Scaled Up Small Rapid Shelter Systems
Motion 11 · Standing Committee on Policy and Strategic Priorities, May 6, 2026
Summary
- Directed staff to work with engineering, provincial regulators, and the Vancouver Robotics/delivery industry to develop a framework for a six-month autonomous sidewalk delivery robot pilot in downtown Vancouver and Kitsilano.
- Proponent CERV Robotics cited Canadian roots (Vancouver founder, UBC graduate), hundreds of thousands of deliveries in 20+ US cities, and commitments on accessibility, data sharing, and field agent response.
- Supporters pointed to benefits for local restaurants, reduced vehicle trips, and Vancouver's tech hub reputation; critics raised concerns about sidewalk congestion, displacement of delivery workers, privacy of camera data, financial viability of the sector, and Toronto's ban.
- Bill 23 (BC, 2023) enables municipal pilots but provincial regulations remain pending; the motion also signals to the province to advance those regulations.
- Clauses A and B passed; two councillors abstained, two opposed.
Vote
In favour 3
Abstained 1
Public comments
Read all 10 statements
Transcript
34 segments
That completes motion four. here. The next item is Motion 5, a scaled-up response with small-scale shelter systems, and is to be moved and introduced by Councillor Frey. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare it. Does anyone have a conflict to disclose? Councillor Frye, you have up to two minutes to introduce your motion.
Yeah, I'm losing my voice from talking too much. So we all were here for the Metro Vancouver point-in-time homeless count just a month ago, which saw a 12% increase in folks... unhoused, unsheltered. 40% of those folks are unsheltered living outdoors. Last term and in the past, we had advocated for tiny rapid shelter solutions as an opportunity. This goes back to my own visit where I actually went to Dignity Village in Portland, Oregon and saw this firsthand. And many of you will have heard this story from me before. But the difference that a locking door and a roof over one's head makes is profound. And when we recognize from our recent homeless count that so many of these folks are ending up homeless, not because of any kind of stigmatizing reasons that folks might think. It's mostly because of economic reasons and housing unaffordability. And we know that these are solutions that can be deployed rapidly. And what we're seeing in Seattle with the pressures they have on unhoused population is that they are deploying hundreds of tiny shelters in an effort to manage their encampment situation, but also to meet their FIFA obligations. And this is a moment in time where we could make a difference. You know, when I first presented this and council in the last term approved this idea, I brought in some speakers from Pallet Shelters out of Everett, Washington, who construct these portable Ikea-style shelters that can be built in about half an hour, cost under $15,000, fiberglass and aluminum, durable. They're a roof over their heads. They've got egress. They've got windows. They've got locking doors. They've got full-down cots. They provide a level of dignity and shelter that... are far superior to SROs. We're living on the streets. And I think that's the intention here.
Thank you. Do we have a seconder? Seconded by Councillor Maloney. We'll now hear from registered speakers for the motion. Public speakers should state whether they're in support or in opposition to the recommendations and may only speak once. And I'll also ask speakers if they're residents of Vancouver, if it's not noted on the speakers list. And our first speaker is Stanley Lee.
good afternoon can you guys hear me yes we can and i do live in vancouver um and uh first of all i want to state my position on this motion as i'm i'm actually opposed even though i am sympathetic to the motions intense to house the homeless especially during visa I think my biggest concern is that it's number one, the scope creep. Number two, I think there are many other costs and other details that may not have been accounted for. For example, where are these modular tiny shelters going to be placed? I don't really know where we... there are potential like empty lots to place them. Also, I don't think there are, I don't think there's enough considerations on other costs like plumbing, sanitation, and especially security. They could balloon out of control, which circles back to my scope creep argument. I mean, the city's broke even beyond the zero means zero gimmick. Also, even though I believe the senior levels of government, like the province and the federal government, needs to chip in, I don't know how much luck you have with them either because they're also dead broke. So... I'm not really sure where you could get the money to house them temporarily, especially with all the new plans that are making the homeless situation worse. So while I appreciate the intent of the motion, I can't say I support it. Thank you.
Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is speaker number two, Annette Riley. Welcome back.
Just can't get enough today. Go ahead. Love seeing all your beautiful faces. Hi, I'm Annette Riley, if you haven't forgotten. I am a resident of Vancouver, and I'm speaking in support of this motion. At its core, this motion really is something very simple. It's about people needing somewhere safe to go. As of right now, in Vancouver, as we all know, we have far too many people who don't have that. With the latest homeless count showing homelessness in Vancouver has risen again to the highest number ever recorded, that should alarm every single one of us in this room and beyond. Because prolonged unsheltered homelessness, it doesn't just mean sleeping outside. It means worsening physical health, worsening mental health, and creating a greater vulnerability to violence. All of that costs us money out of our pockets. This motion, it recognizes that we are in an emergency. This is an emergency situation and emergencies require action that's practical, that's scalable and immediate. And I mean, it's in the words, rapid shelters. They're immediate. They're not permanent housing, of course. And they're not the complete solution, of course. But they're fast. They're a flexible tool that can provide safety and stability while long-term housing is built. It buys us time. And importantly, this motion recognizes something that advocates have been saying for years. Traditional shelter models don't work for everybody.
Many people living outside don't feel safe in large congregate shelters. The smaller scale shelters can provide more dignity, more privacy, and more trust, especially for people who have experienced trauma, violence, or instability. And we know that this approach can work. As mentioned, there's versions of these rapid low barrier shelters that have already been used in communities. They've been used in communities across British Columbia and beyond. So this motion isn't asking to reinvent the wheel. The wheel has already been invented. And yes, FIFA is part of this conversation. There's understandable fear that the pressure connected to this World Cup would worsen displacement for unhoused residents. But even without FIFA, this motion would still be necessary. Again, we're in a housing crisis already. Homelessness was already rising. And, you know, I'm going to be totally honest about something here. You can't pause supportive housing. You can't restrict shelter growth and then act surprised when more people end up living outside. So let's get behind this. Let's be practical. Let's be compassionate. And let's respond to the urgency of the moment. Thank you.
