2030-2038 Barclay St rezoning application

Share 2030-2038 Barclay St rezoning application on Facebook Share 2030-2038 Barclay St rezoning application on Twitter Share 2030-2038 Barclay St rezoning application on Linkedin Email 2030-2038 Barclay St rezoning application link


Announcement

Due to the high volume of questions and comments during the Q&A period, the standard response time as been extended to enable staff to prepare responses. We thank you for your patience.


Current Application

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-5B (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 27-storey hotel and long-term stay building and includes:

  • 270 units;
  • Restaurant space on the ground floor;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 12.75;
  • A building height of 88 m (289 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is being considered under the Hotel Development Policy.

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



Previous Application (July 2024)

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-5B (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 29-storey hotel and long-term stay building and includes:

  • 292 units;
  • Commercial space on the ground floor;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 14.7; and
  • A building height of 100.3 m (329 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is not consistent with Council-adopted policies. The City is required to process all rezoning applications submitted and staff position on the proposal will be summarized in the referral report later in the application process timeline.

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


Announcement

Due to the high volume of questions and comments during the Q&A period, the standard response time as been extended to enable staff to prepare responses. We thank you for your patience.


Current Application

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-5B (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 27-storey hotel and long-term stay building and includes:

  • 270 units;
  • Restaurant space on the ground floor;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 12.75;
  • A building height of 88 m (289 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is being considered under the Hotel Development Policy.

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



Previous Application (July 2024)

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-5B (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 29-storey hotel and long-term stay building and includes:

  • 292 units;
  • Commercial space on the ground floor;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 14.7; and
  • A building height of 100.3 m (329 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is not consistent with Council-adopted policies. The City is required to process all rezoning applications submitted and staff position on the proposal will be summarized in the referral report later in the application process timeline.

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: September 3 to September 16. 

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 How will privacy for the adjacent residentail buildings be protected from window washers and rooftop bar patrons? on Facebook Share How will privacy for the adjacent residentail buildings be protected from window washers and rooftop bar patrons? on Twitter Share How will privacy for the adjacent residentail buildings be protected from window washers and rooftop bar patrons? on Linkedin Email How will privacy for the adjacent residentail buildings be protected from window washers and rooftop bar patrons? link

    How will privacy for the adjacent residentail buildings be protected from window washers and rooftop bar patrons?

    Mojo asked about 2 months ago

    The proposed project must comply with tower separation requirements to address the privacy concerns to adjacent properties, which means a 60 feet separation from residential tower developments and 50 feet from office/hotel and commercial towers. In general, building operations and maintenance must uphold the safety standards when working on residential units.

  • Share At 27 storeys, the proposal far exceeds the 3- to 5-storey context. How does this comply with the City’s transition and scale principles, and can you release the built form/massing analysis and shadow studies? What review has been done of privacy and overlook impacts on adjacent residences? Please make public your analysis of the privacy and shadowing studies submitted by the applicant. Was the standard tower separation distance achieved? If not, what exception was granted, and can the City release the tower separation review documents and rationale? on Facebook Share At 27 storeys, the proposal far exceeds the 3- to 5-storey context. How does this comply with the City’s transition and scale principles, and can you release the built form/massing analysis and shadow studies? What review has been done of privacy and overlook impacts on adjacent residences? Please make public your analysis of the privacy and shadowing studies submitted by the applicant. Was the standard tower separation distance achieved? If not, what exception was granted, and can the City release the tower separation review documents and rationale? on Twitter Share At 27 storeys, the proposal far exceeds the 3- to 5-storey context. How does this comply with the City’s transition and scale principles, and can you release the built form/massing analysis and shadow studies? What review has been done of privacy and overlook impacts on adjacent residences? Please make public your analysis of the privacy and shadowing studies submitted by the applicant. Was the standard tower separation distance achieved? If not, what exception was granted, and can the City release the tower separation review documents and rationale? on Linkedin Email At 27 storeys, the proposal far exceeds the 3- to 5-storey context. How does this comply with the City’s transition and scale principles, and can you release the built form/massing analysis and shadow studies? What review has been done of privacy and overlook impacts on adjacent residences? Please make public your analysis of the privacy and shadowing studies submitted by the applicant. Was the standard tower separation distance achieved? If not, what exception was granted, and can the City release the tower separation review documents and rationale? link

    At 27 storeys, the proposal far exceeds the 3- to 5-storey context. How does this comply with the City’s transition and scale principles, and can you release the built form/massing analysis and shadow studies? What review has been done of privacy and overlook impacts on adjacent residences? Please make public your analysis of the privacy and shadowing studies submitted by the applicant. Was the standard tower separation distance achieved? If not, what exception was granted, and can the City release the tower separation review documents and rationale?

    WendyV asked about 2 months ago

    The project must comply with tower separation requirements to address the privacy concerns to any adjacent properties, of which means a 60 feet separation from residential tower developments and 50 feet from office/hotel and commercial towers. City staff will provide urban design conditions to the built form as part of the rezoning process, of which the applicant will agree to follow

     

    The West End solar access policy requires no shadowing between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. at the equinoxes on to the parks, schools, and public open space. The current shadow study shows minor shading on a small portion of the daycare space. Staff are continuing to work with the applicant to further minimize any shadowing impacts.

  • Share There are conflicting statements about a rooftop lounge with food and beverage services. Please clarify, will the city approve rooftop food and beverage services? Will the acoustic study address rooftop uses, amplified music, and mechanical noise, and can the full acoustic report be made available before the Public Hearing? What is the plan for garbage and recycling collection, and can the servicing and waste management plan be released? on Facebook Share There are conflicting statements about a rooftop lounge with food and beverage services. Please clarify, will the city approve rooftop food and beverage services? Will the acoustic study address rooftop uses, amplified music, and mechanical noise, and can the full acoustic report be made available before the Public Hearing? What is the plan for garbage and recycling collection, and can the servicing and waste management plan be released? on Twitter Share There are conflicting statements about a rooftop lounge with food and beverage services. Please clarify, will the city approve rooftop food and beverage services? Will the acoustic study address rooftop uses, amplified music, and mechanical noise, and can the full acoustic report be made available before the Public Hearing? What is the plan for garbage and recycling collection, and can the servicing and waste management plan be released? on Linkedin Email There are conflicting statements about a rooftop lounge with food and beverage services. Please clarify, will the city approve rooftop food and beverage services? Will the acoustic study address rooftop uses, amplified music, and mechanical noise, and can the full acoustic report be made available before the Public Hearing? What is the plan for garbage and recycling collection, and can the servicing and waste management plan be released? link

    There are conflicting statements about a rooftop lounge with food and beverage services. Please clarify, will the city approve rooftop food and beverage services? Will the acoustic study address rooftop uses, amplified music, and mechanical noise, and can the full acoustic report be made available before the Public Hearing? What is the plan for garbage and recycling collection, and can the servicing and waste management plan be released?

    WendyV asked about 2 months ago

    This food and beverage area is exclusively intended to serve the hotel guest at the outdoor amenity space. The City of Vancouver has a Noise Control By-law which outlines the hours of the day that sound can be permissible. In addition, amplified sound must not cause an unreasonable disturbance to neighbours. Notably, restaurants are restricted to below an interior sound level of 90 decibels (90 dBA) and cannot occur after midnight. An acoustic report does not need to be provided at the rezoning stage. City staff may instead address neighbouring concerns at the rezoning stage in regards to noise and privacy by applying urban design conditions for the applicant to follow. 

     

    Ensuring adequate servicing of garbage, recycling, and waste collection is part of the staff review process. Engineering conditions will be applied to the proponent’s design at the rezoning stage only if servicing improvements are needed. A more detailed review of the proposal’s design occurs at the Development Permit Stage to ensure appropriate servicing egress is available to and from the building. Requests for information or enquiries regarding waste management are best enquired at the Development Permit phase because the proposal’s architectural design at that stage is more refined. 

  • Share So far there has been no response to this questions sent on Sept. 4th ... could you please answer the following questions?The West End RM guidelines, referenced on page 21 of the application, state: “Any increase in building height may be considered when livability of the adjacent site is respected. Building separation should take into consideration the impacts on views, privacy, light and open space of the adjacent development.” In response to my question regarding privacy mitigation, staff advised: “All developments should comply with tower separation requirements from adjacent residential buildings. In this case, minimum 80-foot separation should be provided from residential… This separation is the main criteria to protect privacy of neighbour’s residential units.” However, the application materials appear inconsistent with this standard: Page 37 – The graphic shows that portions of 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace) and 975 Chico fall within the 80-foot separation zone and 2010 and 240 Barclay fall completely inside the 80’ zone. Page 47 – The graphic shows an 80-foot distance between the existing building and neighbours, but the proposed tower is positioned significantly closer to 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace). The site is also immediately adjacent to 2010 and 2040 Barclay, with inadequate separation leaving 2040 Barclay in shadow for most of the day. Can you please clarify how these apparent discrepancies are being addressed and whether the proposal, as submitted, meets the City’s own tower separation and livability requirements? on Facebook Share So far there has been no response to this questions sent on Sept. 4th ... could you please answer the following questions?The West End RM guidelines, referenced on page 21 of the application, state: “Any increase in building height may be considered when livability of the adjacent site is respected. Building separation should take into consideration the impacts on views, privacy, light and open space of the adjacent development.” In response to my question regarding privacy mitigation, staff advised: “All developments should comply with tower separation requirements from adjacent residential buildings. In this case, minimum 80-foot separation should be provided from residential… This separation is the main criteria to protect privacy of neighbour’s residential units.” However, the application materials appear inconsistent with this standard: Page 37 – The graphic shows that portions of 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace) and 975 Chico fall within the 80-foot separation zone and 2010 and 240 Barclay fall completely inside the 80’ zone. Page 47 – The graphic shows an 80-foot distance between the existing building and neighbours, but the proposed tower is positioned significantly closer to 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace). The site is also immediately adjacent to 2010 and 2040 Barclay, with inadequate separation leaving 2040 Barclay in shadow for most of the day. Can you please clarify how these apparent discrepancies are being addressed and whether the proposal, as submitted, meets the City’s own tower separation and livability requirements? on Twitter Share So far there has been no response to this questions sent on Sept. 4th ... could you please answer the following questions?The West End RM guidelines, referenced on page 21 of the application, state: “Any increase in building height may be considered when livability of the adjacent site is respected. Building separation should take into consideration the impacts on views, privacy, light and open space of the adjacent development.” In response to my question regarding privacy mitigation, staff advised: “All developments should comply with tower separation requirements from adjacent residential buildings. In this case, minimum 80-foot separation should be provided from residential… This separation is the main criteria to protect privacy of neighbour’s residential units.” However, the application materials appear inconsistent with this standard: Page 37 – The graphic shows that portions of 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace) and 975 Chico fall within the 80-foot separation zone and 2010 and 240 Barclay fall completely inside the 80’ zone. Page 47 – The graphic shows an 80-foot distance between the existing building and neighbours, but the proposed tower is positioned significantly closer to 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace). The site is also immediately adjacent to 2010 and 2040 Barclay, with inadequate separation leaving 2040 Barclay in shadow for most of the day. Can you please clarify how these apparent discrepancies are being addressed and whether the proposal, as submitted, meets the City’s own tower separation and livability requirements? on Linkedin Email So far there has been no response to this questions sent on Sept. 4th ... could you please answer the following questions?The West End RM guidelines, referenced on page 21 of the application, state: “Any increase in building height may be considered when livability of the adjacent site is respected. Building separation should take into consideration the impacts on views, privacy, light and open space of the adjacent development.” In response to my question regarding privacy mitigation, staff advised: “All developments should comply with tower separation requirements from adjacent residential buildings. In this case, minimum 80-foot separation should be provided from residential… This separation is the main criteria to protect privacy of neighbour’s residential units.” However, the application materials appear inconsistent with this standard: Page 37 – The graphic shows that portions of 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace) and 975 Chico fall within the 80-foot separation zone and 2010 and 240 Barclay fall completely inside the 80’ zone. Page 47 – The graphic shows an 80-foot distance between the existing building and neighbours, but the proposed tower is positioned significantly closer to 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace). The site is also immediately adjacent to 2010 and 2040 Barclay, with inadequate separation leaving 2040 Barclay in shadow for most of the day. Can you please clarify how these apparent discrepancies are being addressed and whether the proposal, as submitted, meets the City’s own tower separation and livability requirements? link

    So far there has been no response to this questions sent on Sept. 4th ... could you please answer the following questions?The West End RM guidelines, referenced on page 21 of the application, state: “Any increase in building height may be considered when livability of the adjacent site is respected. Building separation should take into consideration the impacts on views, privacy, light and open space of the adjacent development.” In response to my question regarding privacy mitigation, staff advised: “All developments should comply with tower separation requirements from adjacent residential buildings. In this case, minimum 80-foot separation should be provided from residential… This separation is the main criteria to protect privacy of neighbour’s residential units.” However, the application materials appear inconsistent with this standard: Page 37 – The graphic shows that portions of 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace) and 975 Chico fall within the 80-foot separation zone and 2010 and 240 Barclay fall completely inside the 80’ zone. Page 47 – The graphic shows an 80-foot distance between the existing building and neighbours, but the proposed tower is positioned significantly closer to 2045 Nelson (Emerald Terrace). The site is also immediately adjacent to 2010 and 2040 Barclay, with inadequate separation leaving 2040 Barclay in shadow for most of the day. Can you please clarify how these apparent discrepancies are being addressed and whether the proposal, as submitted, meets the City’s own tower separation and livability requirements?

    MJV asked about 2 months ago

    The new Hotel Development Policy requires a 60-foot separation between hotel and residential tower developments and a 50-foot separation between office/hotel and commercial towers. These separations will be addressed through the rezoning process by applying urban design conditions for the applicant to follow. City staff will include urban design conditions at the rezoning stage to ensure this separation is maintained and that privacy and livability are maintained to nearby residential buildings.

  • Share How does the proposed 17-storey, 88 m height comply with the West End Community Plan, which states that existing height limits should be maintained unless bonus density is tied to affordable or rental housing? on Facebook Share How does the proposed 17-storey, 88 m height comply with the West End Community Plan, which states that existing height limits should be maintained unless bonus density is tied to affordable or rental housing? on Twitter Share How does the proposed 17-storey, 88 m height comply with the West End Community Plan, which states that existing height limits should be maintained unless bonus density is tied to affordable or rental housing? on Linkedin Email How does the proposed 17-storey, 88 m height comply with the West End Community Plan, which states that existing height limits should be maintained unless bonus density is tied to affordable or rental housing? link

    How does the proposed 17-storey, 88 m height comply with the West End Community Plan, which states that existing height limits should be maintained unless bonus density is tied to affordable or rental housing?

    Alexandra Phizicky asked about 2 months ago

    The proposal is being considered under the Hotel Development Policy and takes precedence over the heights outlined in the West End Community Plan. City staff are currently reviewing the height of the proposal and may apply urban design conditions to lower the height in order to preserve protected public views or to reduce shadowing onto public spaces. The height proposed does not appear to come into direct contact with any existing view cones.

  • Share What specific justification is being used to exceed the intended scale for Barclay Street? on Facebook Share What specific justification is being used to exceed the intended scale for Barclay Street? on Twitter Share What specific justification is being used to exceed the intended scale for Barclay Street? on Linkedin Email What specific justification is being used to exceed the intended scale for Barclay Street? link

    What specific justification is being used to exceed the intended scale for Barclay Street?

    Alexandra Phizicky asked about 2 months ago

    The proposal is being considered under the Hotel Development Policy and takes precedence over the heights outlined in the West End Community Plan. City staff are currently reviewing the height of the proposal and may apply urban design conditions to lower the height in order to preserve protected public views or to reduce shadowing onto public spaces.

  • Share Has a shadow study been completed to demonstrate compliance with the Plan’s requirement that new shadows not extend beyond the north sidewalk between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.? What mitigation strategies are being proposed if shadowing exceeds these limits? on Facebook Share Has a shadow study been completed to demonstrate compliance with the Plan’s requirement that new shadows not extend beyond the north sidewalk between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.? What mitigation strategies are being proposed if shadowing exceeds these limits? on Twitter Share Has a shadow study been completed to demonstrate compliance with the Plan’s requirement that new shadows not extend beyond the north sidewalk between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.? What mitigation strategies are being proposed if shadowing exceeds these limits? on Linkedin Email Has a shadow study been completed to demonstrate compliance with the Plan’s requirement that new shadows not extend beyond the north sidewalk between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.? What mitigation strategies are being proposed if shadowing exceeds these limits? link

    Has a shadow study been completed to demonstrate compliance with the Plan’s requirement that new shadows not extend beyond the north sidewalk between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.? What mitigation strategies are being proposed if shadowing exceeds these limits?

    Alexandra Phizicky asked about 2 months ago

    The site is located outside of the Village Areas of the West End Community Plan. There are no requirements to limit shadowing on sidewalks located north of the site. City staff will work with applicants and/or apply urban design conditions to the built form of projects to reduce shadowing on public parks, public schools, and civic spaces. In addition, the City has policy to avoid creating new shadow impacts on the opposite sidewalks in Village High Streets between the spring and fall equinoxes from 10 am to 4 pm. City staff review a proposal’s shadow impacts and mitigations are applied on a case by case basis.

  • Share The Plan requires minimum tower separation of 24.4 m (80 ft.). How does this proposal meet that requirement in such a narrow block context? What design measures are being taken to sculpt the tower above 18.3 m to reduce visual massing and protect the skyline? on Facebook Share The Plan requires minimum tower separation of 24.4 m (80 ft.). How does this proposal meet that requirement in such a narrow block context? What design measures are being taken to sculpt the tower above 18.3 m to reduce visual massing and protect the skyline? on Twitter Share The Plan requires minimum tower separation of 24.4 m (80 ft.). How does this proposal meet that requirement in such a narrow block context? What design measures are being taken to sculpt the tower above 18.3 m to reduce visual massing and protect the skyline? on Linkedin Email The Plan requires minimum tower separation of 24.4 m (80 ft.). How does this proposal meet that requirement in such a narrow block context? What design measures are being taken to sculpt the tower above 18.3 m to reduce visual massing and protect the skyline? link

    The Plan requires minimum tower separation of 24.4 m (80 ft.). How does this proposal meet that requirement in such a narrow block context? What design measures are being taken to sculpt the tower above 18.3 m to reduce visual massing and protect the skyline?

    Alexandra Phizicky asked about 2 months ago

    This proposal must comply with this tower separation requirements of a 60 feet separation between hotel to residential buildings. City staff are currently reviewing the height of the proposal and may apply urban design conditions to lower the height in order to preserve protected public views or to reduce shadowing onto parks and schools.

  • Share Having a large footprint building on a relatively small site will affect the development potential of the adjacent properties. Is there a study that can be released about what the effect on the adjacent properties will be? on Facebook Share Having a large footprint building on a relatively small site will affect the development potential of the adjacent properties. Is there a study that can be released about what the effect on the adjacent properties will be? on Twitter Share Having a large footprint building on a relatively small site will affect the development potential of the adjacent properties. Is there a study that can be released about what the effect on the adjacent properties will be? on Linkedin Email Having a large footprint building on a relatively small site will affect the development potential of the adjacent properties. Is there a study that can be released about what the effect on the adjacent properties will be? link

    Having a large footprint building on a relatively small site will affect the development potential of the adjacent properties. Is there a study that can be released about what the effect on the adjacent properties will be?

    RKnill asked about 2 months ago

    The proposal must comply with minimum tower separation requirements to ensure it does not impact the development potential of adjacent sites. This proposal must comply with this tower separation requirements of a 60-foot separation between hotel to residential buildings. City staff will provide urban design conditions to the built form as part of the rezoning process, of which the applicant will agree to follow if the rezoning proposal is approved.

  • Share At a towering 27 stories, this hotel would have direct sightlines into surrounding buildings. For those of us who live near the site, our privacy would be significantly compromised. What considerations have been made to protect the privacy of existing residents? on Facebook Share At a towering 27 stories, this hotel would have direct sightlines into surrounding buildings. For those of us who live near the site, our privacy would be significantly compromised. What considerations have been made to protect the privacy of existing residents? on Twitter Share At a towering 27 stories, this hotel would have direct sightlines into surrounding buildings. For those of us who live near the site, our privacy would be significantly compromised. What considerations have been made to protect the privacy of existing residents? on Linkedin Email At a towering 27 stories, this hotel would have direct sightlines into surrounding buildings. For those of us who live near the site, our privacy would be significantly compromised. What considerations have been made to protect the privacy of existing residents? link

    At a towering 27 stories, this hotel would have direct sightlines into surrounding buildings. For those of us who live near the site, our privacy would be significantly compromised. What considerations have been made to protect the privacy of existing residents?

    Chilco Resident asked about 2 months ago

    This proposal must comply with this tower separation requirements of a 60 foot separation between hotel to residential buildings. This is a standard distance being applied to ensure privacy. City staff will provide urban design conditions to the built form as part of the rezoning process, of which the applicant will agree to follow if the rezoning proposal is approved.

Page last updated: 17 Sep 2025, 08:18 AM