 |
| While the Social Housing Initiative is proposing the blanket rezoning of a third of the city for highrises, you wouldn't know this from the cover of the Engagement Summary Report! |
Last June, I wrote about my concerns with a most inappropriate City of Vancouver planning initiative, namely the blanket rezoning of approximately a third of the city to allow social housing towers up to 20 storeys in height, at an FSR of 6.0 without any further public input. This would allow new towers juxtaposed along quiet, low-scale residential streets at ten times the height and density. It just seemed so wrong.
My concerns can be found here. https://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2025/06/vancouvers-proposed-social-housing.html
Tonight, Vancouver City Council is holding a Public Hearing at which this initiative will be discussed. I signed up to speak earlier this week and am speaker number 23. I'll be curious to hear whether those speaking before me are also in opposition, or whether there will be dozens of YIMBY supporters speaking in favour of what can best be described as a well-intentioned but ill-advised initiative.
When I recently asked someone 'in the know' why the city planners would be proposing this, he responded that the initiative did not come from staff; it was directed by the province. While we may never know whether this is true, regardless, I am hoping city council will not approve the initiative and send it back to staff for further consideration.
Below is the letter I have submitted to Council which will serve as the basis for my 5-minute presentation.
Dear Mayor and Council,
Re: Social Housing Initiative
As a former Program Manager- Social Housing for CMHC in the 1970s, and architect/ planner and developer for the subsequent five decades, I believe social housing should be allowed everywhere throughout the city.
That said, I have serious concerns with a key aspect of the Social Housing Initiative, namely the proposal to blanket rezone approximately one third of the city to allow highrise buildings up to 20 storeys in height and 6 FSR without the need for any public hearings.
My first concern relates to the urban design consequences of juxtaposing highrises along quiet low-scale neighbourhood streets at ten times the height and density of existing homes. While taller buildings are appropriate when clustered in a neighbourhood or sited along major streets and transition zones behind these streets, wedging towers along these charming, neighbourhood streets is inappropriate for so many reasons.
My second concern is why are we even proposing towers in these locations?
The city defines social housing as that which is 100% owned by governments or non-profits with at least 30% of the units affordable to those with incomes at or below the ‘Housing Income Limits (HILs). Housing income limits are the maximum household incomes to qualify for subsidized or affordable housing programs and vary by unit type, location, etc.
In Vancouver, those in greatest need for subsidized social housing include the unhoused, families with children, and seniors.
The unhoused have nowhere to live and often need supportive housing. However, 15-20 storey towers with 100 to 150 suites are the wrong building form for these households. Research has concluded that to be successful, buildings providing this type of supportive housing should be limited a maximum of 60 units in a low or midrise building.
Similarly, 20 storey towers at a 6 FSR are not the right solution for low-income families with children. As clearly set out in the highly regarded city publication Housing Families at Higher Densities (which has been adopted by Council on three different occasions) “Family housing developments should be compatible in scale, character, and materials to their surrounding neighbourhood.”
Many low-income seniors are also seeking homes. When I oversaw the social housing programs at CMHC, we funded thousands of suitably designed self-contained suites for seniors in highrises. But today, the greatest need is not for more self-contained apartments. Rather it is for new buildings offering levels of care.
As Dan Levitt, the Seniors Advocate has often reported, the waitlist for long-term care in B.C. has ballooned. Between 2016 and 2025, the number of people waiting to be admitted has tripled. Average wait times have doubled over this period.
The need to build more care facilities is particularly urgent since so many low-income seniors are occupying expensive hospital beds since there is nowhere else for them to go.
These care facilities require horizontal building forms rather than highrise buildings.
To conclude, while I agree Council should allow social housing everywhere in the city, I cannot understand why city staff are recommending such extensive blanket rezoning for highrises, especially when only 30% of the units may be providing subsidized homes.
Just as most of the areas coloured yellow on the city map could be suitable for buildings up to six storeys in height, I would recommend allowing six-storey buildings in many of these areas as well. If there is justification for a tower, let it go through a rezoning process with an opportunity for the public to have a say.
In a recent discussion with someone in the know, I questioned why city staff would be recommending housing initiatives that just did not make sense from a planning perspective. He told me this initiative did not originate with city staff. It was directed by the province.
While I would like to know if this is true or not, regardless of the answer, I would urge Council not to approve this Social Housing Initiative as proposed and send it back to staff for further consideration.
Respectively submitted,
Michael A. Geller
Fellow, Canadian Institute of Planners. Registered Professional Planner, Retired Architect, Architectural Institute of British Columbia.
No comments:
Post a Comment