Feint by Numbers: 60,000

City Conversation # 33: What The Broadway Plan means for Kitsilano—perhaps a 100% population increase

March 10, 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 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 about 200 real citizens. Oh yes! There is an online survey open until March 22nd—that’s 12 days away! After these virtual events staff will analyze responses and recommend a final plan for City Council review in mid-May.

Having missed the brief in-person and Zoom opportunities, I am analyzing the Plan, piece by piece. 

Draft Kitsilano Concept Plan annotated by Brian Palmquist

“Dad, what’s with all the numbers?” my son asked as he looked over my shoulder at my computer screen. “You’ve rather spoiled a pretty map!”

I laughed. “This is my way of understanding what’s actually being proposed for the portion of Kitsilano that falls into the Broadway Plan (Plan). The numbers on the map are the range of numbers of storeys that the Plan permits through its various Land Use Policies (Policies). My summary is at the lower right.” He looked at my screen quizzically.

“What are all the K letter combinations. In fact, what does something like 39 KKNB @17 mean? You’ve really outdone yourself for obscurity this time around.”

I smiled and responded: “The Policies say in words what will be considered in each sub-area of this part of Kits. City staff have created 11 sub-areas, each with a K prefix, presumably based on their analysis of Kits. I must say, though, their sub-areas don’t compare much to the existing zoning. In fact, I can’t find anymore an official Vancouver map that lays out the existing zoning—rather frustrating if you want to check out an area.”

“Okay,” he continued, “but you’ve not answered my 39 KKNB @17 question?”

“Well spotted,” I answered. “The number to the left is the number of buildings I’ve calculated can be accommodated in a sub-area—so that’s 39 in the KKNB sub-area, which brackets 4th Avenue down to the south side of 1st Avenue and up to 8th Avenue.” He nodded so I continued. “The @17 is the average number of storeys each of those 39 buildings can rise to, in accordance with the Policies.” He looked again at the map, then continued hesitantly.

“You’re not seriously suggesting 4th Avenue could be bracketed by up to 39, 17-storey high-rises, are you?”

“Well,” I answered, “the actual range is 15-20 storeys, so I took 17 as the average. I did that for each of the 11 sub-areas.”

“How many people is that?” he continued.

“That’s close to 15,000 in the KKNB sub-area.” He looked askance, so I continued. “When you consider all 74 blocks covered by this plan, it comes to more than 60,000 residents—more than 800 residents per block on average. That’s compared to a total Kits population of just over 43,000. The range of the K sub-areas is actually 660 per block in the lower density areas south of 13th Avenue, to almost 1,000 residents per block in the area just across from the new SkyTrain station.”

“Speaking of that station,” he interjected, “What’s the red-boxed 17 just beside the T station?”

“That’s a proposed 14-storey low barrier supportive housing complex currently being considered for spot rezoning.” I anticipated his challenge to my math. “I marked it as 17 storeys because its floor-to-floor height is much more than standard, so 14 storeys is as tall as 17 storeys of conventional construction.”

He thought for a moment, then asked, “So are these other storey heights regular or tall floors?”

“Great question,” I answered, “I wish I knew. City staff no longer talk about height, just number of storeys—perhaps they think that gives them flexibility, which I’m sure it does. But it also means that any of these building heights could actually be about 20% more than the assumption of regular construction.” He looked unhappy at that explanation.

“Back to the 60,000 residents—that’s insane!” he raised his voice. “The city planners can’t possibly mean that!”

“Well,” I responded, “I’m not sure they’ve actually thought about the implications of their Policies—but landowners and developers have.” He frowned so I pressed on.

“The Plan is a two-edged sword. Because it’s an area plan with proposed land use policies, that means that if it is approved, then either each application becomes yet another spot rezoning, where the proponent has to prove their proposal meets the intent of the policies, or,” here I paused for effect, “city staff may choose to recommend that the area called, for example, KKNB, be all rezoned to be new zoning districts, maybe with those same KK prefixes. It’s not clear which way they will go.”

“Does it really matter?” he asked.

“Maybe,” I answered equivocally. “In the 3-1/2 years the current council has been serving, there have been more than 350 spot rezonings brought forward from the various neighbourhoods around the city. They range in size from an eightplex in a low density area, to Oakridge. Regardless of the scale, they consume huge amounts of staff and Council time and are almost impossible for the average citizen to understand or follow—which may be deliberate and is why I’ve developed my own database of spot rezonings.” I smiled, perhaps a bit smugly.

“After a Broadway Plan is approved, city staff may continue with spot rezonings or propose changing the zoning of the entire Kits community. Either approach will result in public hearings, where individual citizens can have their final say—or in many cases given the very few open houses and Zoom meetings, their only say.” He remained with a skeptical look on his face. I continued.

“I mentioned a moment ago that landowners and developers have thought about the implications of the Plan’s policies.” He nodded after a moment’s pause. “I am aware of at least one major real estate company that has set up a specialized branch to advise owners and developers about increased land values and development potential throughout the areas covered by the Broadway Plan. I would be surprised if there are not more.” I paused before continuing.

“Landowners and developers do exactly what I have done in analyzing the Plan. They read the Policy words and figure out how much more the land will be worth with more housing on it. Then, unlike me, they buy the land and proceed with their plans, knowing this City Council has turned down virtually no spot or area rezonings. And if the Broadway Plan is adopted, it will be very difficult to restrain their ambitions.”

I will be continuing my detailed analysis of the Broadway Plan in forthcoming City Conversations. Remember, you only have until March 22nd to voice your opinions about the 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 late 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:

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. These totals do not include most of the Broadway Plan, as I am still analyzing it.

Today’s question: Do you think Kitsilano’s existing population of 43,000 should be doubled (or more) by the Broadway Plan? Why or why not? 

I read and respond to all comments made below. If you enjoyed 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.