Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Collaborative Experiments in New Ways of Living: Vancouver in the Post Post-Industrial Economy Chapman, John Feb 28, 2013

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
310-SCARP_2013_gradproject_Chapman.pdf [ 3.07MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 310-1.0075777.json
JSON-LD: 310-1.0075777-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 310-1.0075777-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 310-1.0075777-rdf.json
Turtle: 310-1.0075777-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 310-1.0075777-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 310-1.0075777-source.json
Full Text
310-1.0075777-fulltext.txt
Citation
310-1.0075777.ris

Full Text

 COLLABORATIVE EXPERIMENTS IN NEW WAYS OF LIVING: VANCOUVER IN THE POST POST-INDUSTRIAL ECONOMY  By  JOHN CHAPMAN  B.A., The University of British Columbia, 2005  A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF ARTS (PLANNING)  In  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  School of Community and Regional Planning  We accept this project as conforming to the required standard  …………………………………..  ……………………………………  ……………………………………  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA January 2013 © John Chapman, 2013     1    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   “We can prosper in a world only if all sectors…are constantly engaged in collaborative experiments in new ways of living.” (Thomas Homer Dixon 2010)   Given the importance of industrial lands to a healthy urban economy and the continued threat to their existence, urban industrial land use is an essential and topical theme for study by urban planners. Based on a review of mixed land-use planning literature, primary research, and case study examples, this paper argues that specific land-use policy, re-zoning amendments, and creative real-estate development and adaptive re-use can provide appropriate space for industry, allowing it to be an integral part of the urban fabric. The case for preserving industrial lands through innovation in land-use policy is based on literature review, analysis of city policy, and qualitative research with planning practitioners, businesses, and relevant professionals. Primary research was undertaken primarily in Vancouver, while examples were drawn from identified best practices elsewhere in North America. Vancouver’s urban industry faces challenges. Decades of redevelopment has eroded the industrial land base, leaving fragmented and in some cases underutilized industrial space; at the same time demand continues to grow from local industry, as well as development pressure from continued strong demand for housing. The literature review investigates how mixed-use developments can ease the integration of industrial, residential, and commercial activities in a dense urban form, and uncovers quantitative data demonstrating that industrial lands are an important element of the urban ecosystem, providing space for productive jobs, essential services, and city functions. This paper begins with an introduction and an explanation of methodology. Section 3 is a literature review, to situate the discussion in a wider academic context. Section 4 investigates Vancouver’s industrial sector, and section 5 is a brief overview of   2 the urban land use system. Section 6 details multiple first-person interviews, and section 7 provides analysis. Additionally, 6 case studies are attached, fleshing out examples of innovative industrial lands policy.            “…a fine grain mixing of diverse uses creates vibrant and successful neighbourhoods” Jane Jacobs (1961)  3  TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION	
  .....................................................................................................	
  5	
   2.0 APPROACH AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY	
  ............................................	
  8	
   3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW	
  ..........................................................................................	
  9	
   3.1 Industrial Land Use Planning	
  .......................................................................................................................	
  9	
   3.2 Mixed-Use Planning	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  10	
   3.3 Opportunities and Challenges of Mixed Land Use	
  .....................................................................	
  12	
   3.4 Production, Distribution, and Repair	
  ...................................................................................................	
  13	
   3.5 Creativity and Innovation in the industrial sector	
  ....................................................................	
  13	
   4.0 VANCOUVER CONTEXT	
  ......................................................................................	
  15	
   5.0 THE URBAN LAND USE SYSTEM	
  ....................................................................	
  20	
   6.0 INTERVIEWS	
  .........................................................................................................	
  21	
   6.1 Planners from Toronto, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle	
  .........................................	
  31	
   6.2 Real Estate Agents	
  .............................................................................................................................................	
  23	
   6.3 Industrial property owners	
  .........................................................................................................................	
  24	
   6.4 Business Associations	
  .....................................................................................................................................	
  25	
   6.5 Local Business	
  .......................................................................................................................................................	
  26	
   7.0 ANALYSIS	
  ...............................................................................................................	
  32	
   8.0 CASE STUDIES	
  ......................................................................................................	
  34	
   8.1 Alex Gair Development, 955 E Hastings Vancouver	
  ................................................................	
  34	
   8.2 Arts Factory/Great Northern Way, Vancouver	
  ............................................................................	
  35	
   8.3 Eastern Neighbourhoods, San Francisco	
  ..........................................................................................	
  36	
   8.4 Backstreets Program, Boston	
  ....................................................................................................................	
  37	
     4 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS	
  .........................................................................................	
  38	
   10.0 CONCLUSIONS	
  ...................................................................................................	
  40	
   11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY	
  .................................................................................................	
  42	
       LIST OF TABLES  TABLE 1: INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT DENSITIES	
  .....................................................................................	
  9	
   TABLE 2: KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF INDUSTRIAL LANDS	
  ................................................................	
  10	
   TABLE 3: INDUSTRIAL LEASE RATES IN METRO VANCOUVER	
  .........................................................	
  16	
   TABLE 4: INDUSTRIAL LEASE RATES IN NORTH AMERICA	
  ...............................................................	
  17	
   TABLE 5: VACANCY RATES FOR INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES	
  ...............................................................	
  18	
   TABLE 6: INTERVIEWS SUMMARY	
  ...............................................................................................................	
  28	
   TABLE 7: INDUSTRIAL JOBS AND LAND SUMMARY IN VANCOUVER AND METRO VANCOUVER	
  .............................................................................................................................................................................	
  31	
   TABLE 8: SUMMARY OF BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES	
  ..................................................................	
  31	
     CASE STUDIES  9.1 ALEX GAIR DEVELOPMENT, 955 EAST HASTINGS VANCOUVER ........................ 34 9.2 ARTS FACTORY/GREAT NORTHERN WAY .................................................. 35 9.3 SAN FRANCISCO’S EASTERN NEIGHBOURHOODS ......................................... 36 9.4 BOSTON BACKSTREETS ...................................................................... 37 5  1.0 INTRODUCTION Urban industrial lands are both a concern and favourite issue for planners. The ongoing transition across North America from a primarily industrial economy to a knowledge- and advanced services-based economy has been inconsistent and uneven, as cities in North America’s former industrial heartland, such as Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, Michigan, struggle to adapt and are facing continued economic and population decline, while cities such as San Francisco, Toronto, and New York emerge as global hubs of commerce and culture, and are dealing instead with rapidly increasing populations and property values. In Vancouver, particularly, this economic transition has created a diverse suite of changes, as Vancouver rapidly transitioned from a colonial outpost, processing and exporting natural resources, to a global destination for capital and investment and an important hub in Asian- North American trade. This change is accompanied by decoupling from British Columbia’s traditional based on natural resource extraction, processing, and export, and consequently a decreased emphasis on the industrial sector. Vancouver’s prosperous economy combined with physical constraints on growth has created a highly competitive land market, including rampant property speculation and rezoning applications. The last few decades have seen a process of spatial homogenization, as available lands are converted for the construction of first office towers and today downtown condominium developments. Industrial lands are frequently seen as a resource for conversion to residential and commercial land, creating conflict with the industrial sector over access to scarce urban space. In the past 40 years, 96 hectares of industrial lands in the City of Vancouver have been converted to other uses, predominantly residential, leaving a total of 379 hectares (Metro Vancouver 2006 p7). Industrial lands provide an important physical space for businesses to operate and flourish, providing essential space for local economic activity and supporting local jobs. As Vancouver has some of the highest land values in North America, demand for residential and commercial space continues to threaten the viability the urban industrial economy. This places a responsibility onto municipal decision-makers and planners to work closely with stakeholders to find creative and pragmatic solutions, to ensure that industrial land is preserved for local production, manufacturing, and distribution businesses.   6              Urban industrial lands provide important space for a diverse set of economically productive activities to take place. Jobs are generally stable and pay good wages without requiring post-secondary education, and industrial businesses provide economic diversity and support mixed-use and residential areas, providing necessary services and products, such as food distribution, waste management, and goods manufacturing (City of Seattle 2007a). Success characteristically depends on proximity to clients, suppliers, and other industrial businesses. Furthermore, industrial businesses, are highly sensitive to rent increases. Conservation of industrial lands is increasingly seen to be particularly important strategy for sustainable development in Vancouver and throughout the Lower Mainland, as a way to retain important jobs and diversity in the economy (Metro Vancouver 2012). Demand for industrial land in Vancouver is projected to continue to grow, slowly and steadily (Metro Vancouver 2011). As a result strategies to preserve existing industrial land and intensify industrial land use are necessary to preserve the economic diversity of the city and region. Creation of new industrial land is not feasible, as demand for space from other uses, primarily residential and commercial, is overwhelming. Without the option of creating additional space, an alternative approach is to focus on conservation of existing industrial land and intensification of its use. This is an ongoing project in Metro Vancouver (Metro  “Appreciation of the local and the mundane exhibited in manufacturing in old industrial spaces creates the potential for a different kind of city, one that resists the one-size-fits-all assumptions of neoliberal urban theory and creates a truly diverse and more inclusive city.” Curran (2010) 	
   7  Vancouver 2011, 2012, Vance 2011), and promises some opportunities for success, but also many intractable challenges. The third option is to look at combining diverse uses within a neighbourhood or a development, with the intent of accomplishing, at the same time, conservation of industrial lands and land use intensification. This is an appealing option in the interface zones between industrial and residential areas. Traditionally, typical industry generally requires the exclusion of other land use activities, such as housing, due to conflicts over noise, traffic, emissions, and other negative impacts. But other industrial activities – “light” industry – may be able to exist harmoniously with other land uses in mixed-use buildings and neighbourhoods. Given the importance of industrial lands to a healthy urban economy and recent rates of conversion to other uses and continuing sensitivity to rents, urban industrial land use is an essential and topical theme for study by urban planners. Based on a review of mixed land- use planning literature, this paper argues that specific land-use policy, re-zoning amendments, and creative real-estate development and adaptive re-use can provide appropriate space for industry, allowing it to be an integral part of the urban fabric. The case for preserving industrial lands through innovation in land-use policy is based on literature review, analysis of city policy, and qualitative research with planning practitioners, businesses, and relevant professionals. This project is an examination of mixed-use zoning as a strategy for retaining urban industrial lands and, at the same time, intensifying their use. Encouraging new and innovative combinations of uses within a neighbourhood or even a single development may be useful, if it can help to maintain spatial heterogeneity and foster economic growth by helping to maintain a viable light industrial sector in a prosperous urban environment. Specifically, mixed-use, light-industrial zones might be most appropriate in the interface – along the periphery of the industrial areas, the transition areas. As a counter-narrative, critics argue that market demand should be allowed to determine the highest and best land use. Zoning categories and regulation strangle the natural process of land conversion and development, leading to sub-optimal outcomes and inefficient land use. Zoning regimes add transaction costs to land development and can lead to inefficient land-use allocation (Karkkainen 1994). Strategic planning and attempts to   8 control land use foster social and economic exclusion, and are seen as constraints on property rights (Fischel 2004). 2.0 APPROACH AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Information for this research was gathered in three ways: through a review of relevant literature, through interviews with people who had a direct interest in industrial land use and mixed-use zoning and development, and through brief case studies of industrial land use policies and developments. The research focused primarily on roles for mixed-use zoning in urban economies, potentially facilitating greater diversity and increased intensity of land use in industrially zoned neighbourhoods.  Successes, failures, and potential of mixed-use zoning were identified in the literature review. This theoretical background was used to inform interview questions. Interview participants included four key groups: 1) planners from the City of Vancouver and other jurisdictions, chosen as important comparisons for Vancouver; 2) industrial property owners; 3) commercial/industrial real estate agents; and 3) industrial and light-industrial business owners. Interviews were conducted with: five land-use planners in Vancouver, Toronto, Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco; two executive directors of East Vancouver Business Improvement Associations; three Vancouver commercial real estate agents; two industrial property owners; and eight Vancouver industrial/light industrial businesses. Interviews were conducted in-person where possible, and via telephone when necessitated by geographic distance. As the largest city in Canada, Toronto is an obvious choice when comparing land- use regimes amongst Canadian cities. Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco were chosen as Vancouver’s geographical and cultural equivalents. The interviewees represented a diverse selection of perspectives, interests and identities and the discussions illuminated stakeholder attitudes to urban mixed-use development, zoning controls, and the role that planners can take in urban economic development. Stakeholders have different land-use interests; industrial landowners may be interested in rezonings that may lead to higher land values, while industrial businesses have a strong interest in restricting competing land-uses in industrial zones. Interviewees were asked about advantages and disadvantages of light industrial and PDR zoning, and 9  potential impacts on neighbourhoods, jobs, and real estate values; the demand for light- industrial space in Vancouver; achievable lease rates and uptake rates; and the physical/spatial needs of small light-industrial businesses. 3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 3.1 Industrial Land Use Planning Historically, land use planning has been about segregating land uses – regulating space to create single-purpose districts in order to increase efficiency, safety, and well-being. Space within cities was regulated in order to create single-purpose zones segregating residential, commercial, and industrial spaces from each other. Scholars have further argued that creating clear boundaries is important to limit the negative effects of industrial production and overcrowding in cities (Dempwolf 2010). City planners have been careful to create cities that minimized negative impacts for city residents, meaning that single-use zoning regimes have been common (Fisher, 2004). Typical industrial categories include manufacturing, transportation, warehousing and distribution, and utilities. Manufacturing has been in decline across North America, though hope for local manufacturing resurgences continues to be popular. Warehousing and distribution has been a growth sector, though it provides fewer jobs than other industrial sectors. Port and transshipment facilities have special land needs, requiring large warehouses, tightly integrated with transportation networks. (See Table 1).  TABLE 1: INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT DENSITIES (average square feet of floor space per job in Vancouver)  Industrial (general/manufacturing) 400-600 Industrial (warehousing/distribution) 1000 Office 200 Retail 500 (Vance 2011)   10 In North America, zoning regulations first appeared as a municipal tool allowing regulation of the rapid and extensive urban changes wrought by industrialization. Industrial and manufacturing activities generated pollution, noise, and traffic, and rapid urbanization forced people into high-density and unhealthy living arrangements. Through the latter part of the 20th century, North American industry followed a pattern of suburbanization, moving out of urban cores to dedicated industrial parks (Dempwolf, forthcoming). These industrial parks do not make efficient use of land, and jobs are widely dispersed, causing commuting and transportation to be highly dependent on automobiles (Vance 2011). In contrast, urban industrial lands offer the potential of a provide stable tax base, source of good jobs close to where people live, and diversification in the urban economy.  TABLE 2: KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF INDUSTRIAL LANDS (after Dempwolf, forthcoming) 3.2 Mixed-Use Planning According to Emily Talen (2005), “the single biggest failure of the past century of American city building can be summed up in a single word: separation” (p214). In the mid- 20th century modern town planning advocated segregating land uses based on classifications. Cities were divided into discrete districts, with meticulously detailed and specific zoning regulations. Master plans and redevelopment schemes re-created old neighbourhoods, erasing communities and displacing residents. Polluted and congested cities emptied as residents with means fled to the suburbs. Exclusionary zoning was reductionist, divisive, and detrimental to the natural complexity of urban life. In some cases, • Accessible to customers, suppliers, workers, transportation networks • Affordable rental/lease rates • Ability to cluster with complementary businesses • Compatible with surrounding land-uses • Site characteristics o Yards or other storage/handling space o Loading bays o High ceilings 11  it was used to segregate not only land uses, but people of different class or race (Davidoff and Davidoff 1970, Liberty 2003). By the second half of the 20th century downtown cores were ripe for revitalization. Jane Jacobs, writing in the midst of the mid-century urban renewal craze, argued for a more sophisticated form of development, sensitive and responsive to local needs. According to Jacobs, “a fine grain mixing of diverse uses creates vibrant and successful neighbourhoods”, restoring “vitality, environmental quality, equity and efficiency” to the post-industrial city (Grant, 2002 p72). Vancouver has had considerable success with mixed-use developments; in fact it is a determining characteristic of the eponymous planning approach known as Vancouverism (Punter 2003). Vancouverism is defined by “multiple-use, high-density core areas, transit- focused transportations system, exquisite urban design and a peaceful, tolerant multicultural population” (Harcourt and Cameron 2007 p2). However, Vancouverism is criticized for lacking (or concealing) aspects of urban life that do not fit, such as industry. The design sensibilities of Vancouverism “promote a suburban homogeneity, complacency, and torpor” at the expense of “vitality, difference, and invention” (Soules 2010 p 142). Vancouver’s livability criteria encourage the creation of “a comfortable ease” of life – views, open spaces, recreational opportunities and shopping within walking distance, which does not specifically address innovation, creativity, and new economic opportunities. The mixed-use development we know and love “doesn’t extend much beyond having a good latte, organic produce, designer shops, and stylish hair salons” (Soules 144). This creates a sort of suburban urbanism – homogeneous and boring. Conflict and confrontation are constrained, resulting in a bland and conformist space, a “deathly livability” (148). For Soules, the coexistence of difference in a constrained space is what makes cities the drivers of innovation and potential. “The livable city smothers living…ushering in a safe and banal city devoid of authentic substance” (148). Industrial activities are messy and difficult to contain. Industrial processes and technologies change rapidly and frequently, making static and specific zoning regulations inappropriate. The emphasis on residential and recreation space in the downtown core is detrimental to Vancouver’s economic and social diversity.   12 3.3 Opportunities and Challenges of Mixed Land Use Mixed-use development in Vancouver has primarily combined commercial and residential uses, but the concept could be pushed further. Mixing residential, industrial, and commercial activities within a single district has the potential to maximize local jobs and economic activity, promoting efficient use of space in a land-constrained urban ecosystem. Mixed-use zones adjacent to residential neighbourhoods and industrial areas may help to facilitate light-industrial activity through the supply of inexpensive space for small and new businesses, while helping to enliven streets and alleyways. Mixed-use zoning promises an urban environment active at all hours, optimizing the use of infrastructure and improving neighbourhood safety as more people will be using the space. Locating work, leisure, shopping, and living spaces within a single neighbourhood minimizes automotive dependency and facilitates interaction and the creation of community to enhance sustainability, urban vitality, social equity, and affordability. Like Jane Jacobs, Kivell (1997) suggests a fine-grained, high-intensity approach to industrial and mixed-use development in cities. He finds a relationship between mixed-use development, compact neighbourhoods, and sustainability. Coupland (1997) takes a positive view of mixed-use development, finding that it increases neighbourhood attractiveness, vitality, and diversity, and leads to optimal space utilization. North American development has proceeded with exclusionary zoning due to valuation difficulties, complications over services and regulations, and an over-emphasis on potential conflict.           “Intricate mingling of different uses in cities are not a form of chaos. On the contrary, they represent a complex and highly developed form of order.” Jane Jacobs (1961) 13  Mixed-use zoning is a favourite principle of the New Urbanists, who have long advocated mixed-use developments (Van der Ryn and Calthorpe 1991) Grant (2006) describes two versions of New Urbanist mixed use development: Traditional Neighbourhood Design (TND), which emphasizes secondary suites, home offices, and commercial town centres; and the nodal Transit Oriented Development (TOD) (Grant 2006). These models typically provide employment space for service and retail uses, but leave no space for industry. Critics argue that this type of development is nothing but “upgraded suburbs and…cloyingly nostalgic anachronisms” (Grant 2006 pXV), in practice creating segregated, exclusionary communities. 3.4 Production, Distribution, and Repair  Production, distribution, and repair (PDR) is a term used to denote a specific collection of light-industrial activities that are deemed to be important for urban economies, and appropriate for mixed-use neighbourhoods. The concept was developed in San Francisco, and is intended to differentiate light-industry from traditional heavy or ‘smokestack’ industry (San Francisco 2002). Generally, PDR includes things such as food processing and preparation, clothing and textiles, printing, transportation, wholesaling, warehousing, and creative activities such as design, furniture building, and artist studios.  Light industrial space is threatened in modern cities, which often chase ‘green jobs,’ the creative economy, and advanced services, and create land use policies that are detrimental to industrial activities (Curran 2010). Quantitative data (Harris 2007, Vance 2011) demonstrates the importance of industry in Vancouver, as it provides important jobs for residents, creates products and services that are used by other sectors of the local economy, and adds to economic diversity. 3.5 Creativity and Innovation in the industrial sector Advanced cities are encouraged to follow a development track that favours “gentrification, creative clusters, and attraction of the creative class” (Curran 2010 p871) while ignoring the rich complexity of urban economies. Curran argues that planners should “recognize a broader spectrum of economic activity,” (p871) and examine the data that shows how vital industry is to the economy. While we tend to focus on the long decline of   14 industry and manufacturing in North America, significant and important industrial clusters remain in most cities, demonstrating the vitality and resilience of this sector. Over time, dense networks form between people and firms in specific locations. This clustering allows smaller firms to remain competitive globally, and allows “knowledge spillover (Malmberg 2002), spurring innovation and creativity (Curran 2010). Planners, politicians, and policy makers often ignore the real and evident values of local urban industry, favouring instead policies that hinder industrial development and facilitate gentrification and conversion of industrial land for service economy and residential activities. As Curran writes: “old industrial spaces are largely invisible to policymakers, receiving none of the attention lavished on the new economy” (p871).    	
   	
   “Allow wider variety of uses” Real Estate Agent 15  4.0 VANCOUVER CONTEXT  More than a quarter of Metro Vancouver’s jobs depend directly on industrial lands (Metro Vancouver 2011), yet, like many other cities Vancouver faces constant pressure to rezone existing industrial lands for commercial and residential uses. Vancouver has only 6% of the region’s industrial lands; the majority is located in Richmond, Surrey, and Burnaby, resulting in these cities attracting an increasing share of the industrial economy (Harris 2007). Vancouver’s industrial land base has been in decline since the 1950s as the city pursues a service-sector dominated economy (Wynne & Oke 1992 p 206). Only recently have civic leaders begun to speak out on the importance of conserving industrial lands (Dempwolf forthcoming). Vancouver was once an industrial hub, when the economy relied on processing natural resources harvested from the Interior hinterlands, and distributing and transporting these resources throughout the Commonwealth. Port Metro Vancouver today continues to be an important sector of the economy; the related warehousing and distribution facilities provide stiff competition with other industrial activities for the scarce land resources (Metro Vancouver 2012). The banks of False Creek, Burrard Inlet, and the lower Fraser River, which were once ringed with sawmills, resource-processing facilities, and a variety of machine shops, equipment manufacturers, and boat yards, today sprout podium-tower condominiums that define the contemporary Vancouver (Barnes et al 2011 p3). The noise and pollution of these activities dictated the early growth of Vancouver’s residential neighbourhoods: wealthier, desirable neighbourhoods are located upwind, to the west, away from negative industrial externalities, while poorer neighbourhoods located closer to the old industrial districts (Vancouver and Its Region 1992). Today, only remnants of Vancouver’s old industrial heritage remain; the contemporary city has been strongly shaped by the service sector. The urban landscape of Vancouver has changed; traditional industries have been in decline as “the sawmills, fish packing plants, and corporate head offices of resource firms gave way to residential uses, leisure spaces, beautified waterfronts and new economy clusters” (Hutton et al 2011).   