send it to all to mayor and all the counselors no i'm
just yeah just make sure i i yeah you had some very good points um just make sure i have that thank you thank you yes that's me thank you um speaker number five nathaniel stewart nathaniel
on the line um speaker number six adam bogark and i hope i pronounced your name correctly
you did thank you mayor um thank you to the mayor and to the council for giving us this opportunity i'm nathaniel stong i've lived in kitsilano for 12 years i am an owner and resident of the capers building which sits directly behind the proposed site which i vehemently oppose a few weeks ago when the barge struck the arthur lang bridge traffic across richmond and vancouver collapsed into total gridlock one disruption exposed how inadequate our road systems are i begin here because version of the same problem, but permanent. This rezoning sits directly beside one of the busiest commercial service alleys in Kitsilano, the alley serving Whole Foods and the Capers Building Complex, which is the entire block on the north side of 4th Avenue between Vine Street and U Street. The alley is not a quiet residential lane. It is a high-intensity loading corridor operating above capacity every day. Delivery trucks line up three to five deep. They park to a breast, they block one another, and they block residents and cyclists. Verbal and physical altercations have broken out. Even the city sent soil testers for the proposed property just a few weeks ago, recently had to back out of the alley because it was impassable. I see this daily from my office above the Whole Foods dock. Next slide, please. If you now... Next slide. Thank you. If you reference the developer's application, pages 17, 35, 36, 38, 41, 44, 45, and 47, yes, there's a lot of them, you will see a pleasant animated mid-block corridor connecting 3rd Avenue through the alley into what they label a public plaza leading to 4th Avenue. You can go to the next slide, please. And the next slide again. This plaza is not public. It is common property, owned, maintained, secured, and paid for, by the commercial strata of the Capers building. In summer months, signage states that the Whole Foods is for customers only. The developer does not own it, they do not maintain it, or insure it. Yet, they are marketing it as a pedestrian through route to support their project. Worse, their rendering of the lane depicts leisurely dog walking and cycling as though this was a residential street. It is not. It is a commercial loading dock. Next slide, please. And the proposed four-level underground parking lot is a commercial loading dock. Next slide, please. And the proposed four-level underground parking lot is a commercial loading dock. Next slide, please. And the proposed four-level underground parking lot is a commercial loading dock. Next slide, please. And the proposed four-level park aid entrance would sit directly across from the Whole Foods loading bay, intensifying conflict in the tightest, most constrained part of that corridor. Next slide, please. That's their walkway. Next slide. No other high-rise development in this area sits atop this level of sustained commercial activity. Next slide, please. So, to that add 200 units, add construction vehicles and service vehicles and ride shares and deliveries and bikes
and pedestrians. And the proposed four-level parking lot is a commercial loading dock. Next traffic from the Safeway redevelopment across the street there and the congestion from 4th Avenue where buses already straddle lanes because the rows are so narrow and the sidewalks are even worse for pedestrians. Next slide please. With this you are not solving a housing problem, you are creating a predictable safety and infrastructure failure. Drivers will suffer, cyclists and pedestrians will suffer, commercial tenants and existing residents will suffer and yes the future residents of this tower will suffer. Next slide please. Next slide. If sewage and water capacity must be upgraded for densification and above-ground infrastructure must reflect the same logic. The roads, lanes, sidewalks and servicing corridors must be capable of handling the population that you are introducing. This alley cannot. Kitsilano can evolve but evolution must respect context. This proposal as it stands totally ignores it. I urge you do not approve a rezoning application that relies on misrepresented public space, idealized drawings and infrastructure that already fails under existing demand. This is categorically the wrong project for this location and I know I'm fighting an uphill battle here but should this application pass it needs to be done so with considerable and notable amendments. Which should be brought forward for meaningful public debate. Thank you so much and for your time and consideration.
Thank you very much Adam. Speaker number seven, Ed Evans.
Hi there yeah I'm on the line can you hear me?
We can hear you great please go ahead.
