Author Archives: Coalition R

CVN to Metro Vancouver Board (20-Apr Public Hearing): Opposed – Metro Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Bylaw No. 1339, 2022 (METRO 2050)

CVN submitted and presented this letter to the Metro Vancouver (GVRD) Board at the Public Hearing in Burnaby Wednesday, April 20, 2022.

April 20, 2022
Metro Vancouver Regional District Board of Directors

Re: April 20 Public Hearing to consider Metro Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Bylaw No. 1339, 2022 (METRO 2050)

Agenda: http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/GVRD/RD_2022-Apr-20_AGE.pdf
Report:  http://www.metrovancouver.org/metro2050

http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/Metro2050.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) includes resident groups from across the City of Vancouver. We have major concerns regarding the proposed Metro 2050 Bylaw and therefore are opposed to it as currently written.

 

Promotion of Growth: This document is more about promoting unsustainable growth than anything else. There are many substantial issues, some of which are as follows.

Lack of Transparent Data – The projections for population and dwellings are not shown by municipality, so there is no way to measure how any municipal-level Regional Context Statements or Official Community Plans line up with regional plans or census data. Having Vancouver grouped with Burnaby and New Westminster, without any breakdown, makes no sense. The projection years should also be aligned with the census years so that data can be compared.

Reliance on “Aspirational” Targets – With this draft bylaw the approach to growth shifts from data-based projections to “aspirational” targets. The result is promoting development beyond what actual population growth would justify, and is unsustainable.

Impacts on Climate – The proposed increased growth will substantially increase the embodied carbon and ecological footprint in the region. Many municipalities have declared a climate emergency, but the approaches taken in the proposed bylaw are not compatible efforts to fight climate change.

Development Is Promoted Ahead of Transit – The new designation of “Major Transit Growth Corridors” is proposed along routes that are currently only bus routes where there are no immediate plans, approvals or resources for major transit expansion. This means that for 1 kilometer, or 1000 meters, in each direction from existing transit routes, the new “corridors” will cover most of some neighbourhoods. There could be vast impacts, including significant disruptions of existing housing (including existing secondary rentals), and major construction/development growth could race ahead without any meaningful transit improvements.

For example, in Vancouver the proposed corridors cover:

* Kingsway, Grandview Hwy., and Hastings St. – These areas are currently only planned for buses and go through neighbourhoods that are historically amenity- and infrastructure-deficient. As just one example, to this day, no amenities that were promised with the rezoning of the Norquay neighbourhood over a decade ago have been delivered.

* 41st / 49th Ave. – These routes currently only have buses running on them, and they are not a regional priority for upgrades.

* Broadway corridor extension to UBC – This area currently only has bus transit services and is NOT a regional priority for a subway extension. At one kilometer in each direction along the route, development, which would certainly occur long before transit improvements, would affect the whole neighbourhoods of Kitsilano and West Point Grey without the supporting transit or infrastructure.

* Vancouver Was Designed for Grid Arterial Transit Not Corridors – Vancouver was designed pre-war, before the common use of the automobile. It is inherently transit-oriented, so everywhere is within a 10-minute walk of an arterial road. Vancouver was designed around the streetcar (on rail) and later converted to be served by trolley buses (on roads). All Vancouver really needs is more electric bus service to electrify the transit system. It doesn’t need the whole city to be rebuilt into only a few expensive corridors.

Transit corridors and tall towers is an American model that doesn’t apply to Vancouver, due to its fundamentally different design with arterial grid transit system. We just need more electric bus service for each arterial.

* Lack of Infrastructure and Financing Options – The proposed growth written into the bylaw will also put significant pressure on all aspects of infrastructure, without the resources to provide these needed increases and upgrades. The result will be significant upward pressure on property taxes and fees, and negative impacts on affordability and livability. At the same time, the bylaw proposes the waiving of development fees for “affordable” housing, meaning that infrastructure would be 100% funded by property taxes, without other sources identified.

* School Districts Are Underfunded – There is already a lack of provincial funding for schools to meet current growth in the region. Existing schools are being closed and sold to fund new schools. This is cannibalizing the school system and not sustainable. The proposed growth will then require more funding for land acquisition and construction for new schools.

* Lack of Health and Social Infrastructure – The province is not currently providing enough family doctors for the current population. Hospitals are stretched. Communities lack addiction and mental health treatment and supports. More growth means more displacement, forcing many to fall further behind or into homelessness. The provincial and federal governments are not keeping up with current needs, and there is no consideration of how they will provide the resources for this growth. The bylaw fails to consider such issues.

