CD-1 Rezoning West 10th Avenue Amendment

Okay. Thank you for that. Can I get someone to move the recommendation? Moved. Councillor Kirby Young, seconded by Councillor Zhou. And we're moving into debate and decision. Please place yourself in the queue if you would like to debate this item. And I'll advance. Councillor Kirby-Young, go ahead.

Yeah, thanks. I know it's late, but I just feel compelled just to provide some brief comments on this one. It's an interesting trade-off. We do know that a lot of projects are challenged economically and are not necessarily moving forward, which is why Council supported some staff recommendations with respects to trying to put measures in place that would enhance development viability and ensure that we continue to deliver more homes. We're starting to see some of those applications coming forward, and we are going through a process, I think, of explaining the impact of some of those changes that are resulting in yellow memos to the public. This particular one is interesting to me. I would expect that in most projects like this, when something is proposed as a 10% BMR, because I think a lot of the public have become used to the 20% below market rental that we would hear that it's not affordable enough. And so people want us to deliver more housing. They want us to deliver the tenure that is attainable for people, which is rental. and they do want the below market. So it is an interesting trade-off, and this is all about calibration, I think, and balance. We could, council has, as with any application, can support it, amend it, or reject it. Effectively, in my mind, if it's amended or if it's rejected on this basis, it will not result in delivering the almost 700 rental homes. And as we heard earlier, I think the applicant did say, but it's true, entitlements doesn't necessarily mean delivery. I think our director of planning articulated very well that not every project can deliver every form of public benefit in a utopic world. That would be great, where you could get below market and childcare and public space and all of those things. We're unfortunately not in that situation. Every time I see it, it gives me pause, not on the specific application, but when the city has been doing so much heavy lifting to deliver on housing affordability and child care, which have predominantly and historically been the purview of senior governments to the point that we have neglected our own house and we have crumbling... city amenities and infrastructure so does it hurt me a little bit that the city is taking a 9.3 million reduction in dcls yes it does because i would love to see us shoring up our parks community centers and other things but i'm also aware that that 9.3 million dollars is hypothetical if a building doesn't actually get built it's just dcls on paper And so all of that in balance is that financing is difficult to achieve. It does require a significant amount of equity, particularly on large-scale projects like this. And I did think it was noteworthy, I think it was mentioned earlier, that this is the only project in BC to receive funding through CMHC's apartment construction loan financing program. That is a big statement. And considering the need that we have, and we are one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, That is disturbing. So this is about trade-offs and weighing it. That is the job that we have to do in front of us. And that doesn't always mean that those decisions are perfect. But having 700 new homes is better than a building not proceeding. Having an intention, which I hope is genuine, and we did hear the applicant speak to that on the record, to try to lease that space to a child care operator makes sense. It sounds like it's been provisioned that A normal commercial operator or a retail type probably wouldn't want it because you don't have the street frontage. And so it was referenced that it has sort of outdoor space and access. So keeping sort of, you know, respecting sort of statements that were made around that one. But I think on balance, it is the greater good to move this project forward. This, I think, really does outline a project or two major issues that we have in the city. One, which is ensuring that we don't end up with a lot of sort of a dearth of projects being built. And if we start to see a decrease in supply. We will not continue to see some of the declines in rent and the increases in vacancy rate that we have seen, which we need. And we will continue to financially be stuck at the city in terms of trying to deliver community amenities, which do come in many forms. So on balance and in weighing all of it, I will support the application. Thank you.

Thanks, Councillor Kirby. I'm just going to add a couple of comments. Oh, yes. I'll relinquish the chair to you, Mr. Kirby Young. Thanks. I think really appreciating the dialogue this evening, and I'm recognizing it is late, and hearing from the different speakers, some of you are still here, around what has been, I think, well articulated by Councillor Kirby Young, but also by our staff around that sometimes in this decision-making, it really is about trade-offs. And I thought our general manager really was bang on in articulating that not every project can solve every problem, because that was going through my mind as I was seeing this application come back, having been on council when we initially approved it. And I think that what I find interesting in particular is listening to Councillor Maloney's questions around the CMHC financing process, And I think we need to look at things in context right now. There's a market context, which may be beyond our control. There's some things we've initiated at council to try to better enable a whole continuum of housing in the city. But in the global context and federal context, the federal government wants to deliver on housing right now. That is one of the number one things. There's other major projects across the country they're looking at, but one is definitely housing. And so I think when we look at CMHC financing... And the question as to whether why is it, you know, they're not considering child care in this. They have a very clear mandate on housing, and the new prime minister of federal government has articulated that. And I think the other piece I would say is we are increasingly seeing projects come forward. They're being rezoned or properties and sites, and nothing is being delivered in this market. And this is a stone's throw away from SkyTrain Station, literally a stone's throw away, and it is an opportunity to deliver housing both market rental and below market rental, right adjacent to rapid transit, in an area that is shifting and developing and growing, and I think in a positive way. I was just there a couple weeks ago. So I am also of the mind to support the text amendment at this time. I think that... There may be some innovative opportunities that can be undertaken with the commercial space with child care operators. I'll leave that to the applicant to sort out because I did appreciate the clarity and clarification that indeed the space is really being designed for the purpose and use of a child care operator in the future. So that is not lost here and that that will be maintained as well. So on balance, I'm prepared to support the application. I'll now move to Councillor Orr and then Councillor Maloney. for final comments. Go ahead, Councillor Orr.

