Over the past three years I have expressed numerous concerns about the Broadway Plan: the inappropriate contextual fit between the existing streetscapes of lowrise homes and new 18-20 storey towers, often ten times the height and density of the existing homes; the lack of any additional parkspace and community amenities; and the potential loss of affordable rental housing. I say 'potential' since I am convinced that many of the projects, especially those replacing existing lowrise apartment buildings may not proceed.
This is particularly true of the projects proposed by HAVN Developments Ltd. A review of their website, https://havn-dev.com/company reveals that the company has three proposed developments along the Broadway Corridor. However, while the principals have real estate experience, there is no evidence that the company has ever financed or built a project. This has led many in the affected neighbourhoods to believe they are simply assembling and seeking approval to rezone sites, with the intention of then flipping them to others.
As a result, they and their architects have paid little attention to building designs, especially suite designs. As I have previously written, the suite layouts are just awful, especially those below market units intended for households with children.
I have attempted to speak with Adrian Lai but he has ignored me. More significantly, the principals have ignored the neighbourhoods in which they are seeking approvals, and refused to address neighbourhood concerns at public meetings and Council.
I was therefore pleased to receive a call from the Vancouver Sun's Joanne Lee-Young this week who invited me to comment on Council's decision to refer one of HAVN's proposals back to staff. I was in Penticton at the time and not aware of this decision, so watched the May 6th Council meeting video before speaking with her.
From the meeting, it was clear that councillors shared the genuine concerns about the shaddowing of a small park, immediately adjacent to the site. However, the Broadway Plan foolishly allowed this. I therefore suspect that given all the other applications coming forward, totalling thousands of units, Council may be getting the message that if they must approve projects, at least they should approve the best ones from the more qualified and experienced developers.
And maybe, just maybe it's time to refine the plan and consider exluding those that are causing the greatest concerns in lovely, established neighbourhoods such as the one in which this is proposed. Below is Ms. Lee-Young's article.
Vancouver city council sent a rezoning application for a new residential rental tower in Mount Pleasant back to staff this week for more work, a move some interpret as a response to growing public criticism of the high-density Broadway plan.
Some residents and observers hope the decision to ask questions rather than just approve the application is a sign the city’s governing ABC party is paying more attention to how the plan affects public spaces and amenities, given the party’s loss in April’s byelection to fill two council seats.
Addressing the main problem identified by council will be possible only if there is a big cut to the height and density of the building, according to staff, who said it will take at least six months before a revised application can be presented at a public hearing.
“When politicians oppose a development, they often camouflage their true intentions with other considerations,” said Michael Geller, a retired architect, planner and developer, who is an opponent of the project.
He noted council voted to explore reducing the shadow the proposed tower would cast on Major Matthews Park, a small green space on a single lot that is beside the site. This is despite the Broadway plan listing parks, including this one, where it “may not be feasible” and “particularly challenging due to the size and location” to avoid shadowing by towers.
“While (shadowing) is very much a concern for them and the community, I was trying to read the minds of the councillors. Were they also using this to perhaps camouflage other concerns?” suggested Geller.
He said he hopes “council is now getting the message and is slowly going to look at ways to refine the plan and maybe this decision is the first indication of that.”
The Broadway plan was approved in 2022 by a previous council and aims to add about 50,000 residents by allowing tall towers in an area of 500 city blocks.
HAVN Developments Ltd., which submitted the rezoning application, hasn’t responded to Postmedia News questions. HAVN’s website lists plans for three rental towers in the Broadway plan area.
In late November, council approved a rezoning application by HAVN for an 18-storey rental tower on West 14th Avenue near Arbutus.
But this time, at public hearings for the West 11th Avenue rezoning, there was discussion about the developer’s lack of a building track record and about the design renderings it submitted.
Liesbeth Thoraval, who lives in the area, said she got the impression city councillors were unhappy with the developer because a representative didn’t show up at the meeting and because they’re proposing a similar design to its other proposals.
Former city planner Sandy James, who believes the Broadway plan needs more public spaces and amenities, said the plans for all three of HAVN’s proposals “are remarkably similar and there is no design context. It is the same building and design.”
The primary access to the EXPO site is from a new station built at the end of a subway extension connecting the EXPO site to the city
The EXPO site, like the Dubai EXPO, is organized by separate theme areas. All the national pavilions are located within the Grand Ring, a large mass timber multi-storey structure that encircles the site.
Unlike the Dubai EXPO, it is difficult to get around the Osaka site. These people movers travel around the outside of the Grand Ring, but there are only 6 stops along the 2 km route. There need to be more. While electric tricycles are available by lottery, they cannot be rented. Another failing. More transportation options are needed, especially for old men like me.
A large landscaped area can be found in the centre of the grand ring, which provides a nice space to rest and relax
Some of the national pavilions are most impressive.
A view of the site from the walkway atop of the Grand Ring.
While most of the visitors were domestic, others had travelled from afar, like these gentlemen who were everywhere at the Dubai EXPO.
The Philippines pavilion was one of the most beautiful, especially at night.
The Shining Hat serves as the main EXPO hall and theatre. The opening ceremonies were held inside and theatrical and other events take place nightly.
At night, the Shining Hat becomes a constantly changing giant screen for image projection.
The Japan pavilion is most impressive, by day and by night.
One of many pieces of public art that can be found around the site.
The US pavilion, with its giant screens, is next to the French Pavilion
Views from the top of the Grand Ring. As was the case in Dubai, a lot of the pavilions incorporate extensive amounts of wood. All of these pavilions, along with the Grand Ring, will be dismantled after the fair is over.
The Chinese pavilion is one of the most impressive, both inside and out.
Ever since the first modern exposition was held in London in 1851, world fairs have allowed countries to showcase their achievements, cultures, and technologies, oftentimes with surprising long-lasting results.
Canadians do not need to be told this. Many of us remember Montreal’s EXPO 86, aka Man and his World. It featured an innovative monorail travelling through Buckminster Fuller’s massive geodesic dome and Moishe Safdie’s Habitat 67 with its stacked prefabricated concrete modules creating gardens in the sky. Now, sixty years later, modular housing is back in the news as a potential way to dramatically increase the amount of housing that needs to be built every year.
Most Vancouverites still have vivid memories of EXPO 86. Although it was not a formally designated Bureau International des Expositions (BIE) World Exposition, it celebrated Vancouver’s Centennial by inviting the world. And the world came. More than 22 million attended with a single-day record of 341,806 visitors.
EXPO 86 gave us Canada Place, BC Place Stadium, SkyTrain, and established Vancouver as a global destination. Prior to EXPO, Metro Vancouver’s annual population increase was approximately 1.5%. Following EXPO, it doubled to 3.0%. EXPO 86 changed Vancouver forever. Whether it was for better or worse depends on who you talk to.
EXPO 67 and 86 are not the only world fairs that left a legacy. The elevator was first introduced at the 1853 World’s Fair in New York. Electric streetlighting became popular following Melbourne’s 1880 Exposition.
At the Paris Expo in 1889, the Eiffel Tower was unveiled to the world. While some Parisians hoped it would be dismantled after the fair, fortunately they did not get their way.
Other exposition firsts included the Ferris Wheel displayed at the 1893 Chicago World Fair; the ice cream cone made popular at the 1904 World Fair in St. Louis; and television broadcasting, first seen at the 1939 World Fair in New York.
In addition to EXPO 67 and 86, I have been fortunate to visit EXPOs in Lisbon, Shanghai, Yeosu Korea, and Dubai. One reason I like to attend them is because they offer glimpses of the future. This week I am at EXPO 2025 in Osaka Japan which began on April 13th. Here the future is truly on display.
This is not Osaka’s first World Exposition. Some Vancouver Sun readers will recall EXPO 1970 was also held in Osaka. It attracted over 64 million people which was the largest attendance at any world fair until EXPO 2020 in Dubai.
EXPO 2025 occupies a 155-hectare (383 acres) site on a new man-made island, connected to the city by a subway line extension.
Every world fair has a theme, and this one is "Designing Future Society for Our Lives".
There are three sub-themes: "Saving Lives," "Empowering Lives," and "Connecting Lives". These sub-themes are intended to address aspects of human well-being, social inclusion, and global interconnectedness.
The most striking feature of the site is an impressive, multi-storey ‘Grand Ring’, approximately 2 km in circumference, constructed out of mass-timber. All national pavilions are located within the ring to symbolise the need for international cooperation. Domestic pavilions are located on the outside.
158 countries and regions, plus 7 international organizations are participating at this EXPO. One notable absentee is Russia.
Over the coming weeks, I will share some highlights of EXPO 2025. Today I would like to invite you into the Canadian Pavilion.
I was fortunate to have a chance encounter with Laurie Peters, Commissioner General for the pavilion who was outside on the plaza during a false fire alarm. She told me the theme is not at all ‘The Great White North’. Rather, it is “Regeneration”.
She noted the theme is also about empowering future generations through innovation and a commitment to a more sustainable and inclusive society.
Visitors will not read about this since there are not any words anywhere in the pavilion. Instead, as one of the designers told me, visitors will enjoy “a poetic, impressionist experience” thanks to augmented reality tablets handed out as each person enters the building.
Canada’s National Day will be on May 17th. It will feature a presentation under the artistic direction of Robert Lepage and Steve Blanchet, where visitors will follow a river’s journey across Canada. More than 100 Canadian performers are expected on stage and in the event spaces.
I suspect most Canadians who visit this pavilion will feel proud of how our country is being presented, which was not the case for many who visited the Canadian pavilion in Dubai.
The creative team also includes ES Global, JKFL Productions, Soleil Launière as First Nations cultural advisor, Rayside Labossière architects, and architect Guillaume Pelletier.
Unlike Habitat 67 which was designed to last forever, this pavilion has been designed to be easily dismantled so the building components can be reused, consistent with the theme of sustainability.
EXPO 2025 continues to October 13th, 2025. It is well worth a visit.
Ever since Expo 67 Montreal and EXPO 86 Vancouver, I have been fascinated by world fairs. In subsequent years, I have been fortunate to attend several others around the world including EXPO 1998 in Lisbon, EXPO 2010 in Shanghai, a more modest EXPO in Yeosu Korea in 2012, and Expo 2020 Dubai, which due to COVID was delayed until October 2021.
In Dubai, I learned the 2025 Expo would take place in Osaka. (they are held every five years) and I resolved to attend, if possible.
Now, three years later I am here. Thanks to Harold Munro at the Vancouver Sun, I was able to arrange media accreditation. I learned from past expositions that this is extremely valuable since it allows one to avoid oftentimes lengthy lineups at pavilions and be able to arrange guided tours of some pavilions.
I enjoy attending world fairs since you can experience countries without the time and expense of traveling to them. But more importantly, they give you a glimpse of the future. This was particularly true in Shanghai and Dubai and is very much so here.
I have now been in Osaka for more than a week and seen so much that after a while it becomes a blur. However, I am preparing some articles which will hopefully find their way onto the website, and I will continue to write some daily blogs.
As some of you will recall Osaka hosted a world EXPO in 1970. It attracted over 64 million visitors. By comparison, EXPO 86 attracted 22 million visitors. This EXPO is expected to attract about 28 million visitors, of which 90% are expected to be Japanese.
World expositions generally have a theme, and sub-themes, and this one is no exception. The primary theme is "Designing Future Society for Our Lives".
There are three sub-themes: "Saving Lives," "Empowering Lives," and "Connecting Lives". These sub-themes are intended to address aspects of human well-being, social inclusion, and global interconnectedness.
The exposition occupies a 155-hectare (383 acre) portion of a new, man-made island. An extension of an existing subway line connects directly to the site. Like the Dubai EXPO, the site is organized around the various sub-themes: connecting lives, saving lives and empowering lives.
The most striking feature of the site is a magnificent, multi-storey ‘Grand Ring’, approximately 2 km in circumference, constructed with mass-timber. All the national pavilions are located within the ring, to symbolise the need for international cooperation, while corporate and other pavilions are located on the outside.
158 countries and regions, plus 7 international organizations are participating at this EXPO. One notable absentee is Russia.
There are two types of national pavilions: custom designed structures, and smaller displays located within large communal buildings. All the Expo 2025 pavilions will be dismantled after the fair. While many pavilions are designed for disassembly and reuse, some pavilions will be dismantled and the materials recycled, while others may be rebuilt in their home countries.
After the fair, the site will be redeveloped as a major new community.
Japan has always been regarded as one of the most technologically advance countries in the world and the sophistication of many of the displays is quite outstanding.
Expo 2025 continues until October 13th. Based on my experience, it is well worth attending. Air Canada has a direct flight to Osaka although you can also connect through Tokyo. Just don’t connect through to the Osaka/Kobe airport like I did. I’ll have more information on getting to the fair and where to stay in future blogposts.
ps. At every world EXPO there is a mascot. The official mascot for the 2025 Expo in Osaka, Kansai, Japan is Myaku-Myaku. It's a quirky, googly-eyed creature designed by Kouhei Yamashita. Myaku-Myaku is depicted as a "mysterious creature born from the unification of cells and water".
The following was published yesterday on CityHallWatch
CityHallWatch has just learned that an unusual third-party appeal to the BC Property Assessment Review Panel has resulted in a threefold increase in the assessed value for the Dunsmuir Hotel at 500 Dunsmuir Street. Readers will recall this historic building was ordered to be demolished by the City of Vancouver in late 2024 after years of neglect by its owner.
The property is owned by controversial Trump Tower property developer Holborn Group who in 2008 purchased the Little Mountain property from the BC Government. The company was subsequently severely criticized for delaying redevelopment of the social and market housing approved for the property. Development is now underway.
