Major skyscraper by Holborn on former Dunsmuir Hotel property Dan Fumano May 12, 2025

Foreign investment and highrise buildings were again in the news in this May 2025 story by Dan Fumano which examined a major new proposal from the controversial Vancouver-based Malaysian developer Holborn Group. Readers of this blog may recall it was the company that allowed the Dunsmuir Hotel to become so dilapidated and so-called danger to the public that it had to be urgently demolished. Coincidentally, or should I write fortunately, Holborn already had plans ready for the now-vacant site. 

When the Vancouver Sun's Dan Fumano called me to see if I wanted to comment, I referred him to former Director of Planning Ray Spaxman who many years ago had undertaken a skyline study for the city. I also suggested he speak with James Cheng, since he had designed the city's tallest buildings. As you can hopefully tell, I bit my tongue when discussing Holborn's proposal.

Here's Dan Fumano's story

When Vancouver’s Marine Building was completed on Burrard Street in 1930, it was derided by some as a “modern monstrosity.” At nearly 100 metres tall, it towered over everything around it.

Now revered as an art deco gem, the 19-storey Marine Building is today dwarfed by neighbouring glass skyscrapers.

The evolution of Vancouver’s skyline is on the minds of many, after a developer unveiled a proposal last week for three skyscrapers that would transform the downtown peninsula.

The towers, designed by Henriquez Partners Architects, are being pitched by developer Holborn Group for a parcel of almost two whole downtown blocks.

In illustrations of the proposed buildings, they stand out both by virtue of their size and shape. At 239, 271 and 315 metres, they dwarf most neighbouring buildings, including recently built towers. The 315-metre hotel would be B.C.’s tallest tower, 55 per cent taller than Vancouver’s tallest existing skyscraper, the Shangri-La.

The three towers feature a distinct, curving design, with a “sculptural exoskeleton” which the architect says are inspired by the rare and ancient glass sea sponge reefs found off the B.C. coast.

“It is worth talking about because city skylines are symbolic,” Michael Geller, an urban planner and retired architect, said.

“That’s not to say that this particular proposal shouldn’t go ahead. I don’t have any views one way or the other on this proposal, but I do feel that it is time to have a discussion about the relative importance of the appearance in the city, whether it’s the skyline or just the look of new buildings,” Geller said.

“I think this is prompting what will hopefully be a conversation, so we can hear what people think about the skyline.”

Geller pointed to the Eiffel Tower in Paris, which was hated by many when first unveiled in 1889, but went on to become the city’s internationally renowned — and beloved — landmark.

Back in the 1990s, Vancouverites were complaining that the city’s skyline was “flat, uninteresting and dominated by 1970s bank towers,” Vancouver Sun reporter Frances Bula reported in 1997.

City council hired consultant Ray Spaxman, who had been Vancouver’s director of planning from 1973 to 1989, to complete a “downtown Vancouver skyline study.”

Spaxman said he recalls discussions about how the city’s skyline should — or should not — change, dating back to the 1970s.

Cities around the world have to grapple with various versions of this question, Spaxman said. In European cities, for example, building heights might be limited to preserve views of a historic cathedral, he said.

“Each community sort of looks at its assets and says: ‘How do we want to allow development to occur around what we consider our assets?'” Spaxman said. For Vancouver, he said, some of its most important “assets from prehistoric times” are the mountains to the north of the city and the views of them.

Coming out of Spaxman’s study, city staff recommended increasing building height limits in the central business district to 183 metres from 137 metres, while still ensuring building heights would not intrude into protected view corridors, including those of the North Shore mountains.

Over the following decades, the city continued to update its “higher buildings policy.”

A big recent change under the current ABC-majority council was to loosen the rules protecting some public views, including mountain vistas. This paved the way for taller buildings on Holborn’s Georgia site, as well as other major proposed development sites such as the former Expo lands.

Former Vancouver city planner Michael Gordon helped lead the city staff work on the skyline study in the 1990s.

Gordon said it will be important to see more illustrations of how Holborn’s proposal would alter the skyline before offering an opinion on the project. This consideration matters, he said, because one thing that makes Vancouver special is how its built form connects with its natural setting.

“Really, the skyline is three lines. It’s the water’s edge, it’s the line of when you connect the dots of the buildings, and then it’s the mountain ridges. … There’s a balance between the three lines, and you’ve got to be careful,” Gordon said. “It’s a Zen thing.”

Illustrations showing a development proposed for downtown Vancouver, from Holborn Group and designed by Henriquez Partners Architects Photo by Norm Li

Gordon has heard, over the years, from people who say: “There’s no view crisis, there’s no heritage crisis, there’s no shadow crisis, there’s a housing crisis.”

The argument is that those other considerations should not prevent tall buildings that contribute significantly to the supply of homes, or hotel rooms, or other priorities.

Gordon is not so sure.

“As Joni Mitchell sang: ‘You don’t know what you’ve got ’till it’s gone,'” Gordon said. “I’m not on board with just saying: ‘It’s a housing crisis, let’s just let ‘er rip.'”

Vancouver architect James Cheng has had a hand in shaping the city’s skyline, designing some of its tallest buildings including the Shangri-La (200 metres) and the Stack office building (162 metres).

Cheng said he is not interested in superficial “beauty pageant” discussions about which big buildings are attractive or not, or how tall they should be. He does, however, spend a lot of time thinking about what he calls “the role of highrises in Vancouver in historic, social, cultural, economic, and artistic terms, as a barometer of our city’s health.”

Some people may be nostalgic for the way Vancouver’s skyline looked before Expo in 1986 and the ensuing development boom.

But, Cheng says: “If we do not have an evolving skyline, it’s a barometer showing our economic health is weakening. … highrises will not happen if there is no economic justification for it.”

“The downtown skyline is the crown jewel. And that has to constantly be polished.”

Are Rennie Layoffs the Canary in the Presale Coal Mine? Kerry Gold Storeys May 21, 2025

Both Bob Rennie and the foreign buyers ban were in the news again in May when Greg Zayadi, president of Rennie announced significant reductions in the company's head office staff. This prompted journalist Kerry Gold to question whether what was happening at Rennie was 'the canary in the coal mine'. 

Here are extracts from her story.

Zayadi noted that, conversely, companies were short staffed as buyer demand soared during the rapid acceleration of 2017 to 2019 and the COVID-related market peak of 2021. Times have changed, and Rennie Group – one of the biggest real estate marketers in Canada – reduced its staff from 123 to 92 people.

Other marketing companies are quietly doing the same, according to developer and real estate consultant Michael Geller. Geller, who’s been working in the industry since the 1970s, said the big news these days is when a developer finds a way to actually launch a presale project. A key part of the downturn is the absence of the investor.

Up until recently, condominium towers relied on the pre-sale of at least 60% of the building to obtain financing to begin construction. Around half of those pre-sale buyers were investors, but government policies and a higher interest rate have chased those investors away, including foreign buyers.

“[Foreign buyers] weren’t a major segment of the market, but they did buy, and they were part of that investor market,” said Geller. “People wanted to ban short term rentals and ban speculators, and they succeeded.”

Condos have subsequently lost their day in the sun, with the current market mostly driven by end-users, such as families who need affordable space to grow. That’s why townhouse developer Polygon is one of the few big developers who are selling in this market. But not enough end-users gravitate towards pre-sale units, which can take years to complete, and prove impractical for those who need a place to live sooner rather than later.

“It is one of the biggest downturns in part because projects can’t proceed without presales and the cumulative effect of all those legislative changes and taxes have taken the investors out of the market,” said Geller. “Right now, it’s an end-user market, and if you had to identify the most popular housing form right now it’s townhouses. Ground-oriented townhouses are generally seen as the most marketable and desirable type of housing rather than apartments and six-storey wood-framed buildings, and apartments in 20-storey buildings.”

Andy Yan, associate professor of professional practice in urban studies at Simon Fraser University, said the fact that townhouses are still marketable, while presale condos aren’t, is a sign that the market and resident needs are two different realities. People want housing to grow families, or to live in for many years, while the market is producing tiny studios and one-bedrooms more suitable to investors who are speculating on ever-increasing values. In Toronto, the proliferation of tiny condos earned them the nickname, “dog-crate apartments.”

“They’re building Mini Coopers while people need station wagons,” said Yan.

Removing the ban on foreign investors - Conversations that Matter March 4, 2025

The topic of potential removal of the federal ban on foreign buyers came up in early March at a panel discussion organized by Stu McNish. I was pleased to participate on the panel along with Mike Hurley, the mayor of Burnaby, Neil Chrystal, Beau Jarvis, and Bob Rennie. Here is account of the discussion.

Prominent B.C. real estate marketer Bob Rennie says he has pitched prime minister-designate Mark Carney on encouraging foreign investment in rental housing development.

Speaking March 4 to a panel of developers at Conversations Live, an industry-sponsored event hosted by Postmedia, Rennie suggested an arrangement involving the Canada Mortgage Housing Corp. (CHMC), the taxpayer-backed Crown corporation that provides affordable housing financing and market-based mortgage insurance.

“I’m working with Carney – surprise – and I’m trying to get a rental program in where people can buy, put it into a 25-year pool, get a preferred rate from CMHC and let’s allow foreign buyers to buy it; they have to rent it out for 25 years and it will show the world we are open for business, because right now all of our governments are not showing that we’re open for business,” Rennie told the panel.

The panel happened to begin with a presentation by Research Co. pollster Mario Canseco, who began the discussion by noting the current federal government ban on non-Canadians (excluding international students) purchasing residential property has support of three in four Canadians.

“This is one of those rare occasions in which agreement spans across party lines,” he said.

Developer Michael Geller said the prevailing public sentiment on foreign ownership and resulting policy changes has been a factor in the pre-sale market drying up.

“As a result of all of that, all of the investors have left the market, and those are the people who were buying the pre-sales that all the … bankers are insisting upon,” Geller said.

gwood@glaciermedia.ca

Below-Market rental units is stupid, says UBC prof. Douglas Todd Vancouver Sun March 18, 2025

In the early 1970s when I started working for CMHC, most of the affordable housing across Canada was developed by the federal government within Public Housing Projects. And they were projects. The first such project in Vancouver was Little Mountain and there were many others...McLean Park, Skeena Terrace, along with seniors housing projects. However, in 1973, the government changed the National Housing Act and introduced Sections 15.1 and 34.18 which provided direct funding to non-profits and coops so that they could build new projects. Thousands of units were built.

However, 20 years later, the federal government cancelled these programs and the supply of new affordable housing was significantly reduced. This ultimately led to a variety of initiatives, including something known as Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) which essentially encouraged private developers to include affordable housing within their projects in return for density bonuses which allowed them to build larger developments.

Today we have many examples of this across the country. Within the city of Vancouver we have examples of condominium projects that include a 20% social housing component. In some cases, the affordable units are owned by the developer who retains a non-profit to manage them. In others, the affordable units are donated to the city in return for even higher densities.

There are also many examples of rental projects that include a below market housing (BMH) component. One of the most talked about is the Broadway Plan which offers significantly higher densities and a waiving of certain development fees in return for inclusion of affordable units. 

I used to be a fan of IZ since it was a creative way to produce affordable units within established neighbourhoods in the absence of government subsidies. But over time I have changed my mind, especially since the IZ obligations have prevented many new projects from proceeding. 

It is within this context that the Vancouver Sun's Douglas Todd article was written.

A dubious trend toward including “below-market” apartment units in a new wave of rental highrises is contributing to a less attractive, less neighbourly Metro Vancouver, say housing specialists.

UBC professor Tom Davidoff said a recent policy push by the B.C. government and many cities, which hands developers huge density bonuses in exchange for their vow to set aside a small portion of their highrises for so-called affordable rental units, is “stupid.”

The business prof, who has been advising the B.C. government, is not alone in spelling out the unintended negative consequences of a policy which has led city councils to waive their customary demand that highrise developers offer appealing architecture, open spaces and public amenities.

The problem, according to housing specialists, is the B.C. government and many cities are encouraging developers to build higher, denser and plainer buildings if they promise up to one-fifth of floor space will be devoted to “below-market” rentals.

The guideline for “below-market” generally ends up meaning that the people on moderate incomes who are fortunate to be selected tenants get a 20-per-cent discount compared to average rents in the region. In the city of Vancouver, a moderate income is generally considered between $30,000 and $80,000 per year. 

Davidoff thinks the policy is a bad way to combat stratospheric rents, which are higher in Metro Vancouver than almost anywhere else in Canada.

“I think affordability requirements in new buildings are, while well-intentioned, stupid,” Davidoff said.

“It’s hard to express what a terrible idea it is to acquire brand new units in desirable locations and hold lotteries so a fraction of those in need get giant prizes while everyone else gets nothing.”

Hundreds of new rental towers are being built or proposed across Metro Vancouver, with many developers promising to make up to 20 per cent of units “affordable” in exchange for upzoning, said Christina DeMarco, former head of planning for the Metro Vancouver regional district.

Many of the region’s proposed rental towers, which now outnumber proposed condo highrises by a wide margin, are in Vancouver’s Broadway corridor and in clusters in Burnaby and Surrey, she said.

However, DeMarco and Vancouver planning consultant Michael Geller say municipalities that upzone properties for higher, bulkier towers in exchange for “affordable” units are forgoing their customary opportunity to require developers to provide quality architectural designs, as well as funds to build day cares and community centres.

“There’s no doubt we are seeing an increasing number of larger and unadorned buildings compared to years ago,” said Geller.

The retired architect said Vancouver and other municipalities are assuming that “housing affordability is generally more important than building appearance.” It has led, he said, to  widespread “acceptance of lower design standards.”

In east Vancouver, housing activist Paisley Woodward worries the city seems ready to approve three “mega-towers” — of 37, 38 and 44 storeys — for a Safeway site on East Broadway, near the Commercial SkyTrain Station.

“The city is not demanding community benefits of any substance because the developers have insisted that rental housing is the benefit,” Woodward said. The developer, Westbank Crombie, is offering only 10 per cent of floor space for below-market units.

Similarly, DeMarco said the blocky, two-tower rental project Vancouver council approved this week for a former Safeway site in her neighbourhood of Point Grey will come with little green space, few amenities and a dull streetscape.

That, DeMarco said, is largely because the main “public amenity” that the international developer, BentallGreenOak, is offering in return for such favourable spot-zoning is a portion of below-market units.

That leaves “no benefits of the zoning uplift for the public realm, such as community facilities,” she said. The city’s policy is leading, she said, to ”ugliness” and a lack of livability and neighbourliness.

DeMarco cautioned that below-market rental units are also managed by each building’s private owners. That means, she said, it will be difficult for municipalities to enforce whether the people allowed to rent the discounted units are truly in moderate-income brackets.

Geller is also worried that some of the scores of developers who are vowing to provide below-market units, which lowers their profit margins, will eventually decide to pull out of their projects entirely. A potential glut of new rental highrises, plus slowing population growth, he said, will put downward pressure on how much landlords can charge tenants.

Facing reduced revenue, DeMarco said some owners of completed rental buildings may go to city hall and make an argument they need to get out of their earlier commitment to below-market units.

Indeed, DeMarco believes many rental developers are being short-sighted by building unattractive rental buildings. She has talked to established highrise landlords in Point Grey who say in the future there is going to be more competition for renters.

Why building higher is not always better Joanne Lee-Young Vancouver Sun January 23, 2025

I always enjoy chatting with Joanne Lee-Young who regularly writes about real estate for the Vancouver Sun. She has the ability to make complex matters compehensible for the average reader. So when she called me to find out what I thought about the city's decision to relax view cones to permit taller buildings, I thought I should offer a perspective that others might not appreciate. Building taller is not always better.

Fortunately, architect James Cheng also agreed to talk to her as well. As the architect of many of Vancouver's tallest buildings, he knows the pros and cons of building towers better than most. Here's Ms. Lee-Young's story.

The City of Vancouver’s decision to relax view-protection policies prompted a flurry of developers to say they’ll seek to build taller, but some in the industry question how much of this

Getting approval to add floors means more units can be sold on the same site and there is more money to be made from it. But there might be a tipping point, some say, where it isn’t necessarily more lucrative or even that easy for the density that is being approved to actually get built, even though the value of the land increases because of it.

The thing about doing bigger, taller buildings isn’t only that they are more expensive to build, but there is an all-or-nothing proposition to them,” said Michael Geller, a longtime developer, real estate consultant, urban planner and retired architect.

If you compare 600 units in one 60-storey building with 600 units spread across three buildings, it’s much harder in the single, tall building to sell the number of units needed to get financing, he explained. There isn’t the opportunity to phase in the process and start by selling and building 200 in one building first.

It’s also the case, he said, that taller buildings take much longer to complete, which increases carrying costs.

“If a six-storey wood frame building takes 12 months or maybe as long as 14 to 16 months to build, an 18-storey tower can take two years. A 60-storey one takes proportionately longer,” he said.

As Postmedia News reported earlier this month, changes to view protection policies last year by Vancouver city council have prompted some developers of condo projects to revise long-held building plans and shoot for much higher towers, including the owners of two major sites on northeast False Creek.

Taller towers have been approved elsewhere in Metro Vancouver, such as in Burnaby where Pinnacle International has the green light to proceed with two residential towers that will be among the tallest in Western Canada at 72 and 80 storeys.

But there has also been a trend in the market of some developers shifting plans they had for taller buildings in favour of shorter buildings.

According to Vancouver architect James Cheng, experienced developers know there are other factors that directly affect their profitability.

“Maximum density is not the only answer to increasing profits,” he said.

Increasing allowances for density doesn’t solve some deep truisms, he said.

“Our current Vancouver-area markets are being hit with this triple whammy: building too big, no market to absorb it and it is inefficient to build. That is why so many projects are cancelled and so many are in court-ordered sales,” said Cheng.

Predictions for 2025 - So how are they turning out so far?

As I reflect on all the 'noise' about housing affordability and whether Mark Carney should remove the ban on foreign buyers, I decided to review what I and others were predicting would happen in 2025. In late 2024, I wrote my annual outlook article for the Vancouver Sun https://vancouversun.com/homes/michael-geller-b-c-real-estate-forecast-for-the-year-ahead

In it, I noted that while many are rushing to buy bitcoin at unprecendented prices few are buying presale condominiums. I suggested that in 2025, presale programs will get underway for new condominium projects throughout the region. Smart developers will be designing these projects to appeal primarily to “end-users” rather than investors. 

Well, I was wrong. The market has continued to be so soft that few new presale condominium projects have got underway for either investors or end-users are buying. This has led to considerable discussion as to what needs to be done to spur the market. One consideration raised in another year end conversation with Kerry Gold who writes for the Globe and Mail and Storeys was the impact of the ban on foreign buyers for both the rental and ownership markets. 

"Developer and consultant Michael Geller said there is not one overall market for Vancouver this coming year. Rather, the region will be divided into sub-markets, each with its own unique flavour. Developers will have to respond to diverse sub-markets.

“What applies to East Vancouver may not apply to Burnaby or Richmond,” he said.

Geller said that the experienced players in the development industry will target end-users such as first-time buyers, move-up buyers, and empty-nesters. The investor is no longer the focus of a presale program, he said. The glut of purpose-built rental units coming online, combined with restrictions around foreign buyers and short-term rental platforms has taken the steam out of the investor-driven presale condo market.

And the federal foreign buyer ban, extended to last until 2027, may have had an impact on Vancouver’s pricey luxury market, both rental and ownership.

With price-sensitive demand, Geller said smart developers and architects will get more creative about their designs.

“Consideration should be given to designing projects containing suites that could appeal to those interested in co-purchasing,” he said. “These could include one-bedroom units where the living room can become a separate sleeping room at night and two-bedroom units with two similarly sized ensuite bedrooms.”

Over the next seven months, vigourous discussion continued on how best to address housing affordability and whether removing the ban on foreign buyers might be an important action. This led to what were called 'dueling letters' and other debate, some of which is addressed in the following blogposts.

EXPO 2025 OSAKA - Previous articles and images

This past April, I posted a few blogposts describing my trip to EXPO 2025 Osaka. They can be found here:

https://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2025/04/expo-2025-osaka.html

https://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2025/04/canada-one-of-158-countries-represented.html

https://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2025/05/expo-2025-osaka-more-images-from-around.html

However, for those of you who don't want anymore words from me, just pictures, here are some of my favourite photos taken around the site.

The Chinese Pavilion (left) is one of the most impressive at the fair

No, it's not the great white north. It's regeneration!

Inside the Canadian pavilion there are no words. Visitors are handed an augmented reality tablet which produces some very attractive images

A good way to get an overview of the site is from the 2 km walkway along the top of the circular mass timber structure....supposedly the largest in the world.

This lunch at one of the onsite restaurants was remarkable in that I never had any contact with a human being. I ordered the food from a tablet on the table, and it arrived on a conveyor. When I was finished, the bill appeared on the tablet!

Inside the French pavilion was an interesting display of French fashions.

Inside the USA pavilion there was absolutely no mention of tariffs

Throughout the site there are public art installations. This one comprised old wheelchairs. 

All this greenery was found in the Belgium pavilion

There were a lot of medical innovations on display

 

The Philippines pavilion was most attractive, especially at night

For a brief moment I thought I was back at EXPO 2020 Dubai. When I was there, there was a surprising absence of international visitors.

The Future Cities pavilion takes a look back and forward at the five key stages of Society.

Kawasaki's futuristic horse!

Inside the Chinese pavilion I was greeted by a guide and videographer. I am sure they deleted my comments as soon as the tour was over. But I was impressed!

One of the Chinese pavilion displays told the story of a day in the life of a modern middle-class family

An impressive theatrical production in the main theatre featured this acrobatic individual in a wheelchair

This toilet analyses your stool and provides advance warning of health issues 

This Honda vehicle is steered by gentle body movements

A sea of solar panels surrounding the site helps power the pavilions and transportation, such as this EV bus that derives its power from the road pavement.

EXPO 2025 offers a glimpse of the future. And based on what I saw it is promising!

For more information, check out the many videos that you will find online. Better still, visit Osaka before October 13th and experience the fair yourself. I don't think you'll regret doiing so.