This is Councillor Claussen. Can you put me on the queue, please? Thank you.

Yes, we can. Thank you for flagging that. Go ahead, Councillor Orr.

Thanks. Yeah, I appreciate the discussion. I definitely think there's room to look more closely at policy around converting in child care to commercial zoning and around security of tenure. And I will note that Council did just make it easier for developers to build childcare. I think saying no to this would mean saying no to both rental housing and private childcare. I wasn't on council when this was approved, so it's difficult to hear that people feel like it was a bait and switch.

I appreciate the staff response on the precedence question and the perceived error and the discussion around CMHC financing and the talk of trade-offs was really valuable for me. And I understand from the speaker, you know, that there's... not the same value in exchange of BMR and childcare. They're just not equal. And I get that too. And as we saw today, you know, 20% BMR is going to become more rare with this rental relief program. We changed it to 20% average. So I feel kind of like I'm in an impossible position here to either to vote for affordable rentals or city-owned childcare. I think it's a really tough one. I think it also really underscores the importance of public hearings, kind of underscores also just the interesting sort of place that we find ourselves recently in terms of... you know, just dealing with this difficult market and the things that people have to do to get stuff built. But so I think in lieu of a policy, a specific policy on this, I think I'll abstain. Thanks.

Sorry. I think Councillor Maloney was ahead of Councillor Claussen, or did you move yourself, Councillor Maloney? You're good?

Okay, just checking. Okay, go ahead, Councillor Claussen.

Thanks very much.

So it has been a long night and a long day, but I wanted just to provide just a few quick comments here, particularly zeroing in on the on the child care, as I think some of my colleagues on Council have already addressed. uh some of the more remarkable aspects including that cmhc funding it clearly took a lot of uh inertia and and uh and dedication to try and see this building get built and um there was some creativity uh in involved in that which i think deserves to be acknowledged but um just to understand There's been a significant amount of work that has taken place. I know that Counselor Dominato and myself have zeroed in a lot on the child care file during this term. The most recent... the report that came back that was approved by council that it allowed for additional ways for us to have more relaxation to allow home based child care. It's been a long time since my daughter was in childcare. She's in her 20s now. So I don't want to try and say that I can relate to parents that are struggling today, but boy, all the people I have spoken to in this area, have been desperate for spaces and too often they're having to drive over bridges and into other municipalities to try and find spaces just so they can keep working. Having access to childcare, regardless of the operator, is an absolute need. And when we say that we have a turnkey space, That just means that the city would essentially be able to decide who was going to be the operator. And as we heard today from the provincial budget, the 10-a-day funding is on hold indefinitely. So that means that it's going to be harder and harder for that. publicly funded childcare is gonna be really hard to get. And so in lieu of that, we're seeing some excellent private operators that are coming forward and providing absolutely class A childcare. And so I just wanna kind of, for that standpoint, try to signal very strongly, both to the applicant, but also the community members that came out to speak today, that I think Notwithstanding some of the fears that were expressed, I think we are going to see from the space that was essentially is being built that is designed for child care will have a child care operator in there. And that's something that I know that we'll be watching closely as this project proceeds. But I think do not lose hope because I do think there are some really great child care operators, both public and private and not for profit. uh that are all out there um and uh and we were seeing uh really great operators coming forward and it's in in part due to the great work our city staff have done um with some direction from council to try and again think more outside the box and how we can try and create more spaces so anyway i'm i'm intending to to support this text amendment but i just want to add those reflections on the child care piece thanks very much

Thank you, Councillor Clarson. Councillor Maloney.

Yeah, this is a tough one. Without CMHC funding, this project doesn't go ahead and CMHC isn't funding without 20% below market and we need housing. And we can't have both the childcare as envisioned and the below market and have it built. But I'm very concerned about... childcare facilities going by the wayside and the effect that that's going to have on parents not having as many childcare places in the pipeline. Because I know we've heard that we've got lots of childcare in the pipeline, but compared to the need, it's nowhere near enough. So I know that this still provides the space for childcare, but obviously it would be better if it was city-owned affordable childcare. And I feel like, as lovely as it is, the home-based childcare that we passed just isn't going to make a dent in delivering the childcare that we need. And as I said, it's going to be parents that suffer. But I would rather this go ahead than not. It's just that it's a real shame all around. So I'm trying to decide between abstaining and voting yes. And so I have about probably 10 seconds to make that decision. Thank you. You do indeed, Councillor Maloney.

I'll try to speak slowly. Thank you. I do not see any other councillors on the queue. I'm just going to clear it now. And so with that, I am going to call the vote. And just a reminder to councillors online, please have your video enabled, please be visible, and please vote online.

Clerks, I will take a vote. Assist in favour, please.

Yes, indeed. We'll do that.