Tag Archives: Harbourside

Five years later, all that remains is barren land | The Global Canadian

Comment from Voices:  This development application was pushed through with much opposition in 2012, Councillor Bookham once again is the voice of reason and common sense.

Source: Five years later, all that remains is barren land | The Global CanadianThe Global Canadian

If Councillor Pam Bookham had her way at a recent council meeting, a major developer would have lost a contentious change to OCP granted by the council five years ago. Concert Properties came before the council in 2012 to ask to rezone waterfront land from Industrial to a mixed-used commercial and residential on Fell Avenue and Harbourside Drive.

It was a controversial ask at the time but the council granted the go-ahead to change the OCP designation and allow for a mixed-use commercial and residential neighbourhood. But five years later all that remains is a barren land with no sights of a development that Bookham said was touted as a vibrant neighbourhood that would provide jobs and office space and revitalise the area.

“Vibrancy sold this project and it’s now in danger of never being realised and I don’t understand why we are not pulling the OCP approval for this. We move this forward or it reverts back to its original OCP designation, which was a place where jobs could be provided. I don’t understand why we would be supportive of Concert when they seem to be unwilling or unable to move forward and deliver the vision they sold to us against a great deal of resistance,” she said.

Coun. Rod Clark also expressed his frustration at the five-year delay, noting that city let go of industrial land to give way to a more mixed designation. “Well, if only I had a dollar for every time I hear Concert was going to do something there.

“Concert came here and said we are going to build a wonderful, wonderful industrial park and according to them that didn’t too well and then they came back and in a very contentious, drawn out process got residential and commercial. It’s been sitting there forever, I want to see some action and I want to see it soon. They have promised and they haven’t delivered,” he said.

The council recently heard from the developer but it wasn’t news about shovels hitting the ground. Instead, Concert came before the council for another ask: It wants to exchange land use and reconfigure commercial space. The company now wants to first build market rental housing on the lot where it first planned a seniors’ rental-assisted living facility and it wants to reduce commercial on two sites and move the commercial to the remaining sites.

“There is a very strong need for both rental housing and seniors’ rental housing in the City of North Vancouver. Delivering rental housing in earlier phases of the Harbourside development will help to address historically low rental vacancy rates,” according to the developer. Councillor Craig Keating agrees.

Keating said he shared the frustration of the council but also felt that Seaspan workers could benefit from housing in the location. Keating said he recently a steady stream of workers leaving work and joining traffic who could stay in the neighbourhood with the kind of housing being proposed by Concert.

“If anyone needs housing near that spot, it’s Seaspan because there isn’t any housing. It would be great if we could have some housing there so people working at Seaspan could live there. I saw hundreds of people today at Seaspan that could use this,” he said.

Councillor Pam Bookham said she recalled a Seaspan representative saying the workers won’t be able to afford the housing being built there. She asked Concert representative if the company has had any conversation with Seaspan over housing.

“Our intent is to provide rental housing and I don’t have any conversation with Seaspan and whether that is going to be affordable for their employees,” said Craig Water, a senior vice-president of the company. He said Concert plans to bring forward a development permit application soon. Council granted the company’s request with Coun. Bookham opposed.

Pay parking decision points to larger issue (NSNews)

 “This (pay parking decision) is just the tip of the very huge iceberg of non-creativity that is currently defining North Vancouver planning across the board.”
– Siobhan O’Connell, April 6 North Shore News

In her letter to the editor, Siobhan O’Connell added an exclamation mark to the frustration many City of North Vancouver residents feel about what they see as a growing lack of democratic process at city hall.

The Harbourside business owner-taxpayer wrote she was “beyond offended and utterly frustrated” that, absent any pretence at public consultation, council had voted 5-2 to turn area streets into a pay parking zone.

Whether or not O’Connell was aware, this issue has been festering for six years or more. We know that because, at a mid-April 2012 open house held to discuss development of the lands held by Knightsbridge Properties and Concert Properties, two of the main concerns that attendees raised were related to traffic gridlock and the already existing lack of parking spaces for employees and clients of the Northshore Auto Mall.

On April 18, 2012, North Shore News reporter Benjamin Alldritt noted that traffic consultant Peter Joyce, of Bunt and Associates, “said he had heard residents’ concerns over traffic at previous events over the past
two years.”

