Skip to main content

About three dozen speakers came to city hall to voice their opinions on the plan, and many more wrote to council.

DARRYL DYCK/The Canadian Press

Vancouver’s city council has approved a new rental housing policy that will allow apartments on side streets, permit the creation of rental-only zoning for some commercial areas, and speed up the process for approving projects on main streets.

Mayor Kennedy Stewart and some housing advocates said the approval was a sign that the city council and many residents – even those in areas that have traditionally been dubious about anything but single detached houses – are accepting that Vancouver needs to take a different approach to solving the city’s housing crisis.

“What struck me was how homeowners from the west side were saying, ‘Uncle, we’ve had enough. We need densification,’” Mr. Stewart said.

Story continues below advertisement

The rental-housing policy was passed in a vote Tuesday night after 12 hours of debate.

The city’s main developer association said one major flaw with the new policy was that it was changed in a late amendment Tuesday to impose new restrictions on developing rentals along main streets, even while now allowing them to go up to six stories, instead of four, without having to go through a lengthy public-hearing process.

“Very concerned they made the change, against the recommendations of staff,” said Anne McMullin, chief executive officer of the Urban Development Institute.

The change means that developers will now have to offer the same kind of significant compensation to renters being displaced from apartments above stores on main streets, similar to the kind of compensation now required for those in stand-alone apartment buildings that are being redeveloped.

In a letter sent to council in May, Ms. McMullin said the move, being considered (and eventually rejected) during early consultation, would be unprecedented in its impact.

She said it would change the rules midstream on several projects, essentially changing the zoning in a way that reduces the overall value of the land, and create significant new financial barriers to developing rentals on those kinds of sites.

But the mayor emphasized that the city’s proposed new policy, which still needs to get approval after a public-hearing process for some parts, will eliminate up to two years of wait time for development applications. That should help encourage such applications, he said.

Story continues below advertisement

The spokesman for LandlordBC said he hoped that would be the impact.

The move to allow rental apartments to be built in a 50-metre “transition zone” next to main streets was a good step, CEO David Hutniak said.

“I do feel like we’re making some progress.”

But, he said, it is a sign of a continuing problem in the city that the initiative wasn’t bolder.

“It should not have been just one street over, it should have been deeper in,” Mr. Hutniak said.

He did think allowing six-storey rental buildings on main streets without a rezoning or public hearing was probably the biggest win for housing in the city.

Story continues below advertisement

“If you can get nice six-storey stuff up there, that has the most immediate potential. I’m walking away optimistic.”

The long debate and public input Tuesday, however, was a sign of a changing mood in the city, said many.

About three dozen speakers came to city hall to voice their opinions on the plan, and many more wrote to council.

While some were traditional opponents, concerned about too-dramatic changes to neighbourhoods or policies not focused enough on producing the lowest-cost-possible housing, many came out in support, including renters, developers and non-profit groups.

We have a weekly Western Canada newsletter written by our B.C. and Alberta bureau chiefs, providing a comprehensive package of the news you need to know about the region and its place in the issues facing Canada. Sign up today.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies