Pitching a new development to District of North Vancouver council without any rental is a tough sell.
It proved to be a non-starter for a proposal to build 108 strata townhomes in the Lions Gate Village neighbourhood, which North Van district council voted to send back to staff at a May 27 meeting.
But the vote wasn’t unanimous, with Couns. Jordan Back and Herman Mah dissenting because they wanted to move the project forward.
Originally on the table for council’s consideration was to build a variety of one-, two- and three-bedroom strata units at 1915-1987 Glenaire Drive and 1974-1990 Belle Isle Place. Ten of the units were set to have small lock-off suites.
In a report presented to council, staff said they were supportive of the application because it provides needed “missing middle” housing, and the developer would be contributing to adjacent road infrastructure. The proposal also includes a community amenity contribution of $1.9 million.
Because the new multifamily development would require an amendment to the official community plan, staff recommended that a public hearing be held.
Mayor Mike Little questioned staff about a proposed density transfer from an adjacent site included in the application, which he said was unusual.
District planner Franki McAdam replied that the developers had included a larger setback at a nearby site to accommodate a wider pedestrian area. At the time, municipal staff agreed to transferring some of that lost density to a future project.
“It’s not a mechanism we frequently see,” Little said. “So I just wanted to highlight that.”
Council divided on townhouse proposal
Coun. Jordan Back said he was supportive of a staff recommendation to have the proposal go to a public hearing.
“It is a very large site that is one of the last to be developed in this part of Lions Gate Village, taking 10 single-family lots and turning it into 108 townhomes,” he said. “I think this is a form of housing – that ground-oriented townhouse – which we need in the district.”
Back said he also supported the density transfer, which allowed for a public walkway and “a really nice connection to Capilano Park.”
But a new development without any dedicated rental wasn’t acceptable for Coun. Jim Hanson.
“What’s missing in our housing mix in the district isn’t 108 units of brand new, expensive strata with 181 parking stalls near a busy intersection,” he said. “What’s missing is more affordable housing that’s available to a greater range of incomes, and especially rental housing.”
Coun. Lisa Muri said she was concerned about the level of density in the project.
“In the overall area it’s really a very small amount of green space for the, 2,000 to 3,000 people that will be living there, probably closer to 5,000 when it’s all built out,” she said.
Little said that the district should honour the past agreement about the density transfer.
“I don’t think that developers in our community would respond very kindly to us reneging on previous agreements that we’ve had,” he said.
With most of council ready to reject the proposal at first reading, Little suggested that instead there should be a new motion to refer it back to staff to negotiate with the applicants given council’s feedback.
“Defeating first reading means that the application is dead,” he said. “If it’s about negotiation of some of the elements then I would highly recommend that it be referred back to staff for further discussion.”
Ultimately, the new motion passed with only Mah and Back opposed.