Driven by the pace of development, concerns about traffic congestion and parking throughout the city were repeated to council by a dozen or more presenters at a subsequent meeting of council on June 17, 2014.

Over those years, anyone who had taken their car down for an early-morning servicing could have told you the Auto Mall street parking was already taken.

How has it taken until now for city staff and council to bring down a hammer – on the wrong people?

Reached for her comment, O’Connell repeated her belief that a temporary solution would be for the city and property owners to reach some sort of agreement that vehicles be allowed to use the five vacant nearby lots to cope with overflow parking needs.

“We often see people from the film industry parked down there,” she said. “Why shouldn’t North Shore residents and businesses be allowed to do the same?”

When I thought of what it would take in business volume for O’Connell to just break even after paying her 24 employees and $14,000/month rent, I didn’t have the heart to answer by suggesting the use of those lots would likely also come at a price.

Lack of parking and traffic congestion issues are reaching crisis point in all three municipalities. It is hard to see how driving commercial operations out of business by making it impossible for their employees to get to work, or clients to patronize them will do anything to improve the quality of life on the North Shore. It is not as though convenient transit alternatives are anywhere close on the horizon.

And speaking of transit, the other major point to be made – especially in the city – is that the developments approved over the past eight to 10 years have so crowded our main thoroughfares, it will soon be impossible to build any effective form of rapid transit, even if TransLink did decide to look beyond the bridges.

Another aspect of the Harbourside question yet to be determined is for the community to hear exactly what will be the updated nature of the development on the still vacant lands. Many of the fundamentals of the original plans have changed significantly over the intervening years since Knightsbridge and Concert Properties first began to put their ideas to council.

Not only has council membership changed at least twice over, the tone of council discussion has become toxic.

Meanwhile, city’s hall’s overzealous staff appears to prefer overcoming council’s democratic right and responsibility to make the final decisions.

Beyond that, though, is the fact that man-made or not, climate change is giving a boost to sea levels and forcing corporations and governments alike to rethink their attitudes to waterfront developments.

Will rising sea levels cause Concert to pull back and revise their plans? If that should happen, will Mayor Darrell Mussatto and his team at city hall give the public another chance to voice its opinions?

Or will they say – as they have over the recent Lot 5 changes – that citizens had plenty of opportunity to say their piece at the start of the process and all they need do now is comment on the design and/or zoning variances.
More and more it seems, the four in the 4-3 votes on council seem to think the public is only useful to pay for the decisions they make behind closed doors.
Question is, are city taxpayers of North Vancouver going to take that lying down?
Or will more and more of them “get their Irish up” as O’Connell has done?

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/opinion/columnists/james-pay-parking-decision-points-to-larger-issue-1.2229689#sthash.MziFoXTj.dpuf


Pay parking coming to North Vancouver’s Harbourside neighbourhood

Comment from Voices:  Concerns were expressed by businesses and employees in July 2013 about parking and congestion in the Harbourside area. In June 2014 Council members, with the exception of Councillors Bookham and Clark, and with fierce opposition by members of the public – approved 800 residential units on the waterfront portion of  the area.

We agree with this NS News statement:

One City of North Vancouver councilor is predicting a “battle royal” following a split council decision in favour of instituting pay parking and time-restricted parking spots in the area surrounding the Northshore Auto Mall.

Article in the North Shore News:

Source: Pay parking coming to North Vancouver’s Harbourside neighbourhood

The free ride may not abide in Harbourside, following council’s decision to support new restrictions including pay parking between Bewicke Avenue and Mackay Creek.

In an effort to free up more parking spots in advance of an 800-unit development slated to be built at Harbourside over the next decade, council supported instituting pay parking and time-restricted spots in a split vote March 7. However, one councillor warned the change could be a disaster.

“I think we’re in for a battle royal,” Coun. Pam Bookham advised her colleagues. “I think we’re going to hear the first outcries the moment we try to introduce this plan.”

City staff weighed several options before recommending a combination of pay parking and time limits. Keeping the status quo was not considered despite the fact that keeping things as they are was the public’s preferred option in a 2013 study.