Okay yeah hi my name is Ed Evans. I'm a Vancouver resident and I'm calling to offer my support for this application. So I used to live in Kitsilano and Fairview for many years before relocating to East Van because I couldn't find affordable housing in the neighbourhood. And so like many others I couldn't stay in the neighbourhood. I still know the area very well and spend lots of time there. It's an incredibly connected neighbourhood with access to beaches, parks, schools, shops, transit, and community amenities. Now that I have a family of my own I appreciate even more how ideal this area is for kids. It's walkable, safe, and families can meet their daily needs without having to rely on a car. I also strongly support the inclusion of pedestrian friendly design features in new developments. The proposed mid-block connection linking West 3rd Ave and West 4th Ave is a great example. Overall I believe this is a great proposal that responds to the needs of the community and the city. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Speaker number eight, Lewis Villegas. Speaker number nine, Ruth Cherry.
Yeah okay good evening. So my name is Ruth Cherry. I've lived in Vancouver since 1985, and I'm opposed to the CD-1 rezoning, 2268, 2294, Arbutus Avenue, and 1902 to 1912 Vine Street. And what concerns me is that we were told that there is a housing shortage, there certainly is, there's a shortage of affordable housing. I don't think that the number of towers that are in this proposal, this proposal, but also the buildings in the surrounding area are truly going to address that because the rent is not affordable. I don't know whom it is, and maybe if you have three people sharing a small place, I don't know. But as it stands, it's not. And the floor space is quite cramped as well. People have talked about the narrow streets. I often go to Kitsilano, I lived there for several years, and it's very congested. So if you have this building and a number of other buildings in the same area, it will be more so. And I think there will be, as the gentleman, one or two speakers back, said, there will be more road rage. People are not very patient. It concerns me that there's such, it seems a rush to have a number of these buildings built, or at least approved to be built without consideration, or at least approved to be built without consideration or at least approved to be built without consideration of infrastructure, such as schools, parks, health facilities, and it has to be more livable. It feels like we're losing our status as a livable city, because we're allowing development to come at a rate that isn't sustainable. So that's that part. And Kitsilano has quite a unique character. I remember coming to it in the 70s when I was growing up, and I remember coming to it in the 70s when I was growing up, and I remember coming to it in the 70s when I was growing up, and it's changed substantially since then. But it still has character that is hard to find in other parts of the city. With this building and a number of other buildings, the fabric of that neighbourhood is being changed, and I don't think it's for the better. So, developers and construction companies say that they're, in essence, doing us a favor by building these tall buildings that are up and running. But, I don't think the people who live here, or the people who are overcrowding the area, I don't think they're truly concerned about us, people who live here, they're concerned about making money. That's their mandate. As for the 20% that are under market value, we don't know how many people are going to be returning. Therefore, how many people in the public, outside of those who are being displaced, are truly going to have access to that 20%. So, I hope you refuse this, and I hope you don't. And thank you for listening.
Thank you, Ruth. Speaker number 10, Alejandra Aguirre. Sorry, I know I mispronounced your name.
Good evening, Mayor and Council. Firstly, I'd like to acknowledge that Council's job is not an easy one. You have to weigh complex and often competing priorities. I'd also like to highlight the power that you hold. Power to have direct and significant effect on people's lives. And as we all know, with great power comes great responsibility. As a ten-year resident of the townhouse complex affected by this application, I, my family, and my neighbours will be greatly affected by your decision. For us, this is not just another rezoning application. Unless you're directly affected in this way, it's truly hard to understand what this is like. Growth is inevitable. The form it takes is a choice. There's substantial research showing that the form buildings have affects quality of life. That ground-oriented housing, townhouses, low-rise buildings, homes with direct street access, foster stronger neighbourhood interaction and a greater sense of belonging. Human-scale development supports vibrant, safe communities because it encourages everyday social contact. Tall residential buildings, residential towers reduce informal interaction and increase anonymity. Our townhouse complex is not just a collection of units. It's a community. Neighbours know each other. Children play. People look out for each other. Replacing our community with a tall tower is a dramatic shift. It not only changes the skyline and shadowing, but also the rhythm and character of our neighbourhood. We all know that the rental market has shifted towards more availability and softer rents. Current developments in Kits will eventually add over 10,000 rental units to our neighbourhood. Some low-rises, 11 towers at the south end of Burrard Bridge and five other towers you have approved so far. We already had a misstep in the 60s and 70s when the city rezoned to allow 10 to 12-storey towers. A half