Eye on Norquay

Looking Out for East Vancouver

2153-2199 Kingsway #2


    from:  Joseph Jones 
      to:  Carr, Adriane, Christine Boyle, Colleen Hardwick, Melissa  De Genova,
           Jean Swanson, Kennedy Stewart, Lisa Dominato, Michael Wiebe, Pete Fry,
           Rebecca Bligh, Sarah Kirby-Yung 
      cc:  Jeanette Jones 
    date:  May 24, 2019, 4:58 PM
 subject:  Re: 1. Request to remove Development Cost Levy Waiver and amend
           Housing Agreement for the CD-1 rezoning at 2153 2199 Kingsway


We write to Council regarding the following item on agenda for 28 May 2019:

        1. Request to remove Development Cost Levy Waiver and amend Housing Agreement for the
        CD-1 rezoning at 2153 2199 Kingsway

We first of all highlight this red flag in the staff report to Council:

        It is very rare that staff would recommend a change to approved rezoning conditions between the
        public hearing and enactment … (p. 4)

Our primary point relates to action that Council failed to take on 3 April 2019. On that day, Council took almost four hours to refer away the motion Re-conceptualizing the City’s Rental 100 Program. Council chose to avoid even minimal short-term confrontation with the dubious Rental 100 program. Under this program, the City of Vancouver has handed over many millions of public dollars to developers in the form of “DCL waivers” – in return for unaffordable rent levels of short duration that functionally are never enforced.

In the present case, developer Hua Long has decided that the profit opportunity of completely unrestricted rent levels exceeds the benefit offered by DCL waiver. The lesson to Council here is that all such DCL waivers have amounted to wasted public money. Meanwhile, infrastructure deficits have degraded Vancouver during the twenty-first century. That misdirected money could have been put to better use.

We made mostly favorable public comment about the proposed development on 19 October 2016, which can be viewed at


Despite full participation at every stage of this project, starting with the pre-application open house of 19 May 2016, we were unable to achieve relocation of the underground parking exhaust vent away from the Gladstone Street sidewalk (high-use public realm with student foot traffic and bicycle route) to the far more appropriate 231 feet along the back lane. This particular unhappy outcome has added to our considerable experience of how what the developer wants will override everyone else’s liveability.

Since the developer has put the project into a position of returning to Council for further scrutiny, we ask you to consider this context and this particular ignored concern.


Joseph and Jeanette Jones


Written by eyeonnorquay

24 May 2019 at 5:38 pm