Hey, next speaker is Gabby Tremblay.
Hi there. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can. Please go ahead.
Wonderful. Thank you. My name is Gabby Tremblay. I am a resident of Vancouver, and I am here today in support of Councillor Pete Fry's motion, scaled-up response with small rapid shelter systems. Through my time working as an outreach worker in Vancouver's downtown Eastside on and off for the past six years, I've seen firsthand why many people who are unhoused or precariously housed avoid the current shelter system. People regularly speak about belongings being stolen, bedbugs, rodents, sites, assaults, and a lack of privacy and safety within large congregate shelters. At the same time, workers are often struggling just to secure someone a shelter bed at all. In reality, obtaining a 24-hour shelter bed today is incredibly difficult unless beds are specifically reserved through health authorities or the province. Some of these challenges may stem from the fact that many of our current shelters are simply too large and not designed in a way that works well for everyone. This motion puts forward a more community-centered approach that could help stabilize people currently living unsheltered outdoors. It is also important to highlight, as noted in this motion, that approximately 40% of people experiencing homelessness in Vancouver are currently unsheltered outdoors, rather than staying in shelters, on couches, or in temporary warming and cooling centers. That number alone demonstrates the need to rethink how we respond to homelessness in this city. In my current role as a part-time consultant and investment analyst for a mission-driven private equity firm that invests specifically in affordable housing, I regularly research housing market trends, housing delivery systems, and government policy. One thing that is clear is the importance of aligning with federal and provincial priorities and funding opportunities. According to federal data, modular, prefab, and mass timber construction approaches currently show significant potential for faster housing and shelter delivery. Lastly, reflecting on completing my master's degree at the UBC's School of Community and Regional Planning this past April, exactly half of my graduating cohort capstone projects focused on housing-related issues. This speaks to how urgent this issue has become, not only for government, but also for non-profits, faith-based groups, researchers, and community organizations across the city. A pilot project is one of the best ways to test and evaluate this approach. With the 2026 FIFA World Cup approaching, the need for action is even more urgent. It would not serve anyone for Vancouver to repeat mistakes made during Expo 86, when many vulnerable people were displaced without adequate shelter or support. I urge all Councillors to support this motion. Thank you.
Thank you. Next speaker is Effie Demeter.
Hello, I'm Effie. I am a resident of Vancouver. I'm here on behalf of my organization, Our Downtown Eastside, and the people of the Downtown Eastside. I guess I'm a little tall.
Tiny homes and shelters like this are not a long-term solution. They're a stopgap in what we hope to see happen in housing across the city. Shelters are not enough. They're already at capacity. There's a reason people are on the streets. They're at capacity, but I've worked in shelters as well, and they're disgusting, honestly. The state of them is unlivable, and so people are very desperate or they're scared. Another thing is that shelters tend to be for women. There's a disparity between vacancy for men and women, which does make sense, but also means that there's a gap in the healing and help. I actually came up with plans for tiny housing when I started this project, our downtown east side, in 2022 when the sweeps were happening because I saw people moving between Oppenheimer and Crab Park and why not designate those parks as spaces for shelter. I think also because we had a mild winter, people aren't thinking of that, but not I really appreciate that in the motion it says people need to be able to lock a door. That is such a strange privilege, and if you don't know what it's like to lose that, especially as a woman, you count yourself privileged.
I really hope that supportive housing... does come through for the city. But in the meantime, I don't understand why the majority of council and mayor would want to put this foot forward as the world comes to visit Vancouver. As all of us have said, FIFA is coming. And this is a blight on the city because of you, not the people that are living out there. The embarrassment should sit with you, not the people that are hurting and addicted. And I've seen, especially also with this week, the halting of an ops site downtown. The language and the attitude that came with that when Ken Sim put that forward in the news was like, we need to get rid of these people. We need to stop this. And that's a little bit how I feel about this current mayor and council.
Fia, I just need you to stay on topic.
Thanks for speaking. Next speaker is Speaker 5, Kylie Murphy.
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, please go ahead.
sorry about that um hello mayor salmon city council members my name is kylie murphy and i'm a member sorry of the downtown oppenheimer district here in vancouver british columbia i'm also a volunteer peer outreach worker I'm calling in today to urge you to vote in favor of Motion 5. I'm begging you to. I moved here in early 2020 as a far too trusting and far too naive individual. That is on me. In my first 30 days, I had spent my entire savings, which I had gained... Through my recent management of a, sorry, I had recently managed a department at an IKEA dealership. So, I mean, I also have a college certificate. I came here with full intention to become a nice, well, better paid because, let's face it, the island is turning into a place for retirement and people not like myself. I work very hard. when I'm able to, but like I said, on me being too naive and too trusting, I ended up in my first 30 days looking across what I called the flyway of a tent city, and that was really disheartening and depressing. I have lost, I didn't know life could be like this, to be honest. I wish you could understand what it was like to just dream and wish of having a window. The place I live, I've lived here for almost two years now, and Not having a window to open for fresh air is depressing as it is. I'm a first-generation woman, and I need oxygen. I need water, and the water in this building is also not very healthy. However, more to point... At Strathcona, it was noticed that I have found my interactivist, and I spoke at about at least four different press conferences to the unhoused and so forth. I was lucky enough to come across some paperwork where the city did a price evaluation on the different options they had available for so many unhoused individuals. And other than putting everybody in a gymnasium uncaught, The next cheapest one was, in fact, small houses. And I believe as a self-governed community, it has so many benefits that I wish I had the time to explain to you at the moment, but I know I only have so many minutes.
I also believe that if anybody has in your pocket a $10 bill and you look at it, It speaks to how Section 15 of the Charter says that we all have the same rights to and under before and after. Sorry, I can't remember the exact statement, but we all have the same rights under the protection of the Charter, regardless of discrimination. I try not to... put blame anywhere or on anyone, but I don't see any benefit.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you are over time.
Okay, well, I'm urgent.
Can you hear me? Hi. So good afternoon. I'm speaking in support for Motion 5. I do want to acknowledge the other speakers as well, and especially Kylie for their words and support. So again, my name is Sion New York. I live in Vancouver. I work with a group of former Crab Park, Kansas City residents and the IAC community bus, which is the Swamish word for crab. For over a year, the group has been providing mobile frontline support in the downtown east side. And the group has been actively calling for tiny homes and a tiny home village in Crab Park parking lot for several years. There was actually an online petition with over 2,200 signatures supporting the idea. So it shows there is a lot of support, including from organizations, including the Aboriginal Housing Management Association. The proposal in this petition, in the petition, builds on the experiences and knowledge of unhoused people, advocates, and supporters. Mining homes would help meet the urgent need for housing and could also be developed and built with local and Indigenous-led talent and by hiring unhoused and underhoused people to help build it, as there are many talented people in the homelessness community. An emptier underused parking lot would provide a dry surface and sheltering space for rainy and cold months, as well as a flat surface for shower, trailer, and other amenities like washrooms and kitchen facilities. and a suitable size space for two tiny homes, private projects that is peer-led and grassroots supported. Any interim sheltering space also needs to remain accessible to nearby services and support and healthcare connections as indicated in the Vandiver versus Vancouver court case. And as other speakers have said, traditional shelters do not work for everyone. So if you're thinking success, it's essential to consider a different model at a smaller scale. The members of our group state that a successful outdoor transitional housing model needs to operate with autonomy and peer leadership rather than through third-party housing providers. Contracts are program-based housing agreements. It should be rights-based, peer-led, and community-supported. And rights-based housing is described by the Federal Housing Advocate in the 2021 report. It refers to security of tenure and meaningful participation of people with lived experience. That's not currently the case under the new Bill 11 and program-based housing agreements. And that's why community-led and peer-led models are essential to the success of the proposed rapid housing. There are numerous resident-led community-first planning home and transitional villages already exist, from a Better Tent City in Kitchener to Dignity Village in Portland, Community First in Austin, and the Aboriginal Housing Management Association called for a transitional planning home village with a communal approach to care model in the 2022 report to BC Housing. As one former resident of Crab Park says, With this model in our petition, we benefit, the whole community benefits, because we become less of a problem, we become more proactive, we care about the community more, and it's a win-win-win situation. Again, I support... I urge you to support Motion 5. Okay.
Thank you.
Sorry. We'll now go to Speaker 7, Kiers Fuhrman.
No. Okay. How about Speaker 8, Bridget Burns?
Hello there. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Bridget Burns, and I am speaking in support of Councillor Pete Fry's motion. I'm a resident of Vancouver, currently living in Gastown. Behind every number in this motion is a person, someone's neighbor, someone's kid, someone who had stability and lost it. Right now in Vancouver, more than 2,700 people are homeless. almost half are sleeping outside that should stop us in our tracks because sleeping outside isn't just uncomfortable it's dangerous it makes it harder to stay healthy to stay safe to think about tomorrow the longer someone is out there the harder it is to come back and what we're doing right now isn't enough we don't have enough shelter and what we do have doesn't work for everyone large crowded shelters can feel unsafe so people stay outside not because they want to but because the system isn't meeting them where they are This motion is about small, simple shelters we can build fast, tiny homes, micro units, small villages, not as a final answer, but as a real immediate step forward. This isn't a big ask. In a city like ours, in a society that calls itself compassionate, the bare minimum should be that no one is left outside without a place to sleep. A basic safe space isn't a luxury, it's the floor. It's what we should be willing to extend to everyone. We've seen these models work across BC and the Pacific Northwest. They go up fast, sometimes in months. People use them. They help people stabilize, reconnect with services, and move on to permanent housing, and we need speed. People sleeping outside tonight cannot wait years. They need action in weeks and months. This motion is about clearing the path to do that using land we already have, removing barriers and matching the urgency of this crisis. Because the status quo is already costing us, not just in dollars, but in human lives, in suffering, in lost potential. We can do better. This motion won't replace long-term housing, but it will help people survive long enough to get there. it meets people where they are today so they can have a real shot at tomorrow so please support this motion not just as a policy but as a choice about who we are as a city a city that doesn't look away a city that acts a city that believes everyone does deserves a door a bed and a chance to rebuild thank you hey thank you um so when i go back to speaker seven uh to see if they're on the line uh cures uh pureman nope okay
So that's the end of our speaker's list. Thanks, everyone, for speaking to the committee and committee members. Any discussion? Councillor Fry, please go ahead.
