March 20, 10am applicant’s shadow diagram from staff Policy Report (left). Compare with shadow diagram on the right (independently generated) also of March 20, 10am. Look at the length of shadows and direction of shadows. The two shadow diagrams have been cropped and are oriented at a similar scale and rotation for easier comparison.
How accurate are the shadow studies for the tower rezoning at 1477 W Broadway? To find out, we’ve done a number of comparisons with an independently-generated shadow study.
The Public Hearing for 1477 West Broadway will resume on Tuesday, April 19th at 6pm (continuing with speaker #16). The staff policy report for this rezoning application includes a shadow study for this tower proposal. Is every shadow diagram in the staff policy report incorrect? To find out, we’ve compared the direction of the shadows against another shadow study from a rezoning application nearby at 3205 Arbutus Street (details further below). A comparison with the NOAA Solar Calculator is included further down in this post.
A rough outline of the tower shadow in the proposed tower for 1477 West Broadway is provided below. The applicant version used by staff is on the left. Is the shadow considerably shorter on the left image (from the applicant)?
March 20, 10am. Applicant (left) vs. generated shadow diagram (right). Rough outline of the shadows (in orange) has been superimposed on both of the shadow diagrams. The end of the shadow falls east of Fir Street in one diagram (left) and west of Fir Street on the other (right)
Before looking at the other shadow studies, it might be worth noting that it could also be possible to see shadow diagrams in 3D. Here we compare the shadows between the approved Development Permit design for the office building on the site and the rezoning application on March 20th at 10am:
March 20, 10am is one of the times used in the staff policy report for shadow diagrams. Here’s a comparison between the length of the shadow with the tower rezoning proposal (left) and the approved development permit (right). This analysis was absent from the Staff Report so we have provided this example.
March 20, 10am shadow diagram. Here’s a comparison between the length of the shadow with the tower rezoning proposal (left) and the approved development permit (right). This analysis was absent from the Staff Report so we provided this example.
Here are a few comparisons with the NOAA Solar Calculator (below). Please see the website of the Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for more details about their online solar calculator. This tool provides the direction of the sun (azimuth) as well as the elevation about the horizon from any place on Earth (this information can be used to manually calculate the length of a building shadow, if desired).
Examining sun orientation: Compare the magenta line representing the direction of the sun on the NOAA Solar Calculator with the shadows on the applicant shadow diagram (top right) and the independently-generated shadow diagram (bottom right)
The magenta line representing the direction of the sun on the NOAA Solar Calculator was copied and moved over the two shadow diagrams to check the direction of the shadows. Applicant shadow diagram (top right), generated shadow diagram (bottom right).
To compare the just the direction of the shadows, here’s a comparison with the spring equinox at 10am from the shadow study submitted with the 3205 Arbutus St rezoning application (note: scroll to the end to see the full sets of these shadow studies):
The shadow studies in the staff policy report include only the summer solstice and spring/fall equinoxes. What would the shadow look like on the winter equinox? We’ve included here a set of shadow diagrams starting at 9am on December 21st (note the 1 hour shift to daylight savings time will likely come to an end in 2023; you can add an hour to convert to standard time):
Below is a full shadow study for March 20th that corresponds to the usual times used by the City of Vancouver (independently-generated renderings, click to enlarge):
Below is a full shadow study for June 21st that corresponds to the usual times used by the City of Vancouver (independently-generated renderings, click to enlarge):
Readers may recall that this isn’t the first time there were issues with shadow studies at the City. Back in November, we documented the issues with a shadow study at 1406-1410 East King Edward: A closer look at the fake shadow diagrams in 1406-1410 East King Edward tower rezoning application (CityHallWatch, November 30, 2021)
Staff to their credit did post corrected shadow diagrams for 1406-1410 East King Edward after we made the post live.
The contact person for the staff policy report for 1477 W Broadway is Assistant Director of Planning Yardley McNeill. Ms. McNeill is of the 1798 staffers who made over $100,000 in 2021 and she received $147,234 in remuneration in 2021.
Adding many tall towers in this part of Fairview as proposed in the draft Broadway Plan direction would result in the loss of solar access. This part of the City is very sensitive to excessive shading due to the topography of the Fairview Slopes, as the north face results in extended shadows when compared to a flat site.
