Skip to content

DNV advances housing/park plan for Delbrook lands

It’s one storey shorter and in need of a funding partner, but the Delbrook housing project is back –now with a park. District of North Vancouver council unanimously advanced a plan Monday for a four-storey building at 600 West Queens Rd.
db

It’s one storey shorter and in need of a funding partner, but the Delbrook housing project is back –now with a park.

District of North Vancouver council unanimously advanced a plan Monday for a four-storey building at 600 West Queens Rd. with three floors earmarked for rentals and one storey reserved for a seniors’ care facility.

The plan is similar to the five-storey rental project and seniors centre council rejected in 2018. But this project, which includes a $2.2 -million park on the north side of the site, is “a fair balancing act of competing community interests,” according to Coun. Jim Hanson.

The rezoning is “generally consistent” with both the $137,000 district-wide Delbrook consultation of 2015-’16, as well as the approximately $15,000 round of consultation in 2019 that put a greater emphasis on the immediate neighbourhood, Hanson said. The nearby neighbours favoured a smaller structure and a park.

An early park design includes a grass amphitheatre, sport courts, a playground, water jets, exercise equipment and an open grass area as well as 22 parking spots. However, a majority of council opted for fewer features.

Examining the park is “stressing me out,” Coun. Megan Curren said. “Parks are supposed to be relaxing.”

Coun. Lisa Muri agreed.

“I’m not sure if we’ve left anything out, except maybe a roller coaster,” Muri said.

If the housing-park project is approved, staff will work with council and the public on a final park design, according to district development planner Kevin Zhang.

In order to turn bylaws into bricks and mortar, council would also have to find a non-profit housing provider and seniors care provider. Staff would then hammer out key details, such as seeking funding and figuring out the design of the building, Zhang told council.

Muri suggested she’d favour between 50 and 62 units with an emphasis on housing for families.

Coun. Mathew Bond disagreed, suggesting the site should be “far more utilized for homes,” particularly for single seniors and small households in core need. Bond also lamented council’s 5-2 vote to scuttle the previous, 80-unit iteration of the project.

“We no longer have a partner for a seniors care facility and we no longer have a funding partner for the affordable rental homes,” he said, noting the call in the district’s official community plan to build 600 to 1,000 affordable housing units by 2026.

Coun. Jordan Back concurred.

While there are massive housing needs in the community, “There isn’t the same urgent need for more parks,” Back said.

The site should offer social housing for those who are “really, really in need,” according to Coun. Betty Forbes.

Those renters would likely need very little parking, Forbes added.

“Usually, they don’t have cars to begin with,” she said, suggesting the district could save an enormous amount of money – and consequently offer lower rents – by doing away with parking on the site.

Apart from seniors centre staff parking, pickup and drop-off spots, and a few stalls reserved for car shares, Muri also suggested removing parking.

“Let’s be bold,” she encouraged.

The municipality could also enforce resident-only parking in the surrounding area to keep cars from lining side streets, Muri explained.

With six councillors voting to remove parking requirements from the site, Mayor Mike Little found himself the lone holdout.

“Don’t under-build it, because you can’t add it afterwards,” he advised.

Council voted 6-1 to remove parking requirements, which would have mandated 0.7 stalls per unit.