1805 Larch Street

After several months without any updates, Hannah and I were excited to see a massive dump of Freedom of Information requests finally revealed. Scouring literally hundreds of pages has left us with a better appreciation of the economics behind the Moderate Income Rental Housing Pilot Program, and the dire situation this proposal faces (Documents A, B, C and D). Though that’s partially due to land values in Kitsilano being among the highest in Vancouver outside of Downtown (A-12), the difficulties go far beyond that.

The story begins on February 16th, 2018 (A-115), with a pre-enquiry for a proposal that offers studio homes which will rent for $950, 3-bedrooms for $2,000 and rent increases limited to those under the Residential Tenancies Act, regardless of turnover. In their review, well-intentioned city staff balance the needs of affordable rental housing with the aforementioned economic realities, and conclude that the proposed 3.0 FSR is reasonable, as an FSR of at least 2.75 is needed to be viable (A-12).

April 1st, 2018 Rendering -Source (C-26)

On March 19th (A-77), this application was officially accepted into the MIRHP Program. This decision may have been leaked out, as the day before the enquiry was submitted (A-6), the city receives an email from the property’s basement tenant. In it, the 20 space Pacific Rim Montesorri promises to rally massive community opposition if any development goes ahead (A-166). Unfortunately, this threat isn’t shared with the city’s Social Planning team until a letter arrives from the Honourable David Eby on June 7th (A-53).

This kicks off a flurry of activity. As the long term tenants, Tenth Church had already made alternate arrangements (A-141), so provincial and city staff reach out to the Kitsilano Neighbourhood House and Hudson Out-of-School Care Society to ensure this building doesn’t sit empty throughout the rezoning process. Both organizations (A-133 & A-174) seem eager to take over temporarily, despite the poor condition of the building’s roof (A-96).

In early July, discussion between city staff (A-184), the applicants (A-135), and the MLA (A-15) break down, forcing the city’s management team to act. By August 17th, their skilled hands help secure a lease extension for the church until September 30th, 2019 (A-81). Despite the good news, roughly a week before the project is made public, opposition emails began to flood in (A-112).

April 1st, 2018 Rendering – Source (C-31)

It’s hard to believe that someone in the city would be leaking confidential information, but based on this, and other recent events, that could be the case. Ironically, many letters complain about the lack of consultation (A-80, 116, & 222), even though the pre-application open house wasn’t scheduled until September 12th. These comments set the tone for that event, as people promise to resist this change in the strongest possible terms. As one persons states, “new homes shouldn’t allow people million dollar views” (A-183).

The city led open house may have exceeded fire safety limits, but the pre-application event sounds like it was much worse. Described as a Monster Trojan Horse (B-18 & 45), some feared these homes would let renters parachute into the neighbourhood, a “draconian” change many boasted of fighting for forty years (B-30 & 47). A few claimed they understood that affordable housing was needed in Vancouver, but didn’t think it belonged in this neighbourhood (B-19), and one person admitted they would rather see Kitsilano emulate West Point Grey instead (B-38).



January 24th, 2019 Rendering –Source

By far the most disturbing submission was a list that claimed renters were best kept in basement suites so homeowners could “keep an eye on how they behave” (B-8). In contrast, BC’s Attorney General (B-96), along with some local business owners (B-123) expressed support, and so did their employees. Many made it clear they would love to have the chance to live in the community they grew up (B-121, 132) and/or work in, rather than commuting daily from East Vancouver (B-170), or even Surrey (B-163).

While these positive comments outnumbered the negative (B-86), their pleas were overruled. To appease the vocal opposition, city staff reviewed the proposal’s proforma again in November (A-107) to justify a previously nonviable FSR of 2.55. In the end, the applicant had to leave five voice-mails (A-126) before they were informed that one floor, with roughly 800 sq.m. (8,500 sq. ft.) of living space, had been eliminated (A-99 & 169). Rather than having a calming effect, this decision only seems to have emboldened the opposition groups.

As this is the last entry in the FOI, there’s no way to know how this remains a worthwhile endeavour for the applicant. However, they are clearly lucky that the Urban Design Panel found the proposal supportable, as it’s unlikely their vision could survive any further cutbacks or long delays. Which means your opinion could either speed these homes to reality, or help kill them dead. That’s your decision to make, so long as you leave your comments here.

Applicant Team Information:

Developer – Jameson Development Corp

Architects – Metric Architecture

Landscape Architects – Damon Oriente Ltd.