16 This has led to the “decoup[ling] of Vancouver from the resource economy of the BC hinterland” (Barnes et al 2011 p4), situating the city in a post-industrial stage of development. This decoupling has been an explicit strategy of Vancouver’ municipal leadership. Hutton (2004) sees the 1991 Central Area Plan as instrumental in this process, as the emphasis on housing first was “a decisive expression of post-industrial policy values” (p1974). Tax revenues, as well as development cost charges and community amenity contributions from residential and commercial development, are an additional motivation for past city councils to support industrial land rezonings. Although Vancouver’s economic and employment growth in recent decades has been primarily in community, business, and personal services, manufacturing and other industrial activities continue to be a significant and important part of the economy (Harris 2007). Like Vancouver, other North American cities are taking measures to retain industrial lands, employing an array of policy tools to remake and reinvigorate industrial sectors (City of Seattle 2007b p3). Tools include special zoning areas, updated and revised zoning classifications, increasing restrictions on non-industrial activities in industrial zones, and spot rezonings and land-swaps (Dempwolf 2011 p26, Seattle 2007a p7). In prosperous North American cities, planning departments and municipal councils face continual pressure to rezone industrial lands for other purposes. Despite Vancouver’s formal commitment to maintaining industrial lands, it continues to experience these pressures (Metro Vancouver 2012). Vacancy rates in industrial zones are lower than average, both compared to the region and compared to other metropolitan areas in North America (see tables 3 and 4).  TABLE 3: INDUSTRIAL LEASE RATES IN METRO VANCOUVER (per square foot) 	
   Vancouver $12.75 North Vancouver $9.50 Burnaby $8.33 New Westminster $7.15 Surrey $5.95 (Avison Young 2012)   17  TABLE 4: INDUSTRIAL LEASE RATES IN NORTH AMERICA (per square foot)  City of Vancouver $12.75 (C) San Francisco $9.60 (US) Seattle Area $7.20 (US) Edmonton $7.00 (C) Calgary $6.75 (C) Metro Vancouver $6.50 (C) Los Angeles $5.85 (US) Portland $5.28 (US) Toronto $5.13 (C) (Colliers 2011)   Adopted by Vancouver City Council in 1995, the Industrial Lands Strategy provides a policy framework to guide future decisions on the use of industrial land. The policy aims to retain the City’s existing industrial land base for industry and service businesses to meet the needs of port/river-related industries that serve the city. Almost all of the city’s remaining industry is located in one of the nine areas identified in the Industrial Lands Strategy, encompassing 668 acres. Nonetheless, re-development continues apace; most recently large tracts of industrial land have been rezoned for residential development in South East False Creek, Marine Drive, and the East Fraserlands.  The demand for housing in Vancouver is high, while land is in short supply. Advocates of a market-oriented approach to land use regulation argue that industrial activities should relocate to peripheral areas with lower land costs. This trend has already been observed in Vancouver. However, industrial activities provide critical support for vital city functions and commercial activities, and proximity to suppliers and customers is essential for efficient service delivery. As land values increase, industrial businesses are driven out by cost which can have a negative effect on the overall urban economy (Dempwolf 2010).  After Los Angeles, Vancouver has the lowest vacancy rate amongst the major West Coast North American cities. This is reflected in the high lease rates for industrial space in Vancouver (see Table 5).    18 TABLE 5: VACANCY RATES FOR INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES      (Vance 2011)  Despite these barriers, the industrial sector in Vancouver remains relevant (City of Vancouver 2006). It provides a significant number of stable and diverse jobs, paying above- average wages, located close to the workforce to minimize commuter traffic. Vacancy rates in Vancouver’s industrial land remain very low, ranging between 1.5-3%, compared with industrial vacancy rates reaching above 6% in other western North American cities such as Seattle, Portland, and Calgary (City of Seattle 2007, Harris 2007), indicating that there is demand for industrial lands, and that businesses in industrial sectors continue to operate profitably. Growth rate projections are steady rather than explosive. Traditional light and heavy industry provide more stable employment than economic sectors such as high-tech or tourism.  Industrial employment also tends to be resilient in economic downtimes, continuing to provide dependable jobs through recessions (City of Seattle 2007a, City of Vancouver 2006).  The economy in Vancouver and Metro Vancouver is particularly diverse, unlike Calgary’s, for instance, which is strongly tied to oil and gas. Metro Vancouver’s industrial sector is the most diverse of all major metropolitan areas in western North America (Vance 2011). The three largest employment sectors in industrial-zoned land in Metro Vancouver are manufacturing (40,375 jobs in industrial zones), wholesale trade (25,430 jobs in industrial zones), and transportation and warehousing (23,405 jobs in industrial zones), which account for just over half of total employment in industrial areas (Vance 2011 p9). Recent trends have seen a gradual shift away from heavy and natural resource-based industries, and growth in industries related to clothing, food, printing and publishing, and niche manufacturing (Harris 2007, Vance 2011). These activities are generally compatible Los Angeles 1.3% Vancouver 1.7% Seattle 3.8% San Francisco 5.2% Portland 6% 19  with other land-uses. Port-related activities, such as distribution and warehousing, will also likely grow, demanding more space but providing relatively few jobs. Port-related development is likely to overwhelm Vancouver’s industrial land supply in the short term, “fundamentally altering the industrial landscape” (Avison Young 2012). As the port expands it will transport more goods, requiring new warehouse space, creating an intractable crisis. New industrial land cannot be easily created, and between demand for new residential development, port-related warehouse and distribution space, and the Agricultural Land Reserve may outstrip supply.       	
   	
   	
   “High-tech, food/beverage, warehouse/storage/transportation are growth sectors…” Planner   20 5.0 THE URBAN LAND USE SYSTEM At a general level, Vancouver’s land use system is characterized by a dense urban core – the Central Business District on the downtown peninsula, surrounded by pockets of high-density residential zones, some on former industrial lands, and a ring of lower-density, primarily single-family residential neighbourhoods (Vancouver’s original suburbs). Industrial lands are chiefly along the waterfront, along Burrard Inlet, the Fraser River with three additional significant industrial blocks, the Mt Pleasant M2 zone, the False Creek Flats, and the Powell/Clark industrial zone (City of Vancouver 1995). All land-use zones are interrelated, and the spatial configuration affects how the city functions in terms of movement of people and goods and efficient use of land and infrastructure. As the city changes over time, the relationship of these zones changes too, and the mix of land use activities changes, necessitating updated and revised zoning definitions.       Land-use policy is “not a complicated theoretical issue; it is a very pragmatic one regarding the interaction between land uses” Consultant 21  6.0 INTERVIEWS In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with planners in Toronto, Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco, as well as with business owners, commercial real estate agents, and industrial property owners in Vancouver, and two Business Improvement Associations in East Vancouver. Participants were interviewed in person when possible, or by telephone when geographic proximity did not allow. The interviewees represented a diverse selection of perspectives, interests, and identities and the discussions illuminated stakeholder attitudes to urban mixed-use development, zoning controls, and the role that planners can take in urban economic development. Different stakeholders have different land-use interests; industrial landowners may be interested in rezonings that may lead to higher land values, while industrial businesses have a strong interest in restricting competing land-uses in industrial zones. Interviewees were asked about advantages and disadvantages of light industrial and PDR zoning, and potential impacts on neighbourhoods, jobs, and real estate values; the demand for light-industrial space in Vancouver; achievable lease rates and uptake rates; and the physical spatial needs of small light-industrial businesses.  6.1 Planners from Toronto, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle San Francisco’s Eastern Neighbourhoods program provided the initial inspiration for this project. With its high land values, constrained footprint, and service sector-oriented economy, San Francisco is a useful comparative study for Vancouver. During the 1990s, San Francisco’s planning department became concerned with the rapid depletion of the city’s industrial lands and launched a program to create space for light-industrial businesses in stand-alone and mixed-use buildings. Housing, offices, and large-format retail were the primary competitors for industrial land. San Francisco re-conceptualized urban industrial land use in order to see it as an integral part of a broader land system. The city created two new zoning designations: PDR zones are specifically for light industry and exclude all residential uses, while Urban Mixed- Use (UMU) Zones allow both PDR activities and residential development. The success of   22 the city’s light industrial sector depended on a targeted approach, clarity and firmness from city council, and innovation in zoning regulations (San Francisco 2002).           Seattle is Vancouver’s closest metropolitan neighbour, and like Vancouver is built around a large port. Seattle is also concerned about continued erosion of its industrial land base, and has undertaken several industrial lands studies recently. Seattle is taking a regulatory approach to this issue, revising zoning regulations to update land-use definitions and increase certainty and predictability in rezoning processes. The Seattle Planning Commission recommendations on industrial lands policy include decreasing the amount and size of office and retail spaces in industrial areas, establishing distinct manufacturing and industrial centres, and creating industrial buffer and industrial commerce zones for light industrial and PDR activities (City of Seattle 2007a). There are some important differences, however, between the economies of Vancouver and Seattle. While Vancouver is a highly differentiated and diverse economy, with few head offices or significant industrial anchor tenants, Seattle is well-known as the headquarters for several multinational firms, with Amazon, Microsoft, Costco, and Starbucks, among others, providing significant employment, including industrial jobs. Portland has managed to maintain a significant amount of affordable industrial space within municipal boundaries. The industrial sector provides little job growth but is a source of stable employment. A trend of industrial out-migration has reversed in the past decade as businesses have increasingly chosen to locate in the city because of urban amenities, 	
