Broadway Plan: Why am I worrying about neighbourhood character when we have a housing crisis?

The Public Hearing for three Broadway Plan towers continues tonight.

Above is an illustration of the proposal at 2156-2172 West 14th which I find most objectionable. In my opinion, buildings like this, in the middle of a lovely, leafy street lined with charming older homes, duplexes, triplexes, will seriously harm the character of surrounding neighbourhoods.

Often when I say or write this, people respond by asking why am I worrying about neighbourhood character when we have a housing crisis, ?

Well, if I thought building a lot of 18 storey buildings would solve the housing crisis, I might be less concerned. But I know, and many of my colleagues know that all these towers will do little to solve the housing crisis. But they will do serious damage to the surrounding neighbourhood character, and upset the lives of lower income seniors, families, and others living in the older buildings thar will be demolished to make way for the towers. So why is this happening? I'm afraid it's a fault in the Broadway Plan.

While I support higher density, highrise buildings near transit stations, there are many things wrong with this aspect of The Broadway Plan.

• When the plan was initially approved, so much attention was given to protection of existing renters few people realized the plan didn't just apply to Broadway; it stretched from 1st avenue in the north, to 16th avenue in the south.

• Many of these streets in Kitsilano, Fairview and Mount Pleasant, are quite lovely, with a broad mix of rental and ownership housing choices - duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings.
  

• Sadly, the plan calls for an urban renewal of these streets with 17-20 storey towers, and new, larger multi-family buildings in between. Of course, some of the existing buildings will remain. The hope is that all this new housing, especially the towers which will be100% rental, will provide new affordable rental housing.
  

• It will, to some degree. 20% of the units in the towers are to be below market. Existing tenants will have the right to move back into these towers at the same rent they are paying now. This sounds fantastic. But will it really happen? That remains to be seen. A bigger question is, notwithstanding the tenant protection measures, where will all the people being evicted move in the interim?

• Another question is just how many more below market units will be built and how will they compare with what's there now?

• What is already obvious to me is that many of the new apartments will not be as livable as the existing apartments. Sure, they'll be new, but they'll be much smaller. Based on the plans for one of the projects going to Public Hearing tonight, they won't be very livable. Why do I write this? Just look at the layout of this two-bedroom suite.

• While it has two bedrooms and two bathrooms, do you see an entry closet?  Any built-in bedroom closets? A linen or broom closet? Storage? 

• Now let's look at the kitchen. What's that tiny space beside the sink? There's hardly room for a dishwasher. So where are the drawers? The cupboards? Yes, there's one under the sink. And that might be a pantry, but that's not a functional kitchen layout for a family with children. By the way, where is the washer and dryer?

• 
  
  
• Here's the 3-bedroom version, likely for a family with two or three children. Yes, this one has a storage room - the space is excluded from the floor space area FSR calculations - this is useful space since once again, there's no entry closet, no built-in bedroom closets, a tiny kitchenette and again, no washer and dryer. What's going on here?
• 
  
• Another absurdity is that this design is not just for the affordable housing. It appears to be the design for the market rental housing as well. Urban land economists and developers expect units like this will have to rent for $5.50+ per sq.ft. per month. That's $4,000 per month and more, plus parking, if there is parking, for this suite.

• To be honest, I'm less concerned about this since market tenants paying $4000 plus per month can move. The lower income households who are lucky enough to get a below-market unit, even one with no closets and a tiny kitchen don't have the choice.

• So. please tell me. Why are we potentially destroying, yes destroying the character and quality of West 14th between Arbutus and Yew to build this awful building, that looks like it belongs in Dubai, not Kitsilano? And doing the same for many other streets in Kitsilano, Fairview and Mount Pleasant? Please tell me.

So what's the solution? I hope Council will listen to the concerns, not just from those who might be considered NIMBYs, but also all the planning professionals who know this is wrong. Hopefully, it will agree that a moratorium on new towers more than 2 blocks away from Broadway is warranted, so that the plan can be modified to allow a different type of densification of these streets. There is plenty of opportunity to build new housing. Maintaining the status quo is not an option. But neither is a proliferation of towers off Broadway.