Housing Expert Geller Dishes On Dunbar

By Carol Volkart

If it has to do with housing, Michael Geller has done it all over the past five decades — designed it, built it, sold it, consulted on it, taught it, written about it, entertained audiences with it, signed public letters on it and commented tirelessly to the media about it.

But it was only lately, when I learned that Geller is not just a planner, consultant, retired architect, developer, and academic, but also a Dunbar-Southlands resident, that the wheels began turning. Why not ask this expert-on-all-things-housing what he thinks about what’s happening in his own neighbourhood?

Dunbar is still relatively unscathed compared to the 500 blocks of the Broadway Plan, or Oakridge, which has turned into a maze of gigantic towers, but we’re already seeing changes to the size and types of buildings springing up along our streets. New city and provincial densification policies ensure there’s much, much more to come.

So I asked, and Geller, with remarkable grace and speed, answered my questions about the past, present and future of the neighbourhood we share. Now I know that he thinks:

• 20-storey towers don’t belong in Dunbar; he’d do “everything” he could to stop buildings above eight storeys
• Residents have been right to fight to preserve Dunbar’s distinctive low-rise character
• Our sense of community is fraying as younger people leave and parents  follow
• Multiplexes are fine, but don’t expect them to be affordable
• We need a broader variety of housing types
• Unless the tax system changes, we’ll keep losing legacy businesses
• If we want Dunbar’s new retail streetscape to look and function better, we have to insist on it

This isn’t Geller’s first address to the Dunbar community. In 2017, he gave a lively presentation to the Dunbar Residents’ Association AGM about adding different types of housing to accommodate changing needs. He wasn’t advocating for towers then either.

An edited version of my email interview with Geller is below:

Dunbar’s Past

Question: Although Dunbar is changing now, it would be helpful to have your thoughts on what it was like before the current changes began, to give a sense of what we’re transitioning from.  How would you describe the “before” Dunbar in terms of livability, affordability, building types, sense of community, and the retail scene:

Answer: One of the best ways to understand and appreciate the “before” Dunbar is to read The Story of Dunbar, a 441-page book edited by Peggy Schofield that provides an account of the history of this distinctive Vancouver neighbourhood and the people who contributed to its character.

It’s noteworthy that Dunbar/Southlands was once part of the new municipality of Point Grey, founded in 1908. It remained a separate municipality from Vancouver until 1929. During this time, Point Grey enacted Canada’s first zoning bylaw which restricted residential buildings to single-family residences. Multi-family residential buildings were not permitted.

There was also an emphasis on the provision of multiple parks and open spaces. This further contributed to the distinctive character and livability of Dunbar.

Notwithstanding all its amenities, since many of the lots, at 33-feet and 50-feet wide, were relatively small compared to nearby Point Grey, Dunbar offered affordability for families wanting to raise a family.

The neighbourhood character resulted from a mix of house types including ‘castle houses’, ‘West Coast Modern’ designs, and a wide variety of bungalows and two-storey dwellings. In the 1960s and 70s, builders bought up some of the smaller lots in Dunbar and replaced the cottages and bungalows with a distinctive style of house that became known as the ‘Vancouver Special’.

They provided plenty of habitable space including the option of separate quarters on the ground level for an extended family or a secondary suite. Today, almost every block in the northern half of Dunbar has at least one of these homes next to the older homes.

During the 70s, 80s and 90s, developers purchased properties and leveled the existing houses and garages and built new houses to offer for sale. This resulted in the broad mix of single-family houses that we see today.

Dunbar has historically been a family neighbourhood with numerous schools and churches. However, over time, as children have grown up, they have moved away and new households with children could often not afford to move into the neighbourhood. As a result, the school enrolment has been dropping.

When it comes to retail, all the neighbourhood services are concentrated along Dunbar and 41^st. It is noteworthy that unlike the rest of Vancouver, new mixed-use developments offering housing above retail were for many years extremely limited. While the first projects offered rental housing, in more recent years, we have seen new low-rise condominiums being built, usually intended to appeal to older people ready to move out of their single-family homes.

It is noteworthy that Dunbar has a history of citizen involvement in the planning process. This resulted in the creation of the Dunbar Residents’ Association which for many years opposed unpopular development proposals. It is noteworthy that Dunbar was one of the first Vancouver neighbourhoods chosen to develop a Community Vision document.

Finally, we cannot ignore the fact that Dunbar’s proximity to the Musqueam First Nation’s Lands and several golf courses and extensive parks and open spaces has further contributed to its special character and overall livability.

While this is not likely to change, many other aspects of the neighbourhood have been changing and are going to change.

Dunbar’s Present

Question: What’s happening with affordability in today’s Dunbar?

Answer: Although the lots are relatively small, given the neighbourhood amenities, the cost of single-family houses is quite high. Furthermore, with the exception of apartments above retail along Dunbar and West 41st, there are few affordable housing choices in the community. In recent years, we have seen some laneway houses built but very few townhouses or multiplex projects have been developed. As a result, although the housing is less expensive than Point Grey and parts of Kerrisdale, it remains amongst the most expensive housing in Canada.

Question: Do you think the Dunbar of today has a sense of community and connectedness?

Answer: It is my impression that the sense of community and connectedness that led to the writing and publication of The Story of Dunbar in 2007 is starting to disappear. This is in part due to the reduced number of children living in the community, and the decision by many seniors to move away, often to Langley and Surrey to be closer to their children and grandchildren. As noted above, households with children have generally not been able to afford to move back in to the neighbourhood.

Question: What do you think of the high vacancy rate of businesses here?

Answer: I find it quite saddening to drive along Dunbar Street and see the many vacant storefronts and run-down properties. Of course, this phenomenon is not just restricted to Dunbar. Similar problems exist along West 10^th in Point Grey and other high streets around the city. The problem is due in part to zoning which inflates the value of these high street properties such that the taxes, which are usually paid by the tenants, not the property owners, are sometimes greater than the rents themselves.

As we can see, many of the properties are now being redeveloped with new retail uses at street level. Some of these new businesses are becoming quite successful and over time, I think we can expect to see much more redevelopment and a revitalization of the street. But there’s no doubt that unless there are changes to the BC Assessment Act, higher taxes will force out many older legacy businesses.

Question: Is Dunbar becoming a better or worse place to live? Are we losing walkability and livability as small businesses providing daily necessities close, forcing people out of the area to shop?

Answer: I suspect many longstanding residents would say the neighbourhood has changed and not for the better. What I don’t know is what newer households think of the area. I suspect many families who have come to Vancouver from Asia are attracted by the quality of the schools and may do their shopping elsewhere. That said, it is interesting to see the new Korean market which appears to be quite successful, and may be indicative of what might become the future of the area.

Question: The demolition of many old homes and loss of trees and mature gardens have prompted concerns that we’re losing Dunbar’s distinctive character. Do you think this is so? Is there value in preserving the unique character of neighbourhoods?

Answer: In 2017, I was invited to speak at the Dunbar Residents’ Association AGM. At the time I gave a presentation which proposed how new housing choices could be introduced into the neighbourhood without significantly altering the character. This included townhouses on corner lots, small multiplex-style developments, similar to what the city now allows.

However, my presentation did not include any taller buildings above six storeys. It should be noted that under the province’s new Transit-Oriented Area legislation, taller buildings up to 12 storeys are not only allowed, but encouraged around the Dunbar bus loop.

Furthermore, a proposed Social Housing Initiative would allow high-rise social housing buildings up to 20 storeys along many Dunbar streets. People are not generally aware of this, but to my mind this could be extremely damaging to the character of the community.

Question:  As new apartments with ground-floor retail go up on Dunbar Street, the streetscape is changing. Instead of many small stores with varied storefronts, there are long walls of glass, sometimes covered over. There have been complaints that this creates an unfriendly, alienating atmosphere. As a planner, what do you think of Dunbar Street’s new look and its impact on the neighbourhood?

Answer: It is most unfortunate that so many architects and developers have demonstrated very little creativity when it comes to the development of new mixed-use buildings offering retail at grade and housing above. As you have rightly observed, these buildings have been designed with virtually no variation in the storefronts nor the canopies which one finds in more traditional shopping streets.

It does not have to be like this. One just needs to look at the Capers development in the 2200 block of West 4^th to see how a new development can be designed and built to replicate the character of a traditional village street. This is something Dunbar residents should insist upon for all new mixed-use developments along Dunbar and West 41^st.

Dunbar’s Future

Question: How will the strong densification push from the city and the province affect Dunbar in the future?  What will be the impact of allowing  20-storey social housing towers  virtually everywhere, as well as towers within two blocks of Dunbar Street, and around the Dunbar bus loop?

Answer: As noted above, I think these two planning policies could be extremely damaging for Dunbar. While change is essential, it is appropriate that certain neighbourhoods like Dunbar be allowed to retain a lower scale character. This doesn’t mean there cannot be some taller midrise buildings at key intersections, but a more village-like scale should be retained.

Dunbar residents should study what is happening in West Vancouver’s Ambleside and Dundarave villages to see how a neighbourhood can retain a more distinctive, village-style character.

Question: What do you think of the idea of creating new “villages” throughout the city, including four quite close to already-struggling Dunbar Street? (Macdonald and West 16^th; Macdonald and West 25^th; Mackenzie and West 33^rd; and Mackenzie and West 41^st) Each will encourage retail at that central point, and denser housing around it. What impact will villages have?

Answer: This question raises an important point about just how much retail can be supported in the neighbourhood. Over time I expect Dunbar’s population to increase, but whether it can support a lot more retail, as might be found in some of these other neighbourhood centres, remains to be seen.

While I do not know how significant the demand will be for much more retail space, I will tell you that many years ago the City of Vancouver implemented a planning policy that required retail activity not just at street level, but also on the second level. Eventually, this policy had to be relaxed because urban land economists pointed out there just were not enough Chinese restaurants wanting to occupy all the second-floor retail space being required by the city.

My personal view is that in many instances it would be desirable to have street-oriented row houses, with and without some commercial activity, in addition to retail or commercial spaces in these village centres.

Question: As referred to earlier, Dunbar will have its very own Transit-Oriented Area around the 41^st and Dunbar bus loop. Between that and its designation as a rapid transit area under the Vancouver Plan, that part of Dunbar will be open to towers and considerable densification. What do you think of the changes planned for this area?

Answer: While I agree with the concept of allowing higher densities around transit, I think it is wrong to allow buildings above six or eight storeys next to the Dunbar bus loop. However, I understand that TransLink is attempting to assemble properties along Dunbar and may already have done so, with the expectation that it can promote the redevelopment of higher density buildings up to 12 storeys in this location.

There is no doubt that the provincial and municipal Transit-Oriented Area policy, which is essentially  a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution, is wrong and inappropriate for Dunbar.

Question: Under the Vancouver Plan, Dunbar Street itself will be designated what’s called a “neighbourhood centre,” with towers allowed within a block or two, although the details have not been ironed out yet. What do you think of this future for Dunbar Street?

Answer: I think there should be distinctive neighbourhoods both in Vancouver and throughout Metro Vancouver. While Dunbar residents were criticized for being too vociferous in their opposition to buildings greater than four or five storeys, in hindsight, I think they were right.

It is wrong to try and transform Dunbar and many other village centres around Vancouver with new high-rise buildings. This should not be allowed to happen.

Question: Now that up to six units can be built per lot (eight if they’re rental), what kind of housing do you foresee being built in Dunbar in future? We’re already seeing much higher, bigger buildings, and very large back-yard structures being added to lots with existing big homes. What impact will all this increased building have on neighbourhoods, on the environment, and on affordability? Will housing be cheaper, or will there just be more – equally expensive – housing?

Answer: These are very good questions, but the jury is out on what is likely to happen as a result of the new multiplex policies. As I presented many years ago, it’s a good idea to introduce a broader range of housing choices along Dunbar’s single-family streets. But when the lots cost around $2.5 million, even with four or six homes, they are not going to be very affordable. It is estimated that these new homes will cost about $1,400 per square foot, so even a smaller two-bedroom home is likely to cost around $1.2 million.

I undertook two developments in West Vancouver in which I put four houses on one lot. They were considered very attractive and fit in quite well with the neighbourhood. However, these lots were 12,000 square feet in size. Furthermore, the new homes ended up selling for a price not unlike the surrounding homes.

Perhaps the biggest challenge with multiplex development, in addition to the cost of the new housing, is how best to accommodate parking. I struggled to provide four garages on a 12,000 square foot lot. It is very challenging to provide more than three parking spaces on a 33-foot or 50- foot lot without going underground, which is cost-prohibitive.

I suspect that if multiplex developments do become more popular, there will need to be a rethink how best to accommodate parking in Dunbar. For instance, should pay parking be introduced along residential streets?

Summing Up

Question: If you had the say over Dunbar’s future, what would you do in terms of housing, vacancies, revitalizing retail, and preserving heritage homes and green space?

Answer:  I would encourage the development of a broader range of housing choices in the community, both to serve existing residents and their children, as well as new households.

This would include laneway housing for rent and for sale, more secondary suites, including lower level ‘garden suites’ that can be sold as well as rented. I would restrict new multifamily buildings to six storeys with some eight-storey buildings in special locations.

I would do everything I can to stop the development of high-rise buildings above eight storeys.

To fill the vacant properties along Dunbar Street, I would encourage BC Assessment and the city to reconsider how properties are taxed. Currently the BC Assessment Act allows lower taxes for homeowners who have lived in their properties for 10 years or more. (Section 19(8) of the Act.)

I think a similar approach should be considered for longstanding businesses. This would benefit Dunbar and many other village high streets around the city.

With regard to heritage conservation, the two multiplex developments I undertook in West Vancouver involved conservation of heritage structures. Unfortunately, the multiplex zoning is going to have a negative impact on heritage conservation. We therefore need to introduce new policies to encourage heritage conservation. One idea may be to allow density banking, something that was used in the past. This allowed the owner of a heritage property to both increase density, but also offer density for sale to be used on another site.

With regard to trees, when I was in France, I discovered a street in a small town where there were many beautiful trees. At the base of many of these trees there was a plaque noting that the tree had been planted in honour of or memory of someone. I have often thought that one way to encourage and fund more street trees might be to institute a similar dedication program. Maybe this could be tested out in Dunbar. Just something to think about.