To support public dialogue, we welcome interested parties (media, Vancouver residents, and neighbourhood associations, in particular) to use the independently generated shadow diagrams presented, with “Credit for renderings to Stephen Bohus, BLA.” We do appreciate a concise e-mail if you do (citizenYVR@gmail.com). For more detail on how the renderings were created, please see one of our previous posts. For comparison, we’ve included images from two rezoning applications as well as from the NOAA Solar Calculator.
References
To compare the direction of the shadows, here’s the shadow study from 3205 Arbutus St rezoning application:
Compare the direction of the shadows with 1477 W Broadway:
March 20, 10am applicant’s shadow diagram from staff Policy Report (left). Compare with shadow diagram on the right (independently generated) also of March 20, 10am. The two shadow diagrams have been cropped and oriented at a similar scale and rotation for easier comparison.
CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions 
These seem to be serious allegations. Assuming incorrect shadow diagrams submitted by the applicant were prepared by their architects, have you contacted them for comment? I would think it is unrealistic to expect planning staff to check submitted shadow diagrams – surely they should be able to rely on the professionalism of professional architects.
Yes, professional bodies should be be responsible for protecting the integrity of the certifications they issue. If certified professionals are presenting incorrect information to elected officials and the public, their certifications should be revoked. Otherwise, the integrity of the certification of every other professional certified by the body is called into question.
City staff were actually given a heads up last year during the comment period about the problematic shadow diagrams, but failed to act upon it. It’s not the first time there have been issues with shadow diagrams, as noted here: https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2021/11/30/fake-shadow-diagrams-1406-e-king-edward-tower-application/
The shadow study for a nearby rezoning application 3205 Arbutus Street was prepared by architects, and they seem to have submitted a correct shadow diagram. See https://shapeyourcity.ca/3205-arbutus-st for details
It is realistic for staff to do a cursory check on shadow studies. They’re always expecting the identical times for a few set times. The direction of the shadows will be consistent for 10am, noon, 2pm at the equinoxes, and the summer solstice will be consistent for these set times.
OK, perhaps as you say, it is realistic for planning staff to do a cursory check on shadow diagrams. But where incorrect ones are discovered by the public, surely blame should fall primarily on the professionals who prepared them. Has anyone tried reporting them to the responsible professional body (as suggested by another comment above)?
The professional body to report a complaint to would be the AIBC. That would be via the aibc.ca website. However, we haven’t heard too much about the status of how complaints have been handled over the last few years.
I can tell you through experience that these shadow reports are inaccurate and bogus – city staff don’t understand nor do their homework .
When you elevate a clerk to a plan checker position – what do you expect – there is a severe lack of professionalism at the planning department @ COV
Would love to hear more about this. Seems a bit counter-intuitive if inexperienced people, as you note, are doing plan checks. If the CoV wants to maximize their revenue for their operations, then ensuring that development floor area figures are accurate would surely be a priority. Otherwise they could be undercharging for DCLs and CACs. There’s also the fuzzy area of FSR exclusions (to determine what gets counted and what’s excluded in FSR).
Having had my property ruined by inaccurate shadow casting submissions by the COV – I can tell you they are pulling the wool over peoples eyes. Vancouver should have a solar rights by-law in place that gives people the right to not live in shadows.
One of my neighbours had solar panels on their roof and he objected to the shadow study anc the development permit -he was ignored by the council of the day ( Vision) the building was even being built over the allowable FSR – E.5th and Quebec .
The whole thing was a sham.
That is alarming. I was considering putting solar panels on my roof to go with my new air source heat pump. But I haven’t because with all the spot rezoning and towers being permitted everywhere, I have no idea what will be built near me and when. So that not only stops me from solar panelling, it also creates a constant anxiety of instrusion to my beloved home of 30 years.
Pingback: Case study on breaking the Broadway Plan already: 18-storey tower at 2535 Carolina St. and 557-569 East 10th Ave, adjacent to a proposed 19-storey tower (Q&A ends Feb 13) | CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions
Pingback: At 1960 West 7th Ave (Kitsilano) yet another Broadway Plan rezoning for 20-storey tower, renoviction of mature rental building. Online Q&A March 13-26. Shadow studies incorrect (yet again) | CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions