Vancouver Downtown Eastside Discussion

[quobobo]

^ That's Frances Bula, from her website.

[logan5]

Right. I forgot to mention the Bula Blog in my post. I always thought "City Plumber" was a different person.

[jlousa]

I know Frances reads this site and we have crossed paths on more then a few occasions. She is a great reporter but in my opinion noone should mistake her for being neutral anymore. Her boycrush on Robertson has made her reluctant to badmouth Vision, or perhaps as the Globes Vancouver civic reporter she doesn't want to upset anyone at the hall too much for risk of being cut off to pre information circuit and potential harming her livelihood. Whatever the case I always takes what she has to say nowadays with a grain of salt.
My understanding of the current plan as it is proposed (I attended the last session put on by the planner last week) is that Michael Gellars interpretion is infact correct.

From the plan as proposed right now.

Policies
6.4.1
Prioritize the area for affordable rental housing for low and moderate income and for the provision of 60% social housing units and 40% secured market rental housing units.

6.4.2
Facilitate compatible new residential and mixed-use development, while reinforcing the existing scale and character of the area.

6.4.3
Support developments with 100% social housing or significant heritage assets by offering additional height and related bonus dens

Cut and Paste isn't working well but read section 7.5.2 For DEOD subarea 1
and section 7.6.1 and 7.6.2 for subareas 2,3 and 4.

http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/downtown-eastside-draft-local-area-plan.pdf

The plan also does away with yet another chuck of industrial area within the city in the name of creating additional family housing. Great to have new family housing while removing the jobs required to support that family.
Must be the new eco-agenda which I still can't understand.

Note the plan hasn't been approved yet and is subject to change but it's not likely to vary much at this stage.

PS Frances if you're reading and take offense I'll buy you a costco hotdog.

[spm2013]

We will all get jobs at Hootsuite.

[logan5]

Looking at the table on page 70, http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/downtown-eastside-draft-local-area-plan.pdf, it says...

sub areas 2,3,4 (Oppenheimer Park) - over 1 FSR to provide 60% social housing and 40% market rental to a max of 2.5 FSR

So if the developer builds at 1 FSR, they are exempt from building rentals and social housing? The city is forcing the developer to build 4 - 6 unit buildings to avoid the social housing component. The Geller scenario just doesn't make sense.

[jlousa]

No the Gellar point is valid, read about it on his blog where it explains it better in his own words.
The things to note as well is the city is talking about providing subsidies to make these projects work financially but has no funding to do so and has admitted as much in the learning sessions on the plan. So in all honestly there is not much likelihood anything will be built in the DEOD under the current plan and that's one of Gellars biggest concerns.
At least the rest of the plan doesn't suffer from the same conditions imposed on the DEOD subareas.

[logan5]

Meanwhile, I would encourage every Vancouver resident to take a walk around Hastings and Main and consider whether a ban on allowing people to purchase homes in this neighbourhood really seems like a sensible planning approach.

That's a quote from Gellers blog. According to the city, a building at 1 FSR in Oppenheimer can have market condos to purchase. I'm not convinced that Geller has a 100% handle on what is being planned for the area.

[WarrenC12]

The kneejerk reaction to loss of industrial lands is silly. There's a ton of industrial land left in Vancouver, particularly along the Fraser. Much of it has been sitting empty for years, so to pretend that anybody is removing industrial land that is in high demand and providing jobs today is simply wrong.

[spm2013]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The kneejerk reaction to loss of industrial lands is silly. There's a ton of industrial land left in Vancouver, particularly along the Fraser. Much of it has been sitting empty for years, so to pretend that anybody is removing industrial land that is in high demand and providing jobs today is simply wrong.

Well once it goes residential, give it time and everything up to the port will be residential once the NIMBYs start complaining about their mysterious new neighbour next door that has semi-trailers pulling up to drop off stuff.

I'm more surprised that entire corridor of Hastings wasn't already planned for condos.

[jlousa]

Industrial land is often left empty or derelict in order to justify a future rezoning. It's a common tactic and one that works unfortunately. The region needs a ILR and it needs it badly. Once that land is placed in it and can not be removed we'll see much less shenanigans and an improved local economy.

M. Gellar is aware that the projects could still be built 100% market at existing zoning of 1FSR. No one is going to bother developing at 1FSR. Nothing is stopping them for doing it now. You need to get up to FSRs of 2.5+ to make the numbers work. The fact is even 100% market housing would need to be marketed at a discount in that area to attract buyers.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Industrial land is often left empty or derelict in order to justify a future rezoning. It's a common tactic and one that works unfortunately. The region needs a ILR and it needs it badly. Once that land is placed in it and can not be removed we'll see much less shenanigans and an improved local economy.

M. Gellar is aware that the projects could still be built 100% market at existing zoning of 1FSR. No one is going to bother developing at 1FSR. Nothing is stopping them for doing it now. You need to get up to FSRs of 2.5+ to make the numbers work. The fact is even 100% market housing would need to be marketed at a discount in that area to attract buyers.

Definitely. The deindustrialization of North America was scary and Vancouver doesn't seem to care much about stopping it.

[spm2013]

Article on Japantown from the Province:

Burger likes the character of the small heritage buildings in the area, but fears they will get caught between the twin forces of condo development and social housing.

“This area is at a critical turning point, and the current (city) policy will wipe this off the map, because it will be financially unviable to do what we’re doing here,” he said.

“It will be financially viable to push over 200 to 300 linear feet on a block and raise up a beige condo. I’m not saying that’s the end of the world, but it kills the small, independent creative working class, which are in this neighbourhood, flying under the radar. Typically illegally, because they can’t get the proper zoning to do what they’re trying to do.

“We have policy that doesn’t fit the existing condition, and policy which is going to concentrate the social (problems) in this area.”

A new Downtown Eastside Area Plan calls for 3,350 more social housing units in the area in the next 30 years. Some would be built in Chinatown, Gastown and Strathcona, but most would likely go on Hastings Street or Japantown.

Burger doesn’t think importing more poverty into one of Vancouver’s poorest neighbourhoods is a good idea.

“It’s an undisclosed political agenda to cordon off an area of the city and call it a ghetto,” he says.

“They don’t want to tell you that politically, but that’s what they’re doing here. There’s no other reason to concentrate poverty, the social service agencies, the drug issues, all within this area.

“It’s like putting an alcoholic in a bar and telling him that it’s gonna get better. It doesn’t work.”

The city’s McNaney, on the other hand, thinks the new Downtown Eastside plan will make Japantown a “mixed income community.”

“We see it changing slowly over time,” he said. “It’s primarily a rental housing district right now, whether it’s social housing or market rental, and the plan really sees it remaining a rental housing area. There will be some continued home ownership, of course. (But) we’re adding social mix to that area, in particular we’re adding market rental, as an appropriate mix for that part of town.”

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Japantown+Vancouver+lost+neighbourhood/9483788/story.html

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Industrial land is often left empty or derelict in order to justify a future rezoning. It's a common tactic and one that works unfortunately. The region needs a ILR and it needs it badly. Once that land is placed in it and can not be removed we'll see much less shenanigans and an improved local economy.

M. Gellar is aware that the projects could still be built 100% market at existing zoning of 1FSR. No one is going to bother developing at 1FSR. Nothing is stopping them for doing it now. You need to get up to FSRs of 2.5+ to make the numbers work. The fact is even 100% market housing would need to be marketed at a discount in that area to attract buyers.

The Bula Blog explanation sounds accurate. Do you seriously think the city would give a worse deal than Norquay? 3 tier social housing is far different from 60% welfare rate. I'll bet you 100 costco hotdogs I'm right. In fact tell me your numbers. The densities proposed in that area are above 2.5 and go up to 5 FSR.

[jlousa]

Originally Posted by logan5

The Bula Blog explanation sounds accurate. Do you seriously think the city would give a worse deal than Norquay? 3 tier social housing is far different from 60% welfare rate. I'll bet you 100 costco hotdogs I'm right. In fact tell me your numbers. The densities proposed in that area are above 2.5 and go up to 5 FSR.

I'm quoting this because it's well too funny. I don't want the hotdogs though best you save your money. Come out to one of the meets someday you might learn a thing or two.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jlousa

I'm quoting this because it's well too funny. I don't want the hotdogs though best you save your money. Come out to one of the meets someday you might learn a thing or two.

Tell me which part of the Bula Blog explanation is wrong... I'll learn a thing or two right now.

A developer can still build 1 FSR of for-sale condos in the new project. (For those just joining the urban-planning world, 1 FSR means you can build a building to the equivalent of the square footage of the lot. So if a lot is 33 x 100, the building can be 3300 square feet, in whatever form you want. One floor of 3,300, two floors of 1,650, three floors of 1,100, etc.) The remainder has to be rental. Sixty per cent of that rental has to be “social housing,” which means, in essence, that it’s below-market in some way. The city’s formula is that a third of that should be deep subsidy (so essentially rented out at welfare rates), a third at shallow subsidy (so rent at 30 per cent of the person’s income, for those who are low-income but not on welfare), and a third at prevailing market rates in the area for all apartments (so you can’t charge the normal rent that you’d get for a new unit.) That’s a super-shallow subsidy, but does encourage people of a different income group to mix in.

[jlousa]

Here is the report the city commissioned in order to see if the plan is viable. Hint it's not pretty and confirms what the those in the industry have been warning the city about.

http://former.vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20140312/documents/cfsc5memo.PDF

[logan5]

The summery report for the Oppenheimer District goes on the assumption that there are no strata units, which I thought up to 1 FSR was allowed, but whatever. I've given up on Oppenheimer for now.

With all the heritage buildings and social housing already there, I don't think there is a lot of development potential anyways. The Hastings Corridor from Heatly to Commercial, and Main street/Chinatown will provide a lot of new residents to reinvigorate Oppenheimer.

[jollyburger]

Start by blanketing ever corner of the DTES with CCTV.

As part of a plan designed to revitalize Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, Mayor Ken Sim announced Thursday that the city will pause the construction of net new supportive housing units.

Speaking at a forum held by the Save Our Streets B.C. Coalition, Sim announced his plan to transform the neighbourhood by breaking up supportive housing, shelter services, and social services to encourage a mix of housing and businesses.

Sim claims the current state of the Downtown Eastside has led to a “cycle of instability and decline,” weighing unfairly on Vancouver.

“For too long, multiple levels of government have been able and encouraged the concentration of supportive housing, shelter spaces and dozens of social service nonprofit organizations in this small, four-square-kilometre neighbourhood. The results have been the Downtown Eastside becoming the epicentre of intersecting proceeds, mental health, poverty, and homelessness, not just for Vancouver, but for the entire region and the province,” said Sim.

“By pausing the construction of net new supportive housing units in Vancouver, the city can focus on renewing and revitalizing the current aging housing stock to better meet residents’ needs until supportive housing availability increases across the region,” it explained.

Ever focused on business, Sim says his plan will help open “vacant storefronts” in the neighbourhood and allow local businesses to thrive. Referring to the Downtown Eastside as a “poverty industrial complex,” Sim says it attracts “predatory criminals” who victimize residents and businesses.

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2025/01/23/vancouver-mayor-sim-announces-dtes-transform-plan/

[WarrenC12]

Sounds like a lot of market redevelopment coming to the DTES. Guess who owns a lot of property down there?

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Sounds like a lot of market redevelopment coming to the DTES. Guess who owns a lot of property down there?

Army & Navy site first.