The City of Vancouver is holding an online Q&A session ( https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/1540-w-10-ave ) that concludes on June 18th, in order to receive feedback on a 21-storey tower proposed at 1540 West 10th Avenue. This rezoning appears to breaks the Broadway Plan on an number of key points. The tower would introduce new shadow on solar-protected greenspace between 10am and 4pm from the spring equinox and fall equinox (see Figure 11.5 – Solar Access for more details).
The floor plans show that there are suites that don’t have balconies, as required under the Broadway Plan (the plans show two suites per level without balconies; sliding windows don’t count as balconies). The ‘tower in the park’ design doesn’t follow Broadway Plan specifications for a 4-storey podium. The site has a 125 foot frontage, which is below the 150 foot frontage in the plan. While the Director of Planning may grant a relaxation (down to a 99 ft. frontage), the proposed design would have to conform to other parts of the Broadway Plan (which it does not). The floor to floor height maximums of 3.0m are exceeded. The floor to floor heights could be reduced slightly to allow two extra storeys to be included in a later development permit stage; a potential “bait and switch” tactic which could be used to exceed the maximum storeys per the Broadway Plan.
The submitted design has 112 rental units with 20% of the units below market (per the City’s definition). A total building height of 65.8m or 226 ft. is requested, with a FSR of 6.5. A total of 47 new parking spaces are proposed for residential uses, along with the replacement of 33 spaces for commercial uses (as part of an existing covenant with 2609 Granville St.).
The designers are omb (office of mcfarlane biggar architects + designers).
The proponent behind the submission is Reliance Properties (https://relianceproperties.ca/about/, CEO Jon Stovell).
[Inset – Reliance Properties CEO John Stovell is leaves no room for doubt about what he beliefs is the best way to make housing more affordable (see “How an industry-spawned Vancouver-centric ‘YIMBY’ narrative has severely twisted B.C. NDP housing ideology and massive legislation changes (Bills 44, 46 and 47)“)]
For the record, according to BC Assessment, the property was assessed as of July 1, 2023, at $8,483,700 (of which, $8,482,000 for was land, down from $8,483,600 in 2022; the Broadway Plan was approved June 22, 2022) and there was no sales history in the previous three full calendar years. Bookmark this page and check back in a year or two to see how, if approved, this rezoning affects land value. According to our research, the property appears to be owned by Reliance Properties, with the beneficial owners being identified as five Chechiks, two Cohens, two Goldsteins, and four Leshgolds.
Always interested in systems thinking, we are trying to figure out the business models of the entities behind the massive rezonings in the Broadway Plan area and also make the connections between the lobbyists/proponents/advocates of the Broadway Plan prior to its adoption in 2022, and those to benefit the most from it. Also, YIMBY activists need to know — when they are rallying their troops via Reddit, Discord, letter generators and social media to lobby City Council to approve rezonings that produce massive land lifts — who are the landowners they actually serving and helping to enrich? When tenants are paying rent in a new rental tower for decades to come, whose wealth is increased? Is there any connection between political donations and government policy and decisions? And to what extent does this all benefit society as a whole?
Now, let’s look at the work of the City planners. Here, yet again, despite clear policies written in the Broadway Plan, those in charge appear to have ignored their own Broadway Plan Solar Protection rules. In the City’s hierarchy, one could say the buck stops with the newly hired chief planner, Josh White, who started in this role on May 1, 2024. We hope he will investigate the performance levels of the relevant departments, take responsibility, and boost the integrity level. Above him is City Manager Paul Mochrie. And above him, Mayor Ken Sim and City Council. This is all the more crucial now that, as of June 12, 2024, the City of Vancouver will be working to turn the Vancouver Plan into the Official Development Plan for the city, eventually eliminating the checks and balances otherwise provided by public hearings. Public trust in the quality and honesty of work of the municipal government needs to be earned.
Here’s an enlarged and annotated section of the solar access map ; it’s clear that the VSB greenspace is designated as protected.
We’ve included several renderings of the proposed building (and shadows) in our Broadway Plan 3D model in the following slideshow:
March 20, 10am 
August 31, 10am 
August 31, 10:15am shadow extends over protected greenspace 
September 22, 4pm shades east side of Granville Street 
Aug 31, 4pm shades Granville Street 
August 31, 10am View from Fir Street over greenspace 
August 31, 10am 
View up from sidewalk 
Context (Fir St. & West 11th Ave in foreground) 
March 20, 10am 
March 20, 11am 
March 20, 11am 
March 20, 12:15pm Shadow still cast onto designated greenspace 
March 20th 10am 
March 20th 11am 
March 20th 12pm 
March 20th 4pm 
Context (Granville Street and West 10th Avenue in foreground, looking southwest)
One might wonder why planners create a section in the Broadway Plan to protect solar access to greenspace, sell this provision to Council, and then subsequently ignore it once the plan is approved. The public assumes the relevant departments will apply critical thought and intellectual honesty. Who is protecting the public interest? What motivates these departments to violate the Broadway Plan?
During the public consultation that ends June 18th, it should be possible to send comments directly to staff via an online form. There is also a Q&A tab on the ShapeYourCity page where questions can be posted publicly. Staff say that they will respond within two days. It could be a good practice for people who submit questions to keep track of what they submitted and also track if these questions are answered online, or if the questions are omitted and never made live.
The information on the rezoning was just posted on May 17, 2024, while staff had received the application on February 29, 2024 and kept this under wraps. We have more analysis about an earlier iteration of this design in a previous post: First proposal already violates the just-approved Broadway Plan on multiple counts (20-storey tower at 1540 West 10th Ave), Sept 12, 2022
Above: A link to our previous post on this Broadway Plan proposal.
Below are a few excerpts of the Broadway Plan. The full 500 page document is available here.
Building Height
11.1.12 Generally, residential floor-to-floor heights of 3.0 m (10 ft.) are supported, office floor-to-floor heights of 3.65 m (12 ft.) are supported, and industrial floor-to-floor heights of 6.1 m (20 ft.) are supported.
11.4.1 A consistent 4-storey podium should be provided in residential areas to create a consistent street wall that is compatible with existing neighbourhood character and preserves solar access across the street.
p. 70 Privately-Initiated Rezonings: “In all instances, the overall height, density, and form of development should be sensitive to the surrounding context. This would include consideration of street character, views, shadowing, topography, access and circulation, and privacy.”
“Tower site frontage requirements: The Policy Area summary tables in Chapters 8-10 typically have a minimum site frontage requirement for tower forms. For areas where the minimum site frontage is 36.6 m (120 ft.) to 45.7 m (150 ft.), development proposals with lesser frontage may be considered at the discretion of the Director of Planning, where the proposal meets the following criteria:
» Sites have a minimum frontage of 30.2 metres (99 ft.);
» The project satisfies the Plan’s built form and site design principles; and,
» The applicant demonstrates that the development reasonably mitigates development limitations on adjacent properties.
Shadow limits p. 288 “Proposed new development should not create new shadow impact on parks and public school yards from the spring to fall equinoxes between 10AM and 4PM.“
PID: 005-410-941
CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions 
Not sure what the developer means by…
“Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply,Supply…?”
If he means that AFFORDABILITY will follow, because the Laws of Supply & Demand guarantee lower prices when there is more supply, that dog won’t hunt.
Adding supply in the form of residential towers will not LOWER prices.
Why? Because of what economists tell us, that the “value is all in the land.” What is in short supply is not towers, but… LAND.
Building more towers will only lift prices higher. Because building more towers does not “add land.” Only by adding new land, and guaranteeing affordability on title, can we provide houses for every Canadian.
Rather than putting downward pressure on prices, the supply-supply-supply chanting developer is milking cow while basking in compassionate narcissism.
All that is happening on this site, and every tower site in Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, is developers are taking profits, while government is extracting revenue.
No Community Amenity Charges (CACs in Vancouver, DCCs everywhere else) on this project, you say? Another snake in the grass move by government captured by the development industry.
Let’s suss out the ‘20% rental’ sweetheart deal developers are crawling over each other to grab.
In towers like this, if the ‘20% of the units’—you know the units that would normally sell or rent for less, the units in the lower floors for example—rent at ‘below market rates,’ then government will forgo the development charges or CACs.
However, renting 20% of the units ‘below market rates’ does not GUARANTEE AFFORDABILITY. In the first place, because market rents are not affordable. And secondly, because rents just keep spiralling up.
Thus, being ‘below market rent’ in 20% of the units, and 100% un-AFFORDABLE on 80% of the units is not good governance.
But it is certainly good business. Try to keep up with this Bizzaro world:
By ‘adding density’ government is increases land values.
When land values go up, the cost of the units—whether you rent or buy—increase. In other words, by ‘adding density’ government is increasing un-AFFORDABILITY.
There is another way in which building ‘Towers and Skytrain’ is undermining Canadian democracy.
‘Turning the population from owners into renters,’ must not be confused with ‘good government policy.’ Just like the Regional Growth Strategies that mandate ‘building up instead of out’ are not ‘good environmental policy.’
Home ownership is the baseline proposition of our democracy.
Homeowners have a stake in their place, their neighborhood, and their government. They also have access to equity, borrowing money, starting businesses, and pursuing their entrepreneurial instincts.
Turning Canadians from home owners into renters is just creating a new feudalism. A postmodern colonialism with the supply-supply-supply-siders lording it over everyone else.