Third party assessment appeals are rare
While most people are familiar with property assessment appeals, what is not widely known is that anyone can initiate a third-party appeal of the assessed value of any property in British Columbia.
This appeal was initiated by retired architect and real estate consultant Michael Geller. He became interested in this property after reading a December 16, 2024 Vancouver Sun article by Dan Fumano regarding a City of Vancouver report to Council from the City’s Chief Building Official. It ordered the demolition of this 167-unit former SRO because it had become unsafe and dangerous to the public due to years of neglect by the owner. Although on the heritage list, it was not a protected heritage building.
Upon reading this Vancouver Sun story and Council Report, Geller was curious to see the assessed value of a building deemed so dangerous to the public that it had to be demolished immediately.
He was surprised to discover this dangerous building was assessed at an astonishingly high $1,757,000 and even more surprised to see the land value of this prominent 12,000 square foot Central Business District (CBD) property assessed at only $6,345,000 for a total of $8,102,000, or $675 per square foot. Based on its ‘outright’ 7 FSR commercial zoning, this equated to only $96 per square foot buildable. This value was considerably less than nearby properties.
SRO Replacement/Conversion fee
When a Vancouver SRO unit is demolished or converted, a $300,000/unit fee may be required. However, there was no reference to this in the Council Report. Geller wrote to the City and was subsequently advised by the former Vancouver Senior Planner who worked on this property that (a) since the property was vacant for many years, and (b) rezoned from mixed-use to commercial, and (c) the Salvation Army (the previous owner) had relocated the SRO units into another building prior to its sale, the fee was not applicable. However, BC Assessment was not likely aware of this when they valued the land and building.
Assessment history
In 2019 this property was assessed at $26,643,000. An agent for the owner appealed this assessment, and successfully had it reduced to $15,521,000. It was further reduced three more times to $8,102,000 in 2024. For 2025, the assessed value was further reduced from $8,102,000 to $6,476,000.
During this time, the SRO removal/conversion fee increased from $125,000 to $300,000.
As a result of this very low valuation, Holborn was saving property taxes while allowing the building to become so run down that it became unsafe to the public.
.
Above: Decision notice from BC Assessment 2025 Property Assessment Review Panel.Below are the key numbers.
Original 2025 Assessment (values as of 1-Jul-2024) Land $6,375,000 Buildings $101,000 Total $6,476,000
Amended Assessment (March 2025) Land $18,864,000 Buildings $101,000 Total $18,965,000
BASIS FOR THE APPEAL – A REQUEST FOR EQUITY ON LAND VALUE
In his appeal, Geller noted that since the SRO replacement fee did not apply for the reasons previously mentioned, and the building was not a protected heritage structure, the land value should be comparable to the assessed value of adjacent properties, including a vacant lot immediately next door. This lot was half the size but assessed at considerably more than the subject property.
After taking considerable time to review Geller’s written and verbal submissions, the Property Assessment Review Panel agreed with his arguments.
It should be noted that if the owner disagrees with the Panel decision, it may appeal to the Property Assessment Appeal Board. It has until April 30th, 2025 to file this appeal. While Geller doesn’t know if the owner will appeal, he is confident that the Appeal Board will uphold the Panel’s decision now that all the facts related to the SRO replacement fee are known.
WHY IS THIS ISSUE IMPORTANT?
Under-assessments of industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) properties appear to be a long-standing systemic problem. Key players here include developers and their legal teams, BC Assessment, and municipal and provincial governments.
Our municipal and provincial governments have checks and balances in place, and it is up to our elected officials to ensure that they are functioning. The failure to do so can have serious negative consequences for society as a whole.
Let’s look first at the actual story of demolition in January 2025, since it is so recent in memory. The issue was covered extensively by media. Here we take excerpts from coverage by CBC.
Vancouver council reluctantly votes to demolish 115-year-old building. Councillors criticized owner of Dunsmuir House for letting historic building fall into disrepair (Akshay Kulkarni, CBC News, 18-Dec-2024).
“Vancouver councillors passed a motion Wednesday that would see a 115-year-old building on the city’s Dunsmuir Street demolished — even as they chastised the property owner for letting the heritage-listed building fall into disrepair.
Built in 1909 at the corner of Dunsmuir and Richards streets, Vancouver’s Dunsmuir House has served as a grand hotel, a barracks for soldiers and a single-room occupancy (SRO) housing complex. But since 2013, it’s stood vacant. 500 Dunsmuir Street is listed in the city’s heritage registry but is not subject to heritage protection, according to a city report, which also noted a detailed cornice atop the building and its historic brick façade.
… City staff recommended that the building be demolished over the risk of a “catastrophic, cascading collapse,” saying that water leakage and disrepair mean walls are no longer supported properly… While councillors passed a staff motion approving the demolition, they did so after criticizing the building’s owner, Holborn Properties, and asking staff to look at legal avenues the city could take against property owners who do not maintain historic buildings…
… In a statement to CBC News, Lee Medd, director of asset management for Holborn, said they are committed to “acting responsibly in the best interests of public safety, the community and the future of this site.” Medd did not say what would replace Dunsmuir House or when that may happen, but that Holborn has had “long-held intentions to redevelop this location.”” Link – https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/dunsmuir-house-demolition-city-of-vancouver-1.7414532
We must note that the City of Vancouver is not an innocent bystander when it comes to low-balled assessments, which benefit some property owners at the expense of the rest of the taxpayers.
In his article on another case of low assessments by BC Assessment, Robert Renger quoted Derek Holloway, AACI (Ret.), a 28-year veteran of BC Assessment: “I’ve made Vancouver City & Council aware of many under-assessed properties over the years. I hear crickets when I send the [info] – even the press is afraid.”
ADDITIONAL INFO ABOUT THE PROBLEM OF UNDER-ASSESSMENTS
A 2019 article by Kerry Gold in The Globe and Mail is entirely relevant now in 2025. She even refers to another project by same developer (Holborn) though the developer is not named in the article. Below are some excerpts relevant to today’s story of the amended assessment at 500 Dunsmuir.
“B.C. has lost millions to undervalued commercial properties, former assessor says” (Kerry Gold, Globe and Mail, 22-Jan-2019, for subscribers).
“Recently retired BC Assessment assessor Derek Holloway says that for too long, large commercial properties, often slated for residential density, were being undervalued and money was left on the table. That’s money that could have been going toward funding social housing and affordable housing models, such as co-op housing.
When big properties aren’t taxed correctly, he says, residential property owners take on the extra tax burden.
… He blames policies that saw government stepping away from housing programs, selling off public lands to private developers and failing to ensure trophy properties were valued and taxed according to the market. Mr. Holloway says that anyone concerned with the creation of affordable housing should consider this overlooked source of lost funding… “I don’t know of any housing advocates who have taken issue with low assessments, since the process is so insulated,” says Mr. Holloway…
…. The former provincially owned Little Mountain property, for example, may have been under-assesseddue to a lack of transparency, he says. The province sold it to a developer [NOTE – Holborn – same as the subject of the 500 Dunsmuir demolition and low-ball property assessment] in 2007 as part of a secret deal, receiving payments in future installments. “I’ll bet that BC Assessment has never seen the sale agreement,”
… He’s especially critical of the BC Liberals’ handling of Little Mountain, which was one of Canada’s largest low- income housing projects. “BC Housing could have just held onto the site and then subdivided off individual lots over 10 years, reaping the windfall for B.C. taxpayers that is reflected in the higher assessments.
… “Past provincial governments have not only screwed taxing jurisdictions by perennially under- assessing trophy properties – they’ve handed over massive amounts of prime real estate to developers, all whilst ignoring B.C.’s needs for affordable housing.”
More recently, in an article entitled “Retired appraiser says BC Assessment intentionally undervaluing commercial properties” (Chilliwack Progress, 24-Feb-2023) Paul Henderson reinforced a number of critical themes.
“A retired property assessor says residential taxpayers in B.C. are getting fleeced by chronically under-valued industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) properties. Derek Holloway was a senior appraiser at BC Assessment for 28 years, and he’s been banging this drum for years, reaching out to media outlets across the province with examples of properties sold at rates way higher than assessments.
… Holloway points to the New York District Attorney who accused former president Donald Trump of inflating values of some of his assets in financial statements to obtain favourable terms for loans, while deflating the value of other assets to reduce property taxes. ‘In B.C., this is a regular occurrence for many large ICIs,’ Holloway says. ‘ICI property owners often hire an army of assessment appeal agents and lawyers to frustrate BC Assessment and the appeal system.’ ”
… Holloway responds that at the very least there is an imbalance if some ICI properties use the appeal system to keep valuations low since the others (usually smaller ones) will have to make up the taxes… It’s all a messy and opaque business, and there does not seem to be enough political will to make it cleaner and more transparent.
This amended BC Assessment for 500 Dunsmuir will no doubt please those members of Council and others who were so very critical of Holborn’s behaviour in neglecting the building . Geller should be complimented for taking on the appeal, noting it was not for any personal gain, other than the satisfaction of seeing Holborn paying its fair share of taxes, based on the true value of the property.