dozen were built until community action successfully stopped them from spreading further, preserving the character of our neighbourhood. This will undoubtedly happen again. I'm not saying don't build. I'm saying build within the neighbourhood's style and character. Besides the aforementioned half dozen 12-storey towers, most buildings in Kits are three storeys. So build more of these or slightly higher on sites that are less dense. Build livable units. Build units that meet the BC Housing guidelines, not overpriced shoeboxes. Provide fair replacement for displaced residents. Suites of similar size. Developers may be required to offer suites at a similar rent, but they are half the size. My family would go from 1,200 square feet to 600 square feet. So really, residents' rents are doubling per square foot. I speak to you in the spirit of the city's mission statement, which reads, Create a great city of communities that cares about our people, our environment, and our opportunities to live, work, and prosper. Kitsilano is like a golden egg, fragile, precious, and irreplaceable. Careful hands are needed to nurture it, because once it's broken, its value and beauty can simply not be restored. is not monetary. I respectfully ask you to consider whether this proposal strengthens the fabric of our neighbourhood or fundamentally alters it in ways that cannot be undone. I ask you to look into your hearts and souls and ask yourselves in 20 years will you be proud of what you've done to Kitsilano? Were you responsible with the power you held? I know this is not an easy decision for you. You have pressures coming at you from all sides but I ask you to respect our neighbourhood and those who live there and choose community over profits. Thank you for your time.
Thank you very much. Speaker number 11, Jennifer O'Keeffe.
Hello can you hear me?
We can hear you great please go ahead.
Thank you. I'm here today to urge you to vote no and delay this approval until the developer and city can demonstrate stronger tenant protections are put in place than current. As heard previously, the last council meeting that approved rezoning for the Broadway Plan, tenants from the Kits and Cambie area spoke out and told city councillors their personal stories about not being rehoused and offered compensation instead they were forced to move out of the city completely. Tenants want assurances that they will be rehoused and allowed to return into equivalent size family units for their family's needs and for the number of people that are actually living in the unit. I know firsthand how weak protections are in my parents' building which is this building. Residents of the building are currently paying below market rates. Residents are terrified to come and speak — there's been a few of them at city hall but most of them are too scared to come and speak at city hall because they're concerned that there will be repercussions if they do. Families asked the developer at one of the Zoom consultation meetings that were held if they would be rehoused and allowed to live in the unit they were told that they would be rehoused in units of the same number of bedrooms and they were told that they would be reassessed later on to determine the unit size and that there was a limit of how many units would be available below market rate. For many this means the pressure on families to split up or even for their children to move out early, with many not being able to afford further education without being able to live at home with their parents. In the current building many of the units are multi-generational family units with grandparents, parents and young children living in the suites together. Many families rely on the shared housing for childcare, elder care and affordability and now they're fearing that they will be crammed into studio apartments or one bedrooms. Is this displacement disguised as development? This Broadway Plan redevelopment represents a massive transfer of land from residents and neighbourhoods to private corporations and investment firms. If we allow this to proceed corporations will continue to control the majority of the rental housing, anticipating market rates and occupancy as they see fit. Rental housing will become like diamonds — scarce and withheld and rationed while families struggle to afford a place to live. I ask you to delay this proposal until the developer and city staff can demonstrate that residents will be protected adequately, that families will be assisted with stronger policies to protect them than what is currently in place and that the tenants of the building — who have already spoken out in other areas saying that they were not rehoused — the Broadway Plan does not demonstrate an adequate way in how the city is expanding infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, sewers, hydro lines that meet the density that is being proposed with the amount of high-rises, unless of course the units are meant to be lived in by single people without families or left as untenanted investments. I ask that you make an amendment to the approval process that the developer must show evidence that they have a comprehensive plan for rehousing the residents and units must be at the same size and the same number of bedrooms as what is currently tenanted as the majority of the residents are living multi-generationally in two to three bedroom family units. Please guarantee that the families can continue living together as currently there is no guarantee that they will be offered units that will be comparable to what they are currently living in. Please vote no to this zoning change. Stand with the residents and not developers. Thank you.
Thank you, thank you very much Jennifer. We do have a speaker number 12, Andrew Seymour. Okay.
I guess uh we do not have speaker 12 here okay um if there are any additional speakers in the chamber can you please come forward to the podium um clerk are there any additional speakers online
yes speaker number one Jane McFadden is now online okay uh Jane please go ahead hi everyone
I apologize uh earlier for not being able to hear me um I have listened to all of the speakers though and I love hearing how near and dear Kitsilano is to everyone's heart I'm from the Kitsilano business association and I'm speaking in support of this we constantly hear that people want to find a place in Kitsilano and they cannot find a suitable place especially from our community because of the number of businesses that want their employees to be able to live and work in the neighborhood that's one of our businesses bigger biggest challenge we have 278 businesses so there's thousands of people that work on West Forth as you can imagine that live outside of the neighborhood I understand what the speakers are talking about in in terms of congestion and traffic but I do think that is just what's going to happen in Vancouver we do need the prices of affordable housing to go down and not just a supply issue for our businesses of course I think it was speaker number two the pharmacist that's a an owner operator of a business for many years of course our businesses welcome those people I understand there will be a courtyard that will go directly into the whole foods courtyard onto West Forth so of course the 278 businesses that I represent welcome those residents that will be moving into this building to shop and dine and eat and and use the services that we offer on West Forth avenue I think that's it for me but I am in support of this project it falls within the Broadway line and I think we do need the density in our city when I tell people what I do for a living I constantly hear oh I wish I could live in Toronto it's just too unaffordable and I haven't been able to find housing there so I think with increased density there will be opportunity for people to move into this cherished neighborhood thank you so much thank you very much and we have three more speakers online yes I believe the
next person online is Andrew Seymour hi Andrew please go ahead can you hear me hello can you hear
me oh sorry can you hear me yes we can hear you please go ahead and can we please restart the timer
yeah sorry yeah I just was unable to get connected before so thanks for hearing me good evening Mayor and Council my name is Andrew Seymour long time resident of Vancouver I was born in White Rock chose to live in Vancouver following my schooling at UBC and I'm choosing to raise my two boys here I'll keep my comments brief as possible this evening we need more family oriented attainable rental housing Vancouver I know this personally my family and I had a really difficult time finding a three-bedroom rental in Kitsilano it really shouldn't be that hard we spent literally months looking for a home that could meet our needs we got two young boys and the reality is that there's simply not enough newer family-sized rental homes in the neighborhood we managed to get in the building by our friends leaving a certain condo and got in there in Kitsilano and without that connection and sort of our friends leaving and sort of finding an angle and we wouldn't have been able to find accommodation and kits so that's why I'm really encouraged to see there's three better units in this proposal along with meaningful commitments to below market rental homes having 20 of the units below market rate you know including those three beds will make a difference for folks being able to live in in Kitsilano it's a you know it's a great spot really great sense of community vibrant local businesses schools parks you know everything's you know it's really walkable and that's what this offers so that's traditionally been there and this project supports that so Mayor and Council I hope you vote all in support of this project this evening thank you great thank you very much Councillor Montague you're okay okay thank you clerk here's the next speaker online yes we the next person online is Adrian Tom
Adrian can you hear us yes I can can you hear me yeah we can hear you please go ahead all right good evening Mayor and Council my name is Adrian Tom I was born and raised on the west
side of Vancouver and I'm calling to offer my support for this application I used to rent a condo not far from the site and this was my go-to shopping area so I know the neighborhood very well
I've seen our city evolve my entire life and change is part of what keeps Vancouver vibrant and alive
neighborhoods grow demographic shift community needs evolve and thoughtful change is how we
ensure the city continues to thrive for the next generation you know I also understand that change