   “PDR businesses contribute to the economic diversity and are a fundamental part of what makes San Francisco work.” San Francisco City Planner 23  proximity to customers, and the availability of space in renovated buildings in the old industrial districts. Portland’s planning department is concerned about a potential shortage of industrial space in the future, but expects that redevelopment of existing brownfield sites will be sufficient to meet future demand. An “industrial sanctuary policy” has been in place since the 1980s, limiting the loss of industrial land and firmly keeping housing out of industrial areas. Planners credit this policy with stabilizing the city’s industrial economy. The City of Toronto waterfront redevelopment plans are ongoing. Toronto’s Port Lands are currently host to multiple industrial activities, some recreational and commercial space, and many currently vacant brownfield sites. The city is planning an ambitious mixed- use development, with housing, high-tech and biomedical, and education as the primary activities, while eliminating most of the older industry. Recognizing the strategic importance of the waterfront areas, they intend to maintain some of the existing industrial uses in the new development, primarily shipping and transportation. Additionally, Toronto is looking at creating a “hybrid-industrial” form, permitting more office space in industrial buildings than is typically permitted. Overall, planners feel that plentiful industrial land exists in Toronto and are relatively unconcerned about intensification of use. 6.2 Real Estate Agents Interviews with real estate agents from the Industrial Commercial and Institutional sector were conducted to gather information on the demand for light industrial flex-space in Vancouver. Responses were often contradictory – some interviewees believe there is strong demand for light industrial and studio spaces, while others see this as a marginal market. All agreed that they see greater demand from traditional heavy industry, and that finding inexpensive space seems to be a significant challenge for small industrial firms. The cost of rent and security of tenure were seen to be the primary challenges, as well as the age of existing industrial buildings, and the difficulty retrofitting them to fit the needs of modern industry. Real estate agents expressed skepticism about the wisdom of the city becoming involved in prioritizing different types of space – in one agent’s words “real estate responds   24 to the market, it does not create the market.” Another agent dismissed attempts to create space for light-industrial activities in Vancouver as romantic and unrealistic, and suggested instead redefining allowable industrial uses to include information technology and software development, which he sees as being the appropriate light industrial activity for a modern city. Software development is an office or quasi-office activity, generating higher rents and might, if permitted, entirely eliminate space in Vancouver for more typical light industry due to ability to pay higher rent. However, Vancouver has a significant software industry, centered primarily in Yaletown (Hutton 2004), and creating additional low-cost space for these businesses might lower cost barriers for start-ups. In the words of Thomas Hutton, Vancouver is an economy of “interesting bits and pieces” (personal communication January 7 2012). The temptation to increase the types of allowable uses in light-industrial zones is strong and understandable, but, unless done with care, may become problematic. Once allowable uses are added, it becomes very difficult to remove them, and allowing office-type activities in industrial areas will result in less space for truly industrial firms, while inflating vacancy rates in existing office zones, and discouraging (re)development. Arguing that zoning should respond to market demand is shortsighted and reduces the city’s ability to maintain resiliency against future market fluctuation. 6.3 Industrial property owners  Property owners and landlords indicated that they believe little revenue and few jobs will result from light-industrial/PDR type activities in Vancouver. They prefer to see the number of allowable uses increased in industrial lands, highlighting again software/IT as a particularly desirable use in currently light-industrial areas. It was pointed out that software- related businesses fit into a dense urban space more easily than would light-industrial, in terms of noise, traffic, and emissions. This is not a surprising response from industrial property owners, as relaxing land-use restrictions would increase the supply of potential tenants. Difficulty with the city’s development application and business license application processes is seen to be the most significant challenge. Obtaining change-of-use permission 25  is expensive and time-consuming, and outcomes are uncertain. The interviewees felt that the city’s development services office is slow, inflexible, overly complex, and outcomes are uncertain and subjective. They suggest that streamlining these processes might encourage new business development. Several landlords mentioned the difficulty of making ends meet after mortgage, upkeep, and tax costs, though at the same time I learned that in this climate of low interest rates many businesses are looking to purchase rather than lease space. Extra costs are associated with maintenance of industrial buildings, such as noise mitigation and venting. Cost of property ownership is an interesting challenge, as the stock of industrial buildings is old, and maintenance and upkeep costs can be significant. The building owners and managers I spoke with all exhibited affection for their neighbourhoods, and were concerned about large development projects changing the feel of East Vancouver’s industrial and peri-industrial areas. One building owner was concerned that new development might lead to higher property values and higher rents, which would push current occupants out of Vancouver altogether: “we don’t need another Yaletown.” Instead, incentives from the city might spur renovations and building upgrading, while maintaining the affordability of the space. The challenge of streamlining business licensing and change of use procedures (not rezoning processes), while outside the scope of this project, is worth investigation. 6.4 Business Associations  The Business Improvement Associations (BIAs) interviewed are located in Strathcona and the Downtown Eastside. Both BIAs expressed interest in mixed-use development, focusing on the potential for job creation and new economic activity. After several decades of skills-training and employment programs in Vancouver’s downtown eastside, a trained and ready labour force exists, as do funding agencies that could help train and supply PDR businesses with skilled workers. The BIAs suggested that PDR/mixed-use might be difficult to sell to property developers, who would be able to realize greater rents from office or commercial mixed-use developments, so a community revitalization program with incentives might be necessary for this program to succeed.   26  According to the BIAs, rising property values in East Vancouver and the ensuing rent and tax increases are pushing small businesses out of Vancouver, and there is a demand among BIA members for the right kind of space, meaning inexpensive space with flexible uses. There is concern that too many large development projects will irrevocably change East Vancouver, undermining the characteristics that residents identify with and value; on the other hand the BIAs felt that a large mixed-use project could have symbolic value for the East Vancouver business community, signaling that the city is serious about supporting a light-industrial sector. Businesses enjoy being located in East Vancouver, as do their employees, finding it “edgy, urban, artistic, gritty, and diverse,” all of which are seen as positive features. East Vancouver PDR firms appreciate the neighbourhood amenities such as nearby housing, public transit options, and clustering opportunities, which are not as accessible in far-flung but cheaper parts of the Lower Mainland. The most significant challenges for local businesses are safety and security and difficulty obtaining necessary permitting from the city to renovate and rezone buildings. 6.5 Local Business Finding appropriate and affordable space is a continual struggle for every business that was interviewed. Each firm identified as being an East Vancouver business, and preferred to stay in East Vancouver, but several were anticipating needing to move out of Vancouver to accommodate changing space needs. The firms interviewed for this project expressed appreciation for sense of community and find benefit in identifying as a ‘local’ or ‘eastside’ business. They are able to forge strong links and relationships with nearby businesses, and take advantage of being close to customers and suppliers. Having a Vancouver address can be important for search-engine optimization and marketing purposes. For every business, proximity to housing and public transportation was a significant factor in choosing a location.  Businesses need to be creative to find ways to stay in the city. Sharing space with other compatible firms is common. One interviewed firm moves location frequently, finding inexpensive space in buildings slated for demolition. This is, obviously, time consuming and 27  inefficient, and becomes impossible for an older, more established company. Business incubators and co-operative spaces have seen some success by decreasing start-up costs. Some of the businesses have had conflict with neighbours over delivery traffic and off-hours noise, but most felt that sharing a well-designed mixed-use building with residences would be possible. None felt that security was a significant issue, but obtaining permits and business licenses is felt to be a time-consuming and confusing process. For many light-industrial businesses, the benefit of an urban location outweighs the costlier rents. Benefits of proximity include nearness to customers and suppliers, marketing, ease of transportation and deliveries, synergies and clustering with nearby businesses, and a sense of community. Industrial firms in Vancouver pay higher rents than they would in nearby cities, which affects their ability to compete regionally (see table 2).   “Newer buildings don’t work at the low price point affordable for PDR and creative.” Portland city planner   28 TABLE 6: Interviews summary 	
