1618-1680 E Hastings St rezoning application

Share 1618-1680 E Hastings St rezoning application on Facebook Share 1618-1680 E Hastings St rezoning application on Twitter Share 1618-1680 E Hastings St rezoning application on Linkedin Email 1618-1680 E Hastings St rezoning application link

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the site from MC-1 (Industrial) District to
CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for a 23-storey mixed-use building with a four-storey podium, and includes:

  • Institutional uses including a Social Service Centre and a School – University or College within the podium;
  • A 44-space childcare facility on top of the podium;
  • 122 social housing units within the tower;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 5.67; and
  • A building height of 81.8 m (268 ft.).

This application is being considered under the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan.

Application drawings and statistics are posted as-submitted to the City. Following staff review, the final project statistics are documented within the referral report.

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the site from MC-1 (Industrial) District to
CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for a 23-storey mixed-use building with a four-storey podium, and includes:

  • Institutional uses including a Social Service Centre and a School – University or College within the podium;
  • A 44-space childcare facility on top of the podium;
  • 122 social housing units within the tower;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 5.67; and
  • A building height of 81.8 m (268 ft.).

This application is being considered under the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan.

Application drawings and statistics are posted as-submitted to the City. Following staff review, the final project statistics are documented within the referral report.

​The Q&A period has concluded. Thank you for participating.

The opportunity to ask questions through the Q&A is available from February 25 to March 10, 2026. 

We post all questions as-is and aim to respond within two business days. Some questions may require coordination with internal departments and additional time may be needed to post a response.

Please note that the comment form will remain open after the Q&A period. The Rezoning Planner can also be contacted directly for any further feedback or questions.

  • Share When you speak of 100% social housing, does this mean that a building could be at 70% full market housing and 30% of the unit area at HILs levels? Could "social housing" here mean that not a single unit of shelter rate or welfare rate rental housing would be provided? on Facebook Share When you speak of 100% social housing, does this mean that a building could be at 70% full market housing and 30% of the unit area at HILs levels? Could "social housing" here mean that not a single unit of shelter rate or welfare rate rental housing would be provided? on Twitter Share When you speak of 100% social housing, does this mean that a building could be at 70% full market housing and 30% of the unit area at HILs levels? Could "social housing" here mean that not a single unit of shelter rate or welfare rate rental housing would be provided? on Linkedin Email When you speak of 100% social housing, does this mean that a building could be at 70% full market housing and 30% of the unit area at HILs levels? Could "social housing" here mean that not a single unit of shelter rate or welfare rate rental housing would be provided? link

    When you speak of 100% social housing, does this mean that a building could be at 70% full market housing and 30% of the unit area at HILs levels? Could "social housing" here mean that not a single unit of shelter rate or welfare rate rental housing would be provided?

    redpanda asked 24 days ago

    The City of Vancouver’s definition of “social housing” requires that: 

    • 100% of the units in the building must be owned by a non-profit or government agency;
    • At least 30% of the units are affordable to incomes at or below Housing Income Limits (HILS) as published by BC Housing or equivalent publication; and
    • The site is secured with a housing agreement, registered against the title, to ensure the site remains social housing for 60 years.

    This project will meet or exceed this social housing definition in terms of affordability. It is dependent on the funding the applicant receives for this project.

    The intent of the City’s current social housing definition is to set a minimum threshold that is achievable for most new non-market housing development. Often the affordability is greater than the City’s minimum threshold prior to building opening, as senior government funding is generally committed later in the development process after the municipality has approved the project.

    The 30% of units available at or below HILs incomes ensures that units are affordable for tenants who cannot afford market rates. The HILs are determined by BC Housing from time to time, and represent the income required to pay the average market rent for an appropriately sized unit in the private market. Average market rents are derived from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s Annual Rent Market Survey.  HILs is the maximum gross household income for eligibility in many affordable housing programs. The HILs units in social housing are available for tenants who earn at or below this number. The project has not yet confirmed what the rental rates will be for the remaining 70% of units that are not required to be at or below HILs. For more information, see here for the City of Vancouver’s social housing definition and BC Housing’s current HILs.

  • Share For the public record, can you please state the land owners for the three parcels? It appears that 1680 East Hastings is City-owned, 1618 East Hastings owners are Urban Native Youth Association. Is 1630 East Hastings also City-owned? Are the other parties in this application non-profits? on Facebook Share For the public record, can you please state the land owners for the three parcels? It appears that 1680 East Hastings is City-owned, 1618 East Hastings owners are Urban Native Youth Association. Is 1630 East Hastings also City-owned? Are the other parties in this application non-profits? on Twitter Share For the public record, can you please state the land owners for the three parcels? It appears that 1680 East Hastings is City-owned, 1618 East Hastings owners are Urban Native Youth Association. Is 1630 East Hastings also City-owned? Are the other parties in this application non-profits? on Linkedin Email For the public record, can you please state the land owners for the three parcels? It appears that 1680 East Hastings is City-owned, 1618 East Hastings owners are Urban Native Youth Association. Is 1630 East Hastings also City-owned? Are the other parties in this application non-profits? link

    For the public record, can you please state the land owners for the three parcels? It appears that 1680 East Hastings is City-owned, 1618 East Hastings owners are Urban Native Youth Association. Is 1630 East Hastings also City-owned? Are the other parties in this application non-profits?

    redpanda asked 25 days ago

    The City’s practice is not to share property ownership information publicly. You are correct that some lands are owned by the City, however since some of the site is non-City ownership, please reach out to the applicant team (a.callison@hcma.ca) for information/confirmation on property ownership. Thank you.

  • Share The Citizens' Assembly Final Report went to Council on Wednesday June 24, 2015. https://council.vancouver.ca/20150624/documents/ptec5_AppB.PDF The work done by the Citizens' Assembly noted that a 12 storey form on this site is to "help meet the need for non-market social housing and much needed community services". The 12-storey height was never meant to be a baseline, but rather this maximum is contingent on "when important public benefits (outlined in this section) can be secured as part of new development." Please kindly note the context for the extra height on this site. Those of us who were living in Grandview-Woodland at that time and who were involved in this process know the background behind the maximum 12-storeys on this site which included conditions for non-market social housing and other public benefits. on Facebook Share The Citizens' Assembly Final Report went to Council on Wednesday June 24, 2015. https://council.vancouver.ca/20150624/documents/ptec5_AppB.PDF The work done by the Citizens' Assembly noted that a 12 storey form on this site is to "help meet the need for non-market social housing and much needed community services". The 12-storey height was never meant to be a baseline, but rather this maximum is contingent on "when important public benefits (outlined in this section) can be secured as part of new development." Please kindly note the context for the extra height on this site. Those of us who were living in Grandview-Woodland at that time and who were involved in this process know the background behind the maximum 12-storeys on this site which included conditions for non-market social housing and other public benefits. on Twitter Share The Citizens' Assembly Final Report went to Council on Wednesday June 24, 2015. https://council.vancouver.ca/20150624/documents/ptec5_AppB.PDF The work done by the Citizens' Assembly noted that a 12 storey form on this site is to "help meet the need for non-market social housing and much needed community services". The 12-storey height was never meant to be a baseline, but rather this maximum is contingent on "when important public benefits (outlined in this section) can be secured as part of new development." Please kindly note the context for the extra height on this site. Those of us who were living in Grandview-Woodland at that time and who were involved in this process know the background behind the maximum 12-storeys on this site which included conditions for non-market social housing and other public benefits. on Linkedin Email The Citizens' Assembly Final Report went to Council on Wednesday June 24, 2015. https://council.vancouver.ca/20150624/documents/ptec5_AppB.PDF The work done by the Citizens' Assembly noted that a 12 storey form on this site is to "help meet the need for non-market social housing and much needed community services". The 12-storey height was never meant to be a baseline, but rather this maximum is contingent on "when important public benefits (outlined in this section) can be secured as part of new development." Please kindly note the context for the extra height on this site. Those of us who were living in Grandview-Woodland at that time and who were involved in this process know the background behind the maximum 12-storeys on this site which included conditions for non-market social housing and other public benefits. link

    The Citizens' Assembly Final Report went to Council on Wednesday June 24, 2015. https://council.vancouver.ca/20150624/documents/ptec5_AppB.PDF The work done by the Citizens' Assembly noted that a 12 storey form on this site is to "help meet the need for non-market social housing and much needed community services". The 12-storey height was never meant to be a baseline, but rather this maximum is contingent on "when important public benefits (outlined in this section) can be secured as part of new development." Please kindly note the context for the extra height on this site. Those of us who were living in Grandview-Woodland at that time and who were involved in this process know the background behind the maximum 12-storeys on this site which included conditions for non-market social housing and other public benefits.

    redpanda asked 24 days ago

    Thank you for sharing your concerns with the proposed height, in particular as it relates to the Citizens' Assembly Final Report.

  • Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan has consideration for 11-12 storey buildings, with upper floors stepped back to "minimize shadowing of north sidewalk" along with a maximum 4.0. Going to 23 storeys is not a modest increase in height, without any stepping back. Is the City of Vancouver both a land owner with 1680 East Hastings as well as the regulator? on Facebook Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan has consideration for 11-12 storey buildings, with upper floors stepped back to "minimize shadowing of north sidewalk" along with a maximum 4.0. Going to 23 storeys is not a modest increase in height, without any stepping back. Is the City of Vancouver both a land owner with 1680 East Hastings as well as the regulator? on Twitter Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan has consideration for 11-12 storey buildings, with upper floors stepped back to "minimize shadowing of north sidewalk" along with a maximum 4.0. Going to 23 storeys is not a modest increase in height, without any stepping back. Is the City of Vancouver both a land owner with 1680 East Hastings as well as the regulator? on Linkedin Email The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan has consideration for 11-12 storey buildings, with upper floors stepped back to "minimize shadowing of north sidewalk" along with a maximum 4.0. Going to 23 storeys is not a modest increase in height, without any stepping back. Is the City of Vancouver both a land owner with 1680 East Hastings as well as the regulator? link

    The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan has consideration for 11-12 storey buildings, with upper floors stepped back to "minimize shadowing of north sidewalk" along with a maximum 4.0. Going to 23 storeys is not a modest increase in height, without any stepping back. Is the City of Vancouver both a land owner with 1680 East Hastings as well as the regulator?

    redpanda asked 25 days ago

    The City’s Planning Department (review team) operates independently from the Non-Market Housing Development team (part of the applicant’s team), which brings forward non-market housing projects on City-owned land. Rezonings proposed by the Non-Market Housing Development team are subject to the same review process, policies and regulatory requirements as applications submitted by private landowners/developers. The applicant for this specific project is the project team’s architect, HCMA Architecture & Design.

  • Share Why are there consecutive re-zoning proposals for 23 storey buildings back to back on Pender/Hastings street alley? Both structures are outside of the Grandview Woodland original zoning plans without "special" considerations. It feels like some narrative has changed around this neighbourhood block, opening the doors for developers to take concessions on the current zoning. Can you list any recent changes to city bylaws and guidelines that make this area particularly vulnerable to massive developments in such close quarters? on Facebook Share Why are there consecutive re-zoning proposals for 23 storey buildings back to back on Pender/Hastings street alley? Both structures are outside of the Grandview Woodland original zoning plans without "special" considerations. It feels like some narrative has changed around this neighbourhood block, opening the doors for developers to take concessions on the current zoning. Can you list any recent changes to city bylaws and guidelines that make this area particularly vulnerable to massive developments in such close quarters? on Twitter Share Why are there consecutive re-zoning proposals for 23 storey buildings back to back on Pender/Hastings street alley? Both structures are outside of the Grandview Woodland original zoning plans without "special" considerations. It feels like some narrative has changed around this neighbourhood block, opening the doors for developers to take concessions on the current zoning. Can you list any recent changes to city bylaws and guidelines that make this area particularly vulnerable to massive developments in such close quarters? on Linkedin Email Why are there consecutive re-zoning proposals for 23 storey buildings back to back on Pender/Hastings street alley? Both structures are outside of the Grandview Woodland original zoning plans without "special" considerations. It feels like some narrative has changed around this neighbourhood block, opening the doors for developers to take concessions on the current zoning. Can you list any recent changes to city bylaws and guidelines that make this area particularly vulnerable to massive developments in such close quarters? link

    Why are there consecutive re-zoning proposals for 23 storey buildings back to back on Pender/Hastings street alley? Both structures are outside of the Grandview Woodland original zoning plans without "special" considerations. It feels like some narrative has changed around this neighbourhood block, opening the doors for developers to take concessions on the current zoning. Can you list any recent changes to city bylaws and guidelines that make this area particularly vulnerable to massive developments in such close quarters?

    Joel C asked 24 days ago

    Thank you for sharing your comments and concerns. 