The same study also found on-street parking was 97 per cent full. According to a 2015 survey, 80 per cent of parking spots in the Auto Mall loop are occupied for an average of six hours at a time, presumably due to employees parking during their shifts.

Parking spots on the street are for customers, not employees, said Coun. Holly Back.

“I believe that employers have to take some responsibility for their staff parking,” she said, adding that many Auto Mall employers “didn’t seem too willing to take that responsibility.”

There is rampant speculation some auto dealers use their parking spots for the cars they want to sell, according to Darrell Mussatto.

“I’ve got assumptions, I don’t have any proof,” he said.

However, at least one dealership holds parking spots overnight, according to Mussatto.

“There’s one dealership I will not name; at the end of the day they take their used cars and they put them on the street,” he said, explaining employees swap spots with the used cars each morning.

There are 410 on-street parking stalls in Harbourside, including 138 in the Auto Mall. More than half of the spots are unrestricted. There are time limits on one-third of Auto Mall spots but the limits are rarely enforced over concerns that handing out tickets will push Auto Mall employees into the rest of Harbourside.

Hawkers Wharf, a temporary home for as many as 40 food businesses and a dining area, is set to open later this year. Harbourside is also scheduled to take on approximately 300,000 square feet of commercial development over the next 10 years.

Council voted 5-2 to institute pay parking, with Couns. Pam Bookham and Rod Clark opposed

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/news/pay-parking-coming-to-north-vancouver-s-harbourside-neighbourhood-1.2215212#sthash.LnYsp6nt.Sd0w0H6E.dpuf

LETTER: Casino not condos at North Van’s Harbourside development

LETTER: Casino not condos at North Van’s Harbourside development.

Dear Editor:

Why does the City of North Vancouver not allow casinos to be built? They are constantly whining about money woes for their pet projects.

They are also making decisions about density that go way beyond the OCP to accommodate the shortfalls. Seems like a “no brainer” to me.

A casino in the empty lots in the auto mall would make perfect sense. The idea of putting hundreds of residences in that location is very simplistic and shows this council has no real vision for our city.I can just hear all the people who move there, crying about the noise and lights as soon as the shipyard starts full production. This location was never meant for homes. The traffic in that area is already at its limit.

We are soon going to be hit with a huge bill for the sewage treatment and with the Harper government in charge in Ottawa, we will be footing that bill ourselves.

The city would receive 10 per cent of the revenue from a casino.Maybe the citizens will wake up before the next municipal election and vote for new blood.

Terry Muldoon

North Vancouver

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/opinion/letters/letter-casino-not-condos-at-north-van-s-harbourside-development-1.1008540#.dpuf


Voices comment:  Or, as a friend said to me, they could put a Casino with the hotel and condos.. It would give people something to do when they can’t get out.


Harbourside gets council approval

Harbourside gets council approval.

The largest single commercial/residential development to come before the city in recent years won its approval at City of North Vancouver council Monday night, years after it was first pitched.

Concert Properties’ Harbourside development, which will place roughly 800 strata and rental units and 300,000 square feet of commercial space on the waterfront property along Harbourside Drive at the foot of Fell Avenue over the next 10 to 15 years, passed 5-2 in a late-night session of council.

The city previously held a public hearing to rezone the property on April 1 but chose to defer the vote.

The motion passed 5-2, with Couns. Pam Bookham and Rod Clark voting against – the same split on council for each step of the project over the last two years.

For the two dissenters, the issues were poor access, a loss of land that could be commercial or industrial and the project’s isolation from the rest of the city and its services.

The only ways into the area are via Fell Avenue and Bewicke Avenue, which is home to an at-grade rail crossing. TransLink has no plans to run transit to the area and so the developer has promised to run a private shuttle linking the neighbourhood with the SeaBus terminal.

“It flies in the face of every planning principle that has guided where we put density. That is in Lower Lonsdale, Central Lonsdale and along the Marine Drive corridor because of that close connection between where people live and how they move about,” Bookham said, adding that the private shuttle plan is “no solution at all.”

“I find it hard to call it a neighbourhood because it is so far removed. There is no connection with other residential parts of the city. There’s no connection to any services. There’s no connection to any commercial area and I doubt very much the kind of commercial that will come in with the mixed use will be more than a place where you can maybe buy a quart of milk and a newspaper.”

However, Coun. Guy Heywood chose to champion the proposal at the late hour. With the project having been before council for both an official community plan ammendment and rezoning, it had, despite its challenges, had more vetting by the city than most projects that come forward, he said. And the commercial space at the site coupled with the housing will make it a community where residents can live and work in the same place, which is the best council could hope for he added.

“It’s never going to be classic industrial. It was never industrial before. It will never qualify as a truck terminal site because it’s not close to a highway,” he said. “There’s no way it’s going to be destination-commercial. It’s going to have to generate its own activity through the efforts of development that will have to promote a livework style of development.” Heywood added he was confident the area will eventually be served by transit.

Council must still pass one final reading of the bylaw.

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/news/harbourside-gets-council-approval-1.965173#.dpuf

Harbourside Hearing Heated

A momentous decision that could impact the City of North Vancouver for years to come – was not made Tuesday.

Concert Properties has spent the last four years pitching and refining a project that would bring 800 strata and rental units and more than 300,000 square feet of commercial space to the strip of land south of the North Shore Automall and bordered by Bewicke Avenue.

Four of the project’s buildings could stretch between 70 and 90 feet.

Council heard one last round of public comment from the project’s champions, who consider the development a great use of the city’s waterfront, and detractors, one of whom objected to the use of the term waterfront.

“The city of North Vancouver has no jurisdiction and no governance . . . no authority to deal with the future of that site,” said Dave Watt, pointing out the actual waterfront is under the control of Port Metro Vancouver.

The real estate agent questioned the need for the development. There are currently 454 apartment-style condominiums available for rent in the City and District of North Vancouver, not including townhouses, according to Watt.

Concert Properties president Brian McCauley said his company does not build without significant pre-sales. Also, while North Vancouver may have a seven month supply of rental stock, the Harbourside development would be built over 10 to 15 years.

The site currently allows a floor space ratio – which measures total floor space against the size of the lot – of 1.0. The project would boost that ratio to 2.2, which was good news for project supporter Ron Spence.

“High density is an indication of a successful city. Think about Manhattan, London, Paris, etc. If I think about low density, then Detroit comes to mind,” he said.

Spence’s only objection was the lack of a recreation centre embedded in the project.

The development’s proximity to train tracks constitutes a tragedy waiting to happen, according to former mayoralty candidate Ron Polly.

Polly implored council to install a pedestrian overpass at Bewicke Avenue at the applicant’s expense.

“I have seen what happens at railway crossings. I have seen it and people and trains do not mix,” he said.

Coun. Guy Heywood asked how Concert would react if a pedestrian overpass was added to the project at this late date.

McCauley said he’d be disappointed but would work with city staff.

The project includes bike lanes, pedestrian walkways and a car share program, but none of those measures can alleviate the gridlock choking Harbourside, according to Amanda Nichol.

The project also includes a 24-seat community shuttle bus, which would offer complimentary service from Harbourside to Lonsdale Quay. The shuttle would cease operations once TransLink beefs up service in the area.

If the project is approved, Concert Properties would shell out approximately $28.5 million for parks improvements, an upgrade to the Spirit Trail, public art, and road work, as well as other improvements.

The project will add life and vibrancy to an area awash in potential, according to neighbourhood proprietor Louis Gervais.

Many speakers at Tuesday’s meeting complimented the project but questioned its location.

“I think this is a really attractive proposal that’s in the wrong place,” said Fred Dawkins. “It’s plopped down in the middle of industrial land where we need to generate jobs.”

The project’s second and third reading could be debated by council as early as April.

© North Shore News

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/news/north-vancouver-s-harbourside-hearing-heated-1.941964#sthash.nRGUb3xY.dpuf

Harbourside and “dancing in place on the head of a pin”

As a followup to unresolved questions at the Harbourside Public Hearing on April 1st Mr. Kerry Morris has written the following two letters.  The first, to Councillor Keating,  addresses transit and union problems, quoting in part:

“I was shocked to see you sit silently, taking no position of any kind in relation to last night’s development proposal by Concert properties for HarbourSide. 

It is clear from the documents and discussions that Transit has refused to provide service which requires entry to the proposed HarbourSide development. For that matter, they won’t even currently commit to support the development with greater frequency on the 1st street route until such time as they see a demand lift.

