Frances Bula header image 2

Chinatown project turns into “line in the sand” as people argue it will change the future of historic area

May 24th, 2017 · 8 Comments

It’s a 12-story condo plus retail plus social housing building on an interior block of Chinatown, meant to fill what is now a surface parking lot (formerly a gas station).

But the project by Beedie Development Group has turned into a pitched battle, with opponents seeing it as the nail in the coffin for historic Chinatown and supporters seeing it as as the kind of development needed to bring life back to a neighbourhood that’s been in decline since the 1970s.

The city hall public hearing started last night, raucous, from all accounts and will continue for several more. My story that lays out the main points and background is here. Lots of fun reading on the city’s website about the project, especially all of the letters for and for and for and against and against and against. (A new batch just got posted today, the last link in each side here.)

Undoubtedly, whatever happens, this is going to mark a turning point. There’s a review of the Chinatown plan coming up in a couple of months and there will be adjustments to it that will likely make larger projects in Chinatown more difficult and even more scrutinized.

Even those who are supporting the Beedie project, like Henry Tom of the Chinatown Merchants Association, say that zoning should be changed so that huge developments with 200-foot frontages are not allowed. Instead, they and others say that development should be finer-grained, with more of the kinds of developments that have happened on the area’s unique 25-foot-wide lots.

I have a feeling councillors aren’t sure which way to go on this or whose voices to listen to. There are a lot of realtor/developer/marketing types and employees who have weighed in with support letters, some of whom live in the area. And there are a lot of young activists whose parents or grandparents had links with Chinatown, even though they don’t live or do much in the area any more. And then there’s the older generation that “saved” Chinatown in the 1960s — Shirley Chan, Hayne Wai, Mike Harcourt — also against the development.

This is not a slam dunk for anyone.


A proposed building in Vancouver’s historic Chinatown is headed for an unprecedented public battle as it mushrooms into the most contentious development the city has seen in a decade.

Thousands have signed petitions for and against the 12-storey condo and social-housing project for which the Beedie Development Group has been struggling to obtain approval over the past three years, while nearly 160 people have registered to speak about the project before city council.

Opponents of the project see it as a defining moment that threatens the heritage, culture and economy of traditional Chinatown. That opposition mounted in the past several years after a new group of young activists, many of them second- and third-generation Chinese whose parents or grandparents had connections to the old Chinatown, made the Beedie project a target of their attention.
“It has become a line in the sand,” said Henry Tom, a director of the Chinatown Merchants Association, one of several business groups that still support the project. Mr. Tom’s group said the area, which had been in a serious decline for a quarter century when the city and different groups worked on a new area plan prior to 2013 that allowed for higher buildings in the south section of Chinatown, needs new residents and activities to make it feel secure and economically healthy.

“We certainly wanted some balance on the street so it dilutes the impact of the dealers and the street people,” said Mr. Tom, whose parents ran a barbecue shop for decades in Chinatown before reluctantly shutting it down 20 years ago.

The site, a surface parking lot that used to be a gas station, is across the street from the Dr. Sun Yat-Sen Classical Chinese Garden and the Chinese Cultural Centre.

It’s the fourth controversial condo project in Chinatown to come through the pipeline since 2013. The first three, all on Main Street, raised alarms among many that the new development was too big and out of character for the area, which was recently designated a national historic site. People were also concerned that the community wasn’t getting much back in benefits.

“You don’t want to preserve Chinatown in aspic, but there’s a feeling that it was being overshadowed,” said Mike Harcourt, a former mayor of Vancouver who got his start in public activism in the 1960s by working with Chinatown residents to oppose a freeway being built through the neighbourhood.

Like many, Mr. Harcourt, who works with a group that has being trying to find workable and sensitive solutions to revitalizing Chinatown and the Downtown Eastside, did not come out in strong opposition to the city’s new Chinatown plan of 2013.

However, he has now come to believe that the plan needs to be changed.

Opponents are lobbying to have different levels of government buy the property, which Beedie bought for $16-million three years ago and is worth much more now, and build a 100-per-cent social-housing project on the site.

“Market condos aren’t going to help the neighbourhood a lot,” said Beverly Ho, one of two staff members with the Chinatown Concern Group. “The government has to take responsibility and build social housing.”

The proposed Beedie project includes 25 units of seniors’ housing, only one-third of which will be required to be rented at welfare-level rates, along with 106 condo units and a seniors’ cultural and recreational space.

BC Housing has agreed to buy the units. Beedie is not required to make a community-amenity contribution, as some other large projects in Vancouver have had to, because planners determined that there is no gain in land value, since the extra height of the building is caused by the addition of the social-housing units.

City planners have recommended approval of the project, which is pegged at 108 feet – 18 feet higher than the allowable nine feet – in part because of the addition of those units.

The project went through a tortuous process in getting design approval, being rejected twice by the urban-design panel, which was concerned that it was too bulky and an architectural mismatch for the area. Even after finally getting approval there, the project did not get approval from the Chinatown historic area planning committee.

The public hearing promises to be long and filled with emotion.

Many people, such as Lisa Zhu, wrote objecting that “Beedie should not profit on the backs of taxpayers” and saying that the company is “not paying their fair share to justifying the rezoning.”

Just as many wrote supporting the project. A significant number of them had connections with local development and real estate companies, but not all.

“I want to see Chinatown blossom and I think the 105 Keefer project can help do this,” wrote Yun Kwang Ng, who said he has lived in Vancouver since 1972. “It will create more pedestrian traffic which will help businesses thrive.”

Categories: Uncategorized

  • peakie

    Yes, International Garage in the old days.

    But I see that [ insert invective here ] Bob Rennie is presenting as a private person, not as a contributor to Vision Vancouver’s political funds, when his 40 metre assemblage of now blank storefronts at 51 East Pender has contributed to Chinatown’s malaise.

    And Joseph Jones‏ @jonesj tweeted 4 hours ago
    Notice CoV using Angela Ko to translate for #chinatownyvr … Chinese in Norquay Working Group resented her willful misrepresentations.

    The councillors are just rubber stamps for the land speculators and are told what to vote. While in their hearts (if they had one of larger size) they know this is wrong as with the new tower developments on East Pender and the mausoleum called International Village mall at 88 West Pender.

  • Norman12

    It’s almost delicious – city councillors torn between their benefactors, the developers, and a large bloc of voters, the Chinese community. After the vote we’ll see who stands where. Maybe the era of blockbusting is ending? Or at least an end to spot rezoning?

  • Frances Bula

    This is not a spot re-zone, by the way. The Chinatown plan says 90 feet is permissible outright and can go to 120 feet if developer providing something to the community.

  • Ralph Segal

    Thanks, Frances, for this summary. One address correction – Keefer Block address is 189 Keefer (not 105 Keefer, the Rezoning application sparking such controversy, now in midst of a 2-day Public Hearing!). As you note, Keefer Block (189 Keefer), now built just up the block corner of Main St., was developed by Solterra, Architect Foad Rafii, under HA-1A zoning (not a rezoning) and the Chinatown design guidelines to a height of 90 ft., was supported unanimously by the Urban Design Panel, “enthusiastically” by CHAPC (Chinatown Historic Area Planning Committee) and Vancouver Heritage Commission when it went through the Development Application process in 2012.

  • peakie

    189 Keefer is the too-tall, little-Chinese-character-references new overwide home to the BMO Bank of Montreal which left Pender street for a Main Street facing mausoleum face.

    I wonder about the “enthusiasm” of the CHAPC when they look at a model or drawing and don’t experience the dreary street-level face of the every-day building. No rain shelter. Too many Starbucks cafes.

    As far as “upstairs” Zolo is showing several (is the CRA watching?) flips.
    Solterra is another name for the Bosa company plague carried on by their children.

  • peakie

    I don’t see anyone trying to save Richmond’s old Chinatown.

    The north side of 8100 Park Road, just east of the present Richmond City Hall was a small strip mall with majority Chinese stores–the only place in Richmond to buy Chinese groceries and such in the 1970s.

    Much of it is empty now, and will be “re-developed” (=made-into-a-ghost-city) into a low rise tower (Airport rules!) or something.
    One advantage was that the block was a layover for the Richmond buses for those many people without access to the family car during the weekdays.
    Google Maps streetview only has a 2 year archive. Bing Maps streetside view is a couple of years old.

  • Kenji

    Why would there be blockbusting? Isn’t the vacancy rate at something like 10%? What’s the incentive to hold out against the developer. The owner, if they even live there, would probably rather set up shop on No 3 Road.

    I do believe that development has to serve the low income and senior folks who are there now, or it is a human rights debacle that doesn’t just affect the Chinese community. The city just has to set a number of units. If one developer doesn’t like it, the next one will.

  • 189 Keefer (Keefer Block) is the smaller of the three new Main Street developments. It is the building with Juniper, Starbucks, and Virtuous Pie. 188 Keefer is the taller building which is where Juke and BMO are located.