   B usiness O perators Planners  TA B LE  6: IN TER V IEW S  S U M M A R Y  -B usiness ow ners m ust be creative to operate P D R -type business in the city – e.g. space sharing, using buildings slated for dem o, etc.  -H igher job densities are achievable in specific areas (up to 40 jobs/acre in P ortland). -Industrial sector provides low  job grow th but good em ploym ent stability Jobs -C lustering is im portant; several industries describe success w ith incubators (e.g. garm ent industry -M ixed use developm ent is seen as positive P ortland: allow  creative industries into industrial lands; m icro- office space (100 sq ft); look at transportation access; m ixed-use light industrial is “an expansion opportunity” -E ncourage adaptive reuse of historic buildings -S eparate stratas for industrial and residential spaces -S trong controls on com m ercial uses to restrict big box stores Land U se Policy -M anufacturing: start- up costs are low er for a local business than for overseas m anufacturing. -R ent is a m ajor struggle for m any sm all businesses -P ortland: “new er buildings don’t w ork at the low  price point affordable for P D R , creatives” -V ancouver: it m ay be possible for residential housing to subsidize P D R  space C osts -Finding space is alw ays possible but difficult, especially finding “affordable” (cheap) space; larger spaces are few  to non- existent in the city -S ecure tenure can be difficult to find, and is one of the m ost im portant issues for sm all businesses in V ancouver -H igh-tech; food/beverage; w arehouse/storage/tra nsportation are grow th sectors -P ortland has had good success w ith “m icro-offices” of approx. 100 sq. ft. -S table em ploym ent, slow  grow th Supply/dem and  29   R eal Estate A gents Property ow ners  -Differing opinions on feasibility of PDR type uses. Som e real estate agents feel this is not a sector worth pursuing, others feel it is econom ically viable. -Very few jobs, little $$ in PDR. These types of businesses generally operate at the m argins. Vancouver property owners and landlords seem ed m ore interested in attracting high- tech/software developm ent than PDR activities, though this m ay change in com ing decades.  Jobs -Allow wider variety of uses.  -Desire greater flexibility in allowable uses, particularly around software production -Difference between light- industrial rents and building owner costs is often very sm all -New vision of “industry’ is needed for the 21 st century – in Vancouver this should include inform ation technology/software developm ent -Any new projects m ust be appropriate so as not to change the neighbourhood too m uch: “we don’t need another Yaletown” Land U se Policy -M anufacturing: start-up costs are lower for a local business than for overseas m anufacturing. -Rent is a m ajor struggle for m any sm all businesses.   -Suggest incentives for developers (e.g. bargain am t of subsidized housing in exchange for subsidized social/light industrial space). -New developm ent will lead to higher property values, higher property taxes, and therefore higher rents.  C osts -Finding space is always possible but difficult, especially finding “affordable” (cheap) space; larger spaces are few to non-existent in the city. -Secure tenure can be difficult to find, and is one of the m ost im portant issues for sm all businesses in Vancouver.  -Trend towards ownership rather that leasing due to low interest rates, high rents. -Space is available in DEOD but it is very difficult to obtain perm ission to operate. – Change of use process is expensive, tim e consum ing.  Supply/dem and    30 C onsultants B usiness A ssociations  -Could be positive; proper m ix of businesses essential. -Value-added m anufacturing is a growth sector in BC -M ost recent growth in land-intensive, low em ploym ent sector – warehousing, transportation. -Flex space has m ore jobs per sq ft -Technology can replace hum an labour.  -Labour force and funding/training agencies exist to supply PDR businesses with skilled labour.  Jobs “-Not a com plicated theoretical issue, it is a very pragm atic one regarding the interaction between land uses.” -M ore live/work space m ay be an appropriate, and should be considered with m ixed-use developm ent to fill this niche.  -Incentives for developers to encourage PDR? -Prom ote m ixed use. -Value of sym bolism : a project would sym bolize City’s com m itm ent to econom ic developm ent in the downtown eastside.  Land U se Policy -Loading, m echanical system s, ceiling heights, clear spans etc. m ay add to building costs. -M etro Vancouver has high land values, average lease rates. City of Vancouver has high land values, high lease rates. -Com m ercial/residential developm ent could help subsidize light- industrial/flex space; could provide incentive to increase FSR.  -Increasing property values = higher property taxes and therefore higher rents: pressure on sm all businesses.   C osts -Im prove dem and with wider range of acceptable uses (include retail/service/office...). -Growth sectors: m anufacturing, prefab construction m aterials, high value wood products, distribution/warehousing. -Growth sectors: social enterprise, food-related, wholesale, printing, graphic design, software developm ent, creative industries. Supply/dem and 31     TABLE 7: INDUSTRIAL JOBS AND LAND SUMMARY IN VANCOUVER AND METRO VANCOUVER  Source: City of Vancouver (2005); Metro Vancouver (2011)     TABLE 8: SUMMARY OF BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES  Barriers to PDR businesses operating in East Vancouver:  Opportunities for PDR businesses operating in East Vancouver • safety (real/perceived) • cost, appropriateness of space, difficulty finding space • difficulty with City of Vancouver Development Services • parking and traffic difficulties  • transportation/commuting access • community feel of neighbourhood • close to clients • clustering, linkages  Source: Metro Vancouver 2011; Vance 2011.   Vancouver Metro Vancouver Total Jobs in the industrial sector  53,090 (17% of total jobs) 235,375 (26% of total jobs) Total industrial-zoned land  657 ha (6% of total land) 11,400 ha (13% of total land)   32 7.0 ANALYSIS Few cities have Vancouver’s space constraints, and this seems to be the determining factor in looking to mixed-use zoning. Toronto, Portland, and Seattle have large tracts of industrial land, and have not been so concerned with intensifying land use as have Vancouver and San Francisco. Attempts to incorporate industrial uses into mixed-use developments seem to be a response to land shortage. Planners are certainly looking at creative uses of space; for example Portland has “micro-offices” of less than 100 square feet to provide cheap space for new creative firms, Toronto is looking at allowing an increase in ancillary uses in specific industrial areas, and San Francisco has embraced mixed-use as a way to fit more activity into its scarce industrial spaces. The barriers to maintaining and encouraging a local light-industrial economy in Vancouver do not appear to be insurmountable, but will require the city to be committed to maintaining an industrial land base and fending off persistent pressure to up-zone industrial space. Finding affordable and appropriate space is a challenge for small businesses in Vancouver. Rents are a major expenditure for light industrial firms, and businesses are forced to find creative solutions to reduce this cost. New development providing flexible spaces for light industry will be welcome, however it may be difficult to meet an affordable price-point. Transit is an important amenity encouraging businesses to remain in Vancouver; ensuring that industrial and peri-industrial areas are well served by transit needs to be part of a comprehensive industrial lands strategy. The city may be able to create incentives to encourage development of industrial space, and a firm, clear, and transparent policy on rezoning may curtail land speculation. Lastly, nearly every subject that I interviewed spoke about the difficulties faced by businesses trying to obtain development permits, business licenses, and zoning amendments from the city. The lengthy process and high associated costs are discouraging, but even more challenging is the uncertainty around outcomes. Businesses feel that the process is highly subjective, which is a significant barrier to new business development. Creating a more streamlined process with clear expectations and outcomes might encourage an increase in new business development. 33  Interviews were conducted with the intention of determining the utility of mixed-use buildings in Vancouver, and what form these buildings might take. The research suggests that there is a place for this type of development in the interface zones between residential and industrial areas. Careful, thoughtful building design and strict guidelines on allowable uses may help a light industrial sector to thrive in Vancouver, but a PDR or flex-light industrial policy will need to be accompanied by a larger slate of policy initiatives as outlined above, including transit linkages, land use clarity, streamlined permitting processes, and developer incentives.     	
   	
   	
   “Intricate mingling of different uses in cities are not a form of chaos. On the contrary, they represent a complex and highly developed form of order.” Jane Jacobs (1961)   34 8.0 CASE STUDIES 8.1 Alex Gair Development, 955 E Hastings Vancouver 	
   Sources:	
   City of Vancouver Rezoning Centre http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/rezoning City of Vancouver Industrial Lands Policies (1995) City of Vancouver Strathcona Planning Initiatives (1992) East Hastings is a major corridor through East Vancouver, transecting several neighbourhoods and assuming various personalities. Between Main Street and Clark Drive, consisting largely of intermittent industrial buildings and under- utilized commercial spaces line East Hastings. Rezoning was recently approved by the City of Vancouver for a site located at 955 East Hastings St. Site zoning was changed from M-1 (industrial) to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development), and the developer is proposing an innovative mixed-use building incorporating residential and industrial uses. The residential aspect includes 352 market and non- market condominium units in three mid-rise towers, situated above 20 to 30 commercial units intended for PDR (Production, Distribution and Repair) activities, at a density of 6.0 FSR. This site is within the Powell St/Clark Dr. industrial area, which, other than Hastings St frontage, is to be retained for industrial uses. The block in question was specifically designated as a “let go” area in 1990. The Downtown Eastside Housing Plan emphasizes housing, particularly rental, for this site, and the objectives in the Downtown Eastside Local Area Plan for this site include enhancing residential development, minimizing conflict between residential and industrial uses, and accommodating industries related to the nearby port. Wall Financial’s proposed mixed-use building meets many of the objectives of the various City plans guiding development in this neighbourhood. At-grade commercial space, required for new development in the Downtown Eastside/Oppenheimer District, frequently remains vacant. Revising permitted uses may encourage uptake, bringing new life and economic activity to the neighbourhood. Outstanding issues include: concern about the affordability of the PDR units for start-up firms; commitment of building operator to keeping PDR units filled with light-industrial businesses; and ability of the building design and construction to limit conflict between residential and industrial occupants. 955 E. Hastings St – S elevation Copyright GBL Architects 2012 35  	
   8.2 Arts Factory/Great Northern Way, Vancouver 	
   	
    The Arts Factory is a new creative mixed-use facility in Vancouver, with space intended particularly for artists with an industrial element to their practice. Onsite activities will include a theatrical scene shop, metal fabrication, offices, and a sawmill. The building is owned by the City of Vancouver, and is leased to a non-profit society which will manage the facility. A ten-year lease provides stability, and the design will promote a collaborative working environment, with shared production space and facilities for visiting artists.  The Arts Factory concept grew out the Great Northern Way Campus (GNWC). This former industrial site was donated to a consortium of post- secondary institutions by Finning, the heavy machine manufacturer, and is slowly being developed into a creative hub for digital and fine arts education. The Great Northern Way Campus has been host to The Centre for Digital Media, a program offered jointly by UBC, SFU, BCIT, and Emily Carr University, and to a number of light-industrial initiatives, including an urban farm, a sawmill, an art gallery, theatre fabrication shop, digital media firms, and rehearsal spaces. Emily Carr University will soon relocate to the GNWC, displacing the light-industrial space which will now move to the Arts Factory. This shuffling will lead to creation of two exciting, dynamic arts hubs and incubator spaces in East Vancouver.  Appropriate, affordable space for creative ventures and start-ups is in short supply. If Vancouver is to maintain a vibrant creative sector economy and encourage business start-ups and experimental ventures, high- intensity mixed-use spaces such as the GNWC and the Arts Factory will be increasingly important.  Sources: “City announces launch of new creative space.” http://vancouver.ca/news- calendar/city-announces-launch-of-new-creative-space-with-the-arts-factory.aspx Great Northern Way Campus (2012). www.gnwc.ca 	
     36 8.3 Eastern Neighbourhoods, San Francisco  	
   	
    Growing land-use conflicts in inner-city industrial areas impelled San Francisco to create the Eastern Neighbourhoods Program to plan for the future of these areas. Like Vancouver, San Francisco has a limited land base, a growing population, and an industrial sector in decline. Production, Distribution, and Repair Zones (PDR) and Urban Mixed-Use Zones were a response meant to encourage the preservation of industrial land and spur renewal for modern industrial use. Planners recognized the challenge of balancing housing and jobs in an expensive city, and managing gentrification in a proactive manner. Though much industry is not compatible with residential use, some is, and thoughtful integration of these uses is expected to result in development of more complete communities, resilient local economies and a better capacity to withstand shifting economic trends.  Real estate speculation through the 1990s and early 2000s was accelerating the inflation of land values and driving out start-up and low-margin industrial firms. Recognizing the necessity of retaining this sector of the economy, San Francisco embarked on a planning process to create industrial lands policy that is relevant in a 21st century urban economy. The Eastern Neighbourhoods Program was a clear signal from the city that industrial lands had inherent value and would not be available for rezoning. By creating clear and appropriate land use policy, San Francisco enabled new and existing businesses to confidently invest in their spaces without concern that they would shortly be priced out of the neighbourhood. The clarity also allowed the city to streamline permitting and regulatory processes, as businesses could apply for business licenses with certainty that they would be allowed to operate.  Key to the success of the Eastern Neighbourhoods Program are design guidelines for new buildings, which require PDR units to be flexible and easily adapted to new use. Limiting new housing and office development to strategic locations minimizes conflict between user groups, and allowable PDR uses are carefully selected to be relevant and appropriate. The new land use zones also resonate with the local history, as the Eastern Neighbourhoods were the originally site of San Francisco’s industrial sector. The goods and services produced are often consumed locally, contributing to the stronger feelings of community and a more robust local economy.  Sources: “About the Eastern Neighbourhoods.” City of San Francisco http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=1673  37  8.4 Backstreets Program, Boston  	
  	
  	
  	
     Similar to San Francisco’s Eastern Neighbourhood Plan, Boston’s Backstreets Program is an economic development plan to aid and encourage the success of small light-industrial (“Backstreets”) companies, and is recognized as one of the most successful urban regeneration efforts in urban North America. Recognizing the vital importance these dynamic small businesses play in the urban economy, Boston developed this program to stem the loss of industrial land and ensure the ongoing survival of local industry. It was spearheaded by Boston Mayor Mayor Thomas Menino, with the goal of “supporting Boston’s many small and medium-sized industrial and commercial companies by creating conditions in which they can grow and prosper, and attract new manufacturing and commercial businesses to the city.” The goods and services provided by Boston’s light industrial are the foundation for the advanced services industry, and their ongoing success underpins the continued success of the rest of the local economy. The Backstreets Program focuses on helping the strongest and most competitive sectors, which include manufacturing, logistics, wholesale, construction, food procession, and business services. Backstreet businesses complement the ‘mainstreet’ businesses – primarily office and retail-based. Research confirmed the importance of the light industrial sector, showing that this sector provides jobs with higher- than-average wages and generates a stable source of tax revenue for the city. Through the Boston Redevelopment Authority, the Backstreets program provides business assistance, competitive financing, site selection advice, and workforce training.	
   The Back Streets program identified the most significant issues hindering light industrial businesses, which were forcing them to close or leave the inner city. These include difficulty finding appropriate and affordable space, difficulty with licensing and regulatory requirements at city hall, and conflict with neighbours. Initiatives to address these challenges include stopping the loss of industrial space, streamlining business licensing processes at city hall, and creating resources for small business to help them access business resources and financing programs, such as low-interest business loans. The success of the Backstreets Program has had an additional benefit – it has sparked a local culture of innovation and entrepreneurship.  Sources: Boston Redevelopment Authority. 2012. “Backstreets.” http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/econdev/Backstreets.asp Miara, Jim (2002). Back Streets. Economic Development Journal 1(4) p39-46   38 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The following six recommendations are drawn from literature, research, and interviews. Industrial land use conservation and intensification are worthy goals, but difficult to achieve. Competition for land resources is fierce in the lower mainland, and property development can be extremely lucrative. Advocates can marshal a wide selection of metrics and statistics to prove the utility of various land uses, so the case for industrial lands preservation must be made clearly and convincingly. Maintaining up-to-date policies, definitions, and regulations is essential; reviews should be undertaken frequently and planning staff should be engaged collaboratively with stakeholders in developing thoughtful, appropriate, and innovative strategies. 	
   1. Efforts to provide affordable space and small, flexible units can encourage a stable and vibrant industrial sector when accompanied by clear zoning regulations and thoughtful comprehensive planning. 2. Definitions of allowable uses in zoning documents must be clear and up-to-date. Classifications and definitions should be revised, and land-use should be enforced. Although mixed-use areas incorporating industrial uses may impact neighbours, planners are urged to offer creative solutions to ensure that this type of zoning can exist while creating minimal disruptions to adjacent areas. 3. The city should continue to update community plans and/or official development plans to facilitate strategic land use decision-making. Plans must ensure extensive community consultation with stakeholders, partners, and businesses to ensure that plans and policies reflect the needs not only of residents, but also industrial business operators and owners. 4. Vancouver should continue to research and expand upon best practices in other cities to ensure preservation, intensification, and appropriate density of industrial lands remains a corporate priority. Industrial lands support many stable, high paying local jobs in a spatially efficient manner. While the creation of more industrial land is most likely impossible, Vancouver could, and should, pursue 39  strategies to put more jobs and more productive activity into the industrial space that currently exists. 5. Vancouver can streamline and clarify the various permitting and licensing processes for industrial firms. Complicated applications are time-consuming and difficult for small firms and stifle new business development. 6. Buffer zones, or interface areas between purely industrial land use areas and residential/commercial areas should be identified and evaluated for potential PDR development. A soft transition zone between exclusionary use zones could allow more efficient use of urban space, encourage area revitalization, and provide space for light industrial activities that are marginally provided for in Vancouver’s current industrial zones. Potential sites for these mixed-use, light industrial zones are around the Powell St and Clark Dr industrial zones, along Hastings St between Commercial Dr and Main St, in and around the Mt Pleasant industrial zone between Cambie St and Main St, and around the margins of the False Creek Flats.       “Mixed-use light industrial is an expansion opportunity” Planner   40 10.0 CONCLUSIONS The City of Vancouver faces significant challenges to its industrial sector. Recent trends have seen decreases in the amount of industrial-zoned land and increases in land values and rents, which has resulted in an increasingly challenging landscape for local industrial businesses. As a result city planners and businesses have had to adapt in novel and creative ways. This project will draw on the experiences of other cities and jurisdictions, as well as existing literature on city planning in an industrial and post- industrial context. The purpose of this work was to study past and future changes in land use in industrial areas in Vancouver and to examine the implications of redevelopment in these neighbourhoods. This project compared best practices by examining industrial land use in Vancouver and in other jurisdictions and developed policy recommendations for industrial land use decisions in the City of Vancouver, focusing on mixed-use development and the interface between different exclusionary land use zones. Recommendations are primarily for Vancouver, with implications for the region, however this project has the potential to serve as an example for other cities in Canada. This project is timely because of the need to carefully study land use in a space- constrained and growing city such as Vancouver. Land use policy made today will have long-lasting repercussions, affecting issues such as local employment, housing affordability, and greenhouse gas emissions. The overarching objectives for the project are to demonstrate the practicality of thoughtful land use policy and to apply high-level theory to a grounded case study in order to contextualize recommendations and best practices. The project will further contribute to current attempts to clarify the meaning of a local urban industrial economy and urban industrial jobs in the 21st century. Planning and zoning are market interventions meant, with respect to industrial lands, to limit negative effects of industrial production on human health by spatial separation. Modern environmental regulations alleviate these externalities, perhaps allowing greater integration or mixing of industrial activities with other land uses. In general, separation of industrial from non-industrial uses, particularly with traditional or 41  heavy industry, is still seen as essential, however a significant and growing category of light industrial and PDR activities are perhaps more compatible with dense urban neighbourhoods.   MIXED USE DEFINITIONS: “integration of different building types and uses, whether residential or commercial, old or new” (Project for Public Spaces) “three or more functionally and physically integrated revenue producing uses…in the same development project” (Urban Land Institute) “use of a building, set of buildings, or neighbourhood for more than one purpose (Wikipedia) “planned integration of some combination of functions…pedestrian oriented, including elements of live-work-play…maximizing space usage…tending to mitigate traffic and sprawl” (2006 Conference on Mixed-Use Development) “the practice of allowing more than one type of use in a building or set of buildings” (Merriam-Webster) “any combination of housing, office, retail, medical, recreational, commercial , or industrial components” (Community Dividend 1998) “development that blends residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, and industrial uses” (American Planning Association) “must serve more than one primary function; preferably more than two. These must insure the presence of people who go outdoors on different schedules and are in the place for different purposes, but who are able to use many facilities in common.” (Jacobs, Death and Life of Great American Cities) “includes include residential housing, significant employment opportunities from office or light industrial facilities, retail shopping, outdoor recreation and open spaces.” (Hirschhorn and Souza, 2001) 	
     42 11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY  Barnes, T., Hutton, T., Ley, D., Moos, M. (2011). Canadian Urban Regions:  Trajectories of Growth and Change. Oxford University Press: Don Mills.  Bell, D. (1999). The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. Basic Books: New  York.  Bosselmann, P. (1998). ‘Images in Motion.’ In The Urban Design Reader. Eds  Matthew Carmona and Steve Tiesdell. Oxford: Elsevier.  Calthorpe, P. and van der Ryn, S. (1986). Sustainable Communities.  American Planning Association: Chicago.  City of Seattle (2007a). Seattle’s Industrial Lands: Background Report  City of Seattle (2007b). Seattle Industrial Lands Survey.  City of Seattle (2009). Basic Industries Economic Impact Analysis.  City of Vancouver (1995). Industrial Lands Policies.  City of Vancouver (2006a). Info Sheet 1.3:  Employment change in industrial  jobs.  City of Vancouver (2006b). Industrial Lands Survey.  City of Vancouver (2006c).  Metropolitan Core Jobs and Economy Land Use  Plan.  City of Vancouver (2009). Understanding Vancouver: Industrial Areas.  Curran, W. (2010). ‘In Defense of Old Industrial Spaces: Manufacturing,  Creativity, and Innovation in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.’ International  Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34(4).  Davidoff, P. and Davidoff, L. (1970). Opening the Suburbs: Toward Inclusionary Land  Use Controls. Syracuse Law Review 509.  Demographia International (2011). International Housing Affordability  Survey. Retrieved April 19 2011 from www.demographia.com  Dempwolf, S.C., (forthcoming). ‘A Review of Industrial Land Use Studies in the U.S.: Do History and Theory Matter in Practice? Journal of Planning 43  Literature.  Fischel, W.A. ‘An Economic History of Zoning and a Cure for its Exclusionary Effects.’  Urban Studies 41(2).  Florida, R. (2005). ‘The World is Spiky’ Atlantic Monthly October: 48-51.  Fotheringham, A. (1982) Malice in Blunderland. Toronto: Key Porter.  Gerwing, Kira. (2008). Flex Space for PDR and Commercial Uses. Retrieved March 11  2012 from  www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca%2F2010%2Freadings%2FFlex%2520space%250r  evised%2520April%25202008.pdf%3FresUID%3D1000340  Glaeser, E., Kolko, J., Saiz, A. (2001). ‘Consumer City.” Journal of Economic  Geography 1.  Grant, J. (2006). Planning the Good Community: New Urbanisms in Theory and Practice. Routlege: New York  GVRD Policy and Planning Department (2006). Industrial Lands Inventory for Greater Vancouver. Retrieved March 11 2012 from www.metrovancouver.org/%2Fplanning%2Fdevelopment%2Fstrategy%2FRGSB ackgroundersNew%2industurallandsinventoryforgreatervancouver.pdf.  Haddow, Douglas (2008) ‘Hipster: The Dead End of Western Civilization.’ Adbusters 79.  Harcourt, M. and Cameron (2007). City Making in Paradise. Douglas and  McIntyre: Toronto.  Harris Consulting (2007). Powell Street/Port Lands And Powell Street/Clark  Drive Industrial Areas Study. Retrieved April 19 2012 from www.vancouveragreement.ca/wp-content/uploads/PowellStreet2007.pdf  Hessing, M., Howlett, M., Summerville, T. (2005). Political Economy and Public Policy 2nd ed. UBC Press: Vancouver.  Hirschhorn, J. and Souza, P. (2001). New Community Design to the Rescue.  National Governors Association for Best Practices: Washington DC.  Homer Dixon, T. (2010). Complexity science and public policy: the 2010 Manion Lecture. Retrieved February 4 2013 from: www.homerdixon.com    44 Hutton, T.A. (2010). The Emerging 21st Century Economy: Land Use Issues for the City of Vancouver. Prepared for the City of Vancouver Planning Department.  Hutton, T. (2004).  ‘Post-industrialism, Post-modernism, and the Reproduction of Vancouver’s Central Area: Retheorising the 21st- century City.’ Urban Studies 41(10): 1953-1982.  Hutton, T. (2005). The Transformation of the Metro Core. Retrieved March 11 2011 from wwww.vancouver.ca/corejobs  Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random  House: New York.  Karkkainen, B. (1994). “Zoning: A Reply to the Critics.” Journal of Land Use and  Environmental Law 45.  Kratke, S. (2010). “Creative Cities and the Rise of the Dealer Class.”  International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34(4).  Liberty (2003).  Malmbert, A. (2002). “The elusive concept of localization economies:  towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering.” Environment  and Planning 34.  Metro Vancouver (2011). 2010 Industrial Lands Inventory.  North, Peter. “Local action in the face of dangerous climate change and resource constraints.” available: http://www.liv.ac.uk/geography/seminars/ESRC-funded_seminar_series.htm  Peck, J. (2005). ‘Struggling with the Creative Class.’ International Journal of  Urban and Regional Research 29.  Punter, J. (2003). The Vancouver Achievement: Urban Planning and Design.  UBC Press: Vancouver.  Rees, W.E. (2008). Human Nature, eco-footprints and environmental  injustice. Local Environment 13(8).  --. (2010). ‘Thinking Resilience. In The Post Carbon Reader, eds. R.  Heinberg and D. Lerch. Watershed Media, Santa Rosa.  45  Renn, A. (2011). ‘What Does Globalization Mean to Non-Global Cities?’ The  Urbanophile. Available:  http://www.urbanophile.com/2011/12/15/what-does-  globalization-mean-to-non-global-cities/  San Francisco Planning Department (2002). Industrial Land in San Francisco.  Retrieved March 11 2012 from http://www.sfplanning.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=4893  Scott, A. (1997) ‘The Cultural Economy of Cities.’ International Journal of  Urban and Regional Research 21(2).  Scott, A. (2011). ‘Emerging cities of the third wave.’ City 15(3-4).  Smith, A., and MacKinnon, J. (2007). 100 Mile Diet: a year of eating local.  New York: Crown Publishing.  Soules, M. (2010). ‘The Livable Suburbanized City.’ Harvard Design  Magazine 32:  Tannenbaum, B. (2008). ‘San Francisco 2020.’ San Francisco Magazine. Retrieved March 11 2012 from www.sanfranmag.com/story/san-francisco-2020  Wynne, G. and Oke, T. eds. (1992). Vancouver and Its Region. UBC Press: Vancouver.      

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.310.1-0075777/manifest

Comment

Related Items