Weak Green Zone Protections from Urban Sprawl: The primary role of regional planning is to protect the green zones of conservation, recreation and Agricultural Land Reserve from urban sprawl to create a livable and sustainable region. This proposed plan continues to weaken these protections from what existed in the original Livable Region Strategic Plan and has already been weakened by Metro 2040, the Regional Growth Strategy adopted in 2011.

* Urban Sprawl in North Shore – Also of concern is the expansion of the Urban Containment Boundary that allows “General Urban” into green zones such as exist on the North Shore. The proposed bylaw also has a huge “Special Study Area” that could allow urban sprawl to move even further up the mountainside. There are many implications, including the fact that these mountain views also play an important role in regional identity and their ecosystems are a carbon sink to fight climate change.

* UBC Golf Course – This should be in the “Conservation and Recreation Lands,” not “General Urban.” The golf course is not available for potential development until 2080, well beyond the scope of this proposed bylaw.

* Special Study Areas – The proposed bylaw only requires a 50% + 1 weighted vote of the MVRD board to remove Special Study Areas from a green zone and convert into General Urban. This is lower than the currently-required 2/3 vote and should not be reduced. Under the Livable Region Strategic Plan, a 100% vote was required. The current vote threshold is already very weak and should not be weakened further.

 

Lack of Process: There has been little to no resident involvement by the residents of the City of Vancouver in this plan. Most residents are unaware that this Metro 2050 discussion, Bylaw, and Public Hearing is even happening. What we have enumerated above is just a small indication of many concerns about Metro 2050 and its implications for the people of Vancouver and for the entire Metro Vancouver region.

Further, we are alarmed that in this bylaw formulation there has also been no involvement of any of the Boards of Education across the region, B.C. ministry of Education and Child Care, police departments across the region, or B.C.’s Solicitor General and Attorney General Ministries. Input from all of them needs to be considered to respond to the proposed growth.

In conclusion, we request that the Metro Vancouver Board reject the Metro Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Bylaw No. 1339, 2022 (METRO 2050).

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Murphy
On behalf of the Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN)
www.coalitionvan.org, info@coalitionvan.org

Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (20-Apr): Vancouver Plan Consultation Process – Request for Extension and Rescheduling

April 20, 2022
City of Vancouver Council & Staff
Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart, Councillors and Staff,

Re: Vancouver Plan Consultation Process – Request for Extension
https://shapeyourcity.ca/vancouver-plan

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) continues to be very concerned about the Vancouver Plan consultation process.  While we appreciate that staff responded to our letter of April 14 by adding another meeting date, it is still in conflict with other City public processes. In addition to today’s meeting that is in conflict with the Metro 2050 Public Hearing, the additional date of Thursday April 21 is in conflict with the public hearing for 1477 Broadway. Further, the addition of pop-up outdoor information booths, in the downtown core only, are not equitably distributed throughout the city.

On April 9, staff only started notifying a small subset of Vancouver’s neighbourhood groups of the final draft plan, which was released April 5. While we appreciate that there are now two virtual evening meetings for “various resident and neighbourhood groups and associations” on April 20 and 21, both conflict with City-related hearings, including the sole public hearing being held in the entire Metro Vancouver Region for the Metro 2050 Regional Growth Strategy and an important controversial City public hearing as noted above. We request that the Vancouver Plan consultation meeting dates be rescheduled to avoid these conflicts and the Easter holiday shortened week when many people are away.

The only opportunity to give feedback on the draft plan is through a very short window until April 24 for the survey. We also request that the survey be extended and that there be more opportunities for questions and discussions with neighbourhoods. There has been no meaningful neighbourhood-based consultation to date.

Thank you,
Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Member Groups of the Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (14-Apr): Vancouver Plan Consultation Process – Request for Extension and Rescheduling

April 14, 2022
City of Vancouver Council & Staff
Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart, Councillors and Staff,

Re: Vancouver Plan Consultation Process – Request for Extension

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) is very concerned about the Vancouver Plan consultation process.

There has been no meaningful neighbourhood-based community consultation process to date and the last phase of the planning process is continuing this practice. The recently released final draft plan is filled with significant new changes the public has not previously been informed of, and it proposes massive development citywide. Most residents of Vancouver are completely unaware this process is even happening, and even fewer would be able to make their way through the complex and lengthy document and analyse or adequately grasp what it means.

Only on April 9 did staff start to notify a small subset of Vancouver’s neighbourhood groups of the final draft plan, which was released April 5. We understand that only one evening has been set for a virtual meeting for “various resident and neighbourhood groups and associations” on April 20. This date conflicts with the sole public hearing being held in the entire Metro Vancouver Region for the Metro 2050 Regional Growth Strategy. We request that Vancouver’s date be rescheduled to avoid this conflict and the Easter holiday week.

The only opportunity to give feedback is through a short window to reply to a survey by May 5, including the Easter holidays. We request that the survey be extended and for more opportunities for questions and discussion with staff by neighbourhood.

Thank you,
Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Member Groups of the Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Arbutus Ridge Community Association
Arbutus Ridge/ Kerrisdale/ Shaughnessy Visions
Cedar Cottage Area Neighbours
Dunbar Residents Association
Fairview/South Granville Action Committee
False Creek Residents Association
Grandview Woodland Area Council
Granville-Burrard Residents & Business Assoc.
Greater Yaletown Community Association
Kitsilano-Arbutus Residents Association
Kits Point Residents Association
Marpole Residents Coalition
NW Point Grey Home Owners Association
Oakridge Langara Area Residents
Residents Association Mount Pleasant
Riley Park/South Cambie Visions
Shaughnessy Heights Property Owners Assoc.
Strathcona Residents Association
Upper Kitsilano Residents Association
West End Neighbours Society
West Kitsilano Residents Association
West Point Grey Residents Association
West Southland Residents Association

CVN letter to Council (14 Apr Public Hearing): Opposed – 1477 West Broadway (at Granville St)

April 14, 2022
City of Vancouver Council
Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

Re: Public Hearing 1477 W. Broadway at Granville St.
Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220414/phea20220414ag.htm
Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220301/documents/rr5.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) is opposed to this proposal since it is far too large for the area, has had a flawed process that is brought forward prematurely.  The local community’s concerns have not been addressed. Not only is the project far too large in scale for both height and density, but there has also been an enormous breach of process to get to this point.

City staff state that the proposed height of 40 storeys and density of 12.3 FSR aligns with the Broadway Plan, even though Council has not approved the Plan yet. This sets a huge precedent for the whole Broadway Corridor. There is no rationale why this project should be considered for approval now when the Broadway Plan is proposed to go to Council next month.

Staff are recommending $3.3M in development fees be waived. If you accept that, this project will increase demand for infrastructure and amenities, and you will instead force those costs to be subsidized by public funding through property taxes and capital debt financing. If you approve this project you will be setting a precedent for 40 storeys at other stations, resulting in large scale growth despite having no plans for funding for more schools, among many other growth related needs.

You must not ignore the many other issues involved in setting a precedent for this development in the Broadway corridor, such as massive shadowing, embodied carbon, as well as land value inflation that will lead to the loss of affordable rentals throughout the area.  Please do not approve this proposal. See more here: https://www.fsgac.org/1477-w-broadway-rezoning

Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Member Groups of the Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Arbutus Ridge Community Association
Arbutus Ridge/ Kerrisdale/ Shaughnessy Visions
Cedar Cottage Area Neighbours
Dunbar Residents Association
Fairview/South Granville Action Committee
False Creek Residents Association
Grandview Woodland Area Council
Granville-Burrard Residents & Business Assoc.
Greater Yaletown Community Association
Kitsilano-Arbutus Residents Association
Kits Point Residents Association
Marpole Residents Coalition
NW Point Grey Home Owners Association
Oakridge Langara Area Residents
Residents Association Mount Pleasant
Riley Park/South Cambie Visions
Shaughnessy Heights Property Owners Assoc.
Strathcona Residents Association
Upper Kitsilano Residents Association
West End Neighbours Society
West Kitsilano Residents Association
West Point Grey Residents Association
West Southland Residents Association

CVN letter to Council (29-Mar-2022): Millennium Line UBC Extension Alignment and Integration (Opposed)

[Note – Appendix attached at bottom]
March 28, 2022
City of Vancouver Council

Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

Re: Millennium Line UBC Extension Alignment and Integration
Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220329/regu20220329ag.htm
Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220323/documents/r1.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) is opposed to the staff recommendations in this report and concerned that, once again, Council is being asked to make a major decision before meaningful neighbourhood consultation has taken place. The proposed recommendations would bring major changes to the neighbourhoods of Kitsilano and West Point Grey.

It is entirely premature to be deciding on proceeding with station area planning when a subway extension to UBC is far from even being decided. The business case has not been produced, and an extension to UBC has not been declared a regional priority. This is at the bottom of the list of TransLink’s regional Transport 2050 priorities, as it is only the sixth priority of seven total. Only after all other priorities are funded would this subway extension even be considered.

The staff report recommends proceeding with planning for towers at the hypothetical stations, although the concept is decades away, if ever, from ever becoming a funded project. For your consideration, attached are a few of the many issues raised by the affected neighbourhoods for your consideration.

Please only accept this report for information and refer it back to staff.

Thank you,
Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (Mar 3 Public Hearing): Reject ‘Rezoning by stealth,’ send back to staff (Miscellaneous Amendments – Zoning and Development By-law …)

March 3, 2022
City of Vancouver Council

Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,
Re: Public Hearing 3-Mar-2022 Agenda 3: Miscellaneous Amendments – Zoning and Development By-law and East Fraser Lands Official Development Plan
Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220303/phea20220303ag.htm
Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220208/documents/rr6.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) requests that some of the items included in this report, items A.(v)(vi) (ix), be referred back to staff for more work since they do not meet the test for miscellaneous amendments to be for “minor non-substantive changes”.

Any changes to zoning that change the unit numbers, form of development, or density (FSR), are substantive in nature. Numerous items in this report are lumped in with unrelated items and it is unclear where in the city they apply without related maps. The proposed changes affect Grandview and Mt. Pleasant in particular, among other areas as well, without consultation.

The public hearing documentation should include redline versions showing the proposed changes to the zoning bylaws and guidelines. Staff have only provided redlines for the Guidelines.  Staff should also be required to provide maps and links to the zoning bylaw schedules that are affected, as well as detailed analysis to explain implications and what these changes mean in practical terms. 

The following excerpts are just some of clauses of particular concern in the RECOMMENDATION section of the Referral Report:

v. correct an omission in section 4.7.7 in the RM-11 and RM-11N Districts Schedule by including reference to two additional sections for which more density for multiple dwellings can be achieved through the purchase of amenity or affordable housing shares;

 vi. correct an omission in sections 4.1.1. and 4.1.3 in the RM-3A District Schedule and section 4.1.1 in the RM-4 and RM-4N Districts Schedule to include seniors supportive or assisted housing as a use for which minimum site area requirements can be reduced;

ix. correct the minimum site area allowance for multiple dwellings to align with unit density in sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 in the RT-5 and RT-5N Districts Schedule and the RT-6 District Schedule

For example, the proposed changes in (ix) above for RT-5 & RT-6 zones would allow multiple dwellings on much smaller lots (those less than 30 ft wide), but the referral report does not explain the implications. Minimum lot sizes are set on purpose. The proposed changes cannot be presented simply as an issue to “correct”.

In (ix) the references to numbers of units regarding  “multiple dwelling” do not seem to be counting secondary suites as units. In fact, under Vancouver’s existing by-laws for RT5 duplex zoning, it already allows a secondary suite for each duplex unit, for a total of 4 units on each lot. Thus, multiple dwellings of 3 units could actually mean a total of 6 units on a lot when secondary suites are also counted.

The proposed changes would likely change the economics in favour of demolition, rather than character house retention, the latter being a key objective of current City policies in RT5 and RT6 zones.

These are just some of the implications of the staff’s proposed “minor” “miscellaneous amendments”.

Council needs to know that staff are proposing substantive changes. This would constitute rezoning by stealth.

Please refer these items back to staff with instructions to prepare the required documentation, for proper community consultation, and a report back to Council prior to bringing this forward to a public hearing.

Thank you,

Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Member Groups of the Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (for Jan 25): ‘Making Home” Motion (opposed)

January 24, 2022
City of Vancouver Council

Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

Re: Making Home Motion

Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220125/regu20220125ag.htm
Motion: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220125/documents/b3.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) agrees with the aim of this motion to provide more affordable, innovative housing options throughout the city. However, CVN continues to oppose this motion, based on concerns regarding its total lack of details and that it will not accomplish the intended goals.

Citywide spot rezoning of 2000 projects everywhere is not a pilot project. At 6 units each, it would create 12,000 units / 26,000 people that equals the entire population growth of the City of Vancouver for 4 years, without considering the huge amount of projects already in the pipeline.

