CD-1 Rezoning 2202–2212 West 10th Avenue and 2221 Marstrand Avenue – Approve in principle with amendments — Public Hearing, March 4, 2026
← Public Hearing March 4, 2026
Summary
- Council voted on whether to approve the CD-1 rezoning in principle, as amended, allowing a 25-storey mixed-use building with 221 rental units (45 at below-market rates) and a new telecommunications building.
- Supporters on council noted the project's zero displacement of existing tenants, the 20% below-market rental component, modernisation of critical regional telecom infrastructure, and the site's proximity to rapid transit as strong justifications for approval.
- Concerns raised during debate and by speakers included shadowing of St. John's School playground (which would not be permitted for a public school), traffic congestion on narrow surrounding streets, pedestrian and cyclist safety, the impact on the privately maintained portion of Marstrand Avenue, and the building's scale relative to the low-rise Arbutus Walk neighbourhood.
- Staff clarified that the Broadway Plan's shadow policy for independent schools focuses on minimising impacts rather than prohibiting them outright, and that the applicant had tested multiple tower designs and locations to reduce shadowing as much as possible.
- The rezoning was approved in principle with amendments, including the new sidewalk condition, with no council members voting in opposition.
Vote
Public comments
| Dan Holloway | Resident | support |
| Blaine Adley | St. John's School · Head of School | oppose |
| Jamin Manga | Resident / UBC Student | support |
| Russell Wong | Resident | support |
| Allison Taylor | Resident | oppose |
| Brenn Mongen | Enterpro · Designated Environmental Professional | support |
| Henry McQueen | Resident | support |
| Dr. Sadiq Abdullah | St. John's School Board of Governors / BC Women's Hospital · Obstetric Anesthesiologist / School Governor | oppose |
| Stephanie Binnington | Resident | oppose |
| Aaron Yates | Resident | oppose |
| Spencer Perry | Resident | oppose |
| Kate Wilson | Resident | oppose |
| Diane Elliott Buckley | Westside Family Place · Representative / Resident | support |
| Tracy Kemp | Resident / Midwife | oppose |
| Davin Lieson | Sharpest Drug Mart · Pharmacist / Business Owner | support |
| Jane McFadden | West 4th Avenue Business Association · Executive Director | support |
| Michelle Burreal | West Broadway BIA · Representative | support |
| Tim Lauman Gardner | Resident | oppose |
| Adam Politzer | Strata Council of 2228 Marstrand · Retired Architect / Strata Council Member | oppose |
| Anita Landon | Resident | oppose |
| Carrie Gaimond | Strata LMS 317 · Strata Council Member | oppose |
| Stephen Bossam | Resident | oppose |
| Lavanya Anand | Fraser Academy · School Staff / Resident | support |
| Jeff Manton | Local Business Owner / Resident | oppose |
| Diane Henry | Resident | oppose |
| Dennis Agar | Movement Metro Vancouver Transit Riders · Executive Director / Resident | support |
| Jeff Wilson | Resident | oppose |
| Janet Bruce | Resident | oppose |
| Verena Muscheru | Fraser Academy · Teacher | support |
| Eric McDonald | Resident | oppose |
| Barbara Oaks | Resident | oppose |
| Lorraine Lowe | Resident | support |
| Hartstar Crawford | Resident / Energy Efficiency Consultant | support |
| Taylor Fisher | Resident / Young Professional | support |
| Louis Galvan | Resident | support |
| Mack Wilson | Resident | oppose |
| Bobo Iric | Resident | support |
| Christina Shorthouse | Resident | support |
| Jeb Sinclair | Mariloma Athletic Club · Resident / Club Member and Administrator | support |
Statement ▶ Watch
Good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Hi there. Thank you. My name is Dan Holloway. As you mentioned, and I'm a resident of Vancouver. I'm here to offer my support for this project at 10th and Yew. I went to St. John's School, and I'm also a member of the Arbutus Club, so I know the area very well. But I support the project specifically, not just because I spend a lot of time in the area, but because it will add rental units without displacing any tenants or businesses. I remember looking across the street when I was a student wondering what that building was. After listening to the presentation, I now know. So it would be great to have secure rental units. And I believe there's going to be some below market units as well. So it would be great to be near a transit-rich location. Also, two of my favorite restaurants are within a few minutes walk of the proposed building. And I anticipate they would thrive with these new residents and having these new residents bolster the economy and sustain local business. These are all independent restaurants — would be really, really great. Finally, the proximity to Connaught Park, the community centre, ice rink, is a great benefit to the potential residents — green space, recreational amenities — and hopefully they do join the Arbutus Club. It's great space and a great area for communities and families. So I really hope that you will approve this project. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
Good afternoon and thank you for hosting us. My name is Blaine Adley. I am the head of school for St. John's School, a junior kindergarten through grade 12 IB school, and I'm a Vancouver resident. I'm here to speak in opposition to this development. I know I speak on behalf of our entire school community, our neighbours, as well as our board of governors when offering this opposition to the project. Let me explain why we oppose this development. We have three main, though not exclusive, reasons for doing so. The plan to build a 25-story residential tower directly across from a school on a one-way street and a designated bike lane does not make any reasonable sense to us. In fact, we believe this is unprecedented and is a major safety concern. It is the only 25-story project planned with a school directly across the street from it. St. John's School is a school that has a licensed after-school daycare program whose play area will be permanently shadowed. We also have a full-year school day junior kindergarten program whose play area will be perpetually shadowed as well. As those who live in the neighbourhood know, we are an urban school without a playground. Instead, we have a rooftop play area, which will be shadowed much of the day. And I must comment that shadowing is not reflected in bar graphs of 81% when that constitutes sunlight coming through trees. It's best done with shadow studies, which we haven't seen this evening. If we were a public school, the project would not be considered. We strongly believe the approval based on the different wording for public and independent schools is discriminatory. As you will hear from others tonight, children are children, regardless of where they go — a public school or an independent school. The project does not improve, nor does it reflect the community in which it will be situated. The vast majority of people who have responded with input oppose this development. If it does not improve the community, you might ask, well, what would? That's an easy question to answer. Buildings designed to blend into the neighbourhood and possibly a community centre or theatre would be a better use of this space. In fact, St. John's School identified 11 not-for-profit organizations in the area that would make use of a theatre. Why did we do so? Because we had communications with Scott Juchak, who at the time oversaw TELUS Developments Canada-wide, and he requested of me we forward the architectural drawings of a 281-seat theatre we had prepared and when our school would have been willing to help manage. This occurred in December of 2020. Moving forward to November of 2023, Mansuita Batia, Director of Real Estate Developments for TELUS at the time, reached out to arrange to meet with us, and we welcomed her to the school. When we met, she explained some concerns with the creation of a theatre space. Instead, she shared architectural renderings for two very attractive, six-story, apartment buildings that TELUS was considering. We thought they looked fine and would be well received by our community. To date, it's true, we've had two meetings with TELUS and Ledcor. The meetings were cordial, but clearly both sides remained entrenched in their respective views. We have heard and continue to hear the financial viability of the project requires a 25-story tower. I would argue it is not viability, but rather profitability that is the driver. Only two years earlier, six-story apartment buildings that blended into the community were the plan. And these were to be built on lands TELUS acquired long ago at very little cost through its merger with BC Tel. Recently, City Councillor Mike Klassen attended a meeting at our school where some condo associations were meeting and heard the unanimous opposition by our neighbours to the project. Mr. Klassen also graciously accepted my invitation to come to the school to hear from me our school concerns and to view firsthand the concerns, the construction site, the area, and to better understand how imposing this structure would be for our school, as well as the several condominiums that would adversely be affected. In closing, I'm inviting all city councillors to come to the school, to meet with me, to see the project, and to better understand why building a 25-story tower on a one-way street with a designated bike lane and directly across a narrow street from a school is a very bad idea. Thank you for your time this evening.
Statement ▶ Watch
Hello, am I audible?
Thank you very much. Dear Honourable Mayor and the Honourable City Council, thank you so much for this opportunity to speak in front of you today. I would like to voice my strong support for this rezoning proposal for 2202 and 2212 West 10th Avenue, and I'm a UBC student and a proud resident of Vancouver who is interested in progressive housing development. I am a staunch believer in the structural reform of Vancouver's housing landscape by adding new high-density housing stock. Moreover, I find myself in Kitsilano regularly, so I'm personally interested in its future. I visited the open house for this project in November. While I was impressed with features like the 20% sub-market rate rentals, when I went out for a walk to check out the project site, I visited — I found it rather striking how little variety of housing options a neighbourhood as desirable as Kitsilano has. What makes Kitsilano desirable is not its low housing density per se, but instead its proximity to the water, mountain views and welcoming community that's serviced by small Canadian businesses and connected by transit. I believe that everyone should be entitled to living in a community like this and not just being a fleeting visitor. This project introduces more variety, greater housing density, which will positively affect affordability over time. Moreover, its proximity to transit routes like the 84 and 99 B-Line buses connect this neighbourhood to East Vancouver, Commercial Drive, UBC and business centres like West 1st and West 2nd Avenues, as well as downtown. This is also consistent with BC's transit-oriented areas policy as written out in BC Bill 47. Because of this, this development is particularly appealing to younger residents like students and professionals like myself, who are energetic and eager to contribute to our communities. As I mentioned earlier, I am a supporter of structural initiatives. Market reforms help alleviate rental concerns, but don't make up space for growing cities like ours. We need more housing units to ensure that newcomers to Kits or Vancouver have ample options or that even existing residents have housing options for the future. Kitsilano belongs to everyone, just like Vancouver belongs to everyone. Smart housing decisions should be made today in order to provide access to every neighbourhood, to people regardless of where they are in life or how they fare in the future. And I see this project as a smart housing decision. So please vote in favour of this application. Thank you so much for your consideration today.
Statement ▶ Watch
My name is Russell Wong. I live in Vancouver and I do not work in real estate or development. I'd like to speak in support of this application. My wife and I have two kids who are now young adults, and like a lot of parents in Vancouver, we wonder where are they going to be able to live. We have limited land in Vancouver because of the ocean and the mountains. To add more housing, we need to build up. And it makes sense to allow more height and density where demand and thus land prices are particularly high. In this case, close to the new SkyTrain station at Broadway and Arbutus. Because this is a larger site, the 25-story height is consistent with the Broadway Plan. Shane Zinner observes that when you see low-density buildings next to tall towers, it's concrete evidence of a severe housing shortage. What usually happens is that neighbourhoods devolve in stages from single-detached houses to townhouses and low-rise apartments, then to mid-rise apartments, and finally to high-rises. But when all of the intermediate stages are suppressed by restrictive zoning, the unmet demand accumulates. Lack of housing results in prices and rents having to rise to unbearable levels to push people out. We end up with a health care system that's under increasing strain. High prices and rents translate directly into low real salaries, which means that hospitals have a hard time finding nurses and even doctors. This project will provide 176 market rental apartments for people to live in and 45 below market apartments. There's zero displacement of existing renters because it's on land freed up from a TELUS switching station. I understand that people in the neighbourhood are concerned about traffic, but if we block new housing close to a SkyTrain station, the people who would have lived there don't disappear. They'll end up finding somewhere else to live further out. Some of them will end up driving through the neighbourhood instead of being able to simply walk to the SkyTrain. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
Thanks for the opportunity to come in and share a few words. My name is Allison and I oppose the motion and I am a resident of Vancouver. I think we need to look at the big picture. Yes, there is a need for housing and there is already no problem with densification in this neighbourhood. I understand that over 2,500 new apartment units will be added as a result of rezoning applications that have been approved in the last couple of years. Last week, I saw another rezoning on the same street, 10th Avenue, a couple of blocks down from the one we're talking about here today. Everyone in this community — I live there, I've lived there for 12 years — is aware that the face of this community is going to change. And we accept it to a degree, okay? But let's just turn to this particular one, and you've heard from the schools who are concerned about the consequences of a 25-story building for traffic congestion, safety, and well-being of children and staff. I'm speaking from the perspective of a resident and I'm a senior who has lived in the neighbourhood for 12 years. I attended an open house about this rezoning on November 6th last year and attended a discussion organized by community members on January 21st to educate ourselves, which — thank you to Councillor Klassen for attending. And there I learned some interesting history. You heard a bit of history of the TELUS building. What about our neighbourhood's walk? This neighbourhood was redeveloped from the site of a Carling O'Keefe brewery in the late 1990s. It already has more than 1,000 condo apartments in townhomes in over a dozen low-rise and mid-rise buildings. So there's no problem with density. Further, it's clear that this development — the original development that I'm living in — was carefully and thoughtfully planned as a living street design that prioritized walkability, green spaces, and places to gather. I think this history needs to be on the record because it seems to have been forgotten. We've already had to — this is the second rezoning. And I think that what attracted me to this neighbourhood originally was it provides safe, calm, and social community life. So what are the likely impacts of a 25-story building with 221 units on top of the many other rezoning applications in the area? I'm very concerned that the neighbourhood becomes more dangerous. We talk about children. There's also the elderly. It will lose its unique character and it will experience infrastructure strain if not deficit, and I'll talk briefly about each of these. I say dangerous and chaotic because it's planned for an already congested location. I rely on crossing guards on 10th Avenue when I go to London Drugs on Broadway when school is starting and ending. As has been said, it's a one-way street with a bike lane. It's important too to consider that the Seasons retirement home with 147 units for seniors is about 30 metres from this proposed development. They are a
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Hello, Mayor and Council. Can you hear me okay?
Fantastic. My name is Henry McQueen. I'm a resident of Vancouver, and I support this project. I'm a longtime member of the Maraloma Athletic Club down the street from the proposed project. The Maralomas are an inclusive multi-sport club for all ages and walks of life. Annual membership is cheaper than a flexi pass because it's volunteer run. I coach the very elite under six co-ed rugby team there or my daughter plays. I'm also a graduate of Kitts High down the street. Full disclosure, I'm a trained city planner and developer by profession. Housing is amongst the greatest anxieties on the minds of our young adult members of our club trying to make ends meet in an expensive city. It was also certainly the case for those of us who grew up around here. The project will not only provide housing opportunities in the near term, and as the applicant noted, without any residential or commercial displacement. But these buildings will become tomorrow's affordable housing, as so many of the buildings north on Fourth have provided to young members of the clubs over the years. This location next to the new subway, great schools, a great park, and the best athletic club in Vancouver could not be better suited to make space for people. And, you know, I want to note it's not on a loud arterial corner where these have traditionally been approved. So I think this will be additive to our community today and into the future. That's why I want to lend my support. Thanks so much.
Statement ▶ Watch
Thank you. Your Worship, Mayor Sim and Vancouver City Councillors. Thank you for taking the time to convene this hearing. My name is Dr. Sadiq Abdullah. I'm a resident of Vancouver. I'm an obstetric anesthesiologist at BC Women's Hospital, a clinical assistant professor at UBC and a parent of two children at SJS. I'm also a governor on the board at SJS, and I'll be speaking in opposition to this item. I urge council to reject this application for two reasons. First is the deleterious health impact of a reduction of exposure to bright sunlight. Second is the unacceptable decrease in the safety of young school children in the affected area. Page 5 of the city's referral report explicitly admits that a six-story building height represents the baseline at which no shadows are cast onto school yards during school hours. The construction of a 25-story tower will therefore result in significant shadowing over an area frequented by school-age children for outdoor recreation. It has been shown in numerous scientific publications that exposure to bright natural light is crucial for childhood development. Furthermore, and equally concerning, a deficit of bright light exposure has been shown to be harmful to a developing child. David Hull-Adald in journal Dermato Dermato Endocrinology identified a number of conditions that individuals were at increased risk for when exposure to bright natural light was impaired. Children with reduced sun exposure were at elevated risk of developing multiple sclerosis MS. Several types of cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dementia later in life have also been linked to reduction in sun exposure. Mental health conditions have also been linked to reduction in exposure to bright natural light. Work done by Marie Taculvey et al in the journal Physiology and Behavior, and Virginia Gable et al in journal Chronobiology International, has shown that bright light improves mood and wellness. Children's ability to regulate their circadian rhythms and obtain the recommended amount of sleep are improved significantly with exposure to sunlight during the day. Academic success, motivation, and cognitive performance have all been linked to adequate light exposure. Bright natural light exposure has also been shown to be an efficacious therapy in treating major depressive disorder, most recently by Menezes Almeida et al in the Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry. I cite these studies in an attempt to show that sunlight exposure is crucial for young developing students. I commend the City of Vancouver for recognizing this as evidence in the July 10, 2024 publication, Solar Access Guidelines for Areas Outside of Downtown. In section 3.1, the guidelines state, and I quote, proposed development should not create new shadow impacts on public parks and public school sites. And new buildings should minimize shadowing impacts on independent schoolyards, that is outdoor playfields, playgrounds, etc., particularly during school hours. I urge council to follow their own published policies before actively putting developer profit over the health of children, which would be the case if the motion to approve a 25-story tower at this site is carried. I also want to point out that approving this tower that shadows an independent school is discriminatory, insofar as the project would not even be considered if SJS was a public school. I humbly request council consider the legal and human rights impacts of this. I also want to highlight that the developer's shadowing study shows that our youngest students' play area on the ground is currently 81% shadowed. This is misleading. Those existing shadows are from trees. And if the tower were to be built, the percentage of true shadows to these youngest students would be significantly increased. Your Worship and city councillors, on January 30th, 2024, a 15-year-old student heading to school was struck by a car on 16th and Wallace Street. November 28, 2018, another student was struck heading to school on the corner of Barclay and Bidwell Street. Both students thankfully survived, but vehicular traffic was identified as a contributing culprit in both of these situations. These are only two examples of how students in our communities were put at risk from increasing traffic and congestion. We must take action to prevent these situations from occurring. West 10th Avenue is a narrow one-way street on a designated bike route. It is used by school buses and parents and vehicles for drop-offs at two schools. Students also walk or take public transit and must cross several streets in order to arrive at school. Page 8 of the city's own referral report acknowledges the strain this creates and requires major mitigations to manage this impact. There have been several cases of close calls where students have nearly been struck traversing crossings over West 10th Avenue. I feel particularly impassioned to comment on this point because one of my volunteer roles at SJS is to serve as a crosswalk coordinator. I've seen firsthand bicyclists being struck by cars who are stuck in traffic making unsafe maneuvers. I have actively stopped children from crossing despite having the right of way to avoid speeding cars not following the rules of the road. I fear that adding the traffic and congestion of a high-rise tower at this site creates unacceptable safety risks in an already crowded area. I implore you to take steps to reduce risks in school zones rather than to add to them by approving a tower in this location. Your Worship and council, I ask you today to reject the proposal in this current form. My objections are not those of a single concerned citizen. These objections are shared by hundreds of members of the SJS community. They had 10 more seconds
neighbourhood and my members of the medical community who have listened to my concerns. I implore you to work with the developer to create a building that fits into the fabric of the community. I'm sorry. And enhances it rather than. We're way over sorry. So thank you for your time.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Good evening, Mayor and councillors. My name is Aaron Yates. I'm a resident of Vancouver. And I am here tonight to express my opposition to this rezoning application. My concern about this, my concern is not about housing itself. I support housing in our city. My concern is whether a 25-story 221 unit tower is appropriate for this specific site. This is not a typical city block we're dealing with here. It's a unique pocket within the Budas walk ordered by two schools, children's playground. To the north, there's a one-way road of a bike lane. To the south, there's a narrow cobblestone avenue. Access in and out. of this block is already constrained. This block has a history of access problems. In 2018, traffic islands were removed and traffic patterns altered because emergency vehicles were not able to properly access the north side of the block. Masterand Avenue on the south side carries a significant number of non-resident through traffic. During school drop-off and pick-up times, congestion on Masterand Avenue, U Street and tents have is an everyday reality. There are no back alleys on Masteran Avenue. It's a dual-purpose road, which means rubbish bins are placed directly on the street for collection, effectively reducing Masterand Avenue to a single-lane road for multiple days a week. This issue will be compounded with the number of additional rubbish bins required to support further 221 units under this development. Street parking on all sides of this block is extremely limited. As a result, delivery vans, trades, rideshare services, postal trucks frequently stop and live traffic lanes, blocking movement and further restricting access. The key point is this block has struggled with congestion for years long before this proposal. A high-rose tower will compound existing problems in a location that is already uniquely constrained. Ayrs City Council to consider whether a 25-story tax is a high-story tower. is the best option for this site. And pro-housing, I believe a mid-rise building with a reduced number of units would be a far better option for this particular block. Thank you for your time and
Statement ▶ Watch
to speak today. My name is Spencer. Excuse me, I'm in our Buda's walk resident, Kitsilano neighbor, and as of eight months ago, a new dad. And I'm doing everything I can to stay in Vancouver and raise my family here, and I live in the strata across from this site on Marstrand Avenue. This site does not work for this place, so please just vote no to this proposal. 580 people submitted comments to this building, and from the online comments only 42 were in support. The overwhelming feedback to oppose this development is because of the structural issues on the block of West 10th, Marstrand, and U Street. Residents and community members see, feel, and experience these factors every single day. These factors are greatly oversimplified in the staff report and the design package. Staff's main argument to overlook these massive impacts is to secure additional rental housing. Development applications are everywhere in better suited parts of Kisselano, and many of them are approved. Further, even if this site has no displacement, the size of this tower proposes to do nothing with the displacement issue. This tower on its own does actual little to build more affordable family-sized units, given that more than half are one beds and studios. We see articles every day showing that Vancouver has built way too many of these small units in big towers that are not desirable or alleviating our housing crisis. These kind of units will not be the units that keep essential people like teachers and firefighters here. In fact, you can drive south on Arbutus and look at all the for rent signs on all the brand new purpose-built rental buildings. Today's tenants don't want to live in these kinds of units. I'll paint a picture of what we experience every day on these tiny streets like Marstis. because remember, there was no official traffic study done. On any given school day, residents on West 10th cannot exit their parking garage without cutting into lineups of cars that back up all the way towards Arbutus. West 10th becomes a one-way street that moves only when drop-offs or pickups happen at St. John's. Going north on you through West 10th is also a crawl. So to avoid waiting on West 10th, cars race down Marstrand and then get stuck on the blind corner as they come around onto U Street. I see near misses here daily. It's right above my home office, and I personally have almost been hit crossing this exact intersection. So to avoid waiting on... So if you exit Marstrand, by the way, on the Vine Street side, the school buses from Fraser Academy create yet another blind corner. So right now, by the way, that road is also closed for sewer work, which is worth doing, by the way. But you can really see how the traffic is intensified once you start messing around with the way the traffic flows. It's a nightmare to get down and around Marstrand Avenue right now. And this proposal makes no effort to alleviate any of this. In fact, it actually downplays an awesome. obfuscates the reality that more development of this size on this block only adds to the morning and afternoon rush. And peak traffic needs are real. Our road infrastructure is smaller than ever because of the protected bike lane that was built on West 10th in 2020. So now I have to speak about garbage day on Marstrand Avenue. Three times a week, our street becomes a one way for most of the day as dumpsters line the street. The staff report directly confirms this limitation by telling the developer they cannot add any more dumpster bin storage onto Marstrand. Even then, the applicant submitted this plan in its design, a blatant disregard for the site and the neighborhood that they seek to join. We all know this tower is not a fit, and yet here we are looking at a poorly conceived plan right on our desks. And by the way, the renderings don't even show our building in the actual pictures. It looks like there's green space directly adjacent to the site, but my building's been there since 1998. Importantly, none of the structural issues are alleviated by a sky train either. Young kids don't take the train to school, and Marstrand Avenue will continue to be the only. only way to service our adjacent strata. And bikers, by the way, will still take West 10th to get across town. It's a glorious piece of cycling infrastructure. So I'm greatly concerned about our adjacent strata on Marstrand Avenue that's primarily made up of seniors and young families like myself. We're also going to be forced to indefinitely pay for road maintenance from a larger building. So I really would like to understand why a large company gets all the financial benefits, but yet we have to pay for all of the costs. In fact, on Marstrand Avenue from some of the pictures we just looked at, you can already see the bricks are starting to break. right in front of the entry and exit of the parking lot where Telas's service vehicles access their site. That's only going to get worse, during construction and after the building. I just don't see how this makes any sense. So in summary, I want to leave you with just a few key thoughts if you came in today wondering how you should vote. I really don't think it's right or fair to download the costs to our strata just so that one of BC's largest corporations can make a few more dollars. And I don't think we can justify the approval of a massive tower given the shade and the effects on students and kids, as we've heard from some of the other people today. Would this proposal honestly even fit be in front of our desks if it were not for the Broadway plan? And given all of the demand for four lease, with all the four lease signs right now, why are we even looking at building more buildings of this size? Please reject this proposal outright. Thank you. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
Good afternoon, counsel. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I too am a resident of Mars Strand Avenue. And I want to begin with something important. This proposal is not a question of housing versus no housing. It's currently zoned for housing. They could go build housing there right now if they wanted to. The conflict coming to the neighborhood is directly to the scale and size and lack of safety, essentially. So I have a lot of notes, and I'm going to try to get over them quickly because I think a lot of this has been covered. The private road governance, while it's true that the statutory right of way does not explicitly name a limitation. It is known in BC property law that the intent that was considered when that was granted is the reasonable use in which it is allowed. So by the city approving, you know, three to 500 more additional trips onto a road that individual residents are legally liable for. And financially responsible to clear and maintain. I don't really think that's fair. Our fair precedent is set to local residents. Something else I wanted to mention. A couple of my neighbors have brought up the dumpster staging, so three days a week. We have dumpsters blocking half the road, bringing our functional width to about three meters. Vancouver Fire Rescue requires six meters at all times. The city has also, admitted that they do not have any tools for governance or enforcement to ensure that that part of the road stays clear. This means emergency access compliance is effectively dependent on a volunteer strata to ensure that access is compliant. Documented safety concerns. So I pulled some information from the Freedom of Information Act, and in a 2021 study it showed school pickups. We had a vehicle passing Marstrand Avenue every 44 seconds. And I'd like to remind you that currently there is no sidewalk on the northeast corner where the tellus lot is and what the applicant is proposed. I emailed you all photos with measurements this morning if you'd like to check that out. There is a manhole cover that goes from three feet to 12 inches and is not a safe passage or anyone using a walker, a stroller on mobility device whatsoever. Further, a 2023 speed study found that one in four vehicles is exceeding the 30 kilometer an hour speed limit down that road. The active school active travel planning program
Statement ▶ Watch
Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Diane Elliott Buckley, and I'm a resident of Vancouver here today representing Westside Family Place. I'm happy to speak in support of this rental housing proposal in our neighborhood. As many of you know, Westside Family Place was founded in 1973, by two local moms who saw a need for connection and support among young families. Their vision was simple but powerful to create a welcoming space where parents and caregivers could build community and receive support while nurturing the well-being of their children. Over the decades, we've evolved to meet the changing needs of families. Today, we serve a diverse community and offer a wide range of parenting resources, early childhood programming, and opportunities for social connection. We're proud to be Canada's first recognized family resource program, and to have served as a model for hundreds of similar programs across the country. What sets us apart is not just our programs, but the warm, supportive, and trusting relationships families build with our staff. Families come for connection and belonging, not just activities, and they return and refer others because they feel known and respected. Our work is also preventive by reducing isolation, strengthening parental confidence, and fostering positive parent-child interactions. We help families build resilience early. Families feel part of a community with a sense of belonging that is protective and meaningful. And that's why housing matters so deeply to us. We see firsthand how difficult it has become for young families to find stable, secure housing on the west side. Many of the families we serve are renters. Many face uncertainty when leases end or when rents rise beyond what they can manage. Housing instability creates stress for parents that directly affects the well-being of children. Conversations with parents also indicate that tenant protections are weak and adjudication is difficult to access, and many landlords seem to operate under the assumption that the tenant's rights are optional. Purpose-built rentals with proper management help ensure that rental units are maintained and that rights are respected. Projects like this one, which include rental and below-market rental homes close to transit, parks, schools, and community services are desperately needed. Stable rental housing allows families to put down roots. It allows children to thrive in their neighborhood. It allows parents to build support networks, participate in local programs, and contribute to the life of the community. We believe that this project will become a valuable part of our community and will help ensure that the West Side remains a place where families, not just those that can afford home ownership, can belong. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
This is her. Yes. Yeah. Thanks. Hi, everyone. Thank you for hearing my voice. My name is Tracy Kemp, and I'm an owner and resident living directly adjacent to where this rezoning proposal is suggested. My neighborhood is called Arbutus Walk. I have lived in the neighborhood for 25 years. I oppose the development application for this 25-story tower at this site. I'm also a midwife. I work at BC Women's and I chose my neighborhood to give me the mental health support that I need to be of service in the community because I like blue sky and green open space. So this proposal, I would like to oppose this based on four key reasons. One, it does not align with the pre-existing long-term vision of this neighborhood. Two, there is significant neighborhood opposition to this proposal. Three, there is insufficient public benefit. Four, the infrastructure does not exist to support the extra parking and traffic congestion expected from this development. Now, I will say a few words about each point. Point one, this application does not uphold the long-term vision of the Arbutus Walk neighborhood. Here is a description of the neighborhood. You can find this online. It's a master-planned community, known for its tree-lined streets, quiet, park-like atmosphere. It has won architectural awards. The planners were praised for transforming the Carling Brewery industrial site into a sustainable, community-focused neighborhood through collaborative public hearings. The redevelopment means to insert a 25-story tower into this mid-rise award-winning community, effectively changing the character of the neighborhood forever. This could cast long, imposing shadows through the playground area and the park space. These are the spaces that support our mental health as people. and they're important, as we've heard from the doctor earlier. I'd like council to respect the hard work that your councillor peers and the community did in the 1990s, establishing this master-planned neighborhood by opposing the development application. Point number two, there is significant neighborhood opposition to this proposal. Today, you just have to look at the speakers and online to see that. The public forums were very well attended, and people have a lot to say about this. Point number three, there is insufficient public benefit. I would argue that with the rental vacancy rate at an all-time high, so higher now than in the past 30 years, we do not need another high-rise with a high vacancy rate with unaffordable rent. There is no evidence to suggest that this rezoning application will add any value to the community. We already have a great example of how to create affordable housing for families. It's called cooperative housing and it already exists in our Arbutus Walk immediately adjacent to this area. And these are actually affordable. There's no vacancies with cooperative housing because this type of housing is wildly popular. Finally, point number four, the infrastructure to support this plan has not been adequately addressed. There is already insufficient parking around the site and already severe traffic congestion without adding anything. This proposed site is encircled by a one-way road, a bike lane, two schools, and Marstrand Avenue, this smaller, minor street. The immediate vulnerable populations are cyclists in transit, school children, and seniors from the nearby seniors' home. Two days ago, I just saw somebody coming in a car up the one-way street, completely confused as to how to orient themselves around that area two days ago, causing people to flee in the streets. Before considering this proposal, there needs to be a traffic analysis, including peak hour traffic activity, a cumulative block impact analysis with a prospective lens that incorporates the new adjacent developments already underway. This should be a collaborative process with the residents, the schools, and bike users, because their safety should be a priority. Please support this community by opposing the development of this rezoning proposal. Please remember, these towering buildings are not removable. They must be proven to be beneficial for everyone through thoughtful, careful analysis. This proposal is in opposition to what the residents want. It has not been thorough considering the scale of the development, nor is it in keeping with the original Arbutus Walk Plan or the Broadway Plan to preserve the original form of communities. Please preserve the livability of this precious neighborhood. Thank you so much for your time.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
everyone it's Jane McFadden and I'm calling in support of this project. I'm the executive director of the West 4th Avenue Business Association. Although this project is, of course, outside of a few blocks outside of our BIA boundary, we see customers, of course, coming to dine and shop and use the services of West 4th from all over the city, but especially in Kitsilano. And one of the things that I consistently hear is that there's not enough rental in Kitsilano in and around our area. There's a few things that I really like about this project, that it's rental for sure, that there's zero displacement. That's something that we hear as well consistently. And I really like that commercial and residential will not be displaced as a result of this project. It does align with the Broadway Plan as one of my members that was just on the line from the pharmacy indicated, it is in line with it. And it's really, I don't know if you've been to this site anytime recently, but it's really just sitting there and it's been sitting there for a long time. And I think the need for rental housing in the area in the city, but also just specifically in Kitsilano is just a perfect use of this space. and now will be very close to this great hub of transit for people to be able to get around. And, you know, perhaps not rely on vehicle traffic, but use that transit infrastructure that we've been investing in building for several years. I think that's it for me, but I hope that you support this project and thanks for listening.
