Feint by Numbers: 350…Vancouver House High-Rises, that is

City Conversation # 34: The Broadway Plan is the urban planning carpet bombing of Kitsilano, Fairview, South Granville and Mount Pleasant. We only have a week to say “Stop it!”

March 14, 2022—Vancouver City Hall recently published the final draft of the Broadway Plan. Although this is the largest area plan by far in the city’s history, its final draft version has been presented in only three open houses within the space of one week (I was out of town, missed them all) and three already sold out Zoom style meetings—there are so many city staff and communications folks in attendance that there is only room for a total of less than 200 real citizens. Oh yes! There is an online survey open until March 22nd—that’s a week away! After these virtual events staff will analyze responses and recommend a final plan for City Council review in mid-May. Neither staff nor City Council need consult the citizens of Vancouver again.

Having missed the brief in-person and Zoom opportunities, I have completed my own analysis: 

Call to Action—These usually come at the end of my City Conversations, but the Broadway Plan is such a serious attack on Kitsilano, Fairview, South Granville and Mount Pleasant that I urge you to take the city’s online survey right after you have read this Conversation and the previous one about Kitsilano. City staff will shut the highly controlled “Consultation” door on or immediately after March 22nd. You can also write to Council, BUT there will not be a Public Hearing about this Plan—your options for making your views known are very limited!

Draft Fairview Concept Plan annotated by Brian Palmquist

“Dad, that’s pretty harsh, even for you!” exclaimed my son as he noticed the subtitle on my computer screen. “Carpet bombing is rather extreme, isn’t it?”

“I wish it was,” I responded. “I was somewhat alarmed when I looked at the Kitsilano portion of the Broadway Plan (Plan). But the Fairview/South Granville and Mount Pleasant portions of the Plan make the Kits part look like low density!”

“I know I asked this before, but what are all the four letter designations like FSOC, FUSB, etc.—what do they mean?”

“It’s become impossible to find on the City’s own website a map of the existing zoning schedules covered by the Plan—these are new zones,” I responded. “Fortunately, in response to my last City Conversation a gentleman came forward with his copies of the current zoning plan, for comparison.”

“So how do they compare?” My son asked the obvious question, as I hoped he would.

“First of all, none of names of the zoning districts that planners, architects, even ordinary citizens of Vancouver are familiar with exists anymore in the Broadway Plan areas. You’ve heard me talk of the RS and RT zonings, being the Residential Single (RS) and the Residential Two (RT) duplex zones. Of course, the RS zones now permit up to 4 homes (duplex + 2 suites or laneway) so RS is a misnomer.” He nodded hesitant understanding so I continued.

“Worse than changing all the names, the 24 existing zoning districts have been replaced with more than 50 new land use policy areas. Some of these new 50+ overlap somewhat with the existing 24, but there is little explanation why the boundaries have been changed and everything made more than twice as complex. That’s why I call it carpet bombing—the existing zoning is being obliterated.”

“Surely there’s some explanation for each of the 50+ policy areas?” he asked hopefully.

“Yes, if you call a single sentence saying something like Strengthen as a mixed-use station area with new housing, job space and amenities (Panel 35). Every one of the 50+ policy areas has a single sentence explanation, as if we citizens are incapable of absorbing more, I guess.”

Draft Mount Pleasant Concept Plan annotated by Brian Palmquist

“Okay,” my son interjected, “I get your annoyance at more than double the existing number of zones, but why should we care about names so long as the Plan represents modest densification? You mentioned before that the planners say the existing area has 78,000 residents, and they want to add another 50,000 over the next 30 years—frankly, that doesn’t seem that many in a city growing as fast as Vancouver.”

“Would that 50,000 was the number,” I answered. “The problem is that the actual Plan contemplates more than three times that many new residents.” I paused, giving him a moment to take that in.

“But how can the planners say 50,000 when you say the plan says more than three times as many?” he asked timidly.

“There are two parts to answering that question,” I started in. He sighed and his eyelids dropped as he recognized my professor tone coming on. 

“When the resort municipality of Whistler was created by provincial legislation,” I began as he looked puzzled, “the enabling legislation put an absolute cap on the number of beds that could be built under the Plan. There was concern that Whistler might become overbuilt, so a cap was legislated.” I could see him puzzle up when I mentioned beds rather than homes, so digressed for a moment. “They capped beds because they knew Whistler would have lots of hotels and wanted to control just how many, mainly because there were limits on what the proposed infrastructure could bear—infrastructure is roads, sewers, water, etc.” He nodded understanding so I continued.

“Ironically, Whistler became so successful that the cap was quickly reached. The development community went back to the government and asked Please, Sirs, can we have some more?” He smiled at the David Copperfield  reference. “The province then did a clever deal, in essence saying ‘If you agree to build and pay for the school, community centre, municipal services offices, a library, some art galleries, etc., we’ll let you develop more.’ The development community did the math, agreed and built all the community amenities—a good deal all round, I’d say.” My son is an avid snowboarder, nodded eagerly.

“Nice story,” he interjected, “ but how does it relate to the Broadway Plan?”

“There are no plans in the Broadway Plan for any new schools, parks or other amenities.” He looked startled so I continued. “City staff advise that schools are a provincial responsibility and parks are the responsibility of the Park Board. There is vague talk of acquiring land for parks, but new community facilities and the like are to be funded by developer Community Amenity Contributions (CACs), although no city legislation requires CACs be used that way, and for the past 10 years they’ve mostly just gone to general city revenues.”

“So they’ve just left the community facilities out?” Now he looked incredulous.

“Pretty much. When the North Shore of False Creek was developed, also Coal Harbour, the developers provided sites and money for community centres, schools and parks. None of that appears in the Broadway Plan except as draft budgets.”

After a few moments of stunned silence, he said hesitantly, “You said there were two parts to answering my question about 50,000 versus three times that. What’s the other part of the answer?”

“The Broadway Plan has no cap, unlike Whistler.” After taking this in, he interjected, “What about the 50,000 new residents mentioned in the Plan?”

“Mentioned is the correct word—there’s no cap. I don’t even think city staff have calculated the potential development inherent in the Broadway Plan.”

“So what could the Plan include?” ha asked.

“It’s taken those complex marked up plans I’ve shown you, plus reading all of the draft land use policies the way a landowner or developer might, for me to figure that out.” He waited patiently for me to continue.”A landowner/developer would ignore all the sweet words around character, form of development, etc.—that’s what architects are for.” He smiled at my minimizing my own profession. “They would look at the density and height, which is what I’ve done. Many of the 50+ policy areas in the Plan have a range of heights, so I took the average—15 to 20 storeys becomes 17 in my calculations, generally a bit conservative. It’s easy for me to quickly calculate how many new buildings per city block for the various 50+ areas—that’s what my annotations like 16 MSAA @17 mean. 16 buildings in the MSAA area, each an average of 17 storeys tall.”

“So what are the totals,” he asked with a bit of a wince.

“The Plan is broken into three main pieces, as are my annotated plans. In summary:”

He was silent at the figures so I continued with my explanation.

“So, what started as an existing resident population of 78,000 according to city staff could actually grow to more than double the 128,000 residents they suggest. The Plan could actually see a quarter million residents—that’s equivalent to a 25-year supply of Vancouver’s new housing needs.”

“But the Plan is for a 30-year time frame, so isn’t that okay?” he asked hesitantly, knowing the answer could not be that simple.

“We forget that, yes, the entire city may add 200,000–250,000 or so new residents over the next 30 years according to historic population growth, BUT that’s the entire city. We have to add to the Broadway Plan numbers the tens of thousands of apartments already proposed by the Jericho Lands, Langara, Senakw,’ etc. The current City Council has already spot rezoned an as-yet-unbuilt 18+ year supply of new housing, and has another 14+ years of spot rezonings tabled, like Jericho and Langara but NOT including the Broadway Plan.” I paused for effect.

“So, if the Broadway Plan is approved, city management, staff and Council will have baked in 61+ years housing supply over the next 30 years—my math says that’s about twice as much housing as we actually need. Not to mention what more than 500 high-rise buildings from Vine Street to Clark Drive, 1st Avenue to 16th Avenue will do to livability, views, sunshine, etc.”

“Two final comparisons: You remember my first city conversation with you, when we were sitting across False Creek from the 49-storey, 500 apartment Vancouver House, and I said some folks, like me, believe the entire city needs the equivalent of 60 Vancouver Houses over the next 10 years, while others insist we need 160?” He nodded after reflecting for a moment.

“Well the Broadway Plan will need more than 350 Vancouver Houses to accommodate the density it actually allows for.”

I continued. “Final comparison: the block we live on is quite typical in the city, has ten 33’ lots each side. That’s 20 homes over 2 acres, or 10 homes per net acre.” He nodded agreement with my math so far. “If every home became a duplex and added two secondary suites, as current zoning permits, then that would be like 40 homes per net acre.”

“When I analyzed the Broadway Plan as it applies in Kitsilano, which has the lowest densities of the three major Plan areas, I calculated that the lowest density foreseen by the Plan could be over 660 residents per city block—that’s 150 homes per net acre, almost four times what you’d get if every lot on every block had a duplex and two secondary suites.”

I concluded, “I don’t know about you, but I think that’s just too much.”

“How would you go about determining what’s enough but not too much, and where to provide for it?” He asked with a hopeful look.

“Vancouver has 50 neighbourhoods,” I responded. “Each is unique; many have community plans that Council and staff have largely ignored, instead favouring spot rezonings, mega projects and simplistic mega plans like the Broadway Plan. Over the past year, City Councillor Colleen Hardwick has met with community representatives from a large majority of those 50 neighbourhoods—I’ve also attended many of those meetings. What I observed was this: when you say to a neighbourhood, you need to welcome your share of new Vancouverites, say, 100-200 new residents per year, needing 60-100 new homes per year—how would you do that?—they are quite prepared to roll up their sleeves and accommodate those folks through existing or slightly denser zoning. It’s a number that is reasonable, neighbourly and matches the growth of our population over the past 35 years. Those are the conversations city staff and politicians need to have and to act on. The effort may be greater, but so are the results.”

Remember, you only have until March 22nd to voice your opinions about the Broadway Plan by taking the Survey. 

Calls to Action

Opposition to the Broadway Plan is being led by the Kitsilano Coalition and the  Fairview/South Granville Action Committee (FSGAC). There may be other groups I am unaware of. If you are also concerned about the Broadway Plan and similar initiatives, consider joining them.

Vancouver’s civic election is in mid October of this year. Lots of damage can be done by the current Council, city management and staff before that date—and it will continue, and worsen, unless TEAM for a Livable Vancouver elects a majority (6 of 10) City Councillors—less than 6 and not much will change. If you are concerned that what you’ve just read is an example of what’s wrong with our city, and want to bring back its livability, join TEAM and work with us to restore Vancouver as a place we can all afford to call home.

The Last Word on the Numbers

Vancouver City Hall refuses to release data about many aspects of housing, so each time I become aware of a new spot rezoning project (359 so far since the last civic election) that changes Vancouver’s future housing supply, I log the details, then produce this snapshot, which only includes 30,000 homes for the Broadway Plan, not the 80,000+ that the Plan allows for:

So as of today, the city has an 18.5 year supply of housing, totalling 59,000+ homes, that’s been approved or likely to be approved, PLUS an 18.2 year supply (58,000+) that’s been identified in plans like the Jericho Lands, Senakw’, etc. The 18.2 year supply includes only 30,000 Broadway Plan residences.

---

Today’s question: Do you think the populations of Kitsilano, Fairview and Mount Pleasant should be trebled by the Broadway Plan? Why or why not? 

I read and respond to all comments made below. If you appreciated this post, consider becoming a free subscriber to City Conversations at

 Brian Palmquist is a Vancouver-based architect, building envelope and building code consultant and LEED Accredited Professional (the first green building system). He is semi-retired for the moment, still teaching and writing, so not beholden to any client or city hall. These conversations mix real discussion with research and observations based on a 40+ year career including the planning, design and construction of almost every type and scale of project. He is the author of the Amazon best seller “An Architect’s Guide to Construction.” He is also a member of team for a livable Vancouver, a new political party dedicated to restoring a livable Vancouver starting with the 2022 civic election. City Conversations are generally congruent with TEAM policy, so if you like the ideas that I’m writing about, please consider joining TEAM.