Mount Pleasant developer offered to pay tenant to pressure neighbours out of Broadway Plan site

It’s the last Friday of the month and there’s an air of tension hanging around a row of houses on East 10th Avenue and St. George Street in Mount Pleasant. It’s moving day for Corey Walsh and Nicole Caron, two of the rental tenants who lived in a strip of five single-family homes set to be demolished to make way for a 19-storey rental tower. 

“It's Vancouver. This is the city of moving,” Walsh, who’d called on friends and family to assist, told Vancity Lookout. 

“I think it's been really confusing for my six-year-old,” Caron, a mother of two, explained. “He goes to school just two blocks away from here and [doesn’t] really understand why we have to move.”

It’s not easy to explain to a young child that their home of five years was bought in 2023 by a numbered company linked to Fastmark Developments, after the city instituted an ambitious area plan aimed at adding a significant amount of rental housing in the form of towers around the Broadway Subway’s under-construction stations.  

“There's absolutely no empathy that they are displacing someone from somewhere that they called home,” Walsh said, speaking about his interactions with Fastmark.

The planned development on East 10th would replace five houses, which hosted 12 rental units, with 142 market rental units, 33 more units at 20 per cent below market rate, and a private childcare space with room for 25 kids.  

“I think everyone's been on edge, looking for stability and feeling like as a renter here it's just not possible,” Caron said.

Caron is one of eight households eligible for enhanced tenant relocation protections (TRPP) instituted by the city as part of the Broadway Plan. But, contrary to city guidelines, Caron and her family have yet to receive the first of two approximately $10,000 payments from the developer, which are intended to bridge the gap between the rent at their old house and their new apartment. 

Another former tenant, who spoke with Vancity Lookout on the condition of anonymity, said Fastmark was several months late in paying them TRPP benefits and a $6,000 bonus for moving out early.

There have been other instances of late payments under the TRPP, according to a city spokesperson, who said they have “had to follow up with applicants to remind them of their obligations,” but didn’t share details about individual cases or how common that situation was. 

“Every step of the way, we've had to seek out what is being offered to us,” according to Caron, who didn’t know that the developer is required to begin paying eligible tenants on or before their move-out date. “If you don't put your own effort in … you kind of just get screwed,” Walsh added.

According to the city, the developer or applicant “holds full responsibility for delivering all required tenant relocation supports,” including “communications, compensation, rent top-ups, moving expenses, relocation assistance, and managing Right of First Refusal commitments.”

Even with the payments required under the TRPP, Caron estimates the additional uncovered cost of displacement for her family, including increased transportation, storage, and workspace costs, will be just under $43,000 over three years. “It’s just ridiculous,” Caron said.

“While I recognize that the standardized compensation may not fully align with every individual circumstance, my role is to apply the program rules consistently and fairly,” Fastmark Development founder Hans Fast told Caron and her partner by email. 

Caron said Fast’s claim is hard to take seriously, pointing out that some people were paid more than the compensation required under the TRPP.

When reached by phone, Fast declined to answer questions and told Vancity Lookout he had no comment on the eviction process at the East 10th properties.

However, in a 2023 Globe and Mail story about the development, Fast commented that Mount Pleasant is “historically anti-development, and so we are expecting pushback from neighbours,” adding that “the Broadway Plan got approved for density on quieter streets, so that’s just the way the city is going.”   

Fast, who founded Fastmark in 2020 in his mid-20s, comes from a family with significant real estate connections in Vancouver. He’s one of nine children of Paul Fast, the founder of the engineering firm Fast + Epp, and his four brothers are all in the building industry, working as architects, engineers, and construction managers, Fast said in a 2022 podcast appearance. 

Meanwhile, Walsh’s situation is a bit different from Caron’s. Walsh and his roommates moved into their house in the summer of 2024, knowing it was up for redevelopment. It also meant they were one of the four households that weren’t eligible for the extended tenancy protections under the TRPP. 

Walsh took the opportunity to build a large, complex skate bowl in the backyard. “When we were moving into this place, we joked with our property manager about building a backyard skate park … it's kind of been a dream to be able to do that,” Walsh said. But things got more complicated when Fastmark used the fixture he built as leverage in an attempt to convince Walsh’s household to take a deal to move out early.  

According to Walsh, Fastmark told them that they would be responsible for removing the bowl if they didn't sign an agreement to move out early, neither of which they did. “It's gonna die with the house,” Walsh said.

Fastmark initially offered all tenants a bonus payment, first of $2,000 each and then increased to $6,000 each, if everyone agreed to end their tenancies and move out ahead of schedule, according to Walsh, Caron, and other tenants. 

“It caused a lot of tension between the neighbours, some wanting to make a deal, and some not,” Caron said, particularly given that a third of the households were not eligible for TRPP benefits and the deal being offered by Fastmark required all tenants to agree to it. 

According to one former tenant, Fast personally offered them an additional $40,000 bonus if they convinced all the other tenants to take the deal. 

“I just thought it was manipulative. I would only get paid out if everybody signed. I knew everybody didn't want to sign,” the former tenant recalled, saying they declined that offer. 

“This kind of tactic goes against the intent of the TRPP … It is not appropriate for a property owner to pay one tenant to pressure other tenants into accepting an early move‑out deal,” the city told Vancity Lookout. 

The city said it was “not able to comment on specific details” when asked whether it had any knowledge of Fastmark using this tactic in this situation.  

The last three months before moving were “pure chaos and stress,” Walsh said. 

In the winter of 2025, three households, including Walsh’s and Caron’s, attempted to have their four-month eviction notice cancelled by the province’s Residential Tenancy Board (RTB), which adjudicates disputes between tenants and landlords under the Residential Tenancy Act. 

At the time, Walsh said his household was offered $6,000 and four months free rent by Fastmark to retract the RTB dispute. Walsh said he and his roommates decided to accept the offer three weeks later, only to be told by Fast that the deal was no longer available.

The RTB hearing proceeded in late November, where the tenants argued that Fastmark did not have all the necessary permits in place. However, their claim was ultimately dismissed by the RTB arbitrator, who found Fastmark’s permits were sufficient to proceed with the evictions. 

Specifically regarding the cancelled deal between Walsh and Fast, the arbitrator said they “do not assign the negotiations any significant weight given the absence of any agreement formed.”

Thyrza and Erez Segal owned the home next door to Walsh and had lived there for over 20 years. In the midst of packing, Thyrza told Vancity Lookout she felt Fastmark was “really fair … [and] quite ethical” in the sale process, especially compared to other developers and agents they had been approached by. 

“It was very egalitarian with the selling process, but then [Fastmark] started trying to pit us one against the other by telling one tenant that if they managed to talk other people into leaving at a certain date, then he would pay out those people,” Thyrza explained. 

“It didn’t seem right to me that some people got paid and others didn't,” Thyrza said, referring to Walsh’s household next door. 

But, ultimately, Thyrza said she felt like Fastmark would do a good job with the development, and she’s glad to see more rental buildings coming to the neighbourhood.

“I think that with the 19-storey rental building, it'll be better for the city. We just need more rentals.”

Fastmark has another project, a 17-storey tower with 138 rental units, in the pipeline just one block west. Current tenants at that site are also displeased with being displaced. At a rezoning hearing last summer, Fast said the company would consider extending assistance to help relocate tenants who don’t qualify for tenancy protections at that site. 

We rely on readers like you sharing these stories to help others discover our journalism. Share today: Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin | Bluesky | Copy this url. Have some thoughts about this story? Leave a comment in our Comment Corner.