Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Louie to Anton: “Signature building” was not what community wanted

July 27th, 2010 · 7 Comments

In an earlier post, Councillor Suzanne Anton voiced her objections to the Vision councillors’ decision to lower the height allowed for a social-housing project at Broadway and Fraser from 11 storeys to eight.

Here is Councillor Raymond Louie’s response.

Councillor Anton’s desire to have a ‘signature’ 11 storey building at the corner of Broadway and Fraser is directly at odds with what council heard from over 70 speakers, the Urban Design Panel, the Director of Planning and three nights of public hearings. Rather than question our need to ‘prove’ that we were listening , I think the question should be, “was she listening at all?”


What’s she’s ignored is that 103 units of social housing have been approved as part of a strong partnership between the provincial government and this city council. As a result, over one hundred individuals will be off our streets and gain access to support services that give them a fighting chance to lead better lives. Given the demand we saw at the Broadway and Fraser HEAT shelter this past winter, we know that these social housing units are needed and needed in this area.

She’s also ignored that 24 units of rental housing were approved if BC Housing finds the money – something they hadn’t done by the time of the public hearing, nor were they able to provide assurances the money would be forthcoming.

Providing the option of allowing the rental housing to be part of the eight storeys gives the project an element of flexibility while still ensuring that community concerns about height were heard and responded to.

The public hearing process is designed to give citizens a voice and what they said was very clear, 11 storeys is too high. Councillor Anton’s eco-density dogma should not be able to trump this. Yes, we do have a responsibility as council to meet city-wide priorities such as providing affordable housing for those in need, but it must be done in partnership with communities, not in spite of them.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Dan Cooper

    Hmmm…. I’ll approach this in the same vein as others did M. Anton’s missive: I’m no great fan of M. Louie, but what he writes here makes sense to me.

    Come to think of it, there are not one but four corners at the intersection of Fraser and Broadway, not to mention adjacent properties, any or all of which could – and I suspect someday will – support three or so floors of rental housing up above.

  • Lewis N. Villegas

    “The public hearing process is designed to give citizens a voice”

    My experience of standing before Council for five minutes oscillates between the farcical and the frustrating. Who wants a voice after the horse is out of the barn, the decisions have pretty much all been made, and it is not possible to scrap the whole thing and start fresh with a clean sheet of paper?

    I know this intersection well. Approaching from the east Broadway rises from Clarke to get to Fraser. Approaching from the west there is a bend on Broadway—and a break in the platting—that speaks to the origins of Mount Pleasant.

    Two things make this segment of Broadway important in urban design terms, and neither suggests a tower at Fraser Street as a necessary expression.

    First, Broadway turns here. It bends just past the Kingsgate Mall between Prince Edward and Guelph Streets.

    Second, approaching from the west this bend announces the arrival of a flat segment about 1/4 mile long. This short stretch of just the right length for the human experience of place terminates just as Broadway rises to meet Fraser.

    Still moving east, a few building lots past Fraser, the slope of the street past becomes too steep to support quality pedestrian activity.

    Thus, both the bend near Guelph, and the rise of the pavement heading towards Fraser, demarcate with closed street end vistas what is in fact a special precinct with the proportions and physical attributes to resonate with human sense perception. This stretch of street could function as a thriving neighbourhood centre. The retail, and the restaurants are there already.

    Missing is the urban design to mediate the volume of traffic… and protect against towers blighting the existing human scale which is in fact the true signature of this place.

  • Star Tripper

    Louie do us all a favour and just take the LPC Nomination in Vancouver East already.

  • Bill McCreery

    “The public hearing process is designed to give citizens a voice”

    My experience as an elected person tells me 2 things:

    1] You might only have 5 minutes but, if you have a lot of friends, an astute elected person will be listening & acting to incorporate your concerns;

    2] However, sometimes, even when the gallery is full of predominately those one one side or another, they are not in fact representative of the ‘greater good’ as the elected person sees it, so you may not be seen to be listening, but, you are. These are tough positions for politicians but, that’s why we need them there, to make those very decisions on behalf of the community [sometimes the larger, sometimes smaller components of it].

    So the process, while frustrating, is important. The key for the elected people is to know where to draw that line. In the case of the present Vision Council & Park Board is it is clear they have a previously established, scripted agenda &, even when they do try, in this case to drop 3 floors, they don’t end up with a well conceived solution or satisfy those affected & eventually voters.

  • Joe Just Joe

    I’m not sure I’m following Raymond Louie on this one. If they voted against it because it was against the wishes of the community and they’re listening, then what’s the difference between this project and the ones in the west end which also do not seem to have community approval…

    Anyways I’m curious if 11 was too high for Fraser and Broadway will 26 be too much for Kingsway and Broadway. 😉

  • OOPS! They Did It Again.

    Councillor Louie, is it true that the City is considering 14 floor towers along the Burrard Corridor (I think eco density originally called for no more than 6 floors?).

    And if you are considering that, when is the first public consultation for Kits and False Creek residents?

    If what Bill Mc says is true, this City will literally notbe able to see the light of day in many places, due to height relaxations.

  • David C.

    Democracy is all well and good but this is not democracy. This is an example of the loudest person in the room screaming the most until they get what they want.

    The problem with “listening to the community” as the defining factor of urban design is that “the community” are often full of nimby’s who don’t have the city’s interests at heart. They want “their city” to have city-wide attractions and diversions. But they’re unwilling to have those things in “their neighbourhoods.” It’s the same mentality that keeps City liquor licences controlled in a nearly-Talibanesque sort of way. Anytime a “controversial issue” comes up, the nimby’s are sure to come to the council meeting and natter on about it. The Councillors, fearing their wrath give in to the malcontents thus making the city as a whole weaker for it.

    So I actually agree with Anton on this. And I can see the political reasons why a Vision councillor like Louie would give in and cite “neighbourhood concerns” as his reason for voting the way he did. When the actual reason is pure politics.That said, I doubt she gets very many votes, let alone donations or volunteers, from the Mount Pleasant or Grandview Woodlands area, so of course she doesn’t need to worry about alienating anyone there. In this case she can look out for the city-wide good! If this where to happen in her base of support on the southwest side of the city, I bet the tables would be turned!