Thanks, Chair, and thank you to the speakers. I want to just quickly reflect on some of the staff comments, which very explicitly do not recommend this motion, and talk about how we first approved this motion back in 2020. Indeed, in 2020, we approved this as an urgent approach. yet it's 2026, and we're still waiting on a report back for the pilot that we approved back in 2020, six years later. So what's happened between 2020 and now? Well, the unhoused, the homeless count was 2,223 back then. As per our recent update, it's now at 2,715. So that's 500 new homeless Vancouverites, and here we are. And to reiterate, from that point in time, housing analysis or unhoused analysis, those are the majority Vancouverites. These are people who are becoming unhoused in our city. So what else has changed other than this growing unhoused? Well, we have a more fragmented and dysfunctional shelter system. We have the emergence of even worse drugs, more debilitating drugs, more toxic drugs. We have more pressure on unhoused folks. We have a ban on new supportive housing. But you know what else has changed? Just last month, the feds introduced $125 million in new funding through the Unsheltered Homeless and Encampments Initiative. There's money. There's money to do this, folks. It's not just, you know, our money. We could actually do something different here. Now, I recognize that there may be a political imperative at this council to ban new supportive housing. But the good news is this isn't supportive housing. It's a shelter. There's no plumbing. There's no foundation. You can pick it up and go. Other jurisdictions have dropped these tiny shelters and parking lots. So when the earlier caller, the dog crate condo guy, called in and asked where we could put these, let's look. We've got the Hastings Racecourse parking lot. We just approved it this morning. We've got the city-owned easy parking lot at Main and Terminal where the mayor is hoping to build for-profit housing but hasn't broken ground yet. Apparently, there's a lot right next to the Canby Bridge here where the mayor is pitching that we could locate a new Major League Baseball stadium for some future use. Now, none of these spaces have been activated yet, and these are, by definition, temporary uses, these tiny shelter villages. Effie mentioned it, the speaker earlier, locking doors. That's the big difference, folks. A locking door is a game changer for folks. I mean, if anybody here has spent 24 hours on the street unsheltered, there's a reason we call it sleeping rough. It is rough. It is scary. It is no wonder that people turn to drugs for solace and comfort. In fact, our homeless point in time... Analysis showed just that, that people become more addicted when they're unhoused, on the street, vulnerable, unsheltered, living rough, sleeping rough. Yesterday, this council made a big deal about the need for recovery beds. I got to tell you, if we want to talk about recovery, congregate shelters where you got to line up at night to go get a cot and sleep overnight and then they kick you out and you walk around the streets again for the next rest of the day and then you go back to the shelter at night, those congregate shelters aren't going to cut it for sobering up. It's just not going to happen. So this is an opportunity, this is a point in time. This is a point in time where we can put aside some of the political ideology and say, you know what, this is actually something that could work and could be deployed very quickly and could actually achieve some objectives that I think we collectively share. And that is fundamentally keeping people from getting into deeper, deeper crisis while they languish unhoused on the streets of our city in an ever-growing cohort of misery and vulnerability.
Thanks, Councillor Frye. Councillor Orr.
Thank you. Thanks for that update on what's been happening since and the lack of report back. I will note, however, I disagree with Councillor Fry. This council did unanimously agree to recognize housing with supports in an amendment to their homelessness count. um which is great so good to be on the same page there but like you said 2700 2715 people the highest number ever recorded uh 40 of them sleeping outside right now tonight you you did say if you've ever mentioned if you've ever slept uh on the streets or ever Spent a night on the streets. I have. It's not fun. And I've been saying for a long time that the status quo isn't neutral. Leaving people unsheltered isn't a passive choice. It's an active one. And it comes with costs. Human costs that don't show up in a budget line will compound every single night someone spends outside. the health deterioration, the trauma, the lack of sleep, the narrowing of what's possible for that person, and financial costs too. Sanitation, emergency response, park remediation, policing. We are spending money on the consequences of homelessness while chronically underfunding the solutions. Dignity Village in Portland has been running since 2000. Duncan did it. Kelowna did it. And their mayor just told us 83% of residents moved on to better outcomes. Victoria did it. These aren't experiments anymore. We know this works. We know tiny shelter villages have higher utilization rates than congregate shelters, better exits to permanent housing, lower costs per successful outcome. The data is not ambiguous. What's been ambiguous is our willingness to move fast enough for it to matter. Our own tiny shelter pilot took years to open. Years. and that's the part that has to change. The motion asks us to streamline, to identify sites, to stop treating every development like it needs to be solved from scratch. There's new federal money, as Councillor Fry said, on the table right now. BC Housing has programs we haven't fully tapped. Seattle is moving faster than us, and they're doing it because FIFA gave them a deadline. We shouldn't need a soccer tournament to act with urgency on this. A locked door and a bed, that's what we're talking about. I'm supporting this motion, and I ask every councillor at this table to do the same. Thanks.
Thank you. Councillor Kirby Young.
Yeah, thanks very much. Appreciate the discussion. And I'm going to approach this from a human perspective, not a political or an ideologically driven perspective, but I think a human one and a practical one. As was noted, we considered a motion very substantively similar, I believe, from Councillor Fry last term in 2020. Staff did a lot of work on it. I think that the current conditions are deplorable and I think council's job is to push for better because people deserve more and that means yes saying no more SROs. That means yes saying we want truly supportive housing with quality supports and I think that means that yet pushing for funding that actually maximizes the constrained amount of sites that the city of Vancouver has to deliver as many homes as possible on these and getting people into quality homes that they can stabilize in and stay longer term. The pilot that has happening on Terminal Avenue with the 10 units, I think we've all toured them and looked at them and been inside them, was very difficult to... actually land into sight for a number of reasons because when staff went through looking at options, all of the considerations with respects to things like security for individuals that are there, et cetera, the cost of operating things like plumbing, running water, access to bathrooms and or kitchen space, meals, et cetera, that one was only enabled because of the adjacent nonprofit operator in the temporary housing. and it was very challenging and difficult to find a site. And at the end of the day, I think that we, I've often talked a lot about this in terms of how long do we tie sites up for with temporary housing for 10, 20 years of what we're being asked to do. For example, even when we did TMH, which has been successful in providing better quality housing, but if you do that on a site for 20 years, say for 20 people, You could house so many more people if we just actually put all of our effort into getting a building built that could house dozens or potentially hundreds of people and get that moving. There's limited access to funding across the country and with the province, and what I want to do is get people into better quality housing. I think that a lot of these examples, we had a very fulsome debate, if I recall, the last time that council did this go around. A lot of individuals come that spoke to some of the examples that were raised, like Dignity Village in Portland, and provided a very different picture that things were not rosy there at all in terms of the success. And the other challenge, too, it's not just that you build it and you leave it. It requires pretty significant ongoing operating support. which typically comes from province BC housing other folks who have really and they're having their own tough times and again if we're gonna get I don't say blood all the proverbial stone but you know perhaps pick a nicer analogy I want to get it to get people into really good quality housing that they actually deserve I don't think that this is the best and the highest use of housing that we can be advocating for or the best and highest use of our land Some of the speakers mentioned things like shelters, et cetera. I agree. I don't think that's something we want to be pushing. What we want to be pushing is getting people actually into homes that they can stay in. Thank you.
Thanks, Councillor Kirby-Young. Councillor Maloney.
Thanks. Yeah, I will be supporting this. I know that this council unanimously declared housing to be a human right. I think the situation is desperate. I also prefer temporary modular housing to the idea of tiny homes, but I think we've got to use every tool in our toolkit to deal with this situation. And, you know, I appreciated... or talking about some of the consequences of homelessness. And recently Councillor Klassen and I went to visit Fire Hall No. 2 and, you know, we often talk about how much we appreciate our frontline workers, but the people that work in Fire Hall No. 2 and in the ambulance service are being pushed to their limits by the results, the damage that's caused by escalating homelessness crisis. You know, one of the things that people talk about with temporary modular housing is that there are self-contained units so residents can lock their door and they don't need to share bathrooms, which is safer for residents not to have to leave their unit to use a shared bathroom. But a locked door is, as we've heard, critical no matter what. You know, I think ideally we would have, of course, a lot more shelter rate housing and supportive housing being built to house all the SRO residents and all the homeless folks. But that's $7, $8, $10 billion. And so I think that it's important that we try and keep people alive long enough that those longer-term solutions are possible for them. So, yeah, I'll be supporting this because we should be doing everything possible.
Okay, thank you. Councillor Bligh.
Yeah, thanks very much. I am listening to this debate and...
I'm struggling to understand the difference between sort of stable housing that people can live in. That was described by a fellow counselor here in support of housing. I cannot for the life of me figure out what the difference is in that version of rationale. And I think that's what I continue to believe, housing with supports. we should be prioritizing on city-owned land.
We have sites available. We don't have the political will currently. My concern, and I look at the Heart and Hearth program that is currently funding new temporary modular housing in Squamish and in Whistler, creating housing that is, for folks, about this number, 40 to 65. My concern is, If we go down this path, we're going to not deliver the scale that we need. 15 units, 20 units will take up a lot of land that could have two stories of temporary modular housing and have 40 to 65 units on it. And I do think that the operating that goes with tiny villages, however we want to frame it, is... is not the best use of our funding. But what I have heard in this debate, which confuses me, is a desire for something more substantive than tiny villages, but yet still those same folks vote against supportive housing. And... in which case homelessness gets worse. So I really feel frustrated, I think, at this point with this particular council on this debate that we're, it's like a race to the bottom, that we're not going to build the housing that we really need. So now we're going to do a stopgap of 20, and I get it, locked doors. We have SROs. under our standards of maintenance bylaws now that do not have locked doors in buildings, and we do nothing to enforce them. There are buildings that have 100 units. There's one building that has 108 units, and 52 of those doors don't lock right now today, and we do nothing to enforce it. So I actually agree. Dignity is a locked door. But we're not even doing that as a city for folks that we would consider housed now, but they don't have a locked door. So I struggle with this because probably because in eight years, I've been through also three encampments that have caused enormous... strain and pain on people as well as systems, and we haven't gotten any further ahead. And so I'm starting to lose faith that it's the right thing to do. I think what the right thing is to do is to build housing at the scale of the crisis we face. And that's what we should be focused on. That's what the money is there for provincially. That's what the money is there for federally. We should be getting more temporary modular housing at the scale that a city like Vancouver with homelessness surpassing 2,000 people sleeping outdoors every single night requires. So I'm going to abstain. I can't even remember the last time I abstained, if ever. I am going to abstain on this because I'm not comfortable voting against it, but I want to make it very clear that what I support is actual proper housing with supports, with dignified self-contained units, and we should stay focused to deliver that and not spend money on things that will not provide that long-term stable housing for people.
Thank you.
Councillor Frye. Yeah, just given some of the conversation around housing, I just want to be clear why this motion was entitled small rapid shelter systems. It's not housing, folks. It's not housing. It doesn't have a kitchen. It doesn't have a toilet. It doesn't have plumbing. It doesn't have running water. It's a shelter system that has a locking door and windows and looks like a little house. It's built with self-leveling feet. You can pick it up and you can move it. You can put it in a parking lot. They are designed to be temporary. This is exactly what Victoria did with theirs. This is what Duncan has done. This is what New Westminster is in the process of doing. These are temporary shelters in nature. It is not a replacement for... temporary modular housing or supportive housing. These are all laudable goals that we would love to see senior levels of government step up and fund. But folks, I'm here to say it's not happening. It's not happening at the scale or the pace that we need to see it. And in the meantime, folks are living rough. Folks are struggling on our streets. And frankly, folks are turning for the worse. We know, we see it. And we know that this is an intervention that actually... can and does make a difference. I've been to Dignity Village, and I appreciate that Councillor Kirby-Young may have spoken to somebody who was there, but I've been there, I've talked to the residents, I've visited the physical place, and I know that that has been a success, and it's been a success that's been replicated around North America, up and down the coast, for that very reason.
Look at that, five minutes exactly.
Yes, you're right on the button there. Okay, I'm not seeing anyone else on the queue to speak to this, so we'll go to the vote.
Mayor, is that you on the line? Yes. Can I please get a vote of assist in opposition, please? Yes. Thank you. You're welcome. A vote of assist in opposition for me, too, please. Yep. I understand, Councillor Montague. Okay. That does not pass with myself in opposition, Councillor Kirby-Young in opposition, Councillor Dominato in opposition. Councillor Montague in opposition. Councillor Klassen in opposition. Mayor Sim in opposition. And Councillor Zhou in opposition. And Councillor Bligh abstaining.
So that completes the item.
Now move to motion six. Keeping the session rolling. Renewal of the Hastings Park skateboard facility.
Statement Watch
Great. Thank you. My name is Liv Yu, and I am a longtime resident of Vancouver and professor at UBC with the Center for Climate Justice. I co-authored a report about the need for a right-to-cool framework in BC, as well as a report about cooling centers across Metro Vancouver. I currently co-lead a research project about how extreme and chronic heat hits harder for those who are already marginalized. I'm speaking on behalf of our research team in support of this motion to proactively protect residents from dangerous heat. What our research consistently shows is that heat in Vancouver is an indoor, chronic, and deeply unequal matter. It is not just outdoors, and it is not just a thing of the past of the 2021 heat dome. In our work on extreme and prolonged indoor heat in SROs in the downtown east side and low-income housing in other parts of the city, we found that indoor temperatures can exceed outdoor temperatures for weeks at a time, often not dropping below safe thresholds even overnight. This means that for many residents, especially those in older or poorly ventilated housing, there is no relief from heat. People are exposed not just for hours during heat waves, but for days and weeks on end. This kind of prolonged exposure significantly increases the risk of heat-related illness and death. This is why the first part of this motion, expanding access to cooling centers beyond declared extreme heat events, is so critical. Heat risk is not contained to the duration of a heat alert. Our data shows that dangerous indoor conditions begin earlier in the season and persist even after official heat warnings have ended. At the same time, our research on cooling center use across Vancouver shows challenges with access. Many described barriers such as limited hours, long travel distances, inaccessible or infrequent transit, and a lack of culturally appropriate or welcoming spaces. Some told us that they had to choose between enduring the heat at home or undertaking physically exhausting and sometimes unsafe journeys just to cool down. Additionally, when cooling centers aren't open extended hours consistently, people can't trust that if they make the journey to a cool space that it'll actually be open. Our research shows that in order to keep people safe, cooling spaces need to be more reliable and comfortable to meet users' needs. This is why this motion's focus on extended hours, cooling transit, and mobile outreach is so important. These are absolutely necessary to make cooling infrastructure actually usable for the people who need it most, as well as increasing people's trust in city services to actually be available when they are needed. We also found that many people rely on informal and community-led solutions, such as checking in on neighbors, sharing fans, and creating ad hoc cooling spaces. These efforts are vital, but they are currently under-resourced and unsustainable. When communities and community organizations respond to these events, they need stable, ongoing funding as proposed in this motion. Finally, the commitment to collect disaggregated data is key. Without it, there's no way to fully understand who's being left out of current systems, nor can we design effective and equitable responses that cover everyone. This motion reflects what the evidence has been telling us, that in order to protect... Sorry, Leif.
Statement Watch
Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Bharat Gupta. I'm a Vancouver resident living in a high-rise apartment in downtown Vancouver. I'm here in support of Motion 8, brought forward by Councillor Maloney. I moved to Vancouver from India in 2021. I took my oath as a Canadian citizen not long ago. I chose this city because of its natural beauty, its values, and its temperate weather. But I also know the heat. Growing up and living in India, I experienced extreme summers that are deadly. Not headlines, but lived reality. I volunteered with NGOs distributing water, rehydration stores, and cool spaces to daily wage workers, elderly, and the families without the means to protect themselves. I've seen what happens when a city isn't repaired. Honestly, I did not expect to carry those same worries here. We are in early May, and it is already noticeably warmer than historical averages for this time of the year. Like Councillor Maloney said, ECC projects to be one of the hottest years on record, consistent with the long-term planning of warming summers across British Columbia. As a renter and a high-rise, I know firsthand what Councillor Maloney's motion describes. Indoor temperatures in older buildings exceed health authority guidelines as early as June. And maybe this year, it'll be much earlier. And they stay dangerously high overnight because there's no ventilation and prevent the body from recovering. For seniors, people with disabilities, and families, engaging them to talk is not a comfort issue. It is a matter of survival. This summer, the world's eyes will be on Vancouver for FIFA 2006. While we celebrate this global moment, I urge the mayor and the council to ensure our most vulnerable residents are not left behind. of the measures uh called for in the motion extended us for cooling centers mobile outreach for those who can't come cooling kits and air conditioned transits are these bad practical life-saving steps i also want to speak to the power of community Many grassroots organizations in the city have the trust, the relationships, and the ideas to deliver meaningful heat relief, but they lack reliable funding and the permissions to act. The city can be a force multiplier. Partner with them. Fund them. Remove barriers so they can do what they do best. And finally, I fully support the motion's call to collect disaggregated data from heat relief services. We cannot fix what we cannot see. Better data means more equitable outcomes for everyone. Councillor Maloney has put forward a motion that is proactive, evidence-based, and compassionate. I respectfully urge this Council to vote in full support of it. Thank you for your time.
Statement Watch
Hi, John.
It's on now. Okay, great. Thanks. Yeah, good afternoon, everybody. I'm John Irwin. I'm speaking for myself. Basically, 20 temperature records were broken across BC last Sunday, some of them in our region, and it's only the start of May. Added to that, in 2021, 619 heat-related deaths occurred during the heat wave. that happened that year that we all know about was quite shocking because we never expected heat to do that in our city. And that took place from June 25th to July 1st that year. With hotter temperatures hitting our region much earlier, likely due to climate change, a UBC study found that longer summers are occurring... uh between the tropics and the polar uh circles by about six days longer per decade so they tracked it over decades and our summers are getting longer the heat period's getting longer um when i was on the park board we learned about um through presentations uh that there are areas where people are most vulnerable to heat, and they're, of course, concentrated in the downtown east side. These vulnerable residents require extra supports to maintain their health and lives during the recurring heat events. And, you know, I agree with the motion that cooling centers need to be added and their operation extended to periods that aren't quite extreme heat, just to make sure people don't overheat. The SRO residents often share one bathroom per floor. I know because I've canvassed in them many times at different levels for elections. And if you think about it, like myself, I don't have air conditioning. When I get hot during the heat waves, I'll pour a cold bath and I'll get in it for a bit and I cool down. They don't have that option, right? So they need these extra supports. Another thing I'd like to add is that, you know, incentives should be put in place for building owners to replace the rooftops with lighter, whiter, you know, finishes. Where does this idea come from? From Phoenix, Arizona, where they do that just regularly because we've really created a heat island paradise there for heat to just reflect off all the pavement. We also need to plant more street trees, but that's challenging. budgetary concerns and things like that. So there's many things we can do to improve the conditions of the people who are most vulnerable in our city. Thank you.
Statement Watch
Counselors, my name is Suki Sahota, and I live in East Vancouver. This motion is fundamentally about protecting lives. We know that extreme heat is no longer a rare event. It is becoming a defining feature of our summers. Projections show that this year will be amongst the hottest on record, continuing a clear and dangerous trend. And we also know that heat is not just uncomfortable, it is deadly. And what's especially concerning is that many residents, particularly seniors, low-income individuals, and those in older buildings, are facing indoor temperatures that exceed safe levels, often even overnight. For them, there is no relief throughout the summer. And right now, our system is largely reactive. Cooling centers and supports are often tied to extreme heat alerts, but people are getting sick before those thresholds are even reached. And this motion moves us towards a more proactive, preventative approach. It addresses real barriers, limited hours, lack of transportation, and unequal access to cooling spaces. It expands what we already know works, longer hours, mobile cooling, better outreach, and sustained funding for supports like cooling kits. But this is also about equity. The people most affected by extreme heat are often those with the fewest resources to adapt. If we are serious about climate justice, this is where we act. And importantly, this is a smart investment. Preventing heat-related illness reduces pressure on emergency services and healthcare systems. It saves both lives and public dollars. At its core, this motion is about climate. dignity no one in our city should be left without a safe space to cool down during increasingly dangerous summers i urge all on council to support this motion thank you thank you um next speaker is bobby lee taylor thank you I am Bobbie Lee Taylor, a longtime Vancouver West End resident, and I'm speaking in support of this motion. In Vancouver's Heat Study 2021-2023, a team of health and climate professionals from Vancouver Coastal Health, the BC Centre for Disease Control, and the City of Vancouver identified indoor temperature as a data gap, with their primary call to action as introduce or expand programs that facilitate passive and active cooling options in existing buildings through information and financial support. Further, in the 2025 study, Staying Cool, Experiences and Challenges Using Cooling Centers in Metro Vancouver, its primary recommendation was... explore the right to cool for residents in existing buildings. And it further states there has been progress on mandating cooling within buildings. The BC Building Code was changed in 2024 to ensure that there's at least one cool space that doesn't exceed 26 degrees Celsius in new buildings. And the City of Vancouver is mandating mechanical cooling in all new buildings from 2025 onward. But nothing is said about the existing buildings where 99 deaths occurred in Vancouver in June 2021. I participated in these important studies, and I also understand the predictions are for a hot, dry weather this year. Water restrictions are already in place. Finally, the recommendations of the 2022 BC Coroner Service Report state in part, ensuring vulnerable populations are identified and supported during extreme heat events, implement prevention and longer-term risk mitigation strategies. So I ask you, my esteemed mayor and city council, in light of the removal of funding for the cool kits and the air cleaner programs, How do you reconcile that action against these recommendations made to prevent the loss of more lives, our human capital? Please support this motion. Thank you.
Statement Watch
Hello. My name is Dawn Lessoway, and I am a Vancouver resident. Today I'm speaking to you from the unceded territories of the Hong Kong Minim speaking people. I am speaking today in support of Councillor Maloney's proposal that money for cool kits and air cleaner programs being reinstated and that measures to ensure cool spaces are available outside of extreme heat events. I'm also phoning to demonstrate to my students that being part of a program like this where I can speak to city council is an important part of democracy. We were hoping to be speaking during the school day. And my students have three comments. They're wondering how the counselors sit for so long. They wonder where the mayor is sitting and how come their recess is longer than theirs. And they wanted me to pass on a joke so that you can focus better on the issues at hand by taking a bit of a break. And the joke is, why don't bakeries let their employees shave? And the answer is because they need their whiskers. I think the previous speakers in front of me have spoken extremely well, but I would like to add one more component to the conversation, and that's the forest fires that are occurring around the province and indeed around the world. Small particulate matter entering the lungs causes cancer and huge costs to our health care system. We not only need cooling spaces, but we need clean air filtration to protect all members of our society. And as people have pointed out, older buildings, including the building my mother lives in, do not have this infrastructure, including the electrical ability to run such systems. I would like to reinstate and promote funding for cool kits and add on even more protective measures such as the cooling centers outside of extreme heat events, trans-link buses, and clean air kits. If night times and evenings are hot, this is when most deaths occur, and we all know better than that. I would like you to know that the sensors on my porch held up, sent me an alert that yesterday they were at 28 degrees Celsius for four straight hours, and it's only the beginning of May. In conclusion, Councillor Maloney has my trust and support with this motion, and I would like to see other caring councillors step up to the plate as well. Thank you for your time.
Statement Watch
Hi, can you guys hear me?
Yes, please go ahead.
All right, so good evening. I know it's been a long day. With regards to this motion, I do not have a position, so you can classify it as other. It's a mixed bag because while I agree with the intentions of saving lives, especially with especially with um there's still a lot of older buildings where um where the cooling isn't adequate for safe living or even safe to be indoors i am concerned about this thing being a license to hunt puts the football or puts the responsibility of other things that would address the more fundamental causes of these incidents. For example, many buildings aren't adequately equipped with the electrical wiring to power air conditioners. While I do know the finances dictate especially whether it's going to be getting torn down for a taller denser building it could affect whether the building owner is willing to retrofit the electrical electrical outlets and the systems um i think that there are measures that could be done with not just portable, not just portable cooling inside the units, but also with different blinds and other measures, although the installations are pretty hit or miss. Also, I think the city, while it doesn't look related on the surface, and I don't know how much power the city has, but I think the city could flex even more muscles on enforcing certain bylaws related to heat and indoor safety. So not really sure I'm making much sense. So I can't really say I agree with the motion, I support the motion or oppose the motion. But I am just concerned about the unintended consequences here either way. But thank you for letting me speak.
Statement Watch
Yes. All right. Good evening. My name is Katie Hawking. I live in Vancouver and volunteer with and coordinate the X Community Bus, which is a community-run warming and cooling bus. And one of the grassroots initiatives this motion suggests could benefit from reliable ongoing funding. I absolutely support this motion because what I've witnessed this past year is clear. A community-run mobile warming and cooling bus that quite literally meets people where they're at works. A mobile cooling bus matters because the folks most at risk often can't make it to a community center or designated cooling space. They need responsive, flexible solutions. I want to urge council to think about their responsibility to ensure there are as many preventative measures in place as possible to avoid a repeat of the 434 deaths in Vancouver during the 2021 heat dome, when the majority of victims were elderly, low-income, isolated women who couldn't access cooling centers or air conditioning. What I can say from my experience with the cooling bus is that we know this model works because it's built on the meaningful involvement of community members. specifically people with lived experience of living outdoors in encampments, and to use substances who actually know their neighbors, who actually know the neighborhoods they work in. The workers on the X bus know where to look for their most isolated neighbors. They know what spots their friends and neighbors hang out in, and they go find them and remind them to drink water, to have a freezie, or to sit in the shade. Community-designed and led solutions are not quick or easy to implement. They take more time, more energy, and more trust. But they are far more effective than top-down approaches that miss the mark, go underused, operate at inconvenient hours, like not overnight, when the risk doesn't disappear, as this motion acknowledges, and ultimately waste time and money. LAST SUMMER THE EX-BEST PARTNERED WITH ORGANIZATIONS TO DISTRIBUTE COOLING KITS. LOSING THAT PROGRAM THIS YEAR WOULD BE DEVASTATING. REUSABLE WATER BOTTLES AND INSTANT COOL PACKS ARE ABSOLUTE LIFELINES ON EXTREME HEAT DAYS AND DEFINITELY STOPPED QUITE A FEW ER VISITS FOR HEAT STROKE. I'M ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION AND COMMIT TO SUSTAINED INCLUDING COOLING KITS AND MOBILE SUPPORTS AND FOR THE COMMUNITY DESIGN SOLUTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY WORKING.
Statement Watch
Hello, Mayor and Council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Claire, and I'm a resident of Vancouver, and I'm also a board member of Women Transforming Cities, who work to make our cities places where everyone can belong, participate, and thrive. I'm calling in today in support of the motion proactively protecting residents from dangerous heat. First of all, I want to recognize there's been many positive steps towards heat preparedness already taken by this Council, including passing motions on expanding tree canopy as advocating for climate-resilient housing standards and ensuring that tenants cannot be prevented from installing air conditioning. The momentum of this work must continue to ensure that our city is doing everything within its power to protect the lives of the most vulnerable, as we head into what is set to be another exceptionally hot summer. Five years ago, we witnessed the devastating tragedy of the heat dome that claimed hundreds of lives. It is undeniable that the majority of these deaths would have been preventable with more climate resilience and responsive infrastructure and policy. While in the long view, I would love to see some really big and bold climate action, what I appreciate about this motion is that it proposes a number of very simple, practical, and easy-to-implement actions that could have an outside impact on the most vulnerable people's experience of extreme heat this year. I know that this council don't want to see a repeat of what happened in 2021 and will make the right proactive decision today to take steps that could save lives this summer. Thank you for your time.
Statement Watch
Thank you, Chair Meisner and committee members and folks on the phone. My name is John Irwin. I'm a resident. I'm speaking for myself. As Alleyside dwellers for all of our 31 years when we've lived in Vancouver and we've lived with extra noise and high particulate emissions from waste removal vehicles, I was just coming to me. I don't want to take up too much time. It just came to me. that some good things we've done as a city have added to that, like the composting waste, the food waste stream, and more recycling. So that adds to the picture, right? They also add to the CO2 emissions of the city. Numerous trucks roll up and down the lanes to pick up waste from one or two residences per block, usually one or two units, apartment blocks per block. In a former time, many neighborhoods had less of this kind of traffic because there was less density, actually, I'd argue. Perhaps the city could explore different zones for different waste removal firms so the firms could compete for the zones and then go through and pick up the waste once a week instead of every day, literally. And we could look at doing this mainly in the densely populated areas of the city because... We know that the single-family zones are serviced by city trucks, right? So anyway, thanks for your time, and good luck with the rest of your evening.
Statement Watch
Good evening. I know it's heading into the homestretch, so I'm not going to take too much of your time. Can you hear me clearly? I'm outside before I'm heading on a drive. Okay, I take it that I am speaking clearly enough. While I appreciate the intentions of collecting more data on garbage truck collection trends, I cannot in good spirit support this motion because I am concerned about the potential downstream effects of having more data to justify and request for even more densification on top of the ODP, although THANKS, STANLEY.
THAT COMPLETES OUR SPEAKER'S LIST.