can feel uncomfortable but in this case it's needed and I think really positive this application will deliver more than 200 secured rental homes including below market rental at a time when housing availability and affordability are critical challenges these are long-term homes that will need to be managed in the future as well as in the future for the next generation if we can make a difference in the future the region needs to be more diverse and we can need to have quality housing we need to have a better way to live in the long-term and a better way to live in the long-term and we want to create a more progressive and a better environment for the next generation and we need to try and have a way to do that for the next generation we need to start developing something that will let us give back to the community we need to build a better future for the next generation I wanted to thank you for that thank you very much in addition to that I'm glad that we've been able to have these kids here and receive the documentation and we've seen the progress you very much uh mayor and council uh i'm a um i want to say some words in in opposition to this project um not total opposition but i just think that based upon what i've heard tonight and what i've seen in the plan the overall broadway plan there are some things that i think still need to be considered and by the way i'm not a resident of kitsulano but i'm a very frequent visitor to kitsulano kitsulano yacht club royal vancouver yacht club i've spent a lot of time in kitsulano and i've seen a change significantly over the last 15 years um some of the speakers have made some very good points tonight um change is inevitable the the council and the mayor have
significant responsibilities when it comes to leading um there's been comments about the the livability of the area as it has changed over the last 15 years and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point and i think that's a great point over time and i think that one of the most important things that was said tonight
and i think that one of the most important things that was said tonight and i think that one of the most important things that was said tonight was by was by was by speaker susan davies speaker susan davies speaker susan davies when she when she when she pointed out that there are a lot of tbds pointed out that there are a lot of tbds pointed out that there are a lot of tbds in the plan in the plan in the plan um um um i think that is a is a almost a fatal i think that is a is a almost a fatal i think that is a is a almost a fatal flaw in the plan for instance flaw in the plan for instance i would think the plan would want to when it says we're going to have more parts be specific about this because the livability kits one is going to change dramatically with an influx of people for instance we take we say there's 207 units in this building but there's not because the people that are in the buildings being replaced this first are going to take some of those 207 so it's less than 207 in total um if we're going to put green space in there's i couldn't see any spot about green space in the plan a way to say that would be all of the condos and apartments on third avenue between arbutus and vine all of those people are going to be relocated into this building those apartment complexes would be demolished and all that would be turned into this beautiful park and when you consider the fact that there are other buildings going on how are those buildings going to affect the neighborhood and the need for parks in in the kitsilano fourth avenue third avenue fifth avenue area so there needs to be some more thought it seems on how all of these buildings are going to integrate together to make this a neighborhood that is livable in the future um and maybe there's a little bit of self-interest here because one of the places i like to go to is jackson's on fourth and it's really hard to get a reservation these days there are more people coming how difficult will be to shop in all the stores along fourth avenue with 2 000 new residents over the next several years so i think my advice is just maybe pause rethink about how all these buildings are integrated together and how all of the things are identified with tbds need to be actually addressed before a shovel hits the ground so i just hope that the council would consider that deliberations thanks for your time appreciate it thank you very much jeff um is there anyone else online no one else online i saw louis here so i believe speaker yes my name is louis velegas i am
a vancouver resident practicing urbanism in canada and the u.s for 40 years next slide please i oppose this proposal as i oppose towers building in the neighborhoods outside the downtown generally
but i have this on the right on the left next slide please for the two-state plan the broadway plan is the worst plan i've encountered so far in my professional career next when i project this image on in council chambers i am left with two impressions one on the one hand there's a consensus of this chart published by global news accurately diagrams the housing crisis but on the other hand the voting record reveals that the party report the financialization of land is being passed off for urban design next here is proof the towers in the foreground were all approved here the urbanism the architecture the planning everything is low class city making of vancouver is in a tailspin with towers and slot machines out of control next this proposed tower will destroy property values by shadowing the houses across the lane is there a legal case to be made by property owners and residents prosecuting a class action suit against government for loss of property value and reduction in the quality of life next let your eyes follow the shadows residents and walk-up apartments lose houses and townhouses lose as well next the quality of the public realm is also diminished by tower shadows next here the model accurately predicts the right approach to towers the downtown peninsula is seen in the distance as a tower zone jutting out into berard inlet seen from far far away the towers appear smaller and don't block the views next the lesson is crystal keep the towers out of the neighborhoods next every tower casts a shadow we already have canyon streets downtown where the sun doesn't shine anymore the town this is until summer was seen as a
beckyしい orange phosphorous china pretty hard to say so cool
beautiful public realm. Towers blocking the view of the Sky Dome. This is the worst possible urbanism. Next. Profits are soaring, sort of. The push is up, not out. Government chooses land inflation, not ecological hub-and-spoke urbanism, where GAAP guarantees affordability to all Canadians. How could it be otherwise when Canada is the largest democracy by land mass? We are not running out of land. Government has run out of imagination and more than a modicum of common sense. Next. We've seen it all before. Both Charles Baudelaire and the Impressionists were in full force during the modernization of Paris. The Impressionists immortalized the towns on the periphery of Paris. Baudelaire immortalized the products of modernizing the city, dubbing them the flowers of evil. Next. Tonight, the party
in power and those voting in step betray no interest in ending the housing crisis. Next. Building the concrete jungle, they do it one tower a town, one vote at a time, one slot machine at a time. In October, next please. In October, the voters face a binary choice. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak. Okay. Clerk, do we have any other speakers online? There is one other online, Bailey. I don't know how to say the last name. Okay. Speaker, are you online? Yes. All right. Please
go ahead. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Bailey Myazga, and I'm a lifelong Vancouverite. For many years, I lived blocks from this site. My childhood home and my apartment were just blocks away. So I know the area very well, and I'm in support of this proposal. While recognizing, that change can feel scary, I think this is a great project that will enhance KITS and allow more people to join the community. KITS is a wonderful area, and we should continue to ensure it remains welcoming and inclusive by encouraging the development of market and below-market rentals. So I hope you vote in favor tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. This is
the third and final call for speakers. If there are speakers for this item who wish to speak to council, please call toll-free at 1-833. 353-8610, followed by participant code 1061445 before the close of the speaker's list. The phone number will be posted on X and displayed during the recess. So we're now going to take a two-minute recess for any additional speakers to call in or come forward to the podium. I believe we may have
one in the chamber. Hi, I'm Marissa. I didn't prepare. Can you hear me? Everybody hear me well? I didn't prepare for this, so excuse me. I'm opposed to this. I live and work in KITS Solano, and one thing that's really kind of, you know, we're all coming together on one thing here, and that's that we love KITS Solano. We love the character. We love the heritage. We love the community. We love the walkability. We love the parks and the beach and all of this amazing stuff that is KITS, and I understand the people that are calling in for it who are saying, you know, we want the chance to move back to the community, and I think there's a tasteful way to do that. You know, mid-rise buildings, but why does it have to be 20 stories? Because what these 20-story buildings are really going to do is all they're not going to be there anymore. They're not going to be keeping people in the area, and it's unfortunate, and it's sad, and I've lived here my whole life, and it's been my favorite neighborhood, and it's just devastating to imagine what it's going to look like in the next few years, so I oppose this, and thank you for listening. Just checking for online. No, no, no further speakers, Mayor. Okay, seeing no further speakers. No. See the public comments. Does the applicant have any closing comments? Thank you, Mayor. Yes, I have a few closing comments. Firstly, we absolutely respect and acknowledge those who are currently living on the property who, through this process, should the project be approved, may need to relocate for a period of time and ultimately have the opportunity to come back to this project. I can tell you, you know, as an owner
of this property and having long-term intent as a family to own this property going forward,
change as seamless as possible and to stand by our commitments through the tenant relocation policy to deliver on that, and we've done so successfully in Vancouver in the past. Speaking to some of the items around logistics around the site, I understand them well. I'm a 15-year resident of Kitsilano. I spend a lot of time, almost obsessively so, in that node with my wife telling me to stop looking at the back lane and figure out how we can resolve and make the condition better. The mid-block connection adjacent to Whole Foods that has been discussed is actually a known amenity in the community that's actually been referenced in an urban design context as precedent
in many communities as a successful privately owned public space, and our goal with the mid-block connection that we are proposing for this site and the node we're creating on the north end of the property was actually really to lean in to the success of that space, which I personally have used many, many times over the years and see the community using frequently. So, I think it's a
great opportunity for us to do that, and certainly we think we can add to that experience as we go forward and add to the vitality of that immediate block. I should also point out that currently the
project has no parking and no on-site loading, and there is a very tight wall and fence right