HarbourSide represents a unique and uncomfortable challenge for the City. If the proposal on the table is accepted, Transit will have a precedent to seek private bus initiatives as part of future developments, all over the Lower Mainland, when the proposal conflicts with current service patterns and budget constraints.”

Read letter here: Harbourside PH letter to CK re transit

The second letter to Mr. Penway addresses density bonuses and community amenities and refers to statements made at the Harbourside public hearing, quoting in part:

“At last nights Public Meeting in relation to the HarbourSide development after performing what can only be described as “dancing in place on the head of a pin” for the full 10 minutes of my questions, in response to further questioning by councillor Bookham on the same topic, you finally admitted that due to various extraordinary costs associated with the HarbourSide site selected by Concert, the City had applied development costs as if amenity contributions which effectively become a burden borne by the City by way of a reduced realization from the density lift which would otherwise apply, were this development situated at the old Lonsdale School site instead of at HarbourSide.”

Read letter here: Harbourside density letter to GP

The Q & A referred to can be found here:https://nvcityvoices.wordpress.com/2014/03/30/ocp-town-hall-mar-6-qa-from-kerry-morris/

Replies to both letters will be posted when received.  The Harbourside public hearing was concluded without a vote. 



Harbourside – concern about CN rail crossing

Information follows regarding the level rail crossing on Bewicke, which is one of the two access points for the Harbourside development.  The letter from CN Rail dated Feb 2013 states concerns, quoting in part:•

“CN has concerns that this residential and commercial development will
result in increased vehicle traffic at Bewicke Avenue. This poses both
safety and operational concerns at this multi-track crossing, with expected
future increase in rail traffic as part of the Pacific Gateway.”

Following is an email from Ron Polly to CNV requesting whether there has been an update to the letter from CN, the response from the City, and the original letter from CN Rail detailing their concerns.


Email from Ron Polly to CNV:

From: Ron [mailto:rpolly@shaw.ca] 

Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 10:35 AM

To: Emilie Adin
Subject: Bewicke closing and future staffing for Harbourside development.
Importance: High

Hello Ms Adin

 I was wondering if there has been any resolution to the CN letter dated Feb 2013 and the Concert/Knightsbridge project on Harbourside application ?

Also I was wondering sine this project will be going on for so many years and it will take up so much staff time. Will there be additional staff and or a department added as this project proceeds ?

Could you get back to me please prior to the public meeting this Monday..


Ron Polly

Response from City:

Hello Mr. Polly,

Thank you for your e-mail.  If you would like to make a formal written submission on this rezoning application, your correspondence would need to be directed to the City Clerk’s office:kgraham@cnv.org.

The Public Hearing for the Harbourside Waterfront rezoning application is on Tuesday April 1st at 6pm, not on Monday.  The Council Meeting Agenda for April 1, 2014, can be found at this link:


Since the letter dated February 15, 2013, that you attached to your e-mail, we have not received any further formal response from CN Rail to the referral that was sent by the City of North Vancouver.  However, we have been in regular discussions with CN Rail and we are working with CN Rail on safety improvements to the Bewicke at-grade crossing.  I am copying Brian Willock, Manager, Engineering, Planning & Design, to provide you with more information on how safety and operational concerns raised in CN Rail’s letter are being resolved.

Other issues, such as noise attenuation and noise covenants, Spirit Trail master planning, etc. are fully resolved in this rezoning application.

There is absolutely no expectation of additional staffing or a department added as this project proceeds.  Approval of this rezoning is not anticipated to bring a rate of development and construction beyond what is normally anticipated to occur in the City.