Statement ▶ Watch
Good evening, Council. My colleague, Jane, from the West 4th BIA, really covered all the great points about why I also support this project. I represent the West Broadway BIA. And there's an event that we do every year. We're very grateful to host an outdoor movie night at Connaught Park, which is near this site. And a lot of the feedback that I hear year after year is from. people that attend that grew up in the neighborhood but can't afford to buy a home in the neighborhood. So one of the reasons I strongly support this is more rental, and as Jane noted, it won't displace any existing tenants. And we really do need all the support we can get for local businesses to have more shoppers in the neighborhood. So I do hope this goes through, and I really appreciate. all of the different points that have been made this evening about the concerns. And I hope there's a workable solution for this project to move forward. Thank you so much.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Yes. Thank you. Great. Go ahead, please when you're ready. Okay. Yes. My name is Adam Politzer. I'm a retired architect and member of the Strata Council of 2228 Marstrand, the development facing the development site. I'm speaking for myself. I ask council to not approve the proposed rezoning and rather send it back to the drawing board to correct its many major deficiencies. First and main deficiency: the rezoning has been developed considering that Marstrand is a lane, not a street. The planning department agrees with this bizarre concept and substantiates it in the report, with the ludicrous fact such as that the width of Marstrand is 20 feet. A simple proof that Marstrand is a street and not a lane is that Marstrand is the only access for the 176 unit complex where I live. It was approved by the planning and building department 30 years ago. At that time, as now, the zoning bylaw clearly stated — clearly defined a lane as a thoroughfare that provides only secondary access. The Telus rezoning has been developed as if the site faces two streets, West 10th and Yew, to which it shows its good face. And a lane, Marstrand, where I live, to which it shows the backside. That means that we, the Marstrand residents, will face the overwhelming 80-foot long blank wall of the Telus building that sits at the property line without any space for greenery to soften its impact. It means that in front of our entry, there will be a semi-covered loading bay that may in the future become a drug shooting gallery. It means that three mature trees, an asset to our street, will be cut down. It means that the proposed tower will overlook our bedrooms and living rooms. It means that the ramp to the proposed underground parking almost faces the ramp to our parking, which will increase the risk of fender benders. I could go on, but there are other problems that I want to bring to your attention. Item 3 of the proposed CD-1 bylaw states that the site is subdivided into sub-areas A and B. Although no area dimension is shown, Figure 1 is fairly easy to scale, and sub-area A is 21,275 square feet, sub-area B is 3,725, total 25,000 square feet. Item 7 of the bylaw states that in sub-area A, the maximum FSR should be 6.5, that is 138,287 square feet. The gross floor area of the proposal in front of you is 162,522 — an excess of almost 25,000 square feet. Floor space ratio is an index of the bulk of the building. The Broadway Plan determines the FSR of 6.5 as the allowed bulk for that area. The proposed development's bulk is way over. Last point. CD-1 341 that created Arbutus Walk 30 years ago took an easement of 5 feet from the Fraser Institute, Academy site and the Co-op side, in order to create a sidewalk. At that time, an easement could not be taken from the Telus side because it was not part of the CD. For some reasons that is hard to understand, Thank you.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Can everyone hear me?
Okay. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Carrie Gaimond, and I am one of several strata council members speaking on behalf of Strata LMS 317, representing 170 units on Marstrand Avenue. I'm here to oppose the proposed 25-storey 221-unit tower at 2212– 210 West Tenth Avenue. This neighbourhood has long been recognized for its green space, walkability and livability, even receiving awards for its thoughtful streetscape and pedestrian-friendly design. The proposed tower threatens all of that. A building closer to 10 stories could integrate fully with the community, preserving trees, sunlight, and pedestrian access while still providing housing. My primary concerns are safety, traffic, congestion, poor design, operational noise, acoustic impacts, shadowing, and the effect on future development opportunities. Marstrand Avenue is narrow and portions lack sidewalks. The proposed parkade ramp is almost, as Adam said, directly opposite our existing ramp, creating an unnecessary safety hazard. Traffic is already significant, particularly near two schools. The tower will worsen congestion, putting pedestrians at risk, and adding maintenance costs to a privately owned portion of the street, as has been reiterated by several members. We'll also experience continuous mechanical and servicing activity — heating, ventilation, deliveries — immediately adjacent to homes, while the CD-1 rezoning does not change noise limits. This operational activity has a real impact on livability. The proposal will further amplify what we call a canyoning effect, as mentioned by several people already, with four mature trees being removed and a 138-foot brick wall added to an already paved area. Echoes will intensify, making the street louder and more enclosed. This reduces both comfort and safety for pedestrians. The shadowing on St. John's School playground is unacceptable. Public schools are protected from such impacts, and independent schools deserve the same consideration.
Statement ▶ Watch
I'm on the line.
Go ahead, Steven. Okay, I have a presentation. Can you make sure it's up?
Go ahead.
I'm Stephen Bossam resident in Vancouver. I'm a renter, and I'm opposed to this application. As a cyclist, I will actually. I will actually echo the concerns of one of the previous speakers who spoke about bike safety, and it is a really big issue, especially on this block. What you see here is a massing model of the proposal that I just built independently. I will note that there are inconsistencies with a drawing. So this is a general massing. There are inconsistencies between the elevations, plans, missing floor layouts for the tower and so on, but this will give you the idea of the whole outline of the massing. Next slide, please. Slide number two, there's permeability through the site. So you can actually see through from one side of the site to the other site, and I think you can see the school right here. Next slide. The tower would significantly shade a school, and this is my shadow rendering from Marsha 20th at 12.15 p.m. I can give you any number of shadow rendering. It's very easy to do. to do. And during the broadway plan discussions, some of council were in the room at that time. There was discussion about solar access for schools, whether they're independent or public. And the consensus was that kids will be kids. And you're not going to discriminate between someone who goes to a public school or to an independent school. And this really does not show respect for people who are going to schools in Vancouver. Next slide. So here is the general amassing in the Arbutus Walk area. And the Arbutus Walk area was specifically made at this lower scale to respect the character of the neighborhood. And it was an award-winning space. And the whole idea was not to build towers. Next slide. Now, here's another shadow study at 10 a.m. on Marsa Twain, which is one of your standards. And there are significant shadow impacts all day long. And I said there are a shadow. inconsistency between the elevations and the plants in terms of where the windows are, and balconies and so on. Next slide. Here you see the other side of the site and the open space through the site and the neighboring properties. Next slide. And what you're seeing here is more like a bunker, which is the future TELUS building, the Telecom building. And it's not very neighborly. It's one big block that just faces the street here. And there is a possibility that Telos could actually redevelop this without actually having to do any residential or to do something like a Chester Street, which is six stories. Next slide. Here is another view and there is actually another tower on the other and on Arbutus. And I will note that I know model this over Christmas and the plants had actually been submitted to the city in December but only posted at the end of last month. So big delay there. Next slide. Here is another 3D view. And I've been working on this Broadway plan model for about four years now just to show the public and everyone else who is concerned about what potential amassing impacts are on the neighborhood. Next slide. And in the city of Toronto, this information is available and I heard other speakers before me talk about next one. You got that. Okay, I'm on the city of Toronto slide and you can. download all of the rezoning applications via a website, download all the context. There's no time to create, needed to create the 3D modeling and you can go anywhere and do your shadow studies and so on. So it's a huge barrier to entry that this information isn't available with the city. Considering the city has its own internal 3D database that's not releasing to the public currently via F.O.I. Next slide. And this is, again, the view from the green space in the middle of Arbuta's Walk, and it would be a big mistake to go back. on decades of planning. Next slide. The site is permeable. As you can see currently, next slide. That is the streetscape and you can get an appreciation of what tent looks like currently as a cyclist or as a motorist and so on. It is a narrow street and it would really add to conditions for cyclist. Next slide. That's from Cannot Park. Just a view to give you a sense of the scale. Next slide. Okay, next slide. The current building. a lot of telecom dishes on the top. Next slide. And here is, again, the shadow impacts on the other side of the streets. So the impacts are very large. Please listen to your neighbors.
Statement ▶ Watch
Okay. Thank you so much. Hello, Consular. So my name is La Vanya and I'm a Vancouver resident. And I just wanted to call in to say that I support the proposed rental housing development at West Dent and Mars Trend. So I currently work at one of the schools right near the site. I work at Fraser Academy. So I really see every day how housing challenges affect both families and the staff in our communities. We have families who send their kids to our school from all over Lower Mainland, including as far as mission. And that's, you know, a really long commute for a child. And families are really making big sacrifices because they value the education the kids are receiving in this area. But it also goes to show how difficult it is to find housing closer to where they would ideally like to live. And it goes the same for staff. So I'm lucky enough to commute from East Vancouver. but some of my colleagues come from as far as White Rock every day. And for many of the staff in the school and the school families, living close to where they work just doesn't seem financially realistic, which is why this development, because it includes 20% of the below market rental unit, I really think that could make a big difference. More rental supplier just creates more opportunities for families and for school staff to actually live in the communities that they're a part of. I also just wanted to say that I appreciate that the project. doesn't involve displacing any existing residents or businesses since the site is currently a utility property, as we all know. And adding new housing without pushing anyone else just feels like a positive step to me. And with the new Arbuta Skytrain station coming, it just makes sense to add housing closer to transit, just supports short commutes and better access. So yeah, just wanted to say from my perspective, as someone who works right next to this site and walks right next to this building every day, it feels like a thoughtful addition to the neighborhood. Thank you so much.
Statement ▶ Watch
Thank you.
Good evening, counsel. My name is Jeff Manton. I'm a local business owner, a community builder, and I'm raising a growing family directly across from the proposed site at 10th and you. And to be clear, I'm opposed to this development. I am not opposed to housing, nor am I opposed to density. In fact, I live in it. The Arbutus Wai. is one of the densest neighborhoods in Kitsilano already. It has been home to my family for the last eight years. And to paint a picture, it's 1,400 units across medium-rise buildings on a footprint of 25 acres, centered around a lush greenway with several playgrounds that are heavily used, communal gathering spaces, windy streets, quaint lamp posts, and a cohesive aesthetic. The list goes on. It's a wonderful place to live. And I have always wondered, who were the... visionary builders behind this neighborhood. How is this not the shining example of how a municipality balances the ever-urgent need for density with intentional human-sized communities? And it is important to remember the origin of the Arbutus Walk, as it seems to have been forgotten, as several of my neighbors have already shared. Imagine the Arbutus lands decades ago, a former industrial site slated for rezoning and the The initial solution offered by the city and the developers was four massive towers. Of course, the community pushed back and instead offered an alternative version focused on livability and connection. And history seems to be repeating itself. At the time, the city followed a program called the local area planning. Instead of ignoring the residents, the city council invited the community to participate and co-author the future of those lands. It took years. Many meetings. heated discussions, but in the end, this co-created rezoning plan was passed unanimously, and it gave developers a framework that the community actually helped write. Today, Arbutus Walk is a world-renowned, award-winning example of how community-led, human scale, transit-oriented density is possible. And central to that framework was a bold commitment. 20% of the homes were to be non-marketing. housing. According to the original architects of this area, that goal, that promise to the community has still not been fully achieved. Many of my neighbors and members of the St. John's Community School have gone to great lengths demonstrating to you all the countless safety and scale concerns that this massive project forces onto our already constrained community. And we are told these safety and scale compromises are a necessary trade-off for below-market housing or additional housing and to meet the goals of the housing at any cost strategy that seems to be such a priority. As we witnessed at the last council meeting on February 17th, as part of a motion that was passed for the East 10th and Guelph development, these below market promises can be stripped away at the 11th hour without adequate public awareness. Why are we trading the safety of our school zones and neighborhoods for fragile promises, while the original 20% non-market market? a goal for this very area remains unfinished. If we are going to build density, shouldn't we hold it to the gold standard that we co-authored decades ago, rather than a broad target that bypasses our safety and our history? Counsel, I am asking you to return to the visionary spirit of the Arbutus Walk. Do not allow a 25-story tower to hollow out a neighborhood that was built on trust. work with the community to find a path forward. I urge you to require the promised non-market housing, a cumulative block impact analysis, and a true safety study before ever allowing a project of this scale to proceed in this neighborhood. Let's return to a Vancouver that works with its residence and not in spite of it. Thank you for your time and your attention.
No transcript available.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Good evening. Thank you very much for your attention. I'm Diane Henry. I'm a longtime resident of Vancouver, and I live in Kitsilano for the last 12 years. I came here from Ottawa in 1996. And I wish to put my objections to this proposed rezoning plan forward because what I saw when I arrived here in Vancouver was what I thought was just amazing architectural, livability, sustainability. I saw the False Creek project. I saw so many developments that were livable and habitable and green. And it was just, I loved this city. And now all I can think of when I hear and see what the Broadway plan and it's really going through almost turbocharged, with development. All I see is they paved paradise and they put up towers. So many towers and so in this block, it's such a narrow place, such a small space for a huge tower to go into. And I've lived in an apartment building that was 28 stories high. I was in the 21st level. You cannot sustain something that has delivery trucks and vans
Statement ▶ Watch
And then as of February 22nd, 2021, the peak was 82 vehicles passing through this block. That was one. vehicle per 43.9 seconds. If you go forward with this tower, how are you ever going to keep it under one vehicle every five seconds, 10 seconds? You vastly underrated and underestimated the amount of traffic congestion that is going to happen to this small little place. And I just want to say in closing, I'm a senior citizen. I visit friends who are at Seasons and assisted seniors care. home. Many elderly people are walking in that block with walkers or canes. There's dogs. There's students. There's children. How are you ever going to manage the congestion if you go forward with a 25-story building? So many people who have come tonight have said, look, we were fine with six stories. We were fine with eight stories. These people aren't against more apartments. They aren't against helping with our housing situation. They're against something that is so out of character and so out of scale and so out of proportion. And I am going to just close by saying, I'm begging you, please consider that you must adjudicate this land use in a fair and honest way. Just go there and look at the traffic between 330 and 530 and ask yourself, how are they even going to build it? I just don't know how it's going to work. And I really, really hope you consider this carefully and reject this proposal. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I appreciate you speaking to counsel. Number 36 is Dennis Agar. Hello, everyone. My name is Dennis Agar. I'm the executive director of movement Metro Vancouver Transit Riders. I'm a Vancouver resident as well. And I'm speaking in that capacity. You're not going to be surprised to hear that I support density in your transit.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
Okay. Thank you for the opportunity. I'm Eric McDonald, a long time Vancouver resident and father of two young kids. And I oppose this project. I'd actually make some very brief points. The developer's own shadow study shows a tower almost any height, a tower of almost any height, will shadow the outdoor play areas of St. John's school during recess and lunch for almost the entire year, affecting 580 students aged 4 to 18. The graph presented earlier was a bit misleading. As one speaker said, the bars should have been stacked on top of each other to show the increase in shadow. The shadowing the school playground would not be permitted for a public. school and independent schools should not be subject to a lower standard. All children deserve equitable access to sunlight and safe outdoor space to play. And approving this rezoning would effectively endorse unequal treatment and affect our children's health. We also create, as everyone said, lots of traffic and safety risks for kids and cyclists, you know, big trucks falling debris, potentially. So we all want more housing. But sacrificing people's health for developers' profit is not right. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
Thank you. Good evening, Councillor Kerby Young and Council. My name is Barbara Oaks, and I'm an Arbeda's resident. I'm born and raised in Vancouver, and I'm ready to express, or I'm actually speaking today. I've submitted my written opposition on January 23rd, but I'm speaking today to express my deep concern in opposition to this proposal, and it across the streets and the site. To be clear, I support increasing housing supply density and especially the creation of additional non-market housing. Replacing the surface parking lot with homes is in principle, a positive goal. However, density must not come at the expense of basic safety due process the neighborhood livability. I'm asking counsel to reject this proposal based on the following concerns. Traffic gridlock, number one, West 10th is a one way-way street with a dedicated bike lane. Introducing approximately 300 additional daily vehicle trips on this already constrained block creates a heightened risk for pedestrian and cyclist collision. Freedom of information studies show the block is already operating beyond capacity. There also does not to be, there also doesn't appear to be any clear plan how council intends to manage the increased traffic in the area beyond reducing parking spaces in the new building in an effort to discourage vehicle use, a strategy that in practice rarely works. It feels as though insufficient consideration has been given to how this project will affect the day-to-day lives of current residents. By approving a 25-stored building in an established low-rise neighborhood, the city risks creating long-term congestion and safety issues and then stepping back and leaving the community to deal with these consequences. Marstrand is not a standard city street. It's a privately owned space with the statutory right-of-way, SRW, granted to the city. This SRW was originally intended to a local. allowed for frequent trips and local parkade access for the three condominiums. It was never intended to facilitate a high-volume block circling traffic pattern. It is a space without sidewalks. Vehicle frequency is the primary predictor of pedestrian safety. On March 20, or sorry, on February 22nd, 2021 at 3 p.m., a peak hour saw 82 vehicles pass through the block. This is one vehicle every 43 seconds. In 2017, a car passed every 73 seconds. In 2017, a car passed for 73 seconds. So the current frequency has sharpened in that time period almost 40%. There's no safe intervals for residents to navigate their own street. Because there's lack of continuous sidewalks, pedestrians of course, to cross mid-lock or to walk on the street. Proposal lacks required setback, sidewalks, and meaningful public realm improvements. It attempts to exempt the project from standard safety requirements on a block that currently lack sidewalks by mislabel by mislabeling at illegal street. The proposed shadowing of St. John's outdoor players with significantly undermined student well-being, shadowing the trouble's play space is discouraged by the Broadway plan. The Broadway plan envision towers along major arterials, not inserted into internal residence lock. This proposals directly conflict with the key plan principles, including requirements for human-scale urban form and sunlight protection for the public realm a need for cumulative impact analysis on multiple developments on a single block, particularly with the upcoming Fraser Academy application, and the commitment that a new development is sensing enough to existing neighborhood content, which in this area consists primarily of three to six-story low-rise developments. Public trust has been safe, sorry, public trust is sincerely eroded by documented processes, including failure to post-recar and legal signage and failure to properly notify residents, later confirming through FOI requests. Refusal to reopen public Q&A despite acknowledging these notification failures, nondisclosure of relevant shadow studies, and continue insistence by planning staff that Marshon Avenue, while legally as a street, is exempt from safety, standard safety requirements. I request mayor and council, as I urge council to exercise its oversight role and oppose this project as it is presented, while planning staff assess policy compliance, The council is entrusted with protecting the real-world safety, livability, and long-term well-being of the neighborhoods affected by these decisions.
Statement ▶ Watch
We do support growth, housing, and density, but we also expect development to be safe, transparent and genuine and genuinely sensitive to the communities in which it's supposed. The mobility is not an abstract concept. It's the daily experience of residents who walk these streets for these children here and the alliance-based functional infrastructure to support their lives. So in closing, I just want to say that as a long-term resident of this area, I'm not opposed to this. Thank you, Barbara. Thank you. I'm opposed to the project as it's down. Thank you. Thank you, Barbara. I appreciate it. And if I can just ask all speaking. to just that are calling in now to identify themselves and if they're a resident of Vancouver I think next we have Lorraine Lowe on the phone. Hi, good evening deputy mayor, councillors and city staff. Lorraine Lowe here, I'm born and raised in Vancouver, a long-time resident. So I'm here representing as a resident tonight and I'm in strong support of this redevelopment application. I want to focus on something that we don't often think about when we look at building, but we absolutely should. And this facility is quite literally the home of the internet for our region. And behind those walls sits the legacy telephone and data infrastructure that keeps our city connected and the digital hub that businesses, hospitals, schools, and first responders rely on around the clock. Most of us never see it. But without it, Vancouver's economy simply doesn't function. Now here's a challenge. That infrastructure is aging and in an era where high-speople. data is an essential as electricity. We can't afford to let this critical backbone fall behind. This redevelopment replaces outdated systems with a state-of-the-art facility, future-proofing our digital foundation from what's coming next. And what's coming is AI, Cal Computing, Telehouse Smart City Technologies. These are all engines of our modern economy, and they require reliable, high-capacity
Statement ▶ Watch
They look at digital capability. This project sends a clear signal that Vancouver is ready for the future. And the housing component adds to that story. Rental homes, including family and below market units, on a major transit corridor. This is a rare opportunity to address multiple city priorities all at once. and I encourage council to support it. Thank you. Thank you very much for calling in. Next speaker on the phone also is, I believe it's Hartstar Crawford. Hi there. You have five minutes to speak to council. Please start when you're ready. Hi, thank you. My name is Hartstar Crawford. I am a resident in Vancouver. I run a small consultancy that is based in Kim, Vancouver, and it specializes in the building industry and specifically around energy efficiency. I don't, I have not done any work with, um, like court development or TELUS, uh, for context. Um, I do support the project. Uh, in general, I support the, uh, increased density to deal with affordability of housing in our city, especially if that density complies with the, you know, kind of the rules of the game that's been set out and, uh, and along with any kind of reasonable compromises. Um, what I specifically like about, about this development is that there's no loss of existing rental. Having lived in, you know, many neighborhoods in Vancouver, including the West End. And, um, uh, you know, I've seen the buildings that I've lived in turn into the high rises on those, those ways. And, uh, there, you know, even though there is some compensation there always is, uh, you know, displacements that happens with that. I also think the, uh, the ability to integrate with the existing infrastructure to tell us building.
Statement ▶ Watch
Uh, and recover heat is a unique opportunity to this site that allows, uh, the greening of a building in a very effective way. Um, and then along with that, it typically comes any kind of upgrades to will happen to the existing, uh, you know, cooling system associated with that infrastructure, improving what's already on site, uh, on that end of things. Um, yep, and that's, that's basically it. I think if all the rules, uh, more or less is required and, uh, and, uh, has a bunch of unique aspects that make it a good project. Great. Thanks so much for calling in. Okay. Next speaker is the number ending in 5336. If you can just identify yourself and if you're a resident. Hi, good evening. My name's Taylor Fisher and I'm a recent graduate and a young professor, a young professional living here in Vancouver. And I'm calling to support this redevelopment application. I want to be direct. I'd love to live in this neighborhood. It's vibrant, walkable and super close to where I work. Um, but unfortunately I have to commute. When I started looking for rental housing here, I quickly realized it wasn't affordable on my salary and I'm not alone. This is what I hear from nearly all my friends in these similar situations. This redevelopment, uh, would change that. Adding those 221 rental homes and including 45, uh, below market units means young professionals like me and other people could actually afford to live here. And that matters more than you may think.
No transcript available.
Statement ▶ Watch
My daily life is here, my friends routine and places where I like to shop and eat. This application is only a few blocks from my home. It's currently has no tenant. which is a huge benefit and only blocks from our beauty station. I think it will be a positive addition to the neighborhood and I hope we move forward. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. Next we have Mack Wilson. Yes, we can hear you. You have five minutes when you ready. Go ahead. I'm a resident of Vancouver. If I can just identify, sorry, if you are a resident of Vancouver, then and then proceed with your comments. That'd be great.
Statement ▶ Watch
Yes, that me?
Thank you. Okay, I won't take up five minutes. Yeah, sorry for missing my time earlier today. I was in work meetings and couldn't get away, and now I'm trying to avoid some construction at home. Yeah, my name is Bobo Iric. I'm a resident of Vancouver in Mount Pleasant, as part of the Broadway plan area, and I'm calling in support of this motion. Yeah, I mean, I think one of the things that's really struck me about this whole proposal has been the sheer volume of opposition. And when you look at where that opposition is coming from, it's once again this idea that there are different rules in the city and depending on sort of how wealthy and well-connected people are in terms of rising opposition to much-needed housing. You know, a lot of the opposition today has been sort of gathered from the St. John's school, which is a private school where tuition's sort of range between $25,000 and $30,000 a year. And so, there's clearly a lot of money and wealth and access that an organization can try to sort of drum up a lot of opposition, summon, or complain legally that things might not have been done exactly to the letter, and that sort of prompts to in-person open houses and information sessions about a proposal that's no different from anything else that's happening on the Broadway plan. And anything, it's less controversial, it's replay. a tele-switching station as opposed to replacing existing housing. There's no displacement of tenants. It meets all of the Broadway plan requirements. We're just once again sitting through a rezoning that complies with all of the city's housing policy guidelines. We're sort of going through this whole process. I think there are a couple elements that I flagged then when I caught a bit of the staff presentation is how much this building has all done. been shaped to try and accommodate the school. We've got a smaller floor plate, which means smaller homes. The shape of the building is sort of gone for a narrower tower instead of so the, yeah, so it's more of a tower and a podium as opposed to a longer building, which I think when we've seen some of the ones that are pretty iconic in the West End in particular, those older buildings, they just have more sides. And that means more windows, and it means sort of more visibility. for the people who are living in them. So, you know, we've already seen a process that has really bent over backwards to try and accommodate the winds and specific, the minutiae and details that sort of a very exclusive private school would want. I remember riding through 10th Avenue about sort of 13, 14, 14 years ago, around drop-off time in it being totally crazy. So I'm really glad that there's the... the separated bike path now. I think that's good. I'm hoping that 10th Avenue will be continued. So if there's concern about parents dropping their kids off at school, like maybe their kid, maybe they shouldn't be going on 10th, right? There are other streets around that can carry cars. Another thing I sort of wanted to flag is in some of the documentation around this project is the headmaster trying, made the claim that when this proposal first came forward and they were discussing with the applicant. They were trying to negotiate for a presentation space, whether that was some sort of a communal theater. And this was supposed to be some sort of benefit. They could benefit the community. But really, it's all about benefiting the school. The school was trying to extract space from a private development and trying to use the city's process to extract something that they could use for their own benefit. And I think that's pretty. pretty important and pretty objectionable. So all that's be said, because I've gone on longer than I wanted here, I do hope city council will approve this project. It's a Broadway plan proposal. It's much needed housing. It has no displacement. And yeah, it's really along the transit line. So let's move forward. Let's approve it and let's go on to what's next. Thanks. Bye.
Statement ▶ Watch
Thank you, asking mayor and council members. I'm calling as a long time resident of Vancouver and I'm actually calling on behalf of my young adult children. They're busy at work and studying in their school studies. I have lived near the Broadway and commercial sky train station and I currently live near the Broadway and Granville SkyTrain Station future. And I am calling to say that I'm calling to say that. support this project. So I'm not obviously right next to this project, but I do look out my window at the tower at Broadway and Grenville, and it's AOK. There are many similar development proposals around where I live that will displace people. And I can feel the anxiety of my neighbors with that process. And so the positive aspect of this. This development of not displacing anyone is huge and density around SkyTrain just makes sense. It's just part of having lived at Broadway and commercial, having living now near Broadway and Granville, these are, it's just a part of a vibrant and sustainable city. I'm a university instructor. I work with young people, young adults every day and they are concerned about the They're concerned about sustainable cities and having some place to live. So if I am going to have launch my children and if they're going to have an opportunity to, along with all the other young people to live in the city that they grew up in, or it doesn't even matter if they grew up here. Everyone should have a chance to live in Vancouver and experience this beautiful city. And we just need more housing. like this where young adults can hope to stay here in the city and enjoy it. Thank you.
Statement ▶ Watch
Council and Mayor, Jeb Sinclair, and I'm a Vancouver resident.
Thank you. I'm here speaking as a resident of Vancouver, but my comments are more focused on my experience as a long-time Marilloma Club member and coach and administrator, which is how I was just down the road from the proposed development in Knawark Park. I'm very glad to be speaking in support of this development and this application. In my 10 years, I'm involved with the Marloma Club as a coach and administrator, all of our membership, uh, averages between 19 and sort of 35 years old. And, um, many in that city that fall within that rate, uh, age bracket. Most are renters. Um, they're young students, young professional tradespeople and early career workers, coaches, volunteers and active participants in the community, um, a project like this delivering new rental with in close proximity to the transit and the park, um, and all the other community amenities will be a meaningful benefit to all the young people in the area creates an opportunity for future residents, many of whom they already spend much of their time here to actually live here. Um, Kitslano always evolves, always has, supporting new rental housing is appropriate, inappropriate locations is part of ensuring the evolution remains inclusive and welcoming.