immediately at that northern boundary of the lane. This proposal will solve, we believe, many of those challenges, having not only containing all of the on-site expected loading and logistics, but also having a very tight wall and fence right immediately at that northern boundary of this proposal on the property. We're obviously adding parking stalls, and we think there will be greater relief in the total width of that lane because of some of the space we will be creating and setting back from, which will add some greater relief than the current condition. And so, we do
think that this project and the opportunity around the public realm will be significantly enhanced, and we think that it will really add to the fabric of this neighborhood and the vitality that is in and around this fourth and final block. So, I think it's a great opportunity for us to do that. And finally, I should say that we really do pride ourselves in the homes that we create for folks, and we have many in Vancouver, some as recent as high-rises in the Oak Ridge Town
Center area that we've occupied. And we have hundreds of very, very happy residents that
not only have expressed their positive experience being singles, families, seniors, all occupying our buildings with a refreshed sense of urban living, being in a new rental building, including below-market units. We get great feedback, and we continue to aim to integrate and make our homes better, and this is certainly something we have an interest in doing on this property. And we do think that the overall commitment of this project to provide 20% below market housing and over 70 homes for families is a meaningful step forward in this community and creating housing supply, which we really do believe is there. And we actually have, through this process, a lot of hope for the future of the community. And I think that's something that's gotten a lot of feedback about how this community has been challenged to create these type of opportunities over the years. So, we welcome the public commentary this evening, and we believe we can be great stewards of development on this property into the future. Thank you very much. Mayor Redekopal Great. Thank you very much. Do our team members have any comments? Mayor Redekopal No closing comments from staff. Mayor Redekopal Thank you very much. Does Council have any final questions for our team members? Councillor Don Minato. Councillor Don Minato Yes, thanks, Mayor. Yes, I appreciate the I don't need to ask about the mid-block connection, because that was just addressed in the applicant's closing comments. But I did want to follow up on a couple of points that were raised by speakers to staff. There was a question raised around the TRPP and adjusting moving allowances comparable to other municipalities. Remind me, I believe the TRPP is under review at present. Is that correct? And when is the timeframe for that to come back to Council? Mayor Redekopal Thank you for the question. Amel Norden here with Housing Regulation. Yes, staff intend to start scoping for the next TRPP policy review later this year with a report back anticipated to Council in 2027. Councillor Don Minato Okay, thank you. So as you're hearing comments coming up as part of public hearings, that will be considered as part of some of that policy review. Is that correct? Mayor Redekopal Yes, we'll be doing a broad review of the policy to ensure that it's working effectively. Councillor Don Minato Okay, thank you for that. And then I want to circle back to also a question that was raised. Current residents do have the option to come back to the proposed new building, but their point raised was if they're living in a three-bedroom town home now, do they have the opportunity to come back to a three-bedroom home in future? Could staff comment on that? Because I can't ask the question to the applicant, but under TRPP policy? Mayor Redekopal Yes. Councillor Don Minato Oh, sorry. Mayor Redekopal Yes. Councillor Don Minato Yes, I can answer that question. Sorry, online again. So per TRP policy, returning tenants, if they choose to exercise the right to return, should be offered a unit based on their household size and composition in accordance with national occupancy standards. So it may be that tenants currently in a three-bedroom unit would be eligible for a three-bedroom unit upon return, but it depends how many people are in their household at time of rezoning application. Mayor Redekopal Okay, okay, I appreciate that. Okay, I'll pause there. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Redekopal Thank you very much. Councillor Montague. Councillor Montague Yeah, thanks. Just one more question for me. I'm pretty familiar with the area. I moved from 12th and Mabel to 3rd and Arbutus for a while and behind the what's now Lululemon shop, but it was a Midas muffler at the time. So I'm pretty familiar with the area. Pretty familiar with that laneway. I wanted to address some of the comments around the bottleneck and behind the Whole Foods. There's a few things I'm curious about. When I was going through the Appendix B, and I noticed 2.3 E, it talks about higher zone lane standards. And I'm wondering if staff could explain a little bit what that means. And I also see something here in, I guess it's I and J talks about the duck banks to meet current city standards, and as well as the standalone lighting poles. Are we looking at removing the the utility poles? Because those are actually in the laneway and I think cause a shrinkage of the width of the lane. of the width of the lane.
Thank you for the question, Councillor. We're going to relay that question to Carolee, our colleague in the engineering department. our colleague in the engineering department.
Hi, Mayor and Council. This is Carolee representing engineering. So I think in response to your question about the ducting, that is a standard requirement that we require on all development sites. sites.