Emilie K Adin
Deputy Director, Community Development
t: 604.982.3922

Original letter from CN Rail February 15 2013: 
Quentin Moore
Second floor – Building B
10229 – 127 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5E 0B9
Telephone: (780) 643-7654
Facsimile: (780) 377-4281
E-mail: quentin.moore@cn.ca
February 15, 2013
Attn: Farouk Babul
RE: Harbourside Waterfront Rezoning Application – Request for Comment
CN has reviewed the rezoning application and have the following comments for
your careful review and consideration:
• CN has concerns that this residential and commercial development will
result in increased vehicle traffic at Bewicke Avenue. This poses both
safety and operational concerns at this multi-track crossing, with expected
future increase in rail traffic as part of the Pacific Gateway. It should be
noted that, as per federal regulation and CN’s Operating Rules, while no
part of a train or engine can be stopped on a public crossing and blocking
it for more than five minutes when vehicular or pedestrian traffic requires
passage through, there are no time restrictions a moving train may occupy
a crossing for (regardless of the speed) under federal regulations. The
best outcome would be to close Bewicke Avenue crossing, or make it a
private gated crossing for use in Emergency situations only, as there is an
existing overpass at Fell Avenue. At the very least we would like to review
the Traffic Management plan for the development.
• We note the conceptual proposal includes a drawing showing the Spirit
Trail running north to CN Rail at Bewicke Avenue, and running adjacent to
the CN Track eastward. CN must reiterate again, we are not in support of
the Spirit Trail adjacent to the track as shown for Safety reasons.
• CN strongly suggests all possible security measures are taken along CN
Right of Way to avoid trespass and security related safety issues with the
increase in adjacent population, as trains can be moving and/or parked on
the multiple tracks in the vicinity?
• If there are changes or additions to Utility crossings of CN they will have to
be addressed for CN approval.
. Construction traffic crossing of CN will need to be addressed at time of
construction, and may require flagging protection.
• Residents and Retail personnel of the development must be made aware
of the noise to be expected from the adjacent Railway. This may include
whistling and possibly shunting as well as other noise associated with our
operations in the area. The Developer should include noise abatement
strategies in the project such as windows that reduce noise, insulating
materials, walls, berms, etc. Residents of the development should be
made aware of the railway noise via a noise and vibration covenant
applied to titles. We would ask that the City of North Vancouver make this
a condition of the development.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me and kindly keep
CN involved during your ongoing consultation process.
Yours truly,
Quentin Moore
cc: Emilie K. Adin (Deputy Director, Community Development Department, City of North


DNV Council halts project – gridlock concerns

From the North Shore News:http://www.nsnews.com/news/council-halts-seymour-projects-1.931636#

Given the likelihood of Harbourside – 800 units, The Shore – 375 units, other developments in the 700-800 block of Marine up to 700 new units, current gridlock, access problems – any chance the CNV Council will hit the pause button?

Quoting in part: 

“You put in an application for redevelopment or rezoning at your own risk,” he said. “I’m not eager to see too much more development happen at Seymour until infrastructure and the transportation network can tolerate it.”

As long as the pace of development outpaces transportation improvements, growth will limit access to bridges, hospitals and schools, said Eric Andersen, who was speaking on behalf of the Seymour Local Plan Monitoring Committee.

Seymour has seen 222 new units in the past 11 years. However, if developments on Tsleil Waututh land and other nearby projects are included in the tabulation, that number swells to 851 units in 11 years.

It is entirely appropriate for council to “apply the brakes” until infrastructure has a chance to catch up, according to Andersen.

The district needs to focus on sustainable development as opposed to “continuing to sprawl up our mountainside,” said Coun. Lisa Muri.

With myriad developments in various phases of completion, residents need a respite from what can be a very stressful process, according to Muri.

“The days of continuing to battle development applications needed to come to an end,” she said. “We’re just very cognizant of piling too many projects on at once.”

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/news/council-halts-seymour-projects-1.931636#sthash.FaqychVe.dpuf

Harbourside Public Hearing April 1st

The Public Hearing has now been scheduled for April 1st, full details of the application:

Harbourside Waterfront Development Application


Following the successful application for an Official Community Plan amendment on the Harbourside Waterfront land, an application has been made to rezone the property. This application proposes amending the zoning bylaw from the existing CD-359 to a new Comprehensive Development Zone allowing for residential uses and densities consistent with the Official Community Plan Amendment application finalized in July 2012.

As part of the rezoning application, two key documents will be created to govern development on the site. The first document is the Comprehensive Development Zoning bylaw which will regulate density, height, setbacks, site coverage and other quantitative restrictions on a lot-by-lot basis through the site. The second document is the development permit guidelines to control the form and character of the development, and also regulate the look and feel of the public realm inclusive of street width, parking access, public amenities, materials and architectural styles.



Details of the rezoning submission are here: