Vancouver’s Density Health Meter — How Neighbourhood Activism Gradually Drained the City’s Capacity to Build Housing
DENSITY‑POTENTIAL METER
[████████████████████] 100 % (optimistic baseline ≈ 1970)
Context. Half a century ago planners imagined Vancouver blossoming into a compact, European‑style city where mid‑rise apartments lined streetcar corridors and everyday errands were a short walk from home. Nothing in the zoning by‑law prevented that future: most residential lots could legally add row‑houses, walk‑ups, or even modest towers.
What happened instead was a series of local rebellions—each one small on its own, but together powerful enough to steer zoning, politics, and developer math toward ever‑lower density. The density‑health meter below visualises how each confrontation shaved points from the city’s ability to build housing.
How to read each chapter
- Where are we & what is happening? situates unfamiliar readers—naming the neighbourhood, describing the proposal (height, tenure, location).
- Who is involved? spells out the factions so you always know which side each actor sits on.
- What happens? / Why does it matter? shows the clash, the policy fallout, and how many “health” points disappear.
Kitsilano Beach District—a former hippie enclave, now attracting middle‑class families. On West 3rd & Balsam, a local developer has bought three bungalows and begun digging a 13‑storey rental tower. Excavators are carving a three‑level underground parkade barely 200 m from the sand; few neighbours realised zoning still allowed towers this close to the beach.
- Anti‑tower side: Kits House Defenders – an impromptu coalition of local families led by illustrator Michael Kluckner.
- Pro‑tower side: the project developer and city planning staff who issued the building permit.
- Referee: a TEAM‑dominated City Council, suddenly nervous about televised protests and the next election.
Neighbours launch a 48‑hour blitz: late‑night flyer drops, phone calls to CBC, and a dawn‑to‑dusk human‑chain encircling the excavation. Television crews capture children standing on exposed rebar; police decline to intervene. Panicked councillors convene an emergency session and revoke the tower permit. The six‑metre‑deep pit, soon dubbed “The People’s Hole,” remains a muddy landmark for years.
It became Vancouver’s first on‑camera proof that determined residents could overturn a legally issued development permit. The demonstration taught other neighbourhoods that direct‑action protests—combined with media pressure—could halt unwanted density projects.
[████████████████□□] 90 %
City Hall & West‑side meeting halls. Planning‑department staff, still rattled by the Kitsilano fiasco, warn councillors that dozens of other waterfront lots—especially along West 4th Avenue, Broadway, and Cornwall—remain eligible for towers. Their nightmare scenario: a queue of copy‑cat applications from developers, each sparking fresh televised blockades.
Planning‑chair Walter Hardwick proposes a defensive manoeuvre: cap building heights at three storeys north of 4th Avenue and freeze individual “spot‑rezonings” unless neighbours give written consent.
- Policy authors: Walter Hardwick and senior city planners.
- Public voice: workshop facilitators citing “street character” preservation.
- Onlookers: developers debating whether to fight or redirect investment downtown.
A series of evening workshops invite residents to pin photos of beloved streets. Unsurprisingly, low‑rise heritage houses top the collage walls. Council enacts the cap; the once‑flexible RS‑1 single‑family zone now blankets roughly 80 % of Vancouver lots.
Mid‑rise apartments become illegal on most residential blocks overnight. Future developers now face a guaranteed council fight—and likely a street protest—if they propose anything over three storeys.
[██████████████□□□□] 75 %
False Creek Rail Yards, an industrial brownfield re‑imagined for World Expo ’86. When the fair closes, Hong‑Kong‑backed Concord Pacific unveils renderings for 30‑ to 40‑storey condos on the waterfront. Downtown buyers love the skyline; west‑side homeowners fear a domino effect of glass walls along the beach.
- Pro‑tower side: Concord Pacific, downtown business groups, and planners eager for property‑tax windfalls.
- Anti‑tower side: informal West‑side homeowner networks in Kitsilano, Kerrisdale, and Point Grey.
Opponents coin the slogan “protect the view cones.” Packed hearings pressure Council to codify view corridors and add height exclusions city‑wide. Developers note the message: go tall downtown or nowhere.
Broadway and 4th—ideal transit corridors—lose their chance to evolve into mid‑rise spines. Downtown densifies further; the rest of the city ossifies.
[██████████────────] 60 %
School gyms across Vancouver host open‑house maps for CityPlan, while Metro Vancouver drafts the Livable Region Strategic Plan. Both processes promise to distribute future density sensibly.
- Detached‑home majorities – the bulk of attendees; sceptical of parking shortages and tax hikes.
- Early independent critic: Ned Jacobs — son of urbanist Jane Jacobs — newly relocated from Toronto (1996); attends Kits and Grandview workshops and pens a 1999 Vancouver Courier op‑ed, “Blank‑cheque rezoning erodes public trust,” warning CityPlan could rubber‑stamp blanket up‑zoning.
- Pro‑density minority – renters, planners, and a few urbanists with little electoral clout.
- Walter Hardwick – now regional‑plan advisor pushing “protect stable neighbourhoods.”
Sticky‑note consultations morph into wish lists prioritising “maintain character” over new housing. The regional plan echoes these priorities almost verbatim.
Low density becomes an official regional strategy. Growth is effectively directed either to downtown mega‑projects or car‑dependent suburbs.
[████████──────────] 50 %
City Hall, June 2006. Mayor Sam Sullivan debuts EcoDensity, proposing 4‑ to 8‑storey apartments on most residential blocks in return for greener building codes.
- Pro‑density side: Sullivan, planning staff, environmental NGOs arguing compact growth cuts carbon.
- Anti‑density side: Neighbourhoods for a Sustainable Vancouver (NSV)—a coalition from the West End, Kits, and Dunbar—fronted by Elizabeth Murphy (ex‑planner) and Ned Jacobs.
- On‑the‑fence: small‑scale builders hoping for clarity.
NSV floods public‑hearing sign‑up sheets with 400 speakers under plywood banners “DENSITY ≠ DEMOCRACY.” After weeks of testimony, Council trims EcoDensity to a symbolic charter; three city‑owned pilot sites for rental housing are quietly shelved.
Investors deduce that city‑wide up‑zoning is politically radioactive; rental bids outside downtown look unfinanceable.
[███████───────────] 40 %
Four simultaneous battlegrounds challenge City Hall’s ability to add higher‑density housing:
- 1401 Comox (West End): a 22‑storey purpose‑built rental tower using the new STIR incentive.
- Norquay Village (East Van): a neighbourhood plan envisioning 12‑storey mixed‑use hubs along Kingsway.
- Marine Gardens (Marpole): a pair of 26‑storey condos slated to replace 1970s rental townhouses.
- Broadway & Commercial: a draft blueprint for 30‑storey towers atop Vancouver’s busiest SkyTrain interchange.
- Anti‑tower advocates: Randy Helten (West End Neighbours), Joyce Chan & Joseph Jones (Norquay), Elizabeth Murphy (Marpole), Jak King (Grandview‑Woodland Area Council).
- Pro‑tower side: developers, city planners, tenant groups hoping extra supply will cool rents.
Each proposal endures multi‑year hearings, petitions, and redesigns. STIR is branded “developer welfare” and scrapped. Heights are trimmed (e.g., Norquay capped at 6–8 storeys), and thousands of units slip from the housing pipeline.
Approval timelines triple; mid‑size local builders withdraw; “missing‑middle” apartment models vanish from feasibility spreadsheets.
[█████────────────] 30 %
- Georgia & Cardero (West End): the new West End Plan allows 60‑storey “gateway” towers bordering downtown.
- 1805 Larch (Kitsilano): a six‑storey non‑profit supportive‑rental building proposed for a single‑family lot.
- Council chamber: Councillor Colleen Hardwick introduces a motion to pause major rezonings until a comprehensive city plan is finished.
- Pro‑density side: non‑profit housing groups pleading for quicker approvals.
- Anti‑density side: Hardwick supporters and local petitioners fearing parking loss and “over‑density.”
- Financiers: banks tracking hearing lengths before releasing construction loans.
The Larch Street project endures an 11‑hour public hearing. Hardwick’s moratorium motion fails but dominates headlines, signalling council volatility.
Lenders conclude that even charitable projects face political landmines; capital for non‑luxury rentals evaporates in RS zones.
[███──────────────] 20 %
City Hall, November 2022. Entrepreneur Ken Sim wins the mayoralty with an ABC majority. One of their first housing moves is to legalise multiplexes—up to 6 units and 3½ storeys—on former RS‑1 lots and to pilot a fast‑track permit office.
- Pro‑density side: Mayor Ken Sim, ABC councillors, planning staff drafting multiplex rules.
- Cautious observers: homeowner groups fatigued after decades of fights but wary of parking spill‑over.
Council passes the multiplex by‑law in September 2023—weeks before the province unveils its broader Bills 44 & 47. Sim bills it as “gentle density so kids can stay in the city.” Critics call it incremental, yet builders file more than 150 multiplex applications within months.
Although modest, Sim’s by‑law restores developer interest in small‑lot rentals and signals a political climate shift back toward city‑led density solutions.
[████─────────────] 25 % (+5 pts)
B.C. Legislature, Victoria. With price‑to‑income at 12× and vacancy below 1 %, the province passes Bills 44 & 47—legalising 4‑ to 6‑plexes on every urban lot and 20‑storey towers near frequent transit. Municipalities must update bylaws within 12 months or default to provincial rules.
- Law‑writers: Premier David Eby and the provincial housing ministry.
- Implementers: municipal planners scrambling to meet conversion deadlines.
- Market players: developers & architects designing multiplex templates for 33‑ft west‑side lots.
Legal barriers drop overnight, but high land prices, limited trades labour, and entrenched permitting culture slow the rollout.
The density meter jumps, but until permitting times and project economics align, Vancouver’s housing shortage persists.
[██████████────────] 60 % (+35 pts)
Five decades of caps, delays, and “character” clauses have left Vancouver in the yellow. Provincial reform opens the door, but three locks must still click:
- Permitting friction — approvals must shrink from years to months.
- Community trust — neighbours must accept density has already been democratically legislated.
- Market recalibration — builders must pivot from view‑premium condos to family‑oriented rentals on small lots.
GAME STATUS : ☑ Patching in progress
NEXT CHECK : 2030 Census — Did the bar rise another 20 pts?