    In terms of the subject rezoning application (1618-1680 E Hastings St), the site is identified as a Special Site in the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan. On p. 57 of the Plan, the special sites section of the Hastings Plateau sub-area states the following: “Consider applications for additional height and density – consistent with all other policies outlined in this section – on the Urban Native Youth Association site to support renewal and expansion of the existing social facility, as well as the creation of additional social purpose uses, such as non-market housing and expanded cultural and recreation facilities.” This policy does allow for consideration of height and density on this site above the 12-storeys and 4 FSR density envisioned for the Hastings Plateau sub-area.

    Please note that the City is required to process all rezoning applications submitted and staff positions on proposed rezonings will be summarized in the referral report later in the application’s process timeline. The timing of rezoning applications in a neighbourhood is at the discretion of each individual applicant/landowner and is dependent on their own project timeline, financing/funding, etc. The other rezoning application you are referencing was submitted in August 2025 and is independent from this one. Staff do recognize that there has been a number of new towers proposed in the immediate area and are taking this into consideration in the review of each proposal, including relationship of the proposed built form to each other, impact on the area, solar access, neighbourhood fit, etc.

  • Share Thousands of residents in Grandview-Woodland took part in the creation of the plan, that was partly overridden by City staff at the last moment. Now this "Community Plan" is being categorically ignored. What can you say to the thousands of people who took part in this process, in good faith? What can you say to the volunteers on the Citizens' Assembly who took part in this process in good faith? This was supposed to be a 30-year plan. on Facebook Share Thousands of residents in Grandview-Woodland took part in the creation of the plan, that was partly overridden by City staff at the last moment. Now this "Community Plan" is being categorically ignored. What can you say to the thousands of people who took part in this process, in good faith? What can you say to the volunteers on the Citizens' Assembly who took part in this process in good faith? This was supposed to be a 30-year plan. on Twitter Share Thousands of residents in Grandview-Woodland took part in the creation of the plan, that was partly overridden by City staff at the last moment. Now this "Community Plan" is being categorically ignored. What can you say to the thousands of people who took part in this process, in good faith? What can you say to the volunteers on the Citizens' Assembly who took part in this process in good faith? This was supposed to be a 30-year plan. on Linkedin Email Thousands of residents in Grandview-Woodland took part in the creation of the plan, that was partly overridden by City staff at the last moment. Now this "Community Plan" is being categorically ignored. What can you say to the thousands of people who took part in this process, in good faith? What can you say to the volunteers on the Citizens' Assembly who took part in this process in good faith? This was supposed to be a 30-year plan. link

    Thousands of residents in Grandview-Woodland took part in the creation of the plan, that was partly overridden by City staff at the last moment. Now this "Community Plan" is being categorically ignored. What can you say to the thousands of people who took part in this process, in good faith? What can you say to the volunteers on the Citizens' Assembly who took part in this process in good faith? This was supposed to be a 30-year plan.

    redpanda asked 25 days ago

    Thank you for your comments and questions. There is a policy within the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan which allows for consideration of additional height and density at this site. Generally, rezonings within this section of the Hastings Plateau Land Use area of the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan can be considered for 11-12-storeys with densities up to 4 FSR. However, if you continue to the Special Sites section of the Hastings Plateau Land Use area in the Plan (one page down (on p.57)), there is the following policy which applies to this site: “Consider applications for additional height and density – consistent with all other policies outlined in this section – on the Urban Native Youth Association site to support renewal and expansion of the existing social facility, as well as the creation of additional social purpose uses, such as non-market housing and expanded cultural and recreation facilities.” Further policy analysis will be included in the report to Council.

  • Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan clearly states that there is a 6,500 square foot maximum floor plate for any tower proposed at this site. The maximum floorplate site is not subject to relaxation. Can you please make a correction on your signage and on ShapeYourCity to clarify that this rezoning does not follow the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? Thank you. on Facebook Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan clearly states that there is a 6,500 square foot maximum floor plate for any tower proposed at this site. The maximum floorplate site is not subject to relaxation. Can you please make a correction on your signage and on ShapeYourCity to clarify that this rezoning does not follow the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? Thank you. on Twitter Share The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan clearly states that there is a 6,500 square foot maximum floor plate for any tower proposed at this site. The maximum floorplate site is not subject to relaxation. Can you please make a correction on your signage and on ShapeYourCity to clarify that this rezoning does not follow the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? Thank you. on Linkedin Email The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan clearly states that there is a 6,500 square foot maximum floor plate for any tower proposed at this site. The maximum floorplate site is not subject to relaxation. Can you please make a correction on your signage and on ShapeYourCity to clarify that this rezoning does not follow the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? Thank you. link

    The Grandview-Woodland Community Plan clearly states that there is a 6,500 square foot maximum floor plate for any tower proposed at this site. The maximum floorplate site is not subject to relaxation. Can you please make a correction on your signage and on ShapeYourCity to clarify that this rezoning does not follow the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? Thank you.

    redpanda asked 25 days ago

    Thank you for your question. Please note that the proposal is still under review by urban design staff. It is important to highlight newer city-wide guidance that also apply and which inform staff review, including the Residential Tower Floor Plates bulletin (2025). Under Section 3.3, it notes that tower floor plates for social housing developments can be considered up to 8,000 sq. ft. Staff would take this guidance into consideration, along with other form of development implications such as tower separation onto adjacent sites, solar access, compatibility with the existing and planned context, etc.

     

    Please note that within the Intent and Application section of the bulletin highlighted above, it states: “Where existing guidelines and policy are inconsistent, the guidance in this bulletin provides clarification until such time when other policies are brought into alignment.” This application can be considered under the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan, which is the language on the site sign and Shape Your City page.

  • Share I am writing to request clarification on several aspects of the proposed development in the 1600 block of East Hastings and Pender Street. Specifically: Policy Alignment: Does this proposal comply with the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? If there are discrepancies, please specify which policy areas or guidelines are not being met. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Has a comprehensive Traffic and Parking Study been conducted for the 1600 block? I am specifically concerned with the cumulative impact of the proposed 22-story tower on Pender, the Kettle Society redevelopment, and existing multi-family residences. How will the increased density affect local infrastructure? Utility Infrastructure: Will the existing above-grade power lines in the lane between Pender and Hastings be relocated underground as a condition of this development? on Facebook Share I am writing to request clarification on several aspects of the proposed development in the 1600 block of East Hastings and Pender Street. Specifically: Policy Alignment: Does this proposal comply with the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? If there are discrepancies, please specify which policy areas or guidelines are not being met. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Has a comprehensive Traffic and Parking Study been conducted for the 1600 block? I am specifically concerned with the cumulative impact of the proposed 22-story tower on Pender, the Kettle Society redevelopment, and existing multi-family residences. How will the increased density affect local infrastructure? Utility Infrastructure: Will the existing above-grade power lines in the lane between Pender and Hastings be relocated underground as a condition of this development? on Twitter Share I am writing to request clarification on several aspects of the proposed development in the 1600 block of East Hastings and Pender Street. Specifically: Policy Alignment: Does this proposal comply with the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? If there are discrepancies, please specify which policy areas or guidelines are not being met. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Has a comprehensive Traffic and Parking Study been conducted for the 1600 block? I am specifically concerned with the cumulative impact of the proposed 22-story tower on Pender, the Kettle Society redevelopment, and existing multi-family residences. How will the increased density affect local infrastructure? Utility Infrastructure: Will the existing above-grade power lines in the lane between Pender and Hastings be relocated underground as a condition of this development? on Linkedin Email I am writing to request clarification on several aspects of the proposed development in the 1600 block of East Hastings and Pender Street. Specifically: Policy Alignment: Does this proposal comply with the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? If there are discrepancies, please specify which policy areas or guidelines are not being met. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Has a comprehensive Traffic and Parking Study been conducted for the 1600 block? I am specifically concerned with the cumulative impact of the proposed 22-story tower on Pender, the Kettle Society redevelopment, and existing multi-family residences. How will the increased density affect local infrastructure? Utility Infrastructure: Will the existing above-grade power lines in the lane between Pender and Hastings be relocated underground as a condition of this development? link

    I am writing to request clarification on several aspects of the proposed development in the 1600 block of East Hastings and Pender Street. Specifically: Policy Alignment: Does this proposal comply with the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan? If there are discrepancies, please specify which policy areas or guidelines are not being met. Traffic and Parking Impacts: Has a comprehensive Traffic and Parking Study been conducted for the 1600 block? I am specifically concerned with the cumulative impact of the proposed 22-story tower on Pender, the Kettle Society redevelopment, and existing multi-family residences. How will the increased density affect local infrastructure? Utility Infrastructure: Will the existing above-grade power lines in the lane between Pender and Hastings be relocated underground as a condition of this development?

