General Vancouver Development Updates II

[jollyburger]

Vancouver council considers proposal for rental tower on industrial land

A previous application for the site in question was approved at a public hearing in 2021 for an industrial-office building.

Development and building permits were issued in 2023 and 2024.

The property is vacant and was undergoing excavation but halted pending the outcome of this application. The area mainly consists of industrial, commercial and office buildings, except for a small number of older residential buildings that pre-dated the city’s zoning bylaw.

Staff has provided council with three options in making its decision at public hearing:

• Refuse the application, should the merits of the proposal be deemed unsatisfactory.

• Approve the application, in principle.

• Refer the proposal back to staff to undertake planning work for the Mount Pleasant Industrial Area as an “exceptional site,” as per a council motion in July 2025.

https://www.westerninvestor.com/real...asant-11771784

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

https://www.westerninvestor.com/real...asant-11771784

That's Strand's Three Sixty project.


https://www.westerninvestor.com/real...asant-11771784

[madog222]

^^No council decision tonight, they will reconvene on the 27th.

[WarrenC12]

That site has been an abandoned eyesore for months... years?

[madog222]

Yeah, demo started three years ago IIRC.

[Glow Fun City]

PNE Amphitheatre / "Freedom Mobile Arch" update for January 26th… looking good, but gonna be tough to finish in four months!


All photos by me today:

[officedweller]

Great shots!
Thanks!

[Glow Fun City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Great shots!
Thanks!

Cheers! I haven't taken a close look at the site since the fair last summer, really amazing to see the progress since then.


(but I do wish they'd built a higher stage grid and bigger/covered loading dock!! )

[officedweller]

... and partially enclosed the sides!

[madog222]

Originally Posted by officedweller

That's Strand's Three Sixty project.


https://www.westerninvestor.com/real...asant-11771784

Passed unanimously after three hours on the floor.

[PBlonde]

Originally Posted by madog222

Passed unanimously after three hours on the floor.

So the first 3 floors are for industrial use on a site that currently has no industrial buildings, and the proposed development appears to extend almost right to the edge of the property in each direction. They're stacking residential on top of that industrial space, I assume in an attempt to make the development economically feasible, and people are unhappy because it's not 100% industrial? Are there actually industrial uses that can sit on a 3rd or higher floor?

[Chirpythecougar]

I like how there's so much pearl clutching about protecting the precious industrial land when there's a lot-sized surface parking lot (4th & Alberta) 1 block away.
If the choice is between this and no industrial being built then obviously this is the way to go.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Chirpythecougar

I like how there's so much pearl clutching about protecting the precious industrial land when there's a lot-sized surface parking lot (4th & Alberta) 1 block away.
If the choice is between this and no industrial being built then obviously this is the way to go.

Just need to convince Metro Vancouver to play along.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by PBlonde

So the first 3 floors are for industrial use on a site that currently has no industrial buildings, and the proposed development appears to extend almost right to the edge of the property in each direction. They're stacking residential on top of that industrial space, I assume in an attempt to make the development economically feasible, and people are unhappy because it's not 100% industrial? Are there actually industrial uses that can sit on a 3rd or higher floor?

The former tenants on the site were industrial.
The previously approved proposal was for five floors of office space over two floors of manufacturing industrial. The previous rezoning is actually up to 11 storeys but the DP is for a 7 storey building.

[PBlonde]

Originally Posted by madog222

The former tenants on the site were industrial.
The previously approved proposal was for five floors of office space over two floors of manufacturing industrial. The previous rezoning is actually up to 11 storeys but the DP is for a 7 storey building.

Okay so there's more density, the same industrial space, less office space (which is a complete non-starter nowadays) and 5 more storeys in an area that height shouldn't be a restrictive issue, at least note with an 11 storey building.

I agree that those industrial portions of the City should be protected for that use, but if it achieves that use and gives further use above (literally), what's the problem?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by PBlonde

Okay so there's more density, the same industrial space, less office space (which is a complete non-starter nowadays) and 5 more storeys in an area that height shouldn't be a restrictive issue, at least note with an 11 storey building.

I agree that those industrial portions of the City should be protected for that use, but if it achieves that use and gives further use above (literally), what's the problem?

It raises the land value, which means similar sites which could be rezoned in a similar way will see their property taxes rise, potentially forcing existing tenants and owners to leave the area. It also limits the sorts of industry that can move in, and sets up for complaints from future residents about industries operating nearby either because of what they do, (for example, breweries are smelly), or the hours they operate (bakeries often bake at night). The zoning in Mount Pleasant used to allow residential use - it was quickly removed again, as those situations arose.

[seamusmcduff]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It raises the land value, which means similar sites which could be rezoned in a similar way will see their property taxes rise, potentially forcing existing tenants and owners to leave the area. It also limits the sorts of industry that can move in, and sets up for complaints from future residents about industries operating nearby either because of what they do, (for example, breweries are smelly), or the hours they operate (bakeries often bake at night). The zoning in Mount Pleasant used to allow residential use - it was quickly removed again, as those situations arose.

I didn't consider the land value impact that this would have, which definitely changes my opinion on this. I still don't mind these types of density/development along the arterials abutting Mount pleasant industrial, but it shouldn't be allowed in the interior.

[jollyburger]

Council ended up creating a fourth option, which was proposed by ABC Coun. Sarah Kirby-Yung at the end of Tuesday’s meeting. Kirby-Yung proposed council could invoke something called the “municipal flexibility clause,” which enables council to change the use of industrial properties of a certain size without the approval of Metro’s board.

The municipal flexibility clause is not a well-known or commonly used mechanism. Speaking Wednesday, Kirby-Yung commented that she could not recall seeing a use of the clause during her two terms on council.

“Council exercised its discretion in a very unique and exceptional circumstance for this one specific project,” said Kirby-Yung.

Kirby-Yung’s amendment also included language, based on city staff’s guidance, meant to send a signal to the broader development community that Strand’s application was a unique situation, and these kinds of changes were not going to become frequent. This included directing staff “to not recommend further use of the municipal flexibility clause” for these kinds of rezonings until after staff report back about the future of the Mount Pleasant industrial area.

Kirby-Yung said she believes in the value of preserving industrial and employment space, but that the city’s approach to this zoning needs to modernize, which could, in some cases, include allowing residential or other uses.

https://vancouversun.com/business/re...ndustrial-land

[officedweller]

I agree with this that the south side of West 2nd should be allowed to mirror the north side - that entire strip is close to either Canada Line or Expo Line.

25-storey, mixed-use residential tower approved to fill big hole in an industrial area of Mount Pleasant in Vancouver

The property lies within the northernmost perimeter of the Mount Pleasant Industrial Area (MPIA) — a designated industrial area protected by the regional district, framed by 2nd Avenue to the north, Main Street to the east, Broadway to the south, and Cambie Street to the west.

Mixed-use residential projects are already permitted for MPIA’s perimeters on Main Street, Broadway, and Cambie Street, but not along the area’s northern perimeter on the south side of 2nd Avenue.

Furthermore, just across the street along the north side of 2nd Avenue, there are mixed-use residential buildings — catalyzed by the City’s Southeast False Creek Plan, which includes the Olympic Village.

Existing permitted land uses within the Mount Pleasant Industrial District, with the location of 302-360 West 2nd Avenue highlighted.
(Yamamoto Architecture/Strand Development)
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/320-...asant-approved

[jollyburger]

Nicola Wealth applied for their demo permit for the motel on Main Street

https://plposweb.vancouver.ca/Public...ctId=286973060