This ignores neighbourhood-based planning that could potentially produce unintended consequences leading to the development of more intensive high-end market housing that inflates land values in the areas affected.

Additionally, this would increase speculation and demolition of older, more affordable housing, causing displacement while also undermining the few character house retention incentives currently existing in zoning and City policy.

The RT zones in particular have a lot of missing middle character housing already that would be put at risk of demolition, so RT zones and areas with a lot of character houses should be excluded. Also, houses on the heritage register, both listed and registered, should be exempt. Lots with character houses should require the character house retained as part of this proposal.

Neighbourhood-based planning processes integrated into a citywide plan will deliver substantially better results. However, this motion is unclear what it actually proposes and raises a lot of questions.

We would be prepared to work with the City on identifying other options that could be put in place to increase affordable housing options. Any of these approaches should recognize the unique characteristics and needs of each neighbourhood so as to best adapt any actions to that neighbourhood, thus following the intent of zoning by-laws and local community visions and plans.

Seeking truly effective solutions to the need for affordable housing, we oppose this motion.

Thank you,
Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods Continue reading

CVN update letter to Council (for Nov 9): Streamlining Rental Rezoning Public Hearing (opposed)

November 9, 2021
City of Vancouver Council

Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

Re: Streamlining Rental Rezoning Public Hearing
Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211102/phea20211102ag.htm
Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211005/documents/spec1.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) acknowledge that there are many different ways to provide more rentals and to accommodate growth. However, CVN is strongly opposed to the recommendations in this report and this arbitrary, citywide approach that lacks neighbourhood context.

This letter is to update you on the Change.org petition, Our Communities Our Plans, is opposed to these arbitrary rezoning policies and was previously 4,100 but is now over 4,450 signatures. https://www.change.org/p/city-of-vancouver-council-officials-our-communities-our-plans-99961c91-4a17-497d-86c8-b385b3c0f315

We continue to oppose the combining of dramatically different types of rezonings into one public hearing, an approach that is very confusing to the public.
• The proposed C2 changes to zoning schedules and design guidelines include changes to:
o all C2 citywide outright 4 storey strata with increased heights and decreased setbacks
o the addition of 6 storey rentals in areas as per eligibility map
• The proposed RS/RT zoning changes allow random spot rezonings for rental-only apartment buildings based on new RR zoning schedules approved in advance, up to 6 storeys on-arterials and up to 5 storeys off-arterials
These are three different types of rezonings should be in separate reports and public hearings.

Please do not approve the recommendations in this report and instead, refer it back to staff to separate the three major zoning initiatives, allow for neighbourhood-based planning work and community consultation, and provide proper notification to the properties affected.

Thank you,

Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (for Nov 2): Streamlining Rental Rezoning Public Hearing (opposed)

November 2, 2021
City of Vancouver Council
Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

Re: Streamlining Rental Rezoning Public Hearing
Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211102/phea20211102ag.htm
Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211005/documents/spec1.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) acknowledge that there are many different ways to provide more rentals and to accommodate growth. However, CVN is strongly opposed to the recommendations in this report and this arbitrary, citywide approach that lacks neighbourhood context.

We also oppose the combining of dramatically different types of rezonings into one public hearing, an approach that is very confusing to the public.

* The proposed C2 changes to zoning schedules and design guidelines include changes to:
– outright 4 storey strata with increased heights and decreased setbacks
– the addition of 6 storey rentals

* The proposed RS/RT zoning changes allow random spot rezonings for rental-only apartment buildings based on new RR zoning schedules approved in advance, up to 6 storeys on-arterials and up to 5 storeys off-arterials

These different types of rezonings should be in separate reports and public hearings.

There has been no neighbourhood-based planning processes. Most of the areas included in this rezoning have CityPlan Community Visions prepared with extensive public input, but they have been completely ignored in these proposals. The most recent Community Visions were approved by Council as recently as2010 and were intended to cover 30 years.

Please do not approve the recommendations in this report and instead, refer it back to staff to separate the two major zoning initiatives, allow for neighbourhood-based planning work and community consultation, and provide proper notification to the properties affected.

The planning-related data that Council directed staff to provide has yet to be received and the expected recalibration of the Housing Vancouver targets has yet to be done. Each neighbourhood should be meaningfully consulted on how data-based and needed growth is to be accommodated, including new rentals. The solution is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Each neighbourhood is unique, and planning should consider the local context.

Consultation by the City has emphasized special interest groups and avoided most of the population of Vancouver. The City’s consultation processes continue to be flawed and appear to be designed for a predetermined outcome. Continue reading

CVN letter to Council (for Oct 5): (opposed) Streamlining Rental around Local Shopping Areas (C-2, C-2B, C-2C, C-2C1 Zones) + New Rental Zones in Low Density Areas

Oct. 4, 2021

City of Vancouver Council

Dear Mayor Kennedy Stewart and Councillors,

 Re: Referral Report – Streamlining Rental Around Local Shopping Areas – Amendments to the C-2, C-2B, C-2C and C-2C1 Zones and Creation of New Rental Zones for Use in Future Rezoning Applications in Surrounding Low Density Areas Under the Secured Rental Policy

Agenda: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211005/spec20211005ag.htm

Report: https://council.vancouver.ca/20211005/documents/spec1.pdf

The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods (CVN) is strongly opposed to the referral of this report to public hearing as proposed.

This 348 page report combines two very different types of rezonings that should be separated into two separate reports and public hearings rather than combining them into one as proposed.

The area rezoning of the commercial C2 zones is a specific change to the zoning schedules. This deserves its own report that clearly lays out this proposal for both Council and the public to consider.

The creation of the new rental zones as “off-the-shelf” future  spot rezonings is an entirely new type of zoning that affects RS, RT and RM zones arbitrarily across the city. This is very confusing even for people with planning background, far less the general public. Most people who are affected have no idea this is happening or what it is. There have been no notices provided to these areas during the consultation process to advise those affected of changes to the proposals to allow for their feedback to inform the report.

What little public consultation was done on these two types of rezonings, was done separately so it should follow that the public hearings and reports are also separate.

There has been no neighbourhood-based context considered for either of these proposals. Nor has the Vancouver Plan completed the consultation process or the recalibration of the housing targets based on data that has yet to be provided. This should be all done in advance to inform any proposals and prior to considering referral for such sweeping changes to zoning.

It is completely against every planning principle to be referring this report to public hearing before the larger issues regarding the Vancouver Plan have been addressed, and without neighbourhood-based planning completed. To refer this report now is making assumptions and setting precedents that limit future options in advance of this process.

These proposals are also in conflict with the Interim Rezoning Policy for Kitsilano and West Point Grey that requires a “collaborative neighbourhood-based process” which has not, as yet, taken place. Additionally, the IRP restricts rezoning to projects already approved to proceed, and to future collaborative neighbourhood-based processes that focus on rental-only zoning along Broadway and West 10th Avenue. The other area covered by Interim Rezoning Policy east of Vine for the Broadway Plan is exempt from the proposed C2 changes.

A Change.org Petition: Our Communities Our Plans, is opposed to these arbitrary rezoning policies and is currently over 3,500 signatureshttps://www.change.org/p/city-of-vancouver-council-officials-our-communities-our-plans-99961c91-4a17-497d-86c8-b385b3c0f315

During previous discussions with staff, the public was told that unprotected buildings listed on the heritage inventory would be exempt from these spot rental rezonings as had been in earlier drafts of the proposals. But here in this report, listed unprotected heritage buildings are explicitly included as eligible for rezoning, that is a further incentive for demolition and undermines retention incentives.

We also note that the Climate Emergency Action Plan proposal is to eliminate onsite parking requirements for new development, that offloads those costs and impacts onto the surrounding area. This would affect these rental rezoning proposals.

The related Climate Emergency Parking Program is a City cash-grab that takes advantage of the removal of onsite parking minimums in new development by implementing city-wide pay parking permits, making the city yet more unaffordable and unlivable for the residents. If these changes are implemented as proposed, it would further add increased parking pressure in the surrounding areas where these rental rezonings would occur.  These parking issues should be resolved before referral of this report so those issues can also be considered and addressed in the rezoning reports.

Please refer this report back to staff  to allow for more basic planning work and community consultation, which should be done prior to finalizing proposals for rezoning. Also to direct staff to divide this report into two separate reports and public hearings: one for the  area rezoning of the commercial C2 zones; and the other for the creation of new rental zones for future spot rezonings under Secured Rental Policy.

 Thank you,
Steering Committee,
Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Member Groups of the Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods

Continue reading