    Neighbor on Pender asked about 1 month ago

    Policy alignment: The site is located within the Hastings Plateau sub-area of the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan, which generally considers buildings at heights of 11-12 storeys and a density of up to 4.0 FSR for mixed-use development. The site itself is considered a Special Site within the Hastings Plateau sub-area (p.57 of the Plan) which permits consideration of additional height and density for the Urban Native Youth Association site, “to support renewal and expansion of the existing social facility, as well as the creation of additional social purpose uses, such as non-market housing and expanded cultural and recreation facilities.” The Housing section of the Plan (see p. 131) seeks to “recognize opportunities to achieve a diversity of housing forms and approaches to meet the range of needs for urban Aboriginal residents (e.g. Renewal of the Urban Native Youth Association Native Youth Centre at 1618 East Hastings with complementary housing, and the redevelopment of the Vancouver Aboriginal Friendship Centre Society’s cultural centre at 1607 East Hastings with complementary housing).” The applicant is seeking additional height and density, as envisioned by the policies noted above.

     

    Traffic and parking impacts: Transportation staff are reviewing this rezoning application in conjunction with other existing and planned developments to determine whether any transportation upgrades are required to support this area.

     

    Utility infrastructure: Like transportation infrastructure, Engineering staff are still reviewing the application from a utility infrastructure perspective. Any conditions of rezoning will be included in the report to Council.

  • Share Hello: I reside off of the Drive a block or so from this proposed building, will there be several floors of sub parking in the plan? Any retail? Lastly, how long is the anticipated construction period?? Thx! -Mark on Facebook Share Hello: I reside off of the Drive a block or so from this proposed building, will there be several floors of sub parking in the plan? Any retail? Lastly, how long is the anticipated construction period?? Thx! -Mark on Twitter Share Hello: I reside off of the Drive a block or so from this proposed building, will there be several floors of sub parking in the plan? Any retail? Lastly, how long is the anticipated construction period?? Thx! -Mark on Linkedin Email Hello: I reside off of the Drive a block or so from this proposed building, will there be several floors of sub parking in the plan? Any retail? Lastly, how long is the anticipated construction period?? Thx! -Mark link

    Hello: I reside off of the Drive a block or so from this proposed building, will there be several floors of sub parking in the plan? Any retail? Lastly, how long is the anticipated construction period?? Thx! -Mark

    MGMasterson asked about 1 month ago

    Thank you for your question. The application currently proposes two levels of underground, which includes vehicle and bike parking. The underground parking would be accessed from the lane. The ground floor is proposed to have a post-secondary school (NVIT) on the western part of the floor and the Urban Native Youth Association (UNYA) will occupy the remainder of the ground floor. The applicant has indicated that three will be a café/bookstore within the ground floor. In terms of length of construction, the applicant has advised that the construction period for the proposed building is anticipated to take 36-40 months.

  • Share The Architectural layouts show windows along the laneway to the podium, However the elevation does not show any windows on the podium. Please confirm if there will be windows in the laneway and if they will overlook the existing residential buildings. on Facebook Share The Architectural layouts show windows along the laneway to the podium, However the elevation does not show any windows on the podium. Please confirm if there will be windows in the laneway and if they will overlook the existing residential buildings. on Twitter Share The Architectural layouts show windows along the laneway to the podium, However the elevation does not show any windows on the podium. Please confirm if there will be windows in the laneway and if they will overlook the existing residential buildings. on Linkedin Email The Architectural layouts show windows along the laneway to the podium, However the elevation does not show any windows on the podium. Please confirm if there will be windows in the laneway and if they will overlook the existing residential buildings. link

    The Architectural layouts show windows along the laneway to the podium, However the elevation does not show any windows on the podium. Please confirm if there will be windows in the laneway and if they will overlook the existing residential buildings.

    Neighbor on Pender asked about 1 month ago

    The plans submitted at the rezoning stage have less detail than at later stages in the approvals process. Although the massing/renders do not show windows, they are shown on the site plans of each level. Please take a look at pages 6-8 of the Architectural drawings. The floor plans on these pages show the windows which are currently proposed at the podium level. The red arrow in the snippet below demonstrates what a window looks like on a floor plan. Please reach out to me directly at Allison.Smith@vancouver.ca if you need additional assistance.

Page last updated: 13 Mar 2026, 12:28 PM