Speaking notes for multiplex streamlining
I’m planning to speak in support of motion 7 at today’s City Finance and Services committee meeting, brought forward by Lucy Maloney (OneCity):
Hello, my name is Russil Wvong. I’m a resident of Vancouver. I’m calling in support of this motion.
We need more housing. The big advantage of multiplex projects is speed. Compared to larger projects, multiplexes should be a lot faster to plan and build.
Back in 2017, Kelowna introduced and fast-tracked four-plexes in a new RU7 zone. With pre-approved designs, they were able to reduce approval times from a year to just two or three weeks. If Kelowna can do it, there’s no reason that Vancouver can’t do it.
There’s a four-plex planned across the street from where we live. The initial application was received in March 2024. The development permit was issued in July 2025. Kelowna could approve a four-plex in 15 to 20 days; in Vancouver it takes as long as 15 months. Apparently the median time right now is about 10 months.
The motion also mentions Burnaby’s multiplex policy, which allows for four floors and 50% site coverage. That’s about twice as much floor space as Vancouver’s multiplex policy allows. On a 33x122 lot, about 4000 square feet, Burnaby would allow about 8000 square feet of floor space. Vancouver would only allow 4000 square feet.
This is backwards. Within a region, you’re going to have more people who want to live close to the geographic centre of the region, with easy access to jobs. In the case of Metro Vancouver, that means the city of Vancouver. Because we’re not building enough housing in Vancouver, it’s like pushing down on a balloon. We’re pushing people out to Burnaby, to Surrey, or to Langley.
I think it’s fair to say that the city of Vancouver should allow more housing than a municipality that’s further out. But at the very least, we should be considering making Vancouver’s multiplex policy as permissive as Burnaby’s. In places where demand is high and land prices are high, we should be allowing more density, not less density.
Thank you.