Last spring we told you about a City plan that could have far-reaching consequences for our neighbourhood and could mark the beginning of changes we have fought long and hard to prevent. Those worrisome prospects have now returned, and will soon require us all to take action.

The Secured Rental Policy, a long-in-the making, massive plan, is being updated and will go to Council for approval this fall. The City is pushing hard to speed up construction of rental housing in low-density neighbourhoods such as Upper Kitsilano by removing red tape for developers and input from neighbours.

If secondary suites and the proliferation of laneway houses and duplexes are taken into consideration, Kitsilano isn’t really low density at all. However, the City doesn’t seem to see it that way. They are saying it’s time that neighbourhoods like ours became more inclusive.

What we’ve seen of the plan is short on specifics, confusing, and loaded with words like “faster, easier, streamlined.” If the draft policy is approved, we will see the beginning of land assemblies, new townhouses and multiplexes with “simplistic” designs on arterials and side streets — and the loss of our distinct neighbourhood.

Based on information from the City’s website, this is what we know so far:

The plan calls for new zones to be implemented, which will be applied to new rental buildings on eligible blocks. (See rental tenure.)

Affected areas include C-2 (up to six storeys, public hearings not required), such as West Broadway, and surrounding arterials: Alma and Macdonald Streets, W. 10,^th (W. 12^th from Macdonald to Vine St), and W.16^th Aves (up to six storeys). Both arterials would allow new market rentals, below-market and non-market housing on streets near shopping, public transit, parks and schools.

Affected areas in Upper Kitsilano include West Broadway, West 10^th, West 16^th, in the area between Alma and Vine (RS, RT, and CV2 zones), and light-blue zoned off-arterial blocks.

Three-to-four-storey (or more) market and below-market rental housing (including apartments, townhouses, and four and six-plex buildings on lots as small as 33 ft. are being pushed for side streets near arterial roads. The affected off-arterial zones have been changed from half a block to one whole block on either side of, or perpendicular to, an arterial. So, for example, most of West 11^th and W. 15^th Aves, Mackenzie, and so on.

One significant update to the old plan is the introduction of a pilot project that would permit “no limits on projects or spacing requirements.” This one is difficult to interpret. Does it mean there would be no limits on the number of projects or the minimum space between them in the neighbourhoods selected for the pilot project? In the previous plan, only two new developments per block would have been allowed.

Read the policy updates for details on lot size, building forms, and more.

In connection with the changes, the City has launched a Secured Rental Policy survey that’s available until June 25. Before you take it, keep in mind that most City questionnaires are vague, leave out important information, and can include misleading questions.

For example, we are asked if the City should change the approvals process to make it easier and faster to build new secure market and below-market rental housing. Most of us affordable housing, but would we tick “yes” if we discovered that only a select few could qualify/afford these new units? Would we check “yes” to building faster if we knew neighbours would be given little say as to the size and look of the new buildings, neighbourhood fit, the threat of “demovictions,” destruction of character homes, as well as the loss of street parking, sunlight, and trees?

This month, UKRA directors attended a meeting with members of the Planning department as part of the City’s public consultation process. We and other group members left wondering if any of the issues we raised — problems of liveability, including the size of new units, “demovictions,” and doubts that the plan would actually create affordability — would be taken into consideration in the coming plans. For now, it’s clear staff are sticking to their script. Which means now is the time to write to City Council and planners to voice your concerns. There will not be many opportunities to do so once the report is finalized.